Nasrallah: "If Israel wants open war, so be it"

[Plane]

<<We can't really do this [install a Mubarak-type puppet government], I never thought we could and why should our prime objective be something every thoughtfull person considers impossible?>>

Oh, but you're far too modest.  You've done it many times.  The Shah.  Mubarak.  The King of Jordan.  The King and Royal Family of Saudi Arabia.  The Emir of Kuwait.  And many other two-bit tyrants all depend on you for support and weapons and protection.  Without you, they could not continue to exist. Of course you can do this.  Have done this.  Are doing this.  Will continue to do this.  Until stopped by superior force.  Hopefully China and/or India.

[install a Mubarak-type puppet government]

That isn't what I said is it?


Install any kind of government you please , it will not have thge ability to controll the price of oil .

[Christians4LessGvt]

You've done it many times.  The Shah.  Mubarak.  The King of Jordan.  The King and Royal Family of Saudi Arabia.  The Emir of Kuwait.  And many other two-bit tyrants all depend on you for support and weapons and protection.  Without you, they could not continue to exist.

Or we could not do this when needed and allow the "bad guy" like the Shah to fall only to be replaced by another un-elected bunch of thugs that will try to build nuclear weapons that will point at Europe and send $100 million a year to Hezbollah in attempts to topple other governments! Sometimes life forces you to deal with skunks, thats a given, but always make sure if you must deal with skunks at least pick one that is pointing his squirter away from you not at you. (in others words not pointing his nukes at you) I mean DUH.

[Plane]

Anyone that can see Japan sould know what we like to have happen in that respect . The Establishment of democracy in Iraq is gonna be good for the people of Iraq and that by itself is a good attack on the root causes of poverty , discontent and violence in the Middle east .

In fairness Plane, Japan's "democracy" was little more than a sham for many, many decades at the national level. The local level was more of a democracy, true, and interestingly the Japanese often voted for extreme parties that include the communists, a party that is respected in Japan for their competence and lack of corruption (a far cry from their Chinese couterparts).

I know about that ,you could say much the same thing about the Phillipines and Korea or the first halfcentury of the US, patience is required the democracymust be a custm fit it can't be made one size fits all, but giveing power to the people is the whole point , that the people grow wise over time is the effect.

In most countries the United States absolutely has not supported democracy. From an historical viewpoint I really don't know where you get the notion that we "are lovers of democracy."

Even if we count Japan and West Germany, Italy , France , Poland ,Chezh Republic and Slovocia ,Austria , Russia , Estonia that is two? Off the top of my head I can give you many more examples of dictators we installed and democracies we dismantled to install some of them. It is a true historical myth that this country has supported democracy in its history. It has been quite the opposite.

Let's see:

Democracies we overthrew to install dictators: Chile, Greece

? didn't know about that one

, Iran

No that was England

 , Vietnam (was supposed to hold elections and we cancelled them)

?And why?Becaus half of the electorate was unable to vote against the communists?

Dictators we installed: South Korea,

? No

?  Taiwan,

? No

?  South Vietnam, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, El Salvador, Cuba, Honduras, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Panama,  Indonesia

That's just off the top of my head. We also supported the Khmer Rhouge, Haile Selassie, Saddam Hussein, numerous Pakistani juntas, China, Thailand, etc.

No, if I were an Iraqi student of history I'd have to weigh the evidence as being VERY unlikely that the United States would support a democratic government over a government that supports the economic ideals of the United States despite what form it takes.

In the past fify years the umber of Democracys went from a minority to a majority of governments , yes we were involved.

[Christians4LessGvt]

"why would anyone with a knowledge of your past conduct in the Middle East
have any reason to believe your ridiculous lies that it is "democracy" you are pursuing in Iraq?"

Because that is in fact exactly what is happening.
Are you living in fantasy land again?
8.56 million Iraqis voted in the 2005 election. (ordered by the United States)
(US also demanded women be allowed to vote and have MP seats)
Shiite Muslim Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistanti supported
the elections and is considered by many to be the most
revered and most influential leader among Iraq's 15 million Shiite Muslims.
The current gvt in Iraq got a bigger percentage of votes in the 2005 election
than your 27% Hezbollah got in it's 2005 election.









Iraq sets Oct. 1 election
Provincial voting called key reform
February 14, 2008

By STEVEN R. HURST and QASSIM ABDUL-ZAHRA

ASSOCIATED PRESS

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- The Iraqi parliament cleared the way Wednesday for provincial elections this year that could give Sunnis a stronger voice and usher in vast changes to Iraq's power structure.

The new law, which set the vote for Oct. 1, is one of the most sweeping changes pushed by the Bush administration and signals that Iraq's politicians may take small steps toward reconciliation.
 
Passage of reforms to ease Iraq's sectarian and ethnic rifts went hand in hand with reducing violence as the primary goals for the 30,000-troop surge President George W. Bush ordered early last year.

The law was bundled with a $48-billion budget for 2008 and another measure that grants limited amnesty to prisoners in Iraqi custody. The measures still must be approved by Iraq's three-man presidency council.

Kurds, who operate from a semiautonomous region in the north, insisted on the legislative maneuvering because they feared getting double-crossed on a deal that maintained their 17% share of the budget.

The elections are likely to reshape Iraq's political map. Sunnis, who sat out the 2005 voting, could claim a much stronger role in government. They have provided crucial security help by joining U.S.-led battles against Al Qaeda in Iraq and other insurgents.

Among Iraq's majority Shi'ites, the elections could be an important test of strength for rival factions fighting for control of oil-rich southern Iraq.

The law calls for the provinces to work with the United Nations on how elections will operate. Also, the measure would allow provinces to form regional bodies that would begin making many decisions now made by authorities in Baghdad.

Debate on the measure ended in an 82-82 tie, broken by parliament Speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani. On Tuesday night, he threatened to disband parliament and call early elections because lawmakers had been unable to compromise.

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080214/NEWS07/802140389/1009/NEWS07

[The_Professor]

You've done it many times.  The Shah.  Mubarak.  The King of Jordan.  The King and Royal Family of Saudi Arabia.  The Emir of Kuwait.  And many other two-bit tyrants all depend on you for support and weapons and protection.  Without you, they could not continue to exist.

Or we could not do this when needed and allow the "bad guy" like the Shah to fall only to be replaced by another un-elected bunch of thugs that will try to build nuclear weapons that will point at Europe and send $100 million a year to Hezbollah in attempts to topple other governments! Sometimes life forces you to deal with skunks, thats a given, but always make sure if you must deal with skunks at least pick one that is pointing his squirter away from you not at you. (in others words not pointing his nukes at you) I mean DUH.

Y'all are all talking from theory. I WAS THERE IN IRAN. I saw the advancement in that culture. The jobs created. The roads, yes, real pavement roads, being built. The subsidies for small businesses and on and on. And then, these THUGS got in control. Do you know that within a week, one week, they killed EVERY CREATURE in the Tehran zoo, one of the finest zoos in the world! Yeah, now THAT demonstrates culture and civilized behavior! Next time you tree huggers talk about environmental concerns, just remember that one!

[Plane]

You've done it many times.  The Shah.  Mubarak.  The King of Jordan.  The King and Royal Family of Saudi Arabia.  The Emir of Kuwait.  And many other two-bit tyrants all depend on you for support and weapons and protection.  Without you, they could not continue to exist.

Or we could not do this when needed and allow the "bad guy" like the Shah to fall only to be replaced by another un-elected bunch of thugs that will try to build nuclear weapons that will point at Europe and send $100 million a year to Hezbollah in attempts to topple other governments! Sometimes life forces you to deal with skunks, thats a given, but always make sure if you must deal with skunks at least pick one that is pointing his squirter away from you not at you. (in others words not pointing his nukes at you) I mean DUH.

Y'all are all talking from theory. I WAS THERE IN IRAN. I saw the advancement in that culture. The jobs created. The roads, yes, real pavement roads, being built. The subsidies for small businesses and on and on. And then, these THUGS got in control. Do you know that within a week, one week, they killed EVERY CREATURE in the Tehran zoo, one of the finest zoos in the world! Yeah, now THAT demonstrates culture and civilized behavior! Next time you tree huggers talk about environmental concerns, just remember that one!

I read "On the wings of Eagles " a few years ago , in it Ross Perot seemed to be trying to help the Sha set up a Social Security system, but when the Sha 's regime couldn't pay the bill , they kidnapped a few of Rosses employees instead.

I wonder what happened to that Social Security idea? No sha, no need for it.

[Michael Tee]

[install a Mubarak-type puppet government]

<<That isn't what I said is it?>>

========================================

It's pretty much exactly what you said.  First you quoted one of my posts:

<<Quote
<<Your real objective is to install a Mubarak-like government that does what you want it to do and sells oil to you at your prices. >>

Which you then answered as follows:

<<We can't really do this , I never thought we could and why should our prime objective be something every thoughtfull person considers impossible? The Oil will rise in value and decrease in availibility no matter what the politics are like. Hugo Chavez too is learning that he doesn't controll the price of oil in any real sense.>>


OK now I see the problem.  It became apparent as I was cutting and pasting.  When you said "We can't really do this," I thought you were referring only to installing a puppet government to do whatever you want it to do, and I responded to that.  Looks like you meant we can't control the price of oil by installing a puppet government, and I did not respond to that at all.

Sorry.  My mistake.

[Michael Tee]

Further to the last post, plane, I still have to respond to your point - - the goal of installing a Mubarak-type puppet regime is not, of course, motivated by a simple desire to fix the price of oil.  I was using a kind of verbal short-hand or oversimplification to make a point.  That was extremely poorly expressed and misleading.  Sorry.

The real profits to be gained from control of Iraqi oil through a puppet government are that whereas previously the Iraq National Oil Co. produced and sold its oil without foreign partners, now it will have an unwanted and uninvited partner taking a cut, as yet to be determined, off every barrel sold.  Also there is such a thing as "security of supply."  If the day comes when there isn't enough oil for everybody, the U.S. will be able to ensure that it gets served at the pump first and everyone else can share what's left.  THAT is the point of establishing a pro-Amerikkkan puppet government in Iraq.

[Michael Tee]

<<I wonder what happened to that Social Security idea? No sha, no need for it.>>

Sharia law probably provides for care of the elderly, and did so for a thousand years before social security.

[The_Professor]

But they don't.

[Michael Tee]

I was just guessing, don't know all that much about Sharia law, but I was pretty sure that it did.

How do you know that it doesn't?

[The_Professor]

There are multitudes of poor.

[Rich]

>>Sharia law probably provides for care of the elderly, and did so for a thousand years before social security.<<

>>I was just guessing ...<<

Oh brother ... can you believe this?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Charity is one of the Five Pillars of Islam. I think 10% is the recommended donation.

Mohammad preached more than throwing bombs, shooting rockets and taking hostages.

[Amianthus]

Charity is one of the Five Pillars of Islam. I think 10% is the recommended donation.

As it is with Christianity.

Guess we can rely on the church tithes to care for the elderly instead of Social Security, eh?