I agree that many times ALL presidents do what is politically correct and they shouldnt.  Bush did that when he had bremer remove the Baathists from power and then there was nobody to run Iraq.  Why do you think they still dont have pre-war power levels.

Why do you long for the days when the Baathists were in power instead of celebrate freedom for the people of Iraq?

I dont, but the fact is that the baathists that were removed from the secretarial jobs, the engineering jobs, running the electric grid, the trains and so on have caused the people of Iraq ALOT of undue pain, and there is no denying that, even most rebuplicans admit this now.

You are very bright to have caught it so quickly. I am impressed. The purpose if the news organizations, and this is covered in the constitution, is to report to the public what the government is doing so they can’t slip one over on us. If it hits the news then it is supposed to be and independent source of information that is corroborated by more than one person or witness. If it is a press release they are supposed to tell us that as well. Sometimes when a news organization wants to damage a political party in power they will take press releases that there was no room left to print that day and reword them as news the next day or week or month. In this case it is well known that this is how business is done. It is not news but some enterprising person may have tried to make it sound as if this was something underhanded and sneaky. Iran pays its terrorists to attack US and Iraqi forces in Iraq. They are not doing this out of some sense of patriotism or a civil war. In that part of the world you get paid even if it is the side you want to win. If it is the other side then they have to pay you more. Over here that is shocking and just not done. But keep in mind that this is not happening in America it is happening in the middle East, rules and customs are different.



And as evidenced by the fact that they keep giving the class that it has not reached the people yet. How many people are liberals because they care about what is happening and think that liberalism is the better way to go? How many of them are still liberals after they turn age 30? How many are in their 40’s you will see the numbers drop as people get older because they learn that liberalism sounds good but does not solve any problems. Name one problem that was solved through liberalism. Liberals came up with welfare which is a good idea, then they tried to use it to get votes, to do that they had to recruit people into it slowly creating a welfare state. They stopped solving the problem and created another one. As liberals get older they see that the mean conservatives have tried to solve the problems just not the same way as liberals. Being exposed to conservatives creates more conservatives from the liberal base. The same with ethics, the more exposure the more people start to agree that it is the best way to be. Honest and true. But liberals don’t believe this as evidenced by the fact that they are dishonest and untrue. Not the liberal but the professional liberal. No one votes for liberals when they say what they really want to do so they have to hide their agenda. People without ethics believe everyone else is without ethics so until they see everyone else following the rules they won’t either.



This is one of those political lies you were told.
Removing the Baathists is part of the way we have done things since WWII, it works, we removed everyone that was a Nazi, vetted them and the ones we could trust were put back in place where they were needed. The same was done in Japan, Italy, and France. This was not a BUSH thing it was a military procedure that we have followed with success each time. Study your history you will see I am correct on this.

The reason why you still don’t have power going everywhere it is needed. Is because you have Iran Special Forces there tearing up most things that get done there. Keep in mind that in the first gulf war we shut down their power plants and repairing bomb damage was not high on their list after the war because they used it to gain sympathy. Then we attacked again and this time we did not attack their power grid like before. So you are talking about damage done in the first gulf war not the second one. It has nothing to do with the people in charge when you have people blowing up power lines and pipe lines every chance they get.

Mooseplow -

You mean to say that the Iraqis aren't a bunch of stone age religious zealot freakazoids who will never stop warring with each other no matter what we do? That civil war wasn't inevitable after all? That the little hiatus in the 3000 year war wasn't temporary after all? That the minute our military muscle steps back the whole freakin' place won't go to hell in a handbasket? Weren't those just some of the arguments agin' before the 'surge/payoff'? It amazes me how reluctant some people are to accept or acknowledge success. But then what was I thinkin', right?

Patton got flamed for NOT doing it. Damned if you do and damned if you dont.

Baathists were only in power because of murder, rape, torture and the threat of such. Why would anyone let even one of these pieces of scum stay in any position of importance?

I guess that’s it then, I hate fried chicken so I am not voting for Obama.

Patton didnt and guess what his area of control was in the best shape in terms of things running and working than all the others.

Yes the political leaders but there were many who were baathists that were in positions of immense power who could care less about politics.  The baathist political leaders and other activists who proported crimes such as you talked about should be removed.

So one sector of Germany worked that way while it worked for 4 different countries. yes, minority rule!



Sorry, tell me again the last time you were in the Middle East?

I dont need to be somewhere to  know history, All I need to know how to do is read.

But what perspective are you reading? If you read from a Western perspective you will come off with a completely different picture than if you read the same things from an Arab perspective.

My point exactly, thanks Ted. I lived in those countries before there was a gulf war. I got to know the people. In school my dorm mate was from Iran and we spent four years teaching each other our cultures and languages. I got to get inside the mind and thought process of those people for a bit of time.

Reading is good comprehending what you read is better. Being able to take what you read and put it in context of the situation is best.

If you are able to read and you say you know your history try this example on for size. I used this when I was teaching a class to help them understand what they faced over seas. I will up date it a little.

Your president is weak, he will die very soon. My friend tells me. Why do you say that? I ask not understanding. Your president won the election and did not kill the losers. It is a sign of weakness. In my country political opponents are not killed. How does he stay in power? The man asked in true shock. In Syria if you someone said the same things about my president as they said about yours his family would be killed. We don’t do that, we have freedom of speech we are allowed to say almost anything we want about our leader even if it is not true. My friend looked at me as if I had three heads. None of this made since to my friend. In his world you are the leader of the nation because you have power and the strength to use that power. If you let others talk about you in an unflattering light that person and their family must be made an example of or others might have the same idea and voice it.

In Iraq Saddam held his last election and after criticism that he got 100% of the vote in the previous election he ordered people to vote against him. To ensure that he had an opposition and people were free to vote for anyone they wanted. Here was the catch. You had to put your name and address on the ballot. If your name was not on the list of approved dissenters you and your family died. Surprisingly he won with 99% of the vote. See it was a free and fair election.

In Europe they were shocked when President Clinton was impeached for telling a lie. In that part of the world it is expected for politicians to lie to the people. They have learned to tell the difference and mostly ignore what the politician says.

It all has to do with your point of view and your culture. Our culture says we must do things the proper way. In another country and culture the proper way is not how we do it. Because their way does not work for us and our way does not work for them.

Paladin:


Great example here! I use to points when I'm trying to explain this concept to Americans. First, most Americans don't realize the miracle that occurs here every 4-8 years. They understand the miracle of free elections which help choose the next leader of the US. However what they don't seem to understand is the miracle that occurs in November.

I've been asked by people in other countries, "I understand why the next president takes power, but why does the previous president give up power so easily?"

The fact is, it takes a Constitution like ours to create this miracle. It also takes a culture like ours, raising future presidents, expecting certain things from them. To us a president who refuses to give up the White House, and mobilizes a military to defend his position would be a criminal and a coward... in most countries, it would be expected.

The other example I use is the aftermath of Desert Storm. Westerners saw the Coalition humanely ending the carnage and offering a ceasefire agreement. Arab and Persian cultures saw cowards who would rather offer a peace plan than finish the job we started.

In the end, the Coalition left, Hussein was the one left standing. This empowered him. Then, Americans saw Prs. Bush Sr. voted out of office. Arabs and Persians saw Hussein out last him. This empowered Hussein even more. Westerners applauded as the UN agreed to allow Hussein to sell oil for humanitarian supplies and food. Arab and Persions saw the UN surrender to Hussein's demands. Later down the road, even though the UN knew Hussein was using the money for palaces and rebuilding his military, the UN agreed to further relax the sanctions... again, in the eyes of Arab and Persian cultures, the mighty UN was no match for Hussein's courage and stamina.

Just think how it looked to Arab and Persian nations when John McCain, a US Senator was rejected as a speaker at Columbia University, but Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was not only welcomed, but invited... even at the protest of Americans. In other words, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was respected over a US Senator by one of our most revered educational institutions.

When we feel pride in our freedom of expression, all they see is that we respect their leaders more than we respect our own... We respect Arab and Persian culture more than we respect our own.