What if I've been wrong about W?
 

We've got huge peaceful and maybe effective demonstrations hopefully driving the Syrians out of Lebanon. Egypt may actually get a competitive election. Wierd. Not that I really go for democracy but maybe some governments can be changed without a bloodbath. Iraq is still a shitstorm though. This is as close as a cellarite ever gets to admission of wrongness, enjoy the spectical.

PS. George do not take this as a go ahead to get more Marines killed you AWOL punk.

Lebanese chick protesters are really hot. Be on the right side of this one! :P

http://cellar.org/2004/lebanon.jpg

http://cellar.org/2004/lebanon2.jpg

somehow i was expecting them tolook more like Klinger.

My, oh, my.

http://cellar.org/2004/lebanon3.gif

http://cellar.org/2004/lebanon4.gif

These are liberated arabic women! And they ROCK!

It's 'spectacle', ZippyG

I saw an article recently which posed the question "What if Bush has been right about Iraq all along?" It's a nice little piece by a "skeptic" which suggests that perhaps Bush's ends (a vote in Iraq) justifies his means (an unprovoked, unjustified attack on a sovereign nation which posed no threat to us, nor was it even close to being the worst human rights offender). I found that particular brand of tripe to be unswallowable.

There is much evidence that voter turnout was due to coersion. The country is far from safe, and thousands of men, women and children have died. That's to say nothing of the castration of our civil liberties here at home, the prisoners tortured and imprisoned indefinitely without trial...

If you had a low opinion of W, I'd say you weren't wrong. He earned it. I am absolutely not suggesting that nothing good has come of this war, but the bufoonery of the execution has made the price far dearer than it needed to be.

With that much, I certainly agree. Yowza.

uh do you mean that they are hot? rock.. hot... dropping it

no really, I think it's great what's happening there.. and like in the Ukraine. peacful protests that actually accomploish something, great to see. and I am all in favour of womens rights, and it seems to my american ass that there needs to be more of that in the world

I was in the nothing camp. Now at least something may come of it.

Yowza doesn't even touch that.

You'd best be very careful, Jimbo. ;)

I'm sorry, the response we were looking for was "fuck you, lumberdave."

You still qualify for the lightning round, though, so stay tuned and we'll be back after these important messages.

The possibility of chaos always exists
 

As proven by the experience of the French Revolution, the Weimar Republic, and the short lived Constitutional monarchy in Russia in 1916-7, sometimes a shaky neophyte democratic government can lead to complete disaster and genocide. One has to remember that a true democracy can only survive in an economic and political climate that allows it. As seen with the French in 1789/80 what appeared to be bloodless, resulted in the executions of hundreds of people and the Napoleaonic wars. So it is to be seen what happens to these "democracies". Wait in the wings well prepared for the worst.

-Walrus

What the fuck does the Syrians assassinating a popular Lebanese politician leading to mass protests have to do with Bush? Precisely Fuck all. What does the new hope in the Israeli/Palestinian peace process have to do with bush? Fuck all. They're both the product of internal, home-grown forces. Want to see what happens when that works? Look at Ukraine at the moment. Want to see what happens when it's forced by foreign interests? Look at Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan at the moment.

The net effect of the invasion and occuption of Iraq so far has been to drive Iran closer to the edge, Syria off the deep end, deepen the hate in Saudi and lay the seeds for a gorgeous little civil war if they ever pull out of Iraq and maybe even if they don't.

we can only keeper our fingers crossed and hope, right walrus?

Maybe this will have that intended effect, and since France is involved you can be in favor.

We can hope
 

True 123 we can hope, but definately don't count on GW Bush just crossing his fingers. If he and his buddies do anything, they'll be putting their fingers all over these events.

-Walrus

There's a huge number of people who won't ever give Bush credit for anything, at least not while he's in office. They'll blame him for bad stuff, but not for good stuff. That's ok, as long as the outcome is the same.

What kills me is the number of people who think that the people of the middle east don't want to be free. "Bush is forcing democracy down their throats," is as arrogant a statement as can be made. What human doesn't want basic freedom? And if you think that a democratic middle east isn't vital to our own security, you're nuts. We need to apply all the pressure we can to the thugs that run those countries until they finally give up terrorism as an international policy.

As an aside, I wonder if the reason libs want to downplay the impact the American president has on world affairs is that we'd have to blame Clinton for N. Korea and al Qaeda.

Only if you can't detect irony.

The problem is that there are many flavors of democracy, and America's execution is far from perfect, particularly in Iraq. Bush basically invaded without provocation, created an unstable area where nobody is safe from death or dismemberment, and said "You're free!" Then he gave them a list of pre-selected people and said "Vote for one of these guys." Then he forced them to vote, on pain of losing their food rations.

It's not that he's forcing democracy down their throats, it's that he's forcing this shameful mockery of democracy down their throats without bothering to find out what they want, and asking them to be grateful for it.

You say some people won't give Bush credit for anything, and maybe that's true, but many people won't hold him responsible for anything, and that's worse given his actions. I'm speaking as a person who had no strong feelings about Bush until he earned the strong feelings.

But he didn't cause those areas to be unsafe and unstable - they already were. I'll admit that it's awfully presumptuous of us to go in guns blazing without being specifically asked, but who's going to do the asking? The people who aren't even allowed to watch anything but state-run TV? That is, if they even have electricity. We were set up as the so-called defenders of freedom 60 years ago because no one else was willing to do it. Just because everyone else has decided to hide behind the skirts of the impotent U.N. doesn't mean that our role has changed (whether this is a good or bad thing, I don't know). The only difference between freeing the middle east without their consent and entering the European theater (without provocation) in WWII is that it was difficult for the French to be snidely anti-American from the bottom of a urine-filled German bomb crater.

Bush ain't perfect, but he's ours, and he represents more than his personal faults. I felt the same way about Clinton. I detested him personally, but nobody else better say anything bad about him, because he's the American president. Sometimes the pres is kind of like your drunken cousin. You have to back him in a bar fight because he's your cousin, not because he doesn't deserve to get his ass kicked.

Iraq was safer and more stable than most dictatorships before the invasion.

Nazi Germany was safer and more stable before we invaded them, too.

UT *everyone* has been telling Syiria to get the fuck out for a very long time. The only thing that's changed is that the locals are very, very pissed off.

Mr noodle, would that be the thugs the US props up, or the ones it's ignored the bloodshed of for decades? I get confused with these things.

They don't LOOK pissed off.

it's both, jaguar. accompanied by thugs who have surfaced without our help and possibly thugs we helped get into power in the first place. The fact remains that they need to go, and civil uprisings only do so much without the muscle to back them up.

just because there's someone in the white house who will back up his talk, people get all miffed.

What do you think they're protesting about UT. Think about it.
Civil uprisings sure haven't worked in Georgia and Ukraine of late.
Yet somehow despite all the cowboy bullshit about backing his talk, I don't see abhrams rolling though Harare or Cairo or Riyadh........There's a guy in the whitehouse with the intellectual capacity of a rotten tomato having his stings pulled by a lobby of arrogant, neoimperialists who are having a whale of time trying out some of the most destructive foreign policy of recent times and raping the treasury for their own benifit in the process, I think that might be why people are miffed. You honestly think the whole freedom&democracy&candy for all thing is more than Karl Rove with his hand up bush's ass don't you? amazing.

You want to talk about the US instilling democracy in the middle east? Take a look a Lebanon, very topical. The US has been trying to supress democracy in lebanon, they're worried that the if people freely voted they might vote for an organisation that provides media, schools and hospitals - hezbollah. That's how serious the US is about freedom and democracy. Wake the fuck up, it's South America all over again, all that's changed is the decade. Death Squads, installed dictators, it all sounds so familiar.

Jag, the old game is out and a new one is afoot. Your old media BBC still thinks the old game is on.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp..._wh/us_mideast

Bush Demands Syria Withdraw From Lebanon
What. Side. Are. You. On.

How very 2004 of you. Let's move the fuck on dot org from this tired "Bush is dumb" routine. He's dumb like a fox, and while the sheeple bleat about not getting their way in the election, he is getting things done, cowboy-style or no.

I banged so many metaphors into each other in that sentence, my head hurts. Oh well, that's why it's called quick reply. no editing here, baby.

Which, true or not, is a non-sequitur. There are no parallels between the US rationales for war for Iraq and Germany.

'my old media'. Huh?
Whose side am I on? The Lebanese. The US aren't interested in helping them, just an excuse to lay into Syria, good thing they're stretched so far in Iraq already or i'm sure they'd be 'liberating' the palce by now. France has interests in Lebanon of its own.

As long as people we don't like get elected. What exactly is this new game you're going on about? Looks like the same old duplicity to me.

Getting what done exactly noodle? He's managed to trash the transatlantic alliance. That was impressive. Presiding over some impressive spending too, I wish I had the balls to blow out such a deficit, I'm sure he's proud of that one. He sure is getting stuff done, gotta respect a man that can barge ahead, regardless of facts, logic, history, diplomacy or prudent economic policy, I'm sure that appeals to your kind of intellect.

Let me explain where I am on this and maybe Jag will get it. Bush made a huge stupid gamble when he invaded Iraq. In the final tally it will probably mean many more millions enslaved by Mullahs. However! Lebanon, which has more liberal roots than much of the middle east, should grab this moment. Yes, Bush hates Syria. This should embolden the Lebanese people. Bush is crazy enough to back up his words, Lebanon is counting on it. The most likely outcome is Syria backing down. It is time for pragmatism. Don't let UT's triumphalism sour you to the potential of this moment. Root for Lebanon.

I am but I don't see what may happen as to any notable degree, the result of Bush's actions. Bush can't back up his words, there isn't the military capacity.

Right, there is NO connection whatsoever between millions of Iraqis holding up ink-stained fingers on Aljazeera and the Lebanese public cheerily fomenting change in the streets. It's all coincidence, along with the Egyptians, and the Saudi women possibly getting a vote, these things would have happened in isolation too.

Also, if you cover your ears and sing real loud the monsters can't get you in the dark.

The George Jr propaganda machine is that good. Many Americans foolishly think the elections in Iraq were the reason for these Lebanese demonstrations. Notice how the world revolves around American perspectives? But the incentive for those demonstrations was the equivalent of Martin Luther King being shot combined with a Lebanese fascination with the Orange Revolution in Ukraine.

This assassination has been rather galvanizing. This may be the first time that Druze, Shia, and Maronites are fully in agreement. Not because Syria executed the assassination. That again is American propaganda again not supported by any facts. This Lebanese leader resigned only because he could not lead an independent Lebanon. That surprise (virtually not reported in the US) combined with his murder galvanized all parties in Lebanon to a patriotic fever. A fever they saw reported extensively in Ukraine. What is happening in Lebanon is very similar to the popular uprising in Ukraine. Ukraine (not Iraq) is what got the Lebanese attention - once we eliminate White House propaganda.

Lebanese holding up printed English signs. When there are anti-American demonstrations, we claim they are government controlled or the result of outside agitators. When there are anti-government demonstrations, we deny that we in any way funded these groups.

I am pretty sure we didn't have anything to do with Hariri's death, but considering how far we are stretching the definition of anti-terror operations, you have to wonder if we're back to our old tricks.

There's a lot of room for funding black-bag operations in budgets with no supervision.

Isn't the Ukraine that place where the American stooge beat the Russian stooge? :gray:

Well inside the realm of possibility.

And they all have real long and similar names making a long story that much harder to comprehend. Simpler to call one pro-western and the other pro-Russian. Or even easier - one is George Jr's man; the other is Putin's man. Forget the other candidates that only muddy the story. Then one need not read a long and rather 'Clancy like' story.

The climax in Ukraine was a nation wide demonstration equivalent to a Civil Rights March in Washington or another that was against the War. The Orange Revolution of Ukraine resurfaces in Lebanon.

I love you guys, I really do. But you really should get together on your alibis:
D'ya follow? Either it has nothing at all to do with the US, and we should be ashamed that we think it's all about us -- or, it was entirely orchestrated by the US using secret black budgets but not enough supervision to tell them to re-write the signs in Arabic.

Wouldn't it be easier to hold your hands over your ears and sing?

Forgive me for being suspicious, I forgot that we have never before meddled in any other countries internal affairs with dirty tricks. My bad. :cool:

Rich has too many good reasons to suspect underhanded US involvement. I don't see any direct involvement. IOW Rich and I are not monolithic. We are both examining a very complicated situation with different perspectives.

How complicated? Well first off, Syria is a primary source of American intelligence in the region. Go figure. Furthermore, Condi Rice is quite skillfully playing the situation as a subtle threat to that same Syria. Go figure. Situation cannot be comprehended in a two dimensional 'good and evil' perspective. But to appreciate the primary inspiration for a demonstration of united Maronites, Shia, and Druze (who ten years ago would have thought it possible), one must look to Ukraine and its thrilling Orange Revolution.

Neither George Jr nor the Iraqi election was the inspiration for that crowd. Maybe George Jr ordered the assassination? Don't give George Jr credit for being that skillful. But George Jr's skillful propaganda machine is using half truths and events in Lebanon to promote themselves domestically - because so many Americans don't follow world news. The administration spin actually has people believing this was all due to US 'pushing democracy down the Middle East throat'. That would be a silly 'good and evil' interpretation. The world, especially in Lebanon, is far more complex.

What a paradox: the Bush administration is remarkably stupid and incompetent - except for when spinning the American public, at which time they are remarkably brilliant and talented.

Kind of like how Rich's "perspective" is 180 degrees different from your own, but he's not "wrong"; because even though he's just throwing out a bunch of stuff to see what sticks, without any facts, he's anti-administration - and that makes him not-wrong, by definition.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m...equestid=20282

Mark Steyn explains it:

No. There isn't. One is about holding people to ransom with food stamps, the other is a reaction to a very public assassination and a rapidly developing country sick of war and foreign intervention. Lebanon is a very, very different place to Iraq in so many ways it's not funny, it's more like Berlin than Bagdhad, you need to understand that. I don't think you do, if you do, you're choosing to ignore it because it gets in the way of this odd idea that somehow, the US is responsible for the uprising.

Ah, the great far-right circle-jerk. The telegraph has it's uses, cheap insulation, mopping up spills, starting fires but don't make the mistake of reading it. That said, I cannot honestly believe a newspaper would refer to LGF, the mind boggles. Lets not notice the death of Arafat and events since then, I'm sure that had no impact whatsoever on the situation at all in Israel.

Paraphrasing isn't your strong point. There's a combination of factors, a timied, totally whipped US press busy licking bush's asshole and I must admit, very skilled spin from Rove. By creating support based on image andmore abstract values like morals, there are a number of figures, most of which the public wouldn't even recognise and some of whom who have no left since their ideas have failed who have been free to execute some very extreme policy under a pliant president who is willing to be led by those who surround him.

There are a lot of intersting things going on in the ME at the moment, some good, some bad, most of which will come to nothing more than token moves. There's a fair chance that Syria will pull out and maybe things can stay on track in Israel, time will tell but if you think the US is resonsible for either, you're kidding yourself.

It is pretty hard to believe that someone could be skilled in one area and incompetent in others.

That's right Jag - progressive Lebanon, backwards Saudi, mixed Egypt - it's all coincidence. Like when Libya gave up its WMDs on the heels of the Iraq invasion, just coincidence.

Happy people holding up their finger proudly to show they've been... held up for food stamps? What shit are you eating over there? Wouldn't it be easier to hold your hands over your ears and sing, than to make this kind of shit up?

As far as newspapers referring to LGF, in this case Steyn is noticing that LGF is NOT circle-jerking, which is why the information is notable. When the chamber doesn't echo, that's news too.

BTW Steyn is a Canuck I think, writing in the Telegraph, so this strange US media bias doesn't apply in his case.

No, there was a direct link there although once again, it wasn't straightforward, the issues to do with the massive nuclear weapons manufacturing equipment trading ring, based on the US's great allay, Pakistan had a role to play. Saudi and Egypt are paying lip service to the US, when either government changes I'll admit you have a point. When. How did the US instigate what is now happening in Lebanon? Some kind of vague 'oh well, the US was democracy, let's all suddenly get really angry and kick out the Syirians'? Or maybe, just maybe, the assassination of a popular political figure provided the catalyst that brought long-held anger to the surface. The US doesn't want democracy in Lebanon, it'd be a disaster, Hezbollah would do very well.

I want some of what you're smoking. A not-tiny newspaper referring to a far-right highly questionable blog at all is worrying, considering it legitimate is beyond the pale. I'm well aware he's writing for the telegraph, a second rate hard right concervative newspaper with a long history of going for emotion over facts, it's Sunday Edition in particular is used in some journalism courses as an example of how not to write articles.

I don't have to make anything up, I just have to read real news, not the thinly vieled lies fed to you by major networks.

Well the nice part is that we only have to wait for another round of history to play itself out. I'm content to let another year pass while we see what happens.

easier than answering isn't it.

Let's review your "answer" then:

- Blogs are biased because they aren't journalists.

- US network news, full of credentialed journalists, is biased because its viewers sometimes draw conclusions you don't agree with.

- Opinion pieces in righty newspapers are wrong because the journalists you like say the paper is bad.

Very nice. How many hours of network news do you watch? Can you name the US networks?

I'd like to know what jag reads.

Let's take the spin away and look at that again.

LGF is a right wing hate site.
US network news, full of credentialed journalists, do not stand up to this administration. Once like CBS, ABC, CNN, Fox and MSNBC, I don't really watch TV at all but I do keep a weather eye on their websites.

Opinion pieces in second rate right-wing newspapers that refer to dodgy blogs are not a good source to back up your opinion. You should check before you choose to assiciate yourself with such a source, that's the same newspaper that might have endangered the health of an entire generation with it's baseless claims about the MMR vaccine, ultrasound, passive smoking and that's before we get to the xenophobic, racist rantings of Charles Moore and Harry Cummins amongst others on it's editorial pages. The paper you feel is a good source has published such gems as:

and
not to mention being the mouthpiece of some of the most creative intel service lies:

That is what I said.

My question was:

Sorry, I thought you were aware of the neocon argument made as early as 1998 that fomenting Democracy in Iraq would lead to similar fomentation in other Middle East countries through example.

oh please. Do you honestly think that was the catalyst?

"Let's take the spin away and look at that again.

LGF is a right wing hate site...."

Physician, heal thyself.

The Lebanese had plenty of cause to do this before January 30th... but didn't. Why not?

Don't like right-wing secondary papers, here's the Washington Post.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...27.html?sub=AR

What's the spin in that sentence?

Don't like the WaPo? How about yor own Times?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...508354,00.html

Poppycock. Balderdash. Right-wing rubbish. American media buggery. A hand puppet of the Administration. A blog in newsprint. The reporter is Karl Rove in drag.

(Brit school uniforms sacrilege for Muslims? I could get behind that idea. I for one was nearly caned for forgetting to wear my school tie. Of course that was 1978. Now non-tie-wearing IS my religion!)

Democrat (but pro-war) blogger Michael Totten has an interesting POV:
He's cautionary: