0
   

The US, UN & Iraq II

 
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2003 11:51 pm
MUWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2003 11:51 pm
Sounds like propaganda, my prayers have increased! Please Lord, make it so! Amen
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Mar, 2003 11:55 pm
Kara, have you read this rag?


http://www.cyberpaperboy.com/
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 02:07 am
Hey, is that "X" showing as a photo to anyone?
0 Replies
 
pueo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 02:10 am
i just see the red x's too.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 02:26 am
Wilso, I don't think it's our computers...
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 02:43 am
The pic's were showing initially. I don't know what happened. They shouldn't have been censored as they weren't graphic, just sad.
0 Replies
 
Ketamine
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 02:51 am
Have you a link for the pictures?
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 02:58 am
Photos
0 Replies
 
pueo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 02:59 am
Ketamine wrote:
Over 700 US, British troops killed in Iraq: Envoy

Press Trust of India
Moscow, March 27

Iraq on Thursday claimed that in the US led attack over the country nearly 700 American and British troops have been killed in the past seven days of fighting.

Iraq's Ambassador to Moscow, Abbas Khalaf, quoting fresh reports from Baghdad, claimed that in the last 24 hours alone over 500 American and British troops were killed in fierce fighting in An-Najaf and Kerbala.

Three American spy drones were downed over An-Najaf, he told reporters.

Though it has not been possible to verify the claims of the Iraqi envoy, Khalaf pointed out to the "great difficulties faced by the invading army as US is planning to send up to 30,000 more troops to Iraq as reinforcement."


according to cnn the confirmed deaths of coalition forces stand at 51.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/index.html
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 03:00 am
There's also a poem that'll break your heart..................for those who actually have one.
0 Replies
 
Ketamine
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 03:58 am
Well if CNN said it it must be true.
0 Replies
 
Ketamine
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 04:01 am
Well Puero..if CNN said it then it must be true.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 05:40 am
never mind
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 06:01 am
Saddam and those like him have to realize that censorship does not make truth .... there is no validation in that form of tyranny.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 06:41 am
Posted previously but bears repeating that some with military expertise do NOT agree with timber and Ash that things are going swimmingly:

The biggest war game in US military history, staged this month at a cost of £165m with 13,000 troops, was rigged to ensure that the Americans beat their "Middle Eastern" adversaries, according to one of the main participants.

General Paul Van Riper, a retired marine lieutenant-general, told the Army Times that the sprawling three-week millennium challenge exercises, were "almost entirely scripted to ensure a [US] win".

He protested by quitting his role as commander of enemy forces, and warning that the Pentagon might wrongly conclude that its experimental tactics were working.

The Guardian
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 06:55 am
Perc

I suppose you were a bit frustrated that it was only Russian radar equipment and not French. The opportunity of removing a few Frenchies is no doubt highly desirable.

But all is not lost. The French company, Eutelsat SA, is providing much of the surveillance equipment in Iraq, but to US troops not Saddam.

Regarding my "hypocracy" and "disgustingly odious desires", you say:

Quote:
You have filled page after page of this forum with your desires for the failure of this administration and the Administration of your own PM at any cost. You knew full well that if we failed it meant the deaths of thousands of our and your own troops.


Wrong. I'm a long time member of the Labour Party. I've always voted for and supported Tony Blair. Foreign Office Minister Bill Rammell is a personal friend. Blair will go down in history as a truly great Prime Minister, he has done a lot for Britain. But on THIS ISSUE, I believe he has made a catastrophic misjudgement which may well be herald the end of his career.

I didn't want to go down the Bush road to war, true. But I was willing to suspend my belief that it could be avoided. When it started, I was prepared to overlook the obvious fact that it had no legal basis. I was prepared to do this because I thought

a) we would win and
b) that it would be short.

But what I overlooked was the ineptitude and incompetence of war plannners such as Richard Perle (now resigned take note) and Bush's naivety in trusting them. That, Perception, is what will cost American and British lives, not my opposition to war.

Lieutenant General K.S. Randhawa (ret.) of the Indian Army says

Quote:
Iraq knew it could not win the war, but would be ready to fight on for months, aiming to draw U.S. and British troops into its cities for a protracted and bloody campaign. He said the United States and Britain had miscalculated by underestimating the strength of the likely Iraqi resistance. The Iraqi army would focus the bulk of its strength in its cities, reducing the impact of superior U.S. and British firepower by forcing them into urban warfare, while also harrying their advancing troops from the rear.

"It certainly won't finish in a couple of months."

Asked whether he thought Saddam realised he would die whatever happened, he said, "Definitely. He is a very intelligent man. I don't want to say he has gone into the war planning to die. He went in fully accepting that 'if need be, I'll die'."


But are we going to win? Even this fundamental point is now in doubt. The battle for Iraqi "hearts and minds" is already lost. Do we have the stomach to press on to the war's bitter end? Or would it be better to quit now? I'm just glad I don't have to make those kind of decisions.

You go on to say that many of my posts were deliberately designed "to inflame the emotions" of Bush supporters. Well tough. I suggest you calm down and grab a beer, or don't read what I post, it really doesn't matter.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 07:27 am
Kara, I try to make clear distinction when I post conjecture or opinion. If you have a question about some particular, or if you take issue with something I've posted, please jump right in with it. After all, this is all about communication.

Wilso, some websites do not allow, or may limit or otherwise restrict, "Hotlinking". Yahoo! and GeoCities both are known to have issues with this. That more than likely explains the red "X"s folks see instead of the images you posted. Sometimes the best you can do is to post a normal link instead of trying to embed the off-site image, though a work-around is to copy the image to your machine then upload it to a site, such as MSN Groups, which does not inhibit hotlinking, then image-link to that copy when you post.


Switching hats here for a moment, as Moderator, I think it appropriate to toss in a general reminder that while it is perfectly acceptable, even encouraged, to criticize the content or theme of a post, personal matters belong in PM, not on public threads. No matter who, why, when or how flaming gets started it is NEVER appropriate. Go ahead and attack arguments or assertions. Feel free to publicly disagree with, challenge, or to offer rebuttal to any position or statement. Please don't attack or otherwise impune the person of a member with whom you have issue. If you feel something on a thread is inappropriate, please bring it to the attention of a moderator, being as specific as you can. Thanks.
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 07:57 am
timber, I will find an example of what inspired my comment but it will take time. I have gone back 10-15 pages to find a post of yours and one of Asherman's but I am away from home this week and on a slow dial-up. Back later.

pDiddie, thanks for that interesting article.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Mar, 2003 09:09 am
Any time, Kara. Oh, and Wilso, another thought ... while others might not have been able to see the images, your browser probably cached them when you first accessed them, and displayed the cached images rather than invoking them from the outboard site ... hope that's clear; I know I'm a lousy teacher.
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
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
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The US, UN & Iraq II
  3. » Page 107
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 10/07/2024 at 12:32:48