Home | Community | Message Board

NorthSpore.com BOOMR Bag!
Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds, High THC Strains, USA West Coast Strains   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Edibles   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Kratom Powder for Sale, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Left Coast Kratom Premium Bali Kratom Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible"
    #1814433 - 08/14/03 07:03 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

It appears the the US government had been warned by various intelligence agencies that Democracy in Iraq might be nigh-on impossible. From Boston.com:

Quote:

Democracy might be impossible, US was told

By Bryan Bender, Globe Correspondent, 8/14/2003

WASHINGTON -- US intelligence officials cautioned the National Security Council before the Iraq war that the American plan to build democracy on the ashes of Saddam Hussein's regime -- as a model for the rest of the region -- was so audacious that, in the words of one CIA report in March, it could ultimately prove "impossible."

That assessment ran counter to what the Bush administration was saying at the time as it sought to build support for the war. President Bush said a democratic Iraq would lead to more liberalized, representative governments, where terrorists would find less popular support, and the Muslim world would be friendlier to the United States. "A new regime in Iraq would serve as an inspiring example of freedom for other nations in the region," he said on Feb. 26.

The question of how quickly, and easily, the United States could establish democracy in Iraq was the key to a larger concern about how long US troops would be required to stay there, and how many would be needed to maintain security. The administration offered few assessments of its own but dismissed predictions by the army chief of staff of a lengthy occupation by hundreds of thousands of troops.

Now, frustration among Iraqis about a lack of stability and the slow pace of reconstruction -- and new evidence that Islamic militants are slipping into Iraq to take up arms against the Americans -- are leading the administration to lengthen its plans to keep troops in Iraq for up to four years. And the Pentagon is moving to lower expectations for a shift to democracy, suggesting that a liberal democracy is an ideal worth fighting for, but acknowledging the difficulty of creating one.

"The question isn't whether it is feasible, but is it worth a try," Lieutenant Colonel James Cassella, a Pentagon spokesman, said yesterday.

The intelligence community's doubts were fully aired to top Bush administration officials in the months before the war in multiple classified reports. The National Intelligence Council, which represents the consensus view of American spy agencies, reported to top policy makers at the start of the year that "what the administration was saying was a rosy picture," said a senior intelligence official who read the report and asked not to be named. "The report's conclusions were totally opposite."

The vision the Bush administration has for the Middle East has been honed at least since 1996, with the writing of a paper entitled "A Clean Break." The paper was written by Douglas Feith, now the Pentagon's policy director; Richard Perle, a senior Pentagon adviser; and others for then-incoming Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

It provides an early window into some of the current administration's thinking. For one, it predicted that toppling the Hussein regime could be the beginning of a larger rollback of autocratic, terrorist-supporting states such as Syria and Iran, blamed for supporting Hezbollah guerrillas operating in southern Lebanon and accused of terrorism against Israel and the United States.

It said a new Iraqi regime, coupled with pressure on the Syrian government, would also open up the opportunity for Lebanese Shi'ite Muslims to reconnect with Shi'ite religious leaders in the southern Iraqi holy city of Najaf, "to wean the south Lebanese [Shi'ites] away from Hezbollah, Iran and Syria." The document noted that the Lebanese Shi'ite community has historically identified with their Iraqi brethren, who during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s fought against the Iranians who share their faith.

A senior defense official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the administration's view of a postwar Middle East begins by breaking current governments down into three categories. First are countries like Saudi Arabia, where the ruling class is relatively pro-Western but its people are increasingly anti-American; second are countries like Iran, whose governments are opposed to the United States but whose people are increasingly open to stronger ties with Washington; and third are those like Israel, Jordan, and Turkey, in which the government and the people are largely pro-American as a result of broader political freedom. He said a Middle East in which all Muslim countries fit the third category is the long-term goal.

But intelligence officials and specialists have long been uncertain whether reform-minded Arab intellectuals who embrace the US approach can overcome those who have shown little regard for it so far. Their suspicion has only grown in recent months as the postwar situation in Iraq raises serious questions about whether democracy can flourish there, let alone elsewhere in the region. Many leading clerics are calling for a religious-led government, frustrating the efforts of US allies to establish the foundations for democracy.

The intelligence community's cautious view of the administration's broader vision for the region was highlighted in a series of reports and briefings to top policy makers.

The CIA's March report concluded that Iraqi society and history showed little evidence to support the creation of democratic institutions, going so far as to say its prospects for democracy could be "impossible," according to intelligence officials who have seen it. The assessment was based on Iraq's history of repression and war; clan, tribal and religious conflict; and its lack of experience as a viable country prior to its arbitrary creation as a monarchy by British colonialists after World War I.

The State Department came to the same conclusion.

"Liberal democracy would be difficult to achieve in Iraq," said a March State Department report, first reported by the Los Angeles Times. "Electoral democracy, were it to emerge, could well be subject to exploitation by anti-American elements."

A June risk assessment of the situation in Iraq by Kroll and Associates, an international consulting firm, raised anew doubts that representative democracy can take root there. It said a leading possibility would be that "Iraq experiences frequent lurches into serious disorder and instability, with changes of leadership, religious, and regional clashes and interventions by neighboring states. It seeks order in a military-led regime that provides a minimal level of stability in areas crucial to the economy and high levels of disorder elsewhere."

The report, "Iraq Risk Scenarios," described a pro-western, liberal, capitalist democracy as "very unlikely, although it appears to be the general goal of the US."

Critics of the administration's approach have said that pushing too hard for democracy could spark an anti-American backlash, increasing the risk of terrorism against the United States.

"US efforts to impose a US vision on the area could lead to instability in countries like Jordan and Pakistan, and could result in further strengthening the hand of fundamentalism and terrorism," Edward Walker, former assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs in the Clinton administration, warned in a prewar speech.

If the US presence is seen not as liberating, but rather as hostile to Islam and Arab culture, insensitive to the suffering of Iraqi people, and arrogant in its lack of consultation with other countries, "pressure will build on Arab governments to distance themselves from us; anti-Americanism will grow; new recruits will flow to fundamentalist causes and some will wind up in terrorist operations against us, against Israel and against moderate governments in the region; and the war on terrorism will suffer reversals," Walker said.

Top US officials have tempered their optimism, with the president saying last month that he never expected a Thomas Jefferson-type figure to emerge in Iraq overnight.

But the Bush administration remains committed to its vision. Last week, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice said that "much as a democratic Germany became a linchpin for a new Europe . . . so a transformed Iraq can become a key element of a very different Middle East in which the ideologies of hate will not flourish."




--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Edame]
    #1814450 - 08/14/03 07:07 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Also, another article but this time from an Iraqi perspective (from Salam Pax, the 'Baghdad Blogger'):

Quote:

Baghdad Blogger

The temperature is rising. And Baghdad, Basra and Nasiriyah have all erupted on the same day

Salam Pax
Wednesday August 13, 2003
The Guardian

As you go into Baghdad from the west there is graffiti on the walls that says "Welcome to the Republic of Darkness and Unemployment".

Baghdad had no electricity for a whole day. Call me the master of all whiners but do you have any idea what it feels like to sleep in 50C? I guess with the current heat wave you have a taste. Today's office stories: Muhammad, one of the drivers, decided the best place for his family to sleep was in the car with the engine running and the air-conditioning on. Shihab was up every couple of hours getting water for his kids because he was afraid they would totally dehydrate. Everyone who got into the office today had bags under their eyes and a bad headache. Haifa, the nice lady who makes sure we have coffee in the morning, was ranting about having to watch "this Paul something" give us lies on TV everyday. She actually described Paul Bremer as another Saddam; we see him every day on TV, and the news is all about what he says and what he does. Next we'll have statues of him in the streets. Somehow you feel like he lives in a bubble and has absolutely no idea what the people are saying.

Listen to Bremer talk about improvements in the electrical situation while Basra is rioting. I just didn't believe my eyes when I saw the images from Basra. I am guessing that the reason we didn't have electricity for a whole day in Baghdad is because they wanted to patch things up in Basra. Two days of riots and about eight Iraqis injured. At least the Coalition forces didn't call the rioters "Saddam loyalists", at least there is some acknowledgment that these are people who are upset with the way the occupation forces are mismanaging the country. And it is getting out of hand. Baghdad, Basra, Nasiriyah all going up in one day and Baqubah being added to the list of cities not really under control.

I went to a press conference where our new one-month-president [the coalition provisional authority has a rotating chairman] was telling us about what they were up to. The press guy, at the request of the conference, was telling journalists that the instantaneous translation thingy has two channels; channel one for Arabic, channel two for English. I would like to add another channel: channel three for the truth. It keeps repeating one phrase: "We have no power, we have to get it approved by the Americans, we are puppets and the strings are too tight." I feel sorry for the guys on the council, some of them are actually very good and honest people and they have been put in a very difficult situation.

As usual, getting into these press bashes is an event in itself. You have to be there an hour early, you get searched a thousand times and, of course, as an Iraqi I get treated like shit. I have no idea why the American soldiers at the entrance to the convention centre [where the CPA press operation is] are so offensive towards Iraqis while they can be so nice to anyone with a foreign passport. I have to be the Zen master when the soldier at the gate gets condescending. The reporters of Iraq Today were not allowed to get to the press conference and they went ballistic. "This is my friggin' government, what do you mean I can't get in?" My sentiments exactly. Keep this image in your head: an American officer stopping you, an Iraqi, from attending the press conference your government is holding.

Earlier in the day I got frisked and the car I was in searched because the colonel or something who has just passed by thought that he didn't like the people who are standing by the car (me) and that I was giving him dirty looks. Habibi, you have no idea how dirty my looks can get, you didn't get one. What you saw was the I-have-been-standing-for-a-whole-hour-in-the-sun. But because you have the power to decide what a look means I got searched. You really should have looked more carefully before you shot the nine-year-old kid in Ramadi only to find out later that it was a water gun he had in his hands. Dirty looks - yeah, totally justified frisking me.

Yes, I am annoyed because if the occupation forces fail, my country will fall apart. And for some reason the CPA does not look like it has a sense of how serious the situation is.

Spot what is wrong in this sentence: "I am sitting in a car going to Fallujah with the Pretenders blasting from the speakers and air-conditioning on super-freeze."

What is wrong with it is that it can't last forever. I will get to Fallujah and will have to step out of the car and get smacked by Madam Reality for wanting to escape her grip on me.




--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblewingnutx

Registered: 09/25/00
Posts: 2,282
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Edame]
    #1814462 - 08/14/03 07:11 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Yeah, it's impossible for those silly brown people to adopt democracy.

Let's throw in the towel.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: wingnutx]
    #1816299 - 08/15/03 09:51 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Exactly.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Edame]
    #1816502 - 08/15/03 11:30 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

I guess democracy is the last thing the US wants in Iraq. Another bunch of compliant thugs will do fine.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Xlea321]
    #1816514 - 08/15/03 11:37 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

ETF are you babbling about? Democracy is already being set up in Iraq.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1816528 - 08/15/03 11:43 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Correction: George Bush has TOLD you democracy is being set up in Iraq.

There is a difference.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Xlea321]
    #1816530 - 08/15/03 11:44 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Whatever. I am in to good of a mood to deal with you today. I guess the Iraqi council that was formed is really a bunch of dudes in Hollywood or something, and the Constitution they are working on drafting is BS as well.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1816532 - 08/15/03 11:45 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

BTW, people said the same thing when our government was built on democratic principles.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1816547 - 08/15/03 11:57 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

I am in to good of a mood to deal with you today

Wondered why you'd gone so quiet in the smuggling arms thread.





--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Xlea321]
    #1816845 - 08/15/03 02:10 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Democracy must be earned, not given!

/Me sighs at americas self-righteous, we know best, attitude.


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Azmodeus]
    #1816916 - 08/15/03 02:31 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Democracy by definition is Government chosen by the people.  If we choose Iraq's Government for them, how can it possibly be a democracy?  :confused: 


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1816919 - 08/15/03 02:34 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

We aren't going to choose their government for them. They have a council of people from every sector of Iraqi culture. Yes we approved these people, but they will be drafting their own Constitution. We are just going to make sure we don't end up with another Taliban or Saddam in the country.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1816921 - 08/15/03 02:34 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

We aren't going to choose their government for them. They have a council of people from every sector of Iraqi culture. Yes we approved these people, but they will be drafting their own Constitution. We are just going to make sure we don't end up with another Taliban or Saddam in the country. That will be the extent of our involvement. I don't see how that is a bad thing.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1816939 - 08/15/03 02:38 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

What if they want another Taliban or Saddam in the country? If the will of the people is not followed, how can that be democracy?


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1816954 - 08/15/03 02:44 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

The point is, those people wouldn't be on the council without US approval, so how exactly does that make it a Democracy if the people aren't free to choose who to elect? How would a draft constitution be really valid unless it's written by people the Iraqis have chosen?

Surely the whole point of a democracy is for the Iraqi people to choose, not for them to choose, and then have their choices 'approved' by another power.


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: silversoul7]
    #1816959 - 08/15/03 02:47 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Exactly. If they want a Taliban or another Saddam, it's up to them in a Democracy. I'm not saying that's what they want, but I am saying in a true democracy, they have that choice.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Edame]
    #1816963 - 08/15/03 02:48 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

I am not saying it is perfect, but if you really think that the Iraqis are capable of holding an election right now you are crazy.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817009 - 08/15/03 03:01 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Obviously I must be crazy to think that the Iraqis are capable of doing things for themselves. It's best that we let our occupying forces point guns at them some more so we can show them how the world really works.


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Edame]
    #1817018 - 08/15/03 03:04 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

The problem with just leaving them on their own right now, is they are not yet able to come to an agreement. You have three different major portions of the population that generally dislike each other. They also tend not to understand the concept of the future all that much. If we left right now the country would turn into a nightmare of chaos.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817025 - 08/15/03 03:06 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

shakta said:
We aren't going to choose their government for them.




Quote:

shakta said:Yes we approved these people, but they will be drafting their own Constitution.




Quote:

shakta said:We are just going to make sure we don't end up with another Taliban or Saddam in the country. 




'we' don't need to worry about it as it is not 'our' country! :shake:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Azmodeus]
    #1817028 - 08/15/03 03:08 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

You are right, you Canadians don't need to worry about it. The countries involved with operation do.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817030 - 08/15/03 03:09 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

shakta said:
The problem with just leaving them on their own right now, is they are not yet able to come to an agreement. You have three different major portions of the population that generally dislike each other. They also tend not to understand the concept of the future all that much. If we left right now the country would turn into a nightmare of chaos.




some would argue that saddams atrocities were for the greater good of keeping the country from plumeting into civil war, and chaos. It is not a true democracy so all america did was invade and gain control of a soverign nation.


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Azmodeus]
    #1817032 - 08/15/03 03:09 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Some would call that argument fucking retarded as well.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817040 - 08/15/03 03:12 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Also, it was not only America who invaded as you very well know.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817043 - 08/15/03 03:13 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Then i would like to hear the reasoning.  I mean all the casualties in this war and the last are for the greater good.  Saddam can't kill any more people so the couple thousand that died were acceptable losses.  Well in his mind he killed families of the rebels, but the ensuing casualities would have been worse

Its all in the name of the greater good, but i understand why you wouldget you panties in twist. :smirk:


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817080 - 08/15/03 03:26 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

If we left right now the country would turn into a nightmare of chaos.

Don't be so melodramatic. What do you think conditions were like for the last 12 years while the US subjected Iraq to medieval sanctions policy that left 750,000 iraqi children under 5 dead? Not to mention bombing them regularly. It's a good bet that most Iraqis would loathe any US appointed government with all their heart and soul.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Azmodeus]
    #1817089 - 08/15/03 03:28 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

When the Army starts executing Iraqis by the thousands for disagreeing with them get back to me. There have been demonstrations against the occupation quite often. The soldiers let them happen unless the protestors get violent. You defending Saddam's actions makes you look pretty sad.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817100 - 08/15/03 03:31 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Punishment without trial

Hundreds of Iraqis civilians are being held in makeshift jails run by US troops - many without being charged or even questioned. And in these prisons are children whose parents have no way of locating them. Jonathan Steele reveals the grim reality of coalition justice in Baghdad

Friday August 15, 2003
The Guardian

It was a warm spring evening in a Baghdad suburb when American troops stopped the car in which 11-year-old Sufian Abd al-Ghani was riding close to his home with his uncle and a neighbour. They were ordered out and told to lie face down on the road. Sufian's father heard the commotion and rushed out to find the soldiers pointing their rifles at his son and the others. Claiming the uncle had fired at them, they started beating the three captives with their rifle butts, according to the father.
A neighbour confirms that a shot had been fired, but it was part of a row between the Ghanis and another family. "In Iraq this is normal. Almost every household in Baghdad owns a weapon. One man was drunk. The Americans must have heard the shot as they were passing. It was not directed at them," says the neighbour, who prefers not to be named.

The American soldiers searched the Ghanis' house, but found nothing. For three hours Sufian was kept on the ground with the two adults. Then the Americans put hoods over their heads, tied their hands with tight plastic bracelets, and drove them away. "Why are you taking my son?" a desperate Abdullah Ghani pleaded. "Don't worry. As he's a child, we'll send him back in a couple of days," a Sergeant Stark assured him.

........

After 24 days the boy's ordeal was over, but he regularly has nightmares. However, his case is not the worst in the four months since the Americans occupied Iraq. Several children have been shot dead, some as passengers in cars which fell foul of American checkpoints, some mistaken at night for adults. But if those deaths were the result of accidents, how is it that an 11-year-old could be held for over three weeks without anyone in authority asking questions?

The answer is: easily. Sufian's detention highlights the problems faced by hundreds of Iraqis: arrests followed by incompetent interrogation, or none at all; the lack of an efficient trial-or-release system; shocking prison conditions; constant buck-passing; and sloppy paperwork by the coalition authorities. The result is that in almost every case families take weeks or months to find out where their loved ones are being detained.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1019096,00.html



--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Anonymous

Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Xlea321]
    #1817122 - 08/15/03 03:38 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

thats fucked up.

americans are assholes, man.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: ]
    #1817127 - 08/15/03 03:39 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Yep, we are.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Xlea321]
    #1817136 - 08/15/03 03:41 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Were is the part were we executed thousands of Iraqis for protesting?


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817152 - 08/15/03 03:46 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

I don't think those 750,000 under fives would have been too big on protesting.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Anonymous

Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817153 - 08/15/03 03:47 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

that hasnt happened yet


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Xlea321]
    #1817158 - 08/15/03 03:49 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Nice try.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineDeepDish2
journeyman
Registered: 01/14/02
Posts: 55
Last seen: 12 years, 8 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817160 - 08/15/03 03:49 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

BTW, people said the same thing when our government was built on democratic principles.

What people said this, and how does the situation in Iraq even remotely resemble the creation of the United States of America? What makes you so sure that the United States is looking out for the best interests of Iraq, and its people? Since neither of us is in Iraq, nor do we have access to government policy, I think the best way to look at examine true intent is to look at the United States history of regime change. History proves you wrong; the United States is notorious for installing regimes which benifit us rather than the people living in the country (Saddam Hussein being a perfect example). In fact I challenge you to find one example of the United States instituting a regime change in any country where the people benefited.
Now maybe this time around our motives are pure, it could happen, but at this point it seems that the United States has everything to gain and little to lose by taking advatage of the Iraqi's.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: DeepDish2]
    #1817167 - 08/15/03 03:51 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Damn good point dude. I wished you'd post here more often!


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: DeepDish2]
    #1817174 - 08/15/03 03:54 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

I believe Ben Franklin thought it would never work at all. We are looking out for our best interests first of course. This would include not having another militant Islamic government in the region. As far as an example goes, how about Japan, Germany, or Afghanistan. I know Afghanistan has not realized it's potential yet. How about some examples of this notoriou history of regime change. We did not put Saddam in power.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineTheHobbit
Pot Head Pixie

Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 863
Loc: the Oily Way...
Last seen: 18 years, 2 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817188 - 08/15/03 04:02 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

"americans are assholes, man"

Well, some are, and you'll ultimately find assholes all over the world, but of course there's good people who care as well, but they aren't running the government, obviously.

"Were is the part were we executed thousands of Iraqis for protesting?"

Oh man, sad to say, but give it time. American troops, who want the fuck out now anyway, have killed thousands of innocent civilians in this whole mess, so I guess it's a matter of what's worse, people dying because they want change, or people dying because another country wants change - either way the people are fucked.



Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: TheHobbit]
    #1817190 - 08/15/03 04:05 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

You are missing the point. I agree it is very sad for any innocent civilian to die. It happens in war though unfortunately. Azmodeus was trying to argue that Saddam executing 300,000 Iraqis was for the greater good.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineTheHobbit
Pot Head Pixie

Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 863
Loc: the Oily Way...
Last seen: 18 years, 2 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817237 - 08/15/03 04:19 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

I don't think he's arguing in favor of it himself, just saying that the argument could be theoretically presented that executing some could be for the greater good, but of that's a reasoning devoid of any moral content or compassion.

"We are looking out for our best interests first of course. This would include not having another militant Islamic government in the region."

How have we defended our best interests in all this? There didn't exist a military threat, as we've seen, and haven't been connected to Sep. 11 in any clear way. Is it really our place to decide what sort of government is acceptable elsewhere? Isn't that the business of the people themselves? I don't know man, I think this was a really bad idea, and history will look back on it disapprovingly.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Edame]
    #1817242 - 08/15/03 04:20 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/15/1060936052309.html

Quote:


Inside the resistance


August 16, 2003

The United States likes to think that all it confronts in Iraq are a few die-hard Saddamists. But Paul McGeough meets a new guerilla movement with growing popular support.

There's a knock on the door. Standing in the first-floor corridor of the Al Safeer Hotel are two men - Ahmed, a weapons dealer and group commander in the Iraqi resistance, and Haqi, one of his foot soldiers. They enter and take a seat on the sofa, edgy but full of bravado after what they claim was a successful strike against a US convoy in a rural area north of Baghdad.

They had agreed, after weeks of negotiation through a go-between, to talk about the resistance. Now they are here to recount the detail of their most recent offensive against the US occupation forces in Iraq.

Ahmed begins: "Yesterday we were told about the new movement of convoys, so we used a special car to take our RPG [rocket-propelled grenades] and guns up there. We struck at sunset, in an area surrounded by farms.

"We positioned ourselves as locals, just standing around. But as the convoy came into view we picked up the weapons which we had lying on the ground. There were 19 soldiers. I could see their faces. I fired three grenades - two at a truck and one at a Humvee. Then we escaped across the fields to a car that was waiting for us. It took just a few seconds because God makes it easy for us."

This is the third mission for Ahmed, a 32-year-old who has inherited family wealth, including a factory and a farm, and the fourth for Haqi, a 25-year-old Baghdad taxi-driver who defers to Ahmed as "my instructor".

Their claim to success is in keeping with exaggerated local accounts of the hundreds of hit-and-miss resistance attacks on the US.

I checked. At Al Meshahda, near Tarmiya, which is 60 kilometres north of Baghdad, the road is scorched and gouged. Two local farmers, brothers Muhammad and Ibrahim Al Mishadani, insist three US soldiers died when the tail-end vehicles in a convoy were hit.

But the Americans reported no deaths from Tarmiya on Tuesday.

The postwar US death toll in fighting in Iraq now stands at 60, with almost 500 wounded. The conflict is showing all the early signs of what could be a protracted guerilla war.

When he took up his commission in mid-July, the new US military chief in Iraq, General John Abizaid, acknowledged the rapid development of the resistance: "They're better co-ordinated now. They're less amateurish and their ability to use improvised explosive devices combined with tactical activity - say, for example, attacking [our] quick-reaction forces - is more sophisticated."

Washington has been reluctant to accept that what is happening in Iraq constitutes a guerilla war. It has repeatedly pinned the blame for instability on Saddam Hussein and Baath Party loyalists; and, particularly since last week's bombing of the Jordanian embassy in Baghdad, on foreigners associated with the terrorist network al-Qaeda and its offshoots.

So it fell to Abizaid to finally acknowledge the Americans face a "classic guerilla-type campaign". But he, too, stuck to the Washington script, insisting the critical threat to the Americans was from "mid-level Baathists" and from an organisational and financial structure that was, at best, localised.

The Pentagon, the US military and American analysts are reluctant to acknowledge popular support for the Iraqi resistance. But the chaos has tribal sheiks, Baghdad businessmen and many ordinary Iraqis speaking in such harsh anti-American terms that it is hard not to conclude there is a growing body of Palestinian or Belfast-style empathy with the resistance.

If the accounts of the resistance given to the Herald in interviews in the past 10 days are accurate, US intelligence is way behind understanding that what is emerging in Iraq is a centrally controlled movement, driven as much by nationalism as the mosque, a movement that has left Saddam and the Baath Party behind and already is getting foreign funds for its bid to drive out the US army.

The warm night air is so heavy that, when Ahmed exhales, his cigarette smoke hangs just where he parks it. It is a week before the attack, and we are in the garden at the comfortable home of one of his relatives in a west Baghdad suburb.

Ahmed denies having served in Saddam's military or any of the security agencies. He offers a peculiar account of how he avoided military service: "I put lots of tea leaves in cold water and gulped it down so that it filled my lungs. The tea showed up as spots in my lungs and, after I paid the doctor some money, I was rejected on health grounds."

Asked why he has joined the resistance after going to such lengths to avoid doing time for Saddam, Ahmed declares: "Saddam was a loser. His wars were useless and he made enemies of our Muslim neighbours."

But this weapons dealer is uncomfortable talking war in a family environment, so he makes a call on a satellite phone, organising the use of a room in a nondescript hotel nearer to the city. Its ground-floor windows and all but one of its doors are still bricked up to fend off looters.

Slightly more at ease, Ahmed sits in a formal armchair at the hotel, the folds of his white dishdasha draped over the chair's red brocade upholstery. Toying with his beard, he describes a Sunni resistance that is a disciplined, religiously focused force. Asked where authority rests, he says: "It's with the sheiks in the mosques. Baath Party people and former members of the military are not allowed to be our leaders. Baathists are losers; they didn't succeed when they worked for the party.

"We now have a single, jihadist leadership group that operates nationally. Everything is done on instructions carried by messengers. There are 35 men in my cell and I'm a leader of three other cells. The number of foreigners who are coming to help us is increasing - Syrian, Palestinian, Saudi and Qatari.

"US claims about al-Qaeda and Ansar al Islam are just propaganda." But then he goes on: "We don't even ask the fighters if they belong to these groups or to political parties."

Speaking through an interpreter, he continues in guttural Arabic: "Our fighters are protecting our religion. We cannot allow foreigners to occupy our country."

Then he repeats the argument in much of the anti-American graffiti around Baghdad: "We suffered under Saddam and we hate him, but we would put him in our hearts ahead of a Christian or a Jew, because he is a Muslim."

This is a culture in which revenge is honourable, and Ahmed vents his opinion freely: "The Americans do not respect us, so we cannot respect them. They are a cancer of bad things: prostitution, gambling and drugs."

Haqi: "This struggle is not about Saddam. It's about our country and our God. Our aim is not to have power or to rule the country. We just want the US out and for the word of Allah to be the power in Iraq."

THIS POCKET of the resistance calls itself the Army of Right. Like others, including the Army of Mohammed and the White Flags, it first came to notice in leaflets and graffiti around the fabled Abu Hanifa mosque in Baghdad's Aadamiyah district.

Both Ahmed and Haqi refuse to give their real names or any information about where they live. "Iraq is my home," Ahmed says.

However, their chat is peppered with references to life on the land and a tribal background. Ahmed tells stories of dropping explosives into the Euphrates as a child to stun fish which he would then gather; and of learning how to conceal weapons in his clothing from the sheep smugglers who criss-cross the Jordan-Iraq border.

Estimates of how many resistance fighters are on call run as high as 7000, but these two will not discuss numbers.

And just as Iraqi children are being coached to lie when foreigners inquire about their parents or the whereabouts of their homes, the families of resistance fighters deny their involvement in the war.

In a far-flung Baghdad suburb, dentist Amar Abbass insists his "little brother" Ameer was armed only with his "student papers and a calculator" when he was arrested six weeks ago. But neighbours say the 20-year-old - now prisoner No. 10496 at the Baghdad Airport prison - was carrying an RPG launcher when the Americans grabbed him from the street.

Ahmed's first mission was an attack on a small US convoy near Balad, in the Tikrit region, in June. Weeks later he was part of a failed attempt to down an American helicopter at Mahmoudiya, 25 kilometres south-east of the capital.

He adopts a worldly tone as he talks about the missions: "First we watch the Americans to understand their movements. We know from the way they shoot in every direction that they are afraid."

Usually the cells operate teams of four or five - two to manage the rocket-propelled grenade launcher and two or three to provide covering fire. In most cases the identity of each fighter is withheld from the others.

Because the roots of Iraqi offence at the American presence are to be found in their tribal culture as much as in the Koran, the resistance fighters confidently rely on tribal networks for information on the Americans and for help to get away in a hurry after an attack.

Ahmed says: "The people offer us hiding places when we are in danger. They support us with words and blessings and sometimes they hide our fighters in the boot of their cars to take them to safety."

Their approach is as effective as it is simple. Usually they explode a landmine to halt an US convoy and to disorient the soldiers. Then one group of resistance fighters opens fire from one side of the road, drawing the attention of the Americans, while the men with an RPG take aim from a position about 150 metres back from the other side of the road.

Many of the fighters draw on their experience in national service under Saddam and they have acquired bomb-making and other manuals from the disbanded Iraqi military. They have been having lethal success with remote-controlled devices, including one that was floated down a river on a palm log to explode under a bridge used by the US.

On the highway south of Tikrit later in the week, a US soldier explains to me how a series of four IEDs - improvised explosive devices - had been found on a track routinely used by his convoy. The explosives were spaced at precise 25-metre intervals, the distance that separates vehicles in the American convoys.

At one of our early meetings Ahmed is irritable. He has just spent the day meeting colleagues to nut out a new problem: the Americans have started jamming the radio frequencies the resistance uses to detonate its bombs. He laughs when I ask if his group found a solution, but makes it clear he is not going to answer.

The resistance missions are opportunity-driven. Local fighters are assigned to keep up low-level attacks in their areas, maybe three or four a week. Then new cells are dispatched to areas for ambushes at a rate of three and four a day.

Ahmed claims his cells are responsible for the death of at least a dozen Americans, but there is no way to confirm this.

He declares: "The Americans say they are still looking for weapons of mass destruction. But they have found them. We are their WMD!"

Resistance weapons are stashed around the country, hidden in homes, buried in graveyards and concealed in the fringes of tall, reedy grass that grows by rivers and irrigation canals.

The US makes regular announcements of success in its efforts to block the attacks, like Operation Soda Mountain, in which, it says, 128 raids in mid-July detained 971 Iraqis - 67 described as "former regime leaders" - with the confiscation of 665 small weapons, 1356 rocket-propelled grenades, 300 155-mm artillery rounds, 4297 mortar rounds, 4.3 tonnes of C4 explosive and 563 hand grenades.

The figures are impressive. But they pale against the reality that under Saddam there were estimated to be more than 5 million AK-47s alone in the country - in a recent US-run amnesty, fewer than 100 were surrendered - and against the suggestion implicit in the figures that much of the seized weapons are from unmanageable prewar stockpiles put in place by Saddam's military which subsequently fell into the hands of the resistance.

Haggling in the country's illegal arms bazaars, the resistance never pays more than $US100 ($154) for an RPG launcher while hand grenades sell for as little as $US2. In the days after the fall of Baghdad, AK-47s could be bought for as little as $US3; today they cost about $US40.

Ahmed, whose illegal weapons business grew out of his teenage hobby of restoring guns, says: "We thank God the gun stores of the Iraqi army and the Baath Party were opened for us. But we get donations. The other day a rich man gave us an expensive SUV which we will use for carrying weapons or for observing the Americans - or we can sell it to buy more weapons.

"But we also get weapons from outside Iraq. We allowed some of the fighters to appear on the Arab TV channels because we knew that would make wealthy Arabs send aid and encourage Arab mujahideen to join us. It was a very intelligent and effective operation.

"They didn't just send money. They send fighters and ammunition; and they give us good intelligence and ideas for dealing with the Americans."

Ahmed and Haqi laugh as they describe the ease with which they are able to move weapons around Baghdad and beyond.

Ahmed: "Once I passed through three American checkpoints in a pick-up that was half-filled with explosives and weapons. They didn't even look."

Haqi: "One night I was driving during the curfew hours with a box of grenades in the car. The Americans stopped me and I told them that my wife was in the hospital. 'Go, go,' they yelled without searching the car. We thank God they are so stupid."

Despite thousands of Iraqi detentions, the Americans are still hit by a dozen or more attacks a day.

US commanders are buoyed by their history. With the glaring exception of Vietnam, they have always managed to best guerilla movements. However, the outcome of America's 16 attempts at nation building is more sobering. Germany, Japan, Panama and Grenada succeeded. But the seeds planted in 11 others, including Nicaragua, Haiti and the Dominican Republic, were overgrown by dictatorship, corruption and autocracy. Afghanistan remains a cot case.

And, for now, the Americans' inability to deliver the security, political and economic miracle implicit in the promised liberation of Iraq is playing into the hands of the resistance. Public anger at the US is morphing into popular support for the guerillas, creating the likelihood of a descent into prolonged cycles of violence.

Few Iraqis are present when the Americans reopen a refurbished school or hospital. But all are deeply aware that their "liberators" live a world apart, in well-provisioned, little-America bunkers, and that every time they come among the Iraqis they do so behind armour plating and with guns at the ready.

Challenged about the chaos this week, US administrator Paul Bremer urged his questioners to consider the new freedoms that Iraqis have, before firing back: "The north is quiet and the south is quiet. There is a small group of bitter-end people resisting the new Iraq. We'll deal with them.They will be killed or they'll be captured."

Ahmed loves that kind of talk. Relishing the challenge as he sits in the evening cool, beneath a date palm heavy with fruit, he says: "Before the war I was a hunter; we'd shoot pigs. Now I can't go hunting but the pigs are coming to me."

As a US surveillance helicopter flies high above us, he instantly adopts the pose of firing an RPG. "Our country has been occupied for only four months," he says, "this is just the beginning."

What seems clear is that the US has not begun to grasp the depth of Iraqi resentment and continues to feed the anger, as I note following my first meeting with Ahmed.

I have just returned to my Baghdad hotel, on Abu Nuwas Street which runs along the east bank of the Tigris, when a US Humvee roars past. Blaring from a block of six big speakers strapped to its rooftop is John Mellencamp's 1980s American anthem Pink Houses: Ain't that America? You and me! Ain't that America? Something to seeeee!




--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: TheHobbit]
    #1817297 - 08/15/03 04:32 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

You could be correct about history looking back on this. I don't know. The President thought he was protecting our interests by ousting Saddam. You know the reasons that were given. It remains to be seen whether those reasons were valid or not. How about the long history of regime changes that were failed you mentioned?


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineTheHobbit
Pot Head Pixie

Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 863
Loc: the Oily Way...
Last seen: 18 years, 2 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Edame]
    #1817298 - 08/15/03 04:33 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Damn good post Edame...i think these soldiers may be stuck over there, and the civilians lives continually endangered, until the next President is sworn in.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817313 - 08/15/03 04:37 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

shakta said:
When the Army starts executing Iraqis by the thousands for disagreeing with them get back to me. There have been demonstrations against the occupation quite often. The soldiers let them happen unless the protestors get violent. You defending Saddam's actions makes you look pretty sad.




Sorry, but i never defended saddams actions, only pointed out the same mentality being used by him, and america to justify thier crimes. I think it an excellent comparisson...one which you are obviously uncomftorable with...so i won't press the issue.


--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineTheHobbit
Pot Head Pixie

Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 863
Loc: the Oily Way...
Last seen: 18 years, 2 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: TheHobbit]
    #1817314 - 08/15/03 04:37 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

I don't know that he really did this because he was trying to protect our interests, that's really pretty speculative. Believe me, I'd like to see any bad leader removed from control over helpless civilians, I'm not defending Saddam by any means. In all fairness, he did blatantly lie about the military threat posed by Iraq. Ooops, time to go...have a good one, maybe I'll get back later.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: TheHobbit]
    #1817317 - 08/15/03 04:38 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Ah, you drop a bullshit bomb and leave. Nice.

Of course he was protecting our interests. It isn't speculative at all. He wants to make sure we can get cheap gas after the war, right? :grin:


Edited by shakta (08/15/03 04:42 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817336 - 08/15/03 04:47 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Everything in his post he said was his opinion.  The only exception is "he did blatantly lie about the military threat posed by Iraq".  Do you disagree with that???  :oogle: 


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1817346 - 08/15/03 04:51 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Yeah, I agree with that. I am confused now. Who was he saying blatantly lied, Saddam, or Bush. I interpreted it as Bush. That is the part I call bullshit on.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817366 - 08/15/03 04:57 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Azmodeus said:
"some would argue that saddams atrocities were for the greater good of keeping the country from plumeting into civil war, and chaos."

shakta replied:
"Some would call that argument fucking retarded as well."


I agree shakta.  That's almost (but not quite) as retarded as saying killing people in a preemptive war is "for the greater good."  :wink: 


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817379 - 08/15/03 05:03 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

I wanna see the huge list of regime changes the US has done that did not benefit the people of the country they happened in. I misread DeepDish's post, and thought he said failed regime changes. There have been a couple of those. Viet Nam and Cuba. As far as regime changes that I believe benefitted the countries they happened in.

Germany
Japan
Afghanistan
Iraq (eventually)
Panama (twice)
Haiti (They have since managed to screw that up. This one was UN mandated though)
Hawaii (This one is arguable for sure)

I will agree that some of the regime changes we have encouraged were solely done for our best interests in the past. Some worked out well, and some didn't.

Iran
Guatemala
Chile
Grenada

I will concede that almost all of the times we have been involved in regime change it was because it benefited us in some way, or during the Cold War prevented the USSR from gobbling up yet another country.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1817383 - 08/15/03 05:05 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Cornholio said:
I agree shakta.  That's almost (but not quite) as retarded as saying killing people in a preemptive war is "for the greater good."  :wink: 




Debatable. I am tired of debating it for today though. Everyone have a good weekend.



Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817424 - 08/15/03 05:17 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

shakta said:
I wanna see the huge list of regime changes the US has done that did not benefit the people of the country they happened in.


Panama, Nicaragua, Vietnam, Cambodia, Iran, Guatemala, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Indonesia, and the former Zaire.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1817444 - 08/15/03 05:23 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Veatnam, and Cambodia never happened. I am talking about regime changes that were successful not attempts. Got any links for the rest of them? I would like to learn more about them. Specifically Nicaraugua, the Dominican Republic, Indonesia, and Zaire. Those were not mentioned in any of the links I found regarding regime change and the US.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1817469 - 08/15/03 05:30 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Cornholio writes:

Panama, Nicaragua, Vietnam, Cambodia, Iran, Guatemala, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Indonesia, and the former Zaire.

Learn some history. The US didn't install Pol Pot. And the Sandinistas in Nicaragua lost in a fair democratic election that was probably the most carefully scrutinized election ever held in Latin America.

As for the Dominican Republic -- you must be confusing us with some other country. The legally elected government was overthrown here by a military junta. There was civil war and chaos. The US sent troops, the situation was stabilized, internationally-supervised democratic elections were held, and Dominicans had their freedom once again. You won't find any Dominicans complaining about the help the US gave us.

I have posted in this forum on at least three separate occasions the real story (with copious quotes from Dominican sources) in considerable detail. If you can't find the thread using the search function, let me know and I'll bump it for you.

Here's a hint -- if you are interested in truth rather than polemics, try reading someone other than Noam Chomsky as a sole source.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Phred]
    #1817482 - 08/15/03 05:34 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

I must admit that I am not the most informed about every thing that the US has ever been involved in. This article seems to fit in with this discussion though. I am going to study up on the rest of them that I do not know about.

http://www5.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/16/time.standards/


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1817623 - 08/15/03 06:10 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Panama, Nicaragua, Vietnam, Cambodia, Iran, Guatemala, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Indonesia, and the former Zaire.

Good point. The US bombing Cambodia back into the stone age was directly responsible for the rise of Pol Pot.

Here's a few more US interventions:

1. China - 1945 to 1960s: Was Mao Tse-tung just paranoid?

2. Italy - 1947-1948: Free elections, Hollywood style

3. Greece - 1947 to early 1950s: From cradle of democracy
to client state

4. The Philippines - 1940s and 1950s: America's oldest colony

5. Korea - 1945-1953: Was it all that it appeared to be?

6. Albania - 1949-1953: The proper English spy

7. Eastern Europe - 1948-1956: Operation Splinter Factor

8. Germany - 1950s: Everything from juvenile delinquency to terrorism

9. Iran - 1953: Making it safe for the King of Kings

10. Guatemala - 1953-1954: While the world watched

11. Costa Rica - Mid-1950s: Trying to topple an ally - Part 1

12. Syria - 1956-1957: Purchasing a new government

13. Middle East - 1957-1958: The Eisenhower Doctrine
claims another backyard for America

14. Indonesia - 1957-1958: War and pornography

15. Western Europe - 1950s and 1960s: Fronts within
fronts within fronts

16. British Guiana - 1953-1964: The CIA's international
labor mafia

17. Soviet Union - Late 1940s to 1960s: From spy planes
to book publishing

18. Italy - 1950s to 1970s: Supporting the Cardinal's
orphans and techno-fascism

19. Vietnam - 1950-1973: The Hearts and Minds Circus

20. Cambodia - 1955-1973: Prince Sihanouk walks the
high-wire of neutralism

21. Laos - 1957-1973: L'Arm?e Clandestine

22. Haiti - 1959-1963: The Marines land, again

23. Guatemala - 1960: One good coup deserves another

24. France/Algeria - 1960s: L'?tat, c'est la CIA

25. Ecuador - 1960-1963: A text book of dirty tricks

26. The Congo - 1960-1964: The assassination of
Patrice Lumumba

27. Brazil - 1961-1964: Introducing the marvelous
new world of death squads

28. Peru - 1960-1965: Fort Bragg moves to the jungle

29. Dominican Republic - 1960-1966: Saving democracy
from communism by getting rid of democracy

30. Cuba - 1959 to 1980s: The unforgivable revolution

31. Indonesia - 1965: Liquidating President Sukarno ...
and 500,000 others ...... East Timor - 1975: And
200,000 more

32. Ghana - 1966: Kwame Nkrumah steps out of line

33. Uruguay - 1964-1970: Torture -- as American
as apple pie

34. Chile - 1964-1973: A hammer and sickle stamped on
your child's forehead

35. Greece - 1964-1974: "Fuck your Parliament and your Constitution," said the President of the United States

36. Bolivia - 1964-1975: Tracking down Che Guevara in
the land of coup d'etat

37. Guatemala - 1962 to 1980s: A less publicized
"final solution"

38. Costa Rica - 1970-1971: Trying to topple an ally -- Part 2

39. Iraq - 1972-1975: Covert action should not be confused
with missionary work

40. Australia - 1973-1975: Another free election bites the dust

41. Angola - 1975 to 1980s: The Great Powers Poker Game

42. Zaire - 1975-1978: Mobutu and the CIA, a marriage
made in heaven

43. Jamaica - 1976-1980: Kissinger's ultimatum

44. Seychelles - 1979-1981: Yet another area of great
strategic importance

45. Grenada - 1979-1984: Lying -- one of the few
growth industries in Washington

46. Morocco - 1983: A video nasty

47. Suriname - 1982-1984: Once again, the Cuban bogeyman

48. Libya - 1981-1989: Ronald Reagan meets his match

49. Nicaragua - 1981-1990: Destabilization in slow motion

50. Panama - 1969-1991: Double-crossing our drug supplier

51. Bulgaria 1990/Albania 1991: Teaching communists
what democracy is all about

52. Iraq - 1990-1991: Desert holocaust

53. Afghanistan - 1979-1992: America's Jihad

54. El Salvador - 1980-1994: Human rights, Washington style

55. Haiti - 1986-1994: Who will rid me of this
turbulent priest?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OnlineBaby_Hitler
Errorist
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 26,159
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 7 minutes, 11 seconds
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Xlea321]
    #1817678 - 08/15/03 06:26 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

>>>A neighbour confirms that a shot had been fired, but it was part of a row between the Ghanis and another family. "In Iraq this is normal.<<<

>>>After 24 days the boy's ordeal was over, but he regularly has nightmares.<<<

Don't worry about the boy, soon he'll be back to having visions of neighborly gunfire dancing in his head.


--------------------
(•_•)
<) )~  ANTIFA
/ \
\(•_•)
( (>    SUPER
/ \
(•_•)
<) )>    SOLDIERS
  / \


Don't vibe my harsh, bro.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Baby_Hitler]
    #1817691 - 08/15/03 06:29 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

:lol: :lol:


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineAzmodeus
Seeker

Registered: 11/27/02
Posts: 3,392
Loc: Lotus Land!! B.C.
Last seen: 16 years, 10 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1817705 - 08/15/03 06:34 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

shakta said:
Debatable. I am tired of debating it for today though. Everyone have a good weekend.




Quote:

shakta said:Ah, you drop a bullshit bomb and leave. Nice.




bye!  :smirk:



--------------------
"Know your Body - Know your Mind - Know your Substance - Know your Source.

Lest we forget. "


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Phred]
    #1818197 - 08/15/03 10:24 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

shakta said:
How about some examples of this notorious history of regime change?

Cornholio said:
Panama, Nicaragua, Vietnam, Cambodia, Iran, Guatemala, Chile, the Dominican Republic, Indonesia, and the former Zaire.

pinksharkmark said:
Learn some history. The US didn't install Pol Pot.


Where did I say the US installed Pol Pot?  The US supported a coup d'etat which put General Lon Nol in charge of Cambodia.  This is an example of a US regime change that failed.

And shakta, in 1963, the CIA engineered the overthrow and assassination of Ngo Dinh Diem in South Vietnam.  The new regime never gained the support of the South Vietnamese people and was yet another failed US regime change.  I'm not sure why you claim "Vietnam, and Cambodia never happened".

pinksharkmark said:
And the Sandinistas in Nicaragua lost in a fair democratic election that was probably the most carefully scrutinized election ever held in Latin America.


In 1909, the US engineered a regime change in Nicaragua by helping to depose General Jose Zelaya.  That regime wasn't too successful as evidenced by the rise in popularity of the Sandinistas.  But even after the Sandinistas gained power, the US did plenty to bring them down before the elections, such as the Iran-Contra scandal and other questionable, if not illegal things.

pinksharkmark said:
As for the Dominican Republic -- you must be confusing us with some other country.  The legally elected government was overthrown here by a military junta. There was civil war and chaos. The US sent troops, the situation was stabilized, internationally-supervised democratic elections were held, and Dominicans had their freedom once again.


True, but you left out a VERY important point for some reason:  The US didn't bother to get involved in the civil war until the legally elected government was about to regain power.  Then it sided against Bosch.  After Bosch's supporters were humiliated/killed by the US, he lost in the next election.

pinksharkmark said:
You won't find any Dominicans complaining about the help the US gave us.


I found PLENTY of Dominicans/ex-Dominicans complaining about the "help" the US provided.  It all depends on whose side you were on:  if you supported the democratically elected Constitutional Party (Bosch) then you were against the US invasion, while if you supported the overthrow of the democratically elected party by the "Loyalists", then you were for the US invasion.

Besides, not to be rude to your country, but I don't know if I'd call the Dominican Republic a success story.  :frown:

pinksharkmark said:
Here's a hint -- if you are interested in truth rather than polemics, try reading someone other than Noam Chomsky as a sole source.


Perhaps you should read someone other than your conservative source. 


And shakta, here's an article with a table showing our success rate at regime changes.  :tongue:         


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineStrumpling
Neuronaut
Registered: 10/11/02
Posts: 7,571
Loc: Hyperspace
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Edame]
    #1818612 - 08/16/03 01:15 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Hasn't anybody noticed that Democracy isn't even possible in the United States?


--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1819314 - 08/16/03 09:01 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Cornholio writes:

True, but you left out a VERY important point for some reason: The US didn't bother to get involved in the civil war until the legally elected government was about to regain power. Then it sided against Bosch.

Absolutely false. Not even close to describing what actually happened. Where are you getting this information?

After Bosch's supporters were humiliated/killed by the US, he lost in the next election.

???? The US was killing Bosch's supporters?!?!?! Bullshit. As for "humiliating" them, what does that mean? Marines standing on street corners thumbing their noses at Dominicans and chanting "Nya nya nya NYA nya" ?

I ask again, where on earth are you getting this load of crap from?

I found PLENTY of Dominicans/ex-Dominicans complaining about the "help" the US provided.

Where? Source please. I can assure you that in the almost sixteen years I have been discussing politics with Dominicans from all walks of life, I have yet to find one who was against the US intervention, and that includes those who voted for Bosch and his party in every election in which he ran.

It all depends on whose side you were on: if you supported the democratically elected Constitutional Party (Bosch) then you were against the US invasion, while if you supported the overthrow of the democratically elected party by the "Loyalists", then you were for the US invasion.

Try to understand this simple fact -- the military junta overthrew the democratically elected Constitutional Party and Bosch. Without the US intervention, there would have been no elections -- just a succession of junta after junta seizing power.

Okay, I bumped the thread with my most recent post about this. It's the thread titled "Interesting Thought". My post is number 83 in the thread. If you are displaying twenty posts per page, it is the third post on the fifth page of the thread.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Phred]
    #1820863 - 08/16/03 09:17 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
Cornholio writes:

True, but you left out a VERY important point for some reason: The US didn't bother to get involved in the civil war until the legally elected government was about to regain power. Then it sided against Bosch.

Absolutely false. Not even close to describing what actually happened. Where are you getting this information?


Practically every single web page I found when searching for "history of the Dominican Republic" showed this to be the case. Try it yourself. I didn't have to "dig" for these. Either every site confirmed this, or failed to provide the details of US involvement. I believe the following sites are well respected sources:

The History Channel
The Encyclopedia of World History
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Syracuse University, History of the Dominican Republic

Here's a few more sites from the Dominican Republic:
DOMINICAN OVERVIEW & HISTORICAL SUMMARY
Dominican Republic General Info

There's such an enormous amount of evidence backing me up, that I don't believe you were ignorant enough to say "where are you getting this information?"

Quote:

After Bosch's supporters were humiliated/killed by the US, he lost in the next election.

???? The US was killing Bosch's supporters?!?!?! Bullshit. As for "humiliating" them, what does that mean? Marines standing on street corners thumbing their noses at Dominicans and chanting "Nya nya nya NYA nya" ?

I ask again, where on earth are you getting this load of crap from?


Read the very first link above from The History Channel. 3,000 people were killed. A loss is always humiliating. US troops greatly assisted the anti-Bosch forces. While US forces were "officially neutral", this clearly was not the case based on the fighting they did.
Quote:

I found PLENTY of Dominicans/ex-Dominicans complaining about the "help" the US provided.

Where? Source please.


Dominicans Recall U.S. Invasion
U.S. invasion changed the Dominican Republic

Before I waste too much time, let me just remind you that since the US invasion, over 1 million people fled the Dominican Republic. Don't you think there's anyone who might have something bad to say??? I realize that most of these people migrated to the US, but no one's criticizing the US for its economic conditions.
Quote:

I can assure you that in the almost sixteen years I have been discussing politics with Dominicans from all walks of life, I have yet to find one who was against the US intervention, and that includes those who voted for Bosch and his party in every election in which he ran.


If you say so.
Quote:

Okay, I bumped the thread with my most recent post about this.


Thanks, but I read it before I made my last post. And I don't think anything I said really conflicts with anything you said, it simply adds important information.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Phred]
    #1820886 - 08/16/03 09:26 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Oh, and I'm glad to see that you accept the evidence I provided on the failed regime changes for the other countries I mentioned.  :smile: 


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1821154 - 08/16/03 10:58 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Cornholio writes:

Practically every single web page I found when searching for "history of the Dominican Republic" showed this to be the case. Try it yourself. I didn't have to "dig" for these. Either every site confirmed this, or failed to provide the details of US involvement. I believe the following sites are well respected sources:

What was the point of including those? There is no detail in them at all. One of them dedicates a single sentence to the incident, for pete's sake!

As to the US not intervening until it was "apparent" that Juan Bosch would be reinstalled as president, that is sheer speculation. As your other more detailed links show, the situation was much less cut-and-dried than that. It was in no way a sure thing that Bosch would be returned to power. I suggest you read your own links.

There's such an enormous amount of evidence backing me up, that I don't believe you were ignorant enough to say "where are you getting this information?"

Those links are not "evidence", they are full of erroneous information (you have surely noted how they contradict each other on several matters of FACT, not opinion) and unsupported categorization. For example, some of the links claim that the coup ousting Bosch was a "US-backed" action. Not a shred of evidence, just the bald assertion that it was so, despite the evidence in the more detailed links of how Kennedy felt towards Bosch.

On the other hand, I must admit I was unaware of just exactly how much worthless bullshit there was out there on the internet in regard to this incident. I should have taken into consideration the fact that a non-resident would not have the in-depth knowledge as easily available to him as a Dominican would. I guess I can't really blame you for holding the opinion you do.

Read the very first link above from The History Channel. 3,000 people were killed.

Not by American forces. I presume you did read your own link? The one called "fighting"? (By the way, that is the most comprehensive link you provided in that sorry collection, and it is a good one). There was freaking civil war for five freaking years! Of course there were thousands killed.

I found PLENTY of Dominicans/ex-Dominicans complaining about the "help" the US provided.

A demonstration in front of the US embassy that had "dozens" of participants, and an essay by an expatriate Dominican Lefty (who can't even get the number of US troops involved anywhere near correct) qualifies as plenty, does it? This in a country with a population of 8.5 million. Okay.

Bottom line is this --

The first democratically-elected government the Dominican Republic had since 1924 was overthrown by force -- a familiar story in Latin America, unfortunately. The country was cast into turmoil, violence, and chaos for five years. The US came in, stopped the fighting, organized elections, then left. The Dominican Republic once again had a democratically-elected government.

Let's face it, if Bosch had won the election rather than Balaguer, no one would be saying a word. But since a Lefty lost in the most carefully internationally-scrutinized election ever held in Latin America until that time, it must all be blamed on the United States.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1821174 - 08/16/03 11:02 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Cornholio writes:

Oh, and I'm glad to see that you accept the evidence I provided on the failed regime changes for the other countries I mentioned.

I leave it to others to find the holes in your "evidence" of failed "regime change" on that list. All I will say is that if there is so much bullshit surrounding the facts of the Dominican Republic incident, which involved actual warship blockade and US troops landing on the soil of the country named, it wouldn't surprise me at all that the charges of "regime change" in the countries where no troops were stationed are equally bogus.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Phred]
    #1821598 - 08/17/03 02:04 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
What was the point of including those? There is no detail in them at all. One of them dedicates a single sentence to the incident, for pete's sake!


The point was that every one of them was from a credible source and confirmed the purpose of US intervention was to prevent the democratically elected leader from regaining power.  If you seriously refuse to accept "The History Channel" and/or the other sources as credible, then arguing with you is pointless.  I didn't post "Joe Shmo's" opinion for a reason.  I'll leave it to the other readers to decide for themselves if they are willing to trust The History Channel or not.  Just to see if anyone else is even following this argument or not, let's try this:

This History Channel article:
Can be trusted
Is bullshit


(please be honest)
Quote:

As to the US not intervening until it was "apparent" that Juan Bosch would be reinstalled as president, that is sheer speculation. As your other more detailed links show, the situation was much less cut-and-dried than that. It was in no way a sure thing that Bosch would be returned to power. I suggest you read your own links.


Fine, I'll concede this because the important point is that the US took sides and fought against his forces.
Quote:

Those links are not "evidence", they are full of erroneous information (you have surely noted how they contradict each other on several matters of FACT, not opinion) and unsupported categorization. For example, some of the links claim that the coup ousting Bosch was a "US-backed" action. Not a shred of evidence, just the bald assertion that it was so, despite the evidence in the more detailed links of how Kennedy felt towards Bosch.

On the other hand, I must admit I was unaware of just exactly how much worthless bullshit there was out there on the internet in regard to this incident. I should have taken into consideration the fact that a non-resident would not have the in-depth knowledge as easily available to him as a Dominican would. I guess I can't really blame you for holding the opinion you do.


Again, if you don't trust credible sources, I can't do any better than that.  I realize Bosch was liked at first by the US, but this isn't a contradiction, as opinions changed after it was decided he was too leftist.  Kennedy was dead by the time the US got involved.

Besides, you argue that since you've been there for 16 years you know how people felt about something that happened nearly 40 years ago.  I'll bet people in Germany felt a lot different about Hitler 40 years after his death than they did at the time he was Fuerer.
Quote:

Not by American forces. I presume you did read your own link? The one called "fighting"? (By the way, that is the most comprehensive link you provided in that sorry collection, and it is a good one). There was freaking civil war for five freaking years! Of course there were thousands killed.


Ok, let's look at the link you liked.  It confirmed that US forces fought against and killed Constitutionalists, er I mean "rebels".  Interesting how in most articles, it was the "Loyalists" vs the "Constitutionalists", but in the article you liked, it was the "Loyalists" vs the "rebels".  :rolleyes:
Quote:

A demonstration in front of the US embassy that had "dozens" of participants, and an essay by an expatriate Dominican Lefty (who can't even get the number of US troops involved anywhere near correct) qualifies as plenty, does it? This in a country with a population of 8.5 million. Okay.


Compare that with a rally in support of the war in Iraq.  150 people in a country of 250 million attended to show their support of the Iraqi war.  It doesn't mean only 150 people in the country supported the war.  Besides, what about the 1 million people who left the Dominican Republic after 1965?  Things weren't so rosy after the US "fixed" things, which is the whole point of this argument.
Quote:

Bottom line is this --

The first democratically-elected government the Dominican Republic had since 1924 was overthrown by force -- a familiar story in Latin America, unfortunately. The country was cast into turmoil, violence, and chaos for five years. The US came in, stopped the fighting, organized elections, then left. The Dominican Republic once again had a democratically-elected government.

Let's face it, if Bosch had won the election rather than Balaguer, no one would be saying a word. But since a Lefty lost in the most carefully internationally-scrutinized election ever held in Latin America until that time, it must all be blamed on the United States.


I won't argue with anything you just said here.  The point of this whole argument is to prove that not all US backed regime changes have been successful.  I don't mean any disrespect, but most history links would say the the Dominican Republic is NOT a success story. 


Votes accepted from (12/31/69 07:00 PM) to (No end specified)
View the results of this poll



--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1822232 - 08/17/03 09:35 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

shakta said:
This article seems to fit in with this discussion.

http://www5.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/16/time.standards/ 


Interesting article.  It says we are now justified in supporting evil dictatorships if they help us "in our life-and-death struggle against radical Islam", just as we were justified supporting evil dictatorships if they helped us fight Communism.  Hmmm, I seriously question both our goal of wiping out the "radical" Islamics and of supporting evil dictatorships.  I mean, is it really mandatory for us to wipe these groups out at any cost in order to achieve peace?  Or can we peacefully coexist with them?  I really don't think we've ever even considered the latter option as a possibility.  It seems like we believe in perpetual war for perpetual peace, which is a bunch of crap in my opinion.  :tongue: 


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 6 years, 10 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1822399 - 08/17/03 12:24 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

That History Channel article is bullshit because it makes casual assertions with absolutely no evidence rather than sticking to factual reporting --

"Johnson initially claimed that the primary purpose of the U.S. military operation was to evacuate Americans and other foreign nationals, but in truth the U.S. soldiers were sent to prevent the restoration of the exiled president of the country, Juan Bosch."

Really? Says who? No quotes from anyone supporting this statement -- merely a baldfaced assertion that this was the case. If they had said, "in truth, the US soldiers were sent to prevent Fidel Castro from invading the country," or "in truth, the US soldiers were sent to prevent Haitian agitators from crossing the border," would you believe it?

Who wrote that article for the History Channel? Has he ever set foot in the country? Who did he interview? For pete's sakes, not even Juan Bosch himself ever took the stance that article did!

If you seriously refuse to accept "The History Channel" and/or the other sources as credible, then arguing with you is pointless.

If you seriously refuse to accept the much more detailed articles I provided, some of them written by Dominicans (and Dominicans who were critical of the United States, at that -- read the articles and you will see this), then arguing with you is pointless. The statements from Dominicans who were here at the time it happened, some of them actively aligned with one side or the other, counts more than a single unsupported assertion from a television station.

Fine, I'll concede this because the important point is that the US took sides and fought against his forces.

The Constitutionalists were not Bosch's forces. Bosch was in exile and remained in exile. He had no control over the multifaceted "Constitutionalists", and directed none of their actions. They were a polyglot group (including even some, though not many, Communists -- Bosch himself was no Communist, as even Kennedy and Johnson were aware), factionalized and in violent disagreement over one another on key issues, as the links I provided (and even some of the ones you provided) show. The fact that their public stance was that they favored reinstating Bosch does not make them "his forces".

Again, if you don't trust credible sources, I can't do any better than that.

Some of the links you provided were worth reading, as I pointed out. The first group of links was essentially worthless. Again, I say my sources -- the people who were actually involved and the many MANY detailed books and articles those people have written about that time -- are more credible than most of the ones you provided.

Besides, you argue that since you've been there for 16 years you know how people felt about something that happened nearly 40 years ago.

As another of the links you provided pointed out, Dominicans are VERY passionate, opinionated, and knowledgeable about their history and their politics. I have had many, MANY conversations with Dominicans about everything from Trujillo to the Three Sisters to Bosch to Balaguer to Fernandez and more -- including the events of 1962-1966. While not every single one holds exactly the same opinion (some I have spoken to voted for Bosch every chance they got, for example), every one WITHOUT EXCEPTION was grateful that the US ended the civil war and arranged elections. The Bosch supporters were of course displeased that Bosch lost that election, and almost all the Boschites are vehement that Balaguer "rigged" at least two and probably three later elections (especially the 1994 election!), but not even the most radical Boschite I have spoken to (or read an article from) has ever tried to tell me that the US/OAC supervised election was anything other than scrupulously honest. Dominicans, having been either colonial subjects or the pawns of dictators for almost all of their history, are great believers in the democratic process.

Further, every one (again without exception, although some of them were kind of sullen about admitting it) told me that had the US not intervened, it was almost a certainty there would have been years more fighting, thousands more dead, and a never-ending series of coups and counter-coups.

Don't you dare presume to tell me how Dominicans feel, Cornholio. I extend an open invitation to you to visit me here any time and talk to Dominicans in their fifties and sixties -- the ones who lived through that time. How's your Spanish?

It confirmed that US forces fought against and killed Constitutionalists, er I mean "rebels". Interesting how in most articles, it was the "Loyalists" vs the "Constitutionalists", but in the article you liked, it was the "Loyalists" vs the "rebels".

As I have pointed out, the fighting was not restricted to that between Constitutionalists and Loyalists -- it was not that cut and dried. There were a lot of factions, fighting between themselves as well as against the junta. Some were simple rioters and criminals with no particular political agenda at all. Civil wars are chaotic affairs -- there is rarely a simple A vs B divide. As one of your own links says --

"The revolutionists called themselves Constitutionalists, the movement was a mix of lower ranking officers (and therefore younger), political opposition groups, and the mob on the streets. Some truly hoped that violence would lead to a restoration of 1963 constitution and democracy. Others were communists who had temporarily joined in with? the reformers. However the largest group were mere rioters who took advantage of the weapons being passed out on street corners in the capitol and took up looting with the protection of their new firearms. These weapons passed out to the populace by the rebel forces would prove a problem for Dominicans long after 1965. "

Here's more from that same link --

"Twice in the last 6 years communist insurgencies had tried to take the country. Most notably in 1959 when Castro landed a a small guerrilla force too "liberate" the island. It was quickly crushed.. Even Truijillo had flirted with the Soviet Union going so far as to allow Soviet radio broadcasts. Yet the humanitarian and historical concern cannot be over looked, as it has been by many historians.? The country had been embroiled in conflict for much of it's post-Trujillo period and had made little reform. Many Dominicans were starving to death and out of work In the rural countryside the conditions were so bad that some girls were being sold into slavery."

"More importantly in the diplomatic sense was the creation of the Government of National Reconstruction or GRN. This government combined some Constitituionalists with some members of the Junta established on the 28th along with a large body of "neutrals" and included a large number of popular Dominican politicians. This body showed signs of actually lasting and the US officially severed ties with the Loyalistas and stopped them from conducting air force or naval operations against the rebels. President Lyndon Johnson was furious about the unhindered Loyalista rampage against the Radio Station in the North of the city and ordered all support to the Loyalistas to stop - the US was to be officially? neutral."

I ask again -- do you bother to actually read the articles in the links you provide?

Besides, what about the 1 million people who left the Dominican Republic after 1965?

What about them?

Things weren't so rosy after the US "fixed" things, which is the whole point of this argument.

Oh my goodness! Things weren't "so rosy" after five years of chaos, looting, starvation, the selling of girls into slavery; in a country that had first been subjugated and plundered for centuries by various foreign powers and then completely raped by the devil Trujillo -- well, DUH!!!

The whole point of this argument is that the Dominican people (thanks to the US) were once again able to freely elect a government of their own choosing and get on with their lives. With the benefit of hindsight, some now say that they would have been better off electing Bosch rather than Balaguer. Perhaps this is true, perhaps not. The point is that it was the entire Dominican populace who made the choice, not a military junta or a civilian junta or an armed mob. Try to imagine just how "rosy" things would have been after another five (or more) years of civil war, with one coup after another after another.

The point of this whole argument is to prove that not all US backed regime changes have been successful. I don't mean any disrespect, but most history links would say the the Dominican Republic is NOT a success story.

Then you haven't looked at the right history links. The Dominican Republic has the fastest growing economy in Latin America (probably due to the large degree of freedom they have -- as you are well aware) as well as one of the longest (possibly the longest -- I am unsure) uninterrupted stretches of democratically-elected governments in Latin America. Compared to the majority of Latin American ex-colonial countries, it is doing well. It is certainly doing better than it would have had the civil war continued for years.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Phred]
    #1823599 - 08/17/03 07:34 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

pinksharkmark said:
That History Channel article is bullshit because it makes casual assertions with absolutely no evidence rather than sticking to factual reporting  --


Just because the History Channel article was a summary rather than an in depth analysis, doesn't mean it's bullshit (see my next link below).
Quote:

"Johnson initially claimed that the primary purpose of the U.S. military operation was to evacuate Americans and other foreign nationals, but in truth the U.S. soldiers were sent to prevent the restoration of the exiled president of the country, Juan Bosch."

Really? Says who? No quotes from anyone supporting this statement -- merely a baldfaced assertion that this was the case.

Who wrote that article for the History Channel? Has he ever set foot in the country? Who did he interview? For pete's sakes, not even Juan Bosch himself ever took the stance that article did!


Ok, I'll give you quotes from one of the most respected US Senators of the time who was directly involved in the US decision making, William Fulbright.  Here are his conclusions (if this still isn't good enough for you, he backs them up in the body of the link I provided):

"My specific conclusions regarding the crisis in Santo Domingo are as follows:

First. The United States intervened forcibly in the Dominican Republic in the last week of April 1965 not primarily to save American lives, as was then contended, but to prevent the victory of a revolutionary movement which was judged to be Communist-dominated. The decision to land thousands of marines on April 28 was based primarily on the fear of "another Cuba" in Santo Domingo.

Second. This fear was based on fragmentary and inadequate evidence. There is no doubt that Communists participated in the Dominican revolution on the rebel side, probably to a greater extent after than before the landing of U.S. marines on April 28, but just as it cannot be proved that the Communists would not have taken over the revolution neither can it be proved that they would have. There is little basis in the evidence offered the committee for the assertion that the rebels were Communist-dominated or certain to become so; on the contrary, the evidence suggests a chaotic situation in which no single faction was dominant at the outset and in which everybody, including the United States, had opportunities to influence the shape and course of the rebellion.

Third. The United States let pass its best opportunities to influence the course of events. The best opportunities were on April 25, when Juan Bosch's partv, the PRD, requested a "United States presence," and on April 27, when the rebels, believing themselves defeated, requested United States mediation for a negotiated settlement. . . .

Fourth. U.S. policy toward the Dominican Republic shifted markedly to the right between September 1963 and April 1965. In 1963, the United States strongly supported Bosch and the PRD as enlightened reformers; in 1965 the United States opposed their return to power on the unsubstantiated ground that a Bosch or PRD government would certainly, or almost certainly, become Communist dominated. Thus the United States turned its back on social revolution in Santo Domingo and associated itself with a corrupt and reactionary military oligarchy.

Fifth. U.S. policy was marred by a lack of candor and by misinformation. The former is illustrated by official assertions that U.S. military intervention was primarily for the Purpose of saving American lives; the latter is illustrated by exaggerated reports of massacres and atrocities by the rebels-reports which no one has been able to verify. It was officially asserted, for example, by the President in a press conference on June 17 according to an official State Department bulletin-that "some 1,500 innocent people were murdered and shot, and their heads cut off." There is no evidence to support this statement, . . .

Sixth. Responsibility for the failure of American policy in Santo Domingo lies primarily with those who advised the president. In the critical days between April 25 and April 28, these officials sent the president exaggerated reports of the danger of a Communist takeover in Santo Domingo and, on the basis of these, recommended U.S. massive military intervention. . . .

Seventh. Underlying the bad advice and unwise actions of the United States was the fear of another Cuba. The specter of a second Communist state in the Western Hemisphere-and its probable repercussions within the United States and possible effects on the careers of those who might be held responsible-seems to have been the most important single factor in distorting the judgment of otherwise sensible and competent men."
Quote:

If you seriously refuse to accept the much more detailed articles I provided, some of them written by Dominicans (and Dominicans who were critical of the United States, at that -- read the articles and you will see this), then arguing with you is pointless.


Again, I don't disagree with hardly any of the facts you provided.  I'm providing additional, very relevant information.
Quote:

Bosch was in exile and remained in exile. He had no control over the multifaceted "Constitutionalists", and directed none of their actions. They were a polyglot group (including even some, though not many, Communists -- Bosch himself was no Communist, as even Kennedy and Johnson were aware), factionalized and in violent disagreement over one another on key issues, as the links I provided (and even some of the ones you provided) show.


I don't disagree with this either.  But as Senator Fulbright said, "some of our officials seem to have forgotten that virtually all reform movements attract some Communist Support, that there is an important difference between Communist support and Communist control of a political movement, that it is quite possible to compete with the Communists for influence in a reform movement rather than abandon it to them".
Quote:

I have had many, MANY conversations with Dominicans about everything from Trujillo to the Three Sisters to Bosch to Balaguer to Fernandez and more -- including the events of 1962-1966. While not every single one holds exactly the same opinion (some I have spoken to voted for Bosch every chance they got, for example), every one WITHOUT EXCEPTION was grateful that the US ended the civil war and arranged elections.


Once again, I don't dispute this.  But aren't some people just a little upset with the fact that the US "associated itself with a corrupt and reactionary military oligarchy"?  Do you want more links?
Quote:

Don't you dare presume to tell me how Dominicans feel, Cornholio.


I wouldn't dare do that.  I provided links from Dominicans who dared tell you how they feel.
Quote:

"Twice in the last 6 years communist insurgencies had tried to take the country. Most notably in 1959 when Castro landed a a small guerrilla force too "liberate" the island. It was quickly crushed.. Even Truijillo had flirted with the Soviet Union going so far as to allow Soviet radio broadcasts. Yet the humanitarian and historical concern cannot be over looked, as it has been by many historians.? The country had been embroiled in conflict for much of it's post-Trujillo period and had made little reform. Many Dominicans were starving to death and out of work In the rural countryside the conditions were so bad that some girls were being sold into slavery."


I don't disagree.
Quote:

I ask again -- do you bother to actually read the articles in the links you provide?


Yes, and I'm not disagreeing with them.
Quote:

Things weren't so rosy after the US "fixed" things, which is the whole point of this argument.

Oh my goodness! Things weren't "so rosy" after five years of chaos, looting, starvation, the selling of girls into slavery; in a country that had first been subjugated and plundered for centuries by various foreign powers and then completely raped by the devil Trujillo -- well, DUH!!!


Things weren't so rosy for a LOOOONG time after that.
Quote:

The whole point of this argument is that the Dominican people (thanks to the US) were once again able to freely elect a government of their own choosing and get on with their lives. With the benefit of hindsight, some now say that they would have been better off electing Bosch rather than Balaguer. Perhaps this is true, perhaps not. The point is that it was the entire Dominican populace who made the choice, not a military junta or a civilian junta or an armed mob. Try to imagine just how "rosy" things would have been after another five (or more) years of civil war, with one coup after another after another.


Again, I'm not disagreeing.  But this doesn't disprove the fact that the US "associated itself with a corrupt and reactionary military oligarchy" in order "to prevent the victory of a revolutionary movement" (quotes from Senator William Fulbright).
Quote:

The Dominican Republic has the fastest growing economy in Latin America (probably due to the large degree of freedom they have -- as you are well aware)


It's about time, dude.  :tongue: 


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1825626 - 08/18/03 12:02 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Cornholio said:
Quote:

shakta said:
This article seems to fit in with this discussion.

http://www5.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/16/time.standards/ 


Interesting article.  It says we are now justified in supporting evil dictatorships if they help us "in our life-and-death struggle against radical Islam", just as we were justified supporting evil dictatorships if they helped us fight Communism.  Hmmm, I seriously question both our goal of wiping out the "radical" Islamics and of supporting evil dictatorships.  I mean, is it really mandatory for us to wipe these groups out at any cost in order to achieve peace?  Or can we peacefully coexist with them?  I really don't think we've ever even considered the latter option as a possibility.  It seems like we believe in perpetual war for perpetual peace, which is a bunch of crap in my opinion.  :tongue: 




I don't know the answer man. It seemed to work against communism though. I see your point, but think about this. If a groups main goal it to kill you, how do you peacefully coexist with them? This is most certainly what groups like Al Qaeda want to do. Their goal is to force the rest of the world to be Islamic, or die. I don't see anyway to coexist with that myself.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1825642 - 08/18/03 12:14 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Giving the palestinians justice would be a start.

By showing courage and compassion for people rather than slaughtering, maiming and bombing them. Bin Laden does explain in simple terms exactly what his grievances are. Contrary to what Bush says he doesn't say "We want to kill americans because we are against freedom and hollywood films".

Surely the approach has to be taking away all reasons to support Al-qaeda.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,245
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Xlea321]
    #1825709 - 08/18/03 12:48 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

By showing courage and compassion for people rather than slaughtering, maiming and bombing them.



Sso, we should show courage and compassion for.... which group? Seeing as there are several conflicts going on around the globe at any given moment, who decides which group? And then how do you deal with those who support the other group?
Quote:







Quote:

Surely the approach has to be taking away all reasons to support Al-qaeda.


Surely you would then have pissed off someone else.

The answer is for a countries leadership to worry first and foremost about those who vote for them.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1827289 - 08/18/03 06:58 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

shakta said:
If a groups main goal it to kill you, how do you peacefully coexist with them? This is most certainly what groups like Al Qaeda want to do. Their goal is to force the rest of the world to be Islamic, or die. I don't see anyway to coexist with that myself.


Do you really think Al Queda's main goal is to kill Americans and dominate the world?  I think there's more evidence showing Bush's goal is world domination.  As Alex said, Bin Laden explained in painstaking detail what Al Queda's grievances are, and that he only resorted to terrorism as a last resort to try and protect the lifestyle that he believes in.  You should seriously consider reading Bin Laden's letter to at least understand his point of view.  I'm truly amazed that the mainstream media never published it.  I'm not saying that you should necessarily agree with his letter, but just read it to understand his real point of view rather than the one the Bush admininstration would like us to believe, that "they hate freedom and democracy".

By the way shakta, do you now agree with "the huge list of regime changes the US has done that did not benefit the people of the country they happened in"???  I went through a lot of trouble to prove it for you.  Again, here's the article with the scorecard.

Let's have a beer sometime.  :smirk:   


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 17 years, 6 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1827304 - 08/18/03 07:01 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

I agree with the principle. I still need to research each case to form my own opinion though. Back to terrorists. I am not just talking about bin Laden, but all of them. Anyway, I don't buy their leave us alone, and we will leave you alone BS at all. They teach their kids that we are the great Satan and that we should be destroyed. They also believe that Islam should be the only religion practiced, and are willing to kill anyone who doesn't agree. I think the way the Taliban treated the people of Afghanistan is a prime example of this.


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1827377 - 08/18/03 07:20 PM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

shakta said:
They teach their kids that we are the great Satan and that we should be destroyed. They also believe that Islam should be the only religion practiced, and are willing to kill anyone who doesn't agree. I think the way the Taliban treated the people of Afghanistan is a prime example of this. 


Our own Pat Robertson (who is good friends with Bush Sr) feels the same way about Christianity.  He's on a mission to spread Christianity throughout the world, and has even tried to influence our Government to invade countries that are opposing his Christian ministries.  It's sick.  And no different from what you're talking about.

I think Islam has more than enough evidence to make a very strong case that we are the Great Satin (just read Bin Laden's letter).  But we feel others are the "Axis of Evil".  Who's right?  Personally, I think a strong case can be made for both sides.  It's just like the discussions on these boards between Democrats and Republicans.  The Republicans point out all the evils of the Democrats, and the Democrats turn around and point out all the evils of Republicans.  I think both are probably right, but neither side is willing to accept their own faults, but just turn around and point the finger back at the other side instead.  :tongue:       


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Offlinemonoamine
umask 077(nonefor you)

Registered: 09/07/02
Posts: 3,095
Loc: Jacksonville,FL
Last seen: 16 years, 2 months
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: shakta]
    #1828654 - 08/19/03 04:27 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Back to terrorists. I am not just talking about bin Laden, but all of them. Anyway, I don't buy their leave us alone, and we will leave you alone BS at all.




That's the problem-you're grouping everyone who doesn't agree with the U.S. agenda under a little convient blanket term "terrorist". Not all "terrorists" have the same agenda.For example-some Palenstinian "terrorists" are just fighting for land that was wrongly taken from them and want to reestablish reasonable boundries that are only a couple decades old. It's pretty ironic that their Isralie counterparts are seldom called "terrorists" by the western media or the admininstration.

And why the hell is "terrorist" thrown around like it is? The Bush administration needs to get a dictionary.


--------------------
People think that if you just say the word "hallucinations" it explains everything you want it to explain and eventually whatever it is you can't explain will just go away.It's just a word,it doesn't explain anything...
Douglas Adams


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineCornholio
A liberal guy(on hiatus)

Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 845
Loc: Austin, TX
Last seen: 18 years, 22 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: monoamine]
    #1828730 - 08/19/03 05:23 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

ter?ror?ist
n.
One that engages in acts or an act opposing the Bush administration.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
OfflineGernBlanston
unintended sideeffect
Male

Registered: 05/28/03
Posts: 842
Loc: OR
Last seen: 2 months, 5 days
Re: US was warned Democracy in Iraq may be "Impossible" [Re: Cornholio]
    #1829001 - 08/19/03 10:29 AM (18 years, 3 months ago)

:grin:


--------------------
There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.
  --  Howard Zinn


Extras: Filter Print Post Remind Me! Notify Moderator Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds, High THC Strains, USA West Coast Strains   Bridgetown Botanicals CBD Edibles   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Kratom Powder for Sale, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Left Coast Kratom Premium Bali Kratom Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Arming Iraq and the Path to War dee_N_ae 924 3 04/18/03 11:10 PM
by JohnnyRespect
* iraq
( 1 2 3 all )
Lallafa 2,288 46 08/21/02 10:06 PM
by Phred
* Polish Troops in Iraq find recently produced French Missiles
( 1 2 all )
wingnutx 2,435 32 10/05/03 03:11 AM
by Xlea321
* Who armed Iraq?
( 1 2 all )
luvdemshrooms 2,394 27 03/21/03 09:52 AM
by luvdemshrooms
* Support US war on IRAQ
( 1 2 all )
LordMorham 4,357 29 09/20/02 11:56 AM
by LordMorham
* Turkish leader warns of terror wave if EU rejects membership Great_Satan 406 0 12/13/04 07:58 PM
by Great_Satan
* US running scared of Iraq elections
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Xlea321 6,619 77 02/05/04 08:07 PM
by mntlfngrs
* Bush: Iraq Part of 'Global Democratic Revolution' SquattingMarmot 586 1 11/06/03 06:51 PM
by Psilocybeingzz

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
5,922 topic views. 0 members, 1 guests and 3 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic | ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2021 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.092 seconds spending 0.036 seconds on 21 queries.