jesus christ.

Write a novel why doncha.

Curt arguments spark flame wars. But thanks for the advice.

You missed the important part which are the words ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT. Further, you posed your self the other magic words, ANOTHER NATIONS BOYCOTT. This also means sign a contract. Your right in pointing out that these laws came into play because the oil producing Arab countries tried to strong-arm our oil companies into contracts stating that they would not do business with Israel. The Arabs were trying to save face after the Israelis had kicked their asses in short order. Happy Chanukah.

Ok you obviously missed my point about Bill O’Reily. The point was that you should lodge a compliant about his call for a boycott and then tell what official response you receive. I agree with you no man is above the law in the US so make your complaint.

I never deny history. In fact my professionalisum and that of my peers is guided by an accurate view of events. How in the world did the US make Afghanistan a hornets nest for the Soviets. I seem to remember they kicked they hive all on there own. Yes, it was to some degree by proxy but no it was not 30 years. Try 10 years.

If you are going to be intellectually honest, you have to tell the whole story. The Soviets invaded and we supported all factions opposing the Soviets. When the Soviets pulled out, we stopped supporting the anti-Soviet factions and left a power vacuum the Taliban filled. Now yes we did funnel money to Islamiests during the years of support and some later morphed into the Taliban but we also supported the factions, which later became the Northern Alliance lead by Ahmad Shah Masoud, a great freedom fighter I might add.

In the end what is your point. Personally, I am about fixing problems not fixing the blame.

You’re a guy who points at something broken. I’m a guy who fixes something broken.

It really boils down to this. Do you support freedom and democracy for all people or not.

We did it is called NATO

That is laughable do you think that ideas form in a vacuum.


Proxy must have been on your word of the day calendar. It is obvious to me you have know idea where the Iran Iraq war was fought. Hell I do not think you have any idea where the first Gulf War was fought or you would not even bring them up in context with mass graves of civilians. I’m sure many of the mass graves in the Kurdish areas are from uprising and Saddam ordering VX and mustered gas dropped on civilian areas. In fact, we know that did happen. Kobuchi next you will try to convince everyone that the holocaust never happened.

Well I am happy for Canada, economic health is in our best intrest. However, You still have a higher debt per person per capita. Further, it is in no ones interest that the US economy collapses, particularly our largest trading partner.


LOL you expect any trade agreement to work out perfectly. Let me ask you a question, “do you argue with your wife?”

So you're saying that the antiboycott laws only apply in the case of contracts, with persons outside the US? You're saying, for example, that Americans are free to boycott Israel at their own initiative or endorse the legality of boycotting Israel? In effect, you're supporting the option of boycotting Israel? Or any countries, nationalities, religions, etc? And you're a US citizen? Answer in statement form please.

No, your argument boils down to insistence on election of national representatives or no democratic participation allowed. It's a pretext to stifling democracy in other arenas. That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

You're replying to, "IMO the UDHR was about as fresh a document as was possible at the time", apparently.

You were talking about personally seeing mass graves in Southern Iraq. IIRC Iran-Iraq (originally called the Persian Gulf War) was fought along the entire border and into the Gulf, mainly on Iraqi soil. The WWI character of Iran-Iraq (the Iranians deployed human wave attacks including unarmed women and children, both sides used gas, mines, trenches) ensured mass graves. What is now called the first Gulf War (Iraq-Kuwait war, or, Desert Storm/Desert Sabre, lest there be confusion) was waged initially from the air, from Turkey to Saudi Arabia, then on land, well north into Iraq. The US forces buried Iraqi soldiers in mass graves, and Iraqi "collateral damage" from the intense bombing could very well have been buried with the same expediency we just witnessed in Fallujah: bodies piled in trenches. I don't know just where in Iraq you've been, or when.

Anyway, your point seems to be that I'm ignorant, somehow.
No, and I won't deny Dresden, Hiroshima, or Halabja either.
Yes, I see you are happy. It's in your interest to be happy.

Nuts.
My wife never flipped the Byrd Amendment in my face. Nor have marriage counselors judged her actions "illegal".

I feel better about my role in what Canada is preparing to do , with your self professed LOL on the matter.

I don’t support a boycott of Israel. Personally, I support all democracies even our current arch nemesis, France. My family came from France to fight this countries first war, I couldn’t be more American. So yes I am a US Citizen.

Yes, Americans are free to boycott or advocate for the boycott of any country they wish. The First Amendment protects a citizen’s right to advocate any political view they wish. Including advocating the boycott of Israel, France or whomever. Look, Kobuchi your interpretation is wrong, if you want to prove you are right you will need to find some United States CASE LAW that supports your contention. The law is over 25 years old thus there should be a lot of case law generated.

I pretty sure democracy requires a vote by the people. All though there are a few counties that call them selves democracies and are not , such as Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (North Korea)


Yes, the US Constitution is undeniably one of the most important and inspirational documents in the history of law and government.

Both Gulf War and the Iran/Iraq wars were fought in the Eastern and South-Western Deserts of Iraq, respectively. The mass graves are all located in the interior of Iraq…far from any battles. Moreover, bullet holes to the head look a lot different from the damage done by 1000-pound bombs. Most of the bombing of Iraqi Troops occurred in the Northern Deserts of Kuwait and Southwestern Desert if Iraq. There was not collateral damage because the troops where in trenches in open desert.

Once the trial of Chemical Ali starts, you will hear plenty on the mass graves we found in the south.

Yep

I agree I think both Dresden and Hiroshima were a shame. However, they are certainly not comparable to the systematic extermination. Which both Japan and Germany participated. Or the Ba’athist in Iraq


I’m sure this will all work out in the end. Between democratic nations, these things ALWAYS do…you act like trade disputes are something new or uncommon.

Thank you.

Now, suppose you run a cheese shop, and you want to boycott Israeli products through it...

----------
The antiboycott provisions of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) apply to all "U.S. persons," defined to include individuals and companies located in the United States and their foreign affiliates. These persons are subject to the law when their activities relate to the sale, purchase, or transfer of goods or services (including information) within the United States or between the U.S. and a foreign country.
----------

...the boycott would begin with telling your suppliers or purchasing agents, "Goods of Israeli origin not acceptable". Are you free to do that?
Agreed.
I'm curious to see how it plays out, and the precedent it will set.
I'll take that for an emoticon.
Halabja isn't comperable to Dresden and Hiroshima? OK both sides were bombarding it, but isn't that irrelevant to the dead? It was a slaughter.
Contradictory to say these trade disputes work out, in the end, and also admit they're eternal (lumber for example has been an issue between out countries for centuries). Pick one.

I didn't mean to act like trade disputes haven't been around as long as lying and stealing and squandering your good name. That you, Lothar5150, excuse it as normal behaviour (in your "interest", perhaps?) really illuminates the problem to me, and blesses the solution.

Your theory on how the law should work has some major First Amendment issues. Let’s not speculate on how the law should work in theory. Show me some case law. This has been on the books for 25 years.

No Halabja is more comparable to what the Turks did to the Armenians. Kobuchi dead is dead, no doubt. However, circumstances and intent are always factors.

Self-interest is modeus operandi of all involved in free trade. That doesn’t mean lie, cheat or steal but it does mean the every trade is a quid pro quo or be perceived as such by both parties. Sure the dispute over lumber will likely pop up repeatedly. Each time we will come to an acceptable, albeit temporary, compromise. There are some very complicated underlying issues in all these disputes so don’t fall into the trap of oversimplification.

For instance, agriculture is an industry where we need insure our ability to produce food our population. Lumber, mining of certain base metals, transportation etc… also fall into this category. Not that I think these industries should not have to compete with foreign goods or services but we do need to insure that we maintain the industrial capability.

Won't answer the question, eh? Well I'll show you why I posed that question, phrased just so. From the Office of Antiboycott Compliance, Examples of Boycott Requests:

----------
"Goods of Israeli origin not acceptable."
----------

Case law? But that would prove my second point that the spirit (though not the letter) of the law is pro-Israel, and everyone knows it. You won't see the law applied in defense of other countries. OK then let's see what happens when the Presbyterian Church decides to openly divest from Israel: Boycott Watch - Presbyterian Church Violates US Antiboycott Laws . But watch out for these guys, they also pen "balanced" open letters like "Boycott Watch to Duke University: Do You Stand With Us, Or The Terrorists?" Anyhow, they're lawyers, plainly.
Both sides saw it as strategic, that's why they fought over it so long, why the town kept changing hands. I think the intent was purely military, without much consideration for civilians in the crossfire, and then finally no consideration. The circumstance was desperate, brutal attrition warfare. They put military objective before the lives of local civilians. For this those soldiers and commanders are guilty of a crime against humanity.

That's right. Still your trading partners are now authorised to retaliate. US government should not have tested the law you now acknowledge. You see that behaviour harms us all. Why I put "self interest" in quotes - it's pavlovian mindset and if one insists on living it the others finally play that game by applying negative reinforcement.
So in that light what should Japan do? Seems to me all your trade partners have a greater problem with potential self-sufficiency. Shouldn't they protect or subsidise their industries even more then?

"Today, the SPR(Strategic Petroleum Reserve) has the capacity to hold 727 million barrels."
- US DOE

Demand
US OIL DEMAND, 2004: Over 20 million barrels per day, up from January 2002, when demand was about 18.5 million barrels per day

727,000,000/20,000,000=36.35 Days (slightly shy of 30 years)

(Actual current SPR total is 673.5 million bbls or 33.675 Days)

How do we control price with 36 days supply of oil? Wait you mean the total amount of available, drillable, oil in the US right?


"According to the Oil and Gas Journal, the United States had 22.7 billion barrels of proved oil reserves as of January 1, 2004, eleventh highest in the world."

Ok
22,700,000,000/20,000,000= 1135 days of proven drillabe oil in the US (3.1Years)
(Still shy of 30 years)

This is assuming that consumption in the US remains constant.. and I think a jump of 1.5 million barrels per day from 2002 to now shows thats just not the case.

But here is the kicker on that little tidbit.

The US can't come close to producing 20 Million barrels per day..


"During 2003, the United States produced around 7.9 million barrels per day (MMBD) of oil, of which 5.7 MMBD was crude oil, and the rest natural gas liquids and other liquids. U.S. total oil production in 2003 was down sharply (around 2.7 MMBD, or 25%) from the 10.6 MMBD averaged in 1985."


I love your faith in our contry. I love you commitment to the US, and your dedication to defend it.


But I also see Iraq as 300,000,000,000/20,000,000= 15,000 Days of Oil for the US
(Theres the 41 years we wanted, right?)
Bought at $0.66/Barrel plus the cost of actually drilling it.
Iraq is the new US oil reserve.

Case Law…lets see it. Again, this law is almost 30 years old let us see how this law played out in the courts. We don’t need to wait for the Presbyterian Church to go to court, let’s look at few cases that have been ruled upon including appeals and judicial reviews up to the US Supreme Court. (I’m waiting)

No doubt these laws were enacted to protect Israel but I’m sure that was addressed a page or two ago.
What is your point…are you anti-Semitic? :mad:

Was their a point you where trying to make?

Don't be rediculos there will not be any type of trade war.

You’re kidding right? Japan protects its farmers big time. We (California) are one of the largest producers of rice in the world and we have been trying to export rice to Japan for decades but the import laws in Japan insulate the rice farmers from competition. Personally, I don’t blame them for doing it. Like I said you have to ensure you maintain a base for certain industries.

yoshana, the 30 year estimate is based on rationing and widespread use of nuclear energy. Further, I would not take the number published on the DOE website as gospel.

However, no one is suggesting that we would stop buying oil on the open market. That is not necessary to significantly affect price. Consider that the last time we began to fill the SPR in 1994, that action raise the price of oil $0.28, the fill rate was set at 100,000 barrels per day. Therefore, what if we began to add 100,000 barrels per day. We can easily sustain that for ten years or more at the DOE published capacity.

Thanks, I think that is called a left-handed complement. I Think I said this before we get the vast majority of our oil from Canada, Mexico and Venezuela. If I use your assumption (not a good assumption by the way) that we would consume every barrel produced by Iraq then we could have saved $0.66 a barrel. It would have been far cheaper to get the UN to lift sanctions on Saddam and just buy it on the open market. If our motivation was the oil that would have been the logical decision.

So what exactly, in your opinion, was our motivation for going to war?

It certainly wasn't to free Iraqi peple from Sadam. That was just a nice side effect.

Yes, I do think that was a major reason. I also think that we thought Saddam had WMD and he was in constant violation of the UN and cease fire agreements.

Liberating the Iraqis was part of the a policy you will not hear on the news but if you look at the issues of Foreign Affaires right after 9/11 you’ll see quite a few articles on it. It is also outlined in the National Strategy. Honestly, it is called Pax Americana. The basic premise is that democratic nations have the best chance for stability and that by establishing stable democratic nations we will ultimately create long-term international stability and peace. Yes, it is a policy to establish some degree of hegemony throughout the world. However, unlike previous world powers attempting hegemony we have no interest in grabbing land or subjugating the population. Quite the opposite is the ultimate aim. The best example of this policy in action is post WW2 Western Europe.

I also think that we honestly thought Saddam possessed WMDs. If you talk to most people who have any experience as an intelligence consumer they have no problem with the idea that we received bum scoop. Intelligence analysis uses many assumptions and in many cases, the assumption is based on indirect observation. Honestly, weathermen have a better track record.

You were waiting for me? Well... thank you!

Here's an odd one. Discriminatory hiring. What's that got to do with illegal boycotts? Antiboycott law applied because the discrimination was against a Jew who wanted a position managing sales to Arab countries. Weird, but idealistic - I like it.

Here's another. On eight occasions, the mail-order company McMaster-Carr "failed to report its receipt of boycott-related requests within the time period required by the EAR". Although the company did voluntarily disclose the alleged violations to the department, it has agreed to pay an $8,000 civil penalty. Want a bet none of those offending requests involved France, Zimbabwe, or China?

This one's cute. "Specifically, the OAC (Office of Antiboycott Compliance) alleged that G.M. Marketing told other parties to the transactions that ships involved in the transactions were able to enter ports located in the boycotting countries. These statements, according to OAC, conveyed information about the blacklist status of those ships, thereby illegally complying with the boycott."

Here's a German subsidiary of Dell forking over to the US Department of Commerce, because it "furnished information regarding its business relationships with Israel" to a customer. I wonder if Dell USA furnished information regarding its business relationships with Germany? Why not get them twice? Anyway, the German company pays because otherwise it'll be blacklisted. Antiboycott operates by counter-boycott.

No. But I said the spirit of these laws is pro-Israel and you said I'm mistaken. Your accusation is little more appropriate than if I'd said a law was pro-Brazil and you asked am I anti-Catholic. Also, it's impossible to discuss the antiboycott laws without Israel in the foreground. I think these laws funny because they're written broadly to cover any country not officially sanctioned, yet they're enforced in a very selective way. I stand by that and you aren't doing well to disprove it.
Any type of trade war is out of the question... and trade disputes involving tariffs and counter-tariffs are normal? You said both. Make up your mind.
Fair enough.

America will not be held hostage by foreign energy exporters. Canada and its friends are committed to fostering strength in the US energy industry. To this end *pulls plug* we believe hard incentives necessary *cranks valve* to prompt increased self reliance *throws switch* and ultimate self-sufficiency to protect the American way of life from the whims of foreign interests.

*fires up aluminum smelter*

***

The DOE site:

-----------
Oil can be pumped from the Reserve at a maximum rate of 4.3 million barrels per day for up to 90 days, then the drawdown rate begins to decline as storage caverns are emptied. At 1 million barrels per day, the Reserve can release oil into the market continuously for nearly a year and a half.
----------

Nothing to sneeze at. It could steadily supply 1/20th of demand for sour crude, for over a year.

***

Weathermen aren't often in the position of selling snowsuits on the side.

It was obvious from the start WMD was a Big Lie. Drones of Death!? Come on. Transcript of the Hussein Kamel interrogation was available to the public well before the invasion. Analysis of his defection and the consequences of secretly "leveraging" his testimony illuminated otherwise odd behaviour on both sides. Certain individuals tried hard to get this intelligence out, but we were up against a childish anti-war chant on one side, and cognitive dissonence already in motion and on the other. And it's still in motion, spiraling day by day. The majority of Americans now think the invasion wasn't worth it. Democracy for Iraqis is just the last rationalisation.

No a single incident you posted went to court. I am still waiting for some case law.

Canadian Oil Companies are interested in continuing to sell oil for profit to the US.

Don’t be foolish you are talking about a process you have no experience with. Why do you think the joke Military Intelligence is a funny joke to people in the military? Do you think it is a matter of self-deprecation or maybe we know something about the nature of intelligence gathering and analysis, which makes that joke funny to us? :dome:

OK, I'll grant you that its very possible that we did indeed believe that sadam had WMD's

However, i still doubt that Iraqi liberty was verry high on the list. If it was, why would they beat arround he bush the way they did. First it was terrorism connections, ten WMD, then when that didn't pan out they started tooting the liberty horn. Just sems very shady to me.

You can read the National Security Strategy for yourself. This is the source document driving our foreign policy right now, both in terms of diplomatic goals and military operations.

I think that part of the problem that all administrations face is that the issues and strategies are very complex. When you’re the guy in the hot seat you may have a set of analysts telling you there is a high probability that he has WMD, We think he has connections to terrorist because money is being funneled to the PLO, Saddam has violated the cease-fire and fired on our aircraft for the last 10 years. Finally the National Security Strategy call for spreading democracy in order to foster long term stability....What to do you do as President, if you take out Saddam no one will really miss him, some might complain but deep down everyone would like to see him gone. On the other hand if he does have WMD and there is an attack using WMD, the American People will be asking for your resignation at best, more than likely they will want a piece of your ass. So you error on the side of taking out Saddam and give the one simple reason for going to war. However, it was not the only one but it is easier to get the people to rally around one idea rather than a multitude of probabilities.

If you can't retreat further, deny all evidence and stonewall. I'm done.
Of course we prefer to send it your way. Our oil happens to be in the transportation cost centre of the continent, uphill of America. Oil is just 25% of our energy export. We ship a lot of coal out of BC (11%) to Japan and South Korea.

Other energy exports can't go overseas; natural gas at 39%, hydropower at 20%, and nuclear power at 5%. The energy trade relationship is not so much like one of a free market as it is like that between management and an entrenched workforce: ultimately America has the power to set the price (i.e. wage), or could gradually replace (i.e. unemploy) its Canadian import, but Canada has the power to disrupt and force a settlement through American public outcry. I've talked to one Canadian politician who was very explicit: "pull the plug" were the words he used. I imagine this threat has been hinted in past bargaining with the US. We have little more choice in our energy exporting than a trade union does in who employs its members, so I don't think your general statement about interest and profit among oil traders suits the case.
My forecasts of Iraq were spot on before the invasion, and they still are. Go back in the thread to consequences of the Fallujah assault, for example.

Look, I know how your nation's intelligence fails, because I know what it wants to see. Remember the yellowcake prank we played on you? Iraq just isn't something your nation views objectively anymore. Outsiders map that distorted view and sell into it, or work around it. We all have our blind spots. Maybe you see mine.
I understand your problem, and appreciate you can have a good chuckle about destroying and invading a country by accident.

Its simple Kobuchi in many cases it is cheaper to settle fines out of court because the fine is less that the first hour of trial lawyer’s fees. Further, case law is only created after a case has been completely through the applet system. Its not stonewalling you just have not proven your interpretation is correct, all you have shown is that it was cheaper to pay the fine rather than go to court.

And doesn’t it bother you that we idiots of the world make the decision that count...given that you are so much smarter than everyone else.

I find that funny...all intelligence fails not just American Intelligence. The joke is that it is all an educated guess just like the weather. There was no accident about invading Iraq and the country was far from destroyed. In fact, Iraq’s infrastructure is in better shape today than it was before the war.

By context I assume you mean "US government" by "we idiots". No, I don't believe the US government makes the decisions that count.
I said we all have our blind spots, myself included. Of course your nation enjoys objectivity on some subjects mine cannot.
A while back you claimed your expert opinion the producer of ground truth straight up to the President, and that your "professionalisum and that of (your) peers is guided by an accurate view of events" for example reinterpreting a "poorly written" Gallup survey to better reflect reality. Now you're throwing up your hands and calling intelligence a joke nobody should take seriously.
My neighbour's household doesn't operate with fair and transparent democratic process. For example they don't use secret ballots. They don't even have elections. I've seen him hit his wife. What do you say? I'll give my neighbour an ultimatum to disarm himself of the illegal tracked combat vehicle I know he has stowed in the secret basement bunker, or I'll invade his house and disarm him myself, since the so-called police can't even find the illegal tracked combat vehicle in their searches. Then I'll smash everything he has that I can replace for him at a real bargain, and lockdown the family and install order. They'll be real friendly and offer me a chair and a cup of tea and listen to my advice. Then when the police arrive to ask is everything OK I'll have one of the brats declare, "yes I'm the new boss... we need money to fix the broke toilet can you give it to that man holding the baseball bat?" and I'll say, "you wouldn't want them to suffer more, would you?" I'll buy the family a new toilet! Have it delivered and installed by a guy I know does good work. And then I'll teach the family democratic process. But I won't leave until I've taught them to punch each other. When the heat is on, failure to strike is unacceptable, I'll tell them. Also I want to keep several of my dogs tied up in the yard, and I want the tenant downstairs and the family across the street to stop interfering with the neighbours, and I mean it.

That family will be a lot better off when I'm through with them.



That was fun.

EDIT: Fixed link.

You are talking about apples and oranges. The stuff produced by having people on the ground is generally very good. I am sure you have seen lots on the news about intelligence failures and the need for more human based intelligence. Enough said.

I think you are in the realm of the false analogy argument. For instance in America if a couple is having a domestic dispute that gets physical the cops will normally separate the two in most states the perpetrator will spend the night in jail. If the abuse continues, the courts can enforce a separation via court order or trial and Jail of the perpetrator. No such mechanism exists in the international arena.

Why don’t we apply your same analogy to the US involvement in WW2? Why did we bother to involve ourselves in Europe’s problems…you know many Americans felt as you do about our involvement in WW2. Now you rarely hear anyone say that US involvement in WW2 was a bad policy. Why? Because look at Western Europe today. Over 50 years and no war, Why? Pax Americana, US intervention worked and the long term benefits out weighed the short term cost.

Well Kobuchi I guess you were on the wrong side of history. :)

lets see if he is capable of anything positive

indeed it was a good day, considering the past

A good day indeed... :)

How's that? Last predicion I made now pending was that the military crackdown would stop Sunnis from voting. The crackdown (e.g. turning every Fallujan into a refugee) was supposed to free Iraqis from terror so they could vote. So let's see if I was right.

Where have I been wrong, specifically?

Here is an email from a buddy of mine who volunteered to go back for a second tour...

Thought you'd all want to have first hand info of the historical event taking place today. I'm assuming the only thing you'll see tonight on the news tonight will be the blood, gore, doom & gloom. But I'll share with you that it was very uplifting to watch elderly men and women, hunched over, walking with canes, barefooted, coming out to vote for the first time EVER. It leads me to ask myself, "just how many of us would show up at the polling site in OUR neighborhoods, which had been taking incoming mortar rounds all morning?"

Hope everyone is well! I'm doing great, despite my current grid coordinate...

Love you all & Semper Fi...

KevinScott

CWO4 Kevin Scott Bera

2d Bn, 24th Marines, 24 MEU

Kobuchi you would complain about a blow job. :rolleyes:

I'm not a Bush fan due to the economics and religion, but bringing the vote to a totalitarian state is just magnificent. Expensive sure, still a monummental achievement - against the majority of the world.
Like him or not, Bush gave an object lesson in leadership.

It will be a model for removing the theocracy in Iran.

That's not an answer. You said I'm wrong, presumably about the election, but you can't say specifically what I'm wrong about. Let me respond with my best guess:

Curses. My plot to sap Iraqis of self-determination has been foiled again by those do-good Americans. But I will return in a new guise..

OK? Is that the strawman you need?

Now my turn:

You're on the wrong side of scientific fact, Lothar5150. My country has satellite imagery...

Satellite Image




You see, Lothar5150, the sky is not falling. LOL. The world stands behind Canada in our conviction. And people like you, with your apocalyptic vision...

:rolleyes:

See what I mean? You need to get a handle on this, it makes you look rabid,

or,

if you must search around looking for people to be "wrong" for you, be prepared to back up your accusation.

I too am glad the voting went as well as it did.
This doesn't change my opinion that we went in under false presences, but I am impressed that this large a part of the population did vote.
From reports I heard on the radio today (so nothing direct to quote) there was an "informal vote" in the Kurdish north - different sets of booths but set up in somewhat close proximity to the official ones. The question was, basically, "become independent or remain affiliated with Iraq?" - and "become independent" was, from first reports, leading "remain affiliated" at about ten to one. I think the person speaking (reportedly on the ground in northern Iraq) was (ex?) ambassador Moynihan. Anyone else catch this?

Oh for Christ's sakes! "Oh look, people are voting! Democracy in progress! All shall be well and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well!"

I am getting a bit tired of this naive, blithering stupid sentimentality. You think it's all over now? You think "democracy" has prevailed? This is just a Kodak moment in a protracted history of chaos and misery. Pose for the camera at the ballot box. Smile! Tomorrow we will be suffering again, struggling again, living in fear for our lives, getting blown to bits or shot at. Tomorrow we will still live in the ruins that were our homes. Tomorrow our lives will still be flotsam in the ocean of Western conflict investment, over twenty-five years of Western foreign policy jerking about our politics, economics, our very lives and future over a few barrels of oil.

Grow the f*ck up already. You think this is a Hollywood happy ending? This is just more conflict investment. Some of the players may have changed, but it's still the same game played over the lives and corpses of innocent people. And best thing is, play it right and we actually think it's a beautiful fairy-tale. :rolleyes: