Thank you for A civil reply. I understand your point. I'm telling you your own posts undermine it. One sided statements of of understaning tend to indicate support for that side. You can legitimately claim that of me and I'll accept it. You just can't seem to apply the same rules to yourself.
I firmly believe the US has to take a proactive role in fighting terrorism because the soft hand approach of the Clinton administration was an obvious failure as was GB1's policy of containment. That said I think GB2 has screwed up in all sorts of ways with regard to the aftermath in Iraq.
One thing I strongly agree with is elections. Caving in to the terrorists by postponing elections will only embolden them. The majority should not have their voice stifled by a fanatical minority. Sure I'd rather everybody have a vote, but letting most vote is far preferable to waiting forever for peace before letting anyone vote.
Regards,
Mark
Current Events » in reply to But you keep driving it home.
Nice Reply But
The whole thread (23 posts)
- The importance of the elections in Iraq
- "- - - democratically elected government - - - "
- Yes We Know You Think
- This election will be imperfect. All elections are imperfect. It is the best that can be managed at this time. Why do you not accept that? (n/t)
- It is of genuine concern
- re: It is of genuine concern
- If the Sunnis don't play the game, then the will not be able to help write the rules. It is THEIR choice to exclude themselves. THEY will suffer the consequences.
- Say C I V I L W A R (n/t)
- OK, "C I V I L W A R" Only the Sunnis are going to be wiped out if they don't stop attacking the Kurds and the Shi'ites. They are pouring gasoline on the very beds upon which they will lie. Outnumber…
- no question. point? (n/t)
- Say C I V I L W A R (n/t)
- It is of genuine concern
- "- - - democratically elected government - - - "