If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Times)   Record 1,398 civilians killed in Baghdad in May, with the start of season not due until August   (latimes.com) divider line 404
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

2518 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Jun 2006 at 11:37 AM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



404 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-06-06 03:03:40 PM
Yeah, that shut you all up, didn't it!
 
2006-06-06 03:04:53 PM
FlashLV: Didn't they call them out after they were sick of the games they were pulling by not letting them inspect places they were supposed to go on certain days?

not according to the inspectors, they were saying they were given the access the were looking for. that has been proven to be true with the complete lack of WMDs. you revisionist attempt would work better if they actually found something.

AK-47?? They were shooting surface-to-air missles at them. Who said AK-47? They were getting radar locks on them.

how many planes were shot down? if you answered 0 you would be correct!
 
2006-06-06 03:05:04 PM
Elnolewis texas was Mexico and Lousiana was French, what's your point :D
 
2006-06-06 03:05:05 PM
2006-06-06 02:57:53 PM FlashLV

MithrandirBooga Do you have a bad memory and you actually forgot about the 19 UN resolutions for inspections that went through the UN. Why would they need 19 resolutions if Saddam was fully cooperating?


They acquiesced before the invasion. Oh shiat, big words. They "let the UN in to inspect their sites" before the invasion.

The UN resolutions were brute forced by the USA in order to gain military intelligence on Iraq under the guise of searching for non-existant WMD's. We wanted access to sites that couldn't have possibly been used for WMD generation.

Let me ask you this; what if the UN passed a resolution forced through by Russia, demanding that they have access to every inch of the Pentagon.

We'd tell them to go to hell, right?

Retard.


Again with the insults. Sir you are the biggest idiot I have ever seen on here.

I guess you've never looked in a mirror then.

You choose to ignore the UN resolutions, you choose to ignore the right we had to set a no-fly-zone because they INVADED Kuwait.

A) We ignore UN resolutions on a daily basis. So does Israel, Russia, Pakistan, India, China, France, and the UK. What made Iraq special?

B) No, we didn't have that right. We asked the UN to set up the NFZ, they said no, we weren't allowed to, and we did it anyway. We broke the law.


Do some farking research you retard.
 
2006-06-06 03:05:15 PM
Headso
No, I'm say by responding to the things that happen in Iraq is the only way a Terrorist trying to terrorise Americans is going to know how effective he is.

Do I NEED to know about every road side bomb, do I need to know about dead solders? How is this going to benefit the campaign? Is the media concerned enough to want the campaign to do well? So far, I have no reason think they do.

I'm an advocate of free press, but come on now...I don't need to watch Faces of death to know that dieing is bad. Like I don't need you to break down a war for me to know it's not pretty. It's only going to serve to upset the public, and empower our enemies because we are upset.

Could this be escalating the situation? Who knows?!? I think so, but the only way to tell would be to make an effort to stop FUELING the Islamofacist cause by not reporting every little thing they do.

I think that this task would be MUCH easier then removing our troops at this time, but that would demand a moral responsibility on behalf of the media so screw that.

If it bleeds it leads, cash money..holla!
 
2006-06-06 03:06:05 PM
geography book, boys!

Kuwait used to be Iraq. Then came the British...and well the rest is history
 
2006-06-06 03:06:36 PM
The armchair warmongers are out in force. Who sounded the junior noob fascist horn?
 
2006-06-06 03:08:17 PM
2006-06-06 03:03:34 PM FlashLV

MithrandirBooga I care less about them dying truthfully. VERY FEW were on purpose, most were from suicide and roadside bombings.

I'de rather have 100,000 of them die before a US soldier, on the otherhand you would rather have 100,000 soldiers die before one Iraqi militant.


Uh, no, I'd rather that no one died, but thanks for assuming that I love seeing US soldiers die.

But nice going, you've just revealed yourself to be the morally reprehensible asshole that you really are. You would rather have 100,000 Iraqi civillians die before a single US soldier.

Wow. Have fun burning in hell. This coversation is over.
 
2006-06-06 03:08:48 PM
I believe the correct term is chickenhawk, and it is a symptom of penis envy.
 
2006-06-06 03:08:56 PM
Bush finally comes clean.

"I didn't have a plan for invading Iraq. I didn't think I'd need one. And look how it's turned out. But I really do promise to do a simply fabulous job the next time when I invade Iran, North Korea and the Molucan Islands."
 
2006-06-06 03:09:26 PM
The_Devil's_Due
Hell if I know, but let me ask you this.

If I'm playing by the rules and my opposition is not...who has a better opportunity at success?

Just sayen....
 
2006-06-06 03:11:32 PM
my point is...

I am comandeering your home tonight because I have more guns than you. If in fifty years you find some guns, you might try to take it back, but I have a friend with even bigger guns and he will shoot you down.

I love a world based on who can shoot the most powerful weapons and who controls them. Very human. Senseless. But who cares? Only the dying.
 
2006-06-06 03:12:44 PM
GodLovesBeer: I'm an advocate of free press, but come on now...I don't need to watch Faces of death to know that dieing is bad. Like I don't need you to break down a war for me to know it's not pretty. It's only going to serve to upset the public, and empower our enemies because we are upset.

how much restraint do you want? we only see pg-13 pictures coming out of Iraq with the gory parts blurred out, maybe if the media reported a war for what it is the keyboard commando chickenhawks wouldn't be so quick to call for it.

If it bleeds it leads, cash money..holla!

welcome to planet earth, keep your hands and feet inside the ride at all times.
 
2006-06-06 03:13:38 PM
Headso So shooting towards a cop should be legal then? As long as you don't shoot them you are within the law then.

According the UN security counsil they didn't comply,

MithrandirBooga Um, no they didn't let them inspect. Why did they need 19 UN resolutions if they were in FULL compliance then? Was it all a lie?

Isn't the UN security counsil comprised of 5 nations? Not just the US??? If so doesn't that make you a liar? What proof do you have they used it to gather intelligence? NONE, STFU.

Russia would have no right to ask, Iraq was under UN sanctions and we had the right under the agreement the AGREED to, to end Desert Storm idiot. You really need an education, because you are getting everything wrong.

A) Iraq invaded Kuwait and to stop us from going to Baghdad they agreed to it, are you that stupid to not know that? Or are you just ignoring facts to get your lie across?

B) We had the right and we did it. How did we break the law? We were not held to any law, so how can we break it?

I have done my research, I've done it in a few places, not just MichaelMoore.COM fool.
 
2006-06-06 03:15:47 PM
Monkeys could settle this argument. Give them AK-47's and a couple thousand rounds.

Bush is Clinton is Reagan is Carter is Johnson is Kennedy is Eisenhower is Truman....

All politicians are self serving asshats. Only morons pledge loyalty to any politician. What suckers!
 
2006-06-06 03:15:57 PM
MithrandirBooga Thank god, I don't need to hear one more lie from you.

I guess you thought dropping the bombs on Japan were wrong to then, even though they saved millions of lives.
 
2006-06-06 03:17:00 PM
Elnolewis DING!
 
2006-06-06 03:18:07 PM
I resemble that remark!
 
2006-06-06 03:20:25 PM
FlashLV

I don't care why we went to Iraq, and I won't claim I foresaw all these consequences. But you're just being difficult. How can you claim someone would rather see 100,000 soldiers dead than a single Iraqi? Furthermore, while I admire your honesty, the fact that you value American life more than Iraqis' lives is telling. Don't you think it makes sense that MOST OF THOSE PEOPLE WOULDN'T HAVE DIED IF WE HADN'T INVADED? I mean, seriously... abhorring the deaths of Iraqis is not the same as wishing death on U.S. soldiers. Taking the moral high ground you seem to detest really would have prevented a great number of deaths, both American and Iraqi.

But it really isn't about who was right and who screwed up, I think we should indeed focus on where we go from here.
 
2006-06-06 03:20:55 PM
FlashLV: So shooting towards a cop should be legal then? As long as you don't shoot them you are within the law then.

International diplomatic relations are not quite as simple as a civilian shooting at a cop.

According the UN security counsil they didn't comply,

Why do you keep bringing up the UN, we did not let the UN work it out we invaded unilaterally, oops I mean with the coalition of the willing!
 
2006-06-06 03:23:11 PM
Uhhhmmmm....I think they mean 1398 civilians liberated.

/duh
 
2006-06-06 03:23:20 PM
Its a sin americans are dying in this war. Its just not worth it.

How many people in this discussion would sacrifice a loved one for the way in Iraq?

Yeah, thats what I thought you'd say.
 
2006-06-06 03:23:50 PM
FlashLV

You have a lot of farking nerve telling other people to do research.
 
2006-06-06 03:24:20 PM
2006-06-06 03:15:57 PM FlashLV

MithrandirBooga Thank god, I don't need to hear one more lie from you.

I guess you thought dropping the bombs on Japan were wrong to then, even though they saved millions of lives.

I don't know about millions, but you make a good point... is a moderate amount of death and gore worth preventing a great deal more? Well, maybe, but just as we had no indication Japan was really even prepared to keep fighting, we had no conclusive evidence that Saddam had WMDs... I wanted to take Colin Powell at his word, but ethos wasn't enough to convince me... the evidence was circumstantial at best--"well, Saddam COULD be making WMD-shaped objects."
 
2006-06-06 03:26:47 PM
2006-06-06 03:23:20 PM Elnolewis

Its a sin americans are dying in this war. Its just not worth it.

How many people in this discussion would sacrifice a loved one for the way in Iraq?

Yeah, thats what I thought you'd say.


I don't really know what you were getting at, but that's a pretty insensitive comment. Many of us already have sacrificed loved ones in Iraq--it's not your job to put value on human life just as it's not George Bush's job or Saddam Hussein's job. If all human life isn't worth the same then it's all worthless.
 
2006-06-06 03:27:57 PM
my point is---ONE LIFE IS TOO DAMN MANY!
 
2006-06-06 03:29:13 PM
Headso Do you think Iraq needed more chances? If you do then that's fine and I understand why you didn't want them to go in, I on the otherhand thought 19 chances was to many.

Also you forget that Germany, France and I think Russia had conflicts of interest that kept them from agreeing to go in.

coretnor I would rather have zero US casualties.
 
2006-06-06 03:32:12 PM
Don't you think it makes sense that MOST OF THOSE PEOPLE WOULDN'T HAVE DIED IF WE HADN'T INVADED?

I'll give my own answer to that one. Yes, they probably would have died due to infighting.

Seeing as that ~500,000 children under the age of five died under the UN sanctions in the 90s, which also caused even more infighting between the already testy groups of differing Islamic factions (with Saddam's group benefitting more than their adversaries), this civil war was well into its formative stages (going back decades) well before this current administration took office.

Personally, I think we went to war for all the wrong reasons. Although, I still think we (spearheaded by the UN) would have eventually had to go in there anyway once the fighting escalated like it has at current.
 
2006-06-06 03:32:40 PM
wait, wait, wait,...
can't we all just get along???
 
2006-06-06 03:32:59 PM
FlashLV: How bout this:

My name is MithrandirBooga
I'm a sore loser
I lost in '04 therefore I still cry


FlashLV does not
Know what a damn haiku is
Die in a fire
 
2006-06-06 03:33:34 PM
Lets all get together and sing
Kumbaya (d12)
 
2006-06-06 03:33:57 PM
The_Devil's_Due
Hell if I know, but let me ask you this.

If I'm playing by the rules and my opposition is not...who has a better opportunity at success?

Just sayen....


If "success" is killing as many people as possible, I'd probably agree with you. But escalating violence in Iraq does not mean success for America. It is failure.

So you have no idea. If you're looking for blame for the debacle, put it where it belongs... the leadership of this country. They are the decision makers, they are the commanders of our military. They are the ONLY ones who were EVER in a position to succeed or fail in Iraq. They are accountable. Period.
 
2006-06-06 03:34:38 PM
Mr. Clarence Butterworth Sometimes I let my emotions get the best of me.

coretnor Ahh, but after we dropped the first bomb and even after the second bomb they wanted to keep fighting. I can't remember who it was but it was a high religious person in Japan that actually forced the fighting to stop.
I wish I remembered his name sorry about that.

I think we made a BIG mistake in Iraq and I'm torn on pulling troops, do we look worse for leaving? Or staying, which just makes more people dead. Am I right by saying that any agression now is started by insurgents and not us?
 
2006-06-06 03:34:49 PM
Headso
It's not the gore, it's the motivation I question.

If you know the things your reporting are going to make your enemy happy, why assist them.

It does seem a bit ridiculus doesn't it? The free press assisting people that if In power, would have them shut down COMPLETELY!

Even now the Islamofacists have some type of foothold in free press, and I don't get it. They are afraid to put a cartoon of Mohamed on display but will blast Bush/America/Blair/the war in Iraq/ at every turn.

This concerns me.
 
2006-06-06 03:35:04 PM
RanDomino

Since when is 'Islam' a race? Zealotry of all kinds poisons the mind... and Islam is the current pollutant of choice...
 
2006-06-06 03:35:45 PM
FlashLV: Do you think Iraq needed more chances? If you do then that's fine and I understand why you didn't want them to go in, I on the otherhand thought 19 chances was to many.

I think Iraq was a non-threat and it didn't really matter what we did with them, I understand why it was in our interest to remove Saddam and install a puppet government that could facilitate the world with delicious crude but that could have been done without completely turning the countries power structure on its head.
 
2006-06-06 03:35:57 PM
The media are overwhelmingly conservative.


.
 
2006-06-06 03:36:23 PM
FredSmythe Does not knowing a haiku make me a bad person.....Don't answer that.
 
2006-06-06 03:37:34 PM
why don't you all run for office so I can not vote for any of your retarded asses
 
2006-06-06 03:38:05 PM
FlashLV:

How dare you glorify liberating people who have no idea what freedom is? The only thing they understand is "candy". Freedom is not worth the delectable confectionaries the west taints them with as they play kickball with severed marine heads. BIG CANDY is the war machine. Why do we go to WAR? Even my dog knows it's about money, but like me, my dog also likes CANDY. They wanted our "American" ports and now they want our taste buds. Bush cronies are in it with the midgets from the WANKA. Chris Rock wanted us to believe there wasn't a connection between the Bushwazie and the Wankaburton. But now, break your jaw on this my little red white and blue friend, democrats are ghey. :)
 
2006-06-06 03:40:17 PM
StubePT: No one has brought up the fact that since 9/11 there hasn't been another terrorist attack on US soil. Why? They're too busy fighting their jihad on their own turf to bother blowing up our buildings and killing our citizens.
Oh dear lord, you can't really be...

If we aren't over there, then they're going to come over here.
uh oh...
In case you haven't heard, those Muslim extreamists want us dead... all of us.
even grandma!
Iraq and Afghanistan are the first pieces in a much bigger puzzle. Once the west has influence in Iraq, the squeeze will be on Iran (from the US on the right and Isreal on the left). Iran will panic, start WWIII, the rest of the world will destroy Iran and, we'll all carve up the Middle East like we did Germany after WWII.

The fark? We're already on Iran's right (and left)... israel is several countries away, and... ugh....
 
2006-06-06 03:40:24 PM
GodLovesBeer: If you know the things your reporting are going to make your enemy happy, why assist them.

Muslim extremists killing Iraqis day after day is not helping their cause.
 
2006-06-06 03:41:22 PM
I believe the correct term is chickenhawk, and it is a symptom of penis envy.

img.photobucket.com

I say, I say, see here boy, you can't just go around invading countries like that. You done been lied to, boy, and I say, I say it's time to recognise, I said recognise that fact.
 
2006-06-06 03:42:32 PM
2006-06-06 03:34:38 PM FlashLV

coretnor Ahh, but after we dropped the first bomb and even after the second bomb they wanted to keep fighting.

Maybe you're right, but again, you're drawing a conclusion based on something that could easily be interpreted the other way... let me put it this way... if we were in a war and someone dropped a nuclear bomb on Omaha, Nebraska, do you think we'd take it lightly? Even if we were on the verge of surrendering, I think some would still want to fight to the end.

I've read conflicting reports about Japanese fitness to continue their war effort before the bombings, and since there's so much propaganda, it'd be hard to say conclusively. So, maybe we didn't need to bomb, but I guess it worked. And if it's any consolation, Japan is one of the few countries in the world that will always love the U.S.
 
2006-06-06 03:45:04 PM
2006-06-06 03:32:12 PM Civil_War2_Time [TotalFark]

Don't you think it makes sense that MOST OF THOSE PEOPLE WOULDN'T HAVE DIED IF WE HADN'T INVADED?

I'll give my own answer to that one. Yes, they probably would have died due to infighting.


So let me get it straight... hundreds of thousands starved to death, and you use that to support your claim?

Don't be confused... just because a similar number of people could have been killed doesn't mean we didn't cause all the subsequent deaths, and that certainly isn't any justification for doing so.
 
2006-06-06 03:49:20 PM
Headso

Now I question how much you know about what's going on in Iraq.

Do you know what sects are involved here, and what the Muslim Extremist Jihadis want?

ONE GREAT ISLAMOFACIST NATION!

They will beat you, and kill your sect into submission to this great cause.

If your country is currently in a state of Liberation, that is where the Extremist Muslim should take the fight, and they have.
 
2006-06-06 03:52:24 PM
coretnor

So let me get it straight... hundreds of thousands starved to death, and you use that to support your claim?


My claim is that this current civil war has been going on for decades, and the UN sanctions in the 90s...AND this current war, did nothing but speed up that process of death. Nothing more, nothing less.

IMO, scandal-ridden sanctions are just as effective at killing innocent people as an illegitimate war. The numbers seem to back that claim up, too.
 
2006-06-06 03:54:04 PM
GodLovesBeer: They will beat you, and kill your sect into submission to this great cause.

If your country is currently in a state of Liberation, that is where the Extremist Muslim should take the fight, and they have.


I understand the extremist muslim creed, but moderate muslims around the world do not appreciate those extremists perverting islam like that and every time an extremist muslim kills a group of Iraqi civilians and it is reported it turns the moderates against them.

For instance, many bars in Boston used to have little jars where you could put change and that change went to the IRA, after 9/11 moderates(read drunk Irish Americans) stopped donating money to those jars and they all but disappeared from the bars.
 
2006-06-06 04:00:38 PM
There have been sectarian tensions in Iraq for decades, if not centuries, but the bitterness leading up to the violence was increased during Saddam Hussein's rule. The government of Saddam was run almost entirely by Sunni Arabs like himself, and he tended to favor this group over all others. Rebellions by Shiites and Kurds in 1991 just after the Persian Gulf War was met with a genocidal slaughter, more than 100,000 people from both groups were massacred.

Saddam also kept a tight rein on power by suppressing Iraqi civil society and civil groups, both democratic and Islamic.


It isn't a new civil conflict. If Wiki is accurate, then I would have to agree with this excerpt.
 
2006-06-06 04:02:26 PM
Screw blogging guys! Lets go chanting! Kan I git a walla walla cockbuhar
 
Displayed 50 of 404 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report