birdlike 0 #51 August 28, 2008 QuoteWhile thinking about the unintended or unexpected consequences of our or US foreign policy actions may have zero ability to impact the past..." Please reconsider future use of the word "impact" in this sense. This is a trend that has grown stupendously in the last few years, and it's just... horrible. The principal definition of the transitive verb "impact" is to fix firmly by or as if by packing or wedging. (Think of an impacted wisdom tooth.) Yes, the dictionary does list "to strike forcefully," but there are better words to use when our meaning is not a literal striking: why not use "affect" in cases like these? Thank you for considering my earnest suggestion.Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #52 August 28, 2008 Quote I was truly on the fence in regard to us going into Iraq. Saddam was a brutal dictator that was responsible for the mass murders and torture of so many Iraqis. Iraqi citizens were helpless. He also was raping the shit out of the oil for food program and it truly appeared that the UN had no plans of putting an end to it. Hindsight is a waste of time. I never believed we would lose 3000 lives and how many Iraqi citizens would be lost. I blame it on my naivete. Has it all been worth it? All I can answer is that only history will tell. No, you're wrong, and what's more, you are totally unreasonable to say that "only history will tell." How do I know this? Kallend told me! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #53 August 28, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteImagine you could go back 5 years and it was your decision whether or not the US invades Iraq. If you knew it would turn out like this, would you or would you not trade 3000 US lives (and thousands of Iraqi lives) in order to remove Saddam from office and execute him. What a ridiculous question from word one. No one ever said that the purpose of the mission was to execute Saddam Hussein. What an idiotic poll. That’s also not what Dave wrote. Your statement is specious. Is it? The poll options were, "Yes, I'd trade 3000 service members for Saddam's execution No, I wouldn't sacrifice 3000 service members in exchance for Saddam's execution." Dave is clearly equating the choice to go to war with Iraq with a goal, that goal being to secure Saddam's execution. How is what I said specious?? QuoteRemoving Saddam Hussayn from power was the purpose of OIF. And why do you and others keep misspelling "Hussein"? Is it to do your best to avoid linking the late, deposed dictator with Barack Hussein Obama (the dictator-hopeful)?Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nerdgirl 0 #54 August 28, 2008 QuoteAnd why do you and others keep misspelling "Hussein"? That’s a legitimate question. It’s been moderately curious that only a couple folks (via PMs) have inquired. Your presumed vector of who is doing the misspelling is in the wrong direction. Hussayn is a more accurate transliteration from the Arabic to Roman alphabet. Another example is al Qa’eda rather than al Qa’ida. The “i” sound as represented in European language in the former brutal dictator of Iraq's name and the global radical Islamist group's name is not found in classical Arabic. It's also an issue with Asian languages, e.g., the former South Korean President Roh Moo-hyun (his preference, using one transliteration system) objects to the CIA's use of "No Mu-hyun" (using a different system.) Unless it's a genuine question (as I'm interpreting & responding to the above to be) or emerges as a topical issue, I don't find much value in being pedantic toward other people's grammar or spelling in Speakers Corner, although I do appreciate a high bar for which to aim. --- --- -- --- --- If you had stopped with just the question (putting aside for the moment the less than correct assertion w/r/t vector of inaccuracy) you would have demonstrated earnestness; this, however, QuoteIs it to do your best to avoid linking the late, deposed dictator with Barack Hussein Obama (the dictator-hopeful)? demonstrates more specious misdirection. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #55 August 28, 2008 Quote Dave is clearly equating the choice to go to war with Iraq with a goal, that goal being to secure Saddam's execution. If the goal was not to get rid of Saddam, what was it? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #56 August 28, 2008 QuoteQuotePathetic that you are still excusing the lies. Even more pathetic is that you are so wrapped up in your pat response of calling JohnRich a liar, you probably didn't even really read what he said. Poor reading skills, Jeffrey! That's not calling him a liar, it's calling him gullible.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
