Originally posted by Damieux
No, outrageous arrogance is trying to silence and intimidate opposing political opinions.
Whew. Good thing I didn't do either of those things.

Originally posted by Damieux
The importance of public perception on the reality of politics is a timeless excuse of those who seek to stifle free speech.
It is stifling free speech to expect people not to offer up worthless opinions about topics they are utterly clueless about?

When people offer opinions about things they are completely unqualified to discuss, they are just blowing hot air. That is neither productive nor worthwhile. In fact, it can be quite the opposite.

It is not stifling free speech to say a professional chef with no training in science or engineering shouldn't give his opinion on how to build a Space Elevator.

I am quite happy to listen to Kofi Annan or Condoleeza Rice speak on the matter. They have widely divergent views but at least they are qualified to comment on an issue such as democratizing a country like Iraq.


Originally posted by Damieux
There is absolutely nothing absurd about Kharum, a citizen of the United States, offering suggestions on how he thinks his government should handle its affairs.
How positively naive. The sooner we abandon the fallacious and detrimental belief that mere citizenship somehow qualifies someone for having a worthwhile opinion on extremely complicated issues, the sooner we can start actually solving problems. There is a reason why our system of government was created as a representative democracy rather than a direct democracy. That reason is that most people are not even remotely qualified to weigh in on most issues.

If you don't like the opinion I am putting forth, take it up with the Framers of the Constitution.

This is the same "timeless excuse" celebrities trot out when they go around telling people what to think. They do enormous damage to our country by misusing their celebrity and speaking without sufficient knowledge or understanding of the subjects they address.

Kharum strikes me as a very intelligent person, but he doesn't know the tiniest thing about democratization of a third world tyranny surrounded by violent religious fundamentalism. Neither do you. Neither do I. That isn't an insult. If it were, I'd be insulting myself just as harshly. It is simply a statement of fact.

A flaw in our culture is that we make people think their opinion is a helluva lot more valuable than it really is. Sometimes, one's opinion just isn't worth a tinker's dam.

When there are abuses, then it is vital that they are exposed and that we talk about them. But it is arrogant and foolish when unqualified people think they have ANYTHING valuable to offer regarding the incredibly complicated technical issue of democratization.

Originally posted by Damieux
You attack him for "excessive partisanship"
Please read more carefully. I never accused him of this. When I used "you", I specifically noted it was in the general sense and not directed at him.

The people I accuse of "excessive partisanship" are the current politicians, the people in the media who cover politics, the pundits who appear on TV news shows, the talk radio shock jocks, and the everyday citizens who embrace all of the above. I cannot even read or watch such things anymore because all reason and debate are gone. All that remains is Gotcha! politics and the Blame Game.

Originally posted by Damieux
Evidence is increasingly mounting that the U.S. has thus far mishandled the occupation of Iraq.
Compared to what?

Compared to all the other countries that have taken over a tyranny and replaced it with democracy?

Ooops. Nobody has done that but us, and in every case it took decades.

Considering this will take 5-10 years at a minimum (and the longer it takes, the more likely we are succeeding since it means the people want us there), isn't it a little premature to proclaim that the sky is falling? Doing so only fuels the morons who think you can just pull out and hope for the best. Yes, there actually were and are mainstream candidates for President who claimed they would do just that.


Originally posted by Damieux
Another part of the problem, I think, is the way we initially went into Iraq, with complete disregard for the United Nations and world opinion.
In case you haven't been keeping up with current events, the people in charge of the countries (France, Germany, and Russia) and entities (United Nations) who opposed us were all receiving illegal kick backs from the Iraqi Oil for Food Program.

Do you honestly think we would EVER have obtained their support when they were too addicted to bellying up to the trough?

Get real.