IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Mou droog, I respectfully disagree...
With a number of your stated positions. Primarily the assumption that we will be hated more or less no matter what happens with Iraq.
I was in Germany in the early 80's (France too) for just shy of 3 years, with many German friends and acquaintances. They "hated" our government then (probably rightfully so). What is happening now is a shameless exhibition of we aren't joining this bandwagon 'cause we can't afford the reconstruction. We don't want you there because of the oil. Mind numbing hypocrisy on all sides.

As far as the Democrat thing, it was alluding to his original premise of wagging the dog, a purely political innuendo. Opportunistic too!

I truly have grepped many of the headlines, parsed them and piped them to my own conclusions, and, unfortunately for our current discourse, humbly agree with the US position. If that makes me an apologist for the current crop, so be it.

I highly respect you and many of the others who post on this board, but wonder if maybe you aren't being a tad reactionary and joining the counter-cabal yourselves. A possibillity?
Just a few thoughts,

Screamer


Living is easy with eyes closed
misunderstanding all you see,
it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out
it doesn't matter much to me


J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
New In simplest terms then - bringing this 'off'
would require a degree of genuine ability + wisdom.. of the calibre of a Gandhi or at least a Disraeli; it would require going to the root of the Problem, simultaneously with fdisking Iraq and installing mental s/ware from scratch:

Giving sufficient teeth to the World Court to intercede, create a territory for the Palestinians and discipline both sides while they get used to the fact that Neither shall force the other into the sea.

Yes, this last would require more than just 'US Will' - but it would require that First and backed by serious and competent intent.. and then the suasion which diplomacy means: that for which we have substituted harangues and naked threat to 'allies'.

Absent both the will and the intellect to accomplish the latter (Isr/Pal), the former (Iraq) shall IMhO next.. remind a whole new US generation of The Uncle Remus Stories, in partiicular The Tar Baby.

May your faith not be misplaced; we witness a Dubya never before seen or deemed possible + beneficent Wonderfulness transforming people who have never *seen* 'democratic representation' -- mostly converting to Charismatic Christianity and building Corporations. Well franchises, maybe. and shopping. shopping A Lot.

It Could Happen.


Ashton
     interesting "Fresh Air" today - (rcareaga) - (32)
         Um... - (ben_tilly) - (31)
             Re: Um... - (rcareaga) - (29)
                 Very telling... - (screamer) - (28)
                     Your logic is wrong - (ben_tilly)
                     Re: Very telling... - (rcareaga) - (26)
                         Carrying this a bit further... - (screamer) - (25)
                             you're assuming *way* too much - (rcareaga) - (13)
                                 Very fair assessment... - (screamer) - (3)
                                     Eschewing obfuscation, then_____ 'Democrats' indeed! - (Ashton) - (2)
                                         Mou droog, I respectfully disagree... - (screamer) - (1)
                                             In simplest terms then - bringing this 'off' - (Ashton)
                                 Been down this slippery track with this person before - (dmarker) - (8)
                                     Add one more thing, Dougie... - (screamer) - (7)
                                         He HAD answered that, even BEFORE you asked! - (CRConrad) - (1)
                                             Avoiding the flames forum... - (screamer)
                                         Re: Add one more thing, Dougie... - (rcareaga) - (4)
                                             he's not a "seasoned brawler" Thor God of Flaming thunder! -NT - (boxley)
                                             Let's start again then. - (screamer)
                                             P.S. Dimestore words like interlocutors... - (screamer) - (1)
                                                 Well, when correctly spelled, then - - (Ashton)
                             Why the US won't attack countries with nukes - (ben_tilly) - (10)
                                 Re: Why the US won't attack countries with nukes - (deSitter) - (3)
                                     Conventional Western Wisdom holds... - (ben_tilly) - (1)
                                         US current global strategy has China already contained ... - (dmarker)
                                     Digression -- Khrushchev - (rcareaga)
                                 Using same logic, what about bio/chem weapons? - (screamer) - (4)
                                     I'd dispute that getting bio/chem weapons are easier to get - (jake123)
                                     Bio/Chem won't have the same impact as nukes. - (inthane-chan) - (2)
                                         Basically agree with you and Jake except - (screamer) - (1)
                                             Re: Basically agree with you and Jake except - (jake123)
                                 'Immanent' - a Jungian typo ? ;-) - (Ashton)
             There was a piece on BBC World Service a day or two ago - (jake123)

Cosmological belly bomber.
98 ms