Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

If possible, think for one moment what it would mean for Israeli troops to fight in Iraq. TI

Posted By: Kfir on 2006-08-15
In Reply to: Why is that? - Liberal

If I need to say anymore, my suspicions will be confirmed.


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Fight terrorists where they live. Iraq=Shia OBL=Sunni
OBL last sighted in a cave in Afghanistan. Taliban power concentrated in Afghanistan...never Iraq. Iraq had secular govt. Afghanistan govt based on Sharia law.

O is not about a phoney war. He is about disarming the real terrorists who waged war on our country. He has not wavered on this message and has always been candid about his intent. He knows what he is doing. You are being disingenuous with your little veiled innuendo. Ineffective and uninformed.

BTW, SP gave us a 7th grade social studies definition of what NATO membership means. What she did not seem to be aware of is the controversy that has surrounded Georgia's aspirations to become a NATO nation. Its's really tricky business and not a foregone conclusion that it will actually happen, especially in view of its own recent aggression in South Ossetia. NATO has been cautious at best and is not terribly enthusistic about extending membership to Georgia, given the fact that it could very well touch off a litany of cold war scenarios in the region relative to those countries' relationships to Russia, both past and present. Bush has his own agendas to serve by pushing in favor of Georgia's NATO membership. Three guesses what that might be. Think pipeline. Think Oil, oil or oil. There has been a lot going on there behind the scenes in that respect with US troops in the region.

Therefore, a leader of the US versed in foreign policy might have been more forthcoming in response to Gibson's question than a simplistic 7th grade definition of a NATO's function. For example, ask Biden the same question and he could talk for hours on the subject.
Obama is calling for keeping troops in Iraq....
for how long he does not say, but that we need MORE in Afghanistan. He does not differ from McCain on that stance. Diplomacy does not work with terrorists (the Taliban were in charge there when bid Laden was parading around in the open after 9-11). Taliban = terrorists. With all due respect...you cannot negotiate with terrorists. Do you remember the horrific images of 9-11? I do. Of the Khobar Towers bombing? I do. The first World Trade Center bombing? I do... the bombing of the marine barracks in beirut? I sure remember those images.
Bush Says U.S. Troops Will Stay in Iraq Past ང

GOP Unrest Dismissed As Sign of Election Year


Well it didn't take a rocket scientist to know that this mess was not going to get cleaned up on his watch.


This statement alone lets you know Bush is out of touch and in his own bubble.  * There's a certain unease as you head into an election year, he said.* Of course GOP unrest has a lot to do with the election year because they know they will have to answer to the people on election day, not Bush.


See link.


Britain to pull troops from Iraq as Blair says 'don't force me out' sm-long article
Britain to pull troops from Iraq as Blair says 'don't force me out'

· Defence Secretary confident withdrawal will start in May
· Plan follows pressure for exit strategy


Peter Beaumont and Gaby Hinsliff
Sunday September 25, 2005
The Observer



British troops will start a major withdrawal from Iraq next May under detailed plans on military disengagement to be published next month, The Observer can reveal.

The document being drawn up by the British government and the US will be presented to the Iraqi parliament in October and will spark fresh controversy over how long British troops will stay in the country. Tony Blair hopes that, despite continuing and widespread violence in Iraq, the move will show that there is progress following the conflict of 2003.

Britain has already privately informed Japan - which also has troops in Iraq - of its plans to begin withdrawing from southern Iraq in May, a move that officials in Tokyo say would make it impossible for their own 550 soldiers to remain.

The increasingly rapid pace of planning for British military disengagement has been revealed on the eve of the Labour Party conference, which will see renewed demands for a deadline for withdrawal. It is hoped that a clearer strategy on Iraq will quieten critics who say that the government will not be able to 'move on' until Blair quits. Yesterday, about 10,000 people demonstrated against the army's continued presence in the country.

Speaking to The Observer this weekend, the Defence Secretary, John Reid, insisted that the agreement being drawn up with Iraqi officials was contingent on the continuing political process, although he said he was still optimistic British troops would begin returning home by early summer.

'The two things I want to insist about the timetable is that it is not an event but a process, and that it will be a process that takes place at different speeds in different parts of the country. I have said before that I believe that it could begin in some parts of the country as early as next July. It is not a deadline, but it is where we might be and I honestly still believe we could have the conditions to begin handover. I don't see any reason to change my view.

'But if circumstances change I have no shame in revising my estimates.'

The disclosures follow rising demands for the government to establish a clearer strategy for bringing troops home following the kidnapping of two British SAS troopers in Basra and the scenes of violence that surrounded their rescue. Last week Blair's own envoy to Iraq, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, warned that Britain could be forced out if Iraq descends so far into chaos that 'we don't have any reasonable prospect of holding it together'.

Continued tension between the Iraqi police force, the Iraqi administration and British troops was revealed again yesterday when an Iraqi magistrate called for the arrest of the two British special forces soldiers. who were on a surveillance mission when they were taken into custody by Iraqi police and allegedly handed on to a militia.

For Blair, the question of withdrawal is one of the most difficult he is facing. The Prime Minister has abandoned plans, announced last February, to publish his own exit strategy setting out the milestones which would have to be met before quitting: instead, the plans are now being negotiated between a commission representing the Shia-dominated Iraqi government, and senior US and UK diplomats and military commanders in Baghdad.

Senior military sources have told The Observer that the document will lay out a point-by-point 'road map' for military disengagement by multinational forces, the first steps of which could be put in place soon after December's nationwide elections.

Each stage of the withdrawal would be locally judged on regional improvements in stability, with units being withdrawn as Iraqi units are deemed capable of taking over. Officials familiar with the negotiations said that conditions for withdrawal would not demand a complete cessation of insurgent violence, or the end of al-Qaeda atrocities.

According to the agreement under negotiation, each phase would be triggered when key security, stability and political targets have been reached. The phased withdrawal strategy - the British side of which is expected to take at least 12 months to complete - would see UK troops hand over command responsibility for security to senior Iraqi officers, while remaining in support as a reserve force.

In the second phase British Warriors and other armoured vehicles would be removed from daily patrols, before a complete withdrawal of British forces to barracks.

The final phase - departure of units - would follow a period of months where Iraqi units had demonstrated their ability to deal with violence in their areas of operation.

Blair will tackle his critics over Iraq in his conference speech, aides said this weekend, but would decline to give a public deadline for withdrawing troops. He is expected to make several major interventions on the war in the coming weeks, before a vote on the new constitution in mid-October, explaining how Iraq could be steered towards a sufficiently stable situation to allow troops to come home.

'What we are not going to set out is a timetable: what we are going to set out is a process of developing that security capability,' said a Downing Street source. 'We don't want to be there any longer than we have to be, the Iraqis don't want us to be there any longer than we have to be, but the Iraqi Prime Minister has made it very clear that our presence there is one that is necessary.'

It was revealed yesterday that an Iraqi judge issued the warrants for the arrest of the two rescued soldiers, accusing them of killing one policeman and wounding another, carrying unlicensed weapons and holding false identification.

The continuing preparations for a military withdrawal come, however, as officials are bracing themselves for a new political crisis in Iraq next month, with what many regard as the inevitable rejection of a new constitution by a two-thirds majority in three provinces, sufficient to kill the document and trigger new elections.

The same officials believe that a failure of the controversial constitution - which Sunnis say favours the Shia majority - would require at least another year of political negotiations, threatening any plans to disengage.


AR, you can't remember what you were talking about from moment to moment.
Sorry for the late reply, I've been gone a week. Now AR, I have no problems admitting when I'm wrong about something. However, you STILL have not pointed out anything I said that was factually wrong. First you attack me for claiming R. Bennett was a partisan Republican, which I never did. Seeing that YOU were wrong, you then shifted gears to try and attack me to say that the Bennetts don't LIKE to be lumped together and that was what I really intended to do!! Just admit it!! LOL - sure I was speculating that they may share the same upbringing and philosophies, which is a very logical SPECULATION to make. I never said I didn't do that. That was the point of the whole post.

Arm yourself better next time and you might not come off looking like such a ninny.
And that statement is ridiculous, Iran and Iraq enemies, remember the Iran-Iraq war? Iraq would jus
nm
Is it any wonder that Israeli war hawks might be shaken up
by that upstart new kid on the block? I am sure the very idea of nuclear nonproliferation dialog sends shivers up their spine since until now, they are the only country in the region that has held an impressive US-backed unclear arsenal.

Nuclear nonproliferation talks with Iran from a "do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do" and "never-mind-our-nuclear-stockpiles-in-Israel" approach is not likely to go over big with Iran's negotiators. As long as we are coming at them with this truckload of hypocrisy, they are likely to just continue on their current course of nuclear arms development (that can NEVER catch up to US-backed Israel's arsenal). Nonproliferation is a two-way street, remember? Balance of power in the region currently favors Iran's current course of action, like it or not.

I can see why Israel's war hawks might be feeling a tad nervous at this point. So yeah, this is going to be a really tricky pass on Obama's part and the very idea that he not only has intent, but also has a plan of strategy makes me feel more secure.

By the way, do you guy NEVER tire of all that fear, fear, fear?
It is as much Israeli as ALSO Palestinian land...nm
nm
Israeli intelligence is far superior to our own...at this point

This man knows these things because he has been involved in Israel's intelligence community since the late 60s early 70s and is currently a consultant to the US.


Did you know that our fed gov is currently hiring like gangbusters? They are striving to improve our security as a nation. Surprise! We actually have a president who is trying to improve things! We will get attacked under Obama's watch - you can pretty much count on it. But, I suspect he will not ignore intelligence warnings beforehand - like Bush did.


I despise Olmert, as many Israeli do. However, article is not correct. TI

Much as he appears to be without experience in combat, he served with Tsva HaHagana LeYisrael, Israel Defense Forces, with the Golani Brigade.   The Golani Brigade is an Israeli infantry brigade that was formed in 1948.  It is one of the most highly decorated infantry units in the Israeli Defense Forces. He was forced to leave after an injury. 


This shows a true and disturbing lack of knowledge regarding the Israeli
Arab conflict.  You surely realise that.  I hope this was a joke....an unfunny one at that.
Bush didn't destroy Iraq. He helped to liberate Iraq.
m
I don't believe it for a moment. sm
The fact is, he WAS the face of terror.  Knowing how cohesive the Arab world is, I don't for a moment believe there were no terrorists in Iraq. 
Well, first, I don't believe that; but, let's for a moment....
assume he did call his wife that. And again assuming IF he were so silly as to call Sarah Palin that in public, he would find himself sitting on his rear in that same public, because she would probably clock him. As long as we are talking about what if's, rumors and innuendo.
Think for a moment....
If you pay 20-25% in taxes with 60K, just how much do you think someone making 250K a year pays in taxes?

Believe me, someone making that amount of money does pay their FAIR SHARE. They are in a much higher tax bracket, MUCH HIGHER, and therefore, pays MUCH MORE in taxes. I'm always amazed at how those without a clue seem to criticize those that financially make more. Since when is that a crime? If you could, I'm certain you would too and would not feel you should be penalized for a higher income.

The higher incomes are what keep our lousy government afloat in the first place.

Taxes are relative, the more you make, the more you pay.
At this very moment

I have left the room because I cannot stand listening to Arnold Schwartznegger talk about Obama's skinny legs and scrawny arms.  Schwartznegger is a proponent of the right to choose in case you aren't aware of that.  So what is he doing campaigning with John McCain.  Another thing that is just disgusting is Hank Williams Jr. grinning and nodding in the background.


I can see, I can hear.  I respect your opinion to believe what you believe.  I DO NOT believe in abortion but your McCain must not have too much problem with it if he has Schwartznegger introducing him do ya think? 


Historical moment. We have come together
nm
Wow, what a mirror moment. (nm)
nm
I realize that. But at that particular moment, they
Seeing as how there were standing there praying for her and all. And yes, I saw the video, and yes, they DID mention witchcraft.
Must be real low on issues at the moment, huh....nm
.
Agreed....my only regret at the moment...sm
...is the ton of work that just showed up on my desk from my two itsy bitsy GT accts I have, which ain't so itsy bitsy....I won't be able to be around very much for the next week, and there looks like a bunch of new topics up above, which I may have to skim later...

Take it easy....


OK, sam. Another moment in history has come to pass.
you go me ROFLMAO. LOL.
Correct if I am wrong, but at the moment this is
you can't test ANYBODY until they hold the position, can you? Having said that, there are a few things to consider here. What do you think is an appropriate response to Russia's renewed aggression of late? Does it come as any surprise that, with American military forces stretched so thin, Russia would not try to take advantage? Georgia was not aimed at Obama, now was it?

This is where viable alliances come in handy. Europe is in the neighborhood and not across the ocean from Russia. Poland, Ukraine, Georgia and other countries interested in orienting themselves toward and allying themselves with the West will naturally be viewed by Russia as open targets, vulnerable to their flexed muscles.

W has done very little in the way of preserving the value of these time-tested alliances and has held the US in the isolation that is endemic to world superpower status. A diplomat he is not and the guy seems to have a real adversion to the basic concept of diplomacy.

In stark contrast we find Obama. As far as I am concerned, he cannot get to the helm fast enough, so if anything, I take comfort in the idea that we are 76 days and counting.
I haven't but would not hesitate in a moment
The area we live in is getting overrun with thugs, drug addicts, meth heads, etc. Robberies are on the rise and a lot of them happening in the middle of the night while people sleep. Kids were caught burning down houses because "I was bored and didn't have anything else to do".

I would have no problem doing whatever it takes to protect myself and home. Anyone who enters my home illegally is a skum bag and piece of dirt and I don't consider them human so have no problem destroying the animals they are.
Ah, YESS! Thank-you! (I was having a 'senior moment',
nm
Then why don't we make a pact from this moment forward?

We will stay off your board if you stay off ours. Do you agree or not?


I did notice that. These peoople are getting more and more pathetic by the moment..sm
and have been pushing me farther and fatther to the left.

That was such a retarded response to an important issue. I would like to know what you guys think about it though. Keep the electoral college or not.
If you would step out of paranoid palace for a moment..
point to me ONE place where I advocated killing all Muslims. All I said was, and the only question I asked was, why don't the peace-loving Muslims denounce the murders within their own ranks who are hijacking their peaceful religion to justify killing of innocents and hatred of anything nonMuslim? And you rant and you rant, but you never answer that. And again..it was the Muslim extremists who called what they were doing jihad...I did not call it that, I simply repeated what they said. For someone who is supposedly educated, you certainly run from questions when they are posed to you. And by the way...education does not give you the right to be rude, and rude you are lady...and if you are the poster child for an education...I believe you get the idea.
Wow. A historical moment. I almost never agree with your posts....
x
Where? Who? Our country has no real leader at the moment.
Not Bush.

Not Obama.



Nobody.


Nada.


Zilch.


Oh, wait, maybe Pelosi...she's got a lock on the purse strings...yours and mine, although you don't know or care......ugh....


Like I said, no real leader anywhere in sight.
Why don't you lay off me for a moment and pray for the people on our gulf coast...
they are far more important than this bickering.
On terrorist ties, since topic is popular for the moment
McCain link to private group in Iran-Contra case.

http://yorkdispatch.inyork.com/yd/sections/politics/ci_10655363
Nevermind the soul for a moment....let's talk about LIFE.
The law says killing someone is murder. It does not say anything about killing someone with a soul is murder. The baby is alive, and it is being killed. That's murder.
Punishing a teen for life for a stupid moment of
it just brings yet another person (most likely ALSO stupid) into an already overpopulated world.
Then they should be willing to fight...sm
if it is democracy they want. After all, that's their fight not ours.
ooh cat fight
compassionate hippie cat fight!!!  I've got so much patchouli on that you couldn't stand to get near me anyway.
See? there you go again, trying to fight
nm
Your guy is still going to fight the war...
in Afghanistan and is backing off a bit on his timetable for Iraq...but as long as it his HIS idea to fight, its okay?

Why don't you do a little bit of research on Obama, and not close your eyes to the numerous skeletons in HIS closet? Only one guy talking about cleaning up washington, both parties. Only one guy talking about cutting spending. That is the guy I am voting for.

Looking at the shape this country is in right now, looking at what Obama says he is going to do (STILL) when he knows there is no money to do it with...the Dems on the banking comittee and the ones getting rich while our economy was going down the tubes...you on the left have such a problem with the "rich" but Franklin Raines, Timothy Howard, James Johnson...ALL advising Obama...got RICH dragging Fannie Mae to the ground and all of us with them...and Obama the MOST liberal senator in his voting record...that isn't CHANGE. That is the same old Washington politics.

You really can't see that? Really?
GO FIGHT WIN
MCCAIN!!!!!
Do I want to fight?
Oh yes, I want to have an email war! Lets go, first one to type the dirtiest word wins!

Sheesh. Does your mommy know you are on here?

But seriously, get help.
Sometimes it is necessary to fight, whether we want to or not...
not one service member wants to be in Iraq, but they ARE doing good things over there. Unfortunately, our media is so biased that we rarely see the good that comes of our efforts. I do not believe that the war is senseless and it is not because I "have to believe" any such thing. It is because someone needed to stop Hussein before he became another Hitler. He was well on his way. Also, by fighting a little on other soil, I believe that we keep it from happening on ours and, unfortunately, our general populous doesn't have what it takes to defend their own way of life. Someone else has to do it for them.
I don't know why you would choose this fight anyway...sm
Bennetts words are right there for all to see/hear. This came out of his mouth, you can't make this stuff up.

If you can't see any wrong, hate, inappropriateness in what he said then that's on you.
Well....we know they have no stomach for the fight. ;-) (nm)
nm

Thank you for your post.....some of us do fight
xx
She's willing to fight for the blob....(sm)
but not the turkey!!  The voice of the turkey will be heard!!!!  LOL.
P.S. I hope you fight to the end.
There should be no way you should take a smaller amount if he was insured for a certain amount.
Not to get a fight started...just an observation...
that little twinge is probably be the Holy Spirit and you would be well served to maybe listen to it....? Or perhaps you think not listening to the twinge in favor of listening to John Edwards is the better path.

God bless!
One more question...and I am NOT trying to start a fight....
just curious as to what you mean by "extremely conservative viewpoint?" Could you give examples? I won't even respond if you do not want me to...I just want to know what you consider an extremely conservative viewpoint.

Thanks!
why did you even bring this up - looks like you are trying to start a fight
Everytime a subject is brought out you seem to like to interject a bash to Sam. I've been reading the posts and nowhere in response to my post here did I see sam post a "message with the express intent of wreaking havoc and instigating argument". I'm reading the responses to my post about issues and I'm not seeing one from sam called "let the games begin", so I have no idea what you are talking about. If your talking about another post awhile back, then start a new thread, but for Pete's sake don't drag it into mine. Forget sam - it looks like you are the one who is trying to start arguments. Leave your personal hatred out of this and be an adult for once. Posts like this I would expect from my 12 year old, but we are adults here. What's frustrating is to finally start reading about a lot of issues that both sides would like to know about and info they are sharing with us and then all of a sudden - bam, here comes your post bashing sam. I'm sitting here now looking at all the responses to my post and I'm not seeing the one you are talking about. Lets stick to issues and facts. It also sounds like some other posters want that too.
No fight. Just looking for space and issues.
nm
I still vote for a jello fight
I mean since that's about how silly these campaigns have gotten :)

But seriously, why waste this much money on campaigning from either side? I admit it was just a bit of a pot shot at Obama (sorry!) but Mccain could do it too.

Then again our nation pays celebrities and professional athletes millions and teachers and police/fire/EMS etc make barely above minimum wage...

No wonder we are going down the crapper! Where are our priorities? When it's more important to see Lindsey Lohan's tadadada instead of paying teachers decent money to teach "our future".

*sigh* Maybe I'll go to Australia. I don't ever hear anything about Australians, 'cept for barbies and kangaroos and Steve Irwin (God rest his soul!). :-D