 |
|
 |
| [-] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
Prev | List | Random | Next |
American Incompetence in Iraq, Chapter 879
Excerpt:
The story of Basra's descent traces the arc of the war itself. People here, mostly Shiites whom Saddam Hussein oppressed, embraced the invasion. But for the next three years, Baghdad put its resources into fighting insurgents in central and western Iraq, leaving the quiet Shiite south to find its own way.
But the rules have fallen away along with the end of Mr. Hussein's rule, leaving a broken landscape of empty state institutions.
"So much of the state melted after Saddam fell," an American official said. A primordial soup of political parties, their militias and tribes filled the void. They formed morals patrols at the university, commanded entire units of the flimsy police force, and moved into positions of power in the company that controls the vast oil-processing and transportation network.
Now, with provincial elections still many months away, a bloody power grab has ensued. It is a battle being waged from inside Basra's institutions and will be particularly difficult for the prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, to stop. Indeed, three days after he vowed to crack down with an "iron fist" and imposed a state of emergency, a bomb killed 27 in a market here.
Maybe the Liar-in-Chief and the bumbling fools who surround His Idiocy should have planned for how to govern Iraq after the invasion? Nah. Planning's for limp-wristed sissies. We do things on gut feel.
Posted by WW at June 13, 2006 04:30 AMEx-Detainees Detail Gitmo Suffering
Excerpt:
There are no scenes of attempted suicides in the movie, but the British friends said they saw several at the camp.
''A Saudi detainee in the cell in front of us had had enough,'' said Ahmed. ''We could hear him rip up his sheets and tie it to the wire mesh roof of the cell. He jumped off his sink and tried to hang himself. We shouted to the military police and they came and saved him.''
The men said they suffered beatings, saw guards throw Qurans in the toilet, were forced to watch videotapes of prisoners who had allegedly been ordered to sodomize each other and were chained to a hook in the floor while strobe lights flashed and heavy metal music blared.
In "milblogland," they are lying. In "milblogland," anyone who accuses the U.S. of anything is lying. And even if they weren't lying, they deserved it. Or as Greyhawk might put it, they provoked it. The Liar-in-Chief is god, and no torture is too much for these animals.
Posted by WW at June 13, 2006 05:14 AM82d Airborne Personnel Detail U.S. Torture
http://hrw.org/reports/2005/us0905/
They must hate America.
Posted by WW at June 13, 2006 05:19 AMU.S. Torture Reported By Faux News
(It must be true, right, children?)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,147957,00.html
The death of the prisoner, Manadel al-Jamadi (search), became known last year when the Abu Ghraib scandal broke. The U.S. military said back then that it had been ruled a homicide. But the exact circumstances of the death were not disclosed at the time.
The prisoner died in a position known as "Palestinian hanging," the documents reviewed by The AP show. It is unclear whether that position — which human rights groups condemn as torture — was approved by the Bush administration for use in CIA interrogations. ...
Navy prosecutors in San Diego have charged nine SEALs and one sailor with abusing al-Jamadi and others. All but two lieutenants have received nonjudicial punishment; one lieutenant is scheduled for court-martial in March, the other is awaiting a hearing before the Navy's top SEAL.
Isn't it just great that the U.S. military imposes "non-judicial punishment" for torture and murder? But I'm sure the "milbloggers" just love it. After all, you think all Arabs should be tortured and murdered!
Posted by WW at June 13, 2006 05:31 AMWW
Did you end up getting bedbugs at the Koz convention or what?
You know WW, I tried reasoning with you. The response I got was a personal attack, when you have no idea what my politics are.
All that's left is calling a spade a spade.
You brainwashed idiot. Get some mental help, to learn how to play nice with others.
Besides, if every one here is so f'ed up. There's no saving us. Just go away...
Stupid asshole.
Posted by LJD at June 13, 2006 01:03 PMOOOOOOOOHHHHH. Willy's gonna edumacate us. School's open. Let's all learn what the moonbats have in their heads. This ought to be more fun than slinging cowchips at the stupid kids.
Of course, that's what Willy thinks he's doing.
Can't wait for PE.
Subsunk
Posted by Subsunk at June 13, 2006 01:43 PMGreyhawk, somehow I f'd up and a chunk of my post got deleted before I published it--including the linkage to this post. Sorry about the initial trackback ping; if it comes through again (if!), the post has been fixed.
I wouldn't care about the t/b normally, but this one's kind of important to me.
http://bamapachyderm.com/archives/2006/06/13/army-ssg-david-bellavia-medal-of-honor-nominee/
Posted by Beth at June 13, 2006 04:19 PMYou know WW, I tried reasoning with you. The response I got was a personal attack, when you have no idea what my politics are.
You've tried nothing. You're just one more deluded wingnut who can't stand it when someone doesn't sign onto his propaganda. You couldn't care less about the troops you claim to support. You hate this country and every single thing it ever stood for. You and your lying president have ruined the American standing in the world, and are taking us down to defeat in Iraq.
Congrats.
Posted by WW at June 13, 2006 04:41 PM"You know WW, I tried reasoning with you. The response I got was a personal attack, when you have no idea what my politics are.
You've tried nothing. You're just one more deluded wingnut who can't stand it when someone doesn't sign onto his propaganda. You couldn't care less about the troops you claim to support. You hate this country and every single thing it ever stood for. You and your lying president have ruined the American standing in the world, and are taking us down to defeat in Iraq."
"Congrats."
Posted by WW at June 13, 2006 04:41 PM
WOW, great lesson, Willy. We're deluded. We hate our troops and our country. We made, even forced, mind you, everyone else in the world to hate us, AND we are headed to certain defeat in Iraq. Did I miss anything? The test will say Zarqawi Dead, Saddam on Trial for War Crimes, America Doomed, right?
Can't wait for the next history lesson! But bring on PE now.
Subsunk
Posted by Subsunk at June 13, 2006 05:16 PMMaybe it would be worthwhile to chip in for a fund for WW so he could have his own website, and post all he wants, rather than munching from the Greyhawks.
Posted by Sherry at June 13, 2006 05:26 PMWell, Sherry, the so-called "milblogs" are the mirror image of the lefty blogs in that each side is dominated by Kool-Aid drinkers who can't brook opposition and can never, ever acknowledge error.
The result, really, is that the political Internet has quickly become the equivalent of talk radio. It's a manipulated fake forum that offers 99 parts heat to one part light.
During most of Mudville's existence, my postings have been banned here. From time to time, Greyhawk lifts his ban for reasons known only to him. He may well see it as comic relief, i.e., an opportunity to admit a critic for the purpose of reviving his readership and boosting his amen chorus's sense of espirit.
But there is no real debate here, just as there's none on FreeRepublic or Blackfive or Daily Kos or Democratic Underground. It's all about the megaphone, truth and fact be damned. Some are entertained, or at least their time is occupied, but no one is served.
I'll get tired of it and go away, and you'll have your fact-free forum back, undisturbed by realities. American military personnel will keep dying and suffering grave injury for nothing; Iraq will continue to sink into further chaos; your Liar-in-Chief may well make war on Iran next.
I've got no idea what the future will bring. I think it's obvious for all to see that the U.S. is getting ready to beat a face-saving retreat of some sort. If were lucky, the military will be able to retreat to the big new embassy in the Green Zone and the Halliburton bases being built throughout Iraq. If not, the U.S. will be chased out of the country altogether.
My view is that this is a 50/50 matter. We'll see. But one way or the other, the so-called "milblogs" will cling to their illusions, and the lefty blogs will cling to theirs. That we can count on.
Posted by WW at June 13, 2006 06:13 PMU.S. Prepares Massacre for Ramadi
The only question is whether the U.S. will use white phosphorous munitions, banned by chemical weapons treaties that, like those outlawing torture, the Liar-in-Chief ignores at will.
Excerpt:
.S. and Iraqi forces had cordoned off the city by Saturday, residents and Iraqi officials said. Airstrikes on several residential areas picked up, and troops took to the streets with loudspeakers to warn civilians of a fierce impending attack, Ramadi police Capt. Tahseen Dulaimi said.
U.S. military officials refused to confirm or deny reports that a Ramadi offensive was underway.
Thousands of families remain trapped in the city, those who have fled say. Many can't afford to leave or lack transportation, whereas other families have decided to wait for their children to finish final examinations at school before escaping.
"The situation is catastrophic. No services, no electricity, no water," said Sheik Fassal Gaood, the former governor of Al Anbar province, whose capital is Ramadi. ...
The Iraqi Ministry of Displacement and Migration has tried repeatedly to send medical and food aid into Ramadi, but it has been thwarted by insurgent attacks, an official there said. In recent weeks, the government has managed to get only one shipment of aid into the city.
"If things continue, we will have a humanitarian crisis," Lahaibi said. "People are getting killed or wounded, and the rest are just migrating aimlessly."
Posted by WW at June 13, 2006 06:43 PM[b]World Image of U.S. Continues to Collapse[/b]
Excerpt:
Favorable views of the United States dropped sharply over the past year in Spain, where only 23 percent now say they have a positive opinion, down from 41 percent in 2005, according to the survey, which was carried out in 15 nations this spring by the Pew Research Center.
In Britain, Washington's closest ally in the Iraq war, positive views of America fell to 56 percent this year, from 75 percent in 2002, before the war began.
Other countries where positive views dropped significantly include India (56 percent, down from 71 percent since 2005); Russia (43 percent, down from 52 percent); and Indonesia (30 percent, down from 38 percent). In Turkey, a NATO ally of the United States, only 12 percent said they held a favorable opinion, down from 23 percent last year. ...
Despite the toll taken by the Iraq war, Americans appeared to be paying less attention than others around the world to the controversies that the war has caused.
While 3 in 4 Americans said they had heard reports of abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and at the United States naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, substantially more West Europeans and Japanese — 9 in 10 — had heard about them. ...
In a phenomenon troubling to Mr. Bush and his Republican supporters, war worries and high gasoline prices appear to be weighing on Americans' satisfaction ratings, even as many economic indicators have risen. While half of Americans expressed satisfaction with conditions at home in 2003, only 29 percent did so this year.
Posted by WW at June 13, 2006 06:49 PMMission Accomplished: Chapter 4,718
Excerpt:
All of the attacks happened in a space of just over one hour as people headed for work, the local authorities said. By the time they were over the bombers had killed at least 25 people and wounded 46 more, said Dr. Mohammed Abdullah, a physician at the Kirkuk hospital. Dozens of people lined up at the hospital to donate blood to help those injured.
The first bomb missed its target, an Iraqi police patrol, shortly after 8 a.m. In the second attack, at 8:30 a.m., a suicide bomber tried to force his way into the home of a police colonel. The bomber killed one policeman and wounded 10 others, including the colonel, said Brig. Burhan Tayeb Taha, a Kirkuk commander.
The brigadier said the deadliest blast killed 18 Iraqi civilians in a crowded public market in Tiseen, a district of Kirkuk that is heavily populated by Turkmen Shiites. The attack in Tiseen - a car bombing at 8:45 had also targeted a police patrol, although only two of 19 injured in that attack were police officers, the brigadier said.
Ten minutes later, the fourth bombing killed four people, including two policemen. Then, two more bombs aimed at Iraqi police detonated at about 9:20 a.m., killing two civilians and wounding 10 others. Police also said they had killed another would-be bomber as he tried to detonate his car bomb.
Posted by WW at June 13, 2006 06:55 PMGee Willy, Sherry is right. Why don't you get your own blog? You just want to use someone else's money and high traffic to let everyone else see how stupid you are. That's not very polite.
Pay your own way, deadbeat. Post the articles on your own website.
Subsunk
Posted by Subsunk at June 13, 2006 07:10 PMImpolite, yes. A brain-dead drunk, no.
Posted by WW at June 13, 2006 08:56 PMWilly,
Based on your writing we wouldn't be able to tell that, now would we?
Subsunk
Posted by Subsunk at June 13, 2006 09:10 PMI'm surprised none of you have said anything about the controversy all over the conservative blogosphere about "Hadji Girl".
Hot Air has it. Charles Johnson has two posts on it. The latest is here: "Mainstream Media Disgrace of the Month: Hadji Girl
Posted by Michael in MI at June 14, 2006 02:04 AMWell, it's only a song and it's the sort of gallows humor that you can expect out of a war. I'm sure the other side has theirs, too. I wonder what Americans would think if they heard it. But hey, we're all way past the hearts 'n minds point by now. Screw that.
The singer looks like a marine, but hell anyone can get a goofy haircut and buy camos and a green t-shirt at the barber shop, so whether it was actually a marine remains to be seen. I'm sure the USMC will investigate this one over, oh, the next four months or so.
And in any case the lyrics must be a joke, because God knows a marine wouldn't so cowardly as to use an infant as a human shield. Nor would a marine ever slaughter one in cold blood. Nope, couldn't happen. So let's all have a laugh as the utter absurdity of the idea.
Oh, and like the Liar-in-Chief says, it's not a war against Islam or anything.
Hadji Girl
I was out in the sands of Iraq
And we were under attack
And I well I didn’t know where to go
Then the first thing that I could see
Was everybody’s favorite Burger King
So I threw open the door and I hit the floor
Then suddenly to my surprise
I looked up and I saw her eyes
And I knew it was love at first sight
And she said
Dirka dirka mohammed jihad
sherpa sherpa balagan
Hadji girl I can’t understand what you’re sayin
And she said
Dirka Durka Mohammed Jihad
Sherpa Sherpa Balagan
Hadji girl I love you anyway
Then she said she wanted me to see
She wanted me to go meet her family
But I, well I couldn’t figure out how to say no
‘Cause I don’t speak Arabic
So she took me down an old dirt trail
And she pulled up to a side shanty
She threw open the door and I hit the floor
‘Cause her brother and her father shouted
Dirka Durka Mohammed Jihad
Sherpa Sherpa Balagan
They pulled out their AK’s so I could see
And they said
Dirka Durka Mohammed Jihad
Sherpa Sherpa Balagan
So I grabbed her little sister and pulled her in front of me
As the bullets began to fly
Blood sprayed from between her eyes
And then I laughed maniacally
Then I hid behind the TV
And I locked and loaded my M-16
And I blew those little f****** to eternity
And I said
Dirka Durka Mohammed Jihad
Sherpa Sherpa Balagan
They should’ve known they were f***** with a marine
Yes, If we don't agree with WWs selfserving, politically motivated hyperbole we are all mindless idealogues. Or Drunks. I can't keep all his accusations straight anymore, I'm must have had too much Kool-Aide!
WW, I think it was Goebbles who said if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth. How long will yours take?
Posted by Deamon at June 14, 2006 03:44 AMWhoa, Willy! What America hating, GW loving Rovian plant are you to Ignore the obvious proof of another massacre immortalized in that song. Clearly you will forgive any transgression by the Military. Why do you hate America and everything she stands for!?!
/Sarcasm
Posted by Deamon at June 14, 2006 03:47 AMWW-
You seem to be a fan of research.
Break out the Funk & Wagnalls and look up the word "satire".
Posted by SFC D at June 14, 2006 03:48 AMSimply WW, nobody takes you seriously because you long ago discarded any attempt at rational discourse. You A Priori believe anything that advances your political opposition to Iraq, GWOT, and Pres. Bush, and discard everything else as a right-wing plot. You have dispensed even with the basic decorum of giving our soldiers the presumtion of inncocents if that spilt human blood gives you yet another chance to spout your defeatist catchphrases The War is Lost. Liar in Chief. Justice Delayed is Justice Denied. Wounded Veterans are thown to the Wolves...Etc.
Have you ever seen the movie Back Hawk Down? There is an excellent scene near the end of that movie where US soldiers have been inadvertantly left behind by the extraction convoy, and resort to running after the convoy, under fire, back to the soccer stadium under US control. As they run and shoot to cover their escape, a Somali tries to take position to shoot at the Soldiers. A US soldier has a shot, takes it, and kills the Somali. A woman, looking distraught, races toward the dead Somali, and the US soldier watches, saying "Don't pick it up" over and over. A moment later, we understand what the Soldier is talking about as the woman pulls up, not with her wounded loved one in her arms, but picks up the AK and takes aim at the US soldiers. The American shoots and kills her.
If we look at the aftermath of that moment in a vaccum: A Somali Woman shot by US forces, dead over the body of a Somlai Man, shot by US forces. There is only one weapon between the two. If no other information is provided, You seem inclined to believe the worst. That US forces killed a woman grieveing over her dead husband. What if another poor Somali picks us the AK in the aftermath? Surely its valuable in such a poor part of the world. Will you believe that American forces killed an unarmed Husband and Wife in the heat of battle? What if the man and the weapon are taken away? Will you then believe that US forces killed an unarmed women? How many more permutations are there that can be used to shame America from the same evidence?
I was once watching a documentary based around a movie, I think it was The Longest Day. As American forces breach the seawall at Utah beach and come up behind the German defenses, one man is wounded. Another soldier drags his wounded friend against a pillbox and tries to stop the bleeding. At that moment, a German soldier, hands in the air, runs out of the pillbox behind the two Americans crying "Bitte, Bitte" "Please, Please!" I think, in English. The unwounded American, turns around in shock and sprays the German with his Thompson, killing him. His wounded buddy asks what Bitte means, and the unwounded soldier replies that he has no idea. During the commentary after that scene, one Veteran from Utah said that scene was irresponsible. He never saw anyone shoot a surrendering German.
Afterwards, I realized that was the point. The soldier in that scene didn't know if the man behind him was surrendering or about to kill him and his wounded comrade. He had a moment to react, with hell all about him. Only in the omniscients of a safe theater-seat could we know for sure.
Was killing that surrendering soldier a war crime? In the strictist sense, absolutely. I, however, cannot damn a man for reacting in that way. I honestly don't know how any reasonable person could. And I honestly don't know how you might answer that question.
You seem to be overcome by your hatred of Bush and his policies. You seem to have made up your mind on the wisdom of the War in Iraq, a War you seem to believe is so immoral in its undertaking that it must be stopped. I can understand that, even if I don't agree with it. I don't know what action I would take if I believed my government was conducting so henious a crime.
But you seem to believe that it must be stopped at any cost, and any means to damn the War must be persued. Here is where you go astray, and let your oposition to Bush overcome your good sense. Even if you are right and the underatking of this war is immoral, it does not follow that the war is being prosecuted by immoral men and immoral means.
If you believe that, and it appears to me that you do, then we are left at an end where no rational discourse can occur. If you are not a part of the solution you are part of the problem.
The only olive branch I can extend to you is not to believe that the worst is upon us because it is politically expeident. Milblogs, for all your malignment, have story after story of Americans helping Iraqis, and Iraqis greatful for that help. Nor have any site I have see claim it impossible for Americans to have committed the work crimes they are accused of. As always, War is Hell and the worst things happen in hell. Remember only that we must exercise restraint when reviewing the evidence, becuase War is Hell, and the perfect choice is sometimes the enemy of the good.
Posted by Deamon at June 14, 2006 04:58 AMDeamon, I don't know whether to laugh or cry when you quote movies at me. I think I'll laugh. You're not worth crying over.
subby, I understand it's a satire. Like I say, it's just a song. I wonder what you'll think of, oh, I don't know, that insurgent hit tune, Holy IAD when one of them puts it on-line sometime. But you know what I will say: It's just a song. Move on.
Posted by WW at June 14, 2006 05:08 AMOops, I mean SFC D. Yup, just a satire. Let's hope you keep your sense of humor when the worm turns. Oh, and when future American POWs are Gitmo-ized in some foreign hell-hole, I'll expect you to trot out the same list of excuses you and your wingnut whackjobs have invented for torture, American style.
Posted by WW at June 14, 2006 05:10 AMWW, Your inablity to respond to genuine criticisms is final proof of your Intellectual Bankruptcy. You cannot persue a simple thought execrise, you prove yourself beyond reasoning, and unworthy of further attention.
Posted by Deamon at June 14, 2006 05:25 AMyes, yes, I know that no one is taking Dub-Dub seriously but... not seeing the elephant gets so... Dub-Dub, darling... the worm turns? You mean like how our enemy follows the rules of war *now*? Send me to Gitmo, darling, because it's still better than treatment that can be expected anywhere else. The only thing worse than Gitmo in the anti-American mind is sending the poor fellows to any other country. The only thing louder than a human rights activists yowl at what goes on at Gitmo is the banshee scream they emit when we suggest sending any of our guests elsewhere. Because even *they* know that if you want to be a prisoner you're best off with being *our* prisoner.
The song, BTW, is awesome. And if the enemy has one like it (I sort of doubt they'd make as much fun of themselves as this one does of the clueless Marine... what did you think everyone was laughing at for the first three-quarters?) I wouldn't be offended. Being offended is for pussies.
Stop imagining that everyone is like you, Dub-Dub. It's not useful.
Posted by Synova at June 14, 2006 05:31 AMDeamon - Good to see you finally come around. I figured that out days ago about WW, when he assured me his only purpose here was not to engage in debate, but to "crack skulls".
By the way, I remember that scene in Blackhawk Down as well. Good analogy. That is exactly how the Enemy Media uses a situation and takes it completely out of context to smear the military.
The anti-military fools are doing the same thing with this song. A Muslim girl leads a Marine into an ambush by her father and brother, the father and brother kill the girl then her younger sister in cold blood while trying to kill the US Marine (who is in their country to liberate them from a dictator who sent Iraqi Army soldiers to houses to take people from their houses and put them in jail for dissenting from the Iraqi government). The Marine then kills the father and brother in self defense.
However the anti-military liberals would make this out to be the US Marine deliberately went into that house on a premeditated massacre of innocent civilians in cold blood.
The more they open their mouths the more they discredit themselves and expose themselves as anti-military. CAIR really did us all a favor by exposing this video so we could in turn expose the anti-military types.
I have yet to see a retraction from CAIR about the Palestinians killing their own innocent civilians on the beach and then blaming it on Israel. I have yet to hear CAIR condemn the Iraqi insurgent terrorists who took those children off the bus and murdered them in cold blood. No, what matters to CAIR is a song.
Tells me all I need to know about the agenda of CAIR. Not to mention, this song came out in March. Interesting they wait 3 months to be all up in arms about it, coinciding with the Haditha smear. Similar to the Cartoon Jihad.
Posted by Michael in MI at June 14, 2006 05:38 AMMichael, can you link that this song has been knows for several months? I hadn't heard that before.
As for WW, I was a gracious as I could be, even after he attacked me personally. He really is just a simpleminded jackass, in every sense of the word.
Posted by Deamon at June 14, 2006 05:44 AMDeamon - Matt at Blackfive mentioned to me, after I e-mailed him the lyrics, that he had been a fan of the video since March. I have seen it mentioned on Michelle Malkin as well. AllahPundit says that it was shot on March 2nd or 3rd. Maybe it had not been posted to YouTube until recently, I will have to track down that info.
I am pretty sure that the video was put up and then taken down and then put up again by another person. I don't think the video on YouTube now is the one that was posted originally, which would have had the date on which it was posted.
Posted by Michael in MI at June 14, 2006 06:21 AMWW, you have exactly proven my point. Thanks.
1.) You have no idea if I am a 'wingnut' or anything else. All I've called you on is your childish tactics.
2.) I am one of the 'Troops I support. You're wrong again.
3.) If our standing in the world has been lowered, it is because of your defeatist propaganda.
4.) As the tin-foil hat wearing nutjob you make yourself out to be, your touchy-feely values ought to tell you that not every one here is of the same mind. We have formed our own opinions. Just as many of your fellow nutjobs probably don't support the tactics you use here.
Why not start your own blog? Oh yeah, you have to rely on stealing traffic from somebody else's site.
Posted by LJD at June 14, 2006 12:02 PMReport: $1.4 Billion Went to Fraudulent Aid for Katrina Victims
I KNEW THIS WAS GOING ON
Posted by MELLY at June 14, 2006 01:35 PMYou have to come to my site and see a post about a Flag Officers Conf on Iraq @ Ft. Carson, CO.
It's an amazing analysis about the situation in Iraq.
Regards
Posted by patd95 at June 14, 2006 01:49 PMLJD, as for your politics I call 'em like I see 'em. I regard you as just one more wingnut, thumping the tub for the Liar-in-Chief every chance you get. You've given not a shred of evidence to the contrary.
As for your deployment status, anyone can make any claim they want to. But if you are in fact deployed, my stance toward you wouldn't change a whole hell of a lot given that, a) You're just another wingnut, and b) Three-quarters of the troops and their families voted for Bush.
Obviously, the "military community" is overwhlemingly in support of this imperial adventure. I think that's a real paradox, but life is full of paradoxes. In any case, it's one of the factors that attenuates my sympathy for them.
Unlike, say, the draftees of the Vietnam War who were shanghaied into it, you are volunteers. The longer this goes on and the more the force is comprised of people who have enlisted or reupped since '03 the less inclined I am to get all that teary-eyed about their fate.
I note the veterans issues, therefore, not so much because my heart bleeds for the wounded but because I genuinely find it surprising that your crew pays them so little notice or attention. Don't any of you ever, in mid-bleat about the 19 troops killed in Somalia at the beginning of Clinton's term, stop to think about the 2,500 so casually tossed away between '03 and now?
Look, the general public is more 'n happy to have them hidden away in the middle of the night like a bad family secret. I debate all this stuff here for all kinds of reasons, but most Americans really don't care very much. That's what happens when, a) you fight with volunteers, and b) the military culture tells civilians not to look under the hood.
It's amusing to see myself described as a "bleeding heart." I'm anything but that. I'm against torture and wanton slaughter, i.e., massacres like Haditha and Fallujah and what's on the drawing board for Ramadi, but no one needs to be a bleeding heart to oppose that sort of thing.
Frankly, to support torture and massacres you've got to be some sort of psycho. Or be swept up in vengeance. Or be a religious fanatic who thinks he's going to Christianize the world. Or be so afraid of the bad news that you must deny it.
But me, a bleeding heart? Oh please. The biggest reasons I'm against the U.S. doing all things are, a) It's against our principles, and when nations throw away their principles they generally decline, and b) Everything being done there now will come back and bite us in the ass.
Oh, and it all costs too many resources that could, and should, be directed elsewhere. That doesn't make me a pacifist, it makes me a pragmatist. War should be the last option. Bush was itching for it, and now we're going down to a costly defeat. At best, if there is a U.S. "victory" here, it'll be Pyrric, as in a victory in which the winner is hard to distinguish from the loser.
One of your guys said the following. See if you can guess who:
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
Posted by WW at June 14, 2006 04:20 PMIncidentally, the word "hero" is incredibly overused. They're not all heroes, children. Don't dilute the currency.
Posted by WW at June 14, 2006 05:36 PMOnce You Break The Big Rule ...
The U.S. military has broken the big rule, i.e., the one against torture. So who can expect them to care about freedom of the press?
The press has been kicked out of Guantanamo Bay because the military commander there didn't like this report:
Of course, the military denies that retaliation had anything to do with it. But, since the U.S. military routinely lies about war-related subjects including the policy of torture and the military's implementation of it, we can give their latest statements all the credibility they deserve.
Posted by WW at June 14, 2006 05:55 PMSo there you have it, Wee Willy doesn't like the troops because of who they voted for and the fact that they have enlisted and re-enlisted to fight in an illegal war of aggression.
Just like most of the left the only time the wee one has use for us is either to make us out to be victims or criminals. As much as I enjoy having a cut-and-paste master, wack-job, loonie, moonbat around for everyone to use as a punching bag his tiring use of the same old previously debunked arguments is getting boring. Try being original willy, or at least rational because no one here is drinking your kool-aid.
Posted by SSG K at June 14, 2006 06:31 PMOnce again SSG K, you misrepresent me. You wingnuts just can't resist the temptation to lie, can you? I wrote that the tendency of the troops to overwhelmingly support the war and to re-enlist is "one of the factors that attenuates me support for them."
[b]at·ten·u·ate[/b]
1 : to make thin or slender
2 : to make thin in consistency : RAREFY
3 : to lessen the amount, force, magnitude, or value of : WEAKEN
4 : to reduce the severity, virulence, or vitality of
I used third meaning of the word. I haven't abandoned my support for American troops. After all, they are Americans. They have volunteered to place themselves in harm's way. One can't help but be impressed by that, and to feel for the people who do it.
At the same time, however, a part of me looks at this a bit like I look at someone who rides his motorcycle without a helmet. If he falls off and cracks his skull I will still feel sympathy for him as a human being, but I'll also say (or think) something like: What was the idiot doing without a helmet?
Posted by WW at June 14, 2006 07:12 PM"LJD, as for your politics I call 'em like I see 'em. I regard you as just one more wingnut, thumping the tub for the Liar-in-Chief every chance you get. You've given not a shred of evidence to the contrary." (Willy has gleefully ignored any reasonable evidence to the contrary because he's made up his mind, ya know. Us Milbloggers are 1) liars, 2) drunks, 3) murderers, 4) shills for the Rethuglican party, 5) anti-heroes, 6) wingnuts, 7) koolaid drinkers, 8) Bush supporters without brains, 9) repeat Bush supporters who stupidly voted for a "C- student" who is the worst President in history (history being so full of great Presidents that this absolutely make him the worst human being on the face of the Earth, even worse than Jimmy Carter, Calvin Coolidge, Herberty Hoover, and William McKinley), and 10) dickless wimps.
As for your deployment status, anyone can make any claim they want to. (Willy doesn't believe we actually deploy or serve, and removes any respect or authority we might have gained by being deployed) But if you are in fact deployed, my stance toward you wouldn't change a whole hell of a lot given that, a) You're just another wingnut, and b) Three-quarters of the troops and their families voted for Bush. (Willy hates us whether we serve our country or not, solely because we support Chimpy McBushitlerHalliburton presently, but we used to be good people when we supported Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton)
Obviously, the "military community" is overwhlemingly in support of this imperial adventure. I think that's a real paradox, but life is full of paradoxes. In any case, it's one of the factors that attenuates my sympathy for them. (Willy thinks soldiers choose the wars they fight and should be able to mutiny en masse when they don't agree with the political correctness of it. This causes him to lose respect for us, and grow indifferent to any suffering or moral quandaries over who he should support. Of course Willy wouldn't recognize an altruisitic reason for national service because it is not important to him, and neither are the benefits he uses daily, --- until some "fascist" takes them away from him.)
Unlike, say, the draftees of the Vietnam War who were shanghaied into it, you are volunteers. The longer this goes on and the more the force is comprised of people who have enlisted or reupped since '03 the less inclined I am to get all that teary-eyed about their fate. (Ahh, since you volunteered, then you were stupid and should be punished. Who knew that when you enlisted in 1998 you'd be caught up in a "bad" war and should have deserted based on your principles. After all, anyone who continues to reenlist now either deserves to be punished, killed, tortured, maimed, or else he must know something about the War on Terror that I, Willy, don't know. [Wonder what that could be?] Besides by 2008 I will hate everyone in the military because you all had the chance to leave the military honestly by then. I wonder why the Hell you won't just do that, dammit?)
I note the veterans issues, therefore, not so much because my heart bleeds for the wounded but because I genuinely find it surprising that your crew pays them so little notice or attention. Don't any of you ever, in mid-bleat about the 19 troops killed in Somalia at the beginning of Clinton's term, stop to think about the 2,500 so casually tossed away between '03 and now? (See I really don't care about the soldiers, maimed, injured, or mentally impaired because they brought it on themselves. I just like to point out how stupid they are for following the President and do my best to irritate the milbloggers because I hate them. And think of the poor saps who just threw away, threw away, I say, their lives for nothing in this war, because their sacrifice and their service in defense or their country, against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic, because there certainly isn't any serious defense of the country issue involved in fighting Islamic terrorism wherever it rears its ugly head that I can see.)
Look, the general public is more 'n happy to have them hidden away in the middle of the night like a bad family secret. (I despise you military guys because you are killers and you get all the cute chicks). I debate all this stuff here for all kinds of reasons, but most Americans really don't care very much. That's what happens when, a) you fight with volunteers, and b) the military culture tells civilians not to look under the hood. (Americans really don't care about the troops. I don't really care about them. It is because you guys volunteered so regular unpatriotic Americans wouldn't have to feel guilty, and you really don't want us to care about you anyway because you think regular unpatriotic Americans don't understand what you do anyway. So you are happy we are ignorant about what you do. [By the way, what do you do?])
It's amusing to see myself described as a "bleeding heart." I'm anything but that. (I'm an intellectual, you see, and I'm much smarter than you lowlifes.) I'm against torture and wanton slaughter, i.e., massacres like Haditha (unproven) and Fallujah (proven not to be a massacre, including no use of "chemical weapons" in Fallujah) and what's on the drawing board for Ramadi (but I'd never prejudge anyone, now would I?), but no one needs to be a bleeding heart to oppose that sort of thing. (Of course, I'd never say anything about when terrorists do those things because a) our guys deserve it, b) innocent Iraqis, I just don't care about, and c) I don't care about anyone at all until it is my own personal rice bowl that is being affected, like when Abu Mussayib al Mujaher shows up on my doorstep with a butcher knife)
Frankly, to support torture and massacres you've got to be some sort of psycho. (You milbloggers and our Marines are psychos.) Or be swept up in vengeance. (And vindictive bastards.) Or be a religious fanatic who thinks he's going to Christianize the world. (As opposed to Muslim fanatics who want to "Muslimize" the world. Go ahead, "Islamicize me", baby.) Or be so afraid of the bad news that you must deny it. (I'd rather stick my head in the sand and ignore the bad news until Abu what's-his-name sticks that long knife up my dumb ass and starts cutting my balls off from the back side. Then I'll be wide awake and asking for your help.)
But me, a bleeding heart? Oh please. The biggest reasons I'm against the U.S. doing all things are, a) It's against our principles, and when nations throw away their principles they generally decline, (I really want us to remain a great country, respected in the free world and be rich as possible, but I just don't want us to have to do anything to get there or earn that reputation. I just expect folks to like us because we are cute and cuddly) and b) Everything being done there now will come back and bite us in the ass. (As opposed to the stuff we didn't do which came back to bite us in the ass on 11 September 2001 and in dozens of incidents before that.)
Oh, and it all costs too many resources that could, and should, be directed elsewhere. (Not a penny for defense. My medical insurance is too high. I want my Mommy state!) That doesn't make me a pacifist, it makes me a pragmatist. (Or, what's the other word, ---- a coward). War should be the last option. Bush was itching for it, and now we're going down to a costly defeat. (At least that is what I'm praying for). At best, if there is a U.S. "victory" here, it'll be Pyrric (That's Pyrrhic), as in a victory in which the winner is hard to distinguish from the loser. (Well, at least I'll still be alive, so that makes me the big winner, because all you promilitary saps will be dead or maimed and I can have my way with the cute chicks in the burqas).
One of your guys said the following. See if you can guess who:
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. (Don't know, but I'm sure he was big in the annals of free healthcare and welfare receipts. Guess I'm stupid. I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat.)
Posted by WW at June 14, 2006 04:20 PM
"Incidentally, the word "hero" is incredibly overused. They're not all heroes, children. Don't dilute the currency." (I haven't seen anyone I"D call a hero because they all support Bushy).
Posted by WW at June 14, 2006 05:36 PM
Once You Break The Big Rule ...
The U.S. military has broken the big rule, i.e., the one against torture. (Of course, I don't have any proof, and I ignore reports to the contrary, but I'm just positive there must be someone who has broken the rules on torture. Was Zarqawi a Marine in disguise?) So who can expect them to care about freedom of the press?(I'm sure the Marine Corps, nay the entire military, is full of liars, and there is nothing they can possibly say which would make me believe them).
The press has been kicked out of Guantanamo Bay because the military commander there didn't like this report:
http://w3t.org/u/rsr (Actually, the press was right there outside the door allowed to listen in, but not allowed to see the classified material on the screen. But I'm a liar anyway, so I can say what I want and no one who can read English would be able to say differently.)
Of course, the military denies that retaliation had anything to do with it. But, since the U.S. military routinely lies about war-related subjects including the policy of torture and the military's implementation of it, we can give their latest statements all the credibility they deserve. (I am a firm believer that the military ALWAYS lies about anything that looks bad, so I ALWAYS attribute the worst of intentions to them, whether there is any basis for it or not)
(See in this article, the Pentagon kicked out the reporters because other news organizations were threatening to sue them if they weren't allowed in to be part of the media circus surrounding the suicides at Gitmo. So the Truth here is that reporters and their bosses will stab each other in the back to get access to any story. So the Pentagon sent them all packing. Threaten to sue because one gets special treatment, then none of you will get special treatment. It works that way with detainees too [Hmmmm, there's a thought. Treat the reporters like detainees -- they want the story, let 'em live it firsthand.] That way, they can make sure they all hinder progress in the treatment of hardcore detainees, and I, Willy, can keep painting the entire US military as liars and murderers and torturers because there is no press there and I can make any claims of torture I want. Because if they really reported the Truth about Gitmo, the American people would want Gitmo closed ---- and all the detainees killed for the evil SOBs they truly are before they ever left that place. But then, I wouldn't have anything to complain about anymore. I might have to make something up.)
Posted by WW at June 14, 2006 05:55 PM
Once again SSG K, you misrepresent me. You wingnuts just can't resist the temptation to lie, can you? (See any additional slurs I want to submit in 1-10 above) I wrote that the tendency of the troops to overwhelmingly support the war and to re-enlist is "one of the factors that attenuates me support for them." (I really mean it turns me off on them because those bastards support Chimpy McBushitlerHalliburton. But I still love them while I hate them.)
[b]at·ten·u·ate[/b]
1 : to make thin or slender
2 : to make thin in consistency : RAREFY
3 : to lessen the amount, force, magnitude, or value of : WEAKEN
4 : to reduce the severity, virulence, or vitality of
(I own a Funk & Wagnalls, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah)
I used third meaning of the word. I haven't abandoned my support for American troops. (I'm just undercutting it every day because they are so stupid. But I really do love them. Really, I do.) After all, they are Americans. (And murderers, torturers, and stupid, too). They have volunteered to place themselves in harm's way. One can't help but be impressed by that, and to feel for the people who do it. (Some of me and my friends are less impressed than others).
At the same time, however, a part of me looks at this a bit like I look at someone who rides his motorcycle without a helmet. If he falls off and cracks his skull I will still feel sympathy for him as a human being, but I'll also say (or think) something like: What was the idiot doing without a helmet? (See you stupid prick. I told you not to support Bush. Got what you deserved.)
Posted by WW at June 14, 2006 07:12 PM
[Willy has proven with his responses here, and on other threads that he really isn't interested in changing minds. Isn't really interested in facts, Truth, or honesty. And isn't interested in the safety and security of Americans or innocents among our allies. He does not care that America's military is the only thing between the throatcutters of the world, and his neck.]
[He'd rather make fun of them, berate them, call them liars, and make sure as many people in the world support hostilities towards Americans everywhere on the Earth. He just doesn't think there is any danger to America from anyone outside the country and certainly not from the Islamic world.]
[He is a fan of Neville Chamberlain, and is certain, certain mind you, that we are the source of what is wrong with the world. He has NEVER had a bad thing to say about terrorists, bad actors outside America, or the far left principles of his sympathizers. Willy is a disease that rots from the inside, saps the will of the free to fight tyranny, and plants the seeds of doubt and destruction amongst us. In World War II, they were called seditionists and traitors. They were enemy sympathizers and were jailed or run off to other countries, or they learned to keep their mouths shut to preserve their lives in America. Today, they face no threats, no chastisement, and no penalty for their undermining the support for Victory in the War on Terror.]
[Unless we label them for who they truly are, they will continue to undermine and hinder every step in our defense. Unless we answer them, they will make the already difficult defense of America impossible. We who know better must stand up to them, and make ourselves heard.]
[Don't let them define what America is or is not. We must define it, and make sure everyone who comes in contact with us, knows by our example who the Defenders of Freedom and Justice are, and who the terrorists and oppressors of the weak are, and who are their handmaidens in their evil plans.]
Press on. To Victory.
Subsunk
And I'm sure Eisenhower knew all about Radical Islam when he made those statements. He was pratically clairvoyant. Because he Knew, KNEW mind you, that we'd never need the M-1 tank, the Patriot missile, the F-18 Hornet, the F-16 Falcon, the CVNs, the nuclear submarine fleets, the ballistic missile forces which deterred Communism, or the dogface US soldier who has defeated every single enemy he has ever faced, except the American media. Because his heart is noble and honest, and the MSMs hearts are empty and timid.
I know what you are Willy. And you are Dead Wrong.
Subsunk
Posted by Subsunk at June 14, 2006 09:50 PMDamn Subsunk, very well said.
Has your ass pegged Willy.
Posted by rick at June 14, 2006 11:00 PMAnd WW (hey, is that double take-off of our beloved name for our President, as in Dubya?), it would be really considerate of you, if you would scroll up to the Greyhawk's tip jar, and deposit, hummmm..... maybe about $50 for the bandwidth for this and other threads of your postings, that is mostly generated by you or at you. Least you could do.... and a "Thank You" to them for offering you space and time for your comments. But, well, I'm guessin', you aren't "an officer and a gentleman," and won't go and do the right thing.
Replying to Mudville's leading sloppy right wingnut drunk ...
Willy doesn't believe we actually deploy or serve, and removes any respect or authority we might have gained by being deployed
Another falsehood. There are roughly 140,000 military personnel in Iraq, not counting the U.S.-financed mercenaries who are subject to no law. Obviously, someone is deployed. But someone's mere assertion on a website that he's deployed is hardly gospel.
Willy thinks soldiers choose the wars they fight and should be able to mutiny en masse when they don't agree with the political correctness of it.
Another lie. In fact, part of my sympathy for the deployed troops prior to about 2005 was rooted in their not being able to choose their deployments. My comment about the attenuation of my sympathy since then was related to those who actually chose to go to Iraq, either directly or in practical terms.
You see, unlike your average wingnut Republican, I DO believe in "personal responsibility" and "accountability." People make their choices, and then they must live with them. If someone votes for the guy who lied our way into war, and/or enlists or re-ups after the evidence is plain, then the place he should look for who dug his hole is no farther than the closest mirror.
Not a penny for defense. My medical insurance is too high. I want my Mommy state!
No, but I'd rather that the military not suck the country dry. If they do, then it might at least be a good idea if they'd at least win. The U.S. effort in Iraq is the most pathetic spectacle since Mussolini failed to defeat the Ethiopians.
Really, stand back and think about it. The world's best trained, best led, best equipped, most heroic army, blah blah blah, can't even keep minimal order in a small country full of battle-shocked civilians with a rag-tag insurgency with no major outside supplier.
Let's face it, the way things are turning out the U.S. military couldn't manage a bumper car pavillion. I think this is a VERY dangerous message to be sending, because the outcome could easily be the outbreak of mischief all over the place.
You know, like the barbarian tribes at the Roman frontiers? Oops, that's history again. Only sissies read history.
See you stupid prick. I told you not to support Bush. Got what you deserved.
Sometimes life teaches some pretty hard lessons, doesn't it though? Isn't that what the Republicans have been telling the poor for so many years?
Isn't really interested in facts, Truth, or honesty.
Hey, I'm not the one who, like Greyhawk, looks at an American massacre of civilians and asks what the victims did to provoke it.
And isn't interested in the safety and security of Americans or innocents among our allies. He does not care that America's military is the only thing between the throatcutters of the world, and his neck.
The adventure in Iraq has diminished my safety and security, not enhanced it. Our "allies." Oh, you must mean the 51st State, Israel, suddenly the Christian darling due to those wingnuts who think the End Times are nigh and the Jews are part of the plot.
Well, my answer is three-fold. First, the Book of Revelations is a commentary on First Century politics in the Roman empire. Second, people have been (incorrectly) predicting the end of the world for a long time. Third, Israel has nukes and can therefore take care of itself.
They were enemy sympathizers and were jailed or run off to other countries, or they learned to keep their mouths shut to preserve their lives in America. Today, they face no threats, no chastisement, and no penalty for their undermining the support for Victory in the War on Terror.
Get a wingnut mad enough and he'll eventually revert to his fascist instincts and start in with the threats.
Least you could do.... and a "Thank You" to them for offering you space and time for your comments. But, well, I'm guessin', you aren't "an officer and a gentleman," and won't go and do the right thing.
Are you kidding? I'm going Greyhawk a favor by attracting traffic to his otherwise moribund site.
"They were enemy sympathizers and were jailed or run off to other countries, or they learned to keep their mouths shut to preserve their lives in America. Today, they face no threats, no chastisement, and no penalty for their undermining the support for Victory in the War on Terror.
Get a wingnut mad enough and he'll eventually revert to his fascist instincts and start in with the threats."
Posted by WW at June 15, 2006 02:25 AM
You know how to tell when a moonbat is lying? His lips are moving and his keyboard is typing.
What's the matter? Too cowardly to address the rest of the thread?
Here it is, just so you can't make it seem like threats were made, boy:
Unless we label them for who they truly are, they will continue to undermine and hinder every step in our defense. Unless we answer them, they will make the already difficult defense of America impossible. We who know better must stand up to them, and make ourselves heard.
Don't let them define what America is or is not. We must define it, and make sure everyone who comes in contact with us, knows by our example who the Defenders of Freedom and Justice are, and who the terrorists and oppressors of the weak are, and who are their handmaidens in their evil plans.
If the handmaiden's glove fits, Willy, then wear it.
Subsunk
Posted by Subsunk at June 15, 2006 02:55 AM"And isn't interested in the safety and security of Americans or innocents among our allies. He does not care that America's military is the only thing between the throatcutters of the world, and his neck."
"The adventure in Iraq has diminished my safety and security, not enhanced it. Our "allies." Oh, you must mean the 51st State, Israel, suddenly the Christian darling due to those wingnuts who think the End Times are nigh and the Jews are part of the plot."
Somehow, Willy, I knew you'd get around to blaming the Jews for it all. Who is the fascist and who is the national socialist now? What now, Willy? Cattle cars, ovens, and bullets to the brain for Rethuglicans once the Dhimmicrats take power?
Subsunk
Posted by Subsunk at June 15, 2006 02:58 AMWow! That Didn't Take Too Long!
Gee, when the Marine Corps is threatened by the evil enemy of bad publicity, it sure doesn't take them long to set the wheels in motion. And here I thought that if it would take them four months to commence a criminal investigation of a massacre, it would take them at least that long to track down some dweeb who wrote a stupid little song that made light of using an Iragi infant as a human shield.
Nope! The Marine Corps nipped this one in the mid, I'll tell ya.
Excerpt:
Cpl. Joshua Belile, 23, apologized and said the song was not tied in any way to allegations that Marines killed 24 unarmed civilians in Haditha last year.
"It's a song that I made up and it was nothing more than something supposed to be funny, based off a catchy line of a movie," he said in Wednesday's Daily News of Jacksonville.
Poor schmuck, get with the program. Do it all you want, but don't sing, don't tell.
Posted by WW at June 15, 2006 03:09 AM"Not a penny for defense. My medical insurance is too high. I want my Mommy state!"
"No, but I'd rather that the military not suck the country dry. (Man, that 3.25% of GDP is just draining the cfountry dry, ain't it? Too bad it isn't as bad as the 8% from Vietnam, or the 40% from WWII, but we all know how they ruined the country, didn't they?) If they do, then it might at least be a good idea if they'd at least win. The U.S. effort in Iraq is the most pathetic spectacle since Mussolini failed to defeat the Ethiopians." (Right. Let's see your comparisons, military genius. How about some facts to back up your assertions, child?)
"Really, stand back and think about it. The world's best trained, best led, best equipped, most heroic army, blah blah blah, can't even keep minimal order in a small country full of battle-shocked civilians with a rag-tag insurgency with no major outside supplier." (I think 150,000 Americans have done a pretty good job of keeping 26 million Iraqis in line. Over 3+ years, 2500 deaths, 9000 serious injuries (the rest are back on duty in 72 hrs), and less money than the VietNam War in 3 yrs, I'd say they were doing quite well, actually. Not perfect, but better prosecuted than anything you or John F. Kerry or Al Gore would have come up with. See politicians, Bush included, ain't Generals. The same gents who ran this war would have run it the same way under a Dhimmicrat, if he'd had the balls to fight it. But you would never agree with that because you are just too damned smart for us. You have some secret powers that you'll only share with another Dhimmicrat because that is who you are, Willy. A child who would pick up their marbles and run away when they don't get their way. Nanny-nanny-boo-boo, I won't support you. You wouldn't support your country unless a Dhimmicrat runs it -- your way, I might add. Power only to the Dhimmicrats.)
"Let's face it, the way things are turning out the U.S. military couldn't manage a bumper car pavillion. I think this is a VERY dangerous message to be sending, because the outcome could easily be the outbreak of mischief all over the place."
(As if you and your lefty buddies have lifted a finger to help keep the rest of the world in line. When you work against the leadership of the country, the military, and the American people, what do you expect the rest of the world to do? They see your kind dragging the American military back and keeping it from being a threat to their aims. But you and they are mistaken. There's plenty of death and destruction left to deal, if it comes to that. So you are the ones who have made the country less safe. By undercutting your own country's credibility. If reputation is what deters our enemies, then you long ago became an instrument of their will. And that makes you a terrorist sympathizer, a seditious traitor, and an evil backstabber of your own countrymen.
Are you proud of yourself?
Subsunk
Posted by Subsunk at June 15, 2006 03:14 AMBy the way, let's examine this more closely:
"Really, stand back and think about it. The world's best trained, best led, best equipped, most heroic army, blah blah blah, can't even keep minimal order in a small country full of battle-shocked civilians with a rag-tag insurgency with no major outside supplier."
What omniscience do you possess oh most clairvoyant of moonbats, to suggest there is no major outside supplier? What military genius told you this, or was it an MSM reporter, pray tell?
Pretty stupid comment if you ask me.
Subsunk
Posted by Subsunk at June 15, 2006 03:22 AMI think Dub-Dub is enjoying the attention.
Hell, I am enjoying reading Subsunk tear WW a new a-hole with his responses to WW's seditious jibberish! Keep up the good work, Subsunk!
I think we should compile all these "debates" between WW and Subsunk into a mini-book and entitle it (with apologies to Ann Coulter) "How to Talk to an Ignorant Moonbat, If You Must"
Posted by Michael in MI at June 15, 2006 04:13 AMWhere's the Ho Chi Minh trail? And I'm not talking about the one you see in the morning when you have the DTs.
Posted by WW at June 15, 2006 04:15 AMWow, I admire the patience and willingness y'all have shown willy. Considering he only parrots one-sided lib talking points from MSM opinion pieces (even if couched in the form of "news"), you really have gone above and beyond the call of duty--something I gather many of y'all are not unfamiliar with. Thanks for your service, to those readers to whom it applies.
But why bother with willy? You'll sooner get the stink off an ape before you can change the mind of a willy moonbat.
Every discussion that I bother to have with liberals these days ends with them saying: "Well, the facts don't matter! Bush is still as bad as Hitler..." or some other reidiculous (sic, really sick) innanity.
God bles America!
D. Ox
Where's the Ho Chi Minh trail? And I'm not talking about the one you see in the morning when you have the DTs.
Posted by WW at June 15, 2006 04:15 AM
It's called Iran! Care to post some more stupid stuff???
Posted by SpectreCode at June 15, 2006 09:36 AMI can't see Ted Turner supporting troups like this. Thanks Rupert Murdoch!
http://army.laser.net/article.asp?section=104&article=37936
Posted by SpectreCode at June 15, 2006 09:42 AMSpectreCode, what evidence is there that Iran is supplying the insurgents of Iraq? Don't cite U.S. military propaganda, cite an independent source.
Oh, and what sense what it make anyway? The Iraq insurgency is a Sunni insurgency. The Iranians are Shiites. Or, like your Liar-in-Chief, are you so stupid that you don't know that? Wait, better not answer.
Here's what actually happened. When the U.S. invaded, as a result of Rumsfeld having not given the military the number of troops it originally requested there weren't enough people to guard a huge ammo dump near Baghdad. Insurgents looted that dump quite literally by the truck load.
One of the things held at that dump was very large quantities of C-4 plastic explosive. C-4 is now showing up in many of the IEDs that are killing Americans. The so-called "milblogs" say nothing about this because, rather than giving a damn about American troops, they exist as nothing but Bush propaganda vehicles and therefore nothing that embarrasses your Fuhrer can ever be discussed.
Posted by WW at June 15, 2006 03:11 PMIt has been well reported, even by the defeatist media, that IEDs have become increasingly more sophisticated, beyond the level of any technology available in Iraq.
If you choose to believe that these devices, which have been captured along the Iranian border, are nothing more than a 'propaganda stunt', perhaps you should also consider the forensics. Devices acquired by U.S. forces show 'signatures' linking them to factoiries in Iran.
Is ABC news good enough for you, or are they paid off by the administration as well?
http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=1692347&page=1
LJD, the first paragraph of that ABC News story says it all. Datelined March 6th, which was right around the time the Liar-in-Chief was thumping the tub for an attack on Iran. Sourced from U.S. "military and intelligence," which means a propaganda plant.
I don't trust that report any farther than I can throw the Washington Monument. I seem to recall the U.S. media feeding us plenty of the Liar-in-Chief's lies on WMD and Saddam-al Qaeda links, too. Once burned, twice shy.
You'll have to do better.
Posted by WW at June 15, 2006 04:20 PMFrom the ABC News report:
What the United States says links them to Iran are tell-tale manufacturing signatures — certain types of machine-shop welds and material indicating they are built by the same bomb factory.
Yup, like like those aluminum tubes, huh? You know, the ones that the Liar-in-Chief's people said were for centrifuges but actually were for short-range rockets? But, hey, let's just let bygones be bygones and trust what they tell us -- NOT!
Posted by WW at June 15, 2006 04:24 PMBeyond the 'propaganda', let's not forget that:
*Iran has nothing to gain from an unstable Iraq.
*Iran HATES to see U.S. casualties.
*The Iraqis MUST have learned to build sophisticated IEDs from the U.S. either when they were our 'buddy', or in support of the 'Liar-In-Chief's War for Oil'.
(Sarcasm off)
There once was a Moonbat who lived in a shoe,
repeating sound bites was all he could do
He had some wacky ideas,
and persistent verbal diarrhea,
that kept him from seeing the truth.
So ... Iran is going to ship arms to the same Sunni militias that are regularly executing their Shia brethren. Let's just say that I remain to be convinced.
Posted by WW at June 15, 2006 06:46 PMIn the world of identity politics it all makes sense. Shia must act a certain way and be loyal to each other. Sunnis as well. Oops! Kurds are Sunni and Saddam was Sunni... what the heck is up with that? I betcha those reports about genocide and chemical weapons were fabrications since Sunnis are natural allies, huh?
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, particularly when paired with a simplistic view of human behavior.
This is why no one listens to you, Dub-Dub. You think you are so intelligent and informed and if others don't agree with you it's because they don't understand the facts... Iran is primarily shia, you say, and would never help someone else kill shia.
The world and human motivation is far more complicated than that. Human behavior is less rational and usually inconsistant.
There are some indications resulting from the intelligence haul resulting from Zarqawi's death that AlQaida targeted Sunnis in order to frame the Shia and cause internal strife.
Some time ago on Iraq the Model one of the brothers relayed a conversation at a barber shop where the men talked about Zarqawi as an American tool. (I think that the speakers were Sunni but I'm not sure.) If Sunni are loyal to Sunni why would the local conspiracy theorists have cause to believe Zarqawi was working for the US?
Could it be that identity politics *never* works?
Understanding that you *don't* understand is the first step, Dub-Dub. Try it.
Posted by Synova at June 15, 2006 07:33 PMYou're truly an idiot. The Shia and the Sunni have been playing "identity politics" for roughly 1,300 years. Yes, they've been known to suspend it from time to time, as in the 1920s when they united for a while to toss the British out.
Are the Shia of Iran giving IADs to the Sunni of Iraq? Like I wrote, "I remain to be convinced." I'm sure as hell not convinced by ABC News quoting U.S. military and intelligence officials at a time when your Liar-in-Chief was getting ready to attack Iran.
That move was held at bay for a while, anyway, when several retired generals came forward to denounce the Iraq War execution. This made it impossible for the Liar-in-Chief to launch an attack on Iran, and lo and behold, no more accusations from ABC News.
The U.S. military and the "intelligence community" have a track record of lying about these things. Their word, spoon-fed to ABC News, isn't enough. Come up with something better. Like this:
Posted by Synova at June 15, 2006 08:02 PM"SpectreCode, what evidence is there that Iran is supplying the insurgents of Iraq? Don't cite U.S. military propaganda, cite an independent source."
"Oh, and what sense what it make anyway? The Iraq insurgency is a Sunni insurgency. The Iranians are Shiites. Or, like your Liar-in-Chief, are you so stupid that you don't know that? Wait, better not answer."
"Here's what actually happened. When the U.S. invaded, as a result of Rumsfeld having not given the military the number of troops it originally requested there weren't enough people to guard a huge ammo dump near Baghdad. Insurgents looted that dump quite literally by the truck load."
"One of the things held at that dump was very large quantities of C-4 plastic explosive. C-4 is now showing up in many of the IEDs that are killing Americans. The so-called "milblogs" say nothing about this because, rather than giving a damn about American troops, they exist as nothing but Bush propaganda vehicles and therefore nothing that embarrasses your Fuhrer can ever be discussed."
Posted by WW at June 15, 2006 03:11 PM
Now who is ignoring the facts? You are either the stupidest strategist or the blindest ideologue I've ever seen. Thank God you don't plan our wars. You wouldn't recognize the Ho Chi Minh trail if it paved over your sorry ass and rolled a 5 ton truck or an HEMTT through it.
How about the Guardian?: http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,12858,1546838,00.html
Excerpts: Iranian arms intercepted at Iraqi border
Britain warns Tehran about weapons smuggling
Ewen MacAskill, diplomatic editor
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian
Britain yesterday described as "unacceptable" the smuggling of weapons from Iran into Iraq after revealing that a consignment was intercepted at the border between the two countries.
While complaints have been made in the past, it is relatively rare to have concrete evidence of such smuggling.
The British embassy in Tehran raised the issue at a meeting with the Iranian foreign ministry. Officials relayed the government's concern and pressed Iran to acknowledge that there was a problem that should be dealt with.
Article continues
Donald Rumsfeld, the US secretary of defence, warned Iran this week about the extent of smuggling. The US has been protesting for the past two years over alleged Iranian meddling in Iraq. Mr Rumsfeld told a Pentagon briefing that the smuggling was "a problem" for the Iraqi government. "It's a problem for the coalition forces. It's a problem for the international community, and ultimately, it's a problem for Iran," he said.
.........
A senior British official disclosed yesterday details of the incident two weeks ago when a group crossing from Iran was intercepted near Maysan, which is in the British controlled sector of Iraq. Iraqi security forces opened fire and the smugglers fled back to Iran leaving their cache of timers, detonators and other bomb-making equipment.
The British official said he did not know the identity of the group or those behind it but said it had the "fingerprints" of either Iran's Revolutionary Guard, controlled by the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, or the Lebanese based Hizbullah which Tehran backs. The incident came against a backdrop of tension between Iran and the west over allegations that Tehran is intent on securing a nuclear-weapons capability.
Or maybe the Christian Science Monitor, a Well Known Wingnut Bush mouthpiece, eh? --- NOT!: http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0706/p01s02-woiq.html
Excerpts:
from the July 06, 2004 edition
Iraq battles its leaking borders
Iraq's prime minister called on Syria and Iran Sunday to help check flow of weapons, fighters.
By Ann Scott Tyson | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
TALL AFAR, IRAQ – One recent moonless night, a company of US infantrymen rolled out of an austere camp and deep into uncharted terrain in the Iraqi desert. Their mission: a 160-mile assault on a suspected terrorist training camp near Iraq's border with Syria.
Surveillance had spotted some 20 men in black tunics at the small encampment. Among them was a "high value target," sought for smuggling arms and foreign fighters from Syria. Yet the mission, which detained 12 people, missed its top man, who apparently disappeared among the nomadic tribes here that are as shifting as the desert sands. "They have a very sophisticated tribal communications network throughout Iraq," says Capt. Eric Beaty, whose company led the assault in the early hours of June 27.
The incident underscores the challenges facing US and Iraqi forces as they labor to curb the influx since last year of 1,000 to 3,000 foreign militants tied to a growing string of terrorist strikes.
Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi is appealing to Syria and Iran to help check the illegal trafficking of weapons, money, and fighters into Iraq. Iraq intends to enter negotiations soon with both countries on the border problem, Mr. Allawi told reporters Sunday.
Senior Iraqi and American officials are quick to blame Syria and Iran for tacitly supporting car bombings and other attacks that have killed and wounded hundreds of people in the past month, including scores of Iraqi security forces and civilians. On Monday, Iraqi officials said they arrested two Iranians attempting to detonate a car bomb in eastern Baghdad.
"Now Iraq is open for all terrorists," admits Osama Kashmoula, governor of Iraq's northern Nineveh Province, which shares a 155-mile boundary with Syria. "We've arrested Iranians, Jordanians, Palestinians, Algerians - I don't know the number," he said.
US commanders agree. "I don't think there's any difficulty pushing weapons or fighters across the border," says Army Col. Michael Rounds, who commands the main US ground unit in northern Iraq, a 5,000-strong Stryker brigade task force......
As for whether weapons are coming only from Iran, you are the worst of intelligence analysts and military planners if you don't think weapons, men and money are also coming from Syria, and even, Jordan and Turkey. In those cases, it is possible they may be coming in without the permission or assistance of the governments of those countries, but since sheep, gasoline, and money seem to be able to pass freely across those borders despite the best efforts of Jordan, Turkey or Syria, it would be ludicrous to say no outside country is smuggling in weapons to the insurgency. (I can cite articles discussing smuggling in general there too.)
And as for C-4 from Iraq's old arms dumps, it is entirely possible that the majority of explosives in Iraq came from those dumps. After all it was surmised it would take over 2 full years of nonstop EOD operations to eliminate all of Iraq's excess arms in over 60 dumps in the country, approximately 1/3rd of them in the Northern half of the country where no US forces were until the insurgency had already commenced on 15 April 03. (By the way, it was RDX which was stolen there, not C-4. C-4 is made from RDX, but is not RDX)
But C-4 pretty much grows on trees in this world, coming from Czech, Iranian, Syrian, Jordanian, Russian, US, British, French, German sources, and any other country that has an explosives mill and it can be smuggled as easily as sheep, guns, liquor, freon, or people.
There is nothing magic or WMD infrastructure intensive about it. If you can make gunpowder or TNT, you can pretty much make C-4. So your supposition that all the C-4 in Iraq came from one Iraqi Saddamite weapons depot is pretty idiotic. If the 10% of the insurgents who supposedly came from outside Iraq got into the country, and if Hamas can smuggle $20M in 5 suitcases into Gaza, then a lot of Semtex, PBX, or C-4 can be smuggled across the Syrian and Iranian borders.
As for the insurgency being a strictly Sunni insurgency, what is Mookie al Sadr doing? His airhead Mehdis are fighting all the time in Sadr City and Basra and Samarra, even. It ain't because they are pro-Sunni. It is because they are Muslim jihadis who want to fight any infidel they can find. Try listening to their press releases sometime and take them at face value. Is the majority of the insurgency Sunni? Probably yes. Is it solely Sunni? No. It is Islamic in nature. It is sometimes what makes a typical young Muslim Man Muslim. He feels he must participate in any jihad available which is "defending" Islam. I think you are dumb to believe this doesn't qualify.
Just like there are many reasons young Americans join the Army, there are many reasons young Muslims join the jihadis. Not all of them have to do with whether their mother is a Shiite and their father is a Sunni.
Any other tripe and rash generalizations you want to lay on us, lamebrain?
Subsunk
Well subby I have to hand it to you. A stopped clock, even a drunken one, is right twice a day. You bring persuasive evidence that the Iranian shia are supplying the Iraqi shia. Maybe if the incompetent Rumsfeld, serving the Liar-in-Chief, hadn't vetoed the military's original war plan, the U.S. could have sealed the borders.
That said, it's ain't exactly a Ho Chi Minh Trail. Oh, and where is the NVA? This is still a case of the U.S. military being defeated by a bunch of irregulars whose supply lines and organization don't begin to approach that of the adversary in Vietnam.
Not only that, but the terrain in Iraq isn't even in the same universe of difficulty. I still say this is the biggest flop since the Italians failed to beat the Ethiopians.
Posted by WW at June 15, 2006 08:32 PMSo WW hates torture, Robert Mapplethorpe must really blow his pious mind to kingdom come.
Posted by syn at June 15, 2006 10:29 PMThe loftiness is staggering.
Subsunk cites reports that most of us have been aware of since milblogs have linked them or similar reports in the past.
Dub-Dub admits Subsunk is right without ever even intimating that he was wrong or that there is anything lacking in his world view... the one where he claims to understand the motivation and sectarian behavior of middle eastern peoples and anyone who doesn't sign on to his simplistic logic is a complete idiot.
What else do you know that isn't so, Dub-Dub?
Posted by Synova at June 15, 2006 11:00 PM"Well subby I have to hand it to you. A sto
