0
   

THE US, THE UN AND THE IRAQIS THEMSELVES, V. 7.0

 
 
gav
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 07:44 pm
Doubting the US militarys ability to marginalize insurgence isn't foolish. Doubting the US militarys ability to marginalize ITSELF - now THATS foolish. Lets keep it real here!.

You'd be better served asking the British military for some advice in dealing with such a situation as in Iraq.

PS Does anyone else find this a wee bit funny?
Navy Rear Admiral Crag Quigley
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 07:53 pm
Nor did I.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 08:18 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Hmm, I'm not so sure it's fear that is motivating them. Just an unwillingness to let Democracy take hold, because they really don't want our democracy. What the hell are they afraid of, exactly?
My Theory is they are far more afraid of each other than they are of us. Turning down an insurgency recruiter risks immediate death at the hands of the recruiter. Failure to comply with any insurgent's demand risks the same. Cooperation with the current provisional government or the US also risks the same. In brief the insurgents are bound together by their mutual fear of their comrads in arms.

Why their unwillingness to let Democracy take hold merely because they don't want democracy? It would be a less risky and more rapid way to get rid of us. Once democracy takes hold, we will leave and they can then vote or corrupt their democracy into anything they want including a theocracy, an aristocracy, a bureaucracy, a secular-ocracy, or even a demon-ocracy.

No rejection of democracy is not what is driving them. What is driving them is mutual fear of each other combined with an impatient obsession to maintain and/or obtain the power to continually generate fear in others.

Killing as many of them as it takes to convince them elections are a less risky and a quicker way for them to get what they want, is a workable tactic. Yes, we've been doing that for about a year now. Yes, we have not convinced them yet. Hell, I expect our current approach to look worse before it begins to look better. We just need to continue killing them for the next several years until it finally occurs to them that they can get all they want in less than a year after democracy takes hold and we leave.

What do you think is motivating them?
What tactic or tactics do you recommend we adopt?
0 Replies
 
gav
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 08:45 pm
ICAN are you serious? Are you that naive? "Yeah, keep killing 'em and killing 'em THEN they'll understand". That has to be the most dense thing I've ever read. This is a guerilla war your in the middle of!!!. They don't need "insurgency recruiters" (WTF?) they have YOU - your kind of attitude is all the average Iraqi needs to join the resistance.

Because of the kind of war your involved in you will battle eachother to a standstill, its happened the world over and Iraq is going to be no different. People like yourself (I would imagine) are of the opinion " Never negotiate with a terrorist" - well get used to the possibility that someday your country just might have to do that to secure the peace in Iraq.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 09:36 pm
gav wrote:
iraq (who put saddam hussein in power??)


Do you know the answer to that query, gav?
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 09:42 pm
gav wrote:
ICAN are you serious? Are you that naive? "Yeah, keep killing 'em and killing 'em THEN they'll understand". That has to be the most dense thing I've ever read. This is a guerilla war your in the middle of!!!. They don't need "insurgency recruiters" (WTF?) they have YOU - your kind of attitude is all the average Iraqi needs to join the resistance.


Yes I am serious. No I am not naive. They join the resistance to avoid being murdered by what you call the resistance. It's so simple and straight forward. Their survivors will eventually come to understand that the least risky and quickest way for them to get rid of the US is to adopt a democracy which they can subsequently easily shape to their own satisfaction once we leave.

gav wrote:
Because of the kind of war your involved in you will battle eachother to a standstill, its happened the world over and Iraq is going to be no different. People like yourself (I would imagine) are of the opinion " Never negotiate with a terrorist" - well get used to the possibility that someday your country just might have to do that to secure the peace in Iraq.
Rubbish! It is unfortunate that you do not understand that we and their terrorist resistance have irreconcilable, non-negotiable differences. Peace can never be secured with them without them or us being first destroyed in the process.

Did the negotiation that gave Hitler Czechoslovakia secure the peace in 1939? No, what secured the peace was the eventual destruction of Nazis Germany in 1945 and the subsequent multi-year development of a Democratic Germany despite remnant nazi resistance. We did not convert the nazis from haters to tolerators. We demanded unconditional surrender and we either converted many of them to dust, or we obtained their unconditional surrender.

Were we able to negotiate peace with the Shintoist Japanese? No, we demanded unconditional surrender enforced by a couple of atomic bombs. That bought us peace in 1945 and a Democratic Japan several years later.

Either the Iraqi terrorist resistance shall stop murdering their own people or they shall die, period. Since so many of them seek their own death anyway, in the evil belief it is an automatic escalator to paradise, that they will not stop murdering their own people, much less stop murdering us, whether or not we succeed in negotiating an agreement. Negotiated agreements between them and westerners have less status among them than negotiated agreements with pigs.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 09:43 pm
McTag wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
From everything I've read, seen, and been told, anyone who says the U.S. is using cluster bombs in Fallajah either has no idea what cluster bombs are or is intentionally lieing. While I have no doubt some innocents have been killed, the vast majority of civilians have fled the city and extreme measures are being used to protect the 1/3 or so who stayed. This would show Revel's 'eye witness account' to either be completely contrary to what other eye witnesses are saying or it is highly suspect.


Oh, the buzzing of the bees, and the cigarette trees
The soda-water fountain....


McTag, I've figured out those are lyrics to "The Big Rock Candy Mountain," a song I don't believe I've ever heard, but I haven't figured out why you've written them.
0 Replies
 
gav
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 10:20 pm
ican711nm wrote:
gav wrote:
ICAN are you serious? Are you that naive? "Yeah, keep killing 'em and killing 'em THEN they'll understand". That has to be the most dense thing I've ever read. This is a guerilla war your in the middle of!!!. They don't need "insurgency recruiters" (WTF?) they have YOU - your kind of attitude is all the average Iraqi needs to join the resistance.


Yes I am serious. No I am not naive. They join the resistance to avoid being murdered by what you call the resistance. It's so simple and straight forward. Their survivors will eventually come to understand that the least risky and quickest way for them to get rid of the US is to adopt a democracy which they can subsequently easily shape to their own satisfaction once we leave.

gav wrote:
Because of the kind of war your involved in you will battle eachother to a standstill, its happened the world over and Iraq is going to be no different. People like yourself (I would imagine) are of the opinion " Never negotiate with a terrorist" - well get used to the possibility that someday your country just might have to do that to secure the peace in Iraq.
Rubbish! It is unfortunate that you do not understand that we and their terrorist resistance have irreconcilable, non-negotiable differences. Peace can never be secured with them without them or us being first destroyed in the process.

Did the negotiation that gave Hitler Czechoslovakia secure the peace in 1939? No, what secured the peace was the eventual destruction of Nazis Germany in 1945 and the subsequent multi-year development of a Democratic Germany despite remnant nazi resistance. We did not convert the nazis from haters to tolerators. We demanded unconditional surrender and we either converted many of them to dust, or we obtained their unconditional surrender.

Were we able to negotiate peace with the Shintoist Japanese? No, we demanded unconditional surrender enforced by a couple of atomic bombs. That bought us peace in 1945 and a Democratic Japan several years later.

Either the Iraqi terrorist resistance shall stop murdering their own people or they shall die, period. Since so many of them seek their own death anyway, in the evil belief it is an automatic escalator to paradise, that they will not stop murdering their own people, much less stop murdering us, whether or not we succeed in negotiating an agreement. Negotiated agreements between them and westerners have less status among them than negotiated agreements with pigs.


Ah, sorry to burst your bubble - but it aint 1945!!!!. Look you just don't understand. These people are'nt intentionally going out to murder their own civilians. Their own civilians (this is cold I know) are getting caught up in it. Now, who set up the Iraqi police force? Who set up the newly constructed Iraqi armed forces? Bingo!!! - we have an answer - AMERICA. These people are going to stand against everything America has a hand in. These fellow citizens who are now working at the behest of the American government (lets face it they are) have now become part of the American war machine- in lay mans terms they have become "legitimate targets". As have construction workers, because they are basically working at the behest of AMERICA. Can you not f**king see the common thread running through this!!!? And before you start your usual beheading rhetoric - look no further than Saudi Arabia, one of your bestest buddies!!
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Nov, 2004 10:42 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
I don't think we're not so very far away in thought. I would agree with your Soviet /Afghanistan model, if you were talking about US/Afghanistan instead of Iraq. :wink: That, I suspect will take longer to fix... and I do expect Iraq to take a long time. But Iraq has the oil... and with it comes the wealth. With wealth comes the greed. And with the greed comes the purpose... the purpose that has nothing to do with worshipping invisible men. Nothing to do waiting for the next life for your reward.

Afghanistan itself had no oil, but the Soviets hoped to cross it with a pipeline.I once saw a placard describing a boat as.... a hole in the water into which you throw money. Iraq is looking like a boat to me. You say you expect Iraq to take a long time. Viet Nam took a long time. I don't think we have that much time in this case.

OCCOM BILL wrote:
The trick to winning Iraq IMO, is to stop hoping and start anticipating. Face it as a battle that must be won and therefore will be won. Doubting the ability of the United States Military to marginalize the resistance is foolish. The people of the United States spoke last Tuesday and the folks they spoke to will see this through. Believe it.

That sounds more like a sermon than a strategy and IMO the last thing this conflict needs is more belief, superstitious or otherwise. And here all along I thought you were one of the non-believers.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 12:43 am
At this point in time I don't believe anything pentagon says.

I don't believe we are doing everything we can to marginalize civilian causalities, one reason is because we have it wrapped up neat and tidy by calling everyone in sight in Iraq, "insurgents." Another reason is that there are other sources that tell otherwise and I believe them over our media and over our own pentagon people almost any day of the week now. (didn't always)

Furthermore, just what does this mean, "stay the course" and "can't cut and run." How long are we going to stay there and kill people in the name of saving them? Also who are we to say that they can't be fundamentalist if they want to be fundamentalist? Do we believe that we have to right to organize the whole world according to our own beliefs?

Disgusted with my own people.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 01:30 am
Ticomaya wrote:
McTag wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
From everything I've read, seen, and been told, anyone who says the U.S. is using cluster bombs in Fallajah either has no idea what cluster bombs are or is intentionally lieing. While I have no doubt some innocents have been killed, the vast majority of civilians have fled the city and extreme measures are being used to protect the 1/3 or so who stayed. This would show Revel's 'eye witness account' to either be completely contrary to what other eye witnesses are saying or it is highly suspect.


Oh, the buzzing of the bees, and the cigarette trees
The soda-water fountain....


McTag, I've figured out those are lyrics to "The Big Rock Candy Mountain," a song I don't believe I've ever heard, but I haven't figured out why you've written them.


Oh really? I think most here do. They describe the kind of fantasy-land Foxy and Ican, and a few others here, inhabit. The one where "extreme measures are being used to protect" the remaining citizens of Fallujah, and where surgical strikes and precision aim are being used to remove insurgents.

It's a nice song:

"In the Big Rock Candy Mountain, the cops have wooden legs
The bulldogs all have rubber teeth, and the hens lay soft-boiled eggs...."
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 06:57 am
Bringsta mind lil Shirley Temple singin 'on the good ship lolipop' .... ah yes

<spoken in a WCFields drawl>
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 09:08 am
McTag wrote:
Ticomaya wrote:
McTag wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
From everything I've read, seen, and been told, anyone who says the U.S. is using cluster bombs in Fallajah either has no idea what cluster bombs are or is intentionally lieing. While I have no doubt some innocents have been killed, the vast majority of civilians have fled the city and extreme measures are being used to protect the 1/3 or so who stayed. This would show Revel's 'eye witness account' to either be completely contrary to what other eye witnesses are saying or it is highly suspect.


Oh, the buzzing of the bees, and the cigarette trees
The soda-water fountain....


McTag, I've figured out those are lyrics to "The Big Rock Candy Mountain," a song I don't believe I've ever heard, but I haven't figured out why you've written them.


Oh really? I think most here do. They describe the kind of fantasy-land Foxy and Ican, and a few others here, inhabit. The one where "extreme measures are being used to protect" the remaining citizens of Fallujah, and where surgical strikes and precision aim are being used to remove insurgents.

It's a nice song:

"In the Big Rock Candy Mountain, the cops have wooden legs
The bulldogs all have rubber teeth, and the hens lay soft-boiled eggs...."


Yes, really!

If "extreme measures" were not being taken, I suppose Fallujah would pretty much be a parking lot right about now. Wouldn't you agree? Do you doubt the US military's ability to flatten that town, if that were the goal? Of course you don't.

Infrastructure is destroyed in one part of the city in the rout of the insurgency thugs, while rebuilding efforts are begun in another part.

Quote:
Rebuilding What the Assault Turns to Rubble
Seabees, Other Units Began Planning Early for the Reconstruction of Fallujah

By Jackie Spinner
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, November 10, 2004; Page A20

NEAR FALLUJAH, Iraq, Nov. 9 -- Weeks before Marine and Army units stormed into Fallujah, blowing up buildings and blasting holes in insurgent positions, Navy Lt. Cmdr. Larry Merola was already working on a plan to fix the damage.

Merola, an architect from Stoughton, Mass., was part of a Seabee team of engineers, builders and carpenters responsible for estimating the battle damage long before the first tank rolled.

Merola and his crew -- which included an ironworker from Connecticut, an electrician from Virginia and a general contractor from New Hampshire -- pored over combat plans with Marine commanders and made suggestions for how to secure the city without completely tearing it apart.

...
0 Replies
 
mesquite
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 10:07 am
I know that some will cheer, but I don't think images such as this will play towards easing tensions.

http://www.azstarnet.com/ss/2004/11/12/l47806-1.jpg
Charlie Company Marines regroup inside Fallujah's Khulafah al-Rashid mosque. Insurgent fire soon prompted the Marines to leave.
Fallujah's black flags are deadly omens for embattled Marines
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 10:35 am
gav wrote:
Ah, sorry to burst your bubble - but it aint 1945!!!!. Look you just don't understand. These people are'nt intentionally going out to murder their own civilians. Their own civilians (this is cold I know) are getting caught up in it. Now, who set up the Iraqi police force? Who set up the newly constructed Iraqi armed forces? Bingo!!! - we have an answer - AMERICA. These people are going to stand against everything America has a hand in. These fellow citizens who are now working at the behest of the American government (lets face it they are) have now become part of the American war machine- in lay mans terms they have become "legitimate targets". As have construction workers, because they are basically working at the behest of AMERICA. Can you not f**king see the common thread running through this!!!? And before you start your usual beheading rhetoric - look no further than Saudi Arabia, one of your bestest buddies!!


Civilian construction workers are not legitimate targets in any civilized person's mind. Neither are the families of dead human shields our troops are finding in Fallujah. This isn't a philosophical difference. This isn't a religious preference... And it damn sure isn't a reasonable thought pattern. This is the work of murderers, not soldiers. Your lack of disgust, leaning towards defense of these vile acts is disgusting. If a US soldier were filmed cutting off the head of one of the guilty murderers you'd scream bloody murder... but somehow you're able to look past the insurgent's doing it to construction workers? And you think we should negotiate with these vile murderous bastards? You think we should leave them in charge to decide the fate of the other 25 million people in Iraq? And this, presumably, because you care about Iraqi civilians? Are you mad? (Saudi Arabia hasn't got a damn thing to do with it. Try to keep your eye on the ball.)

There is a good deal of debate, between thoughtful civilized people, about what should happen to those who cut heads off of innocents: Death or Imprisonment (just in case they are later found innocent). That's it. There are no extenuating circumstances, which could justify such a barbaric crime against an innocent. NONE. Not to civilized people anyway. To change our posture based on these vile acts is a sure fire way to encourage more of themÂ… as we're already beginning to see around the world. When you give in to terrorist demands, it encourages terrorism. Hell, it lends legitimacy to the tactic. Is that something you want?

And lastly, comparing the heinous crime of beheading innocent people by anyone, to Saudi Arabia's chosen method of capital punishment for the guilty is as foolish as it is irrelevant. You seem to object to Saudi Arabia's Death Penalty for the guilty, while approving of a band of murderers using the technique on innocents. Moreover, you wish to reward the murderers by meeting their demands. This contradiction would be laughable if it weren't so disgusting.

"Anti-American" is a much-overused term by hawks against people who disagree... but it fits you perfectly.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 10:38 am
Mesquite, I agree that that will increase tensions... but the message had to be sent that hiding in Mosques won't help.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 11:37 am
Icann, I can (hee hee) find a few things to discuss in your post below. Sorry I chopped it up so much.

Quote:
My Theory is they are far more afraid of each other than they are of us. Turning down an insurgency recruiter risks immediate death at the hands of the recruiter. Failure to comply with any insurgent's demand risks the same. Cooperation with the current provisional government or the US also risks the same. In brief the insurgents are bound together by their mutual fear of their comrads in arms.


That's Bullsh*t. The insurgents are bound together by a mutual hate of Americans and mutual following of religion. Perhaps you have a hard time understanding this because you haven't tried to imagine your favorite relative with a big piece of shrapenel sticking out of his/her head.

The insurgents may harrass and kill those who do not agree with them, but I don't believe the kind of environment you are describing exists within the insurgency whatsoever. Don't attempt to marginalize the enemy by presenting them as unorganized or incompetent, for they are neither.

Not to mention the fact that you don't have an iota of proof to hold up your position, other than the fact you consider the insurgents to be some sort of bloodthirsty animal instead of people....

Quote:
Why their unwillingness to let Democracy take hold merely because they don't want democracy? It would be a less risky and more rapid way to get rid of us. Once democracy takes hold, we will leave and they can then vote or corrupt their democracy into anything they want including a theocracy, an aristocracy, a bureaucracy, a secular-ocracy, or even a demon-ocracy.


Do you really believe that is true? You seem to forget a simple fact: we are never going to leave Iraq in their minds. The military bases we have built there will be stocked with American troops for quite some time. They find this to be quite unacceptable. And they are willing to die to kick us off their land. I'm surprised that you don't understand this fact; would you act any differently in their place, if you thought your country was invaded and conquered by a truly evil force?

And do you really think that we would allow them to slip into whatever form of government they want 'after' the elections? Seriously, now, we invaded them once already because we found their government acceptable, you think we're just going to say 'oh, well, we tried.' Get realistic, Iraqis have no choice between being in a permanent democracy or in kicking us out.

Quote:
No rejection of democracy is not what is driving them. What is driving them is mutual fear of each other combined with an impatient obsession to maintain and/or obtain the power to continually generate fear in others.


Incorrect, for the reasons listed above.

Quote:
Killing as many of them as it takes to convince them elections are a less risky and a quicker way for them to get what they want, is a workable tactic. Yes, we've been doing that for about a year now. Yes, we have not convinced them yet. Hell, I expect our current approach to look worse before it begins to look better. We just need to continue killing them for the next several years until it finally occurs to them that they can get all they want in less than a year after democracy takes hold and we leave.


This is the craziest thing I have ever heard. "We just need to continue killing them for several years.' I'm really starting to think that you don't understand the first thing about psychology or guerrila warfare.

Quote:
What do you think is motivating them?


The dream of Dar al-Islaam, and/or the dream of an Iraq without Saddam OR the Americans.

That, and Revenge. Many of the insurgents have dead relatives from US bombs and bullets. Amazing what that will do to a man's psyche.

Quote:
What tactic or tactics do you recommend we adopt?


We have to turn the people of Iraq against the insurgents and terrorists by showing them that we are more concerned with their welfare than we are with their oil. We need to start paying THEM to rebuild their country, instead of paying AMERICANS to do it, even if it takes longer.

WE, the Americans, will never be able to defeat the insurgency. Only the Iraqi people can do that....

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 12:06 pm
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/813419D5-CC95-4505-9367-05140111C618.htm

Quote:
Muhammad Abbud said he watched his nine-year-old son bleed to death at their Falluja home, unable to take him to hospital as fighting raged in the streets and bombs rained down on the Iraqi city.


In the midst of a US onslaught and hemmed in by a round-the-clock curfew, he said he had little choice but to bury his eldest son, Ghaith, in the garden.

"My son got shrapnel in his stomach when our house was hit at dawn, but we couldn't take him for treatment," said Abbud, a teacher. "We buried him in the garden because it was too dangerous to go out. We did not know how long the fighting would last."

Residents say scores of civilians have been killed or wounded in 24 hours of fighting since US-led forces pushed deep into the city on Monday evening.

Doctors said people brought in at least 15 dead civilians at the main clinic in Falluja on Monday. By Tuesday, there were no clinics open, residents said, and no way to count casualties.

Medical supplies low

US and Iraqi forces seized control of the city's main hospital, across the Euphrates river from Falluja proper, hours before the onslaught beganOvernight US bombardments hit a clinic inside the Sunni Muslim city, killing doctors, nurses and patients, residents said. US military authorities denied the reports.
Interim Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi said troops detained 38 fighters entrenched at Falluja hospital and accused doctors there of exaggerating civilian casualties.
Sami al-Jumaili, a doctor at Falluja hospital, said the city was running out of medical supplies.
"There is not a single surgeon in Falluja. We had one ambulance hit by US fire and a doctor wounded. There are scores of injured civilians in their homes who we can't move," he said by telephone from a house where he had gone to help the wounded.
"A 13-year-old child just died in my hands."
ICRC voices concern
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said on Tuesday that it was extremely worried about the fate of people wounded in the battle for control of the Iraqi city of Falluja.

"The ICRC urges the belligerents to ensure that all those in need of such care - whether friend or foe - be given access to medical facilities and that medical personnel and vehicles can function without hindrance at all times," a statement said.

The organisation said it was "deeply concerned about reports that the injured cannot receive adequate medical care".

Families flee
Weekend air raids destroyed a clinic funded by an Islamic relief organisation in the centre of Falluja and a nearby warehouse used to store medical supplies, witnesses said.


Residents say there is no power
and food supplies are running low
Many families fled the city of 300,000 long before the offensive began. An official from a Sunni Muslim group with links to some fighters in Falluja said on Monday only about 60,000 people remained.
Residents say they have no power and are using kerosene lamps at night. They say they keep to ground floors for safety. Food shops have been closed for six days.
"My kids are hysterical with fear," said Farhan Salih. "They are traumatised by the sound but there is nowhere to take them."
US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on Monday he did not foresee large numbers of civilian casualties in the assault, saying US forces were disciplined and precise.
Those words were of little comfort to the Abbud family, sitting in a house damaged by the bomb that killed their child.
"We just bandaged his stomach and gave him water, but he was losing a lot of blood. He died this afternoon," said Abbud.


It is easy for us not sitting in a war torn country to talk about how it is necessary to kill so many people and destroy homes and hospitals. I bet if we lived in those places we would not talk so casually about war and death.

I don't believe for one moment that this is justified. They have a right to fight for their own country.

(in order to get news about the people of Iraq I had to go to other sources. Our news is just about our loses and objectives.)
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 12:32 pm
Revel -- I am so glad the Dems have you. Please, please don't ever jump that ship, although they may not want you either (feeling sad for a monster like Arafat who not only murders women and children but hates his own people and now you're quoting Aljazeera -- terrorists each and everyone).

You're disgusted by "your own people" but you admire Aljazeera enough to quote them and feel sad for Arafat.

That says volumes. Unbelievable as it may be.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 12:36 pm
Cyclops:

I find it remarkable you would call one of Ican's points "Bullsh*t", when you typed out a post filled with the stuff.

Do you know any Iraqis? I do, and they have family in Baghdad. They don't like the unrest and danger that's there, but they are glad Saddam is gone.

Did you catch on the news the reports of the insurgents in Fallujah that used innocents as human shields, then shot them in the head when they were done using them? How does that scenario fit in with your nice vision of these honorable "freedom fighters"?

Quote:
The insurgents may harrass and kill those who do not agree with them, but I don't believe the kind of environment you are describing exists within the insurgency whatsoever. Don't attempt to marginalize the enemy by presenting them as unorganized or incompetent, for they are neither.


Did you actually type that? They "may harass and kill those that do not agree with them ..."? But these are people you can sympathize with, right?

The available evidence points to the fact that the insurgents ARE IN FACT "some sort of bloodthirsty animal." These are people that would just as soon cut your head off than look at it. What evidence do you have to provide that indicates the contrary, other than your willingness to give them an undeserved benefit of the doubt?

You need to realize these ARE bloodthirsty savages. They are not guerrillas. You should learn the distinction.

Cyclops wrote:
WE, the Americans, will never be able to defeat the insurgency. Only the Iraqi people can do that....


I don't disagree with that. I completely disagree with you on the means to achieve that end.
0 Replies
 
 

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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 05/14/2025 at 03:20:52