The Iraq war.
 

The war in Iraq has taken another ugly turn. Now that the possibility for an all out civil war is looming closer and closer it confirms the belief that I've held that Saddam should have remained in power. Sure you can complain about the way Saddam ran the country but Iraq's history has shown that the country was always a deadly corrupt filled nation that had one violent take over after another. Saddam has kept the nation from complete civil unrest for the last 30 +years until the U.S invaded that is, he understood the complex makeup of the country w/it's many ethnic and religious groups fighting for control. Now that he's gone all hell has broke loose ethnic fighting, outside terrorist, the influence of Iran. It's begining to look like Iraq was a hell of a lot better w/ Saddam as pesident.

Re: The Iraq war.
 

But his tactics included the rape, torture, and murder of those who disagreed with him. It's much easier to keep things under the surface when you are murdering your critics.

I can't buy in to the thought that Saddam staying in power is the best thing for Iraq in any senario.

I do wish we could have figured out some way to remove him without this war. I think that would have been possible. The war was sold to us for all the wrong reasons in my opinion, IF the real reason for it was to overthrow a murderous dictator.

One thing I thought we learned in the Vietnam Conflict is that some societies simply aren't ready for democracy. It appears that Iraq may be one of them.

Having said that, I don't believe that this is the right time for a total US pullout. The lives, money and resources we've spent there would almost certainly be wasted -- as was the case in Southeast Asia if we were to do that at this point.

We've put ourselves in a very uncomfortable position.

Again.

DA, you know that you & I don't usually agree about politics, but I think that's one of the best summations I've read yet.

It's the "IF" that we'll probably never know, in totality.

How would it be possible to remove him? The entire world was propping him up.

You're right about some societies not being ready for Democracy. It is some stupid notion that Democracy is everyone's right. In general, the right to live is forgotten by many of us because we believe in all these wonderful "Freedoms". These people are nothing more than a bunch of morons that will kill if there are cartoons they don't like - I do not think they have any right whatsoever to govern over themselves or others.

I think now is the perfect time for a pullout. We should encourage them to just kill each other and get the hell out. Maybe we can even sell all the poor citizens handguns.

-Rudey

Happy Birthday War In Iraq

Bump

I personally think the war is a crock. We got pulled into it for all the wrong reasons (ie. non-existant weapons of mass destruction) and continued to stay in it because as Americans we have this insane notion that it's our job "to fix" everyone else. When other countries need money, they come to us (probably why our deficit is in the billions).

I think we need to pull out. (Although I completely understand that a complete pull out of US forces isn't something that can be done, I just think we should be doing a gradual withdrawal, not talking about putting more troops over there)


According to the US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, for January 2006, there were approximately 6,148,125 people unemployed in the US, (6,307,925 if you count Puerto Rico).

That's really high. We need to stop worrying about other countries and their lack of diplomacy issues and star worrying about ourselves.

(Here's the link to the website for the stats)

http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives..._nr.htm#BM2006

Your understanding of the economy is much appreciated on this website.

-Rudey

Rudey, if your making fun of me, that's okay :D. If you're being serious, I really don't understand the economy so very much. I tried an economics class and I was totally lost. LOL. I can just read and add statistics. :D

The easiest way to start here is to understand the statistics - 6-some million sounds like a lot, but it's not - it's 2% of the US population, and 5.1% of the employable population (non-child, non-retired).

Now, saying that just over 1 in 20 Americans is unemployed sounds kind of like a lot, too - but again, it's not. Unemployment has to be viewed through the lens of 'transient' workers - workers who are between jobs or simply do not desire employment. Generally, around 4% is considered the baseline for this (IIRC; Rudey can prob correct this figure if wrong) - that means the effective 'zero unemployment' is equivalent to 4% (total) unemployment. In that light, 5.1% is not a very high number.

In fact, it's also LOWER than last year, according to the BLS - last January, unemployment was at 5.7%.

Thus, I would posit that the statistics actually show improvement, a positive sign for the economy (and subtley, the reverse of your point).

But it (unemployment) going down .6% isn't something we should be jumping for joy for.

That's fine that you feel unemployment isn't too high, it's your opinion.

My feeling is that it is too high and that we (and when I say we I'm talking The President & Congress) should be worrying about "our own" and not people in a different country.

Again, you're missing the point here - obviously the government IS caring for its own, as unemployment has dropped significantly . . . and saying it's "only" 0.6% is kind of ridiculous, since that's greater than 10% of 'gross' unemployment, and MORE THAN A THIRD(!) of the 'actual' unemployment (since, again, 4% is effectively full employment).

Here's a link to an article on the topic . . . it doesn't give an exact figure, since economists don't agree on it, but I'll take the lowest figure given by the US Gov't, to prevent biasing in my favor.

How about we just agree to disagree?

You think unemployment isn't to high, I think it is. We're not going to change each other's minds, so let's just agree to disagree.

I don't feel the government is caring for it's own, you do. That's fine, it's your opinion.

But from my perspective, as a teacher (plumbers make more than I do. I am at the bottom of the barrel), the government hasn't done crap for me except make my job 10 times harder than it needs to be, force me to continue my education (to keep my certificate) and not pay for this "continuing education" or let it count towards a pay raise. So no, I don't think the government has done a damn thing for me or my students.

But that isn't the discussion here and obviously I didn't mean to get so off track with my earlier posts, the discussion is the war.

I don't agree with it. You might. And that's totally fine. It's your opinion. :D

Here's the thing, though - I can see where you're coming from here. I just don't think it's at all related to unemployment.

There are literally dozens of areas you've made valid points, but using unemployment statistics really isn't one of them, from my end.

I do feel for teachers, in many ways - while many people are forced to pay for continuing education (attorneys pay out the ass for CLE, often) to stay certified, many make more than teachers. I'm not sure I know the solution, though - it's obviously partly supply and demand . . . around here, the 'better' teaching jobs often get hundreds of applicants for a single position. It's also difficult to say where the money should come from - is it the Federal Gov't's job to pay teachers, who are not Federal employees? I don't really know . . . I'm fairly sure, though, that you can't just take the dollars going to Iraq and give them to teachers - but perhaps I'm wrong.

So yeah - I feel where you're coming from, but I don't have any clue where to even start. Any suggestions?

mini-hijack on education...

I kind of feel that the federal government should pay teachers. I say this because NCLB is a federal law that they are making us adhere to. (And I hate NCLB btw). The problem is that the federal government gives the money to the states and it seems like they really aren't "checking" to make sure the money is spent properly. The thing is I live and work in AZ. We are number 50 when it comes to teacher pay, per child spending and anything else having to do with education.

I wish they could take the money for the war and give it to teachers. I mean the way I see it who is educating those "future soldiers" or "future presidents" or "future million dollar basketball, baseball players", I am. Yet, I can barely afford to live. I had to sell my house because I couldn't afford to live in it because my salary is so crappy. Not that this has anything to do with the war, I'm just saying.

I wish I knew a solution. I don't though.

CLE: continuing legal education? Man do I even want to apply to law school now?

Right HiJack.

Not for this threqad!

On a word or several. Make a glass table top out of that area and be gone first!

They Preach one thing and do another!:mad:

Tired of this crap. They dont seem to care, why should We?

Tom Earp is Right!

For the life of me I don't understand how they got this thing so wrong....Iraq was never a threat to America....and what is really sad is that in the end we will cut and run.

Yes.....obvioulsy you have no understanding of what is going on...there is much more that goes into it than just threats.

I'm always interested in being enlightened -- why don't you explain it to those of us who "obviously have no understanding of what's going on?"

I've been around quite a while and feel that the older I get, the less sure I am of anything.

Interesting.....could you please explain that statement.

Hasn't it been proved a thousand ways from Sunday that throwing MORE money into the Dept. ED and teacher's pay is NOT improving our schools the slightest?

Obviously that isn't the answer.

I think that it's the teachers themselves. I know quite a few people that are going through the teaching program....and there is no way in HELL I want my kids at the same freaking school as them. They are complete and utter fuck ups that pick a field that they know is safe and can get a job in.

In other words more often than not it is the people that can't do anything else that go into teaching. For everyone one truely outstanding teacher you have 5 that don't understand physics, calculas, or any other subject to any depth.

So, what does American Education have to with the War In Iraq?

The problem with Iraq is the Iraqies who cannot make up thier Ninds on a Government that is run By The People, not Sects of a Religions Faction.

They want power to over lord those that do not agree with them and therefore, there is infighting among each Faction. The Normal Citizen if We can call them that have no damn clue and only follow the Mullahs who preach to them and dictate to them.

They are to afraid to turn in the Insurgents who kill them, thier Wives, and Children.

As was said by an in the know Military Adviser, at least when Sadamit Hussain was in power, He could be controlled.

Now, it is asswhole and elbows!:eek:

I agree completely.

Without making a total hijack, even though the reasons for getting into the war may not have been totally clear to most Americans, we should not pull out. I feel as if, despite all the reading I've done about the war, I can't pick a side about this war. Yeah, war is hell, but I think we were the only ones who could have had even a shot at getting Saddam out of there.

With all the real bad guys out there....I quess I can't see the real importance of removing Saddam.

So Saddam is a good guy since he's not a real bad guy? And who could we have removed? Kim Jong Ill? Highly doubt it. The president of Iran? Again, sounds doubtable. That leaves Canada.

-Rudey

Again with the shots on Canada;)

But back to Iraq - really it's not that much of a surprise... kinda predicted way back before the war really...

That is why this war disturds me b/c in a sense it's like the powers that be said the leaders of N.K and Iran are too hard to handle so let's get our old whipping boy Saddam. I've said this b/f and I'll say it again everyone knows that Iran is and has always been the biggest threat in the Middle East.

Who would support that war? The Europeans? They don't want any war that would harm their business interests and the Russians were busy providing intelligence to Iraqi forces on the US. The Chinese? They'd rape their mothers for 5 yuan and a little more global influence.

And I have no idea what happened to all those weapons that Saddam used to have but what happens if we did go to Iran and there were no weapons?

I guess we gotta start somewhere and we started with Iraq. But someone decided the US needed to give charity and fix the country after we toppled the government and now we're paying too much. I'd support a war in Iran only if our men didn't go in.

-Rudey

First or second behind North Viet Nam, or China?:rolleyes:

There seems to be no end to Ass Hats who will want to controll the Peed ons and have power!:(

Many of the above mention didn't support the Iraq war...but that train left the station anyway. As for the WMDs I really don't think he had them but b/c Iran was really packing I believe he had to maintain a bluff card.

He had them at some point. We've got at least some of the receipts and France, Russia and China probably have binders full of them.

I'm just saying America doing anything would be lose-lose both at home and abroad.

-Rudey

I think if America would have used all of it's resources to go after Bin-Laden and found him instead of going to war w/ Iraq it would have been a win-win situation.

What would we have done? Created a giant search party with 200,000 troops to walk around the deserts and mountains.

-Rudey

Good point, not to mention that we could have taken out Bin Laden during the Clinton Administration but he f*cked that one up.

Maybe about 80,000 troops, I believe that would be more then enough to find him.

And if you found Osama what would happen?

-Rudey

The first thing it would do is make the so called war on terrorism look legit also by capturing Bin-Laden(The poster boy for terrorism) it would make many of the love ones of 911 victims feel some sense of relief.

Listen I agree that we need to catch him and punish him. I do.

But in terms of preventing something, catching him wouldn't stop the cells all over the world that operate independently from working. So I don't see how it would bring legitimacy to a war on terror when really catching Osama is a war of punishment.

-Rudey