I am so proud of you Nicole and the "Fury". Ultimate frisbee requires explosive power, speed, agility, stamina, balance, coordination...can you see where I am going with this. I am honored and proud to have been able to coach you. Congrats on the Championship

I just wanted to give a shout out to all the Aggies out there. Congrats on the win and if you are ever in CS stop by!

Dutch

WHOOP!!

yeah Ultimate! congrats Fury!

any other crossfitters play ultimate?

no rest for the weary .. what to do what to do????

#4, funny that you ask. I missed the back squats for Ultimate practice. I'm playing on the U of South Carolina club team. I'll bee doing back squats in the morning.

Nicole...it was impressive to see you play live at UCSC...I am glad they could capture your talent on film!

Yes Syria killed Hariri,yes they killed Gemayel.What are we going to do about it?....nothing!besides a little wrist slapping.Its called "realpolitik".
Re. stable sovereign states who have an interest in stability - Oh for the good old days of Sadamm Hussein.Ruled that place with an iron fist,kept it real quiet like any dictator worth his salt knows how to do.Sure could use someone like him in Baghdad about now.

#8 It's not too late, he's not dead yet!

So, can we spend this rest day talking about real strategies to help democracy--or not--in the region instead of arguing over minutia, restating past mistakes and/or labeling each other's beliefs?

Where does our foreign policy go from here? And I mean specifics, not just "cut and run" or "stay the course" platitudes.

What do we really do? And before you pose the question, personally I don't know, that's why I'm asking you.

Political victory- As Donald Trump said on Larry King the other night.Bring em' home now,declare victory and spend the $20 million Congress has already appropriated for a victory celebration.

Real Victory-Mc Cain is right,need to send in another 100k troops asap.Kill Sadr now.Kick ass on those militias,it'll get down & dirty for a month or so.Pull the rug right out from under Iran.Need a strong man President,proably a Kurd.Guarantee Sunnis solid share oil revenues,and proably their own army.Future Iraq will be a loose federation.
You want real peace in the region.Send 50k troops to surround Israel,no in or out of Israel or Palestine till a deal is done.Take the leaders to a secluded place and break em down until they do a deal-a la Dayton(Yugoslavia).

Need a real President to do that,and a public ready to make some real sacrifices for a part of the world most can't find on a map.Don't have either right now.

#10 - forget about democracy in the middle east, if that's what your suggesting. pipe dream pal.

#11 - another 100k troops? man, the real shame of this is that we should've never been there in the first place -- the world would be a far better (and safter) place if we hadn't started this insane war.

i and several others on this site have recognized for a long time that the attempted democratization in iraq has been a total fiasco, a neo-con wet dream gone bad. (MAXIMUS, wherever you are, is it time for us to gloat, or are we above i-told-you-so's?)

now, even the conservatives realize this is the case -- witness today's admission by bush's aide that iraq is in civil war. even red staters now realize the real scope of this utter disaster -- witness the midterm elections.

with the dawning of this reality on conservative minds, i'm not surprised that pro-iraq war articles are no longer posted on rest days. hallelujah for that.

#12: I've also noticed a quiet discontinuation of pro-Iraq articles recently. Are we to assume this is tantamount to a retraction of their views?

As far as the article goes - and I've only skimmed this I'm afraid - I do enjoy his homogenising of "the left". George Galloway is hardly a spokeperson for everyone who opposed the Iraq war, and less still a mouth piece for those who now recognise the need to involve Iran and Syria in any plans to stabilise the region. He is a political oddity, and comands little 'respect' in his home country.

The article also misses the point IMO; the coalition may well have gone into Iraq as the would-be champions of democracy, but they've lost. What good is it clinging on to those noble ideals if it is going to result in more blood-shed?

An alternate thesis for the goals of the Iraq invasion can be found at:

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar.html

To summarize, the invasion was a response to Saddam's threat in 2000 to sell oil for Euros instead of U.S. dollars. If other oil producing countries followed suit, it would precipitate a calamitous plunge in the value of the U.S. dollar and an implosion of the U.S. economy. The result of the invasion was to send a clear message that disaster would result for any state that followed this path. From this perspective the invasion was a success.

We could build a wall around the Middle-East, let them kill each other and encourage the last person standing to commit suicide... That is usually the solution to political problems posed on rest days (see "Let Africa Sink")!

Okay, sorry about my sarcasm. I don't think there is a simple solution, so I'll be on my way ->

I'll always remember reading "Hegemony or Survival" by Noam Chomsky. It made my jaw hit the floor a few times. I don't profess to understand the nuances of foreign policy but I always wonder why the administration never listens to Chomsky, Pilger and their peers.

Oh for the world peace that I will never see.

If the NYT editorial reflects a new policy direction for the US and its allies in the middle east, then it is little wonder that Hezbollah, Al Qaeda and their patrons have been celebrating the election results. The proposal is that we now "engage" the regimes that have been fomenting civil war in Iraq, and if they don't behave that we should "shun" them. The prospect of being shunned must have them quaking in fear, and saying, "Please, please don't throw me in that briar patch."

Victory in Iraq is impossible without addressing the center of gravity of the enemy.

Which is the Democratic Party in the US and their lick spittle propagandists in the media, for whom losing the war in Iraq was always a cheap price to pay for the more urgent business of beating George Bush. They have got their wish, and now the world will reap the whirlwind of resurgent islamic terrorism and 12th Imam apocalyptics.

The second center of gravity is in Tehran, but that can never be addressed until the enemy legions in Washington are persuaded by clever counter-insurgency strategy to buy into US national security strategy.

When the democrat/media/left wake up from their champagne hangover we will still have this basic problem: the nexus between extremist islamic fanatics and rogue regimes provisioning them with WMD. Giving Khalid Sheik Mohammed Miranda and habeas rights is not going to solve that problem. Having a "dialog" with Iran and Syria and NoKo is not going to solve that problem. Our defeat in Iraq compounds it and feeds jihadi triumphalism beyond measure.

Since I am from Hungary (but now living in London) and there are some references at the end of the article about comparing the democratic process in eastern europe to that of the middle east, I thought I will summarize my thoughts from this angle.

Since the change in the system at '89, while Hungarians may have the illusion of a democratic process, what actually is happening is populist politics being used to swing the power between the liberal and capitalistic right wing and the conservative and socialist left wing. One sold out the country by privatizing national companies for fractions of their value and inviting investment with huge tax breaks, even as they would acknowledge that those companies will move on to Romania and Bulgaria as the tax breaks expire. The other put the country into a debt spiral equaling a budget deficit that of Lebanon, by spending and subsidizing for the benefit of their voting base without making actual investments.

The rest of the region is not faring well either with the Polish having an "anti-corruption" bureau which effectively operates as a secret police removing unwanted political figures and operating on the whims of the twin control of the prime minister and the president.

It has been more than 16 years and 4 election cycles and large majority do not see the benefits of the new system as key political and financial figures managed to concentrate more wealth and power, not unlike what is happening in Russia.

Still I am a long term optimist, remembering that even in the US, democracy did not happen overnight. It took many generations to go through a civil war, women's getting the right of vote and black people being able to sit where they wanted on a bus. Only in the second half of the XX. century can you consider the US a modern democratic state. Thus while some point out that the Americans have now spent more time fighting in the second gulf war than they have in World War II, the change of the system will not happen overnight. There will be lots of pain and suffering as tensions and hatred built up during the previous decades will need to be dissipated, and this will take many generations. Looking back to history books again, France and Germany were lethal enemies with dozens of wars and squirmishes between them in the past millenia. Similarly, sectarian violence in the middle-east is not going to away overnight, but it will eventually. While the situation may look to worsen in the short term, I believe it is the painful path needed for future stability, as often short term artificial solutions worsen the already dismal conditions.

So what now ? I will tell you what now. Define core directives, make a plan and stick to it. Warning: it may take a couple of decades to execute. But as in Hungary, while blame the politicians, when the voters are the ones encouraging short term solutions and populist agenda ? When the powers that may be in the west and east sense that the voters and the public want long term solutions, hard work and dedication to the peace process then that is what we will get.

Until then, why always place the blame on the other side when all we want is the immediate gratification of instant success ? Instead of pointing the finger to Bush, Saddam, big oil corporations or Syrian assassins and crying foul for causing human suffering, our energy may be better spent by working towards a common goal. For me the direction is clear, even if the destination cannot be seen on the horizon. All we need to do is make one step forward after another.

Marcus #12,

Could you elaborate on your view that democratization of the Middle East is a fiasco? Are Arabs incapable of self-rule? Are they not smart enough, or just sub-human? Would you identify other peoples for us unworthy or incapable of living free?

Marcus, Iraq is a better place today than it was under Saddam Hussein. It’s safer. It’s freer. We’ve improved the place. You Liberals have way, way, too much regard for the stability of concentration camps. Why is that?

Finally, you and Maximus have nothing to gloat about. The Left’s profound hope for failure of American foreign policy has you morally confused.

America needs to clean up its own backyard!

We have made it a policy of exporting death and destruction in Central Asia the name of our national security while ignoring history and the cultural differences inherent in the region. We have moved from the champions of democracy, defending the weak against fascism to imposing our will, our version of democracy and our worldview upon those who only want to make a living and feed there kids (I speak of the average citizen). We can take this endless pseudo intellectual debate on the regions citizenry as far as we want with our rhetoric and all our polarizing rants, yet our boys are still dying while we try to save face and find a new enemy to combat. Perhaps it is time to look within instead of without....without placing this harsh intellectual light on ourselves.

Can anyone really say our current policies are working?

#12 - I like how libs refer to the midterm elections to support any argument in their favor... Why is it that when the GOP wins it is called a "hostile takover of the house" and when the dems win it is a Mandate from the People?

Can't we just chalk Gemayel up as one of those "birth pangs of a new Middle East"?

For starters I think we need to stop doing a few things:

Stop fuggin w/people's right to self-determination. If they are not willing to stand and/or fight for democracy and/or human rights - they will never be able to hang onto them once "given" them.

Stop thinking that we can change other people's perception of reality to match ours. We can't re-meld a mindset that has been shaped by unique cultural evolutions over many generations with critical ethnic and religious under-pinnings.

Stop meddling in the affairs of other Nations by supporting strongmen when it is of convenience or supporting undemocratic regimes when it is convenient or supporting democracy only when it is convenient or supporting human rights only when it is convenient.

Stop being such Hippocrates.

Stop arming the world.

Stop blaming the Left or those with opposing points of views for failures.

Stop being so paranoid - commies and zealots are not going to take over the world. Human greed will and since that is what our society is based upon, we will ultimately win the day. Hmmm...

Stop thinking that we are the answers to everyone's problem.

Stop strategically investing in the chronically unstable regions - strategically divest in them.
Invest in people - education, health-care and FAIR trade. NOT in regimes that take the wealth, that we largely give them, and distribute next to nothing. Foster the distribution of the wealth and equity and not the consolidation of wealth and power.

If anyone raises a weapon against us...
- Raze the place to the ground with absolute certainty.

Yay Ultimate! I've been trying to convince my teammates to try CrossFit as well. Maybe Fury's example will help...

Wow!!! Some really good posts--Dan, Harry, Coach, Tamas. I agree fully.

I'll add a couple of thoughts. It occurred to me a while back that a good summary of leftism--in its' cultural expression--is that it believes in nothing but the freedom of others to believe something.

Theoretically, Israel should be excoriated for being racist and imperialist. They hate Arabs, we are told, and they pushed them off their land, and deprived them of their rights.

The form the criticism of Israel takes is that they are Zionist pigs and should be run into the ocean. Thus, we see prominent leftists embracing Hezbollah--the same group that bombed the Marine barracks in Beirut--as an agent of freedom and decency. Why? Because, by mathematical deduction, if the Israelis are racist and imperialist, then their enemies cannot be. They are simply countering the "reality" they confront.

Thus, with all the rigor of Cartesian rationalism, we can proceed without an apparent sense of irony, to a policy supporting despotic nations which are committed to hurting America, and who are currently at war with us by proxy, and who are actively, virulently, anti-democratic, in the name of human rights.

Adding to the irony, moderate conservatives are regularly derided in their efforts to protect this nation as "Orwellian", as in, you know, "Peace is War." "War is Peace", or whatever he actually wrote.

I've said this before, but this is a form of inverted belief. You don't believe something, you react to something. Your beliefs exist only in opposition to something else. You can watch this process. It begins with a belief, say, that Israel is categorically wrong. Wrong as a nation, wrong as a people. This is especially easy if you are already Jewish, for the same reason black people can use the N word daily all day but nobody else can.

You take that as your foundational principle in articulating your philosophy. Logically, if X is positive integer you would prefer to be 0, then you need a "not-x". You find your "not-x", you've found your political raison d'etre. Hezbollah, of course, is a "not-x".

Obviously, this basic process can be applied to any number of basic issues. However, in the sense that America really does stand--better than anyone else, but still imperfectly--for what is good in this world, you will find that given almost any X, the "not-x's" will tend to aggregate in the same places, because the X will be something we define.

This is how you stand for human rights by opposing human rights.

With respect to my own opinion on the article, we need to stick to our ideals. We do best when we maintain an idealistic goal--in this case the democratic process, in some form, in the Middle East--and pragmatic methods. You can't make a good deal with a bad person. All you can do is buy time. Sometimes that's needed, but not here, not now.

We need to take Sadr out, and arrest the the players in this thing. If the blood of these guys runs in the street for a month, so be it. Better guilty than innocent blood, and if we do it right, at some point the violence is substantially reduced. Bush is still the Commander in Chief. He needs to make some effing decisions.

Wow. These are some really good (and unexpected) discussions of what is going on in Iraq, and, by extension, the entire Middle East. I'm new to Crossfit, but I never thought that it reached so far into the realm of the intellect as deeply as it does into the physical. I need to stick with this program... Hopefully it will make me smarter as well as incredibly fit!

There is a very interesting piece by Thomas Ricks in today's Washington Post reporting on a classified assessment by the Marine Corps that Al Qaeda cannot be beaten in Anbar with present force levels and tactics.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/27/AR2006112701287_pf.html

Ricks is a charter member of the defeatist chorus in DC, but the USMC is not.

Then, there is this Michael Fumento piece - he's embedded in Anbar and he says we are winning, or at least that some of the stuff we are doing is working.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/issuesideas/story.html?id=845851a2-af6c-4fd0-8b79-f841cb6e5e85

It also seems discordant with reports from Bill Roggio that 25 tribes in the Anbar Salvation Council are in the fight against al Qaeda and are whacking and stacking them. http://billroggio.com/archives/2006/11/anbar_the_abu_soda_t.php

Not sure who is right, but I'm guessing the USMC assessment subsumes Fumento's analysis. I'd also bet a dollar that the USMC report mentions the victory of the democrats in the midterms as signficantly and negatively affecting Iraqi and insurgent perception of US willingness to stick it out, but that Ricks left that out of his reporting.

Re #20:

"Marcus, Iraq is a better place today than it was under Saddam Hussein. It’s safer. It’s freer. We’ve improved the place."

I certainly hope so, or if it isn't that it will be some day. I'm no fan of our involvment over ther, but I'm not so resigned to say that it will never have been a god thing. It'll take a lot of time to tell and even after 20+ years we'll never know what would have happened otherwise. I really honestly do hope that 20 years or so from now I can say "You know, things really are better as a result of that war". We'll see.

As far as it being safe and better: Unclear. How you could measure such a thing, maybe death toll? We have a better idea of how many Iraqis are dying each year now, but it's tough to quantify during the Hussein era (I don't even know what the guesses are). Has anyone here had conversations with Iraqis regarding how their average 24x7 was before and since our invasion?

"You Liberals have way, way, too much regard for the stability of concentration camps. Why is that?"

Strongly put. However without using any labels ("liberal"), one thing I totally agree with is that there is a fear of disorder, even at the cost of freedom and individual rights. This has nothing to do with political views, just more of a natural human instinct to fear change and unkown, despite how poor the quality of life may be. It's sad, and as much of a part of the human condition as anything. That said I hope I'm never in a position where I have to trade a hand or a foot for some of the freedoms I'm afforded now.

There's a typo in my previous post...

"god thing" -> "good thing" ;)

Tyson

Jim #11:

“Need a real President to do that,and a public ready to make some real sacrifices for a part of the world most can't find on a map.Don't have either right now”

Your comment is sadly, 100% correct.

Adam #16:

“I'll always remember reading "Hegemony or Survival" by Noam Chomsky. It made my jaw hit the floor a few times. I don't profess to understand the nuances of foreign policy but I always wonder why the administration never listens to Chomsky, Pilger and their peers.”

Perhaps because Chomsky is a far left wing radical, and while an expert in linguistics, is sadly ignorant on the realities of foreign policy?

Just my thoughts.

I had coined a term, "forgession" some time ago, to stand for conscious forgetting. We have a term, remembrance, for conscious remembering. It seems to me that in our day to day life, remembering is something that takes effort, and forgetting is something which goes with the passing of time. "Remember 9/11", 'Remember the Maine". "Remember the Alamo." We assume that with the passing of time things will be forgotten, as indeed they are.

However, that process can be accellerated, by the intervention of volitional effort. You can force things out of your mind by just not thinking about them, by conditioning yourself, every time that thought occurs, to "change the subject". People that do this about fundamental issues, like courage and integrity, necessarily become "shifty", because they don't want to be reminded of certain things. As you burrow in deep, they feel an almost compulsive need to escape.

You see this in debates by an inability to follow a line of thinking to its' conclusion, and the unwillingness to acknowledge relevant facts. You see it in the reflex release of factual flack--irrelevancies that serve solely to alter the path of the discussion.

The fact of the matter is there used to be two buildings in downtown New York, 100 stories or more, that were full of people when two hijacked airplanes were flown into them at top speed. The resulting devastation made anything but cleanup impossible for many blocks around.

This fact, while disputed by apparently desperate leftists, is consistent with a pattern of attacks dating back to 1992, which is when the first effort to bring the towers down was made, by people we are very certain are guilty. It fits the rhetoric of Islamic extremists, and they were quite happy.

Even though, through a highly directed propagandistic effort at collective forgession, many people have forgotten that these people exist, they have in no way shape or form forgotten we exist. We are a burning obscenity to them, because we remind them of how backward they and their ideas really are. There is no reason to doubt many of them are still searching for ways to hurt us. We have them on the run, because we did not play our part in the script and run, while muttering leftist apologetics for what would have amounted to cowardice. Syria pulled out of Lebanon when they were worried we might take them on next. Now, we see the result of the cessation of that worry.

You can't deal with sociopaths with compassion, reason, or anything but naked force and the threat of force. That is a fact of history I would challenge anyone of a leftist persuasion. I offer as Case One Chamberlain's wildly futile and unsuccessful role as Hitler's willing dupe.

Catch-up day.

PU ladder 12 rounds on the nose (PR)
Back Squats, details posted ystd.

All of my numbers keep going up, albeit modestly c/w the elite here. Finishing my 11th month, with continued gratitude and respect for Coach and all here.

D.

Back on the wagon.

did cfwu x 3
then 185 bench 5x5 alternating with 95-105 OHS 5x5

Feels good to be back. Pullups were weak during the cfwu. @206lbs now, want to get down to 185lbs.

There's a human aspect to this discussion that I feel many people don't want or feel a need to deal with. American citizens are ultimately comfortable in the stability that has been afforded them by 200 years of hard work, political strife, and bloodshed. Everything we have and are today is a direct result of our past, and yet most Americans today couldn't tell you what decade the civil war was in. They can't tell you the year the Declaration of Independence was signed. Why is that?

Every year the percent of the population that votes stagnates or gets smaller. I feel this stems from one of two emotions. The first is apathy. I often ask people if they voted in the last election (after any election) and if they say they didn't, I ask why not. I'd guess that 90% of people respond that they feel that their one vote isn't going to change the outcome of an election. What they don't realize is that if every person who felt this way voted anyway, elections would have a very different turnout then they do.

The other emotion people seem to have is over-reliance on our government to take care of them. During a charity drive at my work one of my coworkers actually said "I wish I could just give a little more in taxes and let the government take care of this." Needless to say, I nearly fell out of my chair. But this is a serious example of how many citizens just don't want to get involved in the world around them. They want to just worry about getting that next promotion at work and then going home to stuff themselves with buffalo wings and beer and watch Monday night football. And when the commercials with the starving African children come on, they change the channel. They don't want to be bothered with the chaos outside their controled world.

Too many people in this country are riding the democracy wave without realizing the SACRIFICE necessary to maintain that democracy.

When was the last time YOU sacrificed for your country?

I know I just posted, and this is off the subject, but I want to show what democrats think of the military that PROTECTS THEIR RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH.

"If a young fellow has an option of having a
decent career, or joining the Army to fight
in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would
not be in Iraq," Mr. Rangel, a Democrat
representing Manhattan and Queens, said
on "Fox News Sunday."

"If there's anyone who believes these
youngsters want to fight, as the Pentagon
and some generals have said, you can just
forget about it. No bright young individual
wants to fight just because of a bonus and
just because of educational benefits. And
most all of them come from communities
of very, very high unemployment," the
congressman said.

I know there are a lot of military and ex-military on this site, so I'm curious,
1) What Branch
2) What years
3) What compelled you to join (be honest, I'm curious not trying to judge anyone)
4) What education level did you have when you joined

I'll start:
I'm currently a Captain in the Air Force. I've been in since 2002, not including 4 yrs of ROTC (ROTC is just a step above boy scouts, and with women). I joined because males in my family have done military service since the first Schwab came over from the old country. When I joined I had received my BS in Physics, with minors in Archeology, Math, and Aerospace Studies (ROTC).

It's amazing.....people continue to directly link the war in Iraq to solving the 9/11 problem. Somehow Iraq and not Saudi money, Bin Laden etc. has has everything to do with the attack. Repeating the same propaganda (and that's what the "fact gathering" was leading up to the invasion) over and over, with spin, pseudo intellectualism and poor fact gathering doesn’t make it fact or correct in any way. If we as a country and a people do not get our collective heads out of the sand and THINK of a way to truly solve this problem it will happen again. Punching the guy beside you does not stop the bully in front of you.

ricky

"Victory in Iraq is impossible without addressing the center of gravity of the enemy."

Which, according to you is "the Democratic Party in the US and their lick spittle propagandists in the media, for whom losing the war in Iraq was always a cheap price to pay for the more urgent business of beating George Bush."

So, apparently, the Democratic party is the center of gravity of the enemy that is preventing victory in Iraq? You really think that a political party which to date (until Jan) controls not one branch of government is what has been holding us back from victory? Oh yes, and the all familiar boogeyman of the media. The same media that gave the current administration a pass in the run up to the war.

The Democratic Party has not yet stood in the way of a single thing this administration asked for in prosecuting this war. If victory is impossible, conservatives have no one to blame but themselves. It was this White House that wanted war at all costs and yet failed to plan for just about anything after toppling Saddam.

And one last point, please stop with the "liberals want us to lose" crap. No we don't. I can't speak for all "liberals" but I can tell you as someone who was at the WTC on 9/11 that I wanted this country to hunt down and kill the terrorists that attacked us. To me, that meant doing afghanistan for real with as many troops as needeed and not being distracted into a war in Iraq that squanders American lives, treasure and goodwill. I believed (correctly as it turned out) that the war in Iraq was a war of choice and was a mistake that we will pay for for years. Just because I don't think we ever should have gone into Iraq, however, doesn't mean that I want my country to lose.

Had to make up Linda on this rest day. Ouch. I didn't see Pukie, but I met his friend Dizzy, ya know, the one that makes you have to sit down for a second and close your eyes to keep from falling over.

Coach: Iraq is now safer???? How is a civil war, (in all but name) safer than anything? Compare the mortality rates in Iraq from the past month with what it was like 5 or 10 years ago, I'm pretty sure it's higher now.

As well stated and eloquently put some of your positions on Iraq are, I'm afraid while your typing history is judging your views to be wrong.

Howard:

We cannot sustain a prolonged military conflict in Iraq or anywhere else without the entire American polity buying in. That is a fact of life. We had it when we started in Iraq. We do not have that condition in our country right now because the Democrats and the left and the media perceived an opportunity to wound their enemy #1, GWB, over the war. They took that opportunity and it has with the midterms finally had the desired effect for them. The bad news is that this EXACTLY dovetailed the strategy of our enemies in Iraq. They sought specifically to induce that outcome in our domestic politics. That has been obvious from the start, but the dems did it anyway.

The perception that we are bailing out is disastrous to all we have undertaken in the ME and a huge triumph for the jihadis, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and islamic extremism everywhere.

This was also obvious in advance, but the dems did it anyway.

Regards,

Barry C # 26,

I seem to recall that last rest day you bemoaned the lack of sensible argument from the 'Left': too much name calling, ad-hominems, blaming 'big oil' and 'racism'. Now I read "Wow!!! Some really good posts--Dan, Harry, Coach, Tamas. I agree fully." Now I have no doubt that you agree fully with the named posters, but are they 'good posts" by your own criteria? Some of the following points are petty and picky (and feel free to pick my own nits - I'm feeling punchy today), but I think you are holding the 'Leftists' to a high standard, so your guys should be held to the same...

1. Dan McD: paints the NYT axis of Leftists as believing that 'shunning' regimes reflects what should be 'a new policy direction... in the middle east' - they actually talk about shunning Hezbollah if Hezbollah tries to grab further power in Lebanon. What they say is that Damascus would get 'scorn, isolation and sanctions' if found to be involved in assasinations of anti-Syrians. The article focusses on Lebanon and Syria, not the wider region.

2. Harry McD: Starts fine, we do need to the engage the centre of gravity of the enemy, but follows with: 'lick spittle propagandists in the media', 'enemy legions in Washington. Ends by assuming that the 'democrat/media/left' are unaware that here is a problem if WMDs proliferate to fanatics. (Really? or do they just have a different view of how to proceed than Harry McD?)

3. Tamas: I'm going to agree with this one as a 'good post', probably the best post on the thread. Tamas presents a different, interesting viewpoint; stays clear of abuse and mischaracterisations; presents useful historical analogies; presents a real point of view: This will take time, it will be painstakingly slow, we need perseverance, there are no easy answers. Full marks Barry.

4. Coach: misquotes Marcus - 'Could you elaborate on your view that democratization of the Middle East is a fiasco?' ; Marcus said the democratic process in Iraq has been a fiasco. Presents an aggressive false choice 'Are they not smart enough, or just sub-human?'; (Hmm, maybe they are culturally not ready and democratisation will take time, ask Tamas). Asks a leading question: 'Would you identify other peoples for us unworthy or incapable of living free?' (And by the way Marcus are you still beating your wife...?). Slips in the evocative term concentration camps and accuses the Left of a 'profound hope for failure of American foreign policy'; (is that right? Is he sure the Left wants America to fail or just has a different view of how it might succeed?)

Personally, since we are keeping score, I think the posts by Jim #11, mwu #12, RC #13, ricky #21, Chris - Ottawa #24 (btw you may mean 'hypocrites', Hippocrates was a 5th century Greek physician) are just as good or better, certainly on your criteria (apologies to later posters - this took a while); they don't all agree with each other, but are generally clear of ad hominems and blaming 'isms like Leftism, the media or Democrats'.

I think you need to challenge your views, not just reinforce them with similar ones. Here is Francis Bacon in the Novum Organum all the way back in 1620: 'The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion ... draws all things else to support and agree with it. And though there be a greater number and weight of instances to be found on the other side, yet these it either neglects and despises ... in order that by this great and pernicious predetermination the authority of its former conclusions may remain inviolate." This quote introduces and summarieses the following article: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=13&articleID=000CE155-1061-1493-906183414B7F0162 Enjoy.

Borat

People like Rangel piss me off! I earned my degree in Aerospace Engineering. Some of the brightest people I knew in my major were in the military. I myself have been putting the effort in to train in hopes of enlisting in the next few months. (That is how I came across CrossFit.) I am a native Washingtonian, DC where I live and work in the metro area. I know people who influence American policy on both sides of the isle. I see the disdain for the military among those on the Left. I also see the unmitigated ignorance, niavete, and arrogance on the Hill and within the "Intellectual" class.

The disdain is not simply for the military, but for law enforcement and even the Secret Service. You can tell a lot about a President by how he treats the Secret Service and Military staff. Likewise, you can tell the Character of those in Congress by how they treat the Secret Service and Capitol Hill police.

Having said all this, there are good men and women on both sides of the isle. End of rant.

I'd like to remind everyone that Saddam Hussain (or however his convicted ass is spelt) tried to WIPE KURDS OFF THE PLANET. Try doing a search for Iraqi death toll pre-war. Not possible, because no one cared. I feel we have have an obligation as the world's superpower to stop atrocities to the max extent possible. That being said, we'll never get them all or stop them fast enough.

Borat,

That article, as I read it, summarized a new potential policy, which in effect appeases the Iranians and Syrians in exchange for their help ending a war they have done much to create and sustain. An element in that appeasement was potentially giving Syria greater latitude in its' imperialistic take-over in Lebanon, against the will of the majority of Lebanese. It doesn't appear to me there are ifs, ands or buts, but that they just assassinated another prominent Lebanese leader, in no small measure because he refused to accept as "just one of those things" their LAST assassination of a Lebanese leader.

Leftists are big on talking tough, then rationalizing backing down. They say they will "shun" Hezbollah if they grab power in a vacuum their policy created. OK, let's say they grab power. How exactly does "shunning" work? Do they not get invited to the office Christmas Party? Do we issue long and impressive-sounding perorations on the necessity of playing fair? What sanctions exactly are we going to levy? How much business do we do with them anyway, and can we get it through the United (third world) Nations? That's horse-poop, plain and simple.

What is the plan Democrats have for denying the terrorists WMD's? Negotiations? Unless you all have been asleep at the wheel, you should know THE TERRORISTS THEMSELVES have called Iraq their chosen central front in the GWOT. If they can get the United States to cut and run after 3,000 dead, then there is no place we won't run from, Iran has no worries, Syria has no worries, North Korea only has her normal worries, and everything moves forward one space on the game board.

With respect to Coach, surely it is obvious that things on this planet change. Change--as Heraclitus stated--is a constant. You can't even get in the same river ONCE. Thus, the error in the phrase "the democritization process is a failure" is in committing the cardinal intellectual error of essentialization. He is attributing to a dynamic evolving system of events a static, closed quality. IF we choose to view it as a failure--which is what the Leftists wanted us to do, oh, before we started--then we can get our failure by quitting. That's what is being proposed. Part of that proposal is pretending our enemies are our friends, and calling it "realism" because it otherwise stinks to high heaven.

IF we choose to view it as a system evolving slowly, by ugly lurches in all directions, towards our desired outcome, and persist in our action towards achieving that end, then we can get our success, over some period of time.

It used to be a commonplace to say "winners never quit; quitters never win". You saw it everywhere. I don't see it any more, presumably because the words "winner" and "quitter" are excessively value-laden and consequently unpleasantly judgmental.

I'm quite conversant on philosophy. I have studied the process of thinking, and how thinking atrophies in favor of rote habit and reflex far more than anyone I know, and more than likely most people on this planet.

What I see is conservatives proposing solutions, and leftists levelling criticism. What I don't see are constructive, actionable solutions.

You tell me what you think we ought to do, and why. I'm saying I believe we know the who's and the how's, and could put a plan into execution within a day that within six months would have kids riding their bikes on the streets again almost everywhere in Iraq. It would involve arresting Al Sadr, breaking apart his militia, and probably scaring the crap out of both the Syrians and Iranians. We CAN do it.

Where the Democrats come into the equation, is that almost ANY substantial use of force that is anything other than perfectly sanitary and cleancut gets roundly criticised, and then politicized. They used Iraq to take power here they are ill-equipped to handle. I don't think it will be long before the American people realize what's happened, and get pissed. We don't like losing wars, and there is no reason whatsoever we can't win this one.

I'm not saying "stay the course". I'm saying, let's qualitatively alter our tactics because what we're doing isn't working. Sort of like George Washington in Trenton. How many of you know what I'm talking about?

Just to clarify and not further reinforce stereotypes being a “liberal” and all: I love the military and I respect and admire the discipline, commitment and patriotism.... but I truly hate the way the current administration is using up and discarding some of our countries best and brightest.

Ricky

Here you go: http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h679.html

It seems to be an unstated assumption, often on both sides of the debate, that the existence of civil strife in Iraq is evidence of the failure of our democratization policy. I don't think this assumption is correct. Look at our own history. The American Civil War had more American deaths than all our other wars combined. Was that because we were not ready for democracy? Was the North wrong to fight to preserve the Union? The cause of freedom in the Iraq should not be abandoned in exchange for the stability that the left's friends in Iran and Syria, in Hezbollah and Al-Qaeda, would provide.

Stability is easy. Give the bully what he wants. All you need is a brutal dictator. Cuba has had a stable government for 50 years.

The Bush doctrine as I understand it is that the longing for freedom beats strongly in every human breast, and that it is in our long term (perhaps not short term) interests to help that longing come to fruition. Thus I don't see the Bush doctrine as being any different than John F. Kennedy's appeal that , "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty. This much we pledge—and more."

I would like to see Bush and the American military get much more aggressive in Iraq, instead of half measures designed to appease critics, and guaranteed to fail.

Huge congrats to Fury on their big win and strong showing the last several years. A good friend of mine is on the team and is one of the reasons I've been playing Ultimate for a number of years now.

I'll echo #1 in saying that competitive Ultimate requires tremendous amounts of "explosive power, speed, agility, stamina, balance, coordination". I recently stopped playing for several months to focus on Crossfit. I was a little worried that without playing or practicing AT ALL for a period of several months, I would have a tough time playing in even a semi-competitive tournament. Turns out that even though I was still ramping up on Crossfit, it still put me in good shape for a grueling Ultimate tournament. It'll be interesting to see how things progress after I have some long-term Crossfit under my belt.

#12:

We should wait to gloat until Fox News calls for the troops to get out of Iraq. Oh yes, it will happen. If you doubt my prescience go back and read my rest day comments from the last year point five.

And, in all seriousness, I would not gloat: it is just awful what both the people of Iraq and our people in uniform have suffered and for what? An aborted attempt to steal the riches of the middle east for a few greedy, cynical, amoral super-rich families (AKA Bush-Cheny,etc.) Perhaps they never truly cared about the outcome: Haliburton, etc. have gotten rich on the death and destruction of the innocent and the guilty alike, and we a weaker as a nation because of it.

# 45 Barry- THANK YOU!!! You essentially said in that post what I was thinking and getting to write in much less eloquent terms.

Borat- you really like to point out everyone elses typo's and slight confusion of facts. Where is your mirror? Are you that perfect that is the only way that you can attack someone's opinions? How about voicing your own instead of saying how we are wrong?

Ricky- we are still in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban, trying to snuff them out. Not only are Americans dying there but we have lost a lot of Canadian and English brothers, and Dutch as well as some from many other countries.

I've got to say, that being with my husband in the military community for 17 + years we have heard a lot from liberals throughout those years. The "Baby Killer" statements have given way to the "You Chose to sign up and do this" if we ever complained about the op tempo, or about the fact that my husband hasn't been able to go to college or take classes for the past 12 years. Or to see his kids grown up.
What I still hear the most is "You chose to do this". Well, that's right we did and we have sacrificed A LOT, and our kids have sacrificied alot without having an opinion originally in the matter. They are proud of their Dad and he is still their hero (at ages 14 and 12) and truly understand what sacrifice means. N just recently held an unprompted moment of silence with her class for one of her friends whose dad was killed last year. Even they know what will happen if we pull out of Iraq now. Talk about a house of cards falling down.

Joe- My husband has been in the Army for 17 years, (SF for the past 10) from a bit before the Gulf War until now, prior education was high school diploma, reason for joining was that there weren't very good long term job possibilities in rural Maine.
On a side note- Tomorrow is My husband and I's 20th anniversary. I don't just love him, I'm still "in" love with him, very proud of him, and he truly is my best friend! Uh oh, speaking of love and mushy stuff during a "war" conversation, that'll get me kicked out... :-)

Kate

#12 Coach:

I hope you are not calling me a liberal: you should know better! However you seem to have too much regard for the "liberty" of a slaughterhouse.

The UN said this month 100,000 people a month are fleeing Iraq. What are they fleeing from Liberty? Safety?

#36 Joe

1. Captain, US Army
2. 6 years, direct commission. Still serving. Two tours in Iraq with 10th SFG/CJSOTF
3. Joined simply to serve. Honestly. Walked away from med school tenured faculty position with NIH and AHA funding.
4. PhD

Ethan

Re: comment #35 (Joe)

I agree with just about everything you said, sadly. However I have one thing I want to point out reagarding...

"When was the last time YOU sacrificed for your country?"

Anyone who pays taxes every April sacrafices the first 4 or 5 months of their work year to fork over that money to pay government salaries. I'm not complaining since I have no better solution, but it's just incorrect to say that working Jan through April (roughly) just to pay taxes is not a sacrafice!

#36 Joe-
In addition to the what I listed above my husband is an E8.

Kate

Awesome picture. Ultimate Frisbee rocks!

Hey-

In the past 5 days we have lifted both the Front Squat and the Back Squat in sets of 3reps.

My FS was 80% of my BS. I'm pretty happy with that.

-K

Kate,

You should be proud of yourself. As hard as it is being an operator, I've heard it can be harder still, in some ways, being the wife of one. Hang in there. You have my respect, gratitude, and love.

I would add, aren't we in some respects talking about love throughout this thread? Love of our nation? Love of freedom? Even love of the Iraqi and Syrian and Iranian and Lebanese peoples? There are a lot of decent people in Iraq especially that are getting blown up, shot, and tortured. Yes, that was happening before, under Saddam. The difference is we're there now, and we can do something about it.

I have developed an ethical system based upon 3 core principles: the rejection of self pity, an attention to detail, and perseverance. You can build all traditional virtues from those three principles. Love, for example. How much use is love as an emotion if you are constantly feeling sorry for yourself? If you are oblivious to someone else's true needs? If you quit the moment things get tough?

In point of fact, love is giving others what they need, not what is convenient for you. It hurts to discipline kids, even though its' in their (and ultimately your) best interest. What gets you through that? Rejecting self pity, understanding the factual need for it, and the committment to do right by your kids. Not "love".

Love as it has come down to us is something immersive and which comes upon you. The Romantic conception of volitionless rapture. It's always about feeling good, and as soon as the feeling stops, you call it quits on "love". If it is painful to discipline your kids, you quit. This is the opposite of love.

What we are in effect seeing in the Democratic calls for withdrawal is their tacit sense that, "gosh, I'm just not feeling the whole "war vibe" thing any more. It was cool for a while, but all this death and destruction stuff is just wrecking my buzz. You know what I'm saying?"

The feeling is gone, and there never was a principle to begin with. They more or less went along, kicking and screaming, because the country wanted to send a clear message in the wake of 9/11.

That message--listen up all of you who persist, obstinately, and in vapid defiance of Bush's own articulated goals, in linking the Iraq War SOLELY to the purported link between Bin Laden and Hussein--was that America was once again prepared to use military force based upon abstract principles of international law, and her own self defense. Hussein was openly flouting the UN, and the ONLY nation willing and able to take him on was us. The Europeans--with the likely exception of the British--are by and large out of the military business. Yes, they contribute troops, which is good, and admirable. But the Dutch would not have been able to mobilize 250,000 people or whatever it was, to do the job.

If people will recall, Hussein told the inspectors to get out, Bush mobilized a credible force, Hussein started allowing inspections again, but kept playing games. Bush told him to stop, he didn't, and we invaded. Had we not invaded, we could not have afforded to keep that force there forever. The political will would have evaporated quickly. The second we vacated, Hussein would have once again kicked out the inspectors, and at some point felt sufficiently secure to go back into weapons production. That scenario, in my view, was so likely, it might as well be considered fact.

We went in, scared the crap out of the Iranians and Syrians, and shut them up for a while. The Syrians withdrew a lot of troops from Lebanon. Then, they realized that if they could get enough bombs and guns into Iraq, they could find people willing and able to shoot them, and destabilize the whole country. By destabilizing the country, they put us--not in a war of attrition, since we have taken relatively few casualties--but in a war of perception and will. They created political ammunition for American "failurists" (if I'm the first to say that, I'll claim it), and of course our actual enemies, such as Hezbollah and Al Queda.

Now they are offering to step in and help. I may have been born at night, but it wasn't in the process of landing on my head while falling from a turnip truck, to mix metaphors.

We seem to have become a nation of suburbanites who no longer have to deal with sociopathic violence, who no longer understand the evil that men do while claiming to do good. Who by and large have avoided their entire lives violent crime, violent people, and who consequently listen to rap music, and put up Scarface posters.

This stuff is real. It's not made-up. We're dealing with people who get off on watching people get decapitated, and who smile and laugh at it. Bin Laden was giggling after 9/11. Have we forgotten that?

Barry,

You must have as much time on your hands today as I do...

What I always enjoy about your postings is your absolute certainty. Unfortunatley, I don't have that certainty most of the time, so it is instructive to read it in action.

Here, perhaps, is how we think differently.

I'm glad you brought up GW at Trenton - and yes to your last question. I believe you also brought him up a while ago in the context on your reading the book 1776. As I recall, one lesson you took from the book was that a key to success in the American Revolution was the quality of perseverance and the strength of character of GW. You supported this with some reference to Ross Perot and concluded that this was an indication that the US should stay the course in Iraq (qualified today with: 'qualitatively alter our tactics because what we're doing isn't working', fine).

When I first read that I thought 'nice point, Barry'. But then I also thought, while in many cases perseverance can pay off and people often do quit too readily, can that be right in every case? How do we judge it in the case of Iraq? Further, what would a Jihadi who read 1776 think? If one puts oneself in his position I find it easy to see that his conclusion would be: our Resistance position in Iraq is akin to the Revolutionary position in the American colonies, where they were fighting to overthrow the English yoke, we the US; almost by definition the US is less committed in Iraq than we are (as with the English in America) - we can go nowhere else, they can go home - therefore we take the lesson of George Washington to be perseverance and strength of character will win us the day; we will use the lessons from the enemy's own history against him. This is exactly the same conclusion you reach from the other side. Who is right? I don't know, you are certain you do...

As for the article, I have a few issues with it, but they can mostly be summarised by examining the first couple of sentences:

"The emerging realist hypothesis plays regional stability off against democratic reform. We're presented with a choice: Peace or Freedom, i.e., to get to peace, we are apparently supposed to give up on freedom."

Actually, that is not the 'choice'; he is basing his whole article on a false choice he has made up. The choice is probably more along the lines of 'some peace now and maybe freedom later' (realists) or 'some freedom now and maybe peace later' (someone, not Berman, clearly, who sees things in black and white). The choice faced is messy, whatever the US chooses to do; there is no magic bullet. There are any number of factors economic, geopolitical, moral, etc. that need to be fed into a strategy in the region.

You say "What I see is conservatives proposing solutions, and leftists levelling criticism. What I don't see are constructive, actionable solutions." I see both sides proposing solutions (Engaging Syria and Iran and disengaging from Iraq at an appropriate time is a proposed solution, not a criticism; in fact to a Democrat it probably seems like 'let's qualitatively alter our tactics because what we're doing isn't working'. The fact that you don't see it as constructive or actionable is your opinion). I also see both sides levelling criticism - some fair some not.

Finally I don't share your optimism that your solution to Iraq "within six months would have kids riding their bikes on the streets again almost everywhere in Iraq." It didn't work for the French in Algeria; it hasn't worked for the Israelis against Hamas, Hizbollah, Fatah, whoever. The US faces resistance from people based on what they see as their land, who have no where else to go. My opinion, as of today, is that your strategy would not solve the Sunni issue, would antagonise the Shiites and drive the militias underground. Without some form of compromise Iraq will be a very long and gruelling struggle.

Since you are fond of historical analogies (as am I), the last time the world was going to implode if the US cut and run was supposed to be Vietnam - the dominoes would fall, no one would respect the US etc. What happened? The dominoes didn't fall; Vietnam didn't act as some base for evil communist plots; despite having the sht bombed out of them the Vietnamese actually appear to have minimal animosity against the US; while not democratic or 'free', they are experiencing the joys of commerce and one day will probably be democratic (there's a high correlation between economic prosperity and pluralistic political systems). It may take 50 years, but are you sure Iraq would not eventually follow a similar path?

Borat

PS Kate #51

I was under the impression that the rest day discussions were to encourage rigour in thinking after 3 days of rigorous WODs. Whether I offer opinions on this site should be neither here nor there - in fact, many opinions in the world at large are expressed with minimal thought. I'm sure Barry C, for one, would agree that an important component in exercising one's thinking is by someone 'saying how we are wrong'; similarly an important component in thinking is to try to establish where you see someone as wrong. Further, unlike some, I don't find any of these topics easy - I don't have easy opinions on them; in fact, my opinions often change as the facts on the ground change; nor do I have time to study them in the depth I would like to be able to state a firm conclusion. I am however using this forum as one means to educate myself on them.

Kate I am aware we are still in Afghanistan, we are losing that one also. We had a shot but may have blown it by our invasion of Iraq which let to a major insurgency and civil war. Our attentions were diverted from the good fight to the oil war.

Again, this liberal supports out troops. I also support REASON and abhor blind faith in institutions that require and perform best under scrutiny by an active citizenry. I respect your familial commitment to the military. I respect my family’s commitment to the military but labeling someone as a liberal because they don’t fit the YES MAN mold is silly.

Our allies, especially the English are paying dearly for their support. Blair is known as Bush’s lackey around the world.

ricky

Did yesterdays WOD today back squats
3x20lbs
3x30lbs
3x50lbs
3x50lbs
3x60lbs
3x70lbs
3x70lbs
felt good today!!!!!!!!!!

Sporadic fire from a passer-by.

1. Borat - your last post is well reasoned, polite, and worthy of emulation.
2. Whoever is "gloating" deserves a smack. Gloating over what? Hahaha - we were right? About what? What was your initial premise? The troops withdrawal proves you were right? Now THAT's some ascendant logic.
3. Ethan # 53 - Currently back on active duty after 12 years previously. Marine O4. Former Cobra guy, now attorney. Had a chance to study astronomy and physics at Carnegie Mellon out of high school but went for an ROTC scholarship at BU instead - why? because I saw Tom Cruise kissing Kelly McGillis and I thought that would be WAAYYY cool. Life happens.
4. I was against the invasion of Iraq because I thought it detracted from Afghanistan, where the terrorists were. They've moved about 15 miles east, into the FATA of Pakistan and that's where they sit now, plotting and planning. (No accident that the London Bombings were by people with ties to Pakistan and the aborted recent plane bombings were by Brits of Pakistani origin.) Despite that, once we went into Iraq, we had to do it right or risk becoming the next recruiting poster for jihadis, like the Russians leaving Afghanistan. Yes, I know, we had our hand in that - arguably, however, it helped hasten the demise of the Soviet Union. At the time, hard to argue with that foreign policy position.
5. Take my word on this from conversations with friends in that part of the world, the perception among jihadis is that they (the mujahidin) defeated the Russians single-handedly. They do not care about the effect of the Stinger missile (provided by us) or other aid pumped in by the ISI from Pakistan. Bin Ladin has played on that sentiment repeatedly. If we simply pull chocks on Iraq now, it will not be in our long term interests. By any stretch. Maybe Maximus and others will be able to "gloat" then, but our kids will be reaping that whirlwind for a long time to come.

Oh, and one more -
I don't know enough about Lebanon to comment intellligently on the article and this discussion has obviously digressed (like almost all rest days) to Iraq. But I remember joking way back as a new LT that when the troops were in the first Iraq War, we should probably take a left and clean up Syria before leaving.

That regime is covertly and overtly doing everything it can against us and has been for a LOONNNNNG time. It's too bad, because a friend from Damascus tell me the city is beautiful.

RC #40,

Several months back I checked the sites of Amnesty International and a handful of other NGO’s keeping score of the body count accrued through the ongoing exhumations of Saddam’s mass graves. I took the most conservative (lowest) of these estimates and added the Iraqi war dead from Saddam’s ill fated attempt at taking Iran. Amortizing these deaths over Saddam’s 30 years produced a daily body count far in excess of the wildest estimates (liberal) I could find of the post invasion toll. Easy math. Do it yourself. You tell me. I didn’t need historians’ permission to make the comparison.

BTW, a regime where innocent men, women, and children can be killed by random acts of violence (terrorism) is a preferable existence to one where moral, intellectual, and leadership talent is routinely and systematically eliminated – regardless of relative body count.

Borat #42,

If you reread my post and Marcus’s, you’ll see that you’ve made a couple of obvious errors. I neither quoted Marcus nor misapprehended his point as you seemingly have. How could you have missed: “forget about democracy in the middle east, if that's what your suggesting. pipe dream pal.”? Now, I’ve quoted him, and my characterization was perfectly accurate, wasn’t it?

I was hoping that Marcus would offer the “not ready/it takes time” response, because that sentiment is the capstone argument of Libertarians and Conservatives (NeoCons) urging restraint on Liberals proposing sanctions for authoritarian regimes while habitually heaping favor, toasts, hugs, and kisses on totalitarians. (Ask for examples!) (“Dictatorships and Double Standards: Rationalism and Reason in Politics” - Jeane J. Kirkpatrick is a brilliant analysis of this problem.) The “not ready it takes time” angle is a losing (and wholly disingenuous) gambit for Lefties and I wanted Marcus to play it.

For the record, and to partly answer your question, I believe that Democrat leadership 1) doesn’t think that freedom is worth fighting for – anywhere, 2) are saddened by the lower than the pre-invasion projected American GI toll, and 3) would support any policy that looked popular enough to win elections.

Finally, I’m amused but not surprised by your objection to my reference to “concentration camps”. Borat, the Left has no problem befriending the builders of concentration camps and is quick to heap totalitarian attributes on all but brutal totalitarians. (Ask for examples!) I’ll not make that mistake nor use the language of totalitarian reality in hyperbole (ghetto, mass murder, genocide, Nazi, Fascist, concentration camp, etc.). Saddam’s Iraq was little different than a nation transformed into a concentration camp. (The realities of Baathist Iraq were wildly sufficient moral justification for deposing Saddam, or invading Iraq and deposing Saddam.)

Coach,

I almost forgot the reason we are all here, I got caught up in the debate at hand.

My presses are all way up; I am running faster, punching harder and generally kicking more ass while reshaping my body and losing weight. I am at 179 from 195, but much stronger than I was and 2 inches slimmer in the waist.

This works!!!! Plain and simple. My boxing team is on board as well as the wife and some of my friends. We are all making amazing gains and becoming truly well rounded, better athletes.

THANK YOU COACH.

Ricky

couldn't get to my swim practice tonight because of a mess diner...had to do my own little workout
Four times for time of:
10 pull-ups
20 push-ups (10 lbs weight on shoulders)
30 sit-ups (10 lbs medicine ball thrown on wall)
40x 20 lbs overhead squats
50 wall-ball (10 lbs ball)
200m sprint
200m jog

age 20
BW 150
time 24:35

As a life long Conservative (Business/Libertarian wing specifically) with a very demanding day (and often night) job I never get to go to the rest day party. I do, however, try to read up on the weekends or whenever I get a break. Well, screw the company for a few minutes, there’s one thing that’s been troubling me, if anyone has the time to explain. Thanks in advance.

I'm always bothered in the rest day discussion, and it's always the same discussion, by the overly simplistic notion equating an anti-war position with liberalism.

Now I'm sure that I too am guilty of over simplifying the situation, but as I recall a couple of the basic tenants of Conservatism include limited government, and the notion of self reliance (i.e. individual liberty and responsibility). That being the case could one not make a sensible and valid argument that the Iraq war specifically and the Middle East democratization process generally are, at the core, liberal undertakings.

Unfortunately I don’t have the time to make that argument in full, but anyone still reading this is certainly aware of the rapid expansion of government and governmental powers over the course of this experiment. I don’t have the numbers (or the inclination to pursue them) but with the creation of an entirely new (and thus far incompetent, Katrina) bureaucracy alone, we must be closing in on something of Great Society proportions.

And individual responsibility? I’ll turn Mr. Coach’s initial question on it’s ear:

Are Arabs incapable of self determination; can they not decide for themselves how they want to live? Are they not smart enough to want to live like us? Can we identify other peoples whom we’d like to mold into our likeness?

If self determination and individual liberty are so damn important for you and I, why would we take that opportunity away from Joe Iraqi? By forcing our vision on him we have obliterated any notion that he can determine his own destiny without our assistance. A liberal notion if ever there was on, affirmative action anyone?

The obvious response is that today’s Arabs don’t have the freedom necessary to pursue any concept of self-determination under the repressive regimes in place (regimes that in many cases we installed, but that’s a much longer treatise). The interested reader needs look no further than our own bloody quest for liberty for a template. Not discounting the Naval contributions of self-interested Frenchmen, we pulled that off ourselves…because we wanted it.

An alternate response is that the world has changed, and we need to change with it. To which I respond, a belief system that can be cast aside so readily was not truly held in the first place.

When the Arabs want it they’ll do it, and all our meddling will not expedite that process and is likely slowing it. We cannot force liberty on people, people must take/make liberty. The notion that we can give someone self-determination is non-sensible, hence SELF. But how will people know how to be without us showing them the way? Isn’t that what you’re really asking? Where is the conservatism in that?

Having already spent more time on this than I intended I’ll offer up a few words on “Next Steps”. In short, I support the China model of international relations, live and let live, can we do business? Does that mean that China is not guilty of international meddling? Of course not, 6 million Tibetan can’t be wrong. Does this mean that I support the Chinese government’s repression of its own people? I could care less about how China treats its own people. I respect the Chinese people and support them in whatever path they choose. If they want to change it they will. As long as they keep loaning us money, buying our stuff, selling us theirs, and not shooting at me and you I’ll be happy. I should also note that in all my years of international travel the only negative comments I’ve ever heard directed at the Chinese government were spoken by native Chinese. And as I told my son recently, if he plans to follow me into business he needs to study Mandarin next year in college.

And with that I conservatively turn it over to you, thanks in advance for an intelligent exchange.

Coach #64,

You are quite right, you did not directly quote Marcus on the fiasco point, my mistake. I presume that you misread him and your question should therefore have been either: "Could you elaborate on your view that democratization of the Middle East is a [pipedream]?" or "Could you elaborate on your view that democratization of [Iraq] is a fiasco?" (How's that for petty, Kate?)

Thanks you for the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick book tip - looks interesting, although a quick look on Amazon indicates it will be hard to come by.

As for concentration camps, I expressed no objection to your use of the term other than the fact that Barry C has accused Leftists of using similar evocative terms, implying that others don't, while my observation would be that similar terms are used indiscriminately by all sides.

Michael Ledney # 67,

Very nice post, very deserving of a response. Unfortunately, no time to do it justice now; please check back in a couple of days...

In fact, Mr. Coach, how about rustling up an article on the subject, or approximately, on one of these rest days?

Borat

i'm not going to waste time debating any ludicrous assertion that iraq is safer now than it was under saddam. please.

michael ledney #67 -- you win best post of the day award. thanks for sticking to your conservative values, all of which i share.

(i only wish republican politicans were similarly conservative. perhaps we wouldn't have sunk $1 trillion into iraq. and perhaps 40% of every tax dollar wouldn't have to be spent on interest on national debt. very sad.)

Borat- yes, it is always good to have someone point out our faults and weaknesses, so we can correct them and change and hopefully become better human beings. My point was that it appears as though you like to nit pick the details of other posts and in doing so miss the meaning of what the person was saying. No hard feelings.

I come from a very liberal family (Bra burning, peace/ anti war marching) and they were some of the people that called my husband a baby killer, and it was not in jest. Only a few of my relatives respect our decision to remain in the military, most of all of them I have lost touch with because of their unacceptance of our decision to stay in.

We are not all 'Yes men'. Actually, I know of no 'Yes Men', I do know a lot of very opinionated men that will tighten their jaw and stiffen their back when someone is spewing anti war statements. But they will not go after the other person the same way out of respect. They can respect the other person's statements against the war but it sometimes feels like that same respect is not reciprocated.

Sometimes it is unclear what someone's intent is when the say that they are "for the troops" but want the troops to pull out. Sure, I want my husband to come home, more than anything, but I also know that if we pull out right now from Iraq and Afghanistan then there will be this immense vacuum and all of the Terrorists will look at each other and then yell, "Let's Get 'em!" and come down our streets and get us on our land. It will be for moot that our guys were dying over there. They are dying over there so we don't have to die over here. If it came to the Terrorists fighting us here on our land would you pick up a gun and fight them? Would you do as they did in the Revolutionary war and pay all that you had to financially support the war and still go out in the fields and fight hand and foot to defend your property?

Kate

Barry,

You state: "I have developed an ethical system based upon 3 core principles: the rejection of self pity, an attention to detail, and perseverance. You can build all traditional virtues from those three principles."

You also state: "I'm quite conversant on philosophy. I have studied the process of thinking, and how thinking atrophies in favor of rote habit and reflex far more than anyone I know, and more than likely most people on this planet."

One quick question: can you derive modesty from your three principles? Just wanted to know...

"BTW, a regime where innocent men, women, and children can be killed by random acts of violence (terrorism) is a preferable existence to one where moral, intellectual, and leadership talent is routinely and systematically eliminated – regardless of relative body count."

I would accept the validity of this statement ONLY from someone who has lived in both conditions - eg a resident Iraqi. Otherwise the words are utterly hollow.

I would also like a link for the death-rate studies you mention. The Lancet report, (which found the death rate post war to be FAR higher) was slated, mainly due to the difficulties they encountered in determining a pre-war figure. However, various sources, ranging from the US Cencus Bureau to the World Health Organisation place the post war mortality rate higher than pre war. I am interested to see what other studies have been done - especially ones that contradict this.

i'm infamous, among those who are forced to listen to me on a regular basis, for far-flung analogies. i'm going to try one here.

our situation in Iraq is kinda like this:

there you are, barreling down an empty road late at night, in a hurry because you're late for an appointment. you spent a little too much time sippin the ol' sizzurp. there happens to be someone walking on the shoulder. you clip this person, who in turn nails a tree and dies. you have two options:

cut-and-run. just keep driving, act like you didn't see anything. you'll probably be alright long-term (no vehicle damage, most likely no witnesses), but you'll definately be better off short-term.

stay the course. pull over. call for help. you can probably hide the mild intoxication (besides, you DO have a cold), and anyway, he was walking in the street! yea, it'll be difficult, and you might just get a dui. but if nothing else, decency and honor compels you to do right by the victim.

of course, none of this would have happened if you weren't driving drunk in the first place (http://www.alternet.org/rights/44815/). but you were - now what to do?

and i think a lot of the debate about what to do now is informed overmuch by the fact that we were driving drunk. it's no small coincidince that those who want to cut and run are also the most preoccupied with the drunk driving bit.

trying to shrug off the consequences isn't going to undo the initial action.

...i suppose the usefullness of analogies (especially mine) can be debated, i just felt like contributing.

Harry MacD (#28): There is a longer version of the Fumento piece on Ramadi up on The Weekly Standard:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/985qugel.asp?pg=1

It's worth reading for his closing section, "Are We Winning?"

The print version of that issue of The Weekly Standard pays special tribute to Navy SEAL Michael Monsoor who sacrificed his life to save those of his comrades.

To the "Cut and Run" supporters:
You're right... We're not safer here now, nor is Iraq safer. Their fearless leader only gave money to the families of suicide bombers, shot at our's and NATO's planes patroling the Kuwait/Iraq border everyday. Raped and slaughtered his own people at will. Not to mention had enough weapons and munitions stockpiled to outfit his military 3 fold. But hey you're right. We're not safer at all. The whole world isn't a better place.

If you could of seen the looks on the faces of the poeple of Iraq when they finally were taken out from under his reign of terror, you would have a whole different opinnion. Especially when you heard the horror stories of the late night raids by the Bathists for women to rape and have their way with. How would you feel if a group of militants kicked in your door, put a gun to your head and was going to make a permanent window in your dome if you fought against them taking your wife. And if that didn't stop you, they would do the same to your kids before they smoked you.

The first time an Iraqi lady came up to me in tears holding her daughter saying thank you in Arabic, it all made sense. I know that Iraq and the U.S. is better because of us as a nation and what we've done there. We just can't lose sight of the mission and remember that Japan wasn't rebuilt and made an alli over night.

I know my spelling is not up to par. I banged this out at the gym w/people all around getting ready to workout in hopes that some of the J-Holes that think we need to cut and run will read it and at least give some thought that turning Iraq over to insurgents would only make it a bigger mess. Then again some people may want to see a terrorist training camp the size of a small country. I agree... It was a big Concentration Camp.

RC- I never lived there, other then some "Visits". So I don't know if you'll accept the validity of my above statemnet or think that they are hollow as well.

please stop using "cut and run." this term was developed by the imbecile zealots who got us into this mess in the first place. stop being sheep.

Kate (#51): Congratulations on your 20th! Bless you and your family.

Can't we just get everyone in the Middle east to play Ultimate? The winner gets all the oil!

Honestly, I don't comment on these rest days, but I really enjoy the disscusion and dialog. I have gained alot of education from everyone's posts. I truly feel we as Americans must educate ourselves more on many different issues if we want to play on the world stage.

Thanks for the conversation Coach.

#36 Joe

I am an Army Staff Sergeant with 8 years in. I joined straight out of high school because someone has to serve and not everyone will. I also kind of figured I owed it to those that came before me to carry on. I have completed over 150 credit hours towards a college degree (got to stop switching majors), learned Chinese, and did a volunteer tour in Iraq to do combat forensics of post blast, IED, VBIED, and bomb maker homes; in the attempt to stop those making the bombs killing our guys. I did all of that not because I am less than intelligent or couldn't get a decent career, but because it is something that has to be done and well I really love my job. I have to say though that it always makes me laugh at the ignorance of some people when they say that no intelligent person who could get a decent career would ever join the military. I happen to know a lot of military people that have given up six figure jobs because they love this work. So props to all the military and ex-military on this site for what you do on a day to day basis, and to all of those that support them.

Kate,

My major congratulations to you on your 20 years of marriage. I have always thought that spouses have it worse than we do. You are an inspiration.

Very well said Kate. I don't pretend to know a lot about the political ins and outs of war, but I do know that I have nothing but the utmost respect and admiration for everyone in the military. Where would the rest of us be without those willing to fight for and defend our country? Prayers out to your husband and all others.

Crossfitters come and go, but the arguments about rest day posts unite us all.

Just back from vacation where I consumed nothing but fat and warm flat beer. Getting back into the CF groove. Yesterday I did 7 rounds of full warmup in 20 minutes (+20 secs). Today did 5x 1000m rowing sprints. Times 3:58, 4:08, 4:13, 4:08, 4:04.

Tariq

Hey-

HS wrestling warm up,

DL 335 x 5x5

Cool down with an Amber Bock, ... or two.

-K

CFWU x3
5k row- :21::12

Had to get out and do something. Rowing felt ok on my back, so I took it easy and just cruised.

MWU- It's like Deja-Vu. If you know a better way to describe a policy that would basicly be "cutting" your losses and "running" home, let me know. Hmmmm, Sounds like something that I heard before. Oh that's right.... Somalia. It worked there right?

Time to go home and work on that 6 pack. The one in my fridge. Arrrrggghhhh!!!

Get some, Go again!

we finally squeezed in a workout after our a fire. We did a the 3 bars of Mediacroty(Death on a diet). With 5 guys and limited supplies we did 200#DL, 60#BP w/DB, 135lb Cleans, and 10 hammer blows each side after each set and finished around 20 min.

Had to improvise at work before Vball tonight. The batteries on the ghetto C2 rower were dead hence timed rowing instead of distance.

6:00 row
75 squats
15 bar dips
4:00 row
50 squats
12 bar dips
2:00 row
25 squats
9 bar dips

22:02

Today i worked out with my dad

I did 5 rounds of

hill sprint
10 45 pound backsquat
10 handstand pushups

My time was 26:25

Today i worked out with my dad

I did 5 rounds of

hill sprint
10 45 pound backsquat
10 handstand pushups

My time was 26:25

Very proud of keegan. Handstand pushups have eluded him until today.

My workout:
3 Rounds
Hill sprint
3 Rope Climbs
10 Monkey Swings
10 HSPU

17:30

Zach,

My friend. Don't you know the answer to that? Of course.

It falls within the detail section. The more you know, the less you know. The deeper you drill, the bigger the topic becomes, and the smaller you get. Ask anybody that is a genuine master in anything. They know nothing. I have dozens of pages written on this topic.

The thing is, there is a continuum between what we might call the "spirit of exploration", and what we might call "where the rubber meets the road". In situations like this, decisions have to be made, perceptions have to formed.

I know I could be wrong. So could you. One of the possible benefits of this forum is that, in the course of hashing out ideas on controversial topics, we might actually come up with new ideas.

I'm throwing new stuff out there all the time.

I do have to say though, that for some of us anyway, there is this moment where it feels like the mind control chip has been removed, and we're like: what the h@#$ is these people's problem?

You know what? We could achieve peace in the Middle East within 2 years or less. Who is creating all the trouble, besides the drama we have in Iraq? Syria, Hezbollah (proxy for Iran, and more proximately Syria), and the Palestinians. Iran is threatening to add their name directly to the list, but hasn't yet.

If those groups, collectively, didn't feel they had substantial political constituencies in the West they could rely on, they would quickly be forced to negotiations. As it is, every time the Palestinians kill Israelis, it's too bad, but what they had coming. Every time the Israelis kill Palestinians, it's a war crime.

If Ahmadinedjad wants to say the Zionist racist pigs should die, then he's allowed poetic license. Anti-Zionism is so 80's, it's almost like retro-chic.

If an Israeli ever calls any group of Arabs depraved amoral sociopathic cretins, expect to read about in every language available on this planet. Hell, if there are Martians, they will know about it, too. And the editorials will make them wonder what's wrong with those racist Israelis.

Once you get through this mental fog, the fact that these issues are even discussed from a position of moral ambiguity makes you feel like your brain is being fried in Nancy Reagan's frying pan.

Good evening all,
I thougt I would post. I know that many of us are in the military and have our own views. I have heard republicans and democrats accuse and point fingers, but in the end America chose that partisian politics needs to take a rest. There is no simple way out and there were way to many WTF moments as to why we went into this war but now it is here and it will cause historic changes. In my opinion, we need to pull out. I heard an argument for the complete withdrawel and I looked at the historic evidence when we have done just that. Overall, it has led to a lessening of violence. Many folks are being recruited to combat us in the name of fighting the infidels. Iraq is in a civil war that is plain and simple. We had ours and they now have theirs but it must be left in the hands of the people of that nation. We are proud of our nation and the ideals that we represent. They must find their own way through the fog so to speak to find a peace. In conflict however it usually comes down to who can mobilize and fight harder and smarter. In the end we need to stop bickering amongst ourselves and begin to see that be it Dems. or Reps. in the end we are different people with different ideas trying to find a soultion to a hard problem. Enough with the back biting and let's get to solving our issues. Have a good night. I don't support the war but every night I pray for my brethern for a safe return.

Barry,

Thanks for the kind response. I was just joshing you. (But you knew that.)

We've voiced our disagreements in the past (and civilly), so there's no need to rehash them here. I would argue, though, that "we" can't achieve peace in the Middle East in two years. The "Middle East" might be able to do so, but, for an area with hundreds of years of colonial history under its belt, any intervention by a foreign power -- whether it be benign or benevolent -- will be seen as an irritant and opposed as such, whether it be on rational or irrational grounds. Peace in the Middle East, whether it be in Iraq, Israel, Palestine, Egypt, etc., has to be an organic process, which, admittedly, is an open-ended and indeterminate affair.

I'm interested to know what your training in philosophy is. I'm a year away from my doctorate in philosophy and theology (at Claremont Graduate University), though I could have attended your alma mater, UChicago. Having been baptized in the Continental tradition, your articulation of "thinking" sounds somewhat familiar, though I have a hard time dissociating the notion of thinking from my Kantian/critical theoretical training. At least with critical theory, thinking "thinks outside of thought itself," and tries to consider possibilities yet unknown. I think you're occasionally headed in this direction, though I often sense a more Lockean strain to what you are terming "thinking." Am I headed down the right path, here?

~Zach

Rest day workout = cut/split wood 1 hour.
Run one mile

Comment on article: amazing how someone could write a whole article and not mention the elephant in the room - A Christian leader of a traditionally Christian nation was assasinated by Muslims who are in the process of trying to take over. World War III in a nutshell. Like it or not this problem will not go away by itself nor will it be contained to the Middle East. The few Lebanese people I have known over the last 20 years all said the same thing, "Leabanon is a Christian country. It was stolen from us and we want it back."

You know, Tobias, I understand what you are saying. It may seem contradictory, but I am a peacenik. I have never been in war, but I've had good friends who have, and from what they tell me, there is nothing beautiful about it. It's an awful, awful, thing. I have zero romantic illusions about it. It's pools of blood, and pieces of bodies strewn all over the place. It's something good people find their way through, not something they enjoy. It's fatigue, flies, dust in your crotch, and feet that want to fall off. There's likely more, that others can fill in.

I think about withdrawing, and even though I'm not the one there, it makes me feel good. It's a relief. Finally, the damn thing is done.

Then, it hits me: it isn't done. The people--however many they may have been--who trusted us, who took our word when we said we would cover their asses when they became mayor/police chief/battalion commander/your pick, still want us there. They want people they can rely on, as they try--against the odds--to build their own country.

These people are there. There are heroes, I believe, arising out of the Iraqi people. People who are willing to risk their lives for a better future for their people and their families. There are no doubt many corrupt elements, and people with less noble ideals, but the people we need, the people with dreams: I believe they are there. I'm not there, so I can't say I've shaken their hands, but my gut tells me that--as different as Iraqi and American cultures may be--there are people in Iraq who genuinely want freedom.

Michael Ledney,

I read your post a couple hours ago. Your point is well taken. Where is the flame, the spark, of intense desire for freedom? Shouldn't the whole country be on fire for freedom, for self determination?

My take on this is that, historically, the "George Washingtons", as Coach has put it, have been exterminated. What we have left, are the next generations of George Washingtons, who have seen what happened to the last generation. Something about being tortured to death tends to put a damper on many peoples' political aspirations.

At the same time, many people are making the effort. They made the effort to vote, and they are frequently caught in whatever line the terrorists find them in now, such as police, or military. And killed.

It takes a tough SOB to persist in that sort of environment, and as far as I can tell, they are doing it.

Zach,

I depend a bit on Edward de Bono, who I like a lot, and a bunch on my own set of what I call heuristics. I make up my own stuff when I can't find anything that suits the purpose.

I've read quite a bit of philosophy on my own. I was compelled to read Kant, Hegel, Leibniz, and some others in grad school. Descartes, Plato, Nietzsche, Russell, Heidegger, Camus and many others, I've read on my own.

All that stuff, it makes sense up to a point. What interests me, though, is not so much the content of thinking, as the form it takes. What is the process.

I learned a long time ago that I could create a compelling argument for darn near anything, right or wrong. I could probably argue the case of the "Endloesung" or the Southern approach to race, if I had to. That doesn't make either right, of course.

I would probably be a darn good attorney. Not that there's anything wrong with that. (with apologies to the appropriate parties).

My big hit on career aptitude was "advertising executive". Well, I've met some ad folks, and that is a tough, tough, ethically challenged business. I'll stay where I'm at.

Did we meet in Santa Cruz at the May Cert?

Thank you all for the well wishes for my husband, kids, and me. Here's looking at another 20, 40 or 60!

Kate

# 96 Barry-
Race relations in the South? Now That would be an interesting rest day topic!

Kate

Ray: 1 hr weight training
Will: 1 hr weight training and 30 min cardio

QA4, Afghanistan

Barry,

Unfortunately, I've not been to a CrossFit certification seminar. I'm still not an "orthodox" CrossFitter, though I've used a lot of the principles (I had the honor of taking classes on kinesiology and resistance training from Stephen Fleck -- who trains Olympians and has written a number of books on the topic -- at Colorado College) in designing my own personal program.

I also agree about the "arguability" of just about anything in philosophy. Some are troubled by the seemingly recent move towards relativism in the West, but the open-ended nature of philosophical discourse has been around for some time. It is a bit troubling, though, and one of my advisors has often remarked that graduate education ends up making everyone a relativist.

A process orientation to thinking is fairly recent, and not many -- despite modern discoveries in science -- have yet to see that thinking is a process that is often iterative, inordinately complex, "irrational" at multiple levels, and meaning oriented. Of course, the often irrational or unconscious values that inform thinking are the bedrock of the process itself, and the process of thinking should normatively include a concept of self-criticism which brings even these values to light...

Just my thoughts after a post-workout dinner...

Response to number 36:

I served from 1989 - 1994 as a Navy corpsmen, primarily with the Ist Recon Bn/Co, and briefly with 1st Force Recon. I served in the gulf (shield/storm) and Somalia (restore hope). I am currently a physician with a wife and two kids. As a descendent of William Bradford, my forefathers have fought in every war and skirmish the U.S. has ever been involved in, including both sides of the Civil war.

I joined the military after 1.5 yrs of college. Ran out of money. Worked in an iron foundry for three months after college, but decided after some conversations with the old timers that I didn't want to spend the rest of my life there. Talked to a Navy recruiter on Friday and left on Monday. Why did I join? Wanted out of my hometown, didn't want to be the first generation not to serve, wanted to test myself, wanted to be part of something bigger than myself, secretly wanted to be a Navy Seal (found out that colorblindness excluded me after basic - made it to dive school/recon/force anyways after becoming a "doc" and basically doing my own dive physical; FTS). Anyways, when I signed up it was not because I wanted to save Arabs from other Arabs, or save Somailians from other Somalians. But, doing so gave me the opportunity to acheive some of the other things on my list. I don't believe that most of the people currently serving signed up to prevent Iraqis from killing other Iraqis. Did you? As for the mission of setting up a democracy, was that our original intention? Or was it to rid Iraq of WMD's/terrorists. When no WMD's were found, the reason for the ivasion/occupation seemed to change to first dethroning Sadame for crimes against humanity, and and then to establishing a democratic government in Iraq. Only time will tell if the war made the world a safer place, or just turned Iraq into a petri dish for anti-U.S. sentiment and future terrotists. While the war may have allowed some military members to achieve some of their goals, I suspect that this is little conselation for the families of the thousands of soldiers/sailors/marines who have died.
Just my 2 cents.

Marcus #70,

Not only will you not waste time “debating any ludicrous assertion that Iraq is safer now than it was under Saddam”, but you’ll also not engage meaningfully on the criteria for which I make the assertion – body count of innocents. You have a Liberal’s fondness for the seeming calm of totalitarian life. (“With Saddam the trains were on time”.) Step away from Pelosi and Katie Couric for a moment: If far fewer innocents are being butchered everyday, doesn’t this support my contention?

If you’re unwilling to waste time debating my contention, why don’t you offer a scintilla of evidence for your contention that Iraq is more dangerous post Saddam? I believe you cannot, but more importantly that it is essential to your world view to never let any quantitative or otherwise substantive argument challenge the “Bush Lied; Millions Died” logic of the Left.

RC #73,

Of course you found my words to be hollow. What I offered was a moral observation on the value of liberty, and you drew a blank – heard nothing. Your education has failed you.

Studies? Mortality rates? Lancet? Are you kidding me? Mortality rates published by totalitarian regimes are, like their reported literacy rates, and their history books, never trusted by intelligent people. Bodies can be hid but can also be dug up. (They’re harder to hide than most facts.) Count the corpses instead. (Assume not all of them have or will be found.)

Saddam was engaged in genocide and mass murder. You’ve chosen to ignore it. History will not be able to distinguish your and Marcus’ “peaceful Iraq under Saddam” view (my characterization, not yours) from the Holocaust deniers’ pitiful claims.

http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/pdf/iraq_mass_graves.pdf Tell me this is faked, or U.S. propaganda and I’ll bring you the same info from NGO’s historically and reflexively critical of U.S. policy.

Tell us all, RC, that the current rate of butchering innocents in Iraq is remotely comparable to what transpired under Baathist rule. Go ahead.

“More dangerous today” my ass.

"Of course you found my words to be hollow. What I offered was a moral observation on the value of liberty, and you drew a blank – heard nothing. Your education has failed you."

Actually, what you offered was a personal opinion about a situation you have no direct experience of, made from the saefty of your computer.

I do not deny or choose to ignore the butchery that went on under Sadaam, so please don't twist my words to better suit your argument. I merely asked for you to direct me to the studies you quoted before, partic