THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

revel wrote:

...
Without quibbling over your numbers, the point is that they're still being killed and the quality of life has gotten worse instead of better after the invasion.
I didn't have time to check the numbers last night. IBC claims that from 1/1/2003 to 2/28/2006 the total number of Iraq civilians killed is "37,589." According to my calculations from the IBC data, Coalition forces killed about 7,883. So the total number murdered by Terrorist Malignancy = 37,589 - 7,883 = 29,706.

Saddam's regime in its last 38 months murdered 68,373 Iraq civilians.

Iraq has more AQ than they did before the invasion
Yes, that is true. Most of them are from the "10,000 to 20,000" who graduated 1996 to 2001, before our invasion of Afghanistan, from the AQ Academy in Afghanistan.

and the Arab/Muslim sentiment towards the US in that part of the world is low to say the least so we are not safer in terms of having friendly middle east allies for having gone into Iraq.
I agree! But unfriendly arabs are a far less threat to the lives of American civilians than is Terrorist Malignancy. I bet many of those unfriendly arabs are unfriendly because we have lately been so ineffective in exterminating Terrorist Mallignancy.

You say that we could get rid of this insurgency problem if Bush started treating them as a cancer and just gets rid of them, don't you think they have been trying to do just that?
NO! The Bush regime has been taking many of these Terrorist Malignancy humanoids prisoners instead of openly killing them on site, on sight.

What else can they do short of setting a nuclear bomb off over the whole area? We can be there for another 10 years and be no closer to any of our stated goals than we are now. Say whatever you want but the "enemy" seems to have the patience and the man power to last indefinitely.
Terrorist Malignancy humanoids must not be taken or held prisoner like conventional uniformed troops, who do not murder civilians and who do not cut off the heads of their prisoners. Instead we should instead openly kill these Terrorist Malignancy humanoids on site, on sight (including those in process of crossing the Syrian and Iranian borders into Iraq).

As for what the answer is now, who in the world could know.
I do! In addition to what I just wrote, the President must give the newly elected Iraqi government a deadline for getting organized. If they fail to meet that deadline we should pull out of Iraq ASAP.

Many of the prisoners abused at the Abu Ghraib prison were innocent Iraqis picked up at random by US troops, and incarcerated by under-qualified intelligence officers, a former US interrogator from the notorious jail told the Guardian.

Nope, Just heard it on TV. Anon

icant doesn't trust a2kers, but trusts Bushco. What a laugh!

...
What do you do at night, sit around thinking of new little catch words? "humanoids."

www.m-w.com

Quote:

Main Entry: hu·man·oid
Pronunciation: 'hyü-m&-"noid, 'yü-
Function: adjective
: having human form or characteristics <humanoid dentition> <humanoid robots>
- humanoid noun

Quote:

Many of the prisoners abused at the Abu Ghraib prison were innocent Iraqis picked up at random by US troops, and incarcerated by under-qualified intelligence officers, a former US interrogator from the notorious jail told the Guardian.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1211374,00.html
emphasis added by me

Quote:

Private contractor lifts the lid on systematic failures at Abu Ghraib jail

Julian Borger in Washington
Friday May 7, 2004
The Guardian


The following correction was printed in the Guardian's Corrections and Clarifications column, Friday May 14 2004

In the interview below, we quoted a remark Torin Nelson made about "cooks and truck drivers". Mr Nelson has asked us to make it clear that he intended the remark to be rhetorical. He did not mean that people from those jobs were actually working at the prison as interrogators. He intended the remark to reflect what he felt was the declining quality of private interrogators at the prison. Since the article was published, CACI Interntional, the company involved, has insisted that all interrogators have been vetted for the job.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many of the prisoners abused at the Abu Ghraib prison were innocent Iraqis picked up at random by US troops, and incarcerated by under-qualified intelligence officers, a former US interrogator from the notorious jail told the Guardian.

Torin Nelson, who served as a military intelligence officer at Guantánamo Bay before moving to Abu Ghraib as a private contractor last year, blamed the abuses on a failure of command in US military intelligence and an over-reliance on private firms. He alleged that those companies were so anxious to meet the demand for their services that they sent "cooks and truck drivers" to work as interrogators.

"Military intelligence operations need to drastically change in order for something like this not to happen again," ...

DUH!

If we just shot those prisoners on sight as you so humanely suggest, we would have outright killed a lot of innocent people.

How about a simple rule and a simple test?

Do not ask "cooks and truck drivers" (rhetorical or otherwise) or otherwise untrained persons to answer the following questions about suspected Terrorist Malignancies.

Are they non-uniformed humanoids in possession of ordnance?
Are they shooting at soldiers?
Are they shooting at civilians?
Are they beheading prisoners?
Are they digging holes alongside roads?
Are they cohabiting with, or being transported with, or walking with, or otherwise traveling with humanoids for whom the answer to anyone of the previous questions is YES.

Bush and icant should be impeached - immediately:

Quote:

...
By a margin of 50% to 44%, Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if he lied about the war in Iraq ...

...
But this poll tells the other half of the story - that a solid plurality of Americans want Congress to consider removing Bush from the White House."

Main Entry: 3lie
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): lied; ly·ing /'lI-i[ng]/
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English lEogan; akin to Old High German liogan to lie, Old Church Slavonic lugati
intransitive senses
1 : to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2 : to create a false or misleading impression
transitive senses : to bring about by telling lies <lied his way out of trouble>
synonyms LIE, PREVARICATE, EQUIVOCATE, PALTER, FIB mean to tell an untruth. LIE is the blunt term, imputing dishonesty <lied about where he had been>. PREVARICATE softens the bluntness of LIE by implying quibbling or confusing the issue <during the hearings the witness did his best to prevaricate>. EQUIVOCATE implies using words having more than one sense so as to seem to say one thing but intend another <equivocated endlessly in an attempt to mislead her inquisitors>. PALTER implies making unreliable statements of fact or intention or insincere promises <a swindler paltering with his investors>. FIB applies to a telling of a trivial untruth <fibbed about the price of the new suit>.

Nope, Just heard it on TV.

Anon

icant doesn't trust a2kers, but trusts Bushco. What a laugh!

Isn't it interesting how Bush continues to parrot that there is still hope in Iraq? When did his brain detach from his mouth?

I didn't change anything from that article:

Poll: Americans Favor Bush's Impeachment If He Lied about Iraq

By a margin of 50% to 44%, Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if he lied about the war in Iraq, according to a new poll commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, a grassroots coalition that supports a Congressional investigation of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003.

Where's the lie, icant?

Bush and icant should be impeached - immediately:


Poll: Americans Favor Bush's Impeachment if he lied about Iraq
Submitted by davidswanson on Tue, 2005-10-11 16:46. Media
For Immediate Release: October 11, 2005

Poll: Americans Favor Bush's Impeachment if he lied about Iraq

By a margin of 50% to 44%, Americans want Congress to consider impeaching President Bush if he lied about the war in Iraq, according to a new poll commissioned by AfterDowningStreet.org, a grassroots coalition that supports a Congressional investigation of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq in 2003.

The poll was conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs, the highly-regarded non-partisan polling company. The poll interviewed 1,001 U.S. adults on October 6-9.

The poll found that 50% agreed with the statement:

"If President Bush did not tell the truth about his reasons for going to war with Iraq, Congress should consider holding him accountable by impeaching him."

44% disagreed, and 6% said they didn't know or declined to answer. The poll has a +/- 3.1% margin of error.

Among those who felt strongly either way, 39% strongly agreed, while 30% strongly disagreed.

"The results of this poll are truly astonishing," said AfterDowningStreet.org co-founder Bob Fertik. "Bush's record-low approval ratings tell just half of the story, which is how much Americans oppose Bush's policies on Iraq and other issues. But this poll tells the other half of the story - that a solid plurality of Americans want Congress to consider removing Bush from the White House."