my perennial message to the war mongers of hippyland

Slowly but surely.

To be fair - i'll apologise for being so dismisive. I just do not see it working.
I've said ''if all those people would put there guns down and talk then peace might be achieved'' - that is ''monumentaly naive or unquestionably opptimistic'' - So very very sorry for dismissing your ideas out of hand.

If it was a ''civil war'' about the ''haves and the have nots'' i might agree with you.

I think we should aknowledge that there are many many differing people carrying out the violence [in Iraq]. While i can accept ''creating a good life'' is a good idea. Who infact would put away their guns/bombs with the prospect of big TVs etc etc . OBLs Jihadists ? Nope . Secterianists ? Nope . Jihadists in general ? Nope.

I do not say that - i say those that are continueing the violence should stop. That would be a brilliant start in ''giving the people what they want''.

 

No one is willing to give up at the moment because the biggest winners will be those that control the flow of oil. The little people certainly want to get on with their lives, but in a way I am glad they aren't giving up to the point where they are sacrificing their futures for those of the multinational corporations seeking to gain control.

 

double post

 

Insurgents / Terrorists / Secterianists are not fighting about the oil.
If they WERE then maybe they need to look at how to politicaly take control of IRAQ oil - even though that is what IS happening NOW.

Giving up what ?.

 

What are they fighting about then? I am sure we'd love to paint their resistance as "god" related...but who is pushing god's views this time?

Giving up what???? Security, homes with electricity, the ability to walk the streets...those are just a few things they are giving up.

 

Insurgents/Terroists/Secterianists aren't those all names that affect all Iraqis? They aren't individual groups that represent a threat to the world, anymore than the IRA is a terrorist group...or is it? Funny how Bush and co. never went to the point where they defined the IRA as terrorists.

 

Yes - well not all -just the innocent.

I never said they did.

I think by the time Bush came to the white house - the IRA PARIMILITARY wing where pretty much over. So he did not have to define them - they already had been. I think i am correct in the BUsh regime defining the ''Real IRA'' as a terrorist organisation.

Obviously the secterianism is ''god related'' I've lost track of what the terrorists want - the insurgents what us all out of IRAQ through violent means.

 

So no one is actually really clear why the Iraqis want the US/Coalition forces out? Who exactly are the "insurgents"? Where do they fit in?

I wasn't aware the IRA were over. Wonder if the Irish were aware of that. And it's odd I never thought of them as parimilitary, guess you have your reasons for seeing them in that light.

The first thing I thought of at GW's first speech against terrorism was where does the IRA fit in. Being Irish I wanted to know. But I guess they're glad he hasn't turned the might of the US against them. But maybe that's why Blair has been so friendly.

That's why I've always called for a definition of terrorism.

 

I'm hoping some dude does - me - i'm not sure anymore.
Imho it is multifaceted - some see us as provoking the violence - others think the Iraqi gov' and Iraqi army can cope - others obviously never wanted us there in the first place. Imho the "insurgents" are multifaceted also - not many imho are true Iraqis - wishing for peace and unity.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/6311921.stm

Just the accepted term for them i thought .

 

Don't ever count the IRA out until there is unity in Ireland.

 

. OK Possibly splinter groups will continue a 'war' nobody wants anymore - They will continue to use violence to settle scores - can this legitimately be called ''IRA activity'' i do not think so.

 

It depends on your definition of nobody is.

 

Catholics / Protestants / British goverment

 

None of them are seeking more?

 

What ?

 

They are alll satisfied with the state of their world as it is right now? I don't think so, and I don't think the IRA is totally disbanded.

 

you know it never fails to amaze me how dogmatic and blind the war apologist and supporter is. what nevers surprises me is that they never want to join the party and boogey on down in baghdad. please people, if you love this war, please go to it. won't go to it huh? oh well you could always jerk off to soldier of fortune magazine or get religious and then god can be on your side. i'm sorry i have grown very tired of the war supporter. saying this though, it our duty as reasoning people to play our containment policy. as long as the war supporter rages against intelligent rebuttal they are limited to where they can spread their poison.

if you love war

go to it. i hear they are desparate for understanding people to serve their country. i mean you do want to serve your country don't you?

 

I think [as i have humility] the 'IRA' are disbanded for all intents and purposes and have been for quite some time. IF another power structure is developed say something like 'The NEW IRA' - then it is back to square one.
Like i said earlier - i think possibly splinter groups will be around - but imho they are criminals involved in drugs / money laundering etc.
Not that that was not occuring before - but how robust can their ['The NEW IRA' for e.g] political arguement be - when the best of both sides has been bashing this out for decades and they have come to the position they are at now.
Maybe when they [Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness et al] pop their clogs the dynamics might alter - but i think the old days and all the strife are consigned to the history books.

We shall have to see though.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6637403.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6634251.stm

 

I suppose this thread needed to come back on track - but unless you address anything i have said directly - i'm not answering your posts . I'm sure there is a few people who have not responded to you as of yet - maybe they will come out of the woodwork - but to be fair i do not think you have said anything that you have not said in your initial post.

''well you could always jerk off to soldier of fortune magazine or get religious and then god can be on your side''

hahahaha you make me laugh some times - thats quite funny. I appreciate it is NOT a funny subject though.

 

i think only 2-3 people have been game enough to say no i won't fight for my beliefs i hold so dear, can't blame em really.