Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Totally...halabja, iran-iraq war, kuwait...good times. Seriously...how much better off would we be if we just let Saddam roll over Kuwait?
No, we should have kept the two no fly zones and continued UN weapons inspections and monitoring in place. Going all the way back to 1991 now are we? $1 billion a year for an effective strategy is a relative bargain these days. But the neocons wouldn't know that or even realize it in hindsight. Cheney had to get his cut.
Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Yes you lost. We lost. It was victory. Violence had drastically subsided. Yes money was being spent but troop deaths had significantly decreased. Now it has imploded and the number of dead muslims has skyrocketed. The US turned its back on the local population. Allies sold out for domestic politics. Victory pissed away. Own this defeat America. It's on you.
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Yes you lost. We lost. It was victory. Violence had drastically subsided. Yes money was being spent but troop deaths had significantly decreased. Now it has imploded and the number of dead muslims has skyrocketed. The US turned its back on the local population. Allies sold out for domestic politics. Victory pissed away. Own this defeat America. It's on you.
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
You seem to forget or be in denial that Iraq wanted us to leave. Our president obliged. So much for that breath of freedom your always espousing and national sovereignty, huh?
Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Yes you lost. We lost. It was victory. Violence had drastically subsided. Yes money was being spent but troop deaths had significantly decreased. Now it has imploded and the number of dead muslims has skyrocketed. The US turned its back on the local population. Allies sold out for domestic politics. Victory pissed away. Own this defeat America. It's on you.
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
We lost the minute Dubya authorized action. After that it was a forgone conclusion. The longer we stayed the worse it got. Again you take your ass over there and fight the bad guys. And send me $2000 for taxes that came out of my pocket. And you can't offend me. So you brought up god. Not Christian god? What kind?
Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Yes you lost. We lost. It was victory. Violence had drastically subsided. Yes money was being spent but troop deaths had significantly decreased. Now it has imploded and the number of dead muslims has skyrocketed. The US turned its back on the local population. Allies sold out for domestic politics. Victory pissed away. Own this defeat America. It's on you.
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
We lost the minute Dubya authorized action. After that it was a forgone conclusion. The longer we stayed the worse it got. Again you take your ass over there and fight the bad guys. And send me $2000 for taxes that came out of my pocket. And you can't offend me. So you brought up god. Not Christian god? What kind?
I believe he's of Jewish faith. Or Zionist. It's hard to keep it straight with him being all over the place and flip flopping around.
Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Yes you lost. We lost. It was victory. Violence had drastically subsided. Yes money was being spent but troop deaths had significantly decreased. Now it has imploded and the number of dead muslims has skyrocketed. The US turned its back on the local population. Allies sold out for domestic politics. Victory pissed away. Own this defeat America. It's on you.
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
You seem to forget or be in denial that Iraq wanted us to leave. Our president obliged. So much for that breath of freedom your always espousing and national sovereignty, huh?
Keep telling yourself that nonsense if it makes you feel better.
Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Yes you lost. We lost. It was victory. Violence had drastically subsided. Yes money was being spent but troop deaths had significantly decreased. Now it has imploded and the number of dead muslims has skyrocketed. The US turned its back on the local population. Allies sold out for domestic politics. Victory pissed away. Own this defeat America. It's on you.
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
We lost the minute Dubya authorized action. After that it was a forgone conclusion. The longer we stayed the worse it got. Again you take your ass over there and fight the bad guys. And send me $2000 for taxes that came out of my pocket. And you can't offend me. So you brought up god. Not Christian god? What kind?
Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Yes you lost. We lost. It was victory. Violence had drastically subsided. Yes money was being spent but troop deaths had significantly decreased. Now it has imploded and the number of dead muslims has skyrocketed. The US turned its back on the local population. Allies sold out for domestic politics. Victory pissed away. Own this defeat America. It's on you.
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
We lost the minute Dubya authorized action. After that it was a forgone conclusion. The longer we stayed the worse it got. Again you take your ass over there and fight the bad guys. And send me $2000 for taxes that came out of my pocket. And you can't offend me. So you brought up god. Not Christian god? What kind?
The war was won. Obama and Biden said so.
See I don't care what others say. I am not enamored with Obama or any politician really. I know what you propose and your solutions keeps us in this mess. And as an American citizen with family in the military and me paying taxes out the ass can say and have the right to say your positions are utterly fucked up and would hurt me personally as well as many thousands of other humans around the world. Keep up your position and I will continue to point out the idiocracy of it.
You don't know where to start because you have not actually read the study or evaluated it from a scientific perspective. If you were in a thesis defense right now the committee would tear your postulations apart. Let's take your very last point for instance: Did you know the number of defects rose again in 2011 to 37? So as you say it was normal for the numbers to fall in 2010 because the US wasn't bombing anymore but then the number climbed again in 2011 at the height of the pacification? How do you explain that climb in defects again? There was very little bombing that year? Hmmm. Your theory is unsupported by the data. Again...do yourself a favour and do not post a scientific study where you have only read the abstract as it just makes you look silly. If you want to make a greater point about how war is evil then just make the damn point...you won't get an argument here.
Edit - probably good to mention as well that the birth defects they diagnosed were also primarily folate dependent. That means adequate access to folic acid during pregnancy might have prevented some of these defects. Sanctions and war probably reduced access so if not the bombs you still get to blame the US.
I have to ask - what is your motivation in the debate over birth defects? To clear the use of radioactive material in the battlefield? To keep up appearances for the good guys? so messed to choose this topic as one to take a stand on. Gambs is right - your observations on birth defects in Iraq are no different than climate change deniers who pick apart evidence with bias, ask for clear causal evidence that is virtually impossible to provide, even tho all common sense tells us it's happening, then leave the discussion saying 'yes, pollution is bad, but correlation doesn't prove causation'. unless you don't believe that heavy metals cause birth defects, miscarriages, cancer, etc, the discussion is moot. Science says that it does. Do US munitions contain heavy metals? Yes. So what are we debating here? The sexiness of birth defects? like wtf? the U.S. wont provide data on locations of DU use, something we'd need to know to prove causation, right? They've been covering up anecdotal evidence and sewering causal studies, with the help of the WHO, for decades now. They are worried about the implications of allowing science to follow through. Which means they KNOW it causes these effects; they would rather have a better bomb and not have to worry about legality, than worry about unborn children and innocents in the 'theatre'. This isn't a courtroom, nor am I obligated to peer review medical studies to form my opinion. That is evidence enough for me.
And why throw in the chemical weapons comment without context? Who are you blaming and how does it affect our decision to wage war? Your assertions about an Isis / Shia war are, as always, short sighted fear mongering - pushing for humanitarian war instead of, you know, humanitarianism. Which again begs the question - what is your real motivation here? What is your end game? Perpetual occupation, or a subservient client regime like the good ol' days?
Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Yes you lost. We lost. It was victory. Violence had drastically subsided. Yes money was being spent but troop deaths had significantly decreased. Now it has imploded and the number of dead muslims has skyrocketed. The US turned its back on the local population. Allies sold out for domestic politics. Victory pissed away. Own this defeat America. It's on you.
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
You seem to forget or be in denial that Iraq wanted us to leave. Our president obliged. So much for that breath of freedom your always espousing and national sovereignty, huh?
Keep telling yourself that nonsense if it makes you feel better.
You don't know where to start because you have not actually read the study or evaluated it from a scientific perspective. If you were in a thesis defense right now the committee would tear your postulations apart. Let's take your very last point for instance: Did you know the number of defects rose again in 2011 to 37? So as you say it was normal for the numbers to fall in 2010 because the US wasn't bombing anymore but then the number climbed again in 2011 at the height of the pacification? How do you explain that climb in defects again? There was very little bombing that year? Hmmm. Your theory is unsupported by the data. Again...do yourself a favour and do not post a scientific study where you have only read the abstract as it just makes you look silly. If you want to make a greater point about how war is evil then just make the damn point...you won't get an argument here.
Edit - probably good to mention as well that the birth defects they diagnosed were also primarily folate dependent. That means adequate access to folic acid during pregnancy might have prevented some of these defects. Sanctions and war probably reduced access so if not the bombs you still get to blame the US.
I have to ask - what is your motivation in the debate over birth defects? To clear the use of radioactive material in the battlefield? To keep up appearances for the good guys? so messed to choose this topic as one to take a stand on. Gambs is right - your observations on birth defects in Iraq are no different than climate change deniers who pick apart evidence with bias, ask for clear causal evidence that is virtually impossible to provide, even tho all common sense tells us it's happening, then leave the discussion saying 'yes, pollution is bad, but correlation doesn't prove causation'. unless you don't believe that heavy metals cause birth defects, miscarriages, cancer, etc, the discussion is moot. Science says that it does. Do US munitions contain heavy metals? Yes. So what are we debating here? The sexiness of birth defects? like wtf? the U.S. wont provide data on locations of DU use, something we'd need to know to prove causation, right? They've been covering up anecdotal evidence and sewering causal studies, with the help of the WHO, for decades now. They are worried about the implications of allowing science to follow through. Which means they KNOW it causes these effects; they would rather have a better bomb and not have to worry about legality, than worry about unborn children and innocents in the 'theatre'. This isn't a courtroom, nor am I obligated to peer review medical studies to form my opinion. That is evidence enough for me.
And why throw in the chemical weapons comment without context? Who are you blaming and how does it affect our decision to wage war? Your assertions about an Isis / Shia war are, as always, short sighted fear mongering - pushing for humanitarian war instead of, you know, humanitarianism. Which again begs the question - what is your real motivation here? What is your end game? Perpetual occupation, or a subservient client regime like the good ol' days?
First...no issue with the birth defect issue really. War has consequences. I nor anyone has ever denied that. It is a complete straw man argument. Gambs had to link to a study which for the most part is based on poor science just to make the point. Does that mean there wasn't in an increase in defects? Of course not but Gambs could have said war sucks...the link to the study was needless frills.
2...I am not a climate change denier but I do debate the science with respect to the degree of change. Anyone who posts a scientific study on any topic better be prepared to debate that study otherwise don't post it. For me to debate it is not to deny defects occur but to actually question the paper. Does the paper have validity? Does it actually measure what it claims to measure?
3...My motivation was always and only to tackle the problems of today. To salvage whatever good is left from an absolute clusterfuck of a situation. People want to constantly dwell on the past here without care for the future. What I have said is that view is shortsighted and will result in further horrors. I have no more end game. My point view has lost. It is over. Enjoy the world you have been advocating for.
Is anybody but me having a problem with the PJ website not hiding quotes past two quotes? It used to hide previous quotes and offered a button to show them.
I checked my personal settings and it say it should be hiding them, but it isn't. It's hard to follow a thread when it gets so convoluted that each letter of a sentence is stacked below the last letter.
"Birth defect/cancer rates? What the hell are you talking about?". (BS) 'War sucks' in reply would have satisfied yout? I doubt it. You obviously did your homework about the two prominent studies released in 2010 prior to making these comments. You were ready to attempt to shoot those studies down to prove...what? That correlation doesn't prove causation. Which is the parallel to climate change denial. The point is - we need to stop polluting. Disputing the science to the point of inaction on pollution is tacit support of the status quo. Same as disputing the science behind birth defects and DU munitions. So...in light of your admission that 'of course' there was an increase in defects, what were you trying to achieve by debating that, aside from support of the status quo of using radioactive munitions that poison foreign soil for millenia...or obfuscation? yet you accuse HIM of strawmen and frills?
regarding 3....total political lip service and setting yourself up for a big 'atodaso'.....nobody likes the atodaso guy. no substance to that part of your post whatsoever - we could both say the same to each other and get nowhere. You never had an endgame, aside from subservience, or subservience.
Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Yes you lost. We lost. It was victory. Violence had drastically subsided. Yes money was being spent but troop deaths had significantly decreased. Now it has imploded and the number of dead muslims has skyrocketed. The US turned its back on the local population. Allies sold out for domestic politics. Victory pissed away. Own this defeat America. It's on you.
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
You seem to forget or be in denial that Iraq wanted us to leave. Our president obliged. So much for that breath of freedom your always espousing and national sovereignty, huh?
Keep telling yourself that nonsense if it makes you feel better.
Is anybody but me having a problem with the PJ website not hiding quotes past two quotes? It used to hide previous quotes and offered a button to show them.
I checked my personal settings and it say it should be hiding them, but it isn't. It's hard to follow a thread when it gets so convoluted that each letter of a sentence is stacked below the last letter.
Is anybody but me having a problem with the PJ website not hiding quotes past two quotes? It used to hide previous quotes and offered a button to show them.
I checked my personal settings and it say it should be hiding them, but it isn't. It's hard to follow a thread when it gets so convoluted that each letter of a sentence is stacked below the last letter.
This tech problem started a few weeks ago.
yup. huge hassle when on the phone. god....bring back the riot act layout!
You don't know where to start because you have not actually read the study or evaluated it from a scientific perspective. If you were in a thesis defense right now the committee would tear your postulations apart. Let's take your very last point for instance: Did you know the number of defects rose again in 2011 to 37? So as you say it was normal for the numbers to fall in 2010 because the US wasn't bombing anymore but then the number climbed again in 2011 at the height of the pacification? How do you explain that climb in defects again? There was very little bombing that year? Hmmm. Your theory is unsupported by the data. Again...do yourself a favour and do not post a scientific study where you have only read the abstract as it just makes you look silly. If you want to make a greater point about how war is evil then just make the damn point...you won't get an argument here.
Edit - probably good to mention as well that the birth defects they diagnosed were also primarily folate dependent. That means adequate access to folic acid during pregnancy might have prevented some of these defects. Sanctions and war probably reduced access so if not the bombs you still get to blame the US.
I have to ask - what is your motivation in the debate over birth defects? To clear the use of radioactive material in the battlefield? To keep up appearances for the good guys? so messed to choose this topic as one to take a stand on. Gambs is right - your observations on birth defects in Iraq are no different than climate change deniers who pick apart evidence with bias, ask for clear causal evidence that is virtually impossible to provide, even tho all common sense tells us it's happening, then leave the discussion saying 'yes, pollution is bad, but correlation doesn't prove causation'. unless you don't believe that heavy metals cause birth defects, miscarriages, cancer, etc, the discussion is moot. Science says that it does. Do US munitions contain heavy metals? Yes. So what are we debating here? The sexiness of birth defects? like wtf? the U.S. wont provide data on locations of DU use, something we'd need to know to prove causation, right? They've been covering up anecdotal evidence and sewering causal studies, with the help of the WHO, for decades now. They are worried about the implications of allowing science to follow through. Which means they KNOW it causes these effects; they would rather have a better bomb and not have to worry about legality, than worry about unborn children and innocents in the 'theatre'. This isn't a courtroom, nor am I obligated to peer review medical studies to form my opinion. That is evidence enough for me.
And why throw in the chemical weapons comment without context? Who are you blaming and how does it affect our decision to wage war? Your assertions about an Isis / Shia war are, as always, short sighted fear mongering - pushing for humanitarian war instead of, you know, humanitarianism. Which again begs the question - what is your real motivation here? What is your end game? Perpetual occupation, or a subservient client regime like the good ol' days?
First...no issue with the birth defect issue really. War has consequences. I nor anyone has ever denied that. It is a complete straw man argument. Gambs had to link to a study which for the most part is based on poor science just to make the point. Does that mean there wasn't in an increase in defects? Of course not but Gambs could have said war sucks...the link to the study was needless frills.
2...I am not a climate change denier but I do debate the science with respect to the degree of change. Anyone who posts a scientific study on any topic better be prepared to debate that study otherwise don't post it. For me to debate it is not to deny defects occur but to actually question the paper. Does the paper have validity? Does it actually measure what it claims to measure?
3...My motivation was always and only to tackle the problems of today. To salvage whatever good is left from an absolute clusterfuck of a situation. People want to constantly dwell on the past here without care for the future. What I have said is that view is shortsighted and will result in further horrors. I have no more end game. My point view has lost. It is over. Enjoy the world you have been advocating for.
You do realize humans are very predictable and to predict the future we merely need to check out the past.
Find it fascinating reading your positions and justification.
And climate change. Wow. The evidence is everywhere. Fuck look at glaciers and co2 levels and you should be set but alas no.
So you believe in god? Will he save us? Does he have a plan? Seriously trying to understand your motivations.
You don't know where to start because you have not actually read the study or evaluated it from a scientific perspective. If you were in a thesis defense right now the committee would tear your postulations apart. Let's take your very last point for instance: Did you know the number of defects rose again in 2011 to 37? So as you say it was normal for the numbers to fall in 2010 because the US wasn't bombing anymore but then the number climbed again in 2011 at the height of the pacification? How do you explain that climb in defects again? There was very little bombing that year? Hmmm. Your theory is unsupported by the data. Again...do yourself a favour and do not post a scientific study where you have only read the abstract as it just makes you look silly. If you want to make a greater point about how war is evil then just make the damn point...you won't get an argument here.
Edit - probably good to mention as well that the birth defects they diagnosed were also primarily folate dependent. That means adequate access to folic acid during pregnancy might have prevented some of these defects. Sanctions and war probably reduced access so if not the bombs you still get to blame the US.
I have to ask - what is your motivation in the debate over birth defects? To clear the use of radioactive material in the battlefield? To keep up appearances for the good guys? so messed to choose this topic as one to take a stand on. Gambs is right - your observations on birth defects in Iraq are no different than climate change deniers who pick apart evidence with bias, ask for clear causal evidence that is virtually impossible to provide, even tho all common sense tells us it's happening, then leave the discussion saying 'yes, pollution is bad, but correlation doesn't prove causation'. unless you don't believe that heavy metals cause birth defects, miscarriages, cancer, etc, the discussion is moot. Science says that it does. Do US munitions contain heavy metals? Yes. So what are we debating here? The sexiness of birth defects? like wtf? the U.S. wont provide data on locations of DU use, something we'd need to know to prove causation, right? They've been covering up anecdotal evidence and sewering causal studies, with the help of the WHO, for decades now. They are worried about the implications of allowing science to follow through. Which means they KNOW it causes these effects; they would rather have a better bomb and not have to worry about legality, than worry about unborn children and innocents in the 'theatre'. This isn't a courtroom, nor am I obligated to peer review medical studies to form my opinion. That is evidence enough for me.
And why throw in the chemical weapons comment without context? Who are you blaming and how does it affect our decision to wage war? Your assertions about an Isis / Shia war are, as always, short sighted fear mongering - pushing for humanitarian war instead of, you know, humanitarianism. Which again begs the question - what is your real motivation here? What is your end game? Perpetual occupation, or a subservient client regime like the good ol' days?
First...no issue with the birth defect issue really. War has consequences. I nor anyone has ever denied that. It is a complete straw man argument. Gambs had to link to a study which for the most part is based on poor science just to make the point. Does that mean there wasn't in an increase in defects? Of course not but Gambs could have said war sucks...the link to the study was needless frills.
2...I am not a climate change denier but I do debate the science with respect to the degree of change. Anyone who posts a scientific study on any topic better be prepared to debate that study otherwise don't post it. For me to debate it is not to deny defects occur but to actually question the paper. Does the paper have validity? Does it actually measure what it claims to measure?
3...My motivation was always and only to tackle the problems of today. To salvage whatever good is left from an absolute clusterfuck of a situation. People want to constantly dwell on the past here without care for the future. What I have said is that view is shortsighted and will result in further horrors. I have no more end game. My point view has lost. It is over. Enjoy the world you have been advocating for.
You do realize humans are very predictable and to predict the future we merely need to check out the past.
Find it fascinating reading your positions and justification.
And climate change. Wow. The evidence is everywhere. Fuck look at glaciers and co2 levels and you should be set but alas no.
So you believe in god? Will he save us? Does he have a plan? Seriously trying to understand your motivations.
But wait, he wants us to forget about the past and own this situation we're in now. What?
Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Yes you lost. We lost. It was victory. Violence had drastically subsided. Yes money was being spent but troop deaths had significantly decreased. Now it has imploded and the number of dead muslims has skyrocketed. The US turned its back on the local population. Allies sold out for domestic politics. Victory pissed away. Own this defeat America. It's on you.
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
You seem to forget or be in denial that Iraq wanted us to leave. Our president obliged. So much for that breath of freedom your always espousing and national sovereignty, huh?
Keep telling yourself that nonsense if it makes you feel better.
It's amazing how you all want to disown the withdrawal. It is essentially what the 2008 election was about. This was predicted. Own it!
There is some evidence in there, but there is more speculation for sure. It doesn't matter anyways, as you pointed out, it was a big part of the election, and it is what the American people wanted. I do own it, as my response to your thread shows. We can't be the world police without exacerbating problems like we hhave in the Middle East for 50 years. Would you have us step into every cultural war?
Ben, come again? I understand your sentences individually but not your point.
My point is that as a citizen, just as I can criticize a president but not vie for his position, I can criticize a militaristic decision and not join the military. This shouldn't affect the clout of my opinion.
Disagree, easy to send others kids into battle and spend others money. Sure you can have the opinion but it will be taken for what it's worth and should be challenged.
I guess people believe in civilian control of the military until they don't. Either way my position has now changed. The war is for the most part over and the US has lost. A great opportunity for victory has been squandered and by the time the next President takes charge it will certainly be too late. God help all those poor souls for the real horror show is about to begin.
We lost? What would victory have looked like? 7000 more US troops dead and another trillion dollars pissed away and even more Muslims hating the west cause they lost 200000 family members.
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Yes you lost. We lost. It was victory. Violence had drastically subsided. Yes money was being spent but troop deaths had significantly decreased. Now it has imploded and the number of dead muslims has skyrocketed. The US turned its back on the local population. Allies sold out for domestic politics. Victory pissed away. Own this defeat America. It's on you.
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
You seem to forget or be in denial that Iraq wanted us to leave. Our president obliged. So much for that breath of freedom your always espousing and national sovereignty, huh?
Keep telling yourself that nonsense if it makes you feel better.
It's amazing how you all want to disown the withdrawal. It is essentially what the 2008 election was about. This was predicted. Own it!
There is some evidence in there, but there is more speculation for sure. It doesn't matter anyways, as you pointed out, it was a big part of the election, and it is what the American people wanted. I do own it, as my response to your thread shows. We can't be the world police without exacerbating problems like we hhave in the Middle East for 50 years. Would you have us step into every cultural war?
You don't know where to start because you have not actually read the study or evaluated it from a scientific perspective. If you were in a thesis defense right now the committee would tear your postulations apart. Let's take your very last point for instance: Did you know the number of defects rose again in 2011 to 37? So as you say it was normal for the numbers to fall in 2010 because the US wasn't bombing anymore but then the number climbed again in 2011 at the height of the pacification? How do you explain that climb in defects again? There was very little bombing that year? Hmmm. Your theory is unsupported by the data. Again...do yourself a favour and do not post a scientific study where you have only read the abstract as it just makes you look silly. If you want to make a greater point about how war is evil then just make the damn point...you won't get an argument here.
Edit - probably good to mention as well that the birth defects they diagnosed were also primarily folate dependent. That means adequate access to folic acid during pregnancy might have prevented some of these defects. Sanctions and war probably reduced access so if not the bombs you still get to blame the US.
I have to ask - what is your motivation in the debate over birth defects? To clear the use of radioactive material in the battlefield? To keep up appearances for the good guys? so messed to choose this topic as one to take a stand on. Gambs is right - your observations on birth defects in Iraq are no different than climate change deniers who pick apart evidence with bias, ask for clear causal evidence that is virtually impossible to provide, even tho all common sense tells us it's happening, then leave the discussion saying 'yes, pollution is bad, but correlation doesn't prove causation'. unless you don't believe that heavy metals cause birth defects, miscarriages, cancer, etc, the discussion is moot. Science says that it does. Do US munitions contain heavy metals? Yes. So what are we debating here? The sexiness of birth defects? like wtf? the U.S. wont provide data on locations of DU use, something we'd need to know to prove causation, right? They've been covering up anecdotal evidence and sewering causal studies, with the help of the WHO, for decades now. They are worried about the implications of allowing science to follow through. Which means they KNOW it causes these effects; they would rather have a better bomb and not have to worry about legality, than worry about unborn children and innocents in the 'theatre'. This isn't a courtroom, nor am I obligated to peer review medical studies to form my opinion. That is evidence enough for me.
And why throw in the chemical weapons comment without context? Who are you blaming and how does it affect our decision to wage war? Your assertions about an Isis / Shia war are, as always, short sighted fear mongering - pushing for humanitarian war instead of, you know, humanitarianism. Which again begs the question - what is your real motivation here? What is your end game? Perpetual occupation, or a subservient client regime like the good ol' days?
First...no issue with the birth defect issue really. War has consequences. I nor anyone has ever denied that. It is a complete straw man argument. Gambs had to link to a study which for the most part is based on poor science just to make the point. Does that mean there wasn't in an increase in defects? Of course not but Gambs could have said war sucks...the link to the study was needless frills.
2...I am not a climate change denier but I do debate the science with respect to the degree of change. Anyone who posts a scientific study on any topic better be prepared to debate that study otherwise don't post it. For me to debate it is not to deny defects occur but to actually question the paper. Does the paper have validity? Does it actually measure what it claims to measure?
3...My motivation was always and only to tackle the problems of today. To salvage whatever good is left from an absolute clusterfuck of a situation. People want to constantly dwell on the past here without care for the future. What I have said is that view is shortsighted and will result in further horrors. I have no more end game. My point view has lost. It is over. Enjoy the world you have been advocating for.
You do realize humans are very predictable and to predict the future we merely need to check out the past.
Find it fascinating reading your positions and justification.
And climate change. Wow. The evidence is everywhere. Fuck look at glaciers and co2 levels and you should be set but alas no.
So you believe in god? Will he save us? Does he have a plan? Seriously trying to understand your motivations.
Believe in God? Not sure where that's coming from. Do you read my posts?
Climate change. Again I believe in it but question the degree. For example we just found out that NASA has revised their data and the ice caps are not in retreat.
Does this mean climate change isn't occuring? No but the question is to what degree. Again I ask...do you read my posts?
Lastly...yes we must learn from our past...past actions and inactions. All decisions have consequences. The world will now being subjected to the consequences for the lack of action you all propose. Own it.
Comments
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
And what your Christian god helping the Muslims that are hell bound?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Also - Don't have a christian god. It's a figure of speech. Sorry to offend your atheistic sensibilities.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Gambs is right - your observations on birth defects in Iraq are no different than climate change deniers who pick apart evidence with bias, ask for clear causal evidence that is virtually impossible to provide, even tho all common sense tells us it's happening, then leave the discussion saying 'yes, pollution is bad, but correlation doesn't prove causation'.
unless you don't believe that heavy metals cause birth defects, miscarriages, cancer, etc, the discussion is moot. Science says that it does. Do US munitions contain heavy metals? Yes. So what are we debating here? The sexiness of birth defects? like wtf?
the U.S. wont provide data on locations of DU use, something we'd need to know to prove causation, right? They've been covering up anecdotal evidence and sewering causal studies, with the help of the WHO, for decades now. They are worried about the implications of allowing science to follow through. Which means they KNOW it causes these effects; they would rather have a better bomb and not have to worry about legality, than worry about unborn children and innocents in the 'theatre'. This isn't a courtroom, nor am I obligated to peer review medical studies to form my opinion. That is evidence enough for me.
And why throw in the chemical weapons comment without context? Who are you blaming and how does it affect our decision to wage war? Your assertions about an Isis / Shia war are, as always, short sighted fear mongering - pushing for humanitarian war instead of, you know, humanitarianism. Which again begs the question - what is your real motivation here? What is your end game? Perpetual occupation, or a subservient client regime like the good ol' days?
2...I am not a climate change denier but I do debate the science with respect to the degree of change. Anyone who posts a scientific study on any topic better be prepared to debate that study otherwise don't post it. For me to debate it is not to deny defects occur but to actually question the paper. Does the paper have validity? Does it actually measure what it claims to measure?
3...My motivation was always and only to tackle the problems of today. To salvage whatever good is left from an absolute clusterfuck of a situation. People want to constantly dwell on the past here without care for the future. What I have said is that view is shortsighted and will result in further horrors. I have no more end game. My point view has lost. It is over. Enjoy the world you have been advocating for.
I checked my personal settings and it say it should be hiding them, but it isn't. It's hard to follow a thread when it gets so convoluted that each letter of a sentence is stacked below the last letter.
This tech problem started a few weeks ago.
'War sucks' in reply would have satisfied yout? I doubt it. You obviously did your homework about the two prominent studies released in 2010 prior to making these comments. You were ready to attempt to shoot those studies down to prove...what? That correlation doesn't prove causation. Which is the parallel to climate change denial. The point is - we need to stop polluting. Disputing the science to the point of inaction on pollution is tacit support of the status quo. Same as disputing the science behind birth defects and DU munitions. So...in light of your admission that 'of course' there was an increase in defects, what were you trying to achieve by debating that, aside from support of the status quo of using radioactive munitions that poison foreign soil for millenia...or obfuscation? yet you accuse HIM of strawmen and frills?
regarding 3....total political lip service and setting yourself up for a big 'atodaso'.....nobody likes the atodaso guy. no substance to that part of your post whatsoever - we could both say the same to each other and get nowhere. You never had an endgame, aside from subservience, or subservience.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2014/06/26/hillary-clintons-latest-falsehood-on-iraq/
It's amazing how you all want to disown the withdrawal. It is essentially what the 2008 election was about. This was predicted. Own it!
E
Y
K
A
T
P
L
E
A
S
E
F
I
X
T
H
I
S
S
H
I
T
T
H
A
N
K
Y
O
U
S
I
N
C
E
R
E
L
Y
J
P
#hashbrowns
Find it fascinating reading your positions and justification.
And climate change. Wow. The evidence is everywhere. Fuck look at glaciers and co2 levels and you should be set but alas no.
So you believe in god? Will he save us? Does he have a plan? Seriously trying to understand your motivations.
It doesn't matter anyways, as you pointed out, it was a big part of the election, and it is what the American people wanted.
I do own it, as my response to your thread shows.
We can't be the world police without exacerbating problems like we hhave in the Middle East for 50 years. Would you have us step into every cultural war?
Climate change. Again I believe in it but question the degree. For example we just found out that NASA has revised their data and the ice caps are not in retreat.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/05/19/updated-nasa-data-polar-ice-not-receding-after-all/
Does this mean climate change isn't occuring? No but the question is to what degree. Again I ask...do you read my posts?
Lastly...yes we must learn from our past...past actions and inactions. All decisions have consequences. The world will now being subjected to the consequences for the lack of action you all propose. Own it.