Geez, a old-fashioned McCarthy purge tactic: the ad-hominem attack.
The fellow's a hopeless dinosaur. His kind went after my mother-in-law, because of a liberish editorial on her cat blog. Sent her a few death threats also.
wow, professor payne... i am impressed.
i am graced with your attention on more than one of your blogs...very flattering.(lol)
You accepted my invitation to choose between VICTORY or DEFEAT in Iraq by coming to my blog and commenting.
You have given us "the war according to you" and the history of the world (according to you), but you have failed to provide the simple answer to the very simple question/offer/challenge i posed...
This would be a good time (and place)for you to do so.
So, which do you support?
Victory or Defeat.
and please spare me the six page disertation on Bush, Vietnam, the 1960's and US troops are the foreign fighters who are killing innocent Iraq's speech.
Just answer the question.
-red
What an idiot.
nur al, you should not talk about the professor that way.(lol)
"if you can't say something nice...don't say anthing at all.
However in spite of you calling Rodger an idiot, i still invite you to "take the challenge".
-red
Ah, Red, this is my (second) home, not yours, and I can write whatever I want here.
Since you are so gung-ho about continued US military presence in Iraq, tell me which side you are supporting in Iraq's civil war?
Simpe choice Red: Sunni, or Shia?
Keep in mind that Al Qaeda is Sunni and the Sunni are a distinct minority in Iraq. Though Saddam was Sunni, his regime was secular.
Oh, but there's a dilemma: like Iran, Iraq has a Shia majority.
And of course, many regimes friendly to the US in the neighborhood are Sunni.
Finally, bear in mind that large majorities of both Sunni and Shia Iraqis have favored US withdrawal for at least a year.
If only those darn Iraqis had some sort of mechanism -- call it democracy -- by which they could pursue their preferred policy choice.
(lol) See rodger squirm...see Rodger change the question quick!
Hurry, and try to change the debate to something irrelevant on 'ol red, no one will notice...wow.
But sure, I'll bite, providing YOU answer my question. (My guess is that you can't/won't or you already would have).
Your question do i support the sunni extremists or the shia extemists is irrelevant since by supporting a US victory, it would supersede both of those extemists groups as victors.
(we are fighting against sunni extemists AND shia extemists Rodger)
So if you (or I) support either of those, then you (or I) support a US defeat.
Your question should read... If you support a US defeat, then who do you support in victory- the sunni thoatcutters or the shia bombers?
You are trapped and your only exit is to change the subject and change the question, and you seem to know it.
If you say you support "defeat", you know there are consequences(from your critics) ...and if you say you support "victory", you know there are consequences (from your liberal antiwar pals) ...what a pickle you've gotten yourself into Rodger.
You CAN'T afford to truthfully answer the simple question that you came to my blog to "debate" can you?
Brilliant.(lmao)
-red
"Your question do i support the sunni extremists or the shia extemists is irrelevant since by supporting a US victory, it would supersede both of those extemists groups as victors.
(we are fighting against sunni extemists AND shia extemists Rodger) So if you (or I) support either of those, then you (or I) support a US defeat."
Oh, this is easy! I support a US victory. I also support world peace, the immediate colonization of outer space, personal matter transporters, the renewed use of Akkadian as the lingua franca of the Middle East, and ponies for everyone.
Yes, this is easy.
I support US claiming victory over the violent extremists, which will be achieved by a US withdrawal as part of a sweeping political settlement.
Previously, I already supported the US claim victory ("mission accomplished") for already meeting the pre-war goals:
1. Regime change. Check.
2. Assure Iraq is not a source of WMD. Check.
3. Assure Iraq is not a state sponsor of terrorism. Check.
Victory is ours! When can we pop the champagne?
Dan
Dan
I support poines for every one.
Hank
Red
As I pointed out on your blog, to convince you have to provide a program to get from here to there,
Everyone supports victory as they see it, nobody likes terrorists, or even cares much for those who are properly insurgents. But the proprietors of this blog are not inclined to sign a blank checks from anyone other than Barak Obama, and maybe not then.
What’s your program?
What’s your program?
VICTORY. Why is that so hard to understand?
It's good enough for Glenn Reynolds...
I'm gonna try and wrap this up and be done (again).
rodger- "conviction" look it up, you are lacking.
Grow a pair and stand behind what you imply, insinuate and allege.
(you support a U.S. defeat in Iraq)
It's clear (from your prolific blogging) you never got over the 2000 election and can't support anything associated with Bush...even your own country and military, you bash cheney, rumsfeld, halliburton, the war, the troops and everything Republican or conservative every chance you get...you hate Bush so much it blinds you from the reality of the progress in Iraq, so how could you possibly give students both sides when you (yourself) don't acknowledge one side is valid?
Nobody in their right mind should believe that somehow you suddenly leave all that behind when you walk into a classroom full of young impressionable future potential democrat voters?
Especially after you admitted attempting to "make" those young impressionable potential Bush haters (students) "sympathize with the insurgents"
We shouldn't believe YOU any more than YOU believe Bush and Cheney.
You began this entire love/hate affair (love insurgents/hate Bush) by answering my offer to unite the country, ...by calling the US troops the "foriegn fighters who are killing the majority of innocent iraqi's".
(sounds like you don't support them)
I answered by asking then if i should go ahead and mark you down for supporting U.S. defeat.
YOu could have and should have ended it right there by answering truthfully (as in- yes, of course you support defeat because you don't believe in the cause, the mission, the war, the tactics, the commander in chief or that victory is even possible) instead of playing "duck and cover" for several days and contradicting yourself.
But then again, had you simply done that...instead of challenging me to "PROVE" that you bring your politcs into the classroom... I never would have researched and you might never have been exposed.
I didn't know (or care if) you were a college professor until after a few of your evasive comments got my attention... and I looked you up.
But now, lot's of folks know you may not be the most liberal professor at UL (like you said) but you ARE left of most blue state voters (according to you)...and you do bring your politics into the classroom (according to you before you denied it).
Those are problems you're going to have to deal with long after I move on...which hopefully begins NOW.
good nite and have a pleasant tommorrow.
-red
Red- take a deep breath, have a nice glass of warm milk, a cookie, and relax.
Its the New Year! No need to engage, so soon, in a long, rambling set of personal attacks climaxing in a pre-adolescent paroxysm of "having gotten in the last word I'm taking my toys and going home."
I support defeat for bush and the neo cons in Iraq. it will be a victory for the troops who get to return to their families from which they never should have been taken.
Red is right, this exchange is now pointless. I would point out, however, that I started my personal blog just months into the Iraq war (9/03) -- not months into the Bush administration. The overwhelming majority of my blogging is about the war in Iraq or related topics.
On my blog, Red wrote that winning means "victory in the fight." I genuinely believe that goal is politically impossible to achieve and militarily fruitless. Thus, I don't support the ongoing war mission, the current strategy, the war profiteers, or the current politically appointed/elected strategists.
And Red, given the numbers, the US soldiers are the foreign fighters doing most of the killing in Iraq, including of the innocents. Unfortunately, innocents now constitute upwards of 90% of the victims of every war. Given that the US has maintained 130,000 heavily armed troops in Iraq, this is not especially startling. I didn't say they were killing everyone intentionally, as a matter of state policy.
However, I worry a great deal that the current intentional policy is seriously undercutting the military's strength (and country's credibility) and have published arguments to that effect. If Iran, North Korea, Somalia or some other hotspot quickly required large numbers of US military resources, they simply do not exist right now. The current policy in Iraq undermines the US ability to achieve what Red calls "the cause."
Next, I refuse to further "debate" the operations of my classroom with someone who thinks I am trying to recruit Democrats. I do not assume that your personal politics enter every discussion you have at work with your coworkers and clients. In fact, I'm guessing that you blog anonymously exactly because you don't want coworkers, clients, family and/or neighbors to know your politics -- meaning that you are able to keep them to yourself in a different context.
And believe me, a classroom is a very different context than a blog. In fact, I virtually never discuss my blogging with my students in the classroom. If someone asks about it, which is rare, I say something self-depracating and move discussion back to the matters at hand.
The "Red Dawn" discussion is old news. I wanted students to sympathize with the US insurgents IN THE MOVIE, so as to better understand the motivations of Iraqi insurgents -- and the difficulty in fighting them. My god, I'm being criticized for indoctrinating students as Democrats by selecting a right-wing fantasy movie!
At least LESTER has the guts to say what he wants.
For that lester, at least I know you are honest with yourself (about yourself).
More than I can say for others...
-red
The same guy labeled me a liberal dove, so you're not alone.
hey dan,tdaxp... there are a couple other bloggers using red stater out there, i don't recall you (just visited your site after seeing this)...
but what's wrong with being a liberal dove anyway...there ARE worse things...
Or are you saying you are not a liberal dove?
did you vote in my poll and take the Red stater challenge?
if not, please do so.
Support Victory now before it becomes fashionable...
-red
to quote muhammed ali, no iraqis ever did anything to me
Commenting by HaloScan.com
