PDA

View Full Version : World News USA abandons financial commitment to Iraq



Pages : [1] 2

Atomik
03-01--2006, 10:39 AM
Who'd have thought it, eh?


Bush pulls the plug on Iraq reconstruction

$18bn funding to stop at end of year

Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Tuesday January 3, 2006
The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/)

The Bush administration has scaled back its ambitions to rebuild Iraq from the devastation wrought by war and dictatorship and does not intend to seek new funds for reconstruction, it emerged yesterday.In a decision that will be seen as a retreat from a promise by President George Bush to give Iraq the best infrastructure in the region, administration officials say they will not seek reconstruction funds when the budget request is presented to Congress next month, the Washington Post reported yesterday.

The $18.4bn (£10.6bn) allocation is scheduled to run out in June 2007. The move will be seen by critics as further evidence of the administration's failure to plan for the aftermath of the war.

A decision not to renew the reconstruction programme would leave Iraq with the burden of tens of billions of dollars in unfinished projects, and an oil industry and electrical grid that have yet to return to pre-war production levels.
Full article here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1676911,00.html).

(http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1676911,00.html)

Boy Anachronism
03-01--2006, 10:58 AM
Ha ha ha ha ha! Way to fuck over the Iraqis Mr President!

matthew
03-01--2006, 09:34 PM
Ha ha ha ha ha! Way to fuck over the Iraqis Mr President!

I think the insurgents have fucked over the Iraqis.. but hey lets blame the usual suspects.

“We're helping to rebuild Iraq, where the dictator built palaces for himself, instead of hospitals and schools. And we will stand with the new leaders of Iraq as they establish a government of, by, and for the Iraqi people.”

Atomik
03-01--2006, 09:38 PM
Yeah, I mean resistance... who'd have expected it? What the fuck did the Americans expect? Iraqi citizens throwing flowers in their path? Oh yeah....

I mean c'mon, matthew. I agree that the majority of the insurgents are cunts who aren't doing Iraq any favours. But that doesn't mean that Bush has clean hands in this. He knew what he was getting into, he promised to rebuild Iraq.... where did he say "so long as it isn't too difficult or expensive"?

matthew
03-01--2006, 10:09 PM
Yeah, I mean resistance... who'd have expected it? What the fuck did the Americans expect? Iraqi citizens throwing flowers in their path? Oh yeah....

I mean c'mon, matthew. I agree that the majority of the insurgents are cunts who aren't doing Iraq any favours. But that doesn't mean that Bush has clean hands in this. He knew what he was getting into, he promised to rebuild Iraq.... where did he say "so long as it isn't too difficult or expensive"?

Using 25% of resources on trying to maintain order .. then having to maintain that as each and every development is put into place.. costs.
You have the anti war groups shouting ''bring our troops home'' or ''Iraq another Vietnam'' for imho unjustified reasons.. a reflection of peoples attitudes.. the possible withdrawl and economic reality of Iraq AND america.. has to be considered.
I think a 'stop' is being put into place [and is wise].
A reasesment in 2007 will occur imho..

I don't deny Bush has 'dirty hands' to a degree.. but it in one swipe brushes over what has been achieved .. and seems to conclude america is abondoning Iraq [wich is not true].

The article does not say ''The majority of insurgents are cunts and are hindering the reconstruction and order of Iraq'' does it.. wich is a better Headline and more accurate.

It just gets ''Ha ha ha ha ha! Way to fuck over the Iraqis Mr President! '' one persons opinion.. i imagine many more peoples opinion.

I edited my above with a quote.. did bush actually state ''I plan on completly rebuilding Iraq'' ?.. It may seem a bit pedantic.. but ''Bush pulls the plug on Iraq reconstruction'' hardly sums up what is actually happening..and may not be what was actually promised [as stated in article] . Blame the 'critics' for implying such things eh ?.


Who is going to go over the finances and reality of this .. ?

Who is just going to conclude ''Way to fuck over the Iraqis Mr President! '' with out bothering ?.

Am i suprised at the tone of the thread.. am i just cynical :whistle:

Atomik
03-01--2006, 10:26 PM
did bush actually state ''I plan on completly rebuilding Iraq'' ?.. It may seem a bit pedantic.. but ''Bush pulls the plug on Iraq reconstruction'' hardly sums up what is actually happening..and may not be what was actually promised [as stated in article] .You're really splitting hairs. He sure as hell promised to rebuild the infrastructure. Not leave before they have running water and electricity.

Rook
04-01--2006, 09:00 AM
Anyone remember the phrase "Lights on war". There was to be minimum collateral damage but the country is shattered. Ok Sadam was a bastard but the west created the monster and do we really believe the CIA couldnt have had him killed without two wars.
Go in, make lots of cash by giving contracts to your mates, tie up the oil contracts, make sure the Middle East stays unstable so the arabs cant unify even if they want to (which they dont) to exploit their natural riches, make sure the arms lobby get lots of new contracts. Distract the public from trouble at home be focusing on foreign policy. (Worked for Napoleon and Thatcher). Create an atmosphere of fear to allow unpopular policy to be pushed through.

Job done. The West leaves.And the buggers did it in the name of freedom and democracy.

matthew
04-01--2006, 11:50 AM
You're really splitting hairs. He sure as hell promised to rebuild the infrastructure. Not leave before they have running water and electricity.

I suppose i am... and i understand that was the intention..all i originally said was i think the insurgency fucked the Iraqi people up .. So the shifting of resources occured..
This was known nearly a year ago..

William Taylor, a U.S. diplomat who oversees Iraqi reconstruction efforts, said the country's violent insurgency has created a "security premium," gobbling up money that would have been spent to provide clean water, electricity and sanitation for Iraqis.

http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/10779.html

http://www.waterwebster.com/IraqWater.htm

If the insurgency were not blowing people and infrastructure up... the funds made available WOULD have covered the reconstruction...

Pouring money into this could happen.. but then you get people having money counters running on Anti war sites don't you.. or '' USA abandons Iraq'' they can't realy win either way.

Atomik
04-01--2006, 11:57 AM
..all i originally said was i think the insurgency fucked the Iraqi people up .. So the shifting of resources occured..I agree with you. I'm not some stupid cunt who thinks they're just a bunch of freedom fighters.

However, all of this was entirely predictable. If the US didn't budget for it, they damn well shoulda done.

matthew
04-01--2006, 12:13 PM
I agree with you. I'm not some stupid cunt who thinks they're just a bunch of freedom fighters.

However, all of this was entirely predictable. If the US didn't budget for it, they damn well shoulda done.

Was Katrina part of the budgeting back in 2003.. ?

Is a never ending supply of money available ?..



I think 10% was budgeted for 'security' too little ?.. possibly.

I think a delicate juggling act has had to be done.. basicaly it just comes back to those darn insurgents imho.

If another 10 billion was promised tommorow [picked up by the Gaurdian say this time in November] .. screams of ''pouring money down the drain'' from some ''what about us Bush'' from katrina victims etc etc etc

What pissed me off about the article was that it was manipulative... and IF more money had been allocated i imagine another derogatory article would have been printed.. This kinda crap is why i gave up on that rag..

Atomik
04-01--2006, 12:44 PM
I think a delicate juggling act has had to be done.. basicaly it just comes back to those darn insurgents imho.So let me get this straight. It's the insurgents falt that Bush isn't keeping his promises, because America started a war with them and they had the nerve to fight back? That's kinda like blaming the vietcong for the Vietnam war being expensive! Technically true, but sorta like blaming gravity if you jump off a cliff and break your leg.

Zonk
04-01--2006, 12:52 PM
So let me get this straight. It's the insurgents falt that Bush isn't keeping his promises, because America started a war with them and they had the nerve to fight back? That's kinda like blaming the vietcong for the Vietnam war being expensive! Technically true, but sorta like blaming gravity if you jump off a cliff and break your leg.

Bush and his outfit....the International version of the SPG?

matthew
04-01--2006, 12:58 PM
So let me get this straight. It's the insurgents falt that Bush isn't keeping his promises,
Erm yeah thats who i blamed from the start of this thread.


because America started a war with them and they had the nerve to fight back?

Fight back is one thing.. killing your fellow countrymen women and children.. blowing up / destroying the infrastucture that is another.
How is that justifiable ?.

Many who raised arms are now decieding the vote is better.. wich is Good . Shame OBL and Saddam Loving Iraqis who wish to go back to the ''good old days'' .. have no thoughts along those lines...unsuprising.


That's kinda like blaming the vietcong for the Vietnam war being expensive! Technically true, but sorta like blaming gravity if you jump off a cliff and break your leg.

Are you defending the never ending attacks of the insurgency ?... I had hoped i had made a reasonable attempt at broading my thoughts out.. seems i have to defend the notion ''its our fault'' i am not man enough for that , i am afraid.

Atomik
04-01--2006, 01:02 PM
Fight back is one thing.. killing your fellow countrymen women and children.. blowing up / destroying the infrastucture that is another.
How is that justifiable ?.You seem to have a problem distinguishing between predictable and justifiable. I think the insurgents are a bunch of low-life, bloodthirsty cunts. Doesn't mean it wasn't as predictable as gravity though.


Are you defending the never ending attacks of the insurgency ?Read my posts.


... I had hoped i had made a reasonable attempt at broading my thoughts out.. seems i have to defend the notion ''its our fault'' i am not man enough for that , i am afraid.Not sure what you mean. It sure as hell is our fault if we demolish a country and then bail out before even putting the basics of civilisation in place. If you think the insurgents are cunts, then that's even worse. If it's not the ordinary Iraqi's resisting, then that makes it even more disgusting that we should leave before we sort out the mess.

matthew
04-01--2006, 05:04 PM
You seem to have a problem distinguishing between predictable and justifiable. I think the insurgents are a bunch of low-life, bloodthirsty cunts. Doesn't mean it wasn't as predictable as gravity though.


I know it was predictable ... but how predictable.
How long does this prediction have to extend.
For ever ?...thats a little impossible to predict and i think USAID and the US Department of commerce would need some forward planning of herculian standards.

Some funding has been scaled back.. the whole funding/development programe has NOT dried up or given up. Their is still a commitment.. when that commitment is broken then we will share the same outrage.

Maybe you can make sense of the Iraqi development Strategy
http://www.export.gov/iraq/pdf/iraq_development_strategy_063005.pdf
or
Donor Country for support For Iraqi Construction
http://www.export.gov/iraq/pdf/donor_country_support_for_iraq_reconstru ction.pdf
or
IFFRI
http://www.irffi.org/
As we are talking about a share of the costs..not the whole costs.. Is any shortfall going to be scooped up by other countries. I have been trying to see past 2007 but i can't.



Read my posts.

Ok..i will make up my own mind.



Not sure what you mean. It sure as hell is our fault if we demolish a country and then bail out before even putting the basics of civilisation in place. If you think the insurgents are cunts, then that's even worse. If it's not the ordinary Iraqi's resisting, then that makes it even more disgusting that we should leave before we sort out the mess.


Who said we are leaving ?.

Atomik
04-01--2006, 05:08 PM
I know it was predictable ... but how predictable. Well I think that pretty much any halfwit on the planet could've predicted that Iraq would become a magnet for Muslim extremists looking to kill Americans. I'm not surprised, so I'd think that if I could work it out, the White House should've been able to.

matthew
04-01--2006, 05:20 PM
Well I think that pretty much any halfwit on the planet could've predicted that Iraq would become a magnet for Muslim extremists looking to kill Americans. I'm not surprised, so I'd think that if I could work it out, the White House should've been able to.

We are not talking about killing Americans.. I thought we were talking about reconstruction and those destroying it...and ofcourse the funding .
How predictable is the ongoing destructive element.. ? was that not clear ?.


Their is still a commitment.. when that commitment is broken then we will share the same outrage

Lynney
04-01--2006, 05:24 PM
Y'know, none of this is any huge shock is it? I'm ashamed to be British when connected with such evil, power-freaks as Bush.

Thank God for people like us and alt-celebs such as Micheal Moore, Rob Newman, Stuart Lee, as without them, the world would be owned and controlled by Americans.

Obviously, not ALL American's are bad don't get me wrong, the last poll turn-outs proved that people were beginning to listen and understand the need to get rid of Bush, but for those who voted for this pathetic excuse of a human being; shame on you and I hope you're happy with the consequences of his actions. If you want to see a real 'filthy terrorist', look no further than George W himself.

Lynney x

matthew
04-01--2006, 05:41 PM
Thank God for people like us and alt-celebs such as Micheal Moore, Rob Newman, Stuart Lee, as without them, the world would be owned and controlled by Americans.
Lynney x

Michael Moore :One of the worlds saviours from 'Evil' .. this is HUGE news.:eek:

Shame he makes more unacountable amounts of money than he knows what to do with.. with the sale of biased lies :whistle: .

Atomik
04-01--2006, 05:41 PM
We are not talking about killing Americans.. I thought we were talking about reconstruction and those destroying it...and ofcourse the funding .
How predictable is the ongoing destructive element.. ? was that not clear ?.Well that was what I was talking about, so now I've no idea what you're on about (again!). :frust:

matthew
04-01--2006, 05:51 PM
Well that was what I was talking about, so now I've no idea what you're on about (again!). :frust:

You just needed to continue reading... imho.

I think somebody veered off at this point:

Fighting back is one thing.. killing your fellow countrymen women and children.. blowing up / destroying the infrastucture that is another.
How is that justifiable ?.

You seemed to have taken the first part as a question when i never meant to continue with that part.. It was merely part of the whole of the point.


I probably should have gone to grammer school.

Atomik
04-01--2006, 05:56 PM
Fighting back is one thing.. killing your fellow countrymen women and children.. blowing up / destroying the infrastucture that is another.
How is that justifiable ?Are you actually reading my posts, Matthew?


You seem to have a problem distinguishing between predictable and justifiable. I think the insurgents are a bunch of low-life, bloodthirsty cunts. Doesn't mean it wasn't as predictable as gravity though.

matthew
04-01--2006, 06:15 PM
Are you actually reading my posts, Matthew?

Yes... as we were talking about reconstruction i thought thats where it would remain.

However, all of this was entirely predictable. If the US didn't budget for it, they damn well shoulda done.

I guess something changed at this point.. how was i supposed to know that we had changed subject ?. Why did we change subject ?.

Lynney
04-01--2006, 06:42 PM
Michael Moore :One of the worlds saviours from 'Evil' .. this is HUGE news.:eek:

Shame he makes more unacountable amounts of money than he knows what to do with.. with the sale of biased lies :whistle: .


I wasn't saying he was a 'saviour' at all, I was merely suggesting Micheal Moore has woken alot of people up through his ranting, raving and bravado who previously knew nothing of what was happening behind closed doors. Yes he may be filthy rich and isn't always objective, but at least he's using his brain for good rather than evil. I'd rather society be awoken to a few 'biased lies' than be sucked in by the likes of Bush and his 'terrorist' bashing cronies.

If we're gonna talk 'saviours' though, I'd stand by Stuart Lee and Robert Newman any day. They may not have changed the world, but they're giving it a good go!

Atomik
04-01--2006, 06:55 PM
Yes... as we were talking about reconstruction i thought thats where it would remain.

However, all of this was entirely predictable. If the US didn't budget for it, they damn well shoulda done.

I guess something changed at this point.. how was i supposed to know that we had changed subject ?. Why did we change subject ?.Well I'm confused. I thought you were arguing that reconstruction would suffer because of the financial strain created by the insurgency - which I was arguing should've been entirely predictable.

matthew
04-01--2006, 07:00 PM
[quote=Lynney]I wasn't saying he was a 'saviour' at all, I was merely suggesting Micheal Moore has woken alot of people up through his ranting, raving and bravado who previously knew nothing of what was happening behind closed doors. Yes he may be filthy rich and isn't always objective, but at least he's using his brain for good rather than evil. I'd rather society be awoken to a few 'biased lies' than be sucked in by the likes of Bush and his 'terrorist' bashing cronies.


Ok i was being a little melodramatic.. If he is using his brain for ''good'' why the distortion and lies.. there is no need for that at all..unless you have agenda that needs meeting..wich i despise about him. Sure goverment has it darker sides..but Mr moore seems to ignore everything apart from his prize wich is Mr Bush.



If we're gonna talk 'saviours' though, I'd stand by Stuart Lee and Robert Newman any day. They may not have changed the world, but they're giving it a good go!

Now i have nothing but respect for those guys.. thats why i never mentioned anything ''nasty'' about them

matthew
04-01--2006, 07:02 PM
Well I'm confused. I thought you were arguing that reconstruction would suffer because of the financial strain created by the insurgency - which I was arguing should've been entirely predictable.

This is what i WAS argueing.. thats whay i said :

I know it was predictable ... but how predictable.
How long does this prediction have to extend.
For ever ?...thats a little impossible to predict and i think USAID and the US Department of commerce would need some forward planning of herculian standards.

Some funding has been scaled back.. the whole funding/development programe has NOT dried up or given up. Their is still a commitment.. when that commitment is broken then we will share the same outrage.

Lynney
04-01--2006, 07:02 PM
Ok, you're forgiven :) Heh heh.

matthew
04-01--2006, 07:10 PM
Ok, you're forgiven :) Heh heh.

Thanks.. :)

Lynney
04-01--2006, 07:17 PM
Sorry for taking over the thread, I will hush now...especially seeing as what I'm saying is now completely unrelated to what you're both (Matthew and Doktor) currently 'actually' talking about!

Tatty-ta x

Atomik
04-01--2006, 07:21 PM
This is what i WAS argueing.. thats whay i said :

I know it was predictable ... but how predictable.
How long does this prediction have to extend.
For ever ?Yeah. To which I replied....


Well I think that pretty much any halfwit on the planet could've predicted that Iraq would become a magnet for Muslim extremists looking to kill Americans. I'm not surprised, so I'd think that if I could work it out, the White House should've been able to.And somehow this line of argument seemed to end with you reaching the conclusion that I'm siding with the insurgents. :wall:

Atomik
04-01--2006, 07:22 PM
Sorry for taking over the thread,Go for your life. It's a crap thread anyways! :D

matthew
04-01--2006, 07:28 PM
Lynney do you mind reading this terrible thread and see if any of it makes sense ??>.

Dok' why do you think i never started talking with you in this thread ??:whistle: ..i knew it would go pear shaped at some point. ESPECIALY BECAUSE IT IS YOUR THREAD... So have your point to maintain :insane: .

Atomik
04-01--2006, 07:30 PM
Dok' why do you think i never started talking with you in this thread ??:whistle: .Coz you don't love me anymore :(


i knew it would go pear shaped at some point. ESPECIALY BECAUSE IT IS YOUR THREAD... So have your point to maintain :insane: .No it ain't. I gave it away to Lynney. She can have it. :harhar:

matthew
04-01--2006, 07:50 PM
Coz you don't love me anymore :(

Whats love got to do with it.. it is just a second hand emotion.






No it ain't. I gave it away to Lynney. She can have it. :harhar:

Lynney
04-01--2006, 10:58 PM
Haha, you want my opinion huh? Well, if I'm honest, I'm somewhat lost with what's going on other than you're both stressing an awful lot so...my advice would be, chill my lovelies, 'give peace a chance', 'make love not war'. Enough cliches for you?? :)

Bright Blessings,
Lynney x

Aunty Al
05-01--2006, 11:00 AM
Just to add my two pen'orth, the war was supposedly to 'help' the people of Iraq. In my oppinion that means that as America undertook to create the war (with OUR British backing of course), they do have a responsibilty to leave the country and its people better off than they were before. So, yes, they do have to fulfill this obligation despite the insurgents. Cos otherwise, in what way did America 'help'? Its infrastructure may not have been perfect before, but at least it functioned. The majority of the Iraqi people are worse off now than they were before, aren't they?

matthew
05-01--2006, 07:14 PM
Haha, you want my opinion huh? Well, if I'm honest, I'm somewhat lost with what's going on other than you're both stressing an awful lot so...my advice would be, chill my lovelies, 'give peace a chance', 'make love not war'. Enough cliches for you?? :)

Bright Blessings,
Lynney x

I am chilled :whistle: ok maybe not so when chatting with Dok'.. we have had some very LONG chats.. sometimes meandering all over the bloody place.:eek: .. begining with 'hate' over a year ago .. now 'acceptance' [i hope] .

I was trying to get one point across before it was disected to much...but i sometimes fail or am hindered.

The thrust of my point is that :

I think the insurgents have fucked over the Iraqis.. in destroying parts of the infrastructure.
Securing it all has dwindled the funds.
Was it predictable ?

How long does this prediction have to extend ?.
For ever ?
Thats a little impossible to predict and i think USAID and the US Department of commerce would need some forward planning of herculian standards.

''USA abandons financial commitment to Iraq'' Is basicaly a flawed statement to make...

If you ignore the varied other US backed projects and focus on 'direct funding from Commerce'.. Funding may have not been requested past 2007.. but that is a long way away. We don't know what will occur, it is a little presumptive and ignores other US backed projects and efforts..
These funding issues were known over a year ago..but for some reason the Gaurdian has decieded it 'emerged yesterday' they did not bother to update this story or add the rationale in any great detail.. apart from a military source no Gaurdian reader will believe :whistle: [I read it also- not so regular now].


There are other revenue streams supported by the US [and others] :

http://www.ukhippy.com/forums/showpost.php?p=24016&postcount=15

Do people read these kinda storys and not look into it further themselves...if i can be so pompouse.

Their is still a commitment.. when that commitment is broken then we will share the same outrage

That basicaly was my point :whistle:

Aunty Al
06-01--2006, 10:59 AM
I still think its a bit like someone saying they'll rid your house of a rat. To do so, they take down your front and back doors to make it easier to drive said rat out. They are prepared to pay for any damage done by the weather but not for the stuff that is stolen cos you've no doors. If Bush went to war with the committment to making things better for the people of Iraq, his job and obligation is not done until the people of Iraq are better off than they were before his intervention. If his sole intent was to rape the country for oil, he should have had the balls to stand up and say so. Blair may not have been so stupid or misguidedly loyal to have committed British involvement in the whole situation

matthew
06-01--2006, 07:39 PM
I still think its a bit like someone saying they'll rid your house of a rat. To do so, they take down your front and back doors to make it easier to drive said rat out. They are prepared to pay for any damage done by the weather but not for the stuff that is stolen cos you've no doors. If Bush went to war with the committment to making things better for the people of Iraq, his job and obligation is not done until the people of Iraq are better off than they were before his intervention. If his sole intent was to rape the country for oil, he should have had the balls to stand up and say so. Blair may not have been so stupid or misguidedly loyal to have committed British involvement in the whole situation

If http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/ ends in 2007 i will eat my words as
the title of this thread will be correct.. Until then i will continue to believe it to be factualy misrepresentative..

You could say just the removal of mmmmmm NO i won't continue thats not fair.

Atomik
06-01--2006, 08:46 PM
You're very blinkered on this issue and utterly unable to see the obvious truth, even when it's staring you right in the face. It's impossible to have a rational conversation with someone who denies reality.

matthew
06-01--2006, 09:27 PM
You're very blinkered on this issue and utterly unable to see the obvious truth, even when it's staring you right in the face. It's impossible to have a rational conversation with someone who denies reality.

Can i cut and paste this ..and use it when i feel the same way about some of your opinions..

I don't agree with you sometimes.. i thought we had gotten over this little issue...stop insulting me.

Atomik
06-01--2006, 10:59 PM
Can i cut and paste this ..and use it when i feel the same way about some of your opinions..

I don't agree with you sometimes.. i thought we had gotten over this little issue...stop insulting me.I'm not insulting you. I respect your right to hold differing opinions, but I don't respect the way you deny reality from time to time. You have an intellectual blind spot when it comes to opinions you disagree with, IMHO. You hold to the opinion and seek to twist reality to fit it, rather than looking at reality and shaping your opinion accordingly. Sorry dude, no offence meant.

matthew
08-01--2006, 01:22 PM
I'm not insulting you. I respect your right to hold differing opinions, but I don't respect the way you deny reality from time to time. You have an intellectual blind spot when it comes to opinions you disagree with, IMHO. You hold to the opinion and seek to twist reality to fit it, rather than looking at reality and shaping your opinion accordingly. Sorry dude, no offence meant.
You have said as long as somebody has come to their POV honestly then that should be respected and saying anything derogatory is unfair .. It assumes that the person has not thought about and is not being honest with the POV they hold [or something like that]. You have quoted this a few times when i have been rude about somebodys POV

This is what i have done, i have been honest and i have thought about it.. it should not be upto you to deciede otherwise... thats why i think you are insulting me.

I have tried to NOT shape reality into my own likeing.. but WE ARE ALL GUILTY OF THAT .. I believe just the title of this thread says that imho.

I appreciate no offence was meant to a degree.. but sometimes you are a hypocrite...no offence meant [and no sarcasm either].

Atomik
08-01--2006, 03:49 PM
You have said as long as somebody has come to their POV honestly then that should be respected and saying anything derogatory is unfair .. It assumes that the person has not thought about and is not being honest with the POV they hold [or something like that]. You have quoted this a few times when i have been rude about somebodys POV I agree. And if that's true, then I respect your point of view. But in all honesty, it seems to me as though you have a blind spot where Iraq is concerned. You seem to support the actions of the allies regardless of the facts. As soon as anyone is even vaguely critical, you react in their defence. Before you accuse me of the same, you might want to note that I consider the calls for immediate withdrawl of our troops to be unjustified (as an example) and I do try and treat each issue on its relative merits.


This is what i have done, i have been honest and i have thought about it.. it should not be upto you to deciede otherwise... thats why i think you are insulting me.It's got to the point where you appear to be disregarding the facts though. Look:

America invades Iraq
America promises to fund reconstruction
America cancels funding on the basis of entirely predictable insurgency

How can you possibly believe that this is reasonable? I mean you'd be pretty hard pushed to find any intelligent person who thought that this war was justified, well planned and well executed these days.


I appreciate no offence was meant to a degree.. but sometimes you are a hypocrite...no offence meant [and no sarcasm either].That's fair enough. I think sometimes these things are a matter of perspective. It wasn't my intention to be insulting, but your views seem so divorced from reality to me that it's difficult for me to see how you've reached them rationally. I do try though :D

matthew
08-01--2006, 07:58 PM
[quote=Doktor Atomik]I agree. And if that's true, then I respect your point of view. But in all honesty, it seems to me as though you have a blind spot where Iraq is concerned. You seem to support the actions of the allies regardless of the facts. As soon as anyone is even vaguely critical, you react in their defence. Before you accuse me of the same, you might want to note that I consider the calls for immediate withdrawl of our troops to be unjustified (as an example) and I do try and treat each issue on its relative merits.

I comment on what is put in front of me.. it does tend to be headline driven. I probably should comment more on the negative aspects from my perspective, though it tends to be defensive merely because of what is posted. A defense from your perspective is usualy the norm .. i am afraid. I do see that you are inclined to think i just jump to the defence of the Bush admin' , that is just because that's what i pick up on, and from your perspective and what is posted it tends to be me that comments with a defense [if that makes sense]. This maybe should not be the norm, but is the way it is.



It's got to the point where you appear to be disregarding the facts though. Look:

America invades Iraq
America promises to fund reconstruction
America cancels funding on the basis of entirely predictable insurgency

How can you possibly believe that this is reasonable? I mean you'd be pretty hard pushed to find any intelligent person who thought that this war was justified, well planned and well executed these days.


It might be because i am being pedantic..but for me the title of this thread is false.. Is the US 'shipping out in 2007' presumptive either way to answer this.. but a full financial removal is unlikely. I can read and can see your point.. but scant evidence has been put in front of me to think otherwise.



That's fair enough. I think sometimes these things are a matter of perspective. It wasn't my intention to be insulting, but your views seem so divorced from reality to me that it's difficult for me to see how you've reached them rationally. I do try though :D


Your views seem divorced from reality sometimes to me.. i do try and see it from your perspective..it is difficult but like you i do try. I understand the 'frustration' that this sometimes arises believe me:whistle: .

Atomik
08-01--2006, 11:16 PM
Ah, fuck it. I can't be arsed arguing about it. Believe it or not, I think you're a nice guy with a lot of integrity. I just find it difficult to follow your reasoning sometimes. The world would be fucking boring if we all thought the same way though, eh? :hippy:

matthew
09-01--2006, 07:15 PM
Ah, fuck it. I can't be arsed arguing about it. Believe it or not, I think you're a nice guy with a lot of integrity. I just find it difficult to follow your reasoning sometimes.

I find it difficult following your reasoning sometimes.. I guess pretty much how you sometimes view my thoughts.. i think the same about yours.
Shocking as it seems... :whistle:


The world would be fucking boring if we all thought the same way though, eh? :hippy:

It would be..i am suprised you did not have this conversation in your head and not come to the same conclusions i did.. i know your intuative about such pedestrian reasonings..

Your not gonna give me a hug are you ???:eek:

Atomik
09-01--2006, 08:16 PM
Your not gonna give me a hug are you ???:eek::hug:

matthew
09-01--2006, 08:42 PM
:hug:

:hug:

don't tell anybody about this ya' hear

Rapunzel
09-01--2006, 11:49 PM
Y'know, none of this is any huge shock is it? I'm ashamed to be British when connected with such evil, power-freaks as Bush.

Thank God for people like us and alt-celebs such as Micheal Moore, Rob Newman, Stuart Lee, as without them, the world would be owned and controlled by Americans.

Obviously, not ALL American's are bad don't get me wrong, the last poll turn-outs proved that people were beginning to listen and understand the need to get rid of Bush, but for those who voted for this pathetic excuse of a human being; shame on you and I hope you're happy with the consequences of his actions. If you want to see a real 'filthy terrorist', look no further than George W himself.

Lynney x

Well said! I know what you mean about being ashamed - I am an American! How do you it feels to have a baboon for a president? Yes, Americans are FINALLY realizing that Bush is an idiot, but what the hell took them so long? I was dead set against invading (that's what it was!) Iraq in the first place. What I cannot believe is that Bush was elected for a second term! What were my fellow Americans thinking???

phil
10-01--2006, 09:53 AM
I've read and seen so much about the war i dont know what i think anymore. i keep changin my mind. After 9/11 something was always gonna happen. the poor iraqies got fucked over by saddam, then bombed, then fucked over again. My problem however is with people, muslim or otherwise, having any sympathy whatsoever with the terrorists who bomb in this country. On a tube with people of all religeons, nationalities, with no input whatsover. fuck off. you dont like things here, leave.

Atomik
10-01--2006, 09:55 AM
It depends what you mean by sympathy. I find that a desire to understand the social and political factors that lead to these sorts of actions is often mistaken for sympathy.

phil
10-01--2006, 10:04 AM
I have no problem with a desire to understand as maybe that can be a way to drive forward. I think of it in the same way as other henious crimes. for example horrific child murders, rape etc. Exploring and understanding the reasons is one thing as long as it doesnt begin to cloud your judgment and turn into sympathy and forgiveness as for me some actoins are and always will be beyond this.

matthew
10-01--2006, 07:35 PM
I have no problem with a desire to understand as maybe that can be a way to drive forward. I think of it in the same way as other henious crimes. for example horrific child murders, rape etc. Exploring and understanding the reasons is one thing as long as it doesnt begin to cloud your judgment and turn into sympathy and forgiveness as for me some actoins are and always will be beyond this.

I agree.. as long as it stops short of glorification or merely a excuse.
I do have a issue with Al-quaeda and for e.g the London bombers or those sharing 'sympathy'... Who go on about the 'foreign policy' .. to me it is a excuse.
Ok i can understand to a certain degree , but it starts to become less credible and more irrational when it ends up defending murder.
You can only defend killing with that line , for so long.. if at all.

Why not if the rationale is the foreign' policy is so bad..act to create a dialouge rather than killing 'infidels'.. it all seems pathetic.

gratefulkm
10-01--2006, 09:09 PM
oil oil oil oil oil oil oil
ok have you all missed what the russians are doing with thier vast fuel supplies ..putting the price up ...
thats the main reason we went with bush..
the yanks have control of the oil in iraq and have built the pipelines they needed to ..
whats the first rule of war ???
supply lines..
no one really cares about the populace ...
and yes its all sick that we turn on an electric light and consume the fuels that so many innocent people have had to die for us to be able to do so..
and the only thing that makes me sane is the fact that i live near london where we have thousands of people pooring of the boats and the planes to be able to enjoy the benefits of a safe society provided by our military might..
i thought of a line recently..
only a well fed man debates the taste of his food and how he can make it taste better in his mouth ,a starving man does not have that luxury he will not ask any questions at all he will just consume..
our only hope to end this particular war thats been going on for eons is the science that may make these commodities irrelevant ..
so i pray ever day we make it
and that there is some decency and casualties are kept to a minimum..
i hate the fact im too scared to completley walk away from the modern world ..
i tried it once but for those who have read it
im like the ferret in "cannary row"
i went were the females were and im now stuck here with kids
i think that by historic standards the americans have done a lot better than they have ever done before and hays off to them for trying ..
lets face it they could have just completly oblitarated iraq,that would have been the easy choice..
but thanks too people like you and me and all the others that make thier voices known in any way .
we provide the military with a conscience..
so to finish the point
the insurgance in iraq have made the military position too difficult to maintain..
the balance from control is slowly sweeping to choas ..
which means that if they stay the situaiton will get uglier and uglier ..
and the controlled aggression that the military have used will turn into uncontrolled aggression ..
and guess what we the people will not stand for it ..we wont let them oblitarate the enemy ...so they really have no choice but to withdraw
until the enemy becomes a clear big target again..then we will just go back in ..and so the cycle begins...until science saves us

gratefulkm
10-01--2006, 09:12 PM
just to make it clear the enemy is anyone that will stop us getting what we need to keep turning those electic lights on

gratefulkm
10-01--2006, 09:17 PM
so with all of the above ..
why do you think we get bombed ..
what do you expect
for them just to give up and roll over and die
i expect to get bombed always will
i appreciate i live behind a wall of military might ..and if some people are strong enough to get behind the front lines and break up our daydream well ..i just hope that i dont get hit..
even with the occasional bomb going off its still a lot safer here than where the bombers come from

matthew
10-01--2006, 09:25 PM
but thanks too people like you and me

Not like me.. :o



and all the others that make thier voices known in any way .
we provide the military with a conscience..


No you don't.. i guess when the eventual withdrawl of troops occurs it will be thanks to all those that stood up and spoke out.. ?

If thats what you or those people waving there placards wish to believe..and it helps you feel 'victorious' in some kind of self rightuose way.. then thats upto you/them..

I apologise for being harsh..and i have not responded to all your post because trust me it would get ugly.. i just felt i needed to add my two penny worth , your post got under my skin..

gratefulkm
10-01--2006, 09:37 PM
so do you think that the military dont use chemical weapons coz they dont work
or coz we will not let them ??????
and by we i mean the people in our privliged position