What the hell did the Iraqi people ever do to the US to deserve the

[keithyboy]

carnage we are now infliction upon them? Are we any different from the thugs in Rwanda? Hitler's regime?

It doesn't seem to be about 9/11 but about Iraq and Iraq's oil. Saddam is gone, why the hell are we still in Iraq?

[Skidmore]

1. This conflagration as it is framed by the current administration

cannot be won. It has been defined as a cultural war, a clash of civilizations, a religous war. In terms of sheer manpower, Moslems constitute two thirds of the world's population at the present time. This will be the undoing of our nation, brought down by an exercise steeped in hubris. Our swaggering cowboy has guided his herd off the cliff.

We need to save our nation and teach it how to live with the rest of the world.

[McHrozni]

4. Astonishing

Your ignorance is astonishing. Islam is currently the 3rd or 4th most populus religion, after Christianity and Hinduism and possibly Communism.
The only thing more astinishing is comparing Iraq to Rwanda.
Reality check: in Rwanda, 800,000 people were killed in 100 days (3 months).
Where are the mass graves of the 3.2 million fresh deaths?

Comparing Iraq to Holocaust? Holocaust was twice as intensive than Rwanda. If that analogy holds, as you say it does, two thirds of Iraq would be dead by now and there wouldn't be anyone left to rebel.

As for saving your nation, you're probably right. A war on ignorance is in order, and I'm not talking about Bush.

McHrozni

[keithyboy]

5. Sorry, but it's the same evil that motivates this admin.

Of course, the numbers aren't the same but the outcome and objective is. Ignorance is as ignorance does. What is really astonishing is the number of people who just don't get it and I am talking about Bush.

[McHrozni]

13. Hmm, really

If US objective is to wipe the Iraqis out, as was the case in the Holocaust and in Rwanda, why is it handling the power to Iraqis? Why aren't we seeing mass slaughters? Why aren't we seeing concentration camps?
Why is food being shipped into the country at all? Why is it not at least poisoned? Why aren't the same medical practices adopted that are so successful in spreading AIDS in Africa?

If this were a genocide, we'd know it by now. Less than 11,000 dead in one year is in no way a genocide, not even a war. 11,000 dead is a death toll of a battle, or sometimes only one day of fighting, not a year of war.

And according to Iraq body count, the Iraqi death toll has yet to reach 11,000 by the "high" value, not the "low" one.

McHrozni

[trotsky]

16. You're the one who brought "genocide" into the discussion.

The original poster you replied to rightfully described this as a war of cultures. This is painfully obvious on so many levels - from Bush's pre-war rhetoric to the current right-wing defenses of the military action.

I don't know why you're steering things in that direction - I guess because it's much easier to attack something your opponent never said.

But since I haven't been able to find ANY accurate figures on the number of Iraqi dead, (and believe me, I've looked), I question where you get your "11,000" number anyway.

[McHrozni]

20. Here

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

Given how the page is set, it is very likely biased towards overreporting, not underreporting, casulties.

McHrozni

[McHrozni]

22. If you discount the Rwanda and Hitler refferences...

... which amount to around 1/2 of the original post.

McHrozni

[trotsky]

26. Then why didn't you reply to the original post?

The post you referred to made no such claims.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Skidmore]

35. Ding, ding, ding!!! Artful Dodger Award winner here...

not worth my time. LOL!!

[Skittles]

48. I agree, Skidmore

f***ing sad

[are_we_united_yet]

43. Go away

[Jazzgirl]

44. Free Republic is a few sites over thataway....

n/t

[McHrozni]

46. Link?

[leesa]

65. I'm sure you know the way.

The military is looking for volunteers to bring the glory of democracy to Iraq, by the way.

[McHrozni]

74. No, actualy I don't

And I'm crippled enough not to be able to do military service.

McHrozni

[Skittles]

47. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!

"Handing power to the Iraqis" - now WHO exactly will that be? The Shiites? The Sunnis? The insurgents? Please specify!!!

[jo35042]

49. How about

The next three guys we see with an idea instead of a gun....

[Skittles]

57. Here is how our "leader" answered that question:

~But the President unnerved many when he publicly stumbled over his explanation of who exactly will take over in Iraq on June 30. "The United Nations representative is there now to work on to whom we transfer sovereignty," Bush said haltingly. "It's one thing to say that it's a transfer; we got to ... we're now in the process of deciding what the entity will look like to whom we will transfer sovereignty."~

OK, that's all cleared up. :o

[leesa]

64. Handing the power to the Iraqis? Funny.

Ummm. A completely upprovoked invasion of a disarmed country is genocide, immoral and a crime against humanity. The high value of dead Irais I have heard is well over 22,00 people. These are primarily civilians. This makes the US terrorists without a doubt because we target civilians.

[McHrozni]

94. Umm right

Immoral, you might have a case, but a genocide it is not.

22,000 dead in a year isn't exactly massive death toll. About this many people die on French roads in a year. Twice as many die on US roads every year. Heavy civilian death toll is 10-20,000 in a day, when bombing occurs.

In Dresden, 50,000 people died in one night, in Tokio, 100,000 died in one night, in Belgrade, 17,000 died in one hour; and none of these was a genocide.
In Iraq, 22,000 died in one year, and it is a genocide, according to you.
Give me a break, this doesn't even qualify as a war. If you count in population numbers, Washington D.C. is more dangerus than Iraq, and it isn't even a war zone.

McHrozni

[NickB79]

68. Handling the power to Iraqis?

Are you referring to the June 30 handover? Every major paper has already reported that, after than handover, the Iraqi ruling council will still have almost no actual power, certainly nothing that could go against the will of the Coalition.

"Why aren't we seeing mass slaughters?" - Fallujah is the beginning. Did you read that they've begun to bury their hundreds of dead under the soccer field there?

"Why aren't we seeing concentration camps?" - Try to read some of Mari333's posts here. Her son is a soldier at a "detention center/prison" in Abu Ghraib there, and even he's reporting that over 10,000 Iraqis are being held without charges. The beginnings of the concentration camps.

"Why is it not at least poisoned?" - We provide the poison in the form of depleted uranium munitions, which can act as a toxic heavy metal when ingested or inhaled. Besides, if we kill of the Iraqis, who will pump our oil for 50 cents a day?

Finally, 11,000 dead is only the number of civilians dead. The number of dead Iraqi soldiers has been estimated at at least that number. Thats over 20,000 people dead at least. Considering that we had NO REASON WHATSOEVER to go into Iraq in the first place, that means every one of those deaths could have been prevented. Comparing the Iraqi invasion to the number of dead in a justifiable war is comparing apples to oranges, because we had no reason to invade in the first place.

[McHrozni]

93. You can argue the Iraqi war justification...

...all you want. I know it is illegal to support it on this freeminded forum, so I won't

However, you do need to check your facts on DU (and I'm not talking Democratic Underground). There is a considerable differance between a "mass slaughter" and "hundreds of dead burried on a Soccer field". Should the army target civilians deliberately, and with an intent to destroy them, there wouldn't be anyone to do the burrials, don't you think? Or it would be US army eingeneers, at least, using heavy equipment to get rid of the bodies.
We aren't seeing that, and we won't.

Concentration camps for military personnel are a standard thing in a war. Tens of thousands of German troops were held in this fashion after the second world war - without charges, of course. This is to prevent them from forming anti-occupation militias, like Werevolves in Germany, or whatever now fights in Iraq.
Yes, it is a concentration camp, in a pure meaning of the word - a camp, where people are concentrated. It's not a forced labor camp, or an extermination camp, which are sort of necessary for a genocide.

Plus, you gave a reason against the genocide yourself. The Iraqis are needed to pump the oil, although you underestimated the costs of pumping oil in Iraq. It is 2$ per barell.

McHrozni

[mulethree]

7. ??

Islam is second with about 1,200,000,000 "adherants" which is 20% of the worlds people. Hindu is 3rd with 900,000,000

Christianity claims 2,000,000,000. So I guess you don't have to know or practice a religion to get in these counts.

Communism is not a religion.

Iraq has about 25,000,000 people

[Skidmore]

9. Thanks and my apologies

for not taking the time to check the stats. I had heard that 2/3 estimate in a class or lecture once.

However, for Mr. Mcwhateverishandleis (can't see it on this screen), my point is still the same. You can't just set about killing the other half of the world because you don't believe the way they do. Our society is now in the grips of people who seem to believe that the warmonger is blessed, the rich inherit the earth, and that we are destined to rule the world.

Time to learn to share the planet.

[McHrozni]

37. And who is engaged in a war of genocide here?

It's definitely not the coalition and it's definitely not the USA. When the West goes onto a rampage of destruction, it's on a much grander scale when the rest of the world does.

McHrozni

[jo35042]

50. Our society is now in the grips of people who seem to believe that the war

Thank you! and look up PNAC

(sadly ignorant and haven't learned yet how to do links0

[McHrozni]

15. Let's check the facts, shall we

Counts vary, so I'm not going into number of adherents, other than that 2/3 of the world being islamic, which is a nutcase estimate.

Communism has:
- faith that there is something greater than man
- faith that man must strive to reach the paradise
- faith that man must be fixed in order to reach that paradise
- holy scriptures (Communist manifesto, etc)
- prohpets (Marx, Lenin, Engels, ...)
- factions among the belief (Stalinists, Trotskyists, Maoists, Titoists, Anarchists, ...)
- fanatics (Red Brigades, etc)
- symbols (hammer and styche, red star, etc)
- music celebrating it (national anthems, Internationale, etc)
- denies the legitemacy of any and all other religions

If it walks and quacks as a duck...

McHrozni

[trotsky]

18. Yes, let's check them.

Republicanism has:

- faith that there is something greater than man
- faith that man must strive (marketplace) to reach the paradise
- faith that man must be fixed (corrected of any opposition to free markets) to reach that paradise
- holy scriptures (Adam Smith, etc.)
- prophets (right-wing economists)
- factions among the belief (supply-side, etc.)
- fanatics (Randians)
- symbols (they've co-opted the American flag, etc.)
- music celebrating it (national anthems, country ballads, etc.)

I think you can see how ridiculous your "facts" are.

On edit: I see you added "denies the legitemacy of any and all other religions" after I posted. That doesn't even properly refer to religion in general, since many consider that there are multiple paths to god/enlightenment/whatever.

[McHrozni]

21. And that doesn't prove one bit, does it?

Just because you can write something similar about a different theory, you don't disprove my point.

McHrozni

[trotsky]

23. What it proves

is that your "facts" can be twisted to call nearly anything a religion, and thus they're useless.

[King_Crimson]

25. Where did the low-poster go?

Those types give me the heebie-jeebies..if you know what I mean! :evilgrin:

[Skidmore]

28. It's ran out of quacks.

:evilgrin:

[trotsky]

30. No kidding. :-)

I'm not even a communist - I just like the name Trotsky.

[McHrozni]

34. To eat. I do have better things to do than lie in wait for responses.

[McHrozni]

36. Think so?

Opinions are like assholes - everyone has them.

You, of course, are free to think that Communism is something other than religion. I have evidence and you have an opinion, but that doesn't make your point totaly invalid, I agree.

McHrozni

[NickB79]

70. Communism is a religion?

Despite one of the key requirements for a strict Communist society being a denial of God and an embracement of atheism? How can a country switch from communism to capitalism through a change in government if communism is a religion? Russia was under communism for 80+ years, yet switched to a capitalist style of government in a matter of days when a coup occurred. Are you telling me that over 100 million people converted from the "religion" of communism to, what exactly? A "religion" of capitalism?

"Religion is the opiate of the masses" - Karl Marx, founder of modern communist theory. Doesn't sound like he was too key on religion of any form, and didn't want it in his idea of the perfect society.

[McHrozni]

73. I'm glad you're quoting Marx

Yes, religion, especially Communism, is an opiate for the masses.
It's means of control, it's just slightly different application. Either a cleric in a church tells the people that they need to behave in a certain way to reach paradise, or a political officer in a factory tells them that they're already in a paradise, and that they need to work to sustain it.
Yes, there is a very slight differance. But there are also differances among various religions, greater than between, say Islam and Communism. You could also say Catholic Christianity and Communism, it makes no differance.

I'm also glad that you have pointed out that Communism vehemently denies existance of any god - any god, other than itself, that is. It is slightly unusual in the god being mankind, I'll give it that much, but this again, is less differance than between other, older religions have between themselves. Nearly all religions deny existance of the gods they don't worship - Judaism, Chrisitanity and Islam all do. This isn't universal for all religions, of course, but Communism is again, more similar to established dominant religions, than to anything else.

As for conversion - the Russian people didn't believe in Communism. Not anymore. They rejected the religion that was forced upon them, which is something not exactly uncommon in the world history, and has been a cause of a number of wars and unrests. The only real differance is that the surpressed beliefs won, which isn't a big differance.

I would also like to point out that your numbers are wrong. The Soviet union existed of 73 years, not 80+ years, and it didn't have just over 100 million people, it had over 250 million people. It also didn't have a 'true' communism yet, as any hard-core commie will explain to you vigurosly, but a Socialist dictatorship, which is a limbo en route to communism. This probably made it easier to make the conversion.
There is no "capitalist" style of government, there is only capitalist style of governance. Capitalism is possible in a dictatorship.

To sum up, thank you for helping me prove my point :)

McHrozni

[worldgonekrazy]

84. Marx is a legitimate theorist

To use him and his theories is not necessarily to endorse them. Its like if I were to use a Neitzche point of view in explaining something. Or would you have us be fascists where the mere mention of a particular political theorist is not tolerable?

[McHrozni]

88. Just a friendly bit of advice...

... read first, then comment on what was written.

For the record: I used him and his theories to prove my point. I am in no way endorsing him.

McHrozni

[dpibel]

90. Then you accept the premise?

This is not merely a case of "writ<ing> something similar about a different theory."

It is taking your own analytic and applying it to see whether it proves anything.

If you demand that your bill of particulars be taken as a legitimate proof that communism is a religion, then you must take it as legitimate that, if the same criteria apply to republicanism, then republicanism is a religion.

Perhaps you do not deny that.

But if you accept it, then you accept that nearly any firmly held set of beliefs can be called a religion, which pretty much makes it a meaningless assertion.

[McHrozni]

95. Heh

I can't see why not, although I haven't explored the theory.
There is a problem, though, because "Republicanism" is typicaly associated with wealthy Christians and Jews, which means that it separates the spiritual world from the material one.
Communism doesn't. In Communism, you're supposed to believe in Communism, and nothing else, just like in a Theocracy.

So while Republicanism might be considered a religion, it isn't as clear cut as Communism. If you want, I'll explore the subject and report the findings, although I find most responses on this forum insulting. I thought that the root of the word "liberals" (which is "liberal") that this forums are supposed to be meant for stands for "liberty", which includes "freedom of thought" and "freedom of expression". It should be against your principles to flame me for an argumented assertion.

McHrozni

[McHrozni]

24. One more thing

Most, if not all, of this stuff is hardly unique to Republicans.

If we go from the bottom up:
- national anthem was there before the Republicans
- so was the flag
- all economic issues: hardly unique to Republicans. Clinton established NAFTA and Bush imposed tariffs.

McHrozni

[trotsky]

27. And most, if not all, is hardly unique to communism.

That's my point.

[McHrozni]

32. Of course, of course

I never said that Communism is the only religion in the world.

McHrozni

[jo35042]

51. About the flag!!!!!!!!!!!

The "Bushies" have appropriated the flag and seem to be trying to make it stand for a warlike, exclusive, hateful place that I never expected my country to even try to become.

I think OUR flag is a beautiful symbol. I just wish it was still "OURS"

[McHrozni]

55. One more thing

"On edit: I see you added "denies the legitemacy of any and all other religions" after I posted. That doesn't even properly refer to religion in general, since many consider that there are multiple paths to god/enlightenment/whatever."

Yes, I forgot to add it the first time.

Denouncing other beliefs is not unique to religions, nor it holds true for all religions. Judaism, for instance, intialy didn't renounce all other gods, mearly instructed its' followers to worship one god and one god only. It wasn't until later that it evolved into a true monotheistic religion, that denies the existance of other gods.

However, it is something commonly associated with religion, and something most if not all religions have proclaimed at one point in time. Imagine standing in Seville in 1500 and proclaiming there are really two gods, or doing the same in Ryihad today. Imagine standing on the Red Square in 1935, proclaiming Communism is a false idea.
The only differance between the three will be the way you will die.

McHrozni

[charlie]

56. Or standing in Times Square

proclaiming the Yankees suck, for that matter.

[Skidmore]

19. I agree with the duck part

and I'm hearing a lot of quacking right now.

[snippy]

29. Sometimes it seems that dipshitism must be a religion.

Most dictionaries contain the definitions for both religion and communism.

[WhereIsMyFreedom]

62. So does every other country

I clearly belong to the Americanism religion.

[Ysabel]

82. quack quack quack...n/t...

[McHrozni]

89. Why is it that..

... so few people are actualy interested in a debate? It's a legitemate point that deserves interest, isn't it?

McHrozni

[thebigidea]

96. those darn commies!

http://www.terminalproduct.com/bioterror.rm

Eek!

[Malva Zebrina]

10. Hmm--ignorance

Communism is not a religion last time I looked :-)

[McHrozni]

39. Well now

Definitions of religion:

1.
a) Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b) A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.

2.
The life or condition of a person in a religious order.

3.
A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.

4.
A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

Communism falls into categories 2, 3 and 4. Not bad, is it?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=religion

McHrozni

[Malva Zebrina]

40. ignorance hmm

You are mixing apples and oranges and trying to make your conclusion fit the false premise.

Communism is an economic condition/status/theory, not a religion

[McHrozni]

45. Ignorance

Communism focuses on personal realtions and the effects the economic system has on them. It is primarily a theory of relations, not economy, although it does pin all blame on one particular group of people. Kind of like Christianity or Islam pin all the blame on Satan. It also pins all that is good on a common worker, kind of like the two beforementioned religions pin all what is good on an almighty god (Islam more so than Christianity).

Yes, you can call it a theory in personal relations, in the same sense as you can call the book of Genesis a theory of the creation of the Universe and Islam a theory on personal fulfillment.

McHrozni

[Malva Zebrina]

61. Yes and by your definition

you can also call Democracy or Socialism a religion--is that not correct?

I don't think so

[McHrozni]

63. Hardly

For democracy it isn't exactly true.

Democracy doesn't denounce all other forms of government as illegitemate. True, democratic leaders have a tendency to do that, but they also support dictators when they protect their interests. Democracy doesn't have any 'holy' guidelines as to how it should work, only examples of other functioning (or not functioning) democracies. Also, democracy doesn't denounce every other religion, nor does it have a set of leaders that promote democracy at all costs.
Democracy is an idea. The idea is that if people are given an illusion that they have a direct effect on policy, they won't rebel against the government. That idea works rather well as soon as the people are fed and know how to read and write, and aren't brainwashed in a militant religion (like Communism, militant Islam, whatever). It's not a socio-economic theory, it's not a way to paradise.

Socialism, on the other hand, is a limbo on the way to Communism, so it could be defined as a religion. Socialism is also an economical system, so it can also be that.

McHrozni

[Malva Zebrina]

67. Oh really

you know that Communism is not a religion. You seem, to have made an apples and oranges mistake when you said that Communism is a religion, while referring to another poster's ideas as "ignorant"


The issue here does not require long descriptions of other forms of government, nor does it require a lesson in other forms of government.
The issue is clearly this: You called Communism a religion.

the attempt to use a dictionary definition of religion to force the faulty premise, was intellectually dishonest

Communism is not a religion and that is obvious to anyone with common sense and the ability to read.

[McHrozni]

76. Well

Obviously you have to learn one thing.

That is - your opinions aren't absolute. Noone's opinions aren't absolute. Noone here has proved any rebuttal for my arguments as to what separates Communism from other religions, other than calling it "false".
You see, if you say it is false, it doesn't make it false. Unless you're the God, or at least one of them, and I don't think you are, sorry, but I'm an atheist.

I have substantiated my claim with more words than all the rest of posters put together here, and the best you have to say "it is blatantly false", despite that noone, least of all you, has came forward with any sort of substantiation for your claim.

I say you're the one who is intellectualy dishonest, and does not want to listen to reason. I have evidence to prove it, as seen above. Do you have anything to disprove it?
If not, we can go to court :)
(joke)

McHrozni

[Malva Zebrina]

91. intellectually dishonest

you have said that Communism is a religion. Is that not true?

Do you, at this point, still maintain that premise?

You still maintain that Communism is a religion?

Bwahahahahaha

[McHrozni]

92. Heh

Yes, I do. And if you say I'm wrong without offering any reason I can't refute at will, you're the one who is intellctualy dishonest.

Look at it this way: In the 14th century it was also clearly obvious to the Pope that Earth was flat. It's exactly the same with you now that Communism is not a religion.

You don't feel the need to prove it, because you can't. EOS.

McHrozni

[sadiesworld]

42. No, it only falls into category 4...

and so does golf.

[NickB79]

72. Wow, is that convoluted thinking

First, you admit communism fails your first tenant of religion: it doesn't have a belief in a supernatural power or powers. For most people, that is THE definition of religion, so you lose a lot of support and credibility right there with your inability to support that position.

Your second tenant is a circular argument: communism puts the life and conditions of a person in a religious order because communism is a religion, and communism is a religion because it puts the life and conditions of a person in a religious order. The argument loops around itself, using itself to support its own argument.

Third, who was the spiritual leader of Communism? Was he/she worldwide like the Pope, or were there seperate spiritual leaders in different countries? Who were they in Russia? In China? In Cuba? All their leaders have been political, not religious, in nature. In the USSR they elected new leaders through general elections, something you rarely do in a religion. They never lead their countrymen in prayer; in fact conventional religious beliefs were widely denounced in the USSR. Churches and synagogues were widely banned in many areas.

Four can be applied to almost anyone committed to a cause or belief they care about. For example, I am a self-proclaimed gun nut. I am sure that if you asked a few of my friends how I feel about guns and gun control, they would describe my beliefs as "a cause, principle or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion." That hardly means I worship my firearms, does it? Well, ok sometimes pretty close to it, but still.

Your "evidence" is weak at best.

[McHrozni]

77. Finaly one with a bit of substance, too bad it can be refuted

"First, you admit communism fails your first tenant of religion: it doesn't have a belief in a supernatural power or powers. For most people, that is THE definition of religion, so you lose a lot of support and credibility right there with your inability to support that position."

I quoted that web dictionary for a reason.

"Your second tenant is a circular argument: communism puts the life and conditions of a person in a religious order because communism is a religion, and communism is a religion because it puts the life and conditions of a person in a religious order. The argument loops around itself, using itself to support its own argument."

Pretty neat, isn't it? :)
If you don't believe that Communism puts life in a Communist order, you should step into contact with people who lived under it - or at least under an approximation of it. Or see a few movies from would-be Communist nations. Or hear their songs. Or read their literature. Or their newspapers. Or...

"Third, who was the spiritual leader of Communism? Was he/she worldwide like the Pope, or were there seperate spiritual leaders in different countries? Who were they in Russia? In China? In Cuba? All their leaders have been political, not religious, in nature. In the USSR they elected new leaders through general elections, something you rarely do in a religion. They never lead their countrymen in prayer; in fact conventional religious beliefs were widely denounced in the USSR. Churches and synagogues were widely banned in many areas."

The first prohpets of the religion were people we all know of - Marx, Engels, Bakunin, Lenin and other, less important individuals.
In USSR, they elected leaders in a closed, members-only elections, very much like the Cardinals elect the Pope. The elections for the people had only one name, or only one list of candidates on it, and the people had no word in election of the General Secretar, or th Central Commitee.
The leaders never led the people into prayer? Of course they did, they just called it "songs" not "prayers", which is essentialy a matter of linguistics. Most prayers can be and are sung anyway.
And yes, conventional religious beliefs were banned, much like practicing Judaism is banned in Saudi Arabia, for example. There is nothing unusual about that at all.

"Four can be applied to almost anyone committed to a cause or belief they care about. For example, I am a self-proclaimed gun nut. I am sure that if you asked a few of my friends how I feel about guns and gun control, they would describe my beliefs as "a cause, principle or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion." That hardly means I worship my firearms, does it? Well, ok sometimes pretty close to it, but still."

I didn't write that defintion, I found it in a dictionary, I never made my case soely on that, or primarily on that, nor have I set it forward as the prime example, nor is it the only definition that fits. If you have a problem with it, fine, it still applies, obviously, but there are plenty of other reasons for the Communism = Religion claim to be true.

McHrozni

[izzie]

14. I do think you are wrong about their number in the world.

It is a religious that is all over Asia.

[Q]

33. Communism...

...is not a religion. Just thought I'd point that out so someone won't call you 'ignorant'.

[McHrozni]

38. See above

It has all the necessary requirements, other than calling itself a religion, and even that isn't far from fact either.

McHrozni

[izzie]

41. Oh I thought you meant that religion and gave that number.

I was thinking we were fighting a very large religion world wide and if they all turned on us it would be just really bad.I am sure I read some place they out number Christians, many times over.I guess I read it wrong, and sorry.

[worldgonekrazy]

83. You do have a point about the genocide comparisons

They aren't relevant because it isn't nearly the same thing. This is not a systematic campaign to eliminate the Iraqi people (or a particular group of Iraqis). Rather, Iraqi civilian deaths are an entirely inevitable result of a war, especially when urban warfare is involved. Genocide must be deliberate, methodical, and must aim for the destruction of a particular race or culture. You can argue that all the elements are present, but the motive is not.

[Rex]

85. Islam is the 2nd largest religion, and the fastest growing.

Hinduism is 3rd, followed by agnostics & atheists in 4th (don't know why they pair the two). I think you have confused communism (a form of economic governance) with atheism. Then again, if you're a fundie knuckle-dragger you no doubt think that communism and atheism means the same thing.

Let's not throw stones at others about being ignorant before checking our facts, jack.

[Centre_Left]

75. Actually...

If history is our guide, then the US's enormous debt burden will probably be our undoing. Of course, the occupation in Iraq increases that burden, but I seriously doubt a "clash of civilizations" itself is going to destroy the US. Governments have rarely need other civilizations to put an end to themselves; they almost always finish the job on their own.

[worldgonekrazy]

81. Hubris always kills the empire

Thats how empires die: they simply overextend themselves. It gets to the point where all those around them realize who the common enemy is. Also, the people within the empire realize that supporting the empire is much more work than anything they can hope to get out of it.

[Journeyman]

2. It's about far more than Iraqi oil. . .

Take a geopolitical view of the region. It's as much about Iraqi water as it is their oil. And it's about toeholds and staging areas, too. You miss better than half the reasons if you just focus on the oil.

[Combat Honey]

3. War in Iraq continues...

Well Keithyboy...I've been wondering the same thing! I guess Bush thought that creating a western democracy in a developing country ruled by dictators for years would happen in a few months time...well, but it didn't.

Will be interesting to see if the Shia-muslims are gonna be the next rulers of Iraq. I think maybe then it would be a bit more appropriate for Bush to speculate on possible terrorist strikes from Iraq. I just feel sorry for the women of Iraq who will have a lot harder times if the country will be run by the religious leaders.

-Joni

[keithyboy]

6. You have a point. At least under Saddam women were educated

and played significant roles in the life of the people. Everything that was predicted about this war has come to pass and it will only get worse. Saddam was an evil person but Iraq had one of the most inclusive educational systems and health systems in the world up to the time Iraq was attacked by Iran. Funny how Saddam gets blamed for waring against Iran when Iran started the whole thing. Funny how the bio-materials that he used against the Kurds and the Iranians were produced with materials the US sent to him.

I wonder if the Kurds even feel better off without Saddam now?

[jarab]

17. Welcome to DU!!

jarab - moderator

[corporatewhore]

8. They were born in a non x-tian white western country rich in oil

[worldgonekrazy]

79. Oh yeah, I forgot the "non-white" part

I posted about the oil, but you are right, their race and religion certainly plays a big role as well.

[corporatewhore]

87. yep they are the dark skinned cave dwelling evil doers

[In Sha Allah]

11. The Repuds are falling out of love.

"...why the hell are we still in Iraq?"

Even FOX News, bless their shriveled, cold hearts, is beginning to ask the same question. There's no Saddam, no WMDs, we're creating terrorists, our boys and girls are dying, and it's costing us a fortune - so, why are we still over there?

Sweet Baby Jesus, I hope and pray this is Bush's Waterloo. And I hope Kerry has the sense to get the hell out immediately.

[Nile]

12. It is never what the people do.

It is what the leaders do.

[AirAmFan]

52. Somehow, their sand got on top of OUR oil

[jo35042]

53. Bummer, dude

so how many must die to get that d..ned sand off it?

[MAlibdem]

54. WHAT

Comparing the US with Nazi Germany is an undefendable analogy.

I demand you apologize for that analogy.

[ret5hd]

66. well, just in case he/she apologizes...

(and i doubt that will happen)
let me be the first to make the comparison again.

[DrWeird]

71. Well, if it steps like a goose...

nt

[thebigidea]

98. I demand a chocolate eclair! STAT!

[ConcernedCanuk]

58. Iraqi's didn't do anything, - God put Junior's oil under their sand !

.
.
.

[Dark]

59. They were stupid enough

to be born on oil-rich ground. Dumbasses.

[arewethereyet]

60. if its about Iraqi oil then why are we not just taking it ?

Hussein is not gone, he yet lives worse, the vacume is not yet satisfied and we would much rather have that vacume fill in an orderly way than with what we allowed to happen in Rwanda and Somalia and Kosovo etc.

[worldgonekrazy]

80. Because we have to "pacify" the country first

Its just not safe enough to start taking their oil yet. Do you recall all the stories about "terrorists" blowing up oil pipelines? The U.S. must first secure the nation (or at least the oil routes) before it is feasible to steal their oil.

[arewethereyet]

86. been about 9 months

and apart from a little trouble in the cities, done deal.

I'm not buying it.

[LibertyorDeath]

69. Iraq's oil...You got it...Just that simple

And its location to the rest of the Middle Easts Oil.

Plus they were trading their oil for Euros a definite no no as far as the USA Gov is concerned

[worldgonekrazy]

78. They live on oil rich land

Thats it. Period.

[Zinfandel]

97. They have oil, a stategic area for US bases and a crazed leader who

wanted to go with the Euro instead of the dollar.

No excuse for whats happening to the so many innocent, defenseless Iraqi people who are in the struck in the middle, with nowhere else in the world to go.

Fuck, this is where they made their homes, this is their land.