The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #97835 Message #2205183
Posted By: Teribus
29-Nov-07 - 08:27 PM
Thread Name: BS: Maliki doesn't want more U.S. troops
Subject: RE: BS: Maliki doesn't want more U.S. troops
Ron Davies - 28 Nov 07 - 06:49 PM
"Fine, Homey, You didn't write anything. Congratulations, Mr. Pharisee. You win your point. So what, pray tell, was the point of your last posting? Just to practice your cut and paste skills? We really don't need any more brilliant posters wasting bandwidth with irrelevant articles."
Now then Ron Davies being both impartial and fair why don't you post exactly the same message addressed to Amos on his "Impeachment" thread.
By the bye Ron, ould Maliki appears to favour the US being there for at least the whole of 2008 under the current agreement with the UN he then wants some form of bi-lateral agreement with the US beyond that, which rather blows the premise of this thread apart. So rather than witter on about "national reconciliation" you might start focusing on the realities of the situation, and start answering a few questions for a change. Here are a few:
1. In the period 1979 to 2003 how many elections were held in Iraq?
2. In that same period how many candidates appeared on any ballot?
3. In that same period please name the number of opposition parties that appeared on the ballot list?
4. Please state if you agree that those results were credible.
5. Since March 2003 how many democratically free elections have there been in Iraq?
6. Since March 2003 how many referenda have been held?
7. Does the present Government of Iraq reflect the will of the people of Iraq?
You Ron live in a democratic country, you Ron, have certain freedoms, which apart from all the hysteria to the contrary, still provides all the protection that your "Constitution" affords. Please explain why you would deny similar rights to others.
"By now it should be apparent to even the most hermetic observers that untangling the problems of Iraq will be a monumental task."
As a statement of the obvious this beggars description, of course it was a monumental task, that does not meant to eliminate the requirement that it be undertaken.
"As the January 2007"
OK, hang on a minute, lets just wait for Ron Davies to point out that January 2007 was just about a year ago - Don't hold your breath he won't do that, holding to the good old socialist rule that there is one law for the goose and another for the gander.
"As of January 2007, National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq highlighted, the country suffers from a variety of dangerous, complicated, and intertwined problems, including terrorism, pervasive organized and unorganized crime, as insurgency, a failed state, a security vacuum, and a civil war."
Well pointing out the obvious no-one for one minute has denied the existence of exteremely complicated problems, but they are being addressed. The insurrection is being contained and dare I say it defeated. Iraq is far from being labelled as a failed state and there is certainly no such thing as a civil war by any "official" definition.
Now provided that you stay and actually do what you have stated that you would do, all bodes well. If on the other hansd you "CUT AND RUN" as you are noted, historically for doing, then you will definitely reap the whirlwind - Your choice.