If you had a more nuanced understanding of the Republican psyche you would be having such trouble reconciling this apparent contradiction, Flipper.
Consider, for example, the possibility that the folks at Fox probably do “want lots of blood and gore” (because, being Republicans, they rejoice in violence and enjoy watching the innocent suffer) but that they restrain their enthusiasm for such suffering, and refuse to show it on their network, because, being Republicans, they abhor honesty and see the dissemination of lies and propaganda as a goal in and of itself.[/quote]
Should be good fun. I understand they are going to ink people’s hands to ensure they don’t vote twice. Be a lot of people with only one hand after this one, as Al Blistering-barnacles or whatever he’s called says he’ll lop the hand off anyone he catches voting.
I think they should have had voting during the First and Second World Wars as well. Seems like jolly good fun. And a damned sight more dramatic than queing up outside some primary school on a damp Saturday to vote for someone you’ve actually heard of.
As we used to say in good old Norn Iron: “Vote Early and Vote Often!”
If you had a more nuanced understanding of the Republican psyche you would be having such trouble reconciling this apparent contradiction, Flipper.
Consider, for example, the possibility that the folks at Fox probably do “want lots of blood and gore” (because, being Republicans, they rejoice in violence and enjoy watching the innocent suffer) but that they restrain their enthusiasm for such suffering, and refuse to show it on their network, because, being Republicans, they abhor honesty and see the dissemination of lies and propaganda as a goal in and of itself.[/quote]
One of the biggest problems of blanket critics of Republicans is they assume there is only one Republican psyche. And tend to generalize as easily as any other loonies. Loonies loonies loonies. :loco:
If you had a more nuanced understanding of the Republican psyche you would be having such trouble reconciling this apparent contradiction, Flipper.
Consider, for example, the possibility that the folks at Fox probably do “want lots of blood and gore” (because, being Republicans, they rejoice in violence and enjoy watching the innocent suffer) but that they restrain their enthusiasm for such suffering, and refuse to show it on their network, because, being Republicans, they abhor honesty and see the dissemination of lies and propaganda as a goal in and of itself.[/quote]
One of the biggest problems of blanket critics of Republicans is they assume there is only one Republican psyche. And tend to generalize as easily as any other loonies. Loonies loonies loonies. :loco:[/quote]
[EDIT: Original post amended due to fear that it was less than completely intelligible.]
For the record, I plead not guilty to the loon charge, by reason of insanity, and I ask that Tigerman be reprimanded for this outrageous personal attack.
P.S. Who said it: “The loons, the loons, they’re welcoming us back!”
I believe that Hobbes is once again engaging in irony and I do hope that those who were criticizing his post understood that. I think this perhaps may have gone over Broon Ale’s head but then perhaps he is being ironic in his response. I am pleased to see that today’s newspaper had an article about how the BBC was found to be heavily and systematically biased. Say it isn’t so! Really!
Anyway, on with the elections. Now is the time to pray. I am disappointed to hear that US military planners now say that 150K troops may need to remain in Iraq for another two to five years. If this is the case, then I will be forced to agree with Spook’s assertion that Iraq has in fact become a quagmire, but it is one that I am still willing to see the US fight in. Let’s hope that this is not in fact the case.
Ol’ Broony may be confused about things from time to time , but he’s always struck me as a fellow who knew his irony. I reckon he was just being a good sport and playing along.
Cheers BA!
And I couldn’t agree with you more about the elections, Fred. Regardless of how one feels about whether it was right to go in, and regardless of how one feels about how long coalition troops should stay (which is, probably, one of the first issues an incoming democratic Iraqi government will be considering) – it is hard to imagine a well-meaning person who hopes that the election is destroyed by a small number of killers who are upset about not being able to treat their fellow Iraqis as doormats anymore.
Well, if you’re willing to see U.S. soldiers fight, why not travel to Iraq to urge them on! I bet you would do a great job of giving them encouragement and helping them understand the importance of this invasion and why we’ll soon need to count on them in Iran.
Well, most of the soldiers already believe in what they are doing but I for one certainly did not anticipate that we would require 150K there at this point. I had expected this to be down to 50K to 90K by now. That extra 60K to 100K is a worry to me since I would like to see these forces freed up for other endeavors. Anyway, we have fewer in Afghanistan than I thought that we would need and it is helping spur the movement of troops out of stable places like Korea, Japan and Europe so perhaps this will serve a purpose but I was hoping Iraq would be much more stable now, but then you don’t always get what you want, when you want it. Change of plans does not make the goal any less worthy. That is the difference between those of us who are willing to stick this out to the end and those who wimper. The goal has not become less worthy because of the difficulties and as to a quagmire, what then do we call Japan, Korea, Europe, Turkey, etc.?
Furthermore, we were already stuck in the region after the first Gulf War with troops all over the place and major air and naval resources tied down. Those have since been freed but our army is bogged down a big. Lose on one but gain on two others. Such is life.
“Sixty-three percent of respondents approve of the way President Bush is handling the war, and 60 percent remain convinced it is a war worth fighting. And support for the war is even greater among those who have served longest in the combat zone: Two-thirds of combat vets say the war is worth fighting.” http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2004_mainbar.php
Technically, “most” of the soldiers means 60%, which is true. However, what you have is 40% that don’t think it’s worthwhile. Don’t you want to go over to Iraq to see these soldiers and help them?? If you’re “willing to see” them fight, why not do so in person. I’ll buy the pompons.
So basically you acknowledge that both you and the Bush administration got it wrong. The “opportunity cost” of dumping one-half of our combat capabilities into the middle of a desert is starting to become apparent. At least you’re learning…
Got OBL yet? How’s that resurgent Taliban doing? Interesting to see that Aghanistan is now the biggest supplier of heroin again … having gone from practically nil crop up to bumper harvests of dope is good for the U.S.??
“Stable” places like Korea?? Keep it up!
Yeah, put those hopes and wishes in one hand, a big pile of manure in the other, see which gets full first.
What goal? To shovel billions of dollars into the pockets of Bush cronies while tying up half of the U.S. combat capabilities into the middle of a desert where they can’t do an ounce of good for the security of actual Americans? And the goals shift so fast, we can’t keep up with them anymore. WMDs? None. Terror? Not until we went there and helped the terrorists recruit thousands to their cause. Liberation? Nope – Abu Ghraib just went under new management, and the “Salvador Option” doesn’t bode well for American values being spread there.
Hardheaded jackasses who are willing to stick out any bad plan “to the end” sometimes end up as the guys shooting themselves in the bunker. Just a thought. Meanwhile, those with the courage to use our American rights of free speech to fight for the soul of a nation that has traditionally stood for liberty and opportunity, have lately been hearing most of the “wimpering” coming from the neoconmen who are pathetically begging us to hear more of their hare-brained invasion schemes.
I’d call any nation giving us bases overseas, allowing us to project our military power globally, our “friend.”
Our air patrols were pretty minimal in terms of cost compared to our invasion of Iraq. In terms of economics and available military resources, this is simply a ridiculous argument.
I’d call any nation giving us bases overseas, allowing us to project our military power globally, our “friend”.[/quote]
I have to disagree with MFGR here. I’d call Japan, Iraq, Germany, Italy (or any other country that the US invaded and still keeps imperial troops on the ground in) “oppressed provinces of the American empire.”
You can give me that [color=black]“Yes, but the US kicked out cruel, aggressive, murderous tyrants out of each of these places, rebuilt, pumped money and investment in, and each of them is improving/has improved dramatically as a result”[/color] nonsense all you want, but the fact is that the majority of people in all those countries would far rather be ruled by a dictatorship, than have to endure the democratic governments that the US has foisted upon them.
You guys and your cultural superiority complexes. Never even occurs to you that the 95% of Iraqis who were mustard gassed, starved, and kicked around by the Baathists for decades might have actually preferred to live like that? No, of course not. For you guys its always about putting your values onto others [color=black]“All people want legal rights. All people want freedom to worship in their own way, or speak their own language in their homes (even if they happen to belong to the Kurdish or Shiite majority)”[/color] But try to tell someone like Fred or Flipper that, and all you get is Americo-centric ignorance. :wanker:
P.S. Apologies for the hostile tone. It’s one of those days, and sometimes I just don’t have time for Republican empire-denial nonsense.
Thank you Hobbes. Just to make sure Fido Smithsonian is clear on my level of perceived confusion, I would like to wish the Afghan people all the best and lots of security in their elections next month in Iraq and I pray, like a good solid bible-bashing white trash trailer park resident that the capital, Dili, remains quiet so that both protestants and catholics can vote safely in the full knowledge that KFOR will prevent any attacks from armed Hutu militia trying to retake the Canal Zone.
In the future should we ask our soldiers whether or not they wish to go into combat and combat zones? Should the soldiers take a vote as to whether or not they wish to be assigned some particular task?
Gosh… Afghanistan is not perfect paradise. I guess then that it must be an abject failure.
No, it isn’t a good thing that Aghanistan is now the biggest supplier of heroin again. But, even this is, IMO, preferable to Afghanistan being the source of training ground locations from whence ideas to fly commercial jets into our buildings and kill 3000 civilians in a single day’s work are hatched and planned and supported.
Urging them on? Running alongside them on the road and handing them a Gatorade and a wet towel as they sprint towards battle. Could be a sponsorship opportunity. A private sector war.
expat voting in the us. his son was killed in the shiite uprising in the early 90’s.
one of the more important aspects of this election. here’s a shiite casting a ballot in iran. the longer democratic elections continue, the harder it will be for the mullahs to stop iranians from wanting the same for themselves.
[quote]BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Iraqis voted Sunday in their country’s first free election in a half-century, as insurgents made good on threats of violence with a car bomb and mortar attacks in at least two cities. Casting his vote, President Ghazi al-Yawer called it Iraq’s first step “toward joining the free world.”
Police reported an explosion near a polling station in western Baghdad an hour after polls opened, but there was no immediate word on casualties. Mortar fire and explosions were also heard in central Baghdad and in the religiously mixed city of Baqouba 30 miles northeast of the capital.
The violence came after insurgents had rocketed the U.S. Embassy in downtown Baghdad late Saturday, killing two Americans.
Al-Yawer was among the first to cast his ballot, voting alongside his wife at election headquarters in the heavily fortified Green Zone in central Baghdad. As poll workers watched, he marked two ballots and dropped them into boxes, and then walked away with an Iraqi flag given to him by a poll worker.
“I’m very proud and happy this morning,” al-Yawer told reporters. “I congratulate all the Iraqi people and call them to vote for Iraq.”
The election is a major test of President Bush’s goal of promoting democracy in the Middle East. If successful, it also could hasten the day when the United States brings home its 150,000 soldiers. - excert[/quote]
I am SO happy! The Iraqis are voting and smiling and now they learn the FEAR from the fargin TERRORISTS has a much larger bark than bite.
I hope now that the Iraqis learn this fundemental lesson and start ratting on the bombers and shooters and cleaning out the murderous trash from their cities.
ya know what? I’m tipsy and happy so, what the hell…
An Iraqi man shows his dye-stained finger
– signifying he has voted - at a polling station
in Basra, southern Iraq
(news - web sites), January 30, 2005, as the
country holds its first elections.
REUTERS/Toby Melville
.JPG)
, but he’s always struck me as a fellow who knew his irony. I reckon he was just being a good sport and playing along.
