Does this mean we have to invade them, too?

[Ibby]

UG, I don't care what assumptions you have about any of them, they are killing americans because we are an invading, occupying army that was not invited, not welcomed, and not prepared. If someone invaded the US, you would fight them tooth and nail. They are only doing the same.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Not welcomed? You have a memory that is shorter than your dick. The pulldown of Saddam's statue outside the Paradise Hotel in B'dad was just one example of many welcoming crowds. Now that I've reminded you of that, consider just how many other Saddam pictures got sandal-smacked -- and what that means in the Middle East. No fuckin' way could that have happened without us.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Oh, then you never saw the long shots of that crowd when Saddam got pulled down. Seems I could fit that crowd in my living room when you stood back.

[Ibby]

And half of them were Americans anyway.

The majority of Iraqis say they had things better under Saddam. They weren't free, but they had stability and safety. They had electricity, they had working oil stuff, they could go out on the street without fearing that they would be blown up. The only downside to the whole thing is that if Saddam decided he didnt like one of them, he or she was dead. If you kept your head down, you were safe.

Now, you have no such safety. People are blowing up houses, mosques, markets because of the Americans. People are not safe, and maybe will never be again.

The Americans and the Americans alone (well, okay, the Brits and allies too) took away that safety in return for the freedom to get shot at, blown up, and reduced to a statistic. Just another number in the death toll.

[yesman065]

Uh, excuse me. I don't agree with any of that Ibram. I think many Iraqi's were and still are scared, rightfully so. Most of them have known nothing other than Saddams dictatorship - they have no real concept of freedom nor what it can or will mean for them.

[piercehawkeye45]

The falling of the statue of Saddam was planned by the Americans.

Iraqis haven't had electricity, medical centers, and schools for the past five years. I would be pissed if I didn't have those too. I think that is the main reason why the turned against us. We have to keep the Iraqis happy if we want them to support us, ranting about democracy won't do shit if we turned their life into a living hellhole.

[Ibby]

I'm not saying they dont like freedom or dont need it, but a lot of them know that with that freedom comes instability, danger, death, and civil war. Under saddam, they had safety, at cost of freedom. I'm all for freedom, I think theyre better off without him (though I dont like the method of removal), but I'm just noting how a lot of them feel.

[Tonchi]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Hey shitbag, did you forget that I served and you didn't? You were never there. Honestly, if my brain worked as badly as yours, I think I'd shoot it.

And all other snarky schmucks -- when you've got more and greater medals than I do, and have more years in service, then you can talk trash about volunteering.

Oh well, you force me to mention again that my MOTHER was discharged from the US Army with a higher rank than you held. Please try to clash your sabres a little more quietly....

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Well, Tonch, at least you're being amusing this morning -- and quite voluntarily, too.

Ibram, I'm more for freedom than you are. I've seen unfreedom and I'd bleed to leave it, thank you. Take it or leave it.

[Ibby]

Forcing freedom on people is no way to act.

I've LIVED under a communist regime. You served in the military.
I have seen more lack-of-freedom than you ever will. I've been to Tibet, and seen the suffering the commies caused. I've seen the killing fields of the Khmer Rouge. I've seen the scars left by so many totalitarians.

That is why I despise you so, UG. You are exactly like them. You support American and worldwide rights being taken away. You support the scrapping of the bill of rights, as long as nobody touches your precious guns. You support American aggression against enemies who have not provoked us. You support unlimited power to the executive branch. You support unprovoked large-scale US military action on soverign soil.
You are nothing short of a new-age fascist, full of nationalism and vinegar, raring for a fight to dominate the world with US puppet states, in the name of freedom.

Originally Posted by Tonchi
Oh well, you force me to mention again that my MOTHER was discharged from the US Army with a higher rank than you held.

Totally irrelevant. In the military, just as in other walks of life, there is rank and then there is position. Most people grasp this concept just from watching television programs like M*A*S*H when they see a doctor who is a Captain and a Nurse who is a Major go into an operating room and that Major follows the Captain's orders.

I was at a US Army field hospital in Central America when a nearby military police station got fired up by domestic terrorists. Fearing an attack on the hospital, the troop Commander (HQ Co.) walked up to me and said "Sergeant 'NoBoxes', I relinquish my command to you." The full bird Colonel (physician) who was the hospital commander wasn't even a factor. I, a senior NCO and the senior Special Forces advisor in the vicinity established protocol for the security of the hospital proper and the security of the troops in the contonment area. I issued the weapons, established the fields of fire, and I gave the order to shoot to kill anyone* who breached the security protocols (*including US troops and indigenous allied troops who had never been under fire before).

I've related this experience because the troop Commander (Captain) and hospital Commander (Colonel) were both female Army officers. The only legitimate inference that can be made from your statement is that "Your mother wore Army boots." Nowadays, ironically, that is a good thing!

That was; however, your mother and NOT YOU! Using someone else's accomplishment to assert your position reflects second world ethics. I've seen others who, like you, have spent extended periods of time dealing with second worlders and have had their judgment unduly influenced by second world ethics. The change is so gradual that the person is almost never aware of it. I've seen this in you on multiple occasions which is why I have discontinued PM correspondence with you. In another forum we both frequent, even though I enabled my option not to receive PMs, you used your capability as forum Administrator there to send a PM through to me. Don't do that anymore. I have no use for people, who have adopted second world ethics, in my personal life. Live and let live.

Originally Posted by Ibram
Forcing freedom on people is no way to act.

(from the mouths of babes)

[Tonchi]

Originally Posted by NoBoxes

That was; however, your mother and NOT YOU! Using someone else's accomplishment to assert your position reflects second world ethics.

I'm surprised at your response. You missed the original conversation here, over a year ago, which led to my remark. I was speaking totally tongue in cheek, which even UG realized, and harkened back to that previous (unrelated) thread where UG was fulminating about his medals and rank. When somebody else asked him what that rank actually WAS, it turned out that he was not exactly as "high up" as his rhetoric would make you believe, whereupon I made my remark originally. Poking UG with sticks is a time-honored tradition here and is definitely is more satisfying than getting into a rabid shouting match with him the way others have.

As for your other evaluation, I am even more surprised. Because YOUR opinions and suggestions were always appreciated and forwarded on, it is not easy to understand why you simply didn't communicate your feelings directly if you saw a problem instead of just slamming the door and then venting here. Even people who genuinely hate me and wish me serious harm will tell me so in a PM, you couldn't?

Originally Posted by Tonchi
I'm surprised at your response. You missed the original conversation here, over a year ago, which led to my remark.

I'm surprised at your recollection. You related that story to me in a PM; though, not quite in the same context you present it here. I thought the remark improper at that time; but, didn't say anything because it was history and I didn't expect that mistake to be made again.

As for your other evaluation, I am even more surprised. Because YOUR opinions and suggestions were always appreciated and forwarded on, it is not easy to understand why you simply didn't communicate your feelings directly if you saw a problem instead of just slamming the door and then venting here.

The change in venue was necessary. There, you are in charge and correspondingly less flexible (in the direction in which you guide both the forum and the club). I've lost confidence in your vision for them based upon some of your decisions and stated positions. My aforementioned evaluation of the underlying cause for your disposition warrants discontinuation of personal correspondence; however, I'm still posting here, I'm still posting there, and I will continue to interact with you in both places - out in the open.

Sound principles were applied to this decision; however, I'm not going to elaborate on them. Going back to an earlier level of our interaction works for me. You may choose to ignore me if you wish. Rest assured that I won't do anything to undermine your authority there; but, I will speak my mind here regardless of the consequences to you. Now, aren't you glad I chose to "vent" (as you so simplistically put it) here?!

[Ibby]

jeez, both of you just shut up already!

[Griff]

The photo nobody saw: