Iraq na Phobia

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by Duke41

I am pro killing the bastards con lying about Iraq and there involvment with Bin Laden. I am also sick of Bush acting like a King and Rumsfield the top courtier. Real kids got killed and maimed over there. We have inflamed not only the Middle East but a lot of the 3rd world against us. And I am certian that we come off looking like 3rd grade bullies over the whole thing. Did I metioned American kids getting killed!!! Thats a shame, a shame. 3000 empty spots at the Christmass dinner table this season FOR WHAT!!!

Killing Terrorists is bad but killing conservatives is good?
Yeah okay.

[Skitterpop]

Originally Posted by Skip N

Pick up a book on the Holocaust if you wanna see war crimes and crimes against humanity. Read up on the Bataan death march and what the Japs did to Americans. You'll see real war crimes there, not you're silly make believe war crimes.

I don't think GWB is out looking to round up and slaughter random civilians. Please show me the proof of where GWB ORDERED the murder and exececution of innocent people? And innocents killed during battle is not a war crime you know. I want you to show me proof of when GWB ordered the murder and slaughter of random innocents just becasue he could.

The 7 people who voted to charge Bush with war crimes in this stupid poll are freakin idiots. You guys are clueless! Read some history and you'll see what war crimes truly are.

How about Shock and Awe Skip..... get your head out of Patriotic Drivel and look around... you never suprise me with your deeply slanted perspective.... wake up kid.

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by spence

Your perception of what I believe seems to be quite different from what I really believe. It's as if you don't read my words, but just respond with the same tired black and white mantra.

-spence

Maybe these statements were misinterpreted.

On the topic of Bin Ladens victory you claim we have handed him:

Originally Posted by stripersnipr
Bin Laden punches America in the face and then predicts America will punch back. That is validation?

It's a bit more nuanced than that...but you did just articulate his point!

As far as the use of Miltary Force against Terrorism
your statement was:

There's no military only end game...
Sorry I missed the only.

But having said that; We can assume you support (in conjunction with Military action) the Governments non-military efforts such as the wiretapping of Terrorists and the programs to investigate, trace and freeze Terrorists financial resources?

Any objection to the NY Times exposure of those efforts just prior to an FBI raid on a Terrorist funding Islamic charity?

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by Skitterpop

How about Shock and Awe Skip..... get your head out of Patriotic Drivel and look around... you never suprise me with your deeply slanted perspective.... wake up kid.

All this from a guy who refers to Democracy as Demonocracy.

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by Skitterpop

How about Shock and Awe Skip..... get your head out of Patriotic Drivel and look around... you never suprise me with your deeply slanted perspective.... wake up kid.

Wow you must be privy to some real secret stuff because this is the first time I've heard of civilians being targeted by America in Iraq including the shock and awe campaign which targeted strictly Government and Military Targets. That probably bums you out huh?

[spence]

Originally Posted by stripersnipr

But having said that; We can assume you support (in conjunction with Military action) the Governments non-military efforts such as the wiretapping of Terrorists and the programs to investigate, trace and freeze Terrorists financial resources?

Certainly if done within the law, and I think there a high probability that Bush has abused his authority in this regard in some cases. Simply because he has good intentions isn't good enough for me. History has proven that proper oversight is prudent to protect the liberties of US citizens.

Any objection to the NY Times exposure of those efforts just prior to an FBI raid on a Terrorist funding Islamic charity?

I felt that specific instance was a bad editorial decision.

But that's not to say that the media should abuse censorship of its own content. There's a line between breaking a scoop to sell papers and providing information the public ought to know.

For all the allegations I hear about a "liberal media" subverting the US government there's little discussion about the political idiology of the leakers themselves!

-spence

["uffah!!"]

All I can say to you spence, Get a rifle and walk the post!

[spence]

Originally Posted by Skip N

I don't think GWB is out looking to round up and slaughter random civilians. Please show me the proof of where GWB ORDERED the murder and exececution of innocent people? And innocents killed during battle is not a war crime you know. I want you to show me proof of when GWB ordered the murder and slaughter of random innocents just becasue he could.

Skipper, you don't have to murder or execute innovent people to have commited a war crime. There is a lot of International Law regarding war that the US is party to...and we've clearly violated a lot of it, which I'd guess most wars do. While I wouldn't burden Bush with all of this, he certainly bears a lot of responsibility seeing as he is the Commander in Chief.

Additionally I'd be willing to wager some good money that Bush has indeed approved exemptions to the Geneva Conventions which are probably illegal.

At the very least he's clearly misled the American people or outright lied about our behavior in this regard.

-spence

[spence]

Originally Posted by "uffah!!"

All I can say to you spence, Get a rifle and walk the post!

What color is a rifle?

I need to select some coordinating shoes, and perhaps a contrasting linen pocket square

-spence

["uffah!!"]

Originally Posted by spence

What color is a rifle?

I need to select some coordinating shoes, and perhaps a contrasting linen pocket square

-spence

YELLOW to match your body color!!!!!

[spence]

Originally Posted by "uffah!!"

YELLOW to match your body color!!!!!

-spence

[Skitterpop]

Originally Posted by stripersnipr

All this from a guy who refers to Democracy as Demonocracy.

Only when we try to force feed it into a country that has no interest in it.

[Skitterpop]

Originally Posted by stripersnipr

Wow you must be privy to some real secret stuff because this is the first time I've heard of civilians being targeted by America in Iraq including the shock and awe campaign which targeted strictly Government and Military Targets. That probably bums you out huh?

If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Skitterpop

If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.

Well, I think we've killed on the low end many tens of thousands to on the high end several hundred thousand innocent Iraqi's.

Any way you cut it it's a lot of death.

If I remember correctly, International law does provide for a "reasonable" number of civilian deaths as acceptable in times of war.

But considering the context...

The the ratio of civilians to hostiles isn't very productive.

That most of the world (including America) doesn't buy the justification.

That it's clear the war was planned and executed at the top in a most incompetent manner.

So given all of that, it's really not all that difficult for a Muslim in some far off country to think the local Imam might just be preaching the truth when he calls for Jihad against the West who's waging a crusade aginst Islam.

Please think

Bing! because in that time another few young men or women joined the dark side.

Get it?

-spence

[JohnR]

I would not consider war crimes just or practical. Certainly to the military - just doesn't fly for me. I wouldn't mind seeing some investigations at the very top...


Interesting read from Iraq - I'm about 1/2 way through but my eyes are burnt out...

http://www.brookings.edu/comm/events/20061026.pdf

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by spence

Well, I think we've killed on the low end many tens of thousands to on the high end several hundred thousand innocent Iraqi's.

So given all of that, it's really not all that difficult for a Muslim in some far off country to think the local Imam might just be preaching the truth when he calls for Jihad against the West who's waging a crusade aginst Islam.

Please think

Bing! because in that time another few young men or women joined the dark side.

Get it?

-spence

You make it sound like Terrorism was born as a result of the Iraq invasion.......It simply isn't true.

[spence]

Originally Posted by stripersnipr

You make it sound like Terrorism was born as a result of the Iraq invasion.......It simply isn't true.

Not at all, I only cited recent examples that are having tremendous impact. There's plenty to pick from in the past half century. Granted you or I might not agree with an alternate assessment, but that simply is the way it is...

-spence

[Skitterpop]

Originally Posted by spence

Not at all, I only cited recent examples that are having tremendous impact. There's plenty to pick from in the past half century. Granted you or I might not agree with an alternate assessment, but that simply is the way it is...

-spence

You say Toma toe they say Tahmahto

[Skip N]

Originally Posted by Skitterpop

If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.

No one ever stated that no civilians were killed during shock and awe, they certainly werent targeted though, we have the most precise bombs ever known to man, but civilians will always be killed by accident. We went after military targets of importance, but civilians were killed because they were around those targets, but they werent the intended targets. You know this, quit playing your stupid war crimes bull %$%$%$%$. But you seem to believe that any civilian killed by accident means that Bush is Guilty of a war crime. Thats just insane! If he was ordering bombs dropped on civilians to kill them, then i'd be outraged too! But we both know this is NOT the case. I know you'd like to believe we are targeting civilians, but it aint the case buddy!

Wake up, and stop with this Bush is going out of his way to kill civilians bull %$%$%$%$. Of course civilians were killed during shock and awe, but they were NOT the intended targets. God you need to get a clue

[Skip N]

In Skitterpops mind, every member of a US Bomber crew that flew flights over Germany during WWII should be charged with war crimes. I mean, how many tens of thousands of civilians were killed during those bombings!? FDR and IKE should've been charged with war crimes and murder also. After all, they ordered the attacks that killed those civilians! In Skitterpops mind, they must be war criminals too.

Just needed to put into perspective how insane his logic is.

[JohnR]

I don't think Bush is going out of his way to get civillians killed - kinda rediculous. Sure, he has ranged from stupid to less than brilliant on many things but trying to kill civilians is as foolish as him being behind 9/11.

The rules of engagement by the US military are probably more inline with minimizing civilian casualties than any military in the past 100 years.

Shock and Awe was just that. Precision munitions and missiles that destroy what they are aiming at 85% of the time.

From a military standpoint to be able to take out a single target now means that one aircraft can often destroy today, in 2006, what probably would have taken a squadron of B17s in WW2. Two smart weapons from one aircraft hitting the intended target instead of a fleet of aircraft indiscriminently unloading hundreds of bombs for the same target. Even in Vietnam there was often several attempts at a target with "dumb" bombs that were within a few years hit with the early versions of laser guided weapons.

Using the unguided weapons caused far more civilian deaths and the deaths of our military (takes a lot more planes to hit a target means a lot more planes can get shot down).

Add to the top of it that these people on the other side put THEIR civilians in harm's way. Mosques, schools, hospitals.

[Skitterpop]

Originally Posted by Skip N

No one ever stated that no civilians were killed during shock and awe, they certainly werent targeted though, we have the most precise bombs ever known to man, but civilians will always be killed by accident. We went after military targets of importance, but civilians were killed because they were around those targets, but they werent the intended targets. You know this, quit playing your stupid war crimes bull %$%$%$%$. But you seem to believe that any civilian killed by accident means that Bush is Guilty of a war crime. Thats just insane! If he was ordering bombs dropped on civilians to kill them, then i'd be outraged too! But we both know this is NOT the case. I know you'd like to believe we are targeting civilians, but it aint the case buddy!

Wake up, and stop with this Bush is going out of his way to kill civilians bull %$%$%$%$. Of course civilians were killed during shock and awe, but they were NOT the intended targets. God you need to get a clue

Skip....are you really this dumb?

[Duke41]

Man do I know how to stir up some %$%$%$%$ or what!!

[Skip N]

Originally Posted by JohnR

I don't think Bush is going out of his way to get civillians killed - kinda rediculous. Sure, he has ranged from stupid to less than brilliant on many things but trying to kill civilians is as foolish as him being behind 9/11.

The rules of engagement by the US military are probably more inline with minimizing civilian casualties than any military in the past 100 years.

Shock and Awe was just that. Precision munitions and missiles that destroy what they are aiming at 85% of the time.

From a military standpoint to be able to take out a single target now means that one aircraft can often destroy today, in 2006, what probably would have taken a squadron of B17s in WW2. Two smart weapons from one aircraft hitting the intended target instead of a fleet of aircraft indiscriminently unloading hundreds of bombs for the same target. Even in Vietnam there was often several attempts at a target with "dumb" bombs that were within a few years hit with the early versions of laser guided weapons.

Using the unguided weapons caused far more civilian deaths and the deaths of our military (takes a lot more planes to hit a target means a lot more planes can get shot down).

Add to the top of it that these people on the other side put THEIR civilians in harm's way. Mosques, schools, hospitals.

Good post, right on the money!

But Skitterpop thinks we are bunch of dummies for thinking this way!

[spence]

STOP

You guys are missing the point.

Nobody has said Bush targets civilians, and the fact that terrorists might do it is moot unless you care to stoop to their level.

The simply fact is that many tens of thousands of civilians are being killed for a variety of reasons and this is adding kerosene to the already blazing fire. Regardless if it's a US bomb, insurgent or terrorist attack...the Iraqi finger points back at the USA as we're supposed to be providing protection.

More Iraqis pushed into the insurgency for nationalistic reasons means even more pushed into sectarian violence and more into Jihad.

We're in a very bad place right now. I hope everyone has a lot of tuna stocked under the bed.

-spence

[Skitterpop]

Originally Posted by Skip N

Good post, right on the money!

But Skitterpop thinks we are bunch of dummies for thinking this way!

No I don`t Skip....but nice try at the cover....I make one very brief statement which you add names and much content to which I never mention....you make up all this crap I never said to fit your war on you being right about everything you comment on.....its funny

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by spence

STOP

You guys are missing the point.

Nobody has said Bush targets civilians, and the fact that terrorists might do it is moot unless you care to stoop to their level.

-spence

I'm not sure Skitter will agree with you on that.

[stripersnipr]

Originally Posted by Skitterpop

No I don`t Skip....but nice try at the cover....I make one very brief statement which you add names and much content to which I never mention....you make up all this crap I never said to fit your war on you being right about everything you comment on.....its funny

So you are now saying that Bush hasn't targeted civilians? Should Clinton have been charged with War Crimes for his bombing in the Balkins?

[spence]

Originally Posted by stripersnipr

So you are now saying that Bush hasn't targeted civilians?

No, he's never said that. He may be saying that he believes our use of force has at times been illegal...

-spence

[likwid]

Wow, draft wins.

Good luck with that, I'll be somewhere warm and fishing if that happens.