Why don't we hear more voices such as his from the Left!?
yes
why, then are we letting Afghanistan languish and slip back into its fractured state . . . ?
Why did we embark on a foolhardy endevour that so many people saw right through and that was gauranteed to take our resources away from rebuilding and securing Afghanistan?
When the price of failing to do so would be the spawning of even more taliban adherents and the sure as rain alienation from the rest of the muslim world . . .who are, even now, holding up their arms and saying: "look, you invaded this country supposedly to liberate them and eradicate the Taliban but it really looks like you merely wanted to establich a toehold and let the people continue to suffer"
good quotes from that article:
Quote:
The President [Bush} talks of a Marshall Plan for Afghanistan at the Virginia Military Institute in April, 2002, and then he fails to include any dollars for Afghanistan in his 2004 budget proposal; the President gives a landmark speech at the American Enterprise Institute in February, 2003, proposing a democratic Iraq as a model for the transformation of the entire Middle East, and within two months the Pentagon?s minimalist planning for postwar Iraq has that country in chaos, its state institutions gutted, its people demoralized; the State Department sets out to improve public diplomacy in the Islamic world, then puts the campaign in the hands of Charlotte Beers, a Madison Avenue executive, who produces a slick video about Muslims in the United States that is widely ridiculed; the Administration vows to get tough on Saudi sources that finance terrorism and the spread of extremist ideology, then suppresses the section of a congressional report on September 11th having to do with Saudi Arabia; after the Iraq war the President vows to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, only to stand aside a few months later.
Quote:
The President speaks idealistically of spreading democracy around the world. [ . . . ] Since Bush took office, favorable views of America have plunged globally?especially in the Muslim world.
Quote:
n Turkey, our secular Muslim nato ally, favorable opinion of the United States fell from fifty-two per cent three years ago to fifteen per cent last spring.
That's a decent article
. . . did you read the whole thing? . . . its surprisingly liberal of mind for you to post favorably . . .
Good article. Balanced, giving both Parties a good smack.
Points of interest:
Since Vietnam, the Dems have had no foreign policy (other than defaulting to the UN).
The neocon thinkers wrongfully see militant Islamists as an extenstion of Cold War era totalitarianism.(1)
For the love of... will somebody please fire Rummy:
Quote:
?Peacekeeping? is a dirty word at the Rumsfeld Pentagon: its peacekeeping division was renamed the Office of Stability Operations, and its importance was downgraded, even after war created the need for such an operation in Afghanistan and then again, on an even larger scale, in Iraq.
Nice:
Quote:
As Lakhdar Brahimi, th former United Nations envoy to Afghanistan recently told the Times, ?There is now a very well-meaning and welcome Western interest in supporting democracy everywhere, but they want to do it like instant coffee.?
Quote:
Success can come only over a period of years, mainly by finding local groups and helping them do what they already want to do.
BTW, the quotes above are not from Biden, but the article's author George Packer.
(1) They aren't. There's no nation, no army. They're cultist. There's more of Jim Jones than Joe Stalin to Bin Laden's ideology.
why, then are we letting Afghanistan languish and slip back into its fractured state . . . ?
Why did we embark on a foolhardy endevour that so many people saw right through and that was gauranteed to take our resources away from rebuilding and securing Afghanistan?
What are you hoping to achieve in Afghanistan? 95% of the population doesn't even have a grade 2 education. I think we've done all we could have done with Afghanistan. We deposed the Islamocists there, but the place is lost cause in term of development money. Better to save the funds for future military contingency in the area. Look at the waste of funds sunk into Russia. Same applies here, but even more so.
Anyway. It is a long article. And if the author(s) found it in their heart to say some charitable words regards to left (after all, tiz a lefty magazine if I'm not mistaken) however erroneous, it should not detract from the main thrust of the article: In treating the war on terrorism as a mere military struggle, the Administration?s mistake begins with the name itself. ?Terrorism? is a method; the terror used by the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka is not the enemy in this war. The enemy is an ideology?in the German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer?s phrase, ?Islamist totalitarianism??that reaches from Karachi to London, from Riyadh to Brooklyn, and that uses terror to advance its ends.
Quote:
Originally posted by pfflam
When the price of failing to do so would be the spawning of even more taliban adherents and the sure as rain alienation from the rest of the muslim world . . .who are, even now, holding up their arms and saying: "look, you invaded this country supposedly to liberate them and eradicate the Taliban but it really looks like you merely wanted to establich a toehold and let the people continue to suffer"
I don't give a shit about alienating the Islamic word. Like I don't give a shit about alienating the communist world. And neither should you. When are going to understand that it's a zero sum game?! This has proven itself true during the Iraq war when Turkey refused the Americans the Northern flank to attack Iraq and allowed Iraq's WoMD to slip into Syria. In fact, my suspicion is that all our Islamic "allies" are all playing a double game, the most obvious being Pakistan, Saudia, Egypt and Jordan. The enemy is Islam. I know your liberal sensebilities would be offended by me saying so. So let me rephrase it. The war is on the followers of a certain 7th century Arab pedophile and the fascist totalitarian ideology they hold sacred. How's that?
In fact, my suspicion is that all our Islamic "allies" are all playing a double game, the most obvious being Pakistan, Saudia, Egypt and Jordan. The enemy is Islam. I know your liberal sensebilities would be offended by me saying so. So let me rephrase it. The war is on the followers of a certain 7th century Arab pedophile and the fascist totalitarian ideology they hold sacred. How's that?
PC^KILLA
Hoo boy, How to be a Dick 101. It's the very belief that the West is against Islam is what is driving these middle class twenty-somethings into the terrorist camps. Your hhhhhhorrible attitude smacks of that dim stick Coulter: invade them all and convert them to Christianity.
The fight is against poverty and a history completely lacking any democratic impulse. Most religions have been used to push a totalitarian state, bub. Crack open a textbook. Read. Think!
All in all. this article reflects what I thought in the weeks after 9/11. We're not combating a nation or political movement but a mindset. However, we can't expect, by whatever means, a Western democracy to sprout up over there.
I have a strong dislike of the Totalitarian ideology of Islamicists and I understand that they are real and a real and constant threat to be battled
So?!
What does tht have to do with our bad handling of post-war Afghanistan?
What does that have to do with the truth spelled out in that article which states that Bush's policy of Foriegn Affairs through military rather than through military as a political weapon?
Just because the Islamicists are knuckling down doesn't mean that we should give the general Muslim population more reason to see our bungling actions as some kind of proof in favor of the Islamicist world-view.
Hoo boy, How to be a Dick 101. It's the very belief that the West is against Islam is what is driving these middle class twenty-somethings into the terrorist camps. Your hhhhhhorrible attitude smacks of that dim stick Coulter: invade them all and convert them to Christianity.
The fight is against poverty and a history completely lacking any democratic impulse. Most religions have been used to push a totalitarian state, bub. Crack open a textbook. Read. Think!
All in all. this article reflects what I thought in the weeks after 9/11. We're not combating a nation or political movement but a mindset. However, we can't expect, by whatever means, a Western democracy to sprout up over there.
Screed
Sorry. But you're wrong.
Islam is an imperialist totalitarian movement bent on world domination. Always has been, and always will be. If you can't see that, you've got your head buried in the sand.
I have a strong dislike of the Totalitarian ideology of Islamicists and I understand that they are real and a real and constant threat to be battled
So?!
What does tht have to do with our bad handling of post-war Afghanistan?
What does that have to do with the truth spelled out in that article which states that Bush's policy of Foriegn Affairs through military rather than through military as a political weapon?
Just because the Islamicists are knuckling down doesn't mean that we should give the general Muslim population more reason to see our bungling actions as some kind of proof in favor of the Islamicist world-view.
The policy should be: Leave them invest in their own future. But let them clearly understand what such an investment in Islamicism will mean. I'm sure the rest will follow.
Islam is an imperialist totalitarian movement bent on world domination. Always has been, and always will be. If you can't see that, you've got your head buried in the sand.
That's funny! Let's play with that:
Quote:
Originally posted by 11th century Muslim
Sorry. But you're wrong.
Chrisitianity is an imperialist totalitarian movement bent on world domination. Always has been, and always will be. If you can't see that, you've got your head buried in the sand.
Quote:
Originally posted by Linux Geek
Sorry. But you're wrong.
Microsoft is an imperialist totalitarian movement bent on world domination. Always has been, and always will be. If you can't see that, you've got your head buried in the sand.
Quote:
Originally posted by Burger King Training Manual
Sorry. But you're wrong.
McDonalds is an imperialist totalitarian movement bent on world domination. Always has been, and always will be. If you can't see that, you've got your head buried in the sand.
I could go on for days... Look, I'm no Muslim, nor do I agree with what their beliefs do to the average Middle East citizen, but you come off as incredibly pigeonholed into your own beliefs.
The millions of Muslims out there are not "under the gun" in the style of Castro or Stalin. They. Just. Aren't.
I could go on for days... Look, I'm no Muslim, nor do I agree with what their beliefs do to the average Middle East citizen, but you come off as incredibly pigeonholed into your own beliefs.
The millions of Muslims out there are not "under the gun" in the style of Castro or Stalin. They. Just. Aren't.
Screed
Maybe so. But then I lack your distance from this issue. Still, how far can you ran away from it? There's now almost not a place in the world that's not affeted by it.
Comments
Originally posted by Blue Shift
The New Yorker
Why don't we hear more voices such as his from the Left!?
yes
why, then are we letting Afghanistan languish and slip back into its fractured state . . . ?
Why did we embark on a foolhardy endevour that so many people saw right through and that was gauranteed to take our resources away from rebuilding and securing Afghanistan?
When the price of failing to do so would be the spawning of even more taliban adherents and the sure as rain alienation from the rest of the muslim world . . .who are, even now, holding up their arms and saying: "look, you invaded this country supposedly to liberate them and eradicate the Taliban but it really looks like you merely wanted to establich a toehold and let the people continue to suffer"
good quotes from that article:
The President [Bush} talks of a Marshall Plan for Afghanistan at the Virginia Military Institute in April, 2002, and then he fails to include any dollars for Afghanistan in his 2004 budget proposal; the President gives a landmark speech at the American Enterprise Institute in February, 2003, proposing a democratic Iraq as a model for the transformation of the entire Middle East, and within two months the Pentagon?s minimalist planning for postwar Iraq has that country in chaos, its state institutions gutted, its people demoralized; the State Department sets out to improve public diplomacy in the Islamic world, then puts the campaign in the hands of Charlotte Beers, a Madison Avenue executive, who produces a slick video about Muslims in the United States that is widely ridiculed; the Administration vows to get tough on Saudi sources that finance terrorism and the spread of extremist ideology, then suppresses the section of a congressional report on September 11th having to do with Saudi Arabia; after the Iraq war the President vows to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, only to stand aside a few months later.
The President speaks idealistically of spreading democracy around the world. [ . . . ] Since Bush took office, favorable views of America have plunged globally?especially in the Muslim world.
n Turkey, our secular Muslim nato ally, favorable opinion of the United States fell from fifty-two per cent three years ago to fifteen per cent last spring.
That's a decent article
. . . did you read the whole thing? . . . its surprisingly liberal of mind for you to post favorably . . .
Points of interest:
?Peacekeeping? is a dirty word at the Rumsfeld Pentagon: its peacekeeping division was renamed the Office of Stability Operations, and its importance was downgraded, even after war created the need for such an operation in Afghanistan and then again, on an even larger scale, in Iraq.
As Lakhdar Brahimi, th former United Nations envoy to Afghanistan recently told the Times, ?There is now a very well-meaning and welcome Western interest in supporting democracy everywhere, but they want to do it like instant coffee.?
Success can come only over a period of years, mainly by finding local groups and helping them do what they already want to do.
BTW, the quotes above are not from Biden, but the article's author George Packer.
(1) They aren't. There's no nation, no army. They're cultist. There's more of Jim Jones than Joe Stalin to Bin Laden's ideology.
Screed
Originally posted by pfflam
yes
why, then are we letting Afghanistan languish and slip back into its fractured state . . . ?
Why did we embark on a foolhardy endevour that so many people saw right through and that was gauranteed to take our resources away from rebuilding and securing Afghanistan?
What are you hoping to achieve in Afghanistan? 95% of the population doesn't even have a grade 2 education. I think we've done all we could have done with Afghanistan. We deposed the Islamocists there, but the place is lost cause in term of development money. Better to save the funds for future military contingency in the area. Look at the waste of funds sunk into Russia. Same applies here, but even more so.
Anyway. It is a long article. And if the author(s) found it in their heart to say some charitable words regards to left (after all, tiz a lefty magazine if I'm not mistaken) however erroneous, it should not detract from the main thrust of the article: In treating the war on terrorism as a mere military struggle, the Administration?s mistake begins with the name itself. ?Terrorism? is a method; the terror used by the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka is not the enemy in this war. The enemy is an ideology?in the German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer?s phrase, ?Islamist totalitarianism??that reaches from Karachi to London, from Riyadh to Brooklyn, and that uses terror to advance its ends.
Originally posted by pfflam
When the price of failing to do so would be the spawning of even more taliban adherents and the sure as rain alienation from the rest of the muslim world . . .who are, even now, holding up their arms and saying: "look, you invaded this country supposedly to liberate them and eradicate the Taliban but it really looks like you merely wanted to establich a toehold and let the people continue to suffer"
I don't give a shit about alienating the Islamic word. Like I don't give a shit about alienating the communist world. And neither should you. When are going to understand that it's a zero sum game?! This has proven itself true during the Iraq war when Turkey refused the Americans the Northern flank to attack Iraq and allowed Iraq's WoMD to slip into Syria. In fact, my suspicion is that all our Islamic "allies" are all playing a double game, the most obvious being Pakistan, Saudia, Egypt and Jordan. The enemy is Islam. I know your liberal sensebilities would be offended by me saying so. So let me rephrase it. The war is on the followers of a certain 7th century Arab pedophile and the fascist totalitarian ideology they hold sacred. How's that?
PC^KILLA
Originally posted by Blue Shift
I don't give a shit about alienating the Islamic word.
Then you missed the whole point of the article
and you apparently posted with regards to it before you even read it.
and now that you signed it it all makes sense . . .
and I now know why it all sounded so familliar
Originally posted by pfflam
Then you missed the whole point of the article
and you apparently posted with regards to it before you even read it.
and now that you signed it it all makes sense . . .
and I now know why it all sounded so familliar
Obviously I gave you too much credit.
First Rule of Fight Club: never talk about Fight Club.
Originally posted by Blue Shift
In fact, my suspicion is that all our Islamic "allies" are all playing a double game, the most obvious being Pakistan, Saudia, Egypt and Jordan. The enemy is Islam. I know your liberal sensebilities would be offended by me saying so. So let me rephrase it. The war is on the followers of a certain 7th century Arab pedophile and the fascist totalitarian ideology they hold sacred. How's that?
PC^KILLA
Hoo boy, How to be a Dick 101. It's the very belief that the West is against Islam is what is driving these middle class twenty-somethings into the terrorist camps. Your hhhhhhorrible attitude smacks of that dim stick Coulter: invade them all and convert them to Christianity.
The fight is against poverty and a history completely lacking any democratic impulse. Most religions have been used to push a totalitarian state, bub. Crack open a textbook. Read. Think!
All in all. this article reflects what I thought in the weeks after 9/11. We're not combating a nation or political movement but a mindset. However, we can't expect, by whatever means, a Western democracy to sprout up over there.
Screed
So?!
What does tht have to do with our bad handling of post-war Afghanistan?
What does that have to do with the truth spelled out in that article which states that Bush's policy of Foriegn Affairs through military rather than through military as a political weapon?
Just because the Islamicists are knuckling down doesn't mean that we should give the general Muslim population more reason to see our bungling actions as some kind of proof in favor of the Islamicist world-view.
Originally posted by sCreeD
Hoo boy, How to be a Dick 101. It's the very belief that the West is against Islam is what is driving these middle class twenty-somethings into the terrorist camps. Your hhhhhhorrible attitude smacks of that dim stick Coulter: invade them all and convert them to Christianity.
The fight is against poverty and a history completely lacking any democratic impulse. Most religions have been used to push a totalitarian state, bub. Crack open a textbook. Read. Think!
All in all. this article reflects what I thought in the weeks after 9/11. We're not combating a nation or political movement but a mindset. However, we can't expect, by whatever means, a Western democracy to sprout up over there.
Screed
Sorry. But you're wrong.
Islam is an imperialist totalitarian movement bent on world domination. Always has been, and always will be. If you can't see that, you've got your head buried in the sand.
PC Killa = an Israeli, ultra right wing fascist anti-fascist who would gladly shove every muslim in the ovens himself
yep . . that's why your rhetoric sounded so familiar
Why do you come here?
Originally posted by pfflam
I have a strong dislike of the Totalitarian ideology of Islamicists and I understand that they are real and a real and constant threat to be battled
So?!
What does tht have to do with our bad handling of post-war Afghanistan?
What does that have to do with the truth spelled out in that article which states that Bush's policy of Foriegn Affairs through military rather than through military as a political weapon?
Just because the Islamicists are knuckling down doesn't mean that we should give the general Muslim population more reason to see our bungling actions as some kind of proof in favor of the Islamicist world-view.
The policy should be: Leave them invest in their own future. But let them clearly understand what such an investment in Islamicism will mean. I'm sure the rest will follow.
Originally posted by Blue Shift
Sorry. But you're wrong.
Islam is an imperialist totalitarian movement bent on world domination. Always has been, and always will be. If you can't see that, you've got your head buried in the sand.
Originally posted by 11th century Muslim
Sorry. But you're wrong.
Chrisitianity is an imperialist totalitarian movement bent on world domination. Always has been, and always will be. If you can't see that, you've got your head buried in the sand.
Originally posted by Linux Geek
Sorry. But you're wrong.
Microsoft is an imperialist totalitarian movement bent on world domination. Always has been, and always will be. If you can't see that, you've got your head buried in the sand.
Originally posted by Burger King Training Manual
Sorry. But you're wrong.
McDonalds is an imperialist totalitarian movement bent on world domination. Always has been, and always will be. If you can't see that, you've got your head buried in the sand.
I could go on for days... Look, I'm no Muslim, nor do I agree with what their beliefs do to the average Middle East citizen, but you come off as incredibly pigeonholed into your own beliefs.
The millions of Muslims out there are not "under the gun" in the style of Castro or Stalin. They. Just. Aren't.
Screed
Originally posted by pfflam
yes . . it all comes back to me now:
PC Killa = an Israeli, ultra right wing fascist anti-fascist who would gladly shove every muslim in the ovens himself
yep . . that's why your rhetoric sounded so familiar
Why do you come here?
Because it's fun. Why do you?
Screed
but not spreading the hate around . . . that seems like wallowing in bitter indegestion
I want to avoid misery and an ulcer . . .
Originally posted by sCreeD
I could go on for days... Look, I'm no Muslim, nor do I agree with what their beliefs do to the average Middle East citizen, but you come off as incredibly pigeonholed into your own beliefs.
The millions of Muslims out there are not "under the gun" in the style of Castro or Stalin. They. Just. Aren't.
Screed
Maybe so. But then I lack your distance from this issue. Still, how far can you ran away from it? There's now almost not a place in the world that's not affeted by it.
It's not fun for us to see you trolling this thread again
The staff will decide of your fate.
Until this your privileges are revoked (you where supposed to be ban forever)