Saudi Arabia is said to be ready to do whatever it takes to ensure stability in Iraq.
A senior White House official says Saudi Arabia would be ready and willing to deploy its own troops into Sunni-dominated areas of Iraq if the Bush Administration plan to crush the insurrection fails, leading to total chaos. …
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - Dave Nalle
MCH, did I mention that the rate of unplanned prengancies among enlisted women is 42% higher in Iraq than it is among those not deployed in Iraq, and 83% higher than the general population of the same age? So our soldiers in Iraq are MAKING lives, not losing them. Isn't that reassuring?
Dave
27 - Dave Nalle
Oh, and just to add to that earlier statistic, the number of children born to military personnel deployed in Iraq exceeds the number born to an equivalent number of people in the general population by so much that deploying soldiers to Iraq is actually responsible for more than twice as many additional births as there have been deaths in the war.
Dave
28 - SHARK
re: Nalle's statistics:
...and with the Average American Family having 2.3 children -- and with 3024 DEAD AMERICANS as of this morning --
that means BUSH & CO. have created SIX-THOUSAND, NINE-HUNDRED and FIFTY FIVE (6,955) AMERICAN ORPHANS.
====
in other words, Dave, STOP. PLEASE STOP. For the love of gawd, STOP.
====
Clavos, re. your constant "zzzzzz"
Shark sez "zzzzzzz"
ie. If you don't like it, don't read it.
====
re: BRIAN -- "..."I know .. the American public doesn't support the Bush "surge", but I suspect the collective sense of embarrassment that would reverberate throughout the country following such a horrible defeat..."
This is still one of the most ignorant, fucked up remarks posted around here in a long time.
====
A semi-intellectual blowhard whose goal is to implicitly insult the dreaded Democrats/liberals -- or to write sentences that sound 'good' -- but are relatively meaningless: "I do not pretend to be an expert on Middle Eastern politics. But I do think the status quo in the region is unsustainable, and without innovative solutions nothing is going to change."
Practicing for a career in American politics.
heh.
====
PS: WHAT DEANO SAID.
29 - Martin Lav
"some people want government to do its job, which may include making war in some cases, and that the choice to support generals and elected officials in determining when to use military force isn't the same as ordering troops into combat yourself."
Dave Nalle
What does this mean?
Aren't you for less government?
Or are you only for a government that supports only your ideals?
You can't have it both ways Nalle. You are either with us or you're for Big Government.
30 - Clavos
Clavos, re. your constant "zzzzzz"
Shark sez "zzzzzzz"
ie. If you don't like it, don't read it.
Thanks, shark, but I think I'll just keep on doing what I've been doing...
31 - Martin Lav
What's that Clavos?
Waiting for Dave to say something and then you following up with your agreement and accolades?
One wonders (at least I do) if you and Dave aren't one and the same person.....
32 - Dave Nalle
Aren't you for less government?
Of course, always.
Or are you only for a government that supports only your ideals?
Absolutely, because my ideals are the best ones for the nation, as they include absolute freedom of thought, action and expression.
One wonders (at least I do) if you and Dave aren't one and the same person.....
No, I'm the one with the silly cowboy hat and he's the one who looks a bit like Billy Joel.
Of course we don't have pictures of you and shark to go by. You guys could be the same person, since you both make no sense at all.
Dave
33 - Martin Lav
Aren't you for less government?
"Of course, always." - Nalle
Or are you only for a government that supports only your ideals?
"Absolutely, because my ideals are the best ones for the nation, as they include absolute freedom of thought, action and expression."
Then since the majority of Americans do not support the war and the majority of commenters on this site think your a fraud, WE THE PEOPLE demand you leave.
How's that?
34 - Dave Nalle
Martin, who ever said I supported the war? That's your delusional fantasy.
As for commenters thinking I'm a fraud, you and Marthe apparently form a majority of two?
Dave
35 - Martin Lav
Who's Marthe? And how is it pronounced?
36 - Clavos
What's that Clavos?
Stalking MCH's stalking of non veterans, martin.
37 - Clavos
Then since the majority of Americans do not support the war and the majority of commenters on this site think your a fraud, WE THE PEOPLE demand you leave.
One flaw in your thinking, martin:
This site is not a democracy; it's a privately owned entity the rules for which are decided by its owners, not the mob.
One other thing:
Who appointed you leader of "THE PEOPLE"?
38 - Martin Lav
Obviously Clavos you know little about democracy and confuse it, like Dave does, with socialism.
We the People doesn't need a decider.
WE decide.
WE have spoken.
YOU should listen.
39 - Franco
#37 " Martin Lav
"Who's Marthe? And how is it pronounced?"
LOL
40 - Clavos
YOU have spoken, martin, I don't see anyone with you.
And it doesn't matter, anyway, martin, as BC is a private site, and you're NOT the decider for it.
One thing I DO know about democracy, martin: if left unchecked, it invariably descends into mob rule, and the mob doesn't have a mind.
Thankfully, the USA is not a democracy, martin. It's a republic. You do remember your history; Franklin's response to Mrs. Powel's query, don't you martin?
Or are you having difficulty remembering?
41 - Franco
#35 " Martin Lav
"Then since the majority of Americans do not support the war and the majority of commenters on this site think your a fraud, WE THE PEOPLE demand you leave."
40 " Martin Lav
"Obviously Clavos you know little about democracy and confuse it, like Dave does, with socialism.
We the People doesn't need a decider.
WE decide.
WE have spoken.
YOU should listen."
First of all Martin, no one likes the war, but for you to say the majority of Americans do not support the war is saying you alone speak for everyone as fact when really it is only your opion.
The Dem’s take over of the House and Senate in November does not support your assertion for the following reasons
If you go bake and look you will find that the Dem’s ran there central campaign on a new direction for the war in Iraq and used it to counters Bush’s “stay the course”. You will also find back then, as now, the Dem’s did not have a plan, only a campaign slogan. The slogan worked and the American people spoke and said they wanted to see a change in direction in Iraq.
You are the only one that said the Americas do not support the war. That my be your position and you have a right to it, but to try and mind read the majority of Americans and say they share your exact thought is not logical. It’s just your opinion,
I think your wrong and I think the majority of Americans do support the war, it is my option that they spoke and said lets get the cluster fucks out of the way and get this f+++++g thing under control.
There are big differences it our opinions. I hope your wrong.
I suggest you take your doctoral opinions out our democracy and go pound sand.
42 - Lumpy
I believe martin has come out as a supporter of what jefferson called the tyrrany of the majority, which is a crappy way to run a country.
As for support for the war a recent poll showed over 70 percent of the population hoped that bush's escalation would be successful. People are sick of the war but they haven't given up.
43 - Clavos
Dead on, Lumpy.
Here's an interesting quote from De Tocqueville I just found in an opinion piece written by Mike Rosen and published in the Rocky Mountain News:
Alexis de Tocqueville, writing in Democracy in America in the 1830s, cautioned that democracy could be taken too far, noting that "there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level, and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality in freedom."
44 - Clavos
"As for commenters thinking I'm a fraud, you and Marthe apparently form a majority of two?"
- Dave Nalle
Me and Shark make four...
Wow! It's a whole movement!!!
A Four Man March On Austin!!!
45 - STM
Clav quoted: "There exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level."
Beautiful philosophy ... nothing like cutting down the wankers and tall poppies. It's worked for us Down Under. You guys ought to try it some time :)
46 - Dave Nalle
STM, in a truly liberal society the hand of the powerful should always be extended to lift up the downtrodden and provide them with opportunity. That's the very heart of liberalism. And by that I mean the good kind of liberalism which built this country, not the destructive perversion of those ideals we see in play today.
Dave
47 - STM
Nah, bugger the powerful ... power to the people, which is where it should be. Let the ordinary, knockabout folks run the place, and let them dictate to those who would be powerful if they could be. That idea's built a good country here, and I hope it stays that way.
Each to its own Dave ... remember, this country was founded by convicts and immigrants with either a hatred or a healthy disrespect for authority.
Different place to the US. God 'elps those who 'elp themselves so bugger the big wigs and the would-be's if they could-be's.
No one's ever truly prospered in this country by thinking they're any better than anyone else. It truly is built on an egalitarian spirit and you get chopped down pretty quick if you try it on.
Like I wrote on another thread recently, try getting into the back seat of a cab in Sydney (unless you're a woman) instead of riding up the front with the driver and see what kind of reaction you get.
It's indicative ....
48 - Clavos
Stan,
Yer a good mate, but I think you left out the best and most important part of that quote:
and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality in freedom."
IMO, Mate...
49 - STM
Yes Clav, naughty old me ... I did do that didn't I - on purpose of course, but I rather suspect you already bloody know that it was a judicious piece of editing. It was written by an American of course, so it doesn't apply here :)
50 - Clavos
Um, Stan, old boy:
Alexis De Tocqueville was writing about America, but he was actually a Frenchman.
He traveled extensively in America during the early nineteenth century. From those travels came his best-known work, "Democracy In America", which was published in 1835. The quote, of course, is from it.
We don't give Americans prissy sounding names like that, mate!
51 - STM
Well bugger me, Clav ... I should have known someone who'd write something like that could only be a duplicitous bloody Frenchman.
I'm surprised the French are given any street cred at all these days in the US. At least you've finally woken up to what the rest of us have known for centuries: can't trust the buggers.
I'm half joking of course - I actually don't mind them. I've always found them to be good people once you work out what's going on.
52 - Clavos
Except for the waiters, of course.
What (as you asked me a couple of nights ago) are you doing up at 0152, mate? Sunday morning? Planning on sleeping in?
53 - STM
I'm at work mate ... it's 2am Sunday here. Just about to knock off, however, and drive home (in my French diesel-powered car! I can't believe I bought one, but it's actually not bad. It also has the steering wheel on the proper side). Have had to stay back a little as we've had a bit of sports action, and a cop was shot down the bad end of town tonight just a hop, skip and a jump from the office so the cops are everywhere, flying over in helicopters and what have you.
54 - Clavos
Stan,
Did we not have several discussions recently about gun control, in which you pointed out the primary benefit was elimination of gun related violence?
a cop was shot down the bad end of town tonight
Must have been an American tourist who did the shooting? :>)
55 - STM
Ah, yes, I thought you'd pick up on that. The best I can offer, and it's true, is that it's unusual. Nevertheless, I still prefer to stay off the streets when the cops are zooming around angry. They've spared no expense, either. The trains are shut down while they go on the hunt for the two shooters and you'd think they were getting ready to invade Iraq. Can't say I blame though for being a tad pissed off.
56 - Dave Nalle
STM, here in the US the cops generally support - quite vocally - private ownership of guns, because on the whole it makes their jobs much easier when honest citizens are able to defend themselves and when criminals have a genuine fear that any victim could potentially strike back.
Dave
57 - S.T.M
Ah, but that's in the US, where lots of cops actually really like guns in their private lives.
The opposite is true here: cops generally don't like guns on the streets, period. And they certainly don't want a proliferation of them out in the community like there was in the old days.
Every man and his dog had a gun here 10 years ago, and there were shootings all the time. There are a lot less now, although the demise of the old-style self-policing criminal milieu (most of them were shot or locked up in a gangland war in the mid-to-late '80s. To say the place was like a modern-day version of prohibition-era Chicago then wouldn't be too far off the mark) has led to an increase in other violent crimes committed by gangs of younger criminals of various ethinc origins.
But there have been less cop killings since the ban.
58 - moonraven
Just a minute here--there will be no march on Austin that includes THIS bird.
Dave's freezing his ass off there and it's 85 degrees here in Central Mexico! I am not nuts.
When he finally starts having to EAT those frozen dog turds on the porch of his trailer, justice will have been served.
Now, if you sandbox standbys do not mind, I would like to comment on the topic.
Not on Dave's piece, however, as it is not written in standard English--nor any of the other languages that I read.
First, I DO have a trickle of experience of the Middle East. I have BEEN to Saudi, and you couldn't pay me enough to drive there--those folks still think they are racing camels in the sand!
They allegedly cause every traffic accident in Jordan and Bahrain.
Saudi women have drivers who drive them across the bridge to Bahrain. The women take the wheel in Manama and drop the drivers off to get drunk as skunks (Saudi is dry) and then go spend the entire day shopping at Seef Mall for the teeny tiny jeans and tops they wear under those black abayas and jeweled cell phones.
Then they pick up the driver, pour a thermos of hot coffee down his throat--and he drives them back across the bridge to Saudi.
But seriously:
1. There are plenty of Saudis in Iraq. Many are actively leading the Sunni resistance, and more have joined the fray since the lynching of Saddam Hussein.
2. As several folks mentioned, adding Saudi military to the picture would only increase the number of Sunnis out to revenge the death of Saddam, among other things.
(I have never heard one single person in the Middle East mention that Iraqis are better off since the US invasion. Considering that Saddam Hussein does not have that many fans outside of Iraq, that's a clear indication that things are VERY bad there.)
2. The Saudi military is a joke. Putting those jokers in Iraq would yes, get them out of Saudi--but it would just be pouring gasoline on the enormous flames of ineptitude already raging there.
3. At this moment the latest Cromagnon at the helm of the Pentagon is trying to beef up defensive and offensive capability in the Gulf(There is a fairly large, vulnerable US navy base in Bahrain 3 blocks from where I used to live--one of the reasons I justcame back to Mexico....) in case Iran decides to close the Straits of Hormuz. Sending a bunch of Saudi troops north into Iraq would be at odds with the current scheme.
4. The Saudis ALWAYS play both ends against the middle--not just Osama Bin Laden--this offer makes them look like good guys and if they were taken up on it would be a great opportunity to beef up the non-military Sunni Saudis already fighting in Iraq.
I could go on and on, I suppose, but then I would start to feel creepily like Dave Nalle.
59 - Dave Nalle
Oddly, when she has no ideological axe to grind, Moonraver makes a little bit of sense. Of course, she still can't rein in the personal attacks, but her assessment of the Saudi situation is not bad.
As for how many Saudis are already in Iraq, where do you think the 10-20 thousand Al Qaeda who are there came from? As is their SOP the leaders are Saudis and the cannon fodder come from the poorest nations in the region like Yemen and Sudan.
Dave
60 - moonraven
The deal here, Dave, although you don't seem to get it, is that I NEVER have an ideological axe to grind.
I have no adherence whatsoever to any ideology except maybe something called Keep Your Nose Clean Pragmatism.
YOU, in the majority of your posts, DO have an ideological axe to grind.
If that was not a rhetorical question you asked, I can tell you that a fair number of those Al Quaeda fighters in Iraq came from Jordan, also.
In this case you did not put forth a big raft of survivalist looking for commies under the bed propaganda, so by writing a comment based on my experience, LIKE I ALWAYS DO, I did not step on your big pointy...boots.
61 - Dave Nalle
I'm afraid you're not an entirely objective judge of your own behavior, MR. You clearly feel an ideological allegiance to Chavez and other socialists, because when their flaws are pointed out in a relatively objective and straightforward manner you immediately become defensive. I think most people who have seen your behavior here would agree or say that I was being overly kind in my description.
Dave
62 - moonraven
Dave, Nobody elected you to speak for the readers of this site.
(Of course clavos would say that it's not a democracy, but a dictatorship but he knows where he can go with his cubano culero chachacha.)
1. Don't tell me how I feel. I am here to tell YOU how I feel. You do NOt speak for me--or for anyone else.
2. You have never OBJECTIVELY or STRAIGHTFORWARDLY pointed out the flaws in ANYTHING, Dave. Everything you write that I have read has been couched in the Commies under the Bed language of propaganda.
3. If you have written ANYTHING that is OBJECTIVELY or STRAIGHTFORWARDLY critical of ANYTHING, please publish it. I would like to see it.
4. Your kindness and 3 bucks apiece will buy us all a cup of coffee at the Third World Exploiting Starbucks.
63 - Clavos
Um, moonbeam,
I NEVER have an ideological axe to grind.
What the hell is this...
Your kindness and 3 bucks apiece will buy us all a cup of coffee at the Third World Exploiting Starbucks.
Oh, and BTW: it's 5 bucks.
64 - Dave Nalle
1. Don't tell me how I feel. I am here to tell YOU how I feel. You do NOt speak for me--or for anyone else.
I'm not telling you how you feel, I'm telling you how others perceive you - something which you clearly have no consciousness of judging by your behavior.
Dave
65 - moonraven
You just made my point, clavos.
If its now 5 bucks for a cup a java at Starbucks and the price paid to producers has not risen--which it has NOT--then they are exploiting Third World producers even more now than they were a month ago.
Just how is that an ideological issue?
I am sure the coffee bean producers here in Chiapas and Veracruz would dearly LOVE to hear your explanation of that one.
You claim that your opinions are facts and that my facts are ideological statements.
What the hell is THAT?
66 - moonraven
No, Dave, You are telling me how YOU perceive me.
And I could not care less--even if you were multiplied by a hundred.
67 - Clavos
moonie,
then they are exploiting Third World producers
They're exploiting First World yuppies, who could go to Waffle House (too redneck and declassé for them) and get the same cup for $1.00. Or better yet, brew it at home for less than 50 cents.
And most of the "Third World" producers are big corporate plantations or coops who charge whatever the buyers will pay -- when they have a freeze, the price goes up; when there's a good harvest, it goes down. Starbucks has to compete against all the other wholesale buyers for its beans.
Meanwhile, Starbucks' prices are so outrageous they insulate the company from the vagaries of the futures market, but they rip off only the people stupid enough to pay them because it's trendy.
68 - moonraven
Well, well--clavos knew the price of that trendy cup.
If it really IS five bucks.
I did not know.
What does that say about us?
Here in Mexico--where I live, and which has traditionally been a fairly big coffee producer for the world market--the majority of producers are coops and families, largely in the states of Chiapas and Veracruz.
But youwouldn't know that since you clearly are not a Mexican.
I have NOTHING against the yuppies (is that term still in use?) being exploited by Starbucks.
No one is forcing them to pay the Starbucks price.
Here in the Third World, as you pointed out yourself, producers are paid what the buyer feels like paying. The deal is take it or leave it.
69 - Clavos
Here in the Third World, as you pointed out yourself, producers are paid what the buyer feels like paying. The deal is take it or leave it.
Actually, I pointed out that the buyers have to pay what the market (supply and demand) makes them pay. Because there are thousands of buyers, they are competing against each other for the available supply of bean. Small harvest=high price; large harvest=low price. To protect themselves against huge buyers is exactly why the small producers form co-ops: more clout in the market.
Because the growing of coffee is regionalized worldwide, with each region having distinct characteristics, the market is further fragmented on a regional basis, enabling some relatively small producers to charge a premium for their product, e.g.: Jamaica and Hawaii.
Because it features coffee from a number of different coffee growing regions, Starbucks doesn't wield nearly as much power as it would if it were buying only from Mexico, for example.
BTW, Mexico ranks 7th among the 70 nations considered to be producers by ICO, the OPEC of coffee.
Well, well--clavos knew the price of that trendy cup.
If it really IS five bucks.
I did not know.
What does that say about us?
Since the price of a cup of Starbucks is hardly a secret here in the USA, nothing much.
70 - moonraven
But, Clavos, I don't live in the US.
At the Starbucks and at the Seattle's Best in Bahrain less than a month ago the price of a tall cappuccino was 1 dinar 100 fils, which at a fixed rate of exchange against the dollar of $2.65 to the dinar, was $2.92.
I have no idea what it is at a Starbucks in Mexico City, as I patronize a local coffee place.
Thanks for copying that stuff from your Internet search and NOT attributing the source.
That's another form of lying called plagiarism.
71 - Clavos
But, Clavos, I don't live in the US.
I know, you live in México (¡pobre México! The country will never recover until you metiche gringos go home), as you never tire of telling us; which is why I answered your rhetorical question asking what it says about us with "not much," because you DON'T live in the US, and I DO -- DUH!
Thanks for copying that stuff from your Internet search and NOT attributing the source.
That's another form of lying called plagiarism.
You say you're a teacher, and you don't even know what plagiarism is?
What exactly are you saying is plagiarized? I wrote every word of that comment. I failed to give you this link to the source, true, but that's NOT plagiarism.
72 - moonraven
I have been reading student plagiarism since 1968, clavos.
You only have one writing "style", and that was not it.
I am going to recommend, AGAIN, that you take a basic English class at Miami Dade CC. Your prof will teach you that all of the things you routinely do here and crow about getting by with are not acceptable:
1. Lying
2. Plagiarizing Internet sources of information
3. Plagiarizing from The Miami Herald
4. Putting statements with no documentation to support them or putting links that either directly contradict your statements or have only tangential reference to them or which are not documentation at all but someone else's opinion.
5. Reliance on propaganda instead of facts, information and reasoned argument.
And a host of other sins.
It's time to repent.
73 - Franco
Clavos,
Are boat sales really that slow on a Saturday afternoon?
74 - Clavos
t's time to repent.
You're right, I repent AND regret.
I deeply regret even trying to debate with you.
I've never seen anyone claiming the credentials you claim resort so frequently and ineffectively to baseless and vitriolic ad hominem attacks and name calling.You have NO civility.
I don't have all your fancy degrees; mine is just a BA in English Lit with a minor in writing, but I know low class when I see it.
Have fun.
75 - Clavos
Franco #76:
Actually, yes, often.
I don't work in a store or dealer; I'm a broker.
I work with clients from all over the US and the world, with a specialty in LatAm clients, and my time is set by their requirements when they come to town to shop. Sometimes I'll work for two weeks without a day off, and other weeks maybe only a day or two. Today, obviously, no work.
Sometimes the work requires that I travel to the Mediterranean (for example), or to Italy, or Mexico, often to Argentina and Brasil (they build a lot of boats there) to pre-inspect a boat for a client.
I also help clients who are having a boat built to order by managing the project for them and coordinating the work of the shipyard and other suppliers on their behalf.
Aside from my love of boats, that flexibility (and the travel) is one of the things I most like about the job.