1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Gains are seen against insurgency

Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by carpro, Jul 1, 2006.

  1. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,752
    Ratings:
    +1,274
    Faith:
    Baptist
  2. Daisy

    Daisy New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Ratings:
    +0
    Good news! Maybe we can finish reconstruction and get out soon.

    Do you think we're going to keep a permanent military base there? After all, we wanted to get our people out of Saudi Arabia and we gotta put them some place. Some place near Iran, maybe?
     
  3. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,752
    Ratings:
    +1,274
    Faith:
    Baptist
    If it can be done with the approval of the Iraqi government, I do believe that a permanent base in Iraq would be in the our best interest.
     
  4. The Galatian

    The Galatian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Ratings:
    +0
    Do as we say, not as we do.

    BTW, in another "improvement" Shiite gangs entered a neighborhood, and sytematically killed something like 50 Sunnis. Shortly after, a car bomb killed a number of people at a Shiite mosque.

    The US is trying to convince both sides to avoid attacking those who were'nt actually involved..
     
  5. The Galatian

    The Galatian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Ratings:
    +0
    BTW, even if we killed every last member of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, we'd only be back even to the point we were before we invaded.


    The only reason Al-Qaeda was able to operate in Iraq was because we made it possible for them.
     
  6. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,752
    Ratings:
    +1,274
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It's a tough job.

    Muslims seem to be best at killing each other. It didn't just start 3 years ago.
     
  7. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Ratings:
    +1
    Never fear. US taxpayers aren't building the largest US embassy in the world in Iraq (the size of Vatican City) for nothing. :rolleyes:
     
  8. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Ratings:
    +0
    insurgency

    Every time there are new lies in the press we get a new word. Don't recall "insurgency" used by the press until this war.
     
  9. poncho

    poncho Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    19,657
    Ratings:
    +265
    Psssssssst, hey General word on the "Arab Street" is that al-Masri is in a jail cell in Egypt and has been for some time. :smilewinkgrin:
     
    #9 poncho, Jul 11, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 11, 2006
  10. The Galatian

    The Galatian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Ratings:
    +0
    Actually, it did. Shiites and Sunnis were safe on the streets in Iraq, unless they crossed Saddam. He made sure that anyone who tried to start religious conflict was quickly removed.

    Then, as was the case when Tito died in Yugoslavia, we removed Saddam, and more importantly, destroyed the government right down to the precinct level.

    And the rest is history.
     
  11. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,752
    Ratings:
    +1,274
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Quote:Carpro
    Muslims seem to be best at killing each other. It didn't just start 3 years ago.




    It's convenient how you just dismiss the 300,000 Iraqis Saddam killed while he was running things.

    BTW "Quickly removed" is a nice way to say killed. Odd how you say the killing just started 3 years ago, then in almost the next sentence say that Saddam killed or "quickly removed" those that caused trouble.

    Maybe you'd like to try life under Saddam or his kind. I'm sure it could be arranged. There are plenty of murderous muslim dictators around.
     
  12. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Ratings:
    +1
    Galatian, you seem to be forgetting about the Kurds. There was genocide in Iraq, just as there has been genocide in virtually every muslim country, including Turkey, Iran, etc. It is the way of islam, genocide, is, to include the countries falling like dominoes in Africa and other regions like Indonesia, where "infidels" are killed as the spread of islam takes root. Islam is linked shoulder to shoulder in political ideology with Nazi fascisim. This is the third jihad.
     
  13. The Galatian

    The Galatian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Ratings:
    +0
    Nope. Although the figure of 300,000 includes well over 200,000 he "killed" because they were fighting a war with Iran.

    Right. Crimes of violence back then met with summary executions, particularly those motivated by religious hatred. Not nice, but Iraqis who didn't get involved in politics didn't have to worry about being murdered in their homes.

    As you know, all that changed three years ago. Iraqis in most areas live in constant fear of being killed for being Sunni, or for being Shiite, or whatever. The only real peace is in the Kurdish areas. The fact that Saddam ruthlessly killed anyone who wanted to stir up violence was sufficient to keep violence out of the streets.

    That's the direction we're moving. Can you imagine even ten years ago, arguing whether about the legality of tapping phones without a warrent, or whether or not the government can legally torture people?

    Bush is working on it. These things take time. As Jefferson said, a nation rarely loses it's freedoms all at once. It's a gradual process.

    Sure. And Saddam was as bad as they come. The problem with you, carpro, is you feel the need to make anyone you hate, the devil incarnate. You reacted furiously when I pointed out that Saddam (for completely amoral reasons) did some things that benefited the Iraqi people. A rational look would have been a lot more sensible. And if that rationality had ruled a few years ago, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in.

    Never hate your enemies. Understand what motivates them. That way you aren't such easy prey for them.
     
  14. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,752
    Ratings:
    +1,274
    Faith:
    Baptist
    :confused: Please tell us how your post backs your other contention that the killing only started 3 years ago.

    Quote:Carpro
    Muslims seem to be best at killing each other. It didn't just start 3 years ago.

    Galation:
    Actually, it did. Shiites and Sunnis were safe on the streets in Iraq, unless they crossed Saddam. He made sure that anyone who tried to start religious conflict was quickly removed.



    You're not making sense. You just refuted your own statement.
     
    #14 carpro, Jul 12, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 12, 2006
  15. The Galatian

    The Galatian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Ratings:
    +0
    Barbarian observes:
    BTW, even if we killed every last member of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, we'd only be back even to the point we were before we invaded.

    The only reason Al-Qaeda was able to operate in Iraq was because we made it possible for them.[/quote]

    carpro responds:
    Barbarian observes:
    Actually, it did. Shiites and Sunnis were safe on the streets in Iraq, unless they crossed Saddam. He made sure that anyone who tried to start religious conflict was quickly removed.

    carpro tries a quick shuffle:
    Not bad, but too slow. :laugh: There was no religious strife in Iraq when Saddam was in charge, because he wouldn't permit it. Not because he was a nice guy, but because it would tear the country apart (as is happening now).
     
  16. Daisy

    Daisy New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2003
    Messages:
    7,751
    Ratings:
    +0
    That's ethnicity, not religion.

    Actually, it isn't. Moslems accept converts. The genocide thing is about culture and territory, not religion.

    That's ethnicity, not religion.[/quote]Some sects are, some are not. Same with Christianity.
     
  17. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,752
    Ratings:
    +1,274
    Faith:
    Baptist

    OK, if you say so.

    Tens of thousands of Shiites were killed by Saddam and his Sunni henchmen.

    Must have been some other reason than religion.:rolleyes:

    This is pretty amazing. I didn't know we had so many Saddam apologists on board.

    Oh well, maybe Bush haters have to also be Saddam apologists in order to make it work.
     
    #17 carpro, Jul 13, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 13, 2006
  18. The Galatian

    The Galatian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Ratings:
    +0
    Originally Posted by The Galatian
    There was no religious strife in Iraq when Saddam was in charge


    Not to mention his Shiite and Christian henchmen. And many Sunnis and Christians and Shiites were killed. Maybe not tens of thousands, but a lot. Not for religious reasons, which meant nothing to Saddam.

    Yep. Saddam was a secular Baathist, and didn't give a darn about religion, except as it might help him personally. That's why he made a Christian one of his top henchmen, and recruited Shiites amd Christians into the party.

    Youi didn't know this, um?

    You get kinda nasty when you're embarassed, don't you? What part of "And Saddam was as bad as they come." don't you understand?

    Or did you just lose your temper and make up the nastiest accusation you could think of? It might feel good at the time, but there are consequences for that sort of thing.

    If you can't be nice, be careful.

    Let me explain it one more time:

    The problem with you, carpro, is you feel the need to make anyone you hate, the devil incarnate. You reacted furiously when I pointed out that Saddam (for completely amoral reasons) did some things that benefited the Iraqi people. A rational look would have been a lot more sensible. And if that rationality had ruled a few years ago, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in.

    Never hate your enemies. Understand what motivates them. That way you aren't such easy prey for them.
     
    #18 The Galatian, Jul 13, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 13, 2006
  19. carpro

    carpro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    21,752
    Ratings:
    +1,274
    Faith:
    Baptist
    :laugh:
    Thanks for the sermon, Galation, but I've got my own pastor.

    Why do you feel the need to say I lost my temper or "reacted furiously" to your patently absurd statement that the muslims killing each other in Iraq did not begin until we entered the picture?

    Is that supposed to somehow lend legitimacy to your absurdity? :smilewinkgrin: Incredulity is a more apt description than any other adjective having to do with anger.

    The way I had to look at your statement was that you were either uninformed or stupid. I don't believe you are either. So it had to be intentional. The only thing I could come up with, since you seem so sincere about doing it, was that you were a Saddam apologist. Well, maybe not.

    Maybe you just jumped to the conclusion that I was talking strictly about religious motivation. I don't see how anyone could ever challenge the statement that muslims did not just begin to kill each other 3 years. I didn't mention the reasons for the killing. They may have been primarily religious or political or tribal, but they were killing each other by the thousands and have been for years.

    BTW Saddam is very much a Sunni muslim as well as a Baathist politically, and personally ordered the killing of many thousands of Shiites. You can nitpick about his reasons if you wish, but the fact is he is a muslim and was ordering the killing of other muslims.
     
  20. The Galatian

    The Galatian New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Ratings:
    +0
    The condition of your soul is your business. I'm just pointing out that you'd be a lot smarter to realistically assess people instead of demonizing anyone you don't like.

    Let's take a look... I said...

    The only reason Al-Qaeda was able to operate in Iraq was because we made it possible for them.[/quote]

    carpro responds:

    Quote:
    Muslims seem to be best at killing each other. It didn't just start 3 years ago.

    Barbarian observes:
    Actually, it did. Shiites and Sunnis were safe on the streets in Iraq, unless they crossed Saddam. He made sure that anyone who tried to start religious conflict was quickly removed.


    No wonder I thought you were angry. Also, claiming that I was an "apologist" for him, when I told you that he was as bad as they come, that was a big tip-off. You obviously lost your temper, and decided to get personal. Always a big mistake.

    It's easy to show, if it's true. Just go back and show that religious strife was common in Iraq prior to the invasion.

    Since I don't think you're stupid, I'm finding it kinda hard to see how you could have interpreted "And Saddam was as bad as they come." as being an apologist for him. It's possible you think "apologist" means "critic", or more likely, you just popped your cork and typed without thinking clearly.

    Since I specifically mentioned that I was talking about religious strife, yeah, I thought you were addressing what I actually said. You think I'd remember by now.

    Yeah, probably why Sunni Muslim Osama bin Laden said he should be killed as an apostate. :laugh:

    Baathists are officially secular. He had no religiious faith at all, any more than Hitler did. They both claimed to be religious, but neither followed the precepts of his claimed faith.

    And Sunnis, and Christians. In fact, Saddam killed far more Sunnis than Shiites (most Kurds are Sunnis, and he conducted several massacres of Kurds), Is that a surprise for you, too? Seems to be completely incompatible with your claim that it was done for religious reasons, when you match it with your claim that Saddam was a Sunni Muslim.

    So we're back to the original point; there wasn't any religious strife in Iraq until Saddam was overthrown. Regardless of whether or not it's nitpicking, it's the truth.
     
    #20 The Galatian, Jul 13, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 13, 2006
Loading...