The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

Milkman

The Nazis are a different story than the Baath party, as is WWII and the holocaust.

The original recommendation and plan was to remove the top echelons of the Baath party in the bureaucracy and military (keep everyone at the rank of Colonel and below).

Instead, Bremer disbanded everybody from the top to the very bottom.

This is what many Generals believe was the big mistake.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

_____________

raycarey

sk just doesn't 'understand' the true threat of terrorism and still has a pre 9/11 mentality.

ChiangMai noon

steady on Sir Bur.
I didn't realise that flawless logic was allowed in here.

Butterfly

And also because Saddam tried to kill his daddy

and also because the US was kicked out of SA, they needed a new base in the ME

That's why I don't believe a minute the US will leave Iraq anytime soon.

man with no head

Given the choice of two evils it should be clear which one would be the one chosen: a full scale invasion with little to no hope of success, or, a carefully selected assassination of bin Laden (don't think you're going to shoehorn me here on the assassination/torture issue). I don't think there is any justification whatsoever for what we've done in Iraq (especially since the mess is completely our fault). There was no threat. I supported the original Gulf War with no precondition; I supported this one initially with reservations due to the fact that every other agency involved with weapons inspections told the truth: there were no banned weapons, there was no threat, Saddam was not in possession of nuclear weapons.

Assassination of bin Laden? Or a full scale war? A no brainer which is the lesser of two evils (and in reality putting bin Laden on trial would show the world that we are indeed civilized people).

man with no head

Someone else who gets it. Bravo.

Boon Mee

As usual, our illustrious Headmaster sums up the argument with perfect logic and reason.

stroller

Thank you.

And I am sure you've come across the plan outlined by the PNAC before

Storekeeper

WESTERN dominance ...

Milkman

AMERICAN dominance.

Storekeeper

Surasak ... it's starting to appear to me that it's the method you have a problem with ... not really the goal. I think you and I ae actually closer to being in agreement than we might realize.

Sir Burr ... that's just plain kindergarten logic pal.

Storekeeper

Oh no ... we're perfectly willing to share the spoils with the Aussies, Britards, JNs and others ...

I think you're letting yourself get fooled by the limey rhetoric.

Milkman

^ Unilateralism.

Sir Burr

Sorry SK, which post of mine are you refering to?
If it's the one which asks the reason why Iraq was invaded, then, I don't see why you think the logic is faulty?

N. Korea, as has been shown by their nuclear test has nuclear capability. They must have been working on this for many years. They also have cheated, why no invasion? Because the casualties would have been too high and the US knew that China would not tolerate an invasion, even though Dear Leader is clearly nuttier than Saddam ever was.

Admittedly, India was never a signatory to the Nuclear Non-proliferation pact, but when they went nuclear, they got a pat on the back from GWB. This is why countries like Iran think the US is hypocritical and has double standards.

Pakistan, a nation that could in the forseeable future have a fundamentalist muslim theocracy as a government has nuclear weapons too and has consistently lied about their nuclear efforts and has exported nuclear technology to pariah states such as Libya just got a slap on the wrist ie. they didn't get the F-16s they ordered.

The perceived double standards in US foreign policy is one of the root causes of problems in the ME.

If the US had spent half the time and money it has used in Iraq to resolve the Israeli - Palestinian problem, knocked heads together and be seen as a fair and impartial mediator, this would have done far more to reduce terrorism than anything else.
The Israeli - Palestinian problem is the root cause of most of the problems in the ME today.

__________________
Phuket - Veni Vidi Veni

man with no head

Western?

Definately American dominance.

man with no head

I can't imagine how many times I have stated this.

The problem with opposing the war is that those who do support the war automatically label those who don't as being soft on terrorists. I think that's a mistaken assumption. I don't recall anyone in power saying "I oppose the war and we should leave the terrorists alone as well." But in the classic smear campaign the right wing of the Republican Party labels those who oppose the war as soft on terrorism.

I think people all agree that the terrorists need to be dealt with. It's the method that is the problem.

If we want to deal with terrorists then let's capture them, bring them to justice, and put them on trial and execute them if found guilty. Don't cheat, however, just to give the appearance that something is being done (such as taking away Constitutional rights of legal permanent U.S. residents, for one).

raycarey

baker and co. can just pack it in, GWB is on the case....

White House conducting its own Iraq review - Politics - MSNBC.com

quick joke....

what's the difference between iraq and the vietnam war?

george bush had a plan to get out of the vietnam war.

kingwilly

no kidding. and the frustration is that is so obvious and was obvious 100 years ago....

Storekeeper

Sounds good in theory ... but obviously you and I are going to disagree on how to go about accomplishing this.

You so