9 American Soldiers Were Killed In Iraq Yesterday...

[Jonathan Randall]

9 American Soldiers Were Killed In Iraq Yesterday. Please tell me what their deaths are accomplishing? The situation in Iraq is getting WORSE, not better. Is there an end in sight? What is the objective? And don't give me **** about not supporting "the troops". If I had had my way NO troops woulld have been sent to Iraq. I SUPPORT the troops. It is the right-wing kool-aid drinkers "freedom is on the march!" folks who don't.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

****ing sociopaths.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

**** you *******s who memorized right wing talking points in order to sell this war to a frightened American people. Do you know who is most responsible for the debacle in Iraq? The President? Defence Secretary Rumsfeld? NO! It is the Joe Sixpack who listened to right-wing talk radio and memorized its talking points and called ANYONE who dissented "an anti-American" who is MOST responsible for this mess.

You put your party before YOUR country. *******s!

I am an American first and last. I was opposed to the Iraq War because I saw it contrary to the best interests of the U.S.A. Screw you who played the patriotism card.

 

[mrhnau]

**** you *******s who memorized right wing talking points in order to sell this war to a frightened American people. Do you know who is most responsible for the debacle in Iraq? The President? Defence Secretary Rumsfeld? NO! It is the Joe Sixpack who listened to right-wing talk radio and memorized its talking points and called ANYONE who dissented "an anti-American" who is MOST responsible for this mess.

You put your party before YOUR country. *******s!

I am an American first and last. I was opposed to the Iraq War because I saw it contrary to the best interests of the U.S.A. Screw you who played the patriotism card.

There are alot of people who are American. About 3000 people who were American were killed in 9/11. Have you forgotten? Where is the rage for this? Where is the rage for the train bombings in Spain and London? How about the embassy bombings across the world? Suicide bombers in Tel Aviv? Why is there no rage for police murdered? Victims of drunk driving? Training accidents in the military?

We went into Iraq in a search for weapons of mass destruction based on intellegence. Overall, it appears that intellegence was mostly wrong. This invasion was done as part of the war on terror.

So, we are now in Iraq. We have thousands of foreign fighters streaming into Iraq. I'd wager the highest concentration of terrorist currently exists in Iraq. They may not have been there before, but they are sure there now.

So, we do what you think is patriotic. We pull out. Terrorist proclaim another victory, because we have not dealt with the problem. Think they are planning on staying in Iraq? Where do you think they will be going? Terrorism is no longer a local problem. With technology, planes, etc, they can be and go anywhere.

So, you want the best interest of the USA and don't want us to play the patriotic card. Those wanting to be in Iraq WANT the best interest of the US. Cowering in our own boarders is not going to solve the problem. The analogy to WW2 is scary. Why did we go into Germany? We were attacked by Japan. SURELY there was no reason to invade Europe. Let THEM deal with their problems. If this were to happen, Europe would have fallen to the Nazi regime. Think they would stop there? Same thing here. The world is no longer a closed system. Hiding in our shell is simply not going to work.

I've stated this before. I'd love to pull out of Iraq. We will be leaving the country in a worse mess then when we came in. Even Democrats are not openly suggesting an immediate withdrawl. Get the country where they can support themselves and defend themselves. At this point we can pull out w/out sounding the death knell of the country. This is not going to happen next week. Deaths will occur until that point. Deaths occur during war. That is part of war.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

There are alot of people who are American. About 3000 people who were American were killed in 9/11. Have you forgotten? Where is the rage for this? Where is the rage for the train bombings in Spain and London? How about the embassy bombings across the world? Suicide bombers in Tel Aviv? Why is there no rage for police murdered? Victims of drunk driving? Training accidents in the military?

And Iraq had WHAT to do with this?

 

[michaeledward]

Jonathan Randall,

I have to disagree with your ascertion of responsibility. The responsibility of the Iraq debacle falls specifically upon the Republican Party.

The leader of the Republican Party is President Bush. He initiated this war. He has been the 'calcium in the backbone' in continueing this war.

The President has had the complete and total unwavering support of the rank and file Republican's in both chambers of Congress; so much so, that the minority party, now that they are in minority, are looking to give away the giant 'Rubber Stamp' they made as a prop for the House Floor.

Joe SixPack, while mostly sharing in responsibility, was presented from all angles overwhelming information to support the Republican Party; Television, Radio, Newspaper all presented the 'Party Line'. How could Joe SixPack not come to believe in the presented material? With Judy Miller presenting the Vice President's cherry picked intelligence on the front page of the 'Liberal' New York Times, how can Joe SixPack make quality discernments on the issue.

I found this is a good article ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/the-republicans-lost-iraq_b_35432.html

In this article, Cenk makes the point, that the "Blame Game" is about to start being played by Team R - pointing directly at the Democratic Party.

The Republicans Are Responsible ! Make no mistake about it.

The Republicans Are Responsible.

 

[mrhnau]

And Iraq had WHAT to do with this?

Where are the terrorist NOW? As I stated, there seems to be a stream of terrorist heading into Iraq.

Were there terrrorists in Iraq at the time of invasion? Evidence seems to say its unlikely.

 

[mrhnau]

I have to disagree with your ascertion of responsibility. The responsibility of the Iraq debacle falls specifically upon the Republican Party.

I'll mostly agree. I think the faulty intellegence played a significant part into the initial thinking. If Saddam had been transparent about weapons we would not have had a problem. Not allowing inspectors when required was not exactly a smart move. The UN had no real backbone for enforcing their rules, especially with Russia, France and Germany having veto power. Being on the take in the Oil for Food program would seem to influence their veto power.

Fault abounds. Its not -only- on the Republican party, but they bear their own share.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

Where are the terrorist NOW? As I stated, there seems to be a stream of terrorist heading into Iraq.

Were there terrrorists in Iraq at the time of invasion? Evidence seems to say its unlikely.

The two are NOT mutually exclusive - fighting them either here or there. 9/11 took at most a few dozen. Iraq, like Afghanistan under the Soviets, is serving as both a training ground AND unifying force for groups and sects that would otherwise be at each others' throats.

Stop drinking the Kool-aid, look at the evidence and let your party hang if necessary to save your country.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

I'll mostly agree. I think the faulty intellegence played a significant part into the initial thinking. If Saddam had been transparent about weapons we would not have had a problem. Not allowing inspectors when required was not exactly a smart move.

There were inspectors on the ground in Iraq WITH unrestricted access in the months before the invasion. Your information comes from right-wing propaganda.

 

[michaeledward]

I'll mostly agree. I think the faulty intellegence played a significant part into the initial thinking. If Saddam had been transparent about weapons we would not have had a problem. Not allowing inspectors when required was not exactly a smart move. The UN had no real backbone for enforcing their rules, especially with Russia, France and Germany having veto power. Being on the take in the Oil for Food program would seem to influence their veto power.

Fault abounds. Its not -only- on the Republican party, but they bear their own share.

Saddam Hussien was completely transparent about his weapons. He provided UNMOVIC a report of thousands of pages. He made repeated public ascertians that he had no weapons.

UNMOVIC had unfettered access to all areas in Iraq in the fall of 2002, and winter of 2003.

The one weapon system UNMOVIC discovered was a short range missle. Iraq was allowed to have missles of 150 kilometers in range. UNMOVIC destroyed missles with range of 159 kilometers. This was the only discovered violation of missles.

That Saddam Hussien was uncooperative, is a 'Big Lie' that the Republican Party spins, to shift blame, from them to anyone else.

There were no weapons in Iraq.

 

[mrhnau]

Stop drinking the Kool-aid, look at the evidence and let your party hang if necessary to save your country.

btw, not my party. I'm not a Republican. I see evidence quite fine. Two people given identical facts will have different views of what to do about it. We still live in a country where this is permissible, unlike in Iraq before the invasion. Thats why we debate. Hopefully a civil converstation that does not include such clever interjections as " ****ing sociopaths.", "**** you *******s " and "You put your party before YOUR country. *******s!". If you want a civil conversation, please try to act civil.

The two are NOT mutually exclusive - fighting them either here or there. 9/11 took at most a few dozen. Iraq, like Afghanistan under the Soviets, is serving as both a training ground AND unifying force for groups and sects that would otherwise be at each others' throats.

This may be true. Are you endoring a civil war in Iraq then? Do you believe we will be left alone and our country fine if we show weakness and run in fear?

 

[mrhnau]

Saddam Hussien was completely transparent about his weapons. He provided UNMOVIC a report of thousands of pages. He made repeated public ascertians that he had no weapons.

UNMOVIC had unfettered access to all areas in Iraq in the fall of 2002, and winter of 2003.

The one weapon system UNMOVIC discovered was a short range missle. Iraq was allowed to have missles of 150 kilometers in range. UNMOVIC destroyed missles with range of 159 kilometers. This was the only discovered violation of missles.

That Saddam Hussien was uncooperative, is a 'Big Lie' that the Republican Party spins, to shift blame, from them to anyone else.

There were no weapons in Iraq.

I watched the news every night when this crap was happening. I recall several broadcasts when Bush warned Hussein to be transparent and allow inspections to resume. He chose not to. It's no "Big Lie". Surely you were paying attention back then in real time.

Public assertions and documents are wonderful. Until its verified, its just that: paper and speech. Words are nice, proof is more meaningful.

I also recall videos of trucks leaving labs ahead of inspections. They had word of impending inspections. If I recall correctly, large masses of Anthrax in Syria were found near the Iraq boarder. Think thats circumstantial? I also recall anti-aircraft fire being shot at our planes in/around the no fly zone being enforced. *shrugs* I guess thats all part of the "Big Lie". Bush Sr. should have finished the job.

 

[Jonathan Randall]

btw, not my party. I'm not a Republican. I see evidence quite fine. Two people given identical facts will have different views of what to do about it. We still live in a country where this is permissible, unlike in Iraq before the invasion. Thats why we debate. Hopefully a civil converstation that does not include such clever interjections as " ****ing sociopaths.", "**** you *******s " and "You put your party before YOUR country. *******s!". If you want a civil conversation, please try to act civil.

How can I be civil about the unconscionable waste of human lives, both Iraqi and American?. How can I ignore the right wing dishonest call for perpetual war? No, I believe, very strongly that a large number of Americans put the appearance of patriotism before the actuality and chose the cheap route of supporting the Invasion over the harder, less politically acceptable, route of raising objections? Objections based upon the best interests of the U.S.?

 

[mrhnau]

How can I be civil about the unconscionable waste of human lives, both Iraqi and American?.

Allow me to repeat myself.

There are alot of people who are American. About 3000 people who were American were killed in 9/11. Have you forgotten? Where is the rage for this? Where is the rage for the train bombings in Spain and London? How about the embassy bombings across the world? Suicide bombers in Tel Aviv? Why is there no rage for police murdered? Victims of drunk driving? Training accidents in the military?

How can I ignore the right wing dishonest call for perpetual war?

There is no call for perpetual war.

No, I believe, very strongly that a large number of Americans put the appearance of patriotism before the actuality and chose the cheap route of supporting the Invasion over the harder, less politically acceptable, route of raising objections? Objections based upon the best interests of the U.S.?

Key word... you believe. We have the right to have our own beliefs. Others have beliefs that differ from your own. A majority of Americans elected George Bush as president. Perhaps you voted the other way. However, this is a democracy. The last election made the statement that public view is changing. That fine, thats how democracy works. In the next presidential election the process will work again.

Want to raise objections? Feel free! I maintain the right to do the same or support whatever route I feel is right. I don't like my opinions being called having "the appearance of patriotism before the actuality", but thats your view. It is also debatable if your views represent the best interests.

 

[michaeledward]

I watched the news every night when this crap was happening. I recall several broadcasts when Bush warned Hussein to be transparent and allow inspections to resume. He chose not to. It's no "Big Lie". Surely you were paying attention back then in real time.

Public assertions and documents are wonderful. Until its verified, its just that: paper and speech. Words are nice, proof is more meaningful.

I also recall videos of trucks leaving labs ahead of inspections. They had word of impending inspections. If I recall correctly, large masses of Anthrax in Syria were found near the Iraq boarder. Think thats circumstantial? I also recall anti-aircraft fire being shot at our planes in/around the no fly zone being enforced. *shrugs* I guess thats all part of the "Big Lie". Bush Sr. should have finished the job.

It's verified now, isn't it?

Trucks driving around means what, exactly?

UNMOVIC said they found no evidence of weapons prior to the invasion. UNMOVIC was directed out of the Iraq by President Bush, because they would be in harms way.
UNMOVIC has stated with more time, they would have been able to declare Iraq in compliance with the obligations of the UN Mandates.
Hussein's delegation to the United Nations presented a report that said they had no weapons.
Hussein and his spokespersons said they had no weapons.
Our military found no weapons.
The Iraq Survey Group found no weapons.

Add that all up, and it comes to the realization that no amount of evidence would have been sufficient.

We have the proof now, don't we? ... when it is all too late.

 

[Lisa]

ATTENTION ALL POSTERS IN THIS THREAD:

Please keep the conversation polite and respectful.

Lisa Deneka
MartialTalk Super Moderator

 

[michaeledward]

This article is interesting. It is linked here to demonstrate why Joe SixPack might have not been able to form an opinion outside what the media spin presented.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/03/AR2006120301108.html

Although given little public credit at the time, or since, many of the 126 House Democrats who spoke out and voted against the October 2002 resolution that gave President Bush authority to wage war against Iraq have turned out to be correct in their warnings. . .

Rep. David R. Obey (Wis.), who will chair the Appropriations Committee, was among the group that organized the Democrats. He spoke then about poor preparation for postwar Iraq . . .

Obey's district was 70 percent in favor of going into Iraq,

The day after the House vote, The Washington Post recorded that 126 House Democrats voted against the final resolution. None was quoted giving a reason for his or her vote except for Rep. Joe Baca (Calif.), who said a military briefing had disclosed that U.S. soldiers did not have adequate protection against biological weapons.

Mr. Pincus' reporting before, during, and after the invasion was always spot on. His skeptical stories were often buried on page A-18 (as opposed to Ms. Miller's front page publication).

Once again, he presents an excellent case full of newsworthy, and noteworthy, information.

 

[Tez3]

It is commonly believed in the UK that when Bush jnr became President he would takes steps to remove Saddam purely and for no other reason than because his father had failed to. So it was no surprise to many of us when Iraq was invaded. I don't think anything was going to stop Bush going to war and yes we blame Blair every bit as much. The 'facts' about WMD was going to be manipulated to read whatever the governments wanted them to read. Blair admitted that the reports were 'sexed' up and a government scientist employed by our MOD working on those reports died in strange circumstances.
Frankly I don't care about 'saving face', I don't care who appears to win anymore, I just want the Armed Forces, all of them home, from Afghanistan too. I want the deaths of children and innocent people to stop in Iraq too and I really don't care how much the politicians whinge and squirm, there must be a way for it to be done.Stuff egos and appearances, I can't believe that war is the only way.
The children I teach in our martial arts club are aged 4-13, most of them have one parent away in Iraq, mostly fathers. The children are 'playing up' a little now, the anxiety is showing, the mothers put brave faces on and carry on being 'normal' for their families. A couple of children have their mothers In Iraq. We've had deaths too and everyone wonders, who's next? The politicians who believed the war was a good idea at the time need to come down to earth and start saving lives not throwing them away.

 

[Cryozombie]

I have to disagree with your ascertion of responsibility. The responsibility of the Iraq debacle falls specifically upon the Republican Party.

Yeah, cuz 100% of Republicans supported it, and 0% of Democrats did.

Party ******** at its best.

JR, you are, of course right about the party line thing, but it clearly runs both ways, and both sides are full of *******s. Lets stop pointing fingers and FIX it.