Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thanatoast, Dec 28, 2004.
Is this a contradiction in terms, or a looming catastrophe? Where is Iraq headed?
Can't be trusted. What plan are you talking about?
Yahoo is a conservative mouthpiece. Look, I have proof. There's a period, and this:
By a margin of over 20,000 votes, it's clear that Yahoo! has a liberal bias.
Ooo and faster too! Clear proof. I stand corrected.
at this point, it's pretty impossible to say, since no one has really taken the time to figure out what the various insurgency groups want. to this point, the bush administration has characterized them as a single group w/ a single goal: to destroy democracy.
i think that's pretty ludicrous. i couldn't state for certain, but i suspect that what a number of the insurgency groups want is a say in their own affairs, which is the underlying concept of democracy, imo.
sadly, no one prominent is discussing the situation in these terms. instead, we have "evil-doers" and the razing of cities.
went to a screening awhile back that had a q&a afterwards with wes anderson, owen wilson, jeff goldblum and willem defoe...very enlightening.
you'll like it. subtle, funny and bill murray can do no wrong. for some odd reason, cate blanchette really pulls my string. and the music is great.
on topic, i'm glad i missed the 2nd grade tantrums...
i like the new spin that the elections are just the beginning of the process...and i guess our invasion was the beginning of a procees, as was the training of iraqis that seem hellbent on deserting. this administration has finally come up with a way to avoid not having an end game plan...just call everything a new beginning.
Guess that's what happens when you try to force Democracy on people...
Building a Democratic Police State in Iraq? Testing to see if that kind of thing will work here in the future? The illusion of freedom? Nah, I'm just being paranoid.
Or am I?
If ordered Democracy isn't freedom then we are in trouble right here at home. We have laws too, just not as many or as powerful.
"Freedom" is not possible in any country that has a government is it?
What we have here in the U.S. is 'ordered liberty,' I believe.
A Democracy decides which freedoms are advantageous and which are not, which is not exactly freedom.
Not to dispute the original point. I have always wondered how much freedom Iraqis have when we have 100,000+ troops there to ensure that Iraqis are free by our definition.
Rememeber the pre-reqs required for an effective insurgent force to exist. It requires the support of the people to hide and help them. How are we ever going to win against that?
will take out the irrelevant parts tomorrow.
See, I think that if anything, that's giving the administration too much credit. If they couldn't see why Iraqi's wouldn't want an occupying army in Iraq, why would they see the consequences of the policies they're pursuing domestically? Constitutionalizing inequality, keeping the public in a constant state of fear and skirting international law are all de facto agendas for the Bush administration. I don't think they see these things as dangerous. They can't see that the long term consequences of these policies are anger and instability. They only see them as opportunities to cement and grow their own power-base.
We need to get the word out: the elite internet media is hijacking our democracy by indoctrinating the masses with conservative ideals.
Unfortunately I have, as of late, tended to learn towards the looming catastrophe angle. Not as in sudden, unexpected catastrophe but a slow downhill grind to complete ruin. I think the truth is that there are too many individual groups within the borders of Iraq that will not, either because of the inherent power strucutre, or by their own doing, have a voice in the representitive governemnt. And even if they did, their aspirations do not even begin to line up with each other. What people seem to forget is that the borders of Iraq were, and are, a political action, not a reflection of an especially similar group of people. Dividing it up into multiple mini countries is an option, but because of ideological alliances that would be formed among other middle eastern countries and the newly created states, the situation would most likely be no less desperate. Plus I am sure our admin wouldn't allow it. Below is a link to a National Geographic article that discusses some of this stuff.
Ok, I think most of us would agree that Iraq is a problem and has a very dim, if any, light at the end of the tunnel. But I would be curious to here some of your own ideas as to how to go about creating a non-violent Iraq.
P.S. lets try not to let this thread become about media bias. Natl Geo
I forgot the in my post, but... yeah, pretty much. I keep hoping that when the administration goes too far, more people will wake up. But it hasn't happened yet.