The Iraq thread 3

[Chill 0]

What i cant understand is that if i show anything that is the truth then you people call it anti USA Why is that? Let truth speak for its self and it has.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]So, the blacks of USA have never revolted in any way against what they perceive to be injustice? Do you think Martin Luther King was the only way for the blacks? How about the racial uprising in the 60's, the "Black Panther-movement" and the revolts that took place after the Rodney King scandal?

Yes, I believed MLK was the only way because bigots/racists wanted a "race war".

Racial uprising in 60's was northern thing and were suppressed, "Black Panther movement" was taken apart by the government, and Rodney King riots were just stupid.

MLK and civil rights activists used the media has a effective tool to get their point.  The images of dogs attacking defenseless children and adults. Black people taking beating from white mobs while they did not fight back. The key was they protest, took the beating, and did not fight back. Hell, even some of the civil right activists were murdered and they did not retaliate by killing a random white child or woman or man.

[ralphwiggum 6]

What i cant understand is that if i show anything that is the truth then you people call it anti USA Why is that? Let truth speak for its self and it has.

cause you are not the truth nor what you say/show is.

the truth is that no fucking gov't in the world gave a fuck about Iraq before the war and had nothing to say UNTIL Bush decided to go in. and then rest of the leftwing talk as if it they were doing some fucking thing to improve situation in Iraq.

for example, I see no thread about Suu Ki, or that ecentric populist president in south America, and left side talking about human rights discussion in other parts of the world. but for them when US is involved they have to chime in as if US needs to get out of the world politics and as soon as some rightwing moron says that accusation of isolationism is thrown.

you want the truth? all of us talking here about politics are whores of current issue, not about overall continuous effort to unbiasedly talk about world situation.

[Pathy 0]

Quote[/b] ]the truth is that no fucking gov't in the world gave a fuck about Iraq before the war and had nothing to say UNTIL Bush decided to go in. and then rest of the leftwing talk as if it they were doing some fucking thing to improve situation in Iraq.

Language!

What about the UN ect, the huge protests in London, ect, before the war started?

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]the truth is that no fucking gov't in the world gave a fuck about Iraq before the war and had nothing to say UNTIL Bush decided to go in. and then rest of the leftwing talk as if it they were doing some fucking thing to improve situation in Iraq.

I do not remeber mass protests when Clinton used tomahawk missiles against Iraq after finding out Saddam men tried to kill fmr. president Bush (the missiles did not do a thing). Also, no protests about the corruption of the food for oil program that took food/money away from Iraqi people. What about the uprising that was violently crushed in Iraq after the Gulf War. Were was the mass protests to do something about Saddam actions? Were were the mass protests when the UN inspect. team was kicked out in the 90's? or when Iraqi aa fired at american/british planes in the no-fly zone?

[ralphwiggum 6]

truth hurts, eh?

the protests were there, but during 90s no one gave much thought about Iraq, or if did was in context of how US's imperialism is killing kids through embargos.

current sitaution is that if occupational force can't get the nation back on its feet, it will be a long time before we see a stable gov't in Iraq, and more trouble in ME. So whether we like it or not, we are stuck with this.

good news is that people can understand that Iraqis need international hepl, bad news is that some of the nations or people think this is a good chance to discredit US first.

[ralphwiggum 6]

I do not remeber mass protests when Clinton used tomahawk missiles against Iraq after finding out Saddam men tried to kill fmr. president Bush (the missiles did not do a thing). Also, no protests about the corruption of the food for oil program that took food/money away from Iraqi people. What about the uprising that was violently crushed in Iraq after the Gulf War. Were was the mass protests to do something about Saddam actions? Were were the mass protests when the UN inspect. team was kicked out in the 90's? or when Iraqi aa fired at american/british planes in the no-fly zone?

the missiles sent in response to attempted assasination was a strong message to Saddam that if he tries to f!@# with US, he'll be sorry. AFAIK, the missiles were targetting Iraq's intelligence agency and that caused enough burden on them.

on the other hand, the neocons have absolutely no idea how the history works and think that they can do whatever it is necessary at the time.

when Clinton launched some missiles in response to jets getting tracked/fired upon, guess who protested such action. Republicans. they were worried that their merry little dirt digging into Clinton was going to get 'shrouded' by missile response.

Do I remember many 'patriotic americans' weep for Kurds? Do I remember any 'patriotic americans' working to revive a nation in crisis? fuck no.

just as i lashed out left wings, I say right wing has equal burden. since when did Iraq suddenly become an example of an oppressive regime that must be dealt with? not until Bush Jr started waving flags. I guess it was ok to send Rumsfeld to Iraq during the 80s and now in 90s Saddam was suddenly bad.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]just as i lashed out left wings, I say right wing has equal burden. since when did Iraq suddenly become an example of an oppressive regime that must be dealt with? not until Bush Jr started waving flags. I guess it was ok to send Rumsfeld to Iraq during the 80s and now in 90s Saddam was suddenly bad.

I think Saddam crossed the invisible line.

Thank god I'm not a Republican or Democrat.

[EiZei 0]

Quote[/b] ]just as i lashed out left wings, I say right wing has equal burden. since when did Iraq suddenly become an example of an oppressive regime that must be dealt with? not until Bush Jr started waving flags. I guess it was ok to send Rumsfeld to Iraq during the 80s and now in 90s Saddam was suddenly bad.

I think Saddam crossed the invisible line.

Think god I'm not a Republican or Democrat.

At what point? Does it involve the word "chemical"? Or when he stopped being a friend of US?

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]current sitaution is that if occupational force can't get the nation back on its feet, it will be a long time before we see a stable gov't in Iraq, and more trouble in ME. So whether we like it or not, we are stuck with this.

There was a report on the television that talked about the reopening of a university/college in Iraq. It had brand new computer, internet access, and etc. The students were interviewed and the main problem for them is security situation. The school had armed guard for protection against would-be attackers. I wish I can remember what channel it was on.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]At what point? Does it involve the word "chemical"? Or when he stopped being a friend of US?

It is a invisible line! How do I know?  

[Balschoiw 0]

Clashes near holy Iraq city, rebel cleric defiant

Quote[/b] ]Blasts shook Iraq's holy Shiite town of Kufa on Friday after militiamen loyal to anti-US cleric Moqtada al-Sadr said they ambushed a convoy of vehicles from an American force that is building up nearby.

"I saw at least two Humvees on fire and we also attacked armoured personnel carriers," said one fighter in the town adjacent to Najaf, home to the holiest Shiite shrines and where Sadr has been hiding from US forces ordered to kill or capture him.

"We attacked them again, but then they started mortaring our position so we had to retreat," said the man, clad in the black uniform of Sadr's Mehdi Army militia, as columns of smoke rose above the town and militiamen tried to evacuate at least two wounded colleagues across a bridge.

Defiant at Friday prayers in Kufa, Sadr said he would not disband his militia under any circumstances "because I did not create it on my own but with the cooperation of the Iraqi people".

Hospital sources said at least five people were killed and 20 wounded, most of them seriously, in the fighting.

There was no immediate comment from US forces which have reinforced Spanish and Polish soldiers in the area around Najaf, prepared to root out Sadr and his militia, which took control of the city centre earlier this month, if peace talks fail.

Quote[/b] ]US troops also fought Sunni insurgents in Falluja overnight and a hospital official in the city west of Baghdad said 15 people were killed and 20 wounded, just hours after America's top general said truce talks could not go on for ever and more military action might be necessary.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Myers said Iraq's US governor Paul Bremer was using "multiple channels" in talks to pacify Falluja and avoid fighting in Najaf.

Polish officers commanding international troops in the Najaf region were unhappy at the prospect of an assault on the holy city by 2,500 US troops poised outside, Polish media said.

Sadr said earlier Iraqis would hit back with unimaginable "force and severity" if US forces carried out their threat to kill or capture him.

"Their threats to kill or detain me are a result of their weakness and collapse in the face of what has happened, and is happening, in Iraq," he told Lebanon's as-Safir newspaper.

Quote[/b] ]An American soldier missing for a week was shown unhurt but clearly frightened in video footage aired on Arab TV, surrounded by masked gunmen who offered to exchange him for imprisoned Iraqi fighters and claimed they had more hostages.

There was no sign of what happened to a soldier who disappeared with 20-year-old Pfc. Keith Maupin after their convoy was attacked April 9 outside Baghdad during a wave of kidnappings blamed on anti-U.S. insurgents.

The footage aired Friday showed Maupin, in a floppy desert hat, sitting on the floor and nervously looking around him. Men whose head were covered with keffiyeh scarves stood nearby.

"My name is Keith Matthew Maupin. I am a soldier from the 1st Division," he said, looking into the camera. "I am married with a 10-month-old son. I came to liberate Iraq (news - web sites), but I did not come willingly because I wanted to stay with my child."

Videotape Shows Captive American Soldier

I have no international source for this one but it looks like Freedom fighters have ambushed the town of El Kaim at the syrian border successfully. US forces have retreated from the town after heavy fighting. No details yet.

Irakische Aufständische greifen Grenzstadt El Kaim an

[ozanzac 0]

Also to anyone who thinks that American soldiers would never shoot an apparently unarmed man, here's a good article on the realities of war from a Marine's perspective:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....7&ncid=

Man, that's messed up. I don't know - they've must have gone through hell in Fallujah. But still..

From the story:

Quote[/b] ]When Deady (the soldier who shot the unarmed man) woke up in a Tijuana, Mexico jail after busting into a candy store drunk and passing out behind the cash register, Wofford came to bail him out.

Jeeze.

Americas Finest?

Seriously, would you trust a guy like Deady to pass on the spirit of democracy? Sure. He might be good for a soldier. But as a peacekeeper, or bringer of peace? Far out!! Why are guys like this still stationed in Iraq, when quite obviously, they can only make the situation worse.

If this is the standard of what the Iraqi people have had to deal with, then no wonder they've gone hostile towards the americans.

i dunno what country your from but you being 17 i doubt you have had much experience with Alchohol, people do stupid things for fun when they are drunk and are with there mates, they egg each other on, i know i have done stupid things, you cannot judge a Soldier on his performance from one event like that. go look at Ibiza if you wanna look at the things done under the influence.

i don't know what state you live in, but being drunk doesn't legitmize your actions.

Im from the UK we don't have States, but ozanzac was judgin him as a person and a soldier on what he did on one night with his friends when they got drunk that is all i was merely pointing out peple did stupid things when they are drunk.

Well, put it this way. A citizen cannot become a law enforcement officer if he has a criminal record.

Soldiers, who are in a peacekeeping role, such as Iraq, arguably have alot more power at their disposal than any law enforcement officer bar none, but on the flipside, are much less likely to have to face the concequences of a life taking misjudgement.

I don't know about you or anyone, but I find it a bit odd that fellows such as Deady couldn't be given the responsibilities as a justice of the peace in his own country, but he's allowed to be given greater powers in other countries because he wears a different uniform.

Add to that. The offense he committed was in a country not of his own. To me, that's even worse. He did not rationally think about the implications of his actions on the local population then.... would he do so now? I don't think he does.

I may be only 17. But I've been drinking socially long enough to know that even during my worst of binges, that the law is still the law whilist intoxicated. Deady might actually be a top bloke, he might be a great soldier, I don't know.

What I am criticising is the selection process for specific roles in the military, and why the rules of employment are bent compared to say a similar civillian role in his own home country. What makes a good soldier, may not necessarily make a good peacekeeper.

[EiZei 0]

Indeed, you dont have a snowball's change in hell to become a peacekeeper here if you have a criminal record.

[Longinius 1]

Well, since when are there peacekeeping forces in Iraq?

[ozanzac 0]

Well, since when are there peacekeeping forces in Iraq?

Unofficially, since Bush declared the war was over.

The coallition are no longer fighting an army. They might have defeated the Iraqi army, but, they failed to prove to the Iraqi people that this was a war to free them from Saddams tyranny. At the current time. This is their biggest failure. They failed to usher the Iraqi people that their cause was for the better, and as a result, ordinary Iraqi folk see it as an occupation, not alot more, not alot less.

The day Bush declared the official fighting had ended, was the day that the humanitarian effort towards Iraq and its people should have taken priority, even over finding WMD's.

[Longinius 1]

Quote[/b] ]The day Bush declared the official fighting had ended, was the day that the humanitarian effort towards Iraq and its people should have taken priority, even over finding WMD's.

But it didnt, which leads me to think that there are no peace keepers in Iraq either. They are security forces at best, with a job to guard and secure targets of interest. Of interest to the coalition that is.

[ozanzac 0]

Quote[/b] ]The day Bush declared the official fighting had ended, was the day that the humanitarian effort towards Iraq and its people should have taken priority, even over finding WMD's.

But it didnt, which leads me to think that there are no peace keepers in Iraq either. They are security forces at best, with a job to guard and secure targets of interest. Of interest to the coalition that is.

That's definantly the better analysis.

For the sake of the Iraqi people.

[SpongeBob 0]

If I was him, I'd have that fixed.  

[ozanzac 0]

http://www.zippyimages.com/files/13915/fuglyteeth.jpg

If I was him, I'd have that fixed.  

Where would he have it fixed though? The hospital that has no power, the clinic that has a contaminated water supply, or the surgery thats run out of anaesthetic?

[Longinius 1]

I am sure some friendly coalition soldier can perform dental surgery with the heel of his boot or the butt of his rifle...

[ran 0]

I am sure some friendly coalition soldier can perform dental surgery with the heel of his boot or the butt of his rifle...

A good soldier doesn't dirty his boots with anything other than mud, dirt and dust.

[brgnorway 0]

Edit: post belongs in middle east thread

[EiZei 0]

Well, since when are there peacekeeping forces in Iraq?

peace·keep·ing ( P ) Pronunciation Key (pskpng)

adj.

Of or relating to the preservation of peace, especially the supervision by international forces of a truce between hostile nations.

Last time I checked US forces were supposed to be trying to "preserve peace" and help rebuild a nation. Not genocide Iraqis or find the oh-so-elusive WMDs.

[miles teg 1]

Quote[/b] ]So, the blacks of USA have never revolted in any way against what they perceive to be injustice? Do you think Martin Luther King was the only way for the blacks? How about the racial uprising in the 60's, the "Black Panther-movement" and the revolts that took place after the Rodney King scandal?

Yes, I believed MLK was the only way because bigots/racists wanted a "race war".

Racial uprising in 60's was northern thing and were suppressed, "Black Panther movement" was taken apart by the government, and Rodney King riots were just stupid.

MLK and civil rights activists used the media has a effective tool to get their point.  The images of dogs attacking defenseless children and adults. Black people taking beating from white mobs while they did not fight back. The key was they protest, took the beating, and did not fight back. Hell, even some of the civil right activists were murdered and they did not retaliate by killing a random white child or woman or man.

You know it's sad Billybob when a non-American like brgnorway knows more about American history then yourself.  

I think brgnorway was spot on in his historical analysis and you just completely ignored what he said.   Blacks in America DID fight back.  There was a LOOOONG struggle, both peaceful and violent against oppression upon blacks in America by white America.  Look at some of the violent rioting after WWI by Black soldiers returning from the war.  Look at the history of the Black Panthers.  

Ditto for hispanics.  Ever heard of La Raza?? Ever heard of the Zuit Suit riots of 1943??

These are things that MANY history books in American High Schools and even in Universities, STILL do not cover and you will not learn about them unless you take coarses that specifically cover African American or Chicano/hispanic history

in the United States.

This is slowly changing, but sadly the majority of Americans I believe are very ignorant of their own history when it comes to the history of ethnic miniorities in the US.

Interestingly enough, within about 20 years or so they predict that hispanics will be the new ethnic majority in the US.  

Some Americans are horrified by that and there may be ethnic conflict in the future as hispanics begin to assert their power in politics on a wider scale.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>