Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

But the charge put forth is that WE, the AMERICANS were the ones forcing them to accept our values... not you Europeans. That's what the articles you put forward seem to be saying anyway.

So unless we are now changing the accusation from it being Americans who forced their policies on Iraq to it being the USA and EUROPE TOGETHER that forced their values on the Iraqis, the point stands.

Are you changing your accusation? If so, can you show me any evidence that European soldiers rigged the Iraqi elections?

Elliot

---

YOU ME WE

Our two nations along with others were fighting in Iraq, I can appreciate that the inclosed almost incestual news that america seems to have can persuade you that it was just the US over there

AND YES, YET AGAIN AND AGAIN I HAVE TO STATE TO YOU, THAT WE US, ARE THE ALLIED FORCE, NOT JUST ONE COUNTRY!!

This is not a change, I have constantly stated that our countries, the US, UK and Europe Australia have ALL INFLUENCED IRAQ!

WHO Do you think made the borders of Iraq in the first place!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

So... It wasn't the USA that forced it's policies on the Iraqis... it was the WTO.

Got it.

What you are actually saying is that the USA is innocent of all charges... the WTO is the guilty party.

Thanks. Got it now.

---

Now you are just be a single pointed argumentative human being

IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW THE WORLD WORKS ELLIOT, try finding out for yourself, you will find that things are just not as simple as you make your arguments!

Quote:

---

WHO Do you think made the borders of Iraq in the first place!

---

For a while there Joe Biden thought he was Thomas Edward Lawrence with a blank map of Messopotamia .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phlanx

YOU ME WE

Our two nations along with others were fighting in Iraq, I can appreciate that the inclosed almost incestual news that america seems to have can persuade you that it was just the US over there

AND YES, YET AGAIN AND AGAIN I HAVE TO STATE TO YOU, THAT WE US, ARE THE ALLIED FORCE, NOT JUST ONE COUNTRY!!!!

This is not a change, I have constantly stated that our countries, the US, UK and Europe Australia have ALL INFLUENCED IRAQ!

WHO Do you think made the borders of Iraq in the first place!

---

In the current era? That would be Churchill.

In ancient times? The Babylonians made their own borders. So did the Persians right next door.

And again, INFLUENCE is very different from FORCING or PRESSING. I should hope that we influenced them toward democracy. But we didn't FORCE them into anything.

You seem to think that "influencing" is a bad thing. Why is that?

Nations have been influencing each other for millennia. India influenced China with Budhism in the 2nd Century CE when Bhodi Dharma travelled through China teaching his philosophy. He never forced ANYONE to accept his philosophy, he merely influenced them... and China became an overwhelmingly Budhist society. Was that "influence" a bad thing?

Christianity influenced the Roman Empire. It didn't force Rome to accept Christianity as the main religion of the empire, but it certainly influenced them. (The Christians didn't actually have the power to FORCE anyone to do anything until centuries later, with the advent of the Byzantine Empire.) Was such influence "bad"?

If force had been used in Iraq, I would probably agree with you that it was a bad thing. But it wasn't. The Iraqis were influenced, yes. I freely admit that. But influence is NOT the same as force. And influence is not a bad thing, as long as the one being influenced still can choose his own path. I think that Iraq fits the bill.

Again, if you can show me evidence of force being used... your exact word was "pressed" or "pressing", I believe... then I will be happy to review that evidence.

Elliot

Hahaha, I just had to look up who Joe Biden was?

Has been a criteria to have certain names to gain office this year? :)

I think TE Lawrence would be very sad to see what has happened to the area, especially as the arabs should have had it anyway

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

In the current era? That would be Churchill.

---

There was no country of Iraq until it was created by the British in 1920. In 1534 the Ottoman Turks conquered the area of what is now Iraq. Here the Ottoman empire ruled until its defeat in World War I because Turkey sided with the Central powers. After World War I, the French and British divided up the formerly Ottoman-controlled lands in the Middle East. France was given a League of Nations mandate over Syria and Lebanon; Great Britain was given the same over Palestine, Transjordan, and Iraq. The modern state of Iraq was created out of the three Ottoman provinces of Basra, Mosul, and Baghdad. The defeat of the Turks may have brought to an end the Ottoman empire, but it began a century of Western imperialism.

So the ansser to the question which was not really a question, was David Lloyd George, as he was PM to King George V

Quote:

---

And again, INFLUENCE is very different from FORCING or PRESSING. I should hope that we influenced them toward democracy. But we didn't FORCE them into anything.

---

Influence is [noun] a power to affect persons or events especially power based on prestige

So YEP I do think we Influenced them

Quote:

---

You seem to think that "influencing" is a bad thing. Why is that?

---

Here we go again, trying to put words in my mouth to twist an argument around, so you know you have no answers to what I have said - I am the one that has constantly stated to YOU matey, that influence is greater than political say. I have been a pro influence understanding all along, I am sorry that it has missed you, you might have learnt something

Quote:

---

If force had been used in Iraq, I would probably agree with you that it was a bad thing

---

.

Putting words in my mouth again elliot!

For goodness sake man, you are speaking english, how much more of an example do you want of how influence works!

Quote:

---

But it wasn't. The Iraqis were influenced, yes. I freely admit that. But influence is NOT the same as force. And influence is not a bad thing, as long as the one being influenced still can choose his own path. I think that Iraq fits the bill.

---

So by trying to twist my argument, you then slip it in and state you agree that influence played a major part in how Iraq is won, thank you for a very backward way of accepting this point

Quote:

---

Again, if you can show me evidence of force being used... your exact word was "pressed" or "pressing", I believe... then I will be happy to review that evidence.

Elliot

---

You will have to show me where I stated pressed first, as I cannot find it to see in what context it was said if ever at all, or just another attempt at twisting the argument

Why don't you just simply say, I see and agree with your point of view - it would be a lot easier and for me I would gain more respect for you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phlanx

You will have to show me where I stated pressed first, as I cannot find it to see in what context it was said if ever at all, or just another attempt at twisting the argument

---

Here it is.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/curren...ml#post2068200

Quote:

---

However Elliot, you are saying when your attacked then it is okay to press your values on another country?

---

That sounds like an accusation of "pressing our values" on the Iraqis to me. And it was an accusation against the USA, not ALL countries... since you specify in that post that you are talking about the country that was attacked.

Or am I putting words in your mouth again?

Perhaps I am putting words in your mouth... but they were YOUR WORDS TO BEGIN WITH.

Elliot

Have you read that statement - that's where the sentence starts, and ends, this then gives you the context of the sentence - I suggest you read it all!!

Are you on drugs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phlanx

This is not a change, I have constantly stated that our countries, the US, UK and Europe Australia have ALL INFLUENCED IRAQ!

WHO Do you think made the borders of Iraq in the first place!

---

Elliot I think it can be said that Australia made precious little difference to the outcome in Iraq either militarily or politically. It certainly wasn't our system of government that was imposed on Iraq. As I recall the UK and France may have had some influence in settling the borders and political structure in the middle east after WWI, but all that has gone and what you now have is a uniquely American not Muslim idea with a little tinkering at the edges by the Iraqi. It is good that they abandoned the idea of a President as an all powerful executive. Must have had the opportunity of observing the American system in action. Why you keep ducking the reality of this eludes me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Now that we're done talking about Islamo-fascism, back to the Obamacare debate. The GOP alternative would cost $61 billion, reduce the deficit by $68 billion and cut insurance premiums, as opposed to the Democrat plan which will cost as much $1.8 trillion, cut Medicare benefits and increase the already mammoth deficit.



And by the way, unemployment just hit 10 percent and the economy is what won NJ and VA for Republicans. Go ahead, support your fiscal and health care nightmare and ignore common sense solutions.

---

Betsy McCaughey: What the Pelosi Health Care Bill Really Says - WSJ.com

Quote:

---

What the government will require you to do:

• Sec. 202 (p. 91-92) of the bill requires you to enroll in a "qualified plan." If you get your insurance at work, your employer will have a "grace period" to switch you to a "qualified plan," meaning a plan designed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. If you buy your own insurance, there's no grace period. You'll have to enroll in a qualified plan as soon as any term in your contract changes, such as the co-pay, deductible or benefit.

• Sec. 224 (p. 118) provides that 18 months after the bill becomes law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services will decide what a "qualified plan" covers and how much you'll be legally required to pay for it. That's like a banker telling you to sign the loan agreement now, then filling in the interest rate and repayment terms 18 months later.

---

See the article for more wonderful details of the Pelosi plan.


G&P

The bill fundamentally changes how Medicare pays doctors and hospitals, permitting the government to dictate treatment decisions.(can you say deth panels ?)Don't forget ;Dr Zeke Emanuel has written extensively about applying "cost/benefit analysis" to determine who should get care and to what extent.

No wonder Madame Mimi broke her pledge to publish this on line for 72 hrs before the vote. They are still doing back room changes in the bill hours before the vote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

The bill fundamentally changes how Medicare pays doctors and hospitals, permitting the government to dictate treatment decisions.

---

Link us up to text of the bill that shows this please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Link us up to text of the bill that shows this please.

---

What bill? The most ethical and transparent Congress ever won't post it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

What bill? The most ethical and transparent Congress ever won't post it.

---

So how did tom get his info then?

What you are admitting then is that you did not read In's posting preceding mine.
Sec. 1402 (p. 756) says that the results of comparative effectiveness research conducted by the government will be delivered to doctors electronically to guide their use of "medical items and services."

The Pelosi unconstitutional socialized medicine monstrosity passed late last night in the House of Representatives . The vote was 220-215 . Only one Republican voted for it while 39 Democrats voted for it. The bipartisan effort was in the opposition to the bill.

I question the constitutional mandate for passing entitlements in the 1st place . This congress has taken it to new depths of depravity.They have passed a law that criminally penalizes people who refuse to exercise the entitlement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

What you are admitting then is that you did not read In's posting preceding mine.
Sec. 1402 (p. 756) says that the results of comparative effectiveness research conducted by the government will be delivered to doctors electronically to guide their use of "medical items and services."

---

a) where did he get it then if it's not available as you say?
b) your quote simply says that, for example, in situation "a" procedure "b" is the best course. What's wrong with that?

a.There were many revisions right up until the vote . The Speaker promised to post the final bill on line for 72 hrs before a vote. It was a LIE !
That section of the bill was available .

b. I can read between the lines and the legalese . The administration plans on placing people like Zeke Emanual at the head of any agency related to this gvt, plan ;and Emanuel has made his position clear. It will not advise a physicican ;it will dictate tp physicians.

If this bill ,or any version of it ,makes it through the Senate ;seniors on Medicare are going to get screwed . Of that there is no debate .Whatever imaginary savings the Democrats think are in the bill are directly taken from the benefits seniors already have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

That section of the bill was available .

---

But you can't point us the actual text. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

b. I can read between the lines and the legalese .

---

No what you do is make up scare tactics instead of posting the actual parts of the bill.

Similarly, "When Asked Where the Constitution Authorizes Congress to Order Americans To Buy Health Insurance, Pelosi Says: 'Are You Serious?'"

CNSNews.com - When Asked Where the Constitution Authorizes Congress to Order Americans To Buy Health Insurance, Pelosi Says: 'Are You Serious?'