What is your prediction of what will happen in Iraq?

[BRUCE]

Not necessarily.

But, since it's never been tried, we can at least say that it's never been disproven in practice.

As opposed to the fantasies of the neofascists [i.e. "they'll greet us as liberators"] - which have been disproven in practice.

So your plan is to retreat and hide, then see what happens?  And you believe this has never been put into practice before?

[ribonucleic]

So your plan is to retreat and hide, then see what happens?  And you believe this has never been put into practice before?

Well, let's see...

Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II - by William Blum

 Table of Contents

 Introduction
 1. China - 1945 to 1960s: Was Mao Tse-tung just paranoid?
 2. Italy - 1947-1948: Free elections, Hollywood style
 3. Greece - 1947 to early 1950s: From cradle of democracy to client state
 4. The Philippines - 1940s and 1950s: America's oldest colony
 5. Korea - 1945-1953: Was it all that it appeared to be?
 6. Albania - 1949-1953: The proper English spy
 7. Eastern Europe - 1948-1956: Operation Splinter Factor
 8. Germany - 1950s: Everything from juvenile delinquency to terrorism
 9. Iran - 1953: Making it safe for the King of Kings
10. Guatemala - 1953-1954: While the world watched
11. Costa Rica - Mid-1950s: Trying to topple an ally - Part 1
12. Syria - 1956-1957: Purchasing a new government
13. Middle East - 1957-1958: The Eisenhower Doctrine claims another backyard for America
14. Indonesia - 1957-1958: War and pornography
15. Western Europe - 1950s and 1960s: Fronts within fronts within fronts
16. British Guiana - 1953-1964: The CIA's international labor mafia
17. Soviet Union - Late 1940s to 1960s: From spy planes to book publishing
18. Italy - 1950s to 1970s: Supporting the Cardinal's orphans and techno-fascism
19. Vietnam - 1950-1973: The Hearts and Minds Circus
20. Cambodia - 1955-1973: Prince Sihanouk walks the high-wire of neutralism
21. Laos - 1957-1973: L'Armée Clandestine
22. Haiti - 1959-1963: The Marines land, again
23. Guatemala - 1960: One good coup deserves another
24. France/Algeria - 1960s: L'état, c'est la CIA
25. Ecuador - 1960-1963: A text book of dirty tricks
26. The Congo - 1960-1964: The assassination of Patrice Lumumba
27. Brazil - 1961-1964: Introducing the marvelous new world of death squads
28. Peru - 1960-1965: Fort Bragg moves to the jungle
29. Dominican Republic - 1960-1966: Saving democracy from communism by getting rid of           democracy
30. Cuba - 1959 to 1980s: The unforgivable revolution
31. Indonesia - 1965: Liquidating President Sukarno ... and 500,000 others
    East Timor - 1975: And 200,000 more
32. Ghana - 1966: Kwame Nkrumah steps out of line
33. Uruguay - 1964-1970: Torture -- as American as apple pie
34. Chile - 1964-1973: A hammer and sickle stamped on your child's forehead
35. Greece - 1964-1974: "Fuck your Parliament and your Constitution," said
    the President of the United States
36. Bolivia - 1964-1975: Tracking down Che Guevara in the land of coup d'etat
37. Guatemala - 1962 to 1980s: A less publicized "final solution"
38. Costa Rica - 1970-1971: Trying to topple an ally -- Part 2
39. Iraq - 1972-1975: Covert action should not be confused with missionary work
40. Australia - 1973-1975: Another free election bites the dust
41. Angola - 1975 to 1980s: The Great Powers Poker Game
42. Zaire - 1975-1978: Mobutu and the CIA, a marriage made in heaven
43. Jamaica - 1976-1980: Kissinger's ultimatum
44. Seychelles - 1979-1981: Yet another area of great strategic importance
45. Grenada - 1979-1984: Lying -- one of the few growth industries in Washington
46. Morocco - 1983: A video nasty
47. Suriname - 1982-1984: Once again, the Cuban bogeyman
48. Libya - 1981-1989: Ronald Reagan meets his match
49. Nicaragua - 1981-1990: Destabilization in slow motion
50. Panama - 1969-1991: Double-crossing our drug supplier
51. Bulgaria 1990/Albania 1991: Teaching communists what democracy is all about
52. Iraq - 1990-1991: Desert holocaust
53. Afghanistan - 1979-1992: America's Jihad
54. El Salvador - 1980-1994: Human rights, Washington style
55. Haiti - 1986-1994: Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?
56. The American Empire - 1992 to present

Nope, not lately!

Hope this helps.

[BRUCE]

Well, let's see...

Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II - by William Blum

 Table of Contents

 Introduction
 1. China - 1945 to 1960s: Was Mao Tse-tung just paranoid?
 2. Italy - 1947-1948: Free elections, Hollywood style
 3. Greece - 1947 to early 1950s: From cradle of democracy to client state
 4. The Philippines - 1940s and 1950s: America's oldest colony
 5. Korea - 1945-1953: Was it all that it appeared to be?
 6. Albania - 1949-1953: The proper English spy
 7. Eastern Europe - 1948-1956: Operation Splinter Factor
 8. Germany - 1950s: Everything from juvenile delinquency to terrorism
 9. Iran - 1953: Making it safe for the King of Kings
10. Guatemala - 1953-1954: While the world watched
11. Costa Rica - Mid-1950s: Trying to topple an ally - Part 1
12. Syria - 1956-1957: Purchasing a new government
13. Middle East - 1957-1958: The Eisenhower Doctrine claims another backyard for America
14. Indonesia - 1957-1958: War and pornography
15. Western Europe - 1950s and 1960s: Fronts within fronts within fronts
16. British Guiana - 1953-1964: The CIA's international labor mafia
17. Soviet Union - Late 1940s to 1960s: From spy planes to book publishing
18. Italy - 1950s to 1970s: Supporting the Cardinal's orphans and techno-fascism
19. Vietnam - 1950-1973: The Hearts and Minds Circus
20. Cambodia - 1955-1973: Prince Sihanouk walks the high-wire of neutralism
21. Laos - 1957-1973: L'Armée Clandestine
22. Haiti - 1959-1963: The Marines land, again
23. Guatemala - 1960: One good coup deserves another
24. France/Algeria - 1960s: L'état, c'est la CIA
25. Ecuador - 1960-1963: A text book of dirty tricks
26. The Congo - 1960-1964: The assassination of Patrice Lumumba
27. Brazil - 1961-1964: Introducing the marvelous new world of death squads
28. Peru - 1960-1965: Fort Bragg moves to the jungle
29. Dominican Republic - 1960-1966: Saving democracy from communism by getting rid of           democracy
30. Cuba - 1959 to 1980s: The unforgivable revolution
31. Indonesia - 1965: Liquidating President Sukarno ... and 500,000 others
    East Timor - 1975: And 200,000 more
32. Ghana - 1966: Kwame Nkrumah steps out of line
33. Uruguay - 1964-1970: Torture -- as American as apple pie
34. Chile - 1964-1973: A hammer and sickle stamped on your child's forehead
35. Greece - 1964-1974: "f**k your Parliament and your Constitution," said
    the President of the United States
36. Bolivia - 1964-1975: Tracking down Che Guevara in the land of coup d'etat
37. Guatemala - 1962 to 1980s: A less publicized "final solution"
38. Costa Rica - 1970-1971: Trying to topple an ally -- Part 2
39. Iraq - 1972-1975: Covert action should not be confused with missionary work
40. Australia - 1973-1975: Another free election bites the dust
41. Angola - 1975 to 1980s: The Great Powers Poker Game
42. Zaire - 1975-1978: Mobutu and the CIA, a marriage made in heaven
43. Jamaica - 1976-1980: Kissinger's ultimatum
44. Seychelles - 1979-1981: Yet another area of great strategic importance
45. Grenada - 1979-1984: Lying -- one of the few growth industries in Washington
46. Morocco - 1983: A video nasty
47. Suriname - 1982-1984: Once again, the Cuban bogeyman
48. Libya - 1981-1989: Ronald Reagan meets his match
49. Nicaragua - 1981-1990: Destabilization in slow motion
50. Panama - 1969-1991: Double-crossing our drug supplier
51. Bulgaria 1990/Albania 1991: Teaching communists what democracy is all about
52. Iraq - 1990-1991: Desert holocaust
53. Afghanistan - 1979-1992: America's Jihad
54. El Salvador - 1980-1994: Human rights, Washington style
55. Haiti - 1986-1994: Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?
56. The American Empire - 1992 to present

Nope, not lately!

Hope this helps.

Good to see your plan of response here is to post long and boring lists of poorly researched information.  Notice I didn't say the US was the nation retreating, which seems to be a cause close to your heart.

[ribonucleic]

Notice I didn't say the US was the nation retreating, which seems to be a cause close to your heart.

The ersatz machismo of the right-wing [so compatible with the ersatz machismo of bodybuilding, I guess] never fails to amuse me.  I take it I'm supposed to be stung by the accusation that I endorse retreat? As if this impugns my virility in some way? 

Since you appear to have a comic book-level view of the conflict [i.e. "America good! Towelheads bad!"], I'll tell you a story about Alan Moore. Someone asked if he planned to sue DC Comics over the way they screwed him over on Watchmen. His sage reply was "When you discover you're standing in a pile of sh!t, you don't stamp on the sh!t to punish it. You step out of it as quickly as you can."

In this metaphor, the presence of American troops in Iraq - fanning the flames of fanaticism with every innocent house they barge into, creating a new suicide bomber with ever child they blow up - is our country standing in a big stinking pile of sh!t. My solution is to, yes, retreat our foot out of this pile of sh!t. Yours, I guess, is to "surge" by grinding our heel deeper into it.

Perhaps bellicose stupidity is the cause close to your heart.

[BRUCE]

The ersatz machismo of the right-wing [so compatible with the ersatz machismo of bodybuilding, I guess] never fails to amuse me.  I take it I'm supposed to be stung by the accusation that I endorse retreat? As if this impugns my virility in some way? 

Since you appear to have a comic book-level view of the conflict [i.e. "America good! Towelheads bad!"], I'll tell you a story about Alan Moore. Someone asked if he planned to sue DC Comics over the way they screwed him over on Watchmen. His sage reply was "When you discover you're standing in a pile of sh!t, you don't stamp on the sh!t to punish it. You step out of it as quickly as you can."

In this metaphor, the presence of American troops in Iraq - fanning the flames of fanaticism with every innocent house they barge into, creating a new suicide bomber with ever child they blow up - is our country standing in a big stinking pile of sh!t. My solution is to, yes, retreat our foot out of this pile of sh!t. Yours, I guess, is to "surge" by grinding our heel deeper into it.

Perhaps bellicose stupidity is the cause close to your heart.

First, you incorrectly label me as 'Right-Wing', as if you can categorise my statement as such and dismiss it as mere rhetoric.  I am not, but if you understood the definition of such a title, and then did a little reading of my posts, you would identify this easily.  Perhaps you were too busy writing incomprehensible nonsense, as above (‘ersatz machismo’?  Where did you learn to write?). Then, you agree that you endorse retreat, thus allowing this entire board to recognise you as a coward, a supporter of terrorism, and devotee to defeat for your own nation’s forces in Iraq.

You then tell a completely irrelevant tale about a comic book and try to tie this into your limited understanding of a conflict that escapes you both mentally and geographically.  Please try and understand the difference between a war against terrorists, and a war against the Iraqi people, whose noble plight against that which you define them as being is something which again manages to elude you.

To end your barrage of meaningless, ill-composed diatribe, you conclude that the coalition’s departure from Iraq would result in an estoppel of the discernable level of terror that is occurring in this region currently.  You should then be easily able to note the Iraq you characterise here was, in fact, a paradise as you surely fantasise it was under Saddam’s rule.  The sorry reality, for you, is that Iraq was ruled by one of the most brutal tyrants of our generation, who gladly sat watch over a nation that purposefully erased the lives of hundreds and thousands of innocents.  You, of course, would prefer to pretend such people, and such scenarios, are nothing more than a figment of your already significant imagination.

You are morally bankrupt, and an attempted intellectual blowhard.

[gtbro1]

This is just about spot on. Supporting us has nothing to do with the will to win. Its national will and pride and we seem to have found other interests.

  Pride? It isn't a bar fight.Wars should not be fought over "pride". You enlisted in the service,I assume,to protect YOUR country...not Iraq.

[ribonucleic]

you agree that you endorse retreat, thus allowing this entire board to recognise you as a coward, a supporter of terrorism, and devotee to defeat for your own nation’s forces in Iraq.

Coming after that, your categorization of me as a "blowhard" was especially amusing. 

We both condemn terrorism. The only difference between us is that I think people with brown skin count and you don't.

Number of civilians killed by Osama bin Laden:   less than 3,000
Number of civilians killed by George W. Bush:    at least 55,000

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

We also agree on this: Hussein was a nasty piece of work. Geez, the guy tortured people. Though at least his goons were smart enough not to photograph themselves at work...



And you're absolutely right on the central point: I want us to lose.  Did you think I would deny it - or be embarrassed by the accusation? Far from it.

You see: we're the bad guys. I know that flies in the face of everything you were taught in school - and everything you hear on FOX News. But once you learn some history and start thinking for yourself, there's no other conclusion you can reach.

We did this...



So we could drive around in these...



You're god-damned right I want us to lose.

[BRUCE]

Coming after that, your categorization of me as a "blowhard" was especially amusing. 

We both condemn terrorism. The only difference between us is that I think people with brown skin count and you don't.

Number of civilians killed by Osama bin Laden:   less than 3,000
Number of civilians killed by George W. Bush:    at least 55,000

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

We also agree on this: Hussein was a nasty piece of work. Geez, the guy tortured people. Though at least his goons were smart enough not to photograph themselves at work...



And you're absolutely right on the central point: I want us to lose.  Did you think I would deny it - or be embarrassed by the accusation? Far from it.

You see: we're the bad guys. I know that flies in the face of everything you were taught in school - and everything you hear on FOX News. But once you learn some history and start thinking for yourself, there's no other conclusion you can reach.

We did this...



So we could drive around in these...



You're god-damned right I want us to lose.

Glad we cleared that up.  You're inaccurate, a coward and pathetic.

[ribonucleic]

You're inaccurate, a coward and pathetic.

Gee, don't get your panties in a bunch, BRUCE. [Hadn't figured out the Caps Lock key back when you made your Getbig account? Or is it an acronym of some sort?  ]

I'm intellectually bankrupt, remember? My ideas can't harm you! 

Your ideas, unfortunately, are harming quite a lot of people - including the American soldiers whose welfare you to profess to be so concerned with.



[Lucky for that soldier he only lost his legs rather than his life. Bush doesn't go to military funerals.]

[BRUCE]

Gee, don't get your panties in a bunch, BRUCE. [Hadn't figured out the Caps Lock key back when you made your Getbig account? Or is it an acronym of some sort?  ]

I'm intellectually bankrupt, remember? My ideas can't harm you! 

Your ideas, unfortunately, are harming quite a lot of people - including the American soldiers whose welfare you to profess to be so concerned with.



[Lucky for that soldier he only lost his legs rather than his life. I hear Bush doesn't go to military funerals.]

No, you see, I'd rather use a moniker far more relevant like 'ribonucleic', which is in no way a self-serving attempt to make yourself appear intellectual.  No, you'd have no use for such things, not with research such as above - stating that GWB is personally responsible for an amount of deaths that, for the majority, are attributable to terror attacks.

Why on earth would you desire to make the US seem evil?  Oh, that's right:

And you're absolutely right on the central point: I want us to lose.  Did you think I would deny it - or be embarrassed by the accusation? Far from it.

You're god-damned right I want us to lose.

No partisanship in that, then.

[ribonucleic]

Why on earth would you desire to make the US seem evil?

Yeah, I should probably give up on that. It'll never work.

[BRUCE]

Yeah, I should probably give up on that. It'll never work.

Poor terrorists 

[ribonucleic]

Poor terrorists 

Clearly, you've dispensed with pre-9/11 ideas like "proof". But admittedly, you do have the law on your side now. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 makes it very clear: When W says you're a terrorist, you're a terrorist. End of discussion.

I might even embrace the idea of being spared so much legal paperwork, were it not for the fact that W's statements - how can I put this tactfully? - aren't always borne out. You know: stuff like "Saddam was connected to 9/11", "Saddam has WMDs", "I'm not getting rid of Donald Rumsfeld", etc.

But since you're on the side of the fighting men [though apparently not to the point of volunteering to be one of them - what was that you were saying about cowardice earlier?] and I'm not, I would at least expect you to denounce the events at Abu Ghraib as being a stain on the honor of the service, blah blah blah - not to mention a provocation for the enemy to treat our prisoners with equal savagery.

I guess you just get off on torture. Just like your beloved President, now that I think of it - who whiled away his boyhood days in Kennebunkport blowing up frogs with firecrackers.

[24KT]

The best we can pray for is Iran taking Iraq under its wing. Think about it, they're both Shia countries and Iran wouldn't be doing anything the US isn't already doing. This will happen, but only if the US doesn't turn around and start a war with Iran.

So Americans don't have any balls because they disapprove of the Iraq debacle? Oh brother..  

Won't be that simple CJ. The Saudis have already stated "They will AGGRESSIVELY back the Sunnis, if the US pulls out", ...and then there are the Kurds who want their own state. It's a colossal mess the likes of which will not be solved quickly or easily. It has the potential to spread to the entire region, ...which would sodomize the US and infact global economies like nothing we have ever seen in the past.

It could even lead to scenarios like this:

[24KT]

Damn, ribo.  I truly enjoy your posts and would love to see your insight here more!!

{BLUSH}  Not only am I embarrased to say I'm turning into a ditto-head, ...I'm turning into a 240 ditto head!

Wow Ribo... and to think they had the audacity to call Reagan the great communicator? He had nothing on you!

[gtbro1]

   what did they ever do to that chic anyway? The young army girl that was in trouble for the humiliation of the prisoners?

[ribonucleic]

   what did they ever do to that chic anyway?

Same thing that happens in every war. The enlisted personnel got sent to prison and the senior officers were passed over for promotion.

[Dos Equis]

Clearly, you've dispensed with pre-9/11 ideas like "proof". But admittedly, you do have the law on your side now. The Military Commissions Act of 2006 makes it very clear: When W says you're a terrorist, you're a terrorist. End of discussion.

Is that the end of discussion?  Why don't you quote the specific provision of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 that "makes it very clear: When W says you're a terrorist, you're a terrorist."  I'm specifically referring to the portion that applies to American citizens, since you did not distinguish between Americans and foreign terrorists.  I'd love to further discuss this "end of discussion" topic.   

[ToxicAvenger]

we will stay...and we will stay for good..we HAVE to now..disguise it with whatever political stance ya wanna..

the alternative would be unthinkable..

we've made sure of that..

[ribonucleic]

Why don't you quote the specific provision of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 that "makes it very clear: When W says you're a terrorist, you're a terrorist."  I'm specifically referring to the portion that applies to American citizens

S.3930.ENR (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)

Sec. 948a. Definitions

            (1) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT- (A) The term `unlawful enemy combatant' means--

                  `(i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al Qaeda, or associated forces); or

                  `(ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense.

Hope this helps.

[Dos Equis]

S.3930.ENR (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)

Sec. 948a. Definitions

            (1) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT- (A) The term `unlawful enemy combatant' means--

                  `(i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al Qaeda, or associated forces); or

                  `(ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense.

Hope this helps.

Actually it doesn't help.  Now quote the definition of "alien" and the purpose of the Act in section 948b. 

[240 is Back]

the plot thickens!

[Dos Equis]

***CRICKETS***

[ribonucleic]

Actually it doesn't help.  Now quote the definition of "alien" and the purpose of the Act in section 948b. 

Yeah, somehow I didn't think you'd get the point. 

Some armed soldiers break into your house tonight with automatic weapons and tie a black hood over your head. When you try to ask what's going on, you're tasered until you shut up. You're driven somewhere, put on a plane, and flown away.

24 hours later, the hood is taken off. Blinking painfully at the light, you see that you're handcuffed to a chair in a windowless interrogation room. When you ask where you are, a man in a military uniform says that you've been declared an alien unlawful enemy combatant by a competent tribunal as established by the Military Commissions Act of 2006. And now you're going to tell him about the Al Qaeda plot or be introduced to the waterboard over there in the corner.

The situation is not quite as entertaining as it was when you saw something like it on 24. But you're not completely panicked yet. You're an American, after all - you have rights! So you tell him not only are you not a member of Al Qaeda, you're an American citizen - and therefore have the right to have your case presented in a court of law.

"American citizen, huh?" The man in the military uniform laughs a rich, Rush Limbaugh kind of laugh. Then he leans down to your face and hisses two words: "Prove it."

Hmm. Well, that may prove a bit difficult. You don't even know what country you're in - let alone the phone number of public defender's office. So you explain that, if he'll kindly just uncuff you, you're sure you'll be able to prove to his satisfaction that you're a 100% FOX News-watching patriotic American like himself.

Having been forewarned against this kind of crafty Muslim treachery, the interrogator instead signals two burly colleagues. They strap you to the board, put the bag over your head, and start filling it with water. Just like it said on the Internet, your will to resist is broken in seconds. Between your choking and gagging, you tearfully beg for your life - insisting that you don't know anything about Al Qaeda except what Bill O'Reilly said in the No-Spin Zone.

Maybe you don't, the interrogator wonders to himself. After all, the only evidence against you came in an anonymous call from a Florida pay-phone - from some guy who would only identify himself with the code name "240". [It's always funny until someone gets hurt!  ] But acting on the 1% Principle enshrined by his Commander In Chief, he won't take any chances. There's a clock ticking somewhere! So he continues waterboarding you. And as you sh!t youself in terror, you decide: F#ck Cheney, this sure feels like torture to me...

.
.
.

LOL! Absurd psychobabble! This could never happen to you! The purpose of the Military Commissions Act is to go after the bad guys! You know: the "worst of the worst" we keep in "Club Gitmo" - hahaha! [All but the ones we released after a few years when we decided they were just schmucks who had been handed over to us by Afghan warlords in exchange for a bounty. They're, uh... back with their families now.]

[Dos Equis]

Wow.  That is one of the poorest smoke screen's I've seen in a while.  Let me help you out my friend.  You didn't quote the definition of "alien" or the purpose in section 948b, because it blows up your claim that Bush can use the Act against American citizens.  Here is the language:

"ALIEN--The term 'alien' means a person who is not a citizen of the United States." 

Section 948a(3).

"PURPOSE--This chapter establishes procedures governing the use of military commissions to try alien unlawful enemy combatants engaged in hostilities against the United States for violations of the law of war and other offenses triable by military commission."

Section 948b(a) (emphasis added). 

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s3930enr.txt.pdf

Now, I'll wait for your explanation of how this Act can be used against American citizens, when the plain language expressly excludes American citizens (rather than a made up hypothetical). 

[insert Jeopardy music here]   

Oh, and class will resume AFTER the Super Bowl.