Not worried.

We'll just install someone like Chalabi who's 'friendly' to the west.

Good choice, but let him first finish the rest of his jail-sentence so he can start clean.

Isn't he an Iranian Spy ? how is that for friendly ?

Ah...you're forgetting 'Realpolitk'.

Ah...you're forgetting 'Realpolitk'.

Thinking of it all the time. Why not send GWB to the Hague-court. Now Milosevic is gone they can concentrate on a new case and give him a fair trial.

Sentence, not 4 more years but 40 to life.

Both you and Boonie just don't seem to grasp that there are other perspectives. Oh, you do recognize that. Otherwise everyone would be in complete agreement with you, and it's quite evident to you that that is not the case. What you fail to grasp, then, is that there are other perspectives which have validity, and perhaps moreso than yours.

However, you are not free enough to grant another perspective validity. For you to be able to do that you would have to allow yourself the luxury of exploring ideas which would run contrary to your currently held beliefs. All for the purpose of comparing other ideas to your own to see which ones have the greater validity. You might then find that you hold ideas which only make sense in light of certain knowns, or assumptions, or given certain facts. The introduction of other knowns and other facts would force a necessary adjustment of your beliefs.

This is what's called mental flexibility. The ability, which hinges on a willingness, to change one's thinking, one's beliefs, as one grows in knowledge, in order to better ones self. Lots of people lose their mental flexibilty for a variety of reasons. Whatever the reasons may be the inevitable result is stagnation.

In any case, unless people are willing to allow themselves the luxury of more than a single perspective discussions become impossible. And in the case of politics this luxury is seldom afforded ones self. There is no willingness to grow or to learn, only the impetus to defend current positions. There can be little more than mudslinging, derision, charater assasinations, and all of the other <deleted> that's so putridly common in any political arena. Fun in a way, but it gets old very quickly for me. Once you understand how it works you move past it.

Mental masturbation, oh gooferous one.

Sling a bunch of trite, all-encompassing judgments about open-mindedness and "flexibility" that apply more to you than those you are accusing, and pretend to be above it all.

Don't you realize that you are just as stubborn and close-minded as Boonie and I about your beliefs with a lot less critical thinking going in to them?

Keep up the pretentious pontificating about all and sundry. I'm sure that Butterfly, zzap and your other illustrious comrades are eating it up.

The followers reflect the master.

Ah...you're forgetting 'Realpolitk'.

Thinking of it all the time. Why not send GWB to the Hague-court. Now Milosevic is gone they can concentrate on a new case and give him a fair trial.

Sentence, not 4 more years but 40 to life.

You really needed to post a couple of 'smilies' behind that last line there Alex.

The kind that smile too!

The followers reflect the master.

Finally said something sensible. Though I'm sure you didn't intend to upset your Boss.

The followers reflect the master.

Finally said something sensible. Though I'm sure you didn't intend to upset your Boss.

Sorry, I forgot to mention lamphun along with Butterfly and zzap.

What a cool bunch of dudes!

The followers reflect the master.

Finally said something sensible. Though I'm sure you didn't intend to upset your Boss.

Sorry, I forgot to mention lamphun along with Butterfly and zzap.

What a cool bunch of dudes!

Don't be too hard on Lamphun, Ulysses G.

He's just a mite frustrated these days since the OIM won't sit with him in the Galley!

Both you and Boonie just don't seem to grasp that there are other perspectives. Oh, you do recognize that. Otherwise everyone would be in complete agreement with you, and it's quite evident to you that that is not the case. What you fail to grasp, then, is that there are other perspectives which have validity, and perhaps moreso than yours.

However, you are not free enough to grant another perspective validity. For you to be able to do that you would have to allow yourself the luxury of exploring ideas which would run contrary to your currently held beliefs. All for the purpose of comparing other ideas to your own to see which ones have the greater validity. You might then find that you hold ideas which only make sense in light of certain knowns, or assumptions, or given certain facts. The introduction of other knowns and other facts would force a necessary adjustment of your beliefs.

This is what's called mental flexibility. The ability, which hinges on a willingness, to change one's thinking, one's beliefs, as one grows in knowledge, in order to better ones self. Lots of people lose their mental flexibilty for a variety of reasons. Whatever the reasons may be the inevitable result is stagnation.

In any case, unless people are willing to allow themselves the luxury of more than a single perspective discussions become impossible. And in the case of politics this luxury is seldom afforded ones self. There is no willingness to grow or to learn, only the impetus to defend current positions. There can be little more than mudslinging, derision, charater assasinations, and all of the other <deleted> that's so putridly common in any political arena. Fun in a way, but it gets old very quickly for me. Once you understand how it works you move past it.

Mental masturbation, oh gooferous one.

Sling a bunch of trite, all-encompassing judgments about open-mindedness and "flexibility" that apply more to you than those you are accusing, and pretend to be above it all.

Don't you realize that you are just as stubborn and close-minded as Boonie and I about your beliefs with a lot less critical thinking going in to them?

Keep up the pretentious pontificating about all and sundry. I'm sure that Butterfly, zzap and your other illustrious comrades are eating it up.

The followers reflect the master.

You just proved my point to the T, UG. Well done.

Hitler was a sane and rational man; at least in his own mind. Without a doubt he put a lot of critical thinking into his perspectives. Of course, he couldn't see for himself how twisted his critical thinking was. You consider yourself to be a sane and rational man; in your own mind. You put a lot of critical thinking into your perspectives. Of course, you can't see for yourself how twisted your critical thinking is. Scary parallels.

Anyone who justifies death as a means to an end does so with a great deal of critical thinking. And yet for the life of them they can't understand how it may be twisted and distorted. Boonie talks about the low death toll in Iraq. The necessity of having to expend peoples lives. It's all justified. The justifications are all logically thought out to make sense to the individual. All of the rationale appears to be quite self evident and beyond further questioning.

Both of you guys are no doubt educated and possess intellect. Yet education and intellect are ultimately merely tools to be used for whatever purpose you deem. Great minds can be bent towards great deeds or they may be bent towards destruction and pain. Up to you.

There is knowledge out there that would dispute what you believe to be true. You and Boonie aren't interested in acquiring it. Your only interest is maintaining your current, extremely limited positional thinking. Heavens forbid if you stumbled upon your own mental errors. Deny, deny, deny.

For myself, and maybe or maybe not I can speak here for the likes of Butterfly and zzap, prove me wrong and I will be willing to adjust my beliefs. Show me a better way and I will find a way to adapt. Not only am I unafraid to be in error but I welcome each and every opportunity to go beyond my own self-imposed limits. You and Boonie? Nah. Best not stray from your comfort zones.

You really needed to post a couple of 'smilies' behind that last line there Alex.

The kind that smile too!

Alex? Not really Me Boon.

But let's face it, that guy is a nut-cas. You really should not let him out without supervision. But than, that's only my opinion, maybe he is better than the rest.

You really needed to post a couple of 'smilies' behind that last line there Alex.

The kind that smile too!

Alex? Not really Me Boon.

But let's face it, that guy is a nut-cas. You really should not let him out without supervision. But than, that's only my opinion, maybe he is better than the rest.

Getting dyslexic in my young age Axel - apologies

I'm not much on defense of Dubya these days other than he is the Commander-in-Chief during wartime and as you say - possibly better than most. At least he's not waffling like a lot of his predecessors. I'd hate to think what shape our economy or security would in if Kerry had won the White House...

Both you and Boonie just don't seem to grasp that there are other perspectives. Oh, you do recognize that. Otherwise everyone would be in complete agreement with you, and it's quite evident to you that that is not the case. What you fail to grasp, then, is that there are other perspectives which have validity, and perhaps moreso than yours.

However, you are not free enough to grant another perspective validity. For you to be able to do that you would have to allow yourself the luxury of exploring ideas which would run contrary to your currently held beliefs. All for the purpose of comparing other ideas to your own to see which ones have the greater validity. You might then find that you hold ideas which only make sense in light of certain knowns, or assumptions, or given certain facts. The introduction of other knowns and other facts would force a necessary adjustment of your beliefs.

This is what's called mental flexibility. The ability, which hinges on a willingness, to change one's thinking, one's beliefs, as one grows in knowledge, in order to better ones self. Lots of people lose their mental flexibilty for a variety of reasons. Whatever the reasons may be the inevitable result is stagnation.

In any case, unless people are willing to allow themselves the luxury of more than a single perspective discussions become impossible. And in the case of politics this luxury is seldom afforded ones self. There is no willingness to grow or to learn, only the impetus to defend current positions. There can be little more than mudslinging, derision, charater assasinations, and all of the other <deleted> that's so putridly common in any political arena. Fun in a way, but it gets old very quickly for me. Once you understand how it works you move past it.

Mental masturbation, oh gooferous one.

Sling a bunch of trite, all-encompassing judgments about open-mindedness and "flexibility" that apply more to you than those you are accusing, and pretend to be above it all.

Don't you realize that you are just as stubborn and close-minded as Boonie and I about your beliefs with a lot less critical thinking going in to them?

Keep up the pretentious pontificating about all and sundry. I'm sure that Butterfly, zzap and your other illustrious comrades are eating it up.

The followers reflect the master.

You just proved my point to the T, UG. Well done.

Hitler was a sane and rational man; at least in his own mind. Without a doubt he put a lot of critical thinking into his perspectives. Of course, he couldn't see for himself how twisted his critical thinking was. You consider yourself to be a sane and rational man; in your own mind. You put a lot of critical thinking into your perspectives. Of course, you can't see for yourself how twisted your critical thinking is. Scary parallels.

Anyone who justifies death as a means to an end does so with a great deal of critical thinking. And yet for the life of them they can't understand how it may be twisted and distorted. Boonie talks about the low death toll in Iraq. The necessity of having to expend peoples lives. It's all justified. The justifications are all logically thought out to make sense to the individual. All of the rationale appears to be quite self evident and beyond further questioning.

Both of you guys are no doubt educated and possess intellect. Yet education and intellect are ultimately merely tools to be used for whatever purpose you deem. Great minds can be bent towards great deeds or they may be bent towards destruction and pain. Up to you.

There is knowledge out there that would dispute what you believe to be true. You and Boonie aren't interested in acquiring it. Your only interest is maintaining your current, extremely limited positional thinking. Heavens forbid if you stumbled upon your own mental errors. Deny, deny, deny.

For myself, and maybe or maybe not I can speak here for the likes of Butterfly and zzap, prove me wrong and I will be willing to adjust my beliefs. Show me a better way and I will find a way to adapt. Not only am I unafraid to be in error but I welcome each and every opportunity to go beyond my own self-imposed limits. You and Boonie? Nah. Best not stray from your comfort zones.

Agreed!

Not sure if I got my posts mixed up but in any event I'm happy to see you agreeing with me, UG.

Besides, what good does it do to continuously split up countries into smaller and smaller countries (like East Timor for example), especially along ethnic/religious lines ?

You end up creating a lot more welfare states that would have to rely on international aid to avoid starving to death. Eventually, quite a few of them will turn into M.E. versions of Somalia or worse.

It worked in the example of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics didn't it?

Why not on a smaller scale?

Hahahaha, you are a funny one Boon Mee !!

You are thinking of course, of the places like Poland, Bulgaria, Ukraine and Romania ?

Remember that these were individual countries already, and "members" of the Soviet block (similar to the members of NATO, without the secret police but having huge numbers of military from the "dominant" nation in the alliance based within their nations).

Those countries weren't "broken up" into smaller nations. When the Soviet Union dissolved, those countries regained their independance from Moscow.

Maybe you are referring to those, ummm, other wonderful examples, like the "stans" (Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgzystan) ?

Surely you can't be referring to those other shining examples like Azerbaijan, Armenia or Georgia ?

What you (or the previous poster) were suggesting was "breaking up" an individual country (Iraq) into smaller pieces (Kurdistan, Sunni-jan, Shia-land ?).

This would be similar to southern Florida suddenly being split off as a separate Hispanic country (Neuvo Cuba ?).

Or Northern California becoming a separate country (New Liberal-stan ?).

Or Isaan becoming a separate country (Isaanistan ?).

As I said before, I think breaking up exisitng nations into smaller nations along ethnic/religious lines won't solve the problem in the long run. It would just reinforce the "tribalism" and "us against them" mindset. Without a solid economic base to work from, there would be rampant poverty and strife, and the need for international assistance.

Try to imagine what the US would be like (or would have been like) if the 48 contiguous states were separate, individual nations. I don't think America would be the superpower that it is now had that been the case.

For myself, and maybe or maybe not I can speak here for the likes of Butterfly and zzap

Blah, blah, blah.

At least you seem to realize that the only way to get anyone more rational that Butterfly, zzap and Company to agree with your silly psuedo-intellectual gibberish is to forge a fake post where it looks like they do so.

The most common lie is that which one lies to himself; lying to others is relatively an exception.

Friedrich Nietzsche 1844-1900

Hahahaha, you are a funny one Boon Mee !!

You are thinking of course, of the places like Poland, Bulgaria, Ukraine and Romania ?

Remember that these were individual countries already, and "members" of the Soviet block (similar to the members of NATO, without the secret police but having huge numbers of military from the "dominant" nation in the alliance based within their nations).

Those countries weren't "broken up" into smaller nations. When the Soviet Union dissolved, those countries regained their independance from Moscow.

Maybe you are referring to those, ummm, other wonderful examples, like the "stans" (Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgzystan) ?

Surely you can't be referring to those other shining examples like Azerbaijan, Armenia or Georgia ?

What you (or the previous poster) were suggesting was "breaking up" an individual country (Iraq) into smaller pieces (Kurdistan, Sunni-jan, Shia-land ?).

This would be similar to southern Florida suddenly being split off as a separate Hispanic country (Neuvo Cuba ?).

Or Northern California becoming a separate country (New Liberal-stan ?).

Or Isaan becoming a separate country (Isaanistan ?).

As I said before, I think breaking up exisitng nations into smaller nations along ethnic/religious lines won't solve the problem in the long run. It would just reinforce the "tribalism" and "us against them" mindset. Without a solid economic base to work from, there would be rampant poverty and strife, and the need for international assistance.

Try to imagine what the US would be like (or would have been like) if the 48 contiguous states were separate, individual nations. I don't think America would be the superpower that it is now had that been the case.

Excellent post. And we all know what was the cause of WW1 and WW2 for that matter, the Balkans states. They always have been the cause of instability in Europe, and guess what they are again now. Trying to merge them into the EU might be the only solution to stabilize those shitty little countries, at a great cost unfortunately for the Europeans that are already part of the EU.

Breaking up Iraq will bring more instability to the ME. Maybe they need it

For myself, and maybe or maybe not I can speak here for the likes of Butterfly and zzap

Blah, blah, blah.

At least you seem to realize that the only way to get anyone more rational that Butterfly, zzap and Company to agree with your silly psuedo-intellectual gibberish is to forge a fake post where it looks like they do so.

The most common lie is that which one lies to himself; lying to others is relatively an exception.

Friedrich Nietzsche 1844-1900

UG, yours is the typical response from somebody who refuses to debate certain issues only because they would really rather not go there. Why? Because if their ideas were put under the microscope and examined a mite too closely they might be exposed for what they really are. So your only alternative is to attempt to deflect the issues you don't want to examine with that highly touted critical mind of yours.

Following is what your entire response consists of:

Blah, blah, blah - this is an absolute classic and a well used favorite. A mere wave of your mental hand to dismiss any opposing viewpoints as being utterly feckless and therefore not worthy of your response.

Psuedo-intellectual gibberish - another tactic used to deflect from having to respond rationally. Simply brand the viewpoint as inane and absurd. Not much different than the first, though. Other than it affords one the opportunity to employ their sarcastic creativity and show off their great put-down talents to their supporters.

And you've included a rather mild character attack. Remember, always connect the opponent to his thoughts. Make absolutely sure that the audience understands they are one and the same. Not that it's true, but honesty can be justifiably compromised in order to attain the end result.

Ultimately, using your critical mind, you have offered nothing of value. If it's too hot in the kitchen, Ulysses, just say so.

BTW, can't say I agree with the Nietzsche quote. Lying to ones self will predispose you to lying to others as well. How can you possibly be honest with others if you can't be honest with yourself? And I don't believe it's an issue of lying so much as it is just plain fooling yourself. We're all guilty of that to one extent or another. So it doesn't strike me as a brainy quote.

For myself, and maybe or maybe not I can speak here for the likes of Butterfly and zzap

Blah, blah, blah.

At least you seem to realize that the only way to get anyone more rational that Butterfly, zzap and Company to agree with your silly psuedo-intellectual gibberish is to forge a fake post where it looks like they do so.

The most common lie is that which one lies to himself; lying to others is relatively an exception.

Friedrich Nietzsche 1844-1900

UG, yours is the typical response from somebody who refuses to debate certain issues only because they would really rather not go there. Why? Because if their ideas were put under the microscope and examined a mite too closely they might be exposed for what they really are. So your only alternative is to attempt to deflect the issues you don't want to examine with that highly touted critical mind of yours.

Following is what your entire response consists of:

Blah, blah, blah - this is an absolute classic and a well used favorite. A mere wave of your mental hand to dismiss any opposing viewpoints as being utterly feckless and therefore not worthy of your response.

Psuedo-intellectual gibberish - another tactic used to deflect from having to respond rationally. Simply brand the viewpoint as inane and absurd. Not much different than the first, though. Other than it affords one the opportunity to employ their sarcastic creativity and show off their great put-down talents to their supporters.

And you've included a rather mild character attack. Remember, always connect the opponent to his thoughts. Make absolutely sure that the audience understands they are one and the same. Not that it's true, but honesty can be justifiably compromised in order to attain the end result.

Ultimately, using your critical mind, you have offered nothing of value. If it's too hot in the kitchen, Ulysses, just say so.

BTW, can't say I agree with the Nietzsche quote. Lying to ones self will predispose you to lying to others as well. How can you possibly be honest with others if you can't be honest with yourself? And I don't believe it's an issue of lying so much as it is just plain fooling yourself. We're all guilty of that to one extent or another. So it doesn't strike me as a brainy quote.

Debate what issues? You ignore them completely while blabbering on and on about nothing.

You remind me of a gormless 13 year old who has just taken LSD for the first time and thinks his every thought is a profound revelation from beyond - while everyone else is laughing at him from across the room. The one and only thing that I've learned from from your posts is that you enjoy hearing yourself "talk".

Like it not, Tippaporn, in your case, blah, blah, blah pretty much sums it all up.

I have to admit that Tippaporn is probably the most articulate poster in Bedlam, better than our resident "intellectual" TM, who is sometimes pretentious but mostly boring.

Having Porkie call him a pseudo intellectual is like GW Bush calling the pope a bad christian

You are a fraud Porkie, just admit it

Tippaporn, "Ulysses" is not interested in any sort of 'debate', his main "raison d'etre" is to wind-up and feel more clever than you.

Btw, I feel flattered I have been mentioned in the same breath as one of the more intelligent and most polite members of Tv.

Thank you for the compliment, UG.

I have to admit that Tippaporn is probably the most articulate poster in Bedlam.

Don't worry, Butterfly and zzap love you.

I have to admit that Tippaporn is probably the most articulate poster in Bedlam, better than our resident "intellectual" TM, who is sometimes pretentious but mostly boring.

Wrong again.

He hasn't posted for a while but JohnL, your old bud, is the most articulate dude 'round these here parts...

Tippaporn, "Ulysses" is not interested in any sort of 'debate', his main "raison d'etre" is to wind-up and feel more clever than you.

Btw, I feel flattered I have been mentioned in the same breath as one of the more intelligent and most polite members of Tv.

Thank you for the compliment, UG.

Same here

We should be honored

I have to admit that Tippaporn is probably the most articulate poster in Bedlam, better than our resident "intellectual" TM, who is sometimes pretentious but mostly boring.

Wrong again.

He hasn't posted for a while but JohnL, your old bud, is the most articulate dude 'round these here parts...

JohnL without the writing skills just sound like you or Porkie.

Yeah, that was a compliment

I have to admit that Tippaporn is probably the most articulate poster in Bedlam, better than our resident "intellectual" TM, who is sometimes pretentious but mostly boring.

Wrong again.

He hasn't posted for a while but JohnL, your old bud, is the most articulate dude 'round these here parts...

I am surprised he's still posting at all. It's been obvious for a while that he has had difficulties finding the keyboard whenever the nurse leaves him on his own in the room.

Debate what issues? You ignore them completely while blabbering on and on about nothing.

You remind me of a gormless 13 year old who has just taken LSD for the first time and thinks his every thought is a profound revelation from beyond - while everyone else is laughing at him from across the room. The one and only thing that I've learned from from your posts is that you enjoy hearing yourself "talk".

Like it not, Tippaporn, in your case, blah, blah, blah pretty much sums it all up.

Well, you've finally left me speechless, Ulysses. Few times do I encounter people whose brain cells act as antibodies to immunize against the antigen of reason. I will leave you to your painful and tortured self.

Debate what issues? You ignore them completely while blabbering on and on about nothing.

You remind me of a gormless 13 year old who has just taken LSD for the first time and thinks his every thought is a profound revelation from beyond - while everyone else is laughing at him from across the room. The one and only thing that I've learned from from your posts is that you enjoy hearing yourself "talk".

Like it not, Tippaporn, in your case, blah, blah, blah pretty much sums it all up.

Well, you've finally left me speechless, Ulysses. Few times do I encounter people whose brain cells act as antibodies to immunize against the antigen of reason. I will leave you to your painful and tortured self.

Sound idea. It's not worth the trouble of trying to argue with Porkie. He spends 24/7 trying to wind up normal folks on these sites.

...spends 24/7 trying to wind up normal folks on these sites.

Well, the operative term here is 'normal' and since you, zzap & Tippaporn and the B-Fly don't fall into that catagory...

Coming from you, I take that as a compliment.

Btw, Tippaporn is a fellow yank who is as proud of his nation as you are, you should extend some courtesy towards him.

Debate what issues? You ignore them completely while blabbering on and on about nothing.

Not to worry, Ulysses G.

Just more unfinished work by unskilled labor...

Debate what issues? You ignore them completely while blabbering on and on about nothing.

Not to worry, Ulysses G.

Just more unfinished work by unskilled labor...

An apropos comment from an unfinished work of art such as yourself, Boonie. I think you have legitimate grounds to ask God for a refund.

Tippaporn, "Ulysses" is not interested in any sort of 'debate', his main "raison d'etre" is to wind-up and feel more clever than you.

Btw, I feel flattered I have been mentioned in the same breath as one of the more intelligent and most polite members of Tv.

Thank you for the compliment, UG.

Same here

We should be honored

Actually, I'm the one who feels honoured to be among the company of zzap , Butterfly and lamphun . I've long been a great fan of all three of you for your tremendous wit, your remarkable intelligence and knowledge, clarity of thought, and most of all your unsurpassed stamina in dealing with the Booby Twins (I believe both definitions of the term 'booby' apply here).

The saddest part about my experience with the Booby Twins is the realization that their mentality is representative of the leadership of the United States. Almost makes me feel as though I've come face to face with GW Bush myself. Very sad, indeed.