Iraq poised to end drought for thirsting oil giants

[dilligras]

Quote by: PatrickHenry If this is your fear, you are clearly delusional. You recognize a threat, but you aren't able to identify it..

Do I fear the beheading of "tolerant" atheists by muslims?

No. They will reap what they have sown, by their blind appeasement of fanatics.

You claim I cannot identify that which I recognize.......could you possibly go and post that in the "Volconvo's most idiotic statements" thread for me? I'm too lazy.



As you were.

[rmnunez]

There will be no Muslim caliphate.

Two issues on the caliphate; whether some aspiration to create one is evident, and whether such a caliphate would pose a threat. I'd answer in the affirmative to both, hence find Islamic fundamentalist terrorism the most important to erradicate first. I'd agree the magnitude of the threat a caliphate could pose is ambiguous, but have no doubt it would be inherently expansionistic and confrontational in its relations with others, and violently repressive of those within its domain.

The threats to freedom are the ones enforcing "First Amendment Zones" and passing laws undermining habeas corpus.

Its a view, but the question really is whether without curtailments of habeas corpus any effort to prevent terrorism is doomed. I've considered this carefully to conclude some limitations are pertinent. Its hard to say what limitations could not be exceeded, but the determination would depend on the risk posed, hence some sort of sliding scale. The scale would apply to everything from arraignment to conviction including probable cause, admissibility of evidence, the suspect's access to said evidence and publicity of the record.

A caliphate is a prerequisite to righteously surge and expand Islam by force of arms.

Although we are told OBL has had no problem drawing recruits thanks to united statian excesses, he is no caliph. These are (have been) sovereign military rulers capable of making engagement of the infidel more of a pan-Islamic obligation through the issuance of a fatwah calling to jihad.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: dilligras Your question makes no sense, given that the quote before it clearly uses a conditional, "if" before the contumelious observation with which you apparently fear association.

I do not "fear" the association ( While I don't much like it either ), I just attempt to correct your misguided label maker.


Do you know how many people repeat that same mistake, or the number of times it happens around here?

Quote by: dilligras A more careful reading will enlighten you, certainly.........unless you claim to be one who normally declares ALL statements by those in power to be lies, in which case I would say your fear is perhaps justified, and yes, your question would then make sense.

You should know this to be true. I admit it here on a regular basis.

Quote by: dilligras But such labels are only tangentially useful at best, and mostly reflect the mind's overwhelming preoccupation with comparisons and catagorizations--which often serve only divisiveness--rather than making any meaningful contribution to communication.

Gee, thanks for the overwhelming empathy I feel from that passionate admission.

Quote by: dilligras And even knowing this, I will continue to use them to point to certain similarities of argument that have the characteristics of a certain ideological bent, mostly because one tends to recognize the same fallacies after hearing them a few thousand times.

I expected as much. Fox News has that affect on those whom the signal "reaches".


In truth though, I know most of the allegations about your heros to be true. It would be sort of naive of them to think nobody watches C-SPAN, or reads the multitudes of political books coming out these days.

Quote by: dilligras Why do I not trust the left? Could it be that familiarity has reared the distasteful expectation sired by past offense? Only the shadow knows......

I don't know, why is it that you can only spot the "good cop" in this routine? I ask myself the same question time, and again. That is why I am ultimately forced to think your sympathetic to one particular side, and therefore biased, and operating with clouded judgement, or just plain bad motives.

Quote by: dilligras As you were.

After my experiences here I doubt I'll ever be "as I was".

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: rmnunez I'm beginning to wonder whether there are any lefties here at all, nobody seems to want the label. It would be interesting if posters declared their political allegiance. I'm sure there are all sorts of conditionals and gradations. I gather most of you aren't "critical lefties", probably none of you would select "communist" or "socialist" as your ideological brand, do we have any "pacifists", some "isolationists" perhaps? I'm a conservative monarchist, what was called an "absolutist".

I am a hard core libertarian. Extreme, but without the desire for anarchy. Think James Madison.

Quote by: rmnunez How many of you honestly believe things would be much better if the US immediately withdrew from Iraq and even better if they also left Afghanistan alone? How does your ideology support such a conclusion?

I think the withdrawl should be conditional. I think we should seek out Muslim countries willing to act as peacekeepers until the "infidels" troops, and influence can be removed.


Believe it or not, I am not on their side in this. I just understand that some cultural differences are to big to ever be crossed, and that I will go to my grave having never fully understood what makes those people tick. But guess what, I don't have to be there in the middle of them, and precisely because of those cultural differences, I chose not to live there, or do business there. Why don't you? Why doesn't Bush, and Co.?


Answer those, and wwe might actually get somewhere.


I do see however, that the chaos, panic, and disorder created by your boys in Washington, is yet again, thrown in my face, as if it were my problem.


Truth be told, if I were somehow to end up in power, I could see myelf making an unprecedented compromise to my die hard constitutional views to allow certain criminals, who just happen to be American, to be prosecuted outside of the United States.


I can think of no greater joy than to imagine the Bush administration being hanged in an Iraqi court for all of their war crimes.


Since I'm so familiar with their views regarding the constitution, I'm sure they wouldn't mind me charting a "legal" path around that document to ensure an expedient trial.


All in the name of justice, of course.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: dilligras You can't even take yourself off their shit list, pilgrim, and yet you have the unmitigated gall to suggest you know how it's done? You suggest that it is only a matter of "leaving them alone".......why, so that they may violently oppress people across the planet with impunity, while you pretend that they're only interested in their own sovereignty?

So you contend that they are the aggressor, period? Interesting...

Quote by: dilligras Was Van Gogh interfering with their 'self determination' when he was slaughtered with knife and gun on his city's streets in broad daylight? How about the four little Christian girls beheaded while on their way to school one morning...........not 'minding their own business' enough for you? Your ignorance is likely the result of a determined media effort to avoid the issue of islamic designs on the West, so it is understandable, abeit regrettable.

Well, to be fair, these people are living in their space. It's a big world, why do you feel the whole world must adopt a Western attitude to be allowed to exist?


Why is there no room for dissent in your mind?

Quote by: dilligras For your perusal: The "Project': Muslim Brotherhood blueprint for cultural jihad - English translation

Well hey, there are extermists of every flavor, but I didn't see these people exporting this type of thing proir to the Wests interference. Again, cause, and effect.

Quote by: dilligras Yeah, waaalll while yer a'floatin' down that there Egyptian river in yer inner tube with yer sunscreen and a sixpack, don't be surprised when a muslim cop starts beatin' the crap outta yer girlfriend for wearin' a bikini, sport.

I don't plan on vacationing in Egypt, but thanks for the travel tip.

Quote by: dilligras I suspect it will more likely be when you notice that muslim prayer rugs are on sale at Wal-Mart, and that Christian churches are being burned as a matter of government policy, simply because you will have no idea whatsoever what is being broadcast on Arabic language stations.....even now.

Is that a Bushism?

Quote by: dilligras Funny you should use that word, "submission." That is, in fact, the literal translation of the word, "islam"........but, of course you knew that, right? Speaking of "scaring" people into submission, what is terrorism, if not an attempt to frighten others into submitting to some political/social end?

Though I answered this before, I'll ammend my answer, and add this...


Do you really think that involking "terrorists", or "9/11" stills scares anybody around here? Obviously, it working on the nightly news, but do you really think that excuse is a pass for irrational thought, or poorly constructed Talking Points on this forum?


Come on, you can do better.

[rmnunez]

Well, to be fair, these people are living in their space. It's a big world, why do you feel the whole world must adopt a Western attitude to be allowed to exist?

The whole world doesn't have to adopt a "Western" attitude, this is about whether Muslims, particularly those residing in western or westernizing countries should be accomodated in certain practices. I don't think so.

Separately we have this issue of westernization and how to preserve cultural identities. I think globalization requires integrating certain western features and societies which don't reach some minimum won't succeed in the future.

The internet and improved communications make it hard to conceive of a successful society anywhere surviving for long behind barriers. What was found behind the 'walls' when the Cold War ended suggests barriers have a negative impact.

Additionally, anyone who argues westerners ought to be more tolerant of Islamic ways, must accept that Muslims need to be reciprocally accomodating to westerners visiting their countries.

Then I'd wonder what is envisioned in calling for greater tolerance for Muslim practices, particularly in western society. I've no problem with different diet and dress, but the Sharia has no place in western society.

And what do we when a transplanted community demands their discriminatory sexist practices be respected in the privacy of their homes or in social interactions among themselves?

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: rmnunez The whole world doesn't have to adopt a "Western" attitude, this is about whether Muslims, particularly those residing in western or westernizing countries should be accomodated in certain practices. I don't think so. Separately we have this issue of westernization and how to preserve cultural identities. I think globalization requires integrating certain western features and societies which don't reach some minimum won't succeed in the future.

So if they choose not to partake in your system, and choose to be left alone, you are prepared to let them be? I sincerely doubt that to be true.

Quote by: rmnunez The internet and improved communications make it hard to conceive of a successful society anywhere surviving for long behind barriers. What was found behind the 'walls' when the Cold War ended suggests barriers have a negative impact.

So what, perhaps they chose those barriers for themselves precisely to limit the Wests influence. Is it not their choice in their onw land?

Quote by: rmnunez Additionally, anyone who argues westerners ought to be more tolerant of Islamic ways, must accept that Muslims need to be reciprocally accomodating to westerners visiting their countries.

Perhaps if you don't like the way you're being treated over there, you shouldn't go there. That goes equally for your business interests.

Quote by: rmnunez Then I'd wonder what is envisioned in calling for greater tolerance for Muslim practices, particularly in western society. I've no problem with different diet and dress, but the Sharia has no place in western society. And what do we when a transplanted community demands their discriminatory sexist practices be respected in the privacy of their homes or in social interactions among themselves?

So we should accomodate, and respect all of the illegal immigrants coming to us from Mexico ( because their Western after all ), but draw a line at accomodating, or understanding Middle Easterners. Interesting.


While I do agree with you about the sharia law, I think you use it as a justification to hate, and discriminate.

[rmnunez]

The Sharia is inimical to so many of the sort of things inspired united statian founding fathers, people like Jefferson or Hamilton. How can people acquainted with their virtuous notions embrace tolerance for something as dark and depraved as fundamentalist Islam so clearly is?

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: rmnunez The Sharia is inimical to so many of the sort of things inspired united statian founding fathers, people like Jefferson or Hamilton. How can people acquainted with their virtuous notions embrace tolerance for something as dark and depraved as fundamentalist Islam so clearly is?

Hey, I agreed that Sharia law would be out of place in the West.


I also think it's fine for them in their own country if that is what they desire.

[rmnunez]

I don't think its fine for Muslims to apply the Sharia even in their own countries. All the places where the Sharia is more generally enforced are poor and repressed, obviously the Sharia does them little good. Worse, it often fosters conflict with others not enforcing these laws as well.

I also get the impression application of the Sharia is something that remains aspirational until the highest authority is seized by those applying it. Excesses applying the Sharia in Saudi Arabia are a problem for just Saudis and their guest workers, so other people could just find its none of their business, but if the ruler of Iraq were some sort of ayatollah things would be different, more like they were in Afghanistan under the Taliban or are in Iran.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: rmnunez I don't think its fine for Muslims to apply the Sharia even in their own countries. All the places where the Sharia is more generally enforced are poor and repressed, obviously the Sharia does them little good. Worse, it often fosters conflict with others not enforcing these laws as well. I also get the impression application of the Sharia is something that remains aspirational until the highest authority is seized by those applying it. Excesses applying the Sharia in Saudi Arabia are a problem for just Saudis and their guest workers, so other people could just find its none of their business, but if the ruler of Iraq were some sort of ayatollah things would be different, more like they were in Afghanistan under the Taliban or are in Iran.

OK, we're clear, no freedom of religion in your mind.


Makes me wonder, do we get freeedom from religion?

[Gods_Mercenary]

You have freedom to not follow a religion, but I can preach to you all I want ( assuming I was that sort) Just look at jehovah's witnesses. Actually, it's kinda funny to see them going door to door in overwhelmingly catholic towns and get a sardonic smile and a quick, "not interested"

[rmnunez]

Is the Sharia religion? I think this law could be applied by Islamic institutions like Catholic ones apply Canon Law. What we can't have is local city-paid cops arresting and facilitating the prosecution of people who breach religious rules.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: rmnunez Is the Sharia religion? I think this law could be applied by Islamic institutions like Catholic ones apply Canon Law. What we can't have is local city-paid cops arresting and facilitating the prosecution of people who breach religious rules.

So really, your OK with freedom of religion, you just can't have any sovereign nations out there that could resist the US hegemony.


I don't see you advocating taking the Vatican. ( Not that it's a direct parallel, but it is a "nation" run by religion, with their own police protection. )

[Gods_Mercenary]

Pretty well trained protection, not to mention. but it's true, if we attacked every theocracy, vatican has to be at the top of the list.

[rmnunez]

The Vatican hardly qualifies as a theocracy, its not really a country. Its population is entirely made up of members of the church, these aren't "citizens of the Vatican" rather than of their own countries deployed to fulfill some of the Church's institutional responsibilities at headquarters in the Pontificate. Theocracies are extremely rare, perhaps the area controlled by the Talibans in Afghanistan would fit under the label. Iran formally is a theocracy, but they do hold elections and have a legislature.

The Vatican doesn't have Canon law enforced by municipal police anywhere. The only "armed" law-enforcement the Vatican commands are those Swiss Guards with their fancy costumes and those elaborate axes. In Iran, the clergy can draw on a "Vice and Virtue" institution with machine-gun wielding enforcers on motor scooters known to mow down marchers in protests.

[Gods_Mercenary]

The swiss guards are an actual combat and guard unit, they dress in the fancy costumes occasionaly, their real uniform is body armor and an assault rifle.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: rmnunez The Vatican doesn't have Canon law enforced by municipal police anywhere. The only "armed" law-enforcement the Vatican commands are those Swiss Guards with their fancy costumes and those elaborate axes. In Iran, the clergy can draw on a "Vice and Virtue" institution with machine-gun wielding enforcers on motor scooters known to mow down marchers in protests.

It has always confused me they way that works. How is it that Swiss Guards end up being deployed in the middle of Italy if it is not its own country?


Italian law allows for this?


Must be the "plausible deniability factor" which to be calculated into the equation were something to actually happen.


As an aside...
I also note that the Axis, and the Allies charted a course well around the Holy Roman Empire when they were in the neighborhood mucking things up. Sort of odd that Hitler would not attack the Vatican with all its spoils.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Wouldn't do much for his approval rating with catholics, would it?

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary Wouldn't do much for his approval rating with catholics, would it?

Do you think that was truly a concern of his?


I thought it was rather clear from the outset that that man despised religion. Well, religion other than his own.


I don't know, seems like the spoils would far outweigh the "negative press".