Iraq: Everything you need to know in five

This plan would put an end to street to street fighting. This plan
would put an end to urban combat. This plan would put an end to road
side bombs,put an end to IEDs.

http://novus-ordo-seclorum.us/2006/1...o-know-in.html

http://novus-ordo-seclorum.us

wrote:
This plan would put an end to street to street fighting. This plan
would put an end to urban combat. This plan would put an end to road
side bombs,put an end to IEDs.

http://novus-ordo-seclorum.us/2006/1...o-know-in.html

It's *Turkey* that doesn't want a Kurdish nation.

While *I* don't care what Turkey wants, and would happily give it back
to the Armenians (sending the Turks back to Turkmenistan, and, no,
that's *not* a pun) it *has* been helpful in Korea as well as in the
War on Terror - not least by setting a (comparatively) good example to
other Muslim countries.

John Savard

wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
This plan would put an end to street to street fighting. This plan
would put an end to urban combat. This plan would put an end to road
side bombs,put an end to IEDs.

http://novus-ordo-seclorum.us/2006/1...o-know-in.html

ahem:

"Warning: mysql_connect(): Can't connect to MySQL server on 'localhost'
(10061) in D:\inetpub\wwwroot\include\db.inc on line 14"


any political analysis piece with rampant grammatical errors *and* the guy
can't figure out that "localhost" means "my own PC" isn't worthy of your
time.

--
Terrell Miller


"Just...take...the...****ing...flower...darlin g"
Terrell's dating style according to OKCupid.com

History has shown that this plan will work.
IT'S THE SAME CONCEPT THAT WAS USED IN INDIA

Britain had assumed political control of virtually all Indian lands.
Indian armed forces in the British army played a vital role in both
World Wars. Nonviolent resistance to British colonialism led by
Mohandas GANDHI and Jawaharlal NEHRU brought independence in 1947. Even
Mohandas GANDHI knew there ways no way to stop the Hindu and the
Muslims from killing each other. So the subcontinent was divided into
the secular state of India and the smaller Muslim state of Pakistan.

And today India is the world's largest democracy. A Kurdish Nation well
be as sucessful.




wrote:
This plan would put an end to street to street fighting. This plan
would put an end to urban combat. This plan would put an end to road
side bombs,put an end to IEDs.

http://novus-ordo-seclorum.us/2006/1...o-know-in.html

http://novus-ordo-seclorum.us

wrote:
This plan would put an end to street to street fighting. This plan
would put an end to urban combat. This plan would put an end to road
side bombs,put an end to IEDs.

http://novus-ordo-seclorum.us/2006/1...o-know-in.html

http://novus-ordo-seclorum.us
The five things you need to know about Iraq.

1. Iraqis are idiots. (not as big as turkey, and I'd not bet on Kurds
as well they are living between two of them so they can't be right
either, however quite large ones.)

2. There is hot in Iraq.

3. There are parasites you don't wanna be affected with.

4. Toilets.

5. You wanna be somewhere near piranhas, sharks, or other nice
neighbors. Not in Iraq.

I actually didn't mention possible better situation called civil war
after quick removal of US forces, that would be better situation than
if they'd stay and try to mess with them.

Raghar wrote:


I actually didn't mention possible better situation called civil war
after quick removal of US forces, that would be better situation than
if they'd stay and try to mess with them.



Here's another one:
What did these eight empires all have in common?
1. Persian.
2. Alexandrian
3. White Hun.
4. Genghis Khan.
5. Tamerlane.
6. Mohgul.
7. British.
8. Soviet.
They all thought it was a good idea to invade Afghanistan.
What else do they have in common?
They aren't empires anymore. :-)

Pat

On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 21:15:04 -0600, in a place far, far away, Pat
Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:



Raghar wrote:


I actually didn't mention possible better situation called civil war
after quick removal of US forces, that would be better situation than
if they'd stay and try to mess with them.



Here's another one:
What did these eight empires all have in common?
1. Persian.
2. Alexandrian
3. White Hun.
4. Genghis Khan.
5. Tamerlane.
6. Mohgul.
7. British.
8. Soviet.
They all thought it was a good idea to invade Afghanistan.
What else do they have in common?
They aren't empires anymore. :-)

Once again, you apparently never learned that correlation is not
causation.

But I'm not surprised. It's a higher level intellectual concept.

Rand Simberg wrote:
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 21:15:04 -0600, in a place far, far away, Pat
Flannery made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
such a way as to indicate that:

Raghar wrote:

I actually didn't mention possible better situation called civil war
after quick removal of US forces, that would be better situation than
if they'd stay and try to mess with them.

Here's another one:
What did these eight empires all have in common?
1. Persian.
2. Alexandrian
3. White Hun.
4. Genghis Khan.
5. Tamerlane.
6. Mohgul.
7. British.
8. Soviet.
They all thought it was a good idea to invade Afghanistan.
What else do they have in common?
They aren't empires anymore. :-)

Once again, you apparently never learned that correlation is not
causation.

Once again, you apparently don't understand what correlation is.
He just gave a list of past empires that have invaded Afghanistan.
One can't get any correlation from that list. Therefore he isn't
implying that correlation is causation. Here is another list of
empires:
1. The Inca.
2. The Maya.
3. The Romans.
4. The Gales
5. The Etrusques
What do they all have in common? They never invaded
Afghanistan. What else do they have in common? They
aren't empires anymore.

Neither my list nor Pat's list can be used to do any
correlation. The purpose of Pats list wasn't to do
a correlation. So what was the purpose of Pat's list?
Maybe you should take a look at the smiley he put
over there :-)

But I'm not surprised. It's a higher level intellectual concept.

No. It isn't that high an intellectual level. I'm sure if you
made an effort you could grasp what a correlation is.


Alain Fournier

wrote:


Neither my list nor Pat's list can be used to do any
correlation. The purpose of Pats list wasn't to do
a correlation. So what was the purpose of Pat's list?
Maybe you should take a look at the smiley he put
over there :-)




It was primarily a joke, I was just pointing out that people who went in
there never did any too well.
Looking through the country's history, it gets invaded by Persia a lot:
http://www.afghan-web.com/history/
They got even by invading Persia.
Although you might note that empires have a tendency to overextend to
the point where they can't control what they have and then collapse.
China's concept of going so far and then stopping (and building a wall)
may be the right way to do things. :-)

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Raghar wrote:


I actually didn't mention possible better situation called civil war
after quick removal of US forces, that would be better situation than
if they'd stay and try to mess with them.



Here's another one:
What did these eight empires all have in common?
1. Persian.
2. Alexandrian
3. White Hun.
4. Genghis Khan.
5. Tamerlane.
6. Mohgul.
7. British.
8. Soviet.
They all thought it was a good idea to invade Afghanistan.
What else do they have in common?
They aren't empires anymore. :-)




Hey, we conquered Afghanistan with a suitcase full of
cash. We bribed the northern alliance to side with us.
The war ended up being a few thousand northern
alliance troops against a few thousand taliban.

Only, one side had a hell of a ****-kicking air force.






Pat