Top Priorities

[antagon]

c'mon, man. a blog citing human rights watch numbers is not comparable to a peer reviewed scientific study. i don't doubt that saddam ran an evil empire, but tallying up the eighties till now in an effort to cast a comparable body count to the last decade is besides the point. sick even.

iraq has been subject to the most powerful military force in the world for 8 years amid an insurgency effort which cant be said to have been quelled. these factions targeted civilians and sheltered themselves among them. the government cant affect policy like it could before invasion. the police cant keep order. there has not been an improvement in iraqi infrastructure, there has been a decline instead. public works destroyed in the first few months of the war have never been totally restored.

how do you make a case of improvement, or rationalize it to yourself? it will take a decade or more for iraq to bounce back, easily. it would be an unprecedented miracle in an unlikely place were your cheery outlook on the country remotely true.

your timeline indicates zarqawi came to iraq around the same time we did, which i have been contending all along. your statement about saddam's collusion with ansar has been refuted. colin powell regretted his presentation of the poor intelligence which supported that claim. there is a historical relationship to iran and the group. saddam the great exterminator of kurds and arch enemy of iran was not in bed with the rebels operating on the iran border.

in 2003, i thought the war was bullshit along with the claims connecting saddam to chickenshit terror networks. i thought that powell pointing at tankers in an oil producing country and affirming them to be chemical weapons transports was playing to a naive and terrorism-sensitive america. i thought ari fleicsher was a liar and bad at it. the only cynical undertone i picked up then as to motive was the oil-for-food relationship between france russia and iraq, noting that those parties were vehemently opposing our escalation of war there. i didn't expect the war to be one of the longest in our history.

 

[Foxfyre]

Still hoping to get this thread back on track. Maybe taking the rerun of Iraq to an Iraq thread? Or at least focus on what the Obama Administration should do NOW as a priority re Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[asterism]

Still hoping to get this thread back on track. Maybe taking the rerun of Iraq to an Iraq thread? Or at least focus on what the Obama Administration should do NOW as a priority re Iraq and Afghanistan.

A bit of a rehash is in order before the discussion of what to do now can be had, IMO.

 

[antagon]

asterism defends the thread kidnap.

i am partial to the cut and run agenda, as far as obamapolicy goes.

 

[asterism]

c'mon, man. a blog citing human rights watch numbers is not comparable to a peer reviewed scientific study. i don't doubt that saddam ran an evil empire, but tallying up the eighties till now in an effort to cast a comparable body count to the last decade is besides the point. sick even.

It appears you haven't investigated the flawed methodology in the Lancet study and you're playing fast and loose with your characterization of the data I provided. You may wish to look into that. If the study was peer-reviewed, it was done in the same haphazard way that got World Wildlife Fund data into the IPCC. The process is not perfect. Also, I didn't quote a blog citing Human Rights Watch, I cited the actual Human Rights Watch. It's disingenuous of you to ask me for a source and then not even take the time to pay attention to it and discard it.

And note that since you have no competing data for your claims, you revert to questioning my motives and obliquely making a slur. I gave you my opinion, my analysis which counters yours. You asked for substantiation and I gave it to you. Now you're dismissing it without any substantiation? That's not honest conversation.

Looks like you have your mind made up and won't consider anything to the contrary.

iraq has been subject to the most powerful military force in the world for 8 years amid an insurgency effort which cant be said to have been quelled. these factions targeted civilians and sheltered themselves among them. the government cant affect policy like it could before invasion. the police cant keep order. there has not been an improvement in iraqi infrastructure, there has been a decline instead. public works destroyed in the first few months of the war have never been totally restored.

True, and all this was present in pre-invasion Iraq. Well perhaps the Police could maintain order, but that was by shooting dissenters on site, torching independent media, and kidnapping entire families of political opponents.

how do you make a case of improvement, or rationalize it to yourself?

All those purple fingers is a very good start, the thousands of small businesses that are now free to operate without paying the "Saddam tax," which was whatever the hell a Republican Guard soldier wanted when he barged in to loot the place. The ability for the people to fight against the insurgents and the terrorists. The control over their own destiny, however flawed it may be.

You seem to have no idea what it actually was like back then. I've heard the stories, I've seen the miles of rubble where a village used to be. I saw the corpses of women clutching their children, massacred by the Republican Guard just days earlier as they were fleeing towards the Turkish border. I know the studies show how much electricity was available in certain towns, but that ignores the fact that if you weren't a Saddam loyalist you didn't get any. I remember when we got the power running in Kirkuk and did a look to see why some houses still had their lights off at night. "We don't have any lights, we've never had electricity. Saddam never allowed us to have it."

it will take a decade or more for iraq to bounce back, easily. it would be an unprecedented miracle in an unlikely place were your cheery outlook on the country remotely true.

Again with the mischaracterization. "Better than under Saddam" is a far cry from "cheery."

your timeline indicates zarqawi came to iraq around the same time we did, which i have been contending all along.

How can that be when before the invasion Gen. Powell named him in a speech to the UN?

your statement about saddam's collusion with ansar has been refuted. colin powell regretted his presentation of the poor intelligence which supported that claim.

You are confusing one part of one speech that was then later partially denied to the general situation. Gen. Powell regretted the tone which appeared to paint direct link between Saddam and Al Qaeda as a justification of war.

Did you even read the HRW backgrounder and the Middle East Quarterly links I provided?

there is a historical relationship to iran and the group. saddam the great exterminator of kurds and arch enemy of iran was not in bed with the rebels operating on the iran border.

You seem to have a very simple view of these groups. You are incorrect.

in 2003, i thought the war was bullshit along with the claims connecting saddam to chickenshit terror networks. i thought that powell pointing at tankers in an oil producing country and affirming them to be chemical weapons transports was playing to a naive and terrorism-sensitive america. i thought ari fleicsher was a liar and bad at it. the only cynical undertone i picked up then as to motive was the oil-for-food relationship between france russia and iraq, noting that those parties were vehemently opposing our escalation of war there. i didn't expect the war to be one of the longest in our history.

It appears no facts will change your mind. I'm curious what got you interested in looking into whether the premise for this was bullshit and whether you actually vetted those sources. You've obviously ignored lots of stuff, namely Saddam's overt support of Palestinian terrorism by paying the families of martyred suicide bombers.

 

[Sky Dancer]

You are not discussing the issue.. you are discussing your feelings and presenting your feelings as fact.... there is a big difference.. and I will call you out every time you do it to to expose your smoke screen

You are right.. we did not go to war with Iraq to "better the people" we went to war with Iraq as a result of their invasion of Kuwait... we re-opened aggression after the terms of cease-fire were continually violated and the national security situation for us drastically changed (and that is fact)

We made more enemies and fed terrorism. There is more ill will toward us from Middle East countries than before we started.

The Iraq war is a colossal failure.

Name one more enemy that we have.... I'll be waiting

It is your OPINION that we have fed terrorism, and the opinion found on numerous left-wing blogs and sites.... It is also your opinion that the war was a 'failure' because it appears to go against your political agenda... by the criteria of the goals set forth, the war itself was not a colossal failure... could things have gone better or been done better? Probably... That does not justify your feeling, nor does it make your feeling fact (something you still cannot seem to grasp)

Name one enemy we have in the Middle East? Iran, Syria
59% of Pakistanis view US as an enemy
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010\07\30\story_30-7-2010_pg7_7

When Gallup asked Egyptians this year if the United States is serious about establishing democratic systems in the region, 75% disagreed, a 12-percentage-point increase from 63% in 2005
http://www.gallup.com/poll/113422/egypt-souring-attitudes-toward-united-states.aspx

Name all the Middle East nations that can be trusted on as friends.

 

[saveliberty]

Lessons of History:

Iraq doesn't work as an artifically bordered nation of three distinctly differing peoples. If it does, it is because of a ruthless strongman ruling.

Afghanistan has never been held by outside forces for long. It is a tribal-based region that will revert to that organization quickly.

The US government doesn't listen to history for crap.

 

[Dr Grump]

Lessons of History:

Iraq doesn't work as an artifically bordered nation of three distinctly differing peoples. If it does, it is because of a ruthless strongman ruling.

Afghanistan has never been held by outside forces for long. It is a tribal-based region that will revert to that organization quickly.

The US government doesn't listen to history for crap.

What I've been saying since day one....

 

[asterism]

Lessons of History:

Iraq doesn't work as an artifically bordered nation of three distinctly differing peoples. If it does, it is because of a ruthless strongman ruling.

Afghanistan has never been held by outside forces for long. It is a tribal-based region that will revert to that organization quickly.

The US government doesn't listen to history for crap.

While you have some valid points, the region we know as our nation used to be considered a worthless piece of land with nothing but savages ruling the roost.

That's not quite the case now is it?

 

[asterism]

Lessons of History:

Iraq doesn't work as an artifically bordered nation of three distinctly differing peoples. If it does, it is because of a ruthless strongman ruling.

Afghanistan has never been held by outside forces for long. It is a tribal-based region that will revert to that organization quickly.

The US government doesn't listen to history for crap.

What I've been saying since day one....

You can always go back to where your ancestors originated and see how it goes from there.

 

[Dr Grump]

Lessons of History:

Iraq doesn't work as an artifically bordered nation of three distinctly differing peoples. If it does, it is because of a ruthless strongman ruling.

Afghanistan has never been held by outside forces for long. It is a tribal-based region that will revert to that organization quickly.

The US government doesn't listen to history for crap.

While you have some valid points, the region we know as our nation used to be considered a worthless piece of land with nothing but savages ruling the roost.

That's not quite the case now is it?

You make the classic mistake of trying to compare European expansion on a continent and all the culture(s), mores and morals that go with that scenario, and that of central Asia. IOW, you are comparing apples and oranges....

 

[antagon]

Assuming that wildly flawed Lancet study is correct, 600,000 deaths post Saddam is an improvement. (7/12/2005) Saddam's Body Count

this might need to be done piece by piece. can you make an argument about the flaws in the lancet study and criticize the peer reviews.

can you preclude your link above from being a blog (or amateur publication), and that it does not rely on human rights watch stats, among other uncited sources? do you contest the fact that it aggregates this bodycount from the 1980s, where the war has claimed its casualties in the course of 3 years (to the end of the lancet survey and before the surge)?

are you aware that human rights watch has claimed that their is no valid humanitarian basis for the iraq war?

 

[Foxfyre]

The mass murders are a matter of record in Iraq. Just google Saddam's mass graves and review the photographs and reports. All the bodies excavated so far were pre-invasion deaths.

Such as this one. You'll have to down the PDF report for the whole thing and the photos:

Iraq's Legacy of Terror: Mass Graves

Download the report in PDF format
Since the Saddam Hussein regime was overthrown in May, 270 mass graves have been reported. By mid-January, 2004, the number of confirmed sites climbed to fifty-three. Some graves hold a few dozen bodies—their arms lashed together and the bullet holes in the backs of skulls testimony to their execution. Other graves go on for hundreds of meters, densely packed with thousands of bodies.

"We've already discovered just so far the remains of 400,000 people in mass graves," said British Prime Minister Tony Blair on November 20 in London. The United Nations, the U.S. State Department, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch (HRW) all estimate that Saddam Hussein's regime murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent people. "Human Rights Watch estimates that as many as 290,000 Iraqis have been 'disappeared' by the Iraqi government over the past two decades," said the group in a statement in May. "Many of these 'disappeared' are those whose remains are now being unearthed in mass graves all over Iraq."

If these numbers prove accurate, they represent a crime against humanity surpassed only by the Rwandan genocide of 1994, Pol Pot's Cambodian killing fields in the 1970s, and the Nazi Holocaust of World War II.

Please note: This report contains some graphic images and descriptions, including first-hand accounts from three Iraqis who survived the mass murders.
USAID: Assistance for Iraq - Iraq's Legacy of Terror: Mass Graves

 

[Foxfyre]

There are some underground rumblings that the Obama Administration might pull an "October Surprise" and push Congress to keep the Bush tax cuts intact including tax breaks for the 'rich'. Others suggest that he and his economic advisors are far too much ideologues to do anything that sensible.

With banks continuing to fail, with many more mortgage foreclosures imminent, with many mortgages continuing to be under water, and hundreds of thousands of new unemployment claims filed each week, there is more and more talk of a double dip recession.

According to Zuckerman, the American public is uncertain about the best way to go, but far less ambivalent in their growing opinion that what the Administrationa and Congress have done so far isn't working. And a growing majority now think we would have been better off if the government had done no stimulus at all.

The Tea Partiers and most small business are not at all ambivalent.

---They want the Bush tax policy to be made permanent for the immediate future so that business can depend on that.
---They want the healthcare reform repealed in its entirety and whatever is done there be done in a way that they can know what's coming and can plan accordingly.
-- They want the economic 'reform' repealed and whatever is done there be done in a way that they can know what's coming and can plan accordingly.
-- They want all unexpended stimulus and TARP funds to be returned to the national treasury and used for nothing but to reduce the deficit.

They are convinced that if the admiinistration would do that, the economy would turn around immediately and we would start pulling out of this mess.

The Most Fiscally Irresponsible Government in U.S. History
Current federal budget trends are capable of destroying this country
By Mortimer B. Zuckerman
August 26, 2010

There is an instinctive conclusion among the American public that President Obama's stimulus package has failed to create a sustained recovery. Unemployment has increased, not declined; consumers have retrenched; housing starts have crashed along with mortgage applications; and there is a fear that a double-dip recession may very well be in the pipeline. The public perception, reflected in Pew Research/National Journal polls, is that the measures to combat the Great Recession have mostly helped large banks and financial institutions, and that's a view common to Republicans (75 percent) and Democrats (73 percent). Only one third of either political leaning thinks government policies have done a great deal or a fair amount for the poor.


There is another instinctive conclusion among the American people. It is that the national deficit, and the debts we have accumulated, are of critical political importance. On the national debt, the money the government has spent without the tax revenues to pay for it has produced mind-numbing numbers so large as to be disconnected from reality. Zeros from here to infinity. The sums are hard to describe; it is hard to describe an elephant, but you know one when you see one. The public knows that, shuffle the numbers as you may, the level of debt is unsustainable.

Who could be surprised since millions of voters have discovered that for themselves? As one realizes the morning after the night before, there is an unavoidable penalty for excess. It is unnerving to wake up and learn that you have a mortgage on your home that exceeds the value of the property. Or, and too often both, you have a credit card line that you cannot repay and the issuer has you on the rack for ever bigger compound interest on the debt. The lesson has been well and truly learned that debt catches up with you. Millions understand that they are just going to have to find a way to live within their means—and then still eke out some savings to pay down debt. And there are well over 14 million Americans without a paying job, so the level of discontent is very high. Just how are they going to regain control of their lives?

In a usnews.com post on July 26, Jodie Allen of the Pew Research Center reported that in recent weeks more academic and market economists have been urging the government to defer budget cuts and tax increases and instead provide additional stimulus to a still-fragile economy, some by continuing the Bush tax cuts. But among the public there has been a suggestive shift of opinion the other way, reflecting worries about debt. "Deficit and government spending" has jumped from 10th or 11th place as a priority for the federal government to one that is second only to job creation and economic growth. The drift of opinion is manifest in other recent polls. For instance, a CBS poll conducted July 9-12 assessed the most important problem facing the country as the economy and jobs (38 percent), with concern about the budget deficit and national debt way down at 5 percent. Yet CNN (July 16-21) has 47 percent preoccupied first with the economy, and 13 percent with the federal deficit. In a recent Time magazine poll, two thirds of the respondents say they oppose a second government stimulus program and more than half say the country would have been better off without the first one. . . .
http://politics-origin.usnews.com/opinion/photos/political-cartoons-august-2010

 

[antagon]

The mass murders are a matter of record in Iraq. Just google Saddam's mass graves and review the photographs and reports. All the bodies excavated so far were pre-invasion deaths...

make the naivete stop.

in the chilcott inquiry, tony blair redacted his notorious 400k bodies claim after fewer than 10k were discovered. human rights watch has discredited their own claims because the heresay from kurds turned out to be dramatically overexaggerated and they received criticism for the extent that they turned around and published these figures without thinking to investigate if any of it was true, or to the extent reported.

do you even recognize that the coalition exaggerated marginal evidence to make a case for invading iraq and to justify having done so notwithstanding that evidence (the WMDs) being seen for what it was?

this is a peak at the crossroads between gullibility and outdated information.

 

[antagon]

i dont think that the btc's will be made permanent, but i'd put my money on an extension.

wait.. my money is riding on an extension.

 

[Foxfyre]

The mass murders are a matter of record in Iraq. Just google Saddam's mass graves and review the photographs and reports. All the bodies excavated so far were pre-invasion deaths...

make the naivete stop.

in the chilcott inquiry, tony blair redacted his notorious 400k bodies claim after fewer than 10k were discovered. human rights watch has discredited their own claims because the heresay from kurds turned out to be dramatically overexaggerated and they received criticism for the extent that they turned around and published these figures without thinking to investigate if any of it was true, or to the extent reported.

do you even recognize that the coalition exaggerated marginal evidence to make a case for invading iraq and to justify having done so notwithstanding that evidence (the WMDs) being seen for what it was?

this is a peak at the crossroads between gullibility and outdated information.

Perhaps. I haven't read up on it for some time so am not confident enough to comment. I do know it makes a difference what source you consult for the information. My sources have been mostly what the Iraqis themselves have said and reports from the 'front'.

There was this blurb in the Huffington Post earlier this year - the Huff Post not being considered favorable to either the Iraq War or the Bush administration:

BAGHDAD — Iraq's Human Rights Ministry says a Saddam Hussein-era mass grave dating to his 1991 suppression of a Shiite revolt has been unearthed in the south.

Ministry's spokesman Kamil Ameen says government teams working on an irrigation project found the grave in an agricultural area in Maysan province.

Ameen told The Associated Press Tuesday that about 20 bodies were unearthed. The irrigation project has been put on hold until the excavation is complete.

Since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion toppling Saddam's regime, mass graves have been found across Iraq.

Following Saddam's defeat in the first Gulf War, Iraq's Shiites revolted in the south, but were brutally suppressed. Hundreds of thousands are believed to have been killed.
Iraq Mass Grave: New Find Dates To Saddam Era

But I'll reserve further comment until I care enough about who is right to research it further.

 

[antagon]

But I'll reserve further comment until I care enough about who is right to research it further.

i've run out of steam on this topic too. it goes back to top priorities, really. we've got our own battles to wage here at home.

the economy has buried 10 million in mass graves of unemployment -- alive

 

[Foxfyre]

Returning to that Rasmussen Poll this week:

Rasmussen runs a weekly poll to determine what Americans (likely voters) are most concerned about.

The overwhelming #1 issue has been the Economy and Jobs for many weeks now.

The #2 issue however is corruption and graft in government.

52% think that most members of Congress would sell their vote.

 

[Spoonman]

Returning to that Rasmussen Poll this week:

Rasmussen runs a weekly poll to determine what Americans (likely voters) are most concerned about.

The overwhelming #1 issue has been the Economy and Jobs for many weeks now.

The #2 issue however is corruption and graft in government.

52% think that most members of Congress would sell their vote.

I'm surprised at only 52%