FTFA: Rogers, professor of peace studies at the University of Bradford, northern England, also warned that any military action against Iran over the Islamic republic's disputed nuclear programme would further aggravate the situation.


'Professor of peace studies'.

Yawn...

Afternoon_Delight: 'Professor of peace studies'.

You're right, education is stupid. Let's just go with our gut feelings.

Afternoon_Delight: 'Professor of peace studies'.

I myself will vehemently disagree with the think tank's "independent" status until they also include a quote from a 'Professor of War Studies' who concurs with the conclusions.

I fear I will also need a quote from a 'Professor of Complete Indifference' so the apathetic are also included.

Afternoon_Delight: FTFA: Rogers, professor of peace studies at the University of Bradford, northern England, also warned that any military action against Iran over the Islamic republic's disputed nuclear programme would further aggravate the situation.


'Professor of peace studies'.

Yawn...

Couldn't find a Cox and Forkum picture that fits with your one liner?

Afternoon_Delight: 'Professor of peace studies'.

Yawn...

'Wannabe troll masquerading as a Las Vegas prostitute'.

Yawn...

Sdecker: Couldn't find a Cox and Forkum picture that fits with your one liner?


Do I really need to?

I'm sure they blame Bush.

Yawn...

Everything that needs to be said about this article, was said in subby's headline.


/thread over.

Afternoon_Delight: 'Professor of peace studies'.

Yawn...

Yeah, peace is stupid! Stupid peace. Anyone who looks for ways to find peace is a big stupid poopy head. Researching our past to see how peace was gained before is pointless! PEAAAAAAAAACE! Only hippies like peace! (drool.)

Can someone replace "Libs!" with "Peace!" in the "Libs, libs libs!" photo?

The [obvious] tag was never more appropriate.

Afternoon_Delight

I sort of agree with the yawn. That IS an awfully narrow area of expertise for a professorship, and while, yes, peace is important and a great goal to work towards, there hasn't been that much of it to study. (Don't give me that Pax Romana crap, it was the beginning of the end for them anyway and Celts were still rebelling.) The guy probably just asked for a loftier title for his 70th birthday so he wouldn't have to teach freshman poli-sci.

nashBridges: Afternoon_Delight: 'Professor of peace studies'.

I myself will vehemently disagree with the think tank's "independent" status until they also include a quote from a 'Professor of War Studies' who concurs with the conclusions.

I fear I will also need a quote from a 'Professor of Complete Indifference lack-of-shiat-giving' so the apathetic are also included.

FTFY

keylock71: Afternoon_Delight

Yawn...

Yes, yes, we all know thoughts that don't fit into your narrow little world view are boring...

It's a common trait among simpletons.

I think his point was:
A: Totally biased source, and
B:We knew this shiat aleady, as well as
C:We hear this shiat daily, plus
D:We knew this shiat already

/My post's full of shiat...

as a person that likes peace, I have to say that I am getting a kick out of these replies...
/cough

The Grinch: Afternoon_Delight

I sort of agree with the yawn. That IS an awfully narrow area of expertise for a professorship, and while, yes, peace is important and a great goal to work towards, there hasn't been that much of it to study. (Don't give me that Pax Romana crap, it was the beginning of the end for them anyway and Celts were still rebelling.) The guy probably just asked for a loftier title for his 70th birthday so he wouldn't have to teach freshman poli-sci.

Did you know that England and Portugal have never been at war?

You didn't need a think tank to come to this conclusion. When the President of the United States has to travel to Iraq in complete secrecy under the cover of darkness for only a few hours at a time in order to do a photo op, that pretty much tells you that this whole thing is a total clusterfark.

"The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For out of the overflow of his heart his mouth speaks."

-Jesus

Atillathepun: Afternoon_Delight: 'Professor of peace studies'.

Yawn...

Yeah, peace is stupid! Stupid peace. Anyone who looks for ways to find peace is a big stupid poopy head. Researching our past to see how peace was gained before is pointless! PEAAAAAAAAACE! Only hippies like peace! (drool.)

Can someone replace "Libs!" with "Peace!" in the "Libs, libs libs!" photo?

I googled that just to see what it would bring...

Yeah, but continuing u.s. history of killing innocent people and violent imperialism has been a huge success.

Anyone else's spidey senses going off that this is probably just a peacenik "think tank"? Like a hippy drum circle version of the American Enterprise Institute?

While not going "positively swimmingly", the GWOT is HARDLY a disaster. Now Iraq, THAT is a disaster. Afghanistan? Pretty freaking good for a counter-insurgency conflict.

Their "solution" for resolving the GWOT seems to be "sit on your hands and it will allllll go away..."

Their justification seems to be that US action is the main provocation for the continuing fights against us and that it is being used as a propaganda tool. So, what if we pull out that propaganda machine will stop? They won't say something like "lookah here! We routed the Americans!" and rebuild the Taliban.

Fire indeed hot!

Wait a second, the war on terror was pretty successful. It created a new enemy for the US which the country can pour money into the military-industrial complex to fight. It has given the US a reason to have a solid military presence in the region and a chance to directly control their oil supply. The US has also picked an enemy this time that isn't going to collapse or disappear like the Soviet Union did. No embarrassing internal collapses, there will always enough injustice in the region to spawn extremism, plus there is all the military equipment and training that we have given the terrorists.

It's weird, it's almost like the professor thinks the White Houses stated goals for the war on terror have anything to do with their real intentions.

"I don't think there is something called reconciliation, and there will be no reconciliation as such," said Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih, a Kurd. "To me, it is a very inaccurate term. This is a struggle about power."

more liberal rantings from the so-called intellectuals far away from the battlefield.

everyone is so quick to condemn a policy instead of giving it some more time to come to full fruitition.

the terrorist threat facing the world of freedom won't just go away in a day.

raging hatred towards everything non-muslim is driving it.

of course, it is sad there will be some collateral damage in the process.

long-run look at the situation should, however, convince almost anyone that only tough stance is appropriate.

insurgents will be defeated, and the end result will undoubtedly bring piece and prosperity in the region.

now, it is sad, but the alternative is an age of darkness as the jihadists overtake the progressive world, which is already happening all over western europe.

//ya, rly.

Among the ORG's recommendations are the withdrawal of foreign forces from Iraq and an increase in diplomacy, including with Syria and Iran; greater civil aid to Afghanistan, a scaling down of military action and talks with militia.

I'm no fan of the war, but the suggestion of "talks" with militia is pretty gutless. How do you reconcile with people who are willing to kill themselves, happily, and behead noncombatants in the pursuit of their goal, whatever it is?

Attilathepun

Did you know that England and Portugal have never been at war?

I believe it. They really had nothing to fight over except trade routes and colonies during the 'age of discovery', and in those days they were kinda preoccupied with the Spanish fleet beating on both of them.

Actually, it's not. Peace studies is basically a multidisciplinary social sciences study for conflict resolution. The guy holds a BsC, PhD, DIC ARCS, MIBiol. It's likely that those degrees are in several social sciences, but I can't dig up his CV, so I couldn't actually say. At any rate, assuming my UK degrees are up to par, a professor for peace studies with degrees in say, sociology, political science, and some other social science, with the most terminal of those degrees being honor-level from the Imperial College, and a chartered biologist, teaching peace studies? I'd pay attention.

Bah. Single T, double L. That'll teach me to copy and paste.

SemperLieSuckah: So, what if we pull out that propaganda machine will stop? They won't say something like "lookah here! We routed the Americans!" and rebuild the Taliban.

The Taliban is a very small part of the violence in Iraq. Pulling out of Iraq is not a victory for the Taliban. I know GWB wants you to think that, but he is lying to you.

omg_lol Yeah, because, as you know... all the countries we've been at war with in the past 100 years were known for their staunch respect for other nations' sovereignty and impeccable human rights records... And they'd still be that way today if it weren't for us meddling Americans.

You know why Iraq's a desert right? Greedy U.S. American corporations stole all the water to drown puppies infront of school children with Blackwater's protection and government funding...


//oh wait, nevermind

SemperLieSuckah: Afghanistan? Pretty freaking good for a counter-insurgency conflict.

Of course Afghanistan's doing great. That's 'cause they're all in Pakistan (new window) instead.

Pincy The Taliban is not in Iraq. al-Qaeda is 10% of the insurgent population. The rest is scattered amongst Sunni and Shia insurgency groups mostly pre-occupied with slaughtering each other with backing from their prospective theocratic allies in the region.

pup.socket: more liberal rantings from the so-called intellectuals far away from the battlefield.

As opposed to all those Conservative talking heads in the Bush Administration and media who have never served a day in the Armed Forces.

Sorry, you can't play that card when the current administration consists of a bunch of chicken hawks.

Biological Ali yeahhh... damn elections. What's your native analysis of the outcome?

SemperLieSuckah: Pincy The Taliban is not in Iraq. al-Qaeda is 10% of the insurgent population. The rest is scattered amongst Sunni and Shia insurgency groups mostly pre-occupied with slaughtering each other with backing from their prospective theocratic allies in the region.

Yeah, I know, that's what I just said. Your previous post indicated that you didn't know that, but maybe I just read you wrong.

Zhouda: Wait a second, the war on terror was pretty successful. It created a new enemy for the US which the country can pour money into the military-industrial complex to fight. It has given the US a reason to have a solid military presence in the region and a chance to directly control their oil supply. The US has also picked an enemy this time that isn't going to collapse or disappear like the Soviet Union did. No embarrassing internal collapses, there will always enough injustice in the region to spawn extremism, plus there is all the military equipment and training that we have given the terrorists.

It's weird, it's almost like the professor thinks the White Houses stated goals for the war on terror have anything to do with their real intentions.

Our military's benefiting? From all those dead troops and destroyed equipment, no doubt--goldmine!
And the oil? Yeah, we pretty much stole it all, right? I mean, we tottaly took control of Iraq and forced them to drill virgin land and sell the oil to us super cheap, right?
...oh...right...oil's more expensive. We haven't taken over the country...

Just because you've been proven wrong isn't a reason to give up the "No Blood for Oil" stance, though; i like it, got a ring to it.

Nobody's benifiting from this shiat storm, genius, unless you count douchebags that gain publicity by restating shiat we already know and being "activists" for a cause the majority of the country believes in.

/Could someone file this article and title it "Shiat I already know"?
//For blood for FAIL

Pincy: pup.socket: more liberal rantings from the so-called intellectuals far away from the battlefield.

As opposed to all those Conservative talking heads in the Bush Administration and media who have never served a day in the Armed Forces.


They are on the ground. Sure they have a fresher perspective than those who read about it in the papers, don't you think?

Also, they have better access to inteligence.

SemperLieSuckah:

Not to threadjack, but why do you find socialism bad?

Do you have a problem with a Police force protecting us, a Fire department putting out fires and rendering medical assistance when in need or how about our great system of public libraries?

All of these things are good and are socialist programs! They seem to work pretty well for us, why are you afraid of progress?

impaler:
Yeah, the Taliban is an almost non-existent part of the violence in Iraq.

Except the bridge of terrorism that connects Iraq and Taleban. You know, the one that ends in an -n

My Google-Fu fails me. All I could find is that his BSc, at least, is in biology:

http://education.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0,5500,1676672,00.html

The Bradford faculty page and most other locations only list his degrees and not their specialization.

pushmi_pullyu: Among the ORG's recommendations are the withdrawal of foreign forces from Iraq and an increase in diplomacy, including with Syria and Iran; greater civil aid to Afghanistan, a scaling down of military action and talks with militia.

I'm no fan of the war, but the suggestion of "talks" with militia is pretty gutless. How do you reconcile with people who are willing to kill themselves, happily, and behead noncombatants in the pursuit of their goal, whatever it is?

With love.

/Seriously, no talks, no fighting, no "security forces"...just get us the hell out.
//Quagmire then, Quagmire now, Quagmire 50 years after we leave

SemperLieSuckah: al-Qaeda is 10% of the insurgent population.


Did you pull that one out of your ass?

Don't worry, we already know the answer to that.

pup.socket: They are on the ground. Sure they have a fresher perspective than those who read about it in the papers, don't you think?

Bush went through several generals until he finally found one that he could agree with. So yeah, they have a fresher perspective but the White House doesn't want to listen to it.

Also, they have better access to inteligence

Like that intelligence about WMDs???