Comments on: Iraqi PM Appeals For Reconciliation

But Bloodshed Surges, Raising Bagdad's Death Toll To 180 In 4 Days

[ya_mahdi]

You see, I too agree that war in Iraq was necessary to remove Saddam. And I too saw the jubilant scenes as his statue fell. But Ronnie it is about honesty, US were going to attack Iraq anyway, regardless of WMD. You see, honesty is a trait I value, this war was illegal whether or not the outcome was a good one or not. I would just like to see the US actually be less isolated in its stance. Why can it not fulfill its obligations in the International community, and only go ahead once it has consent.

Really my qualms are what happened after the attack, places like Abu Ghuraib, monopolization of oil, funding the campaign of a Jew (Nouri Al Maliki) who is now PM, that is not really appropriate, as was the case with Hamid Karzai who was an ex-exec at Halliburton. It isnt really good conduct. Its issues such as sending weapons to Israel, when there is an abundance of weapons already, and then helping the reconstruction of Lebanon by sending $100000 of wheat that leaves a bad taste. You see Ronnie, it is about the way in which you conduct yourself, it plays a big part. In my opinion the US leaves much to be desired in terms of conduct. If it were to conduct itself better in terms of respecing its obligations to the international community, and avoid some of the injustices I lised previously, I would be more of a fan.

[ronniehm]

Well, that was certainly the most chaotic and incoherent post you've ever made. Focus, goat, focus.

[grazinggoat]

There will be no peace with this Bush administration, as long as the main hawkish ring surround him have not conquered a peace of land, any land just to save the reputation, that ought to be well remembered by people through history. Remember what Roanld Reagan did back in Manuel Noriega's Panama? Reagan said it would only be to get this country rid of a drug dealer, then we'll go. Did they? No, troops are still there. Cuba the same thing, ashamedly opening a despicable detention center. Seriously America pretending to defend the free world from exactions of retarded talibans. What do they do? same thing to the captured people from battle field, and worse.
Please read next...

[grazinggoat]

Peace could be achieved only if peoples of different nations are given the minimum required to assure a uniform biological need (non-starvation). Social minimum of respect and dignity at the idividual level. This is denied to the Palestinian People. A tragedy that lasted for more than 50 yrs now.

Look at what Dana Olmert the daughter of (TurtleFace) father, said upon the killing of that palestinian family decimated by an Israeli bombshell while picnicking on a Gaza Beach last june... MURDERER. That's quite an accusation, coming from the PM daughter to Dan Halutz, chief of IDF...
Israel needs to give back a minimum livable space for this oppressed community and let Amercia stay out of influencing the Israelis, the latter stopping to do the dirty the Job, USA don't want to do. Israel and it's neighbors can manage to live a nice relationship.

[ronniehm]

Peace is certainly a good goal, and I sure wish we had a historical example of a peaceful resolution to a problem like Saddam, but I just can't think of any good alternatives for what we did in 2003. Anyway, the debate has deteriorated over the years. It's just turned into politics now. People who strongly hated Bush before he even showed up for his first day still hate Bush. And for six years, they've picked him apart the same way people pick apart ancient texts -- with a nasty hateful agenda. They claim they know what Bush is thinking. They claim they know what Bush wants. They claim they know why Halliburton stock went up. If you hate Bush, it's beyond comprehension that Bush might just think there's no good substitute for Halliburton, because Bush is evil. Bush doesn't think like that. It's all about hating first and justifying it later. Cheney used to work at Halliburton. Imagine that. A vice president working at one of the most skilled companies in the world. And we still want to use them? How could we let this happen? For six years, some people have bought into it and some haven't.

[ya_mahdi]

Ronnie,

I can understand your views politically, although I am not in agreement with all of them. I very truly hate terrorism with a passion. I do not consider those who partake in it muslim, nor those who support it. As a muslim I cannot, the Koran warns of the 'chastisement' in store for those who 'slay unjustly'. And I agree that measures must be taken to counter it. It is necessary. I think terrorism brings a very bad name to us as a people. I just find it difficult to understand those that dislike muslims entirely though, to me that is racism.

You see, I am pro-peace, I dont like innocent people losing their lives period. And I'm sure you are the same. Thats why I oppose war. And I do not support war under false pretences. There have been many lives lost under this administration, and I think unjustly. I am sure you can appreciate that when I hear of innocent muslims killed it hurts me, as does the situation in Darfour. I would just like to see foreign policy change slightly so that it appears more even-handed thats all. A lot of people harbour hate towards Bush and I can see why. I just hope the next Administration, counters terrorism successfully without invading yet another country. Muslims really are people with strong family values and supporters of peace, I just hope our community works hard with you guys to crush this plague, its in our interest too, I look at foreign policy sometimes, and I see why more and more become sympathetic towards terrorism, it worries me.

[ronniehm]

No big deal, Ya Mahdi. If others were as civil as you, even in disagreement, we'd probably end up understanding each other better as well.
Salaam.

[ya_mahdi]

Look if I am mistaken then I am mistaken, If you agree with me, I have nothing further to say other than I apologize for my posts directed to you, attacking you for something you agreed with all along. Next time I shall be more observant. Although I'm sure you can understand my motives, I thought you were saying something that you were not. Sorry!

[ronniehm]

Ya mahdi, I agree with you again. All implications were added by the reader, and my point was merely to illustrate the same thing you said. No one has any business telling someone else what their religion means, because they're usually wrong. You should direct that sentiment to the guy who thinks he made a point with his quotes from the Torah. I find it peculiar that you missed that one, but it explains the false implications you added to my comment.

[ya_mahdi]

p.s when i say books have been subject to change it doesn't include the Koran according to my belief, something that I failed to clarify.

[ya_mahdi]

Ronnie,

You yourself state that you do not agree with twisting the meanings of Old Scriptures to suit an agenda. My rebuttle was based on the fact that you appeared to imply something coherently different to the true meaning in your post, given the contents of the posts before that specific one. If you didn't intend to come across that way, then I believe you, though i responded to your post's implications. Secondly, I would not attempt to argue with the meanings of the torah with a Jew, nor the gospel with a Christian, because I feel unqualified to do so.

What I did was irrational, when I cited quotes from the bible, and it wasn't an attempt to belittle the bible. It was merely to illustrate that the implications of your koranic post could be replicated using another holy book. We have as muslims, and are supposed to have as muslims tremedous respect for the 3 holy books, its just we believe although they were all the true word of God they have now been subject to change. I just find it peculiar that you would see yourself as qualified to strongly imply what you felt the meanings of ancient scripture are, without reading commentary. So I am afraid i believe the example you have used regarding Moses is baseless.

[aliyaaali]

First I too understand why it is necessary to put out an Iraqi opinion poll...the situation and support for the war is dire. Thats why it is necessary. You adamantly believe that it is what Iraqis want, and I find it difficult to believe, after the sort of media coverage they have had of Abu Ghuraib on Arab News, amongst more of what you would defend as isolated incidents. I dont really think they are huge fans.

I merely questioned the ingtegrity of of the poll, and listed a number of points as to why.I do not propose not giving Iraqis what they want. I propose giving them sovereignty over their oil, I propose an international force coming in to take over like in Lebanon, believe me you will not see protests! I for one do not trust the media, this is where many of our spats originate, you do, and having debated with you on numerous occasions I would say that is a fair assessment, you buy the spin. Have you ever considered how many people disagree with you? May I suggest thta you have a look at how many posts are addressed to you..Have you ever wondered why people vehemently oppose your views?

P.S I enjoyed your little surgery example, it was insightful, if only it were applicable, let me put it in your terms, you are conducting eye-surgery on a patient with a broken leg.

P.P.S Very wise not to get involved with converstions from 3 days ago...You didn't offer a rebutele then either!

[ronniehm]

OK, I'm not going to respond to every single point made by people who just jumped in after 3 days, but here are my thoughts on a couple.

Ya Mahdi, I completely agree with you. That's why I pointed out to someone else that there are plenty of "revealing" (not revealing) web sites about not just the Torah, but also the Koran, the Bible and Tom Cruise. Twisting the meaning of "god inspired his ANGELS" is no different than twisting the meaning of "the lord told MOSES." If he was talking to angels, then he was talking to Moses. And if someone wants to pull a few sentences out of someone else's old book to explain the world, I'm afraid I have to call bullsh*t. None of these books are manuals for killing everyone who stands in your way.

Ali said, "I believe that any intelligent individual, would not base his/her political viewpoint on the outcome of a poll that apparently indicates that most Iraqis want us there."

Well, I'm sorry you think I'm not intelligent enough to agree with you, but I guess I'm just too stupid to understand the semantics necessary to put an American opinion poll about what Iraqis want ahead of an Iraqi opinion poll on what Iraqis want. And regardless of WHY Iraqis want what they want, you propose not giving it to them. I don't find that particularly intelligent either.

[ronniehm]

Again, war is bad. I don't think Germany was all sunshine and kites during World War II either, but it was a LOT better AFTER World War II. You people who want to talk about how terrible the patient looks in the middle of surgery amuse me. You have an agenda against a guy who can't even run for reelection in 2008. You Democrats have wasted TWO YEARS complaining about George Bush, who will NEVER be president again. Talk about a lack of intelligence.

[reuben110-2009]

The politics of the US is immoral and it is immoral for good reason. Look at the lobbies, senatorial candidates are picked, jewish, and right-wing christians collect funds to endorse campaigns. It is then senatorial loyalty that thanks the people who got them into the position in the first place, by ensuing their support fits the agenda of their backers.

The same is applicable higher up the heirachy. Ironically the Jews believe in the security and illegal sustenace of Israel, whilst the right-wing Christians believe in the same, as it is where Christ is suposed to rise from......and kill the jews! But it is not Jews nor is it Christians that are to blame. In fact it is freemasonery. Secret societies are commonplace particularly in the US, an extension of the whole fraternity conception in universities. Members hail from the upper echelons of society,including politics and media. It is their vision that is implemented and it is they that are the owners of wealth. It is they that created 9/11, and it is they that needed racial intolerance to be evoked. It is they that are concerned with population control, and they that are persuing huge wealth succesfully.They want the clash of civilisations.

[ya_mahdi]

"Strike them with terror, O LORD;let the nations know they are but men.Selah." Psalms 9:20

"In the morning you will say, "If only it were evening!" and in the evening, "If only it were morning!"-because of the terror that will fill your hearts and the sights that your eyes will see."
Deuteronomy 28:66-68

I saw the Lord standing by the altar, and he said: "Strike the tops of the pillars so that the thresholds shake. Bring them down on the heads of all the people; those who are left I will kill with the sword. Not one will get away, none will escape." Amos 9:1-3

You see Ronnie, The Monotheistic Books consist of such language, For the Lord is the protector of the Good, although the good suffer, ulimately, the Wrath of the Almighty is inescapable by those ALL those who cause terror, jew, christian or muslim, in this life or the next. Its a bit silly to attempt to pass off Islam as a promoter of violence. The word Islam is derrived from the word Salaam, and the word Islam translated word for word means PEACE.

[ya_mahdi]

RonnieHM

62:6 Say: "O ye that stand on Judaism! If ye think that ye are friends to God, to the exclusion of (other) men, then express your desire for Death, if ye are truthful!"

Yes when the Jews say to you that they are the favourites of God, as they believe that they are God's chosen nation, ask them how they feel about death..it will be concluded that they do FEAR death. People generally fear murder(there is a distinction), there is nothing strange about that. Though it is common beleif among the monotheistic religion that one is closer to God in the afterlife as compared to this one. So If they are truly the friends of God to the exclusion of others, why do they fear death is the question. Surely as God's favourite peoples, they ought to look forward to life in heaven.

The second quote
[8.12] When your Lord revealed to the ANGELS: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them

"God inspired his ANGELS....." not man. Terror into their hearts, again, angels do no physically interact with man, whether or not in spirit is debatable. However the spin you were trying to put on it was a command for muslims to murder non-beleivers. Now is that really the case? This is metaphoric.

[alphaa10-2009]

AliYaaAli-- Just think of Bush as Ken Lay in the Oval Office. The "Better Off" question is typical of Bush methods-- it is all but empty of anything but emotional content, and that suits Bush just fine. It is all an issue of crowd control.

No dictator, not even the third-rate Texas politician who last year called the American Constitution a "GD*&&#! piece of paper!" can afford to deal with volatile, complex ideas-- or even complex situations. Again, the control issue. Besides, upsetting folks with complex problems and issues might actually drive ordinary citizens to think for themselves, and who knows what might happen after that?

So, Bush engineers his speeches for feeling. He leaves the heavy freight out of his speeches, not that he has any to add. Bush wants you to register him subconsciously, and on a sublimnal level. Bush creates awkward, but thoroughly warm and fuzzy tapestries of purest non sequitur-- never mind you cannot remember exactly what he said. And if you leave feeling good about that boy Bush, but don't know why, well, Mission Accomplished! You've just been had!

[aliyaaali]

I believe that any intelligent individual, would not base his/her political viewpoint on the outcome of a poll that apparently indicates that most Iraqis want us there. Journalism is dead, so many stories are misreported to fit the spin the government requires,in exchange for reporting a certain way, loyalty is bestowed back to the source in the shape of exclusives that makes the news agencies more $$$.

IF Americans were to conduct a poll with average Iraqii citizens, what sort of accuracy should you expect? Not a great deal I'd hope. Because obviously those that agree to participate in the poll are mostly going to be US-friendly. Secondly in a war-stricken country how many journalists are going to persue a well-researched poll? Thirdly what sort of options would you expect the poll to include..would they for instance include..would you object to an impartial international force taking over from the Americans?Probably not, it is slighhtly peculiar for Ronnie to conclude that 80 odd % of Iraqis are pro-US when 2000 have particiated.

Are Iraqis truly better off? their number 1 export has been monopolized by US companies, everybody knows how murderous Saddam was, but at the time he was removed were 300 dieing a day with 600 injured? were they living more in fear of death now or 3 years ago? With all the destruction how many were years have Iraqi cities been put back?

[alphaa10-2009]

RonnieHM to Alphaa10--
<b>Yeah, OK. I think I finally understand your point of view.</b>

Alphaa10 to RonnieHM-- I wonder. You cling to your notion Iraqis actually endorse the American invasion, and for that, you hijack for your purpose a single item-- and that taken out of context. What Iraqis clearly show in these and other polls they want US troops out. Neither they nor you can have it both ways.

Here is what Brookings says of its own poll of Iraqis-- a plausible explanation for the Iraqi response is they want the bloodshed to stop, want American troops out, but simply removing American troops overnight without a strong security alternative is undesirable at the moment. Almost half of these respondents say they want attacks on US troops to continue! Yet they do not want them to leave, just yet, but on a timetable ranging from six months to as long as two years.

Without the security context, Iraqi poll responses seem illogical.

I used the word explicitly as the dictionary uses the word, "In precise detail." Iraqi responses must be considered the same way-- the only way to derive an accurate and rational context. Selecting your favorite poll questions and ignoring the aggregate is not the way professional poll analysts reason. Neither should you.