Future of Russian Government

[BC]

How did this turn into another Iraq thread?

hehe... Yeah, it is quite outside RW sphere.. I tried a couple of times to prod in that direction but overall believe that the subject is important and on all our minds.  After all what is the quest for a RW worth without a decent world to live in. Yes there are other fora available to carry on such discussions but here we have a 'captive' audience, at least for a time 

Of course it's up to management...  as much as I hate politics if a small difference can be made or thought provoked then in limited scope it might be tolerable.

[BillyB]

But I am sure you know that UN does not have any permanent police or army and is dependent on member nations to provide such policing personal.

Mir, the UN can police it's own corrupt people by simply firing them. I know US businesses are in on the corruption too and they've been dealt with but to suggest this is the US government's fault more than the UN's is ridiculous. When you do find a report, show me the part where the UN requested the USA's help in dealing with the scandal. The UN didn't ask us to help because many of those guys were in on the scandal and didn't want to get caught.

DKMM I don't mind talking politics as long as it doesn't get heated and it's healthy when you can hear other peoples opinions that challenge your own. These kinds of debates make people really think. Good exercise for the mind. I know what I've said has surprised some here. Many always believed one thing only to find out they've been wrong for years. I'm sure most you guys never heard of Iraq attacking Jordan and made an attempt to attack Israel?  If you don't hear it from the media, it must not have happened, right? Africa is a peaceful place now because there is no news coming from there, right? I can assure you atrocities are happening there right now but the media is leaving you out of the loop. Maybe because they have other things to report or simply they don't want to report something that makes Bush look good.

Here you can find the UN resolutions that Iraq has violated. Do not read the state department's report. You will not believe them anyway. Just click on the UN resolutions to read it word for word and you can decide if the war was illegal and if Saddam violated any of them UN resolutions. Iraq has been hostile to it's neighbors, stored ballistic missiles in a soccer stadium, tortured it's people, failed to return Gulf war prisoners, failed to give unrestrictive unconditional and immediate access to UN inspectors to any facility etc, etc, etc....

http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/01fs/14906.htm

I don't expect to educate anybody here. I found it strange that I send people to a thread where I placed a link stating that WMD's were found and I acknowledge that these WMD's were old and weak but in this thread people are educating me that the WMD's are old and weak. Strange.

What I do expect after this thread has passed is many of these people who have read it and has a hard on for Bush will continue to talk to the politics with their friends and continue to beat the drum that "Bush lied to start an illegal war". Nothing I say will change their mind no matter how many facts are placed in front of their noses. These people will continue to inject in threads "Bush Lied!", "Bush started an illegal war!" and again, somebody will ask why is Iraq involved in the thread.

The war was a success, the occupation is currently not and the jury is not yet out on this chapter in history. Ask yourself a personal question if you want Iraq to be a success and the people to be happy at the risk of making Bush look good, or do you prefer Bush to continue to look bad at the expense of the Iraqi people? Is this about Iraq or Bush to you?

[BC]

Billy,

You keep repeating the 'Bush started the war' critique but forget that the world is also a democracy.  Along with UN resolutions there must be a worldly will to carry it out.

Consider the 'coalition' a poll.  What does it show? - A majority or minority?

[William3rd]

the coalition of the "billing" was a discrete minority-most of whom have long departed. . . .

[BC]

the coalition of the "billing" was a discrete minority-most of whom have long departed. . . .

Heavily invested it's difficult to make the choice to go for broke or just cut losses.

I have always admired lawyers for their ability to get to the heart of the matter.

Born again it would be a field that would interest me.

[timothe]

There is only one answer. Give the new government an ultimatum and get out.  There may be riots, a lot of killing, maybe even civil war.  There is nothing wrong with saying 'hey.. we tried' or even 'hey.. we screwed up'.

No...that's the irresponsible way to handle the situation.  The USA invaded Iraq.  The compassionate thing to do is to stay until a stable government is in place.  

The war and forward costs even if all are returned tomorrow will be in excess of 1T dollars, one tenth of the national debt.  Staying any longer will only increase this amount with no chance of any financial recovery.

First, the trillion dollar number is an exaggeration in that in includes a whole lot of military spending that would have been done even if we hadn't gone into Iraq and it includes spending for Afghanistan as well.  

Second, the money spent is a very very small consideration for the US Economy and the worldwide economy.  There was no discussion about the cost of occupation from either party before the invasion.  

Third, there has been success on the military front.  The surge worked.  There's no good reason to potentially to allow the country to potentially turn into chaos again by leaving hastily.  Either Iran or Al-Queda or both will fill the void left by our troops and then what?

Sinking another 1T (that will be saved continuing this ordeal) into reducing dependency on oil and overseas manufacturing capability is the only way. At the same time, open borders to the south for cheap factory labor.  The knowledge is available, the materials too.  Just do it.

The whole money argument smacks to me of a fallback argument because the "we support the troops who are dying" argument no longer applies.  We could eliminate our dependency on foreign oil right now simply by drilling in various places on our own continent and/or by building more nuclear power plants.  Also, there is no guarantee whatsoever that sinking a trillion dollars into alternative fuel technologies will yield any result.    

The left in this country only cares about the money spent on this war as a political weapon to hammer Bush. They really want to hang the war on Bush, more than anything else.  That's why they put through troop withdrawl legislation 43 times but did not put through one piece of legislation to halt the funding of the war.  That's also why none of front-running Democratic presidential candidates will commit to a withdrawl date once they are elected.  

Interesting side comment:  Back in August, Bush invited the Democratic candidates to the White House where he explained the current course of the war and he warned them to tone down the "get out of Iraq" rhetoric.  Bush could have easily withheld this information and let the Dems hang themselves even further.  That would have been the politically expedient thing to do.  

But Bush is more concerned about the outcome of the war than he is about scoring political points.  So he told Hillary and Barack and John the truth about the surge before it ever became public that the surge was working.  It was a clasy and intelligent move for a guy who most accuse of being neither classy nor intelligent.  

The true 'might' lies in economics and not million dollar missiles that will either not be used or wasted turning sand into glass pebbles.  I believe RU is following this model.  China of course economically, has won huge battles if not the war.  They possess the power to destroy the US economy tomorrow.. If they so desire.

Not without destroying their own economy in the process.  All the world's economies are entrenched in the continued success of the US economy and most importantly, the US consumer.  China's problem is that their "success" will be very short lived unless they find a way to create 25,000 jobs a day ad infinitum.  If they don't, the people will overrun their cities and eventually, the government.

Lets say tomorrow the Iraquis get their act together - what will the US have gained aside from a bit more guaranteed oil and puffed breasts? A secure world? I think not.  Getting rid of those gas guzzling SUV's would have the same effect.

One recruiting tool behind the Jihadist movement is the concept that the USA will back down from conflict after suffering casualties.  By staying the course, Jihadists will have much more difficulty convincing their ranks to blow themselves up.  Also, a free and democratic Iraq will show the people in the region, especially the women, that a free and emancipated society is most desirable.

Worried about Iran?.. Bush stated Iran should not have the 'knowledge' needed to build a nuclear weapon.. guess he forgot that any good physics student can calculate critical mass and most of the knowledge necessary is in the public domain.  It's not rocket science anymore.  N. Korea tested up a mere 1KT nuke that was probably more fluke than nuke.  Iran will have to test and such tests are detected easily.  Let the world decide what to do then and if asked blow the sh!t out of 'em.  It won't cost a dime already not spent.  Until the middle east is a nuclear free zone (including Pakistan and Israel) the problem will always be present.

Agreed...except for the part about letting the World decide what to do.  The World has demonstrated more than once that they do not have the best interests of the US in mind when deciding on policies which affect our national security.  

Tomorrow will not be as easy as today any way you look at it so might as well get going with the program.

 

This is the statement which I disagree with the most.  If you go back through recent history, life has by and large gotten significantly better for most people of the world.  The exceptions to this rule are the people that live in dictatorial societies and societies where the military controls the people.  A Democratic society in Iraq will be better for most Iraqis than the other alternatives.  A Democratic society in Iraq will be better for most other affected people in the world as well.    

[BillyB]

Billy,

You keep repeating the 'Bush started the war' critique but forget that the world is also a democracy.  Along with UN resolutions there must be a worldly will to carry it out.

Consider the 'coalition' a poll.  What does it show? - A majority or minority?

BC, I already told you that America's main Allies votes were bought and paid for by Saddam's oil at the expense of starving Iraqi's. If they sell out their vote and violate the UN resolutions they helped create, then they get no vote.

If you want to debate that this never happened, please do so but don't try and convince me their vote is valuable towards a democratic process.

[Bruno]

Deccie, why do you assume the American farmer, government and scientists are dumb and have a fixation on ethanol from corn? You have a habit of implying America isn't smart in the way things are done here whether it be what plants we use for ethanol or military equipment we should build. I can assure you the American government knows that combustable fuels can be produced from any plant as much as the Russians. If you do research, you will find ethanol is cheaper for us to make from corn. It is cheaper for us to make sugar from sugar cane and for the Russians, it's cheaper for them to make sugar from beets. Do you hear me saying "what's the matter with the Russians? They should grow sugar cane in their cold climate? A lot of factors are involved, one of such is soil conditions and the environment to grow crops. Also if you do more research, you will find American scientist trying to extract oil from algae. Once the cost of making fuel from other plants such as algae is lower than corn, then corn may take it's place in history as an ancient source of fuel your future generations may read about. Certainly, one day the cost of producing alternative fuel sources will be cheaper than fossil fuels. Those nations in the Middle East should be saving up for that rainy day or have some good friends that will continue to do business with them.

BillyB, corn or other classic plant used for make ethanol are not interesting in the long term... now, you have back 130% of energy used for grow and transform... from tree, with cellulose, we already reach a 200%... a tree, "populier", who is genetic modified for have low level of "lignine" give 3600% enegy back... but it is only in test phase, count around 10 year for be fulling working...

Like you write, research is the key... but in place of make research all together, everybody work in his own little place...

A interesting article, in dutch !!! http://www.nieuwsblad.be/Article/Detail.aspx?articleid=EH1L24FI

For info, until today, not yet a motor is ready for use 100% ethanol... it is always a mix of petrol and ethanol... more research is needed and actual high price of the petrol is a motivation for these research...

About US, if people complain about price of petrol, why they use car who need more fuel by 100 km that a russian tank ! My little car use only 3 liter diesel for 100 km and it is not the more economic motor who exist ! Here, i see people who use heavy 4x4 jeep in city ! Gouverment and scientist seek solution but citizen is not yet ready, petrole need to be a lot more expensive for lead people to change...

[Mir]

Billy

I am sure that UK did take action against the corrupt officials.

You have mentioned UN resolutions, I have scanned through the link and have counted 17 UN resolutions that were violated by Iraq.
At the time when US decided to launch the invasion there were many other countries also in violation of UN resolutions. Here is a link with the list:

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=2417

So we can see that Israel was in violation of 30 UN resolutions, was the US asking for enforcing those resolutions by force as well? No sir, to date Israel has been given more then 84 billion dollars in US foreign aid.(financed by US taxpayer like the war in Iraq)..
Rather strange that some violators are bombed while others receive billions of dollars in aid, It looks as the US believes in compliance by using the tried and tested method of carrot and stick, the only problem is that some countries only get the carrot and some just get the stick! No doubt the world is such a messed up place

[DKMM]

Screw your UN worldly will. Its America that gets things done for better for worse.  Like it or not its going to remain that way for some time because we have the military.  Puting playing with turboprop bombers and ICBM's isn't going to change anything.  We move the world in matters of military diplomacy too.  See N Korea and Libya for recent examples.

Now you see why i stay off these types of threads...

[deccie]

Screw your UN worldly will. Its America that gets things done for better for worse.  Like it or not its going to remain that way for some time because we have the military.  Puting playing with turboprop bombers and ICBM's isn't going to change anything.  We move the world in matters of military diplomacy too.  See N Korea and Libya for recent examples.

Now you see why i stay off these types of threads...

Really?
So what has the US in all it's glory done in places like East Timor, Solomon Islands, Fiji, Papua New Guinea??

The US may get things done in places the USA has a strategic interest in, but what about the rest of the world? I'm NOT saying the USA should do everything either but please don't deny your self interest in these matters.

[Mir]

Screw your UN worldly will. Its America that gets things done for better for worse.  Like it or not its going to remain that way for some time because we have the military.

Exactly
And all we are discussing is where it has been done for worse. Only some think that what America does is always for the better.

[DKMM]

It doesn't matter what non Americans think regarding whether we are doing things for worse.  We do what we do and no amount of whining will stop it.  Its a debate for Americans to choose their leaders (and we suck at doing that apparently) but for non Americans they can sit and watch and that's the extent of it for the most part.  Not counting some EU getting involved in their former colonies in Africa (that's their problem).

Of course our self interest comes first.  when you are the one with the guns, you get to do that.  Ask Boris, he knows...

[BC]

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=2417

So we can see that Israel was in violation of 30 UN resolutions, was the US asking for enforcing those resolutions by force as well? No sir, to date Israel has been given more then 84 billion dollars in US foreign aid.(financed by US taxpayer like the war in Iraq)..
Rather strange that some violators are bombed while others receive billions of dollars in aid, It looks as the US believes in compliance by using the tried and tested method of carrot and stick, the only thing problem is that some countries only get the carrot and some just get the stick! No doubt the world is such a messed up place

One of the most interesting:

487 (1981) Israel
Calls upon Israel to place its nuclear facilities under the safeguard of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency.

Screw your UN worldly will. Its America that gets things done for better for worse.  Like it or not its going to remain that way for some time because we have the military.  Puting playing with turboprop bombers and ICBM's isn't going to change anything.  We move the world in matters of military diplomacy too.  See N Korea and Libya for recent examples.

Now you see why i stay off these types of threads...

Yes, quite an attitude.

Suggest you check the history behind what happened in N. Korea and Libya.  Both seem to be good examples of how diplomacy can work.  There is still a lot of work to do in N. Korea though. The fact that they did test a nuke seemed to have bumped things along quite nicely.

[deccie]

It doesn't matter what non Americans think regarding whether we are doing things for worse.  We do what we do and no amount of whining will stop it.  Its a debate for Americans to choose their leaders (and we suck at doing that apparently) but for non Americans they can sit and watch and that's the extent of it for the most part.  Not counting some EU getting involved in their former colonies in Africa (that's their problem).

Of course our self interest comes first.  when you are the one with the guns, you get to do that.  Ask Boris, he knows...

And Americans wonder why the rest of the world dislikes them so much sometimes.
The Mind just boggles.

I am thankfull so many Americans I have met in person do not share the attitudes of arrogance, conceit and self serving politics to the detriment of everybody else.

At least you are being honest about the self interest DKMM. I'll pay that bit of honesty.
For one, I am certainly happy my own country has decided not to follow the US model of how things work in the world quite so closely as it looked like it was going to do. And yes, my coutry was guilty of abuse in the Oil-for-food program too. And the government that did nothing to curb that abuse is now gone from power (even if for other reasons).

Just bear in mind one thing guys. Every other civilisation the world has known has fallen at some point. It would be interesting indeed to see either your reaction, or that of your descendants should the USA's place in the world ever change.The dumbfounded looks on people's faces would equal that seen on the faces of those victims from the Katrina floods which quite obviously spoke "This CAN'T happen in AMERICA!"

[BillyB]

Billy

I am sure that UK did take action against the corrupt officials.

You have mentioned UN resolutions, I have scanned through the link and have counted 17 UN resolutions that were violated by Iraq.
At the time when US decided to launch the invasion there were many other countries also in violation of UN resolutions. Here is a link with the list:

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=2417

So we can see that Israel was in violation of 30 UN resolutions, was the US asking for enforcing those resolutions by force as well? No sir, to date Israel has been given more then 84 billion dollars in US foreign aid.(financed by US taxpayer like the war in Iraq)..
Rather strange that some violators are bombed while others receive billions of dollars in aid, It looks as the US believes in compliance by using the tried and tested method of carrot and stick, the only problem is that some countries only get the carrot and some just get the stick! No doubt the world is such a messed up place

Mir, please give a link to a site that is not agenda driven. The author of the article is left wing of a extremely liberal university of  a Liberal city. That city is so liberal that the congresswoman there voted against war in Afghanistan!

The article also states "Calls upon Israel to pay compensation to Lebanon for destruction of airliners at Beirut International Airport." I don't know if Israel fulfilled that resolution but I know in modern times they have given free financial aid to Lebanon. Israel is not that bad.

Unfortunately if may seem unfair if the US decides to enforce some resolutions and not others. Turkey and Israel violated UN resolutions but they are a strategic partner to the US and Europe so enforcement isn't going to happen.

I'm sure UK took action against officials who were involved with scandals. I have high regard for the UK and it's politicians. Corrupt people can be anywhere but for the most part I think there are many good people in government in the UK as there are in the US. In modern history, US and UK agenda in the World are similar. Some think it's bad, some think it good.

[timothe]

And Americans wonder why the rest of the world dislikes them so much sometimes.
The Mind just boggles.

This is a false statement, as I have pointed out previously.  There are less than 10 nations that hate America.  I can count five.  (Iran, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba)

There may be individuals in various European countries or even America itself that hates America, but they don't count in the overall equation because they don't make policy decisions. 

There also may be individuals that generally hate Americans, but these people can only be classified as racists.  We all know that people are unique and special and should not be stereotyped by race, gender, or ethnicity, right?

[deccie]

This is a false statement, as I have pointed out previously.  There are less than 10 nations that hate America.  I can count five.  (Iran, Syria, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba)

There may be individuals in various European countries or even America itself that hates America, but they don't count in the overall equation because they don't make policy decisions. 

There also may be individuals that generally hate Americans, but these people can only be classified as racists.  We all know that people are unique and special and should not be stereotyped by race, gender, or ethnicity, right?

I said dislike, not hate. Not the same thing at all. The term racist does not apply either, even when applied to a "hate" situation since there is no such race as "American". 

[SANDRO43]

deccie, this is the last time in this thread I'm going to debate you. You have Sandro, Mir, deccie and company, I've read all the anti Bush sites years ago that tried to downplay the fact WMDs that were found. Your arguments are weak compared to what they dug up.

They who, the anti-Bush sites or your R Senators ???

Yes the weapons are old, yes they are less potent but by definition, they are WMDs that were known to exist and should have been turned over to the UN whether they were simply in storage hidden, buried in the ground in attempt to be discarded, or hidden in Syria.

That presupposes a strictly accurate Iraqi record-keeping that I'm rather dubious about. 500 shells sounds like a couple of day's worth supply for the Iran-Iraq conflict, and their existence may just have been forgotten. Occasionally, Italian & Austrian ammo dumps from WWI are still found in our Alpine areas, close to where the frontlines used to be. IMO, you're making a mountain out of a molehill because it suits your argument.

There are many WMDs unaccounted for. Based on the markings on the shell cases, they are Iraq's WMDs and they are against UN resolutions.

If they're unaccounted for (missing), how could you read the markings on those shell cases, or are you again referring to the 500 out of a supposed 30,000 ?

[timothe]

I said dislike, not hate. Not the same thing at all. The term racist does not apply either, even when applied to a "hate" situation since there is no such race as "American". 

People can "hate" by ethnicity as they have for thousands of years.  If an individual would say "I dislike all Americans", that individual would be as prejudiced as someone that said "I dislike all Italians".  Would it not?

[Mir]

Mir, please give a link to a site that is not agenda driven.

Violation of UN resolutions remain the same, regardless if they are mentioned in a article written by a left winger or right winger.
It is very easy to brush off all argument by saying it is agenda driven. Both parties in an argument can do this so there is no progress.

Israel is not that bad.

Very true. But then who is all bad? Even the jihandies and taliban are known to give sweets to orphans and Stalin/Saddam had many photos showing affection towards children.
It is important not to label a person/nation as bad but to comment on individual acts by them.

Unfortunately if may seem unfair if the US decides to enforce some resolutions and not others. Turkey and Israel violated UN resolutions but they are a strategic partner to the US and Europe so enforcement isn't going to happen.

So if you can climb into Amercia's lap you can get away with murder?
US is the most powerful nation in the world, due to this it also has the most responsibility for its actions as the harm caused by its mistakes is/can be much greater c/w most other countries.

[deccie]

People can "hate" by ethnicity as they have for thousands of years.  If an individual would say "I dislike all Americans", that individual would be as prejudiced as someone that said "I dislike all Italians".  Would it not?

In which case ethnicism would be a more appropriate word than racism, would it not? Of course the statements above would have a very high degree of likelyhood as being prejudiced.

None of which has anything to do with the fact that is not what I said at all and if I recall correctly, was there not an entire thread in this forum devoted to the dislike of certain members here for one particular ethnic group - i.e. the French?

It may well be more grammatically correct (and more factual) to state "I have disliked every American I have ever met"  and the individual concerned may well have valid  reason to do so.

[timothe]

US is the most powerful nation in the world, due to this it also has the most responsibility for its actions as the harm caused by its mistakes is/can be much greater c/w most other countries.

I suppose that's true, but if you look over the entire body of work of the US military, you will be forced to admit that the US has been the most benevolent superpower in the history of the world.  The US military has done much more good than bad and the US policy towards the world has generally been to act with conscience and peaceful intentions.  (The invasion of Iraq notwithstanding.)  

[deccie]

I suppose that's true, but if you look over the entire body of work of the US military, you will be forced to admit that the US has been the most benevolent superpower in the history of the world.  The US military has done much more good than bad and the US policy towards the world has generally been to act with conscience and peaceful intentions.  (The invasion of Iraq notwithstanding.) 

Well you haven't destroyed the world yet, so that's defintely a good thing.
Just do us favor and keep Billy away from the Nukes huh?

Give him a replica of Fat Man or Little Boy to play with.  It will keep him amused for hours I swear.
"Look what I dug up Mommy!"

[timothe]

In which case ethnicism would be a more appropriate word than racism, would it not? Of course the statements above would have a very high degree of likelyhood as being prejudiced.

None of which has anything to do with the fact that is not what I said at all and if I recall correctly, was there not an entire thread in this forum devoted to the dislike of certain members here for one particular ethnic group - i.e. the French?

It may well be more grammatically correct (and more factual) to state "I have disliked every American I have ever met"  and the individual concerned may well have valid  reason to do so.

Deccie, you made a general statement that the world dislikes Americans.  I corrected you factually and multiple times because your statement implies a perception problem on your behalf.

1.  The "world" doesn't dislike Americans. 
2.  Those individuals that dislike Americans are prejudiced because people are unique and special and should not be stereotyped.
3.  The "world" doesn't dislike America either except for five specific countries run by dictators and one faction of a particular religious group.

And Americans wonder why the rest of the world dislikes them so much sometimes.  The Mind just boggles.

My first reply to this statement was "That statement is completely false."  I stand by that statement.