The surge is working!

[Wrinkle]

Some people just don't have what it takes to do what's right...

Take Harry Ried, for example, who's masculinity can be measured as only slightly less than Nancy Palosi's, for which no fight is worth fighting (probably got picked upon when he was a kid).

One thing for sure, the stronger one's convictions, the more those without any will hate you.

[grahambino]

slippery slope.
strawman.
ad hom.
right off the top of my head.

Post date 11.20.06 | Issue date 11.27.06 - New Republic

By Ellen Knickmeyer and Omar Fekeiki
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, January 24, 2006; Page A13

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040407-124311-9361r.htm
april 07, 2004

http://hrw.org/englishwr2k7/docs/2007/01/11/iran14703.htm
12-31-06

http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2003/Apr-2003/iranian_proamericanism_25403.htm
april 2003

so at best, your citations are nearly 5 months old, at worst well over 4+ years ago.

[iplaw]

Lamp.
Sofa.
T-Shirt.
Plasma TV in my living room.

Saying those words doesn't get you anything.  You have to SUBSTANTIATE your complaint or I have nothing to work with.

As to my citations, do you have something against books that were written before last week as well?  Did you complain in school to your teacher for making you read Plato and Aristotle because they were too old?  Please dispute the information contained and why it is incorrect.  

It's rapidly becoming clear that you're full of it.  Come on Altruism, debate or go home.

[grahambino]

ive already pointed out your ad hom attacks.

quote:So, the question is, are you prepared to have another Taliban type regime in charge of a major ME country? More oil resources than they could ever have imagined in Afghanistan...and the only way to keep that oil away from the militant freaks is to have a secularized democracy in that country.

Do you mind a Taliban-like power taking over Iraq?

slippery slope fallacy.  Just b/c it happened in the past or somewhere else, doesnt mean it will happen in Iraq.

quote:And how revolting that you would allow the people of Iraq to be kept under the thumb of a madman just so you can keep Iran at a distance. The man gassed thousands of innocent people, murdered hundreds of thousands, funding and protecting terrorists, and was still amassing banned weapons, and you're willing to let him continue just to keep Iran in check, which he wasn't able to do anymore... Simply disgusting.

this is a strawman.  i like how you mention to take your ''outrage' somewhere else' later in this thread...

i bring up the date of these articles you cite as sources b/c its becoming rapidly apparent to me that youre extremely out of touch when it comes to your views on this situation in iraq.  

some books that still say the USSR is a country.  so yes, due to the age, a source can be incorrect.  specifically your claim that the 'youth are pro-american' ... 4 years ago?!
bear in mind this was before the pictures and stories from abu ghraib, hadifa...

the realities are that its 2007.  iraq is embroiled in a civil war that we & iran have fostered along and now we have been caught in the middle.  IMHO (& to paraphrase your favorite 'dude')we're screwed.

[iplaw]

quote:
slippery slope fallacy.  Just b/c it happened in the past or somewhere else, doesnt mean it will happen in Iraq.

No genius.  A slippery slope argument goes as follows:  You can't ban partial birth abortion because Roe v Wade will eventually be overturned.  Also, you MUST explain why the argument is defective.  Simply stating "slippery slope" is insufficient.

Please read the above example and re-read it again until you understand the concept.

The fact that you don't understand what a "slippery slope" argument is, should be proof enough to everyone that you're not to be taken seriously.

quote:
this is a strawman.  i like how you mention to take your ''outrage' somewhere else' later in this thread...

Please outline the elements of this strawman.  Saying "that's a strawman" without telling us why is no better than yelling "fallacious argument."

quote:
i bring up the date of these articles you cite as sources b/c its becoming rapidly apparent to me that youre extremely out of touch when it comes to your views on this situation in iraq.  

Again, please dispute the articles on their merit.  Your personal opinion of my beliefs are IRRELEVANT.

quote:
some books that still say the USSR is a country.  so yes, due to the age, a source can be incorrect.  specifically your claim that the 'youth are pro-american' ... 4 years ago?!
bear in mind this was before the pictures and stories from abu ghraib, hadifa...

Very well, how about this one, it's post Abu Ghraib(April 2004): and Haditha(Summer 2005):

Iranians don't hate America. On the contrary, many of them envy Americans to an unrealistic degree and think of the US as a paradise, a land where no problems exist. -- Christian Science Monitor 2007

Librarian of Congress James Billington, just back from Tehran, speaks of a thriving underground press, almost 100,000 bloggers in Iran alone, and about the only country in the world with a pro-American youth fed up with decaying theocracy. -- Washington Times 2005


You're about 0 for 5 now.  Care to continue?

Strawman!  
Fallacious!
Ad Hoc!
Chicken Soup!
Dirty Diaper!

[grahambino]

quote:Your personal opinion of my beliefs are IRRELEVANT

that's rich.  hello pot, this is kettle.

You had purposely misrepresented what Swake had typed and took off on this tangent about Sadaam's atrocities.  As that lended some credibility to your argument, Sadaam's history is not in dispute or even on topic in this thread.  I dont understand what point you were trying to make w/ that.

You had posed the question

quote:Do you mind a Taliban-like power taking over Iraq?

if we were to withdraw what evidence do you have that this will invariably happen?  Afghanistan & Iraq are very different countries.

[iplaw]

I'll take that as a punt on the Iranian youth issue...

quote:that's rich.  hello pot, this is kettle.

You had purposely misrepresented what Swake had typed and took off on this tangent about Sadaam's atrocities.  

It's been so long ago, please show me what I "mirepresented."

quote:
As that lended some credibility to your argument, Sadaam's history is not in dispute or even on topic in this thread.  I dont understand what point you were trying to make w/ that.

I would agree that you are very confused, but that isn't my fault.  I suspect it has something to do with your inability to analyze and present an argument.

quote:
if we were to withdraw what evidence do you have that this will invariably happen?  Afghanistan & Iraq are very different countries.

Let me break it down VERY slowly and I'll try and use SMALL words.  There is a fight going on right now between Sunni Al-Qaeda (AKA Wahhabism and Salafism) and Shia led forces back by Iran and mainly led by Al-Sadr.

The US is standing between the Iraqi people and these two factions.

If we leave there will be genocide, and either the Sunni faction or the Shia faction will emerge victorious.  Either you will have a Shia led government mirroring Iran that opresses the people or you will have a Sunni led government that will mirror the Taliban that opresses the people.

[rwarn17588]

Boy, that's a nice option.

Basically, the country's in far worse shape than it was four-plus years ago.

Remind me why we invaded again.

[cannon_fodder]

per the Youth in Iran:

Most interviews I have seen, the people I know that have travel to Iran, and the people I know FROM Iran all say the general population is not as rapidly anti-American as is often portrayed.  Hell, even when Ted Koppel was over there with the discovery channel teenagers openly talked about admiration for all things American.

The Iranian people are not too different from American's, in that our government does not always speak for us.  I don't hate all Iranians nor North Koreans in spite of our governments disdain for those countries.  For that matter I dont think Castro is the evil man our country has portrayed for decades (misguided - yes). Iranians have some legitimate gripes (support for Iraq, the whole farce government thing, etc.) but most Iranians have no real daily issue with the USA according the sources I am familiar with.

[MichaelC]

I was watching some deal on Military Channel.  It was some kind of Iraq Diary, where regular enlisted guys had recorded all of this stuff, and they made a documentary out of it.  I was amazed at how often I heard the acronym KBR (Halliburton).  Whether it was mentioning KBR and their poor treatment of 3rd Party contractors, or simply that the war was about oil and KBR.  One guy, I believe he was a Sergeant, made no bones about it.  He said roughly "the war is about oil and that's plenty of justification to be in Iraq.  We came here for oil, and we damn well better get it."

I don't like politicizing the Military, it shouldn't be done.  The Military does it's job, that's all.  However, if politicians continue to paint this picture that "the troops" believe that this is about "terrorism" or "democracy in Iraq", it should come with the caveat that "the troops" also believe this about oil.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

Boy, that's a nice option.

Basically, the country's in far worse shape than it was four-plus years ago.

Remind me why we invaded again.

Why?  You've been told a thousand times already.  What makes you think you'd get it this time?  

I won't bother repeating myself.

[RecycleMichael]

Baby Bush promised daddy he would get the bad guy?

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by MichaelC

I was watching some deal on Military Channel.  It was some kind of Iraq Diary, where regular enlisted guys had recorded all of this stuff, and they made a documentary out of it.  I was amazed at how often I heard the acronym KBR (Halliburton).  Whether it was mentioning KBR and their poor treatment of 3rd Party contractors, or simply that the war was about oil and KBR.  One guy, I believe he was a Sergeant, made no bones about it.  He said roughly "the war is about oil and that's plenty of justification to be in Iraq.  We came here for oil, and we damn well better get it."

I don't like politicizing the Military, it shouldn't be done.  The Military does it's job, that's all.  However, if politicians continue to paint this picture that "the troops" believe that this is about "terrorism" or "democracy in Iraq", it should come with the caveat that "the troops" also believe this about oil.

War for oil profits and war to protect oil from being seized by Iran and Iraq's other neighbors are two different things.  Which are you talking about?  It's important to make the distinction.

It is impossible for the US to steal the oil from the Iraqi people.  There are already laws and royalty sharing agreements in place that prevent the US from taking anything.  We can't even use proceeds from their oil to fund reconstruction.

Also, as CF has pointed out ad nauseam, KBR and Haliburton are the ONLY companies equiped to do the work necessary in the region.  There is a French company that can do SOME of the work, but France abdicated their right when they participated in the oil-for-food scandal.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by recyclemichael

Baby Bush promised daddy he would get the bad guy?

That has to be the dumbest of all the pre-war theories...

[MichaelC]

"Royalty Sharing" is not the same as Iraq nationalizing it's oil.  Far less profitable to "share" than to nationalize in Iraq.

In 1951, Iran nationalized it's oil.  Even though the west placed an embargo on Iranian oil, and Iran sold less oil, Iran's profits rose.  That's why we toppled their gov't in 1953, so British and American Oil companies could slice up the profits.