Keeping it civil instead of returning to our dark ways

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Not Me
The different terrain of Afghanistan makes your analogy a poor one. The Soviets lost in Afghanistan because of the terrain more than anything else. They weren't equipped to fight on that terrain.

Dissent partially. The Soviets lost for many reasons:
1.) vast and widespread hostility of the population;
2.) popularization of the anti-Soviet cause across the *muslim world, so plenty of willing volunteers showed up for confrontation;
3.) heavy, heavy, heavy U.S. funding (with Saudi/Pakistani support) for weapons and training.

As with almost all other occupations, the Soviets ended up being confined mostly to bases such that they would only go out into the field in force. The greatly advanced mobility provided by armored helicopters reduced the detrimental effect, as they could still send reaction/deployment forced into the field pretty quickly...

and ultimately, the whole house of cards came tumbling down when we supplied the Muj with stingers. When the Soviets started losing helicopters all over the place, they realized the jig was up.

The terrain plays into the ability to trap the Soviets into bases, but there were many other factors at play there too.

Hello

* eta muslim instead of Soviet

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me

Dissent partially.

I don't dispute that the US funding was important but I still think even without US funding the Soviets ultimately would have pulled out.

My main point to sidd was that his analogizing the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan to the US liberation of Iraq was a poor one. You have just provided even more reasons the two aren't analogous.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Not Me
You have just provided even more reasons the two aren't analogous.

Indeed.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Skeks in the city
No, he's thinking something more Sherman-esque. Look at the Civil War. The North won with a whole lot of killing. Not love songs.

Maybe a mix between that and the Boer wars.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
Maybe a mix between that and the Boer wars.

Sounds more like genocide to me. A little extreme for a war in which the justification is highly suspect.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Not Me
I don't dispute that the US funding was important but I still think even without US funding the Soviets ultimately would have pulled out.

The Soviets needed better tanks.

[Adder]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Sounds more like genocide to me. A little extreme for a war in which the justification is highly suspect.

That was my first reaction, but as he explains more what he is talking about, it seems less extreme. War is won by killing people, and as much as I would like to, I can't come up with a different way to win.

That said, one would hope that we would be killing those who are trying to kill us rather than just any old Sunni.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Sounds more like genocide to me.

This is ridiculous. These insurgents are being killed because they are killing US soldiers and innocent iraqis. If you don't see the difference between that and genocide, well, there is no use discussing this topic.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Adder
That was my first reaction, but as he explains more what he is talking about, it seems less extreme. War is won by killing people, and as much as I would like to, I can't come up with a different way to win.

That said, one would hope that we would be killing those who are trying to kill us rather than just any old Sunni.

Genocide lite?

We invaded Iraq, they didn't choose for us to be there.l Now they're opposing us, just like I would be opposing an invading power. Killing lots of them is not going to make them oppose us any less (except for the dead ones).

This is the quandry we were faced with in Viet Nam. We faced an enemy in his own country, and the enemy was prepared to fight to the death. We were faced with the choice of withdrawl and defeat or genocide. I hope that is not the case here, but to the extent anyone is talking seriously about flattening entire towns, we have already lost.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Fugee
I don't even know you IRL and I could diagnose that.
Depression medication doesn't have to equate being a zombie and self-medication with alcohol is truly not good for you. Wellbutrin is also prescribed for adult ADD so you could kill two birds with one pill. There is another relatively new drug called Effexor that a friend of mine says has changed her life. Really, you could talk to your doctor and give them a try and if you didn't like the way they made you feel, try a different one or go back to self-medication.

This is clearly from a guy who has never seen a seriously ADHD kid. It is likely that too many parents get their kids put on ADD drugs to make their lives easier but I have seen the difference it can make. One of my GAL kids was so ADHD he was practically bouncing off the walls and was years behind his grade in school because he couldn't concentrate and was always disrupting class. After meds, he is a changed kid --- he's like a normal kid, not a zombie and not out of control.

I ride the highs, I ride the lows. It gives me a richness of perspective I don't think I'd get if I were "medicated". As much as I enjoy a drink or a joint, I have always controlled it (with the exception of one time in college). I just don't get the whole addiction or depression thing. I like when the wave rides back up again. I can't imagine how horrible it would be to remain even-keel all the time.

I think we're creating a weak society by knee jerk medicating everything. The bar for when medication should be prescrobed is set too low because its the easy fix for maladies which really don't require medication. Mozart was probably ADHD... ya think soeity would've been better off had he been drugged? I think the medication is insidious because it "cures" many minds of tumultuous emotional peaks and valleys which spur people to do creative things.

I'm beginning to think I'm not nearly as fucked up as some people have led me to believe. Its funny, isn't it, that I get the most impassioned responses when I rant ont the two biggest crutches available - religion and drugs. Why are these such touchy subjects? I think I know why.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Two separate friends have had horrible side effects when they got off of Efflexor. Symptoms included: short term memory loss, confusion, trouble concentrating, dizzyness, nausea, nosebleeds, tremors, and increased appetite. Efflexor also caused one friend's blood pressure to skyrocket. It took nearly a month for my other friend to get off of it, and she thought she was going crazy during that month. The scary kind of crazy, not the endearing kind.

Yes, anti-depressants can be very effective, but there are a lot of dangers associated with them, and a hell of a lot of people in thiss country doctor shop until they get the drugs they think they need.

These people should probably take hallucinogens instead. I'm not joking. Nothing reminds me of just how silly the stresses of life are than being on mushrooms for a night. I say this in all sincerity. I take a strong dose of hallucinogens at least once a year to clean out the pipes and it really does wonders for me. You really do get this sense of understanding you don't get from anything else. You have to cut away the facade and remember who you are from time to time. Sounds hoeky, right? Well, its hard to describe a trip. Suffice it to say, I believe more can be cured with LSD and therapy thaan with all the goddamned mood-regulating garbage in the world.

The human condition is not to be perpetually even-keel. I can't believe Paxil is even sold. I was a shy kid for a time when I was little. You know how you cure that shit? You fucking go talk to people and learn social skills.

[Diane_Keaton]

Apparently, the two female relatives of Allawi have been released but this hasn't been totally confirmed yet. Story Here . Looks like it really IS the religion of Peace. Oh, but wait, the mutilated a body of a Western woman has just been found. (I really hope it is not Margaret Hassan.)

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Not Me
This is ridiculous. These insurgents are being killed because they are killing US soldiers and innocent iraqis. If you don't see the difference between that and genocide, well, there is no use discussing this topic.

If we could reliably tell the difference between the insurgents and innocent Iraqis, why would we need to flatten cities and kill hundreds of thousands of people?

[bilmore]

Originally posted by Fugee
What drugs have you been doing? Minnesota as a whole is not all that liberal and certainly not monolithically so.

McCarthy.
Humphrey.
Mondale.
Kerry.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Its a simple plan of a attack. Any child can do it.

1. Attack the person raising the facts you don't like. If that doesn't work,

2. Change the subject. If that fails,

3. Grasp non-material element of the facts which is not strong and attack it relentlessly. If that fails,

4. Shift to amorphous statement about "values" and softly raise suggestion that the problem with the country is "lack of leadership" or some other grandiose notion which suggests you're above, or should not be subject to, cross examination.

By the time this exercise is over, nobody remembers what the debate was about in the first place and has changed the channel. It really is brilliant.

Michael Moore.