Skip to main content

So what is the opinion on the "immediate withdrawl". Many conservatives argue that we have to stay "until the job is finished".

The ones over at theblackrepublican.net are some scary folks. ConFed is a liberal compared to these guys. I really think that they are white. Big Grin
_______________________ "Morality cannot be legislated but behaviour can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart but they can restrain the heartless." Martin Luther King.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

We should go!!!

Go!!!

Go!!!

Western countries created the mess that is Iraq, beginning around 1914.

The former Ottoman states (Wilayat) of Mosul, Baghdad, and Al Basrah (now called Iraq) are three disparate areas that were placed under the rule of Hashimite King Faisal (imported for his Western friendliness), from the Hijaz region of Arabia after being induced to fight on the side of the British against the Turks for the reward of sovereignty.

Besides the geographical differences, the newly named Iraq (actually an old name reborn) was a complicated ethnic and religious mix. Particularly incensed about the boundries established by Western powers were the Kurds, who had no desire to be ruled from Baghdad. In the south the tribesmen and Shi's had a similar resistance to central control. Everyone in the region resented the false lines of demarcation that cut off Kuwait, a "mini-state" they believed to be a part of their country. The faux borders also limited access to the Gulf's waters.

In establishing their rule over Iraq (with the blessing of the League of Nations), the British layed the ground work for the current violent instability. Iraq wound up as a testing ground for the use of British aircraft against guerrilla fighters and their villages (a Winston Churchill production). Throughout the the 1920s, 30s, 40s and most of the 50s Iraq was bombed from the air and had their first experience with the use of poison gases (against them).

That is a clue as to what Western imperialists mean when they say they only want democracy to spread. What they really want is to run the region, and above all else, maintain access to its oil.

Too many people think that war and colonizing in the interests of economic gain are okay. I say it is not. What is the difference when it is done on a small scale? Racketeering. And, when it's done by individuals it's called stealing, aggravated robbery, homicide (for profit)... etc.
I definitely don't think an "immediate" withdrawal would be a good idea ... for anyone concerned.

A gradual pullout, with about a six month timespan ... I'm very much in agreement with.

Bush's plan is to stay in Iraq until the end ... but the end of what? When is whatever we're doing finished? If he can't answer that question, then conceivably it's now or never. Roll Eyes
quote:
Originally posted by Fine:
IMHO -- THERE WAS NEVER ANYTHING WRONG IN THE FIRST PLACE...IN GOING TO WAR WITH IRAQ...AND KILLING POOR INNOCENT PEOPLE...THEN CALLING THEM INSURGENTS WHEN THEY FOUGHT BACK!

FINE


You say that there was "NOTHING WRONG" because YOU ARE NOT THERE.

I am sure that some WHITE FOLKS in the NORTH back in the day that said THERE IS NOTHING WRONG IN JIM CROW MISSISSIPPI. PULL THE TROOPS.

quote:
Originally posted by Isome:

Why not? We were and remain the focal point of violence because we are occupiers. What would six more months months of occupation achieve?


Using YOUR LOGIC (or lack there of) we should pull the Police out of certain inner city neighborhoods because CLEARLY they are more of the focus of demonstrations than the PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY COMMITTING THE CRIMES THERE.

Benton Harbor, St Petersburg, LA - all recent riots that were Police focused.

PULL EM OUT. Let the Hip Hop artists use their influence on the masses to maintain control of these cities. (and MAKE you stay there as well so you can get a dose of reality to crash your theory)
quote:
Originally posted by MidLifeMan:
The ones over at theblackrepublican.net are some scary folks. ConFed is a liberal compared to these guys. I really think that they are white. Big Grin


And what do you say about the Black folks that post on TheDemocraticUnderground.com, Democrats.com and in truth just about every other Black oriented message board? Since their quasi-socialist policies sound just like Ted Kennedy and in many cases Fidel Castro WE CAN SAY "THEY SOUND WHITE" as well, right?

If their policies are "working in the best interests of Black people" I have yet to see it. They might be handing out fish but they are CERTAINLY not conducting FISHING LESSONS.
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

And precisely WHO is "conducting fishing lessons" and what are the results of those actions?


There are PLENTY of fine programs who are "teaching kids how to fish".

former football great Jim Brown has a good program for mentoring mostly Black kids. Even your ideological enemy Jesse Lee Peters has a good program called B.O.N.D. that goes into the community and applies a comprehensive set of solutions to kids in his program. Many churches throughout the country have programs that extend beyond Sunday School and engage young people with character building activities. And of course we have the Boy Scouts.

We still need more PARENTS to do their part and allow these other groups to only suplement what the kids receive at home.
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:
Out!!! On EbonyRose's rationale.

This society needs a 'strongman' construction for the next generation, at least.
...
Hopefully, that 'strongman', likely to be Cheruba (sp) will not be abusive.

PEACE

Jim Chester


You're referring to Chalabi. He & his cronies played Cheney and his warmongering cronies for fools. He was also accused of providing Iran intel about the U.S. Whatever blowback that results with his installation is well-deserved.

Cultural arrogance, which is white supremacy adopted by sadly conflicted non-whites, says that only "we" can fix what we continue to screw up after all these decades, when in fact, we cannot fix it or we would have done so already.

Our invasion, based on our lies, has created a common goal and a common enemy (our ouster and us) for secular and Muslim fundamentalist Iraqis. History is repeating itself because we refuse to learn from it. Outside of the toll in human life it continues to take, there are more dire financial consequences. And, with financial instability comes political unrest.

It [Iraq] started out with financial instability because of Britain -- under the Anglo-Iraqi Treaty of 1922 the Iraqis were required to contribute to the Ottoman Public Debt Administration, the debts of the liquidated empire to the invading powers. Further, the British demanded they be paid for the "military equipment, stores and operations against the Turks, as well as the cost of building a military railway that had absolutely no commercial value to Iraq". Finally, they demanded the Iraqi government spend at least 25 percent of its revenues on defense"”a slick way of saying they would have to militarily suppress the Iraqis who refused to submit to British rule. Ultimatley, Faisal had to pay the British to stay in power and the Iraqi people bore the financial burden of Britain's imperialism.

We have voided contracts with other countries (meaning Iraq will not have to pay others, but neither will it be paid) and we have no record of millions or billions of gallons of oil that was supposed to generate revenue for Iraq's reconstruction. Clearly, we're repeating a pattern that, in the end, creates a picture we refuse to live with.

A blast from the past that may sound familiar:
    From Gertrude Bell -- a woman who did not believe women in Britain should vote, but believed that she was qualified to esentially be the ruler behind the ruler in Iraq --

    On June 27 1920, she was writing: "In this flux, there is no doubt they are turning to us." In fact, the Shia tribes of the entire middle Euphrates rose in revolt the next month, and hundreds of British soldiers and as many as 8,000 Iraqis were killed before it could be suppressed.
quote:
Originally posted by Isome:
Why not? We were and remain the focal point of violence because we are occupiers. What would six more months months of occupation achieve?


Well, there are a few reasons. First of all, unlike in Bush's mind, this is not a game. We are talking about real lives ... American and Iraqi. You can't just do some kind of "put 'em in, take 'me out" on a whim thing like it's a game of chess. Life and death situations are on the line. And, yes, we went in there with no clue of nothing, but, in regards of what to do ... but, I don't think we need to pull out the same way. Some thoughtful process of what really needs to be done now that we have totally f***ed up everything over there needs to be put in order.

Secondly, consideration for what will happen to/with those ordinary Iraqi citizens needs to be thought about. If you remember what Daddy Bush did - he went over there, promised those people if they fought Sadaam we would fight with them, they did ... and we left them high and dry. To add insult to injury, we did nothing when Sadaam gassed them for doing what WE asked them to do. Will that happen again if we do the same thing?? Of course, Sadaam is no longer in power to inflict that same kind of torture on those people, but, will those terrorist just take his place and do the same things? Or, when we leave, will all the Iraqis jump up and hug each other and sing kumbaya around the campfire??

Third, I do believe that EVERYBODY has a responsibility to take responsibility for their actions. Regardless of who you are and what that action is. And immediate pullout would say -- or rather be -- just like going into a china store, breaking a set of dishes, and feeling like you're not responsible for the loss. I'm sure that if it were your china store, you would definitely feel like some kind of compensation was in order.

I'm not saying that I believe we can "fix" what we have broken in Iraq. It is a mess beyond belief really, what is going on over there. And we aren't living it here, so it's much easier to put a pretty little bow on it and say "it's going to be okay". We are forcing democracy where I don't believe such a thing will work. Some other form of governance for the Middle East is in order, because they're form of society and living has never been condusive to a "democracy" type standard. But, we do owe them a solution. What the hell that might be ... I have no idea! But somebody needs to think of something. Roll Eyes

Six months of withdrawal would give us time to see what is going to happen as we leave, not when we leave. It would give us a chance to adjust and to see how much good (or bad) us leaving them to fend for themselves would do. It would enable a PLAN (which is a foreign concept to this whole operation!) which is something we should have had from the beginning and certainly would be more effective than what we're doing now.

I guess in short, an immediate pull out would be just as shortsided, brainless, immature and destructive as what GWB did by going in there the way he did in the first place. And that was the maximum amount of stupidity that needs to be dedicated to this situation.
You're referring to Chalabi.---Isome

Thanks for the help.

I think Chalabi did his country a favor. He is what I see patriotism being all about.

The 'Bush Empire', and Bush II in particular, is not and has never been, about helping Iraq.

I am for getting out because we have no national interest in being there. It is ASL about the oil!!!!!!

The bad in Iraq is for Iraq to fix. As long as they KEEP IT TO THEMSELVES.

AND...as quiet as it's kept, we DO NOT need the oil.

We have all the energy resources we need INCLUDING keeping the petrochemical industry if that is what has to be.

All this 'oil' thing is about vested PERSONAL interests.


PEACE

Jim Chester
quote:
Originally posted by Isome:

On that we can agree. They're not children who require our guidance in how to run their country. When we learn keep our weapons to ourselves there will be less violence the world over.


Isome:

You sound like Alsadir, the leader of the Suni rebels who now says he is going to work with the government. Last year during an interview with "60 Minutes" he told the story of how Saddam killed his father and oppressed the people of the country. He then said 'By the grace of Allah, Saddam has been removed'.

Somehow in his LOGIC (or lack thereof) he could not make the connection that it was the US's INVASION that had toppled Saddam and allowed for the people of the country to have this opportunity to pick a government of their own choosing. In fact he continued his fighting against the very forces that opened up this opportunity for his people.

NOW after many bombs and gun fights - he is working WITH the government that was born out of the opening that the US made for him.

DOES THIS SOUND RATIONAL?

You both suffer from the complex of SKIPPING OVER and NOT MENTIONING EVENTS that DON'T FAVOR your THEORY as you arrive at a conclusion.

What YOU call "guidance" I call being a similar scenario that we once saw in the American South where Union troops were pulled out too soon as an insergent force, having just lost a war could not wait to get their hands on the people who had been protected by this "invading army". African-Americans caught nearly 75 years of hell because of this. I have to wonder if you were alive just prior to reconstruction in this country what your views would be.
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
CF - your reference was Democrat versus Republican. What are the Republican fishing lessons that have proven results in the black community?


Well MBM - since you like to play "opposing sides" so frequently I figure that since Unions have been so favorable to "Black Interests" then the entity that typically sits at the other side of the negotiating table must be the opposing force - that being the corporations.

With this reference I say that the corporations and those who run them have provided plentyful "fishing lessons" to the Black community. As a matter of fact - if you bothered to listen to the audio report that I posted about Camden NJ you would have noted the critical importance that corporations played in developing the economic infrastructure of these great northern cities and how the Black standard of living flourished while these corps were around.

Funny enough that when the corporations departed the standard of living degraded.....YET it is the corporations that receive the most vile attacks in the ideolological frame work of some people. Rarely do I see them successfully recreating the economic and educational environment via their way of doing things that these evil corporations who have policies that the "Republicans" seem to advance have been successful at achieving for many Americans.

Again I ask you, MBM, if you were focused on achieving a certain outcome for Black people "By Any Means Necessary" would you be willing to alter some of your ways of thinking because time has shown that they have not moved you closer to your end? Are you more committed to your IDEOLOGY or your OBJECTIVES is the real question for you. Thus far it seems pretty clear to me - outside looking in. ohsnap
quote:
Funny enough that when the corporations departed the standard of living degraded.....YET it is the corporations that receive the most vile attacks in the ideolological frame work of some people. Rarely do I see them successfully recreating the economic and educational environment via their way of doing things that these evil corporations who have policies that the "Republicans" seem to advance have been successful at achieving for many Americans.
Ummm.... That doesn't sound like the reception or offering of FISHING LESSONS (or the practice or putting to use of those lessons).

Matter of fact, you seriously failed (or, as usual, avoided) to answer the question:
What are/were the Republican fishing lessons...?

Sorry, corporations that employed people don't amount to FISHING LESSONS especially given the way you presented your scenario.
quote:
when the corporations departed the standard of living degraded
Hmmm.... Sounds like you're preaching dependence: "Corps are good for you. As you can see, you need them. Cause when they're gone... Look at what happens."


RHETORIC MAN!! I GOT YOUR WOLF TICKETS!!!
Oh and I can give you some argument making FISHING LESSONS for a small fee. Hey, and I'm a good guy. As bad as you need them, I could charge you a fortune.

FISHING LESSONS = the critical importance that corporations played in developing the economic infrastructure of these great northern cities... lol

You really do have something with self-hatred, huh? You always say things to contradict, conflict or otherwise complicate the BULLSHIT CLAIMS you make. No wonder why you try to avoid questions. You know you just don't know how to answer them - i.e. lack of basic cognitive skills. But every now and then you try to be brave but only go to prove how much you truly hate yourself (by never adequately supporting/defending/substantiating your claims).

Hate yourself because you never do yourself any favors. You stab yourself in the back the more and more you talk!

quote:
  • "Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetime""”Author unknown

  • "Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you will not have to listen to his incessant whining about how hungry he is.""”Author unknown
  • Your thing about the corps. sounds like the former on both counts. Yet, you must always speak IN DEFERENCE. I guess you're the only person here (between you and MBM, for one) who's involved in business as a profession. Roll Eyes
    Last edited {1}
    quote:
    Hmmm.... Sounds like you're preaching dependence: "Corps are good for you. As you can see, you need them. Cause when they're gone... Look at what happens."


    This is PLAIN DUMB of you to say.

    This is on par with MBM's claim that since I was an employee of the government that I am equivalent to a person receiving Welfare from the government. The key concept being that I was TRADING my skill and labor in exchange for a pay check. A person receiving Welfare is benefiting from the fact that they live in a nation that has certain standards of living and this check represents the nation's attempt to lift them up to this standard.

    (or more causticly put - They are benefiting from the fact that their daddy insemiated their momma in a country that has a particular standard of living that they are able to consume)

    ******
    Poor Nmaginate. A little boy inside. He is left to attempt to pick apart what I say rather than put forth free standing concepts of his own.

    If he were REALLY DEEP he would not have made this comment: "Corps are good for you. As you can see, you need them. Cause when they're gone... Look at what happens."

    Instead he would make note of the SYSTEM and how these corporations are nothing more than entities that have several functions. They produce products or services that are in demand by the market. They give their workers the ability to exchange their labor for salaries that they are able to live off of. These corporations serve as stores of value with their shares being traded on the stock market with people CAPITALIZING on their increasing value.

    Even Noah The African can admit that his city of Detroit was built upon the backs of the big 3 auto makers. What is it going to take to bring Nmaginate (and Isome) into the real world?
    DUDE, you introduced the idea... the concept of FISHING LESSONS. But, being the PUNK (and the pussy) that you are, you just can't manage to ever back up your rhetoric.

    quote:
    Instead he would make note of the SYSTEM and how these corporations are nothing more than entities that have several functions. They produce products or services that are in demand by the market. They give their workers the ability to exchange their labor for salaries that they are able to live off of. These corporations serve as stores of value with their shares being traded on the stock market with people CAPITALIZING on their increasing value.
    And none of that says anything about FISHING LESSONS.

    Had you said something to the effect that these corps. teach and train people, Black people with the skills to build, run and maintain their own businesses and corporations then... then you would be talking about FISHING LESSONS. Merely having a job does not amount to a FISHING LESSON.

    The Key Concept in a FISHING LESSON - training/teaching a person to have a do-it-yourself skill - is undermined by the idea of yours that talked about the standard of living going down after such corps. left. If I'm a corp. and I teach people en masse How To Fish, when I'm gone only poor fishing holes or seasons should "degrade" their standard of living - i.e. their ability to [continue to] "trade their skill (hmmm... skill the corp must teach in order for it to be a LESSON from that "Republican" [infused] entity) and labor for a pay check.

    You only go to prove that you are just PLAIN DUMB and a plain, little pussy-fied PUNK!

    quote:
    Even Noah The African can admit that his city of Detroit was built upon the backs of the big 3 auto makers. What is it going to take to bring Nmaginate (and Isome) into the real world?
    Hmmm... And what will it take for you to have a fuckin' CLUE!!

    Nothing I have said has been anti-corporation (or pro-corporation because that was not what I was addressing). I have, however (as usual), deconstructed your BULLSHIT and shown how it is BULLSHIT. You opened your big mouth and said:
    If their policies are "working in the best interests of Black people" I have yet to see it. They might be handing out fish but they are CERTAINLY not conducting FISHING LESSONS.

    And then the best you can do is talk about fish via jobs handed out by corporations?? As if corporations are a Republican enterprise?

    Needless to say we're still waiting for actual FISHING LESSONS... or you can cite where an unconventional working definition of the term was made.
    quote:
    Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:

    This is on par with MBM's claim that since I was an employee of the government that I am equivalent to a person receiving Welfare from the government.


    That's just plain intellectually (and otherwise) dishonest. You talk forever about not relying on the government, yet you did so yourself for your very livelihood.
    quote:
    Originally posted by Nmaginate:
    You know you just don't know how to answer them - i.e. lack of basic cognitive skills. {...never adequately supporting/defending/substantiating your claims).


    In reading that, no real claim was made after stating the already well known fact of poverty in former manufacturing hubs of the North. There was, however, an implication made, but not a specific argument. I notice that is always a precursor for conversational ratholes that one repeatedly attempts to drag people into.

    Black ideology had no causal effect on the migration of manufacturing from the North to the South. IRB's (industrial revenue bonds) became the weapon of choice for southern states to lure manufacturing companies from the high-wage northern states. The South already had cheap labor, with IRBs they also offered huge government subsidies (public monies) for private corporations at taxpayers expense. This was a major issue between the south & the north beginning in earnest in the 1950s, and legislation to mitigate the damage they caused to nothern cities was being legislated as late as 1986.

    The decimation of the economies of northern cities of predominately Black folks has no nexus to the ideology of the Black masses. To claim otherwise is more than mendacious, it is delusional and indicative of one who has but a tenuous grasp of the issue.
    quote:
    Originally posted by MBM:

    That's just plain intellectually (and otherwise) dishonest. You talk forever about not relying on the government, yet you did so yourself for your very livelihood.
    Yeah, one would think that CON-Feed would be strictly a private sector man. Instead, he's just RHETORIC MAN! Able to evade simple questions in a single disingenuous, conclusion jumping bound.

    quote:
    Even Noah The African can admit that his city of Detroit was built upon the backs of the big 3 auto makers. What is it going to take to bring Nmaginate (and Isome) into the real world?
    lol lol

    I guess when you're a such a huge Intellectual Deficit as CON-Feed always is... you would have to make up shit as quickly as possible to ever even have a chance in your own mind that you can even compete.

    I repeat (for CON-Feed):
    Nothing I have said has been anti-corporation (or pro-corporation because that was not what I was addressing). I have, however (as usual), deconstructed your BULLSHIT and shown how it is BULLSHIT.

    "Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetime"

    By your own account, the corporations that have come and gone have fulfilled that FISHING LESSON role... HOW???
    quote:
    Originally posted by Nmaginate:
    quote:
    Originally posted by MBM:

    That's just plain intellectually (and otherwise) dishonest. You talk forever about not relying on the government, yet you did so yourself for your very livelihood.
    Yeah, one would think that CON-Feed would be strictly a private sector man. Instead, he's just RHETORIC MAN! Able to evade simple questions in a single disingenuous, conclusion jumping bound.


    It's called feeding on the public teat! When there's a bunch of 'em, it's called "pigs at the trough."
    quote:
    That's just plain intellectually (and otherwise) dishonest. You talk forever about not relying on the government, yet you did so yourself for your very livelihood.


    So you choose to continue with this foolishness.

    You are saying that ALL GOVERNMENT WORKERS are "government dependants" despite the fact that they are ENGAGING IN TRADE with the government? (Their labor and skill for a salary)?

    This is the height of dishonesty MBM. (As usual the typical lackies are standing right behind you in support.)

    Once again - Do you not see a fundamental difference beween an employee of the government or a company that provides goods and services to the government (Microsoft, Georgia Power, etc) versus a person receiving a SOCIAL SERVICES check from the government because America has certain standards of living that the people seek to uphold. Thus NOTHING is asked of this Welfare person where as the government employee is asked to WORK in exchange for his paycheck.

    If you don't see a difference I am inclined to understand the challenges that confront you as you attempt to relate to the real world.
    quote:
    Black ideology had no causal effect on the migration of manufacturing from the North to the South. IRB's (industrial revenue bonds) became the weapon of choice for southern states to lure manufacturing companies from the high-wage northern states. The South already had cheap labor, with IRBs they also offered huge government subsidies (public monies) for private corporations at taxpayers expense. This was a major issue between the south & the north beginning in earnest in the 1950s, and legislation to mitigate the damage they caused to nothern cities was being legislated as late as 1986.

    The decimation of the economies of northern cities of predominately Black folks has no nexus to the ideology of the Black masses.



    Hummmmmmm. Having scanned my posts I ask that YOU find where I said that "Black people's ideology destoryed the Northern economy".

    Secondly BLACK PEOPLE WERE NEVER THE MAJORITY BASE of Industrial workers in the north. The Black middle class was, however, created in large part due to the good salaries that these jobs paid.

    I question how you can make use of the word "weapon" in your story about how some of these manufacturing firms had shifted their production to the "Right To Work" states in the South. It is particularly funny since just last week I talked with the mother of a family friend who told us about her husband's employment at the US Steel plant near Birmingham Alabama. I guess he, a Black man was one of the people who has obviously benefited from the use of these "weapons". (In the same way that you are now benefiting from the weapons used against the Native Americans as America was settled by the European. ohsnap)

    I wonder in your personal economy if you don't make use of the WEAPON called newspaper advertisements to do comparison shopping as you look for prices for items that you seek to purchase, looking for the lower cost so you can have money left in your pockets. Please tell me the fundamental difference between you seeking lower costs for your consumption of goods and these companies that you frequently demonize seeking lower costs for the labor component that they "consume" as part of their production of COMMODITY goods?

    We can look at Greensboro South Carolina to see the impact of attracting a major manufacturing anchor to the area. Years after attracting BMW to the area the region is now booming. I do not recognize the place from the way it was 10 years ago. Parts suppliers to BMW have set up shop around the plant. The local university has benefited. The workers having more money in their wallets now eat and shop at one of the many malls and restaurant districts that now line Interstate 85 through this corridor. There is little doubt, Isome, that if YOU were the government strategist designing the response to a solicitation for the construction of a major manufacturing plant - YOU WOULD BE FIRED FOR HAVING DESTROYED THE SEEDS TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
    quote:
    Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:
    quote:
    That's just plain intellectually (and otherwise) dishonest. You talk forever about not relying on the government, yet you did so yourself for your very livelihood.


    So you choose to continue with this foolishness.

    You are saying that ALL GOVERNMENT WORKERS are "government dependants" despite the fact that they are ENGAGING IN TRADE with the government? (Their labor and skill for a salary)?


    Listen, YOU are the one with the deep aversion to government. Not me. It's just very curious how your aversion stops just on the other side of you getting a check from them. You know you actually display a traditional conservative approach here. Bush talks about wanting smaller government - but then grows it in strategic areas so as to pad his pockets. You have this aversion to the government being a solution to anyone yet suppressed your feelings just long enough to get a paycheck from them. Roll Eyes

    Either the government is an appropriate part of the human solution or not CF. Which is it? How could someone with the feelings you have about the institution of government feel comfortable enough to seek employment there? It just doesn't make sense - unless like many - self-interest is really what drives your decisions. If so - that's cool. Just don't try to front that you have these well thought out political principles, when in reality you don't.
    quote:
    Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:
    Hummmmmmm. Having scanned my posts I ask that YOU find where I said that "Black people's ideology destoryed the Northern economy".


    quote:
    ...when the corporations departed the standard of living degraded.....YET it is the corporations that receive the most vile attacks in the ideolological frame work of some people. Rarely do I see them successfully recreating the economic and educational environment via their way of doing things that these evil corporations who have policies that the "Republicans" seem to advance have been successful at achieving for many Americans.


    Again:
    quote:
    In reading that, no real claim was made after stating the already well known fact of poverty in former manufacturing hubs of the North. There was, however, an implication made, but not a specific argument. I notice that is always a precursor for conversational ratholes that one repeatedly attempts to drag people into.
    :: Conversational Rathole ::

    Question -
    quote:
    Originally posted by MidLifeMan:
    So what is the opinion on the "immediate withdrawl". Many conservatives argue that we have to stay "until the job is finished".


    Response -
    quote:
    I am sure that some WHITE FOLKS in the NORTH back in the day that said THERE IS NOTHING WRONG IN JIM CROW MISSISSIPPI. PULL THE TROOPS.


    Response -
    quote:
    PULL EM OUT. Let the Hip Hop artists use their influence on the masses to maintain control of these cities. (and MAKE you stay there as well so you can get a dose of reality to crash your theory)


    Response -
    quote:
    If their policies are "working in the best interests of Black people" I have yet to see it. They might be handing out fish but they are CERTAINLY not conducting FISHING LESSONS.


    Response -
    quote:
    You ...blah blah .

    What YOU call "guidance" I call being a similar scenario that we once saw in the American South where Union troops... blah blah


    Response -
    quote:
    ...since you like to play "opposing sides" so frequently I figure that since Unions have been so favorable to "Black Interests" then the entity that typically sits at the other side of the negotiating table must be the opposing force - that being the corporations. ... [Additional evidence of explicitly implying Black ideology is to blame for poverty in predominately Black Northern cities.]


    Response -
    quote:
    ...(or more causticly [sic] put - They are benefiting from the fact that their daddy insemiated [sic] their momma in a country that has a particular standard of living that they are able to consume)


    What's the topic again? Oh' yeah:

    So what is the opinion on the "immediate withdrawl".

    But the responses from that one will invariably contain personal mischaracterizations, hostile derision, presumptions of opinion and wild leaps of logic. When responded to in kind, the next response is increased antagonism, and finally a self-righteous proclaimation of oh' so honest intentions.
    quote:
    Listen, YOU are the one with the deep aversion to government.


    Please detail for me where I have ever stated my aversion to government?

    I am opposed to DEPENDENCE on government transfer payments.

    There is a big difference between having your trash collected, the law enforcement function and the development of and enforcement of standards for housing instruction VERSUS an otherwise able bodied person receiving a Welfare check for an EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME as his life wilts away never developing skills that would grant him employment.
    Maybe a line by line clarification is needed to shift your mistaken interpretation of my comments.


    quote:
    ...when the corporations departed the standard of living degraded...

    This goes without saying. The jobs left and the standard of living degraded.

    quote:

    ..YET it is the corporations that receive the most vile attacks in the ideolological frame work of some people.


    Again - No specific reference to some BLACK IDEOLOGY. I do say that it is a FLAWED IDEOLOGY that is held by some people who are Black but White folks, socialists, etc hold these same flawed theories.

    In your mind Isome - as I evaluate it's working order based on what you produce here - it is the corporation, operating in their own best interests toward profitability that cause pollution, exploitation of labor and other negative attributes that only government can step in to fix.

    My fundamental point is that if GOVERNMENT is the answer then why can't the GOVERNMENTS in these same cities that are under discussion seem to reform themselves to their previous standing when the corporations were thriving?

    As quite at it is kept Pittsburgh was one of the environmentally filthy cities there was in the USA when the manufacturing operations were in full steam. Many folks were getting paid but the economic choice they made was to have the environment to suffer a bit.

    quote:

    Rarely do I see them successfully recreating the economic and educational environment via their way of doing things that these evil corporations who have policies that the "Republicans" seem to advance have been successful at achieving for many Americans.


    Again - no reference to this BLACK IDEOLOGY that you have claimed.

    In fact it could be argued that the policy that was in the "Best Interests" of Black people was the policies that allowed the corporations to prosper and the unions to work to grab a larger slice of the pie that would have otherwise went into the owner's pockets or distributed to the shareholders.

    YOU HAVE FAILED TO PROVE THAT I MADE REFERENCE TO SOME "BLACK IDEOLOGY" THAT ATTACKS CORPORATIONS. I do make note of the policies held by the Black Quasi-Socialist Progressive Fundamentalist as THEY attempt to sell their policies as being the only viable way of thinking for Black people - relying on popularity rather than proven effectiveness WITHIN our community.
    quote:
    Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:
    YOU HAVE FAILED TO PROVE THAT I MADE REFERENCE TO SOME "BLACK IDEOLOGY" THAT ATTACKS CORPORATIONS.


    Wholly dishonest (lie).

    quote:
    I do make note of the policies held by the Black Quasi-Socialist Progressive Fundamentalist as THEY attempt to sell their policies as being the only viable way of thinking for Black people - relying on popularity rather than proven effectiveness WITHIN our community.


    An attempt at hiding the glaring admission.

    Again:

    quote:

    In reading that, no real claim was made after stating the already well known fact of poverty in former manufacturing hubs of the North. There was, however, an implication made, but not a specific argument. I notice that is always a precursor for conversational ratholes that one repeatedly attempts to drag people into.
    quote:
    Originally posted by Constructive Feedback:

    Using YOUR LOGIC (or lack there of) (you've done this -- made rude comments and assumptions -- since my first day on the board, which is why I called you a cocksucking coon.) we should pull the Police out of certain inner city neighborhoods because CLEARLY they are more of the focus of demonstrations than the PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY COMMITTING THE CRIMES THERE.


    Your analogy is flawed.

    If you don't know how to make accurate ones, then stick to more basic forms of communicating your opposition.

    Local police have jurisdiction over their respective cities. 1) One country, based on lies and misinformation, has no jurisdiction over another country. 2)When the majority of the population wants military occupiers out, the solution to their security is NOT for the occupiers to stay. (Ref my post regarding history repeating itself, all the way down to the empty phraseology used to justify occupation.)
    Isome:

    Were you on the board when my avatar had one large circle represented "All Black People" and then another circle inside of the first circle representing Blacks who are "Black Quasi-Socialist Progressive Fundamentalists"?

    The words underneath the diagram that I made noted that regardless of how large this BQPF front gets they still do not represent all Black people but are only one of many PERSPECTIVES ON BLACKNESS.

    Somehow you have a problem in distinguishing between "Black" - the physical attributes of a particular people and "Black" - as expressed through a particular ideology. (This is why you are a Fundamentalist).

    In your mind God just happened to bless you as being 100% correct on the policies that are necessary to provide salvation for Black people and then God damned me as having all the wrong answers for Black people.

    Sadly you don't offer the EVIDENCE OF WHERE SO MANY OF US STAND AS A PEOPLE as a result of THINKING in a certain way all of their lives as justification for continuing forward despite the feedback that is being provided back to them.

    Certainly no one can blame Black folks for where history has taken us to. CLEARLY we can hold those in power today accountable for where they have TAKEN US SINCE WE WERE DROPPED OFF, free to order ourselves in a way that PRODUCES as "repaired state".

    If you want to shut me up - produce EVIDENCE that PERMANENT AND LASTING CHANGE IS UPON US.

    Thus far Kevin can only show me that if we support certain programs that have White folks to change that Blacks will benefit. The fact that Asians are propsering in college in the wake of the loss of these programs should have Kevin to rethink his strategy. In his brand of fundamentalism - no one forces him to recalculate only to REDOUBLE his efforts to have AA return. (You know what they say about the fool who tries harder at the same thing while expecting different results.......) giveup
    quote:
    Local police have jurisdiction over their respective cities. 1) One country, based on lies and misinformation, has no jurisdiction over another country. 2)When the majority of the population wants military occupiers out, the solution to their security is NOT for the occupiers to stay. (Ref my post regarding history repeating itself, all the way down to the empty phraseology used to justify occupation.)


    If this is so then please tell me by what authority did the United Nations have in imposing economic sanctions upon Iraq?

    What FORMAL IRAQI GOVERNMENT CHANNEL has asked "the United States to depart their country"?

    quote:
    Iraq Foreign Minister Makes Plea For Continued Japanese Presence
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,176676,00.html

    (of course Pace or Empty will come along and say they don't trust the story because it is from Fox News but will never look to another source to validate it.)


    So Isome - do you think that the Iraqi people don't realize that under Saddam they only had one candidate to vote and that you had to be a member of the Baath Party to receive resources that allow you to survive? Now they have a government of their choosing taking power. Certainly not everyone agrees with the government but the same is the case within the United States.

    As we debate on and on it is clear that you are able to discard many of the principles that you claim to stand behind depending on the context of the situation. The fact that so many thousands of people died during the sanctions was no justificiation to realize that they were not working and a new strategy was needed to have Saddam provably comply with the UN sanctions allowing for comprehensive inspections.

    I think that it is best for you to tell us what YOU DO BELIEVE IN first before we go through real world examples that highlight the execptions that you have to your core principles.

    quote:
    Your analogy is flawed.


    No I think I am quite consistent.

    I have a consistent view on not turning a blind eye to the suffering of people by the use of POLICY to impose upon them. The UN sanctions were applied too long and they had thousands and thousands of people to die as Saddam was being "smoked out". There was no new government in place after 10 years of sanctions.

    This war - despite the costs of American lives and American dollars has brought an end to the era of sanctions and has offered the people of Iraq a chance to govern themselves.

    It is quite true that they may squander this opportunity, bowing down to the pressure of the insurgents living among them. Sadly though these were the same people who had been oppressing their own people during the years of sanctions. Now you appear to suggest that we should be listening to their demands for us to withdraw rather than the pleas of the people who know what will happen if we leave too soon before the government is able to defend itself.

    Add Reply

    Post
    ×
    ×
    ×
    ×
    Link copied to your clipboard.
    ×