RE: Resolve

RE: Resolve (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

caitlyn -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 12:54:42 PM)
Good answer ... thank you. [:D]

minnetar -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 2:57:29 PM)
i am more resolved to get out of there as soon as possible. i think we are in a no win situation. The situation going on there all have to do with the different religious sects. minnetar

UtopianRanger -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 3:13:27 PM)
quote: This wave of new amazingly brutal attacks in Iraq - public building, open markets, even a hospital - do they strengthen your resolve, or weaken it? I'd say it reinforces what I already know. That it's a virtual impossibility to win a war of occupation against a people whose hearts and minds are opposed to their occupiers. - R

FirmhandKY -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 5:06:53 PM)
Hypocrisy has a Human Price on the Streets of Baghdad Let me tell you a true story that gives a mere taste of what is to come for the women of Iraq, should the Democratic Party accomplish what it is currently trying to do: thwart the Bush Administration's so-far successful Iraq security plan, ultimately forcing America to leave Iraq at the mercy of organized terrorist groups, criminal gangs and woman haters. My story involves a girl named Jamilah. Some interesting ideas in the article. Read the whole thing. FirmKY

minnetar -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 5:13:19 PM)
Firm, Two questions - first if we are so interested in human rights why haven't we done anything in the Sudan? Secondly, this is all sectarian violence. Why should the US be involved in basically a civil war? minnetar

Real0ne -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 5:42:07 PM)
Neither doesnt change a thing, it was over oil at tax payers expense i wish i had a biz that i could have an army to get richer with! NOT i couldnt send even one person to their death over fuckin money

Noah -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 6:01:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Hypocrisy has a Human Price on the Streets of Baghdad Let me tell you a true story that gives a mere taste of what is to come for the women of Iraq, should the Democratic Party accomplish what it is currently trying to do: thwart the Bush Administration's so-far successful Iraq security plan, ultimately forcing America to leave Iraq at the mercy of organized terrorist groups, criminal gangs and woman haters. My story involves a girl named Jamilah. Some interesting ideas in the article. Read the whole thing. FirmKY I like this idea of yours, KY, to inject some eye-witness accounts into the discussion. More than 4 weeks passed since the implementation of the SP which was awaited for long time. However there is nothing changed a part from the first few days after the plan. In the last few days the terrorists’ attacks against civilian installations and Iraqi people intensified. One of the most important and historic bridges in Baghdad destroyed completely by explosives and detained tanker. Attacks reached into the heart of the security zone and the building of the parliament. Today alone more than 200 Iraqis were killed and more wounded in 5 attacks in the center of Baghdad. Thousands of civilians have been killed since the SP started. The SP of Baghdad has failed with out any slightest doubt. On the other hand the additional number of the US troops arrived in Baghdad and failed to make any changes. http://hammorabi.blogspot.com/ The streets are still empty and filled with horror, gunmen and militias are still roaming the streets even in the presence of American or Iraqi patrols. its really funny that the policy of those patrols is that if those gunmen won't hit us we won't hit them, so they can do whatever they want to do to the harmless people as long as they don't shoot us. http://nabilsblog.blogspot.com/ Last week, Senator John McCain blamed the media for failing to report the "good news" from Iraq. He claimed it's safe to walk in many areas of Baghdad. CNN correspondent Michael Ware, who's been reporting from Baghdad for the last four years couldn't believe what McCain said about the security situation in Baghdad. He stopped short of calling McCain insane: John McCain told Wolf Blitzer that he needs to ‘get up to speed' and stop reporting three-month-old news from Iraq. According to McCain, the surge is working! And the streets of Baghdad are safe for Americans to go strolling down. The only problem? Michael Ware, who is, ya know, in Baghdad, says McCain hasn't a clue... Michael Ware: ‘I don't know what part of Neverland Senator McCain is talking about when he says we can go strolling in Baghdad ...Honestly, Wolf, you'll barely last twenty minutes out there.' McCain who was considered the voice of reason in the Congress, has turned lately to the voice of "I want your vote, I really truly want your vote." Unfortunately, he's already eliminated the swing voters by his latest statements and acts. People liked him when he didn't lie. Now, he's just catering for his base. He's no longer better than the other politicians. So, McCain goes to Baghdad to prove Michael Ware and the media wrong. He again tells the media about his lovely safe shopping experience in Baghdad. I haven't been to Arizona state yet. But, if the following is a normal shopping trip by Arizona standards, then everyone need to think twice before visiting his state: The delegation arrived at the market, which is called Shorja, on Sunday with more than 100 soldiers in armored Humvees — the equivalent of an entire company — and attack helicopters circled overhead, a senior American military official in Baghdad said. The soldiers redirected traffic from the area and restricted access to the Americans, witnesses said, and sharpshooters were posted on the roofs. The congressmen wore bulletproof vests throughout their hourlong visit. “They paralyzed the market when they came,” Mr. Faiyad said during an interview in his shop on Monday. “This was only for the media.” He added, “This will not change anything.” ... Wouldn't this "safe" shopping experience scare any sane person? And how much did this safe experience cost the American taxpayers? You do the calculation. http://fayrouz.blogspot.com/

FirmhandKY -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 6:41:03 PM)
shrugs I'm not a big McCain fan, so your attempt to stir something up isn't really effective. And, in your ploy to start a "my anecdotal evidence is better than your anecdotal evidence " tit-for-tat exchange (I can likely goggle just as many "pros" as you can "cons"), you miss the bigger point entirely. So ... I'm not going to play your game and mess up caityn's attempt to have a calm discussion. The question was about "resolve" and how the attacks affect your personal resolve. The terrorist believe that people such as you will pressure the US government to leave if they can keep attacks in the news. "Weak Americans" and all, yanno. So I think a good argument can be made that people such as yourself - who lack "resolve" - bear some moral responsibility for the continuing attacks. You are the intended audience, after all, you know. How does it feel to be a puppet on a string, and to be dancing to the terrorist agenda? FirmKY

juliaoceania -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 6:49:21 PM)
quote: So I think a good argument can be made that people such as yourself - who lack "resolve" - bear some moral responsibility for the continuing attacks. You are the intended audience, after all, you know. You mistake a different resolve from having no resolve. Some of us were resolved that this war should never take place...and while I would never speak for Noah, perhaps his resolve is just different from yours.

Sinergy -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 6:50:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY The question was about "resolve" and how the attacks affect your personal resolve. A lot of people resolved to not let AnencephalyBoy drag us off to go to fight a stupid and idiotic war in the first place. Lot of good that did us. Sinergy p.s. If his plans are working so well, why are we still over there with no end in sight?

juliaoceania -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 6:54:51 PM)
quote: p.s. If his plans are working so well, why are we still over there with no end in sight? Well I am going to be fair, we were never intending to leave... hence we are attempting to build permanent military bases on Iraqi soil as a launching pad into the greater ME

Noah -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 7:40:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY shrugs I'm not a big McCain fan, so your attempt to stir something up isn't really effective. And, in your ploy to start a "my anecdotal evidence is better than your anecdotal evidence " tit-for-tat exchange (I can likely goggle just as many "pros" as you can "cons"), you miss the bigger point entirely. So ... I'm not going to play your game and mess up caityn's attempt to have a calm discussion. The question was about "resolve" and how the attacks affect your personal resolve. The terrorist believe that people such as you will pressure the US government to leave if they can keep attacks in the news. "Weak Americans" and all, yanno. So I think a good argument can be made that people such as yourself - who lack "resolve" - bear some moral responsibility for the continuing attacks. You are the intended audience, after all, you know. How does it feel to be a puppet on a string, and to be dancing to the terrorist agenda? FirmKY You offered some credible evidence as to how the surge was affecting the resolve of someone on the scene. It struck me as a good idea. Of the five Iraqi blogs I found in a quick search, two hadn't posted since the surge. The other three speak for themselves. I believe that well-intentioned, thinking people can disagree, and discuss their divergent views, KY. Does your attack on my character constitutes calm discussion, in your view? Maybe that is one more area where you and I disagree. Do I bear some responsibility for the carnage? Yes, I think I do, but not on the ground that you cite. I don't believe a military solution can be imposed on Iraq by the United States. Early on I was ambivalent on this but I'm strongly resolved to the view now. That being my view I think a lot of innocent people and some very guilty ones are dying each day to make things worse, as it were, rather than to make things better. In addition, I'm concered at how little attention is given to what I see as the greatest victory of the terrorists to date. I'm referring to the fact that you and I no longer have habeus corpus rights. And since those are the rights by which we may assert any other legal right, I think we are in a major pickle. If I were attacking a democracy which professed to bring Democracy to the world, and could choose between destroying a city, on the one hand, and severely undercutting the political rights of that country on the other hand, I'd attack the rights. I believe the bad guys can't beat us in war-fighting but they can play us to endless stalemate there. And since they fight a lot more cheaply than us they can "make" us spend ourselves into the ground, just as we did to the Soviets. And along the way we bolster terrorist recruitment in ways and to degrees which would be anachieveable without our complicity. I think we are faced with some diabolical strategists, and that current US policy plays directly into their hands. And I'll fight for your right to disagree.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 8:10:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Noah You offered some credible evidence as to how the surge was affecting the resolve of someone on the scene. It struck me as a good idea. Of the five Iraqi blogs I found in a quick search, two hadn't posted since the surge. The other three speak for themselves. I believe that well-intentioned, thinking people can disagree, and discuss their divergent views, KY. Does your attack on my character constitutes calm discussion, in your view? Maybe that is one more area where you and I disagree. Noah, Your second posts gives me quite a different take from my reading of what you were attempting to do in your first post. I've told you before that I respect your intellect and writing skills, but you are also well known for having a sharp wit when using your skills here in the forums. So I apologize for the tone of my reply, although not for the underlying concepts. quote: ORIGINAL: Noah Do I bear some responsibility for the carnage? Yes, I think I do, but not on the ground that you cite. I don't believe a military solution can be imposed on Iraq by the United States. Early on I was ambivalent on this but I'm strongly resolved to the view now. That being my view I think a lot of innocent people and some very guilty ones are dying each day to make things worse, as it were, rather than to make things better. In addition, I'm concered at how little attention is given to what I see as the greatest victory of the terrorists to date. I'm referring to the fact that you and I no longer have habeus corpus rights. And since those are the rights by which we may assert any other legal right, I think we are in a major pickle. If I were attacking a democracy which professed to bring Democracy to the world, and could choose between destroying a city, on the one hand, and severely undercutting the political rights of that country on the other hand, I'd attack the rights. I believe the bad guys can't beat us in war-fighting but they can play us to endless stalemate there. And since they fight a lot more cheaply than us they can "make" us spend ourselves into the ground, just as we did to the Soviets. And along the way we bolster terrorist recruitment in ways and to degrees which would be anachieveable without our complicity. I think we are faced with some diabolical strategists, and that current US policy plays directly into their hands. And I'll fight for your right to disagree. Good post. I do understand and appreciate your moral position. Your points are valid to the extent as far as they go, and are consistent with a lot of good thinkers on the subject. But I disagree about several things, primarily concerning your definition of the "military" aspect. Yes, the US Armed forces are the major players on our side there. And a major weakness of most armed forces in a situation such as Iraq comes from the "if all you have is a hammer, then all your problems are nails" way of thinking. In the one of the last couple of threads were I talked much about the war in Iraq, I posted a link to an article that discussed Gen Petrious and the current military strategy in Iraq. Before he gained command, and was able to implement the new strategy, I was also unconvinced that there would be a "good end" to the mission. Now, I think there is a very good possibility that we can achieve what we need to ... if we stick with it. I will say that I'm ex-military, and I've always been interested in unconventional warfare and have actively be a part of that military milieu, so this isn't just something that I am grasping out for in desperation to recover from an untenable situation. If Petrious can have the time, and the support of the US, the odds are very high that all the death and destruction will have been worth something. Right now, while I can understand and sympathize with your point of view, the biggest danger to success is no longer the Iraqi's opposing us, but the voices of despair and defeat here at home. Our biggest obstacle to success is no longer our putative opponents in Iraq, but our good hearted and good nature compatriots here at home. My point in posting the link was to point out that by waivering now, the results will not only be the waste of the effort and lives lost so far, but an even larger terrible tragedy in Iraq. FirmKY

Sinergy -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 8:25:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY My point in posting the link was to point out that by waivering now, the results will not only be the waste of the effort and lives lost so far, but an even larger terrible tragedy in Iraq. FirmKY For six years, everybody who has been put in charge of what is going on in Iraq has assured people that they have some new plan to solve the problem, going back to the nitwit that invaded in the first place. None of these other people were successful. Yet Petraeus (hired by AnencephalyBoy) wants us to believe that his plan is somehow different. The current administration has done nothing in it's entire history to prove itself competent to find it's keister with both hands. The only thing that comes out of it is spin and more spin to try to get the rest of us to believe that they wont keep screwing up. Read the following article about a discussion by experts on world affairs in general and the middle east in particular, about the possible outcomes for Iraq. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13710030/leaving_iraq_the_grim_truth Petraeus may be a good general, but the past six years have been pretty good at proving Reagan's old adage (applied to FEMA) that they can "fuck up a two float parade." Sinergy

FirmhandKY -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 8:43:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY My point in posting the link was to point out that by waivering now, the results will not only be the waste of the effort and lives lost so far, but an even larger terrible tragedy in Iraq. FirmKY For six years, everybody who has been put in charge of what is going on in Iraq has assured people that they have some new plan to solve the problem, going back to the nitwit that invaded in the first place. None of these other people were successful. Yet Petraeus (hired by AnencephalyBoy) wants us to believe that his plan is somehow different. The current administration has done nothing in it's entire history to prove itself competent to find it's keister with both hands. The only thing that comes out of it is spin and more spin to try to get the rest of us to believe that they wont keep screwing up. Read the following article about a discussion by experts on world affairs in general and the middle east in particular, about the possible outcomes for Iraq. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13710030/leaving_iraq_the_grim_truth Petraeus may be a good general, but the past six years have been pretty good at proving Reagan's old adage (applied to FEMA) that they can "fuck up a two float parade." Perhaps you'd get a wider view of such things if you read some US Civil War military history, and the problems that the Union had in the beginning years. FirmKY

farglebargle -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 8:50:43 PM)
The US Civil War was primarily an Economic War between Rich White Men, while the Iraqi Civil War is the continuation of a 1300 year old feud over whether or not Ali is the right man. Are there parallels to be drawn?

FirmhandKY -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 8:56:39 PM)
Yes. Although someone with such a simplistic view of history and societies likely won't see nor understand them. FirmKY

Sinergy -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 9:53:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY My point in posting the link was to point out that by waivering now, the results will not only be the waste of the effort and lives lost so far, but an even larger terrible tragedy in Iraq. FirmKY For six years, everybody who has been put in charge of what is going on in Iraq has assured people that they have some new plan to solve the problem, going back to the nitwit that invaded in the first place. None of these other people were successful. Yet Petraeus (hired by AnencephalyBoy) wants us to believe that his plan is somehow different. The current administration has done nothing in it's entire history to prove itself competent to find it's keister with both hands. The only thing that comes out of it is spin and more spin to try to get the rest of us to believe that they wont keep screwing up. Read the following article about a discussion by experts on world affairs in general and the middle east in particular, about the possible outcomes for Iraq. http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13710030/leaving_iraq_the_grim_truth Petraeus may be a good general, but the past six years have been pretty good at proving Reagan's old adage (applied to FEMA) that they can "fuck up a two float parade." Perhaps you'd get a wider view of such things if you read some US Civil War military history, and the problems that the Union had in the beginning years. FirmKY I have, thanks for asking. However, I could respond that perhaps you should read some history of Ancient Rome and the difficulties they had dealing with the Druids. Which would be equally irrelevant to the situation in Iraq, except the fact that they are both militarily and economically superior nations attempting to conquer a numerically superior but militarily and economically inferior and hostile country. Sinergy

FirmhandKY -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 10:17:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Perhaps you'd get a wider view of such things if you read some US Civil War military history, and the problems that the Union had in the beginning years. I have, thanks for asking. I didn't ask you anything. (oh, I forgot. That's just one of your snide little comments that you like to throw in there to show your supposed superiority.) quote: ORIGINAL: Sinergy However, I could respond that perhaps you should read some history of Ancient Rome and the difficulties they had dealing with the Druids. Which would be equally irrelevant to the situation in Iraq, except the fact that they are both militarily and economically superior nations attempting to conquer a numerically superior but militarily and economically inferior and hostile country. Which has bumpkis to do with my response to your comments about Gen Petraeus's appointment. FirmKY

Sinergy -> RE: Resolve (4/18/2007 10:24:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Which has bumpkis to do with my response to your comments about Gen Petraeus's appointment. FirmKY I was thinking the same thing about your bringing up the Civil War and Reconstruction. Feel free to actually state your argument comparing and contrasting the Civil War and Reconstruction to the US Invasion and Occupation of Iraq. Sinergy p.s. Or was that simply some snide comment to try to prove you read a book about the Civil War in high school and I didnt?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.882813E-02