Turkish troops enter north Iraq

[Nono]

Quote by: RealRocky Having a similar opinion on a topic to Saddam is one thing, actually comparing someone to a bloodthristy madman guilty of genocide is another. Its kind of like calling a German natinionalist "Hitler".

What do you mean by "German nationalist", Rocky? Someone who, for example, thinks that the Polish city of Gdansk should be made part of modern-day Germany?

In that case I think it would be perfectly legitimate to say "I'm struck by the way your views on the matter accord with those of Adolf Hitler." Why? It would be to remind the person of the unsavoury past of those views.

But (I repeat) it's not that GHook's views on the Kurds are in any way unsavoury, it's just that his pet people in Washington thought that all you had to do was get rid of Saddam and everything would be fine. Now that they've done it, they find themselves knee-deep in the sort of realities that Saddam used as an excuse for his crimes.

I think that's pretty ironic and didn't miss the opportunity to impress the irony on Hook.

[Rainbow]

Quote by: Matt W As is the norm on these forums, Rainbow; you made a claim, it is up to you to back it up.

Off Topic
The thread's subject is well known all over the world. It takes appx. 5 min. to scan some Internet search-engines and get results, especially since the access to that data is not conditioned and/or restricted by any means, unless classified.
The argument is not about the Volcanvo's rules and regulations, but the lack of your willingness to get that data (especially since you were not familiar with, completely).
Therefore, I upkeep my position :
- no more errand-boy/girl ; do it yourself

[RealRockingham]

Quote by: Nono What do you mean by "German nationalist", Rocky? Someone who, for example, thinks that the Polish city of Gdansk should be made part of modern-day Germany? In that case I think it would be perfectly legitimate to say "I'm struck by the way your views on the matter accord with those of Adolf Hitler." Why? It would be to remind the person of the unsavoury past of those views. But (I repeat) it's not that GHook's views on the Kurds are in any way unsavoury, it's just that his pet people in Washington thought that all you had to do was get rid of Saddam and everything would be fine. Now that they've done it, they find themselves knee-deep in the sort of realities that Saddam used as an excuse for his crimes. I think that's pretty ironic and didn't miss the opportunity to impress the irony on Hook.

Well, not that I disagree with anything you've specifically said, but nonetheless is it- wise- to throw around comparisons to Saddam so lightly, when someone could misunderstand uou as I did?

[Nono]

Dunno. But I confess that I wasn't exactly averse to getting Hook's goat while I was at it.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Nono I'm struck by the way your views on the matter accord with those of Saddam Hussein, G.

Que? What do you mean by that?

[GHook93]

Quote by: Nono Well, Rocky, that's probably because you're too new to be familiar with Hook's thought processes. Hook is one of those rah-rah US-is-always-right-about-everything types who (he can correct me if I'm mistaken here)

That is out right slander and disingenious! Here is a trend I started:
Bush will Go Down as the Worst President in History

fully supports Boy George's disastrous decision to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam.

I have repeatedly stated that the invasion of Iraq was the biggest blunder in US history for the reason that:
(1) Sadam's Iraq was a good polarizing force to Iran
(2) Sadam kept Al Qaeda from making Iraq a haven
(3) Sadam had no WMDs
(4) Sadam at least stabilized the country

However, I question the decision to leave right now, while it appears that the surge having some possible effects at reducing the violence. I believe if we leave now a bloody genocidal civil war would break out. Starting the war was a mistake, but I believe leaving now after we created the mess would be a mistake also.

One of the many-many uncomfortable consequences of that decision is that the Kurds are now in the driver's seat.

Why is that unconfortable? The Kurd situation is one of the bright spots in the Iraq mess!

And if, as Hook fears, that nasty ol' Obama ever gets his slimy hands on the levers of power (in which case Hook has threatened to leave the country, no shit) and pulls the US out of Iraq, well Hook thinks the Kurds will go the route of Kosovo. And of course he's right.

(1) I have nothing but respect for Obama as a person
(2) It's Obama's fisical policies I disagree with. I am a fisical conservative (the reason I supported Romney) and that is why I don't want him or any of the Democrats to win. Obama will raise our taxes by 20%!
(3) I said I would leave the country if Edwards! His liberal style would have killed America as we know it.

Be offended if you wish, but Hook is very supportive of the idiots who got y'all into this mess. He deserves to be brought face to face with the resulting ironies.

Please, Bush stands against everything I believe in. McCain is not my first choice, in fact, I had Romney and Ron Paul ranked above him. McCain is the lesser of 2 evils for me. I don't support communist. Believe me if Ron Paul won the nomination I would have been casting my vote for him!

[GHook93]

Quote by: Nono Dunno. But I confess that I wasn't exactly averse to getting Hook's goat while I was at it.

Yep by making an inaccurate generalization of me and slandering my viewpoints!

[Matt W]

A good point, well made. Drop the personal comments, Nono.

DO NOT RESPOND IN THIS THREAD TO THE PRECEDING MESSAGE. Please contact a member of the staff privately if you have any questions.

[rmnunez]

It is foolish to see Saddam's capacity to suppress Kurds as an advantage. Nor do I see much benefit in his 'polarizing' Iran. Saddam was cerainly not a regional stabilizing source, but its true he kept Al Qaeda out.

Saddam waged war against Iran and Kuwait, maintained adversarial relations with border disputes against Saudi Arabia and Gulf States. He was a big military spender and fostered an arms race in the region. Additionally he did repress minorities and even the Shia who are the majority.

Although Islamic fundamentalism has become a much worse problem since his ouster, Saddam sure did have relations with terrorists of different sorts.

[GHook93]

Quote by: rmnunez It is foolish to see Saddam's capacity to suppress Kurds as an advantage. Nor do I see much benefit in his 'polarizing' Iran.

His suppression of the Kurds was a war crime and he deserved punishment for.

There are a ton of benefits to being a polarizing force to Iran. Alamnutjob has lust for power, Saddam prevented him for exerting too much of that power.

Saddam was cerainly not a regional stabilizing source, but its true he kept Al Qaeda out.

And keeping Al Qaeda out was a very very very good thing!

Saddam waged war against Iran and Kuwait, maintained adversarial relations with border disputes against Saudi Arabia and Gulf States.

Good point. Saddam was a evil man. He did all those things, but at least he kept the country together. Post-Iraq Sadam makes the region much more destabilized!

He was a big military spender and fostered an arms race in the region.

He was not the only one!

Additionally he did repress minorities and even the Shia who are the majority.

Many dictators repress the people!

Although Islamic fundamentalism has become a much worse problem since his ouster, Saddam sure did have relations with terrorists of different sorts.

Very true, but there are were no links to America's #1 enemy - Al Qaeda!

[Matt W]

His suppression of the Kurds was a war crime and he deserved punishment for.

Tell me, just how was he able to suppress them after Gulf War 1?

There are a ton of benefits to being a polarizing force to Iran. Alamnutjob has lust for power, Saddam prevented him for exerting too much of that power.

Given that Ahmadinejad was elected after the invasion of Iraq, I think this argument can be rejected out of hand.

[Domino]

Tell me, just how was he able to suppress them after Gulf War 1?

To start, we gave him back his helicopter gunships, with which he put down the rebellion we'd just asked the Kurds to begin.

[Nono]

Quote by: GHook I have repeatedly stated that the invasion of Iraq was the biggest blunder in US history for the reason that: (1) Sadam's Iraq was a good polarizing force to Iran (2) Sadam kept Al Qaeda from making Iraq a haven (3) Sadam had no WMDs (4) Sadam at least stabilized the country.

If you say so. Understandably I haven't read everything you ever posted on Volconvo, just as you haven't read everything I've posted.

From what I'd read, however, I had the sincere impression that you you were a neocon-liner through and through. Have now reappraised you.

[Matt W]

Quote by: Domino To start, we gave him back his helicopter gunships, with which he put down the rebellion we'd just asked the Kurds to begin.

With a no-fly zone over Kurdish Iraq, this doesn't really answer the question....certainly, he would have used them to put down the nascent rebellion from disgruntled Shia, but the Kurds? I would have to disagree.

[grandpa]

By the way, the "moderate" Turkish President Abdullah Gül criticized the foreign press in 2007: "They want Turkey to retire into itself both abroad and at
home. But we will continue fighting the PKK both at home and abroad. I
want to underline this in particular."

TODAY'S ZAMAN

Grandpa h.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Nono If you say so. Understandably I haven't read everything you ever posted on Volconvo, just as you haven't read everything I've posted. From what I'd read, however, I had the sincere impression that you you were a neocon-liner through and through. Have now reappraised you.

It seems to be claim on the Kurdish front. The Kurds terrorist (the ones attacking Turk), don't know how close they are to Statehood (the first Kurdish State in history). Just like the Palestinian terrorist, these terrorist acts hurt that goal! Just like most terrorism it is counter-productive to the ultimate goal. I have a prediction. Once Obama gets elected, America rapidly pulls out of Iraq. The puppet government falls. Iraq goes into a civil war with the Shiite ethnically cleansing the country of Sunnis. The Kurds official say to he11 with the Republic and unilaterally declare independence the Kosovo way. If the Kurdish terrorist keep provoking Turkey, then Turkey will invade Kurdistan upon independence aka the Arab countries invading Israel in 1947!


Answering Nono's question here are some of my political view:
(1) Fiscal Conservative - the main reason I vote Republican; I am for small government and low taxes.
(2) Social Liberal - I support gay marriage and am pro-choice
(3) Immigration Conservative - 2nd reason I support Republicans
(4) War on Drugs Liberal - I have a simple solution, decriminalize it the way the Dutch have.
(5) War on Iraq - Should have never invaded it, but that is moot. Not so sure pulling out is a good thing (no pun intended).
(6) Handling of Hostile Governments - I like Obama's approach

[grandpa]

Quote by: GHook93 It seems to be claim on the Kurdish front. The Kurds terrorist (the ones attacking Turk), don't know how close they are to Statehood (the first Kurdish State in history).

But a Kurdish state would NOT be the solution.

Grandpa h.

[GHook93]

Quote by: grandpa But a Kurdish state would NOT be the solution. Grandpa h.

They have a De Facto Kurdish State right now! Once its becomes official they would go under the same fire that Israel has done, meaning all of her neighbors would be against her existence and independence (Syria, Iran, Turkey, Iraq and Saudi Arabia) and they will probably go to war; nevertheless, right is right and a Kurdish Independent state is the right thing to do. The Kurds have been presecuted by the Turks, Iraqis, Iranians, Syrians, Jordanians etc and the only solution is a free independent Kurdistan.

[grandpa]

Quote by: GHook93 They have a De Facto Kurdish State right now! Once its becomes official they would go under the same fire that Israel has done, meaning all of her neighbors would be against her existence and independence (Syria, Iran, Turkey, Iraq and Saudi Arabia) and they will probably go to war; nevertheless, right is right and a Kurdish Independent state is the right thing to do.

A Kurdish state will guarantee peace no better than a Turkish one. It's the wrong thing to do.

Grandpa h.

[GHook93]

Quote by: grandpa A Kurdish state will guarantee peace no better than a Turkish one. It's the wrong thing to do. Grandpa h.

Right is right! The Turks will be pissed, but so will the Syrians, Jordanians, Iranians and probably Iraqis. But I will state it again what is right is right!