NationStates Jolt Archive

From now on, driving is banned in Baghdad on Fridays. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5203786.stm)

But hey. Don't let the ever-increasing obstacles to having a normal life, get in the way of the impression that everything has become safer and easier since the White Man arrived. :rolleyes:

Our unending national shame and crime is that we have made iraq worse than it was before.

From now on, driving is banned in Baghdad on Fridays. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5203786.stm)

But hey. Don't let the ever-increasing obstacles to having a normal life, get in the way of the impression that everything has become safer and easier since the White Man arrived. :rolleyes:Don't be silly. No one ever said they were free. The President himself said that when they were free, there would be no more torture or rape rooms, and as Abu Ghraib proved, we're not ready for Iraqis to be free yet!

last time I checked, noone drives on Fridays anyways

To be fair, this is to protect Iraqis at prayer from suicide bombings.

From now on, driving is banned in Baghdad on Fridays. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5203786.stm)

But hey. Don't let the ever-increasing obstacles to having a normal life, get in the way of the impression that everything has become safer and easier since the White Man arrived. :rolleyes:

It is unfortunate that the radical Islamists have to make life so miserable for so many people. I hope that the local police and military will get all the training they need to deal with the radicals soon.

From now on, driving is banned in Baghdad on Fridays. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5203786.stm)

But hey. Don't let the ever-increasing obstacles to having a normal life, get in the way of the impression that everything has become safer and easier since the White Man arrived. :rolleyes:

Thanks Whitey!

It is unfortunate that the radical Islamists have to make life so miserable for so many people. I hope that the local police and military will get all the training they need to deal with the radicals soon.Does that mean that the US military is poorly trained for these situations, seeing as they haven't managed to get the situation under control either?

To be fair, this is to protect Iraqis at prayer from suicide bombings.

I get this one thrown at me a lot, so here goes. "Those who would give up a little liberty for a little security deserve neither and will lose both".

And if we hadn't invaded in the first place, they wouldn't need protecting. This is what war does. It splits the populace into factions, as a unified populace is more difficult to subdue than a fragmented one. But the factional divides do not end with the war, and when the conventional war has ended, the assymetric war begins. The factions cut each other to pieces in the streets.

Cool. I love it when mods post trolly headlines and then lay racial flamebait in the OP.

It is unfortunate that the radical Islamists have to make life so miserable for so many people. I hope that the local police and military will get all the training they need to deal with the radicals soon.
Hopefully not from US military because it is apparent that that isn't helping.

And if we hadn't invaded in the first place, they wouldn't need protecting.

From the radical Islamists, but who would protect them from Saddam? :eek:

From the radical Islamists, but who would protect them from Saddam? :eek:
The guy they had before we helped Saddam Hussein take power?

Sure, the place would have been 'nationalist', but at least it would have been a self-inflicted dictatorship instead of the one we used as we saw fit before trying to wipe the slate clean.

From the radical Islamists, but who would protect them from Saddam? :eek:

Frankly, if I were Iraqi, at this point I'd be wondering if I could get Saddam back. He certainly wasn't so ruthlessly efficient at killing his people.

We can all be thankful that it was MISSION ACCOMPLISHED for Operation: Iraqi Fascism.

Err. Freedom. Yeah, freedom.

From the radical Islamists, but who would protect them from Saddam? :eek:

Lesser of two evils, unfortunately. The insurgency, and the Islamist dictatorship that will follow the civil war, will end up killing far more than Saddam's secular dictatorship ever did, not to mention that they will be more restrictive on civil liberties, and quite possibly more belligerent in foreign affairs.

To be fair, this is to protect Iraqis at prayer from suicide bombings.
Of course. The most efficient way to protect people from terrorism is to ban non-terrorists from living their own lives in their own city. To be really safe, they should all be kept locked up in their houses and fed selected rations. :rolleyes:



Man, I'm using that rolleyes smilie a lot today. What's with the people around here?

Cool. I love it when mods post trolly headlines and then lay racial flamebait in the OP.
don't say that!

you might get banned!

Does that mean that the US military is poorly trained for these situations, seeing as they haven't managed to get the situation under control either?
Yes. They lack the correct training, and they've failed to adapt to the current situation. (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=491152)

Frankly, if I were Iraqi, at this point I'd be wondering if I could get Saddam back. He certainly wasn't so ruthlessly efficient at killing his people.

The Kurds and people in Southern Iraq might disagree with you.

Thanks Whitey!
Don't blame white people, blame Americans. Most of us Europeans who oppose the war are white.

I get this one thrown at me a lot, so here goes. "Those who would give up a little liberty for a little security deserve neither and will lose both".
That's just a quote, not an argument.

The Kurds and people in Southern Iraq might disagree with you.
And facts might disagree with them, and you.

From now on, driving is banned in Baghdad on Fridays. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5203786.stm)

But hey. Don't let the ever-increasing obstacles to having a normal life, get in the way of the impression that everything has become safer and easier since the White Man arrived. :rolleyes:

Um, Mr. Mod, shouldn't you be removing the thread and banning yourself for flamebaiting?

$5 (US) to who ever reports this thread over in Moderation for baiting

Reload this Page People in Iraq have more freedom than ever before!
And less safety

The US has less freedom and maybe more safety.


What a trade off!

$5 (US) to who ever reports this thread over in Moderation for baiting

I reported it, but as a question. Keep your money, though ;)

But hey. Don't let the ever-increasing obstacles to having a normal life, get in the way of the impression that everything has become safer and easier since the White Man arrived. :rolleyes:
Oooooooooh...that sounds chillingly familiar...now where have I heard that before???

I reported it, but as a question. Keep your money, though ;)


Good, all I had was a franklin anyway :D

Good, all I had was a franklin anyway :D
(shrug) I'm a government worker anyway. It would be wrong for me to accept so much as a Lincoln. The copper one.

Hey, good news from Moderation. Racist baiting is ok if you put an eye-rolling smiley afterward.

Oooooooooh...that sounds chillingly familiar...now where have I heard that before???

At least once every single decade since the 14th century?

So you guys all riding on TG's jockstrap over this...you're upset over the term White Man? Is that the bone of contention?

The Kurds and people in Southern Iraq might disagree with you.

Tell that to the 40 casualties per-day from bombs, US troops, and other violence.

Hey, good news from Moderation. Racist baiting is ok if you put an eye-rolling smiley afterward.
thanks for the posting, you idiot ******! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

<.<
>.>

Yeah, White Man is definately comparable to ******.

Allow me a rolly eye smiley: :rolleyes:

Popcorn. Get your popcorn. We got buttered, salted or plain popcorn. Get your popcorn....

*wanders off into distance*

From now on, driving is banned in Baghdad on Fridays. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5203786.stm)

But hey. Don't let the ever-increasing obstacles to having a normal life, get in the way of the impression that everything has become safer and easier since the White Man arrived. :rolleyes:

Thanks for your acknowledgement that the "insurgents" and anyone who supports them may safely be considered the enemies of Freedom. :p

But your story does show that life in Iraq is indeed better since now the people may take measures for their own safety against the Baathists and the foreign jihadis instead of being murdered by Saddam at will. ^_^

So you guys all riding on TG's jockstrap over this...you're upset over the term White Man? Is that the bone of contention?
No, the article says that driving in Baghdad is prohibited on Fridays "to prevent attacks on mosques during weekly prayers." It's a perfectly rational course of action that is not uncommon in other parts of the world. We don't want someone bombing the White House, so cars are not allowed to drive in the mall in front of the White House. In this case, the number of mosques in Baghdad and the number of attendees make closing city streets justifiable.

TG used this to attack white people based on the perceived notion of "white people bombing brown people," or as he put it in the Moderation forum, "western exceptionalism." He indicated that the rolling-eyes smiley is keeping in the rules because it indicates sarcasm. It's unwarranted and distinctly unprofessional.

Further, his condescending attitude in the Moderation forum, making a personal attack based on an impression he got from two lines of text is not helping his cause IMO. Moderator or not, he stomped all over the fine line, and has the power to dismiss us simply because he can IMO.

They have to do something to try to stop the tidalwave of violence. This might actually be a good idea - for the time being and under the circumstances.

Thanks for your acknowledgement that the "insurgents" and anyone who supports them may safely be considered the enemies of Freedom. :p

But your story does show that life in Iraq is indeed better since now the people may take measures for their own safety against the Baathists and the foreign jihadis instead of being murdered by Saddam at will. ^_^

So Iraq is better because more people are dying at the hands of terrorists (who would never have been present if it were not for us) than would have been killed by Hussein in a comparable amount of time? It's better because people are in such danger that even going to a mosque is dangerous?

You and I have a differing opinion on what "better" means, clearly.

TG used this to attack white people based on the perceived notion of "white people bombing brown people," or as he put it in the Moderation forum, "western exceptionalism." He indicated that the rolling-eyes smiley is keeping in the rules because it indicates sarcasm. It's unwarranted and distinctly unprofessional.

Crazy. I read the OP as stating that not all is as wondeful as certain people in power would have us believe...something is rotten in the state of Iraq...and all that. But you must be correct. You couldn't possibly have an agenda here.

But your story does show that life in Iraq is indeed better since now the people may take measures for their own safety against the Baathists and the foreign jihadis instead of being murdered by Saddam at will. ^_^
Umm... No, not really no...

Crazy. I read the OP as stating that not all is as wondeful as certain people in power would have us believe...something is rotten in the state of Iraq...and all that. But you must be correct. You couldn't possibly have an agenda here.
I can see that's what he meant. So why did he feel the need to attack "white people" in making the point? "Since the white man arrived" is provocative, and I called him on it.

I don't have an agenda for or against the war, if you've read any of my past posts. I dislike the concept of war, but since I'm actually in the Armed Services, I can't dislike it too much, eh? My only agenda is to call TG out on his unprofessionalism.

I can see that's what he meant. So why did he feel the need to attack "white people" in making the point? "Since the white man arrived" is provocative, and I called him on it.

I don't have an agenda for or against the war, if you've read any of my past posts. I dislike the concept of war, but since I'm actually in the Armed Services, I can't dislike it too much, eh? My only agenda is to call TG out on his unprofessionalism.

Well, what is bolded is normally a reference to Western expansionism, manifest destiny, colonialism whatever you want to call it.

I don't see this as unprofessional. I see this as TG highlighting a "Oh, its not as good as people say it is" scenario while drawing parallels with the arrival of Western powers (or White Man if you will).

Sounds grand to me.

Whatever. I can't win. He's a mod. Not worth the trouble.

Whatever. I can't win. He's a mod. Not worth the trouble.
Yeah, there are other mods. If they find it actionable (very doubtful), then they'll do something.

Yeah, there are other mods. If they find it actionable (very doubtful), then they'll do something.
LOL. NS Forums Good Old Boy Network. HAHAHAAHHA!!!

Wait almost forgot the :rolleyes: . Don't wanna get myself banned.

Hey, good news from Moderation. Racist baiting is ok if you put an eye-rolling smiley afterward.


Anyone who is not white is more worthless than pigs, and they smell too.:rolleyes:

White Power!:rolleyes:


So was that alright?

TG?

Your opening post is offensive. You deserve a 3 day forum ban.

It is quite apparent that they did it for security reasons to cut down on attacks during prayers.

Get a life TG and welcome to the real world!

Anyone who is not white is more worthless than pigs, and they smell too.:rolleyes:

White Power!:rolleyes:

So was that alright?
I've become Switzerland on the issue. I have an opinion read to go, I'm prepared to use it, but I'm going to keep it inside on the basis of perceived neutrality.

This all is very easy; TG's OP deserves three days back in time... but because of Corneliu answered, TG gets 2 days scot free. It says so in the rules.

There's only one way to settle this, a duel. Llamas at dawn.

There's only one way to settle this, a duel. Llamas at dawn.
yes (http://gprime.net/flash.php/llamasong)...no.

I don't settle for anything less than pistols at 15 paces.

How the fuck is the first post offensive?

Is "White Man" and offensive term?

Is cultural imperialism in the Middle East not a viable political topic?

You guys are nitpicking buffoons.

It is quite apparent that they did it for security reasons to cut down on attacks during prayers.

Get a life TG and welcome to the real world!

And that obviously means that Iraqis have more freedoms, correct?

Prayer is in no way relevant. If they disallowed driving to protect marketplaces on Tuesday, it would still be a freedom that the coalition could not provide.

How the fuck is the first post offensive?

Is "White Man" and offensive term?

Is cultural imperialism in the Middle East not a viable political topic?

You guys are nitpicking buffoons.
Thank you!

No freakin' doubt. I've asked a number of times why "White Man" is so offensive, but all I've gotten is a bunch of crap that doesn't answer the question.

I assume you also saw the moronic thread in Moderation?

Thank you!

No freakin' doubt. I've asked a number of times why "White Man" is so offensive, but all I've gotten is a bunch of crap that doesn't answer the question.

I assume you also saw the moronic thread in Moderation?

That was a mess.

TG didn't need to explain away his intentions. Sarcasm doesn't change whether the post was flamebaiting, as I think the sarcasm probably makes the point that everyone was complaining about.

Especially annoying were all the mod conspiracy theorists who claimed they were going to get forumbanned for complaining about a mod.

Too bad they won't be likely to apologise when their whining is incorrect.

Why are you still talking about this? I complained, I got smacked down. I got over it. Maybe you should, too.

TG?

Your opening post is offensive.
How is it offensive?

You deserve a 3 day forum ban.:eek:

It is quite apparent that they did it for security reasons to cut down on attacks during prayers.
The war isn't quite going the way you expected it to huh? I think Dubya feels your pain.

Get a life TG and welcome to the real world!
I guess in your "real world" Iraq is a fantastic success story and Mods aren't allowed to have opinions? Tsk Tsk.

Why are you still talking about this? I complained, I got smacked down. I got over it. Maybe you should, too.
You didn't get smacked down, quit playing the martyr, it's pathetic. Instead of admiting you behaved like an ass, and went way overboard in your complaints and conspiracies, you'd like it to look like TG really just chewed your ass out for daring to question him. Absolutely nothing happened to you...not a ban, not a warning, not even a particularly sarcastic remark.

So Iraq is better because more people are dying at the hands of terrorists (who would never have been present if it were not for us) than would have been killed by Hussein in a comparable amount of time? It's better because people are in such danger that even going to a mosque is dangerous?

You and I have a differing opinion on what "better" means, clearly.


In point of fact things are better in Iraq because *fewer* people are dying at the hands of the the terrorists than were dying at the hands of Saddam in a comparable amount of time. Given that a portion of the "insurgents" are Baathists (Uh, you libs *do* know who the Baathists are, right?) and the others include the foreign Al Qaeda fighters to whom Saddam gave sanctuary the notion that they would never have been here if not for us is most charitably described as unknowledgeable. Not quite as ignorant as the OP of this thread who was apparently unaware that the Iraqi people are Caucasian but definitely unknowledgeable.

In point of fact things are better in Iraq because *fewer* people are dying at the hands of the the terrorists than were dying at the hands of Saddam in a comparable amount of time.
Since you are talking about comparisons and claim for a "fact" that "things are better in Iraq", could you please provide sufficient proof to back up your claim?

Given that a portion of the "insurgents" are Baathists (Uh, you libs *do* know who the Baathists are, right?) and the others include the foreign Al Qaeda fighters to whom Saddam gave sanctuary the notion that they would never have been here if not for us is most charitably described as unknowledgeable.
You're a good little troll. :rolleyes:

So all the Al Queda fighters in Iraq were quests of Saddam? Perhaps you could enlarge upon that premise and provide some proof?

Not quite as ignorant as the OP of this thread who was apparently unaware that the Iraqi people are Caucasian but definitely unknowledgeable.
Nice little flame there. :rolleyes:

Iraqis are Caucasian, since when?

Iraqis are Caucasian, since when?

Since the term was first coined. :rolleyes:

http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.php?title=Caucasian_race_by_Levan_Urushadze

"In physical anthropology, Caucasian (Varietas Caucasia) is a race that includes most of the natives of Northern, Eastern and Central Europe, *West and central Asia*, North Africa, and as far east as the Indian subcontinent. This category was first proposed by the German scientist Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (1752-1840), who coined the term in his treatise "De generis Humani Varietate Nativa" ("On the Natural Variety of Mankind", 1775 ). His studies based the classification of the Caucasian race primarily on skull features, which Blumenbach claimed were optimized by Georgian people, one of the indigenous peoples of the Caucasus and other Ibero-Caucasian peoples." (Emphasis mine).

Now please go and locate Iraq on the map and note that it is indeed a part of what was referred to as "West and central Asia". Good grief, guys! If neither Howard Dean nor the rest of you knew this much then it's just as well as that the White House and Congress are held by the GOP rather than by Democrats. :eek:

Race definitions are crap. People should be catagorized by nipple rigidity.

It is obvious that many on the left are not thinking this issue through. If it was up to them Saddam Hussein would still by the tyrant of Iraq. He would still be filling his mass graves and violating the U.N. Now, thanks to President Bush and his supporters Hussein is on trial by the democratic government which his own people control. The left's view is perplexing to me....if it was up to them Hussein would never have been toppled...so in their view.....why not put him back?

According to the most recent ABC news poll of Iraqis:

60% of Iraqis feel safe in their neighborhoods ( up from 40% in 2004)

61 percent say local security is good — up from 49 percent in the first ABC News poll in Iraq in February 2004.

Average household incomes have soared by 60 percent in the last 20 months (to $263 a month), 70 percent of Iraqis rate their own economic situation positively, and consumer goods are sweeping the country. In early 2004, 6 percent of Iraqi households had cell phones; now it's 62 percent. Ownership of satellite dishes has nearly tripled, and many more families now own air conditioners (58 percent, up from 44 percent), cars, washing machines and kitchen appliances.

70 percent approve of the new constitution, and 70 percent — including most people in Sunni and Shiite areas alike — want Iraq to remain a unified country.

Interest in politics has soared.
69 percent of Iraqis expect things for the country overall to improve in the next year

yet all you hear from the left is doom and gloom. They know that if we lose they will win the next election. Sad but true.

It is unfortunate that the radical Islamists have to make life so miserable for so many people. I hope that the local police and military will get all the training they need to deal with the radicals soon.

Well, the US government never was terribly great at dealing with Radical religious groups in the 1st place.

Waco, Texas is one example...we had a stand off for 50+ days, and when Clinton finally gave Janet Reno the option to do it, it literally turned into a catastrophe and 70+ people died even though they knew David Koresh went to the Wal-Mart every saturday morning to get supplies for his compound, they thought that storming the compound was a much better decision.

Another fine example is right now. If our troops can't deal with the insurgents, training their police won't do much good either. It's kinda like trying to potty train a kid when you don't even know how to use the restroom. And to be honest, it won't do any body much good.

The Iraqi's have, at one point had more freedom before now (Way back in Ancient times). Saddam, I know stripped the people of their rights. He also gassed the Kurds who were stealing his oil. He didn't do it just because he was a psychopath, he did it because he wanted to keep his oil

We've killed more innocent civilians than the radical islamists have killed us. We've killed 30,000, not including the insurgents. The radical islamists killed 3,000. We're not going to eliminate them in Iraq alone, because they are spread out all over the place. Plus these are the EXTREMISTS we are talking about, not the religion itself... The extremists fall under the branch of Shi'ite, the other branch contains the peaceful Islamists.

Radical Islamists are to Isalm, are what nazi's and crusaders are to Christianity. Both were extremists of their own religion. We may have eliminated the Nazi empire in WWII, but there are still Nazi's around. Which also proves, we may eliminate most of the terrorists, but there always be terrorists.

Wow that's a load off my chest.

Hmm.... Well Allow me to correct some of the misconceptions I have noticed so far in this disscussion. People now must realize that while Terrorism is bad the average American helps cause and fund International Terrorism. You must remember that one of the reasons that America even cares about the Middle East besides our little Buddy Isreal is that Most of the "cleanest" (most useable oil) comes form the Middle East. Most Americans secretly (in one way ro another) support this either by Driving SUV's or buying tons of plastic. As to weather the Iraqi's are more free or not is an interesting question. Democracy in lands where a country cannot be self sustaining recource wise (America and France are truely Unique in this respect because both an be self sustaining ) is usually a grab bag of advantages and disadvantages. In Russia they are pushing towords Democracy but the push is still tainted by Rampant Criminal Activity and a general lack of easy-to-get resources. Palistine is another good example of where Democracy will not always work. Form my prespective the people of Palistine, Perhaps supporting the pseudo-terrorists group Hamas, elected it and sense then Palistine has been thru some good and bad spots. With these 2 examples we cannot and should not expect to see an America-esk Democracy in Iraq.

Now in Regrads to Saddam Hussein there is evidence to show that when groups are in conflict they are more often united in hate than in love. Saddam ruled Iraq with an Iron fist and many would be hard pressed to find a good thign about his rule but that is just it! Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis all hated him! (Btw in the previous post it is stated that the Kurds wanted to steal Saddams oil, In fact it was the Kuwaiti's who wanted to steal it. Saddam Gassed the Kurds to get at the people who tried to assasinate him). Now look at Iraq... you have suicide bombings all the time, Civil unrest, murders but would any of that happen under Saddams rule? I doubt it.... When it comes to Criminals I bet Saddam would want to be King. But I also believe that this King perhaps understood Group Dynamics better than many other leaders in that when you have several groups who dislike eachother it is best to keep them at peace with each other by having them at war with you.

So what does this mean for Iraq's Democracy? I believe that it is Destined to fail not only because most good democracies can be self supporting to some degree which Iraq is not, Not only because the Grouo Dynamics there are so screwed up that Peace is but a distant Dream, But just simpley because Now that Saddam is out of power people have enough spare time to stir up trouble and as long as America, England, France, Russia, and CHina keep sticking our noses in thsi conflict then it will onyl get worse. When in this world has one size fit all been a good option and like Sweats, Democracy does not look good as a 1 size fits all.

But that is just my opinion on the whole dang conflict

Eric Out

From now on, driving is banned in Baghdad on Fridays. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5203786.stm)

But hey. Don't let the ever-increasing obstacles to having a normal life, get in the way of the impression that everything has become safer and easier since the White Man arrived. :rolleyes:


Sure.

Normal life in Arabia starts with using poison gas on a few ethnic minories.
Kurds. Negroes. Maybe some Jews, if Hezbollah gets lucky.

And lest we forget: normal Arabic life includes putting some planes through the roof of a skyscraper or 2.

Sure.

Normal life in Arabia starts with using poison gas on a few ethnic minories.
Kurds. Negroes. Maybe some Jews, if Hezbollah gets lucky.

Saudi Arabia, Bushevik? The country ruled by Dear Leader's buddy-buddies House of Saud? Got proof? Not that I expect you to.

And lest we forget: normal Arabic life includes putting some planes through the roof of a skyscraper or 2.

So not only Muslims are a Jihadist Borg hivemind, they're all Kamikaze Pilots as well. It's a miracle the tourism industry doesn't literally crash and burn, not to mention it begs the question of why there hasn't been a micro-Hajj to Japan if every Arab wants to perfect the art of riding to their targets like Slim Pickens.

:rolleyes:

It is obvious that many on the left are not thinking this issue through.
:confused: Wait, is that your left or my left?
*Looks desperately at own hands*

If it was up to them Saddam Hussein would still by the tyrant of Iraq. He would still be filling his mass graves and violating the U.N. Now, thanks to President Bush and his supporters Hussein is on trial by the democratic government which his own people control. The left's view is perplexing to me....if it was up to them Hussein would never have been toppled...so in their view.....why not put him back?
Maybe the difference you're experiencing lies in the methods. The US "violated" the UN to get Saddam, and the reason for doing so was not altruistic: The humanitarian concern was not presented before after the other reasons were proven false.

And have anybody called for the restoring of Saddam to power?

According to the most recent ABC news poll of Iraqis:

60% of Iraqis feel safe in their neighborhoods ( up from 40% in 2004)

61 percent say local security is good — up from 49 percent in the first ABC News poll in Iraq in February 2004.

Average household incomes have soared by 60 percent in the last 20 months (to $263 a month), 70 percent of Iraqis rate their own economic situation positively, and consumer goods are sweeping the country. In early 2004, 6 percent of Iraqi households had cell phones; now it's 62 percent. Ownership of satellite dishes has nearly tripled, and many more families now own air conditioners (58 percent, up from 44 percent), cars, washing machines and kitchen appliances.

70 percent approve of the new constitution, and 70 percent — including most people in Sunni and Shiite areas alike — want Iraq to remain a unified country.

Interest in politics has soared.
69 percent of Iraqis expect things for the country overall to improve in the next year
Linky...

yet all you hear from the left is doom and gloom. They know that if we lose they will win the next election. Sad but true.
It's a complete (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5193892.stm) mystery (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5189832.stm), isn't it? (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5199162.stm)
:rolleyes:

The kidnaps come as a UN report reveals that nearly 6,000 Iraqi civilians were killed in May and June.

Sure.

Normal life in Arabia starts with using poison gas on a few ethnic minories.
Kurds. Negroes. Maybe some Jews, if Hezbollah gets lucky.

And lest we forget: normal Arabic life includes putting some planes through the roof of a skyscraper or 2.

I think you've got your facts confused (and your knowledge of maps leaves much to be desired. We're talking of Iraq.

A couple of more pages on, I am very saddened and disappointed that my post has been interpreted in the way in which it was, and am locking the thread because it is not going in an acceptable direction. Hostility in the direction of the forum was not my intention, I apologise if anyone was offended, though I can see that some people set out to be and could not resist piling in.