U.N. chief: Iraq in 'grave danger' of civil war

Jack · Post by **Jack** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:11 am

U.N. chief: Iraq in 'grave danger' of civil war

Q. Grave danger?

A. Is there another kind?

Mister Bushice · Post by **Mister Bushice** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:20 am

Isn't that two questions?

Nishlord · Post by **Nishlord** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 9:38 am

Glass Dick.

silvurna · Post by **silvurna** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:11 pm

WWIII, The embryonic stage

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:32 pm

silvurna wrote:WWIII, The embryonic stage

good. we'll vote a hawk into power and get moving with that WWIII. PRoblem is it would be more like Middle East vs. Us & Israel. Nobody else would jump in to defend us. Britain will send 100 troops and Japan will send playstations.

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:35 pm

Then again, we could sit on the sidelines and let the muzzies decimate each other until we're ready to put them outta they mizzou & end the clash of cultures on our own terms

TenTallBen · Post by **TenTallBen** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:40 pm

mvscal wrote:What would the UN know about anything?

fify

The phantorino · Post by **The phantorino** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 8:54 pm

Jack wrote:U.N. chief: Iraq in 'grave danger' of civil war

Q. Grave danger?

A. Is there another kind?

Hello? It IS a civil war, with the U.S. and 'George's Glee Club of the Gullible' stuck in the middle of it.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:14 pm

Wasn't it the seething and cajoling neocon slimeball Wolfowitz who insisted that the cost of "post-war" Iraq would be no more than the cost of "conquering" it?

Yes it was. And where is that creepy little rat now? Oh yes, in the tradition of the Cheney 'n Chimp cabal, whenever any minion fucks up entirely, he gets a PROMOTION!. And now Wolfie is running the World Bank--holding impoverished nations hostage to the U.S. agenda with the threat of cutting off aid and loans.

"Civil War"? Isn't that what Saddam was seeking to prevent with his heavy-handed suppresion of the Kurds and Shiites? Didn't Lincoln do the same thing here--killing hundreds of thousands, burning their cities and homes in a punitive fashion?

Of course the neocons have ABSOLUTELY NO PLAN on containing or dealing with the horrific conditions they've created abroad--just like the budget crisis back home--but that doesn't stop them from racheting up the FEAR index, smearing detractors in baldly Joe McCarthy style, and insisting that America is somehow determined to plow onwards along the same catastrophic agenda--this time against the long-demonized Iranians.

It's time to scour off!

And that starts with impeaching the Chimp!

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:24 pm

Cuda wrote:end the clash of cultures on our own terms

I don't see any great clash of cultures.

Goober McTuber · Post by **Goober McTuber** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:28 pm

The U.S. invasion of Iraq was among the "dumbest moves of all time" that ranks with the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor and the German invasion of Russia, billionaire philanthropist Ted Turner said Tuesday.

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:31 pm

Also included are the AOL Time Warner merger and colorizing Gone With the Wind.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:34 pm

Gone With The Wind was filmed in color (Technicolor, actually).

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:43 pm

mvscal wrote:
Bizzarofelice wrote:
Cuda wrote:end the clash of cultures on our own terms
I don't see any great clash of cultures.
I don't expect you would what with your head being stuck so far up your ass.

Where have you seen the great clash of cultures? Hasn't happened in St. Louis.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:52 pm

Bizzarofelice wrote:
mvscal wrote:
Bizzarofelice wrote: I don't see any great clash of cultures.
I don't expect you would what with your head being stuck so far up your ass.
Where have you seen the great clash of cultures? Hasn't happened in St. Louis.

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:16 pm

Ah, yes. That looks a little more familiar. In fact, those guys with guns look like the guys with guns on TV in Iraq. Looks like the Iraqis are having trouble with the same types.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:23 pm

You've gotta admit...Wolfowitz was pretty far off the mark.

Jack · Post by **Jack** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:23 pm

You all take this so f*cking serious!!

I was actually just laughing at the "Grave Danger" reference..

All of you get political on me...

What's a little civil war between friends??

As long as the war stays civil... there is little problem!!

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:29 pm

Don't quibble when folks keep your thread out of TROTS.

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:46 pm

Good to see Joe Camel has stayed active despite his ad campaign getting shelved.

titlover · Post by **titlover** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 4:29 pm

Bizzarofelice wrote:Ah, yes. That looks a little more familiar. In fact, those guys with guns look like the guys with guns on TV in Iraq. Looks like the Iraqis are having trouble with the same types.

yeah, hippies and islam fundies have a lot in common.

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 4:55 pm

Your parents were probably hippies.

Jack · Post by **Jack** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 5:04 pm

PSUFAN wrote:Don't quibble when folks keep your thread out of TROTS.

Yes Sir, no quibbling from me, Sir!!

titlover · Post by **titlover** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 5:23 pm

Mikey wrote:Your parents were probably hippies.

I wish. could've done whatever I wanted.

DAMMIT WHY WON'T THE SMILEY THING WORK ANYMORE?

AGHGHGHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 5:30 pm

1. RTT wanted it to be disabled.
2. It works for the smart people.

:)

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 5:44 pm

PSUFAN wrote:RTT

OH MY GOD! AREN'T THEY THE CAUSE OF ALL EVIL! DON'T THEY EAT BABIES AND KILL TROLLSTOPS!! BUTTSY TOLD ME SO AND HE'S... HE'S... uhh... he's kinda out of favor these days...

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 5:48 pm

RTT was disabled at the request of theArtist. He was ASKED to keep them at bay.

Bizzarofelice · Post by **Bizzarofelice** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 6:02 pm

PSUFAN wrote:RTT was disabled at the request of theArtist. He was ASKED to keep them at bay.

What did they do? All Artist did was toss in cans of redundancy.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 6:07 pm

What did they do?

They did the damage to themselves. All of their hacking was funneled into a cyclic redundancy check that miscategorized their posts.

silvurna · Post by **silvurna** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 8:05 pm

PSUFAN wrote:You've gotta admit...Wolfowitz was pretty far off the mark.

Off the mark??Godfrey Daniel!!! While Rumsfeld on one side of the room was saying the best way to increase troop strength is to utilize The Iraqi military, Wolfie was across the carpet , vigorously promoting the idea of disbanding the Iraqi military. It was beyond the pale of acceptable logic that the military commanders did not go to Rumsfeld and request he reverse Wolfies Big Idea.
Correction by silv:yesterday I attributed the plan for disbanding the military to Wolfie. I should have written it was Paul Bremer's plan.

LTS TRN 2 · Post by **LTS TRN 2** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:31 pm

mvscal wrote:
PSUFAN wrote:You've gotta admit...Wolfowitz was pretty far off the mark.
Not really. The dread PNAC NeoJew Conspiracy did warn that our military places too much emphasis on war fighting and not enough on postwar stabilization missions.

Evidently they weren't as influential as the woo-woo, black helicopter set would have you believe.

Babs, I see your Limpdick style is in full fetid bloom.

"Not really"? ...uh, sorry but it's plain public record that Wolfowitz forcefully advocated the Low-Cost ("the oil will pay for it easily"), welcomed as liberators, etc. Wolfie LED THE PACK in pounding forth this position.

So don't act like a medicated retard and try to suggest he wasn't ASS BACKWARDS in his assessment.

As for your simplistic dismissal of the "dread NeoJew PNAC"--and suggesting that the PNAC disagreed from Wolfie, this is a true piece of pure Orwellian Limpdick spin. After all, Wolfie IS A PRIMARY MEMBER of the Project For The New American Century.

"The woo-woo black helicopter set"--nice Limpdickian smear. After all, who is this? ANYONE who calls total bullshit on the neocon agenda and actions? Like the "drive-by media"? Just a hollow blanket smear topped off with some playground taunts?

Don't you ever feel totally pathetic? You should. Just like Limpdick.

silvurna · Post by **silvurna** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:26 pm

mvscal wrote:
silvurna wrote: It was beyond the pale of acceptable logic that the military commanders did not go to Rumsfeld and request he reverse Wolfies Big Idea.
Or maybe you just don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

The Kurds and Shiites would have freaked right the fuck out if we had preserved intact the Baathist military that had been butchering them for the previous 30 years. Since those groups account for 80% of the population, that view was accomodated.

Many of those in the military were of junior rank whose treatment by more superior officers was less than humane. Some of these were willing to remain, as were some of the police forces and draftees. They were to be used as general-purpose security forces, many of them having no particular attachment to any party. Kurds were willing to provide their own security.
They want their own chunk of real estate, and don't necessarily go searching for problems.The country will inevitably divide once again, though the Kurds won't be able to totally dissociate themselves. For now , they remain on our side, and your claim that the K's would have freaked out is incorrect.

smackaholic · Post by **smackaholic** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 3:54 pm

gotta disagree here. yeah, the fukks running the military were baathist, but, you can damn well bet that keeping them on the payroll just so long as they did what they were told would have been preferable to cutting them all loose to stir up shit on the other side. Not saying it would have went perfectly. It sure as hell wouldn't, but, it would have been better than what we have now.

silvurna · Post by **silvurna** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 7:49 pm

First thing, mv, I never wrote anything about not purging the Baathists.Go back and re-read.
Regarding the Kurds getting panicky, if the military had not disbanded,
Our military was never going to allow the remaining Iraqi military to roam about at will, as your comments would lead one to believe.The Kurds know that with our personnel supervising the cooperation and conduct of the Iraqi military, those subversive and uncooperative elements would have been dealt with immediately, in the field.
The Kurds know also that the Shiite militias do not represent a danger into the extended future. Those militias gained strength not by opposing the military under Hussein, but by forming in concert with it. With the U.S. controlling the Iraqi military, the over-the-camel's-rump handshake relationship between the the militias and the old military was dissolved.
The Kurds know that there are so many militias now that their membership is small, and consequently no one militia is able to dominate all others. Again, no reason for panic.
The Kurds know that no militia has overtly disputed the authority of the new government.
The Kurds are aware that Moqtada al-Sadr, as worrisome a worm as he has become, has insisted that his, now approximately 18,000 man strong Mahdi not conduct attacks on coalition forces. With the majority of the violence being internecine, those back-and-forth battles between the lightning-strike Shiite squads and the Sunni terrorists, the violence stays mostly in the high-density urban areas. At this point in time, the Kurds are living in generally peaceful conditions.
Reason for great worries here, mv????
While the new government is still small, the regrettably corrupt bureaucracy is (npi)booming, and the voids left in Kurdistan have been filled with militiamen, who by the way, provide security for the Kurds.
As the new government grows, there may be insistence that the Kurds, who exist autonomously right now, not break off to be in complete control of their own circus.
And remember, the sine qua non for Kurdistan is a substantial bargaining chip with which to minimize concessions to the new government:They control their own oil revenues. More reason for nail-biting, mv??????

silvurna · Post by **silvurna** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:14 pm

No Kurdistan????
Do your delusions occur without the aid of psychomimetics?

silvurna · Post by **silvurna** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:30 pm

mvscal wrote:No Kurdistan, idiot. Unless, of course, you want a war with Turkey as well.

It's not going to happen. Kurds are just going to have to suck on it.

The Turks know better than start shit with the U.S. We pay them to be our friends..airbase at Incirlik etc...and if you're going to mention that they wouldn't let us run sorties out of that base while we were pounding Bagdad, save it.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:51 pm

Let's list the nations that are unalterably opposed to the creation of Kurdistan:

Turkey
Iran
Iraq (apart from the Kurds of Iraq)

The struggle for Kurdish independence has been going on for a LONG time. No one in the US government wants Kurdistan to happen now - too volatile.

We're not in a position to dictate things to Turkey, either...their uncooperativeness to begin this latest war is indeed a perfect example. No one wanted to take such a detour, it complicated the invasion efforts, and surely cost American lives to a certain degree.

Turkey would never say to us, "sure, set up Kurdistan". Even a passing understanding of the dynamics and demographics of the region necessitates that realization.

T1B

U.N. chief: Iraq in 'grave danger' of civil war

U.N. chief: Iraq in 'grave danger' of civil war

Re: U.N. chief: Iraq in 'grave danger' of civil war