Is Iraq about to turn into Iran 2.0?

[The Duke]

I don't meant to be rude, but you clearly know nothing about Shi'a Islam, Iraq-Iran relations, the united Shia list, or Ali Sistani.  The question itself is stupid.  It has been borught up by the same people who ebfore the war said the Shia were all radicals and would launch a radical uprising against he coalition.  Anyone who says this stuff doesn't know what they're talking about.

[The Duke]

Actually, they were pretty happy when we got there.  Once again, actual facts have no impact on the anti-war crowd.

[The Duke]

Um, Chalabi is HEAVILY linked to Iran. He was passing info to them. Why do you think the US raided his house awhile ago?

Evidence, please.

Like all the charges against Chalabi, this one is unsubstantiated by evidence.  I wonder what BRTD would think if the police raided his house without a warrant?  And if they found no evidence in this raid, as they found no eveidence indicting Chalabi, would he presume his own guilt simply because he had been targeted by the police?

I think the idiocy of his claim is now quite evident.

Actually, they were pretty happy when we got there.  Once again, actual facts have no impact on the anti-war crowd.

That was then, this is now. It has been known for months that Allawi's approval rate had been sliding, and it looks like he'll be voted out...

I don't think Allawi's electability has much to do with the popularity of the US or the feelings of Iraqis towards the notion of liberation.

This is also the first time an anti-war liberal has admitted to me that we were greeted as liberators, so the photo actually is quite significant and there are many more.

[The Duke]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We elft Iraq two days ahead of schedule?  Someone better tell the 130,000 Marines and Army that.

Allawi a puppet?  Can anyone say "Najaf standoff"?  You don't seem to follow Iraqi news very closely.

I'd like you to dig up the thread where I endorsed apartheid.  I'd be happy to bring up the thread where I called DeKlerk one of the greatest African leaders ever, though.  I have said, and do believe that black voters in South Africa keep voting ANC out of bitterness towards the whites, and it has been to their own detriment.  It is a bad decision and their country is worse off than it should and could be, but I've never endorsed apartheid and I challenge you to find where I did.

[The Duke]

We elft Iraq two days ahead of schedule?  Someone better tell the 130,000 Marines and Army that.

I'd like you to dig up the thread where I endorsed apartheid.  I'd be happy to bring up the thread where I called DeKlerk one of the greatest African leaders ever, though.  I have said, and do believe that black voters in South Africa keep voting ANC out of bitterness towards the whites, and it has been to their own detriment.  It is a bad decision and their country is worse off than it should and could be, but I've never endorsed apartheid and I challenge you to find where I did.

Yes, remember? On June 28 when everyone said it was going to be on June 30.

The ANC has turned South Africa into a rathole.

They are the single most destructive force in any Demcoratic country in the world right now.

The only reason they win is because the blacks in South Africa are too pissed off to think straight.

Still pining for Apartheid? eh? eh?

Hardly.  But remember that it was DeKlerk, not the ANC, that dismantled apartheid.

What bothers me is that because of Nelson Mandela's incompetence, a generation of children in South Africa will grow up too illiterate to read this message.

I guess that spells it out. Yes, you never really said apartheid was good but still...you imply that blacks are too dumb to rule themselves.



And one last thing, that picture of Iraqis waving the US flag on the thread? Yes, it's always true that when there's a regime change people welcome it. Same happened in Germany with Hitler, Russia with Lenin, China with Mao, Cuba with Castro, and...

We didn't leave Iraq two days ahead of schedule, we transferred sovereignty two days ahead of schedule.  Idiot.

And I didn't endorse Apartheid, in fact I specifically said I din't endorse apartheid.  Al sarcastically implied that any opposition to the ANC was equivalent to apartheid, and I pointeed out that this was incorrect.  Idiot.

I guess you once again are La Canadienne.

[The Duke]

Um, Chalabi is HEAVILY linked to Iran. He was passing info to them. Why do you think the US raided his house awhile ago?

Evidence, please.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/21/iraq.chalabi/
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120535,00.html
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001935950_iranchalabi22.html
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=5115
http://theage.com.au/articles/2004/06/02/1086058913867.html?from=storylhs&oneclick=true

Bush completley changed his story on Chalabi.  He started to mention that he only met with Chalabi in passing or something of that regard, however Chalabi sat DIRECTLY behind Laura Bush at the 2004 SOTU.  Interesting that someone who you barley know sits right behind your wife at a major speech...

There's no evidence in those stoires!  Repeatedly, they claim to have "rock solid" evidence, but they never produce it.  Don't show me claims that someone says they have evidence, show me the actual evidence itself.

If I said that someone was guilty of murder, and ad rock solid evidence, would you assume I had that evidence, bypass any actual investigation, and put the person in jail?  Of course not.  You'd want the actual evidence.  Yet here, you provide not one iota of evidence!

[The Duke]

Probably because someone told him that Chalabi was dirty, emphatically claimed to have evidence, and Bush believed him without asking any mroe questions.

[The Duke]

Squireling away from our problems?  I reiterate, 130,000 Marines beg to differ.

So you admit I never endorsed Apartheid, and in so doing admit that your ad hominem against was totally illegitimate.

A country not being free is different form a country being a dictatorship like Iraq was.  They are not truly free, but they are not dictatorships either.  Kuwait has an elected government, for example.  Jordan has econoomic and political freedoms for citizens.  There is a key difference between the behavior of these ations and Iraq, if you can't see that then there's really nothing anyone can say to help you out.

Your right I do live near Mexico.  Mexicans seem to be quite fond of America since over a million Latin American immigrants come here each year.  You don't immigrate to a country you hate.

[The Duke]

Yes, even if it's just the government. Bush tried to delay the elections until it was too late, and you know what? the results will be announced in three hours time and it won't be a puppet state, I can assure you.

Suddenly the military isn't part of the govenrment?  Bush did not try to delay the elections.  He was urged to by people outside the Administration, but declined, stating it would result in a loss of US credibility not ot follow thorugh on our promise.

You're not making much sense, and you don't seem to have much of a grasp of the facts.

Second, I don't think a regime that doesn't allow women from voting (Kuwait) and practices intimidation of opposition supporters (Jordan) and public beheadings and cutting off the hands off theives (Saudi) is democratic, no? UNless if you change the definition of democracy.

I didn't say they were democracies, now did I?  I said they weren't dictatorships like Saddam's Iraq, and they're not.  All three are better on human rights, and all three are moving towards democracy at some future date, but I did not describe them as democracies, so don't invent a position, attribute it to me, and then turn around and say my position is wrong, when in fact I never held that position to begin with.

And about Mexico, yes. Go to any village there and they will view their northern neughbour as arrogant and everything. They migate north in droves for money. And they bloody well are aware of, say the ghetto culture of south-central LA. Gotta love Hollywood.

You've failed to connect your point about ghetto culture to this discussion, but anyway.  The point is, people may btich and moan, but the truth is the don't go to a country they hate, and the hispanics I know are often among the most patriotic people in this country.


Lets recap, shall we?

You have made multiple inaccurate statements of fact, accused me of supporting apartheid, slandered the character of Ahmed Chalabi without presenting evidence against him, etc.  After all of these accusation, you have either admitte you were wrong, or have simply dropped the point and acted as if nothing had happenned.  You have made a total and complete fool of yourself in public and if you had any shame, you'd flagellate yourself in repentance.

[The Duke]

And now we come full circle.

I bring up your abandoned line of attack about Chalabi, in response to which you bring up the same tired anti-Chalabi garbage.  To which I repeat my rebuttal: If the police raid a persons home, does that mean they are guilty?  Of course not, and yet this is exactly what you imply when you say that Chalabi's house being raided proves that he was selling secrets to Iran.

You continue on this nonsense about apartheid.  Yet you have still failed to produce any serious evidence to back up your allegations.  The last time you tried, I got you to admit that your "evidence" was garbage.  Care to go in complete circles on this issue as well?

[The Duke]

And now we come full circle.

I bring up your abandoned line of attack about Chalabi, in response to which you bring up the same tired anti-Chalabi garbage.  To which I repeat my rebuttal: If the police raid a persons home, does that mean they are guilty?  Of course not, and yet this is exactly what you imply when you say that Chalabi's house being raided proves that he was selling secrets to Iran.

You continue on this nonsense about apartheid.  Yet you have still failed to produce any serious evidence to back up your allegations.  The last time you tried, I got you to admit that your "evidence" was garbage.  Care to go in complete circles on this issue as well?

Well, it's still true that Chalabi was found guilty of bank fraud while he lived in Jordan. And that before the Iraq election the Iraqi justice ministry said they were to catch Chalabi and hand him over to the ICC. Oh and about his house being raided? That at least got Bush to dump this guy and opt for another guy who worked for Saddam's secret police. Way to liberate a country!

You mean the notoriously corrupt Jordanian court system?  The country that just a few posts ago you said had a government that locked people up for their politics?

Allawi a Saddamite?  You mean the guy that tried to lead a CIA coup to overthrow Saddam in 1996?

[The Duke]

And about bank fraud, umm, well, why didn't he criticese the Jordanian court system when he lived in London? Is Blair suddenly a dictator?

Ever since the conviction was handed down, he has criticized the Jordanian court system.

You missed the point, anyway.  The point is you're being unserious in trying to have things both ways.

Either Jordan is a corrupt autocracy that abuses private citizens so Bush is bad for dealing with them -OR- Jordan has a valid system of legal protections for citizens so the Chalabi conviction is unimpeachable.

You can't have it both ways.

[The Duke]

Did I ever say I didn't accept that Allawi was in Saddam's secret police?  All I said was that its dishonest to present only partial pieces of information to people.  To present Allawi as a Ba'athist thug is akin to presenting Rommel as a Nazi stooge.  Rommel was a German general, but he gave his life in a plot to overthrow Hitler.  Just as Allawi risked his life trying to undo what Saddam had done.  Allawi isn't my favorite guy on Earth, but I don't like people presenting only partial pieces of information.

As for shooting six people, treatment of military prisoners is held to a different standard than civilian crime like bank fraud.  It always has been, in every country I know of, including this one.  To pretend that shooting six insurgents is akin to political convictions over bank fraud is self-evidently ludicrous.

You may or may not realize that you still have nothing but invective and innuendo against Chalabi.

[The Duke]

The US did not train Osama, nro were we the primary sponsor of Saddam's Iraq (that distinction belongs to the USSR and France, the left's two favorite countries).

Taliban is not spelled with an "o".

I am okay with Allawi leading Iraq, just as I am comfortable with Dwight Eisenhower being President of the US.  Killing enemy soldiers doesn't make you a bad person in and of itself.

Who said the enemy of my enemy is my friend?  All I said was that its okay for Allawi to kill terrorists.  I actually appreciate a head of state willing to to some of the killing on his own.

I will presume that the "cooking the books" referenmce is another line against Chalabi, to which I reply that you have still produced no idicting evidence against him.  In fact, you haven't even produced circumstantial evidence against him.

I also reiterate, if you think it is customary for enemy soldiers to get a trial, then you know absolutely nothing about legal history.

[The Duke]

The US did not train Osama[quote/]
Read a history book. The west clearly gave aid to religious extremists in Afghanistan just because they opposed the Russians. And it was reckoned that if the Soviets had access to the Indian Ocean (Afghanistan being just 400km away) the they win the Cold War.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And that place under the bridge you live is getting crowded. NixonNow, Nomo, Philip. Shira, etc...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's a typo

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That kills America's claim that it's for democracy.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Without trials? Without warrents or anything? The Red Cross says about 70% of Abu Gharib inmates are innocent.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You're heartless. Let's see George Bush rampaging into prisons and shooting it up, then. In fact, let's round up everyone who disagrees with the Bushies, call them terrorists and kill them. Yeah. Let's make Hitler spin in his grave. Seriously though, Reuters says that some Iraqis were beaten up for making anti-occupation statements.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have now:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Chalabi

And besides, if Bush was thinking Chalabi is innocent why did he dump this guy for PM?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So the Geneva Convention never existed? Strange. Oh, and the six people werent soldiers; they were insurgents.

[/quote]

Please fix your post if you expect a response.

[The Duke]

The US did not train Osama

Read a history book. The west clearly gave aid to religious extremists in Afghanistan just because they opposed the Russians. And it was reckoned that if the Soviets had access to the Indian Ocean (Afghanistan being just 400km away) the they win the Cold War.

You are an idiot.  I have gone into this several times on this forum and have neither the time nor the inclination to do so again.  We only funded the Hezbis and the Jamiat.  The claim that the US trained/funded Osama is spouted only by the ignorant and the treasonous.  Given your track record, I’ve no intention of giving you the respect to call you a traitor, you are beneath even that fool.

, nor were we the primary sponsor of Saddam's Iraq

Again, the entire western world aided this guy. Saying the US didn't help as much as France did is like saying it's okay to murder one person since there are serial killers out there.

The US provided only 0.005% of Saddam’s arsenal, in dollar terms.  Only a few WWII era artillery pieces out of a scrapyard.  If you consider this significant enough to mention, I suggest you learn a little about world affairs and come out of your ivory tower.

(that distinction belongs to the USSR and France, the left's two favorite countries).

You're a complete dumbass.

g profound.

I am okay with Allawi leading Iraq, just as I am comfortable with Dwight Eisenhower being President of the US.  Killing enemy soldiers doesn't make you a bad person in and of itself.

That kills America's claim that it's for democracy.

You seem to be confused on what constitutes a democracy.  A democratic nation is one that allows elections to determine the leaders, guarantees rights for citizens, etc.  It does not renounce the obligation to defend itself.

Who said the enemy of my enemy is my friend?  All I said was that its okay for Allawi to kill terrorists.

Without trials? Without warrents or anything? The Red Cross says about 70% of Abu Gharib inmates are innocent.

The Red Cross bases this on what?  Their evaluations of prisoner treatment so far have been repeatedly off the mark, I’d be hard pressed to accept their conclusions.

These particular terrorists were not held in Abu Ghraib.

Yes, without trials or warrants or anything, stupid.  This isn’t criminal law, its warfare.  A different set of legal rules apply.  Take civics 101 and you’ll learn that.

I actually appreciate a head of state willing to do some of the killing on his own.

You're heartless. Let's see George Bush rampaging into prisons and shooting it up, then. In fact, let's round up everyone who disagrees with the Bushies, call them terrorists and kill them. Yeah. Let's make Hitler spin in his grave. Seriously though, Reuters says that some Iraqis were beaten up for making anti-occupation statements.

Well, if Reuters said so, I guess that justifies this mindlessly irrelevant non-sequitor.  Stay on topic please; they make some mighty good pills for ADD if you need some.  Ritalin for beginners, Dexadrine for those who like intense headaches.

These people weren’t shot for disagreeing with the occupation; they were shot for trying to kill American soldiers.  You know the people who defend the free world while Canada is busy smoking government distributed weed.

I will presume that the "cooking the books" referenmce is another line against Chalabi, to which I reply that you have still produced no idicting evidence against him.  In fact, you haven't even produced circumstantial evidence against him.

I have now:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Chalabi

And besides, if Bush was thinking Chalabi is innocent why did he dump this guy for PM?

Do you even know what evidence is?  This article contains no evidence, it only points out that he was investigated.  I never mentions a specific piece of evidence that prompted the investigation, only the factual statement that he was investigated, and since no charges were pressed, we can only presume that insufficient evidence existed to bring to man to jail.  Jesus, anyone whose seen CSI knows what evidence is.

And Bush didn’t pick the Prime Minister, as you would have known if you read the article THAT YOU POSTED!  Lakdhar Brahimi, the UN envoy, chose Iyad Allawi as PM.  Bush had nothing to do with Chalabi being chosen or rejected.  It is worth noting though, that Chalabi is one of the last two men up for the Prime Ministership of the new elected government.  All the Chalabi haters who called him a con-man can eat crow now that Iraqis are on the verge of choosing the alleged American stooge on their own.

I also reiterate, if you think it is customary for enemy soldiers to get a trial, then you know absolutely nothing about legal history.

So the Geneva Convention never existed? Strange. Oh, and the six people werent soldiers; they were insurgents.

And what about this

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/02/02/iraq.oil.smuggle/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/ wp-dyn/A52241-2002Dec29?language=printer

The Geneva Convention contains myriad goofball demands for treatment of enemy soldiers, but never is a trial mentioned.  Do you think we gave trials to hundreds of thousands of German or Japanese POWs?  Simple practicality should have rung a little bell in your head that its not realistically possible to try enemy soldiers for their crimes, which is precisely why its not contained in the Geneva Conventions.

You links appear to be a Error 404 and another non-sequiter about Oil For Food that has nothing to do with this conversation.

Look, its cute how you tried to keep pace with me and all, but I don't have tie to deal with pro-terrorist idf=iots who can't stay on topic, lanch off on unrelated tangents, get basic historical facts wrong, cannot discern between accusation and evidence, and have nonsensical utopian pacifist politics.  Just let it go.  I am a legend of this board, you can never defeat me, for I am your better.

Adieu, La Candienne.

[The Duke]

LOL. I love how chickenhawks call anyone who disagree with them traitors.

Since all you do is bash the US and defend the rights of terrorists, I don't think its hard to discern where yor sympathies lie.

[The Duke]

I didn't say you were a terrorist, did I?  I said you defended the rights of terrorists.  There's a big difference, and once again you prove what a failure the Candian school system is with your inability to do basic reading comprehension.

US culture is inseperable from our government, seeing as we elected them on the grounds that they best represent our values and ideas.

There are two reasons I didn't click on your al Jazeera link:

1. Al Jazeera is not a serious news organization, they are the propaganda arm of radical Islam.

2. Your link didn't work anyway because you're an idiot who didn't post it properly.

Even if I had, what the hell does it have to do with what we're talking about?  This is why I say you hate America, you admit to not having any idea what the motive was behind the US action, yet you post it in the most accusatory way you can think of  You admit you're own ignorance, then turn around and pretend you know why America is bad because they do X, Y, and Z.

Bin Laden did not create the MAK.  The MAk was created by the ISI.  The MAK did not exclusively give to bin Laden, it gave to all Muj groups and you could ear mark where your money went.  Saying that US contributions to the MAK are equal to US support for bin Laden is like saying that I put my money in Bank of America, you got a loan from BofA, therefore, I gave you a loan.  uhhh, no.

Idiot.

[The Duke]

So Sharon just wants to gobble up Palestinian territory?  Even though he's taken great risk to pull out of as much of territories as he can?  Man, something's wrong your brain.

[The Duke]

It doesn't matter if Al Jazeera wrote the story or not, goddammit, if the damn link doesn't work anyway!

You fooled me?  Really?  Pretty sure you didn't.  You can criticize Martin, you can criticize Candian policy, but you can't demonstrate a pattern of criticizing your country without supporting evidence while praising its enemies and defending them.

[The Duke]

I-Spy,

If you'd like me to waste my time finding every picture of happy Iraqis, I can dig up hundreds.  Most people however, were able to recognize the purpose of this picture: Leftists claim we were not welcomed by Iraqs, I have photographic proof that this claim is false, here is a sample of said proof, now have a nice tall glass of shut the  up.