why didn't this Iraq withdraw plan get any support?

Pepe Silvia

i'm not interested in debating the effectiveness of the surge, if you skip to around 2:10 in the video she brings up her bill she submitted on leaving Iraq, which never seemed to get very far.....actually listen to her plan....it makes perfect sense, i wonder why this didn't get very much support?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYY2vz5pZ2c

OffHeGoes29

Pepe Silvia wrote:

i'm not interested in debating the effectiveness of the surge, if you skip to around 2:10 in the video she brings up her bill she submitted on leaving Iraq, which never seemed to get very far.....actually listen to her plan....it makes perfect sense, i wonder why this didn't get very much support?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYY2vz5pZ2c

Because you can't expect a country to run its self on the same model as the west in a ridiculous short amount of time. It took us 230+ years to get were we are today, you can't force democracy and a self-substaining government on people who don't know what these concepts are in the first place. Its going to take a lot of time and a lot of money to get them on their feet, we owe it to them for occupying their country.

The idea of bailing out of Iraq/A-stan is like rescuing an abused child out of a disfunctional home and then dumping them on the street because you don't want to spend the time and money to help them, sure they're free, but have no idea how to take care of themselves, and in some ways are no better off then before.

rebornFixer

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Because you can't expect a country to run its self on the same model as the west in a ridiculous short amount of time. It took us 230+ years to get were we are today, you can't force democracy and a self-substaining government on people who don't know what these concepts are in the first place. Its going to take a lot of time and a lot of money to get them on their feet, we owe it to them for occupying their country.

The idea of bailing out of Iraq/A-stan is like rescuing an abused child out of a disfunctional home and then dumping them on the street because you don't want to spend the time and money to help them, sure they're free, but have no idea how to take care of themselves, and in some ways are no better off then before.

This is a good analogy, IMO.

Commy

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

i'm not interested in debating the effectiveness of the surge, if you skip to around 2:10 in the video she brings up her bill she submitted on leaving Iraq, which never seemed to get very far.....actually listen to her plan....it makes perfect sense, i wonder why this didn't get very much support?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYY2vz5pZ2c

Because you can't expect a country to run its self on the same model as the west in a ridiculous short amount of time. It took us 230+ years to get were we are today, you can't force democracy and a self-substaining government on people who don't know what these concepts are in the first place. Its going to take a lot of time and a lot of money to get them on their feet, we owe it to them for occupying their country.

The idea of bailing out of Iraq/A-stan is like rescuing an abused child out of a disfunctional home and then dumping them on the street because you don't want to spend the time and money to help them, sure they're free, but have no idea how to take care of themselves, and in some ways are no better off then before.

its more like you killed his parents and then want a prize for your taking care of an orphan. he wants nothing to do with you.

catefrances

excuse me all you paternalistic people... whats with the children analogies??? iraq is not a child in need of having her hand held. and until that is realised then nothing will be accomplished.

rebornFixer

catefrances wrote:

excuse me all you paternalistic people... whats with the children analogies??? iraq is not a child. and until that is realised then nothing will be accomplished.

I was waiting for someone to say that. I almost mentioned this, in fact. :P

I agree, we are not talking about children. The analogy is not good in terms of accounting for why Iraqi people do what they do. Its good from the standpoint of arguing against expecting someone (or a group of people) to somehow master a concept (i.e., democracy) in a few years that other groups of people took hundreds to years to master.

Commy

catefrances wrote:

excuse me all you paternalistic people... whats with the children analogies??? iraq is not a child in need of having her hand held. and until that is realised then nothing will be accomplished.

good point.


i was simply correcting a poor analogy.

catefrances

Commy wrote:

catefrances wrote:

excuse me all you paternalistic people... whats with the children analogies??? iraq is not a child in need of having her hand held. and until that is realised then nothing will be accomplished.

good point.


i was simply correcting a poor analogy.

by using the same analogy??? hmmmm.. next time, call it out.

catefrances

rebornFixer wrote:

catefrances wrote:

excuse me all you paternalistic people... whats with the children analogies??? iraq is not a child. and until that is realised then nothing will be accomplished.

I was waiting for someone to say that. I almost mentioned this, in fact. :P

I agree, we are not talking about children. The analogy is not good in terms of accounting for why Iraqi people do what they do. Its good from the standpoint of arguing against expecting someone (or a group of people) to somehow master a concept (i.e., democracy) in a few years that other groups of people took hundreds to years to master.

the analogy insinuates that the iraqi people dont have the capability or maturity to run their own lives.


and why are we expecting them to master democracy??

soulsinging

catefrances wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

catefrances wrote:

excuse me all you paternalistic people... whats with the children analogies??? iraq is not a child. and until that is realised then nothing will be accomplished.

I was waiting for someone to say that. I almost mentioned this, in fact. :P

I agree, we are not talking about children. The analogy is not good in terms of accounting for why Iraqi people do what they do. Its good from the standpoint of arguing against expecting someone (or a group of people) to somehow master a concept (i.e., democracy) in a few years that other groups of people took hundreds to years to master.

the analogy insinuates that the iraqi people dont have the capability or maturity to run their own lives.


and why are we expecting them to master democracy??

becos that's what we have and we know what's best for everybody.

rebornFixer

catefrances wrote:

and why are we expecting them to master democracy??

I do not, necessarily ... Thus my earlier comment that its unrealistic to expect them to do so ... Although, I'd be a tad surprised if you thought that they'd be better off governed by a genocidal dictator as compared to an elected government. As imperfect as democracy is, I view it as the least of the various evils.

catefrances

rebornFixer wrote:

catefrances wrote:

and why are we expecting them to master democracy??

I do not, necessarily ... Thus my earlier comment that its unrealistic to expect them to do so ... Although, I'd be a tad surprised if you thought that they'd be better off governed by a genocidal dictator as compared to an elected government. As imperfect as democracy is, I view it as the least of the various evils.

just a tad surprised?? :P


its good that hussein is gone. but, and i realise hindsight is a fabulous thing, it could have been handled so much better. there was no need for an invasion. the US are masters of getting dictators out of countries that want to string them up by the balls. and in imo the hanging of saddam hussein was one of the biggest displays of hypocrisy ive ever seen in my life. the answer isnt always violence. in fact it rarely is.

rebornFixer

catefrances wrote:

just a tad surprised?? :P


its good that hussein is gone. but, and i realise hindsight is a fabulous thing, it could have been handled so much better. there was no need for an invasion. the US are masters of getting dictators out of countries that want to string them up by the balls. and in imo the hanging of saddam hussein was one of the biggest displays of hypocrisy ive ever seen in my life. the answer isnt always violence. in fact it rarely is.

You'll get no disagreement from me on these points ... Especially the violence one. I am not a pacifist, but at the same time, various forms of violence (war, terrorism, etc.) get used as potential solutions way too early in the problem-solving chain, if you will. Violence tends to breed more violence ... It should be used as a last resort, if at all.

catefrances

rebornFixer wrote:

catefrances wrote:

just a tad surprised?? :P


its good that hussein is gone. but, and i realise hindsight is a fabulous thing, it could have been handled so much better. there was no need for an invasion. the US are masters of getting dictators out of countries that want to string them up by the balls. and in imo the hanging of saddam hussein was one of the biggest displays of hypocrisy ive ever seen in my life. the answer isnt always violence. in fact it rarely is.

You'll get no disagreement from me on these points ... Especially the violence one. I am not a pacifist, but at the same time, various forms of violence (war, terrorism, etc.) get used as potential solutions way too early in the problem-solving chain, if you will. Violence tends to breed more violence ... It should be used as a last resort, if at all.

well considering we spend our children's lifetimes telling them violence isnt the answer and to have more empathy for their 'enemy', its kinda mindboggling that violence is way too often 'our' first resort when it comes to sorting to conflicts.

Commy

catefrances wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

catefrances wrote:

just a tad surprised?? :P


its good that hussein is gone. but, and i realise hindsight is a fabulous thing, it could have been handled so much better. there was no need for an invasion. the US are masters of getting dictators out of countries that want to string them up by the balls. and in imo the hanging of saddam hussein was one of the biggest displays of hypocrisy ive ever seen in my life. the answer isnt always violence. in fact it rarely is.

You'll get no disagreement from me on these points ... Especially the violence one. I am not a pacifist, but at the same time, various forms of violence (war, terrorism, etc.) get used as potential solutions way too early in the problem-solving chain, if you will. Violence tends to breed more violence ... It should be used as a last resort, if at all.

well considering we spend our children's lifetimes telling them violence isnt the answer and to have more empathy for their 'enemy', its kinda mindboggling that violence is way too often 'our' first resort when it comes to sorting to conflicts.

violence solves everything on tv. and in the movies. you teach your kids one thing, culture teaches them something else. speaking as as citizen of the US/

Cosmo

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Because you can't expect a country to run its self on the same model as the west in a ridiculous short amount of time. It took us 230+ years to get were we are today, you can't force democracy and a self-substaining government on people who don't know what these concepts are in the first place. Its going to take a lot of time and a lot of money to get them on their feet, we owe it to them for occupying their country.

The idea of bailing out of Iraq/A-stan is like rescuing an abused child out of a disfunctional home and then dumping them on the street because you don't want to spend the time and money to help them, sure they're free, but have no idea how to take care of themselves, and in some ways are no better off then before.

...
You left out the part where the child flushes your t-shirt down the toilet... sets your dog on fire... takes a razor blade to your kids backs... and pisses on your face when you're sleeping.
Yeah... 2 or 3 decades of tolerating this and you'll be on the right track.
Good luck with that kid.

OffHeGoes29

catefrances wrote:

rebornFixer wrote:

catefrances wrote:

excuse me all you paternalistic people... whats with the children analogies??? iraq is not a child. and until that is realised then nothing will be accomplished.

I was waiting for someone to say that. I almost mentioned this, in fact. :P

I agree, we are not talking about children. The analogy is not good in terms of accounting for why Iraqi people do what they do. Its good from the standpoint of arguing against expecting someone (or a group of people) to somehow master a concept (i.e., democracy) in a few years that other groups of people took hundreds to years to master.

the analogy insinuates that the iraqi people dont have the capability or maturity to run their own lives.


and why are we expecting them to master democracy??

As far as a western style government is concerned...no they can't....or atleast not yet.

OffHeGoes29

Cosmo wrote:

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Because you can't expect a country to run its self on the same model as the west in a ridiculous short amount of time. It took us 230+ years to get were we are today, you can't force democracy and a self-substaining government on people who don't know what these concepts are in the first place. Its going to take a lot of time and a lot of money to get them on their feet, we owe it to them for occupying their country.

The idea of bailing out of Iraq/A-stan is like rescuing an abused child out of a disfunctional home and then dumping them on the street because you don't want to spend the time and money to help them, sure they're free, but have no idea how to take care of themselves, and in some ways are no better off then before.

...
You left out the part where the child flushes your t-shirt down the toilet... sets your dog on fire... takes a razor blade to your kids backs... and pisses on your face when you're sleeping.
Yeah... 2 or 3 decades of tolerating this and you'll be on the right track.
Good luck with that kid.

Well whats the right thing to do? Leaving them now isn't the right thing to do, and we don't have a uranium powered Delorean to go back to March 17, 2003.

Relax, you'll still get your fat paycheck from your company for all the military contracts it has while we are there.

OffHeGoes29

Commy wrote:

catefrances wrote:

excuse me all you paternalistic people... whats with the children analogies??? iraq is not a child in need of having her hand held. and until that is realised then nothing will be accomplished.

good point.


i was simply correcting a poor analogy.

Thank you for correcting me

Cosmo

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Cosmo wrote:

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Because you can't expect a country to run its self on the same model as the west in a ridiculous short amount of time. It took us 230+ years to get were we are today, you can't force democracy and a self-substaining government on people who don't know what these concepts are in the first place. Its going to take a lot of time and a lot of money to get them on their feet, we owe it to them for occupying their country.

The idea of bailing out of Iraq/A-stan is like rescuing an abused child out of a disfunctional home and then dumping them on the street because you don't want to spend the time and money to help them, sure they're free, but have no idea how to take care of themselves, and in some ways are no better off then before.

...
You left out the part where the child flushes your t-shirt down the toilet... sets your dog on fire... takes a razor blade to your kids backs... and pisses on your face when you're sleeping.
Yeah... 2 or 3 decades of tolerating this and you'll be on the right track.
Good luck with that kid.

Well whats the right thing to do? Leaving them now isn't the right thing to do, and we don't have a uranium powered Delorean to go back to March 17, 2003.

Relax, you'll still get your fat paycheck from your company for all the military contracts it has while we are there.

...
You want to stay because the decision was made in the past? What, the cards were dealt, so our guys should just deal with it? What the fuck kind of reasoning is THAT???
I say, bring our guys home... you say, leave them there. The place is a fucking mess... a goddamn tire fire we set off in the desert. You want to put the fire out by throwing lives and tax dollars on it for... how long? 10, 20 years? At what point do you cut your losses?
I say, let it burn. The fucking thing is going to burn, whatever we do about it. And in the end... both yours and my decisions have the same results... a smoldering pile of burnt stink in the desert. But, at least my way... we don't lose lives and burn tax dollars.
...
Also... nice little chickenshit comment at the end... real fucking classy.

Commy

OffHeGoes29 wrote:

Commy wrote:

catefrances wrote:

excuse me all you paternalistic people... whats with the children analogies??? iraq is not a child in need of having her hand held. and until that is realised then nothing will be accomplished.

good point.


i was simply correcting a poor analogy.

Thank you for correcting me

it needed to be done. we didn't save these countries. you don't kill hundreds of thousands of their people and get to claim you are saving them. you lose that right.

so it needed to be done