Why I Despise Bush's Presidency.....Rant...

[Copernicus]

the biggest reason to despise Bush's Presidency is that he has been impolitic enough to actually give Shrillary a chance

[mrick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Shooting the looters would have stopped the looting of essentials and alienated even earlier the population.

[/ QUOTE ]
You don't know what you are talking about...
The Arab culture and Arab history show that ruling with an iron fist works. Feel free to provide historical examples where shooting looters is not effective. In any culture

[/ QUOTE ]I wrote that, yes, shooting looters would indeed stop the looters! So, you don't know what you're talking about.

I also wrote that stopping those looters (who were mostly looting essentials, ie stuff that was truly needed and not jacuzzis) should not have been the priority of the peacetime administration. I already outlined that another course should have been followed. It's funny that when the shoot-to-kill policy followed instictively by the American military (which like every military it is trained to KILL and not tend to gardening) FAILS, some red-faced, frustrated, gung-ho superpatriots demand more shoot-to-kill. LOL [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

BTW, dear Felix : The police work undertaken by the American Army was bound to fail because it did not have any support from the local police and there was no state infrastructure in place. (The US destroyed the infrastructure, and then wanted the infrastructure to perform! Kinda tough.) America should have left ALL those lowranking "Baathist fascists" in place and order them to keep the peace. Yeah, I know it's kinda hard for you warlovers to accept this but you'll have to swallow it. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

And you'd be surprised how swiftly the PO-LICE changes sides and obeys the NEW ORDER, when left to its own devices, dear Felix. In any culture... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The biggest source of weapons for the insurgents seems to be the American ammunition given to the Iraqi state!

[/ QUOTE ]
I doubt you even know which end of a barrel the bullet leaves a gun. The Iraqi army uses Warsaw Pact ammunition, not NATO ammunition.

[/ QUOTE ] I am of course referring to the current situation and not the Iraq-Iran war or whatever you wanna go on about. Currently, the American armed forces, in case you haven't heard, is supplying the Iraqi armed forces with a crapload of materiel for which the American taxpayer is paying something close to a billion dollars every month. A lot of that money is not been accounted for. A lot of that materiel too. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

And by the way...
[ QUOTE ]
[blablabla about "geopolitics"]....the USA
provided intelligence and relaxed embargo restrictions against Iraq which was the correct play to do against a possible Iranian takeover of Iraq.

[/ QUOTE ]LOL Here's a wrench for your gearbox :Which side was Israel supporting, arming and helping with intelligence, and quite strongly too, in the Iraq-Iran War?...


[ QUOTE ]
You assume that most Shias support Sadr...
I would be surprised if Sadr had 10% support from the Shia population. But 10% armed with guns and a willingness to murder is enough to cow the other 90%.

[/ QUOTE ] I did not claim that MUKTADA AL SADR enjoys the support of "most Shias". I claimed that killing him, as was idiotically suggested, would alienate the Shias (yes, most Shias), because he is one of them and even if he is not supported, he is not exactly hated by the Shia population at large. Same as happened with HEZBOLLAH recently : you have a "terrorist organisation" being admired even by ultranationalist Christians such as the PHALANGISTS on account of HEZ being attacked by ISRAEL and "standing up to it"...

All in all, your "proposals" amount to just about a big fat zero of worth. Not as funny as reading Ann Coulter but almost as funny as Richard Perle. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]