NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,475208,00.html

Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah is offering a plan for peace in the Middle East


"The real blame should fall on us -- we the leaders of the Arab nations," he said.

What does everyone think will it work or fail?

This is a prime example of a tangible benefit of the war in Iraq. The shockwaves of modernization are spreading throughout the wider region, prompting Saudi Arabia to attempt to broker a peace agreement. No, Hell is not freezing over; however, the administration's far-sighted plan in the Middle East is having its positive ramifications felt. With more submissive Arab states, obsequiously yielding to the US's constructive will, the peace plan might actually work.

Hell is already a pretty cold place. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell%2C_Norway)

Hell is already a pretty cold place. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell%2C_Norway)

so its just thawing out now :p

1) He places the blame on Arab leaders. Not all of the blame, but most of it. There will be Arab leaders out there who do not agree with that statement. And if one country doesn't accept it, then there will be no 'peace'. Either everyone agrees or there's no use in making any soft of deal or arrangement in the Middle East.

2) Terrorist factions will probably get in the way of peace talks. Whether it's one big thing they do, or a lot of smaller things, peace in the Middle East with 'everyone' satisfied is the last thing they want (especially with the case of the extreme Muslim factions, who hate Jews and/or Americans).

3) There's the factor of Sunni and Shi'ite differences that would form a barrier between Saudi Arabia speaking out with their wishes and the wishes of the USA, Israel, and UN/Europe - most notably the Shi'ites in Iraq and Iran where the problem with Sunni Saudi Arabia would lie - might no happen, but in any event, possible.

What does everyone think will it work or fail?I hate to say it, but it'll fail. [...] Israel withdrew to its 1967 borders, acknowledged the right of return to Palestinian refugees and allowed for the creation of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital [...]Israel won't accept any of those things, regardless of what Olmert says. It's about as likely to gain popular support in Israel, as I am to eat a raw steak smothered in human feces for no reason.

Never the less, it's a great suggestion.

This is a prime example of a tangible benefit of the war in Iraq. The shockwaves of modernization are spreading throughout the wider region, prompting Saudi Arabia to attempt to broker a peace agreement. No, Hell is not freezing over; however, the administration's far-sighted plan in the Middle East is having its positive ramifications felt. With more submissive Arab states, obsequiously yielding to the US's constructive will, the peace plan might actually work.

1- They have no obligation to be submissive to the US. Neither does Latin America. Or anywhere else.

2- The US showing its potential for psychopathy under Bush has nothing to do with that. Indeed the terms of the agreement don't do much to help Israel.

3- Iraq is quicky turning into a theocracy. Nice definition of modernization.

4- The only benefit the Iraq war ever brought was getting the Democrats back in the control of both houses.

Good for the Saudis, I think they're only doing this because of Iran's saber rattling, the Arab states are starting to fear a Shi'ite revival, methinks.

1) He places the blame on Arab leaders. Not all of the blame, but most of it. There will be Arab leaders out there who do not agree with that statement. And if one country doesn't accept it, then there will be no 'peace'. Either everyone agrees or there's no use in making any soft of deal or arrangement in the Middle East.

2) Terrorist factions will probably get in the way of peace talks. Whether it's one big thing they do, or a lot of smaller things, peace in the Middle East with 'everyone' satisfied is the last thing they want (especially with the case of the extreme Muslim factions, who hate Jews and/or Americans).

3) There's the factor of Sunni and Shi'ite differences that would form a barrier between Saudi Arabia speaking out with their wishes and the wishes of the USA, Israel, and UN/Europe - most notably the Shi'ites in Iraq and Iran where the problem with Sunni Saudi Arabia would lie - might no happen, but in any event, possible.

yea i was thinking about that too...

al-queada/hamas/hezballah/(insert terrorist group here) would ruin it

but i still think it's a step in the right direction

Hell is already a pretty cold place. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell%2C_Norway)

lmfao...

yea i was thinking about that too...

al-queada/hamas/hezballah/(insert terrorist group here) would ruin it

but i still think it's a step in the right direction

lol that was your 111th post....1/6th of the way there to evil....

Oh. I was guessing it was something like "Submit to our rule."

lol that was your 111th post....1/6th of the way there to evil....

lol you're about halfway there

This is a prime example of a tangible benefit of the war in Iraq. The shockwaves of modernization are spreading throughout the wider region, prompting Saudi Arabia to attempt to broker a peace agreement. No, Hell is not freezing over; however, the administration's far-sighted plan in the Middle East is having its positive ramifications felt. With more submissive Arab states, obsequiously yielding to the US's constructive will, the peace plan might actually work.

"Hey King Abdullah, did you see the news on the war in Iraq today?"
"No I have not... *picks up paper* ah, let me see... improvised explosive devices, massacres of pilgrims, rising insurgency violence.... Why, I can actually *feel* the shockwaves of modernization! Quick, get Israel on the phone!"

"Hey King Abdullah, did you see the news on the war in Iraq today?"
"No I have not... *picks up paper* ah, let me see... improvised explosive devices, massacres of pilgrims, rising insurgency violence.... Why, I can actually *feel* the shockwaves of modernization! Quick, get Israel on the phone!"

"Wait...woman's rights? STOP THESE BARBARIANS AT ONCE! BOMB ZEM! BOMB ZEM ALLLLLLL!!! GAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHA BURN!!!!" [/kingabdullah]

Why, I can actually *feel* the shockwaves of modernization! Quick, get Israel on the phone!"

I was referring to the transition to a free-market economy and democracy. There are always going to be bumps in the road, but remember: when the going gets tough, the tough get going. Sectarian butchers are not going to derail the Iraqi train that is heading for modernization; all they can do is temporarily impede its progress, your sardonic comments notwithstanding.

I was referring to the transition to a free-market economy and democracy. There are always going to be bumps in the road, but remember: when the going gets tough, the tough get going. Sectarian butchers are not going to derail the Iraqi train that is heading for modernization; all they can do is temporarily impede its progress, your sardonic comments notwithstanding.

I thought they de-railed, robbed and suicide bombed that train a while ago

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,475208,00.html

Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah is offering a plan for peace in the Middle East
And in turn, Olmert invites the Arab nations to talk peace...

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/01/olmert.peace.ap/index.html

Maybe, just maybe, there are open ears now...

I thought they de-railed robbed and suicide bombed that train a while ago

They did. I believe they beheaded it too.

They did. I believe they beheaded it too.

Really? I was under the impression that the "Iraq=Democracy" train was nuked a while back by Saddam's WMD's. Or lack thereof.

I thought they de-railed, robbed and suicide bombed that train a while ago

They attempted to, but failed. Its progress is inexorable; its powerful engine can continue chugging along despite all the nefarious schemes concocted by the sectarian fiends who seek to stifle its momentum.

Really? I was under the impression that the "Iraq=Democracy" train was nuked a while back by Saddam's WMD's. Or lack thereof.

no the US was afraid that was going to happen. so they invaded to prevent that

They did. I believe they beheaded it too.

must've been difficult to behead a train

They attempted to, but failed. Its progress is inexorable; its powerful engine can continue chugging along despite all the nefarious schemes concocted by the sectarian fiends who seek to stifle its momentum.

Surely a nuclear weapon could penetrate this "momentum shield"? Especially if it was all of Iraq's nuclear weapons. Which would explain their shortage now....

I was referring to the transition to a free-market economy and democracy. There are always going to be bumps in the road, but remember: when the going gets tough, the tough get going. Sectarian butchers are not going to derail the Iraqi train that is heading for modernization; all they can do is temporarily impede its progress, your sardonic comments notwithstanding.

Seriously? I'm sorry, but I actually laughed at this. When the going gets tough? Platitudes seem like the answer to Iraq? Really?

I think it's funny that even the people most in love with the administration aren't pretending like the war is going well and you're still not convinced. Funny in a terribly sad way.

What part of Iraq is going well? What has improved since we got there?

They attempted to, but failed. Its progress is inexorable; its powerful engine can continue chugging along despite all the nefarious schemes concocted by the sectarian fiends who seek to stifle its momentum.

It hasn't? Hmmm... the missing infrastructure and the deaths and turmoil would disagree. Unless I suppose you don't consider roadside bombs to be a problem.

It's okay to defend the war, but seriously this kind of "Iraq is all flowers and puppy dogs" stuff is just nonsensical.

4- The only benefit the Iraq war ever brought was getting the Democrats back in the control of both houses.

That is NOT a benefit. The Republicans want what's best for the people fo America; the Democrats want nothing but to get in power and stay in power, and enslave their voters to them so that they will re-elect them.

That is NOT a benefit. The Republicans want what's best for the people fo America; the Democrats want nothing but to get in power and stay in power, and enslave their voters to them so that they will re-elect them.

sounds like the Republicans :rolleyes:

Seriously? I'm sorry, but I actually laughed at this. When the going gets tough? Platitudes seem like the answer to Iraq? Really?

I think it's funny that even the people most in love with the administration aren't pretending like the war is going well and you're still not convinced. Funny in a terribly sad way.

What part of Iraq is going well? What has improved since we got there?

If my nuclear train theory is correct, we have indirectly rid Iraq of their 'nuclear weapons'. Not to mention the leader who 'used' them.

In all seriousness though, although I can't say that Iraq looks like a nice place to live in, Iraqis there feel more secure with US troops around then without. Democracy is in no way near, and the "infallible train" is not infallible. Democracy as a failure in Iraq is an option. Democracy as a success in Iraq is also an option.

sounds like the Republicans :rolleyes:

Sounds like all political parties.

Sounds like all political parties.

nah. That's far too rational.

nah. That's far too rational.

Yeah, it's much more fun debating which shit smells better.

Seriously? I'm sorry, but I actually laughed at this.

As the proverb goes, it is better to cry with wise men than to laugh with fools.

What part of Iraq is going well? What has improved since we got there?

The Iraqi people are flourishing under the nourishing influence of democracy. The rotten tree of authoritarianism has been eradicated by a fierce storm of righteousness, whose rain created the conditions for the young and fragile sapling of freedom to prosper. Almost all areas of Iraq have witnessed significant improvement aside fom the crime rate. Even the infrastructure has been rebuilt (Iraqis have more reliable electricity than they did in the past). However, the media does not focus on this plethora of small miracles but rather centers its attention on the sole problem with which Iraq is plagued: violence. This is a deliberate attempt to delude the public and subvert our positive efforts in Iraq; don't give in to it.

The Iraqi people are flourishing under the nourishing influence of democracy. The rotten tree of authoritarianism has been eradicated by a fierce storm of righteousness, whose rain created the conditions for the young and fragile sapling of freedom to prosper. Almost all areas of Iraq have witnessed significant improvement aside fom the crime rate. Even the infrastructure has been rebuilt (Iraqis have more reliable electricity than they did in the past). However, the media does not focus on this plethora of small miracles but rather centers its attention on the sole problem with which Iraq is plagued: violence. This is a deliberate attempt to delude the public and subvert our positive efforts in Iraq; don't give in to it.
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH THE WORDS!!! IT BURNS USS!! AHHHH!

This proves that either:

A: FreedomAndGlory is a troll.

or

B. That FreedomAndGlory is, in fact, President George W. Bush's nationstate.
And seeing how it's a Right-wing Utopia, it may very well be possible.

So George, what do you think of the site? Too many liberals?

As the proverb goes, it is better to cry with wise men than to laugh with fools.



The Iraqi people are flourishing under the nourishing influence of democracy. The rotten tree of authoritarianism has been eradicated by a fierce storm of righteousness, whose rain created the conditions for the young and fragile sapling of freedom to prosper. Almost all areas of Iraq have witnessed significant improvement aside fom the crime rate. Even the infrastructure has been rebuilt (Iraqis have more reliable electricity than they did in the past). However, the media does not focus on this plethora of small miracles but rather centers its attention on the sole problem with which Iraq is plagued: violence. This is a deliberate attempt to delude the public and subvert our positive efforts in Iraq; don't give in to it.
Oh, I get it. You're taking a piss. I took you seriously for a minute. You were a pretty good troll, but you went a little too far with this one. No one believes this. Even EO isn't this deluded.

Oh, I get it. You're taking a piss. I took you seriously for a minute. You were a pretty good troll, but you went a little too far with this one. No one believes this. Even EO isn't this deluded.

Deluded? I'm deluded? No, sir, I realize that the "doom and gloom" scenarios preached by the media have only the slimmest of footholds in the realm of reality. My eyes are not so clouded by partisan hatred that they cannot penetrate the insidious lies surrounding Iraq to see the truth inside. I see progress in the heart of every Iraqi and in the soul of the country. I see progress in a formerly repressed Iraqi braving the sectarian violence in order to vote. I see progress in the Iraqi army and the Iraqi police force securing an area and giving peace to its residents. I see progress in the indominatable spirit of Iraq. And no, I will not surrender that hope because of a few small glitches along the way. I will not give up my faith simply because a dark cloud of smoke issuing forth from a burning vehicle obscures the better nature of Iraq. I can see past all that and into upstanding, perseverent core of Iraq. The question is: can you?

Deluded? I'm deluded? No, sir, I realize that the "doom and gloom" scenarios preached by the media have only the slimmest of footholds in the realm of reality. My eyes are not so clouded by partisan hatred that they cannot penetrate the insidious lies surrounding Iraq to see the truth inside. I see progress in the heart of every Iraqi and in the soul of the country. I see progress in a formerly repressed Iraqi braving the sectarian violence in order to vote. I see progress in the Iraqi army and the Iraqi police force securing an area and giving peace to its residents. I see progress in the indominatable spirit of Iraq. And no, I will not surrender that hope because of a few small glitches along the way. I will not give up my faith simply because a dark cloud of smoke issuing forth from a burning vehicle obscures the better nature of Iraq. I can see past all that and into upstanding, perseverent core of Iraq. The question is: can you?

Nothing is all good. Nothing is all bad. Anyone who claims one or the other is deluded or lying.

Meanwhile, Iraq is nothing resembling what you're describing. Look around. Even McCain didn't believe this when he said it which is why he practically included an entire batallion in his little stroll around Iraq.

Even the biggest Bushites don't paint the Iraq picture like you do. So is everyone lying or is it possible, just possible, that you're taking a piss?

The Iraqi people are flourishing under the nourishing influence of democracy.Half a million fled, half a million dead, the entire country cought in civil war between multiple factions. Flourishing indeed.The rotten tree of authoritarianism has been eradicated by a fierce storm of righteousness, whose rain created the conditions for the young and fragile sapling of freedom to prosper.Authoritarianism - something you're the very image of, by the way - has never been more alive in the country in modern times. Several extremely authoritarian factions, ours included, are murdering everyone not associated with themselves, in an effort to cower the population.Almost all areas of Iraq have witnessed significant improvement aside fom the crime rate. Even the infrastructure has been rebuilt (Iraqis have more reliable electricity than they did in the past).For a realistic comparison, let's use the pre-Gulf War Iraq, shall we? After all, it's hardly fair to compare our fine handiwork to the result of a war, 12 years of routine bombings of infrastructure and economic sanctions so severe they've been classed as genocide.

So what do we have to brag about? Fuck-all, that's what. Living standards are lower now than then. Unemployment's higher. Food, sanitation and energy shortages practically didn't exist them, whereas practically all parts of the population are plagued by them now. Medical help and supplies weren't spectacular then, but provided a high degree of coverage. Now there's a shortage of medical staff, supplies and clinics, and the coverage is haphazard at best, amidst growing worries of epidemics. Same for all other public services, education included. The middle class is fleeing the country or actively engaged in warfare with itself. Despite skyrocketing unemployment, skilled labour is in short supply.However, the media does not focus on this plethora of small miracles but rather centers its attention on the sole problem with which Iraq is plagued: violence. This is a deliberate attempt to delude the public and subvert our positive efforts in Iraq; don't give in to it.Half a million Iraqis would say "Fuck You!" but can't as they're dead. More than 80% of the rest have been shouting it non-stop for a long, long while now. Unless we're some authoritarian nightmare come to oppress the fuck out of them, why don't we sod off already?

Deluded? I'm deluded? No, sir, I realize that the "doom and gloom" scenarios preached by the media have only the slimmest of footholds in the realm of reality. My eyes are not so clouded by partisan hatred that they cannot penetrate the insidious lies surrounding Iraq to see the truth inside. I see progress in the heart of every Iraqi and in the soul of the country. I see progress in a formerly repressed Iraqi braving the sectarian violence in order to vote. I see progress in the Iraqi army and the Iraqi police force securing an area and giving peace to its residents. I see progress in the indominatable spirit of Iraq. And no, I will not surrender that hope because of a few small glitches along the way. I will not give up my faith simply because a dark cloud of smoke issuing forth from a burning vehicle obscures the better nature of Iraq. I can see past all that and into upstanding, perseverent core of Iraq. The question is: can you?Are you Manwë or Ulmo? :p

As long as Israel exists as a state there will not be peace.

FreedomAndGlory is obviously just another MTAE-clone troll, so I will ignore him, i don't want to have to waste my time going through the various mistakes made by the CPA in the first few months in creating the entire insurgency and destroying Iraqi infrastructure thourhg greedy capitalist privatisations.

The Iraqi people are flourishing under the nourishing influence of democracy. The rotten tree of authoritarianism has been eradicated by a fierce storm of righteousness, whose rain created the conditions for the young and fragile sapling of freedom to prosper. Almost all areas of Iraq have witnessed significant improvement aside fom the crime rate. Even the infrastructure has been rebuilt (Iraqis have more reliable electricity than they did in the past). However, the media does not focus on this plethora of small miracles but rather centers its attention on the sole problem with which Iraq is plagued: violence. This is a deliberate attempt to delude the public and subvert our positive efforts in Iraq; don't give in to it.

I agree with you on the point that the media seems to center a little too much sometimes on all the bad things in Iraq, and shoves aside the good things....but hey, it's media, who cares.

That's about all I can agree with there.

Also, when speaking about democracy and freedom and your little righteousness thing - democracy isn't perfect. Most people in the world don't see an invasion by the United States of America because of "WMD's" which has led to a general destabilizing of the region and more and more violence as the "young and fragile sapling of freedom".

What I don't get is if democracy is so free, why is America forcing down upon Iraq the creation of such a democracy? If anything, it should be up to the Iraqi people what they want - not American policies. We're so obsessed with democracy and freedom that we forget that it is, in fact, not free.

Even the biggest Bushites don't paint the Iraq picture like you do.

I never painted a "rosy" picture of Iraq. But the truth you see depends on where you look. If you look at the gruesome sectarian violence, the disintegrating social programs, and the political quagmire, you might see failure. However, if you take a deeper look at the common Iraqi, who struggles through the day and dreams of a time when Iraq will be unified and free, but never gives up hope and never despairs, you'll realize that there is nothing -- absolutely nothing -- that can stop his indomitable spirit and the spirit of millions of Iraqis like him. Inevitably, they will succeed. You'll see that once you look past the depressing facts and statistics relating to Iraq and you peer into the heart of the country itself. If you think that makes me someone who's taking a piss, so be it; but that's not going to alter my views.

FreedomAndGlory is obviously just another MTAE-clone troll, so I will ignore him, i don't want to have to waste my time going through the various mistakes made by the CPA in the first few months in creating the entire insurgency and destroying Iraqi infrastructure thourhg greedy capitalist privatisations.BTW, are US companies now in control of the Iraqi oil production?

Half a million Iraqis would say "Fuck You!" but can't as they're dead.

Well, unless they left wills and/or testaments you can never be sure.... :rolleyes:

the common Iraqi, who struggles through the day and dreams of a time when Iraq will be unified and free.
All six of them?

The average Iraqi wants the group he identifies with to be in power, period.

BTW, are US companies now in control of the Iraqi oil production?

Where did all of Iraq's billions of aid go in the few months the CPA was in power? It certainly didn't go into infrastructure development.
The CPA sacked all their competant civil servants, police, military, doctors, surgeons, workers etc etc indiscriminately for having 'links' with Saddams regime in line with the neocon 'Debaathisation' program. Bush only appointed politically convenient individuals with conservative view points, as a result it lacked expertise and experience, for example the guy (can't remember his name) in charge of health and hospital rebuilding had no experience in hospital stuff, he was a step up the ladder from a GP and was a conservative christian. As a result of this, and under greedy war profiteering capitalists, Iraq's infrastructure and societal structure crumbled, and build upon unemployment and disenfranchisement, plus not being paid for years because of the embargo, the nationalist sectarian insurgency was created.

<Snip>Shhh! You're not supposed to know we gutted a country and started a civil war.

Where did all of Iraq's billions of aid go in the few months the CPA was in power? It certainly didn't go into infrastructure development.
The CPA sacked all their competant civil servants, police, military, doctors, surgeons, workers etc etc indiscriminately for having 'links' with Saddams regime in line with the neocon 'Debaathisation' program. Bush only appointed politically convenient individuals with conservative view points, as a result it lacked expertise and experience, for example the guy (can't remember his name) in charge of health and hospital rebuilding had no experience in hospital stuff, he was a step up the ladder from a GP and was a conservative christian. As a result of this, and under greedy war profiteering capitalists, Iraq's infrastructure and societal structure crumbled, and build upon unemployment and disenfranchisement, plus not being paid for years because of the embargo, the nationalist sectarian insurgency was created.So Bush destroyed Iraq in more than one way? All senior members of his administration are from the oil business, right? How much do they personally profit from this war?

An optimistic article and as an optimist, I say yes. If not, I'll bring peace. :)

Shhh! You're not supposed to know we gutted a country and started a civil war.

:eek:

edit: Halfway there to evil....

That is NOT a benefit. The Republicans want what's best for the people fo America; the Democrats want nothing but to get in power and stay in power, and enslave their voters to them so that they will re-elect them.

With your head up your ass like that do you still need to eat, or does the food just cycle through endlessly?

I never painted a "rosy" picture of Iraq. But the truth you see depends on where you look. If you look at the gruesome sectarian violence, the disintegrating social programs, and the political quagmire, you might see failure. However, if you take a deeper look at the common Iraqi, who struggles through the day and dreams of a time when Iraq will be unified and free, but never gives up hope and never despairs, you'll realize that there is nothing -- absolutely nothing -- that can stop his indomitable spirit and the spirit of millions of Iraqis like him. Inevitably, they will succeed. You'll see that once you look past the depressing facts and statistics relating to Iraq and you peer into the heart of the country itself. If you think that makes me someone who's taking a piss, so be it; but that's not going to alter my views.

Seriously, is this supposed to resemble a cogent statement? In real life, the speeches people give before football games in movies have no value. So put down the movies and pick up a history book. This problem is going to be with them for a long time and we put this problem there and the problem before that we helped to increase its power.

Talking about the indomitable spirit of the Iraqi really has nothing of value to add to the picture in Iraq. Are there people who will survive? Undoubtedly. Are there people who will die? Undoubtedly. Is there anyone there who really believes that what is no occurring is a blessing? Undoubtedly. Are they a significant portion of the Iraqi people? Nope. And those are facts, Jack.

I never painted a "rosy" picture of Iraq. But the truth you see depends on where you look. If you look at the gruesome sectarian violence, the disintegrating social programs, and the political quagmire, you might see failure.

Overlooking all of that, it's all sunshine and puppy dogs.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,475208,00.html

Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah is offering a plan for peace in the Middle East



What does everyone think will it work or fail?

It won't work. The Saudis are America's lap dog and are probably only doing this for yet more money from the US. Way to go Saudi "royal" family. Sell out Muslims so you can buy a few more bmws.

It won't work. The Saudis are America's lap dog and are probably only doing this for yet more money from the US. Way to go Saudi "royal" family. Sell out Muslims so you can buy a few more bmws.What does it have to do with Muslims?

Hell's freezing over again!? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell_Freezes_Over)

<snore/>

Hell's freezing over again!? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell_Freezes_Over)

The plan's been around for a while, before Iraq was invaded.

It's all part of Saudi Arabian foreign policy doctrine, namely being the regional power and the leadership of the world's Sunni Muslims. If the plan works out, not only will that firmly place the Arabs in the 21st century, but Saudi Arabia will have cemented their position.

Not to mention that a bit of stability in Israel and Palestine may be the key to limiting Iran's ability to influence the region through Hezbollah and anti-Israel rhetoric. So in the current situation, Saudi Arabia can only attack Iran through Israel, as weird as that sounds.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,464807,00.html - interview with foreign minister
http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,463674,00.html - about Saudi diplomacy

Overlooking all of that, it's all sunshine and puppy dogs.

The puppy dogs are being killed by brutal sectarian violence, the sunshine being clouded by the quagmire gases.

HOWEVER there are still puppy dogs and sunshine... just dead and swamp-gassy.

The puppy dogs are being killed by brutal sectarian violence, the sunshine being clouded by the quagmire gases.

HOWEVER there are still puppy dogs and sunshine... just dead and swamp-gassy.

Indeed they are by the Evil American Warmongers... (http://songun.phpbbweb.com/songun-ftopic13-0-asc-0.html)


HINT: Read the entire thread...

HINT 2(!): I am specifically referring to the post at the very bottom of page one

HINT the third: And the 2nd post

Maybe I'm being too optimistic but I can see this working: not only is it now in the interests of Saudi Arabia et al. to promote peace, but surveys have shown that a majority of both Israelis and Palestinians are ready to accept a two-state solution.

On the other hand, I'm not sure if the current Israeli government has enough authority left after the debacle in Lebanon to get rid of the settlers. I guess all we can do is hope.

I don't think anything will work there right now.

It's an excellent proposal. Unfortunately, Israel and the United States will never agree to anything so logical.

It will fail for very simple reasons, Israel and Palestinians can't agree where to draw the border and should there be "right of return" or not.

Olmedreca;12506467']It will fail for very simple reasons, Israel and Palestinians can't agree where to draw the border and should there be "right of return" or not.Then why does the international community not force a decision on the area as it did in 1947?

Olmedreca;12506467']It will fail for very simple reasons, Israel and Palestinians can't agree where to draw the border and should there be "right of return" or not.
Actually, the gag is that if the Arab states are actually standing together and draw up a peace plan like this (which gives Israel clear borders that they vow to respect), then the Palestinians won't have a whole lot of input on the issue. Hamas can't do very much if the Arab states cut off their income.

Then why does the international community not force a decision on the area as it did in 1947?

You see how well that worked out yes?

You see how well that worked out yes?It worked out well for one side.

Actually, Hell isnt quite as cold as you'd think.

Its also much smaller.

Been there.

Bought a Sno-Ball.
Didnt have a chance.

http://www.hell2u.com/index.htm

Olmedreca;12506467']It will fail for very simple reasons, Israel and Palestinians can't agree where to draw the border and should there be "right of return" or not.

The new peace offer simply says that an equitable solution should be reached with the refugees. If I remember correctly Israel have been willing to offer compensation in the past, they'll probably do so again.

Seriously, is this supposed to resemble a cogent statement? In real life, the speeches people give before football games in movies have no value. So put down the movies and pick up a history book.

I was attempting to outline my reasoning to this forum. Apparently, you feel that such logic has no value and would be more fitting if espoused prior to a football game. That's a pity, but it simply reflects poorly upon you, not me. It also shows that you are immune to the yearnings of millions upon millions of Iraqis and simply focus on the maleficent minority in order to draw your conclusions. You are attracted as a magnet to tales of destruction, desolation, and doom, yet are impervious to the influence of everyday honor, heroism, and humaneness. It's no wonder you have formulated fatally flawed ideas relating to Iraq. Step back, because right now, you cannot see the forest for the trees.

I was attempting to outline my reasoning to this forum. Apparently, you feel that such logic has no value and would be more fitting if espoused prior to a football game.

It's not logic. It's emotional drivel. It has no bearing on what is going on there. Are you seriously claiming your argument is logical because you despite all the horror in their country you believe in the people's indomintable spirit? What if their indomitable spirit is what is driving them to fight against us? What if it is precisely that spirit that will drive them to support their particular sect as the future leaders of Iraq and nothing else? What if this indomitable spirit leads them never settle for anything less than the complete domination of their ideology?

See how that drivel really doesn't address anything useful? Because it replaces evidence and reason with wild speculation.

I'm not claiming you don't have a right to this belief, but really it adds no value to the discussion of what is going on or what we should do.

That's a pity, but it simply reflects poorly upon you, not me.

My ability to concentrate on the subject at hand and what we actually know versus things that are just complete and utter speculation about the will of the Iraqi people to perservere reflects poorly on me? Come on, man, you're already difficult to take seriously. If you're going to troll, how about maintaining just a modicum of believability.


It also shows that you are immune to the yearnings of millions upon millions of Iraqis and simply focus on the maleficent minority in order to draw your conclusions. You are attracted as a magnet to tales of destruction, desolation, and doom, yet are impervious to the influence of everyday honor, heroism, and humaneness. It's no wonder you have formulated fatally flawed ideas relating to Iraq. Step back, because right now, you cannot see the forest for the trees.

No, it shows that I use evidence to draw my conclusions. Your claims are complete and utter speculation and ignore the evidence at hand. I believe in honer, heroism and humaneness and I believe they occur everyday in Iraq and every other country in the world. I don't pretend that means I can close my eyes to the situation at hand and declare victory.

There is also an indomitable spirit in Sudan. Herosim, honor and humaneness as well. Didn't stop the genocide. And declaring that they exist is ignoring the problem there or anywhere else you prefer to focus on these things rather than actual solutions.

It's not logic. It's emotional drivel. It has no bearing on what is going on there. Are you seriously claiming your argument is logical because you despite all the horror in their country you believe in the people's indomintable spirit? What if their indomitable spirit is what is driving them to fight against us? What if it is precisely that spirit that will drive them to support their particular sect as the future leaders of Iraq and nothing else? What if this indomitable spirit leads them never settle for anything less than the complete domination of their ideology?

On the contrary: it is quite pertinent to this discussion. Your alternate theory, upon which you have expounded in this post, is refutable. Your insinuation that Iraqis are brazen, bloodthirsty butchers is unsupported by the facts. For example, you claim that Iraqis are driven by their indomitable spirit to support a given sect; however, 77% of Iraqis wish for such militias to be disbanded and for the central government to be in charge of security. The other 23% are mostly Shias who benefit from the extensive social programs in which several militias are engaged. This certainly does not represent a willingness to perpetuate the violence, but rather a desperate plea for peace. I have read the first-hand accounts of Iraqis who persevere in the face of adversity in order to reconstruct a more glorious Iraq from the current rubble. I suggest you read the narratives on the blog entitled "IraqTheModel." Iraq wants peace, not war.

Your claims are complete and utter speculation and ignore the evidence at hand.

No, I take into account all that I know of Iraq in order to draw my conclusions. I have read blogs written by those who reside within the country. I have glanced at polls which reflect the opinions of common Iraqis. I have read news articles relating to the situation in the nation. I did not just pull a random thesis out of my mad hat as you would have people believe. My ideas are corroborated by all that I know of Iraq -- that's not wild speculation, nor does it run contrary to the evidence. I am simply willing to look at the bigger picture -- I am willing to focus on Iraq in its entirety rather than glumly stare at the minuscule portion of its population which is implicated in the ghastly civil strife.

Saudi Arabia is doing something good?
SAUDI ARABIA?
Aahhh, it's the apocalypse!
Watch for flying pigs!

On the contrary: it is quite pertinent to this discussion.

No, it isn't. Talking about things absent evidence as a solution to a problem is not relevant. You're claiming that we should pretend like Iraq is going swimmingly despite all evidence becuase Iraqis MIGHT change the course some day.

Your alternate theory, upon which you have expounded in this post, is refutable. Your insinuation that Iraqis are brazen, bloodthirsty butchers is unsupported by the facts.

Reading is fundamental. My insinuation is that we don't actually know what their "indomitable spirit" will drive them to do and claiming we do has no value. I gave several alternatives. All are possible. That they are bloodthirsty is possible. That they are wonderful people is possible. That they are lazy is possible. And everything you are claiming is just choosing one equally like claim about them among many and then extrapolating on that claim to end up at a place that is relatively unlikely.


For example, you claim that Iraqis are driven by their indomitable spirit to support a given sect; however, 77% of Iraqis wish for such militias to be disbanded and for the central government to be in charge of security.

Source?

The other 23% are mostly Shias who benefit from the extensive social programs in which several militias are engaged.

Source?

This certainly does not represent a willingness to perpetuate the violence, but rather a desperate plea for peace. I have read the first-hand accounts of Iraqis who persevere in the face of adversity in order to reconstruct a more glorious Iraq from the current rubble.

You've read first-hand accounts. Well, then I'd asy that really your argument is impossible to refute. Well, of course, unless I actually look for REAL evidence.


I suggest you read the narratives on the blog entitled "IraqTheModel." Iraq wants peace, not war.

You suggest I read a blog? How about I just talk to my fellow Marines?

At least then I know who I'm actually speaking to and that the personality they are claiming isn't just made up.

Of course, they want peace. The question is what kind of peace are they willing to settle for. If their spirit is truly indomitable as you claim, then it's likely they will fight until they get the exact outcome they desire, which is likely not the outcome you're claiming.



No, I take into account all that I know of Iraq in order to draw my conclusions.

No, you don't and we've proven it in this thread. You reject any evidence that doesn't support your conclusions and you admit the horror in Iraq exists right before you go on to ignore it.

I have read blogs written by those who claim to reside within the country.

Edited to make your claims not ridiculous. Blogs are not sources of truth. They have little value as evidence, since they are A) unverifiable and B) anecdotal evidence at best.


I have glanced at polls which reflect the opinions of common Iraqis. I have read news articles relating to the situation in the nation. I did not just pull a random thesis out of my mad hat as you would have people believe. My ideas are corroborated by all that I know of Iraq -- that's not wild speculation, nor does it run contrary to the evidence. I am simply willing to look at the bigger picture -- I am willing to focus on Iraq in its entirety rather than glumly stare at the minuscule portion of its population which is implicated in the ghastly civil strife.

See, here's the problem. You haven't actually done any of these things. You've chosen which evidence you like and chosen to ignore all others. Pretending that's not true is obtuse or dishonest. Take your pick.

It's not corroborated by all you know of Iraq. We'ver already seen you reject evidence.

And even if everything you claim here is true, and let's assume for a moment it is, it doesn't support your claim. At all. That's the problem.

So what are we left with? Either you're taking a piss or you're completely unaware of what conclusions are logical extrapolations of the data and what conclusions are wild speculation. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the first one since I don't generally just assume people are this silly.

And of course, if you were serious and wanted to be taken seriously you wouldn't try to sound like a life coach. "Despite the fact that your entire family was killed in that crash, you will persevere, because you're world is a wonderful place today and every day. Celebrate their death with a dance around the table." It's drivel and in any debate forum, debate class, scientific forum, science class, political science class, or pretty much an forum where the purpose is analysis and not flowery speeches, you'd be laughed out of the place. Given that this is a debate forum, one must assume you're hoping to be laughed at.

I could see it working if not for wanting half of Jerusalem given to the Palestinian state and giving half of Israel to the Arab nations. Gotta hope something comes of it, but for my money, the Saudis are as crooked and fucked as Iran, they just put on a happier face about it.

I hope Olmert sticks to his guns about the '67 borders while making concessions in other areas. Nasser's chest thumping cost the Arab world back then, and any look at a map is a grim reminder: Don't fuck with Israel. Giving back the Sinai, Golan, and half of the Negev would be self-defeating for Israel, and seen as a HUGE victory in the Arab mindset.

As always, it's a very delicate situation. Hopefully even a little bit of willingness to listen and discuss will make a different.

Source?

All the information was acquired from polls posted on http://worldpublicopinion.org/.

These polls reveal a number of starling, yet uplifting, facts. For example, 77% of Iraqis believe that deposing Saddam was worth it. 97% of Iraqis "strongly disapprove" of attacks on civilians -- I guess your "ideological superiority" theory is thrown out of the window by this piece of evidence. Terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda are also despised -- 94% of Iraqis hold a negative view towards it. It is exactly this attitude which permeates practically every tier of Iraqi society upon which I base my opinions.

You suggest I read a blog? How about I just talk to my fellow Marines?

Are they Iraqis?

And of course, if you were serious and wanted to be taken seriously you wouldn't try to sound like a life coach. "Despite the fact that your entire family was killed in that crash, you will persevere, because you're world is a wonderful place today and every day. Celebrate their death with a dance around the table."

What are you talking about? I never said that.

Are you Manwë or Ulmo? :p

Mandos...*nods*

:p

I think that we are making headway in the Middle East. But like FreedomAndGlory said, the media is not focusing on it. Although, we could proceed through parts of it a little more carefully. We are making mistakes. I think if we were going to help the region we need to find out what the people REALLY want. That's what's hurting the move to democracy.

All the information was acquired from polls posted on http://worldpublicopinion.org/.

Ah, I see. So you want me to find and source your evidence for you? How about you link to the study so I can analyze their methodology and see if it's useful? For example what questions did they ACTUALLY ask? What was their wording? I can totally skew a poll with the right wording.


These polls reveal a number of starling, yet uplifting, facts. For example, 77% of Iraqis believe that deposing Saddam was worth it. 97% of Iraqis "strongly disapprove" of attacks on civilians -- I guess your "ideological superiority" theory is thrown out of the window by this piece of evidence.

No. It's really not. I'll go slow? Most Americans would say they don't agree with attacks on civilians either. However, ask them how many of them agree with dropping the bombs on Japan. You'll find that the numbers are both in the majority, which should be impossible.


Terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda are also despised -- 94% of Iraqis hold a negative view towards it. It is exactly this attitude which permeates practically every tier of Iraqi society upon which I base my opinions.

Again, you don't get it, but I'll try to explain, the fact that they dislike terrorism does not suggest they would consent to being governed by a group they disagree with. In fact, it makes no suggestion relative to this at all.

Here's the evidence that matters. Without protection from the people, widespread terrorism HAS to fail. That's precisely why their isn't a problem with it here and most plots get exposed. They are difficult to hide without popular support.

So one of two things is going on -

1. The polls don't mean what you're claiming.
2. Or the polls are eroneous.

It's really that simple. But, hey, I'll tell you what. If there is no popular support for terrorism, at all. Then who are they recruiting? How are they hiding it? Why aren't they being turned in? Can you name ANYPLACE in the world where terrorism and freedom-fighting (depending on which side you agree with) was succesful for even a short while without some level of popular support? I'll wait.

Are they Iraqis?

No. But they're real, and I can confirm who they are and that they've been there. They're likely as Iraqi as your bloggers.

What are you talking about? I never said that.

Yes, I know. It's a parody of the way you talk about this. It's pretty common in debate. I didn't realize I needed to explain that. I'll be more careful to explain how debate works in the future.

I think Saudi is starting to freak about the Iranians. They're trying to tie up as many loose ends in their corner of the region as possible, before they go into full-confrontation mode.

More than that, they want to get their hands untied, something that can't be accomplished under their current relationship to the US.

All the information was acquired from polls posted on http://worldpublicopinion.org/.

These polls reveal a number of starling, yet uplifting, facts. For example, 77% of Iraqis believe that deposing Saddam was worth it. 97% of Iraqis "strongly disapprove" of attacks on civilians -- I guess your "ideological superiority" theory is thrown out of the window by this piece of evidence. Terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda are also despised -- 94% of Iraqis hold a negative view towards it. It is exactly this attitude which permeates practically every tier of Iraqi society upon which I base my opinions.



Are they Iraqis?

What are you talking about? I never said that.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/166.php?nid=&id=&pnt=166

is the link you're looking for. By the way, you are awesome. I was literally wiping the tears from my eyes earlier. Sapling. Priceless. Comedy gold, baby.

I really hope it works. Time will tell.

All the information was acquired from polls posted on http://worldpublicopinion.org/.

These polls reveal a number of starling, yet uplifting, facts. For example, 77% of Iraqis believe that deposing Saddam was worth it. 97% of Iraqis "strongly disapprove" of attacks on civilians -- I guess your "ideological superiority" theory is thrown out of the window by this piece of evidence. Terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda are also despised -- 94% of Iraqis hold a negative view towards it. It is exactly this attitude which permeates practically every tier of Iraqi society upon which I base my opinions.

You know, I thank you for providing that site as it allows me to post this (http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/250.php?nid=&id=&pnt=250&lb=brme).

Yes, I know. It's a parody of the way you talk about this. It's pretty common in debate. I didn't realize I needed to explain that. I'll be more careful to explain how debate works in the future.

Funny, because I thought ad hominen attacks were logical fallacies that aren't used in debate. Luckily, I have a superb teacher such as you, O Wise One, to show me the true way.

Funny, because I thought ad hominen attacks were logical fallacies that aren't used in debate.

Ad hominem means to the man. I parodied your claims and how they were presented, not you. You know the difference, no?

Luckily, I have a superb teacher such as you, O Wise One, to show me the true way.
Talking about what you know or don't know or pointing out the flaws in your claims or the style of your argument are all part of debate. Rational and important part of debate.

Now, dropping arguments like hot rocks every time they get uncomfortable is a big no-no, but you knew that before you started doing that, no?

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/166.php?nid=&id=&pnt=166

is the link you're looking for. By the way, you are awesome. I was literally wiping the tears from my eyes earlier. Sapling. Priceless. Comedy gold, baby.

Yes, a study which conclusively shows that the reaction to the invasion is completely different for the different sects, a study that shows that those who are part of the sect controlling the current government agree with it, and who are not don't. Pretty much confirms EVERYTHING I said. I wonder how the results of said study would be if we put in a Sunni government?

Doesn't the Saudi peace plan insist on right of return for the Palestinians? That's a non starter. It's the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state by demographics rather than terrorism.

Ad hominem means to the man. I parodied your claims and how they were presented, not you. You know the difference, no?

Ah, yes, what a fine distinction to make. "What? No, I wasn't ridiculing you! I was just ridiculing everything you stand for."

Doesn't the Saudi peace plan insist on right of return for the Palestinians? That's a non starter. It's the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state by demographics rather than terrorism.

The original plan simply required a fair solution to the refugee problem, a revised version changed this to a 'Right of Return', the latest one seems to have returned to the original wording.

Ah, yes, what a fine distinction to make. "What? No, I wasn't ridiculing you! I was just ridiculing everything you stand for."

You do know what debate is, yes? If you place an idea up or even enter a debate, then your statements and how you present them are up for grabs. How much conviction you have in those statements does not make debating them personal, no matter how much you want them to be.

I know you don't know the difference, but, trust me, it's not even slightly subtle. I was pointing out the absurdity of claiming that hyperbolous and emotional statements are logical and pertinent. If this feels personal to you, then perhaps you're not cut out for debate.

As Neu Leonstein pointed out, this plan has been around since 2002. So don't act all surprised about it's existence.

Half a million fled, half a million dead, the entire country cought in civil war between multiple factions. Flourishing indeed.
Actually, the number of refugees are a wee bit higher:
Syria says it is home to 1.2m Iraqi refugees, with up to 800,000 in Jordan.
...in adition to about 1,9 million Internally Displaced People.

Doesn't the Saudi peace plan insist on right of return for the Palestinians? That's a non starter. It's the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state by demographics rather than terrorism.
Economic compensation for their losses instead could be one way to go. I.e. buy an end to the problems.

As Neu Leonstein pointed out, this plan has been around since 2002. So don't act all surprised about it's existence.

Economic compensation for their losses instead could be one way to go. I.e. buy an end to the problems.Thanks for the correction. I don't think anyone's acting all surprised about anything but Olmert's reaction. Israel has refused to accept any notion that Jerusalem should be a shared capital. They've in fact gone so far as to legislate that it's all theirs, despite the lack of international recognition.

The return of the displaced peoples isn't feasible under any wording, and even if we ignore that economic compensation wouldn't help the displaced, it's just not feasible either, as the economy of Israel depends on their plunder. And that's also the reason the 1967 borders are out of the question.

It was the same in 2002, and I don't think I've talked to any Israelis in the interim that didn't say what I've just said. Though I've talked to a couple who wanted to disagree (just like I want to).

Thanks for the correction. I don't think anyone's acting all surprised about anything but Olmert's reaction. Israel has refused to accept any notion that Jerusalem should be a shared capital. They've in fact gone so far as to legislate that it's all theirs, despite the lack of international recognition.

The return of the displaced peoples isn't feasible under any wording, and even if we ignore that economic compensation wouldn't help the displaced, it's just not feasible either, as the economy of Israel depends on their plunder. And that's also the reason the 1967 borders are out of the question.

It was the same in 2002, and I don't think I've talked to any Israelis in the interim that didn't say what I've just said. Though I've talked to a couple who wanted to disagree (just like I want to).

Well in the end, if Israel wishes peace, it has to sort out what it is willing to sacrifice to attain that goal. The agreement has got to be quid pro quo or it's surely doomed to fail. I'm interested in what counteroffer Israel will present this time...

Oh, and my "Don't act surprised" comment was directed at the thread title more than anything :)

I hope Olmert sticks to his guns about the '67 borders while making concessions in other areas. Nasser's chest thumping cost the Arab world back then, and any look at a map is a grim reminder: Don't fuck with Israel. Giving back the Sinai, Golan, and half of the Negev would be self-defeating for Israel, and seen as a HUGE victory in the Arab mindset.
See, that's the problem though. If you keep thinking in terms of "a victory for them" whenever you make a concession, you'll never work past the current stalemate.

And Israel needs to get past it as much as anyone in the region. Their domestic politics has stagnated for years, no politician in Israel can hope to really make something last by him- or herself. Their demographics are slowly changing, they're having trouble integrating African Jews and especially Arab Israelis. The poverty rate is still pretty poor. Iran is waving a stick that is only going to get bigger with time. And world opinion is basically against Israel.

All these things can only be tackled if the country can make peace with its neighbours. It would free their hands to clean up, it would open trade to the most logical candidates - their neighbours and it would serve to normalise Israel's status as a country like any other. If you have to give up a few sandy rocks for that, I'd say it's well worth it.

See, that's the problem though. If you keep thinking in terms of "a victory for them" whenever you make a concession, you'll never work past the current stalemate.

And Israel needs to get past it as much as anyone in the region. Their domestic politics has stagnated for years, no politician in Israel can hope to really make something last by him- or herself. Their demographics are slowly changing, they're having trouble integrating African Jews and especially Arab Israelis. The poverty rate is still pretty poor. Iran is waving a stick that is only going to get bigger with time. And world opinion is basically against Israel.

All these things can only be tackled if the country can make peace with its neighbours. It would free their hands to clean up, it would open trade to the most logical candidates - their neighbours and it would serve to normalise Israel's status as a country like any other. If you have to give up a few sandy rocks for that, I'd say it's well worth it.

How can I say this? Hmm...

"Well said :)"

Yeah, that should cover it.

If you have to give up a few sandy rocks for that, I'd say it's well worth it.

I'm in total agreement with everything, especially that it shouldn't be an 'Us Versus Them' problem, except for the quoted portion. The Negev isn't just a bunch of sand and rocks anymore. Ben-Gurion's dream for making this god-awful stretch of desert bloom was realized.

There should be a high cost paid, and willingly, on all sides, but I don't think that fifty years of Israeli efforts in the Negev and Sinai, along with half of Israel itself, should be given in recompense. If anything, I have the feeling that the Arab world would say 'Yeah, thanks for that. Now, what about the rest of it?'

SOMETHING must be done, but sacrificing half of Israel's hard-won territory isn't the way. The politics of it's acquisition aside, I don't think 'giving it back' will do anything except whet appetites on the Arab side of the fence and draw their eyes into pre-'67 Israel.

Great topic, and I like the fairly reasonable tone of the posts. :) I doubt I'll have time to reply much more in the next few days, but I'll try to read.