"THE TERRORISTS kill people in Iraq by bombings and the solutions is too blame our president and troops."

How often did that happen before we showed up?

GodLovesBeer
Or options in this conflict are very slim. We need to stop catering to people, and get this job done, or..again..we can do EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANT US TO DO...which is to die....

What the fark is your problem? You're telling us we have two options -- kill them or be killed. This is the exact farking issue that led us to being involved in this goddamn quagmire in the first place, and the point that you are missing is this:

THEY ARE ONLY KILLING US BECAUSE WE INVADED THEIR FARKING COUNTRY

Jesus christ. Get it through your goddamn heads already, neocons. Saddam was /not/ a threat to us. Now, our actions have caused a vast number of people to hate us for pulling our nation-building, oil-grabbing bullshiat, and we're in a far WORSE position than we were in the first damn place.

Osama's still quite alive though, and the Taliban's got some upward mobility lately. Good to see they're focussing on the people that, you know, actually attacked us.

/does not understand how thickheaded some people can be
//you're the reason our country sucks balls right now
///I hope your kids hate you for what you've done

erikmontana

I hate the moral relativism consistently espoused here. THE TERRORISTS kill people in Iraq by bombings and the solutions is too blame our president and troops.

Boy, that's ignint. We aren't blaming Bush for terrorism. We're blaming him for being a dissembling incompetent.

You should never have taken the low road. You lost your moral authority, and now you're trying to blame anyone you can just to take attention away from the disaster YOU created.

.

21-7-b: how many times do you need this explained to you?

I thought I still had you on ignore...

Dansker

And before Iraq, before 9/11, radical Islamofacists were telling all infidels/Americans/anyone not like them......TO DIE!

This will stop right?

erikmontana

I hate the moral relativism consistently espoused here. THE TERRORISTS kill people in Iraq by bombings

I'm pretty sure that US troops have killed people in Iraq, too.

[A]nd the solutions is too blame our president and troops.

I don't blame the troops. (Except for the very few who do horrible things or obey horrible orders.) I blame their commanders, including the president and Rumsfeld. The troops didn't order themselves into Iraq.

When are you people going to realize Islamic Jihad was declared long ago and that Iraq is the battle front today. We may have picked the battle front but the Insurgents continue the war on [their] own people.

The way I see it, there are two groups you're talking about here. One is the insurgents, who are fighting an occupying force. The other is the Islamic Jihadists, who are

My favorite posts are the ones that praised Saddam and the Islamic terrorists and blasted our President and fundamentalist christains.

Saddam and the Islamists are seperate entities. bin Laden et al had no truck with a secular leader like Saddam. The idea that Saddam had any Islamist support is a fabrication cooked up by american propagandists in the media.

But good call with the Chri-stains thing. I'll have to use that.

When we do get of of Iraq, cause I guarantee you we are, do you expect a huge sigh of relief on behalf of the Iraq people, or a power struggle the likes we have not seen in a very long time resulting in the death of innocent people?

Probably both, but I'm not suggesting we should leave Iraq early. Again, what is the "job" you think needs to be done?

erikmontana:
I hate the moral relativism consistently espoused here. THE TERRORISTS kill people in Iraq by bombings and the solutions is too blame our president and troops.

The article is about nearly 1400 civilians killed in Baghdad during May, mostly by stabbings, shootings and other violence.
The number does not include civilians killed by bombings.

The US is leading an occupation in Iraq. When you occupy a country, you automatically become responsible for the safety and security of the population.
Them's the rules.

erikmontana:I hate the moral relativism consistently espoused here. THE TERRORISTS kill people in Iraq by bombings and the solutions is too blame our president and troops. When are you people going to realize Islamic Jihad was declared long ago and that Iraq is the battle front today. We may have picked the battle front but the Insurgents continue the war on thier own people.

So our motto in the middle east now is "the floggings will continue until morale improves"?

You're right -- they've been doing nasty things over there for a long time. So let's just leave them the hell alone and let them kill each other. We become targets by becoming involved. You don't see foreign islamic terrorist attacks in, say, Mexico, do you? More intervention will not lead to less terrorism.

Sunny Ray

Freedom and peace? You can't give people freedom and peace with a gun. You cannot wage war to increase peace.

vegasj

I thought I still had you on ignore...

gee vegas. that would sting, if only you weren't so obviously a dimwit or i hadn't seen an image of your fat booty standing half-naked in front of a mirror as you took a photo of your ugly-ass self

just wanting to chime in real quick, I just had an enpassioned exchanged with a fellow, aged 22, about how the war in Iwreck was a "success". I was going to send him this article, but then thought otherwise as I remembered, during our previous conversation he didnt know what the "Gulf of Tonkin Incident" was and beleived Bush was a Texan. Waste of breth that one.

PS-This same person boohoo'd about the "liberal" media and its distortion of facts and outright bias, then went on to back up his claims with three articles from freerepublic.com and the christian news service...

Dansker: The US is leading an occupation in Iraq. When you occupy a country, you automatically become responsible for the safety and security of the population.

all war cheerleading chickenhawks please write the above on the blackboard a thousand times...

vylasaven
You say Saddam was not a threat, and yet how many innocent people died because of him? Pre and post 9/11?


This isn't my argument, if Saddam was a threat or not.

What I'm trying to tell you you is that this problem will not simply go away once we are out of Iraq, it will get worse as it's continuing to escalate even now.

If you can't see that, I'd examine your hatred for bush and his buddies with extreme criticism, and ask myself if it's blinding me from what possible outcomes that my come about from immediately leaving Iraq...because I stress it is the future we have to worry about, obviously, the past is behind us.

GodLovesBeer:
And before Iraq, before 9/11, radical Islamofacists were telling all infidels/Americans/anyone not like them......TO DIE!

Before Iraq, Iraqis were saying nothing like that. Now some of them are.

This will stop right?

It won't be stopped by occupying a previously secular country and killing their civilians.

just sad

"It happens sometimes. People just explode. Natural causes."

Heh, nice Repo Man ref.


Anyways, the rampant violence in Iraq isn't being done by "terrorists." What we have uncorked is a sectarian civil war. This is exactly what many people (including myself) predicted prior to the conflict and they were ignored. That it is now somehow shocking just shows how completely in the tank of denial the planners of this war were.

/flame away but your media is still liberal
//very very liberal

The media that sold themselves to the administration to push the war forward?

No it isn't. NEXT

The Icelander:You cannot wage war to increase peace.

Bad for Bush, run it.
Good for Bush, bury it.

/flame away but your media is still liberal
//very very liberal

Or, as has been suggested, reality is liberal. Not much good news for Bush these days. Did he catch another big fish that the liberal media didn't pick up on?

If you people care to read the newletter update on the real shiat from Iraq, read it on Centcom's web site. Yeah, some of it is propaganda but alot of the infrastructure is built, schools are being built, business is opening up [stuff the press doesn't report]... but alot of stuff is blowing up quicker that it can be built. The civilians do have it ruff these days, the ground pounders & those of us covering overhead are having second thoughts & are beginning to loose some focus of the mission, most Iraqi people do want the US to fix things & then leave with their thanks & appriciation, they are very friendly & will share their last bit of tea & food with you but don't think they really trust us yet [orly]. The children are really suffering, you can see the fear in their eyes, they don't know who to trust to keep them safe & alive. Pray for the troops & the Iraqi people, to God or Allah. We still have a long way to go & unfortunately alot more blood to shed. Is it worth it? So far imho I think so, hopefully some day I can tell my children & grandchildren that I had a hand in bringing peace & freedom to the people of the middle east. Sadly, the costs have been high & we have created a whole new crop of enemies. Would love to have us & the insurgency put in a football stadium without any weapons & let us discuss the best way to resolve this, either peacefully or in discussion of the ideal life for these people of just hammer each other to death.

Buzzy

The Icelander

While, I know that in utopia your idealism may prevail. Unfortunately, this world that we live in is not Star Trek: The Next Generation and reality has to be faced. These people do not know what it good for them and if it takes some tough love to show them way, then tough love it is.

GodLovesBeer

You're not getting the goddamn point. Saddam wasn't executing American civilians, and you know what? If his people were too damned cowed or fundamentalist or whathaveyou to rebel? It's their own farking fault for not being able to take care of their own country.

I'm not advocating getting out right now, though it might be a good idea to cut our losses and not turn this into another Vietnam.

I am, however, saying that what /you do not get/ is that we had no reason to be there in the /first/ farking place, and blaming Muslims for what we brought on ourselves is not the way to go about playing the blame game.

After all, if some well-armed guy walked into your house (no matter how oppressive your house was) and started shooting your oppressive family -- but also your children -- would you thank him, or attack him?

Lets get that moran baghdad bob and his dufuss leader and call it an even 1,400

GodLovesBeer: "And before Iraq, before 9/11, radical Islamofacists were telling all infidels/Americans/anyone not like them......TO DIE!

This will stop right?"

Of course not, as long as we are supporting their active recruiting efforts by killing women and children. Every "collateral damage" event that you shrug off only serves to bolster Osama's case against the US in the minds of moderate Muslims. And yes, Virginia, there is such a thing as a moderate Muslim.

The only purpose of this number is to make people say "omg this is why we shouldn't be in iraq!!1!'" Too bad most of these dead civies are from suicide bombers, roadside bombs, etc.

/flame away but your media is still liberal
//very very liberal

HotWingConspiracy: /flame away but your media is still liberal
//very very liberal

The media that sold themselves to the administration to push the war forward?

No it isn't. NEXT

The companies that were supposed to make a shiatload off of iraq after we invaded and were welcomed with flowers are now souring to the deal because nothing can be accomplished, no money can be made in the current chaos, profit margins have been reduced and I believe that is driving the media to report the situation as it is.

Maybe that theory is a little tinfoilish, I dunno...

21-7-b: gee vegas. that would sting, if only you weren't so obviously a dimwit or i hadn't seen an image of your fat booty standing half-naked in front of a mirror as you took a photo of your ugly-ass self

well, now I remember why I did. pussy.

The only purpose of this number is to make people say "omg this is why we shouldn't be in iraq!!1!'" Too bad most of these dead civies are from suicide bombers, roadside bombs, etc.

Dead is dead and we're in charge. We shouldn't hide from the truth.

"yet I'm paying 3.17 a gallon for mid grade."

Who in the fark buys mid grade? You sir, are a dolt.

GodLovesBeer
The problem with saying that we've got to stay and fix the problem is we don't know how to fix the problem. Maybe it would have been possible to secure Iraq if we had went in with a larger, multi-national force, but the Bush administration pissed away that possibility long ago. Even if we did have a solution, the Bush administration has proven so imcompetent that we cannot trust it to actually execute the solution properly. We do know, though, that our troops are getting killed, they are universially hated in Iraq and fueling sympathy for the terroritsts, and they are buckling under pressure and apparently doing things like Haditha. So, we are creating problems and can offer no solutions. This is the textbook definition of an obstacle. The best way to help Iraq go forward is to remove that obstacle. By redeploying, we won't offer any new solutions, but we will reduce the number of problems the Iraqi government faces.

TedDansonGotMyGirlfriendPregnant: The only purpose of this number is to make people say "omg this is why we shouldn't be in iraq!!1!'" Too bad most of these dead civies are from suicide bombers, roadside bombs, etc.

cut and paste rocks!

Dansker: The US is leading an occupation in Iraq. When you occupy a country, you automatically become responsible for the safety and security of the population.

yeah, vegas, i'm a pussy. that's me alrighty. you've sure got my number

I'm nor sure what coverage American Farkers get, and let's not think about Fox's coverage, but on the BBC and Channel4 pretty much every day you heard about a bombing that kills 30 odd civilians, mass hijackings and executions and of course our favorite - madman in a Toyota pickup with a couple of 1000lb'ers wired to a detonator - killing ten or so civilians.

This is every day near enough.

The BBC is saying it's over 6000 for the year:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5053134.stm

Breakdown:

January: 1068
February: 1110
March: 1294
April: 1155
May: 1398

Extend this over the country and you could be looking at double or even triple these monthly figures.

WTF!!

Sunny Ray

These people do not know what it good for them and if it takes some tough love to show them way, then tough love it is.

I'm sure that bin Laden thought he was giving us "tough love" on 9/11. I mean, what's 3,000 souls if it's going to help save a whole nation from descending into hell, right?

And Fred Phelps, he's just giving the US "tough love" by protesting funerals. He's absolutely convinced that the troubles we're having are because we're not following God's word, and he's trying to tell us what we should do.

I say, let's continue treating other nations of brown people like children. It just shows how much we care, and isn't condescending in the least.

/Your racism is showing.

Props to the farker whose name I can't remember who originally wrote this a year or two ago:

"Fighting for hearts & minds in a foreign country is like farking for abstinence in a church, with the whole congregation watching."

Sunny Ray


In time, Iraq will look back on these times with embarassment and shame and President Bush will be regarded as a national
hero.


And then we'll all ride on unicorns with leprechauns to find the pot of gold gold at the end of the rainbow.

erikmontana

I hate the moral relativism consistently espoused here. THE TERRORISTS kill people in Iraq by bombings and the solutions is too blame our president and troops. When are you people going to realize Islamic Jihad was declared long ago and that Iraq is the battle front today. We may have picked the battle front but the Insurgents continue the war on thier own people.

Bbbbbut Bush in his Strategy for Victory in Iraq defined the enemy as Rejectionists (mostly Sunnis) Saddamists and terrorists (Al Qaida) so whom it that is doing all the killing? As far as bombings the article clearly states that the figures do not include bombings.

I DO blame the president for starting a selective war based on faulty evidence that has cost not only this country immeasurably in treasure and casualties, but as this article documents, has cost the Iraqi people in an ever increasing body count.

jimbonics:Who in the fark buys mid grade? You sir, are a dolt.

The manuals of some cars state it as a requirement. One can debate whether or not it's really necessary, but my car (Toyota Solara) does at least claim to require it.

TedDansonGotMyGirlfriendPregnant:
Too bad most of these dead civies are from suicide bombers, roadside bombs, etc.

Except the number specifically doesn't include civilians killed in bombings.

"New Iraqi government documents show that, excluding the nearly daily bombings, more Baghdad residents died in shootings, stabbings and other violence in May than in any other month since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

The numbers, and accounts from residents, depict neighborhoods descending further into violence and fear.

Last month, 1,398 bodies were brought to the central morgue, according to Ministry of Health statistics, 307 more than in April. The count doesn't include soldiers or civilian victims of explosions, on whom autopsies are not usually conducted."

I'll let you read the rest of TFA yourself.
You know how to read, don't you?

dogdaze: Well, you can believe whatever you want to believe, fella. As far as I'm concerned, invading Iraq was a stupendous blunder with zero chance of a good outcome. As far as I can tell, "Iraq" as such doesn't even exist any longer, every dollar we spend is good money thrown after bad, and presidents who make stupendous blunders like this are a net liability to America no matter what else they do. This thing had FUBAR and clusterf*ck written all over it, and anyone still clinging to the extremely remote chance of some kind of miracle happening are utterly delusional.

jshine

And how many times did we get within minutes of nuclear annihilation because we were standing with guns pointing at eachother's heads?

Militarism is idiotic. You can't kill for freedom. You can't bomb for peace.

vylasaven
Two points real quick.

First I don't give a SHAT how we got there flamebait, we are there.

Secondly, it's good too know you don't care if Iraqi civilians die. This article is no skin off your nose then, you can pipe down now.

1398? Thats a slow weekend for Saddam

More people die per day in Iraq now than than when Saddam Hussein ran the place.

No pretty white girls, though, so why is this even news?

/sargasm
//yes, i meant to spell it like that
///slashies!

The Icelander:I say, let's continue treating other nations of brown people like children. It just shows how much we care, and isn't condescending in the least.
/Your racism is showing.

What racism? We treat Europe like children too -- albeit children who we are more careful about offending due to economic & political relationships. To my mind, the problem in the US today is more a matter of nationalism than racism.

vylasaven: THEY ARE ONLY KILLING US BECAUSE WE INVADED THEIR FARKING COUNTRY

Us? They seem to be killing each other more than they kill us.

Osama's still quite alive though...

And I'm sure he's very please with himself. How many muslims have been killed since 9/11?