In the Democrats’ hard fought battle for defeat;
The U.S. military surge, widely denounced as a last-ditch effort by an embattled, lame-duck president fighting an un-winnable civil war, is working. Even as vocal a war critic as Deputy Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin, D-Ill., has now acknowledged as much, telling CNN that the U.S. military is “making real progress.”
Gen. David Petraeus, commander of the multi-national force in Iraq and author of the counterinsurgency surge strategy now underway, told Talk Radio host Allen Colmes that during the past seven weeks, U.S. troops have inflicted “enormous damage” on al Qaeda forces in Iraq, causing three times the losses sustained by coalition forces. Petraeus added that al Qaeda in Iraq, which is responsible for most of the high-profile car bombings and suicide attacks, has been “clearly linked to the… al Qaeda senior leadership, located in the Pakistan Afghanistan border trial areas.” In other words, beating al Qaeda in Iraq is clearly a serious blow to Osama bin Laden wherever he is hiding.
test
It will be most interesting to see what type of negative spin the msm tag on to their reports after that article.
Rome wasn’t built in a day and the coalition forces must take this fight to the finish. It comes at a great price which is even all the more reason for victory. I can’t help but wonder what the end result would have been if the first George Bush president would have “finished the job” in Iraq.
He’s got plenty of support but even so, with the price on his head, I can’t help but wonder what’s taking so long to find bin Laden and have “justice served”, or, is he already dead?
Bin Laden is already dead.
You can take that to the bank.
I had the privilege to hear Gen. Petraeus speak at last years US Infantry Conference. He is perhaps the best mind they have produced in a generation. He will win, but only if Congress allows him to do so.
It would be a crime of historical proportions if the US lost it’s second foreign war within living memory because it failed to win battles in Washington.
You have to admire the pure leadership and courage of Bush.
He had to change out the entire chain of command in Iraq – he had given them plenty of time to succeed – in fact guys like Rumsfeld were his friends – but he had to act. He had to find the right guys to get the job done.
He has no friends in either party – he’s on his own – but he acts on his principles nevertheless.
Under the ‘withering fire’ (I love this term for some reason) of MSM, pundits (I love this term too), arm chair generals, bleeding hearts, real hatred and venom – he shows patience – he shows calmness – he even shows understanding for his enemies – he shows respect – he listens – he really learns from his mistakes – he may come across like a yahoo -but – he’s not a yahoo – and most importantly – he won’t back down (as Tom Petty would say).
Watching him babysit Congress would be funny if it wasn’t so sad. He knows that Congress is fundamentally important. He cannot let them destroy themselves or America – so he has to do the parent/child carrot/stick thing – and not embarrass them – get important stuff done – and help them growup. It is interesting to see.
Recently having spent an extended time in the US – there is one thing for sure – in the small towns and cities – there is much more support and respect for Bush and his policies – including the Mexican thing – than the media would have you believe.
The job in Iraq is not done yet – let’s see if Bush can pull this one out of the bag. This is a generational opportunity for the US to reassert it’s greatness.
“It would be a crime of historical proportions if the US lost it’s second foreign war within living memory because it failed to win battles in Washington.”
Repeat it over and over again and you can imagine that the war is all the Democrats fault.
Well said ccon ! Let us keep our service men and women in our prayers daily.
Dumbass Jose, no one is saying it is the Democrats fault for starting the war…we’re saying that it will be the Democrats fault for losing the war. Now go away and drive-by someone else’s blog.
I keep George Bush in my prayers each day. (Stephen Harper too: THAT must be why he’s an American dupe. [sarc off])
Let’s remember, that Bush and all of us share a commonality: each one of us is far from perfect. Like George Bush, I’m a Christian: we’d both be first in line to admit that we’re far from perfect: indeed, we’d call ourselves sinners, but also a son and daughter of God. With our imperfections, and with God’s help, we do the best we can–in a hostile environment. (As we’ve discussed here many times, Christians usually get a really bum rap in the public square, e.g., Avi Lewis during his hate filled diatribe against Christians while interviewing Ayaan Hirsi Ali on CBC.)
I too have noticed Mr. Bush’s grace under fire. His Christian faith just might have something to do with the fact that he forges ahead without slinging mud with the pigs in the barnyard, which, under such severe provocation, must be very difficult. But he has more important things to do and knows it. God bless him and God bless the USA, which is sustaining sacrificial losses for the rest of us. (God bless our own fighting men and women. I pray for them too.)
This latest news from Iraq is most encouraging. Let’s hope it’s not completely sabotaged by the fifth columnists in the MSM, among others.
They won’t sabotage it so long as they think they need to help Hillary.
Way back in at 9/11, Osama Yomama was running around the Afghan caves on peritoneal dialysis. He was sick like a dog.
Operating dialysis in primitive conditions is bad enough, this guy has been on the run in a war zone for six years. Can you say skin breakdown? How about peritonitis? Yummy!
My money says he died of an infection long ago, or he’s a drooling train wreck in somebody’s back bedroom.
Meanwhile the DemocRats continue their program of saying and doing ANYTHING to regain power, American interests be damned.
What a reversal it will be to the left if the Iraq conflict is Won and AGW is revealed to the general public to be the bunk that it is.
The thing is that if both or either really start to turn the reversal of those who are on the wrong side will be stampede to the other side very quickly – it will not be a rearguard action. They were/are faddish in nature.
And what a coup for GWB it will be.
If Hillary got into power with a House and Senate majority, what do you think she’d do Kate?
Aside from the usual socialist idiocy at home, she’d be doing exactly what Bush is doing, probably more. That the peace weasels really think the Democrats are going to Stop The Killing (TM) only shows what utter morons they are.
Hillary or any of the rat-bag Dem nominees would be invading Iran before they got moved in to the White House. They don’t want a nuke in New York harbor any more than Bush does.
After all, who’s the one kicking sand at the Chicoms these days? Sen UpChuck Schumer, D-NY.
No war was won using the same strategy from start to finish. The situation on the ground changes, so do the tactics. The occupation in Iraq is so different from any historical ones. Little pinheads that envisioned the Americans wrapped up and home in three years with Iraq transformed into a Arab Switzerland are just stupid, but, stupid still gets you employment in the MSM or a seat in Congress by today’s standards.
Petraeus has skillfully turned the embittered and suspicious Sunnis into allies. AQ’s foothold with them has evaporated. Maliki(he resisted re-arming the Sunnis) has been a problem with his denial of reality and lack of spine, but, those are the cards dealt us.
The press, most of the Dems/Libs, the sniveling lefty America haters are in turmoil that Petraeus is succeeding. When you scratch the surface, it isn’t about really Iraq with them, it’s about America being punished in any forum.
Are you guys all staying at the same compound?
The actual war in Iraq is long over, and won by the US. The Iraqi people are no longer run by Saddam Hussein.
What is going on now, is an entirely different situation and it can’t be ‘won’ as a war. What is going on now in Iraq is the struggle between a tribal and democratic political mode.
The ME, as I’ve ranted on for years, operates politically, within tribalism. That’s fine for small populations but disastrous for populations in the millions. It then corrupts to a situation where one tribe achieves authoritarian dominance over the population by military force. That’s the ME. The US took out Saddam’s tribal political structure.
BUT – the Iraqi people can’t transform from a tribal political to a democratic system as if they were machines. It takes time to set up and work within a collaborative rather than adversarial system, to focus on the issues rather than ‘which tribe does your great-great grandfather belong to’, to develop a middle class which rejects tribal fidelity and so on. It takes time – and the left in the West both ignores this – and doesn’t want the Iraqi people to succeed in democracy.
Then, the other ME states, such as Iran, Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia – don’t want Iraq to be a democracy – just as they’ve rejected Palestine as a state (democracy). They don’t want democracy in their midst because the ruling tribes will lose power and a middle class, rejecting tribal filiation, will emerge.
But, it must happen. You can’t have that many millions of people repressed within tribalism; they must develop a middle class.
As for the left – they are basically, tribalists themselves. They reject the freedom of a middle class. They want everyone to be ‘ one class’, which actually works out to tribalism – where one group ia The Leaders and everyone else is – the workers (low class without power). So, the left is against democracy – and that’s why the left supports Islamic fascism.
Mission accomplished, yes.
ET, when you say it takes time, do you mean a hundred years or so? How long do you expect something like this would take? You’re talking about change on a colossal scale. Is installing democracy in Iraq going to do the trick? Who else is on the “to do” list?
Are you guys all staying at the same compound?
You seemed to have found the address. What’s your point?
As for the left – they are basically, tribalists themselves.
Amen to that. They’ve structured their political base in that manner with carefully crafted victim groups invited to it, then, never allowed off of their plantation. Just look at the denounciations and fury leveled at the two NYT’s liberals that recently refused to march in lockstep by writing that the Surge might be successful – Or – Bill Cosby’s demise when he broke ranks and stated that blacks need to take personal responsibility for their ongoing failures.
Lefties are fascists. Try denouncing GW or demanding better science regarding it and see how furiously lefty fascists will denounce you.
ET, this is where Canada, and even the UN, could have helped in Iraq – nation building. Our soldiers (when they’re not torturing poor Taliban, according to Alby), are winning the hearts and minds battle in Afghanistan. Notwithstanding Taliban Jack types denying military the means to win, we (the West, decency and freedom) will prevail.
Our military are fierce and professional soldiers, but they are really good at the shura approach of meeting with village elders and reassuring them the Taliban won’t be back. I just hope they aren’t taking Jack’s press conferences to heart.
ET is right, a nation cannot modernize unless it modernizes its political, economic and social institutions. That is Politics 101. That work is yet to be done in Iraq.
BTW, Ignatieff’s semi mea culpa is a setup for the next election. Now he will try to argue Harper would have gone in (ignoring he would have too). Harper’s comeback – rather than turning our back on the Americans, we should have helped in rebuilding Iraqi institutions to facilitate democracy and modernization. That’s what the UN should have done, instead of the pissing contest between them and Bush. How Russia, Germany and France get a free pass in this affair is also quite troubling.
No, Jose, I’m not in the same “compound.” I didn’t agree with the invasion of Iraq, but did note that AQ made very quick “inroads” into that country. No, Pakistan is not our ally; is is extreme naivete to think so. Musharraf allied with Bush after 9/11 out of self interest. He has no control over the border regions, ie no sovereignty, and Obama is right this must be dealt with.
BTW, for those who think President Hillary Clinton will appease terrorists, think again. She’s likely the biggest hawk to enter US politics in a long time, save possibly Dubya and Rumsfeld. I don’t think the US can be screwed with, not matter who is in power, not matter how silly Congress acts.
ET: The actual war in Iraq is long over, and won by the US.
Wrong. The Baathists prepared for the invasion by establishing irregular “Saddam Fedayeen” forces to continue the fight even if Baghdad was taken. Arms and munitions dumps were scattered and hidden throughout the country. The lessons of Afghanistan, Lebanon and Chechnya were well understood by the Iraqi leadership, and seen as a way by which the U.S. could still ultimately be defeated and the Baathists regain power. There was no break between the invasion and the insurgency. It was simply a shift in tactics. The conflict has been continuous and unrelenting.
What has happened recently though, is that the growing presence and power of Islamists and al-Qaeda in the insurgency has changed its nature dramatically. It is their extreme brand of Islam and murderous tactics which have disgusted other insurgents who do not share their beliefs or goals. Combined with Gen. Petraeus counterinsurgency measures, this has led many former Baathist insurgents and Sunni tribal leaders to begin supporting the new Iraqi government.
The left thinks that the rebuilding of Iraq as a democracy should have happened by now. My question is, how long is it taking for one city, to rebuild one building block in the same time.
Or have I missed something and the WTC has been rebuilt.
Speaking of lefties, how come Taliban Jack isn’t over there negotiating for the release of the Korean hostages? He says the terrorists can be talked to with reason,so why isn’t he proving it?
And yes,Hillary is one mean hawk and protectionist. She may spout silly platitudes like any politico to win votes,but she will never allow any foreigner to harm her country.
I hate to disagree with my fellow conservatives but I don’t think Iraq will work.
Their populations aren’t interested in it working. They don’t feel they’ve been defeated. They don’t want to live in peace with their other factions. They’d rather be killing other groups (and not just the Jews and Americans)than prospering themselves.
Until this happens, we shouldn’t be bothering with them. We should have dropped a bomb on Saddam from 30,000 feet and left the Iraqis to deal with their own problems. Ditto Iran’s mullahs and nuke facilities. We shouldn’t have boots on the ground.
If the population of the ME doesn’t care about their own lives, why should anyone else?
Warwick – as a conservative, I have my doubts too, but, that’s after the Surge is given proper time and Maliki’s ineptness isn’t resolved by the Iraqis themselves over time.
Regret taking Saddam out, never. Regret Bush trying something different with the intractable smoldering rot of the ME, never.
A two state Iraq(mainly Shiia and Kurds) with the smaller Sunnis and Baghdad within Iraq as their “Jerusalem” space may yet evolve, not necessarily a bad thing as it allows a comfort zone to ethnic Iraqis after having been pitted against each other for decades by Saddam.
The left, frozen in cliches even regarding their own divisive victim group electorate, don’t have the imagination to examine positive outcomes in Iraq.
The Iraqis are the only ones that can write the end of this chapter. I see no evidence that they are forging another Saddam to impose on each other. That’s a good outcome indicator. The Russians haven’t been as smart with their brief brush with freedom. America will leave as military imperialists we aren’t by nature. For the sake of the Iraqis, I hope we leave not because of the sniveling carping of the Dems who have no decent plan put forward as an alternative, no decent plan to fix anything in the world for that matter.
belisaurius – I disagree. The US war in Iraq is long over – there is a new gov’t in Iraq, run by Iraqis, and the US is not, and never was, occupying Iraq. You are ignoring the agenda of the other ME states, who don’t want a democracy in their midst.
The US, and other allies, are now helping Iraq defeat its own tribal infrastructure – and the insurgents who are being sent into and run by, in particular, Iran. This post-war scenario is entirely different from ‘Save Hussein and His Iraq’.
I fully agree shamrock – this post war construction is something that the UN ought to be heavily involved with. But remember, the UN is corrupt, it supported Saddam – and it’s hand in glove with Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria etc.
crabgrass – you don’t change an infrastructure, which is something developed over many many generations, at the flick of a switch. It will take at least 5-10 years for the basic change from tribalism to democracy and the dev’t of a middle class. Then, another 5-10 years for a deeper emotional commitment to the new structure of democracy and a middle class. And another 5-10 years after that for the new generation to be educated to operate ‘automatically’ within this new infrastructure.
I used to tell my students it takes THREE generations to change a societal infrastructure. With out modern electronic era, it might take three ‘sets’ of 5-10 years. Give Iraq 15 years and you’ll see a huge change there, and in the ME.
Who else is on the ‘to do’ list? Iran, first and foremost. Then Saudi Arabia. And Syria, Egpyt. Iran is the most important – followed by SA. The other nations will, domino style, follow automatically. Iran might do it internally, if they get rid of their fascist president and allow the educated Iranians to emerge. Might do it. But, Iran is trying, at the moment, to repress its population.
The same leftards that complain that PMSH hasn’t done anything are the same ones who think Iraq is a lost cause. They seem to forget that in both cases we are talking about trying to undo years of dictatorship, thirteen years of Lieberals and twenty-four years of Hussein and the Baathists.
The same leftards that complain that PMSH hasn’t done anything are the same ones who think Iraq is a lost cause. They seem to forget that in both cases we are talking about trying to undo years of dictatorship, thirteen years of Lieberals and twenty-four years of Hussein and the Baathists.
The same leftards that complain that PMSH hasn’t done anything are the same ones who think Iraq is a lost cause. They seem to forget that in both cases we are talking about trying to undo years of dictatorship, thirteen years of Lieberals and twenty-four years of Hussein and the Baathists.
ET I agree that there are many other players now involved in the Iraq insurgency, but until recently the most serious threat and fighting originated with the Sunni Baathists, principally in Anbar province and Baghdad. This was a continuation of the 2003 war, not some new phenomenom.
In 2004 (on “Hardball”), Paul Wolfowitz said, ” … it’s not insurgency. An insurgency implies something that rose up afterwards. This is the same enemy that butchered Iraqis for 35 years, that fought us up until the fall of Baghdad and continues to fight afterwards. It was led by Saddam Hussein up until his capture in December. It’s been led, in part, by his No. 2 or 3, Izzat Ibrahim al Douri, since then.”
Much of the Sunni/Baathist insurgency was funded and coordinated by Saddam’s vice-chairman Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, probably from Syria. His current status and whereabouts are unknown. He was confirmed as Iraq’s Baath leader in January of this year.
ET and Texas Canuck – it goes deeper than that, we’ve sustained serious damage to our US/Canadian culture since the free love, anything goes, stick-it-to-the-man 60’s. It’s where so much pathology came home to roost. It’s when feminists dismantled the family and victim pimps took center stage. Sadly, the slobs are still entrenched on our campuses and in the media.
We’ve gotten 40 years of schools teaching inane muck while becoming lefty nanny state overseers. The Bush=Hitler mantra has the dated stupid resonance of Abbie Hoffman and the radical clowns of the 60’s because those clowns later had education departments created for them. The MSM is in that same time warp. The vanity of aging narcissist Baby Boomers locks them into this script until the grave. Fortunately, there is evidence that our younger ones are more cynical, less herd like and expect less from government. I’m cheering for the misaligned “slackers” that are perplexing employers and politicians because they don’t appear to have a herd mentality and don’t want much out of either group.
The internet becomes more vital as we try to dig out of four decades of lefty cultural rot. It certainly has accelerated the debate and shot down idiots quickly. The best thing we could do in Iraq is wire the population in short order to the internet. Better to settle issues at the keyboard than behind a gun.
How could we possibly have a discussion about Saddam Hussein and the war in Iraq without mentioning the Oil for Cash program (supposed to be Oil for food program)? There are some very angry elitist, people hating, “Habitats for Humanity” (global slavery) aka ‘Ol’ unckka Mo’ (Marice Strong) slugs who were consolidating capital control of the world through the “Oil for Cash’ program.
We have George W. Bush to thank for splintering that ‘plan’. For their courage and compassion, President Bush, Tony Blair, Mr. Howard and the coalition soldiers and leaders are in my prayers every single day. The msm are, as anyone standing on two legs knows, promoters of the Unckka Mo plan (because global ‘equality’ would give media types A LOT more power!). Why anyone in their right mind would ever want to be a ‘global slave’ is beyond my comprehension. As for me and my house – we support President Bush and the coalition of the willing in this fight for Freedom and Democracy.
ET: “I used to tell my students it takes THREE generations to change a societal infrastructure.”
Did those students for the most part agree with you?
I don’t doubt that Iraq will look different in 15 years, but I’m far from convinced that it’s going to move smoothly (or otherwise) in the direction that you’re suggesting. I think that 15 years to a fundamentally different (meaning improved) Iraq is a wildly optimistic prediction.
“It could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months”… that’s what Donald Runsfeld said about this operation in February 2003. He could not at that time foresee what is happening right now. Do you think that you are better able to anticipate how this will unfold? I’m not saying that I am, by the way.
crabgrass – how would students have enough knowledge of the societal structures and psychological realities to agree/disagree with me? I’m a professor, not a group therapist and I’m not interested in their feelings, informal opinions or any ‘final group emotive agreement’. Knowledge is about facts and analysis. I also used to tell them that I wasn’t interested in their opinions; that opinions belong ‘in the coffee shop’. In my class – we dealt with facts and hard critical analysis.
As far as change in Iraq is concerned, I don’t think it will be easy, but the change is inevitable. Kindly recall that Japan changed from a tribal to a democratic and capitalist nation in 20 years – less than a generation. China is now undergoing that change. The three generational phase was pre-industrial.
Rumsfeld was talking about the regime change, not the structural change from a tribal to a non-tribal or democratic structure. And anyone with any knowledge of the nature of and difference between a tribal and democratic structure would know that you don’t flip from one to the other like a mechanical switch. Rumsfeld wasn’t talking about the structural change of the whole nation.
Famous Military saying: You can everyting with a bayonet except sit on it.
The point of the quote (and I think it was said by french general concerning the post WWII Algerian campaign.) was that he could enforce a peace of sort in Algeria, but only at the point of a bayonet.
Now Iraq is not a direct analogy, and god knows I’m happy the US Army finally got it’s act together, but when I see the rather lame Iraq government and it’s many problems, I have to say I’m worried.
Eventually, ( and soonish ) the US Army has to go home (For several reasons, $$$, and general avoidance of having ALL their forces exhausted and local) and training wheels come off and I don’t see any signs of stable coalition of local power brokers that can broker and maintain a peace.
ET: “I also used to tell them that I wasn’t interested in their opinions; that opinions belong ‘in the coffee shop’.”
How gracious. You must have been popular. Were you cognizant of the fact that you might come across as condescending?
Anyway, you can not say that it is a fact that it takes three generations to change a societal infrastructure. Is it not a function of what it is you’re trying to change and whether individuals there actually welcome the change (not to mention a whole bunch of other factors)? Are you expecting religion to be a ticklish matter, for example?
Fred, I share your concerns.
ET”Kindly recall that Japan changed from a tribal to a democratic and capitalist nation in 20 years – less than a generation.”
I’d hardly call Imperial Japan a tribal society and the Chinese have historicaly been a mercantile powerhouse, Mao was the aberration not the rule.
“This is a generational opportunity for the US to reassert it’s greatness.”
They were a great nation before and they will be after, just not so great as they once were.
“The left, frozen in cliches even regarding their own divisive victim group electorate, don’t have the imagination to examine positive outcomes in Iraq.”
Sure we do, once the occupiers leave the people opposing the occupation pipe down and start determining their own future. Iraq has never had a civil war before and it isn’t having one now.
jose – you very obviously don’t know the meaning of ‘tribal’ in the political sense. It means a society whose political authority is based on hereditary kinship – closed kin groups – rather than achievement by merit. The Japanese were a tribal political system, with a rigid societal organization.
The Chinese were not a mercantile powerhouse but an agrarian economy, primarily rural, based around villages – and kinship structures.
Mao was not an aberration; his agenda was to move China out of its peasant agriculturalism into a modern economy. He did it by totalitarian collectivism – and China is now 60-40 urban and rural. The rural population is still an enormous problem for the Chinese, as they attempt to move them out of their subsistence peasant agriculture. And, the Chinese population are rapidly moving into a middle class. They didn’t have such a class before.
The US is not occupying Iraq; kindly don’t be so thick-headed. The Iraq people have their own elected gov’t and constitution. Again, the US IS NOT occupying Iraq. Sheesh – the ignorance of some. Do you know what occupation means? Under no circumstances, can Iraq be defined as ‘occupied’. By anyone. Geez…
Iraq didn’t have a civil war before because Iraq, as are many modern countries, is a hobbled-together nation, with artificially grouped previously isolated tribes. This top-down amalgamation of different groups to form a nation is hardly a new process – and the tribes have to move out of their isolationism and adversarial hatreds and into a collaborative system.
Clearly if an editorial in the Examiner quotes an interview with some stooge general on Fox News, than the surge must be working.
So long as we forget about the collapsing Iraqi government. Oh… and the failing electrical grid. Oh, and all of those Iraqi refugees leaving the country. Oh, and lets not forget the fact that some neighbourhoods are becoming more peaceful, because they’ve already become ethnically cleansed.
Yeah… that surge is going great. Bush is the best president ever.
I have an old truck I’m selling if anyone is interested. Sure it looks like shit, and sounds like shit, but it’s working.
Would you believe me if I put it on Fox News?
If a sufficiently large proportion of a country’s population is dead set against being occupied by a foreign army then peace will never be achieved, no matter what the pundits on Fox News tell you.
The USA invaded Canada in 1812 in an attempt to shove democracy down Canadians’ throats and not incidentally to expand their hegemony across the continent. They thought they would be welcomed with open arms, that Canadians were tired of the tyranny of King George, it would be a cakewalk, blah, blah, blah. It was a total failure. Canadians spoke the same language, a large percentage of them were born in America or were the first-generation descendants of Americans, they were fellow Christians, they were not that averse to having more democracy, they didn’t care too much for their colonial government, and they didn’t despise America in any way – yet they turned out by the thousands to defend their farms and towns from foreign occupation.
This should be pretty easy for Canadians to understand. So quit smoking the neocon rope and snap out of your dopey daydreams. Middle easterners and Muslims in general can’t stand what Americans are doing to their countries, they hate the occupation, they hate that their horrible, brutal governments are propped up by billions of dollars in American aid and weapons, and the more laser-guided bombs you keep dropping on their houses, the more IEDs and car bombs they’re going to set off in retaliation.
Heck, john, you’ve got some points.
Remember the ice storm a few years ago? In Quebec, many farms didn’t have electricity for over a full month. Hmm. And of course, many towns in Quebec are often, often, on a ‘boil-water’ advisory. Oh – and remember after the 1970s and 1995 referendum – the massive exodus of anglophone people from Quebec? Some ‘ethnic cleansing’ when they were told that it was illegal to put up signs in English in Quebec.
Gosh – Paul Martin’s gov’t collapsed in a heap, didn’t it, when the other parties such as the NDP and Bloc refused to support it anymore. Remember the corruption of the Chretien gov’t and its use of taxpayer money to fund their political party? Hmmm?
Remember how we can’t get a verdict in the Air India Bombing? Several hundred people lost their lives and Canada can’t bring anyone to justice. Hmm.
Remember the Hepatitis blood scare, and SARS, and Mad Cow? We handled that really well, didn’t we?
And now, kindly give the Iraqi people credit for working on the massive structural change – from tribal to democratic – while we nerds, safe in our democracy, still find that we can be corrupt, incompetent and inadequate.
wow, ugh, that’s ugh..uh..some revisionist history you are writing.
So- the war of 1812 was ‘because the US wanted to ‘shove democracy down Canadian throats’? Eh?
Heck – and here I thought that Britain (Canada didn’t yet exist – bet you didn’t know that) was already a democracy. And you are saying that it, and its colonies, weren’t democratic. Gee.
And here I thought that the war between Britain and the US in 1812 had to do with the war between Britain and France – and Britain’s attempt to prevent the US from helping France. And Britain’s attempt to help the natives against US settlers. But gosh, you’ve just rewritten history.
It wasn’t about that French-native-embargo etc stuff at all. It was the evil intention of the US to ‘force democracy’ on to Britain, the most democratic nation in Europe.
Geez – what a Friday Night Tale.
Standing ovation ET. Bravo!
Will you retards Crabgrass, Jose and John kindly remember that it took five years of the total industrial output of the Western Alliance, millions of dead men and two nukes to get Germany and Japan to the point where they could -start- to turn around from tyranny to civilized freedom and the rule of law? We NUKED them, children. My old man and both uncles were in the Army and Navy the day that happened.
That’d be World War Two. News flash morons, the USA still has military bases in both countries. Big ones. Heavy duty stuff.
The Cold War went on how long? Cost how many lives? Don’t forget to include the Korean War in there, which came to a tie. Don’t forget that while the Soviets may have folded, the Chicoms are still fighting. They just switched battle fields to the economic arena while they armor up. You hear them threaten to dump all their American bonds on the market? That’s the sound of a sabre being rattled right up in the American’s face. I think George Bush’s speech of the other day was the sound of fingers brushing the handle of a .45 Colt.
Its friggin’ High Noon, right now, in the global markets and you IMBECILES don’t have a friggin’ clue what’s happening in front of your faces.
The Americans are -never- leaving Iraq or Afghanistan. They will have heavy bases there until 2050 at least. They are working miracles down there, pulling infrastructure damn near out of thin air. They have come farther down there in five years than they did in ten with the Germans and the Japanese.
Are they doing all that so the Republicans will look good? No, they are doing it so they will have a place to stand if they want to fight the Chicoms and the Syrians and the Iranians.
Go look at a map, idiots. Have a boo and see what country whose leader is making nukes as fast as he can is smack in the middle of Afghanistan and Iraq. What Worker’s Paradise is bracketed by Afghanistan and Japan.
As for the Iraqis themselves, I think if they get this kick-start from us with the basic electricity, trains, roads and phones their economy is going to start growing like Brazil’s and China’s. And like ours would too if we could just get the taxes down from ruinous to merely confiscatory.
They aren’t stupid spoiled brats like you lot, they just lived through 50+ years of hell. They know money doesn’t come from Nanny, it comes from work.
ET, you’re sort of farting around with the word “tribal”, aren’t you?
“It means a society whose political authority is based on hereditary kinship”
“Iraq, as are many modern countries, is a hobbled-together nation, with artificially grouped previously isolated tribes.”
Did Japan pretty much fit that second description? I don’t think so.
Do you actually believe everything that you write? You don’t think you’re being at all slippery?
Phantom, I’m not sure what it was that I said that you object to. You believe that the US will be in Iraq until 2050? I agree, and probably well beyond that. Why don’t they just say so out loud? I guess they’ll be in Afghanistan, too, and Iran, maybe Syria… How many bodies will they need, and how much money will they spend, do you reckon?
ET, do you think they’ll be there beyond 20 years? Beyond three generations? Do you think the US will still be there in 80 years? Do you think that most of the population welcome the US presence? I don’t know what your definition of “occupation” is, but if the Iraqi government asked the US to leave next Wednesday, would they?
I’m just not sure it’s going so swimmingly well.
crabgrass – Japan didn’t fit the second description – because it is a description of Iraq as a ‘created’ nation rather than a ‘natural’ nation, not of political tribalism. Japan was a politically tribal country; you obviously don’t understand what that means.
It means a political structure that is hierarchically hereditary, with fixed levels of authority – that are primarily kin or class based. Your status is hereditary, not achieved. You didn’t become the ‘president of Japan’ by merit, ie, by coming up from the peasant farmer scale.
I don’t think the US will be there in 20 years.
And I don’t have a unique definition of ‘occupation’. The normal term ‘occupation’ means that the occupying nation controls the political actions of the occupied nation; ie, the local residents don’t have the power of governance. That is not the case in Iraq – which has a gov’t that was elected by the Iraqi people. Their gov’t makes the decisions – not the US gov’t. Iraq is NOT occupied – by any country.
Iraq does, however, ask the US military to stay there and assist it in its battle against insurgents – both from internal tribalism and from external agents such as Iran. That’s not occupation.
Yes, and the US presence in Japan and Germany isn’t occupation either. Its a cooperative self defense effort between democratic nations.
Which is what we will have in Iraq and Afghanistan if the Leftizoids don’t screw it up.
Which is entirely not the colonial garrison Crabgrass is thinking of.
The US can never win in Iraq. Even if Bin Laden was dead someone will take his place. Nobody likes foreigners in their country. The likely
result will be the end of Iraq as a country with the majority joining Iran and Turkey taking half of whats left and Bush calling it a victory.