wrote in message
news:1164963325.695614.176290@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...
> DVH wrote:
>> "John Rennie" wrote in message
>> news:jZWdneIEnrJz3PLYRVnyug@giganews.com...
>> >
>> > "DVH" wrote in message
>> > news:rDFbh.438$r95.198@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
>> >>
> [..]
>> >> A fine post.
>> >>
>> >
>> > You have to be .ing joking, mate. If you believe any of the above
>> > you
>> > are a candidate for the same lunatic asylum that peejay resides in.
>>
>> What is untrue about about it? Why are you so upset with this neat
>> analysis
>> by PJ?
>
> Because it's simple-minded, that's why.
Complexity isn't a virtue.
> Because it's yet another case
> of a man seeing what he wants to see and disregarding the rest.
>
> *If* the only problem was a murderous Sunni minority, then there'd be
> little real long-term problem; the US could just team up with Iran and
> Syria and they'd pretty soon be outnumbered and outgunned. But because
> Iran and Syria have already been demonised by GW Bush, such an alliance
> is going to be very difficult to put together (and of course such an
> alliance would also cause the Iranin and Syrian leadership difficulty
> with their own populace).
What do you suppose the west's duty is now? If you think we have a "duty" to
do anything, that is.
>
> It's been interesting, if depressing, to see the neocon apologists spin
> the situation in Iraq as the reality has changed from an easy military
> victory to small amount of unrest to increasingly deadly terrorism and
> sectarian killings; whatever happens is 'as they expected',
A reference for that quote would be handy.
> however
> hotly they had denied in advance that it would happen.
>
> Looking back to what was said in ukpm in advance of the invasion, the
> person who was most nearly correct in his prognosis was the
> sadly-missed Steve Glynn, who at the time was derided by the neocons on
> the group as 'defeatist'.
So he was, judging from the outcome.
I see he's alive and well and posting elsewhere, by the way.
|