Does This Resonate?
 

Ha. Like any of them have internet access anyway. Obviously admin propaganda.

Does This Resonate?
 

Usually I know what you're talking about.

Today - not so much.

(ETA - I should add for clarity - Who's Owens?)

Does This Resonate?
 

Hint: read the FB discussion that I just started.

Does This Resonate?
 

Sure, that should settle it. Morality by majority vote.

And when you win the elections, which is all that really matters, you can give everyone medals and never even think about the bad stuff. That's because the _election_ is the "accountability moment" that determines both whether you _should_ have done what you did and whether it was well-executed.

Breath-taking arrogance.

S_A_M

Does This Resonate?
 

I understand why the Bush Administration publicly sets the bar this low. What I don't understand is why so many conservatives profess to agree. And what scares me is the notion that the Bushies really think this.

I gather that you spend a large portion of your life talking to someone who thinks that Arabs aren't interested in democracy -- couldn't care less about it. Because then you come here, and say this stuff as if it's relevant to something, anything that anyone is saying here.

Does This Resonate?
 

If you didn't get the "end zone celebration" part, I don't think the Owens part will give it away. Consider it an effort at being funny that failed more grandly than my usual efforts fail.

fwiw, as usual I'm with SAM. Except that I don't see it as arrogance so much. More like a need for reassurance.

Does This Resonate?
 

You suggested that we come to some definition of "common morality". I suggested one method of, at least on a gross level, measuring where those mores lie. You suggested nothing. And, I'm the one that's arrogant?

Look, if you want a determination, but you can't offer an approach, and you think that any sugestion of an approach is arrogant, you don't leave us with much room to progress on your path. How would YOU measure, define, or arrive at a common morality?

Dear Amerika, whee haf yur suns~!
 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...l=chi-news-hed

This is the greatest practical joke of all time. Joker gets a military doll sold at U.S. bases in Kuwait. Puts a gun to its head, takes a picture and broadcasts it as a captured yankee on an Islamist website. Newspapers pick up the story. Hilarity ensues.

Does This Resonate?
 

when is Iraq "fixed?" I say when it is handling it's own security and we can pull out. how does it get there? it's people join the police and nat'l guard. The bigger bombings and most gruesome kidnapping/murders are of recruits for these. What does that tell you Ty? THERE ARE LOTS OF RECRUITS- and they are targetted- AND STILL MORE JOIN. The people want to get there.

now the people have had a chance to pick what the government is. how can that not make more want to join the security and also narc out the insurgents?

Did you know the South Vietnamese Army was almost all drafted?

Does This Resonate?
 

I'm baffled. They voted. Presumably, the winning candidates will be seated, absent fraud. Isn't that democracy? I don't think I called it peace, did I?

This must be my afternoon for bafflement. How this relates to what I said escapes me. You said, the Arab world doesn't appear to be clamoring for democracy. (Or were you just making a joke with the "look like Iraq" thingie?) I said, here are a few things going on in the ergion which make it appear that people are starting to clamor that way. From this, you get . . . that?

Does This Resonate?
 

Chalk it up to the fact that I just don't do sports well. It's like a funny sight gag to a blind guy. Thud.

Does This Resonate?
 

I can't figure out what you think you're arguing with me about. Many people in Iraq want this to work. We agree on that.

Does This Resonate?
 

It sure sounds democratic, and there's nothing wrong with it, but we are a long way from having established a democracy.

That's not what I said, but it's what you keep hearing.

Freedom Isn't Free
 

What a stupid response. I expect more from you (but not much)

Does This Resonate?
 

You wouldn't describe Syria, Lebannon and Iran as totatlitarian?

Does This Resonate?
 

I think it's hard to imagine a totalitarian regime in a non-industrialized society, although China during the Cultural Revolution might fit the bill. In all three of those countries -- and particularly Lebanon -- I don't think the government has extended its control over the rest of society to a degree sufficient to call it totalitarian. Iran has a close relationship between religious and government authorities. But Iran also has considerable divisions right now within its government. I don't know of any reason to call Lebanon totalitarian. Syria's government is ruthless and strong, but I've never understood that it has co-opted other institutions, etc.

Perhaps I'm seeing a distinction between totalitarian regimes and other forms of dictatorships that you're not seeing?

Does This Resonate?
 

Remember, you're talking to a described libertarian. Could be that to club, the Clinton Years were totalitarian.

Does This Resonate?
 

Perhaps, but in the context of what we were discussin, I think any distinction is without a practical difference.

Does This Resonate?
 

Only 1992-1994.

Does This Resonate?
 

In the context of what we were discussing, both you and bilmore are missing the point. My point was that the way we have presided over Iraq since we took over, and the mess we have made of it, discredits and undermines our promotion of democracy. The question is not whether our motives are pure, but how our efforts are seen and appreciated by others in the Middle East. Abu Ghraib, to take just one example, was a disaster for our public diplomacy efforts. The fact that the insurgency has only been gathering strength is also very, very unhelpful. My point was that others look at Iraq and, quite reasonably, would not want to live there. Given a choice between living under such conditions with a right to vote, and living in an orderly, non-democratic country, many people would choose the latter. (Look at Singapore. But I digress.) Moreover, the fucked-up state of the country threatens the entire project. For example, Kurds overwhelmingly want independence for Kurdistan rather than to remain a part of Iraq. If the centre cannot hold, Kurdish secession is increasingly possibly. But this would certainly convince many nationalists elsewhere that the price of democracy is too high. (Evidently, the price of recognizing Kurdish aspirations is too high for us even now, notwithstanding our ostensible commitment to democracy.) Or, if people associated the introduction of democracy with the inability of the central government to stop the insurgency, they may turn to a strongman. They might even elect someone who then eliminates democracy. It's happened before.

eta:
IMHO, notwithstanding the vote on Sunday, we're losing Iraq. In the future, the historians will ask whether the project ever could have worked out, or whether it was doomed from the start. (And the bilmores of the world will blame the MSM for failing to give enough support.) I tend to think the latter, but I'm not sure.

wow
 

Talk about a united front:

• Not a single Senate Democrat will support President Bush’s proposal to divert a portion of the Social Security payroll tax to personal investment accounts, Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Tuesday.
  If he is right, Bush’s plan will be dead on arrival in the Senate, where a supermajority of 60 votes will be needed to overcome a filibuster by opponents. Republicans have 55 seats.
  ...
  “We want to make sure that the American people understand that we’re not for benefit cuts and we’re not for privatization,” Reid said. “There’s no crisis in Social Security.”
  ...
  Reid said he had private commitments from all 44 Senate Democrats that they would not support diverting payroll tax revenues into private accounts, the key facet of Bush’s plan. The Democratic staff on the Senate Finance Committee has come to the same conclusion, based on polling Democratic members and their staffs.

CQ Today, via TPM

wow
 

Good. Stupid idea.

wow
 

The fillibuster appears to be the only new idea coming out of the "party of change" these days.

Does This Resonate?
 

I read once that on internet-type chatting boards, the first person to mention Hitler loses the argument. You haven't done that, but do you really think there is an analogy to be drawn between WWII and Operation Iraqi Freedom To Get Your Ass Blown Off?

There are good reasons to fight wars, like when the survival of your society is threatened, e.g., by weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a madman. There are other reasons to fight wars that are not so good, like oil pipelines in Afghanistan (hi Hank!). There are also good and bad ways to treat prisoners, good and bad ways to go about the reconstruction of a country devastated by war, etc.

As for the kid across the street, I'd feel pretty shitty if someone told me "hey, see that kid over there? He's gonna beat up my little brother at 3:00. Let's kick his ass now," and we did, and it turned out . . . well, you get the picture.

No, you can answer it yourself using your own moral compass and core values. All I know is a lot of innocent people over there got killed in my name because we were sold a bill of goods about the reasons we had to go in guns blazing. It's nice that they're having an election, but that doesn't make everything that preceded it suddenly ok. If it did, Penske would have stopped bitching about the Clinton years after W was sworn in.

Does This Resonate?
 

Everybody thought the guy had the weapons. The UN did, the French the Germans, Clinton, Kerry, everyone. all bush said was "we can't let him- I understand why clinton let him but we can't anymore." That the world was all wrong ain't Bush's fault.



I think this goes with PBS aspect of this forum. Ratings don't matter. You can post what you want. It's like if Chevy Chase worked here. he'd still be doing Ford impersionations.

Does This Resonate?
 

Now you're just taking the piss.

Does This Resonate?
 

You were away, and you're my senior, so i respect what you've done. I won't take the easy win for those reasons. but I've already won this argument with the rest of your fellow-travellers. This is why Ty fears me and will never engage. WTTW- ask yourself "why were htere sanctions?" Nuff said.

Does This Resonate?
 

Sigh. I knew I should have clarified.

The reference to "breath-taking arrogance" was not directed at you. It was directed at George Bush, who I was both quoting and paraphrasing in the paragraph above it with regard to his contention in a recent interview that there was no need to hold anyone in his administration accountable for mistakes in Iraq, etc. because his recent election victory was the "accountability moment", and he won.

I thought that was arrogance, but may be wrong. It may just be blindness. Its really no shock that every corporation he ran went bust (save for the baseball franchise, where he enjoyed an antitrust exemption and effective regional monopoly). But -- he knows how to get elected, and how to bust people's balls.

To answer your question, I don't think that our elections are well-suited for measuring or defining the common morality. Morality in the general sense, as opposed to certain demogogued issues, has damn little to do with our elections, our election process, or politics in general.

I think our common morality is probably shaped, defined, and redefined from time to time, by a slow process of education, shared experience and public dialogue (of which elections may be a tiny part). However, I'm not sure we (i.e. Americans) could reach agreement on definitions beyond the most basic generalities -- which would be nearly useless in practical terms (because we'd disagree on the details). (i.e. "Murder is wrong." "Free speech is good.")

S_A_M

Does This Resonate?
 

No, not even close. The term has a technical definition. Syria under the elder Assad came closest, was defintiely very authoritarian, but has loosened up quite a bit in recent years. Iran has a civil society and economy that is quite free in some respects -- a semi-authoritarian parliamentary religious oligarchy. Lebanon is nothing close and never has been.

S_A_M

Does This Resonate?
 

This continues to be false. Or, to put it differently, not everyone thought so by the time the shooting started because when the inspectors looked where we told them to, they didn't find anything.

Does This Resonate?
 

And my point was (not speaking for Billmore here) that perhaps Arabs in other countries are not rushing to support the Iraqis because they fear reprisals from their government, whether you call that government totalitarian, athoritarian, or another name.

ETA: You really are a pessimist by nature aren't you?

Does This Resonate?
 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Everybody thought the guy had the weapons. The UN did, the French the Germans, Clinton, Kerry, everyone.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This is just to explain to Ironweed. My time is certainly too valuable to get back into this with the rest.

Blix had said the day the invasion began he was certain we would find WMD. The UN maintained sanctions that were starving Iraq, although making the Blix family, the Hussein family and certain French and Germans rich. The reason for the sanction were that Saddam had WMD once and would not show that he got rid of them.

Ty will quote a US general who told Bush "We have not found any" as proof that no one believed they were there.

The above is all anyone really needs to know to reach the answer. That the Dems reach the answer they do (or in Kerry's case one of the answers he does) is why there will not be a Democratic President anytime soon.

Does This Resonate?
 

You post some completely outrageous crap about the UN believing he had WMD and then talk about an easy win? The sanctions were in place because he wouldn't let the inspectors in, not because he had WMD. Do you remember Colin "The Respectable Face" Powell's dog and pony show designed to convince the UN that those Winnebagos were full of anthrax? WTTW - why go to the trouble of convincing a body that already believed, according to you, that there were WMD? Nuff said indeed.

Now I know why Ty doesn't wanna talk to you anymore. And what he said about when the inspectors went they didn't find none neither and like that.

ETA: I love special treatment as much as anyone, but you don't need to waste time on me either. Cheers!

Does This Resonate?
 

If your aim was to hurt my feelings- you have shot true.

Dean to Head DNC
 

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/02/po...rint&position=

I'm curious to see how this is going to work out. Dean is not presidential, but he no doubt energized this base like few before him. He also is one of the few moderates in the party that has respect from the left. Actually, it may be the perfect fit.

This is Sad
 

http://cnn.worldnews.printthis.click...partnerID=2006

Terrorist in Iraq use toy American soldier as hostage.

This is Sad
 

Sad?

I'd think that if the best Terrorist Fuckheads could do is capture a GI Joe, that would be cause for some degree of happiness.

This is Sad
 

I know the word "terrorist" has been used rather carelessly in the last few years, but this really takes the cake.

This is Sad
 

That's my point . . . what kind of terrorists are they?

This is Sad
 

i thought it was a prankster. it really puts credence in Wag the Dog.