Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

Is this different than the last one?

You had me with the fact that these bloodthirsty radicals want to win the battle in the media; they are crazy but they are not stupid. They know that the left wing in this country will pick away at the right wing using the (poor) example of Vietnam… ie: the US did a cut-and-run there… if we cut-and-run with Iraq, they and their campaign of terror have won the day.

But you lost me BIG TIME with the concept that the earthquake in Pakistan was “the hand of God.” I laughed so hard I almost fell off my chair. Are you serious?

I’m not so much with the religion thing. But if there is a God… and if the bible is “true”… when God destroys someplace… uhh… you don’t get to walk in and dig for survivors, or drive in with food, or take pictures. When God decides to rain destruction… there’s nothing left to see.

In my opinion, equating the earthquake with divine justice makes conservatives look as fruits-n-nuts as the wing-nut, tin-foil-hat wearing, window-licking radical left-wingers claiming that they know for a FACT Karl Rove and George Bush cooked up the hurricane in the gulf, and personally went down and blew up levees, all to get rid of a few black people.

CUCKOO!

There are bigger points to make. How about that the anti-war “bring them home” slant in our national media regarding our efforts in Iraq are bolstering the morale of Al Qaeda.

Al Qaeda’s leadership knows that they will win in the arena of public opinion if people like the (have-another-one-Teddy) senior senator from Massachussetts (hiccup) will just keep eroding the confidence of, and support for, the troops slogging through the tough work over in Iraq.

There are nutty people who actually see terrorists as “freedom fighters”. There are people who think that the practice of beheading men, women, and children, or cutting off the hands and feet of the children of one’s enemies, are perfectly acceptable because it’s part of their “religion” or “culture”. Let’s not join the ranks of loonies who think every bump in the night is either a conspiracy or divine intervetion.

I’m all for free speech. I’m all for freedom of religion. You are free to run around naked, wear a tinfoil hat, and even attack your imaginary friends with your light saber.

But I just want to say for the record that not every card-carrying conservative republican is an evangelical Christian, nor do we all think God sent an earthquake to Osama’s cave.

J. Anthony Matel,

Did you ever notice that when the Bush administration is floundering, somehow within a few days we get some terrorist nugget to divert our attention away from the failures of the Bush administration? There was an excellent time-line given last night on the Keith Oberman show on MSNBC that detailed the blunders of the administration and the coincidence that a terror related “Fear Factor” incident happens w/in 2 days.It also details how most of these were false or old news that the Bush administration released to divert the nations focus on whatever screw-up was happening at the time.
Not that these letters are concocted by the Bush team, or are they?

My point exactly.

A letter is intercepted that shows how the left wing’s anti-war efforts contribute to morale among Al-Qaeda… and the first thing they think of is “It’s a conspiracy! The letter was fabricated!”

I don’t remember these same people shouting about a fabrication… when Dan Rather was reporting.

Just a thought.

Missjoy

Re earthquakes as wrath of God

I don’t believe in those sorts of things. Just like I don’t believe in astrology, ghosts, the theory of Atlantis or flying saucers. They are all superstitions. I meant my comment as an irony. You must know that many radicals hailed the U.S. hurricanes as a sign of God’s displeasure. They said their prayers had been answered. They believe it, evidently. If you take THEIR belief as a starting point you come to the result I mention. If they follow their own consequent logic, they should be wondering right now about Osama and his followers. Unfortunatley, I don’t think logic applies.

missjoy,

“You are free to run around naked, wear a tinfoil hat, and even attack your imaginary friends with your light saber.”

Thanks, It’s about time I found someone who will except me for me.
Your pal,
window-licking radical left-winger

Jack,

“What does that mean to us?”

This means, if the letter is genuine, that we’re still not winning the war in Iraq. The media is still aiding them more than us and our own population is going soft from lack of success. Unless our military leaders can shake things up in a major way, demonstrating some decisive victories, we’re going to lose the media war and the war for the hearts of the American populace.

“I wonder if Osama bin Laden got caught in the recent earthquake or buried in the ensuing landslides.”

We can hope, but I doubt it will be that easy. Besides, if that is the case proving he’s actually dead to those who need to know will be almost impossible.

Also it seems some people completely missed your disclaimer at the end.

J,
I am relieved to hear that you don’t subscribe to such theories. But you have to admit, there are people who will, with a straight face, say things like that… and blink in suprise when, in response, you shoot coffee out your nostrils.
m.j.

Andre,

As long as you stick to your own home you should be fine (with the shades down), but as soon as you take to the streets you’re risking being charged with indecent exposure. Alas, we’re not as free as some of like to think, and some of us are very grateful for it.

As one of the folks generally on the left, I am in indeed suspicious of this administration. However, I think the letter from Zawahiri is genuine and these guys believe what they believe. My question is. How does this change anything? We know and have known for some time that radical islamists hate us and want to kill us. I suppose if we put 500,000 troops on the ground and went house to house, we might find 95% of the insurgents and be able to kill them. If we did that what have we accomplished? Occupation in someone elses land is never welcome. Even if democracy takes root, there will still be a deep-seated resentment, anger, hatred, etc. against the west and in particular the United States.

Shall we stay as long as the British did in India? Will that make things better? If we have a “raj” of 100 years like Britain did, will we stamp out terrorism?

What I want to hear from my government is when will we bring our troops home? What is the threshold of death required before we decide it is not worth it anymore? What does it have to be? Is it worth losing a hundred thousand soldiers? Fifty thousand soldiers? Twenty thousand solders? I want the folks who support this war to justify to me the death of an American Soldier so democracy can take root in Iraq. Iraq is a country that we wouldn’t care one whit about if it didn’t sit on the 2nd largest pool of oil reserves in the world. How many more of these men and women will get killed before enough is enough? Someone please tell me what the value proposition is in terms of lost lives?

This is not a Republican issue or a Democratic issue, it’s a sanity issue. Democrats have been just as guilty of “flowery rhetoric and noble gestures” regarding sacrificing someone else’s kids for their means. Kennedy said this in 1961:

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty…

As a result over 56 thousand American soldiers are dead and we didn’t accomplish a damn thing. The Neocons can blather all they want that Iraq is different than Viet Nam. The only difference in my opinion is geographic and that we’ve not been foolish enough to allow this war to last as long as Viet Nam did. We need to be our of Iraq yesterday.

Missjoy,

A letter is intercepted that shows how the left wing’s anti-war efforts contribute to morale among Al-Qaeda… and the first thing they think of is “It’s a conspiracy! The letter was fabricated!â€

That’s the problem when you break trust people had put on you.
You know, “once a cheater, always a cheater”.

Your government had been catch forging fake documents in the past. Nigeria yellowcake story comes to mind. Why should people accept blindly any document as geniune from their government?
Trust is not something you can ask, but something you must deserve.

Plus, conspiracies are everywhere.
No, I’m not paranoid! ;-)

“Did you ever notice that when the Bush administration is floundering, somehow within a few days we get some terrorist nugget to divert our attention away from the failures of the Bush administration?”

At least these nuggets are cheaper than cruise missles.

“Not that these letters are concocted by the Bush team, or are they?”

Take the word of OUR govt or take the word of a terrorist?
Wait for more info on whether the letter is real or fake OR believe the terrorists message?
Depends which side you support I guess.
I for one will wait for more information.

Phillipe,

Yellowcake? You wouldn’t be referring to this http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39834-2004Jul9.html would you? Surely you meant something other than Yellowcake.

I mean, if the Washington Post, not what I’d call a conservative bastion, freely admits what they admit in this story, I’m pretty sure you wouldn’t be referring to yellowcake…

Some interesting facts:
There has been an average of 160,000 troops stationed in Iraq
during the last 22 months. During this time the firearm death
total is 2,112. This is a death rate of 60 per 100,000.

In comparison, the firearm death rate in Washington DC is 80.6 per 100,000.

This means you are more likely to get shot and killed in our
Nation’s Capitol, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in
the nation, than you are in Iraq.

Conclusion:
We should pull out of Washington DC immediately!

I’m not going to say that God sent the earthquake almost on top of OBL’s cave to judge and kill him. No one can say that for sure. Although I’m surprised that Falwell, Robertson, or one of them hasn’t said he knows it as a fact. But if God wanted to HE COULD. He could completely destroy or partly destory of an area according to what he wants.

I find it interesting that we have almost the same people that protested Vietnam protesting Iraq. I reckon It’s helping them relive the youth.
BUT IT SURE AS HELL AINT DOING ANYTHING ELSE BUT BOOSTING THE MORAL OF THE ENEMY! They get the idea that we’re going to cut and run like we did in Vietnam. Maybe the protester don’t mean to be sending that kind of message, but they are. It’s the same message that was sent to the VC and NVA. In that case they got it right. I sure hope it’s not the case in Iraq.

Ron,
The USSR lost in Afghanistan to the Mujahideen, and it had nothing to do with media or soviet liberals. We’re fighting some of the same people today. They are not attacking in the US. They are defending in Iraq and in Afghanistan. What you or I say or do will not matter to them in the least.

For anyone following, CNN has an article on whether the letter was legit. In a Reuters article, a expert on Al Qaida whom I admire, Michael Scheuer, believes the letter is legit. Another expert on Al Qaida in Iraq thinks it’s a forgery.

Worth noting the Islamic fundamentalists take responsibility for videotaped beheadings and numerous other propaganda videos, yet deny the authenticity of this letter.

Faced with a flurry of bad news and falling polls, Bush made a very sudden decision to deliver an ‘important’ speech. The speech was remarkable for its lack of new material and general sloppiness. Immediately following, the NYC subway was subjected to an alert which turned out to be a hoax, and this letter turned up.

The timing is certainly suspicious. The title of Jack’s article, “Goals in Plain Sight,” is true enough. But whose goals are we really talking about?

Another thing I find interesting but not surpirsing is the same people same people that believe that documents, that were proven forgaries, on Bush’s military record are fact, are the same one saying that Zawahiri’s letter is a forgery.
Anything to try to discredit Bush.

Hey Andre

Even Bill Clinton the first black president said there where WMD and so did George Stephanopolis on his show a couple weeks ago. So why are you not following the party line.

DENNIS
Deep seated anger toward the west.

more of there children are being educated than ever before,women are free and not slaves as they used to be. People can speak there mind without being jailed or murdered on the spot.
There sure will be a lot of anger when these people can find a job and take care of there families as they see fit, And generally live a life with much more freedom than they even thought possible just a few short years ago.
DENNIS get over it you have a myopic and come off as obtuse. as far as oil is concerned the left in this country created the problem we have today. You can’t drill here or there or anywhere.then you can’t refine it here there or anywhere we don’t need there oil if we would have drilled here in the states twenty or thirty years ago. Let alone what we know to be facts about oil today. the worlds largest oil reserves are now being discovered in the north pole. But we can’t dril there either right!

Bring all the troops home so then they can nuke NYC,LA,CHICAGO,you name the city. They hate anyone that does not believe as they do. That is why they kill there own. Try to make piece with them and learn the lesson that SPAIN learned withdraw and they will attack. But you have already forgotten 9\11,the USS COLE,attack on the trade center in 93,Khobar towers,Bali and the list goes on.

Robert, the casualties however, including death and wounding/injury of American troops is over 20,000. Apparently you don’t count being shot but not dying as a casualty. Doing so would really screw with your percentages wouldn’t it.

All this talk is meaningless. We will soon see if the Letter is real or not in the effectivity of the Insurgent Attacks in Iraq. If its real, the attacks will weaken. If its false, we will still have 3 GIs die each day.

In any case, I see all this rightwing whining as proof that the Conservatives are already blaming the Left for losing the Republican War in Iraq. The Right simply can’t admit its incompetent and stupid. Can’t say I blame them.

“DENNIS get over it you have a myopic and come off as obtuse. as far as oil is concerned the left in this country created the problem we have today. You can’t drill here or there or anywhere.then you can’t refine it here there or anywhere we don’t need there oil if we would have drilled here in the states twenty or thirty years ago. Let alone what we know to be facts about oil today. the worlds largest oil reserves are now being discovered in the north pole. But we can’t dril there either right!”

DENNIS get over it you have a myopic and come off as obtuse.

——————————————-

Cad, excuse me, but I don’t recall saying anything about being against oil exploration and or drilling in the US. I would be in favor of it depending on the cost/benefit for the country and if we could do it responsibly. You presume too much sir.

I’m not sure where I’m obtuse or myopic, but regardless, I do notice you didn’t answer the question I posed. Exactly how many lives is this exercise worth Cad? How many soldiers die before you say it’s enough, bring them home. If you really think that by occupying Iraq, we’ve reduced the threat of an attack on the west, then you must not have noticed when the U.K. was attacked in July.

Radical islamist will be a focal point of terror for us for a long time. Our continued efforts in terms of manpower and expenditure should be focused on Al Qaeda.

I was in favor of the action in Afghanistan as I believed the country was directly involved in the support of Al Qaeda and the terrorists who attacked us. I am not in favor of the action in Iraq and believe it is worsening the situation versus improving it.

The left in general (and I in particular) have never argued that the troops are part of the problem here. They’re at the wrong end of a chain of command unworthy of them, that’s all.

This canard that our poor performance in this war is the result of media and liberal criticism needs to be taken out to the woodshed and shot. It’s a lousy excuse.

The president’s men raided the files of their intelligence agencies to pick reports with which to stuff their reports to scare us. They didn’t bother to verify, corroborate, get people on the ground we could trust to get samples off these supposed weapons, to find them in the first place. Then, having invaded, they failed to change strategies to improve the situation, and have subjected the country to a grueling combination of political divisiveness, escalating casualties and resource mismanagement ever since.

What kind of idiots intentionally play Americans off one another at the same time they’re gathering support for a war? How do you maintain morale for a cause the soldiers themselves have discovered isn’t what was advertised. How do you explain to them the value of fighting over the same patch of ground again and again, without laying permanent hold of it, and making the sacrifice it took to gain that territory worthwhile.

What will raise our soldier’s spirits is being able to carry out the mission to secure and rebuild Iraq as a Democracy. Success is the prime guarantor of both good press, and good morale. How to fight this war well should take priority over how to convince Americans that they aren’t seeing what they are seeing.

Because Bush is unwilling to take ownership of his mistakes, people find it difficult to lend more faith and credit to one who has borrowed so much of it, yet returned so little on that investment. Practical success will presage victories in public relations.

Is this the same letter that was just announced as a fake on CNN?

Dennis

How many lives would it have been worth to avoid World War II. Chamberlain decided to buy “peace in our time.” Whether or not you think Iraq was a front line in the war on terror before, it clearly is now. If we leave Iraq precipitously, we will pay much more later.

I am for saving as many lives as possible. Leaving Iraq as soon as possible in security terms is a goal that we all share. Leaving Iraq before that would just cost more lives.

Nothing will make us immune to terror. Terror is like piracy. You can reduce it, but when conditions are right it will return. Terror, like piracy, thrives on weakness. The civilized world drove piracy down to low levels by aggressively pursuing pirates and by not tolerating states that protected them. America’s first overseas intervention was against the Barbary pirates, which was very similar to the fight against terrorism.

Do you really believe that if we (or the UK) left Iraq tomorrow that the terrorists would let up? Wouldn’t it be more likely that they would take inspiration to demand even more?

You just are not listening to what the terrorist are telling you. Like Hitler, like the Marxists, they tell you what they want and what they want to do. Their goal is not to get us out of Iraq. If that is what they wanted, how come we were attacked before we invaded Iraq. Their goal is not to get us out of Afghanistan. That is just a way station to the establishment of their power. They still lament the Andalusia debacle of 1492. They are angry about events that happened before the U.S. was even a country. They are even angrier about the end of the Caliphate in Constantinople. What they want, we can’t give them. Our only option is to beat them. If we can’t do that, we are in serious trouble. We don’t have a zero option.

Jack:

You equate a Terror War resulting from a voluntary and unneeded War on Iraq that was run incompetently with World War 2? What planet have you been living in? Your flip statement brushing off the Republican Incompetence which lead to this present is the height of gall. YOUR PRESIDENT caused Iraq to become a Central Part in the War on Terror!!! This would never have happened if you idiots did not invade looking for WMDs or Spread Democracy or whatever the hell you invaded for in the first place!!!

Also, I would like to know just exactly how many lives you intend to spend in Iraq? You know, a cost/benefit ratio? The British and Indian Armies lost 500,000 men during their own Occupation. Am I to assume that 500,000 GIs is your upper limit?

According to Al Jazeera, Al Qaida claims that the letter is fake, although it’s been authenticated by handwriting experts.

So what’s the truth? I must say I have little faith these days in our intelligence services, but I have even less faith in Al Qaida so I tend to think its authentic.

After all, the letter does echo things al Zawahiri has frequently said before (as when he referenced Clinton backing down in Somalia and Reagan backing down in Lebanon).

Aldous—“you idiots?”

I’ve long marveled at the personal exemption you enjoy around here to Watchblog’s policy of “critiquing the message, not the messenger.”

Though for once I’m relieved that your post is at least on-topic and not yet another irrelevant interjection about “McCain’s black baby” or Iraq’s missing money. Cheers.

Jack, we are just about smack dab on the same page. You are absolutely correct that the origins of fundamentalist Islamic hatred of Western nations and cultures dates back centuries and that history is still used today to fuel the movement, along with contemporary events like the invasion of Iraq.

Obviously we agree on al-Queda does not want our withdrawal. Whether we stay or leave, our enemies will not go away. Staying however, aids their recruitments and replacements.

What is needed now is for Arab nations to take on the fight and take our place in Iraq. If we left with foresight, we would put neighboring Arab nations on notice that we are leaving, and argue to them an easy sell which states that if Iraq falls apart after our departure, the civil conflicts with all of the attendant guerilla warfare and suicide bombings will eventually spill out of Iraq and into their very own neighboring nations. Afterall, al-Queda’s position is that any Arab that isn’t with them, is also the enemy.

And that is the scenario that provides the US an exit. An exit which Pres. Bush and his advisors refuse to entertain, at horrendous cost to Americans in both taxpayer dollars and the 20,000 plus American military wounded and dead.

Also, whether we stay or leave Iraq, al-Queda will continue to plan and target Great Britain and the U.S. Our remaining or leaving Iraq will not change that. Which begs the question, why are we, this many years later, still unwilling to make an honest and herculean effort to secure our borders?

Republicans have so mismanged this situation in Iraq from start to present, that Reynolds, the Republican who is in charge of insuring that Republicans keep their majority in the House, has admitted he is very concerned about the prospects, and has indicated quite directly that the GOP hold in the House would very likely be lost if Bush’s Soc. Sec. reform was ever put into an ink and paper bill given public sentiment over other policies (Iraq).

Jack,
“What they want, we can’t give them. Our only option is to beat them. If we can’t do that, we are in serious trouble. We don’t have a zero option.”

Actually, Jack, we do have a zero option, and it might be our best choice. You see, it’s not always ‘all about us.’ It’s not always all about the US when it comes to conflicts in places like Iraq.

We’re accustomed to think of the terrorists as a portion of some sort of monolithic islamofascist movement. The Bush administration encourages this. In the recent speech, Bush warned of an Islamic empire stretching from Morocco to Indonesia (terrible news for people in India and Thailand, but then, geography has never been an American strength), blithely ignoring a crucial fact.

Islamofascism is not a monolithic movement of Muslims. The ‘terrorists,’ as we like to call them, are primarily Sunni. Many of them are foreign jihadists from places like Saudi Arabia, working in concert with Zarqawi’s Al Qaida in Iraq organization. These terrorists are very different from the native insurgents and Baathists; these terrorists attack our troops in Iraq, but they are religious fanatics, and their primary targets are Shias.

The Shias sport their own fanatics: SCIRI’s Badr Brigades in the south, Al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army in Bagdhad and the religious cities of the central region.

The zero option is to withdraw, and let the Shias fanatics fight the Sunni terrorists & insurgents.

It will be a very bloody civil war. The Shias will win, with Iranian help. The Sunni terrorists will lose.

The cost in human lives will be staggering. But with this zero option, the lives lost will not be American ones.

It’s a cold-hearted strategy, but as morally awful as it might be, it’s worth remembering Saddam Hussein is gone, and the US made an opportunity available to the people of Iraq which the Iraqis failed to embrace. That’s not good enough, I know. It may, however, be the best we can do.

David,
Funny, we responded to Jack with such a similar take.
Did I ever mention I played Hawkeye in the play MASH?

Phx8, those are interesting ideas and as draconian as they sound, I don’t think they should be off the table, although a consitution WAS just approved in Iraq, a hopeful sign that gets far too little media attention.

But if we want to go in that radical direction, a better idea would be to permit a partition of Iraq along the ethnic and religious lines that already exist. Allow our allies the Kurds to establish their own state—ignoring the objections of Turkey, who betrayed us anyway in the lead up to war, and Iran, who is no friend to us either.

Then let the relatively peaceful majority Shias enjoy all of the oil wealth on their land while the Sunni religious fanatics and the Baathist holdouts wither in their wide open spaces of empty desert and kill each other whenever they feel like it.

Sanger,
The ash heaps of history hold many examples of fine constitutions. A constitution is a piece of paper, only as strong as a people’s belief in and commitment to it.

Too much of the Iraqi post-war political process has been driven by US political needs, rather than driven by what Iraqis need to create a pacified Iraq.

I’ve thought many times that partition made the most sense, but we’re so far down the current road, with a federalized Iraq which is neither fish nor fowl, neither united nor partitioned, that’s it hard to see separation occurring without at least as much bloodshed as the impending civil war. In a sense, it’s the same conflict, with the Shias and Sunnis preparing to settle the score once and for all, just a question of how united or divided the future Iraq will become; we’ve been delaying the inevitable by fighting as proxies for the Shias against the Sunnis.

Phx8, I brought up the partition idea in response to your expressed willingness to let America wash its hands of Iraq and let the chips fall where they may without regard to worry about bloodshed.

A civil war without borders would be vastly different, actually, from a war between separate mini-states with defined boundaries which prevented unhibited movement of citizens between regions.

Either option is bloody, sure. And either option is a terrible idea, considering the potential for progress symbolized by the consitution—which should at least be given a chance to be tested before we write it off.

Of course, this is all arm-chair theorizing, since the consitution IS going to be given its chance.

You guys and gals on the right simply humor me! Let’s see…this “letter” is alot like the other “letter” the Bush administration released at a very convenient time, i.e. after poor poll showings. And a “suicide”? Right after he had helped investigate a bombing and was just ready to release the results? A bombing that U.S. forces probably pulled off, just like the British troops disquised as Arabs in the commission of more bombings? And since when does a Muslim call God “God”—he would call him “Allah”.

You guys will believe ANYTHING you’re told to believe. Have some self respect, and use your brain. And read up on your history…starting with Hitler’s rise to power.

Separate mini-States? Nice joke. The US will NEVER release control over the oil. Adding a bunch of little Iraqs will just destabilize the entire region.

We cannot leave Iraq. We must complete the mission regardless of cost.

“You just are not listening to what the terrorist are telling you. Like Hitler, like the Marxists, they tell you what they want and what they want to do. Their goal is not to get us out of Iraq. If that is what they wanted, how come we were attacked before we invaded Iraq. Their goal is not to get us out of Afghanistan. That is just a way station to the establishment of their power. They still lament the Andalusia debacle of 1492. They are angry about events that happened before the U.S. was even a country. They are even angrier about the end of the Caliphate in Constantinople. What they want, we can’t give them. Our only option is to beat them. If we can’t do that, we are in serious trouble. We don’t have a zero option.”

——————————————————-
Jack, respectfully,

I don’t see this in the same way. I think we need to continue the pursuit of Bin Laden and his cohorts, but it’s time, as phx8 said in the post above to wash our hands of Iraq and let “all the poisons hatch out”. I think there will be a civil war, in fact I think it’s already started. I simply do not want any more American lives lost because we have some notion that maintaining the status quo will solve the problem. I don’t want to be having this conversation a year from now and instead of 2,000 US soldiers dead, we’ve lost 4,000. I hope that the Iraqis vote to ratify the constitution. I hope it takes hold and allows the people of Iraq self-determination. I don’t believe it is worth sacrificing another US soldier for this. Moderate muslims have claimed to find terrorism in the name of Islam reprehensible and in violation of their faith. Let the moderate muslim states, Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi (if you want to call them moderate) Arabia take our place and let’s get our folks home.

Missjoy,

Keywords in my post were forged and fake, the Yellowcake Forgery being an example.
I see nothing in the WP article denying that these so-called “YellowCake” reports used by US and UK in the Iraq pre-war were forged.
Nobody so far opposed what IAEA told at UNSC few days before Iraq invasion because an easy google search show everyone that’s a fake due to wrong dates and names.

Maybe Iraq had tried to purchase Uraniun from Africa. Maybe Wilson used this scandal to push his partisan opinions and misspoken about it.
But it doesn’t turn these forged documents authentics!

CIA in 2002 sent several memos to White House officials (National Security Advisers Hadley and Rice) stating these documents were frauds and Niger “YellowCake” claims should be removed from official speeches. The White House choose anyway to use these documents as facts in full knowledge the CIA was saying they’re not.

No wonder the lack of trust today in any new document presented by the same people.

Maybe this Al-Qaida letter is authentic, but recent US intelligence services and government log lacks the credibility to take everything blindly.
I’m not saying WH must have forged this letter (I hope not). I’m saying that several time previous intelligence gathering was flawed, last example being the NYC subway hoax.
That just too early to take it as authentic.

It will be a very bloody civil war. The Shias will win, with Iranian help. The Sunni terrorists will lose.

That’s not going to happen, phx8. Saudi Arabia already signalled they’ll help the Sunnis if Iran helps the Shiites. The Syrians are already helping.

Sunnis in the Middle East saw Saddam’s secular Iraq as a buffer state between them and the radical Iranian Shiites. A civil war in Iraq would destabilize the region.

And Turkey would never allow a seperate Kurdish state.

The best thing that could happen this weekend is the rejection of Iraq’s piece of crap constitution. Hopefully, the Bush administration would see the setback as an opportunity to rewrite the document just like MacArthur did with Japan’s first draft. They could also use the opportunity to sincerely include the Sunnis in the process.

But that’s not going to happen. The Bush administration and the Iraqi Shiites have too much invested in the current process. The crappy constitution will be shoved down the Sunnis throats, and the Sunnis will keep fighting. And our troops will continue to die in Iraq.

A lot of you guys on the right point out that the US Constitution tooks years to write and ratify, yet you won’t give the Iraqis the same chance. Everything must go according to Bush’s arbitrary schedule. Bullshit. If it takes those guys five years to hammer out a constitution everyone is happy with, we should give ‘em the time — and send more troops so they have the security in which to do it.

It’s not the liberals or the media that are losing Iraq, it’s President Bush. None of the achievements or the timeline matter if they don’t produce a stable democracy — and it’s becoming ever more obvious to America that’s not happening.

Carri

About the Allah thing. You are reading an English translation. You can’t do etymological analysis on a translated text.

Aldous

What are you talking about? India during the time of the Raj? The situation is entirely different. The British goals and methods had nothing to do with what we are doing. And BTW by the standards of most of the time it was in power, the Raj was phenomenally successful. Nobody in Britian was looking for an exit strategy for most of the history.

Dennis et al

Nobody wants to occupy Iraq. President Bush does not want to occupy Iraq. What we have in Iraq is a combination of the “wolf by the ears” dilemma and an opportunity.

Not to be too dramatic, but we are still dealing with the aftermath of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. Blame Lawrence of Arabia or the shortsighted peacemakers, or the Arab nationalists, but ever since then the region has been in turmoil. Our problem is that the turmoil spills over onto us. It spawns terrorism when fueled by the fantastic and largely unearned wealth from hydrocarbons.

The wolf by the ears is clear. The opportunity is less clear. Iraq is literally the key to the region. If it becomes relatively stable, the whole region can become stable. If not, the region cannot. I don’t know if this can be done and none of you know if it cannot. If we can succeed, the world will be a much better place and safer for everyone. The U.S. cannot do this alone, but only the U.S. can lead the effort for now at least.

The warring groups scenario is attractive in some ways. Give them someone else to fight. But it is immoral and this kind of disorder in a place so crucial for the world economy is not acceptable.

If we are spinning weird scenarios, consider this one. The region’s oil is increasingly important to the Chinese, who are increasingly powerful. Maybe we can see a Chinese intervention.

Jack,

President Bush does not want to occupy Iraq

Too sad then he didn’t have any plan after the invasion, isn’t it?

… unearned wealth from hydrocarbons

Who are you to say it’s unearned?!?
What do you mean here? That oil fields are properties of their largest consumers, not landers?

Philippe

I wrote a longer post about the wealth thing.

What I mean by unearned is that the people receiving the wealth generally did not discover it or even know about its possible existence. Neither they nor their ancestors participated significantly in the exploration of the fields. They did not risk their capital and time in acquiring the wealth. They did not develop them or even provide much of the labor that developed them. They do not manage them. The only reason they get the wealth is geographical proximity. That is one of the ways we distribute wealth but such acquisition tends to corrupt those who get it. It is like the rich kids who never have to earn a living. Some can turn out very good and productive. Others remain spoiled brats till the day they die. Oil wealth is a curse to many countries precisely because the easy wealth aspect corrupts them.

Think of it this way. Switzerland is rich because its people can create wealth. Saudi has money because wealth is found a kilometer under its surface. Being rich and having money are not always the same things.

Any and all successes concerning Iraq must be minimized.
Any information that supports America’s position must be discredited, even before facts are known.
Why?
Elections!

The honest observer must find it somewhat suspicious how the left wingers are now so concerned with the health and welfare of our troops. “Bring them home” they say. Will they spit upon these valiant men and women when they come home, as they have done to our troops returning from Viet Nam ?

Gringo, judging by the way Republicans cut veterans benefits and VA funding, and sneak our fallen sons and daughters back into the country under cover of darkness, it’s Republicans who dishonor our returning troops.

A more pertinent question is: will Republicans balk over supporting our veterans who come back with health problems like they did with Agent Orange and Gulf War Syndrome? Probably, since the money is already ear marked for dividend tax cuts, capital gains tax cuts, and inheritance tax cuts for the wealthy.

Juan Cole has examined the letter in its original Arabic, and has found some fairly serious questions as to it’s credibility. According to him, the beginning of the letter carries a salutation to the prophet that includes the prophets family in a way that is not at all standard for a hardline Sunni Salafist, but is rather characteristic of the Shiites. he lists other characteristics in addition, including references to an Imam that Sunnis don’t recognize, and past problems that Zarqawi and Zawahiri had that the letter seems to gloss over.

Whether or not it’s credible source-wise there are also questions as to whether the letter was meant to mislead or confuse us. we should not base our policy directly on such a letter. Let’s keep our eyes and ears open on this.

Jack,
I’m not sure there is just one key to stability in the Middle East. Israel could be considered a key. Economic diversification could be too.

This article presents some interesting info on Iraq. Yes, brace yourself, it’s from a liberal site, but worth taking a look for the commentary on the British ‘Divide and Rule’ strategy, the US failure to introduce a free market economy in post-war Iraq, and some material on the constitution.

AP,
There are so many pitfalls, including any tolerance the Turks will have for an independent Kurdish state. The upcoming conflict between Sunnis and Shias could escalate to include Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Syria.

At least Reagan had the wisdom to cut the losses in Lebanon and withdraw. I’m really taken aback that we have a foreign policy at the mercy of so many unpredictable circumstances. A good leader frames problems, discussions, and solutions. With good leadership, problems are rare and of short duration, not an endless series of reactions and lunges constantly spinning nto new crises. Ugh.

kctim,

“Take the word of OUR govt or take the word of a terrorist?
Wait for more info on whether the letter is real or fake OR believe the terrorists message?”

Tough choice.
The terrorists have always been honest. They hate us and want to kill us and have made it very clear.
The Bush administration has lied since 9/11 2000.

Jack:

What I mean by unearned is that the people receiving the wealth generally did not discover it or even know about its possible existence. Neither they nor their ancestors participated significantly in the exploration of the fields. They did not risk their capital and time in acquiring the wealth. They did not develop them or even provide much of the labor that developed them. They do not manage them. The only reason they get the wealth is geographical proximity.

I’ve debunked this claim before. Remember this?

In the 8th century, the streets of the newly constructed Baghdad were paved with tar, derived from easily-accessible petroleum from natural fields in the region. In the 9th century, oil fields were exploited in Baku, Azerbaijan, to produce naphtha. These fields were described by the geographer Masudi in the 10th century, and by Marco Polo in the 13th century, who described the output of those wells as hundreds of shiploads. (See also Timeline of Islamic science and technology.)
Wikipedia:Petrolium

Jarandhel

Having tar and making naphtha from easily available resources is not the same as drilling way down through the earth or finding oil deposits in deserts or under the sea. Historical esoterica aside, how much did the CURRENT occupants owners of these oil wells contribute to the exploration, technologies, labor or much of anything else related to the wealth they now enjoy?

That is what I mean by unearned wealth. It is a lot like the situation of Jed Clampet, living on top of a resource he didn’t know about and would have been unable to tap.

Stone age miners were able to dig metals and gems out of the ground. But a mine that goes way below the surface is an entirely different proposition. The same is true of drilling for oil.

Wealth that comes to societies from outside technologies and expertise is corrupting. And there is no doubt that the oil societies of the Middle East are corrupted by it. The only chance a resource rich place has is to distribute the much of the unearned wealth widely, as Alaska does, for example.

Jack, all the Middle Eastern oil producers distribute the wealth like Alaska. That’s part of the problem. The people are so used to stipends, free food, nickle-a-gallon gas, free housing, free healthcare, etc, etc, that they never developed a real economy.

I’m really taken aback that we have a foreign policy at the mercy of so many unpredictable circumstances…. With good leadership, problems are rare and of short duration, not an endless series of reactions and lunges constantly spinning nto new crises. Ugh.

No doubt phx8. More troops — especially international troops — and giving the UN control after Baghdad fell would have given the process stability and legitimacy. The shortsightedness with which the Bush administration turned those options down is appalling.

AP

No, that is not how they do it. The money that the rulers do not steal, they use their oil wealth to subsidize prices and distort the market. If they just gave each citizen a piece of the action and let them individually decide how to spend it, it would probably raise prices overall, but without creating the corruption and market distortions.

It is just a bad thing to have so much easy money pumping out of the ground. Without oil, nobody would pay much attention to the Middle East and everybody would be better off. Osama bin Laden would be just another picturesque local menace. We would view Saddam like we do Robert Mugabe. It is a great metaphysical joke. Easy to exploit resources seem to be distributed to the worst places in the world where they don’t do the local people much good.

phx8, that is interesting. I played Captain Black, and Major Major, in Catch-22.

No, that is not how they do it.

Yes it is, Jack. Have you even read the Iraqi constitution?

I refer you to article 22 section 1: Work is a right for all Iraqis in a way that guarantees them a good life.

Article 30: The state guarantees social and health insurance, the basics for a free and honorable life for the individual and the family — especially children and women — and works to protect them from illiteracy, fear and poverty and provides them with housing and the means to rehabilitate and take care of them.

Article 31: Every Iraqi has the right to health service, and the state is in charge of public health and guarantees the means of protection and treatment by building different kinds of hospitals and health institutions.

Article 32: The state cares for the disabled and those with special needs and guarantees their rehabilitation to integrate them in society.

Article 34 section 2: Free education is a right for Iraqis in all its stages.

Article 109: Oil and gas is the property of all the Iraqi people in all the regions and provinces.

Article 110: The federal government will administer oil and gas extracted from current fields in cooperation with the governments of the producing regions and provinces on condition that the revenues will be distributed fairly in a manner compatible with the demographical distribution all over the country.

AP

that is the Iraqi constitution that we hope will be passed and applied, that was only possible because of U.S. intervention. I hope it works. Until now, the others have talked about such things but not done them. That has been the problem.

Gandhi
Is this the same letter that was just announced as a fake on CNN?

Now there’s a good reason to believe the letter is forged. CNN, the most radical, of the neolib media said it is.

But of course if it was announced on FAUX it would have to be true.

Rocky
But of course if it was announced on FAUX it would have to be true.

Not necessarly.

The letter fundamentally describes the situation and is more or less in line with other statements made by Al Qaida leaders. It is not much of a revelation to anyone who has been watching the situation. It only gives a focus to talk about.

Let Fox and CNN figure out the details, if they can.

FOLKS, IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE THAT EARTHQUAKES BIG WINDS, ETC, IS THE ACT OF GOD, READ YOUR BIBLE.

DON’T TRY AND TELL ME WHAT GOD WILL DO AND WILL NOT DO, YOU ARE NOT QUALIFIED. HE HAS KILLED THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS AND HE WILL DESTROY THE WORLD.

YES HE IS A JUST GOD, AND WHEN THING GET COMPLETLY OUT OF CONTROL, LIKE THE SOUTHERN COAST, HE WILL TAKE A HAND AND IF YOU DO NOT THINK HE DOES, THEN YOU SHOULD THINK ABOUT YOU BELIEF IN HIM AND YOUR SALVATION.

GOD CONTROLS LARGE WINDS, FIRES, AND A LOT OF OTHER THINGS TO CLEAN UP MESSES.

HEAVEN OR HELL, YOUR CHOICE, JESUS CHRIST IS THE ANSWER.

Walter,

What was the question?

that is the Iraqi constitution that we hope will be passed and applied

Yikes! After President Bush promised us a free market liberal democracy in Iraq, we end up with a socialist constitutional theocracy, and you say it’s a good thing?

Here’s the problem with Bush apologists: You guys have to argue this piece of crap constitution is the best we could have expected. Bullshit. It’s the result of a series of really bad decisions made by President Bush over the last two years.

And it’s not (quite) too late to turn things around in Iraq, but it would take the kind of political guts that President Bush has demonstrated he does not have.

The first step would be to send enough US troops to secure Iraq now. That would include disarming the militias — the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq’s Badr Brigades and al-Sadr’s Mehdi Army — and rooting out graft, corruption, and anti-Sunni brutality in Iraq’s police and justice systems.

And then, we — or a UN commission — heavily modify their constitution to create a document that benefits Iraq as a coherent, free market, democratic state. We did it in Japan, the Japanese loved it, and it served them well.

The bottom line is, handing over sovereignty, holding elections, and writing the constitution (completely out of any kind of sane sequence, BTW), hasn’t brought Iraq together as a coherent country. Nor has it decreased the secarian violence or created the basis for anything but civil war at worst or a troubled, anti-American Islamo-socialist petrostate at best.

Walter,

What I believe right now it that you should first find this little capslock on your keyboard and try it.

>

Nature has her way of correcting an imbalance. God just grins while watching.