Tens of thousands of Iraqis marched Monday on the fourth anniversary of the fall of Baghdad. The good news is that such a protest never would have occurred under Saddam Hussein. “This is the right to assemble, the right to free speech — they didn’t have that under the former regime,” Col. Steven Boylan said. The bad news is that the protests were directed at us, as demonstrators ripped and stomped on the U.S. flag and demanded an end to our occupation. Of course, if they would stop killing one another and harboring terrorists, and would reach a political agreement among religious sects, it would make it a lot easier for us to leave.
Posted by Ross Stewart
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JWink on Too many exemptions
- LonnythePlumber on Jail consultants straining patience
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
200 Comments
The Iraqi know in their hearts of hearts that we are there to protect them. It is hard to break old hatreds and it is convenient for some Iraqi leaders to transfer that old hatreds to a new villain.
They’ll come around. :)
And to “protect” them, we kill a hundred of them a day. And a hundred of ourselves a month.
When will people get the message?
Iraq has its Leftist/Facists just like anywhere else in the world. Anyone who ‘protests’ another’s freedom isn’t worth a whole lot.
We did, however, make a mistake in dealing with the insurgency/terrorists in Iraq. We should have disposed of Al Sadr a long time ago. We need to put his capture/death top of our To-do list.
Just like the graveyard Ghoul, the Liberal Left like MonkeyHawk counts the dead and feasts upon their statistics so he may glorify his grim talking points.
There were 1,999,999 aircraft landings says MonkeyHawk, but let’s feast upon the dead of the one that crashes.
We will suck the marrow from their bones so we might exalt our position in the news world.
We shall not visit the graves of the tens of thousands slain by the evil dictator Saddam. This cannot be repeated lest we be known as hypocrites.
Let us feast on the graves of our military who die. Phelps may be banned, but we can attend in our pink shrouds glorifying the cause of macabre attendance for the purpose of counting their skulls.
We will wave black banners held upwards by staffs made from the bones of the military dead and claim unholy victory at the Polls.
We will be quick to affix blame at those who dare to advance democracy. They do not adhere to our manifesto of socialistic cannibalism.
We shall ignore the principles of our Christian forefathers, bash their beliefs by rendering their faith into infinite black candles.
We shall use the black candles not to illuminate, but to cast shadows, doubt and confusion upon our youth by freely allowing them into paths of drugs, sex and perpetual victimhood.
We shall Cuisinart our unborn into protein juices so we can drink their innocent life blood in order than we live like eternal vampires supping on the shredded flesh of our unborn.
We shall endeavor to be like the Roman Tax collector, levying the burden of our every need by distributing wasteful spending into our pork projects.
We shall affix blame on those who are the people and never accept any ourselves.
We are the Democrats, party of turmoil, self-loathing and victims. We shall share our misery, ethics be damned.—–
Folks, you need to wake up. You all seem to be divorced from reality this morning.
“The Iraqi know in their hearts of hearts that we are there to protect them.”
At the point of a gun. The Iraqis want us out. We’re an occupying army.
OK this is MY idea: Let us have another election in Iraq. Set up the polls and have them vote on this question: Should the United States, UK and Austrailia stay and try to fix that which they (we) broke OR should they (we) leave and hand the country back to an unstable government, militias and terrorist?? Let them vote on it and if the majority want us to leave then we should pack up and get the hell out because, quite frankly, our soldiers can be spending their time and effort where they are appreciated.
“We did, however, make a mistake in dealing with the insurgency/terrorists in Iraq. We should have disposed of Al Sadr a long time ago. We need to put his capture/death top of our To-do list.”
That would be the stupidist move we could make. It would probably triple our death rate because thousands of his followers would be enraged. It is better to do what we are doing which is to politically isolate him from the general population and from Al Sistani who is the real leader of the Shites.
Sorry folks there are no good answers, no clear path in this boondoggle that GW Bush unleashed.
The violence now is primarily motivated by a political power grab and this is happending because the government has no real ability to govern at this time.
Instead of paying 2 billion dollars a week to have our military occupy Iraq, agree to pay them 1 billion a month in reparations, withdraw and hope that the region can clean up the mess we left.
It will take years and years for Iraq to stabilize. There will be many dead Iraqis in the process and many dead American troops if we stay deployed there.
People who resist an occupation are not “terrorists.” You keep banging that word around to justify an illegal occupation and name-call the resistance or defence of their country.
You’ve worn it out.
It doesn’t apply.
“And to “protect” them, we kill a hundred of them a day.”
monkey is dead wrong on this one. We do nothing of the kind. It does show the “I hate American” mentality of the Libs, though.
“People who resist an occupation…”
Speaking of worn out. This is not an “occupation”.
This is not an “occupation”.
Then what is it? What would YOU call it if a foreign army were controling our country?
I fill sorry for all you people who believe everything you see on TV and read in the paper. I have served over there twice and 99% of the Iraq people love the Americans for being there. The other 1% is the evil people that think nothing of killing women and kids. So until you have been there and seen the truth please just show some respect to those who have.
I strongly disagree, Ed.
Anyone who specifically targets gatherings of women and children, and the elderly – just for the ’shock’ value their acts will have – is a terrorist.
There is evidence that Iran is sponsoring some of the current Iraqi terrorism and as such, this becomes a much more dangerous affair.
We cannot hesitate when dealing with the enemies of humanity like this.
Kev – as far as putting Sadr out of commission – I seriously doubt it would ‘rally’ more terrorists.
Just like the defeated terrorist leaders before him – his death will cause a few days of ‘righteous outrage,’ then his followers will forget he ever existed. A terrorist’s attention just isn’t that long, as they live only to cause torment to others. We need to concentrate our efforts on squashing him like the little bug he is.
Thank you, USMC, for speaking out about the truth.
Those of us who are not under the Leftist brainwashing spell realized long ago that our liberal MSM devotes its life to ‘outing’ the status-quo, be it honorable, or not. But, let’s be honest, they are in business to sell stories – success stories, while true, rarely garner the attention the negative ones do.
I’m glad you weighed in on what the majority of Iraqi’s want – instead of the very visible, vitriolic, venomous, and dangerous few.
Ali Allawi who is the current minister of Finance and the former minister of Defense for Iraq was on CSPAN this morning. Some of his thoughts on the matter:He supports a separation of the Kurds, Shiites and Sunni to their own regions but they will not have autonomy. The only ones as a whole of the common people that want the U.S. troops to stay are the Kurds because we would stand as a restraint to Turkey from trying to wipe them out. And the Government who without us could no retain power. But over whelming the common man would rather the U.S. to leave.
The problem with the oil policy is and here I will use a parable, is as if after WWII there were a group of Nazis left in France and Russia. We are trying to make them not only except the Nazis but also give them welfare benefits too. I.E. oil revues, something that amounts to feeding the criminals after they have stolen all your valuables.
On the bright side, Allawi does think that democracy or some form of it will take hold in Iraq. But it will take time and will only come about if they are left alone. On the dark side, we have been making several big mistakes. One is to discount those with the real power that are not in the government. Like Al Sadr with the Shiites, he carry’s the same power with the Shiites that the Pope carry’s with the Catholics. To discount him or exclude him from policy would only serve to prolong the outcome. Sadr is a Iraqis cleric not an Iranian cleric which is a plus since they differ in that there is a disagreement between Shiites in the two countries. As long as we see him as an enemy and not an ally to peace there will be none.
The second is the U.S. is being short sighted in that we are on the verge of causing a conflict of not just the Sunni and Shiites of Iraq but the entire Middle east. By not allowing a quick end to the conflict in Iraq it is being spread to other countries in the region.
Allawi has written his own peace plan, please find the link below:
http://www.uncommonthought.com/mtblog/archives/2007/01/05/ali_allawi_iraq.php
The “surge” are actually multiple death squads, told to kill-off the resistance to the occupation, neighborhood after neighborhood and that is causing millions of Iraqi men women and children to flee the occupation.
2 and 1/2 million have fled to Jordan so far because we are making conditions in Iraq impossible to live in.
Of course the propaganda says otherwise, but the reported death count on our soldier is barley three seconds of the evening news, if at all…
It was an illegal invasion and occupation. Further more some of the Iraqis that we label as terrorists or insurgents are just trying to take their country back just as George Washington fought the British. We would do the same thing if our country was invaded and occupied. You could in a way compare the insurgents to the French Resistance in WWII.
I served a tour in Korea in the early nineties. The older folks loved that we were there. They appreciated not only us but those who came before us and saved them from communism. They ‘got it’. The only real problems we had were from the privileged liberal college students who felt it was a travesty to be separated from their brothers in the north.
Now, this happened when the north could not keep its people fed; when the leftist South Korean college students had every FREEDOM given to them by their fathers and the US to go join their Northern brothers. Seems they would rather protest for a leftist idea than practice what they protested. Go figure. Those who understand, understand. Those who don’t protest…
“Belligerent military occupation, occurs when one nation’s military garrisons occupy all or part of the territory of another nation or recognized belligerent during an invasion (during or after a war).en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_occupation”
There is a difference between what we are doing and what, say, Germany did to, say, Poland.For the Libs to call this an “occupation” only exposes them for what they are. Keep it up.
“You could in a way compare the insurgents to the French Resistance in WWII.”
More telling comments from the left.
Oh my God. You are comparing people who intentionally blow up little children in markets, who purposely blow themselves up to kill police officers, who have no concern whatsoever whom they kill to George Washington and the French Resistance. What the hell is wrong with you?
This isn’t a “left” or “right” issue. It is an occupation no matter what propaganda name you tag it.
point of order Fleet, as I have noted in other posts even Paul Bremer the presidential envoy to Iraq referred to it as an “occupation” and caused quite a bit of problems when he treated it as such. To start playing “a rose by any other name is..” game does not change the facts on the ground.
“…no matter what propaganda name you tag it.”
Just who, exactly, is using propaganda terms? When you call something what it ISN’T, it’s called propaganda.
“…game does not change the facts on the ground.”
The left uses “occupation” because it suits their purposes. Everybody knows, even the left, that we have no intention of occupation.
I don’t get how wanting our sons and daughters and brothers and sisters and moms and dads to come home from a fruitless fight in Iraq is “hating America.” They’re Americans, we love them, we want them home safely.
The poster “USMC” says 99% of Iraqis love the occupation. A poll done last month says otherwise. An excerpt:
**************************”Only 18 percent of Iraqis have confidence in U.S. and coalition troops, and 86 percent are concerned that someone in their household will be a victim of violence.
Slightly more than half of Iraqis — 51 percent — now say that violence against U.S. forces is acceptable — up from 17 percent who felt that way in early 2004. More than nine in 10 Sunni Arabs in Iraq now feel this way.
While 63 percent said they felt very safe in their neighborhoods in late 2005, only 26 percent feel that way now.******************************
The Israeli Mossad is active in Iraq, so there is no telling how much of the “violence” they’re causing. I know one thing and that is they’re sure not just sitting on their hands.
The “vice president” of our puppet government in Iraq has blurted-out to get the Mossad to stop “tossing bombs around { his words not mine }.
Those Iraq “polls” are pure fiction from the White House. Think about it: how would anybody take a true survy in Iraq. Go door to door?
The Pope spoke out the other day against the US actions in Iraq. Is he lying too?
“The Pope spoke out the other day against the US actions in Iraq.”
So did you, who gives a shit what the Pope thinks about anything other than his Church. Perhaps he should stick to what he knows about.
Ed – I find it VERY disturbing that you wrote; “…The “surge” are actually multiple death squads, told to kill-off the resistance to the occupation,…”
Say what???
The ‘resistance’ are cowardly terrorists, hiding in the homes of families with small children, women and old people, using them as ‘human shields.’ How ANYONE can justify that kind of terrorism boggles the mind. Only a liberal!
I agree it is sad and unfortunate that there is becoming a refugee problem, although there were refugees when Saddam was in power also, remember?
However, these people would NOT be fleeing if they would just grow a set of gonads and start rejecting the terrorist element in their midst.
At some point, those who encourage and harbor the terrorists are going to have to decide if their religious fanaticism is worth the lives of their children and families. It’s really THEIR call.
Our soldiers (soldiers, NOT death squads,) do NOT randomly shoot the innocent that are going about their business. They ONLY kill those who are CAUSING all the trouble and, unfortunately, those who get caught in the crossfire.
The insurgent terrorists have NO qualms about who they kill.
They have NO honor, whatsoever.
I have such a hard time believing there are actually American citizens that denounce their own countrymen just to build up our enemies.
That is very saddening to me.
The poll was conducted by D3 Systems. The methodology and full poll results are here:
http://www.d3systems.com/results.htm
The Pope?
Since when does the Roman Catholic Church dictate our foreign policy?
Get real.
Remember the time the RCC DID hold sway over much of Europe?
It was called the Dark Ages for VERY good reason.
In fact, it was one of the reasons the Protestants, under Martin Luther, broke from the historical Church.
Pope on a rope.
The future in Iraq is so bright, GSheridan and the other Right Wingers here gotta war shades.
I’d say y’all are the dead-enders. We never should have gone in, and there’s nothing that can be done to make any difference at this point. Iraq is going Shia in a big way.
150,000 American troops versus 27 million Iraqi citizens? Get real. And while you’re at it, call CF2K some names if it makes you feel better. The reality of the situation in Iraq surely won’t.
Republican posts at 1:30 AM and then again at 4:30 AM.
That explains why he’s so cranky.
Ditto, CF2K.
Having not learned the lesson of Vietnam, the wing-nuts still believe that the future of Iraq will be determined by our military.
As if you create democracy and a civil society by dropping a bomb on it . . .
Iraqi society will be determined by Iraqis.
The sooner we come to that realization, the fewer American lives we’ll lose.
Ed – the Israeli Mossad is the group responsible for my son being on the ‘no fly’ list, since they were operating a passport-snatching ring in New Zealand at the time his passport disappeared. No proof they got his – but it was enough to put his name on the list.
However, the Mossad is just one more clandestine intelligence agency, mostly gathering facts and (probably) manipulating propaganda.
So what? EVERY nation that has an intelligence agency, or secret agency does that. One thing they’re NOT doing is blowing themselves up in crowded marketplaces.
The Mossad is in business to protect Israel’s interests – not to cause it more problems.
Surely, you know that?
CF2K – no need to call names – the truth speaks for itself.
The Surge is working.
We are routing the terrorists out of their nasty little hidey-holes and they are killing FEWER of our American soldiers.
Win/win situation.
Unfortunately, what is good news for the United States is, once again, bad news for Leftists.
Thank you fleetwood. I suspect the Pope in much more knowledgeable about the topic than you are:
Bush versus Benedict: Delusion Confronts Reality
http://www.netscape.com/viewstory/2007/04/09/bush-versus-benedict-delusion-confronts-reality/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lewrockwell.com%2Fmanion%2Fmanion75.html&frame=true
GSheridan,
Stop lying. CF2K didn’t call ANYONE a name. He doesn’t have to: he’s right. That stands in marked contrast to all the names YOU called CF2K and his liberal bretheren. Does that make you a liar on two counts, CF2K wonders?
As for your glib assertion that “the Splurge is working,” CF2K wonders what you make of the increased deaths of U.S. troops over the last month.
Oh, right–U.S. troops deaths are up, but the total number of attacks is down, so the Splurge is working! It’s true; I heard some GOP flak saying that last night. Silly me!
Cap’n,
Indeed. 4:30 AM is when Republican posted his two-bit, holier than-thou-screed. This, itself, bears some analysis.
Judging by the whole “liberals drink the blood of children,” it sounds like Republican stayed up reading “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” and decided that because some jews are liberals, that all liberals must be jews, particularly the child-blood drinking kind.
The paroxysms of Right Wing hatred on this thread seem to CF2K to exist in direct proportion to the lies that the Right Wingers are telling themselves about how great things are going in Iraq, and how noble our intentions are and have been.
Well, Right Wingers, a little debunking is in order: they aren’t, they aren’t, and they have never been. The fact that everybody sees this–particularly the Iraqis–isn’t going to be dealt with by your unctuous patronizing and smug moralizing.
And your serial lying. You wouldn’t be Right Wingers without the Big Lie, told again and again.
Ten Americans died in Iraq over the weekend.
That’s an increase in American death rate, not a decrease.
“GSheridan,
Stop lying. CF2K didn’t call ANYONE a name. He doesn’t have to: he’s right. That stands in marked contrast to all the names YOU called CF2K and his liberal bretheren. Does that make you a liar on two counts, CF2K wonders?”
———————–
Okay, CF2K – now I’m GOING to call you a name – you’re a NUT!
I wasn’t ACCUSING you of calling me a name – YOU SAID I could ‘go ahead and call you names,’ and I responded that there was NO NEED TO.
Sheesh – turn down your defensive radar – no one is attacking.
I quite talking about yourself in Third Person – it’s annoying.
Capn – all in all, the American Death Rate is MUCH lower, selective dates aside.
CF2K – earlier, I was responding to the second to last sentence in your 8:52am post.
“Judging by the whole “liberals drink the blood of children,” it sounds like Republican stayed up reading “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” and decided that because some jews are liberals, that all liberals must be jews, particularly the child-blood drinking kind.”
WOW! I must have really missed something wild overnight! And don’t forget GS and fleettwood attacking the Pope!
Thing is about Iraq and the surge: It seems that the only group saying this is working is the US government Ministry of Truth. Everyone else all over the world tell us it is going to hell in a handbasket. Which is correct? I pose a question to the “Yea-sayers”: when does the ARI take over the fighting against those last remnants of dead-enders in their last throes? Remember – this whole thing should be over in “months not years” befinning over 4 years ago.
If you missed something, Ben, I must have missed it, too.
The Protocols are used by staunch anti-American Liberals to try and show Israel to be on a religious mission. Fortunatley, Israel is mostly secular in its way of life, although some strong Orthodoxy remains. In fact, if there was ever a doubt, Sharon’s razing of settler homes in Gaza should clear up any undue speculations in that area.
The Protocols are not used by conservatives who support bolstering our ally for military reasons in the Middle East.
“Attacking the Pope?”
Is there a problem with that? He is a religious leader, after all. Posters here regularly attack religious leaders such as James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Jerry Foulsmell, Osama bin Laden, and a vast array of others.
Why would the Pope be off limits?
Is he somehow above the others?
GSheridan and CapnAmerica are both wrong in their characterization of US troop deaths in Iraq. The rates are fairly consistent, with an occasional spike now and then.
http://icasualties.org/oif/US_chart.aspx
This of course does not lessen that fact that our young men and women are coming home in flag-covered coffins every week, and that they’re now dying not for American interests, but for a civil war between religious fanatics.
That was odd… the unsigned post is mine. TypeKey signed me out and posted a blank sig line.
“Thank you fleetwood. I suspect the Pope in much more knowledgeable about the topic than you are:”
No, thank you, ben. Is this the same Pope who heads the Church that shuffles kid-touchers around the country like a witness protection program? The same Church who looked the other way during the Holocaust? Is this the same Church who makes doctrine from things the Bible never addresses? No thank you.
That’s fine fleettwood. I ask my question again: when does the several-hundred-thousand-strong ARI take aver against that ragtag band of read-enders in their last throes? Especially since each and every one of the dead-enders is dead – MANY TIMES OVER! Remember “months not years”?
“when does the several-hundred-thousand-strong ARI take aver against that ragtag band of read-enders in their last throes?”
The sooner, the better. Wouldn’t you agree?
In the US it takes a couple of months to turn a snot nosed punk in to a world class soldier. Yet in Iraq after several years of training the Iraqis aren’t able to step up to the plate and protect themselves and many of them have served in prior military experience.
That is not an answer. Yes, I agree, “the sooner the better”. Unfortunately apparently Bush does not agree.
When?
Wasn’t the Pope in the Hitler Youth?
“Yes, I agree, “the sooner the better”.”
Good. I’m glad you see it my way. Next!
I am going to tell you people something. Maybe you will listen, maybe you will just play your cute little liberals hate America, Conservatives hate everybody bullshit. Fine, yell at each other and don’t find solutions. You get what you ask for.I was opposed to the Iraqi war from the very beginning. Not because of most of the BS arguments that were floating around, mostly partisan, and mostly crap aimed at proving Bush was a terrorist, Bush was an idiot, Bush was trying to steal oil, Bush lied people died, ad nauseum. Sick of that crap. Some of you should be ashamed. Anyway, I was opposed to this war for one reason. I don’t believe in preemptive strikes. I believe intentions are not the same as action. I certainly don’t believe that perceived intentions are the same as action. Did I believe that Hussein had WMD. Yes, as did most of the world, BS aside. I believe this was propagated by none other than Hussein himself. Anyway, not the point. Did I believe he was a terribly evil personage? Absolutely. Those of you who have taken to point out how peaceful it was under Hussein might do well to remember that. Was he in violation of the UN? Yes, but those assholes never do a damn thing except bitch. So, we took the initiative to enforce the UN resolutions. I understood, but disagreed that our national interests were being served.We engaged anyway. We overthrew Saddam Hussein. We gave the Iraqis a chance at self determination. We were committed. For all the wishful thinking, we must remain engaged. The enemy, the islamofascists, recognize nothing but strength and hardness. Tucking our tails between our legs and going home will only embolden them. They have one thing in thought-to rule the world with their brand of Islam. They could give a rats ass about Hamas, or Hezbollah, etc etc etc, They use those issues as a tool in a successful propaganda campaign to weaken the US and the World. They riot and kill because someone published a cartoon, they stab and kill the author of a piece critical of Islam. Their tear down a centuries old statute because it offends their religion. They intentionally kill children so they can instill fear in the hearts of their enemy. Those are the people some of you glorify as freedom fighters. To those of you who speak of Viet Nam, perhaps you would like to research how our leaving enabled the killing fields of Pol Pot, how the mountain people of Viet Nam suffered. And the VC were kittens compared to the likes of these ‘freedom fighters” who care for nothing and respect nothing but raw naked power and their own brand of Islam, which is mostly a tool and an excuse to take power from others.I wish it were not so. My family has a history of military service. My great grandfather served in WW1, my father in ww2, I served during Viet Nam, My brother has spent one tour in Iraq. My son will soon ship out to Iraq. I Have no desire for him to go, or come back in a box. To the MFers that talk about people for this war being cowards, you are about the stupidest sobs that I know. My son is an adult, he has chosen his path. As has hundreds of thousands who have enlisted, and reenlisted. I applaud their courage, I applaud the wives and children who send them, the mothers and fathers who send them , to a godawful place, in harms way, because they believe that these lovers of Islam and Mecca must be stopped, and we must not show weakness to those who show no mercy. I have no problem with disagreeing over the right policy, or if it was carried out correctly, but the BS and the hate prove nothing but your enemies are more committed than you are, and that you have the wrong enemy in sight.I better stop, I am starting to ramble.
“I better stop, I am starting to ramble.”
You passed that some time ago.
yes, you are correct. My bad
What if we would have pre-emptively struck on 9/10/01? Would that not be OK?
From now on, whenever GSheridan clutches her pearls and collapses on her fainting couch over the way the godless liberals disrespect people of faith I’m going to remember that day in April when GSheridan posted the words “Pope on a rope.”
Oh, but I forgot. We should only respect people of the “right” faith.
What a f*cking hypocrite.
You want to get back at the rag head sonsabitches that are killing our kids? Stop buying their damn oil. If we could go alternative and stop purchasing HALF of the oil we do today, we could cripple the idiots.
If they don’t have the $$$ power from oil, who would give two rat turds about them?
I don;t know. If I thought you were going to invade my house and harm my family “someday”, would it be okay for me to kill you today?
SolDeVB–
In a sense you are right, but, let’s not only develop alternatives, but drill in ANWAR. Let’s put in wind turbnes almost within site of Kennedys compound, lets drill off the coast of Florida, while committing to develop alternatives. Lt’s go whole hog.
“So what? EVERY nation that has an intelligence agency, or secret agency does that. One thing they’re NOT doing is blowing themselves up in crowded marketplaces.”
The Mossad gets others to perpetuate the violence. It’s been an Israeli war from the get-go to eliminate resistance for Israeli expansion.
Today, in Ha’aretz, they’re moaning about how they’ve lost the advantage, now that Hezbollah and Hamas have anti-tank weapons.
The Israelis want to conquer the world while Bush thinks he’s Jesus.
You should know that, and probably do.
So, you like “war” and the justification is fighting the myth of terrorism, which by the way, the British Parliament will not allow that word to be used anymore { as it is a misnomer }.
BTW, the threat of Middle East all out war is wreaking havoc with the price of Crude oil { gasoline }.
Wow!! Pope hate from the “right”. Liberals drink the blood of children? We will all get to watch Iraq continue to unravel in the coming months. Right wingers claim that Iraq will be a beacon of hope for the rest of the middle east. I don’t know about the rest of you but I am planning my 2009 vacation now for Baghdad. I heard that packages are really cheap on Priceline.The left still does not have the spine to really stand up to the prez on this one. They greenlit this deal and now they are trying to save face. I had the pleasure of speaking with a friend over the weekend that just returned from Iraq. His opinion was this….you cannot fight a politically correct war. Either take the gloves off and drop leaflets and bombs and start over. Or get the hell out of there. Makes sense.
“would it be okay for me to kill you today?”
You said “someday”. If we knew that we were to be attacked (imminent danger), then yes.The same could be said for the the December 7th attacks on Pearl Harbor. What if we could have done something on December 6th?
Mike,
So you subscribe to the “More rubble, less trouble” school of thought when it comes to bringing freedom and democracy to people at gunpoint?
I guess those purple fingers weren’t enough to cement the new democracy. Well, they had their chance. Now we’ll just have to stain the whole damn country red, right?
That’s not foreign policy. It’s lunacy.
F*cking lunatics.
“I better stop, I am starting to ramble”
Little john as one “rambler” to another… Well said.
“The same could be said for the the December 7th attacks on Pearl Harbor. What if we could have done something on December 6th?”
The difference is, those who accomplished 9/11 was no acting at the behest of the Iraqui government.
Don;t be a dolt. I know you are smarter than that. Of course if you have evidence that you are about to harmed and in imminent danger you have right to preemption to keep it from happening. That was not the case for the invasion of Iraq. As I stated, I understand the logic, I just disagree.
The children of “let’s tale over Vietnam” just don’t get it. The Middle East is the provenance of people who live there, not yours. Suppose that Iraq mounted a full-scale frontal attack on America. How many of us would roll over?
Fleetwood,
Since you’re so gung ho about taking preemptive action, I’m curious to know your thoughts on the now infamous Presidential Daily Briefing given to Bush in August 6, 2001.
You know, the one entitled “Bin Laden determined to strike in US.”
The one Bush had read to him while he was on vacation. The one he didn’t ask one single f*cking question about.
“Of course if you have evidence that you are about to harmed and in imminent danger you have right to preemption…”
Thank you for seeing it my way.Next!
Well Condor….how do the purple fingers impact anything at all today? I would say that it is way too late to drop bombs now. So what is the alternative now? Continue with the same tactics. Which is the definition of insanity. Do the samething and expect a different result. The fact that we were able to secure the country for one day means what exactly? We went in there half heartedly and tried to wage a “pc” war. That does not work. Could we have won WWII with the Nazi’s mixed in with the population in plain clothes?
fleettwood – sorry, I do NOT see it your way. YOU are content with pretty banners saying MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. I, on the other hand, want to see the ARI take over BY A DATE CERTAIN. So, since you are one of the cheer-leaders, how about answering my question. WHEN?
“What if we would have pre-emptively struck on 9/10/01? Would that not be OK? ”
How would attacking Iraq on 9/10/01 have helped?
Fleetwood the highjackers on 9/11 were Saudi not Iraqi. This my friend is a proven fact!
The so-called Iraq “election” was pure propaganda, as the count was made-up. Not a thousand voted, out of 28 million, as our puppet government counted the “votes.”
Some Joke.
Mike,
The US won WW2 by bombing Germany and Japan into piles of smoking rubble. Is that what you’re saying the US should do in Iraq?
Could we have won WWII with the Nazi’s mixed in with the population in plain clothes?Posted by: Mike | April 10, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Actually we did win WWII with Nazi’s mixed in with the population in plain clothes.
Fleetwood,read the rest of the post, I do not see things your way.
Mark, I am not sure i disagree, but I sure as hell wouldn;t be for walking into a village square and blowing up civilians including women and children. That is not resistance, that’s just murder
“What if we would have pre-emptively struck on 9/10/01? Would that not be OK?”
This is what I said. This is what I meant. It was in response to one who said never strike pre-emptively. All you blather about the rest is just blather.Seditionist pigs.
Yes Tom we should have. But now is too late. I am not a supporter of this war and have been opposed against it since day 1. Since we cannot take this approach then we need to leave. Give the troops the ability to win or bring them home. They cannont win in the current enviroment. And a military solution is not what is necessary at this point. Its time for diplomacy and this prez is lacking big time in that category.
littlejohn- You wrote it, I didn’t.
fleetwood–
Sorry, next time I be a little clearer, and a little wordier, about “never” believing in preemptive strikes. The rest of your last post is exactly the type of BS that never finds a solution, just wants to be a pain in the ass.
Mike,
I just want you to sharpen your rhetoric a little more. Enough of this “pc” reluctance of yours to just come right out and say what you mean. Tell me what you’re really proposing we do here.
Extra points if you use the term “raghead.”
Seditionist pigs.Posted by: fleettwood | April 10, 2007 at 10:49 AM
Asstampon:
Dissent is what this country was built on. Not the lemming-like behavior you would have us all engage in.
Isn’t that what you claim the US is fighting for in Iraq?
“Dissent is what this country was built on.”
From where did you pull that one?
The 9/11 hijackers were kicked out of Saudi Arabia, went to Sudan, then wound-up in Afghanistan. They were nothing more than a rag-tag bunch of misfits who could not have learned how to fly big Jets from “crop-dusters” or single engined flying schools.
The Mossad taught them how to fly, from January 2001 to September 11, 2001 after Bush’s Pnac’ers needed a jump start.
To fly down the Hudson River, make a banking 180 turn at over 500 mph takes an expert to maintain altitude and hit the “sweet spot” on both buildings. A novice would have over-shot or under shot the buildings, missing them completely.
That a fact jack…
Fleetwood,
Just when I think you can’t get more belligerently stupid…
Our founding fathers were guilty of sedition against the King of England.
Shorter Ed Friedemann: “The Jews ate my brain!”
Here’s a neat trick, flood Iraq with little fliers…
“Stop blowing yourselves (and us) up. Stop killing each other. THEN we can go home DUMBASS!!!”
Oh. My. God.
This nation was FOUNDED by people who dissented from the “official” line. The earliest permanent colonies were people who came here not for the fast buck to be made in the beaver trade, but to be rid of those who would tell them what to think and how to think it.
Our Declaration of Independence is one of the greatest statements of political dissent ever issued against a sitting government.
Our Constitution has the protection of dissenting views built into its very foundation. Indeed, one could say the fiber of the very paper it’s printed on is that of dissent.
Asstampon, grab your necktie. Pull hard. Once your head pops out, read a history book.
Thanks.
Condor….as I said in a previous post. I am not in favor of this conflict and have not been since day 1. I saw this as great deversion from the real task at hand. Which was at the time Osama Bin Laden.My term “pc” is just what we are doing. Steeping lightly, trying to limit refugees, and fighting a war and telling the citizens to go about their daily business.
Which brings me to my next point. Had we had the support of the rest of the world then we could have gone in there with both barrells blazing and took care of business. Instead we chose a unilateral move without the support of the rest of the world. That brought our current situation to pass. And now we are stuck with it.
“”I better stop, I am starting to ramble”
Little john as one “rambler” to another… Well said.”
DITTO!!!
Mike,
Having the support of dozens of countries is not “unilateral.”
That is the one thing I don’t get about you people on the left. No matter how many times we debunk your little catch phrase words you still keep using them.
Even if we only had one country with us it is still not unilateral.
Yet here you are still using the word.
You are either ignorant of the truth or you are purposefully being deceitful.
Which is it for you?
Mike,
I’m glad to hear you never supported the war. But you’re not making any sense otherwise. What would we have accomplished militarily “with both barrells blazing” that we didn’t accomplish in the first few days of the war? We completely destroyed the Iraqi army.
It sounds to me like you wish we’d had substantially more boots on the ground to guard ammunition dumps and cultural treasures in addition to the oil fields. And if that’s what you mean, then I’m right there with you. But that’s not what you’re saying. You’re repeatedly implying that “pc” restraints on our military conduct prevented us from kiling the bad guys. And that’s simply not the case. We killed or captured all the bad guys we wanted to. There were no “pc” restraints.
The Bush administration painted all sorts of delusional pictures of what would happen after we captured or killed Saddam. None of it was true. And what’s worse, is that the lunatics in the Bush administration made the mistake of believing their own fantasies to the extent that they didn’t plan for any other contingencies.
Those ammunition dumps we left unguarded were looted and turned against us. The cultural treasures that were left ungaurded were looted and created a culture of lawlessness. Those are not the consequences of an insufficient application of military firepower. There’s no “pc” problem here. Using such arguments plays into lunatic right wing bloodbath fantasies and obscures the real choices we have to make.
The token support which you speak of is in itself silly. Please see the first Gulf War as a reference.
As I have told you before. I am NOT a DEMOCRAT. I am a registered Independent.I do not support either party for obvious reasons!
Spin it anyway you want. We have shouldered the burden completely.
“Stop blowing yourselves (and us) up. Stop killing each other. THEN we can go home DUMBASS!!!”
actually sol that is exactly what I would be saying if I was the leader of Al-Qaeda or for that matter any of the warring sect.
It would get the Americans out of the way and leave Iraq free to be used. The hatred between Sunni and Shittes has existed for over a hundred years. What would holding off for another year or so make?
Mike,
Then I will go with you being both ignorant and deceitful.
Condor,
Actually, the US didn’t “completely destroy” the Iraqi army. That’s been a mixed blessing, and is one of the contributors to the current situation there.
For several months before the invasion, the US ran a brilliant intelligence operation against the Iraqi army, buying off mid-level officers with hard currency. Captains, majors, high level non-coms were targeted and bribed to walk off the battlefield once the shooting started. And that’s what many of them did.
Entire divisions of the Iraqi army were never even in the fight. They just melted away.
The upside: The US and coalition forces had an easier battle than they would have had otherwise, with low casualties and rapid success in the set-piece battles.
The downside: The Iraqis took their weapons home with them, and are now using them against us. And now we’re out of the set-piece battlefield where our troops perform so brilliantly, and are bogged down in urban warfare where our technology and training advantages are somewhat limited.
When a Lt. calls for an airstrike against a house that is a bombmaking factory and then is disciplined for doing it makes it difficult to win. This is why I say that we are fighting a “pc” war.
“Our founding fathers were guilty of sedition against the King of England.”
And a third of you people were for the King.
Nathan,
When we refer to the American military are we being purposely deceitful? Because it’s a fact that approximately two percent of our active duty troops are not actually American citizens.
Although, as far as I know, none of those non-citizens are from Iceland or Tonga.
I just want to remind everyone here that Tonga was a member of the “Coalition of the Willing!”
Left wing talk. Our forefathers were dissenters.
Yes they were – but they dissented and were ready and willing to do war against the British in order to have their own say. We are all a product of their battles.
Is that what the dissenters today are up to? Are they trying to pull out from under the United States government and implement their own nation?
Because they better know the ramifications of their acts. Take a lesson from our forefathers – this will be a war if you insist on going down that path. Is that what your after?
“Our founding fathers were guilty of sedition against the King of England.”
And a third of you people were for the King.
Posted by: fleettwood | April 10, 2007 at 11:29 AM
Of all the incredibly stupid, nonsensical things you’ve written on this blog, that is perhaps the most pathetic.
“I am a registered Independent.”
And I bet you take each issue and thoughtfully digest every point. Unlike those who register with a belief. It is all very high minded.
Shorter TraitorBaiter: “I’m arguing with the voices in my head that are telling me things no actual human being has said or implied.”
“I am a registered Independent.”
translation – I am indecisive with no sense of conviction and will follow whomever my friends tell me to. Yes, I will jump off that cliff if others do it first.
Fleetwood you are right. Anybody that is not a clone of you is wrong. Please post a picture of yourself so I may begin this process.
Being an Independent gives me the ability to be objective. Something you gave up long ago obviously.
Condor – your three days are up.
“I am a registered Independent.”
translation – I am indecisive with no sense of conviction and will follow whomever my friends tell me to. Yes, I will jump off that cliff if others do it first.
Posted by: TraitorBaiter | April 10, 2007 at 11:39 AM
Sounds like the GOP to me
At one time during the Revolutionary War, there were more colonists fighting for the King (that would be you people), than there were fighting for our young country.
Also, being an Independent really means you don’t know what’s up.
Asstampon is clearly having a difficult time with that necktie.
Grab and pull, Asstampon, grab and pull. You’ll see daylight eventually.
Tom, you asked me for civility and yet your continued use of the word “asstampon” is hardly civil. You want respect and then give none.
Fleetwood,
Congratulations! You’ve successfully created a gordian knot of flawed idiotic historical analogies.
Republican,
I ignored him until he started referring to me as a “seditionist pig.”
Respect is earned.
Tom,
Which is civil discourse although disagreeable.
“I ignored him until he started referring to me as a “seditionist pig.”"
You are correct, sir. You are not a seditionist pig. You are a seditionist person. Better?
My my, fleettwood is showing his totalitarian colors today!
Republican,
Sedition is a crime punishable by execution.
A pig is a filthy barnyard animal that wallows in its own feces.
Tell me how that is civil.
I’ve only been posting here for a few weeks, but I watch as every day Asstampon engages in the worst kind of name calling.
Again, respect is earned. Asstampon has a negative balance.
Wrong Tom – Sedition is no longer punished by death. The wording was changed years ago.
It should be though.
Baiter,
US Code says otherwise.
http://frwebgate3.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=2275591320+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve
TraitorBaiter certainly does delight in making veiled death threats against his political enemies.
I certainly hope Republican has his smeelling salts near. Death threats aren’t very civil no matter how veiled.
Funny how the right will criticize you for being Independent and the left says nothing. Kinda reminds me of how Washington works these days.
Please don’t throw the “right” in with the likes of fleewood or traitorbaiter. I am considerably to the right of many of you. However, I am not stupid. I was once an independent, and could be again. However, the reality of politics today is that there is only two parties with any influence (as said by writerdog elsewhere). I have chosen to work within the system to try and change the system. i find the Republican party less repugnant than the Democrat, so that is where I make my home. It is not that I find no fault with the Republican, there is just less that I find fault with. In reality, I am more of a COnstitutionalist. i do not agree with Big Governmet, with federal interference where the Constitution clearly does notgive it authority. The federal government of today is a far cry from the one envisioned by our founders (inmy opinion)
Oh mike where is Joe Williams at when you need another independent to help defend the title. But I have to admit until you I suspected those claiming independent was more like nic changing. They would preach the right wing line sometime more passionately then Fleet or Republican… Just an observation.
Thanks for your link, NoName, on the casualties in Iraq graph.
Actually, if one divides number of casualties by the total number of months we’ve been in Iraq including the half month of April, you find that the average number of deaths per month reported is 70.
In the last 4 and one half months, the number of deaths has been 89 per month.
While this is not a huge increase, it is substantially above the average . . .
GS is certainly WRONG when she says that American deaths are going down.
If anything, they are staying above the average number.
At one time during the Revolutionary War, there were more colonists fighting for the King (that would be you people), than there were fighting for our young country.
Also, being an Independent really means you don’t know what’s up.Posted by: fleettwood | April 10, 2007 at 11:42 AM
LOL
koo kookoo kookoo koo
fleettwood son you gotta get off TILT pronto!
“Tom,
Which is civil discourse although disagreeable.”
Republican
On what possible basis do you consider labeling someone a “seditionist pig” civil (although “disagreeable”) discourse as opposed to “asstampon”? Both are name calling, both are devoid of any other content other than namecalling (fleetwood throws around terms like “seditionist” and “communist” so freely that they have no serious meaning when he uses them).
Tom at least includes serious arguments. Fleetwood generally simply throws insults around.
WriterdogI choose to be independent because neither party represent my views. I am currently very disgusted at the path our country is on. I blame both parties equally for the mess they have created. I am a proud American and love what our country stands for. Unfortunately, at this time I find myself being very ashamed of our gov’t and their policies.Some will say that I do not have any convictions or that I am ignorant. That is their opinion and they are entitled. I will say that by being Independent it gives me the ability to be objective and to question both sides of the argument to somehow find the truth that is typically the middle ground. The apathy that this gov’t has created might be the biggest threat to our democracy. Someday, somehow we must figure out how to meet in the middle to do what is right for the country as a whole.
Sheridan’s using a flawed metric if we want to gauge the level of American “success” in Iraq (such as it would be…whatever it is supposed to be).
Sheridan, what’s the share of American deaths per TOTAL coalition deaths in Iraq? I’m including the Iraqi gov’t forces in our coalition.
If we add US deaths to Iraqi army deaths, take the inverse and multiply by US deaths, and plot data points over time: what’s the slope of THAT metric?
Of all deaths, is the share of Iraqi army deaths growing or shrinking?
If it’s growing, great: we’re getting somewhere in Iraq. But if the share of Iraqi force deaths is SHRINKING, then wouldn’t any reasonable person conclude that our “mission” there isn’t supported by the Iraqi street?
GSheridan wrote,
“I wasn’t ACCUSING you of calling me a name – YOU SAID I could ‘go ahead and call you names,’ and I responded that there was NO NEED TO.”
Fair enough. I–opps, sorry, CF2K–misunderstood what you said.
Having said that, you then go on to make quite a fantastical leap by claiming that the American Left uses the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” to discredit Israel as pursuing some ‘religious’ mission.
When I said that Republican appeared to have read the Protocols, that was only in response to his claim that liberals put aborted fetuses through Cuisinarts in order to drink them.
One would say, Capn, that the increase in deaths is expected with increased offensive military activity; unpleasant, but I believe factual. Were it not so.
Until the Iraqi military, police, or whatever other name one gives the governmental authority operating there proves to be more effective, then this shall continue, IMHO. That’s my frustration; the apparent lack of capability shown by the various Iraqi forces within and around Baghdad to “take over” and secure the areas once the “clearing” part of the operation is over.
Nathan, as you have recently returned, your best estimate of when the Iraqi forces will be in a position to take hold in the area surrounding and including Baghdad, please. You may well have offered this previously, and if so, I missed it.
I note that there was some discussion of the use of the term “occupation” upthread. It is my recollection, dimmed by the mists of time, that an armed force remaining in a country once active military action against the armed forces of said country have ceased are considered an “occupation force” under various international laws. Nothing in the term, to my mind, implies permanence, rather a reflection of the status of such forces remaining in the conquered country.
Nathan, I just realized that the query posted may be a bit unfair, in that you were not a theater commander; however, as a “guy on the ground”, you surely have some thoughts pertaining to the issue which I hope you will feel free to share.
ksagnostic,
Fleettwood is a whole lot smarter than people give him credit. He has the uncanny to focus in on a conversation and see passed several interactions knowing the outcome all along. He played Tom like a puppet.
No, I don’t see seditionist pig as being uncivil. Undignified or perhaps over the top, but not uncivil.
ALL HAIL FLEETWOOD!!!
My honest to goodness predictions:
It will take around another 2 years of our current involvement.
After 2 more years the Iraqi police and Security should be in much better control and we will either begin or already have begun phasing out and leaving the Iraqi’s more in control.
Probably another 2 years of direct logistical and air support.
Probably up to 5 years of a large contingent force to keep the region stabilized.
And who knows, we might keep a large force in Iraq for some time to help aid us in providing regional stability.
We still have forces in Germany, South Korea, Okinawa, Kosovo…
So that is a rough guess.
Thank you, Nathan.
That is too bad–
Regardless of the right or wrongness of it, the people of this country will never stand for it. For good or for bad, this conflict is nearly done.
So Nathan you predict another 9 years of involvement of some type? Any predictions on how to pay for it?
Keep on running up Daddy’s credit card? Treating the US Treasury as your own personal piggy bank?
I do agree with you Nathan that it will take at least what you are predicting and maybe more. My biggest question is “how did we underestimate this by so much?” And would Republicans been with the prez had he said this in the lead up to the invasiion?
Well, I think I see a conflict in Nathan’s estimate.
Namely, that the US may have to choose between supporting democracy in Iraq and supporting a US “large contingent” force there.
The street demonstrations would seem to complement the lack of Iraqi support for the US mission there (after all, the share of Iraqi-army deaths in Iraq is FALLING as a share of total force deaths: it seems reasonable to conclude that not even the Iraqi army is willing to support American goals in country). It therefore seems equally reasonable to conclude that sometime soon a democratically elected Iraqi government might demand the US leave Iraq. If the OP is correct — that Iraq is uniting against the US — then strengthening democratic infrastructures in Iraq hastens the day such a government assumes power.
Ergo, the dilemma in Nathan’s estimate.
Funny how you never hear Bush and his political allies offering estimates as honest as Nathan’s. Instead we get bullshit buzzwords like “surge.” Before the “surge” it was “hold and clear” and “as they stand up we’ll stand down” and the magically eternally renewing “six months from now…” estimates. This is leadership? Just in case no one’s noticed lately, we’re fighting two f*cking wars and American troops are dying every f*cking day.
Or, to employ more bullshit buzz words, would our enemies just choose to “wait us out” if Bush offered Nathan’s “timelines?”
What the f*ck ever. I for one am sick of seeing this war managed with more concern for it’s short term domestic political impact than for our long term national strategic interests. Bush has no plan other than to dump this in the lap of the next President.
Here! Here! Mr Condor……speak it brother!
“Fleettwood is a whole lot smarter than people give him credit.”
Is that why he has such a firm grasp on the history of the founding of this nation?
“He played Tom like a puppet.”
Um…I don’t think so.
“No, I don’t see seditionist pig as being uncivil.”
I certainly do. I’m surprised you don’t.
Death threats Condor?
Where?
“I for one am sick of seeing this war managed with more concern for it’s short term domestic political impact than for our long term national strategic interests.”
Given the current political climate, i would say that is not the case, or it would have worked better.
“Bush has no plan other than to dump this in the lap of the next President.”
I disagee. He is a true believer, in my mind, of winning the peace. Rightly or wrongly so.
I guess it depends on what our real goals in Iraq are. If we fought for the freedom of the Iraqi people, then we leave when they want us to. If we don’t give a damn about them, but want to turn Iraq into a satellite state that sells us oil for cheap, I’d say we have our work cut out for us!
Condor invoked the “F” word. I wonder if someone needs to call his house to let them know there will beatings in the house tonight.
If the elected government of Iraq asks us to leave, I agree. If not, then defining the “will of the people” is a bit tougher
Republican knows his wingnut playbook well. Here he’s invoked the timeworn strategy of implying that your political enemies are unhinged. I used the “f word” so I must be so volitile I’d resort to taking out my anger on familiy members. The implication is as distasteful and offensive as it is pathetic and predictable.
Meanwhile, upthread his political allies glibly accuse their political enemies of crimes punishable by death.
Meanwhile American troops continue to fight and die today.
Meanwhile our country continues to hemorage money on this war.
Meanwhile Bush has no plan other than to dump this in the lap of the next President.
But what the f*ck ever. It’s just politics, right?
Condor, you say the implication is “as distasteful and offensive as it is pathetic and predictable.” But you didn’t say it wasn’t true.
That’s a f*cking strange ommission.
Maliki will never ask the US to leave unless al Sadr tells him to. Maliki is dead meat the very moment that the Green Zone ceases to be his sanctuary.
I cannot imagine that anyone truly believes that the situation is anything but a flaming disaster. We are in our fifth year. The insurgency is getting more capable, not less. They are getting more sophisticated, not less. They are getting more dangerous, not less.
McCain had his Dukakis moment in Iraq this past weekend. He’s done. Romney had his Kerry moment also. He’s just looking silly.
It is certain that Bush is just going to hand off Iraq off the the next President – God help us make the right choice.
TraitorBaiter-
While COndor and I disagree, your comment is waaaaay out of line.
WSClark–
I disagree with motive, but I agree the next President will have to deal with it. In fact, I agree with most of your post. Still, one must do what one must do. We must find better answers,complete the task, and come home.
Meanwhile Bush has no plan other than to dump this in the lap of the next President.But what the f*ck ever. It’s just politics, right?Posted by: Condor | April 10, 2007 at 01:41 PM
Evidently Condor, you have never been in the military or you would know that there are mission goals, forecasted goals and long range goals. It’s even written in the regulations as a requirement to do so.
And I’m very sure, the President gets briefed often on these.
Other than tossing out the daily bilge water Condor, is that all you got?
Littlejohn,
You say: “Given the current political climate, i would say that is not the case, or it would have worked better.”
I say it’s worked better than it should have. Nonetheless, Bush has never – NOT ONCE – offered estimates anywhere NEAR as honest as those Nathan offered above.
If he had offered such estimates before the war we never would have gone in.
If he’d offered such estimates before the 2004 election, he would have lost.
If he had offered such estimates before the 2006 mid-term election, I believe the Democrats would have delivered an even bigger ass-kicking to the Republican party.
Maybe, as you say, Bush is a true believer. But he and his hand-picked, staunchly defended deputies, have managed and talked about this war with as much or more concern for short term domestic politics than for anything else. They’re fond of talking about how the threats we face now are worse than the cold war, or the Nazis, or [insert scary threat here]. But then they refuse to take the POLITICAL risk of devoting the resources necessary to effectively address thesse threats.
Have any of you notice that thirty five years is just about the minimum time that it takes for most countries to establish and stabilize their form of government and society.Those that support the war should have paid more attention to their history classes; they would have seen this as a pattern in the forming of a government.
Sometimes the teachings of a belief system take entire lifetimes to change.The Middle East has repetitively defied six thousand years of progress.With all the influences that the Middle East has experience from other countries and the various forms of government that has evolved, occupied and fallen.Why is it that they are the only group of mankind that changes very little?What would make you think that they will grasp the concept of a free democracy?Is it your arrogance, your ignorance or is it theirs?
Wiseman,
You’re absolutely correct. The people who led us into this war missed the lessons of history.
Another lesson they missed: Every modern war this nation has been involved in has totally transformed this society, and done so in entirely unpredictable ways. They’re playing with fire they don’t even understand.
One inaccuracy in your post I’d take issue with: that the Middle East has defied six thousand years of progress. That’s not true – it was Middle Eastern cultures that gave us our basic mathematical systems, the invention of “zero,” algebra, astronomy, and the decimal system, and codified law.
What the Middle East missed out on was the Enlightenment and Renaissance. Much of those cultures are are still stuck in 700CE, and it’s hurting them and the rest of the world.
Republican,
I’m not sure what you think your invocation of military regulations requiring mission, forecasted and long range goals has to do with anything. This is Bush’s pet war. The commanders on the ground are implementing HIS “surge.” A policy that several Generals objected to prior to it’s implementation. And Bush gets briefed on all kinds of things and a hell of a lot of good its done us so far.
Bush didn’t do f*ck all after getting the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing titled “Bin Laden determined to strike in US.”
Bush didn’t do f*ck all after getting the pre-Katrina briefing. Didn’t ask ONE f*cking question.
Apparently you still have confidence in this loon. I guess you’ll be a member of the proud 20-Percenters to the end.
I would say Wiseman that there has never been another country quite like the United States.
The Japanese during WWII with thousands of years of tradition behind them joined Germany in starting a World War.
I don’t imagine the generations of Japanese or Germans imagined grasping the concept of a Democracy either, but they have. :)
I think estimates prior to a conflict are just guesses. Big deal. WOuld we have entered into the civil war with a clear understanding of what the eventual cost would be? How about WW1? WW2?
There were estimates by talking heads and pundits about the thousands of american soldiers that would be lost in the firsr few days, those didn’t prove out either.
I understand your frustration, and issuing poorly consructed estimates does nothing for credibility, but they are what they are. I don;t think Bush and company are sitting around going “let’s reduce the casualty estimte by tenfold so we can sell this” That’s just paranio fed by the talking heads. I think they are doing the best they know how. Maybe that’s not so good. Maybe we should be totally isonalionist. Maybe we should have left it at Afganistan. Maybe we should have said. “put down your weapons. If we find you with a weapon we will shoot you, and shoot to kill.” Regardless of the high minded marshall plan, the rules on the ground were “get out of line, your dead”, at least according to many of the vets I have talked to.
Republican,
As I pointed out in an earlier post, the US won those wars by bombing both nations into smoking heaps of rubble.
Beyond that: US occupation forces wrote both nations’ new constitutions and oversaw complete revisions of their civil and criminal laws.
Complete destruction, complete domination by the occupying force: These are two things that have not happened in Iraq.
Pray that they never do.
Condor,
You really need to examine your rhetoric, it’s becoming less and less credible.
You mentioned Bin Laden. What exactly did the briefing say? Was it specific? Where was the strike going to be? On what day? What week? What month? Exactly what was there to be done?
Not saying anything about an event means little. I imagine he was stunned like the most of us on the enormity of the Katrina disaster. He said a lot about it later. Perhaps he didn’t want to take up national air time flapping his lips when more important information was needed, like telling victims where to go find shelter, food and water.
You myopia amazes me Condor. You can reason beyond one of your single talking point to see the bigger picture.
That is difference between Liberal Democrats and thinking Republicans.
“can’t reason” -.-
“Is it your arrogance, your ignorance or is it theirs?”
It was their arrogance, and their business, until they decided it was fun to target United States citizens. Then it became ours.
And they will rue the day.
Silly me. I thought a President was supposed to actually f*cking DO THINGS. Like ask questions when people present him with warnings about impending disasters. As for how stunned he was after that Katrina briefing, here’s a photo of Bush and McCain THE MORNING KATRINA MADE LANDFALL.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/images/20050829-5_p082905pm-0125-515h.html
They sure look stunned, don’t they?
In Bush’s defense, he did call the Secretary of Homeland Security that morning… to ask about immigration in reference to a speech he was planning to give.
That’s just one photo, you say. It’s true. Here’s a photo of how stunned he was the next day: August 30, 2005
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blbushguitar.htm
I’m sorry. To my eyes he doesn’t look stunned in either of those photos. Even as one of the country’s largest cities was being destroyed.
For reference, here’s a photo of Bush looking stunned: http://prete.ntio.us/archives/2006/09/where_were_you.html
Now where the f*ck are those thinking Republicans you mentioned. I want to talk to them instead.
Now where the f*ck are those thinking Republicans you mentioned. I want to talk to them instead.Posted by: Condor | April 10, 2007 at 02:35 PM
LMFGAO!!!!
Condor,
We’re right here, but we’re no longer Republicans.
Lot of people don’t wear what’s in their mind by an expressions on their face.
The photographs are meaningless.
What else you got Condor. Tell me that’s not all you got.
Then you never were.
The Ditto-dork BushBots keep telling us victory is at hand; light at the end of the tunnel. If we continue to “stay the course” they will be saying the same thing years from now.
Face it everyone – these Repukes will happily sacrifice America in order to protect their Fuhrer. They happily drink the blood of our fallen soldiers; human sacrifice is their stock in trade.
If there were video of Bush shoving live kittens into a Cuisinart, the GOP would claim that drinking pureed kitten was good for you.
Traitor,
The Republican Party has been taken over by religious extremists who are spending this country into oblivion, who are spending our children’s lives in Iraq, who are spending our grandchildren’s future liberties on an unprecedented attack on individual rights.
That’s not the Republican Party I joined in 1979.
I’ve voted for numerous Republicans for all levels of office over the decades, but it’s been getting fewer and fewer as the extremists take over.
I voted for Reagan twice, daddy Bush once, Clinton never, Dole once. Baby Bush? Not a freaking chance. He and his henchmen are the symptom of what is wrong with the Republican Party, and the Party is now rotten to the core.
If what we see today is Republicanism, you can have it.
Glad everyone took the time to read what I wrote. :D
How are those sedition charges coming, Republican?
Republican the Mamzer strikes again with “Japan and Germany didn’t know what democracy was until we imposed it on them.”
Wrong yet again, Meshugener.
As early as the Meiji era (late 19th century), Japan was taking steps to modernize its government, including more deliberative governing bodies and wider representation of society.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meiji_period
As for Germany, check out the Weimar Republic which began in 1919.
Face it everyone – these Repukes will happily sacrifice America in order to protect their Fuhrer. They happily drink the blood of our fallen soldiers; human sacrifice is their stock in trade.
Posted by: NaziBaiter | April 10, 2007 at 02:50 PM
If there were video of Bush shoving live kittens into a Cuisinart, the GOP would claim that drinking pureed kitten was good for you.
Posted by: WSClark | April 10, 2007 at 02:52 PM
Wow. And I thought Democrats were bad. Geez. Give me a break.
Republican,
It’s not clear to me what you think a President is supposed to actually do. Earlier you expressed confidence that Bush was recieving regular briefings about the Iraq war. I reponded that on two very significant occassions he recieved briefings about impending disasters and then didn’t do f*ck all about those warnings. So I’m curious to know why you’re comfortable with the fact that Bush recieves regular briefings if you apparently don’t think he should actually DO anything after getting these briefings? What’s the f*cking point of the f*cking briefings?
So the expression on Bush’s face doesn’t matter to you. I guess the cake he was holding with McCain doesn’t matter. And guitar he was pretend strumming the next day, doesn’t matter. Does it matter that no matter what was in his MIND, he wasn’t doing f*ck all about the fact that an American city was being destroyed while he was eating cake with McCain and playing pretend with a country singer?
In my business, leaders actually f*cking LEAD. They ask questions about significant events. in fact, one of our offices is located in Atlanta and senior management in my company were all actively involved in working through weather related problems caused by Katrina after it made land fall. In f*cking ATLANTA!
I mean, for f*cks sake! Bush isn’t just some end point in a flow chart. The fact that people prepare briefings for him doesn’t mean that things actually get done. He’s not just a figurehead. He actually has a f*cking job to do. The fact that Bush threw a strike when he threw out the first pitch of the 2001 World Series doesn’t mean f*ck all to the residents of the gulf coast who are still suffering due to his failure of leadership.
And no, that’s still not all I got.
Condor,You have to remember that our fearless leader has so much on his mind that it takes him a while to process new information- think of the 20 minutes or so it took for 911 to register in that Florida classroom. Katrina, being an even bigger disaster just took that much longer to make it’s way around all that political wisdom and into his consciousness.
Speaking of which, Condor, Bush hasn’t thrown out the first pitch for two seasons in a row.
Why?
The gutless wonder can’t take getting booed.
The U.S. needs to get on with the real war on terror – in Afghanistan and Pakistan – remember?
I think this is an excellent post and point Ross.”If Iraqi’s would stop blowing each other and themselves up it would make it alot easier for us to leave.”They also seem to be able to practice the civil disobdience that comes with freedom.Iraqi’s seem to be getting the French attitude but about oh about 60 years earlier.
As early as the Meiji era (late 19th century), Japan was taking steps to modernize its government, including more deliberative governing bodies and wider representation of society.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meiji_period
As for Germany, check out the Weimar Republic which began in 1919.Posted by: CapnAmerica | April 10, 2007 at 03:04 PM
Exactly.
At least 100 years up on Iraq since, as Tom pointed out upthread, Arab Orientalism missed out completely on the Enlightenment.
Completely went over the Arabs’ heads. (the real American tragedy is that THAT completely went over Bush’s head)
So I guess the US alone is supposed to stand the cost of propping Iraq up for their first 100 years?!?
Because I’m thinkin’ that ain’t gonna happen.
Hell, not at the same time as we have a gazillion baby boomers retirin’ and tryin’ to die with a little dignity.
This, by the way, has always, always, ALWAYS been why anybody with a 2 brain cells could see in 2002 that Commander Codpiece (then known as Shrub as this was before his glorious “Mission Accomplished” schtick forever changed his story in American lore) was utterly, completely, 100% full of bull hockey whenver his lips moved and the words “democracy in the Middle East” and “premptive attack in Iraq” emerged forth in linkage.
I am having to do this from memory: The briefing that was given to the newly elected President Bush concerning the threat from Al-Qaeda. Given by then special advisor to the President Richard Clarke and then head of the CIA George Tenet. Express the concerns that through pass activity Al-Qaeda was showing a growing interest in using Commercial aircraft as weapons. There had been a increase in chatter between know terrorist segments that was constant with a impending attack. The CIA had noted that several known persons of interest with Al-Qaeda associations had entered the Untied States.
That all markers were showing a impending threat and attack upon America proper. And a predicted time frame of within months not years. Within the day, the President did question Clarke about a threat, he asked about Saddam Hussein. In August of 2001 once again Tenet and Clarke tried to bring the concerns about Al-Qaeda up again and were told by then National security Advise Rice that the President wanted them to quit “swatting at flies” and focus on the threat from Saddam Hussein.
I am bring this up solely because there had been some question about the briefing and what it contained. Source being from Clarke’s book “Against All Enemies” and statements from George Tenet.
Insider: Missteps Soured Iraqis on U.S.Iraq’s Former Finance Minister Details “Shocking” U.S. Mismanagment Of Iraq In New Book
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/08/iraq/main2662165.shtml
It is clearly known through history that to have a reason to occupy a region is by creating unrest. If Iraq was completely clean and clear after invasion then the US army would have to leave.
I highly doubt that the CIA and the militant white house did not know what they were doing. The wanted to keep the US troops there and for that reason they needed chaos in the country so that they can “maintain peace”
Equal access to gulf oil has been planned for a long time now by the CIA, that’s why the US is a such a big supporter of Israel. The white house wants US presence in the middle east and country by country it will invade and take down the governments. Where ever there is a resource, violence and chaos will break out. Watch and see.
Divide and rule. A new counter-insurgency strategy to carve up the city into sealed areas. The tactic failed in Vietnam. So what chance does it have in Iraq?
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/article2439530.ece
The stat to watch in Iraq is (Iraqi military forces deaths)/(total military deaths in Iraq).
There is no military solution in Iraq, only political ones. We’ve been waiting for at least 4 years for the Iraqis to stand up a government that can provide security and then stability to Iraqis. You can lead a horse to water, etc.
If Iraqi military forces are dying at a decreasing rate when measured as a share of all military deaths, then it seems obvious to conclude:1) US goals for the country are not valued highly enough by native Iraqis to die for.2) The US can either stay around long enough to imprint American goals on Iraqi civil society (likely 4 generations from 2003 or roughly 80-100 years of “teaching democracy” to Iraqis at the point of a weapon), or it can acknowledge that Iraqis know what’s best for their sovereignty and withdraw.
Watch the death rate of Iraqi forces, that’s our canary there.
“Fleettwood is a whole lot smarter than people give him credit. He has the uncanny to focus in on a conversation and see passed several interactions knowing the outcome all along. He played Tom like a puppet.”
It has nothing to do with intelligence and everything to do with conduct. Fleettwood “played Tom like a puppet” because Tom started to call him “Asstampon”. That’s not brilliance on a blog, that’s not making a point, that’s trolling. Making someone angry is not brilliance.
“No, I don’t see seditionist pig as being uncivil. Undignified or perhaps over the top, but not uncivil.”
That’s simply a reiteration of your claim (which I find ludicrous by the way) that “seditionist pig” (i.e. “traitorous pig”) is “not uncivil”, but presumably “asstampon” is. So tell you what, the next time you engage in a face to face political discussion instead of on a board, call someone a seditionist pig and let me know how that effects the conversation.
“”seditionist pig” (i.e. “traitorous pig”)”
For one, they are not the same. For two, I changed it to seditionist person.
Noticing that someone is a seditionist is not the same as name calling. One is harsh, but civil, one is just name calling.
The only solution is to leave now. You cannot force Western style governmet on an Arab nation. Also you have to remember that the Sunnis and the other tribes have been fighting each other for hundreds of years.
We are invaders and not liberators. I am a military vet of three wars and this one is WRONG! You have to remember that the people we label as insurgents are fighting us to take their country back- they want us out! As much as I hate to say it, Iraq was better off with Hussein in power. Yes he commited atrocities by gassing the Kurds. But we gave him the chemical weapons during the Iran-Iraq war. Also him gassing the Kurds is no different from when General sheridan had smallpox infected blankets given to the indians to carry out what he called “the final solution”. You have to remember, it is the Arab way of life to live, die and rule by the sword. Just look at their culture. Now, we have allowed a civil war between tribes to break out. That blood is own our hands.
Regarding seditionist not equaling traitorous. I will grant that they are not exactly the same. Still, you are implying that Tom is advocating sedition, which is synonymous with treason, and treasonous and traitorous are considered synonyms (per dictionary.com). Therefore, seditionist and traitorous are defendably synonymous. Given your perchant for over the top accusations and flaming, I stand by my interpretation of “seditionist pig” and “traitorous pig” being largely synonymous, but I will agree that I would have been more accurate if I had used the synonym “treasonous pig” as an illustration.
I saw your post where you changed “pig” to “person”, which is marginally to your credit (I still think seditionist is over the top and NOT civil in discussion over disagreements concerning national policy). But the fact of the matter is Republican made his claim about “seditionist pig” being civil discourse BEFORE you made your change. I am still curious to see his defense of that, since he thought it was worthwhile to take Tom to task for his lack of civil discourse.
I’m amused that Fleettwood finds it necessary to get defensive over his name calling. I’ll just be honest: I enjoyed being petty and nasty when I called him an “asstampon.”
I actually found “seditionist” to be more offensive than “pig.”
People who know me know I’m a flag-waving, gun-toting, pro-Military patriotic American. I believe this nation is worth fighting for, and I believe the ideals of individual liberty, justice, and basic fairness to all are worth standing up for. I put these beliefs into practice in my daily life in more ways than you, my fellow bloggers, probably realize.
Getting called a pig, well, everyone needs a little porking now and then.
::grin::
Actually Tom, I find that term you keep using offensive under any circumstances and wish you would stop writing it.
Youth read this Blog and your consistent usage of it, sets a bad example.
I don’t understand how any “youth” reading this blog could be so offended by “porking.”
Unless they observe kosher or halal.
You know what term(s) I was talking about Tom. Stop being a jerk and stop using it.
Republican,
A “seditionist” is someone who works to overthrow the government of the United States. For civilians, the punishment is 20 years and a massive fine. For military personnel, the punishment is execution.
A “pig” is a barnyard animal that wallows in its own feces.
A “tampon” is a feminine hygiene product sold legally in stores on every streetcorner.
An “ass” is another barnyard animal, and according to my Bible, was Jesus’ primary mode of transportation 1976 years and 10 days ago.
Republican, when you admonish Fleettwood for his name calling instead of being his chief apologetic, I’ll take your request seriously.
Thanks for writing. Now go back to ignoring all my posts. Yesterday was much more fun that way. :)
The legal definition under U.S. law is not the only definition or usage of sedition.
Now go back to your rationalization of using profane language. Remember , what you write here has the potential to be seen world wide.
Study carefully history of the use of the word sedition as a term describing conduct not a legal term.
Republican is such a delicate flower.
I can only assume he somehow missed GSheridan’s attack on Catholics and the Pope upthread, or SURELY he would have appealed to everyone to THINK OF THE CHILDREN that read this blog! Such incivility against people of faith!
Oh. That’s right. Self-righteous prattling fundy morons are only concerned with people of the RIGHT faith.
What the f*ck ever.
And for the record, I’m not a fan of the word “asstampon,” but I’d rather see name calling of that sort going on than the pervasive attitudes among the far right on this blog that anyone to the left of them hates our country. I can assure you that based on what I know, Tom is FAR to the right of me and we somehow manage to get along just fine without accusing each other of being traitors or seditionists or communists or fascists. Would that the people here who are even further to the right of Tom could do the same.
You and Fleettwood intentionally blur the line between “dissent” and “sedition.” I’ll provide dictionary definitions (Random House, 1996) for your further consideration:
se•di•tion (si dish‚ƒn) n.1. incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government.2. any action, esp. in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion.Syn. 1. insurrection, mutiny. See treason.
dis•sent (di sent‚) v.i.1. to differ in sentiment or opinion, esp. from the majority; withhold assent; disagree (often fol. by from )2. to disagree with the methods, goals, etc., of a political party or government; take an opposing view.3. to disagree with or reject the doctrines or authority of an established church. —n.4. difference of sentiment or opinion.5. See dissenting opinion.6. disagreement with the philosophy, methods, goals, etc., of a political party or government.7. separation from an established church, esp. the Church of England; nonconformity.— Syn.4, 6. disagreement, dissatisfaction, opposition. DISSENT, DISSIDENCE mean disagreement with the majority opinion. DISSENT may express either withholding of agreement or open disagreement. DISSIDENCE, formerly much the same as DISSENT, has come to suggest not only strong dissatisfaction but a determined opposition.
I certainly am far to the right of Condor, and i agree that the “COmmies, fascists, Seditionists, rightwingnuts, traitors,” etc talk needs to stop. If we could quit labelling people so easily, and then listen (not just hear) maybe we could learn something from the other. But then, what fun would that be?
“The legal definition under U.S. law is not the only definition or usage of sedition.
Now go back to your rationalization of using profane language. Remember , what you write here has the potential to be seen world wide.
Study carefully history of the use of the word sedition as a term describing conduct not a legal term.”
You sir, are being absurd. Seditionist is an over the top insult every bit as much as “asstampon”. The idea that the term seditionist is allowable in civil discourse because the word can have another definition other than the “legal” definition is just being silly. Fleettwood typically throws overblown words around to describe his opposition (communist being his favorite).
I strongly suspect that your taking Tom to task for his blog conduct while defending fleettwood has everything to do with which position they have taken on this issue and which of them you identify as being sympathetic to your position on the issue of Iraq, and little or nothing to do with the definition of sedition.
As long as you take Tom to task for his conduct while defending fleettwood’s, you give up any high ground you may think you have. You are being blatantly hypocritical. Period.