The War in Iraq is already a success

[mosch]

The war in iraq has killed between eight and ten thousand Iraqi civilians. Yes, that's right, three times more civilian deaths than occurred on 9/11 have occurred during the Iraq war.

Terrorism is not simply a result of tyrrany. It's the result of deep hatred of a power that is too large to battle symmetrically. If this war creates more people who hate America, it is likely to create more terrorism than it could ever solve. It seems likely that this wave of anti-americanism will assist terrorist groups in their recruiting efforts, and result in increased insecurity for Aericans.

The neoconservatives view America as the policeman of the entire world. They believe that the United States should use it's power, both military and economic, to promote it's values around the world. They could then prevent attacks against America, by creating an American empire, which controls the regions which are likely to be hostile against us.

I sincerely hope that the Bush administration's radical theories are correct, but I believe they are not. I believe the end result of this invasion will be the further radicalization of extremists, increased insecurity for the peoples of the lands we occupy and increased insecurity for ourselves.

If you want to read about the neoconservative agenda, in their own words, read the articles at New American Century, where you can find their theories on the Middle East (including this war in Iraq) being publicly stated since 1997. Other major neoconservative thinktanks are the American Enterprise Institute and the Center for Security Policy. Major neoconservative publications are The New Republic, The Weekly Standard, National Review, and Commentary. In these publications, you'll read passionate support for the overthrow of numerous countries and the creation of a worldwide American empire.

To how things change, but they always stay the same, you could take a look at the 1992 draft "defense planning guidance", and then compare it to this 2002 national security strategy document.

The only conservative idea you'll find in these neoconservative doctrines is that we tax rates should be reduced. The rest of it is filled with incredibly radical concepts of hegemony disguised as liberation, and a view that the United States must become the new Rome.

[hetron]

The immoral one sided support of Israel? How hypocritical can you get?

Who would you have the US support? Despotic Arab regimes? The PA, who sits in the corner and laughs every time 20 more Israelis are murdered? Hamas? Until Joe Palestinian gets his act together and gets a reasonable political alternative in office, there's nobody to support. You're a fucking joke. Wait til you Americans turn tail and hide when a 9/11 is happening every day in New York, Dallas, LA. Dean will be in office and you'll be begging Allah for mercy.




Again, I think this all goes back to international law. The whole reason the UN was set up was to prevent wars and occupations in the first place.

I have seen you argue this both ways. On the one hand, you lump in the Palestinians with the Jordanians, stating that their cultural similarities make obsolete the need for an independent Palestinian state. On the other, you state the Israelis will only negotiate with them "when they get their act together". But if you state that they do not have the right to self-determination, what exactly is going to be negotiated?

[Gamblor]

Theoretically, there is no need to distinguish between Palestinians and Jordanians, as they are the 100% the same ethnically and culturally.

In reality, the Palestinians are those who define themselves as one of the recent national construct "Palestinian". That's it. So if you want to define yourself as a Palestinian, that's yours. But to exercise their's right to self determination, one must expect that they choose leadership, either peacefully or by force, that furthers goals conducive to peace while the established states (namely, Israel), are not compromised in their security. Which a terrorist state in the Yehuda/Shomron region would most certainly be, given the past Arab belligerence that led to the Israeli presence there to begin with.

[Gamblor]

As in other quasi-totalitarian dictatorships, the press in Saudi Arabia must express views approved by the government.

Arab News, "Assassination of Yassin: Who is to Blame?" by Muhammad Salahuddin has to make Bush wonder.

Select excerpts:

"The people who are slaughtering the Palestinians on a daily basis are not Ariel Sharon, the Israeli prime minister and his Zionist aides. The actual killers are the government of President George Bush who still insists that the Zionist terror and the war of genocide waged by Sharon is an act of legitimate self-defense while the Palestinian resistance to the occupation is terrorism."

"The assassination of Sheikh Yassin, for all his status, history, personal qualities and the high place he occupies among the people inside and outside Palestine, is no bigger an outrage than the murder of tens of Palestinians who are being knocked down day and night by American bullets and rockets,"

Salahuddin ends by calling for the complete destruction of Israel, stating that

"the Muslim Ummah will never find the burden of steadfastness and jihad unbearable. It is capable of, with the help of the Almighty Allah, facing the challenge and prevailing over the enemy, and it will never give up even one inch of Palestine land, whatever may be the brutality of the occupiers and their supporters."

I wonder how apologists for the U.S.-Saudi "friendship" are going to explain this particular state-sanctioned piece.

[hetron]

So the Israelis are occupants of the territories in order to keep themselves safe? I bet they have had more civilian/army casualties since they took over that territory than they had before. Let me look it up. I'll get back to you.

[Jim Kuhn]

Too bad it was not 80 billion of Canadian tax dollars paying for this war. I wish we would clean up our neighborhoods first before attempting to clean up the world. I think the negatives outwiegh the positives even if we would have found wmd!

[ACPlayer]

Nothing hypocritical in what I said. You can disagree with it if you like, my statements are not hypocritical. Your defense of IDF's actions, given your avowed support of the history of the Jewish people is hypocritical.

The US already support of despotical regimes (as has been pointed our repeatedly) in the middle east and that support has helped turn the terrorist against us and brought the battle to these shores. As has been pointed out before, our support for all the regimes in the region that target those without power has led us to this position. I listed those regimes earlier.

Israel's constant thirst to grab land from the people who have lived there for thousands of years is a direct cause of terrorism againt the Israeli population. Our support that has contributed to the land grab has turned their attention on the US. Claiming that we should continue to support Israel begause the other side is terrorist, forgets the reason that the terrorists were created in the first place.

If the US ever becomes awash (which I dont believe by the way) in terrorist acts, the reasons are the same as I have stated before.

If Rodney King plants a bomb in LAPD HQ, I would expect the rule of law to prevail in a court room and not with extra-judicial actions.

[ACPlayer]

There you again! Forgeting the old history is NOT possible. You have to more than acknowledge past history you have to put the present action in the total history.

[andyfox]

Talking point #1:

Muammar Qhaddafi, in the months leading up to, during, and after the War, disavows a nuclear weapons program, bringing Libya into the Western world and securing a peaceful partner in a hostile region.

This is hogwash. In point of fact Kadafi was willing to give up his WMD probram in 1999. It was not the Bush administration's "nine months of intense negotiations" or the invasion of Iraq that made Kadafi see the light. Rather, as his representatives told our at secret meetings in Geneva in 1999, Kadafi realized that Libya and the U.S. faced a common threat from Islamic fundamentalism. Thus Libya agreed to cooperate in our campaign against Oasma bin Laden.

So Bush, to his credit, completed a diplomatic plan started by Clinton in 1999. But Kadafi did not give up his WMD programs because of the war in Iraq.

More distortions from the masters in the Bush administration.

[nicky g]

"If you're insinuating that the democratically elected government of Israel is a disgusting "regime", you're now telling the people that they are incapable of choosing their own leadership. "I know whats best for you better than you do". "

Not elected by the millions of Palestinians it represses daily, and yes, a disgusting regime, led by a vile war criminal who will hopefully be in the dock very soon, albeit for the least of his crimes. But you obviously dind't read what I wrote. You descried the idea of the US supporting repressive Arab states (ignoring the fact that it does do exactly that, in two cases as a bribe for peaceful relations with Israel), and I pointed out that Israel is probably unsurpassed in its history of proud support for odious regimes, the South African apartheid state being the most glaring example. Still, no doubt those vicious blacks were evil terrorists or somesuch.