Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
British Take On The US Military In Iraq  
User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2787 times:

from www.news.com.au

US heavy-handedness baffles British
By Daniel McGory
April 03, 2003


THE American infantryman controlling the checkpoint on the road to Nasiriyah was clad in so much body armour he looked like Darth Vader.


US soldier patrols in Northern Iraq


Dark goggles covered most of his face, and a khaki scarf was wrapped around his nose and mouth. His M16 assault rifle was pointed at the windscreen of the car, which was clearly being driven by a young woman who had young children in the backseat.

This did not stop the young soldier from screaming at the occupants to "step out of the vehicle and move to the side of the road". How much of that muffled command the frightened woman understood was unclear, but as she hesitated and tried to comfort the youngest of her children, who was trying to clamber over the seat towards her, the infantrymen yelled even louder.

It was difficult to tell who was the more nervous. Rifles remained trained on the mother and children, who were made to stand 20m away from their car while it was searched. American patrols now appear to treat everyone as if they are suicide bombers.

British troops who have witnessed the Americans at close quarters in this war are baffled at their approach to Iraqi civilians. One captain in the Royal Marines, watching a US unit monitor a checkpoint, said: "The Americans are still behaving like invaders, not liberators. They behave as if they hate these people."

Many American troops speak as though they do.

You often hear them describe "Eye-rakis" in disparaging language. One US officer in charge of delivering humanitarian aid earlier this week likened the crush of people waiting to get hold of food and water to a pack of stray dogs.

His troops lashed at those pushing to the front with fists and rifle butts, even firing shots into the air.

When Irish Guards were nearly mobbed by a crowd trying to grab the food they were delivering to Zubayr this week, Major David Hannah urged his men to keep calm and get the people to sit down.

"They need to have their dignity respected," he said.

British commanders are appalled at how the Americans pulverise anything from afar before daring to set foot out of their armoured vehicles.

This was no better illustrated than in the first skirmish of the land war, where the American 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit was handed what should have been the easy capture of the port of Umm Qasr.

Royal Marine officers watched incredulously as their US compatriots bombed and shelled the town for five days. The experience of nearly 30 years policing Ulster has taught British forces that the only way to root out gunmen is to patrol on foot, searching house by house.

The rhetoric of US soldiers is often provocative. An American colonel, asked what the role of the Fifth Corps would be, replied: "We are going in there. We are going to root out the bad guys and kill them." His men whooped and punched the air as if they were watching a football match.

A British officer who witnessed this exchange shook his head, saying: "We are working from a different script but you won't get anyone in Whitehall to admit it."






This is a legitimate Australian news agency, and the comments are from the Brits in Iraq, not sure if you guys are getting these reports so i've put it here for you to read.



ADG

59 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29698 posts, RR: 59
Reply 1, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2757 times:

Doesn't surprise me. The Brits and the Americans do have differenc Motus Operandi.

Patton didn't think much of Montgomery either.




OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2752 times:

I don't really have an opinion either way on this report at the moment but I do know that many Americans are not seeing these type of reports and hence the post.

Draw your own conclussions.

Check the picture though, it's like watching Star Wars  Laugh out loud
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,3600,246597,00.jpg




ADG


User currently offlineIndianguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2760 times:

This is one story we arent going to hear on American news channels!

They can only report what the Pentagon allows them to!

-Roy


User currently offlineGlenn From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2747 times:

Looks like a Knight on a horse with lance and shield

User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29698 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2738 times:

It is a guy with a 50 and a Bacalava on.

Whats the big deal?



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineKLAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2731 times:

/ignore Indianguy on

I hope the troops arent all that bad. I'm sure there are some buttholes in the U.S. army, but there are alot of good people too.

-CLovis


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29698 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2712 times:

I wouldn't call them buttholes either.


It is just that the british, generally, are a much more reserved people then Americans.

It isn't right, or worng. It is just a general trend.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 19
Reply 8, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2705 times:

After the suicide bombers disguised as pregnant women I don't see what's wrong with paranoia towards civilians at roadblocks...

Better safe than sorry, if there's explosives in the car you're dead if you let it get close.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2689 times:

Actually, there has been commentary on the differences between the Brits and the Yanks. That's nothing new. Some Saddam sympathizers (and that is NOT intended at the author of this post), would make a big deal out of this, but like L-188 said, there are differences in opinion and M/0 here. And, as he said, this kind of thing went on for almost 3 1/2 years when the Brits and Yanks were fighting the Nazis. Patton and Monty was the most famous of those tiffs. It did not deter anyone from finishing the job.

User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13044 posts, RR: 78
Reply 10, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2678 times:

Make no mistake, on initial operations against places like Basra (and the UK forces are still doing aggressive raids into town against Saddam's fighters), it was all arms, full equipment, body armour and helmets, the lot.

Where the differences are is right afterwards, it is felt that the best intelligence will come from the Iraqi people, so 'hearts and minds' swings into action, helmets off, berets on, sunglasses off, look these people in the eye, look less intimidating, interact, get the Arabic speaking personnel on patrol too.
They still have to be alert, but most of the troops would have done Ulster tours so they will be used to 'nonchalant-looking alertness'.
The current policy on Basra is called 'aid and raid', help the civil population, deal with the fighters, keep this up until Basra is pacified.

In truth, in general M.O. terms, the USMC are closer to the British Army.

However, I don't think it is really about differences between armies, it more about recent experience and politics.
UK forces have conducted 'raid and aid' since WW2 in places like Cyprus, Aden, Borneo, Malaya as well as the 'aid to the civil power' in Northern Ireland and 'muscular peacekeeping' in places like the former Yugoslavia.
Jungle operations in Malaya and Borneo against insurgents were all about interacting with and winning the support of the locals, denying their villages to the enemy, gaining intelligence, then taking the fight to the insurgents, both of these campaigns were very successful, low key, with relatively small numbers of troops involved.

The US experience has been less happy, Vietnam, Lebanon, Somalia, the body politic has a policy of minimum risk to service people, plus it is felt that these sort of operations degrade effectiveness in 'war fighting', however the same forces that have conducted the UK operations above also did Korea, Suez, The Falklands and Gulf War 1, as well as having the bulk of the army geared to heavy armoured warfare in defence of Europe during the Cold War.

Also, the British Army tends to put NCO's in the firing line more with greater responsibility, a 21 year old corporal may well have led 4 or 8 man sections in the streets of Northern Ireland and the potentially more dangerous rural border areas on a couple of tours, also this is felt to help in the confused, frantic full urban warfare conditions, when communications from the command to the troops in action will be problematic.

Another factor is size, the UK forces in manpower to general population terms are small, they were by no means the biggest even during the Cold War, no conscription for over 40 years.
The US forces are part of a vast war machine.
The British Empire's influence on military culture still cannot be ruled out even now, for the most part, the forces defending and policing this far flung expanse of colonies was small.

However, I would not be surprised in 'raid and aid' is used on Baghdad if and when possible.
Apart from anything else, half the population of that city are under 15, never underestimate the P.R. front, this war is controversial enough as it is.






User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4445 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2658 times:

I really don't see what the big commotion is. The photo doesn't show a guy "All Armored" up. He is wearing your basic flack jacket and has his face covered from the sand. After what has happened at checkpoints during the least week, I'm not surprised by the soldiers actions. When pregnant women stop blowing themselves and GIs up, the tensions will subside. Also, the title of this post is extremely misleading.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineBanco From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 14752 posts, RR: 54
Reply 12, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2636 times:

Yes, it certainly is misleading. As GDB said, the experiences of the UK and US armed forces are rather different, and this will naturally be reflected in the way they work. It was noticeable that a number of senior US officers have commented publicly that the British operations around Basra are ones that they will seek to emulate and learn from. That doesn't make them worse, if anything, admitting someone else is better at a certain type of action and trying to learn from them shows great professionalism and willingness to learn in senior US ranks. It works the other way around for British forces who try to learn techniques in other fields from the US.

Far from being a confrontation, the UK forces are doing one of the things they are best at very well indeed, and the US are trying to emulate them. Good on the US I say, if they took the view that they were always the best at any particular technique that would be worrying. Neither army has that view, and it is one of the reasons they work so well together.



She's as nervous as a very small nun at a penguin shoot.
User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2615 times:

There is no "big issue" here, the article is nothing more than the poms pointing out the difference between themselves and there american counterparts. They do feel that the US soldiers are overdoing it, this is a matter of conjecture, there are valid points on both sides of these issues.

It's an interesting discussion point and good to see that people have stuck to the topic.

Personally I don't go for the overdone yelling and screaming and pointing guns at children, but then i don't go for soldiers being blown up in suicide bomb attacks either. So I don't really have a final opinion on the behaviour of the soldiers at the checkpoints.





ADG


User currently offlineDc10guy From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2599 times:

Don't surprise me none... Remember Vietnam ? We would bomb the "gooks" then bandage them up only to bomb them again, then we would burn down their huts and wonder why they hated us ??? When you start out with a wacked war plan wacked things happen....


Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4445 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2584 times:

Screaming and yelling during war, I would never have thought it would happen. While this article does have some good points, it is basically an anti-American jab that really has no point. Could it be possible that your "news" sources are just as jaded as your beloved FOX news?

"Dark goggles covered most of his face, and a khaki scarf was wrapped around his nose and mouth. His M16 assault rifle was pointed at the windscreen of the car, which was clearly being driven by a young woman who had young children in the backseat."

Ah yes, the car is clearly being driven by a young woman. Just like the car that was clearly being driven by the pregnant woman a few days ago. I guess you forget about the great Iraq trick called "I'll pretend to surrender and then shoot the G.I.s". I have followed this conflict very closely. British and American troops are doing the best they can.

Each service or country has a different way of "preparing" the battlefield. Could it be that the U.S. has greater precision weapons or stand off munitions than the U.K.? Henceforth they allow those munitions to go to work before they put themselves in harms way? I happened to see a news clip this morning with British troops throwing some fellas around inside a house then slamming bags down over their heads and leading them outside. Personally I see nothing wrong with it. They are doing dangerous jobs and lecturing from a 35+ year old woman who more than likely has never been in the military is ridiculous.

Your veiled anti-Americanism grows more hilarious by the hour.



"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2574 times:

I can't see the "anti-american" slant that you complain of unless you believe people should say nothing but good things about america only.

The article isn't anti-american, it just highlights the difference between the 2 forces and the fact that the british interviewed feel that the behaviour is overhanded. The article lets you draw your own conclussion.

There is no dishonesty in the article that I can see as it merely passes on the opinions of the soldiers, and unlike many articles it is based on talking to those on the scene rather than those who fought in the last gulf war or didn't fight at all.

You are simply being overly defensive.




ADG


User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4445 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2571 times:

You are correct, the article doesn't come right out and say the America and its forces are bad but it IMPLIES it. Then again, almost all of your posts on this subject imply anti-americanism.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2549 times:

Seems to me that you only what to hear what you agree with and nothing more. Discussion doesn't work that way.

My posts don't imply anti-americanism at all. A small minded minority looking for an argument can find that in there. As can be clearly seen here the only negative I have with this thread is that this type of media report isn't being seen in the US.

The rest of it, as i've stated, is a matter of opinion.

It really says more about you than me when you react as you do to these threads.

There isn't a single country that can boast perfection, but threads such as this one are here to discuss. A normal person would say something "yes, it does seem harsh but given the circumstances I feel it is justified" as some have done above. Not have a big whine everytime they see something they'd prefer to have swept under the carpet.







ADG


User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4445 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2541 times:

I don't prefer that it be swept under the carpet. I just find it quite disheartening that you and several others only post material like this. The material that you find IMPLIES that the United States is not doing the best job and is out of control. Your right in stating that the article doesn't actually say that, but it IMPLIES it. If you can't see or read that, then we have bigger problems.

It seems that your only purpose in life is scrounging around the net for information that shows the U.S. is bad lighting. Obviously the United States is not perfect and neither is its military. Some things are handled in the best way possible while others are not. So here is my opinion on the subject matter in the article. The United States Marine Corp and British Marines are doing outstanding work under tough conditions. Each has its own way of fighting and protecting. As for your posts not being anti-american, I can only laugh.



"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2533 times:

I don't prefer that it be swept under the carpet. I just find it quite disheartening that you and several others only post material like this.

Only post information like what?

The material that you find IMPLIES that the United States is not doing the best job and is out of control.

It implies no such thing anywhere but in your mind. By the way, http://www.news.com.au is mainstream Australian media.

Your right in stating that the article doesn't actually say that, but it IMPLIES it. If you can't see or read that, then we have bigger problems.

I don't see it, and I don't have a problem you do. There is a growing number of people in these forums that read the worst into everything, do you want to be one of them?

It seems that your only purpose in life is scrounging around the net for information that shows the U.S. is bad lighting.

Yes, I scrounged all over the internet to choose this piece, all the way to my locally owned media outlet.

Obviously the United States is not perfect and neither is its military.

Well if you think this, what is the issue? Surely it's best to discuss and improve on things than spend your day whining over things you could change?

Some things are handled in the best way possible while others are not.

There is no inference otherwise in this article. In fact, the inference was that they were handled DIFFERENTLY and not in a way the soldier quoted would have dealth with them. Nothing more.

So here is my opinion on the subject matter in the article. The United States Marine Corp and British Marines are doing outstanding work under tough conditions. Each has its own way of fighting and protecting.

Well, finally a statement on the article.

As for your posts not being anti-american, I can only laugh.

in your mind....



ADG


User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4445 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (11 years 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2530 times:

Here is some homework for you. I want you to find an article on the war that is positive and upbeat. Then I want you to say something positive about America's involvement in the war. I'll be waiting.


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2519 times:

Cx,

Here is some homework for you .. you will already see them in this very forum, it's just that you've ignored them. (the top of my had would be the absolute respect I have for Pfc Lynch and my relief that she is back where she should be). Just goes to show you don't need to go back that far to find what you say isn't there.

I do not agree with this war, I do not think it's been handled very well. You will find nothing in these forums in which I have supported the US Government or even my own for making a decision to put the lives of their military at risk. However, that doesn't mean that I don't support the soldiers themselves, quite the opposite in fact (another issue you choose to ignore).

Indeed, much of what people accuse me of saying cannot be found in these forums, but that doesn't stop them saying it. I don't have to prove anything to you, because i'm not the one throwing around unjustifiable accusations. Be careful that you don't turn into another yyz, who needs ot post lies to make his point.





ADG


User currently offlineCX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4445 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (11 years 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2516 times:

Well, it is getting late so I leave the debate for another day. Be careful though as Yz717 is a regarded as a close friend. I do have to say though that my opinion on Australian women has changed. Can you at least tell me that your attractive?  Wink/being sarcastic


"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
User currently offlineYyz717 From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 16228 posts, RR: 57
Reply 24, posted (11 years 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2509 times:

Be careful that you don't turn into another yyz, who needs ot post lies to make his point.

If daring to challenge the left-wing socialist trite of the high & mightly ADG makes me a liar, then yes I'm a liar.

Be careful though as Yz717 is a regarded as a close friend.

And back to you CX747.  Big thumbs up







Panam, TWA, Ansett, Eastern.......AC next? Might be good for Canada.
25 VC-10 : I have to say the report only proves the US learnt nothing from Vietnam. In that conflict they tried to win over the "hearts and minds" of the peasant
26 Post contains images Mx5_boy : yyz717 says: """If daring to challenge the left-wing socialist trite of the high & mightly ADG makes me a liar, then yes I'm a liar.""" I have never f
27 ADG : Actually yyz, it's the posting of lies that makes you a liar. You don't challenge any views, you've dropped all pretence of reasonable discussion abou
28 VC-10 : This thread is from the Australian media Actually it is part of a report that appeared in the British media a few days ago. The Uk version goes on to
29 L-188 : The Uk version goes on to say that British Commanders have ordered their troops to wear berets, rather than hard hats, and have their weapons down at
30 VC-10 : One question then. How many troops and locals have been killed at US Checkpoints compared to U.K. Checkpoints?
31 Tsv : Good point. Obviously they have learnt from their NI "experience". Had to laugh when they interviewed an Aussie landing craft grunt - said he preferre
32 Post contains images L-188 : Well that makes sense, both the Aussis and the Tommies have those funny little accents TSV, you do bring up the point that the Brits do have a pretty
33 Banco : Exactly, L-188. Which is why the US has openly come out to say that they intend to learn from the British tactics. Nothing wrong with that, as I say,
34 L-188 : No problem with that, but you just know that there are people that are playing it up. Only had brits on our base one time when I was in the service th
35 Arsenal@LHR : Man to man, the British soldier is the best in the world, when it comes to special forces the UK is in a different league, SAS, SBS, Royal Marines, be
36 GDB : The relaxed, or relaxed looking, posture and appearance are for pacified, or semi-pacified areas where interacting with the populace is the task. The
37 Post contains links GDB : To illustrate the different operations, here is a good selection of images of UK ground forces in action in Iraq: http://www.operations.mod.uk/telic/p
38 CX747 : Well, now that the Brits are actually going into Basra, we will have to see if they continue to wear their berets or switch back to their Kevlar. Hats
39 L-188 : this isn't ment to be insulting and I hope it isn't. The other thing about the British is that their doctrine is based on the way they have generally
40 Glenn : True, The Americans decided that they could pulverize Germany druing the day. Cost them a lot to realise that they needed to modify their tactics.
41 Post contains links GDB : Despite the long supply lines, the 'don't assume you'll have everything to hand' doctrine worked in the Falklands, that's how they were soon able to d
42 Krushny : D-Day was one battle where the different British and US approaches to war was seen. The British developed a whole brand of funny vehicles for the occ
43 Post contains images Tbar220 : What a great pic
44 CPH-R : Krushny, I believe the Americans did borrow the DD tank, but they were launched way to far out, so they never became an asset. The difference between
45 Banco : L-188, I've been thinking about your observations about the British military and I must admit you surprised me a little there. It's certainly true tha
46 ADG : You only need to watch Black Hawk Down to see a classic example of a leader who would have faced disciplinary action had he been in another mans army.
47 L-188 : Banco. I was really trying to be careful on how to phrase what I did. It certainly wasn't meant to be a jab at the Brits. The only two real cases that
48 Banco : I never thought for a moment that you were having a jab, L-188, I'm sorry if you thought I meant it that way. I thought you raised some interesting po
49 Cfalk : An overabundant supply line is something that the US puts a high emphasis on. I'll phrase it somewhat differently. Th U.S. has developed as a policy t
50 GDB : With all the press talk of deficiencies of the UK military in the British press before the war, the fact remains that we deployed a powerful, well bal
51 Post contains images Donder10 : GDB,don't you read the Daily Mail?We have the one the worst forces in the world and it's all Blair's fault.
52 Post contains images Arsenal@LHR : The media, specially the newspapers, are always full of gloom and doom, quick to jump on anything negative. I guess it's a British speciality to const
53 Prebennorholm : The British military did (and does) a great job, no doubt about that. But please don't compare it to the overall US jobs. The intelligence tasks fell
54 CPH-R : AFAIK, I think much of the difference can be seen in that Britain has a professional army, unlike most other coalition countries, where it's a compuls
55 GDB : It was not a one way street on intelligence, special forces (from all of the coalition), RAF recce flights and a big MI6 and GCHQ listening operation
56 L-188 : Prebennorholm, I think you are comming dangerously close to understating the British contribution. Just by they way the war played out and who ended
57 Donder10 : Wasn't the British role in Basra rather large?With regards to intelligence,I would suspect that the British role is larger than you think too.Still,th
58 GDB : The UK has about 45,000 in theatre, small compared to the US, (but the USA's population is 280 million, the UK 59 million), but it amounts to 25% of t
59 L-188 : Banco. No problem I just wanted to make sure everybody else knew. I found a copy of that Bill Mauldin Cartoon. I need to locate an FTP program so I ca
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
US Forces In Iraq Falling Back On Baghdad? posted Wed Jul 26 2006 17:05:33 by NAV20
Numbers Of NCOs In US Army In Iraq posted Tue Sep 26 2006 17:17:17 by Baroque
Appeasement: Why The US Is In Deep Trouble posted Wed Aug 23 2006 20:15:12 by Matt D
Your Take On The UK posted Sat Apr 29 2006 02:01:31 by Ba757gla
British Guy On The "Capitol One" Commercials posted Mon Nov 28 2005 17:00:58 by NWOrientDC10
US Military In Paraguay Thru 2006: Why? posted Mon Aug 22 2005 17:38:44 by Derico
A Real Guy Runs On The Dem Ticket In Ohio posted Tue Jul 26 2005 20:18:39 by Jaysit
Hilarious Take On The Oscars posted Tue Mar 1 2005 22:25:56 by MaverickM11
Bill Gates Bails On The US Dollar posted Sun Jan 30 2005 00:04:01 by Clickhappy
US Coalition In Iraq Falls Further Apart posted Tue Nov 16 2004 09:54:12 by Sabenapilot