RAF Officer Faces Jail - Refuses to Go To Iraq
Darth,
Start by telling the truth when making public statements.
Take a few fact finding trips to the place....see first hand what is going on.
Read the full intelligence summaries personally....form your opinion from the "best" data possible. Some of the biggest mouths never even read the intel summaries....bad as they were.
Had they...and had been as keen a mind as they claim...they would not have been so quick to vote for the resolution that allowed the President to take the actions he did.
They should attack the policy and not the man...they certainly have not done that.
Quiet statesmanship behind closed doors....persuasion works too....not standing out in front of the cameras getting face time and making such arse hole statements they do.
Every action they take should be weighed against the possible harm it presents....then...after careful consideration of the harm...and considering lives and limbs are at risk....do and say sensible, rational, reasonable things that work to persuade opinon. It would help if they had a real alternative proposal.
One must remember the Cut and Run Brigade....to the man and woman...voted for the Resolution...everyone of them.
It seems a bit two faced now....to shove all of the blame onto the President alone. It is entertaining to listen to sound bites from the period prior to the war starting....and now....from the critics. They sure did not object then....but do so now. I am not comfortable with that myself. You kick off the game....you play till the whistle blows at the end.
Start by telling the truth when making public statements.
Take a few fact finding trips to the place....see first hand what is going on.
Read the full intelligence summaries personally....form your opinion from the "best" data possible. Some of the biggest mouths never even read the intel summaries....bad as they were.
Had they...and had been as keen a mind as they claim...they would not have been so quick to vote for the resolution that allowed the President to take the actions he did.
They should attack the policy and not the man...they certainly have not done that.
Quiet statesmanship behind closed doors....persuasion works too....not standing out in front of the cameras getting face time and making such arse hole statements they do.
Every action they take should be weighed against the possible harm it presents....then...after careful consideration of the harm...and considering lives and limbs are at risk....do and say sensible, rational, reasonable things that work to persuade opinon. It would help if they had a real alternative proposal.
One must remember the Cut and Run Brigade....to the man and woman...voted for the Resolution...everyone of them.
It seems a bit two faced now....to shove all of the blame onto the President alone. It is entertaining to listen to sound bites from the period prior to the war starting....and now....from the critics. They sure did not object then....but do so now. I am not comfortable with that myself. You kick off the game....you play till the whistle blows at the end.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASless - You are clear and precise in what you think John Kerry
did in helping the U.S loose the Vietnam War. Much as John Kerry and the likes of Fonda and other peace activists did to bring it to an end - I think the true blame can be put at the feet of some of the political decisions. The premature stop to the bombing of Hanoi which was demoralising the enemy and the inability to do anything about ships docking with SAM's had a lot more to do with it. Mr Kerry did his bit - I am sure with more research you will find that he did nothing there at all and it was all a dream he had . Faced with a choice however I am sure George W got the better posting ! Indeed why would he want to boast about being in Florida during the Vietnam War?
As for giving support to the enemy - your 'war on terror' was always fought abroad prior to 2001. He however had our war on terror at home a long time before the U.S felt outrages at home.
Indeed for a number of years the U.S was a refuge that IRA killer's could use safe in the knowledge that it would take years to get extradited to the U.K. Similarily the last British soldier to die in the troubles was killed by a Barrett 50 calibre sniper rifle.
This was support from within the U.S to aid terrorists - very much
a matter of aiding the enemy if you are this side of the pond.
I cannot remember rallys against this support happening in the U.S - or for that matter congress speaking out against it
and introducing draconian measures against the terrorists and their supporters.
did in helping the U.S loose the Vietnam War. Much as John Kerry and the likes of Fonda and other peace activists did to bring it to an end - I think the true blame can be put at the feet of some of the political decisions. The premature stop to the bombing of Hanoi which was demoralising the enemy and the inability to do anything about ships docking with SAM's had a lot more to do with it. Mr Kerry did his bit - I am sure with more research you will find that he did nothing there at all and it was all a dream he had . Faced with a choice however I am sure George W got the better posting ! Indeed why would he want to boast about being in Florida during the Vietnam War?
As for giving support to the enemy - your 'war on terror' was always fought abroad prior to 2001. He however had our war on terror at home a long time before the U.S felt outrages at home.
Indeed for a number of years the U.S was a refuge that IRA killer's could use safe in the knowledge that it would take years to get extradited to the U.K. Similarily the last British soldier to die in the troubles was killed by a Barrett 50 calibre sniper rifle.
This was support from within the U.S to aid terrorists - very much
a matter of aiding the enemy if you are this side of the pond.
I cannot remember rallys against this support happening in the U.S - or for that matter congress speaking out against it
and introducing draconian measures against the terrorists and their supporters.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASless,
Why? Because it is nothing more than a rant, using the tired old lines of putting troops at risk through wanting them safely home. I mean, if Mr. Stark's son on his 3rd tour of Iraq comes to any harm, perhaps Stark Jnr's father is to blame more than Murtha?
Murtha is doing more to save lives on both sides of this conflict than Mr Stark and his son are. That is admirable, and he's taking a lot of stick for it.
No, I love to hear views other than mine (that being most of the reason I loiter around on PPRUNE). Many thoughtful points have been put forward; this rant from Mr. Stark hardly qualifies.
Free Speech? Yep, I'm a big fan too. Kerry is a skunk? Yep, I agree again - I reckon he is from much the same build as the Republican leadership.
It isn't cut and run, SASless....it's a war we shouldn't have been in in the first place. Not that I don't think Iraq needed serious attending to, but it just didn't need us supporting it's **** regime in the first place, it did not need us contributing directly or indirectly to the deaths of tens, hundreds of thousands of people, at a time when we needed the average Muslim in the street to see us as acceptable human alternatives.
And the people who got the troops there in the first place, and who refuse to give a clear indication of when Iraq will belong to Iraqi's again are helping our troops stay alive? Orwell was a man ahead of his time.
Sadly that is what you get when you run political regime like Bush's, that stridently marches out against half the population, let alone alienating the world population. He is hated to the extreme by most people on earth it would seem. Is it surprising that the Americans who don't support him will do anything they can to get him out? He is a liability and in my mind a bigger threat to America than Osama bin Laden could ever be.
If I was a doctor in 1939 Germany, I would have serious ethical issues with heading to the front knowing I would be directly supporting a war effort. The saving of lives is one thing, knowing that this role is being used to prop up a bloody and illegal war is another.
It's a fine line, I agree, but this man is putting his balls on the line with his decision, and I doubt very much he is getting an easy ride by chosing this approach.
I absolutely disagree with that. Every word of it. This is a convenient line to scare people and motivate them into supporting the unsupportable.
I enlisted, but I never expected I would be in a situation like Iraq. Fortunately with a bit of thought and using my own countries experience in Vietnam I realised I might just find myself engaging in something utterly wrong and couldn't possibly justify serving further in the knowledge my country could put me in that position. Some people might not have thought it through that far (the army relies on people not thinking these issues through), and I suspect the Doctor is perhaps one of them.
For the record, I certainly don't align myself with Kerry, but if given the choice of Kerry or Bush, Kerry would have it. That's a sad indictment on the state of US democracy.
Enough said from me....we are way off topic here.
Why? Because it is nothing more than a rant, using the tired old lines of putting troops at risk through wanting them safely home. I mean, if Mr. Stark's son on his 3rd tour of Iraq comes to any harm, perhaps Stark Jnr's father is to blame more than Murtha?
Murtha is doing more to save lives on both sides of this conflict than Mr Stark and his son are. That is admirable, and he's taking a lot of stick for it.
No, I love to hear views other than mine (that being most of the reason I loiter around on PPRUNE). Many thoughtful points have been put forward; this rant from Mr. Stark hardly qualifies.
Free Speech? Yep, I'm a big fan too. Kerry is a skunk? Yep, I agree again - I reckon he is from much the same build as the Republican leadership.
It isn't cut and run, SASless....it's a war we shouldn't have been in in the first place. Not that I don't think Iraq needed serious attending to, but it just didn't need us supporting it's **** regime in the first place, it did not need us contributing directly or indirectly to the deaths of tens, hundreds of thousands of people, at a time when we needed the average Muslim in the street to see us as acceptable human alternatives.
The Cut and Run Brigade are indirectly responsible for harm coming to our troops by using the war as a method of hopefully regaining their own lost power.
They hate Bush and the Republican Party more than they love the country and forsake National interests for purely personal issues at a time when we are engaged in a war.
His orders boil down to go to a combat area and attempt to save as many lives as possible.....not kill people.
It's a fine line, I agree, but this man is putting his balls on the line with his decision, and I doubt very much he is getting an easy ride by chosing this approach.
Whether you agree with the reasons given...our countries and society in general are at "War" with a determined enemy which seek to destroy us. Iraq is but one campaign in that war.
If you do not like what you are being asked to do....then resign....leave....depart....but do so honorably. You signed a contract when you entered....abide by the contract terms.
For the record, I certainly don't align myself with Kerry, but if given the choice of Kerry or Bush, Kerry would have it. That's a sad indictment on the state of US democracy.
Enough said from me....we are way off topic here.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: England
Posts: 964
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NC43
Thank you so much for your yuletide greeting, the same of course goes to you. No i do not have an MBA i have an MSc and you still did not answer the questions posed.
SASless
Where did the Iraqis get Chemical and Biological weapons from, including the technology to manufacture these items in the long term???? Mmmm let me think, ooh i know it was the United States of America wasnt it. This entire mess was created by the USA and it all seems to be part of the Bush family 20 year business plan. To which businessman have the Bush family paid 100's of millions to ship Texan oil around the world??? Osama Bin Ladens Father! (owner of Bin Laden shipping), Mmm wondered why the only flights permitted in the USA the day after 9/11 were those flyng Saudi nationals and Royals out of country(including many members of the Bin Laden family -bet they could have helped with the investigation as to their brothers whereabouts!)
Bush wants to get rid of Islamic fundamentalists, when we went to War he said "God is on our side, God has told me to do it". We all worship the same God (there is but one!), why is he on our side?? It sounds to me like Bush is a Christian fundamentalist (we have seen what they are capable of in the 4th century BC and during the years of the Inquisition).
You talk about freedom and free speech, yet the USA is really not the best example example of such is it. With the latest reforms, you are not a free society and speech is not free. Why should i have to tune into liberal radio stations to get a realistic view of world events?Why can that not be done on any radio station? Is it because of things such as the chief press officer appointed to the Bush administration in the whitehouse was the husband of the CEO of CNN?. With the political gerrymandering that goes on in the USA it is not even a democracy. The Bush administration Illegally altered the political maps for the regions in which senetors represented. Even down to the extent of extending borders down particular roads known to be favourable to republicans. During your last elections the results were known before the event. There were only 17 seats that had to be contested because the outcome was unsure. The republicans will also change the law on eligibility for presidential nomination, guess who will be next for president to ensure the republican reign?? Arnold Swartznegger (sp?) mark my words. The USA is not a true democracy.
I have many good decent friends in the USA, and my heart goes out to the brave men and women doing their job in the military, but i get fed up with people who are utterly brainwashed into thinking that the USA should be the world vision of Utopia, because that is really scary. Maybe it would help the USA's outlook on how they should participate in world events if the people travelled more. Are you aware that only 3 % of americans have a passport. Even more scary is that out of the 160 odd countries in the world the USA has a military presence in 142!
Anyway getting back on track, if the Doc doesnt want to go then it is his Human democratic right to make that choice (yes maybe he shouldnt have joined but he has the right to decide, even if i dont agree with him)
merry christmas (seems like we're jousting again!)
Tigsy
Thank you so much for your yuletide greeting, the same of course goes to you. No i do not have an MBA i have an MSc and you still did not answer the questions posed.
SASless
Where did the Iraqis get Chemical and Biological weapons from, including the technology to manufacture these items in the long term???? Mmmm let me think, ooh i know it was the United States of America wasnt it. This entire mess was created by the USA and it all seems to be part of the Bush family 20 year business plan. To which businessman have the Bush family paid 100's of millions to ship Texan oil around the world??? Osama Bin Ladens Father! (owner of Bin Laden shipping), Mmm wondered why the only flights permitted in the USA the day after 9/11 were those flyng Saudi nationals and Royals out of country(including many members of the Bin Laden family -bet they could have helped with the investigation as to their brothers whereabouts!)
Bush wants to get rid of Islamic fundamentalists, when we went to War he said "God is on our side, God has told me to do it". We all worship the same God (there is but one!), why is he on our side?? It sounds to me like Bush is a Christian fundamentalist (we have seen what they are capable of in the 4th century BC and during the years of the Inquisition).
You talk about freedom and free speech, yet the USA is really not the best example example of such is it. With the latest reforms, you are not a free society and speech is not free. Why should i have to tune into liberal radio stations to get a realistic view of world events?Why can that not be done on any radio station? Is it because of things such as the chief press officer appointed to the Bush administration in the whitehouse was the husband of the CEO of CNN?. With the political gerrymandering that goes on in the USA it is not even a democracy. The Bush administration Illegally altered the political maps for the regions in which senetors represented. Even down to the extent of extending borders down particular roads known to be favourable to republicans. During your last elections the results were known before the event. There were only 17 seats that had to be contested because the outcome was unsure. The republicans will also change the law on eligibility for presidential nomination, guess who will be next for president to ensure the republican reign?? Arnold Swartznegger (sp?) mark my words. The USA is not a true democracy.
I have many good decent friends in the USA, and my heart goes out to the brave men and women doing their job in the military, but i get fed up with people who are utterly brainwashed into thinking that the USA should be the world vision of Utopia, because that is really scary. Maybe it would help the USA's outlook on how they should participate in world events if the people travelled more. Are you aware that only 3 % of americans have a passport. Even more scary is that out of the 160 odd countries in the world the USA has a military presence in 142!
Anyway getting back on track, if the Doc doesnt want to go then it is his Human democratic right to make that choice (yes maybe he shouldnt have joined but he has the right to decide, even if i dont agree with him)
merry christmas (seems like we're jousting again!)
Tigsy
Last edited by Tigs2; 15th Dec 2005 at 12:29.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The gulag
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tigs 2
OK I’ll bite just this last time. I imagined I had answered all your questions so I’ll do it in slow time .
What was won? The war was won (coalition were the victors) and events after the war, viz., the peace, is not being won. See dictionary for definition of victory. Whatever you mean it to be is purely up to you. The peace is the restoration of sevices, change of institutions and mindsets.
Do I think the guys did not predict the insurgency, yes I do think that because I fully believe they thought a different scenario would be the result. Iraq is not peopled by a homogenous group of people; they are ethnically diverse and do not have a common purpose. The greater number of the population were those people that SH persecuted and perhaps it was thought that they would be more sympathetic to coalition…the events post GW1 suggested something similar...sadly it has not turned out that way. The peace therefore is a mess and the document to which I alluded confirms that the US think the same way.
You did not say 50-100 per day are dying. Your precise words re deaths in Iraq were: ‘ Before we were there the iraqis did not have 50-100 people dying everyday’. My comprehension of that particular statement is that before our arrival fewer were dying; that before there were less. No Tigs, they had more and the information I provided was a correction of this small error on your part! After a war has been won it often becomes necessary to change the institutions and mindsets and whilst you did not mention mindsets and institutions, from the thrust of your mail I took it to be just that. In fact you never mentioned much and certainly didn’t back it up.
If you re-examine my mail you will see that I answered your questions.
Thank you, I bit (foolishly). Have a good festive season.
NC43
OK I’ll bite just this last time. I imagined I had answered all your questions so I’ll do it in slow time .
What was won? The war was won (coalition were the victors) and events after the war, viz., the peace, is not being won. See dictionary for definition of victory. Whatever you mean it to be is purely up to you. The peace is the restoration of sevices, change of institutions and mindsets.
Do I think the guys did not predict the insurgency, yes I do think that because I fully believe they thought a different scenario would be the result. Iraq is not peopled by a homogenous group of people; they are ethnically diverse and do not have a common purpose. The greater number of the population were those people that SH persecuted and perhaps it was thought that they would be more sympathetic to coalition…the events post GW1 suggested something similar...sadly it has not turned out that way. The peace therefore is a mess and the document to which I alluded confirms that the US think the same way.
You did not say 50-100 per day are dying. Your precise words re deaths in Iraq were: ‘ Before we were there the iraqis did not have 50-100 people dying everyday’. My comprehension of that particular statement is that before our arrival fewer were dying; that before there were less. No Tigs, they had more and the information I provided was a correction of this small error on your part! After a war has been won it often becomes necessary to change the institutions and mindsets and whilst you did not mention mindsets and institutions, from the thrust of your mail I took it to be just that. In fact you never mentioned much and certainly didn’t back it up.
If you re-examine my mail you will see that I answered your questions.
Thank you, I bit (foolishly). Have a good festive season.
NC43
TAC Int Bloke
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where did the Iraqis get Chemical and Biological weapons from, including the technology to manufacture these items in the long term???? Mmmm let me think, ooh I know it was the United States of America wasn’t it
Better question is who makes Mirage F-1s, T-72s and Mig-29s?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tigs2,
Why is it that anyone who fancies a bit of Yank Bashing always trots out that tired old stat about how many of them hold a passport?
I believe the number is closer to 5% but it's largely irrelevant. US citizens can travel to Canada, Mexico and most of the Carribean just on a driving license as well as all over their own country which is vast and covers just about every environment you could wish to visit - snow, forests, deserts, cities, coastline.
People do not generally hold a passport so they can expand their minds and knowledge of other cultures but just to go on holiday. If we could visit any country in Europe without a passport, how many Brits would bother having one (apart from the military obviously).
Next time you start equating a balanced, well-informed world view with holding a passport I suggest you consider our beloved chav masses who just hold one so they can go to Ibiza and the Costa del Sol to drink themselves into oblivion for 2 weeks a year!
Rant over.
Seat 17
Why is it that anyone who fancies a bit of Yank Bashing always trots out that tired old stat about how many of them hold a passport?
I believe the number is closer to 5% but it's largely irrelevant. US citizens can travel to Canada, Mexico and most of the Carribean just on a driving license as well as all over their own country which is vast and covers just about every environment you could wish to visit - snow, forests, deserts, cities, coastline.
People do not generally hold a passport so they can expand their minds and knowledge of other cultures but just to go on holiday. If we could visit any country in Europe without a passport, how many Brits would bother having one (apart from the military obviously).
Next time you start equating a balanced, well-informed world view with holding a passport I suggest you consider our beloved chav masses who just hold one so they can go to Ibiza and the Costa del Sol to drink themselves into oblivion for 2 weeks a year!
Rant over.
Seat 17
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 477
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maple - Iraq became a republic in 1958. We supplied Iraq with Hawker Hunters which were a mainstay of their defences until the 1970's. In 1978 Iraq started to purchase Mirage F.1's and continued into the 1980's under Saddam's regime.
There is no doubt that had we had the chance to supply Iraq with equipment in the 1970's we would have. France was more than happy to take oil in exchange for arms in a very similar way to we did with the Saudi Tornado's.
There is no doubt that had we had the chance to supply Iraq with equipment in the 1970's we would have. France was more than happy to take oil in exchange for arms in a very similar way to we did with the Saudi Tornado's.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The gulag
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Riley Dove.
Just a thought. As a budding historian, a good area to look is RUSI (google and type in RUSI). Good, solid, balanced stuff. If you are doing this already, then please disregard.
NC43
Just a thought. As a budding historian, a good area to look is RUSI (google and type in RUSI). Good, solid, balanced stuff. If you are doing this already, then please disregard.
NC43
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Posts: 507
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<<
I believe the number is closer to 5% but it's largely irrelevant. US citizens can travel to Canada, Mexico and most of the Carribean just on a driving license......
>>>
I think US citizens will soon be required to have passports to travel to Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean. Not sure when the requirement takes effect, but it's on the way.
I believe the number is closer to 5% but it's largely irrelevant. US citizens can travel to Canada, Mexico and most of the Carribean just on a driving license......
>>>
I think US citizens will soon be required to have passports to travel to Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean. Not sure when the requirement takes effect, but it's on the way.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: France
Age: 73
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
subject drifting a bit there...
For me it is obvious this doc is willing to make a political point about the legalty of the war in Irak.
But by doing it this way, he only abjures his oath as an officer and as a doctor.
How much more credible his move would have been, had he on receiving his orders resigned from the RAF and offered at the same time to fulfill his tour of duty as a civilian Doc.
For me it is obvious this doc is willing to make a political point about the legalty of the war in Irak.
But by doing it this way, he only abjures his oath as an officer and as a doctor.
How much more credible his move would have been, had he on receiving his orders resigned from the RAF and offered at the same time to fulfill his tour of duty as a civilian Doc.
71% of eligible voters went to the polls in Iraq...to elect their own government...and oddly had more than one candidate to vote for. The Iraqi security forces provided the security. The Iraqi's are counting the votes. The Sunni's turned out in great numbers urged on by over 1100 Clerics. There was no violence to speak of....even the American media could not find anything to report about violence.
Does this sound like a loss....a defeat? Just over two years after the coalition forces entered Iraqi territory we have this happen.
Sorryo folks. This is not what failure or losing is all about.
Despite the threat of bombs, killings, and mayhem....a far greater percentage of Iraqi's came out to vote than in any Western Democracy.
Those of the Cut and Run Brigade....feel free to explain the disaster in this event....please?
Does this sound like a loss....a defeat? Just over two years after the coalition forces entered Iraqi territory we have this happen.
Sorryo folks. This is not what failure or losing is all about.
Despite the threat of bombs, killings, and mayhem....a far greater percentage of Iraqi's came out to vote than in any Western Democracy.
Those of the Cut and Run Brigade....feel free to explain the disaster in this event....please?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASless,
And I see Iran has claimed the elections are a great victory for Iran.
A country is in chaos, thousands are dead, the rest living under occupation, terrorist groups world wide have been given a massive shot in the arm, the US has been seen to be incapable of securing control, a resurgence to theocracy......
I hardly think a democratic election makes this all worth it. Voting for a politican is hardly the highest priority in Iraqi's dail life is it? And they will be more than aware of who exactly currently pulls the strings.
Given the US's habit of forceably removing democratically elected leaders, should this election result not go the way the US wishes, or if successive governments are not to our liking, can we expect democracy to be allowed to exist? Will be interesting see.
Yes, fantastic news, and you do finally have something to be legitimately happy about.....but, you seem to imply the end justifies the means regardless.
And I see Iran has claimed the elections are a great victory for Iran.
A country is in chaos, thousands are dead, the rest living under occupation, terrorist groups world wide have been given a massive shot in the arm, the US has been seen to be incapable of securing control, a resurgence to theocracy......
I hardly think a democratic election makes this all worth it. Voting for a politican is hardly the highest priority in Iraqi's dail life is it? And they will be more than aware of who exactly currently pulls the strings.
Given the US's habit of forceably removing democratically elected leaders, should this election result not go the way the US wishes, or if successive governments are not to our liking, can we expect democracy to be allowed to exist? Will be interesting see.
Yes, fantastic news, and you do finally have something to be legitimately happy about.....but, you seem to imply the end justifies the means regardless.
Dave,
HELLO....71% of eligible voters came out and VOTED!
What turnout rates do you have in your own country's national elections?
It would seem a very great number of Iraqi's....how many Millions of them....deemed it important and voted.
What must it be like....to have some say in what happens in your life after living under a dictatorship like Saddam's reign of terror.
If we add the populations of Afghanistan and Iraq....how many millions of people now are living in democratic societies?
If we also add the positive changes in Palestine/Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Libya, Egypt, and Saudi.....what value can you place on that?
End justifying the means.....well...in a word....Yes!
Keep looking down the road Dave....years down the road...not days.
HELLO....71% of eligible voters came out and VOTED!
What turnout rates do you have in your own country's national elections?
It would seem a very great number of Iraqi's....how many Millions of them....deemed it important and voted.
What must it be like....to have some say in what happens in your life after living under a dictatorship like Saddam's reign of terror.
If we add the populations of Afghanistan and Iraq....how many millions of people now are living in democratic societies?
If we also add the positive changes in Palestine/Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Libya, Egypt, and Saudi.....what value can you place on that?
End justifying the means.....well...in a word....Yes!
Keep looking down the road Dave....years down the road...not days.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 358
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SASLess,
Well, I'm pretty sure if I had endured what the Iraqi's had over the last two years, now apparently all for the justification of being able to vote, then I would turn out as well.
But I don't think you can really argue that food on the plate, security and seeing an end to occupation wouldn't be a bigger issue to Iraqi's immediate welfare than casting votes, surely? We can guarantee elections, but we can't guarantee survival, or even an end to occuption? Might there be an issue of priorities?
It's all very well saying the end justifies the means - but then, you don't have to endure the means, do you?
I'll look forward to the US reaction to elections in Bolivia and the ongoing reaction to the democratic election in Venezuela (need we forget those distant memories of Nicaragua and Chile), and however much we hate him, a duly elected president of Iran.
Democray seems to be a very flexibile ideal where the US is involved. You seem to think there will be a massive wave of democratisation? All well and good, many will democratise, but in their wake will be those that we deny, and equally so, those that wish to, but for whom, unfortunate alliances between ourselves and their dictators preclude that.
One step forward, followed by one step back, SASless. Take off the rose tinted glasses.
Well, I'm pretty sure if I had endured what the Iraqi's had over the last two years, now apparently all for the justification of being able to vote, then I would turn out as well.
But I don't think you can really argue that food on the plate, security and seeing an end to occupation wouldn't be a bigger issue to Iraqi's immediate welfare than casting votes, surely? We can guarantee elections, but we can't guarantee survival, or even an end to occuption? Might there be an issue of priorities?
It's all very well saying the end justifies the means - but then, you don't have to endure the means, do you?
I'll look forward to the US reaction to elections in Bolivia and the ongoing reaction to the democratic election in Venezuela (need we forget those distant memories of Nicaragua and Chile), and however much we hate him, a duly elected president of Iran.
Democray seems to be a very flexibile ideal where the US is involved. You seem to think there will be a massive wave of democratisation? All well and good, many will democratise, but in their wake will be those that we deny, and equally so, those that wish to, but for whom, unfortunate alliances between ourselves and their dictators preclude that.
One step forward, followed by one step back, SASless. Take off the rose tinted glasses.
I'll look forward to the US reaction to elections in Bolivia and the ongoing reaction to the democratic election in Venezuela (need we forget those distant memories of Nicaragua and Chile), and however much we hate him, a duly elected president of Iran.
