Ed Koch op-ed

[pegasus]

Why President Bush is a Hero...... Link (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/12/why_president_bush_is_a_hero.html)

[rubberneck]

I haven't always agreed with Koch but I do in this case. This country is in big trouble. As a nation we used to look at problems and only see solutions and opportunities to better our collective lives. Now all we want to do when faced with a problem is stick our head in the sand and scream until it all just goes away. We lack a national backbone.

[The Reaper]

We also tend to avoid personal responsibility, and seek legal recourse far too often.

TR

[echoes]

We also tend to avoid personal responsibility, and seek legal recourse far too often.

TR

Sir, Agreed.

Holly

[brownapple]

I like Ed Koch. He wasn't the worst mayor NYC ever had (I think David Dinkins qualifies for that honor) and he always seemed to be trying to do his best.

[Five-O]

Koch is a Dem who puts his country before his party. This seems to be a unique mindset insomuch as many Dems are/were happy for the US to fail in Iraq so they would have a better opportunity to point fingers and regain the majority in the Senate and Congress.

[82ndtrooper]

I like Ed Koch. He wasn't the worst mayor NYC ever had (I think David Dinkins qualifies for that honor) and he always seemed to be trying to do his best.

Doing his best was not good enough. After all, Ed Koch spent more of the national tax payer dollars than any other NYC Mayor, even Guiliani after 9/11 2001. NYC runs much like a corporation, particularly regarding debt. NYC has alway's made lavish promises of benefits and subsidies for the " The Poor". NYC has long been a welfare state within itself and success in the city of politics was traditionally achieved by those promises, lavish or not. Only in NYC can a toll booth operator earn more than a college trained radiography tech. That reality is the lavish promise to "The Poor" only encouraging and promoting minimal academic achievment. Mayor Koch asked congress more than 10 times for loans to meet city payroll as a result of that hideous socialist ideology. By the way, when a city goes to congresss for a loan, it's essentially asking the NATIONAL tax payers to co-sign that loan. Great city? Yeah, if you dont mind alway's supporting it with your hard earned dollars. And, they dont even give us a discount to visit their city. So much for a vote huh ???

"Prosperity through insolvency" is and has been the mantra of NYC mayors since the Federal Reserve was created. OH yeah, the Federal Reserve is really a "CARTEL" but don't try telling Hillary Clinton, or J.D. Rockefeller that . Good Luck NYC. By the way............his op ed piece was decent, but I dont trust him to watch my dog.

[brownapple]

I'm a NYer, born and raised. Don't much give a shit what somebody in the Kentucky suburbs of Cincinatti thinks about much of anything. If you haven't lived and worked in NYC for an extended period of time, I figure your opinion of NYC is just so much hot air.

[82ndtrooper]

I'm a NYer, born and raised. Don't much give a shit what somebody in the Kentucky suburbs of Cincinatti thinks about much of anything. If you haven't lived and worked in NYC for an extended period of time, I figure your opinion of NYC is just so much hot air.

Actually I have worked in NYC for an extended time, 6 months to be exact. That was until some kooky Islamic fundamentalists ran two airliners into the WTC. I was working in the North tower, and staying at the Vista Hotel/WTC #5

No offense, but if you do not know the mechanisms of how NYC has survived it's terrible political and economic policy, not to mention it's insistance, be it polictical or social, on a far left liberal policy, then maybe a history lesson of your own home town is in order. Do not make the mistake of assuming that my patriotism for the events of 9/11 have been blurred by my distaste for NYC's infringement of most of the United States Consitution. One only has to look closely at the current Mayors antics for furthering gun control legislation to see that even in NYC republicans are driven by a socialist legislature or possibly a socialist people. Bloombergs recent attacks on the state of Va for firearm sales are evidence, muck like that of the Mayor of Chicago, is the preverbial "Tail wagging the dog" He seems to forget that Pataki is the Govenor, not him.

Yeah, I may be from the lowly state of Kentucky, and I may only harber a degree from a Kentucky state University, but I do know the facts. At the very least, my observations would likely gather a following of fellow hard line constitutionalists.

[brownapple]

6 months? That's an extended vacation, nothing more.

Oh, and before you start slinging stones, why don't you do a little research on the cities in your area? Louisville or Cincinnatti, for example?

There is nothing unique about NYC and federal funds.

As for the liberalism of NYC, that is what the voters of NYC vote in. You don't like it, don't live there. I don't happen to like it either, but I recognize that in the total scheme of things, the good outweighs the bad by a pretty large amount in NYC. Something I can't say of Kentucky (and I lived and worked there for three years) in my opinion. I'd live in Manhattan again, I'd never live in Kentucky again. My opinion and my tastes. Obviously not yours. However, I would be cautious about shoving your opinion off as if it was fact.

[rubberneck]

Actually I have worked in NYC for an extended time, 6 months to be exact.

And here I thought that my 30+ years living in and around NYC qualified me to have an educated opinion about the city and it's history. I am glad that someone who has spent a grand total of 6 months living in the city could set me straight.

[x SF med]

And here I thought that my 30+ years living in and around NYC qualified me to have an educated opinion about the city and it's history. I am glad that someone who has spent a grand total of 6 months living in the city could set me straight.


Born and raised in Queens NY - left for College, Army, came back for 6 mos, College again which led to 14 yrs in TX, back in NY/NJ since Feb 2003. I love certain things about the City - prefer Upstate, detest the traffic, thinking about a major move. But all-in-all, I am a NYer due to my upbringing.

I've watched it go from a crime ridden sh** hole in the 70's to a vibrant and safe city now. I don't have to agree with the politics, nor the 'social entitlements' - but don't trash it until you've really lived here, there are aspects of NY that can't be matched anywhere else in the world, culturally and economically.

Six months, I've spent longer than that on TDY.

[The Reaper]

I hope that everyone realizes that even if their toes have been stepped on, good manners are in order here.

There is no need for the responses to become ad hominem attacks or rude, despite the widely renowned reputation on NYC residents to be that way.

Try to use a little keener wit and finer sarcasm here if you must quarrel.

Have fun.

TR

[CPTAUSRET]

Nancy has owned an apartment there for about 20 years "One Lincoln Plaza" is the address. Looks directly into the Met (15th floor I think), it is being gifted to our oldest daughter, so I don't see much of it.

[x SF med]

I hope that everyone realizes that even if their toes have been stepped on, good manners are in order here.

There is no need for the responses to become ad hominem attacks or rude, despite the widely renowned reputation on NYC residents to be that way.

Try to use a little keener wit and finer sarcasm here if you must quarrel.

Have fun.

TR

Gotcha Boss, wilco.

[Sacamuelas]

Try to use a little keener wit and finer sarcasm here if you must quarrel.
TR
Yeah, I hate those backwoods rednecks from Kentucky AND all the liberal snobs from New York. :D

Is that what you meant TR? LOL

[tk27]

1. -George Bush is a hero to me because he has courage. The President does what he believes to be in the best interest of the United States. He sticks with his beliefs, no matter how intense the criticism and invective that are directed against him every day.

2. -The enormous defeat President Bush suffered with the loss of both Houses of Congress has not caused him to retreat from his position that the U.S. alone now stands between a radical Islamic takeover of many of the world's governments in the next 30 or more years. If that takeover occurs, we will suffer an enslavement that will threaten our personal freedoms and take much of the world back into the Dark Ages.

3. -This will give support to my proposal, advanced nearly a year ago, that we tell our allies, regional and NATO, that we are getting out of Iraq unless they come in. That may well work, and they will come in, in large part and share the casualties of combat and the financial costs of war.

4. -For me, staying is clearly preferable, provided we are not alone and are joined by our regional and NATO allies, aggressively taking on the difficult but necessary task of destroying radical Islam and its terrorist agenda if we don't want to see radical Islam destroy the Western world and moderate Arab states over the next generation, or as long as it takes for them to succeed.

5. -It won't be easy to implement this proposal. But President Bush has courage. Now is the time to use it.
1. -Would Dennis Kucinich then be a hero if he were president and stuck to his beliefs no matter how half-baked they are?

2. -How does democracy prevent "radical Islamic takeover of the world's governments"? Couldn't Islamists win elections?
-How does democracy help Mubarak and Musharraf who are holding back these "evil doers" as best they can given the circumstances? Couldn't it undermine them?
-How does cutting contact and threatening the Syrians even though they have helped us against AQ and could have helped stem the flow of insurgents in Iraq because they have an interest in a stable Iraq help America?
-How does ignoring our oil dependency and thereby some would say financing of terrorism prevent "enslavement that will threaten our personal freedoms and take much of the world back into the Dark Ages."?

3. - Countries don't have allies/friends they have interests, how is it in the interest of other nations?

4. - Why didn't we do this in the first place? We said we "didn't want the coalition to dictate the mission, we wanted the mission to dictate the coalition". Other nations especially the Europeans do not see this as black and white as the president, why do we expect them to see it this way now?

5. - Courage and idealism certainly have their time and place, when are they good substitutes for cold detached cunningness and realism?

I have nothing but respect for our men and women in uniform. I worked on the President's campaign and have a great deal of respect for him and Mr. Koch. But must disagree with the article, and some of our efforts on the political end, this is the civilian side, my side, and I cant help but think I/we are not on the level with the armed forces here.

Try to use a little keener wit and finer sarcasm here if you must quarrel.
Whats the difference between an porcupine and Yankee stadium?
A porcupine keeps its pricks .....................Nevermind

[echoes]

tk27:

:munchin

Holly

[82ndtrooper]

6 months? That's an extended vacation, nothing more.

Oh, and before you start slinging stones, why don't you do a little research on the cities in your area? Louisville or Cincinnatti, for example?

There is nothing unique about NYC and federal funds.

As for the liberalism of NYC, that is what the voters of NYC vote in. You don't like it, don't live there. I don't happen to like it either, but I recognize that in the total scheme of things, the good outweighs the bad by a pretty large amount in NYC. Something I can't say of Kentucky (and I lived and worked there for three years) in my opinion. I'd live in Manhattan again, I'd never live in Kentucky again. My opinion and my tastes. Obviously not yours. However, I would be cautious about shoving your opinion off as if it was fact.

Cincinnati has suffered much the same way as NYC. Again proving that cowtowing to the minority, social programs, free medical care, college educations, and subsidies for the "The poor" yields poor results politically and socially. Cincinnati had 84 murders in 2006, and yet Chief Striecher, and the city council insist that taking guns from the law abiding will solve deeper social and racial strife. Here across the river in Kentucky, we rarely cross the bridge, unless we absolutley have to for work, medical, or the occassional Bengals or Reds games which allow us to only cross the bridge and walk into the stadium.

"Federal funds not being unique" ? I beg to differ strongly. NYC has, in fact, been treated like Louisiana (Katrina) without having to have an act of God in the form of a flood. In 1975 the bankers and city fathers marched to Washington to ask congress for money for their failed plans of a racial and social utopia through their mountainous overhead for social programs, subsidies and free medical and college educations. At that time NYC had floated so many bond issues that it flooded the market with "Less than" desirable credit ratings to the investors. The answer was three fold. Increase taxes, reduce expenses, or go into debt. There was never any doubt as to which course of action the leaders of NYC would take.

While in Washington, the bankers and city fathers painted the picture of the worlds largest city going bankrupt. Essential services would be halted and millions of people would be without garbage disposal, transportation, and even without police protection. Starvation, disease, and crime would run rampant throughout the city. It would be a disgrace for America. David Rockefeller at Chase Manhatten persuaded his friend Helmut Schmidt, Chancellor of West Germany, to make a statement to the media that the disastrous situation in NYC could trigger and international crisis. Congress actually passed a bill that would allow NYC to recieve direct loans up to 2.3 billion, and amount that would more than DOUBLE the city's current debt to the banks. Those were forgiven, and more were allowed. As I stated in another post, "Prosperity through insolvency" Proof that liberal dreams of a utopia through debt and taxes will never work to cure racial and "Poor" strife without putting the tax payers in a position of hate.

NYC.............without a doubt it's a rare place to visit with cultural diversity, arts, fashion, film, finance, Donald Trump and every thing else that comes with being at the tip of the geographic epicenter to far left liberal ideology. Why in the hell else would Hillary Clinton try to pass her self off as a NY'er. NY got dupped.

[NotME]

1. -Would Dennis Kucinich then be a hero if he were president and stuck to his beliefs no matter how half-baked they are?

*No. He would be an idiot. President or not, he DOES stick to his beliefs, and he is still an idiot. Most Americans agreed, according to the election results. BUT, by sticking to his idiotic beliefs, he demonstrates courage and conviction. That, in and of itself, is rare and admirable amongst politicians. He is not a hero to me, but I can respect him genuinely for sticking to his beliefs and being true to himself. Same goes for the President. The President is a hero. He demonstrates courage and conviction about something beyond how pot should be legal and "Imagine" should be the National Anthem of the United States of America. He believes that the best way to prevent another 9/11 is by spreading democracy. You can dissagree, but can't you see the apples and oranges distinction here?

2. -How does democracy prevent "radical Islamic takeover of the world's governments"? Couldn't Islamists win elections?

*Sure, they could win elections, but they can lose them too! They apparently have less faith in democracy than you do as a means for them getting into power. That's demonstrated by the fact that they almost never give people a real choice in the matter.

-How does democracy help Mubarak and Musharraf who are holding back these "evil doers" as best they can given the circumstances? Couldn't it undermine them?

*I can almost see your point here, but thankfully there are more sensible citizens in Islamabad than there are extremists in Karachi, annd the same goes for Cairo. If that ever changes, we might be in trouble.
-How does cutting contact and threatening the Syrians even though they have helped us against AQ and could have helped stem the flow of insurgents in Iraq because they have an interest in a stable Iraq help America?
Al Qaeda and Iraq are 2 completely different subjects, especially to the Syrians. But they have been minimally helpful with regard to AQ. They have no interest in seeing Al Qaeda's brand f religious fanaticism take hold in their country; but they have every reason to try and work to prevent a potential Shiite Arab state from growing powerful on their borders!
-How does ignoring our oil dependency and thereby some would say financing of terrorism prevent "enslavement that will threaten our personal freedoms and take much of the world back into the Dark Ages."?
Not really sure where you're going with this one.

3. - Countries don't have allies/friends they have interests, how is it in the interest of other nations?

*Ask France! They're having a pretty tough time controlling what they are determined to keep calling an "immigration problem" for the moment.
Besides, after living in Europe for years, I have determined that cowardice is a virtue to many Europeans. This is my opinion, and is based entirely on my own personal beliefs - but I have no desire to see us start asking ourselves about their interests before we determine what course to pursue towards our own agenda.
*As for non-European countries, I think that Ethiopia is sending a clear message to the World of just where they stand on this issue. They didn't want Al Qaeda setting up an Islamic state on their border, so they took care of the problem. As we speak, I am told that the Somalis are fleeing to Kenya!

4. - Why didn't we do this in the first place? We said we "didn't want the coalition to dictate the mission, we wanted the mission to dictate the coalition". Other nations especially the Europeans do not see this as black and white as the president, why do we expect them to see it this way now?

*They don't see ANYTHING as black and white. They have in their minds that to see anything in anything less than hued shades of beige is un-intelligent. They're so open minded that their brains are falling out! Spain, after being told that more trains were going to be bombed if they didn't pull out, capitulated. Are you suggesting that capitulation is something we should examine for its merit in order to bring ourselves more in line with the European way of thinking?

5. - Courage and idealism certainly have their time and place, when are they good substitutes for cold detached cunningness and realism?
Never! The only place we dissagree is in our definition of reality! I think that those things are NOT mutually exclusive. Idealism isn't failing to recognize facts for what they are. Idealism can also be seeing the totality of the situation with complete clarity - and knowing that there tomorrow, if you play your cards right, you will see something far better.

*Lastly, here's what I think. I think that like too many other Americans, you saw this war as something like pulling up to a drive through and ordering a victory and a small order of fries to go. You're still sitting at the window, and the clock is ticking, and you want your money back. You have buyers remorse. You're convinced that since the rest of the world seems to think this is all a big mistake, it must be a big mistake! Well, that might be a good reason to examine the question of whether we are correct to be in Iraq, but it certainly is not an answer in and of itself. Remember that once upon a time, only one man in the world thought that the Earth was round! Everyone else called him an idiot.

[echoes]

*Lastly, here's what I think. I think that like too many other Americans, you saw this war as something like pulling up to a drive through and ordering a victory and a small order of fries to go. You're still sitting at the window, and the clock is ticking, and you want your money back. You have buyers remorse. You're convinced that since the rest of the world seems to think this is all a big mistake, it must be a big mistake! Well, that might be a good reason to examine the question of whether we are correct to be in Iraq, but it certainly is not an answer in and of itself. Remember that once upon a time, only one man in the world thought that the Earth was round! Everyone else called him an idiot.

Greetings,

Agreed! Moving out now, as someone far smarter than I can debate the entire topic.

Holly

[Razor]

Only in NYC can a toll booth operator earn more than a college trained radiography tech.

Well, its been my observation that salary isn't (and shouldn't) always be tied to education. That toll booth operator is sitting in a small glass enclosure for 8+ hours at a time, in the heat of summer and the chill of winter, putting up with rude drivers upset that its taking 10 seconds of their valuable time to get change for a $20 and a receipt. The toll booth operator puts up with this hundreds to thousands of times each shift, worse around peak traffic hours and holidays.

Having been on the receiving end of many radiography techs' work, I think that there are plenty of toll booth workers that would prefer working in a quiet, relatively stress-free, climate controlled environment where they pretty much call the shots with the patients.

Sometimes salary is tied to how much crap a person will tolerate for the money (i.e. mill and factory workers working rotating 12 hour shifts, over weekends and holidays).

For the record, no, I have never worked in either of these jobs, nor do I know anyone beyond a passing familiarity that does.

[82ndtrooper]

Well, its been my observation that salary isn't (and shouldn't) always be tied to education. That toll booth operator is sitting in a small glass enclosure for 8+ hours at a time, in the heat of summer and the chill of winter, putting up with rude drivers upset that its taking 10 seconds of their valuable time to get change for a $20 and a receipt. The toll booth operator puts up with this hundreds to thousands of times each shift, worse around peak traffic hours and holidays.

Having been on the receiving end of many radiography techs' work, I think that there are plenty of toll booth workers that would prefer working in a quiet, relatively stress-free, climate controlled environment where they pretty much call the shots with the patients.

Sometimes salary is tied to how much crap a person will tolerate for the money (i.e. mill and factory workers working rotating 12 hour shifts, over weekends and holidays).

For the record, no, I have never worked in either of these jobs, nor do I know anyone beyond a passing familiarity that does.

Razor,

Good points !! However, this conundrum is the democrats old tired "Redistribution of wealth" disguised as "Social responsibility" Hence the reason that a scientist abandons his or her area of expertise to take on the labor position of working for the local railroad or mill. The incentive to create, produce, and advance is losed in the muttle of watching those with less education, and non competitive attitudes achieve a higher rate of economic stability. This is not theory, it's fact ! If an scientist at Abbot labortories is watching his neighbor succeed with far less education then what is the incentive to become academically greater ? There's been a number of times that I wished I had taken that same route.

[tk27]

1.He believes that the best way to prevent another 9/11 is by spreading democracy. You can dissagree, but can't you see the apples and oranges distinction here?

2.
*Sure, they could win elections, but they can lose them too! They apparently have less faith in democracy than you do as a means for them getting into power. That's demonstrated by the fact that they almost never give people a real choice in the matter.

Al Qaeda and Iraq are 2 completely different subjects, especially to the Syrians. But they have been minimally helpful with regard to AQ. They have no interest in seeing Al Qaeda's brand f religious fanaticism take hold in their country; but they have every reason to try and work to prevent a potential Shiite Arab state from growing powerful on their borders!

Not really sure where you're going with this one.

3. *Ask France! They're having a pretty tough time controlling what they are determined to keep calling an "immigration problem" for the moment.
Besides, after living in Europe for years, I have determined that cowardice is a virtue to many Europeans. This is my opinion, and is based entirely on my own personal beliefs - but I have no desire to see us start asking ourselves about their interests before we determine what course to pursue towards our own agenda.
*As for non-European countries, I think that Ethiopia is sending a clear message to the World of just where they stand on this issue. They didn't want Al Qaeda setting up an Islamic state on their border, so they took care of the problem. As we speak, I am told that the Somalis are fleeing to Kenya!

4. *They don't see ANYTHING as black and white. They have in their minds that to see anything in anything less than hued shades of beige is un-intelligent. They're so open minded that their brains are falling out! Spain, after being told that more trains were going to be bombed if they didn't pull out, capitulated. Are you suggesting that capitulation is something we should examine for its merit in order to bring ourselves more in line with the European way of thinking?

5. - Never! The only place we dissagree is in our definition of reality! I think that those things are NOT mutually exclusive. Idealism isn't failing to recognize facts for what they are. Idealism can also be seeing the totality of the situation with complete clarity - and knowing that there tomorrow, if you play your cards right, you will see something far better.

*Lastly, here's what I think. I think that like too many other Americans, you saw this war as something like pulling up to a drive through and ordering a victory and a small order of fries to go. You're still sitting at the window, and the clock is ticking, and you want your money back. You have buyers remorse. You're convinced that since the rest of the world seems to think this is all a big mistake, it must be a big mistake! Well, that might be a good reason to examine the question of whether we are correct to be in Iraq, but it certainly is not an answer in and of itself. Remember that once upon a time, only one man in the world thought that the Earth was round! Everyone else called him an idiot.

1. No I cannot, you are assigning value to each of the beliefs, this is an analytical error. Dogmatism is dogmatism, I am not going to celebrate a flat learning curve.

2. Syria provided actionable intelligence to us post 9/11 that helped thwart AQ plots and saved American lives. A cursory look at the Syrian economy would reveal that they have a huge interest in pipeline from Iraq to their coast for export, money that is badly needed.

3. You just said AQ and Iraq are two completely different subjects

4. What does capitulation have to do with realism?

5. I've always been more Fowler than Pyle

* I was a proponent of going into Iraq, the window of opportunity was there in '03-'04, my politicians bungled it, were too dogmatic and didn't except reality, that window is shut. Yes people believed the world was flat, they were dogmatists rooted in black and white thinking.

[echoes]

:rolleyes: * I was a proponent of going into Iraq, the window of opportunity was there in '03-'04, my politicians bungled it, were too dogmatic and didn't except reality, that window is shut. Yes people believed the world was flat, they were dogmatists rooted in black and white thinking.

IMHO, "You never know what will happen, when you step out your front door".

I support Our decision, and Our Troops, peroid.

Holly

[aricbcool]

* I was a proponent of going into Iraq, the window of opportunity was there in '03-'04, my politicians bungled it, were too dogmatic and didn't except reality, that window is shut. Yes people believed the world was flat, they were dogmatists rooted in black and white thinking.

Could you be more specific please? Which window are we talking about? Are you specifically saying that the war in Iraq is lost, with no chance for victory? Are you implying that we had our chance but have now bungled it so badly that we might as well pack it in? Or am I reading too much into your analogy?

--Aric

[tk27]

Could you be more specific please? Which window are we talking about? Are you specifically saying that the war in Iraq is lost, with no chance for victory? Are you implying that we had our chance but have now bungled it so badly that we might as well pack it in? Or am I reading too much into your analogy?

--Aric
This board doesn't care for my, or anyones, armchair quarterbacking. Did we win over the people and provide for their basic needs following in the months following the fall of Baghdad? We sent a businessman/bureaucrat to run the CPA, my opinion is that we would have been far better served if we has sent a council made up of this boards moderators.
I don't know what a victory would be, any such victory would be in relation to a regional, global, and US climate, it would happen in the context of everything else. Pack it in? We have a few interests there to look over, but I believe we should no longer sacrifice our citizens in the name of Iraqi democracy.
So are you reading to much into my analogy? Again, my opinion is that its not a black-white thing, and thats the tragic part.

[aricbcool]

This board doesn't care for my, or anyones, armchair quarterbacking. Did we win over the people and provide for their basic needs following in the months following the fall of Baghdad? We sent a businessman/bureaucrat to run the CPA, my opinion is that we would have been far better served if we has sent a council made up of this boards moderators.
I don't know what a victory would be, any such victory would be in relation to a regional, global, and US climate, it would happen in the context of everything else. Pack it in? We have a few interests there to look over, but I believe we should no longer sacrifice our citizens in the name of Iraqi democracy.
So are you reading to much into my analogy? Again, my opinion is that its not a black-white thing, and thats the tragic part.

I care for your armchair quaterbacking. Especially when it comes to clarifying vague statements I don't understand. Let me ask you this. If you don't know what a victory would be, how can you be sure all the "windows" are shut?
I may be less dogmatic than others but I believe that we're sending our citizen soldiers out in the name of US National Security. Think about it. If Iraq was a small, non-muslim, African country, do you think we'd give a damn about their government, or their stability?
That's the key word, stability. The stability of the Middle East plays a primary role in protecting US National Security, especially in our post-9/11 world. While everyone talks about ideology and whether or not it's ethical to force democracy on a tribal people, or even more useless, whether or not we should have gone in there in the first place, few are looking at what the cost of failure will be to the National Security of the US.
If we stop "sacrificing our citizens" as you put it, we'll have more than just the blood of a failed democracy on our hands; we'll have given unmeasurable strength to our enemies. The defeat of the US by any Muslim opponent (even if said opponent is a factured country in the midst of civil war) will embolden and empower those that wish to do us harm.
In regards to your original statement of the window being closed, remember. Our country is the most powerful country on Earth. The window for victory shuts when we say it does. ;)

--Aric

[tk27]

I care for your armchair quaterbacking. Especially when it comes to clarifying vague statements I don't understand. Let me ask you this. If you don't know what a victory would be, how can you be sure all the "windows" are shut?
I may be less dogmatic than others but I believe that we're sending our citizen soldiers out in the name of US National Security. Think about it. If Iraq was a small, non-muslim, African country, do you think we'd give a damn about their government, or their stability?
That's the key word, stability. The stability of the Middle East plays a primary role in protecting US National Security, especially in our post-9/11 world. While everyone talks about ideology and whether or not it's ethical to force democracy on a tribal people, or even more useless, whether or not we should have gone in there in the first place, few are looking at what the cost of failure will be to the National Security of the US.
If we stop "sacrificing our citizens" as you put it, we'll have more than just the blood of a failed democracy on our hands; we'll have given unmeasurable strength to our enemies. The defeat of the US by any Muslim opponent (even if said opponent is a factured country in the midst of civil war) will embolden and empower those that wish to do us harm.
In regards to your original statement of the window being closed, remember. Our country is the most powerful country on Earth. The window for victory shuts when we say it does. ;)

--Aric
I imagine Iraqi's to be just as pragmatic as any other people, willing to go with something new if it meets their needs, but there is a shelf life to this, a window of opportunity if you will, meet none of their needs and back to the old was of sectarian violence. I do not belief this is an outrageous statement. And to be frank, I believe that when the Black and Decker drills are brought out and used in a manner not proscribed on the box, that window may have closed.

The region is of national security concern for one reason: its resources, our way of life depends on it so we have a vested national interest in the region. Otherwise Iraq would be just like a backwards African country (the importance of African countries is rising for much of the same reason, witness Africa Command). I have no problem facing this ugly reality, and no problem aggressively addressing it. My problem is that nothing has been asked of myself and the American people to address this, we aren't even paying the bill for our efforts in Iraq. Only our nations professional servicemen and their families are bearing the cost, this is not right.

As far as emboldening any Muslim opponent (IMHO Muslims aren't the problem, its where they live that is)- our staying in Iraq is a pretty damn good recruiting tool for AQ don't you think?
And again I don't like any of this, I wish I didn't think it was the case.

[The Reaper]

...our staying in Iraq is a pretty damn good recruiting tool for AQ don't you think?

No, I don't.

Did their cause suffer when we left Saudi Arabia?

TR

[rubberneck]

No, I don't.

Did their cause suffer when we left Saudi Arabia?

TR

Or Somalia.

[tk27]

Did their cause suffer when we left Saudi Arabia?

Certainly a good point.

Would their cause exist if we were never there in the first place? If the region were of no interest to us.

[The Reaper]

Certainly a good point.

Would their cause exist if we were never there in the first place? If the region were of no interest to us.

Yes.

IIRC, the Wahabbis pre-dated significant US involvement in the region.

TR

[tk27]

Yes.

IIRC, the Wahabbis pre-dated significant US involvement in the region.

TR
True

Would Wahabbism be even a blip on the radar screen, a legitimate threat, if they never had access to fortunes made from Saudi resources?

Is this becoming a chicken-egg argument ?

[aricbcool]

True

Would Wahabbism be even a blip on the radar screen, a legitimate threat, if they never had access to fortunes made from Saudi resources?

Is this becoming a chicken-egg argument ?
Whether or not the choice of oil for use with the internal combustion engine 100 years ago caused wahabbism to be a deadly threat today really doesn't matter. The problem right here, right now, is that this country is being threatened by muslim extremists with the intent and funding to do us harm.


I imagine Iraqi's to be just as pragmatic as any other people, willing to go with something new if it meets their needs, but there is a shelf life to this, a window of opportunity if you will, meet none of their needs and back to the old was of sectarian violence. I do not belief this is an outrageous statement. And to be frank, I believe that when the Black and Decker drills are brought out and used in a manner not proscribed on the box, that window may have closed.
So your saying that all the bad guys have to do to defeat the most powerful country on the planet is to drill a few holes in someone? Wow, that's some intestinal fortitude right there. Forgive me the sarcasm, but that's ridiculous.
You say there's a shelf life on the opportunity for victory, yet you can't define what victory would be and when that shelf life expired. I'd like to ask you when, exactly, do you think we lost Iraq? At what point strategically, do you think we lost all hope of success?
Because I'm not buying it. It's like the article WM posted in another thread. We may be tied at the half, but we're certainly still in this. We can win. We must win.
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12970

The region is of national security concern for one reason: its resources, our way of life depends on it so we have a vested national interest in the region. Otherwise Iraq would be just like a backwards African country (the importance of African countries is rising for much of the same reason, witness Africa Command). I have no problem facing this ugly reality, and no problem aggressively addressing it. My problem is that nothing has been asked of myself and the American people to address this, we aren't even paying the bill for our efforts in Iraq. Only our nations professional servicemen and their families are bearing the cost, this is not right.
If oil is the only reason we care about the Middle East, why did we destroy the Taliban, in Afghanistan, a non-OPEC country? Why did we even bother liberating Iraq?
I believe that if there is one reason we currently have such a vested interest in the stability of the Middle East, it would be terrorism. We have a vested interest in the stability of Iraq for the same reason.
In my previous post, I noted that non-muslim African countries are not a huge concern. The muslim ones certainly are. Whether or not you want to buy into the whole blood for oil argument is up to you. However, the reason we don't concern ourselves with non-muslim Africa, is because they don't fly their people into our buildings, or harbor those intent on killing us.

As far as emboldening any Muslim opponent (IMHO Muslims aren't the problem, its where they live that is)- our staying in Iraq is a pretty damn good recruiting tool for AQ don't you think?
And again I don't like any of this, I wish I didn't think it was the case.
I'm going to say +1 to TR's response and leave it at that.

--Aric

[Razor]

Razor,

Good points !! However, this conundrum is the democrats old tired "Redistribution of wealth" disguised as "Social responsibility" Hence the reason that a scientist abandons his or her area of expertise to take on the labor position of working for the local railroad or mill. The incentive to create, produce, and advance is losed in the muttle of watching those with less education, and non competitive attitudes achieve a higher rate of economic stability. This is not theory, it's fact ! If an scientist at Abbot labortories is watching his neighbor succeed with far less education then what is the incentive to become academically greater ? There's been a number of times that I wished I had taken that same route.

So, as a former soldier yourself, on a board established by some pretty talented former soldiers that could have had any number of higher paying jobs than what they chose for their career, you're saying that its an undisputable fact that people only chase a higher salary, and don't choose their career based on what they enjoy doing, or because they're following a higher calling? I think perhaps your projecting your own "values" on everybody else.

[pegasus]

True

Would Wahabbism be even a blip on the radar screen, a legitimate threat, if they never had access to fortunes made from Saudi resources?




I'm curious to hear what others think.

My vote would be yes. As far as I can tell Wahhabism has been around since the late 1600's/early 1700's and they have been working a plan of Jihad since then. If not a Saudi base then somewhere else.

.02

[tk27]

Whether or not the choice of oil for use with the internal combustion engine 100 years ago caused wahabbism to be a deadly threat today really doesn't matter. The problem right here, right now, is that this country is being threatened by muslim extremists with the intent and funding to do us harm.


So your saying that all the bad guys have to do to defeat the most powerful country on the planet is to drill a few holes in someone? Wow, that's some intestinal fortitude right there. Forgive me the sarcasm, but that's ridiculous.
You say there's a shelf life on the opportunity for victory, yet you can't define what victory would be and when that shelf life expired. I'd like to ask you when, exactly, do you think we lost Iraq? At what point strategically, do you think we lost all hope of success?
Because I'm not buying it. It's like the article WM posted in another thread. We may be tied at the half, but we're certainly still in this. We can win. We must win.
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12970

If oil is the only reason we care about the Middle East, why did we destroy the Taliban, in Afghanistan, a non-OPEC country? Why did we even bother liberating Iraq?
I believe that if there is one reason we currently have such a vested interest in the stability of the Middle East, it would be terrorism. We have a vested interest in the stability of Iraq for the same reason.
In my previous post, I noted that non-muslim African countries are not a huge concern. The muslim ones certainly are. Whether or not you want to buy into the whole blood for oil argument is up to you. However, the reason we don't concern ourselves with non-muslim Africa, is because they don't fly their people into our buildings, or harbor those intent on killing us.

I'm going to say +1 to TR's response and leave it at that.

--Aric
- It does matter the SOB's wouldn't have any money. Would be fighting each other on the backs of camels with sharp objects.
- The Black and Decker drills part has to do with establishing democracy, I doubt the political climate is conductive to democracy. Democracy cannot be given, it must be evolved.
- The relationship between oil and Islamic terrorism is symbiotic
- There's a reason OBL went to Afghanistan in the first place, there's a reason the Soviets invaded the country. There is such a thing as history, the universe has been conspiring up until right now, so I think it is ridiculous to base any thinking on the matter from a freeze-frame picture of right now.
- 40% of Africa is Muslim, the countries with the least amount of Muslims are in sub-Saharan Africa, which aside from Angola don't have much oil.
My vote would be yes. As far as I can tell Wahhabism has been around since the late 1600's/early 1700's and they have been working a plan of Jihad since then. If not a Saudi base then somewhere else.
Think about what you just said.

[aricbcool]

- It does matter the SOB's wouldn't have any money. Would be fighting each other on the backs of camels with sharp objects.

Would be's and could be's don't matter. There is only what is and what will be.

Democracy cannot be given, it must be evolved.
Evolved? Yeah, I'll buy that. I believe that what you are seeing now in Iraq is the first steps in Iraq's evolution after the big bang toppled Saddam Hussein. There will be chaos and unrest, and it may not work out. But, to further the analogy, if the universe took a couple of billion years to produce the world as we know it now, I think we can give Iraq a little longer before we write it off as an evolutionary failure. :rolleyes:

The relationship between oil and Islamic terrorism is symbiotic What information do you have that proves that claim?

There's a reason OBL went to Afghanistan in the first place, there's a reason the Soviets invaded the country. It wasn't oil was it? If Islamic terrorism and oil are symbiotic, then how does it flourish in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan? How about the US, and Europe? Why isn't Islamic terrorism a huge problem in Venezuela?

There is such a thing as history, the universe has been conspiring up until right now, so I think it is ridiculous to base any thinking on the matter from a freeze-frame picture of right now.
You should look at history to understand how you got where you are, in order to better make decisions about where you are going. Arguing whether or not we'd be in a different spot had someone done something different 100 years ago is useless.

40% of Africa is Muslim, the countries with the least amount of Muslims are in sub-Saharan Africa, which aside from Angola don't have much oil.

While you haven't said as much, I infer from your arguments that you think that if we stopped buying their oil, they'd lose all of their money and the terrorists would go away. Is that about right?

--Aric

[pegasus]

If oil is the only reason we care about the Middle East, why did we destroy the Taliban, in Afghanistan, a non-OPEC country? Why did we even bother liberating Iraq?
--Aric


One more, and there are others, but this is a great post:
Philippines (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=147211&postcount=1)

[tk27]

post
We're grasping at straws here, its run its course. You have the same level of appreciation for context as I do for black and white thinking on this matter, so this is as useless as tits on a boar.

[aricbcool]

We're grasping at straws here, its run its course. You have the same level of appreciation for context as I do for black and white thinking on this matter, so this is as useless as tits on a boar.
I don't think this argument is a matter of context vs black and white thinking, but I'll agree to disagree if that's what you're saying. :)

--Aric