Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by Ectopic Tiger, Apr 9, 2004.
From Bill O'Reilly
problem is... unless our govt realizes these guerillas attacks are from iran/syria/lybia, etc. and not an uprising and treating it as such, then we havent learned anything as we claimed. These countries are using this as an opportunity to fight us in limited numbers and attacking us at our weakest points. These arent iraqis doing the major damage..... We need to assess it for the conflict it is then go from there...otherwise we will just keep on losing 2-10 soldiers a day forever.
Great post and great point...
And all this time I thought it was an Iraqi Cleric named al Sadr leading this thing. I must be reading the wrong papers and watching the wrong news! Tell me, where can I get the REAL news on this?
Bill O'Reilly. Right. What a bullchit artist!
up·ris·ing n. A sometimes limited popular revolt against a constituted government or its policies; a rebellion.
in·sur·rec·tion n. The act or an instance of open revolt against civil authority or a constituted government.
The terms are synonymous. Insurrection may actually be a little more serious. O'Reilly is a word spinner and a gifted one, but he'll hoodwink you if you don't pay close attention.
So what description must we give to the Iraqi fight. Revolt, maybe? No reasonable person is fooled by these semantics.
Call it what you may, there is NO Doubt that Al Qauda, Iran and Syria are causing trouble.
Its a good thing I'm not president, I would be bombing Iran and Syria until they resembled a parking lot.
There is NO DOUBT that Syria and Iran support terrorism and will we have to deal with them sooner or later...
Anyone on the left can prove anything differently?
i dont have any trouble with the word "uprising" either. i agree with red 55.
A couple of daisy cutter bombs stops all resistance.
Red, the terms certainly are not synonomous. Reread your own definitions. An uprising is a "popular" revolt, e.g. Berlin wall event. I think his point is that the majority of Iraqis just want to live in peace and want protection from these crazed militants, but the media will have us believe that they are all attacking us. The attacks are not coming from a majority of the people.
Well, I'm in the center, which is to the left of you, Sourdough, but way right of Kennedy liberals like CottonBowl66.
And it IS a good thing that you are not president, but I admit to sharing some of your frustrations. I'm not anti-war, I'm anti-stupid war. I supported Gulf War I, the Panama invasion, the Libya bombings and the occupation of Afghaniatan. I was against the invasion of Grenada (which was in the British sphere and we didn't even notify them--really pissed them off too) I was also against the "Peacekeeping" in Lebanon which was a fool's errand and had a horrible ending.
But I think our most serious pending problems are not Iran and Syria, who can be dealt with by economic/political pressure without military action. I think we need to be gearing up for war with Korea and Pakistan, who have nuclear weapons, Osama bin Ladin, and unstable governments. Military action may be unavoidable with these countries but we are unprepared for them due to this situation in Iraq which is draining our financial and military resources at an alarming rate.