Making Baby Jesus Cry

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Spanky
At the end of Gulf War I both the Kurds and the Shiites rose up in rebellion against Saddam Hussein. They hated his reign so much that they were willing to incur tens of thousands of casualties to get rid of him. So civil war was preferable to them than the status quo. Now the majority of the people in the country have what they want - no Saddam Hussein.

The Civil war may last for a while but in the end the Sunnis will have to lose. They are the minority and they are don't have the oil.

Clearly the majority of the people wanted him gone, and were willing to take massive casualties to do it. We took him out and now they have got what they want.

If the majority of people wanted him out and he is out, and they are not suffering near the number of casualties they suffered under Saddams post rebellion opression how can anyone say the people are worse off or the status quo has not improved?

A civil war will be a disaster. As gatti has alluded, what makes you think Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey will just sit on their hands while civil war rages on their borders?

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by nononono
Bah humbugger, indeed. And I have never gone to church on Christmas - it wasn't done. Christmas eve, usually much too late at night.

Drag on the economy. Please. Collective leisuretime is a good thing now and then.

Hmpfh. I work with a lot of retailers. fourth quarter generally represents between 50 and 75 percent of annual sales. Without Christmas the US economy would grind to a sudden halt.

[Spanky]

By the way - the reasons for us getting into the war are no longer relevant. Either we (And the Iraqis) are better of or worse off. The rest is just political blather.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Spanky
3) Our prestige increased significantly. As a wise man said - it is better to feared than loved. Whether someone loves you is beyond your control but whether or not they fear you is within your control. Love is a fickle emotion that is unstable fear sticks like glue. Taking out Iraq in three weeks with so little casualites made the whole world realize they really don't want to get into an armed conflict with us. We had lost a lot of crediblity when we didn't enforce the Gulf War peace treaty. Now all the credibility is back.

While I wouldn't call it "prestige," I think there is now a credible threat out there that if the president has a hard-on (figuratively speaking) for your country, s/he will cause the US military to come in and fuck around with things to make it somewhat more like s/he thinks s/he wants it, and then will flail the military around for a while and eventually will leave, after which point a new equilibrium will have to be achieved.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by nononono
Bah humbugger, indeed. And I have never gone to church on Christmas - it wasn't done. Christmas eve, usually much too late at night.

Drag on the economy. Please. Collective leisuretime is a good thing now and then.

Or, think about it selfishly. If things didn't slow down in December (or go crazy for year-end deals and then slow down in January), you'd be really tired from working so much.

1. You don't know me very well. It would be hard for me to be more tired or more overworked.

2. The interesting comparison would be, does the commercialization of Christmas generate more overall revenue throughout the economy than the drag effect takes away? Some of the revenue would occur anyway, gifts would be bought in a different setting, so some amount of the commerce would have to be factored out. has this study been done?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Spanky
When I look at a policy decision the way I judge it is are we better off than we were before. In this case I would say yes.

1) The Iraqis are definitely better off than they were before. As explained above

If you think the Iraqis would be better off in a civil war, you're fucking nuts.

2) With minmum casualties (for the families involved in the deaths are tragic but 2,000 dead is almost nothing. We lost 2,000 men in the first ten seconds of Iwo Jima or D-Day. In Korea we would lose 2,000 men just to take a hill) we got rid of a major enemy of the United States.

To be replaced by?

3) Our prestige increased significantly. As a wise man said - it is better to feared than loved. Whether someone loves you is beyond your control but whether or not they fear you is within your control. Love is a fickle emotion that is unstable fear sticks like glue. Taking out Iraq in three weeks with so little casualites made the whole world realize they really don't want to get into an armed conflict with us. We had lost a lot of crediblity when we didn't enforce the Gulf War peace treaty. Now all the credibility is back.

To the contrary, our prestige has taken a huge beating. If Iraq succombs to civil war, our prestige will sink immeasurably. We will have failed in all of our strategic goals.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
A civil war will be a disaster. As gatti has alluded, what makes you think Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey will just sit on their hands while civil war rages on their borders?

Assumimg that the Civil War is a total disaster. Wouldn't that still be better than leaving Saddam in Power. In 91, before Saddam really got down to slaughtering him, they definitely thought a lot of violence was worth getting rid of him. I find it hard to believe that they have changed their minds.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by nononono
Worshipped, eek!

Well, it's the Trinity, you know, so it's really tritheism (yes, I know this is blasphemy, I'm just playing). I actually find the different roles of Mary in the Cath. and Prot. churches incredibly interesting. I have a really hard time in churches that have her elevated to the same place as jesu, though. It just feels weird. In a garden next to St. Francis, though, and I'm okay, even though that is very not Prot., too.

Sorry, spelling hasn't ever been my strong suit.

We've got the one God, three persons thing, too. And it probably doesn't help matters that the Virgin of Guadalupe is sorta kinda important to My People.

I sort of like to pick and choose though. My favorite quasi-religious ceremony ever is New Years Eve in the Taos pueblo, which picks and chooses from Judeism, Catholicism, Pueblo rituals and touchy feely spiritual stuff that isn't really defined.

ETadd link.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Spanky
By the way - the reasons for us getting into the war are no longer relevant. Either we (And the Iraqis) are better of or worse off. The rest is just political blather.

WHAT? In a practical sense in terms of what we do in Iraq going forward, I agree -- it should be ignored -- but in terms of evaluating politicians' and policy makers' beliefs and values, you are full of shit.

And, w/r/t "should be ignored" the reasons for us getting into the war, sunk cost though they are, do have an influence on what goes on there, unfortunately. If one of the goals of the CIC is to justify himself politically, manpower is going to be expended on looking for shit that just isn't there -- when that manpower might perhaps be useful elsewhere.

You can't just ignore the politics, Spanky. It's like an information cost, kinda.

[ltl/fb]

how the hell did I end up posting over here.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by baltassoc
Hmpfh. I work with a lot of retailers. fourth quarter generally represents between 50 and 75 percent of annual sales. Without Christmas the US economy would grind to a sudden halt.

Yes, but how much of that commerce wouldn't occur in another setting over the rest of the year? Is all of the commerce at Christmas contrived for the holiday or would people buy gifts or acquire the possessions in other settings? Or some proportion of them?

This excepts Christmas specific items, which are probably substantial but certainly not the bulk of what you citing.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Spanky
Assumimg that the Civil War is a total disaster. Wouldn't that still be better than leaving Saddam in Power. In 91, before Saddam really got down to slaughtering him, they definitely thought a lot of violence was worth getting rid of him. I find it hard to believe that they have changed their minds.

I'm just dumbstruck that you're downplaying the effects of a civil war. I hate to resort to namecalling, but you are either a fool or hopelessly naive. If stability in the ME is so unimportant, then what the fuck are we doing there in the first place?

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by Spanky
By the way - the reasons for us getting into the war are no longer relevant. Either we (And the Iraqis) are better of or worse off. The rest is just political blather.

As of the end of the last US election, you are correct. Unfortunately we (I'll leave the question of the Iraqis open) are not better off. We're playing host to a terroist breeding ground. We're riviled in the Muslim world. We've squandered the goodwill we gained post 9/11. Instead of wondering whether Saddam was giving weapons to terrorists, we've definitively resolved that issue by leaving his arms depots unprotected, ensuring the arming of those who would do us harm.

I'm not sure why we went in, but I sure ain't glad we did.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
you're fucking nuts.

Is that a clinical term?

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
To be replaced by?
.

At worst a Kurdish Alley in the North, a nominal alley in the south and a weak center that does not like us. Much better than before were we had teh full resources of Iraq being used to subvert our interests.

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
To the contrary, our prestige has taken a huge beating. If Iraq succombs to civil war, our prestige will sink immeasurably. We will have failed in all of our strategic goals.

That won't change the fear. If they sink into a civil war, people will still not want the US to invade them. Syria, Iran, Libya and North Korea all seriously fear a US invasion. I can't imagine any other feeling I would rather have these countrys feel for us than absolute terror.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Yes, but how much of that commerce wouldn't occur in another setting over the rest of the year? Is all of the commerce at Christmas contrived for the holiday or would people buy gifts or acquire the possessions in other settings? Or some proportion of them?

This excepts Christmas specific items, which are probably substantial but certainly not the bulk of what you citing.

Much of the commerce of Christmas is contrived for the holidays. Many gifts, particularly in the corporate sector, would never get bought but for the holiday. Useless shit like paperweights and tote bags, and stuff like gift baskets. Christmas cards, which everyone has to send to everyone else. The huge amounts of money spent on holiday parties, which probably would not otherwise get spent.

A lot of unwanted, unneeded gifts just get tossed every year. Not everyone just buys the wife some household appliances and the kids regular school clothes at Xmas.