Patton got flamed for NOT doing it. Damned if you do and damned if you dont.

Baathists were only in power because of murder, rape, torture and the threat of such. Why would anyone let even one of these pieces of scum stay in any position of importance?

I guess that’s it then, I hate fried chicken so I am not voting for Obama.

Patton didnt and guess what his area of control was in the best shape in terms of things running and working than all the others.

Yes the political leaders but there were many who were baathists that were in positions of immense power who could care less about politics.  The baathist political leaders and other activists who proported crimes such as you talked about should be removed.

So one sector of Germany worked that way while it worked for 4 different countries. yes, minority rule!



Sorry, tell me again the last time you were in the Middle East?

I dont need to be somewhere to  know history, All I need to know how to do is read.

But what perspective are you reading? If you read from a Western perspective you will come off with a completely different picture than if you read the same things from an Arab perspective.

My point exactly, thanks Ted. I lived in those countries before there was a gulf war. I got to know the people. In school my dorm mate was from Iran and we spent four years teaching each other our cultures and languages. I got to get inside the mind and thought process of those people for a bit of time.

Reading is good comprehending what you read is better. Being able to take what you read and put it in context of the situation is best.

If you are able to read and you say you know your history try this example on for size. I used this when I was teaching a class to help them understand what they faced over seas. I will up date it a little.

Your president is weak, he will die very soon. My friend tells me. Why do you say that? I ask not understanding. Your president won the election and did not kill the losers. It is a sign of weakness. In my country political opponents are not killed. How does he stay in power? The man asked in true shock. In Syria if you someone said the same things about my president as they said about yours his family would be killed. We don’t do that, we have freedom of speech we are allowed to say almost anything we want about our leader even if it is not true. My friend looked at me as if I had three heads. None of this made since to my friend. In his world you are the leader of the nation because you have power and the strength to use that power. If you let others talk about you in an unflattering light that person and their family must be made an example of or others might have the same idea and voice it.

In Iraq Saddam held his last election and after criticism that he got 100% of the vote in the previous election he ordered people to vote against him. To ensure that he had an opposition and people were free to vote for anyone they wanted. Here was the catch. You had to put your name and address on the ballot. If your name was not on the list of approved dissenters you and your family died. Surprisingly he won with 99% of the vote. See it was a free and fair election.

In Europe they were shocked when President Clinton was impeached for telling a lie. In that part of the world it is expected for politicians to lie to the people. They have learned to tell the difference and mostly ignore what the politician says.

It all has to do with your point of view and your culture. Our culture says we must do things the proper way. In another country and culture the proper way is not how we do it. Because their way does not work for us and our way does not work for them.

Paladin:


Great example here! I use to points when I'm trying to explain this concept to Americans. First, most Americans don't realize the miracle that occurs here every 4-8 years. They understand the miracle of free elections which help choose the next leader of the US. However what they don't seem to understand is the miracle that occurs in November.

I've been asked by people in other countries, "I understand why the next president takes power, but why does the previous president give up power so easily?"

The fact is, it takes a Constitution like ours to create this miracle. It also takes a culture like ours, raising future presidents, expecting certain things from them. To us a president who refuses to give up the White House, and mobilizes a military to defend his position would be a criminal and a coward... in most countries, it would be expected.

The other example I use is the aftermath of Desert Storm. Westerners saw the Coalition humanely ending the carnage and offering a ceasefire agreement. Arab and Persian cultures saw cowards who would rather offer a peace plan than finish the job we started.

In the end, the Coalition left, Hussein was the one left standing. This empowered him. Then, Americans saw Prs. Bush Sr. voted out of office. Arabs and Persians saw Hussein out last him. This empowered Hussein even more. Westerners applauded as the UN agreed to allow Hussein to sell oil for humanitarian supplies and food. Arab and Persions saw the UN surrender to Hussein's demands. Later down the road, even though the UN knew Hussein was using the money for palaces and rebuilding his military, the UN agreed to further relax the sanctions... again, in the eyes of Arab and Persian cultures, the mighty UN was no match for Hussein's courage and stamina.

Just think how it looked to Arab and Persian nations when John McCain, a US Senator was rejected as a speaker at Columbia University, but Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was not only welcomed, but invited... even at the protest of Americans. In other words, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was respected over a US Senator by one of our most revered educational institutions.

When we feel pride in our freedom of expression, all they see is that we respect their leaders more than we respect our own... We respect Arab and Persian culture more than we respect our own.

Not always true my friend. I interviewed a history student at Todi University in Japan. He was shocked to hear from me that there was a war with the United States and they lost. Only post grad history majors get this information. The rest of the country is kept ignorant. Think about the two bombs dropped on their country and how that is kept out of sight except on the anniversary and then it is quickly put away. The Japanese people know about it but few remember who did it and why.

I read from mid-east perspectives as well along with others.  I know that in Saudi Arabia they are still taught the the US is evil, and I do understand that these sects in Iraq have been fighting for thousands of years.  So then why did we go there?  We failed to look at history as we usually do.  First it was that he had WMD's which we all found out wasnt true and we know that Bush was going in there  for sure as early as mid 2002.  Then once we were there(and of course after what we did could not just leave) Bush said well we have to build up this nation(funny he was the one who ripped Gore about nation building in the 2000 election, now he is all for it can you say flip flop).  Do you really think that once we get done they will all just be happy together?  I would say most likely no.  So at that point what was this whole war for?  We will have won very little and lost so much, most noteably the brave men and women who serve this nation.  What will Bush have lost, did his daughters serve?  Nieces or nephews?  Friends? But yet (at this point anyway) over 4000 families will never see loved ones again.  And people like my sister will have to live with war wounds for the rest of their lives.  All for so little because we couldnt read their history.

Mooseplow:

If you actually think that this was the only reason Prs. Bush gave in 2002 then you are not only NOT reading from a Middle Eastern perspective, you aren't reading at all. You are simply regurgitating the BS you gladly swallowed by the incompetent press.

Ok, so it's been several weeks since this proposal by Obama.  Has anyone heard him questioned about it?  Has anyone asked for clarificiation?

 

The answer is no. not even a whisper because to challenge him is racist.

This is what I was told by my president as to what was our main reason.  Of course he also told us that there was a link to al queda, and I know they went after his daddy in kuwait years before, and then their the oil, and the fact that he had to finish daddy's war.  Bottom line is that it wasnt the press putting the words about WMD's in Bush's mouth or Cheaney's or Powell's or Rumsfeld's.  I saw them actually say those words on TV.  Now if your saying thats not true then I would say you are a conspirisy  theorist, but I dont think you are.  So can we admit that WMD's were Bush's main reason?

 

P.S. Ted thanks for keeping the discussion professional, I enjoy those types of discussions rather than the name calling type. 

That is just ridiculous. Sounds like something to hide behind. Maybe it proves that people aren't as worried about this situation. I'd wager that the idea of forming such a force is a low priority of issues troubling this nation, and the people recognize it as such.

Yes I heard him talk about it, but I think you are saying it wrong, I think what Obama is proposing is " Civilian assistance corps"  He wants 25,000 volunteers, that have expertise like doc's, engineers, former military, emergency officials, etc.  That sort of thing in case of times of national disasters, like Katrina, or fires like in cal. they could be deployed to get assistance quickly to areas that need help.  Sounds like a good idea....Equip them well and its like a civilian rapid response group just like the Army has.

 

I would agree Kurtin I think Obama's main focus is on getting the economy going and health care, and Iraq.  Those are bigger fish to fry, but this civilian assistance corps sounds like a good idea.

I agree Kurtin I think the economy, health care, and getting out of Iraq are bigger, but its a nice idea.

sorry for the double post:)...computer was acting funny.

Mooseplow:

Not it doesn't. What he's talking about is a federal para-military organization. It is unconstitutional and against federal Posse Comitatus laws. The president of the united states is not granted the authority to raise his own defense force. This is just another example of the contempt Obama has for the US Constitution. For that matter, your support for it shows your contempt also.

There are already plenty of emergency and disaster response organizations in the US. They work very well when they are utilized. The problems with Hurricane Katrina had nothing to do with ability or readiness of disaster relief organizations. They had everything to do with those idiots Gov. Blanco and Mayor Nagin's failures to act.

Once again, you're comments prove that you would rather be spoon fed by the incompetent press than learn a few things for yourself.

NP, double posts happen.

And your information comes from where?  Unless you are able to be in all these places yourself you are getting info from tv, internet, newspapers, etc.

If you guys also want to continue talking about the left leaning media, I have a good book fo ryou to read written bya big republican.  Its called "The Rebuplican Noisemaker."  Check it out.  These are words and ideas written by a insider republican.

I'm sure Mooseplow has been to the Obama website and read the collective plans himself. Just because someone supports a cause for the democratic party doesn't mean they were taught such a way by the media. Perhaps you should go to the sites of both candidates as an informed American and understand what the two camps are both saying at any given time from their own perspectives.