The fustercluck which is Iraq (again)

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
You cannot slip a sheet of paper between the platforms of these two parties when it comes to anything that keeps them in power.
True.

There is practically no difference at all between a platform that supports gay marriage being legal everywhere as a matter of civil rights and platform that is dedicated to preventing that at all costs including a constitutional amendment.

Nor a platform that insists abortion should be legal, safe, and accessible, and the platform that insists that life begins at the moment of conception and that abortions should never be allowed – even in cases of rape, for many.

Nor a platform that sees global climate change as a serious threat to our way of life, and a platform that proclaims it irrelevant at best and a hoax at worst.

Nor a platform that wishes to privatize Social Security and severely limit medicare and Medicaid, and a platform that wishes to keep Social Security and to expand health benefits for the poor.



Really, their platform are identical in every substantiative way.
 

robjvargas

Rob J. Vargas
Banned
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
6,543
Reaction score
511
True.

There is practically no difference at all between a platform that supports gay marriage being legal everywhere as a matter of civil rights and platform that is dedicated to preventing that at all costs including a constitutional amendment.

Nor a platform that insists abortion should be legal, safe, and accessible, and the platform that insists that life begins at the moment of conception and that abortions should never be allowed – even in cases of rape, for many.

Nor a platform that sees global climate change as a serious threat to our way of life, and a platform that proclaims it irrelevant at best and a hoax at worst.

Nor a platform that wishes to privatize Social Security and severely limit medicare and Medicaid, and a platform that wishes to keep Social Security and to expand health benefits for the poor.



Really, their platform are identical in every substantiative way.

It's interesting that you quoted the whole sentence, but only referred to half of it in your response.
 

Williebee

Capeless, wingless, & yet I fly.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
20,569
Reaction score
4,814
Location
youtu.be/QRruBVFXjnY
Website
www.ifoundaknife.com
You cannot slip a sheet of paper between the platforms of these two parties when it comes to anything that keeps them in power.

Is it really their "platforms" that keep them in power? Or is it possible that "anything that keeps them in power" is happening outside of their platforms?
 

robjvargas

Rob J. Vargas
Banned
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
6,543
Reaction score
511
Is it really their "platforms" that keep them in power? Or is it possible that "anything that keeps them in power" is happening outside of their platforms?

It's probably both, and probably irrelevant.

They both defended the NSA's data mining of phone records, and both derided Snowden's revelation of same. They both defend the rubber-stamp court that issues the "warrants" that provide the shallowest of legal authority for this.

They both made ACTA a secret, and they both are on the constant move to force it down our throats.

Guantanamo Bay is still active, with no real indications that it's changing anytime soon (much going away).

Democrats have, if anything, expanded the use of drones, including against US citizens on US soil.

And that's just four minutes' work to see all of that. If you want to argue that these are not on the Democrat (or GOP) platforms, I concede and would have a hard time caring less about whether these policies are actually there or not. It doesn't alter the reality that both parties engage in it, and they convince zealots on both ends of the spectrum to support them at it.

Call them backroom deals, secret cabals, NSA plots, I don't care about the terminology.
 

Synonym

Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
24,038
Reaction score
4,491
Location
Kansahoma
And when they've done that? What's next? My bet is that their next battle cry will be 'Westward!'

I think these are extremely dangerous people and a serious threat. I can't help thinking that WWIII is going to be an East-West fight of horrible proportions.

They already have a target, once the initial objective of carving out their own territory has been reached. That would be the conversion/enslavement/death of anyone that is not following their religion.

There's no diplomatic cure, no appeasement, no 'keep quiet and hope they overlook you' kind of answer to this, if it plays out. Every hard-won inch of societal enlightenment could be blasted clear back to the 1200's.

So yes, I do foresee some very strange alliances that may form, in order to deny this group it's ultimate goal.
 

Magdalen

Petulantly Penitent
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
6,372
Reaction score
1,566
Location
Insignificant
Back to the OP . . . 4500 POWs is alot of dudes!! I'm linking to a surprisingly good WP article on the fractioning of this country. Also, the YouTube video referenced is worth a look -- 4500 Iraqi soldiers-Tikirit from yesterday...

I just checked again on the YT vids for this and there's more than 10 now where 5 minutes ago there was only one, so no link.

The Fertile Crescent of Death!!!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...d46f9c-f2c8-11e3-914c-1fbd0614e2d4_story.html
 

GailD

Still chasing plot bunnies.
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
12,128
Reaction score
4,691
Location
Somerset East, South Africa
They already have a target, once the initial objective of carving out their own territory has been reached. That would be the conversion/enslavement/death of anyone that is not following their religion.

Exactly. That was the point I was trying (rather inexpertly) to make. This goes way beyond territory. It's the 'ultimate objective' that worries me.
 

Zoombie

Dragon of the Multiverse
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 24, 2006
Messages
40,775
Reaction score
5,947
Location
Some personalized demiplane
I think this is resoundingly wrong.

One needs to look at both degree and kind, and there is no comparison between the sides.

Isn't it funny how only conservatives and libertarians say both sides are functionally identical?

I mean, I have yet to see a progressive or a liberal say that the democrats and the republicans are exactly the same...
 

Don

All Living is Local
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
24,567
Reaction score
4,007
Location
Agorism FTW!
Let's not lose track of this part of rob's statement.

robjvargas said:
when it comes to anything that keeps them in power

Every election day, people who are socially liberal flock to the polls to pull the blue lever, and people who are socially conservative flock to the polls to pull the red lever. Surprise, surprise, at the end of the day, regardless of whether the reds or the blues win in this particular election, we have a government that, again, as rob stated, is focused first and foremost on maintaining its power.
robjvargas said:
They both defended the NSA's data mining of phone records, and both derided Snowden's revelation of same. They both defend the rubber-stamp court that issues the "warrants" that provide the shallowest of legal authority for this.

They both made ACTA a secret, and they both are on the constant move to force it down our throats.

Guantanamo Bay is still active, with no real indications that it's changing anytime soon (much going away).

Democrats have, if anything, expanded the use of drones, including against US citizens on US soil.
Now let's also note that they both support Big Agra, Big Oil and Big Pharma legislatively through barriers to entry. Let's also note that they've both been complicit in twisting the legal system to favor corporations over individuals or small businesses. Let's also note that they've both been complicit in an economic system that was designed by banksters to move material wealth relentlessly into the hands of the one percent, and that their dedication to the oligarchy is settled science.

Pick authoritarian corporatist empire A or authoritarian corporatist empire B.

Voters get to influence policy at the margins. They get to vote on what freedoms various marginalized groups get to exercise. It's a great distraction from what's really going on.
 

Diana Hignutt

Very Tired
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
13,314
Reaction score
7,098
Location
Albany, NY
Let's not lose track of this part of rob's statement.



Every election day, people who are socially liberal flock to the polls to pull the blue lever, and people who are socially conservative flock to the polls to pull the red lever. Surprise, surprise, at the end of the day, regardless of whether the reds or the blues win in this particular election, we have a government that, again, as rob stated, is focused first and foremost on maintaining its power.

Now let's also note that they both support Big Agra, Big Oil and Big Pharma legislatively through barriers to entry. Let's also note that they've both been complicit in twisting the legal system to favor corporations over individuals or small businesses. Let's also note that they've both been complicit in an economic system that was designed by banksters to move material wealth relentlessly into the hands of the one percent, and that their dedication to the oligarchy is settled science.

Pick authoritarian corporatist empire A or authoritarian corporatist empire B.

Voters get to influence policy at the margins. They get to vote on what freedoms various marginalized groups get to exercise. It's a great distraction from what's really going on.

It works because of the focus on the fringes of social extremes to fuel the polarization and secure the hate for one group over another...it's genius, really...
 

Don

All Living is Local
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 28, 2008
Messages
24,567
Reaction score
4,007
Location
Agorism FTW!
It works because of the focus on the fringes of social extremes to fuel the polarization and secure the hate for one group over another...it's genius, really...
Exactly. And as the two parties battle over the distribution of privilege between various groups, the government continually chips away at every individual's autonomy and privacy... and justifies it in terms of the battles over the distribution of privilege!
 

ColoradoGuy

I've seen worse.
Staff member
Moderator
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 11, 2005
Messages
6,696
Reaction score
1,534
Location
The City Different
Website
www.chrisjohnsonmd.com
Isn't it funny how only conservatives and libertarians say both sides are functionally identical?

I mean, I have yet to see a progressive or a liberal say that the democrats and the republicans are exactly the same...

And to those who say voting doesn't matter because they're both the same, I answer -- Supreme Court.
 

Maze Runner

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2012
Messages
5,489
Reaction score
609
Yeah, you gotta vote. I'm registered democrat but have voted both Republican and 3rd party. And especially today it seems, as the Tea Party's effect has largely been to shift the GOP further to the right. Not so with the Dems though, right? They seem to have been shifting to the center for a while now. I wonder why this is. Is it just that it's much easier to see the cup as half empty? Is it for the same reason that shock jocks are much more popular than NPR? Easier to garner support if you preach doom, if your words and tone are accusatory and blame mongering? Much safer to say no than yes, because with yes comes the chance of failure. More simply put, and I guess I've been trying to avoid stating it plainly, much easier to promote hate than love. The older I get the more to the left I seem to slide. I wish there were candidates on the left that would challenge me to follow suit. I'd love to be able to say I like a certain candidate but that their policies on some issues are just too far to the left for me to vote for them. So in this sense, I think it's true that Dems are guilty of catering to the prevailing winds, too; in effect following and not leading.
 
Last edited:

Maze Runner

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 11, 2012
Messages
5,489
Reaction score
609
Back on point -- I think the US should stay out of this. Even though none of this would be happening had we not invaded in the first place, at least as long Saddam was alive. What would it accomplish now? Just postponing the inevitable. We've got our hands more than full just trying to get this country in shape. If I thought the motivation to go back in was of a benevolent nature I might see it differently, but I've long given up on that notion in regards to our unmatched military might.

Drones, though they would keep our guys from getting killed, seem to me to be an especially heartless and cowardly way to fight a war.
 

Synonym

Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
24,038
Reaction score
4,491
Location
Kansahoma
Today I heard an immigrant from Iran, (who gave his age as 73), blame this on the Carter administration. According to his view, the Middle East was fairly balanced by strong leaders in the late 70's, while the clerics that have since gained power unbalanced the whole region. We saw those leaders as brutal and decried human rights violations. Eventually, this gave people the motivation to boot the Shah out of power.

It could well be our vision that is the problem. What we see as brutal and intolerable is not seen that way, by most of these people. They reject our "Western" values and views.

Unless we are ready to commit to spending a hundred years occupying, re-educating, and basically reshaping a culture, this may not be something that can be fixed. If it can't be fixed with limited intervention and diplomacy, then we might as well get ready to pull back as isolationists.

Throw up giant fences on the border, ease back on EPA regulations, and get ready for a whole lot of sabotage. I can't be the only one that thinks there are many who scurried across our Southern border and are waiting for their cue.
 

EffinGoose

Registered
Joined
Jun 17, 2014
Messages
38
Reaction score
2
Location
Witty location based quip
Today I heard an immigrant from Iran, (who gave his age as 73), blame this on the Carter administration. According to his view, the Middle East was fairly balanced by strong leaders in the late 70's, while the clerics that have since gained power unbalanced the whole region. We saw those leaders as brutal and decried human rights violations. Eventually, this gave people the motivation to boot the Shah out of power.

This is a really big part of the problem. It isn't a good or rational expenditure of resources for the majority of the American population to try to police other nations, though I would argue that a lot of western intervention arose from economic interests under the guise of liberation. From a military/social standpoint, the belief that the enemy of our enemy is our friend is a pretty bad idea for long term. Propping up religious leaders and dismantling democratic and/or socialist governments to cause grief to our own enemies usually bites us on the ass in the future.

It could well be our vision that is the problem. What we see as brutal and intolerable is not seen that way, by most of these people. They reject our "Western" values and views.

I'd argue that this isn't entirely true. While my mother's side of the family has been in America since the Mayflower, my father's side of the family are first-generation immigrants from the middle east, with people who have came from Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, and other places. While this is anecdotal, none of my family hates America for their "values and views". They might disagree with destabilizing the region and propagating exploitative economic trade, but pretty much everyone enjoys freedom and the choice to do what they wish. Hell, a large amount of my family on that side was Republican until 9/11- even then they held fast until the vilification of Arabs and Muslims and their 'alien belief systems' started. The brutality and intolerance you see is the product of a relatively poor, uneducated mass being given scapegoats to redirect their anger from their ruling classes.

Unless we are ready to commit to spending a hundred years occupying, re-educating, and basically reshaping a culture, this may not be something that can be fixed. If it can't be fixed with limited intervention and diplomacy, then we might as well get ready to pull back as isolationists.

While I disagree isolating our nation from the world is a good idea, it honestly feels like a increasingly attractive idea. The problem is that we (by which I mean western economic interests, not just America) have already been spending a hundred plus years occupying and reshaping a culture. The Sheiks in Saudi Arabia probably wouldn't still be in power if it wasn't in our interests to keep them there.

Throw up giant fences on the border, ease back on EPA regulations, and get ready for a whole lot of sabotage. I can't be the only one that thinks there are many who scurried across our Southern border and are waiting for their cue.

What would easing back on EPA regulations and putting a fence on the border do to help, and why would they be attempting to sabotage us when we don't interfere in their sphere of the world? I like the idea of reverting the nation back to a more self-sufficient state, but the globalization of our economic interests pretty much makes that impossible; even if we were to try, the CEO's and Politicians making money off the global market would not allow it. As for that last sentence, are you really that paranoid about multitudes of terrorist cells waiting for a cue to sew mass havoc and chaos? Honestly, after the work I've done for the military I'm more worried about economic strangulation from China and Russia, especially since a lot of our companies are all too eager to lift up industry and the jobs it creates to those countries so they can make an extra $1.75 per smartphone.
 

Synonym

Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
24,038
Reaction score
4,491
Location
Kansahoma
What would easing back on EPA regulations and putting a fence on the border do to help, and why would they be attempting to sabotage us when we don't interfere in their sphere of the world? I like the idea of reverting the nation back to a more self-sufficient state, but the globalization of our economic interests pretty much makes that impossible; even if we were to try, the CEO's and Politicians making money off the global market would not allow it. As for that last sentence, are you really that paranoid about multitudes of terrorist cells waiting for a cue to sew mass havoc and chaos? Honestly, after the work I've done for the military I'm more worried about economic strangulation from China and Russia, especially since a lot of our companies are all too eager to lift up industry and the jobs it creates to those countries so they can make an extra $1.75 per smartphone.

Paranoid? Call it cautiously unoptimistic. Since we're just as much of a 'target', as the bone you mentioned earlier thrown to the ignorant masses to redirect their anger. Yeah. I'm betting that another attack of some sort is inevitable.

As for China and Russia, I'm sure they wouldn't mind causing some economic pain--as long as it doesn't hurt their bottom line. We are useful, if only for our money.

I haven't checked to see if ISIS has managed to take the largest refinery in Iraq yet. Gasoline jumped 11 cents a gallon yesterday on speculation. I imagine it will only continue to rise as this escalates. Hence, my EPA comment.

While I applaud more effective technology to keep pollution in check and lower emissions, the EPA may have to back off of their newest goal. Solar and wind energy simply haven't achieved the necessary efficiency to replace coal, natural gas, or oil, to produce electricity.

Food and necessities have steadily risen in cost over the last few years. Add the spike in fuel prices, and we will see an acceleration that may break the budget of those that can least accommodate higher costs. When a country is not doing that well economically, they can ill afford to impose more regulations that raise costs to the already strapped consumer. (That's my opinion. I suppose they can plow ahead, but I surely don't know who will appreciate it when they're already pinching pennies to pay rent and buy food.)
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
I favor bombing the bad guys back to the Stone Age by dropping on them from a great height George W. Bush, Evil Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Disco Donnie Rumsfeld, Doug Feith, William Kristol and every over neo-con job jackass strapped in suicide vests and no parachutes.

I call it Operation Inglorious Basterds 2: Electric Boogaloo. :e2salute:
 
Last edited:

Synonym

Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
24,038
Reaction score
4,491
Location
Kansahoma
Too long...nobody would be able to remember the name, nighttimer.
 

EffinGoose

Registered
Joined
Jun 17, 2014
Messages
38
Reaction score
2
Location
Witty location based quip
Thanks for taking the time to elaborate your points Synonym. I have to say, they are pretty good ones! While I'm not sure I am approaching the issues from the same direction as you are, I'm pretty sure we are seeing eye-to-eye on a lot of the troubles that are currently plaguing our country.

I agree that another attack on our country, weather it be internal or external is inevitable. The issue I'm worried about is that how such an attack will change our foreign and domestic policies. One example is with government overreach into monitoring all of us. Personally, I'm not worried on an individual level- I was attached to the NSA for the entirety of my Navy career and it wasn't like I even attempted to hide my lineage and sociopolitical views. Honestly, I believe a lot of the push from the military and the NSA for better (i.e. more) surveillance is simply an excuse for more funding and money. Honestly, while the war in Afghanistan could be arguably justified, I'd rather had have a clandestine insertion of a spec ops team to off Bin Laden rather then start a long term campaign which is still a money funnel to this day.

About Russian and China you are spot on; there's a reason I never used Kaspersky Security and China doesn't even attempt to hide the fact they are consistently hacking US government and Corporate systems. That said, we've pretty much become codependent with the Oligarchy in Russia and China in maintaining our style of life over here- while both sides of the aisle here are perfectly happy scapegoating and grandstanding against them, nothing will come of it- especially since Russia controls roughly 33% of all Europe's oil usage and has nearly completed new pipelines to China and Japan.

ISIS is, in my opinion, not a big threat to us. Gary Brecher (the war nerd) actually wrote a pretty good article on them. Also like you said, change has to come from within those nations- if we keep bombing everybody that we don't like over there, all we do is create a power vacuum for another organization.

Finally, you are right on about solar and wind. One of my buddies is a engineer and spent bit of time writing out the unsuitability of replacing our energy with solar (I'm willing to post transcripts of his words via pm if anybody is interested but I don't want to clog up the chat here with hard math and junk) it'd take 400 trillion dollars and a power station the size of Texas to even attempt to match current world demand for power via solar- and that's with energy cells at maximum possible physical efficiency that never experience nighttime conditions or cloudy days. Honestly, energy is going to be an issue, and it will continue to grow into the foreseeable future. Especially since most food, plastics, and fuel now relies on fossil products. There's is no feasible way to maintain our population growth without serious denigration of the environment and/or our individual quality of life. I'm perfectly willing to admit I'm either to uneducated or dumb in the subject.

@nighttimer
I wish. Though honestly I'd like for a simple cannon that shot baddie politicians and business men into the sun more. Sadly, I'm not enough of a sociopath to enforce my beliefs through murder. :p

Also, sorry about my long posts. I hate simply just giving my opinion without some sort of background or logic on why I believe things to be so- hell, even the stuff I posted here feels a little too bare-bones. If I ever become annoying to the community, or an admin doesn't like it, I'll gladly start shutting up and continuing discussions through pm!
 

Synonym

Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
24,038
Reaction score
4,491
Location
Kansahoma
Expanding on what I tried to say is a necessity. (I know from experience that it's never quite clear.) It may have seemed that way when I wrote it, but obviously there are big gaping holes that need to be filled in order to have a reasonable dialog. Not a problem.

I don't mind the length of your posts, as it gives some insight into your experiences. I'm sure others are paying attention. You may find yourself being PM'd with questions (that pertain to plot lines for instance). That's always good to know.
 

Gregg

Life is good
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,725
Reaction score
247
Age
77
Location
In my house on the river
I favor bombing the bad guys back to the Stone Age by dropping on them from a great height George W. Bush, Evil Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Disco Donnie Rumsfeld, Doug Feith, William Kristol and every over neo-con job jackass strapped in suicide vests and no parachutes.

I call it Operation Inglorious Basterds 2: Electric Boogaloo. :e2salute:
You forgot to include Joe Biden who said:

"I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government.

I spent -- I've been there 17 times now. I go about every two months -- three months. I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society. It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."
 

nighttimer

No Gods No Masters
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 4, 2006
Messages
11,629
Reaction score
4,103
Location
CBUS
@nighttimer

I wish. Though honestly I'd like for a simple cannon that shot baddie politicians and business men into the sun more. Sadly, I'm not enough of a sociopath to enforce my beliefs through murder. :p

The true sociopaths were those lying bastards who dragged us into an illegal and immoral war and ended up ending killing 4,000 Americans and 300,000 Iraqis and wounding, maiming and destroying the lives of countless thousands more on both sides.

If they aren't going to be arrested and indicted for war crimes, then the next best thing would be to get rid of them as cannon fodder.

It wouldn't be murder. It would be karmic justice.