Cliff LyonBaghdad, 5 Years On: City of walls
As any honest person knows, the idea the the surge worked, in any sense of the word as meant be the Pentagon, is a bold-faced lie.
This four and a half minute video was made by an Iraqi journalist in Baghdad. “Five years of war… and we live like this?… Tell the world. I want the world to know, to see how we live here.” This doesn’t look like the part of Baghdad where Lindsey Graham skips in and gets his swell bargains on some cute little rugs; it’s the part of Baghdad where Iraqis live… and die. “In my 3 weeks back home in Baghdad 179 people were killed and no Baghdadi ever mentioned the surge to me.” But why should they? That’s just for domestic audiences here in America.
August 7th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Cliff,
Since you have already called me a name, I might as well live up to it.
Care to address my response to your attempt to set up unlikely situation?
Or respond to the statistics about who could be carrying on campus?
August 7th, 2008 at 11:43 am
In the spirit of Spencer Ackerman’s article on euphemisms, those are not walls in Baghdad– they’re “separation barriers” surrounding “gated communities.”
August 7th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Bob S,
Before I respond, could you clarify the name-calling thing. I can’t see where I called you a name. I assume you mean a ‘bad’ name. I want to make sure I haven’t hurt your feelings.
Thanks
Cliff
August 7th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Of the negroid persuasion?..Sexually undistinguished? Shitstain (not you Bob. I just couldnt help myself).
August 7th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Cliff,
Since your ability to click on a link has failed momentarily.
I have earned the persistent tag, but take light offense at the insult to my parents :)
Whatever I may have grown up to be isn’t their fault; they were married at my birth.
August 7th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
Cliff
Being anti-Iraq war does not mean you have to deny success or hope for failure. Success in Iraq is good for both the United States and the Iraqi people. Success will shorten the war while the lack of it will only prolong it. The sooner we win the sooner US troops can come home.
August 7th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
I’ve seen walls like that. They had them surrounding the Little America Hotel when Cheney came here way back in 2002. I thought we were a red state and loved Cheney. When Carter came after that time, he signed lots of books at Barnes and Nobles for complete strangers.
I’m sure if Bush were to see this video, he would grunt with pleasure in his groins at the misery he has wrought with other peoples money.
August 8th, 2008 at 6:04 am
Thanks Ken,
I do not hope for failure in Iraq. I SEE failure. There is NOTHING repeat NOTHING the US can do to achieve what any reasonable person would consider success.
See Ken, this is not a war so fire power, discipline, tactics etc do not matter.
Baghdad has been reduced to ruble and ghetto divided by walls.
Did you watch the movie? All three parts?
You, I assume suffer from the same immoral position as the admin and republicans.
You won’t admit defeat for self-serving political reasons. You don’t give a shit about Iraquis.
Pray on THAT!
August 8th, 2008 at 6:08 am
Hi Bob S,
“Persistent bastard?” That hurt your feelings? Invoked your parents did it?
Sounds like you are a sensitive young man…hair trigger emotions.
Don’t you think they should test for THAT before letting people buy guns?
August 8th, 2008 at 6:18 am
Stupidity, malice, greed, deceit, mayhem, chaos and roping the greater populace into an illegal, immoral bloody shit-pile should be ground to a halt, along with its perpatrators. None of our truely great adventure in the middle east, which has been so costly on every level, was ever anything but a bold-faced effort to grab power. Never anything but an attempt continue unimaginatively forcing the ‘Lone Remaining Superpower’ into an all powerful warrior nation and policeman of the entire world. Never anything but a perverse desire to see the Project for a New American Century working papers become reality. The very sort of BULLSHIT many had hoped to transcend. With Cheney and his ilk at the helm, anything that would further peace at the expense of the military-industrial, political, media profit grabbing, must be shot down, (those citizens who would have a better world, have no such rights). Peace through War ONLY. ANYTHING this side of defeat is ‘on the table’, and can / will be redefined later as ’success’.
The stupid, it burns.
August 8th, 2008 at 6:40 am
Cliff,
I’ve said before that it will take a lot more then you have to hurt my feelings.
I was pointing out the fact that you resorted to name calling; in the case of my parentage inappropriate name calling. You can’t even be accurate when you are calling names.
Since you’ve labeled me a P.B. I figure I might as well live up to it. I’ve definitely earned the persistent part. I have had to get you to continue the discussion when it goes against you.
You started with a post who concealed carry was so ridiculous, I posted a reply pointing out how off base your post was. You stated that colleges are 99.9999% crime free, I posted stats showing that crime occurs often enough on campus. I also talked about students who commute, you stayed silent.
You posted about immature, irresponsible college students; I replied with information about the number of mature, adult students that are disarmed.
You posted about CCW holders being irresponsible and committing crimes; I posted information that showed CCW holders are 5 times less likely to commit crimes (texas stats only).
You worried about firearm security and set up a situation where someone would get hurt. I replied with information on how responsible people secure their firearms. I also conceded that somewhere, someone would get hurt with a firearm but it’s not really any different behavior than other things college students can do. You derided the gun safes, without factual information by the way.
I waited for a response, lacking that I decided to have a little fun. I am not offended by your name calling. Just pointed out that my parents were married.
Note the light offense remark had a smiley face — since you have exhibited trouble understanding the internet (failure to click on provided link to comment, unable to understand smiley face as designation of humor) I’ll be point blank. No I’m not offended by the name, just using it as an excuse to prod you to continue what you started.
I also fully realize that I’ll never change your mind, but might influence some of the other posters or readers. I really want them to see what lengths you will go to just to justify banning guns.
You want to test for hair trigger emotions before someone is allowed to exercise their rights as protected by the Second Amendment, let’s do the same for those exercising their first amendment rights.
August 8th, 2008 at 6:50 am
Bob S,
The fact that you characterized “persistent bastard” as “resorting” to name-calling is sad enough.
But to invoke the old “literal” definition of bastard can only be followed by the Pee Wee Herman retort, “I know I am, but what are you?”
Is your mother as impressed with your incisive mental acuity as you are? Is it possible to speak with your Mother? I’d like to ask her a few questions about you. Does she love you?
Does she carry? Does she shoot for sport? Practice? Does she hunt?
Be honest now…has she ever pointed a gun at your head?
August 8th, 2008 at 7:18 am
Cliff,
Why is it you are the only one that can use humor on the site?
In the majority of the world, the real world calling someone a bastard is resorting to name calling. The fact that you can’t see the humor in what I wrote is sadder. I’ve taken your name calling quite often in the past without offense.
The PeeWee Herman bit was in response to your accusation that I’m on a hair trigger emotionally. I really think that more people would take umbrage at being called a bastard, then having someone say they need to use small words because you repeatedly couldn’t or would not understand an issue.
This is another example of the adhominen (sp?) attacks that gun banners typical resort to when they can’t argue anything else. Attack the person to distract from the fact that your debate points have been completely shown to be worthless.
Want to try some more insults to me or my family or do you want to get back on topic?
August 8th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Ken wrote: “The sooner we win the sooner US troops can come home.” Can anyone who repeats this talking point also provide a definition of a “win” for the USA in Iraq?
IMHO the present situation is such that the end of the occupation could result in victory for some Iraqis (possibly the Sadrists or the Supreme Islamic Council) –and their ally Iran. Bush’s withdrawal timetable concedes that democracy ain’t happening. Elections have been postponed to at least June 2009. The Sunni “Sons of Iraq” could decide to fight it out, especially if the U.S. stops paying them. The Kurdish Peshmerga has surrounded Kirkuk, and clearly they intend to take it by force if necessary.
Despite Senator McCain’s “100 years” proposal, the occupation will have to end soon– before we exhaust our ground forces. Some soldiers are going on their fifth combat tours, many others have quit and been replaced by newbies. Equipment is piling up in junkyards faster than it can be repaired or replaced. We need “strategic reset” ASAP.
August 8th, 2008 at 8:29 am
Bob S,
I called you a persistent bastard, not JUST bastard.
I resent your misleading OneUtah readers about that. There is a big difference between calling you a persistent bastard and just bastard.
And I did not insult your Mother. I simply asked if I could speak with her. I also asked you some questions about her disposition on guns.
Hey, I’m not the one who brought up the subject of your parents, YOU DID. Bastard follows persistent in common vernacular. Many, many words have divergent connotations depending on context and usage.
It was your choice to read bastard as having no father. That definition in THAT contest, is not an insult, but rather a straight up reference to a fact.
So maybe its true, and maybe it hurt. I’m sorry. I meant to refer to your persistence rather than your genealogical status. Do you know who your father is?
August 8th, 2008 at 8:41 am
Cliff,
Once again, I’m not offended. I posted that with humor obviously indicated.
My parents aren’t the issue other than a distraction for you to try to get off subject.
I know who my father is, I actually have a couple of pistols of his. My mother doesn’t shoot, but can. She keeps firearms in the home for self- protection.
I admitted that I’ve earned part of the connotation, recognizing your intent. I said before I accept the names you call me, they tell me when I’m getting under your skin and pushing your arguments to the point they can’t stand up to scrutiny.
You talk about me having a thin skin, but I post clear evidence that even the lightest humor at your expense meets with indignation from you.
You are doing it again. Let’s get back to the subject at hand. You aren’t going to be allowed to, what was it again
I consider your arguments and facts in the campus concealed carry to be unsupportable. So, I’ll be a P.B, until you are taken to task and a permanent record established.
August 8th, 2008 at 8:54 am
Bob S,
Lotts argument for CCP on campus is that it will save lives. But he does not provide any scientific, valid basis for this thesis. He only used anecdotal evidence.
This is nothing more than advocacy. I really cannot justify expending an energy arguing this with you.
I am happy to state for the permanent record, that the very idea is just stupid. If there were a shred of evidence that more guns on campus made it safer, than insurance companies would be iDEcreasing premiums on colleges that allow CCP holders.
In fact the opposite is true. Insurance companies INCREASE premiums if you allow more guns on campus.
If you have any questions about the insurance issue, I’m happy to help. Otherwise, I can’t help you.
August 8th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Cliff,
This is the height of hypocrisy and irony.
Hmm, maybe you are mistaken about Dr. Lott not providing any scientific, valid basis
Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws: Contrasting Private and Public Law Enforcement
Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns
Not sure how many links the spam filter allows, so I’ll stop there. Here is the link to some of his research
Dr. Lott brings valid, statistical, scientific evidence to the debate and you bring a hypothetical situation about a pool party.
I provide statistics showing that CHL holders are less likely to commit crimes and you bring ……your opinion that the idea is wrong?
August 8th, 2008 at 11:27 am
Needless to say Cliff Lyon, you are by all appearances, out of control, on your your own blog.
It is one thing to call the names thoughtlessly, it is altogether something more to make petty reasons for saying it. It simply compounds the appearance of foolishness.
August 8th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Thomas,
We can spend our precious time hear on earth speaking out about issues or speaking about other people speaking out.
You seem to do a little of both.
I choose to speak about issues. When you attempt to characterize me, you are not speaking about issues.
Do you really believe Mr. McCrae that my own “foolishness” somehow changes the fact that guns on campus is stupid?
Is my being out of control somehow relevant to the fact that YOU elected a MORON president?
Is my pettiness to blame for on going criminality of the Decider-in-Chimp?
Tommy, this is not people magazine, or Dear Abby, and I am not doing this to impress anyone, least of all anonymous people who take it upon themselves to help me behave according to some corrupt assumption THAT I CARE!
But thanks for trying and I really do appreciate when you discuss issues (especially when you do Bush apologetics)
August 8th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
How dare you folks question Cliff’s “authorita“. After all, he has gravitas (passed down genetically).
He can misquote folks, misread research, cherry-pick facts, ignore facts that don’t comport with his warped worldview, screw up the most basic of Google searches and more! He can even call folks names and make blanket perjoratives about whole racial and cultural subgroups.
And in the end, he can declare VICTORY!
We’re very proud of him.
August 8th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
The reality is that more a few times now, psychotics have arrived on campus and murdered people. There is a means of licensing and qualifying the law abiding. Any comment that an 21 year old cannot properly defend themselves, or own, properly use, and secure a firearm, is nothing more than age discrimination.
There are also all manner of illegal behaviors occurring on campuses, rapes, drug dealing, a special favorite, etc. etc. A campus is a microcosm of the entire society, albeit with a group that may imagine themselves a bit more entitled than others. You can be armed in society, you should be able to do the same on campus if legally entitled to do so. If it is private property, then there are avenues from keeping undesired articles off the property. These conditions however, are generally not obeyed by psychotics, leaving us to their whims.
What is “stupid”, is your subjective opinion, and the general name calling on your part is all of stupid. Most people of intellect would hardly characterize it as “speaking out”. In psychological and legal terms, it is generally referred to as “verbal abuse”. Or in common parlance, “diarrhea of the mouth”.
I will refrain from pointing out your glaring immaturity, and leave you to yourself in showing how the world might not take anything you say seriously. What you take seriously is fine, but the manner in which it undertaken is hardly effective.
8 years of the “Decider”, and his uninterrupted reign, would be ample proof of that, don’t you think?
For interest sake, you presume much. I did not vote for Mr. Bush.
There are elements of this blog that have rather unimportant commentary, I recall reading a few sentences about some type of sandal that has someones sensibilities all shaken up. Definitely something you might read in People.
“We can spend our precious time hear on earth speaking out about issues or speaking about other people speaking out”. Says Cliff.
What part of calling people names is not, speaking out, about other people speaking out?
August 8th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Who Thomas McCrae DID vote for is a secret…
Shhhhhh…
August 8th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Psst…Larry. In the US we have a secret ballot in this country.
August 8th, 2008 at 8:12 pm
It is a secret if I wish it to be. For my interests sake, why is it you wish to know Larry? Do you think it has any bearing on a mans opinions?
Are you too, an assumer of much?
Could you make a distinction in who a person voted for if you had no real idea that the vote was perhaps one of a lessor of two evils? Or a vote that has no real impact, as in simple protest vote?
If you cannot, and define people by who they have voted for, that is in my opinion, a measure of political tunnel vision. Intelligent politics is far more complicated than simple Red and Blue.
August 9th, 2008 at 2:57 am
A lot of people refuse to say who they stand for. I just think it’s weird. It’s as if you’re afraid you’ll lose the ability to say you’re perfect. Loosen up a little!