0
   

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

 
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 04:34 pm
All this hysterical self-justification about freedom and life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

These liberties have been used recently chiefly to bring the lives of many innocents to an abrupt end, and the freedom to enjoy a contaminated wasteland for the survivors. The less said about happiness, the better.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 05:08 pm
McTag wrote:
All this hysterical self-justification about freedom and life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

These liberties have been used recently chiefly to bring the lives of many innocents to an abrupt end, and the freedom to enjoy a contaminated wasteland for the survivors. The less said about happiness, the better.
No, McTag! On the Contrary, that which is the cause of bringing "the lives of many innocents to an abrupt end, and the freedom to enjoy a contaminated wasteland for the survivors" is an opposing idea harbored by those who pursue this opposing idea. That opposing idea is that Allah will grant a believer happiness in paradise, if the believer purposly kills infidels; that is, if one murders those who honor the idea that human beings are created by God equally endowed with the rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. It's long past time for you to start recognizing that those who murder and those who "adhere to [murderers], giving them Aid and Comfort," forfeit their rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, and are the actual perpetrators. Those that attempt to defend themselves against these evil scum are the actual victims.

No, all ideas are definitly not equal.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 10:28 pm
Man.

Bold and underlined and italicized.

Is that the same as screaming into a megaphone broadcast over a P.A. system?

I must say (no matter how loud you say it) that it is still bullshit.
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 10:56 pm
Ican you forgot to mention the 100 or so virgins they are meant to get when they kill the inifidels.

It is amazing in the era that we live in with advanced science and technology, that people can believe the **** that the suicide bombers believe. Islam has more brainwashing than any other religion I know.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 11:07 pm
PDiddie wrote:
Man.

Bold and underlined and italicized.

Is that the same as screaming into a megaphone broadcast over a P.A. system?

I must say (no matter how loud you say it) that it is still bullshit.


He's obviously trying to get it through your thick skulls. Doesn't appear he's having much success.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 12:33 am
Before the recent invasion, Iraq was a country where various religions co-existed. Not any longer. Islamic fundamentalists have forced the others, including christians, out.

Progress? Increased safety? More life, liberty, happiness being pursued?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 01:16 am
PDiddie wrote:
Man.

Bold and underlined and italicized.

Is that the same as screaming into a megaphone broadcast over a P.A. system?

I must say (no matter how loud you say it) that it is still bullshit.


I common sayin in Germany, first came up during the Nazi times:

'The one who shouts, is wrong' ("Wer schreit hat Unrecht").
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 01:36 am
I agree with that mctag. The war has brought all the islamic fundamentalists from all areas.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 06:43 am
For the cheerleaders, the kind of Iraq story not published in Readers Digest, nor in the Cigar Aficionado magazine:


US soldiers would kill civilians, says Marine
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
09 December 2004
A former US Marine has claimed that he saw American troops in Iraq routinely kill unarmed civilians, including women and children. He said he had also witnessed troops killing injured Iraqi insurgents.
Jimmy Massey, 33, a staff sergeant who served in Iraq before being honourably discharged after 12 years' service, said he had seen troops shooting civilians at road blocks and in the street. A code of silence, similar to that found in organised crime gangs, prevented troops from speaking about it.
"We were shooting up people as they got out of their cars trying to put their hands up," said Mr Massey. "I don't know if the Iraqis thought we were celebrating their new democracy. I do know that we killed innocent civilians." Mr Massey said US troops in Iraq were trained to believe that all Iraqis were potential terrorists. As a result, he had watched his colleagues open fire indiscriminately. In one 48-hour period, he estimated his unit killed more than 30 civilians in the Rashid district of southern Baghdad .......

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=591171
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 08:05 am
McTag wrote:
Before the recent invasion, Iraq was a country where various religions co-existed. Not any longer. Islamic fundamentalists have forced the others, including christians, out.

Progress? Increased safety? More life, liberty, happiness being pursued?
OMG Shocked That's straight BS McTag. I invite you again to hear the truth from the Iraqi woman referred to in my signature line. (It only takes a minute) In the mean time, stop pretending Iraq was such a lovely open-minded place before the evil Americans showed up. It wasn't. The levels you stoop to, to denigrate this effort are deplorable... ala Michael Moore. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 08:19 am
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 08:21 am
Quote:
US soldiers would kill civilians, says Marine


Jimmy Massey, the former Staff Sgt. making these claims received a "medical retirement", in large part with the help of a lawyer who defended American soldiers after the Mai Lai attack in Vietnam. He's not credible and his only goal, as far as I can determine, is to slander the troops and hope for their defeat.

Hmmmm....reminds me of someone who recently ran for president....and lost big time.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 08:39 am
Quote:
and lost big time.





In the popular vote, Bush has a margin of 3 percent. This is lower than the margin held by any president since 1916, with the exceptions of Kennedy in 1960, Nixon in 1968, and of course, W himself's negative margin in 2000 (remember, he lost the popular vote that time). Bush also has the smallest Electoral College margin, 6%, of any president

http://www.notamandate.org/mandate.html

people might not like the source, but is the above informatin accurate? If so Kerry did not loose "big time."
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 08:47 am
McTag wrote:
For the cheerleaders, the kind of Iraq story not published in Readers Digest, nor in the Cigar Aficionado magazine:


US soldiers would kill civilians, says Marine
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
09 December 2004
A former US Marine has claimed that he saw American troops in Iraq routinely kill unarmed civilians, including women and children. He said he had also witnessed troops killing injured Iraqi insurgents.
Jimmy Massey, 33, a staff sergeant who served in Iraq before being honourably discharged after 12 years' service, said he had seen troops shooting civilians at road blocks and in the street. A code of silence, similar to that found in organised crime gangs, prevented troops from speaking about it.
"We were shooting up people as they got out of their cars trying to put their hands up," said Mr Massey. "I don't know if the Iraqis thought we were celebrating their new democracy. I do know that we killed innocent civilians." Mr Massey said US troops in Iraq were trained to believe that all Iraqis were potential terrorists. As a result, he had watched his colleagues open fire indiscriminately. In one 48-hour period, he estimated his unit killed more than 30 civilians in the Rashid district of southern Baghdad .......

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=591171


Let me guess ... "in a manner reminiscent of Ghengis Khan"?
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 09:01 am
Quote:
Let me guess ... "in a manner reminiscent of Ghengis Khan"?


Laughing My thoughts, exactly!

<Think....John Kerry, Jr.> :wink:
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 11:02 am
Nice to see you guys making light of a very probable situation involving the murder of innocents. Not surprising, however.

In other news, from CNN:

Quote:
Allawi: Trials begin next week

Iraq's interim prime minister said Tuesday that trials of former regime members will begin next week.

Ayad Allawi, speaking to the country's National Council in Baghdad, didn't say who they were.

Saddam Hussein and 11 high-profile members of his regime face war crimes proceedings.

There have been conflicting reports about the starting date for these trials, along with questions about whether they can begin soon because officials need a lot of time to build their cases.

The jailed aides include former deputy prime minister Tariq Aziz, who often defended the regime internationally, and Ali Hassan al-Majid, dubbed "Chemical Ali" for his alleged role in the use of chemical weapons on Iraqi civilians. (Full story)

The announcement was made on the same day Allawi's office confirmed that the prime minister on Wednesday will announce a coalition list to vie for seats in the transitional national assembly election on January 30. Allawi will pursue a seat in the coalition, which will be comprised of his Iraqi National Accord and other parties.

Hoshyar Zebari, Iraq's foreign minister, said Tuesday the elections will take place on time but added an option would be to hold them over a period of two to three weeks to minimize security threats in some areas.


Does anyone think that these trials will be public? It would seem to me that Saddam could say some pretty damning things....

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 11:07 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Nice to see you guys making light of a very probable situation involving the murder of innocents. Not surprising, however.

Cycloptichorn


I'm not "making light" of it, I just don't believe him.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 11:08 am
And, because I didn't see it earlier (via Metafilter):

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-woelec1208,0,4700439.story?coll=ny-worldnews-headlines

Quote:
Logistical issues may undermine Iraq vote

IRBIL, Iraq -- With less than eight weeks remaining before Iraq's national elections, preparations are so far behind it will be virtually impossible to carry off a proper vote, according to several consultants involved in the planning.

Although public attention has been focused on how to make the country safe for the Jan. 30 parliamentary election, logistical problems could undermine the vote just as seriously as the lack of security. Preparations are stalled on many levels, ranging from delays in hiring and training thousands of election workers to deciding what kind of ballots and ink to use.


"I just can't see how we can hold these elections," an American consultant working with Iraqi election planners said on the condition of anonymity. "We still don't know the rules. The ground rules are basic for any country, but the details have to be decided. That hasn't happened here yet."

One main concern is a lack of significant involvement from the United Nations. In other countries wracked by war, such as Afghanistan and Bosnia, the UN played a major organizing role. Here, the bulk of the planning is being done by the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraq, a nine-member body selected by UN specialists. But foreign consultants say the commission is understaffed, with only 500 workers hired to undertake the monumental task of setting up 9,000 polling places around the country and training about 40,000 Iraqis to staff them on election day.

"An election is the largest logistical operation that a country undertakes outside of warfare," said a consultant working for the UN. "The Iraqi commission just doesn't have the manpower."

Afghanistan comparison

In Afghanistan, which held its first-ever democratic election in October, the UN deployed about 600 international staff members, including 266 election experts. Of the 35 UN workers now in Iraq, only four are election specialists. The UN has promised to send another 25 experts into Iraq, but their arrival has been delayed by security concerns.


"The situation would be much different if the UN was playing a greater role," said a European consultant working with the Iraqis, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity. "There would be a system in place by now."

President George W. Bush said as recently as Tuesday in a speech to U.S. troops in California that the elections must proceed as planned. And election officials here insist Iraqis will be able to go to the polls on Jan. 30 to choose provincial councils and a 275-member National Assembly charged with appointing a central government and drafting a permanent constitution.

"We will be ready to hold the elections on time," said Farid Ayar, the commission's spokesman, speaking by phone from Baghdad. "We are making all the necessary preparations."

Three American groups -- the International Foundation of Election Systems, the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute -- are helping the Iraqis with preparations, including the training of poll workers. But the final decision on myriad practical problems rests with the Iraqi commission.

Much to be decided

Among the crucial preparations that have been delayed or are still undecided, according to the consultants:

Recruitment and training of the 40,000 workers needed to staff polling places. So far, several thousand workers have been trained and most were flown to neighboring Jordan to ensure their safety during the weeklong training sessions. In order to staff each of the 9,000 polling sites with four or five workers, the pace of training has to be dramatically accelerated. And because many details have to be worked out, those trained workers may need retraining. "It's very difficult to train Iraqi poll workers, because many of the ground rules are not set yet," said the American consultant.

Registration. The registration period was supposed to be from Nov. 1 to Dec. 15, but election officials do not know how many of Iraq's 15 million eligible voters have registered so far and it is unclear whether those who have not registered will be able to cast a ballot by showing up at polling places Jan. 30 with proper identification.

Iraqis are supposed to register in their area of residence, which is determined by their UN food ration card. Registration efforts have not even started in Anbar province, home to the Sunni Muslim cities of Fallujah and Ramadi, where insurgents were entrenched for months before being driven out by a major U.S. offensive last month. In Mosul, a northern city where insurgents also have a strong presence, a warehouse full of registration forms was set ablaze last month.

Election officials have made contradictory statements about whether Iraqis will be able to vote without being pre-registered. The consultants say the commission is waiting to see how many people register by Dec. 15 before it decides whether to allow registration on election day.

"If there are people who are not on the voter register, they can come with two pieces of identification and they can register to vote," the commission's chairman, Hussain Hindawi, told a UN publication on Nov. 24. "The pieces of identification have to be things like a passport, or a card showing their military service." But Ayar, the commission's spokesman, said registration would not be allowed Jan. 30. "People have to register ahead of time in order to vote," he said. "They can't just show up and vote. They have to be on the voter lists."

Voting sites. A critical issue for people in Fallujah, Ramadi and other "Sunni Triangle" cities where the registration process has been disrupted by violence -- and where polling sites are likely to be targeted by insurgents -- is whether they will be able to vote in other places.

Some U.S. military and Iraqi officials claim that people in Sunni cities who register by Dec. 15 will be able to vote elsewhere, but commission officials deny that. "You have to register and vote in the city in which you live," Ayar said. Already, many Sunni political groups are calling for a delay in the elections, and a boycott if they go ahead as scheduled. Many Iraqis fear an election without significant Sunni participation would lack legitimacy.

The ballots. Indelible ink, which would mark voters' hands for several days and prevent them from voting twice, was used in most of Afghanistan's polling sites to prevent fraud, but in Iraq such a mark could keep voters away for fear of being targeted by insurgents.

"Indelible ink will be sprayed on voters' fingers to show they have voted," Hindawi told the UN publication. "They would have to cut off a finger to get rid of the ink." The European consultant suggested election officials "could use an invisible ink" to keep people from becoming easy targets. That would mean "polling stations would have to be outfitted with special scanners to detect the ink so there's no double-voting. ... I'm not sure that we have time to put that system in place."

Police presence. U.S. and Iraqi officials have said coalition forces will provide the bulk of security at election sites, with support from the Iraqi police and army. There is some question about what safeguards would be applied to keep Iraqi police from intimidating voters.

More broadly, the consultants noted, there has been little time to educate the Iraqi public about the mechanics of a democratic election. In Cambodia, for example, the UN educated voters for nearly a year before 1993 elections. In Iraq, there are signs that voters don't even understand what they are going to vote for. A recent poll by the International Republican Institute found 40 percent of Iraqis think they will be voting for a president, rather than a parliament.

"In a country that has never had real elections before, the first election sets a lot of expectations," said the European consultant. "So if this one goes badly, people will turn away from democracy."


This vote is like a month away..... and the problems don't seem to be resolving themselves.

Is a partial vote better than none? Should we delay the vote until things can be controlled? Can things be controlled? Will the violence die down after an election? There are too many questions that need answering to feel comfortable about the situation.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 11:09 am
Tico Wrote:
Quote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Nice to see you guys making light of a very probable situation involving the murder of innocents. Not surprising, however.

Cycloptichorn


I'm not "making light" of it, I just don't believe him.


Why not? What reason has he given you to doubt his word?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Dec, 2004 11:14 am
OCCOM BILL wrote:
McTag wrote:
Before the recent invasion, Iraq was a country where various religions co-existed. Not any longer. Islamic fundamentalists have forced the others, including christians, out.

Progress? Increased safety? More life, liberty, happiness being pursued?
OMG Shocked That's straight BS McTag. I invite you again to hear the truth from the Iraqi woman referred to in my signature line. (It only takes a minute) In the mean time, stop pretending Iraq was such a lovely open-minded place before the evil Americans showed up. It wasn't. The levels you stoop to, to denigrate this effort are deplorable... ala Michael Moore. Rolling Eyes


No, BS it's unfortunately not. It is no longer possible for non-military christians to worship in Iraq, it's not tolerated. Many have had to flee. I can find you some links in corroboration, if pressed.

And, nothing I have written pretends that Iraq was a lovely place before. That, it clearly wasn't.
And, nothing I have written says that there are no people in Iraq trying to do good. That, there clearly are.

None of that should mask the fact though, that an illegal, immoral invasion has taken place and that tens of thousands of innocent people, at a very conservative estimate, have been needlessly killed.
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 0.11 seconds on 07/26/2025 at 06:29:04