Iraq, what are we looking at here?

[Brother None]

I don't like these arguments anymore, but for old time's sake I guess I have to.

Spring-Heeled Jack.

That's bullshit. No political incident is isolated globally.

Damn straight, much my point.

Bullshit, India is a functional democracy, let them have nukes. They may need them if Musharraf is ever deposed.

Oh, so that's the demand these days? Functional democracy = nukes?

And here I was thinking the NPT was designed to keep nukes out of any additional powers for the simple reason that nukes are bad, period. Democratic, undemocratic, it doesn't really count for shit, nukes can only kill a lot of people and nobody has the "right" to have them.

The NPT, quite unfairly, was designed to keep nukes to those that had them. If, and only *if*, the balance of powers in the world had significantly shifted a renegotiation of the NPT could be the result.

That's not what happened. India was an illegal nuke carrier. So be it, we have more of those, some with pressure on 'em, some with more pressure on 'em, ok.

Then the US goes straight over everyone's collective head, decides India is a-okay because they're their buddies (that attitude got us in trouble before) and decides, in a blatant act of extreme hypocrisy, that the NPT is functionally dead and the US the big boss on nukes.

So where's Iran's deterrent against building nukes. What? The US won't like it? Hah! Without the NPT Russia and China aren't forced to care either, so hey, let them build nukes.

The PNA was as bad as Hamas, and at least when Hamas turns out to be corrupt and insane it will be thrown out of office and loose popularity. Stupid ideas tend to fade away when they are actually tried.

1. Hamas has proven itself locally to be an effective, well-coordinated organisation with significantly less corruption than Fatah.
2. Calling Fatah (I'll assume you meant them, not the PNA, which is an institution and not a party) as bad as Hamas is something so dumb it should only be in Israeli propaganda.
3. My point was that the PNA was a stable power that could be negotiated with. Yet despite all risks, blindly and stupidly, the US decided to pressure a state not at all ready for it into democratic elections. You reap what you sow.
4. Stupid ideas do not fade when tried. ref. Sander.
5. There won't be any time to try any stupid ideas. There is no longer any monetary support to uphold the PNA and its forces, meaning degradation and chaos. What thrives on those two things? Terrorism? Well done, USA.

The entire West did that.

Not really.

Afghanistan is doing much better today then it was during the Taliban, and the problems we have there have more to do with the fact that we are paying way too much attention to Iraq at the expense of Afghanistan.

What the hell kind of excuse is that? I know you're paying too much attention to Afghanistan in favour of Iraq, that's the root of the problem, not "have more to do with the fact..."

The fact that you decided to country-hop on your invasion spree has thrown an unprepared country into total turmoil.

There is no way, at all, that you could possibly argue Afghanistan is better of today than it was under the Taliban, for a number of reasons;

1. A significant part of the country is still ruled by the Taliban.
2. Only one city in the entire country is effectively democratic. And it's not doing great.
3. The rest are ruled by warlords. Warlords whose excesses, wars and cruelties were partially kept in check by the stable Taliban regime. The stability is gone, the checks are gone, they rule unchallenged.
4. Bombs. Lots and lots of bombs.

You are slipping into Eurosexual "Blame Ourselves/West/US" routine again Kharn. It's not cute.

And you have yet to slip out of your old routine of mouthstuffing, shoving someone in a group where he doesn't belong and good old biased blindness. Luckily, that actually is cute, and amusing.

Islamofascism evolved through local as much as western influence, and the Western influence was primarily from the Nazis, Vichys and Commies, not us.

Yes.

And did Palestine have elections because of that? Is Iraq nearing civil war because of that? Is Afghanistan in turmoil because of that? Lemme check those off. No, no and no.

I'm not blaming ourselves for just sitting here and then getting attacked, which is basically the group of people you're trying to shove me into because it's the only way to make any strong argument in thine eyes, I suppose.

Commies weren't a Western power, by the way.

That asides, stop pretending my original post was about the development of Islamism which you still mislabel as Islamofascism. Learn to read. I'm holding the Bush administration directly responsible for exactly what they did. They forced the Palestinians into elections. They invaded Iraq. They left Afghanistan for shit after a lightning strike.

I'm saying, effectively, that Bush's foreign policy is a disaster.

You're reversing the way Europeans think by instead of blaming ourselves for stuff they did, you're blaming them for the consequences of actions that we undertook.

Do you think that is in any form less stupid?

The action-pulling out- is wrong. We owe it to Iraq to at least TRY and KEEP TRYING to help them get on their feet.

No, you owe it to Iraq to grow a brain and try another method because this one isn't work.

Hadn't occured to you yet, had it? If something doesn't work, like the way Bush is handling terrorism, drop it and try another method. Shocker.

But in terms of a clash of civilizations, (yo Kharno), it seems that the clash is more likely to be within the civilization than between one civilization and another.

3K people killed on 9-11. How many dead in Iraq because Sunni and Shia can't get along.

It is essentially a clash within civilizations first and a clash of civilizations second. Bush's actions are turning the pawns around and turning this into an actual clash of civilizations, tho'

 

[Jebus]

But in terms of a clash of civilizations, (yo Kharno), it seems that the clash is more likely to be within the civilization than between one civilization and another.

3K people killed on 9-11. How many dead in Iraq because Sunni and Shia can't get along.

It is essentially a clash within civilizations first and a clash of civilizations second. Bush's actions are turning the pawns around and turning this into an actual clash of civilizations, tho'

't Reminds me of the way the Belgians handles the Tutsis and the Hutus in Rwanda.
All good intentions, all good propaganda, and all good genocide afterwards.

 

[Arquebus]

Iraq is the new Spain.
Anti-facist forces being rallied against foreign invaders, just to get screw over by fractionism and infigthing.

 

[Jebus]

Iraq is the new Spain.
Anti-facist forces being rallied against foreign invaders, just to get screw over by fractionism and infigthing.

Heh?

 

[Paladin Solo]

I think he was trying to be teh smartness by giving us some typo analogy?

 

[DirtyDreamDesigner]

I think he was trying to be teh smartness by giving us some typo analogy?

Or he's reffering to the Spanish Civil war...


Who knowsh, Highlander...

 

[Paladin Solo]

Or maybe I was refering to his typo?

Who knowsh...

 

[Jebus]

In any case, both his knowledge of the Spanish civil war and his analogy seem pretty much far off.

 

[Ashmo]

Wait, wait.

Wasn't this thread originally about cum-parties?

 

[John Uskglass]

Spring-Heeled Jack.

Sorry Kharn. The less ideological I become means the less I am willing to spend an hour researching, writing and editing megaresponses until one side (usually the Right, ie me alone) gave up.

Then the US goes straight over everyone's collective head, decides India is a-okay because they're their buddies (that attitude got us in trouble before) and decides, in a blatant act of extreme hypocrisy, that the NPT is functionally dead and the US the big boss on nukes.

That's pretty much the truth though. And we've already done that with israel. And India will be, if it is not already, way more important then israel. I hope to God that somebody in this fucking country realizes that supporting and investing in India, a stable democracy with billions of educated and tolerant people is a lot smarter then investing in the most democidal regime in history.

5. There won't be any time to try any stupid ideas. There is no longer any monetary support to uphold the PNA and its forces, meaning degradation and chaos. What thrives on those two things? Terrorism? Well done, USA.

You may be right. I don't know much about the situation.

And I don't care that much either. Let Palestine thrash out against israel: it can do nothing beyond raids and slaughtering innocent children and grandmothers with suicide bombs, and eventually israel will just do whatever it wants to the goddamned palestinians.

The fact that you decided to country-hop on your invasion spree has thrown an unprepared country into total turmoil.

I agree with you.

1. A significant part of the country is still ruled by the Taliban.
2. Only one city in the entire country is effectively democratic. And it's not doing great.
3. The rest are ruled by warlords. Warlords whose excesses, wars and cruelties were partially kept in check by the stable Taliban regime. The stability is gone, the checks are gone, they rule unchallenged.
4. Bombs. Lots and lots of bombs.

The Taliban also supported the people directly behind the 9/11 attacks. There was no way we could ever have let them continue to control most of the country. There was NO choice but war in Afghanistan.

Commies weren't a Western power, by the way.

Western Ideologies. For that matter the Vichys where not a power as much as a puppet.

No, no and no.

You don't think simple Ideology has something to do with the present conflict?

I'm saying, effectively, that Bush's foreign policy is a disaster.

You seem to be ignoring some of the better moments: Lebanon, the Ukraine, Georgia, etc...

I don't know how anyone could have predicted the Hamas victory though. Without retrospect I probably would have supported free elections because, quite simply, Arafat was a Mafioso and his party and cronies needed outsing. But now I have no idea what should be done. Blood will find blood.

Do you think that is in any form less stupid?

I think, to be fair, that you are looking into the future a little too much.

Hamas may become a simple civil party without many pretensions of being anything other then a Palestinian AKP because they need aid more then they need water or air.

Afghanistan may stabilize with Khatami's not insane rule and American support.

Hell, maybe the Iraqis will finally realize that they have more to gain by creating a civil society and uniting behind some Deus Ex Machina of a leader.

And sure, pigs could fly, and I might fuck Eva Green. But the truth is that these are all still possibilities, and don't think you are being totally fair to either Bush or overall post 9/11 American foreign policy.

But I'm going to be honest: I'm only voting Republican in two years if McCain or Hillary Clinton are running. This country has had way too much Republicanism over the last few years.

No, you owe it to Iraq to grow a brain and try another method because this one isn't work.

We've tried a lot of methods. We tried just making it the fifty-second state, and that did not work. We tried just giving them sovereignty ASAP, and that appears to have backfired in our faces almost comically. What the hell else are we supposed to do?

Anyway, sorry, I know it's been a fun..ugh...wow, three years I think, but I'm no longer any kind of Republican, Right Wing or even obnoxiously Pro-American idealouge anymore. The idealouge in me has died.