Say Anything Blog

These are the issues JM needs to push.  America has not forgotten 911 as much as the media leads us to believe..

atease

You realize, Rob, that all your latest posts on McCain start with “I’m no fan”, “I have my doubts”, “I don’t support McCain, but”, etc., and then end by praising him for whatever the post referred to. 

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

THIS ELECTION IS ABOUT TWO THINGS: WINNING THE WAR ON TERRORISM AND SAVING THE SUPREME COURT.

America never even knew what 9/11 was.  A handful of thugs organized a brilliant attack against what they think is the Great Satan.  We parried by sending hundreds of thousands of troops into a sovereign nation that had nothing to do with 9/11. 

I mean, really, wouldn’t it be cheaper for you guys to just find and invent a virus that kills all brown people?

I’m in favor of defending our country, but for crying out loud, lets fight the appropriate enemies.

You realize, Rob, that all your latest posts on McCain start with “I’m no fan”, “I have my doubts”, “I don’t support McCain, but”, etc., and then end by praising him for whatever the post referred to.

*shrugs*

I can give credit where it’s due, even if I don’t like the candidate in general.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

We parried by sending hundreds of thousands of troops into a sovereign nation that had nothing to do with 9/11.

I mean, really, wouldn’t it be cheaper for you guys to just find and invent a virus that kills all brown people?

Right.  We invaded Iraq...because Iraqis have dark skin.

I’m willing to debate the decision to invade Iraq, but not with people who are going to start out by calling me a racist.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I mean, really, wouldn’t it be cheaper for you guys to just find and invent a virus that kills all brown people?

Thank you, Reverend Wright!

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

So, you are saying that if an Extremist group of White people flew planes into our skyscrapers and government buildings, we wouldn’t hesitate to invade a neighboring white country?

Don’t fool yourself.  We kill these people with such ease and without regard because they are Brown, don’t talk like us, and don’t worship the same god we worship.  The amount of civilian casualties in this country killed directly or indirectly by U.S. and Coalition forces number in the hundreds of thousands by independent agencies.  Much fewer than Sadam himself killed.

And before you play the “Weapons of Mass Destruction,” or “Hussein needed to go down” cards, remember we are talking about 9/11 here.

Because of 911, we should pre-emptively strike where needed.  If you don’t feel this way. good for you.  Be glad that folks in leadership positions do, and they take actions to protect your right to disagree.

Oh, and the last time a white nation attacked us, we fought back and won.  When a white person blew up a building and people, we killed him after he was tried and convicted. 

I go back to what I figured out a while back, liberals are the real racists.

atease

So, you are saying that if an Extremist group of White people flew planes into our skyscrapers and government buildings, we wouldn’t hesitate to invade a neighboring white country?

Sven,

I assume you were addressing me, since you obviously don’t possess the requisite courtesy.

If there is one attribute of most liberals more contemptible than any other, it is this smarmy dishonesty that invariably begins with, “So, you are saying that...”

If I needed to someone to restate or clarify what I’ve written, and thought you were qualified to do so, I would ask.  You aren’t qualified and I didn’t ask.

Its an old liberal trick to try and reframe the question or refocus attention.  To me, its an insult.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

I assume you were addressing me, since you obviously don’t possess the requisite courtesy.
If there is one attribute of most liberals more contemptible than any other, it is this smarmy dishonesty that invariably begins with, “So, you are saying that...”
If I needed to someone to restate or clarify what I’ve written, and thought you were qualified to do so, I would ask.  You aren’t qualified and I didn’t ask.
Its an old liberal trick to try and reframe the question or refocus attention.  To me, its an insult.

Actually, I wasn’t addressing you.  Forgive me.  I should have clarified to what I was responding to:

Right.  We invaded Iraq...because Iraqis have dark skin.

This is merely an observation.  As someone else pointed out- If a white person blew up a building we would investigate, arrest, press charges, try and convict him.  Not invade a country who may share the same religion and colored people and kill them by the thousands.

This is merely an observation.  As someone else pointed out- If a white person blew up a building we would investigate, arrest, press charges, try and convict him.  Not invade a country who may share the same religion and colored people and kill them by the thousands.

When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor we invaded a nation of whites (Germany) who worship the same God as “us” (though I chaffe at the “us” part a bit given that I’m an atheist and worship no god at all).

We kill these people with such ease and without regard because they are Brown, don’t talk like us, and don’t worship the same god we worship.

We don’t kill anyone without any regard.  We regard who we kill a great deal.  We write news stories about it.  We watch documentaries about it.  We debate about it endlessly.

And the people we kill in Iraq are trying to kill us.  What’s more, we invaded Iraq because extremist Islam springs from the middle east as a region and not any particular country.  Iraq was part of the problem in that region, so we’re correcting it.

But hey, keep believing the extremist angle if that’s what you want.  It’s not true or accurate or anything other than something that exists inside your head, but we’re a free country and you can believe what you want.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor we invaded a nation of whites (Germany) who worship the same God as “us” (though I chaffe at the “us” part a bit given that I’m an atheist and worship no god at all

These were governments that attacked us, not a band of thugs.  And, I’m an Athiest too.  Nice to meet another one of the few. 

And the people we kill in Iraq are trying to kill us.

After we invaded the country.  Can you blame them?

We don’t kill anyone without any regard.  We regard who we kill a great deal.  We write news stories about it.  We watch documentaries about it.  We debate about it endlessly

We often question our motives, actions and ideals long after we act on them.  Some people have the foresight to see what we are doing now as wrong (often called Liberals), but it doesn’t get into mainstream consciousness unitl much later (genocide of Native Americans, Slavery etc.) Less than a century ago blacks had to give up their seat on the bus for whites.  A century from now we will look back at ourselves with disbelief about many things.  One of them, I’m sure will be our Imperialism and disregard for other cultures.

But hey, keep believing the extremist angle if that’s what you want.

My extremism today is Mainstream tomorrow.  Your mainstream today will be our ignorance of yesterday.

After we invaded the country.  Can you blame them?

Better to fight them there than here.  But Saddam was a sponsor of international terrorism (before you go off on a tangent, I agree that he had no direct operational ties to 9/11) and an destabilizing force in the region.

He was part of the terrorism problem - both through direct sponsorship and through the oppression of the masses - and we took him out.  Now fewer people are dying in Iraq than were being murdered under Saddam.

Meaning we’re saving lives in Iraq.  Not that you care.

Less than a century ago blacks had to give up their seat on the bus for whites.  A century from now we will look back at ourselves with disbelief about many things.  One of them, I’m sure will be our Imperialism and disregard for other cultures.

Right.  Because freeing the people of Iraq from Saddam’s cruel treachery is showing disregard for their culture.

What’s shocking is that you actually believe this crap.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Because freeing the people of Iraq from Saddam’s cruel treachery is showing disregard for their culture.

You really believe the Iraqi people are better off now?  Thats really really sad.  You might be able to make the argument that WE are better off now.  But even that is a stretch.  I might buy it though.  But I don’t think I can get myself to believe that the Iraqi’s will tell you they have it better now.  Our media coverage of the war is hilarious.  The few soldiers I have talked to that have been there say it is NOTHING AT ALL like how the media portrays it.  About 90,000 civilians have died:

Copied: An independent Iraq Body Count is an ongoing human security project which maintains and updates the world’s largest public database of violent civilian deaths during and since the 2003 invasion. The count encompasses non-combatants killed by military or paramilitary action and the breakdown in civil security following the invasion.

Data is drawn from cross-checked media reports, hospital, morgue, NGO and official figures to produce a credible record of known deaths and incidents. (more in About IBC)

Meaning we’re saving lives in Iraq.

Hardly.

Sven:

After we invaded the country. Can you blame them?

Last time I looked, the 9/11 attack preceded our invasion of Iraq by more than a year; not to mention the earlier Twin Towers bombing, Kobar Towers, USS Cole and our embassy in Nigeria.  We can even go back to the attack at the Munich Olympics and the on-going string of bombings, shootings, kidnaps and murder which continue to this day.

Islamic jihad has been at this for over a quarter of a century.

Unlike your “extremism”, the facts were valid yesterday, are valid today and will be valid tomorrow.

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

THIS ELECTION IS ABOUT TWO THINGS: WINNING THE WAR ON TERRORISM AND SAVING THE SUPREME COURT.

Last time I looked, the 9/11 attack preceded our invasion of Iraq by more than a year; not to mention the earlier Twin Towers bombing, Kobar Towers, USS Cole and our embassy in Nigeria.  We can even go back to the attack at the Munich Olympics and the on-going string of bombings, shootings, kidnaps and murder which continue to this day.
Islamic jihad has been at this for over a quarter of a century.

These are all examples of International Crimes.  Using this line of reasoning, any violent crimes committed by a person or group of people can be retaliated by sending in military force with tens of thousands of deaths due to collateral damage.  If they harbor Jihadists, help Jihadists, hell, if they look like Jihadists…

Like I said earlier: Wouldn’t it be cheaper to invent a pill that kills all brown people?  Thats where your line of reasoning is going.

He was part of the terrorism problem - both through direct sponsorship and through the oppression of the masses - and we took him out.  Now fewer people are dying in Iraq than were being murdered under Saddam.

Meaning we’re saving lives in Iraq.  Not that you care.

Rob, are you blind or are you just in denial? Just how do you know how many people were dying under Saddam? It has been estimated that over 1 million Iraquis have died since we invaded. You call that saving lives?

You really believe the Iraqi people are better off now?

Better off than they were under Saddam Hussein?  A regime that raped their women when they didn’t vote the right way?  A regime that threw people into plastic shredders for saying the wrong things in public?  A regime that engaged in genocide?

Yes, I do actually think the Iraqis are better under a government they helped create and vote into power even if it means they have to suffer the violence of extremists in order to protect it.

It’s sad that you don’t get this.

About 90,000 civilians have died

Analyzing actual numbers out of Iraq, I estimate that approximately 35,000 Iraqis were dying every year as a result of Saddam Hussein.  Probably more given the indirect impact of his social controls, etc.  If we’d left Saddam in power from March 2003 - March 2008 we’d be talking about 175,000 dead Iraqis.

That “only” 90,000 Iraqis have died during the war is a net gain of 85,000 lives.  It’s still awful that 90,000 died, but 85,000 saved is nothing to sneeze at.

As I said before, fewer Iraqis are dying in Iraq now than died under Saddam Hussein.

What’s more, we didn’t kill those 90,000 who have died.  Think about it.  What would happen if America departed Iraq immediately?  A bloodbath, undoubtedly, as the various extremist factions in Iraq vied for power.  But what would happen if the extremists stopped fighting in Iraq?

Peace, and an end to the death and suffering.

Now, Mr. Oh-So-Concerned-About-Iraqis...why do you oppose a foreign operation that has saved approximately 85,000 lives?  Why do you demand that we abandon Iraqis to more death and destruction?

You come in trying to claim the moral high ground, when really what you’re advocating is increased levels of death and destruction.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

It has been estimated that over 1 million Iraquis have died since we invaded.

That’s not an accurate number.  90,000 is more in the ballpark according to the anti-war Iraq Body Count site, and as I’ve just illustrated in the comment above Saddam was murdering more per year in Iraq before the invasion than are dying in Iraq now post-invasion.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

This from the BBC:

Poor planning, air strikes by coalition forces and a “climate of violence” have led to more than 100,000 extra deaths in Iraq, scientists claim.
A study published by the Lancet says the risk of death by violence for civilians in Iraq is now 58 times higher than before the US-led invasion.

That’s not an accurate number.  90,000 is more in the ballpark according to the anti-war Iraq Body Count site, and as I’ve just illustrated in the comment above Saddam was murdering more per year in Iraq before the invasion than are dying in Iraq now post-invasion.

That’s not entirely accurate.  You are counting deaths due to the Iran/Iraq war as murder. 

The IBC site is assuredly low.  They are only counting documented deaths.  You must realize that in war, there are many deaths that will never be documented.

By David Brown
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, October 11, 2006; A12

A team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists estimates that 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred.

The estimate, produced by interviewing residents during a random sampling of households throughout the country.

Sven, given thorough debunking the Lancet’s numbers on Iraqi casualties have received I’d think you’d be embarrassed to invoke them here.

I, for one, am certainly not going to be taking them seriously.

The best numbers we have available are 90,000, and I illustrated for you the fact that more would have died had Saddam been in power.  Nearly double.

Now answer this:

why do you oppose a foreign operation that has saved approximately 85,000 lives?  Why do you demand that we abandon Iraqis to more death and destruction?

You can’t, because you are either a) so absolutely naive about the situation in Iraq you have no idea what you’re talking about or b) do know what’s going on in Iraq but are so coldly calculating in your politics that you oppose the war simply because that’s the most convenient for your political ideology.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Sven:  Citing the Wshington Post and the BBC is like relying on Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum.  What’s next… the Huffington Post?

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

THIS ELECTION IS ABOUT TWO THINGS: WINNING THE WAR ON TERRORISM AND SAVING THE SUPREME COURT.

A team of American and Iraqi epidemiologists estimates that 655,000 more people have died in Iraq since coalition forces arrived in March 2003 than would have died if the invasion had not occurred.

The estimate, produced by interviewing residents during a random sampling of households throughout the country.

Ok, Sven.  Lancet says 1,000,000.  This other study says 655,000.  So what are we to conclude?  That it’s between 655,000 and 1,000,000 give or take 500,000 or so?

Yeah.  Really accurate and convincing.

The methodology used by Iraq Body Count is the best we have, and according to that more would have died under Saddam than have died since we invaded.

This is simply the truth, however inconvenient it is for your politics.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

I really don’t have a problem with the Post or the BBC.  The problem I have is with Lancet and these other groups that use ridiculous methodologies to come up with absurd civilian death numbers in Iraq.

That these numbers sound true to people who want to oppose the war does not make them true.

The war against illegal plunder has been fought since the beginning of the world. But how is… legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime. Then abolish this law without delay … If such a law is not abolished immediately it will spread, multiply and develop into a system.

Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

The methodology used by Iraq Body Count is the best we have, and according to that more would have died under Saddam than have died since we invaded.

Their methodology is to only count documented deaths.  This is not the best way to account for actual deaths in war and I doubt you could find any statistician who would say it is.  It doesn’t account for the people who just didn’t come home.  In a country where there are between 4 and 5 million refugees, documented deaths might not even be half.

Using this as your baseline is either ignorant or dishonest.

January 26, 2003 | JOHN F. BURNS
NY Times

Obvious article used to help justify the war:

Stalin killed 20 million of his own people, historians have concluded. Even on a proportional basis, his crimes far surpass Mr. Hussein’s, but figures of a million dead Iraqis, in war and through terror, may not be far from the mark, in a country of 22 million people.

The largest number of deaths attributable to Mr. Hussein’s regime resulted from the war between Iraq and Iran between 1980 and 1988, which was launched by Mr. Hussein. Iraq says its own toll was 500,000. Then there are the casualties in the wake of Iraq’s 1990 occupation of Kuwait. Iraq’s official toll from American bombing in that war is 100,000.

Thats at least 600,000 from War (directly or indirectly funded, or aided by the U.S. or against the U.S. anyway).  But we’ll just use the remaining 400,000 as actual deaths caused by Sadaam’s prisons and ethnic cleansing.  400,000 divided by 23 years means 17,391 deaths per year caused directly by Sadaam.  Now, lets take the low estimate of deaths caused by U.S forces since the war:  90,000 divided by the 5 years of occupation gives us 18,000 deaths per year.

There’s your answer.