A Forum for Grinches and Ho-Ho-Hoes

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
If all you are looking for is that sentiment, shoot Ty was bothered that the vote happened. Ty wouldn't put the reason as colorfully as the DU guy, but he is sorry the vote happened sucessfully.

Ty said nothing of the sort (I know, whiff). All he did was point out that a vote does not a stable, peaceful country make. They may have voted, but I'm not buying any time shares on the banks of the Euphrates any time soon.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Ty said nothing of the sort (I know, whiff). All he did was point out that a vote does not a stable, peaceful country make. They may have voted, but I'm not buying any time shares on the banks of the Euphrates any time soon.

ball don't lie!

[sgtclub]

• Maybe you're like me and have opposed the Iraq war since before the shooting started -- not to the point of joining any peace protests, but at least letting people know where you stood.
  
  
  
  You didn't change your mind when our troops swept quickly into Baghdad or when you saw the rabble that celebrated the toppling of the Saddam Hussein statue, figuring that little had been accomplished and that the tough job still lay ahead.
  
  Despite your misgivings, you didn't demand the troops be brought home immediately afterward, believing the United States must at least try to finish what it started to avoid even greater bloodshed. And while you cheered Saddam's capture, you couldn't help but thinking I-told-you-so in the months that followed as the violence continued to spread and the death toll mounted.
  
  By now, you might have even voted against George Bush -- a second time -- to register your disapproval.
  
  But after watching Sunday's election in Iraq and seeing the first clear sign that freedom really may mean something to the Iraqi people, you have to be asking yourself: What if it turns out Bush was right, and we were wrong?
  
  It's hard to swallow, isn't it?
  
  Americans cross own barrier
  
  
  
  If you fit the previously stated profile, I know you're fighting the idea, because I am, too. And if you were with the president from the start, I've already got your blood boiling.
  
  For those who've been in the same boat with me, we don't need to concede the point just yet. There's a long way to go. But I think we have to face the possibility.
  
  I won't say that it had never occurred to me previously, but it's never gone through my mind as strongly as when I watched the television coverage from Iraq that showed long lines of people risking their lives by turning out to vote, honest looks of joy on so many of their faces.
  
  Some CNN guest expert was opining Monday that the Iraqi people crossed a psychological barrier by voting and getting a taste of free choice (setting aside the argument that they only did so under orders from their religious leaders).
  
  I think it's possible that some of the American people will have crossed a psychological barrier as well.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/brown...s-brown01.html

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by bilmore
Wheeler's column goes on to explain who provided the liquor: teams of Porter Goss' CIA working with their counterparts in British MI6 intelligence."

And Ty thought we weren't promoting democracy in Ukraine!

S_A_M

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by sgtclub
But after watching Sunday's election in Iraq and seeing the first clear sign that freedom really may mean something to the Iraqi people, you have to be asking yourself: What if it turns out Bush was right, and we were wrong?

You sometimes hear of people who fall from great heights and somehow survive -- perhaps with many broken bones, sometimes with barely a scratch.

That person may rightly be congratulated as they recuperate, but their survival does not mean it was wise to jump off the bridge.

S_A_M

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
That person may rightly be congratulated as they recuperate, but their survival does not mean it was wise to jump off the bridge.

Are we speaking of the operational wisdom of the tactics of the jump chosen, or the basic morality of the choice to jump? Hindsight might give us insight into how we waged the war, but the success or failure of the vote doesn't, I think, speak to the rightness of the decision to depose Saddam.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
You sometimes hear of people who fall from great heights and somehow survive -- perhaps with many broken bones, sometimes with barely a scratch.

That person may rightly be congratulated as they recuperate, but their survival does not mean it was wise to jump off the bridge.

S_A_M

What if it is Butch and Sundance? You know, there was a good reason to jump- even though they didn't want to, they knew they needed to.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by bilmore
Not the real Dean - the Dean of Vermont - but the Dean persona of 2004, yeah, I do. And that's the persona that's being selected to lead the party for four years.

The Dean persona wasn't right or left in any meaningful sense -- it was anti- the Iraq war.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
If all you are looking for is that sentiment, shoot Ty was bothered that the vote happened. Ty wouldn't put the reason as colorfully as the DU guy, but he is sorry the vote happened sucessfully.

Kiss my ass, Hank.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The Dean persona wasn't right or left in any meaningful sense -- it was anti- the Iraq war.

the Saudi 9/11 phone call rant was centrist?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The Dean persona wasn't right or left in any meaningful sense -- it was anti- the Iraq war.

The persona, in my mind, isn't composed so much of Dean's actual positions - heck, he was fairly anti-tax, anti-welfare when he started the campaign - but what he became in the minds of the far left. Even now, he's assumed a position so far to the left of reality in their minds that it's unreal. He's a demigod to the HC Du set. He's a lot like Ashcroft in that respect, in that the public persona that's been built is fairly far off the mark.

Originally posted by sgtclub

But after watching Sunday's election in Iraq and seeing the first clear sign that freedom really may mean something to the Iraqi people, you have to be asking yourself: What if it turns out Bush was right, and we were wrong?

Ummmm, dunno who this joker is, but I mostly think we can all mainly agree that freedom really has meant something to the Iraqi people even before Sunday. Among the freedoms they might have cherished was the freedom from getting blown to shit as collateral damage in our war to rid the world of the clear and present danger of Saddam's WMDs.

Don't get me wrong - I read the papers and I know that history has been revised so that now the war was all about giving them the chance to elect a puppet government and getting rid of the sadistic psychopaths who ran the place previously. But what exactly is this guy saying Bush was "right" about?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by ironweed
Ummmm, dunno who this joker is, but I mostly think we can all mainly agree that freedom really has meant something to the Iraqi people even before Sunday. Among the freedoms they might have cherished was the freedom from getting blown to shit as collateral damage in our war to rid the world of the clear and present danger of Saddam's WMDs.

Don't get me wrong - I read the papers and I know that history has been revised so that now the war was all about giving them the chance to elect a puppet government and getting rid of the sadistic psychopaths who ran the place previously. But what exactly is this guy saying Bush was "right" about?

Sorry. It wasn't Ty who thinks the vote was bad news, but it was one of your crew. And I suspect more of you feel the way Club's guy does then like to admit it.

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Sorry. It wasn't Ty who thinks the vote was bad news, but it was one of your crew. And I suspect more of you feel the way Club's guy does then like to admit it.

Suspect away, and I'm sure lots of people are softening now that there's some feel-good stuff going on over there. This is because people have short attention spans. They watch the news and see happy Iraqis with blue fingers, and, well, who gives a shit how we got here, right? It was, like, two years ago already.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by ironweed
Ummmm, dunno who this joker is, but I mostly think we can all mainly agree that freedom really has meant something to the Iraqi people even before Sunday. Among the freedoms they might have cherished was the freedom from getting blown to shit as collateral damage in our war to rid the world of the clear and present danger of Saddam's WMDs.

Don't get me wrong - I read the papers and I know that history has been revised so that now the war was all about giving them the chance to elect a puppet government and getting rid of the sadistic psychopaths who ran the place previously. But what exactly is this guy saying Bush was "right" about?

So, we've deposed a mass killer of his own people and others, the people who have been freed have expressed, through polls, an overwhelming happiness with both this deposing and their resulting freedom, they have exercised their new democracy in a rather enthusiatic and heartwarming way, this may well be the first step in bringing an entire region into a more democratic, less despotic era, and you're bitter about this because it goes against your core values?

Scary core values.