The current government in Iraq was freely elected by the Iraqi People. It is recognized by the UN and the US. I am really sorry you dont consider it "worthy". But you appear to be in the minority.

"jsh1120" does not get to veto the Iraqi People on the worthiness of their government.

Source please.

You people complain about the lack of security, then complain about any steps taken to establish security. You talk out of both sides of your mouth.

I do not agree that the Iraqi Government is capable of handling the insurgents on their own (and neither do they actually). Therefore you are wrong; by my definition we have NOT already won on this issue.

Says who?

It will be the end because it will mean the insurgents will have won. Which is what most liberals seem to want.

Liberals have nothing to gain (politically) from a successful Iraq. Therefore it is in their collective best interests for Iraq to fail.

So what? We have that here too. How many white supreamist groups would like to kill Jews and homosexuals?

But they dont, because the government contains them. That is the function of these walls...temporary containment of the violence until it can be addressed through other means.

Yes, we are. Have you been paying attention?

Watch a little more History Channel.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

"would like to" doesnt build walls. And even if the KKK started lynching again, we wouldnt respond with BACKWARD, temporary steps.

Did we build any walls protecting african americans? As accurately as I can remember, we changed legislation and segregation laws. Kind of the opposite.

And who owns whom in Iraq? Your comparison doesnt qualify due to inconsistent variables.

__________________
America is a melting pot, the people at the bottom get burned while all the scum floats to the top.
- - - Charlie King

I don't think he was saying it wasn't legitimate. I think he meant it's so powerless as to be non-existent. It's a "government" in name only. They can pass laws and edicts. They just can't enforce them in a widespread manner. They are like the lone cop on the street when a riot breaks out.

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.

Not sure I can sort out the various unattributed quotations above, but Maliki's demand that the building of the wall on Sunday is not a controversial point.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/IBO270638.htm

As far as whether Iraq has a "government" worthy of the name, elections and recognition by the UN do not constitute a "government" in an actual sense, any more than the "Iraqi National Congress" constituted a "Congress." However, you try desperately to spin it, the Iraqi "government" has failed repeatedly to demonstrate its ability to "govern," the one and only standard by which a "government" is defined.

I must say that I'm amazed that this discussion is even going on. After four plus years of exactly the same reassurances, six month predictions, and failed policies, the idea that anyone would defend this administration's performance on virtually any aspect of the war in Iraq is simply laughable.

__________________
"To announce that..we are to stand by the president whether right or wrong..is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Theodore Roosevelt, 1918

What's interesting is that dependent on region, this sort of government has a different name attributed to it. In Iraq it's a "legitimate and stable government (yet not so stable that we can leave it be)". In Pakistan it's a "valuable ally in the War on Terror TM".
We're a bit more consistent when it comes to subsaharan Africa where such governments are referred to as FAILED STATES. Of course we consider them hopeless and don't even try to help out.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside

Don't try to figure it out. You won't get there. Funny thing is, some of those "failed states" are in better shape than Iraq. The Pakistan thing is funny because we claim we can't talk to Syria because they "sponsor terror". Yet Pakistan is a "valuable ally" even though they openly run fundamentalist Madrasas where terrorists are created and allow terror training camps to operate more or less freely in the border regions. Hell, even Osama is likely there. One can get a headache trying to work it all out.

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.

You werent talking about walls. You were saying:

I was giving you example in America where people similarly hate other people for reasons of ideology.

We might if the situation were bad enough.

We werent talking about walls. We were talking about the reasons for the walls.

The point of that analogy was to illustrate how hatred can be overcome in time. You are trying to claim that the hatred cannot be overcome and that we should give up trying. I am showing you how we have been successful in the past.

Due in large part to a portion of our own population that is working to undermine our efforts there. I think it is amazing that we may yet succeed despite their best efforts to contribute to our defeat.

The left in this country has a political motive to see us fail. They have nothing to gain from a successful Iraq.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

With this administration, I dont doubt that.

I'm trying to say that building walls temporarily fixes a not-so-temporary problem. When the wall comes down, the hatred will still be there. There are ways to overcome these types of problems, but isolation is not one of them.

How did we get from Jim Crowe to present? Not by separation and isolation.

__________________
America is a melting pot, the people at the bottom get burned while all the scum floats to the top.
- - - Charlie King

The not-so-temporary problem isnt permanent, just like the racial strife in America was not permanent.

Slavery is a lot worse than religious persecution. And we eventually recovered from that.

We got rid of segregation, and yet the hatred is still here too. But not nearly to the degree it was in the 1800s.

The walls prevent extremists from killing people, which in turn inflames the hate of all the other people caught in the crossfire. And the hate is the motivation for retaliation, which starts the cycle all over again.

The walls would bring a halt to that cycle, among other things.

Give me an example.

By using a strong central government to impose integration. Iraq does not have that option. And if we do it for them, we will be accused of imposing our own will on the Iraqi people.

In effect, we did have walls; they were just imposed by our police force instead of being physical barriers.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

You provided the example for me.

When the wall comes down, they'll still consider each other different races and different religions. And any victims from before the wall went up are still gonna be unavenged.

You say that we cant help them with integration because it will appear as though we are imposing our will. This is an Iraqi problem and their government is gonna have to get off it's lazy corrupt ass and put these matters into law.

And if you think that slavery is more extreme than religious persecution and we overcame it without the use of physical barriers, then I dont see why the Iraqis cant either.

Maybe if they werent taught to hate each other from childhood we wouldnt be having this conversation.

__________________
America is a melting pot, the people at the bottom get burned while all the scum floats to the top.
- - - Charlie King