|
An interesting read (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Form&Funktion |
To attempt to mire into the abyss of world politics on either side seems pure folly to me. The degree of information, counter-information, countless spins and conspiracy angles are innumurable. Is anyone here so pretentious as to claim mastery over the single thread of fact and truth woven so deeply within?
For Example: YOUR MOTHER claims evidence proves there has been a hidden agenda by supposed Isreali-American neo-cons and Zionest sympathisers to topple Iraq. He states many sources, boasts of their credentials...some of which may be valid. HOWEVER, one must weigh the benefits versus loss before beating one's chest with victory. WHY would Isreal want to overthrow Iraq, the one country opposing their main threat to national security and sovoreignty...that being IRAN.
Please Read: http://www.tenc.net/analysis/goldreply.htm
It seems much more logical that they in fact, would be on a more precarious regional ledge now that Iran has no opposing force to distract from their aim at Jewish eradication. WHY WOULD ISRAEL PUSH FOR A PLAN TO FURTHER COMPLICATE THEIR SECURITY?
DISCLAIMER: I do not swear by any of these sources and reserve judgement based on my first statement in this post. I do however like to make it clear how easy it is to fall into the quicksand of geo-political posturing. I for one see no value in slinging unprovable diatribes such as these form either side. Please, my friends, don't waste your time. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
It's interesting how everyone's the critic but no one actually sources information from the actual people involved!
The Iraqi people themselves.
Did anyone actually stop to think that these people might have actually wanted the U.S. to come to Iraq to free them?
To give them the freedom to choose, to make their own decisions and run their own lives??
I find such hypocrisy in the protestors that protest using the same freedom of choice and expression given to them through millions of lives just a few generations ago.
That's all these Iraqi people want; freedom.
But then there's the cry of, "Conspiracy!", "Oil!", "Human Rights!" blah, blah, blah ad naseum.
These cretins need to take the blinders off and actually hear from a few Iraqis rather than logging onto their protestors anonymous calendar looking for their next hit.
Oh and here's a hint for you all, do you actually think the Iraqis people thought this would all go down without a bullet being fired? :rolleyes:
Here's a quote from an actual Iraqi that I stumbled across today.
| quote: |
Many may say that I am a capitalist and that’s a real crime in many Middle East countries and some of what was left in the mined of Iraqi people from the old days of our old regime. BUT WE REALY DO NEED A GOVERNMENT WHICH RECEIVES TAXIS AND HOLD THE SECURITY SITUATION INSIDE AND ON BORDERS AND MAINTAIN ORDER, AND LET THE ECONOMY FLOW CONTROLED BY PRIVATE COMPANIES DOING BUSINESS UNDER IRAQI LAWS PUT BY THE ELECTED GOVERNMENT. Just an idea very applicable and when it is reality we will find some looser who would blame the government for being homeless, jobless …etc. We can find those all over the world even in Sweden, Denmark, Canada, and Saudi Arabia.
|
Source: Iraq & Iraqi`s
The rest of you far-left weenies: Tell these guys you wish the coalition had never gone to Iraq:
http://www.iraqthemodel.com
http://www.healingiraq.com/
http://www.iraqataglance.com/ |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Your Mother
This happened just down the street from me today... right in the same city that was hit by 9/11. Gee, you would think all these people would be happy about what Bush is doing in the White house. And you would think they would be glad the US kicked Iraq's ass right? Cause after all, Iraq was involved with 9/11, right?
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle....storyID=6097434
|
That is by far the most useless argument I've ever heard. "Millions of Americans can't be wrong!!" Yeah... great, let me introduce you to my little friend The logical fallacy: appeal to popularity. People have been made to believe bigger lies than the disinformation we're fed on Iraq and 9/11 and Bush in general, and I don't think I need to specify where and when. With people like Michael Moore leading the crusade against Bush, and people walking out of Farenheit 911 saying it was a "great movie and really opened my eyes", it's no wonder that the Left could gather at least 400,000 supporters (which must be, oh my god, over 0.1% of the USA's current population of 300 million!).
I can't help noticing that neither of these articles present any conclusive proof of what they are trying to say. The first article takes one piece of the Report completely out of context - the report found that there was no direct evidence that the Iraqi government funded the Al-Qaeda network. But the way the article spins it, the report completely "rules out any link" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. That is totally misrepresenting the actual findings, by making two completely bogus assumptions:
1) That the only way for Iraq to support Al Qaeda would have been government funding (what about weapons, safe havens, or indirect support via either direct support or simple non-prosecution of connected groups?). This is a classic straw-man argument, another well-known fallacy.
2) That the absence of any direct evidence in favour of the premise that Iraq and 9/11 were connected counts as proof against that premise (another logical fallacy called Denying the Antecedent.
The other article takes two conflicting statements from the Administration and apparently uses that to "prove" that only one of them is true. (?)
Now the fact stands that the conclusion of an argument is not necessarily wrong simply because the argument is fallacious, but you'll have to do better than that if you're trying to show conclusive proof of your assertion that Iraq had no stake whatsoever in the 9/11 events.
| quote: | | And why are you even bringing up the 9/11 commision report? What does it have to do with Iraq? As I have just proven above there was no link between Iraq and 9/11 and this is STRAIGHT FROM THE 9/11 REPORT! Furthermore, can I do your homework for you and suggest a real book to read. Its called "Plan of Attack" by Bob Woodward. A man who covers the administration inside and out. In it he gives an account from both sides of the political spectrum, but he is inevitably critical of all the "evidence" the administration used to justify their war. |
I haven't read the book personally, but I have friends that have, both on the Left and on the Right, and they say very similar things about it. Mainly that the book is extremely detailed and fair, but as a result of this detail is also frustrating contextless and unclear, and - here's the most important thing they've said to me - that it would be very easy to pick out from the book only those points which specifically support your viewpoint, regardless of what that viewpoint is. Which does not sound like him being "critical" of the "evidence" in the way you say it.
I'll have to read it when I get the chance. I don't doubt the credentials of Bob Woodward at all, but what I've been hearing is that the book really does not bring forward ANY specific opinions about the situation, positive or negative.
| quote: | | And my original post has a link to a website that outlined the FACTS of what the Bush administration did leading up to the war. Did you even bother reading it? Its factual information, not left-wing dribble. Find me just one point in the timeline thats false. I'm sorry dude, but your too caught up with this left-wing, right-wing thing. This is not about cons versus dems... its about the Bush administration starting a war under false pretenses. Its about the Bush administration sending innocent people to Iraq to fight a war so their rich friends back home can benefit. |
It's "facts" intermingled with a ton of opinion and speculation, and taken completely out of context. I suppose I shouldn't call it "left-wing" dribble, just anti-Bush, anti-American, anti-Israel dribble.
| quote: | | And regarding Israel, I think people are going to be forced to watch their pull in the American govt a little more closely. After all, taking out Iraq has always been a prime concern of Israel and the pro-Israel neo-cons in power right now. Do you not find it funny how Israel is now being accused of spying on the US? After all, they did it 20 years ago, is it inconceivable to think that they might be doing it again and trying to pull strings from the inside. Why not read the following if your still not sure: |
I can't believe I'm even dignifying this "conspiracy theory" with a response, but Iraq has never been a "prime concern" of Israel - since Iraq opposed Iran, it would definitely NOT be in Israel's best interests to piss them off, thereby eliminating one of their best friends-via-common-enemy. I'm getting REALLY tired of hearing all the Israel/Jewish conspiracy crap. Tell me, why would Israel NEED to spy on the USA? The two countries have had a good relationship for decades.
| quote: | And back to the neo-cons, I think you might find the following quite interesting. After all, its a right-wing website, so that alone should give you a hard-on. Do some digging and you should be able to find the plans to overthrow Iraq.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/ |
So you take one website with this information and use it as "proof" that there really is a worldwide conspiracy?
For one thing, I cannot believe you just called neoconservatives "right-wing." Neo-cons are people who were originally on the left-wing but got sick of all the anti-Israel, anti-American sentiment inside it. They're still fundamentally left wing, not right.
| quote: | | Let me ask you this question, if Yossef Bodansky's book was so accurate and so factual, then why wasn't it discussed in the media like Bob Woodward's book was? |
Are you serious? Don't tell me you're going to deny the Left-wing media bias? Have you ever seen any of the major networks or newspapers (other than the "extreme Right wing" ones like Fox News or the New York Post) bring in experts on the Right to discuss important issues? The major news media has endorsed every single Democratic president and every single left-wing ideal (affirmative action, new-wave feminism, multiculturalism, 3rd-worldism, the homeless, and countless social programs). So please, don't tell me that lack of coverage by the media elite makes something lacking in credentials. If anything it makes it a worthwhile read.
Got any more for me? |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by discojoe
Obviously logic would say the international community would have a much more objective opinion about the issue than those directly involved. |
Precisely what "logic" are you referring to? I think it is common knowledge that most of Europe comes from a communist/socialist background, and anti-American sentiment has been going on there for the past 300 years. I'm not saying that makes them incapable of being objective, but it doesn't peg them any closer to the objective truth than the USA. So who else is going to be objective? Middle-eastern Islamic countries? Canada? :stongue:
By no means am I implying that residents of these countries have opinions that are LESS valid than residents of the USA - I'm only pointing out that their geographic location does not make them MORE valid. And Europe (as well as Iraq and Iran and other middle-eastern countries) have dissenting minorities just as the USA does - the only difference is that the dictatorships tend to kill those dissenting minorities, while the USA allows them to speak freely and publicly. |
|
|
| drgoodvibe |
^^^^^^^^^^^ Digi you bored @ work or somethin?? =] I wish I could find the time to discuss some of this, you got some great points, and so do others (i'm talking about all debates in all the tota threads). Anyways its always a pleasure reading your stuff, I may not agree with some of it, but its nice to see essays shedding light on the other side.
p.s get back to work!!:thepirate |
|
|
| Form&Funktion |
^^^^^^^^^^^
THAT'S HOW YOU DO IT.............THAT'S HOW YOU DEBATE!!!!!!!!!
 |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by drgoodvibe
^^^^^^^^^^^ Digi you bored @ work or somethin?? =] I wish I could find the time to discuss some of this, you got some great points, and so do others (i'm talking about all debates in all the tota threads). Anyways its always a pleasure reading your stuff, I may not agree with some of it, but its nice to see essays shedding light on the other side.
p.s get back to work!!:thepirate |
Hahaha, no work today, it's moving day and I'm takin' a break. :p Besides, I told Your Mother that I'd respond to any argument that didn't get excessively personal or emotional and he followed through on that, so it was only fair to keep up my end of the bargain!
I don't expect everyone or anyone to agree with me; as long as they listen, that's what I'm shooting for.
As Aaron (the other Aaron) said, there's just too much disinformation and missing information out there to really make perfect sense out of the whole thing one way or another, and also too much emotion; I'm only here to show that there is indeed a voice that does not indict Bush or his administration for heinous crimes and that there is far more to that voice than blind American patriotism or right-wing fever.
We should all be expecting both sides of any debate to have valid points, otherwise it's hardly a debate at all. It's up to the individual to decide who has a stronger case - simple as that.
P.S. What the HELL is up with that pic!? :haha: |
|
|
| Your Mother |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
It's interesting how everyone's the critic but no one actually sources information from the actual people involved!
The Iraqi people themselves.
Did anyone actually stop to think that these people might have actually wanted the U.S. to come to Iraq to free them?
To give them the freedom to choose, to make their own decisions and run their own lives??
I find such hypocrisy in the protestors that protest using the same freedom of choice and expression given to them through millions of lives just a few generations ago.
That's all these Iraqi people want; freedom.
But then there's the cry of, "Conspiracy!", "Oil!", "Human Rights!" blah, blah, blah ad naseum.
These cretins need to take the blinders off and actually hear from a few Iraqis rather than logging onto their protestors anonymous calendar looking for their next hit.
Oh and here's a hint for you all, do you actually think the Iraqis people thought this would all go down without a bullet being fired? :rolleyes:
Here's a quote from an actual Iraqi that I stumbled across today.
Source: Iraq & Iraqi`s
The rest of you far-left weenies: Tell these guys you wish the coalition had never gone to Iraq:
http://www.iraqthemodel.com
http://www.healingiraq.com/
http://www.iraqataglance.com/ |
I don't see what your point is here? I can assure you that for every Iraqi who is happy for Saddam being overthrown, there is probably another Iraqi that wishes the opposite. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's are without working electricity or clean water because the US bombed the hell out of their infrastructure that provides these services.
And even more to the point, this war was never about the freedom of the Iraqi people. It was always about WMD and the interests of US national security. Do you think Bush cares about the Iraqi people? what about Cheney, or Wolfowitz for that matter? Maybe if they really cared about the freedom of the people, they would have attempted to sell the war that way. Do you really think they would spend over $100 Billion to overhtrow a government to free the people? Nice try. With that kind of money they could wipe out the AIDS epidemic in Africa completely... but wait, Africa has nothing to offer in return on their investment, so why would they waste their time. How can it be a conspiracy theory when the facts are readily available. Or are you one of those who gets all of his news from Fox and doesn't bother doing his own homework.
Nobody doubts that the Iraqi's will probably be better off once the region is stabilized. But thats not the issue here. The issue is that the Bush administration started a war on false pretenses. They used the events of 9/11 to push an agenda they had planned long before Bush even took office.
-Your Mother |
|
|
| Sarcoman |
Over 10,000 people have died. Tens of thousands more are now homeless. Many Iraqis have lost their entire families, their businesses, their homes, theif lifestyle.
Is it good that Saddam is out... Absolutely. I hope they put him in Jail forever.
Is it good that the Americans took military action against terrorism. Yes.
The problem is, there has not been any conclusive, direct, or substantial evidence that Iraq was supporting terrorism, either by funding, or by direct government initiatives. Because such proof was not produced, many are convinced the war in Iraq is unjustified.
I fear that many more people that have been directly affected by American foreign and military policies will now be driven to extremism. How would you feel if a foreign country invaded yours, dropped bombs everywhere, killed members of your family, and many of your friends, and continue to use the resources of your country to pay their own.
my two cents. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by Your Mother
Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's are without working electricity or clean water because the US bombed the hell out of their infrastructure that provides these services.
|
You mean the same ones that are rebuilding said infrastructure?
| quote: |
Source
...The electrical power infrastructure of Iraq remains in a perilous condition. Through the strenuous efforts of the Ministry of Electricity (ME), CPA and Coalition Forces, the level of generation has been restored to the same level as that available prior to the war. However the system is inadequate to meet Iraq’s growing demands and lacks any measure of reliability...
|
Sounds like they're actually further than they were before the bombing...
| quote: |
And even more to the point, this war was never about the freedom of the Iraqi people. It was always about WMD and the interests of US national security.
|
Actually, it was; and the freedom from terror around the world.
You don't sit at a table and have tea with terrorists.
Don't link Iraq and WMD with Iraq's previous government.
It was not Iraq Bush was after; why must people also link the Iraqi people with their past suppressive dictatorship?
| quote: |
Do you think Bush cares about the Iraqi people?
|
Yes. They wouldn't be spending Billions of dollars in rebuilding Iraq if they didn't.
What? Did we actually think they'd just go in there, bomb what they had to bomb and then just leave?
| quote: |
what about Cheney, or Wolfowitz for that matter? Maybe if they really cared about the freedom of the people, they would have attempted to sell the war that way. Do you really think they would spend over $100 Billion to overhtrow a government to free the people? Nice try. With that kind of money they could wipe out the AIDS epidemic in Africa completely... but wait, Africa has nothing to offer in return on their investment, so why would they waste their time. How can it be a conspiracy theory when the facts are readily available. Or are you one of those who gets all of his news from Fox and doesn't bother doing his own homework.
|
Actually, I don't watch cable or the news for that matter and I still seem to know as much.
I do however, read and listen to multi-million dollar businessmen.
Does that make me more competent in this arguement? Maybe, maybe not.
But it's not about who watches more T.V. or reads more newspapers.
We can't compare AIDS with this at all; there's no cure or answer for AIDS is there?
Sure the money could have went there, but that's an atypical, hypothecial, what-if, guilt-trip arguement that the Left always uses to get out of actually getting dirty.
People need to stop hugging their trees, get out of their stoner kumbiya mantra and realize that not everyone in this world wants to play nice. Some people want to hurt others for their own end and we have to stand up to them.
If we don't create our own destiny, someone else WILL.
Don't believe me? Try not going to work and see what happens come rent time.
| quote: |
Nobody doubts that the Iraqi's will probably be better off once the region is stabilized. But thats not the issue here. The issue is that the Bush administration started a war on false pretenses. They used the events of 9/11 to push an agenda they had planned long before Bush even took office.
|
Saddam had to go one way or another.
Did they use 9/11 as an excuse?
That question may never be directly answered.
If anything, it was a catalyst.
But one thing is perfectly clear, Al-Qaida is a known scourage around the world and they could not be allowed to fester and spill out into this world under the sanctuary of a known mad-man. |
|
|
| Your Mother |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
That is by far the most useless argument I've ever heard. "Millions of Americans can't be wrong!!" Yeah... great, let me introduce you to my little friend The logical fallacy: appeal to popularity. People have been made to believe bigger lies than the disinformation we're fed on Iraq and 9/11 and Bush in general, and I don't think I need to specify where and when. With people like Michael Moore leading the crusade against Bush, and people walking out of Farenheit 911 saying it was a "great movie and really opened my eyes", it's no wonder that the Left could gather at least 400,000 supporters (which must be, oh my god, over 0.1% of the USA's current population of 300 million!).
I can't help noticing that neither of these articles present any conclusive proof of what they are trying to say. The first article takes one piece of the Report completely out of context - the report found that there was no direct evidence that the Iraqi government funded the Al-Qaeda network. But the way the article spins it, the report completely "rules out any link" between Iraq and Al Qaeda. That is totally misrepresenting the actual findings, by making two completely bogus assumptions:
1) That the only way for Iraq to support Al Qaeda would have been government funding (what about weapons, safe havens, or indirect support via either direct support or simple non-prosecution of connected groups?). This is a classic straw-man argument, another well-known fallacy.
2) That the absence of any direct evidence in favour of the premise that Iraq and 9/11 were connected counts as proof against that premise (another logical fallacy called Denying the Antecedent.
The other article takes two conflicting statements from the Administration and apparently uses that to "prove" that only one of them is true. (?)
Now the fact stands that the conclusion of an argument is not necessarily wrong simply because the argument is fallacious, but you'll have to do better than that if you're trying to show conclusive proof of your assertion that Iraq had no stake whatsoever in the 9/11 events.
I haven't read the book personally, but I have friends that have, both on the Left and on the Right, and they say very similar things about it. Mainly that the book is extremely detailed and fair, but as a result of this detail is also frustrating contextless and unclear, and - here's the most important thing they've said to me - that it would be very easy to pick out from the book only those points which specifically support your viewpoint, regardless of what that viewpoint is. Which does not sound like him being "critical" of the "evidence" in the way you say it.
I'll have to read it when I get the chance. I don't doubt the credentials of Bob Woodward at all, but what I've been hearing is that the book really does not bring forward ANY specific opinions about the situation, positive or negative.
It's "facts" intermingled with a ton of opinion and speculation, and taken completely out of context. I suppose I shouldn't call it "left-wing" dribble, just anti-Bush, anti-American, anti-Israel dribble.
I can't believe I'm even dignifying this "conspiracy theory" with a response, but Iraq has never been a "prime concern" of Israel - since Iraq opposed Iran, it would definitely NOT be in Israel's best interests to piss them off, thereby eliminating one of their best friends-via-common-enemy. I'm getting REALLY tired of hearing all the Israel/Jewish conspiracy crap. Tell me, why would Israel NEED to spy on the USA? The two countries have had a good relationship for decades.
So you take one website with this information and use it as "proof" that there really is a worldwide conspiracy?
For one thing, I cannot believe you just called neoconservatives "right-wing." Neo-cons are people who were originally on the left-wing but got sick of all the anti-Israel, anti-American sentiment inside it. They're still fundamentally left wing, not right.
Are you serious? Don't tell me you're going to deny the Left-wing media bias? Have you ever seen any of the major networks or newspapers (other than the "extreme Right wing" ones like Fox News or the New York Post) bring in experts on the Right to discuss important issues? The major news media has endorsed every single Democratic president and every single left-wing ideal (affirmative action, new-wave feminism, multiculturalism, 3rd-worldism, the homeless, and countless social programs). So please, don't tell me that lack of coverage by the media elite makes something lacking in credentials. If anything it makes it a worthwhile read.
Got any more for me? |
Those 400000 people were to protest the Bush administration coming to NY for their waste-of-money, shut-down-half-the-city national convention. It wasn't even about Iraq, but since your so brilliant, why don't you do some research into how much support all the "pro-war" rallies garnered just before the war begun. I'm sure you'll be shocked and awed at all the support.
And why is it when you people are losing an argument you start shouting Michael Moore's name? Oh "Fahrenheit 9/11 was a bunch of lies", and "Michal Moore is a fat loser". But speaking of Fahrenheit 9/11, have you even seen it? I would love to hear your opinion on it because I'm sure I would get a good laugh. Are you of the opinion that it was all make-believe? That everything he said was false? That it was just left-wing propaganda? I'll be waiting for your response because it should be funny.
And those articles aren't good enough for you? Dude, I can find a thousand more that make the same conclusions. Would you like one from Faux news just to make you happy? All I see you doing is coming up some excuse as to why they've been spun so people "believe the opposite".
And this quote: "People have been made to believe bigger lies than the disinformation we're fed on Iraq and 9/11 and Bush in general". Please offer some concrete examples or noone is going to take you seriously. You've offered no proof to support your claims, and most of your claims are baseless to begin with. At least make an attempt to redeem yourself and and offer me some (just a little) bit of substantiated evidence to support this claim.
Btw, I love your logical fallacy approach at disproving what I've presented. Who helped you come up with that one hahahaha.
How is "Plan of Attack" anit-Bush dribble? Woodward presents the unbiased FACTS. Thats right, FACTS with some added commentary. Its obvious that your mindset is one that only allows you to believe what you want to believe. And if anything comes by which contradicts your opinion and view point, then it must be left-wing biased, and absurd. Btw, I've got some magic beans to sell you.
If you call the major news networks in the US left-leaning, then your so far right you've swung back around and became left. Please offer me some examples of the following:
"The major news media has endorsed every single Democratic president and every single left-wing ideal (affirmative action, new-wave feminism, multiculturalism, 3rd-worldism, the homeless, and countless social programs)"
What do you mean by endorsing? Are they supposed to come out and flatly say, "don't vote for Kerry" or "don't vote for Bush". Their job is to report the news. dude, it sounds like your part of the KKK based on what you just said in that quote.
-Your Mother |
|
|
| Your Mother |
Diginut and Firestarter... I've got a great site for you. When do you want start getting the paperwork done?
http://www.goarmy.com/rotc/how_to_enroll.jsp
Or do you have another excuse as to why you can't join? You can always use Rush Limbaugh's excuse as to why he missed Vietnam.
-Your Mother |
|
|
|
|
