NationStates Jolt Archive

Maliki tried to retract from his declarations to a German magazine that he'd like the troops out by...

...claiming interpretation error.

Here we are, trying to make ends meet, and that turd throws us under the bus!

Translators: Maligned. Misunderstood. Surrounded by friggin' IDIOTS!

Maliki tried to retract from his declarations to a German magazine that he'd like the troops out by...

...claiming interpretation error.

Here we are, trying to make ends meet, and that turd throws under the bus!

Translators: Maligned. Misunderstood. Surrounded by friggin' IDIOTS!

Link? Coherent sentences? Point?

Say wha...?

Link? Coherent sentences? Point?

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/07/maliki-timeline/

As a translator, albeit a beginner, that infuriates me. It's like a guy shooting someone and then claiming they were the victims of malpractice!

Link?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008063195_obafghan21.html

Coherent sentences?

Maliki said his previous statement about wanting US troops out was an error on the part of his interpreter.

Point?

I believe Heikoku is an interpreter, and is saying that interpreters often get screwed, which is true.

Was the OP lost in translation?

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/07/maliki-timeline/

As a translator, albeit a beginner, that infuriates me. It's like a guy shooting someone and then claiming they were the victims of malpractice!

Ah, okay. Context and calmness. Thank you. I get it now.

ASSHOLES!!!

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008063195_obafghan21.html



Maliki said his previous statement about wanting US troops out was an error on the part of his interpreter.



I believe Heikoku is an interpreter, and is saying that interpreters often get screwed, which is true.

Got it. Thanks for the assist!

I believe Heikoku is an interpreter, and is saying that interpreters often get screwed, which is true.

Beginner translator, I don't have what it takes to interpret yet, but still.

Ah, okay. Context and calmness. Thank you. I get it now.

ASSHOLES!!!



Got it. Thanks for the assist!

Sorry, forgot to add an "us" there, in my anger. :p

I suppose it's possible...

...but seriously, if he doesn't want Iraq to look like an American Manchukuo, he needs to get some balls and stand up for his decisions even if they're unpopular with the US government. If his people want us to leave, he should have no problem saying so.

As far as I know der spiegal released the tapes of the interview which prove the translation was not wrong.

As far as I know der spiegal released the tapes of the interview which prove the translation was not wrong.

Well, they ran out of messengers, and are now aiming their shots at the interpreters.

Maliki tried to retract from his declarations to a German magazine that he'd like the troops out by...

...claiming interpretation error.

Here we are, trying to make ends meet, and that turd throws us under the bus!

he did no such thing. the bush administration tried to retract it for him.

Well, nothing clears up "translation errors" like a Blackwater squad pointing a gun at your head or the populace.

he did no such thing. the bush administration tried to retract it for him.

Oh, goodie. :p

Was the OP lost in translation?*sniffs around heartily for Scarlett*

If I were to swat Maliki with pies for twenty minutes, how would you interpret that?

If I were to swat Maliki with pies for twenty minutes, how would you interpret that?

That the insurgency has switched from bombs to Bozo?

That the insurgency has switched from bombs to Bozo?

Would that make them more dangerous or less?

If I were to swat Maliki with pies for twenty minutes, how would you interpret that?

I'd interpret his screams as "More! More! Whip me, mister Big-d*ck Hassam!"

Would that make them more dangerous or less?

Well, clowns are nature's terrorists.

Well, clowns are nature's terrorists.

That suggests that we use fear to advance our agen....

....okay, well played. :p

see, its all in the translator - wen Muhammed says crucify us unbelievers the problems all in the translation!
(Quran 5:33)

http://www.engrish.com/detail.php?imagename=moms-mustache.jpg&category=Signs/Posters&date=2008-04-07
Not too far off track ...

Maliki tried to retract from his declarations to a German magazine that he'd like the troops out by...

...claiming interpretation error.

Here we are, trying to make ends meet, and that turd throws us under the bus!

Translators: Maligned. Misunderstood. Surrounded by friggin' IDIOTS!

You're not supposed to use "under the bus". That's my catch phrase!

In any case, it's clear that Maliki (and the Iraqi government's) timeline is a few months out more than Obama's.

Not that an adjustment either way couldn't be made, but Maliki is thinking that 16 months is a tad fast for his tastes.

Maliki tried to retract from his declarations to a German magazine that he'd like the troops out by...

...claiming interpretation error.

Here we are, trying to make ends meet, and that turd throws us under the bus!

Translators: Maligned. Misunderstood. Surrounded by friggin' IDIOTS!

Didn't Obama blame the interpretors for his "Jerusalem undivided capital of Israel" statement? I am sure the Messiah could not have made such a statement. He does not make mistakes according to the media.

Didn't Obama blame the interpretors for his "Jerusalem undivided capital of Israel" statement? I am sure the Messiah could not have made such a statement. He does not make mistakes according to the media.

And if he does, he has complete license to revise any and all statements completely.

Only the Obamessiah has the right to do this.

Didn't Obama blame the interpretors for his "Jerusalem undivided capital of Israel" statement? I am sure the Messiah could not have made such a statement. He does not make mistakes according to the media.

I and others gave credible sources to my claims.

Will you give any source for your claim that he claimed that INTERLINGUAL INTERPRETERS made a mistake in TRANSLATING WHAT HE SAID?

Edit: Did your homework for you, kiddo. Google gives me NO references to such an event ever happening in the first pages. So, next time, kindly think better before wasting the time of us adults because YOU HAVE NO POINT! Unless you're actually mistaking interpreter for "anyone that makes a given assessment of something said", in which case you'd be claiming pundits are interpreters and in which case you'd have no CLUE.

And if he does, he has complete license to revise any and all statements completely.

Only the Obamessiah has the right to do this.

Funny and telling how you take any claim against Obama at face value (and expect us to) but require sources when the statements are against McCain, against bombing random Arabs, and so on.

Funny and telling how you take any claim against Obama at face value (and expect us to) but require sources when the statements are against McCain, against bombing random Arabs, and so on.

Even when I source it, you still say it's not sourced. I haven't required you to source your McCain stuff.

I haven't required anyone to source the BS they pipe on about Arabs, either.

I've spent a lot of time reviewing Obama's "refinement" of his statements (the Jerusalem one was classic).

Right now, he really needs to say the surge worked, but he can't because he was so fucking against it. He still says he wouldn't have done the surge.

Well, if we hadn't, the place would be far more fucked up than it is now. Where's the logic in that?

Oh yeah, well, it's really made a difference, but I still would have done the stupid thing.

Yeah, gets my vote every time.

Well, if we hadn't, the place would be far more fucked up than it is now. Where's the logic in that?

If you hadn't invaded, which McCain supported and has said he doesn't regret, the place would be far LESS fucked up than it is now.

Wanna talk judgment?

I'd interpret his screams as "More! More! Whip me, mister Big-d*ck Hassam!"

That was our prom theme.

If you hadn't invaded, which McCain supported and has said he doesn't regret, the place would be far LESS fucked up than it is now.

Wanna talk judgment?

Actually, in a few years, it's going to be more prosperous and more stable than it was under Saddam.

A lot of the infrastructure "missing" in places like Basra, etc., was not caused by the US, but either from the Iran-Iraq War or outright "not fixing anything" because Saddam spent the money on weapons and himself, or paying huge bribes.

We've been rebuilding all of that.

I guess you thought it was fine that Saddam could off 300,000 people on a whim, and pile the bodies in the desert.

Actually, in a few years, it's going to be more prosperous and more stable than it was under Saddam.

I guess you thought it was fine that Saddam could off 300,000 people on a whim, and pile the bodies in the desert.

1- Bush made that claim when the war began. It should be "more prosperous" RIGHT NOW.

2- So you favor invading The Sudan? Belarus? Turkmenistan? No? I guess you think it is fine that all those dictators can do all those awful things. Now I'm ordering you to cut this kind of tripe out. And do it you will, because you know fully well that I'm better at this than you are.

1- Bush made that claim when the war began. It should be "more prosperous" RIGHT NOW.

2- So you favor invading The Sudan? Belarus? Turkmenistan? No? I guess you think it is fine that all those dictators can do all those awful things. Now I'm ordering you to cut this kind of tripe out. And do it you will, because you know fully well that I'm better at this than you are.

Plenty of Democrats think we should invade the Sudan (all those Save Darfur bumper stickers aren't Republicans).

Yes, to Sudan, but only if the whiners stop whining.

Plenty of Democrats think we should invade the Sudan (all those Save Darfur bumper stickers aren't Republicans).

Yes, to Sudan, but only if the whiners stop whining.

What about Belarus? Turkmenistan? Thailand? Should we invade those too? Or you're "okay" with what goes on there? I'm using your lack of logic here, DK.

Sorry, forgot to add an "us" there, in my anger. :p
I thought you meant he was throwing up under the bus.

Actually, in a few years, it's going to be more prosperous and more stable than it was under Saddam..

One day monkeys will evolvedwings, and the human race will be only kept in existence for experiments in their Monkey Labratories.


A lot of the infrastructure "missing" in places like Basra, etc., was not caused by the US, but either from the Iran-Iraq War or outright "not fixing anything" because Saddam spent the money on weapons and himself, or paying huge bribes..We've been rebuilding all of that..

Yeah....

Six out of eight Iraqi reconstruction projects hailed as successes by the US government are in fact failures, a US federal investigation has found.
The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (Sigir) examined works including a hospital, a barracks and Baghdad international airport
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6607039.stm

"Fewer people have access to clean water than did under Saddam Hussein, and 80% have no access to effective sanitation, a figure comparable to sub-Saharan Africa. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6607039.stm


I guess you thought it was fine that Saddam could off 300,000 people on a whim, and pile the bodies in the desert.

I doubt it. It certainly didn't bother the American Government however. I seem to remember during an earlier campaign a certain Henry Kissinger having the Turkish borders closed to the Iraqi Kurds in 75/76 which resulted in quite a few thousand being killed and captured.

Its funny how some people like to trot out Arab and muslim deaths only when it suits them justifying more of the same or similar.....

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/07/maliki-timeline/

As a translator, albeit a beginner, that infuriates me. It's like a guy shooting someone and then claiming they were the victims of malpractice!

and how many times is something "taken out of context" by reporters and newscasters.

yet the one thing you have to realize is that for every cry of 'lost in translation' how many other translators got it right.

and how many times is something "taken out of context" by reporters and newscasters.

yet the one thing you have to realize is that for every cry of 'lost in translation' how many other translators got it right.

Uhm... I know that. I don't think I said anything against that. o_o

One day monkeys will evolvedwings, and the human race will be only kept in existence for experiments in their Monkey Labratories.



Yeah....
{Bad stuff reported}
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6607039.stm

{More bad stuff reported}
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6607039.stm

Something that is really useful and objective is very rarely, if ever, reported by either the "things are better now" side or the "things were better with Saddam" side. What do you suppose the per capita GDP did during Saddam's rule? If I were to believe anything that the "things were better then" side has to say, the country was a positive paradise to live in. I don't believe anything they say, so I looked it up.

Turns out Saddam was not a good manager of the Iraq economy. The GDP tanked from 1980 to 2000. Even with the massive help from the oil for food program, it tanked. Iraq's GDP in the year 2000 was only 47 percent of what it had been in 1980. Iraq's per capita GDP, which reached a high of $3300 in 1980, hit $546 in 1990 and stagnated at around $700 in 1999. It was $2900 in 2006. The estimates for 2007 put it at $3600 -- better than when Saddam took over.
Use http://www.nationmaster.com/cat/eco-economy and the cia world fact book.

Looks like things are going better than when Saddam was in charge. The GDP is rising and that can't be a bad thing... Unless you're a Democrat, of course.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6607039.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6607039.stm


Seriously, the one thing I can't understand is why the hell they would destroy their own infrastructure? I mean, it's not like it's hurting our occupation or anything, since our facilities are independent of the Iraqi infrastructure and the costs of it are being shouldered more and more by their government. The oil infrastructure, perhaps I could see since it's used to fund operations against their resistance groups but everything else does nothing but harm the very people they supposedly want to help in some way or another.

Honestly, it's like these idiot "insurgents" enjoy being poor, backward, and filthy...

Seriously, the one thing I can't understand is why the hell they would destroy their own infrastructure? I mean, it's not like it's hurting our occupation or anything, since our facilities are independent of the Iraqi infrastructure and the costs of it are being shouldered more and more by their government. The oil infrastructure, perhaps I could see since it's used to fund operations against their resistance groups but everything else does nothing but harm the very people they supposedly want to help in some way or another.

Honestly, it's like these idiot "insurgents" enjoy being poor, backward, and filthy...

Excellent question. It's like a playground poor-sport writ large: "if I can't be in charge, NOBODY gets to have infrastructure! So THERE!"

Uhm... I know that. I don't think I said anything against that. o_o

just trying to put it in perspective. (speaking as tech support.. and we know all about tech support... right? :p)

just as Neo Art (or was it Cat Tribe) who said, "?sure you can make fun of the Lawyers, but who do they turn to when they need legal help."

As Shakespeare said, "First thing we do, let's kiss all the lawyers." Yes, I know you've probably heard a different version quoted, but that was all the fault of the interpreters (Shakespeare sometimes wrote those big stretchy S's that look like uncrossed f's, so the mistake was understandable).

A lot of the infrastructure "missing" in places like Basra, etc., was not caused by the US, but either from the Iran-Iraq War or outright "not fixing anything" because Saddam spent the money on weapons and himself, or paying huge bribes.


And the time machines. Don't forget the time machines. It all falls apart without them, what with the infrastructure being there before we got there, and in ruins after we got there.

Obviously, he paid the bribes, bought loads of guns, and left the destroyed infrastructure as it was, then quickly put all of Iraq in his timemachine just before the US invasion, so it would look like all the infrastructure was still there.

That's why it took so long to track him down. We were looking for him in the desert, and he was in 1986.

just trying to put it in perspective. (speaking as tech support.. and we know all about tech support... right? :p)

just as Neo Art (or was it Cat Tribe) who said, "?sure you can make fun of the Lawyers, but who do they turn to when they need legal help."

I hope NO ONE ever accepts ANY JOB to translate or interpret Maliki EVER THE FUCK AGAIN.

Something that is really useful and objective is very rarely, if ever, reported by either the "things are better now" side or the "things were better with Saddam" side. What do you suppose the per capita GDP did during Saddam's rule? If I were to believe anything that the "things were better then" side has to say, the country was a positive paradise to live in. I don't believe anything they say, so I looked it up.

Turns out Saddam was not a good manager of the Iraq economy. The GDP tanked from 1980 to 2000. Even with the massive help from the oil for food program, it tanked. Iraq's GDP in the year 2000 was only 47 percent of what it had been in 1980. Iraq's per capita GDP, which reached a high of $3300 in 1980, hit $546 in 1990 and stagnated at around $700 in 1999. It was $2900 in 2006. The estimates for 2007 put it at $3600 -- better than when Saddam took over.
Use http://www.nationmaster.com/cat/eco-economy and the cia world fact book.

Looks like things are going better than when Saddam was in charge. The GDP is rising and that can't be a bad thing... Unless you're a Democrat, of course.

Yep. Everything can be described in terms of GDP. Starving millions? Good GDP? Good job! Genocide? Good GDP? Good job! Brought world peace? Hmm, your GDP is a little shaky...

Yep. Everything can be described in terms of GDP. Starving millions? Good GDP? Good job! Genocide? Good GDP? Good job! Brought world peace? Hmm, your GDP is a little shaky...
Yes, life was a paradise when Saddam and his sons ruled...

Yes, life was a paradise when Saddam and his sons ruled...

Before Team America showed up, it was a happy place. They had... flowery meadows and rainbow skies and, and rivers made of chocolate where the children danced and laughed and played with gumdrop smiles.

Yep. Everything can be described in terms of GDP. Starving millions? Good GDP? Good job! Genocide? Good GDP? Good job! Brought world peace? Hmm, your GDP is a little shaky...

When we're talking levels like this, GDP is a pretty good metric. Now, it's much less so when you get up to developed-world levels, but the difference between an income of $700/capita and $3,600/capita is something else entirely. That's the difference between starvation and extreme poverty and moving towards an industrialized, developed state. Iraq may have serious structural problems, but a more than fivefold increase in per-capita income is a big deal.

That being said, there are no statistics for Iraqi income inequality, which likely clouds the picture because a lot of that wealth is going to a few people. However, it is basically impossible that it could be any higher, or even equal to the levels when Saddam was running the country.

Yes, life was a paradise when Saddam and his sons ruled...

Reductio ad absurdum? That's the best you've got?

I'm pretty sure you're fighting a strawman of your own creation, there, my friend.

Reductio ad absurdum? That's the best you've got?

I'm pretty sure you're fighting a strawman of your own creation, there, my friend.

You haven't proven it's worse, either.

You haven't proven it's worse, either.

Worse than Myrmi's 'paradise', or your little 'wonkavision'? I don't really feel the need to even address them, to be honest.

I'm actually still waiting for you to cite your sources on the lost and stolen infrastructure thing.

Worse than Myrmi's 'paradise', or your little 'wonkavision'? I don't really feel the need to even address them, to be honest.

I'm actually still waiting for you to cite your sources on the lost and stolen infrastructure thing.

It's old news. Disorganization and violence caused the 2004 infrastructure to drop to pre-war levels (except in oil production), but it's a widely known FACT that after the 1980s, war and sanctions and Saddam's looting of the treasury to cause the Iraqi infrastructure to become dilapidated - roads, power, schools, hospitals...

We're building hospitals and schools, even though we didn't bomb any. Since we didn't bomb any, why are we building them all over Iraq? Because there either weren't any in some places, or the buildings had gone to shit in others.

It's old news. Disorganization and violence caused the 2004 infrastructure to drop to pre-war levels (except in oil production), but it's a widely known FACT


Ah, a widely known fact, eh?

Hence the plethora of sources you'll easily be able to provide?

Or, is this the kind of 'widely known fact' that's just an Argumentum ad Numeram?


...that after the 1980s, war and sanctions and Saddam's looting of the treasury to cause the Iraqi infrastructure to become dilapidated - roads, power, schools, hospitals...

We're building hospitals and schools, even though we didn't bomb any. Since we didn't bomb any, why are we building them all over Iraq? Because there either weren't any in some places, or the buildings had gone to shit in others.

War, as I'm sure you've heard, is often a messy business. Just because you don't target a hospital, doesn't mean it can't get hit. In fact, in a lot of modern wars, it's not uncommon for there to be an 'opposing force' (sometimes called 'an enemy', although that's a little combative) who actually competes against your own forces.

It's not unheard of for a 'war' between two (or more) of these forces to cause damage to infrastructure, even while they're trying to actually damage one another!

Some people, therefore, have argued that 'shit can get blown up' during wars. Even where there is no express order to do so. They have further speculated that, if you were to install an occupying force, and create an effective state of ongoing conflict, infrastructure might fall further casualty to such factors as ongoing attrition, shortage of (safe) workforce, and even just falling apart from lack of maintainence.


When reporters talk to people on the streets in Iraq (and, I'll listen to them over you, I'm afraid) one of the unexpected things we've been hearing is the kind of refrain that runs along the lines of 'at least we had electricity for more than 4 hours a day under Saddam'.

Ah, a widely known fact, eh?

Hence the plethora of sources you'll easily be able to provide?

Or, is this the kind of 'widely known fact' that's just an Argumentum ad Numeram?



War, as I'm sure you've heard, is often a messy business. Just because you don't target a hospital, doesn't mean it can't get hit. In fact, in a lot of modern wars, it's not uncommon for there to be an 'opposing force' (sometimes called 'an enemy', although that's a little combative) who actually competes against your own forces.

It's not unheard of for a 'war' between two (or more) of these forces to cause damage to infrastructure, even while they're trying to actually damage one another!

Some people, therefore, have argued that 'shit can get blown up' during wars. Even where there is no express order to do so. They have further speculated that, if you were to install an occupying force, and create an effective state of ongoing conflict, infrastructure might fall further casualty to such factors as ongoing attrition, shortage of (safe) workforce, and even just falling apart from lack of maintainence.


When reporters talk to people on the streets in Iraq (and, I'll listen to them over you, I'm afraid) one of the unexpected things we've been hearing is the kind of refrain that runs along the lines of 'at least we had electricity for more than 4 hours a day under Saddam'.

Maybe you never heard of precision weapons. Or do you think we flew over Iraq in B-17s and dropped banded high-drag unguided bombs in formation?

It fell briefly below prewar levels as of 2004 as I noted, but it has since climbed.

Rather quickly, as the GDP indicates.

During the 1990s, there were essentially no funds for maintaining the infrastructure, and precious little supplies to do so. Saddam and his sons were pocketing the money, and the sanctions which everyone thought would work were only fucking the Iraqi civilian infrastructure.

Maybe you never heard of precision weapons. Or do you think we flew over Iraq in B-17s and dropped banded high-drag unguided bombs in formation?


And... what? We've been spending all this money on troops in Iraq that are not even on active service?

Or, the slightly more likely scenario, I feel - there has been ongoing'conflict', on and off, for quite some time now?


It fell briefly below prewar levels as of 2004 as I noted, but it has since climbed.

Rather quickly, as the GDP indicates.

During the 1990s, there were essentially no funds for maintaining the infrastructure, and precious little supplies to do so. Saddam and his sons were pocketing the money, and the sanctions which everyone thought would work were only fucking the Iraqi civilian infrastructure.

Which is why 'everyone knows it'... which is why it's so easy for you to show it, yes?

I suppose it's possible...

...but seriously, if he doesn't want Iraq to look like an American Manchukuo, he needs to get some balls and stand up for his decisions even if they're unpopular with the US government. If his people want us to leave, he should have no problem saying so.

Why? So it can look like an American Nanking?

Why? So it can look like an American Nanking?

Now this is the funniest statement in the thread.

As to the statement, all I can say is, not the first time an interpreter made a mistake, that is if he did.

As to the statement, all I can say is, not the first time an interpreter made a mistake, that is if he did.

1- They didn't say what the actual original message WAS, if it was a mistake, and HOW did the guy misconstrue it.

2- Pretty hard mistake to make in most languages.

3- With such a statement, I'm pretty sure the interpreter would be smart enough to ask, and a translator to double-check.

4- The German magazine stands by it, and we're not talking about a The Sun style one.

All in all, yes, translators and interpreters make mistakes, but I highly doubt this was one.

1- They didn't say what the actual original message WAS.

2- Pretty hard mistake to make in most languages.

3- With such a statement, I'm pretty sure the interpreter would be smart enough to ask, and a translator to double-check.

4- The German magazine stands by it, and we're not talking about a The Sun style one.

All in all, yes, translators and interpreters make mistakes, but I highly doubt this was one.

I said they make mistakes but I added a qualifier at the end, if he did. Means that I am unsure so I put both of them out there in one post.

I said they make mistakes but I added a qualifier at the end, if he did. Means that I am unsure so I put both of them out there in one post.

True, true. To be sure, I wasn't disagreeing with you, just pointing out why it would be hard for that claim they made in this particular case to be true. Besides the fact that it's too darned convenient.

I can see why too but it still had to be said.

And the time machines. Don't forget the time machines. It all falls apart without them, what with the infrastructure being there before we got there, and in ruins after we got there.

Obviously, he paid the bribes, bought loads of guns, and left the destroyed infrastructure as it was, then quickly put all of Iraq in his timemachine just before the US invasion, so it would look like all the infrastructure was still there.

That's why it took so long to track him down. We were looking for him in the desert, and he was in 1986.
:fluffle:
http://www.tvscoop.tv/futurama_bender.jpg
Luv ya man

:fluffle:
http://www.tvscoop.tv/futurama_bender.jpg
Luv ya man

Uh oh, I halfway expected that to be the Area 51 episode...

*bows* :)

Uh oh, I halfway expected that to be the Area 51 episode...

*bows* :)
I'm not hearing a "no" ....

I'm not hearing a "no" ....

I'd love to stay and chat, but... I just remembered... my uncle died. It's his funeral. And, I'm the best man.

I'd love to stay and chat, but... I just remembered... my uncle died. It's his funeral. And, I'm the best man.*blinks*
...and i have to check my swimsuit. I didn't see the sense in washing it if it was already wet.