2009-07-26
The Moron Party
In "news" from Iraq, the left-wing goes to extraordinary lengths to provide what can only be described as entertainment. They don't have a single example of Americans violating the security agreement. Even if they did have a single example, the proper process is for that violation of orders to be reported to the military justice system for a court martial or whatever. And thus, the violation of the law by a rogue soldier would be irrelevant. It's the same as if a car gets a flat tyre. You don't say the car is bad. It's quite normal for cars to get flat tyres - these things don't perfectly smoothly. So long as you don't insist on keeping the flat tyre because flat tyres aren't that bad, then there's nothing wrong with the system (unless you have technology better than tyres in every aspect and refuse to use it).
Anyway, in this case they don't have so much as a flat tyre. They have nothing at all other than an alleged *get this* ***EMAIL***. That's it. No Wild West Shootout in Downtown Baghdad. NOTHING. Just a friggin unsourced email, which doesn't even say that they are about to violate the policy anyway. A single guy is unlikely to be able to violate the policy on his own authority even if he wanted to. He would be required to coordinate troop movements, and be told "can't you read the SOFA, moron?". They go further and claim that "US commanders are frustrated by the new rules". Really? Is this commanders, plural, as in 2, or a majority, or a vast majority or what? Any poll done on US commander attitudes towards the SOFA? Just 19 days on, they've managed to do a survey to find out frustration level? Really? And all this is non-event is supposedly causing "tension". Examples of tension please? Measured how? ie some sort of measurable increase in tension or is it just the normal tension and this is irrelevant? Does anyone on the left-wing have any idea at all of the scientific process?
Moving on from the morons at the BBC to the morons of Baghdad who think that "Baghdad's sovereignty and independence had been recovered" because US troops have moved a few km. It would take all of about 10 minutes for those US troops to come back. If you believe that the US troops in Baghdad were causing some sort of violation of the independent actions of the Iraqi politicians, then you are a moron. If you think that that was happening, but stopped when the US troops moved a few km, then you're also a moron. Get this. EVEN IF THE TROOPS PULL OUT ALL THE WAY BACK TO KUWAIT, IT DOESN'T MAKE A SPIT OF DIFFERENCE. THEY CAN BE BACK AT ANY TIME.
If your definition of "independence" is "not being able to have committed US troops and US politicians and US populace enforce their will on the Iraqi people", then that was lost a long long time ago. If you genuinely want to protect against that, you either need to join NATO (and kick the US out), and get all those Stealth Bombers out of range of Europe (and Iraq). Assuming you want to close down the US's options to use conventional force to impose its will. If you want to try the nuclear route, you have a bit more of a problem. If e.g. the US wanted to say ban headscarf-wearing in Iraq, and was prepared to nuke Iraq if required, then the European members of an American-less NATO would probably be unwilling to commit suicide in the face of US threats, especially if the American have a reasonable reason for wanting to do such a thing. Note that the Europeans have been cajoled into making Czechoslovakia give up some of its territory to Hitler, so there is a limit to what they are willing to do for their allies.
Ensuring that there are constraints on US power is a somewhat quaint objective, given that the US is the greatest source of good in the world today, even on a per-capita basis. It's something I support doing after the war against the non-666 forces has been won, and purely as an amusing testament to how seriously we safeguard freedom and human rights, not because I think there's the slightest threat.
But that's the start of what you need to do to maintain true independence. There's also the economic factors. Even without the threat of Stealth Bombers, what are you going to do about the US putting unilateral trade sanctions on you, thus lowering your standard of living?
Anyway, enjoy your party you ungrateful guttersnipes. Let's hope you get what you so rightfully deserve at the appropriate time. And please be aware that what I think about you doesn't apply to all Iraqis. Especially not the 0.3% of Iraq that voted for Mithal Al Alusi.
|
Anyway, in this case they don't have so much as a flat tyre. They have nothing at all other than an alleged *get this* ***EMAIL***. That's it. No Wild West Shootout in Downtown Baghdad. NOTHING. Just a friggin unsourced email, which doesn't even say that they are about to violate the policy anyway. A single guy is unlikely to be able to violate the policy on his own authority even if he wanted to. He would be required to coordinate troop movements, and be told "can't you read the SOFA, moron?". They go further and claim that "US commanders are frustrated by the new rules". Really? Is this commanders, plural, as in 2, or a majority, or a vast majority or what? Any poll done on US commander attitudes towards the SOFA? Just 19 days on, they've managed to do a survey to find out frustration level? Really? And all this is non-event is supposedly causing "tension". Examples of tension please? Measured how? ie some sort of measurable increase in tension or is it just the normal tension and this is irrelevant? Does anyone on the left-wing have any idea at all of the scientific process?
Moving on from the morons at the BBC to the morons of Baghdad who think that "Baghdad's sovereignty and independence had been recovered" because US troops have moved a few km. It would take all of about 10 minutes for those US troops to come back. If you believe that the US troops in Baghdad were causing some sort of violation of the independent actions of the Iraqi politicians, then you are a moron. If you think that that was happening, but stopped when the US troops moved a few km, then you're also a moron. Get this. EVEN IF THE TROOPS PULL OUT ALL THE WAY BACK TO KUWAIT, IT DOESN'T MAKE A SPIT OF DIFFERENCE. THEY CAN BE BACK AT ANY TIME.
If your definition of "independence" is "not being able to have committed US troops and US politicians and US populace enforce their will on the Iraqi people", then that was lost a long long time ago. If you genuinely want to protect against that, you either need to join NATO (and kick the US out), and get all those Stealth Bombers out of range of Europe (and Iraq). Assuming you want to close down the US's options to use conventional force to impose its will. If you want to try the nuclear route, you have a bit more of a problem. If e.g. the US wanted to say ban headscarf-wearing in Iraq, and was prepared to nuke Iraq if required, then the European members of an American-less NATO would probably be unwilling to commit suicide in the face of US threats, especially if the American have a reasonable reason for wanting to do such a thing. Note that the Europeans have been cajoled into making Czechoslovakia give up some of its territory to Hitler, so there is a limit to what they are willing to do for their allies.
Ensuring that there are constraints on US power is a somewhat quaint objective, given that the US is the greatest source of good in the world today, even on a per-capita basis. It's something I support doing after the war against the non-666 forces has been won, and purely as an amusing testament to how seriously we safeguard freedom and human rights, not because I think there's the slightest threat.
But that's the start of what you need to do to maintain true independence. There's also the economic factors. Even without the threat of Stealth Bombers, what are you going to do about the US putting unilateral trade sanctions on you, thus lowering your standard of living?
Anyway, enjoy your party you ungrateful guttersnipes. Let's hope you get what you so rightfully deserve at the appropriate time. And please be aware that what I think about you doesn't apply to all Iraqis. Especially not the 0.3% of Iraq that voted for Mithal Al Alusi.
# posted by Paul Edwards @ 11:53 
