Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : New FADG. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (935)	5/25/2007 2:23:26 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4152

"Ah.. hum.. There is a government in Iraq, duly elected by 12 million Iraqis to represent them. That government has NOT requested that coalition forces leave Iraq. What "occupying" power would permit the country they are supposedly "occupying" to hold such power as to make such a request? Thus, by calling the Coalition presence in Iraq an "occupation", you're building your argument on a logically flawed foundation. Maybe that's a concept YOU "can't seem to get".. " OK, let's see if I've got this straight. One country invades another, running tanks across the country, using air strikes and destroying all forms of resistance. That country, after having defeated the defenses of the invaded country, sets itself up as the governing authority of the defeated country. Acting as the governing authority it makes laws, disbands the occupied country's army, destroys almost all institutions of government and dictates the terms through which the occupied country can "resume" self governance. (Remember how we "liberated" millions of Iraqi women?) As part of the process the occupying country spends billions of dollars. It's the only game in town and the "right" Iraqis are literally getting filthy rich by cooperating. As part of the process the Iraqi people are given an either/or choice. They've not, as you've previously stated, been given the option of voting for or against democracy. That was not a choice in the vote. They were told that they would have a certain system of government and their only choice was to vote for the people offered on the ballot. They then voted along sectarian lines. The people chosen to "represent" the people are guarded largely by foreign "contractors" because they can't trust their own countrymen. They're housed in a "green zone" that's an enclave of the invading country, walled off from the rest of their countrymen. They're riddled with corruption funded by oil revenues from their country's oil production but mostly by the billions of dollars of American taxpayer money channeled through them. They cannot leave the green zone without fear of death. So it's easy to say that "If we're not wanted there by the elected government, then we cannot impose ourselves upon them." Because those "elected leaders" don't want the Americans to leave. I think it's not too hard to understand why that would be. But a majority of their fellow Iraqis approve of the killing of American troops. And when you take out the almost unanimous American support of the Kurds, the majority of those who support the killing of American troops becomes overwhelming. So I'd say that we invaded Iraq, set up a puppet government that was foisted upon the Iraqi people and that with most Iraqis favoring the killing of their "guests," we are, in reality, an occupying force. But if you want to place form over substance, go ahead. I'll live in the real world. Ed