0
   

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

 
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 05:13 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:
...They have bought the party line hook and sinker...and any explanation that can be thought of on short notice...will suffice to refute anything anyone says. You are, as they say in the Navy, pissing into the wind. But I am enjoying it...so don't stop on my account.
Frank you are surely capable of better than this. How about you providing your own analysis of the probable consequences of staying and leaving Iraq.

For Example

1. If we stay and do what is required we do to secure a democracy in Iraq, which do you think is more probable and why:
A. Increased rate of terrorist mass murder of civilians in the US?
B. Decreased rate of terrorist mass murder of civilians in the US?
C. Same rate of terrorist mass murder of civilians in the US?

2. If we leave Iraq to solve its own problems, which do you think is more probable and why:
A. Increased rate of terrorist mass murder of civilians in the US?
B. Decreased rate of terrorist mass murder of civilians in the US?
C. Same rate of terrorist mass murder of civilians in the US?
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 05:17 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
And Revel I don't expect some here to believe anything is good in Iraq when they want so badly for the current administration to be as bad as they think it is and for the effort in Iraq to fail so they can be right. And I think many in the media are of that same mindset. I don't think anybody really wants anyone to experience pain and suffering. But I come from a military family and know lots of folks who are over there. Unless you have talked to people there yourself, you have no basis whatsoever to conclude I'm lying.


The media has been consistently wrong since before the war began. The media presents news they feel will generate the greatest amount of fear, doubt and uncertainty among their readers.

They will print whatever it takes to get people's attention.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 05:43 pm
Just a very quick cursory search turned up the following on a single page of the search. Some of this is pure opinion, some indicates more verifiable information. But if one reads things like this along with all the negative press that is the usual offering out there, we will neither see the situation through rose colored glasses nor be as likely to see the situation as hopeless.

http://chrenkoff.blogspot.com/2004/06/good-news-from-iraq-part-4.html

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005370

http://www.kmax.ws/b/goodnewsiniraq.htm

http://www.fair.org/press-releases/iraq-good-news.html

http://windsofchange.net/archives/005384.php

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110006050

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneweb/mb_030726.htm

http://unix.dfn.org/A_letter_from_Ray_Reynolds.shtml

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2974279
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 06:00 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
The violence will not disappear before, during or after January 30. Democracy cannot be practiced in an environment of uncontrolled violence.

We agree that uncontrolled violence in neither Iraq, or in Afghanistan, or in the US will permit democracy to be practiced in these places. We must control violence in all three places. We disagree that the violence will not be controlled after January 30. It must be. We have too much to lose here in the US if its not controlled within a few years after January 30, 2005.

Quote:
The following text is a fatwa, or declaration of war, by Osama bin Laden first published in Al Quds Al Arabi, a London-based newspaper, in August, 1996. The fatwa is entitled "Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places."

...
Quote:
Few days ago the news agencies had reported that the Defence Secretary of the Crusading Americans had said that "the explosion at Riyadh and Al-Khobar had taught him one lesson: that is not to withdraw when attacked by coward terrorists".

We say to the Defence Secretary that his talk can induce a grieving mother to laughter! and shows the fears that had enshrined you all. Where was this false courage of yours when the explosion in Beirut took place on 1983 AD (1403 A.H). You were turned into scattered pits and pieces at that time; 241 mainly marines solders were killed. And where was this courage of yours when two explosions made you to leave Aden in lees than twenty four hours!

But your most disgraceful case was in Somalia; where- after vigorous propaganda about the power of the USA and its post cold war leadership of the new world order- you moved tens of thousands of international force, including twenty eight thousands American solders into Somalia. However, when tens of your solders were killed in minor battles and one American Pilot was dragged in the streets of Mogadishu you left the area carrying disappointment, humiliation, defeat and your dead with you. Clinton appeared in front of the whole world threatening and promising revenge , but these threats were merely a preparation for withdrawal. You have been disgraced by Allah and you withdrew; the extent of your impotence and weaknesses became very clear. It was a pleasure for the "heart" of every Muslim and a remedy to the "chests" of believing nations to see you defeated in the three Islamic cities of Beirut , Aden and Mogadishu.

...
Quote:
Those youths know that their rewards in fighting you, the USA, is double than their rewards in fighting some one else not from the people of the book. They have no intention except to enter paradise by killing you. An infidel, and enemy of God like you, cannot be in the same hell with his righteous executioner.


Do you actually think we can leave Iraq in its present condition and stop these al Qaeda critters with homeland security and without dictating a declaration of martial law?

Quote:
Marshal Law established on such a basis, destroys every guarantee of the Constitution, and effectually renders the "military independent of, and superior to, the civil power,"--the attempt to do which by the King of Great Britain was deemed by our fathers such an offense, that they assigned it to the world as one of the causes which impelled them to declare their independence. Civil liberty and this kind of martial law cannot endure together; the antagonism is irreconcilable and, in the conflict, one or the other must perish.

From: "Cases on Constitutional Law, Fifth Edition," by Charles G. Fenwick, Chicago, Callahan and Company, 1942, "Restrictions Uon Congress, Ex Parte Milligan," 1866, page 547.
0 Replies
 
Joe Nation
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 06:22 pm
Quote:
The media has been consistently wrong since before the war began. The media presents news they feel will generate the greatest amount of fear, doubt and uncertainty among their readers.

They will print whatever it takes to get people's attention.


I would certainly agree that the media was completely wrong before the war by swallowing whole and regurgitating, still warm, the egg of prevarications, mis-guesses, pot-shots in the dark and damned lies offered by the Bush Administration as reasons for the invasion.

That is, if I believed there was such a thing as "the media" in the US as a single voice, but I don't, because such a voice doesn't exist. Despite huge inroads by conservatives to talk about news but not present facts, see recent decision by CNN to part ways with the likes of Tucker Carlson, journalism as practiced in America in general still rests on the principle of telling who, what, when and where. Commentators deal with the why, but they ought to check with reality before opening their mouths.

Btw: the list of links offered by Foxfyre is kind of fun to paw through. One link leads to the famous Ray Reynolds letter, first out on the internet some three years ago, but offered here as recent.

The Scottish site is from May of 2004 when things were bad but not as bad as they are now.

And the Winds of War offers this good news : Because of recent court rulings on prisoners, fewer prisoners are being taken, that is, more are being killed rather than held. Well, that is good news, isn't it?


Joe( the next move is to stop the presses) Nation
0 Replies
 
JustWonders
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 06:36 pm
A Marine recently recounted the story of an excursion he and his buddies were on to deliver some soccer balls to a school in Iraq that they'd had a hand in rebuilding.

There was an embedded reporter along for the ride when they were ambushed. Luckily, no one was hurt, but due to some minor damage to their vehicle, they had to return before accomplishing their mission (to deliver the soccer balls).

The Marine's purpose in telling this story was to complain about how the story was presented in the media. The reporter accurately reported the account of the attack (don't they just love the gore) and the Marines' response. He made no mention of the purpose of the mission, no mention of the soccer balls, no mention of the reconstructed school.

This is but one of many such stories that no one will hear. <Shrugs>
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 06:41 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Well, when you piss into the wind, you know who it winds up on.


That was the point.

Get with the program, Fox!
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 06:42 pm
he he he he...
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 06:53 pm
Pentagon orders Iraq troop review
By Nick Childs
BBC News Pentagon correspondent



The Pentagon is worried about pre-election violence in Iraq
The Pentagon has confirmed that retired Gen Gary Luck has been asked to review overall operations in Iraq.

The news comes as a senior official revealed that the US army is likely to ask for a permanent increase of 30,000 in its strength.

US defence officials have sought to play this down as just part of an ongoing review process.

But Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has asked the general to look at the training of the Iraqi security forces.

That is critical, because handing over security to the Iraqis is key to the Pentagon's exit strategy - and this new review does seem to reflect the concern about how the security strategy is unfolding.

US military commanders acknowledge that the performance of the Iraqis is mixed, and far from being able to cut US troop numbers as it had hoped, the Pentagon now has more personnel in Iraq than ever - more than 150,000.

As a result, a senior US army official has also said the army is likely to ask for a permanent increase in its strength of 30,000 troops.

There has been a temporary increase of that number, but Donald Rumsfeld has until now resisted making that permanent - something that has been widely criticised because of the strains on the US military.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 06:55 pm
Well, I guess the loyalty of A2K conservatives to their ideology is so intense and exacting...they actually think things are on track in Iraq.

Amazing!

Hey...people have bought into more bizarre scenarios...although I can't come up with any candidates right now.

Like the people who couldn't see what a disaster the Vietnam War was until after the fall of Saigon -- and some much after...I guess these poor, deluded innocents have to have the reality hit them with the force of an anvil.

For those who see this disaster for what it is...a question:

What do you suppose has to happen....what set of circumstances do you guess has to surface...before the likes of Bill, Fox, McG and the rest will come to terms with this mess?
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 07:18 pm
frank : i have started to read again "ambassodor's journal' by j.k. galbraith(issued 1969). you might recall that he was a good friend of president kennedy who appointed him ambassador to india. galbraith pleaded with the president (the many letters are reproduced in the text; he also visited the president when he came to visit washington from india)to stay away from vietnam and gave some pretty convincing arguments for his reasoning. the president was somewhat sympathetic to galbraith, but in the end the hawks won out ... and we all know what happened. hbg
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 09:01 pm
[my comments are in bold blue]
revel wrote:
Ican, Where is the proof for the following information?

[I assume you meant where is some evidence in stead of where is the proof]

Quote:
...We've already had a chance to learn that many many of the prisoner abuse accusations are false or terribly exaggerated.

[First, from what I have read and seen, all the prisoner abuse accusations are limited to small groups of less than a dozen people for each abuse situation. They are not systemic throughout all our troops in Iraq and throughout the rest of our military. Second, almost all of that which is termed abusive treatment of non-uniformed prisoners does not really constitute torture abuse as I understand it. That is, it is not wounding, disabling, crippling or killing. It is at worst only terribly obnoxious. Third, in some cases of actual killing of prisoners, the killing was actually justifiable. I'm thinking of one soldier who shot a moving prisoner he first thought was dead. I think the insurgents who booby trap their dead, or booby trap or arm their wounded to kill their captors, forfeit their own, and their dead and wounded's rights to humane treatment. Why? Because captors have a right to human treatment and should be free from the risk of being wounded or killed when tending to the enemy's wounded, or transporting and burying the enemy's dead.]

From what I have been reading lately the earlier reports of the abuse were whitewashed as more and more information comes to light.
[Can you provide some evidence of such whitewash? Anecdotal evidence will, for me, suffice as some evidence]
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 09:07 pm
and now for your intertainment we have presented for your viewing pleasure "justified abuse" (almost seems an oxymoron -almost)
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 09:17 pm
Frank Apisa wrote:
For those who see this disaster for what it is...a question: What do you suppose has to happen....what set of circumstances do you guess has to surface...before the likes of Bill, Fox, McG and the rest will come to terms with this mess?

For those of us who see what a disaster it would be for us to fail to secure democracy in both Afghanistan and Iraq, "what set of circumstances do you guess has to surface before the likes of" Frank, revel, Batham "and the rest will come to terms with" the necessity for us to secure democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq despite the magnitude of any current mess? Up to now, these folks appear to be focusing completely on repeatedly demonstrating that the Bush administration is no damn good, while ignoring the probable disastrous consequences to all of us of our failing in these two countries.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 09:39 pm
I can hardly blame you ican, I would probably come up with similar responses were I in your shoes.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 09:41 pm
dyslexia wrote:
and now for your intertainment we have presented for your viewing pleasure "justified abuse" (almost seems an oxymoron -almost)

Now listen up! This will be a review of standard practices under our rule of law.

When one kills in self-defense, it is not abuse; it is justifiable homicide.

When one kills while pretending to seek aid, it is not justifiable homicide; it is unjustifiable homicide.

When one is physically obnoxious to a prisoner from a group who kills civilians, in order to learn how to save the lives of civilians, it is not unjustifiable abuse; it is protecting civilians from assault.

When one is physically obnoxious to civilians in order to frighten them from voting, one is not perpetrating justifiable abuse; one is perpetrating an assault.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 09:44 pm
dyslexia wrote:
I can hardly blame you ican, I would probably come up with similar responses were I in your shoes.

You are in my shoes, bubby! You just don't recognize the leather.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 10:43 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
And Revel I don't expect some here to believe anything is good in Iraq when they want so badly for the current administration to be as bad as they think it is and for the effort in Iraq to fail so they can be right. And I think many in the media are of that same mindset. I don't think anybody really wants anyone to experience pain and suffering. But I come from a military family and know lots of folks who are over there. Unless you have talked to people there yourself, you have no basis whatsoever to conclude I'm lying.


I have never concluded that you are lying. I said how do you expect us to accept on blind faith that what you are saying and what you say others are saying is really the truth and the reports in the news are false?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 10:47 pm
We are already paying a disasterous consequence for our preemptive attack on Iraq. That's a given. The problem now is what do we do now besides sending a four star general to evaluate the problems we've had since almost two years ago?
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Jan, 2005 10:48 pm
JustWonders wrote:
A Marine recently recounted the story of an excursion he and his buddies were on to deliver some soccer balls to a school in Iraq that they'd had a hand in rebuilding.

There was an embedded reporter along for the ride when they were ambushed. Luckily, no one was hurt, but due to some minor damage to their vehicle, they had to return before accomplishing their mission (to deliver the soccer balls).

The Marine's purpose in telling this story was to complain about how the story was presented in the media. The reporter accurately reported the account of the attack (don't they just love the gore) and the Marines' response. He made no mention of the purpose of the mission, no mention of the soccer balls, no mention of the reconstructed school.

This is but one of many such stories that no one will hear. <Shrugs>


Maybe the reporter just didn't see the import of delivering soccer balls to people who never are going to be able play them or the reconstructed school where kids are not in them. The main thrust of the story was the ambush which you said he reported accurately.

I agree to make a more honest report he should have added the purpose in the mission and where they were going.
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 0.04 seconds on 08/21/2025 at 10:43:41