An alternate view of the Iraq invasion

Yup, you are. This guy does a great job arguing against a case that NOBODY is making... maybe his next article will be about those bastards that don't support free air. :rolleyes:

Or at least nobody in the U.S. Remember he's writing from the UK and there are even stranger people there than here. :rolleyes:
 
Or at least nobody in the U.S. Remember he's writing from the UK and there are even stranger people there than here. :rolleyes:

Steady there, Bear.
We tend to think that the USA is to some extent populated by 'strange'.

He has a good point. Why aren't we hearing the feminists (if are there still any?) cheering for these 4 Kuwati MPs ?
 
Steady there, Bear.
We tend to think that the USA is to some extent populated by 'strange'.

He has a good point. Why aren't we hearing the feminists (if are there still any?) cheering for these 4 Kuwati MPs ?

Hey, I live in California. 'Strange' is the new 'normal' but some of your academics make Noam Chomsky look sober. And of course there are still feminists, probably at least ten or fifteen different varieties. :D
 
Steady there, Bear.
We tend to think that the USA is to some extent populated by 'strange'.

He has a good point. Why aren't we hearing the feminists (if are there still any?) cheering for these 4 Kuwati MPs ?
Spread the news! I will. Feminism is a DIY affair. There are no Pundits who speak for all women.
 
Or at least nobody in the U.S. Remember he's writing from the UK and there are even stranger people there than here. :rolleyes:

Clive James isn't British either. He is basically a writer, poet, literary critic, linguist television presenter and, remarkably for that occupation is a scarily intelligent man.:)
 
You only say that cos you met me...:D

Hell, Mark, you don't even qualify as odd, by California standards. Here a guy could steal a top hat, a polar bear rug and a silver headed cane, put them on and walk down the street to his getaway and nobody'd notice! Don't believe me? Ask Safe_Bet or Stella. nods
 
Like that is only the argument I have been making for over five years on this forum; hardly news and hardly controversial and just the way things are.

But, thank you for the link, nice to know their are allies out there somewhere.

Amicus
 
Like that is only the argument I have been making for over five years on this forum; hardly news and hardly controversial and just the way things are.

But, thank you for the link, nice to know their are allies out there somewhere.

Amicus

I am but an detached observer. I post what I find, that's all. ;)
 
Sighs, (amicus crosses himself and glances skyward), in the battle between good and evil, there are no innocent bystanders.;) Danica Patrick finished in 3rd place in the Indy 500, go Danica! Highest ever for a split-tail:)

ami
 
Hell, Mark, you don't even qualify as odd, by California standards. Here a guy could steal a top hat, a polar bear rug and a silver headed cane, put them on and walk down the street to his getaway and nobody'd notice! Don't believe me? Ask Safe_Bet or Stella. nods


I did behave myself at the Lit-together...:D
 
I'm just causing trouble, again.
Quoting from the article: "Democracy is the best chance for women." Yep. It is. Too bad that a radical, fundamentalist theocracies are the WORST thing for women. Far, far, far worst than any dictatorship who's leader isn't, himself, a fundamentalist. Too bad that when we took out Saddam, we opened the door for just such fundies to take control of Iraq. Yes, yes, I know. You were told we were putting in a democracy. And we have put one in...supposedly. But the plain truth is that Iraq is a bunch of religious warring factions. And they all want complete control over the country. Very few of them want a democracy. THIS is what we refuse to understand. Which, VM, makes this article NOT an alternative view of the Iraq war. It makes it a stupid, ill-informed, half-assed view.

This article points out certain facts (officials raping women) in lieu of other facts--like the fact that under Saddam women had more rights and freedoms in Iraq then they do now. And if, thanks to us, Iraq eventually comes under the control of Iran or a Taliban-like theocracy--which is altogether possible, all it needs is one charismatic religious figure to lead it there, like an Ayatollah (gosh, we forced our idea of democratic government on that country too...including what leaders we wanted elected. Hmmm, wonder why that didn't last...), if, as I say, that happens, and if Iraq women end up swaddled in burkas, imprisoned in their homes, and forced to live under a worst tyranny than they ever experienced under Saddam, then we will be to blame. And what will this asshat--and you--say then? Oops. Sorry?

I'm sure that will make it all better.

As a feminist, I'd like to say that my vote is not to do STUPID THINGS. If you're going to take out a dictator and put in a democracy, know the way the people in that country think, what's important to them, and how best to achieve your goal given these factors. Be it war or some other way--and there are other ways. Oh, and this part of the article affirms for me that this asshat is really stupid:
six years later, it is no longer official policy to rape a woman in front of her family.
:rolleyes: That's ended, huh?

You post things like this, VM and you imply support for a man who's arguing that all feminists speak for all feminists. And that as some feminists don't see this salient point that he's making, they must ALL be stupid. Or hypocritical. First, not all feminists agree or speak for all, and you should know this even if the asshat does not. So why post this article? Second you should know, if you are a feminist, that what is hypocritical and shameful is to suddenly get all righteous about women's rights when 600,000 people the majority of them women and children, were killed by our air strikes.

Last I looked feminism wasn't just about protecting women from being raped by corrupt officials which, as you see, tends to happen under any and all kinds of government. Feminism is also about protecting women and children from violence and war. So, sorry, no, the feminists who opposed the killing of so many women and children are not hypocrites. Nor do they oppose democracy. Most feminists I know absolutely prefer democracy, but they are smart enough to want it achieved in as non-violent (not always possible, but desired), and as smart a manner as possible (meaning, however it's done, it's going to be strong, reliable and lasting).

This asshat is counting chickens before they're hatched. If and when this democracy holds true, and if and when the corrupt officials stop raping women, and if and when women in Iraq are better off than they were after Saddam, and if and when the democracy is so good for women that it justifies the death of upwards of 200,000 of their mothers, sisters and daughters by a foreign government that never ASKED THEM if they wanted to make such a sacrifice for democracy, THEN he can make such accusations. But at this point, the article is nothing more than hot air.

So, why did you think it a good idea to post this?
 
Last edited:
I posted it because I thought that it would do just what happened.

Personally, I am opposed to censoring ideas whether they are good, bad or merely unpopular. Clive James has his point of view. You have yours. I have mine.

Since you aren't there, your view of Iraq is what you get from viewing the media. So is mine and so is his. All of it is second hand and we all read selectively, picking out the facts that reinforce our opinions. Except that I don't have any. I post what I find.

Stella will attest that I am a little odd, in that regard, but what you see is what you get. :)
 
What a lovely RANT 3113, at the expense of VM, which was merely the platform or catalyst for your ill mannered reply.

The philosophical tenet you fail to comprehend is that all people everywhere, in all times, all people, are humans and that individual freedom is a right each has innately. It is not granted by society nor government, those rights are not given they are inherent and can only be protected by government.

If you could but grasp that concept, 3113, it would take you a long way towards understanding a quote from Osama Bin Laden:

"We Muslims worship death; Americans worship life. That is the difference between us."

Someone declared war on life, freedom and the emancipation of women, but you didn't even notice.

Pity.

Amicus
 
What a lovely RANT 3113, at the expense of VM, which was merely the platform or catalyst for your ill mannered reply.

The philosophical tenet you fail to comprehend is that all people everywhere, in all times, all people, are humans and that individual freedom is a right each has innately. It is not granted by society nor government, those rights are not given they are inherent and can only be protected by government.

If you could but grasp that concept, 3113, it would take you a long way towards understanding a quote from Osama Bin Laden:

"We Muslims worship death; Americans worship life. That is the difference between us."

Someone declared war on life, freedom and the emancipation of women, but you didn't even notice.

Pity.

Amicus

I never saw you in combat, and hope I never will.....you sound too much like an officer or a politician.......Like your heroes: Rumsfeld and Cheney.......
 
Hell, Mark, you don't even qualify as odd, by California standards. Here a guy could steal a top hat, a polar bear rug and a silver headed cane, put them on and walk down the street to his getaway and nobody'd notice! Don't believe me? Ask Safe_Bet or Stella. nods

That would depend on what part of CA. In Fresno or Sacto or pretty much anywhere in the Central Valley, he would be thought of as strange. In some parts of the coast, SF or LA or Berkeley, he wouldn't attract much attention. :cool:
 
Back
Top