Quote:

---

Originally posted by SergeantX:
Seriously though, the parallels with Vietnam are, in fact, much more pertinent than most people seem to be willing to talk about. We didn't lose in Vietnam because we gave up. We 'lost' because it was a foolish war to begin with. There was no victory there worth the effort so we left. We're in exactly the same situation now.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I find a certain amount of disgust when I think of Americans retreating to their wealthy and safe nation believing the war is “over” because they gave up when they couldn’t win fast enough to suit the media.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SergeantX:
...and that's the way this game is played. When you can't sell it as a war that will defeat the terrorists, you fall back on the humanitarian plea. Which is it? Neither. The Iraq war is, and always was, an opening move on the part of the neo-cons. Their grand strategy imagines that rebuilding Iraq as a bastion for freedom and democracy will spread to other nations in the region and bring in a new age of 'Pax Americana'.

How much we you willing to sacrifice for their imperial fantasies?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Iraqi Prime Minister: U.S. troops can leave any time they want

BAGHDAD -- Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki shrugged off U.S. doubts of his government's military and political progress on Saturday, saying Iraqi forces are capable and American troops can leave "any time they want."

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
One of the problem I see in a pull out is that Iraq will become the theatre for a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia and possibly a shooting war between Turkey and Kurdistan. These kind of calculations aren't even mentioned in the US press right now and certainly dont form part of the political debate.

I'm not sure that's a good enough reason NOT to pull out, just worries me that it's not being considered.

---

Quote:

---

One of the problem I see in a pull out is that Iraq will become the theatre for a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia and possibly a shooting war between Turkey and Kurdistan. These kind of calculations aren't even mentioned in the US press right now and certainly dont form part of the political debate.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Bullshit Finn.

The PNAC/Neocon/Clean Break agenda is completely documented and admitted in painstaking detail, and like anything else that gets in the way of your idiotic fantasies and faerytales, you like to just play "let's pretend" and say it doesn't exist.

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

I see no point in discussing things with folks who deny really obvious realities because they're inconvenient...

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

One of the problem I see in a pull out is that Iraq will become the theatre for a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia and possibly a shooting war between Turkey and Kurdistan. These kind of calculations aren't even mentioned in the US press right now and certainly dont form part of the political debate.

---

Which is why you make Saudi Arabia the guardian angel of central Iraq, Iran the guardian angel of southern Iraq, and anyone who cares to stick their foot into this pile of crap- maybe China and/or Russia since they have oil interests in the area- guardian angels of Kurdistan.....

---

Quote:

---

Ah, the delusional fantasy of the evil American Empire. Any consequence is worth it as long as you can defeat the evil American Empire. Signym wanted an example, here’s one. When you find your argument compromised by the complexities of reality, you re-invent it as righteous opposition to some fantastic Imperialistic America seeking world domination.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

Ah, the delusional fantasy of the evil American Empire. Any consequence is worth it as long as you can defeat the evil American Empire. Signym wanted an example, here’s one. When you find your argument compromised by the complexities of reality, you re-invent it as righteous opposition to some fantastic Imperialistic America seeking world domination.

---

Finn, you have this concept that anywhere we are and anything we do is right and justified. But personally, I see NO reason for the USA to have over 800 military installations around the world. And ... speaking of Patriots... I can't imagine the Founding Fathers would be any too happy about it either. Do you?

---

Quote:

---

Here's the problem with that. Southern Iraq would be an Iranian satellite that has a border with Iran and with Saudi. In effect it will become something like Lebanon, a buffer state/military proxy of Iran through which Tehran can launch attacks on Saudi. Now that might not actually happen, but the Saudi's may fear it. We can expect a lot of Sunni based violence in the south if that looks to be happening.

Central Iraq would be hard for the Saudi's to defend especially if the Shia decide on ethnic clensing. It's easier for Saudi to attack the "aggressors" (read Iran/southern Iraq than to actually defend Sunni interests directly on the ground.

---

Quote:

---

You mean the guy's whose first foreign war was sending troops to fight Muslims and secure US commercial interests?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
There would be ethnic cleansing on both sides. The problem with central iraq right now is that the USA has been consistently turning a blind eye towards the Shia paramilitary while attacking the Sunni insurgents. Consequently, the Shias have been aggressively displacing the Sunnis from Baghdad. But if the Sunnis were to be given a free hand in the internal security of "their" territory they would be a powerful force in the region. The only issue with this idea (aside from the internal bloodshed which is going to come when we officially put the Shiites in power anyway) is that the Saudis and the Iraq Sunnis don't get much out of this economically. The Saudi oilfields are played out, central Iraq has none, and the current and future oil production goes to Iran/southern Iraq and Kurdistan to the north. The Saudis and Sunni Iraqis need to get some economy out of it.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Fletch2:
Saudia Arabia is looking into developing domestic nuclear power, which seems a bit fishy when you realise they sit on most of the carbon based fuel in the world.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

You mean the guy's whose first foreign war was sending troops to fight Muslims and secure US commercial interests?

---

We fought a war after being repeatedly attacked on the open seas and having war declared on us. More importantly. we did not establish a military installation there nor did we run their government afterwards. That's the difference between and empire and a war.


---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Ah, the delusional fantasy of the evil American Empire.

---

Quote:

---

Generally, they may define an empire as a state that extends dominion over and populations distinct culturally and ethnically from the culture/ethnicity at the center of power. Other definitions may emphasize economic or political factors. The term generally implies military hegemonic power.

---

Quote:

---

Not entirely sure that's an accurate assessment. The current Bagdad crackdown is actually against the Shite militias especially the Mehdi army. Ironically the US Military is the best defence the Sunni populous has right now, even though it's Sunni militants that are attacking the US.

---

Quote:

---

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) -- Teenage gunmen from the Mahdi Army militia patrol the streets. Shops abandoned by Sunni Muslims are reopening under Shiite Muslim operators. Slurs scrawled on Sunni homes are being scrubbed off, and Shiite families moving in.

---

Quote:

---

Shiites Remake Baghdad in Their Image By SABRINA TAVERNISE
BAGHDAD, Dec. 22 — As the United States debates what to do in Iraq, this country’s Shiite majority has been moving toward its own solution: making the capital its own. Large portions of Baghdad have become Shiite in recent months, as militias press their fight against Sunni militants deeper into the heart of the capital, displacing thousands of Sunni residents. At least 10 neighborhoods that a year ago were mixed Sunni and Shiite are now almost entirely Shiite, according to residents, American and Iraqi military commanders and local officials.

---

Quote:

---

Sectarian hatred in Sunni areas of Baghdad has shredded whatever remained of community life and created cycle of violence that pits Sunni against Sunni as well as Sunni against Shiite; Sunni areas are marked by ruined buildings, damaged mosques, streets pitted by mortar shells, uncollected trash and little electricity; Shiite neighborhoods present sharp contrast: markets are in full swing, community projects are under way, and civilian arms of Shiite militias step in to help when government cannot provide services

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
You can make a case that the FF defended our commercial interests. But you cannot make a case that they were intent on creating an "empire".

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Not sure that's entirely correct. Last I checked into the situation (which was about three months ago) the USA-led attacks were against the Sunnis in Baghdad. There was much talk about USA troops being able to go into Sadr City, but little action. That may have changed recently, but Shhites have already made considerable inroads displacing Sunnis from their homes and neighborhoods and the Iraq government is doing nothing to reverse that .

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

You mean the guy's whose first foreign war was sending troops to fight Muslims and secure US commercial interests?

---

We fought a war after being repeatedly attacked on the open seas and having war declared on us. More importantly. we did not establish a military installation there nor did we run their government afterwards. That's the difference between and empire and a war.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Agreed. Unfortunately westward expansion and dispossession of the natives eventually led to such ugly concepts as "manifest destiny" and the view that all of the Spanish Americas and the Phillipines were "ours". But in the days of the FF that was a nascent concept which took over a century to develop. I wonder what they would have adopted if they could have seen the future?

.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:


Fletch, I disagree with you about one thing: empires are not "just" economic. The motivation to empire may be economic, but the means is military. That's what distinguishes an empire from trade relations.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

---

Quote:

---

Commodore Matthew Perry

The first visit, 1852 to 1853

Commodore Perry's fleet for his second visit to Japan in 1854.In 1852, Perry embarked from Norfolk, Virginia, for Japan, in command of a squadron that would negotiate a Japanese trade treaty. Aboard a black-hulled steam frigate, he ported Mississippi, Plymouth, Saratoga, and Susquehanna at Uraga Harbor near Edo (present-day Tokyo) on July 8, 1853, and he was met by representatives of the Tokugawa Shogunate. They told him to proceed to Nagasaki, where the sakoku laws allowed limited trade by the Dutch. Perry refused to leave, and he demanded permission to present a letter from President Millard Fillmore, threatening force if he was denied. Japan had shunned modern technology for centuries, and the Japanese military wouldn't be able to resist Perry's ships; these "Black Ships" would later become a symbol of threatening Western technology and colonialism in Japan.

The Japanese government had to accept Perry's coming ashore to avoid a naval bombardment. Perry proceeded ashore at Kurihama (near present-day Yokosuka) on July 14, presented the letter to the delegates present, and left for the Chinese coast, promising to return later for a reply.


The second visit, 1854
Perry returned in February of 1854 with twice as many ships, finding that the delegates had prepared a treaty embodying virtually all the demands in Fillmore's letter. Perry signed the Convention of Kanagawa on March 31, 1854, and departed, mistakenly believing that the agreement had been made with imperial representatives.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Agreed. Unfortunately westward expansion and dispossession of the natives eventually led to such ugly concepts as "manifest destiny" and the view that all of the Spanish Americas and the Phillipines were "ours".

---

Quote:

---

Secret Mysteries of America's Beginnings

Have you ever wondered why President Bush ordered American forces to invade Iraq and Afghanistan? In his Second Inaugural Address on January 20, 2005, President Bush said that he invaded these two countries because he was attempting to complete an Ancient Plan based on an "Ancient Hope", a Plan called the "New Order of the Ages". How old is this Plan? How far back in history does this Plan go? You will be shocked to discover the answer.

Secret Mysteries of America's Beginnings unfolds the fascinating history behind the founding of America, and exposes the esoteric underbelly of its design. Why is Washington D.C. build on the 77th Meridian? Are the Revolutionary War cities really built in perfect alignment with Stonehenge? If America was founded as a Christian nation, why are many of its symbols based on Pagan traditions? There is no doubt that much of America's national heritage was Christian, but just as a coin has two sides, our national heritage has a second side – one based squarely on occult secret societies and their values.

To find the answer to these questions, we follow the journey of secret societies from England to the New World and learn of their ancient hope: to rebuild the lost empire of Atlantis.

In the 16th century, Sir Francis Bacon was at the helm of the secret societies in England. When Bacon penned his classic work, 'The New Atlantis' he believed that America and Atlantis were one and the same. He outlined his vision for the perfect society, and some suggest the program he set forth has been the driving force behind the course of modern history. While he did not originate the concept, it was Bacon who articulated an ancient plan to be carried out by all the secret orders.

As Chief of the Rosicrucians and the first Grand Master of modern Freemasonry, Bacon sent his followers to the new world. A 1910 Newfoundland stamp with his image upon it reads, 'Lord Bacon: the Guiding Spirit in [the] Colonization Scheme.' Because of his influence, Francis Bacon is considered by some to be 'the real and true founder of America.' For centuries, controversy has surrounded this figure who is said to be the illegitimate son of Queen Elizabeth I, and secret author of the Shakespeare plays; the man whom Thomas Jefferson considered one of the three most influential men in history.

Is it possible that Bacon’s vision guides America today?

-watch video here http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=12389 -

(if the video doesnt work, heres a trailer

)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Veteran:
Finn,

You picked a good one, I do side with Kelo. Was Alito on the court for that decision?

However, I would refer to the recent decision where the court supported a school Principal's decision to suspend a boy because she disagreed with a sign reading "Bong hits 4 Jesus" displayed by the boy (who was off school grounds at the time).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I get the impression that this doesn’t mean the same thing to me as it does to you. The very fact that this ridiculous case went to the Supreme Court sort of argues my point, in my opinion. We should expect that children will respect their teachers when they tell them not to hold up signs that say “Bong hits 4 Jesus” or dress in Pasta Pirate outfits, but now children can take their disruptive behavior all the way to the Supreme Court, evidently. I see this as a phenomenal waste of time and money of the Supreme Court and all the Appellate Courts.

---

Quote:

---

I see this as a phenomenal waste of time and money of the Supreme Court and all the Appellate Courts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Out on the street ? Away from school ? On their own time ? Little martinete that you are, I guess you don't understand the concept of freedom of expression.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Now where did I say kids should be allowed to do anything they want no matter how disruptive ?

I didn't. You see, I actually have an idea in my head about the function of schools, and not a knee-jerk salute to authoritarianism like you do.

---

Quote:

---

On January 24, 2002, students and staff were permitted to leave classes at Juneau-Douglas High School to attend a school-sanctioned and school-supervised event, to watch the Olympic torch pass by.Frederick, who was late for school that day joined some friends on the sidewalk across from the high school, off of school grounds. Frederick and his friends waited for the television cameras so they could unfurl a banner reading "BONG HiTS 4 JESUS". Frederick was quoted as saying he'd first seen the phrase on a snowboard sticker. When they displayed the banner, then-principal Deborah Morse ran across the street and seized it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
This is the Wiki version of the event

Quote:

---

On January 24, 2002, students and staff were permitted to leave classes at Juneau-Douglas High School to attend a school-sanctioned and school-supervised event, to watch the Olympic torch pass by.Frederick, who was late for school that day joined some friends on the sidewalk across from the high school, off of school grounds. Frederick and his friends waited for the television cameras so they could unfurl a banner reading "BONG HiTS 4 JESUS". Frederick was quoted as saying he'd first seen the phrase on a snowboard sticker. When they displayed the banner, then-principal Deborah Morse ran across the street and seized it.

---

It seems to me that

Frederick was not on school grounds
He was "at" a school-sanctioned event, but
He was not under school supevision because he had not reported to school that morning.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
But how was anything he did disruptive to learning ? That's the ultimate function of a school isn't it - to teach students ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
So you are arguing authority, and not any actual impairment of learning.

---