Tbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7011 posts, RR: 26 Posted (7 years 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2085 times:
Yesterday was a terrible day in Baghdad and throughout the country of Iraq.
BAGHDAD - Grieving relatives retrieved bodies from hospital morgues Thursday, and passers-by gawked at the giant crater left by a market bomb in one of four attacks that killed 183 people on the bloodiest day since the U.S. troop increase began nine weeks ago.
But violence did not abate Thursday, as a suicide bomber exploded in another mostly Shiite district, killing at least 11 people and wounding 28, police said. The car bomb exploded next to a fuel tanker in Karradah, setting fire to the truck. The death toll was expected to rise.
U.S. officials have reported a decrease in sectarian killings in Baghdad since the U.S.-Iraqi security crackdown was launched Feb. 14. But the past week has seen several spectacular attacks in the capital, including a suicide bombing inside parliament and a powerful blast that collapsed a landmark bridge across the Tigris River. The number of bodies dumped in the streets of Baghdad also has risen significantly.
Brig. Gen. Qassim al-Moussawi, the Iraqi military spokesman, said, "We have not seen such a wave of attacks since the security plan began. These are terrorist challenges. Ninety-five percent of those killed today were civilians."...
...Nationwide the number of people killed Wednesday or found dead was 233, which was second only to a total of 281 killed or found dead on Nov. 23, 2006. Those figures are according to AP record-keeping, which began in May 2005.
UH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2061 times:
Quoting TedTAce (Reply 1): Me too. You got to wonder if the more twisted republican operatives are taking some delight in the VT incident as a distraction. This story was barely visible in last nights coverage.
What the hell are you talking about, Ted?
These stories are never huge media events. Never reaching 1/10 the size of the VirginiaTech story.
And it has nothing to do with political operatives. It has everything to do with the fact the American public is completely removed from the war being wage 8,000 miles away.
It's not top news, because a lot of people don't care.
I just don't know how it can be done, until we find some way to teach Muslims to have respect for the lives of other Muslims. There is so much killing in the name of Allah occurring in Iraq, one wonders if Allah has a direct hot-line to these murders? They certainly seem to be getting "messages" by the hour from him.
Iraqis killing Iraqis. Syrians killing Iraqis. Iranians killing Iraqis. Saudis killing Iraqis. Yemeni killing Iraqis. And the moment US soldier step between their barbaric killing sprees... they instantly become the focus of each and every one of them.
We're the cops trying to break up a drunken bar fight.
Muslims, Muslims, Muslims .............. and what has the whole mess to do with Islam and "Muslims" ? True, people in the area happen to be Muslims ..................................
the problem has a name and that is "Iraq". You can blame various sides, but it of course is a fact that internal conflicts inevitably leads to "help" from neighbours, for instance in the Spanish Civil War, as shown here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Guernica
Great example of what is wrong with the Middle East; instead of pointing the finger, laying blame, you ENABLE, you profer excuses, reasons for why things are the way they are. Offer a solution that is viable.
Yup I blame Muslims for the majority of the killing.
Because you see MAF... I am totally and completely NUTS! You see... I am so crazy that when Muslims are violently murdering one another over petty differences... here it comes!... I am so crazy that I actually blame them for their murderous acts!
AH! Send me to the nut house!
Of course I blame them. The real question, MAF, why do you continually write the Muslim community blank checks to continue their horrific goals in Iraq? Why do you continually turn a blind eye to the Muslims who are spilling blood by the hundreds every day?
It's a funny thing MAF... because you love to blame America for everything fucked up in Iraq. But last time I checked, it was me... a murderous, heartless American soldier... who landed his Black Hawk between a group of gunmen and pinned-down Iraqis, so that we could safely evacuate them. It's funny that EVIL AMERICANS are continually putting themselves at risk to save lives in Iraq, while their fellow Muslims are wildly butchering and murdering.
But you never seem to have time to vigorously go after the murdering Muslims,... but there is always time in the day to take cheap shots at US Soldiers. Isn't that right MAF?
Poor analogy. For us to get involved in breaking up a drunken bar fight, someone has to call and ask us to respond to break up the fight. Nobody called the U.S. from Baghdad and said, "Come break up our fight please".
UH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1963 times:
Quoting Itsjustme (Reply 12): Poor analogy. For us to get involved in breaking up a drunken bar fight, someone has to call and ask us to respond to break up the fight. Nobody called the U.S. from Baghdad and said, "Come break up our fight please".
Nope... it's a perfect analogy.
Maybe you'd be right if the entire country/region was united against the allied forces in Iraq... but they're not. Muslims from numerous middle eastern countries are engaged in a mammoth battle against EACH OTHER.
What we encountered was a continual decrease in the number of direct attacks against US/Allied troops and installations. Mortar attacks decreased. RPG attacks decreased. Random small arms fire in the direction of soldiers decreased. Etc...
Slowly the focus was less on killing American soldiers, and more on killing fellow Muslims.
Where we get ourselves hurt, is when we are called out to stop the fighting between the multitude of battling sects. Two sides are engaged in a gun battle, we roll up, step in between to attempt to restore order, and it's very dangerous. We lose some very fine young men and women because they were trying to put an end to needless murder and butchery between Muslims fighting Muslims.
Maybe you'd be right if the entire country/region was united against the allied forces in Iraq... but they're not.
I understand the entire region isn't against allied forces in Iraq. My point is, your analogy that troops doing battle in Iraq are like cops breaking up a bar fight is flawed. Cops typically do not get involved in breaking up a drunken bar fight without being requested to do so. No one called our Commander in Chief and said, "Please come to Iraq and break up our fight".
He pretty much took on that initiative all by himself.
53Sqdn From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1930 times:
BTW, how many can remember when Sadam was our 'buddy'? You know, almost the best thing since sliced bread in the region. Who sold him Aircraft? Who sold him weapons? Who the feck is to blame? Yup! Has to be an outside force surely
Emirates773er From Pakistan, joined Jun 2005, 1448 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1918 times:
Quoting Itsjustme (Reply 17): understand the entire region isn't against allied forces in Iraq. My point is, your analogy that troops doing battle in Iraq are like cops breaking up a bar fight is flawed. Cops typically do not get involved in breaking up a drunken bar fight without being requested to do so. No one called our Commander in Chief and said, "Please come to Iraq and break up our fight".
Exactly. The problem here is that people like to intervene into other peoples affairs without thinking twice what the outcome may be. If you got yourself into sorting out a bar fight then you need to do it right else stop blaming the drunks and don't let the door hit you on your way out. Simple really.
AGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 22, posted (7 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1904 times:
Quoting 53Sqdn (Reply 19): BTW, how many can remember when Sadam was our 'buddy'? You know, almost the best thing since sliced bread in the region. Who sold him Aircraft? Who sold him weapons? Who the feck is to blame? Yup! Has to be an outside force surely
Saddam left the farm guy .. he had a chance to be a great leader of Iraq. He could have been far better off cultivating a up front alliance with the US. But he chose to become the corrupt ,power hungry tyrant that it led to his down fall.
And besides the Fench and Russians were his largest Arms supplier...
You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
Flyingbabydoc From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (7 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1898 times:
Quoting ME AVN FAN (Reply 5): inevitably leads to "help" from neighbours, for instance in the Spanish Civil War
I did not quite get your analogy. If you meant neighbours such Iran or Syria, than maybe appropriate, yet interesting on how you vehemently defended such countries when the subject was Israel. Perhaps then your associating these neighbours with Nazi Germany implicates some deeper (personal) issues (and wishes) with the ongoing conflict with the Jewish people. Otherwise, you were associating these "neighbours" with the US, which would make such comparison preposterous and infamous. Should this be the case (i.e. the US acting similarly to the Condor Legion in Spain), they would simply annihilate as many cities and population as to subjugate the country completely and install a phony dictator to keep-safe the recent-gained authority, not remove one dictator and attempt to restore peace in a shattered country. Actually, a bombing like Guernica would make life much easier and bring the war faster to an end, although morally inconceivable and a FAR cry from what is being done (see all posts by UH60FtRucker for that matter, if you are able to unbiasedly read). To call US troops anything similar to the Condor Legion is not only insulting, but rather historically inaccurate.
See above. As I said, the reasons may be debatable (for the US presence in Iraq), but to compare them with Nazi mercenaries is simply wrong. Not that who posted it cares in the least bit, but it still remains wrong.
UH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (7 years 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1898 times:
Quoting Itsjustme (Reply 17): Cops typically do not get involved in breaking up a drunken bar fight without being requested to do so.
Law enforcement will only stop disorder/violence when someone calls them to do so?
The rest of the time they just sit there and wait for the call?
Quoting Itsjustme (Reply 17): I understand the entire region isn't against allied forces in Iraq. My point is, your analogy that troops doing battle in Iraq are like cops breaking up a bar fight is flawed. Cops typically do not get involved in breaking up a drunken bar fight without being requested to do so. No one called our Commander in Chief and said, "Please come to Iraq and break up our fight".
You're talking about the reasons why we went to Iraq in the first place. And I would completely agree my analogy doesn't make any sense for those reasons. But I am talking about why we're still in Iraq, and what our primary mission is.
And lately, our primary mission is to try and maintain some semblance of peace between multiple groups of Muslims who are violently slaughtering one another. And yes, Iraqis are asking the US to help them in this respect.
The way it works was typically a local leader would contact US forces and inform us of local fighting. They might give us a vague description, or they might give us exact details. We would go to the area, at their request, and attempt to restore order.
Or if there was an active engagement in process, we would get a request by Iraqi officials or the ISF to intervene... the closest American assets would move in to break up the scuffle. When you looked at Iraq, and you looked at the areas we had overwhelming numbers - where we met Army doctrine of 1 soldier per 20 citizens - there was relative peace and quiet. We essentially "owned" that piece of real estate, and denied the insurgents the ability to operate and survive.
However, when you looked at areas of Iraq where our numbers were weak, is where you typically found the highest level of violence and disorder. So we move into that region to crush the insurgency... but by doing so we have to pull troops away from other areas, thus leaving those places now vulnerable for insurgents to move in.
The only way we can insure success is by meeting the doctrine of 1:20. And to do so, we need A LOT more troops. Just like General Anthony Zinni predicted in the late 1990s - the US would require roughly 400,000 troops to control Iraq. And with only 140,000 of us in Iraq, we're proving just how right he is.
Quoting Emirates773er (Reply 20): Exactly. The problem here is that people like to intervene into other peoples affairs without thinking twice what the outcome may be. If you got yourself into sorting out a bar fight then you need to do it right else stop blaming the drunks and don't let the door hit you on your way out. Simple really.
So don't get involved?
Even if both sides are wildly murdering one another? Even when the lack of respect for human life is disgustingly absent?
Don't get involved? That's pretty cold hearted.
Quoting Emirates773ER (Reply 21): And I always though Saudi Arabia, Oman, Egypt, Jordan, Yemen to be allies with the US.
The governments, perhaps.
But I can testify that we regularly encountered foreign nationals from those nations, fighting on the behalf of the insurgency.
[Edited 2007-04-19 17:35:04]
: So you think the US should get involved in EVERY conflict and/or even where there is a lack of respect for human life? Since when is the US suppose t
: Unfortunately, ME AVN FAN has showed us a very ugly side of himself in the past, and tipped his cards regarding his true feelings towards Jews. He po
: Same reason why it does not seem to be a problem to watch these massive killings and do nothing about it, or rather blame all in the US to begin with
: The average American dimwit is probably more interested in what the Olson twins are eating (or not), than how many tens of thousands Iraqis have needl
: No, not the US only, but certainly all of us who witness such conflicts should voice our disgust and do everything possible to prevent any further de
30 ME AVN FAN
: I do NOT write blank checks to anybody. The problem is NOT "the Muslim community" but murderous groups of extremists in Iraq. They happen to be Musli
: I don't think I suggested we get involved militarily with every conflict. But I did question whether it was wise to simply ignore them... because, "I
: And I would hope more people would think like you. Particularly in what concerns the callousness towards human life. When you have to fight to save o
: 'Saddam left the farm guy' ???? What's that supposed to mean AG100? Then your next sentence sums it up nicely... He could have been far better off cu
: really? Well let me requote what you said......... that to me looks like you are suggesting we get involved. so tell me this, do you honestly believe
35 ME AVN FAN
: USA, UK, Saudi Arabia, Iran. - While it is undeniable that also Yemenis, Omanis, Jordanians, Egyptians and Syrians were and are among the culprits, Y
: Interesting to note that some here opposed to Iraq are quick to call for the US to get involved in Darfur and Zimbabwe. Whoever here has called for U
: Still, if this is becoming (who am I kidding - it is already) a civil war similar to the Spanish one, the resolution of the conflict will only come w
: Good point. Like I pointed out to MAF earlier in the thread, often the same men and women who are selflessly stepping between Muslims killing Muslims
: Yup. While we dump on all those other Middle East countries -- Iraq's neighbours -- for clandestine meddling in Iraq's internal affairs, we forget th
: Nope, wrong, sorry. The vast majority of the violence in Iraq is sectarian.
: Very. There are 230 dead Iraqis in one day's of extremely bad violence (bombings, shooting, etc.) If this were to happen in any other country - and I
: This kind of thinking boggles the mind. "If we hadn't gotten involved in the ME hundreds of years ago." "If we hadn't left Saddam in charge after 199
: Before a lot of you continue in the same line of Rumsfeld and Saddam picture, you better read up on the actual history of military support for Iraq, b
: To logical babydoc .. I like to simplify things a bit ... Simple question The US plan for invasion was to overthrow Saddam eliminate his weapons and
: [quote=UH60FtRucker,reply=3]I just don't know how it can be done, until we find some way to teach Muslims to have respect for the lives of other Musli
: Not at all. Being cold hearted and closing your eyes to this massacre would be disgusting to say the least but the question is how should it be stopp
: It's quite disingenuous to ignore the religious aspect of all this, specifically that Sadr, the Iranian Ayatollahs, Muslim clerics in the KSA and Egy
48 ME AVN FAN
: I honour the endeavours of the American soldiers in this respect, but regard the American presence as one of the major reasons for the mess. - Here o
: Now you're just contradicting yourself. The violence is sectarian, therefore it is a 'Muslim thing', just like The Troubles in Northern Ireland were
: You mean like every American in the ME? If one hasn't been invited by anyone in troubled parties to offer solutions, they should keep their mouth shu
: Can someone explain why all this violence was not happening when Sadam was in power ??
: Because the troublemakers were taken out of circulation by any means necessary prior to them causing any problem.
: The violence was happening under Saddam's reign, look at the Kurds that were gassed, the Sunni's in the Southern marshes that were exterminated.
: The violence was happening under Saddam's reign, look at the Kurds that were gassed, the Sunni's in the Southern marshes that were exterminated. I bel