MERGED--> all discussion of Israel/Lebanon conflict - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-14-2006, 07:30 PM   #76
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 11:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




i'll say it once more: the only reason Iraq is not *yet* Bosnia is because of US Troops on the ground in Iraq. basically, you're saying that because Iraq does not yet have the body count of Bosnia -- which was the worst example of European bloodshed since WW2, quite a high standard -- then everything is just dandy. a functioning government does not have 50 people die in the capital on a random Tuesday. if the government were as wonderful as you think it is, then when will Maliki deem it necessary to suppress the violence? he won't because he can't!

many Iraqi MPs think they are in a Civil War. Maliki has said that Iraq is pretty much on it's last legs: "If it fails, I don't know what the destiny of Iraq will be." and Colin Powell thinks we are in a Civil War:

[q]In between panels, I ran into Colin Powell and asked him if we are ever going to get out of Iraq. "We are," he told me, "but we're not going to leave behind anything we like because we are in the middle of a civil war."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ariann...n_b_24599.html

[/q]

and since we all know you believe everything that Powell says, then it must be so.

[q]Bombings, shootings, and other types of random violence have been happening since 2003. Its just that since the February Mosque bombing, every time there is violence, its now labled as being sectarian in nature with little or no evidence[/q]


oh, for goodness sake, NO ONE BELIEVES this anymore.

[q]The U.S. commander in Iraq, General George Casey, said Sunni militants in al Qaeda were stoking the sectarian violence that pits majority Shi'ites against the once-dominant Sunni minority.

"What we are seeing now as a counter to that are death squads, primarily from Shi'ite extremist groups that are retaliating against civilians," he told reporters.

"So you have both sides now attacking civilians. And that is what has caused the recent spike in violence here in Baghdad."

U.S. commanders have often been careful not to label gunmen as Shi'ites, although many of the recent attacks in Baghdad neighborhoods have been blamed by Sunnis and police on the Mehdi army militia controlled by Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr.

Sadr and his followers vigorously deny the accusations.

BIGGEST CHALLENGE

U.S. envoy Zalmay Khalilzad said sectarian violence was now the main challenge to the security forces, overtaking the three- -year-old Sunni insurgency as the biggest source of instability.

"A year ago, terrorism and the insurgency against the coalition and the Iraqi security forces were the principal sources of instability," Khalilzad said on Tuesday. "Violent sectarianism is now the main challenge."

As a result, the U.S. military is adapting its tactics to focus more on containing the sectarian violence, but Rumsfeld cautioned that the "solution is not military."

[/q]


your comparison to murders in the US is laughable -- the US has 300 million people, Iraq 25 million, and please tell me the last time we had a suicide bombing in the US. please tell me the last time we 100 people were killed in, say, Los Angeles (a city far larger than Baghdad) over 96 hours.

it's not the absence of violence that makes a government effective, it's the government's ability to create a civil society that guarantees a basic level of security to it's citizens, a society where the middle class does not flee because they fear violence. the United States has this. Northern Ireland, even in the 1970s, had this.

Iraq does not.
Iraq does not have anything remotely approaching the body count found in Bosnia, Rawanda, Sudan, the Congo, or several other places around the globe. LESS PEOPLE are dying in Iraq on average today than when SADDAM was in power!

There was a functioning government under Saddam, but there was a far greater number of Iraqi's dying throughout the country on a daily basis than there are now. Iraq is in the middle of a war, but it has an elected government. Once the rebuilding of Iraq's security forces is completed in a few years, the level of violence among the civilian population will drop.

The United States military ON THE GROUND in Iraq and in charge of the overall security situation there does not view the situation as a civil war. Once again, if Iraq were in the middle of a Civil War, millions of Iraqi's would be dead instead of thousands, and the Iraqi government that was just formed would not exist. Those committing secterian violence constitute a tiny percentage of the population. More significant are the vast majority of Iraqi's who continue on with their lives every day working to rebuild the country from 24 years of Saddams rule. More significant is the Iraqi military which continues to grow in strength and numbers every day.



Wow, you read on huffingtonpost that Colin Powell says that Iraq is in a full blown Civil War. It must be so, just like all those people who claimed Colin Powell was totally against the use of military force against Iraq and was deeply against most of the administration on most foreign policy matters. What a joke.


The US military in Iraq, including some of my closest friends don't find a Civil War on the ground in their experience there. Sorry if that does not jive with your claim that "NO ONE BELIEVES THIS".

Show me where General George Casey or U.S. envoy Zalmay Khalilzad have said Iraq is in the middle of a CIVIL WAR. The mere presence of sectarian violence DOES NOT EQUAL A CIVIL WAR!


Israel has had dozens of people killed in suicide bombings on single days. Are you going to claim that Israel does not have a functioning government because of that?


1. Iraq has never really had a middle class, at least not one that would be similar to what we find in the first world. Even if there is such a flight, that population of people is so small and will have little impact on the eventual stabilization of the country.

2. Iraq is going through a nation building process while still being attacked by former elements of Saddam's regime as well as foreign terrorist.

3. Despite these strains, it has made dramatic progress, progress that your unable or refuse to see.

4. This is a process that is going to take years to complete. Jumping up and down and claiming x city has collapsed because 100 people died in the past 4 days is simply absurd.

5. If you take the time to examine what Iraq has been through since 1979, you'll find that casualty figures among Iraqi's are currently less than what they were when Saddam was in power.

6. There are certainly a lot of things Iraq does not have, but the same could be said for many other countries around the world. Iraq is going through a development process, yet you seem to think that regime change, and rebuilding a third world country have a 25 year dictatorship by somone like Saddam should take less than 3 years and be nearly bloodless. Fact is, its going to take several years, but things in general are on the right track and the process will succeed provided that coalition troops are not withdrawn prematurely.

The fact is, the disaster that everyone described back in February never happened. Instead, the Iraqi government got over some big hurdles and successfully formed a government. Just another thing on a long list of things that so many people claimed Iraq would never be able to do.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 08:21 PM   #77
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
sue4u2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: hatching some plot, scheming some scheme
Posts: 6,628
Local Time: 06:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2

Instead, the Iraqi government got over some big hurdles and successfully formed a government. Just another thing on a long list of things that so many people claimed Iraq would never be able to do.
Oh My God!!.. Just who are you? Rumsfeld, Bush or Cheney?

And don't even bother to ask me to elaborate.
__________________

__________________
sue4u2 is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 09:57 PM   #78
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 11:10 PM
Iraq is a mess. There's way too much instability in that country to claim any kind of success there.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 10:13 PM   #79
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 03:10 PM
Iraq is a separate topic completely. It has an elected government instead of a dictatorship. Terrorist driven instability does not take away from these accomplishments - but the terrorist would want you to believe otherwise. The fact the terrorists continue to work so hard is evidence of the successes - the ones they are trying to undo.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-14-2006, 10:15 PM   #80
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 03:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by silja
I think this is crossing the line of good discourse. ‘Endlösung der Judenfrage’ is hardly an apt analogy.
When you have leaders in the region calling for the elimination of Israel, it would be completely dishonest to ignore the connection.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-15-2006, 12:56 AM   #81
The Fly
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lindenhurst Long Island
Posts: 174
Local Time: 11:10 PM
From here in New York I'm looking at the big picture.It looks like this,Iran uses Hezbollah to bait Israel then Iran and Syria gang up on Israel.Then the U.S Bombs Iran and while that happens North Korea bombs Japan.Then China goes After Taiwan! Sounds crazy I know,but my imagination runs wild.
__________________
u2fan628 is offline  
Old 07-15-2006, 01:04 AM   #82
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Washington State
Posts: 3,861
Local Time: 11:10 PM
All I know is that if China and Russia support Syria I'm gonna have a tizzy fit.
__________________
shart1780 is offline  
Old 07-15-2006, 01:08 AM   #83
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
trevster2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,330
Local Time: 07:40 PM
I agree U2fan, this whole thing could get out of hand very quickly. I know it's 2006 but the leaders of the world are just as triggerhappy as they were back in 1914 and 1939. This could escalate especially if the US actively supports Israel during this conflict while at the same time Russia and other nations decide to support the other side. One thing leads to another,and who knows where this could lead? Gilad Shalit could be the Archduke Ferdinand of WWIII. I find it odd how the Israeli response to the kidnapping of a single soldier dwarfs their past responses to suicide bombings which killed non-military women, and children, kind of upsetting really. I guess it's a change in policy which will just lead to more and more conflict in the future.

Remember back on the eve of the new millenium when the whole world was all lovey dovey for a few hours and everyone was so hopeful about the new millenium. Well, the wheels fell of that pretty quick.
__________________
trevster2k is offline  
Old 07-15-2006, 01:19 AM   #84
The Fly
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Lindenhurst Long Island
Posts: 174
Local Time: 11:10 PM
I'm not saying I want it to happen,I work in Manhatten and Seeing soldiers in the stations makes me think.Why would China not throw it's weight around and demand Korea stop it's tests?
__________________
u2fan628 is offline  
Old 07-15-2006, 11:39 AM   #85
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 11:10 PM
Developments are happening so quickly in this situation it's hard to keep up.
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 07-15-2006, 11:48 AM   #86
The Fly
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 220
Local Time: 11:10 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by u2fan628
I'm not saying I want it to happen,I work in Manhatten and Seeing soldiers in the stations makes me think.Why would China not throw it's weight around and demand Korea stop it's tests?
Maybe Beijing believes that it's not in China's interest right now to help the Bush administration. There are a lot of things to suggest that they are using the US focus on the Middle East to expand the chinese powerbase in the oil-rich regions of Africa.
__________________
silja is offline  
Old 07-15-2006, 06:07 PM   #87
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 12:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Israel has every right to take the actions it has. Allowing placement of rockets so close to the border is by itself an act of aggression. It has nothing to do with being a “democratic” country. It has everything to do with a country surrounded by enemies (who would love to kill all the Jews) trying to keep its citizens safe from indiscriminate rocket attacks.

If we were so concerned with Israel’s response to international criticism, perhaps we would hear something more than silence concerning terrorist “governments” before Israel is forced to deal with another attack.
When Palestinian terrorists blow up buses in places such as Tel Aviv, killing as many as a dozen people at a time, I view it as an immoral act. I don't put that forward as some kind of new and higher moral insight on my part - practically any sane person will accept that bombing a bus and killing a dozen or two of its passengers is evil.

Or will they?

It turns out that the Israel government and its advocates regularly justify actions such as blowing up buses as 'self defense', 'a proportionate response', etc.

Today Israeli airstrikes blew up a bus, killing as many as 15 or 18 Lebanese civilians, depending on reports.

The great moral error of the Israeli government is its proposition that all acts carried out to allegedly defend the Israeli state are in and of themselves moral. The rest of the world is supposed to agree to that questionable proposition and to waive any other moral considerations.

Tragically, the US does buy into this questionable morality, sends an endless supply of weaponry to the Israeli state, and shields it diplomatically at the UN and elsewhere. Others, such as the spineless EU, remain silent in the face of current atrocities.

I cannot credit your statement that actions of terror-supporting governments (or indeed 'governments', in the case of Hamas) are greated by silence, as we have had numerous threads on here dealing with Hamas, the Iranian regime, Syria, etc.

As for the view that merely pointing rockets at a state is, in and of itself, an act of war, this is the strangest definition of an act of war I have ever heard. For many years, the US and the Soviet Union had rockets pointing at each other - no-one seriously argued that either side was committing an act of war against the other.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 07-15-2006, 06:25 PM   #88
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
trevster2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,330
Local Time: 07:40 PM
India launches a test missile capable of reaching China with nuclear warhead capabilities last week and silence greeted that too. North Korea testing missiles, act of war, India testing missiles, sovereign right, the world is so f'ked up right now. And now India's PM has suggested the terrorist attacks had links to Pakistan and is condemning Pakistan for failing to stop the terrorists from flourishing there, hmmm, perhaps India should start bombing Pakistan too based on the logic used by Israel's leaders.
__________________
trevster2k is offline  
Old 07-15-2006, 07:33 PM   #89
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 12:10 AM
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html

snippet:

"Since the October War in 1973, Washington has provided Israel with a level of support dwarfing that given to any other state. It has been the largest annual recipient of direct economic and military assistance since 1976, and is the largest recipient in total since World War Two, to the tune of well over $140 billion (in 2004 dollars). Israel receives about $3 billion in direct assistance each year, roughly one-fifth of the foreign aid budget, and worth about $500 a year for every Israeli. This largesse is especially striking since Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to that of South Korea or Spain.

Other recipients get their money in quarterly installments, but Israel receives its entire appropriation at the beginning of each fiscal year and can thus earn interest on it. Most recipients of aid given for military purposes are required to spend all of it in the US, but Israel is allowed to use roughly 25 per cent of its allocation to subsidise its own defence industry. It is the only recipient that does not have to account for how the aid is spent, which makes it virtually impossible to prevent the money from being used for purposes the US opposes, such as building settlements on the West Bank. Moreover, the US has provided Israel with nearly $3 billion to develop weapons systems, and given it access to such top-drawer weaponry as Blackhawk helicopters and F-16 jets. Finally, the US gives Israel access to intelligence it denies to its Nato allies and has turned a blind eye to Israel’s acquisition of nuclear weapons.

Washington also provides Israel with consistent diplomatic support. Since 1982, the US has vetoed 32 Security Council resolutions critical of Israel, more than the total number of vetoes cast by all the other Security Council members. It blocks the efforts of Arab states to put Israel’s nuclear arsenal on the IAEA’s agenda. The US comes to the rescue in wartime and takes Israel’s side when negotiating peace. The Nixon administration protected it from the threat of Soviet intervention and resupplied it during the October War. Washington was deeply involved in the negotiations that ended that war, as well as in the lengthy ‘step-by-step’ process that followed, just as it played a key role in the negotiations that preceded and followed the 1993 Oslo Accords. In each case there was occasional friction between US and Israeli officials, but the US consistently supported the Israeli position. One American participant at Camp David in 2000 later said: ‘Far too often, we functioned . . . as Israel’s lawyer.’ Finally, the Bush administration’s ambition to transform the Middle East is at least partly aimed at improving Israel’s strategic situation."
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 07-15-2006, 08:31 PM   #90
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
vaz02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: manchester
Posts: 7,447
Local Time: 11:10 PM
2 Royal Navy ships have been scrambled to the scene , no idea what their objectives are.
__________________

__________________
vaz02 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com