Killing children

[buttercup]

We, the civilized, like to think that people are admirable if they use their brains to create things, think rationally, solve problems. Them? The only thing they can think of, by way of glorifying their god, is to blow people up.

That puts their level of thinking on a par with chimpanzees. It puts their morals on a par with cockroaches. They are the scum of the earth.

 

[slowandeasy]

July 14, 2005
Data Shows Rising Toll of Iraqis From Insurgency
By SABRINA TAVERNISE

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraqi civilians and police officers died at a rate of more than 800 a month between August and May, according to figures released in June by the Interior Ministry.

In response to questions from The New York Times, the ministry said that 8,175 Iraqis were killed by insurgents in the 10 months that ended May 31. The ministry did not give detailed figures for the months before August 2004, nor did it provide a breakdown of the figures, which do not include either Iraqi soldiers or civilians killed during American military operations.

While the figures were not broken down month by month, it has been clear since the government of Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari took over after the Jan. 30 election that the insurgency is taking an increasing toll, killing Iraqi civilians and security workers at a faster rate.

In June the interior minister, Bayan Jabr, told reporters that insurgents had killed about 12,000 Iraqis since the start of the American occupation - a figure officials have emphasized is approximate - an average monthly toll of about 500.

The issue of civilian deaths in Iraqi has been a delicate one, with some contending that the Bush administration and the Pentagon have deliberately avoided body counts to deprive their critics of a potent argument against the war. Estimates have ranged from the 12,000 offered by Mr. Jabr to as many as 100,000 in a widely reported study last year. The new figures are likely to add to that debate.

From: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/14/i...=1121313600&partner=homepage&pagewanted=print

How much worse would it be if Saddam were still in charge? Not much at all.

I just don't understand you TOV... You are in love with cutting and posting articles. If you were under the rule of Saddam in Iraq, you probably would have been arrested and thrown in jail just for possessing them or criticizing their govt...

But you come on here and deny the benefits of the American Invasion, even as you are able to quote statistics that would not have been allowed in Iraq under Saddam Hussein...

How do you know how much worse things would have been under Saddam? You answer the question "Not much at all"? The fact is that any stats that they might have kept are probably very inaccurate. I am sure if Saddam had people killed he did not allow his statisticians to keep track of them..

The fact that you can now at least get some picture of what is going on over there is an improvement from what it was before...

We were so clueless of what was happening in that country that the UN thought they have Nuclear weapons or WMD..

Please stop trying to kill the messenger...

 

[slowandeasy]

Collateral damage.

I wonder how many Iraqi children the American bombs have killed and they have dismissed it as "collateral damage".

I wonder how many children were raped tortured and killed during Saddam's reign... We will never know the answer to that question. The deaths of innocents are inevitable during war... Saddam's "soldiers" chose to hide behind women and children when attacking makes it worse.... The fact that Iraqi children were killed by American bombs is terrible.

I don't see Langvile coming and posting in a froth when that happens.

Is the killing of the children by the insurgents abhorrent? Yes.

Is the killing of the children by Americans abhorrent? Yes.

Americans are killing children based on lies by the Bush government and an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation by a country drunk on it's own power.

Equating the fact that a bomb intended to destroy a military target drops on a residential neighborhood instead to insurgents bombing American soldiers knowing that children will be around them in order to alienate the Americans shows your insanity...

Insurgents are killing children as a means to rid their country of illegal invaders. It is a tactic to keep the Americans away from civilans. If it works and is for the greater cause of freeing a country then maybe there is a justification. Maybe by NOT doing so, MORE Iraqi children will be killed by errant American bombs in collateral damage.
Who is more abhorrent in this case?

USA.

Who do the insurgents represent? Surely you do not think it's they represent the Iraqi people??? The insurgents are not interested in peace, they are interested in Chaos...that's where they make their money... Just like the Western world's military suppliers....

MrLuvr you are not...

 

[TOVisitor]

I just don't understand you TOV... You are in love with cutting and posting articles. If you were under the rule of Saddam in Iraq, you probably would have been arrested and thrown in jail just for possessing them or criticizing their govt...

OK. Agreed. But I don't live there.

But you come on here and deny the benefits of the American Invasion,

Other than getting rid of Saddam, what are those benefits? Please enumerate them for us.

... that the UN thought they have Nuclear weapons or WMD..

Please stop trying to kill the messenger...

You are pretty clueless yourself. The UN thought Saddam had nuclear weapons? NOT! The UN did not give authorization for the invasion of Iraq, despite Shrub asking for it. One of the reasons may have been that the UN did not believe that Saddam had WMDs, which of course turned out to be absolutely true.

Try googling "iraq better off"

From: http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/0404/06blix.html

This is an OLD article, but you will note that Blix worked for the UN "whose inspection team didn't make any significant weapons finds during months of searching Iraq before the war" says "What's positive is that Saddam and his bloody regime is gone, but when figuring out the score, the negatives weigh more."

For a more recent perspective, try reading this: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/8101422/site/newsweek/ or reading this: http://www.juancole.com/2005/06/12000-dead-in-iraqi-guerrilla-war-rate.html or this http://www.newsobserver.com/nation_world/iraq/story/2459887p-8864293c.html or this http://www.albionmonitor.com/0505a/baghdadcholera.html

 

[langeweile]

Like we didn't know already.....

With the exception of MrLuvr (which is surprising in itself) not one of the leftwing pundits here have condemmend what happened yesterday.
TO in his usual copy and paste mode debatting style, didn't find it necessary..just once to attack the terorists..instead he goes on and on cutting and pasting his daily dogma from his bibles (insert any leftwing blog here)
has your judgement and humanity degenerated to such low levels? that you can't find a word of sorrow or regret for innocent children being blown up, while standing in line for some toys.
Has your partisan agenda degenerated your humanity?

Can the absence of regret in the miliotary leadership over "collateral damage" be your excuse? In that case you are not much better that they are...or is your humanity subject to politics as well?

Like most people here I like to toss mud and be offensive at times, but there has to be a point where we put our differences aside, and come together as people.

Shame on you and others...

 

[slowandeasy]

OK. Agreed. But I don't live there.


Other than getting rid of Saddam, what are those benefits? Please enumerate them for us.

Will get to that later unless someone else does it first then I will not respond.

You are pretty clueless yourself. The UN thought Saddam had nuclear weapons? NOT!

If I remember correctly, the UN were sending inspectors into Iraq. They met with numerous road blocks, and finally were denied access leaving the UN to stew in it's own juice. Logical conclusion: they were hiding something...

The UN did not give authorization for the invasion of Iraq, despite Shrub asking for it. One of the reasons may have been that the UN did not believe that Saddam had WMDs, which of course turned out to be absolutely true.

The invasion of Iraq and what the UN believed are two different things. As usual, the UN was afraid/powerless/unable to act. The UN did not give authorization for the invasion of Iraq, and GWB took his own steps. HE WAS WRONG.... now all the hindsighters like yourself can come in and pontificate

The fact that he was wrong is not a crime... I will say it again, I did not support the decision to go to war, but at least I have to give the POTUS credit for taking a stand. Unlike so many others in the world.

Try googling "iraq better off"

Right now Iraq is probably not better off. I do not know. But "googling iraq better off" will only provide me with the crap that has infected your ability to objectively form your own opinion. You quote these articles from the internet and the media as if the writers are objective????

You seem to think and plan like Mr. Bush...
1. Storm Iraq and give it a catchy name (forgot what it was)
2. Don't lose any troops (actually gain about 100,000 when the Iraqis join us)
3. The Iraqis will be so happy to have us 'liberate them" they will shower us
with gold, mer and frankensense (what the hell is mer and frankensense)
We will use that to pay for the war.. .HELL we will probably even make
a tidy profit
4. Find the WMDs and be the hero of the world.
5. They will build a statue of me in Bagdad, and everyday young virgins will
put fresh flowers on my statue's manhood
... the rest of it gets XXXX-rated.... so I will spare you the details..

Iraq has to go through growing pains like any other country. Unfortunately, thta can only happen once they accept the new regime... that will not happen until the insurgents are forced out or at least reduced to a point where they are not a threat to the government.

This is the real work TOV not some bs fantasy of yours or Mr. Bush.

 

[langeweile]

I just don't understand you TOV... You are in love with cutting and posting articles. ...

Nobody does...

 

[papasmerf]

Who better knows the horror and evil of war than one who has served?
Vets are your best source for the consequences of incompetent military
leaders and tacticans. We know because we walked the walk.

Iraq is so similar to 'Nam. I've held injured children in my arms and
recovered dead bodies from road mines. All those deaths were a
direct and proximate result of an ill conceived policy of the Johnson
Administration [a democrat]. I was an accomplice in an immoral and
unjust war. Being a loyal young American and serving in the military
doesn't shield me of that guilt. Patriotism doesn't trump morality.

To even intimate that I shouldn't be acknowledged for my service because I
passionately object to Rumsfeld's policies is ludicrous. Who better would
know the consequences of such a mistake? I grieve for the killed and wounded
Americans and Iraqis and all those that have been crippled or killed in Iraq.

We are responsible for the security of the Iraqi people under the law of nations.
We have done a terrible job living up to that responsibility. The deaths of
those children are on the hands of both the US and the insurgents [guerillas].

This is all so familiar to what happened 4 decades ago.

Don

Don,

Your are clearly in distress over your government and find fault with them time and time again. I suggest again you refuse to accept another penny from the American People and resign your pension. This would be the ultimate protest any former soldier could make. It would send a clear message you no longer support the Millitary or Government and want no part of it.

 

[TOVisitor]

Don,

Your are clearly in distress over your government and find fault with them time and time again. I suggest again you refuse to accept another penny from the American People and resign your pension. This would be the ultimate protest any former soldier could make. It would send a clear message you no longer support the Millitary or Government and want no part of it.

Translation: f** you.

Yup, that's a great example of exactly how the Republicans support the troops and the Vets. Well done, papa.

 

[papasmerf]

Pops:

Let me try once again to explain my position. I support my brothers and sisters in
uniform. I was a major in philosphy and am a practicing attorney. I believe in the
rule of law. This war is not a just war. It does not meet the test. We were not
invaded by or threatened by Saddam. We have no just cause [causa bellum]
to be in Iraq. Not only does our invasion not meet the principles of a just war
but it is also against the law of nations.

I am against my military serving in an unjust [legal] and immoral [philosophy]
war. The costs to those 125,000 Americans in Iraq today and the Americans
who are paying for it [$200 Billion] are not supported by the benefits we receive.
On legal and moral grounds as well as the cost/benefit analysis, this war is
flat out wrong. The same thing happened in 'Nam.

For you to tell me that I do not support my comrads in arms is absurd.
Yes, I do not support the Administration. I did not support the Johnson
Administration when I returned from 'Nam.

Patriotism does not trump ethics. A citizen that supports its government's
immorality is not a Patriot. He's an accomplice to a crime.

As a matter of conscience and as an American given the right under the
Bill of Rights I have a duty to speak out when I see my country
going down the wrong path.

By the way, I spent 3 years in counter-intelligence/terrorism, Middle East
Terrorists Groups at the Defense Intelligence Agency in DC. I'm well versed
in the matters of which I comment.

Pops, you don't know what you don't know.

Enough said!

Don. Sigh, apparently you're a classic target for propaganda and have no
experience or study in this arena.

Don

PS: Pops, what experience and knowledge do you use when making these
derogatory comments? What is your background and how informed are you?
I dare say, its very unlikely you'll respond to my question about your experience
and knowledge.

Don

it was about time you stood up proud and tall.

thank you

 

[blitz]

...I suggest again you refuse to accept another penny from the American People and resign your pension. This would be the ultimate protest any former soldier could make. It would send a clear message you no longer support the Millitary or Government and want no part of it.

Papa, it is about time you retract your statement in the face of someone that knows and has lived the ideals that you purport to support. The same person that just slapped you like a newborn baby requires a straightup apology. IMO

 

[TOVisitor]

Don

it was about time you stood up proud and tall.

thank you

In most circles, this sort of thing is called pandering and patronizing. In papa's world, it's called flattery.

 

[langeweile]

In most circles, this sort of thing is called pandering and patronizing. In papa's world, it's called flattery.

Don't you just hate that when people actually show some real convictions? You should just shut up and say thank you to people like DQ.
Because of their sacrifice you are allowed to spread your stupidity around without being arrested.

All the leftwing psycho babble and googling is nothing but games in comparisson...so please show some respect...boy...

 

[slowandeasy]

Pops:

I believe in the rule of law. This war is not a just war.

We have no just cause [causa bellum]
to be in Iraq.

Not only does our invasion not meet the principles of a just war
but it is also against the law of nations.

I am against my military serving in an unjust [legal] and immoral [philosophy]
war. The costs to those 125,000 Americans in Iraq today and the Americans
who are paying for it [$200 Billion] are not supported by the benefits we receive.
On legal and moral grounds as well as the cost/benefit analysis, this war is
flat out wrong. The same thing happened in 'Nam.

We have to take responsibility for the consequences of this occupation.
You are on a slippery slope when you argue the US is not responsible.
We are responsible for the security of the people in Iraq. That is the
direct consequence of being an occupying military.

We have done a dreadful job of securing the country since the very beginning.
The instability and insurgent movement would never have happened had we
sent 250,000 troops to Iraq. The generals in the Pentagon argued before the
invasion that would be the required force. But Rumsfeld dismissed their
advise and we are now living with the consequences of his poor judgment.
Unfortunately, the Iraqis are the ones that are feeling the brunt of his
poor planning.

No, the US is responsible. "You break it, you own it."

Don

Don I had respected your opinion in the second quote above as it seemed that you had high morals... however, the first quote seems to directly contradict your second.

Don, this is the kind of nonsense that really makes my blood boil... You have shown your true colors... No matter what the US did you would still criticize...

 

[WoodPeckr]

Classic lange 'babble-babble'

Originally Posted by TOVisitor
In most circles, this sort of thing is called pandering and patronizing. In papa's world, it's called flattery.

Don't you just hate that when people actually show some real convictions? You should just shut up and say thank you to people like DQ.
Because of their sacrifice you are allowed to spread your stupidity around without being arrested.

All the leftwing psycho babble and googling is nothing but games in comparisson...so please show some respect...boy...

What the f**k is lange saying?!?
There you go again lange disjointedly drifting about like a crack-ho high on crack, or in your case lange is that more like a Limbaugh Lemming high on OxyContin!
Care to enlighten us on just what you meant....the logic of your response is quite foggy. Unlike you lange,TOV, DQ and I for that matter are all US VETS and I at least wonder how our sacrifices allowed to you spread your stupidity around without being arrested?

Crank up your smoke & mirrors machine and lob out a lame retort....if you can lange.........

 

[TOVisitor]

Don't you just hate that when people actually show some real convictions? You should just shut up and say thank you to people like DQ.
Because of their sacrifice you are allowed to spread your stupidity around without being arrested.

You know, Schicklgruber, you really are an effing douchebag.

It's because of guys like me serving in the US military that a-holes like you aren't still goose-stepping around Berlin. The freedoms that I fought for allowed you to take your sorry ass and emmigrate to Canada.

Once again, you are sent to the woodshed. No more communications with you.

 

[Pete Graves]

It's because of guys like me serving in the US military

I find it fascinating that seemingly every leftwinger served in the US Military yet the military votes Republican by a wide margin every election. Since I'm sure no one lies on the internet, it must be just a statistical anomaly on this board.

 

[langeweile]

You know, Schicklgruber, you really are an effing douchebag.

It's because of guys like me serving in the US military that a-holes like you aren't still goose-stepping around Berlin. The freedoms that I fought for allowed you to take your sorry ass and emmigrate to Canada.

Once again, you are sent to the woodshed. No more communications with you.

if you ever served a single day in the military, than my name should be schicklgruber from this day on.
Your infantile posts don't reflect the maturity a guy would have, having ever served in WW2.
If my math is right you would have to be in your 70's to have served in WW2. I am sorry your language and demeanour doesn't reflect this kind of maturity.

My guess is that you barely made it past thirty and are probably some whiny twit, that never worked an honest day in his life..

Or...you are just full of shit....

 

[langeweile]

Originally Posted by TOVisitor
In most circles, this sort of thing is called pandering and patronizing. In papa's world, it's called flattery.



What the f**k is lange saying?!?
There you go again lange disjointedly drifting about like a crack-ho high on crack, or in your case lange is that more like a Limbaugh Lemming high on OxyContin!
Care to enlighten us on just what you meant....the logic of your response is quite foggy. Unlike you lange,TOV, DQ and I for that matter are all US VETS and I at least wonder how our sacrifices allowed to you spread your stupidity around without being arrested?

Crank up your smoke & mirrors machine and lob out a lame retort....if you can lange.........

Oh Woody the shinnning knight in armour..comes out to rescue poor ole TO..be careful you are being judged by the company you keep.

Don't waste your credibility on this one....

 

[TOVisitor]

... yet the military votes Republican by a wide margin ...

You will find that "wide margin" is about 2:1. Looks like the 1's are here.

Sorry, petey.