M.Dancer Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Because Iraq is an artificial country created 100 years ago to suit the needs of Great Britain .........You wanted an opinion from any historically informed person. There it is. Iraq was created from the provinces of Iraq........... I looked, I can't find that informed opinion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Because Iraq is an artificial country created 100 years ago to suit the needs of Great Britain and now maintained to suit the needs of the US and Israel.... Oh...you mean like Canada, with France's help? Or the USA.....well not really...Great Britain didn't really "create" the US, but it did provide good reasons to boot a king in the ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drea Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 (edited) Here are some historical maps... Historical and Political Maps of Middle East Middle East after 1916 Iraq at 1923 Iraq was made from the joining of 3 separate former Ottoman vilayets (provinces). Mosul, with ties to Syria and Turkey and a history with the Kurds. Baghdad and the adjacent Shi'ite centres of An-Najaf and Kabala in the middle with ties to Persia. And Basra in the south, also largely Shi'ite but with commercial links to the Persian Gulf states and to India. This unnatural union would prove difficult to hold together. Very interesting... First Gulf War Edited August 21, 2007 by Drea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 Oh...you mean like Canada, with France's help? Or the USA.....well not really...Great Britain didn't really "create" the US, but it did provide good reasons to boot a king in the ass. Well, you're not going to believe this, but Canada came into being when the important politicians of the day rose up on their hind legs and put the whole thing together of their own free will. The important politicians of Iraq, on the other hand, are rising up on their hind legs and they aren't putting together something that looks like British colonial Iraq. Get the picture? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 The major players in determining the borders of Iraq were the French and the British who horse-traded the whole thing into existence. Read Margaret MacMillan's "Paris 1919....". Therein is the tale. The people of "Iraq" had absolutely no say in the matter. Hell, they even ended up with a King from the deserts of Jordan - duly appointed by the British, of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 (edited) Well, you're not going to believe this, but Canada came into being when the important politicians of the day rose up on their hind legs and put the whole thing together of their own free will. The important politicians of Iraq, on the other hand, are rising up on their hind legs and they aren't putting together something that looks like British colonial Iraq. Get the picture? Nope....Canada sure as hell didn't "rise up" in three years, didn't have a full consensus, didn't incorporate other provinces until later, and didn't have a re-patriated Constitution Act and Charter until 1982. By that measure alone, the Iraqis have done far more in much less time. To date, they have bested America's development timeline as well, including "civil war". In any event, nothing you have posted denies the legacy of British conquest and empire, just like Iraq. And that's OK. Edited August 23, 2007 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 A map of ottoman iraq http://www.davidrumsey.com/maps4515.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted August 23, 2007 Report Share Posted August 23, 2007 I have a question for BC2004. It really has nothing to do with the topic, I'm just curious. Why do you despise Canada so much? After reading a great many of your posts I can see that you harbour a great deal of contempt and scorn for your Northern neighbour. Almost everything you post has a derogatory tone to it. Honestly, I don't think it helps you get your point across very well. As I said, I'm just curious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 24, 2007 Report Share Posted August 24, 2007 I have a question for BC2004. It really has nothing to do with the topic, I'm just curious.Why do you despise Canada so much? After reading a great many of your posts I can see that you harbour a great deal of contempt and scorn for your Northern neighbour. Almost everything you post has a derogatory tone to it. Honestly, I don't think it helps you get your point across very well. As I said, I'm just curious. Then please get your vision checked at once. I have no beef with Canada whatsoever, but I do rise up to challenge this forum's representative examples of ignorance, myopia, projection, denial, assumption, superiority, and sanctimony. If you find this to be negative (or positive), then I have achieved my purpose, namely to nudge some out of their comfort zones. (In this thread, another member commented on a fledgling Iraq and its British roots while seemingly ignoring the roots of "Canada" (or the USA for that matter)). Such cognitive dissonance invites a challenge. There is little doubt that my "points" get across very well, or you would not be responding in this way. Like General Hillier, I revel in my role as exploder of Canadian myth, particularly when such myths are bolstered by negative depictions of America. Turnabout is fair play, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted August 24, 2007 Report Share Posted August 24, 2007 (edited) There is little doubt that my "points" get across very well, or you would not be responding in this way. Thats a rather large assumption on your behalf. Actually in my case, even though I find at times you do make very valid points, I tend to skim them at best. Not because I find them to be of no value, simply because I find the confrontational tone to be very distasteful to me. As I originally stated, I'm merely curious as to why you choose this approach, it's probably a misconception of mine but I get the impression you may be angry about several issues. As I said, it may just be a misconception on my behalf. If so, I apologize for potentially offending you. Oh, by the way, I wear glasses. As such I do tend to have my vision checked on a pretty regular basis. Thank you for your concern though, it made me feel all warm and fuzzy. Edited August 24, 2007 by AngusThermopyle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psikeyhackr Posted August 24, 2007 Report Share Posted August 24, 2007 The U.S government left behind South Vietnam and 1.1 million anti-Communist ARVN soldiers in 1973 I was in a draft lottery for Vietnam. I clearly remember watching TV in the tube room at the frat with a packed audience constantly wondering what I was going to do if I came up with a low number. The question is who is supposed to risk their lives and possibly die for someone else's stupid mistakes that lead to chain reactions of idiotic events? I watched the Fog of War documentary about Robert McNamara. At one point I busted out laughing about McNamara having an argument with a Vietnamese official about their perceptions of the war. I watched the Vietnam crap all thru high school. At the time I was wondering why anyone expected the Vietnamese to think of White Americans any differently than they thought of White Frenchmen. The existence of the United States is built on genocide. Didn't they expect educated Vietnamese to know that? The US overthrew the legitimate leader of Iran in the 50's and put in the nitwit Shah. The US helped establish and maintain Israel. So people who had nothing to do with starting this shitstorm are supposed to risk their necks limiting the damage. And most likely there is more stupid BS that has gone on behind the scenes that we don't know about. That doesn't even bring up that minor detail that I don't believe for one second that a 200 ton airliner can knock down a 500,000 ton building level to the ground in less than 2 hours. Is there a difference between Jihad, Lebensraum and Manifest Destiny? psik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 24, 2007 Report Share Posted August 24, 2007 The existence of the United States is built on genocide. Didn't they expect educated Vietnamese to know that?psik Could that be why Ho Chi Minh used the declaration of Indepence as his opening paragraph for the Vietnamese declaration of independance...because the US is built on genocide??? (SEPTEMBER 2, 1945) "All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" This immortal statement was made in the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America m 1776. In a broader sense, this means: All the peoples on the earth are equal from birth, all the peoples have a right to live, to be happy and free. http://coombs.anu.edu.au/~vern/van_kien/declar.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 24, 2007 Report Share Posted August 24, 2007 Is there a difference between Jihad, Lebensraum and Manifest Destiny? You forgot to include empire, commonwealth, and dominion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 24, 2007 Report Share Posted August 24, 2007 As I originally stated, I'm merely curious as to why you choose this approach, it's probably a misconception of mine but I get the impression you may be angry about several issues. As I said, it may just be a misconception on my behalf. If so, I apologize for potentially offending you. Because it works.....this format invites pithy responses laced with sarcasm, wit, and abstract thinking. Through such execution and style, I have learned much about Canada, countering complaints about American ignorance of their "neighbour". This is an ironic bonus, even if revealing Canadian warts is "distasteful" to you. I will admit that it has become rather mechanical, having amassed a standard library of rejoinders for any CanAm peeing contest offered up by other members obsessed with American domestic and foreign policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusThermopyle Posted August 25, 2007 Report Share Posted August 25, 2007 Because it works.....this format invites pithy responses laced with sarcasm, wit, and abstract thinking. Through such execution and style, I have learned much about Canada, You think? I think not. One only has to look at your verbal posturing to realize that it is no more than empty rhetoric designed to impress and stifle debate. By the way, what exactly makes you feel like you are witty? I have an idea! Lets all of us who find you to be witty raise our hands. Come on guys! Raise your hands!!! What an overwhelming response. Good night, I have to work tomorrow and this is entirely too much time spent on you. It occurs to me that you might just want to think about how you interact with others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 25, 2007 Report Share Posted August 25, 2007 (edited) Good night, I have to work tomorrow and this is entirely too much time spent on you.It occurs to me that you might just want to think about how you interact with others. Time you chose to spend....like a moth to a flame. Are you the resident playground monitor, bolstering a false sense of superiority by passing judgement on me and my posting style? I shall sally forth as always, not giving a damn for what you think about posting "style" or how one "interacts with others". I suppose expecting the same "courtesy" from you is unreasonable, but this hasn't been a waste of time...add another one to the smug pile. Perhaps the warring factions in Iraq would accept your advice? LOL! Edited August 25, 2007 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted August 25, 2007 Report Share Posted August 25, 2007 Nope....Canada sure as hell didn't "rise up" in three years, didn't have a full consensus, didn't incorporate other provinces until later, and didn't have a re-patriated Constitution Act and Charter until 1982. By that measure alone, the Iraqis have done far more in much less time. To date, they have bested America's development timeline as well, including "civil war".In any event, nothing you have posted denies the legacy of British conquest and empire, just like Iraq. And that's OK. Well the original American flag only had 13 stars did it not? Iraq has made no progress at all politically. The entire country looks like "Fort Apache, the Bronx". When the Fathers of Confederation got together and founded the country there was no civil war. No violent upheaval. Your comparison of Iraq to Canada, or the US for that matter, is specious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 25, 2007 Report Share Posted August 25, 2007 Well the original American flag only had 13 stars did it not? Iraq has made no progress at all politically. The entire country looks like "Fort Apache, the Bronx". When the Fathers of Confederation got together and founded the country there was no civil war. No violent upheaval. Your comparison of Iraq to Canada, or the US for that matter, is specious. Wrong....much of Iraq is as "peaceful" as Toronto, Detroit, or L.A. Iraq had a constitution faster than the Americans and much, much faster than Canada. Women and slaves could not vote in Canada or America...not so Iraq. America would have one helluva civil war long after making "progress". "Specious"?...only to you. Think outside the box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted August 25, 2007 Report Share Posted August 25, 2007 (edited) Wrong....much of Iraq is as "peaceful" as Toronto, Detroit, or L.A. Iraq had a constitution faster than the Americans and much, much faster than Canada. Women and slaves could not vote in Canada or America...not so Iraq. America would have one helluva civil war long after making "progress"."Specious"?...only to you. Think outside the box. Iraq is only peaceful inside the green zone. Everything else is up for grabs. Is that the box you are thinking of? The civil war in Iraq is going on before your very eyes. How are you missing it? Edited August 25, 2007 by Higgly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 25, 2007 Report Share Posted August 25, 2007 Iraq is only peaceful inside the green zone. Everything else is up for grabs. Is that the box you are thinking of? No, I was thinking of the 18,000 American homicides, very few by IED or car bomb. So "peaceful". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psikeyhackr Posted August 25, 2007 Report Share Posted August 25, 2007 Could that be why Ho Chi Minh used the declaration of Indepence as his opening paragraph for the Vietnamese declaration of independance...because the US is built on genocide??? Why don't you compare the dates of the events? What did the Founding Fathers know about the Trail of Tears? It might be nice if most Americans believed in the document too. We might not have invaded Vietnam. It is curious that 30 years after that war about capitalism our American economists can't tell us what we lose on depreciation of automobiles each year. 230,000,000 cars, that should amount to a significant piece of change. psik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted August 25, 2007 Report Share Posted August 25, 2007 (edited) It is curious that 30 years after that war about capitalism our American economists can't tell us what we lose on depreciation of automobiles each year. 230,000,000 cars, that should amount to a significant piece of change. O my God! A fellow iconoclast! Hallelujah brother. I am delivered! Let the bells ring out and the banners fly. Feast your eyes. It's too good to be true but it is here. Another iconoclast! God bless you, whoever you are. Edited August 25, 2007 by Higgly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 27, 2007 Report Share Posted August 27, 2007 We might not have invaded Vietnam. To my knowledge, America didn't invade Vietnam. They were there by invitation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 27, 2007 Report Share Posted August 27, 2007 It is curious that 30 years after that war about capitalism our American economists can't tell us what we lose on depreciation of automobiles each year. 230,000,000 cars, that should amount to a significant piece of change.psik I'm not too sure when or where the war about capitalism occurred, but I guess we won. I also suspect you have never posed that car question to an economist, but I believe an accountant would be a better person to answer it. Every make of car depreciates at an average given rate. X% for the first year, Y% for the next year and so on. Finding a figure that illustrates what that amount is would be very hard. What use that number would be I don't know. Everything (except real estate) depreciates; fridges, stoves, cowboy boots, underwear..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted August 27, 2007 Report Share Posted August 27, 2007 Wrong....much of Iraq is as "peaceful" as Toronto, Detroit, or L.A. Iraq had a constitution faster than the Americans and much, much faster than Canada. Women and slaves could not vote in Canada or America...not so Iraq. America would have one helluva civil war long after making "progress"."Specious"?...only to you. Think outside the box. Much of Iraq is also devoid of any population. Saying that Royal Oak (a suburb of Detroit) is peaceful therefore Detroit doesn't have a murder problem is nuts. ...over 16,000 people have been murdered this year in Iraq, and even the so called peacefull areas are subjected to daily IED attacks and shootings. The major differece between the Peaceful north and south is, in those areas the attacks are one or two a day while in the Sunni triangle they come in dozens and dozens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.