0
   

Hey 'Progressives': Where is Code Pink?

 
 
Reply Sun 22 Feb, 2009 12:22 pm
Hey, what ever happened to the wingnuts from Code Pink?

Quote:


US general visits Afghan bomb site for death claim

By JASON STRAZIUSO
Associated Press Writer

KABUL (AP) -- A U.S. general traveled to western Afghanistan on Wednesday to investigate claims that six women and two children were killed in a U.S. airstrike, officials said. Photographs of the site showed at least one dead boy, bloodied and dirty from the attack.

The Afghan Ministry of Defense condemned the killings of civilians and said they occurred despite a recent U.S.-Afghan agreement to increase participation of Afghan forces in U.S. missions, a step aimed at preventing civilian casualties.

The U.S. coalition said in a statement that a strike Monday in the Gozara district of Herat province killed 15 militants and targeted a leader named Ghulam Yahya Akbari.

But Ekremuddin Yawar, a police commander for western Afghanistan, said six women and two children were among the dead, along with five men. He said the group was living in tents in the remote Afghan countryside.

Photographs obtained by The Associated Press from the site show the body of a young boy - bloodied and dirtied - laying on a white shroud. Afghan men can be seen digging about a dozen fresh graves. Dead sheep and destroyed tents can also be seen.

Civilian deaths have been a huge source of friction between the U.S. and President Hamid Karzai, who has increased demands that American troops avoid killing civilians.

In response to Yawar's allegation, U.S. Brig. Gen. Michael Ryan traveled to Gozara district on Wednesday to meet with officials "to see what the situation is," said Capt. Elizabeth Mathias, a U.S. military spokeswoman.

For now, the U.S. is standing behind its information that 15 militants were killed, she said.

The Ministry of Defense said seven militants were killed in the attack, including three people it named as associates of Yahya Akbari. Neither it nor the U.S. said Yahya Akbari was killed.

The ministry said the militants had hidden in civilian houses, causing an unspecified number of civilian deaths. However, the photographs showed no homes - only tents - and it wasn't clear what the ministry was referring to.

An ethnic group of Afghans known as Kuchis travel the countryside with livestock and live in tents.

After increasingly angry demands by Karzai for more U.S.-Afghan military cooperation, the American and Afghan militaries this month announced plans to increase the number of Afghans who will take part in U.S. operations.

Despite condemning the civilian deaths, the ministry noted it would take more time to implement the agreement. But it urged U.S. forces to "be very careful during their operations."

The investigative team's trip to Herat comes one day after the U.N. released a report saying that a record 2,118 civilians died in the Afghan war last year, a 40 percent increase over 2007.

The report said U.S., NATO and Afghan forces killed 829 civilians, or 39 percent of the total. Of those, 552 deaths were blamed on airstrikes.

Karzai over the weekend said he hoped the new agreement would also put an end to night raids - targeted missions by U.S. Special Operations Forces that seek to capture or kill high-ranking militant leaders.

Such operations often kill innocent Afghans as well, either in airstrikes or in gun fights after villagers try to defend their homes against unknown invaders.

President Barack Obama on Tuesday announced plans to deploy an additional 17,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan to bolster the 33,000 American forces already in the country. That plan increases the chances that more civilians could be killed in 2009 than 2008.

U.S. commanders have requested more troops to battle an increasingly bloody Taliban insurgency. Militant attacks have spiked in the last three years and insurgents now control wide swaths of territory. Obama has promised to increase the U.S. focus on Afghanistan as the military draws down troops in Iraq.


Link:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_AFGHAN_CIVILIAN_CASUALTIES?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2009-02-18-07-20-46


Question for all of our pandering 'progressives' here at A2K:

Where is the outcry?

I seem to recall a whole bunch of you calling for Bush's impeachment, trial in front of the International Court, and a whole host of other demands for the US staying in Iraq and for the bombing of innocent civilians in Afghanistan.

In fact, one couldn't watch the evening news without seeing a Code Pink protest.

Now that Obama is the murderer, where are you guys?

Gosh, what happened? Suddenly, there seems to be a realization that stuff happens in war? That there are no easy answers?

Or maybe it is just simply liberal politics...
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 3,682 • Replies: 43
No top replies

 
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Feb, 2009 10:00 pm
Outstanding, 'progressives'!

A number of views, nary a reply -typical A2K cowards - but a new tag!

"Stupid Agitating Cunts"

Beautiful!

My 'progressive' friends will be so proud. Me, an 'agitator'...

I do believe a small tear is rolling down the cheek of... (thinking of 'progressive' icon...)

Abbie Hoffman.

Laughing

0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Feb, 2009 11:25 pm
@A Lone Voice,
Keep it up, ALV. The world needs to know that the USA just keeps racking up the war crimes.

Quote:
A U.S. general traveled to western Afghanistan on Wednesday to investigate claims ...


Oh great, General Weasel goes to investigate the ranks and file weasels.

A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 12:31 am
@JTT,
Quote:

Keep it up, ALV. The world needs to know that the USA just keeps racking up the war crimes.


Thanks for responding, JT. You, lone amongst the turds here, are true to your convictions.

At least you are the only one so far.

Maybe you can shed some light on this for me. Why, the strident voices that were so loud during the Bush Administration, seem so strangely quiet now? The media that so celebrated Code Pink seems to have forgotten about the old dames.

Cindy who?

Where are all your cohorts? Where are all the peace loving, America-bashing, UN-worshipping A2Kers who should, by all rights, be calling Obama a murderer?

I can't help but think they were disingenuous before, only concerned about political advantage, especially our A2Kers...
revel
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 07:21 am
Sending more troops would actually lessen the civilian casualty if done right because we will not be just sending bombs off planes but would have troops on the ground in Afghanistan and there is a world of difference in Iraq and Afghanistan. One is justified the other is not. However, carelessness is never justified.



U.S. Army captain learning new skills in war-torn Afghanistan

Quote:
U.S. Army Capt. Matthew Crowe trained to obliterate distant foes with high-explosive shellfire. But in this mud-washed, mountain-framed provincial capital in eastern Afghanistan, he is learning to be a diplomat, urban planner, construction manager, humanitarian worker and politician.

As the overseer of the first sustained American aid effort launched in the city eight years after the U.S. intervention that drove the Taliban from power, the 32-year-old artillery officer is having to master skills that he's not been taught by the military.

But those skills are crucial to the Obama administration's plan to end the Taliban insurgency in part by delivering on unfulfilled U.S. vows to lift ordinary Afghans out of the crush of poverty and illiteracy.

"Dealing with the locals is the most important thing I do," Crowe said Sunday after he and some two dozen of his troops from the 4th Battalion, 25th Field Artillery Regiment, 10th Mountain Division, based at Ft. Drum, N.Y., returned from only their second walking tour of this snowy, destitute city since arriving in mid-January.

"Blowing stuff up doesn't have the same effect of what I can do in the town by helping the locals," said Crowe, whose men usually roll through the city in heavy armored vehicles. "Security still has to be a priority, but I tell my soldiers they are not here just to kill bad guys."


I am disappointed in the Obama campaign on quite a few issues concerning torture (he left loopholes for backtracking) and if he does not start to make plans for withdrawing from Iraq regardless of conditions, I will be disappointed in that too.

BTW, what in the world is "code pink?"

0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 01:59 pm
@A Lone Voice,
Obama had this mess and more stacked up on his desk when he took office. I think that he should be allowed a little time to rectify the god awful messes created by folks like you, ALV.

If things don't improve, there'll be ample time to take him and his admin to task. Remember, it was the liberal, progressive, left side that took on the issues relating to Vietnam. If they had left it up to people like you, the US would still be over there, murdering, raping and torturing Vietnamese.

In fact, it's the liberal, progressive, left side who has always taken on the serious issues. Cons just want things to stay the same, no matter how vile they are.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 02:02 pm
Poor alone voice....
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 02:18 pm
@DrewDad,
Laughing
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 02:20 pm
Whoever tagged this thread "bait" nailed it.
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 02:48 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:

Whoever tagged this thread "bait" nailed it.


Gotta love it.

In the 'progressive' world, tough questions are "bait."

If only the rest of the world was so simple...

Avoid, deflect, defer...
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 03:00 pm
@JTT,
Quote:

Obama had this mess and more stacked up on his desk when he took office. I think that he should be allowed a little time to rectify the god awful messes created by folks like you, ALV.

If things don't improve, there'll be ample time to take him and his admin to task. Remember, it was the liberal, progressive, left side that took on the issues relating to Vietnam. If they had left it up to people like you, the US would still be over there, murdering, raping and torturing Vietnamese.

In fact, it's the liberal, progressive, left side who has always taken on the serious issues. Cons just want things to stay the same, no matter how vile they are.



OK, how much time? As a good, 'progressive', what is your timeline until Obama needs to stand by his campaign promises?

Vietnam? You do realize that war was escalated by the dems?

The 'progressives' and the elite thinkers of the time were the ones that got us into the Vietnam mess?

Not long after the Bay of Pigs?

But you didn't answer my question: where are the people protesting the loss of innocent life?

They were quite vocal when it was Bush in charge of the bombs. Now that Obama is in charge of the bombs, these people either have:

-Changed their philosophy, and now don't mind it when the US bombs innocent civilians.

-Never cared anyway, but were just making political hay.

Or, tell me a third option? Why are they quiet?

Or is this question just “bait, as some of the A2K lightweights here are sniveling?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 03:01 pm
There's a wealth of documentation on Code Pink positions, platforms, and activities. So far re Afghanistan: crickets.

We'll see how it goes


The campaign w/Hillary


At the Take Back America convention:


At the Denver Convention


Protesting at Pelosi's home


Code Pink votes for Obama - the video plays when you go to the link:
http://www.youtube.com/codepinkaction



0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 03:05 pm
Since "progressive" is a label which others might apply to me, but not something which has any meaning for me, the rightwingnuts here can puke up whatever stupidity they want about progressives. I have no affiliation with nor interest in "Code Pink," so the mealy-mouthed reactionary rabble-rousers can rant on about that, too. It's no skin off my nose.

This is definitely a bait thread--too bad no one is rising to the bait--except more conservative pea-wits.
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 03:34 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:

Since "progressive" is a label which others might apply to me, but not something which has any meaning for me, the rightwingnuts here can puke up whatever stupidity they want about progressives. I have no affiliation with nor interest in "Code Pink," so the mealy-mouthed reactionary rabble-rousers can rant on about that, too. It's no skin off my nose.

This is definitely a bait thread--too bad no one is rising to the bait--except more conservative pea-wits.


Yeah, I know. No one claims to be a 'progressive' as it's just a label, and 'progressives' are too cool for labels...

Anyway, why don't you just address the question, you non-'progressive', you?

Even if it's from a non-'progressive' viewpoint?

Why do you believe the contingent who was so loud, so incensed, when Bush was the bomber in charge are so quiet now with Obama lighting the fuse?

This isn't a trick question, or "bait"; it is an observation, though.

I've especially noticed it true of the strident A2Kers here.

Could it simply be measly-mouth politics? Hypocrites and whatnot?

Why do you 'progressives', no, libs, no, lefties, no (OK, whatever you choose to call your superhero self) always seem to avoid the tough issues.

You guys are great when you pick the low hanging fruit and slap each other on the back, agreeing with each other about how clever you are.

Yet you all seem to disappear when the issues and questions become just a wee bit difficult...
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 04:03 pm
@A Lone Voice,
I'm a Progressive.

And I hate Code Pink. It's not that I disagree with their politics, I just think their methods are stupid and counter-productive.

Heaven forbid some of us have better **** to do on a Sunday than logging on to A2K to answer your asinine accusations...

Cycloptichorn
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 04:24 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:

I'm a Progressive.

And I hate Code Pink. It's not that I disagree with their politics, I just think their methods are stupid and counter-productive.

Heaven forbid some of us have better **** to do on a Sunday than logging on to A2K to answer your asinine accusations...

Cycloptichorn


You've been quite vocal in your opposition to Bush and his war policies.

While I certainly might have missed an individual post here or there in your case, cyclops, I don't recall you complaining about Obama and his failure to get the US out of Iraq or continuing the war in Afghanistan.

And now he's murdered a whole bunch of innocent civilian in Afghanistan.

Just wondering when I could expect to hear the uproar?

Or will you, and the rest of the lefties here, remain quiet because, as I pointed out, sometimes bad stuff happens in war?

Or, is it simply a case of politics, and since your guy is in charge now, you're not going to complain?

I'm kind of curious to see how deep, if at all, ethics run with you guys.

So far? Apparently not too deep at all...
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 06:39 pm
@A Lone Voice,
A Lone Voice wrote:

Quote:

I'm a Progressive.

And I hate Code Pink. It's not that I disagree with their politics, I just think their methods are stupid and counter-productive.

Heaven forbid some of us have better **** to do on a Sunday than logging on to A2K to answer your asinine accusations...

Cycloptichorn


You've been quite vocal in your opposition to Bush and his war policies.

While I certainly might have missed an individual post here or there in your case, cyclops, I don't recall you complaining about Obama and his failure to get the US out of Iraq or continuing the war in Afghanistan.

And now he's murdered a whole bunch of innocent civilian in Afghanistan.

Just wondering when I could expect to hear the uproar?

Or will you, and the rest of the lefties here, remain quiet because, as I pointed out, sometimes bad stuff happens in war?

Or, is it simply a case of politics, and since your guy is in charge now, you're not going to complain?

I'm kind of curious to see how deep, if at all, ethics run with you guys.

So far? Apparently not too deep at all...



Well, Obama has said he wants to leave Iraq by 2010 and tasked our military with doing so. So he's pretty good on that point with me.

As for Afghanistan, I'm undecided. On one hand, I deplore war in all its' forms and want to see Afghanistan come to a swift conclusion. On the other, the Taliban appears to be coming back, and since GWB couldn't catch Bin Laden, we still have to do that and he's still likely in Afg/Pakistan. We have not accomplished the mission we set out to do after 9/11, primarily b/c you bunch thought that dicking around in Iraq was a smarter idea.

Obama has a little lee-way with us to get these problems solved. I mean, he's been in office for only a month, has already got a ton done and is in the middle of dealing with the financial crisis that Bush left him. What do you want him to do? He doesn't have some sort of ******* magic wand to wave, and make everything better. The best he can do is work on making stuff better, and he's doing a pretty good job at that right now.

The longer he continues to not solve problems in that area, I think the more you will see people protesting his actions.

Cycloptichorn
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Feb, 2009 07:16 pm
@A Lone Voice,
You should warm up your brain cell and read what i posted once again:

Quote:
I have no affiliation with nor interest in "Code Pink," so the mealy-mouthed reactionary rabble-rousers can rant on about that, too. It's no skin off my nose.


There was your answer right there, clown.


Bait thread, live bait . . . get your live bait folks . . .
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Feb, 2009 07:00 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:

Well, Obama has said he wants to leave Iraq by 2010 and tasked our military with doing so. So he's pretty good on that point with me.

As for Afghanistan, I'm undecided. On one hand, I deplore war in all its' forms and want to see Afghanistan come to a swift conclusion. On the other, the Taliban appears to be coming back, and since GWB couldn't catch Bin Laden, we still have to do that and he's still likely in Afg/Pakistan. We have not accomplished the mission we set out to do after 9/11, primarily b/c you bunch thought that dicking around in Iraq was a smarter idea.

Obama has a little lee-way with us to get these problems solved. I mean, he's been in office for only a month, has already got a ton done and is in the middle of dealing with the financial crisis that Bush left him. What do you want him to do? He doesn't have some sort of ******* magic wand to wave, and make everything better. The best he can do is work on making stuff better, and he's doing a pretty good job at that right now.

The longer he continues to not solve problems in that area, I think the more you will see people protesting his actions.

Cycloptichorn


Actually, Obama said early in the campaign - prior to the success of the 'surge' - that one of his first acts would be the beginning of an immediate withdrawal of US forces in Iraq. It wasn't until later that he changed it to an 18 month timetable.

But I certainly respect your response here. And I agree that Obama has got a ton done; we just disagree, of course, on the impact his actions are going to have on the country.

Those who have disagreed with US actions in Afghanistan don't seem to be disagreeable at this point; even the accidental bombing of civilians, which usually caused a fresh round of calls for Bush meat, seem to have now gone unnoticed.

But hey, every once in a while, you call 'em like you see 'em, Cyclops. Not too bad...
0 Replies
 
A Lone Voice
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Feb, 2009 08:31 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:

You should warm up your brain cell and read what i posted once again:

Quote:
I have no affiliation with nor interest in "Code Pink," so the mealy-mouthed reactionary rabble-rousers can rant on about that, too. It's no skin off my nose.

There was your answer right there, clown.


Bait thread, live bait . . . get your live bait folks . . .


Seriously? That is your entire response?


Wow. Here was your first, in-depth, well thought out response:

Quote:

Whoever tagged this thread "bait" nailed it.



But I guess you're referring to this excellent piece of insightful writing?:

Quote:

Since "progressive" is a label which others might apply to me, but not something which has any meaning for me, the rightwingnuts here can puke up whatever stupidity they want about progressives. I have no affiliation with nor interest in "Code Pink," so the mealy-mouthed reactionary rabble-rousers can rant on about that, too. It's no skin off my nose.

This is definitely a bait thread--too bad no one is rising to the bait--except more conservative pea-wits.


And my questions, which you have continued to fail to respond to, are this:

Why do you believe the contingent who was so loud, so incensed, when Bush was the bomber in charge are so quiet now with Obama lighting the fuse?

Could it simply be measly-mouth politics? Hypocrites and whatnot?

Where are the people protesting the loss of innocent life?

They were quite vocal when it was Bush in charge of the bombs. Now that Obama is in charge of the bombs, these people either have:

-Changed their philosophy, and now don't mind it when the US bombs innocent civilians.

-Never cared anyway, but were just making political hay.

Or, tell me a third option? Why are they quiet?

So you have no affiliation with Code Pink? So what? You have certainly complained about US military actions in Iraq; how do you feel about the Obama Administration’s handling of Afghanistan?

Are you going to address these issues? Answer these questions? Or simply 'progressive' your way out of it?

Or are you going to use this excuse; "I have no affiliation with nor interest in Code Pink"; to avoid the issue?

Again?

Quote:

Whoever tagged this thread "bait" nailed it.


Certainly, a sad, tired, avoidance ploy.

How convenient. I think I'll take a page out of the 'progressive' playbook and give it a try when asked about issues:

"No weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq."

Bait Thread!

"Sarah Palin gave pretty pathetic interviews after being named as a vice presidential candidate, didn't she?"

Hey, Bait Thread! This is just a bait question!

Laughing

I realize 'progressives' are masters of the path of least resistance, and will use avoidance ploys whenever necessary, but you have outdone yourself and your species here, smega!


 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Hey 'Progressives': Where is Code Pink?
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 12/08/2021 at 09:11:07