Losing the Enlightenment

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Annie, Apr 2, 2007.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Too many posts recently make me aware of how bereft of history so many Americans are. Well the Europeans not so much, they just ignore history, though they know it well enough.

    I must say, I guess I'm in the process of leaving message boards that are 'political' since most of the posters seem to think 'political' means partisan. The few 'thinkers' are too few to converse with, as most of them post in a blue moon, driven away by the partisans. Now that doesn't mean that there are not those that are able to discuss these ideas, there are, they choose not to, it's so much easier to ram one's political pov and ignore the danger at one's door.

    In any case, here's the stuff I'm looking for, luckily there are places to find those willing to discuss:

    http://www.opinionjournal.com/federation/feature/?id=110009312

     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. maineman
    Offline

    maineman BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    13,003
    Thanks Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    guess
    Ratings:
    +572
    I think Rockefeller is absolutely correct: The WORLD would be better off if Saddam were still running Iraq.

    We would not have to worry about sunnis-shiite sectarian violence in Iraq set aflame by our invasion spreading to engulf the Islamic world.

    We would not have to worry about an Iran, empowered by the vacuum of Saddam's departure flexing its muscles in the gulf, in Lebanon, and throughout the region. The credibility and stature of Iran has risen immensely since our invasion of Iraq.

    We would not have to worry about our real enemies - Islamic extremists - finding safe haven in a country run by secular baathists.

    And even the Iraqis were not subject to the levels of random carnage they live with now in the decade prior to our invasion.

    Saddam was doing a great job at three things that we would desperately LOVE someone to be able to do better than we have done thus far...

    controlling sunni-shiite violence
    keeping a lid on Iranian regional hegemony
    keeping islamic extremists out of Iraq.

    Tell me why Senator Rockefeller is SO wrong for suggesting that the WORLD would be better off is Saddam were still in power.
     
  3. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329
    You will note that the only cut/paste was your own words so the discussion contains context.

    Tag, you're it.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. maineman
    Offline

    maineman BANNED

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    13,003
    Thanks Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    guess
    Ratings:
    +572
    your comparisons to Hitler are self serving and inaccurate. Even Colin Powell, six months before 9/11, said that sanctions had worked, and that Saddam was no longer capable of projecting his power much beyond his own borders and certainly not across the atlantic to us.... his atrocities against his own people had stopped pretty much concurrently with our imposition of no-fly zones over his northern and southern flank.....

    and yes..it is true for the time...so what... why inflame the fires of shiite-sunni sectarian violence when it only serves to lessen your strategic advantage?

    I do not "welcome war" with any nation. I begrudgingly accept war as a last ditch solution when diplomacy has failed. Clearly, you are too old to actually serve in a war in Iraq, so your purported willingness to go serve in a war in Iran is false bravado at best, and pompom waving while young Americans are sent to die at worst.

    And you are dead wrong about Rockefeller AND me...I have some experience in the middle east myself...I understand the gravity of what confronts us, and I firmly believe that invading Iraq and deposing Saddam has been counterproductive to our efforts at defeating the real enemies that threaten us. ANd unless you are willing to try and make the case that our true enemies were not wahabbists, but Iraqi ba'athists all along, you will have a tough time disputing that point.

    tag...YOU'RE it
     
  5. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329
    Iraq is only one battle in a long war. The gravity you understand is that we are not fighting a rational enemy such as the Germans and to a lesser extent the Japanese. You are not being realistic by wishing for diplomacy to work. Diplomacy failed long ago. Now it is time to root out the vermin and kill them.
     
  6. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    :eusa_clap: :eusa_clap: :eusa_clap: (Where's the good clapping smilie when you need it?)

    WOW! That's the best article I've read on USMB in a long, long time.
     
  7. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,548
    Thanks Received:
    8,163
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,165
    I agree. the enemies we are facing dont care about diplomacy or international law. They want to destroy us all. its foolish to ignore this.
     

Share This Page