Is it a civil war yet?

[smeagol]

Don't even get me started on how much aid is given out publicly and privately....as opposed to other countries, who take it, then default, no need to mention any names

We did not default on aid! (thet is ing hilarious!).

We defaulted on debt which before defaulting (10 previous years) had a juice interest rate for investors.

Don't get me wrong, defaulting by my government on it obligations was a disgrace, right up there with many othe acts of disgrace you have never heard about but are too embaracing to be described.

With respect to aid, yes the US is the one who gives them most but I have seen many studies that show that other countries give more propotionally to what they make.

Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf War, Somalia, Kosovo...and so on and so forth.

Korea and Vietnam? Funny!

The persian gulf war? The whole World community went into that one.

Somalia? That wasn't even a war.

Oh, and you forgot Panama and Grenada

[MaNuMaNiAc]

Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf War, Somalia, Kosovo...and so on and so forth.

Korea?? Vietnam?? yes, the US went to war in Vietnam to help the Vietnamese... right? pfff...

As it should....they've also been more benevolent in victory and in a position of power than any other empire in World History. Ask the Germans, French and Japanese(well, better to read a book on it than ask the French).

Please! how were you benevolent on Germany? because you didn't bankrupt the country immediately in order to actually get something out of it in the long run? You think the US hasn't benefitted from Germany bouncing back from utter devastation? That's not being benevolent, thats being smart. Same situation with the Japanese. Germany and Japan were in ruins after World War II, it was not in the US best interest to collect its war debts (like the russians and the english wanted to do) while the countries were in shambles.

Don't even get me started on how much aid is given out publicly and privately....as opposed to other countries, who take it, then default, no need to mention any names

aid?? yeah, like the "aid" you gave Argentina didn't come with huge ing interest rate. Don't get me wrong, what Argentina did was ed up, no doubt, but what the US did wasn't being a good samaritan, it was more like being a loan shark.

Comparitively to other World Empires historically, the USA is the good Samaritan. We're also a death dealer of the highest order..it's possible to be both.

This I agree with, comparatively, yes. Wait a sec... I thought the US wasn't an empire? Are we calling the US an empire now?

[boutons_]

"The common scholarly definition has two main criteria.

The first says that the warring groups must be from the same country and fighting for control of the political center, control over a separatist state or to force a major change in policy.

The second says that at least 1,000 people must have been killed in total, with at least 100 from each side.

American professors who specialize in the study of civil wars say that most of their number are in agreement that Iraq’s conflict is a civil war.

“I think that at this time, and for some time now, the level of violence in Iraq meets the definition of civil war that any reasonable person would have,” said James Fearon, a political scientist at Stanford.

While the term is broad enough to include many kinds of conflicts, one of the sides in a civil war is almost always a sovereign government. So some scholars now say civil war began when the Americans transferred sovereignty to an appointed Iraqi government in June 2004. That officially transformed the anti-American war into one of insurgent groups seeking to regain power for disenfranchised Sunni Arabs against an Iraqi government led by Prime Minister Ayad Allawi and increasingly dominated by Shiites."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26/wo...=1&oref=slogin

==========

It's civil war, even if the dubya suckers are too girly-man to admit it.

No matter what it's called, dubya/ head have lost Iraq and created a huge terrorist training ground of a theocracy, later if not sooner.

The US military is specatating the civil war, powerless to influence it.

Baker, enthroned in the Repug pantheon of Repug political hacks, will most certainly recommend disengagement aka cut-and-run (since escalation is impossible due to exhausted US military).

The Repugs, as always, will take NO responsibility for losing Iraq (and very probably Afghanistan) and blame the media and the Dems as being so powerful as to force the Repugs into lying and incompentence.

[turambar85]

Call it what it is: The dimm-o-crap war. The
terrorist watch the news just like you and they
know who is now suppose to be controlling our
government. And those that are, want to "cut
and run" and declare some kind of victory. So
they are just ramping up the violence and let
the media and dimm-o-craps do their thing.

Wait a second...so the last few days of devastating attacks, killings, and burnings have only taken place because they knew the democrats won the election? Do you seriously believe that that is what went across their minds as they burnt worshippers alive, or mortared slums?

You are seriously reaching X-ray. Stick with the facts, making off-the-wall assumptions isn't your bag!

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Call it what it is: The dimm-o-crap war. The
terrorist watch the news just like you and they
know who is now suppose to be controlling our
government. And those that are, want to "cut
and run" and declare some kind of victory. So
they are just ramping up the violence and let
the media and dimm-o-craps do their thing.

Oh my god dude you seriously are the most unintentionally funny poster on this political forum. Its almost scary how sure you are of yourself.

[xrayzebra]

Wait a second...so the last few days of devastating attacks, killings, and burnings have only taken place because they knew the democrats won the election? Do you seriously believe that that is what went across their minds as they burnt worshippers alive, or mortared slums?

You are seriously reaching X-ray. Stick with the facts, making off-the-wall assumptions isn't your bag!

Those are the facts, my young friend. Sadly. The know very well what
the dimm-o-craps want. To "cut and run". Pacifist have caused more
deaths in war than anyone. Because it gives the bad people the idea they
can do what they want with no consequences. Watch and learn, watch
and learn. You are getting a real lesson about the real world.

[ChumpDumper]

The know very well what
the dimm-o-craps want. To "cut and run".

They know the Republicans want to withdraw to victory, too. What's the difference?

Pacifist have caused more
deaths in war than anyone.

again. Here I was thinking it was centuries of ethnic and religious strife that we unleashed by taking out Saddam without a clue what to do after.

[xrayzebra]

Oh my god dude you seriously are the most unintentionally funny poster on this political forum. Its almost scary how sure you are of yourself.

Yes, I am sure of myself. Why? Because I have history on my side. And
those who choose to ignore history only end up repeating it. And you are
seeing history repeated. We are seriously losing a war we had won,
the pacifist, liberals and dimm-o-craps have managed to pull defeat
from the jaws of victory as they did in Viet Nam. Now shortly, unless,
we change course, you are going to see a real blood bath that will
make today seem like a Sunday school picnic. Remember what happen
to the citizens of Viet Nam after we pulled out. Millions lost their life
and millions more went into "retraining" camps.

[xrayzebra]

Here I was thinking it was centuries of ethnic and religious strife that we unleashed by taking out Saddam without a clue what to do after.

That's what you get for thinking. You know how it always messes you up.

[ChumpDumper]

Now shortly, unless,
we change course, you are going to see a real blood bath that will
make today seem like a Sunday school picnic.

What does changing course mean? be specific.

Remember what happen
to the citizens of Viet Nam after we pulled out. Millions lost their life
and millions more went into "retraining" camps.

And now Bush wants to have a trade agreement with those same communists. What changed his mind?

[ChumpDumper]

That's what you get for thinking. You know how it always messes you up.

So there is no religious or ethnic strife in Iraq? Just American pacifists killing everybody?

[Bob Lanier]

[turambar85]

Those are the facts, my young friend. Sadly. The know very well what
the dimm-o-craps want. To "cut and run". Pacifist have caused more
deaths in war than anyone. Because it gives the bad people the idea they
can do what they want with no consequences. Watch and learn, watch
and learn. You are getting a real lesson about the real world.

Wait...so let me work through this, Ray, so that I can see the wisdom behind your words...

The terrorists are bright enough to know that a democratic win = the ability to run amuk and do as they please, yet are not intelligent enough to know when the democrats are truly in power, and that the President is still republican, and a very strong president, at least in terms of comparitive power with past presidents.

Also, the terrorists made the 9-11 attacks with the conservative hounds in office, and continued to bomb and kill for 5 years since, killing thousands upon thousands in the process. This was all done with these brilliant murderers knowing that your conservative hawks were in office.

Now, the democrats win, and the killing get a little bit more gruesome than before, but is killing nonetheless, and you attribute this to them knowing that the democrats will go easy on them...even considering the fact that many democrats, including Lieberman, have no "cut-and-run" plans, and so any votes in that regard are likely still falling in your favor.

Did you ever stop to think that perhaps the killings increased due to Saddams verdict, and the time leading up to his death? The verdict and to democratic win occured at roughly the same time?

Get the facts straight. Historically, at least, the facts are generally the truth, and the truth is generally the right path. At least I have that on my side.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I haven't bothered to read all three pages, but it looks like this whole original story was nothing but propaganda from the insurgency. Hey, if it worked in Vietnam, can't blame them for trying the same thing in Iraq...

http://www.floppingaces.net/2006/11/...enemies-mouth/

[ChumpDumper]

So everything is fine over there. Bush avoided going to Baghdad just for kicks.

[boutons_]

MSM is to blame for all the worsening, increasinlgy horrible news coming from Iraq, where things are actually going really well, but the WH's "bully pulpit" and the military, always can be counted on to cover their career-protecting asses, just can't get the message out.

The Repugs wanted to invade Iraq no matter what, which included silence and complicty from the MSM about the bull justifications for invading Iraq. The Repugs should consider the MSM their best and silent ally in starting this phony war.

The Repugs have lost Iraq exclusively by themselves, the MSM is not losing Iraq, but the rabble right is pinning the loss of Iraq on everybody BUT the Repugs. Rabble right are lying mother ers, too girly-man to admit the obvious that they and their adored Repugs have created and still support the most disastrous strategic error and US Adminisration in US history.

[xrayzebra]

Get the facts straight. Historically, at least, the facts are generally the truth, and the truth is generally the right path. At least I have that on my side.

Yes. would you please do that. I am not going to go thru the whole
process for you. You will have to do the work yourself. I have stated
the facts which you will not accept. So sit back and see if I was
correct or not.

[xrayzebra]

MSM is to blame for all the worsening, increasinlgy horrible news coming from Iraq, where things are actually going really well, but the WH's "bully pulpit" and the military, always can be counted on to cover their career-protecting asses, just can't get the message out.

The Repugs wanted to invade Iraq no matter what, which included silence and complicty from the MSM about the bull justifications for invading Iraq. The Repugs should consider the MSM their best and silent ally in starting this phony war.

The Repugs have lost Iraq exclusively by themselves, the MSM is not losing Iraq, but the rabble right is pinning the loss of Iraq on everybody BUT the Repugs. Rabble right are lying mother ers, too girly-man to admit the obvious that they and their adored Repugs have created and still support the most disastrous strategic error and US Adminisration in US history.

All this was said by an impartial observer, boutons.

[turambar85]

Yes. would you please do that. I am not going to go thru the whole
process for you. You will have to do the work yourself. I have stated
the facts which you will not accept. So sit back and see if I was
correct or not.

But you have given no facts. You have cited no history, at least no history that you will bother to back with said facts.

I would like some proof that the terrorists not only increased their violence after the democratic win, but that the democratic win was the cause of their increase.

I have given you some logical evidence for my opinion that you are mistaken, all I ask is a refutation. You should consider be kind because you are the one who is attempting to make a positive claim about a situation, and in doing so, the burden of proof lies on your shoulders.

I have shown you my kindness in disproving your claim, which, as we see lacked any proof of its own, so respond in like fashion.

Why, pray tell, did the democratic win lead to more terrorist attacks and how can this be proven?

[xrayzebra]

Son, you have not given a "logical" fact in any of your
responses. You have proffered some debating techniques.

Tell you what. How about you tell me what it will take
for you to come to the defense of this country. Ignore
our other conversations. Just tell me simply what would
upset you so much that you would defend our country
and way of life. Can you do that?

Is our President our enemy.

Is the dimm-o-craps plans for peace the answer. What
ever their plan is.

Is Iran having the bomb the correct solution.

Not taking sides in the Palestinian/Israel problem
the solution to our problems.

You tell me. You seem to have all the answers.

You see, there is one problem with yours and many
others on this site's version of things. Your very
critical but never offer any solutions. And put down those that offer support to our country and the
President.
Being critical of things is easy. Coming up with solutions is the big problem.

[clambake]

Ray, Maliki is in Iran right now. How do you feel about that?

Baker has had several high level meetings with Syrians. How do you feel about that?

Bush had no answers that you expect democrats to supply. Bush ran home to dad because he broke something he can't fix. How do you feel about that?

Bush running home is a clear indication that he doesn't know how correct his biggest mistake. How do you feel about that?

[turambar85]

Son, you have not given a "logical" fact in any of your
responses. You have proffered some debating techniques.

Tell you what. How about you tell me what it will take
for you to come to the defense of this country. Ignore
our other conversations. Just tell me simply what would
upset you so much that you would defend our country
and way of life. Can you do that?

Is our President our enemy.

Is the dimm-o-craps plans for peace the answer. What
ever their plan is.

Is Iran having the bomb the correct solution.

Not taking sides in the Palestinian/Israel problem
the solution to our problems.

You tell me. You seem to have all the answers.

You see, there is one problem with yours and many
others on this site's version of things. Your very
critical but never offer any solutions. And put down those that offer support to our country and the
President.
Being critical of things is easy. Coming up with solutions is the big problem.

I would only fight in a war in which we were being attacked, on our own soil, and the lives of civilians were in severe danger. I do not believe in aggressive wars, I do not believe that violence begets anything other than more violence. That is where I stand, take it for what it is.

I believe that Bush is an enemy of the state, but not numero uno. He is a bad president, but not the great satan. There are other politicians, left and right, worse than him in our own country, and there are dozens or worse leaders around the world. However, America is supposed to be the greatest democracy, and a candle in the night...so I hold him to a higher standard. Because of that, I see him as almost as bad as people who are, in essence, much worse because he has every reason, and excuse, to be better.

For the next question, I voted democratic for two reasons, social freedoms such as gay marriage, and an end to unnecessary wars, or at least this one. Iraq was a complete failure, and even I, and ignorant college student saw it coming. I have to imagine that those in charge did as well. And, a plan for peace, even if it is misguided, it better and more morally defensible than a plan for war, even if it were considered just. That is my stance, and I will elaborate further if you would like.

Moving along, I believe that our staunch support of Israel is wrong. We do not, and should not, have a horse in this race. We support them for Biblical reasons, which is wrong for two reasons. 1. The Bible does not rule over Cons utions. 2. If it is Biblical, and God has promoted the suffering and exile of Israel before, then God will end their punishment. The instant that God wants Israel to have "their" land back, they will get it. For us to try to promote that end is meddling in God's affairs. That is my take on handling Israel from a religious backing.

I offer no solutions other than to try something different. And I have heard no solutions from you other than "support our troops" "support our President" or "support our country". Those are vague concepts and have no basis in reality. I can support the troops in many different ways...the President is a civil servant and deserves no respect that he hasn't earned, and I respect the country by promoting the principles on which it was founded.

See, I answer questions, X, I wish you would do the same. I will answer in like fashion at any time you choose. Be kind and do the same for my entertainment. Prove me wrong, I happen to enjoy that.

[Nbadan]

Classic!

"Anyone who still remains in doubt of whether this is a civil war or not is suffering from the luxury of distance."

-Michael Ware on Civil War in Iraq

[Ya Vez]

Yup it's civil war.. time to leave and follow the clinton and UN rwandan foreign policy examples...

Just let them butcher one another..

[ChumpDumper]

Bushie already followed that policy in the Sudan and Congo.

Nice try.