Al-Qaeda's Zawahiri mocks US bill

[Oath 0]

I honestly do not understand why this is even an argument.

Putting aside the Liberal and Republican bullcrap, we entered their country and blew the ####### out of it, as a so called civilized nation we as a people have a responsibility to restore said country, but the people of that country have to want our help, otherwise they will continue to destroy whatever we do. I firmly belive that the majority of Iraq and Afghanistan want our help, I could be wrong, but the minority are always the loudest and most well connected.

Imagine us being occupied by the People's Republic of China and somehow stoked the tensions along racial and sectarian fault lines. Do you think the majority of Americans will opt for cooperating with whatever puppet regime that is in place so that we can go back to our normal lives guzzling beer and eyes glued of ESPN?

tghink about it!

Hardly the same thing given the 'freedoms' we have in both our respective countries is it. I do understand what your saying though, but the example just isn't correct.

[metta 0]

I honestly do not understand why this is even an argument.

Putting aside the Liberal and Republican bullcrap, we entered their country and blew the ####### out of it, as a so called civilized nation we as a people have a responsibility to restore said country, but the people of that country have to want our help, otherwise they will continue to destroy whatever we do. I firmly belive that the majority of Iraq and Afghanistan want our help, I could be wrong, but the minority are always the loudest and most well connected.

Imagine us being occupied by the People's Republic of China and somehow stoked the tensions along racial and sectarian fault lines. Do you think the majority of Americans will opt for cooperating with whatever puppet regime that is in place so that we can go back to our normal lives guzzling beer and eyes glued of ESPN?

tghink about it!

Hardly the same thing given the 'freedoms' we have in both our respective countries is it. I do understand what your saying though, but the example just isn't correct.

Are you claiming that the US has bestowed upon Iraq the same freedoms we enjoy over on the stateside?

For one thing, where ever there is a violent conflict, freedoms are rescinded and restricted. Even during the civil war, Lincoln rescinded the habeus corpus.

My point is, for the Iraquis, its not like if they supported US backed administration, they will all, in the long run, enjoy the fruits of a democratic nation complete with the Bill of Rights and such.

For the Sunnis, they lost their dominance over control of power wealth and resources.

For the Shites, they just want to wrest away the power, resources that minority Sunnis have denied them through the decades and now want to get rid of the pesky Sunnis and interfering US. They're doing fine with their sponsor Iran and without the Great sayan breathing down their necks.

Perhaps only the Kurds want the US around to keep the Turks at bay.

Edited May 10, 2007 by metta

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The point is, we're fed our information through biased sources, and given that we cannot really claim to know what goes on there unless we've been or have a trustworthy source even then we can't claim that this is the honest truth.

If I choose between the vast majority of the media here and overseas or this here government propaganda machine and it's outlets, I tend to trust the former over the latter.

How can you tell which media is biased and which isn't? If we all had that foresight then President Bush would be screwed eh.

Well... you don't... You do the best you can by reading as widely as possible. In an environment dominated by corporate mass-media there aren't a lot of options. But dragging bias into every single issue has become a bit of platitude - especially on these forums with broad accusations of bias being levelled at posted articles which have more to do with the personal like/dislikes of particular posters rather than whether there is an overt bias in a particular piece of journalism.

On that point about Iraqi opinion. Here is the results of gallup poll of 3500 Iraqis from 2004 around the time of sieges of Fallujah and Najaf. Little old - but it illustrates the point that has already been made. We are not wanted there... Here also is the story that goes along with that

Additionally there have been more recent polls - see Here for links. They pretty much say the same thing...

Edited May 10, 2007 by erekose

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The point is, we're fed our information through biased sources, and given that we cannot really claim to know what goes on there unless we've been or have a trustworthy source even then we can't claim that this is the honest truth.

If I choose between the vast majority of the media here and overseas or this here government propaganda machine and it's outlets, I tend to trust the former over the latter.

How can you tell which media is biased and which isn't? If we all had that foresight then President Bush would be screwed eh.

They're all biased. You gotta take their information with that in mind. You consult many sources and use your own brain mass a little and I don't see how anyone could reasonably arrive at the impression that our presence in Iraq is welcome by the locals.

[homesick_american 1]

British ones

Which one? They're all pretty biased.

I honestly do not understand why this is even an argument.

Putting aside the Liberal and Republican bullcrap, we entered their country and blew the ####### out of it, as a so called civilized nation we as a people have a responsibility to restore said country, but the people of that country have to want our help, otherwise they will continue to destroy whatever we do. I firmly belive that the majority of Iraq and Afghanistan want our help, I could be wrong, but the minority are always the loudest and most well connected.

Imagine us being occupied by the People's Republic of China and somehow stoked the tensions along racial and sectarian fault lines. Do you think the majority of Americans will opt for cooperating with whatever puppet regime that is in place so that we can go back to our normal lives guzzling beer and eyes glued of ESPN?

tghink about it!

Yeah, but the Chinese government is evil. We're the good guys! *cue patriotic music*

[Oath 0]

Iraq — Population: 26,783,383 according to google, your survery - 3500, surverys are good for one thing a basic idea, it is no indicative of the entire population.

If jim has brown hair, and people with brown hair are angry, is jim angry?

[Oath 0]

Iraq — Population: 26,783,383 according to google, your survery - 3500, surverys are good for one thing a basic idea, it is not indicative of the entire population.

If jim has brown hair, and people with brown hair are angry, is jim angry?

Stupid edit button ><

I get it though but neither of us can really know the truth unless we've been and everyone there, which I certainly haven't so it's nothing more than my opinion which of course could be wrong

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Iraq — Population: 26,783,383 according to google, your survery - 3500, surverys are good for one thing a basic idea, it is no indicative of the entire population.

If jim has brown hair, and people with brown hair are angry, is jim angry?

That wasn't the only survey I linked to - see here for others.

Qualitative surveys are not "absolute empirical truth", but clearly others were able to reproduce the same findings, so it probably fair to say that there is some consensus here.

Edited May 11, 2007 by erekose

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I get it though but neither of us can really know the truth unless we've been and everyone there, which I certainly haven't so it's nothing more than my opinion which of course could be wrong

Depends what you're basing your opinion on of course. I'm basing mine on the results of those surveys

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Iraq — Population: 26,783,383 according to google, your survery - 3500, surverys are good for one thing a basic idea, it is no indicative of the entire population.

If jim has brown hair, and people with brown hair are angry, is jim angry?

So, do you also believe that the majority of Americans support Bush? I mean, they never surveyed all Americans when they came up with his latest rock bottom approval rating of 28% that would suggest otherwise...

Edited May 11, 2007 by ET-US2004

[Oath 0]

Iraq — Population: 26,783,383 according to google, your survery - 3500, surverys are good for one thing a basic idea, it is no indicative of the entire population.

If jim has brown hair, and people with brown hair are angry, is jim angry?

So, do you also believe that the majority of Americans support Bush? I mean, they never surveyed all Americans when they came up with his latest rock bottom approval rating of 28% that would suggest otherwise...

I already admited that my opinion may be flawed by the information I've seen, but since they can't have asked every single American who can vote that question I think its safe to say that the 28% isn't entirely accurate, it may well be, but since you havent asked everyone you can't possible make sweeping claims that 90% of Americans are obese, or that 90% of Brits have scurvy (bad examples ) by the same token I can't know for sure that Iraq does or does not want our help, it doesnt change the fact that as a civilized nation we are required to help rebuild does it?

I seem to recall a certain war previously where we helped the Taliban stave off soviet attacks by training them and arming them (albeit rather poorly in comparison) and then simply left them to it, which is where a lot of the bad feeling it stems from the feeling of abandonment, that we come in blow the ###### out of places and ###### off back to out coca cola and freedom fries. It's much the same situation with Iraq, we put saddam in power, we had a war with him, he was left in power, we left, then again we had a war, the ultimate reasons for the war are debated constantly, and you really have to wonder wether removing saddam was the correct thing to do, I agree with the war, I support out soldiers of all sides, but I don't agree with the methods used to exact this 'victory' I think there is a lot of work left to do in these countries and it is almost as much our fault as it is the undercurrents of society who are promoting the sectarianism and violence instead of saying 'well we have an opportunity here to become a better country' as I've said the remainder of the coalition left in Iraq is one of the few stabalizing powers, I realise that statement seems comical watching the news every day, but the British and US patrols are disuading many would be attackers from doing so, and simply pulling them out will leave yet another power vaccum for anyone with an AK and a knowledge if expedient devices to fill, the Iraqi security forces are trained (and training) to deal with this, but rather than being able to take to the streets and protect their country they are targeted by said 'undercurrents' for nothing more than doing a job that NEEDS to be done in order to effect the coalitions withdrawal.

Ultimately the outcome of the war doesnt matter, wether we killed more of them than they of us isn't important, what is, is that we do not simply vanish and let the fledgling 'democracy' (I laughed too) wander aimlessly in the dark surrounded by people that want nothing more than for it to fail so they can insill their own warped ideology.

There are almost 200 (maybe more I havent read the armys primer in a long time ) seperate tribes that make up iraq many of whom can trace their lines back to the gardens of babylon and beyond, they may well all want the US and UK to leave (as well as other countries) but until Iraq can support Iraq then we simply have no choice but to keep on fighting the possibly losing battle of hearts and minds. It is down to no-one else but the Iraqi people to become self dependant both in terms of security and their politics, feel free to mention oil, while the US and Uk occupy Iraq its safe to say that we may well be siphoning off oil, fair enough and in all honesty we probably are, but you cannot ignore the bigger picture.

A phased withdrawal that gradually gives more and more power to Iraqs own security is the only choice, with the option if need be to return if required by the Iraqi people. As I said a total withdrawal would simply leave the door open for not only more criticism for the coalition but feed more extremists with ammunition to attack and kill our own citizens.

Of course pulling out instantly may shock them into getting on with things I think history has shown that the sudden removal of an authoritive force simply leads to chaos.

You may rest your eyes now

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I already admited that my opinion may be flawed by the information I've seen, but since they can't have asked every single American who can vote that question I think its safe to say that the 28% isn't entirely accurate, it may well be, but since you havent asked everyone you can't possible make sweeping claims that 90% of Americans are obese, or that 90% of Brits have scurvy (bad examples ) by the same token I can't know for sure that Iraq does or does not want our help, it doesnt change the fact that as a civilized nation we are required to help rebuild does it?

You can't "know",but as I said before that was not the only survey that has been conducted. There have been a number of separate surverys which show pretty much the same thing – so there’s an element of consensus here. That’s not to say we should just “give-up”, but it’s clearly an important in determining whether what we are trying to do is actually achievable. If the civilian population is working against us – its hard to see how it is… That’s where a lot of the current back-pedalling (if you call it that) is coming from – the idea that we’re wasting huge amounts of money and lives to no good purpose.

[Oath 0]

I already admited that my opinion may be flawed by the information I've seen, but since they can't have asked every single American who can vote that question I think its safe to say that the 28% isn't entirely accurate, it may well be, but since you havent asked everyone you can't possible make sweeping claims that 90% of Americans are obese, or that 90% of Brits have scurvy (bad examples ) by the same token I can't know for sure that Iraq does or does not want our help, it doesnt change the fact that as a civilized nation we are required to help rebuild does it?

You can't "know",but as I said before that was not the only survey that has been conducted. There have been a number of separate surverys which show pretty much the same thing – so there’s an element of consensus here. That’s not to say we should just “give-up”, but it’s clearly an important in determining whether what we are trying to do is actually achievable. If the civilian population is working against us – its hard to see how it is… That’s where a lot of the current back-pedalling (if you call it that) is coming from – the idea that we’re wasting huge amounts of money and lives to no good purpose.

I don't know if I would call it back tracking as such, there has always been, well a lack of support for the war, and I guess we came to a point where the reasons for being there are outweighed by the reasons for not, I understand the reasons we shouldn't be there I also think they're a lot more apparent than the reasons we should. Of course the cost to the typical American (and Uk citizen) is very high, and the loss of life, both Military and Civilian can never be fully comprehended, the planning of this latest war was lets be honest, pitiful, Coalition forces expected to walk straight in oust saddam and be he saviours of all mankind, much of the coalition at that time was not fully prepared for FIBUA and even now is not fully prepared for this guerilla war with the insurgents or the 'hearts and minds' war.

I don't want to get into a long post again, but I can understand the arguments on both sides, I also understand how both sides feel they're right, its simply down to finding the middle ground.

Edited May 11, 2007 by Oath

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

True - but it’s not just about the debates in the US and Europe – we can talk about this endlessly, but without addressing the fact that we’re making decisions on behalf of a huge group of people who have no direct input into those decisions, who have the most investment in the outcome, and who (by most accounts) do not want us involved.

[Oath 0]

True - but it’s not just about the debates in the US and Europe – we can talk about this endlessly, but without addressing the fact that we’re making decisions on behalf of a huge group of people who have no direct input into those decisions, who have the most investment in the outcome, and who (by most accounts) do not want us involved.

Agreed, however if it transpired they 'did' want our help I think we should be willing to assist them when possible.