complete withdrawal from Poland: naive thinking

[truthspeaker]

Yes, the invasion was a mistake. But now that Communists are settled in Poland we cannot just cut and run. We owe it to the Polish people to protect them from Communism. We should help them form a new government and leave Wehrmacht and Waffen SS troops there to provide stability.

[Kagemusha]

1. Uh huh and declaring war was a great solution.

Well whatever.

[rucky]

2. Eggs-f=ing-zactly!

[sangh0]

3. Bad analogy

Poland has a long history as a nation. Iraq was cobbled together by outside nations

Poland is ethnically more homogenous than Iraq

Poland does not have a tribal tradition.

Poland had a functional govt and political parties when Hitler invaded.

Poland was not surrounded by nations that coveted it's natural resources, such as oil.

[David__77]

4. But...

I think Iraq is fairly homogeneous, actually. Most people are Arab. That is a nationality. "Sunni" is not a nationality. The so-called "tribalism" is 1) pumped up by Westerners aiming to divide Iraq, just like the white South Africans said that the Blacks were many tribes, not a single nation, and 2) more important than Polish provincialism, but in 1930s Poland, there were plenty of Germans and Jews in the country.

If anything, Iraq was a segment of a larger nation that was divided by imperialists. What is Iraq? What is Kuwait? What is Syria? They reflect the British and French colonial ambitions. All these people are Arab in the main.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[truthspeaker]

6. They are not as divided as the press wants you to think

And "Arab" is most certainly a national identity. Before issuing idiot alerts, I suggest you look at the history of Arab nationalism.

[sangh0]

7. SO what?

They are divided. They have fought battles and war against each other, and Arab is not a nationality. No one comes from the nation of Arab.

[truthspeaker]

9. Then I guess Jewish isn't a nationality either

No one comes from the country of Judea.

[sangh0]

16. Figured that one out all by yourself?

No one comes from the country of Judea.

And "Oz" isn't a nationality either. FYI

[David__77]

19. You are absolutely right.

There is a difference between juridical "nationality" that is on one's passport and the socially-determined nationality, which is determined by shared language, culture and historical ties. "Arab" is most certainly a nationality, if not in a "legal sense."

The example of Jewish nationality is most appropriate, though I would argue that it is a Semetic or Hebrew question rather than a Jewish one as such. One could also look to the Kurds or many others.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[David__77]

36. So, there is a "Jewish nation,"

because there's a state of Israel that declares itself as such. But prior to 1949, there was no Jewish nation, but only a Jewish ethnicity? I think this is an inaccurate definition of nationality, and I am not alone in my formulation by any means.

Leaving all this aside, I hope that you oppose the occupation of Iraq--in that case, on this very fundamental question we would be in agreement. I think this is a much more crucial issue.

[sangh0]

38. No, there is no "Jewish nation"

because there's a state of Israel that declares itself as such

And if I declare myself the Queen of England, I'm still sangha

[outinforce]

40. Gee -- How Stupid

If you declare yourself the Queen of England, you are not still sangha.

You'd still be sangh0.

DOn't even know your own name.

How pathetic.

[sangh0]

44. sangha

I am sangha

sangh0 is just a login name

[outinforce]

46. And I Am

Elizabeth II.

outinforce is just my sign in name.

btw -- did you know that there is someone who has sangha as their DU sign-in name?????

[sangh0]

48. So how's it going Chester?

.

[outinforce]

50. Please.

I prefer Chet.

It's butcher, and so much less formal than "Chester".

It's going just fine, Mrs. Bush.

Thanks for asking.

[David__77]

15. Why so rude?

I see no need for personal insults.

[sangh0]

18. Because

it's stupid to claim that Arab is a nationality and that the Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds are homogenous when they've fought wars against each other.

[David__77]

22. Kurds are a nationality and so is Arab.

There is no "Iraqi nationality." You would probably agree with this statement. I argue that there is a Kurdish nationality and an Arab nationality. You may disagree, but my view is at the very least held by a large plurality of the Arab people, spanning from Iraq to Tunisia to Morocco. Centuries ago, there were wars in Europe that were over religion but these did not signify a clash between different nationalities necessarily. There was no "Protestant" nation or "Catholic" nation, for instance.

[sangh0]

26. and dumber still

There is a Iraqi nationality, and there is no Arab nationality.

You would probably agree with this statement

You not only get the facts wrong, you're just as inaccurate when it comes to opinions.

You may disagree, but my view is at the very least held by a large plurality of the Arab people, spanning from Iraq to Tunisia to Morocco.

No, it's not.

[stavka]

39. I hate to Rain on your parade....

in ancient history I've been a teaching instructor of Middle Eastern politics and history at the University of Michigan, working at times with Ray Tanter PhD, former national security advisor for Middle Eastern affairs under Reagan.

Everybody I ever came in contact with then would tell you there is an "Arab Nation" - what else would make a Tunisian feel affinity an Iraqi?

Why else would there be an Arab league - that notably doesn't admit countries on a geographic basis?

Why would a Palestinian Christian have anything in common with a Syrian if such was not the case?

Why are such sharp distinctions drawn for those that live in Middle eastern society that are not parts of this Nation? e.g. Kurds, Sarcassians, Druze etc.

[sangh0]

42. And I hate to rain on yours

but nations are created just because a bunch of people say it exists.

WHen Arabs speak of an "Arab nation" they are using the word "nation" metaphorically, similar to the way Isrealis do when they speak of a "Jewish nation", and similar to the American funides who talk about the US being a "Christian nation". In each of those three instances, the word before "nation" is acting as an adjective, and not as part of a proper noun.

what else would make a Tunisian feel affinity an Iraqi?

The same thing that make me feel affinity for a Ukranian.

Why else would there be an Arab league - that notably doesn't admit countries on a geographic basis?

To pursue their political interests.

Why would a Palestinian Christian have anything in common with a Syrian if such was not the case?

Because they come from similar cultures, just as I would have things in common with a British Labor party activist. Also, there are many Americans who I feel do not share anything with me.

Why are such sharp distinctions drawn for those that live in Middle eastern society that are not parts of this Nation? e.g. Kurds, Sarcassians, Druze etc.

Because there aren't many Sarcassians in the US. Here, we have sharp distinctions between blacks, white, hispanics, asians, etc...

[outinforce]

47. Silly, Stupid

word games.

How transparent.

How pathetic.

How ignorant.

[stavka]

51. Maybe silly -

I didn't suggest the notion of the "Arab Nation" was a good one or a bad one, only that there is one.

It is meaningful to understand and acknowledge that that many people self-identify in that particular way.

[outinforce]

52. My Comments

Were not directed your way.

In fact, I think your posts on this thread have been thoughtful.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[outinforce]

37. You Ask. I'll Reply

If you post on DU for any period of time, you will discover that most people here are respectful of other people -- even other people with whom they disagree.

There are a few, however, that seem to truly relish hurling names of all sorts (like "idiot" or "dumb" or other invectives that serve only to tear-down people who do not hold the same opinion or viewpoint) at other people. My guess is that they really like to bully people. ANd, like all bullies, they really have nothing other than bluster behind them.

They are people who find it difficult, if not impossible, to disagree without being disagreeable.

You may have already encountered one or two people like that, even someone like that quite recently.

It is always so sad to see someone who cannot seem to make his or her points without the use of names of one sort or another.

The temptation is always there to sink to their level and to call them names.

Resist it.

[denverbill]

12. Actually, Poland didn't exist until 1918 and the Versailles Treaty.

Also, Poland was cobbled together from territories that included large German populations.

And Poland was coveted for it's natural resources by the USSR and Germany, who amicably agreed to divide it equally.

[truthspeaker]

13. and Poland was divided among several ethnic & religious groups

Catholic Slavs, Eastern Orthodox Slavs, Prussians, Jews, and Roma, among others. Before 1918 there was no recognized Polish nationality. Nobody came from Poland.

If we pull out they'll descend into civil war!

[Liberal Classic]

21. Nobody came from Poland before 1918?

I beg to differ.

"Poland is not dead whilst we live,
What others took by force, with the sword will be taken back."

[Monte Carlo]

14. The modern version, yes, but it does have a prior history.

It's been under foreign rule more often than not, but the Poles do have a national identity that had existed for centuries.

[sangh0]

20. Thank you for injecting some factual history

to counter the cherry-picking of facts while ignoring the historical record. DenverBill was particularly disingenous, as anyone who knows about the formation of Poland should know about it's prior history. I guess it was just conveniently forgotten.

[Monte Carlo]

27. I don't know why

All I know is that my Polish cousins would strongly object that Poland didn't exist prior to 1918.

[sangh0]

31. So would mine

.

[David__77]

25. That is true.

Poland has a thousand-year history despite its oppression under the Czars. Nationality is determined by a shared language, culture and traditions that make a group a distinct entity. It's tricky to "draw a line" between "nation" and "minority nationality."

[sangh0]

28. "a shared language, culture and traditions" defines an ethnicity

not a nationality.

[David__77]

30. OK, what is your definition?

You've discounted the importance of national boundaries by saying that there is no Iraqi nationality. So why is there a Polish nationality. What do they have in addition to a shared culture, language and history? They certainly had no independent economic or political structures during the years as part of the Russian Empire... This is not an easy question and there is a lot of disagreement. The Turkish state says the Kurds are only an ethnicity and not a nationality, for instance.

[sangh0]

32. "You can only be so smart, but stupid runs on forever"

You've discounted the importance of national boundaries by saying that there is no Iraqi nationality

Actually, I said there *IS* an Iraqi nationality.

So why is there a Polish nationality.

Because there's a Polish nation

What do they have in addition to a shared culture, language and history?

They have a nation

They certainly had no independent economic or political structures during the years as part of the Russian Empire

Actually, they did. The USSR didn't control Solidarnse

This is not an easy question and there is a lot of disagreement.

It's an easy question, but there is a lot of ignorance

The Turkish state says the Kurds are only an ethnicity and not a nationality, for instance

The Kurds agree. The difference between the Jurds and the Turks is that the Kurds think there should be a Kurdish nation. So far, you are mistaken on three continents. Wanna go for four?

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mmonk]

41. It's not so much about Iraq/Poland similarities

but speaks to us.

[sangh0]

43. "Facts don't matter...

only how they make us feel"

[mmonk]

45. Like false or forged documents to

lead to an invasion for conquest.

[sangh0]

49. It's not so much the false or forged documents

as how they move us

[Monte Carlo]

8. This isn't Poland and this isn't 1944.

So as long as you want to insist upon only these analogies as if you are the only one aware of these patterns, you go right ahead.

[David__77]

29. What links these two cases...

...is the matter of a foreign power waging war and occupation against a sovereign country. The US has its "CPA" and the Germans had the "Gouvernment General." I think it's a very loose linkage, to say the least, but I don't think it's offensive.

[robertpaulsen]

10. But how are their "training wheels"?

Are they ready to have us take off their training wheels? Some people say we made a mess, but I think if we just change their diapers and burp them, they'll be so fucking grateful they'll throw flowers and sing nursery rhymes about us!

Yes, I read the other thread you're so right in mocking, and I'm so sick and tired of that patronizing "we broke it so we must fix it" bullshit. It is precisely BECAUSE we broke it that we cannot fix it. I'm so sick of explaining the concept of a no-win situation to people who think the lesson of Vietnam is that we "abandoned" South Vietnam. Take your hearts and minds and blow it out your ass!

[Alerter_]

11. Wow, talk about naive thinking

We cannot "cut and run" we must "finish the job" - where have I heard this before?

Why make excuses for supporting the war? Just say it and stop trying to gloss over it with feel-good rhetoric.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-04-28-gallup-iraq-findings.htm

Should US/British forces leave immediately (next few months) or stay longer?

Total Baghdad Shi’ite areas Sunni areas Kurdish areas
Immediately 57 75 61 65 3
Stay longer 36 21 30 27 96

Maybe just move all our troops to Kurdistan and let Iraqis have their own country?

[info being]

17. I think what he's saying is:

The idea that, because we broke it, we must fix it...is ridiculous. The US is the problem, not the solution. After Germany invaded and destroyed Czechoslovakia in an aggressive war...after it went on to France, etc...did the world stand by and wait for them to "fix" what they "broke"? Of course not. What the world wanted is for the aggressor to get out...only then can the situation be dealt with.

The idea that we must fix what we destroyed is naive. It assumes that America is good.