IRAQ IS A DISASTER

[KaBar2]

Where did you find that on-site report from Marine 1st Sgt Bill Skiles in Fallujah? Second Battalion, First Marines was my old unit. I wasn't in Echo Co., though, I was in Headquarters and Service Company for most of my tour. H&S 2/1 was the Marine company that contained the Admin (S-1) section, Intelligence (S-2), Training (S-3) and Logistics (S-4). I worked in the Battalion Armory, so technically we were S-4, but we spent most of our time in the field out with the line companies (Echo, Fox and Golf.) Marine battalions also have what is called a "ghost" company--the weapons and equipment are in storage, and there are no troops, but in a national emergency (like a declaration of war) they would draw some experienced officers, NCO's, and non-rates from the other companies, and then fill up the ranks with new recruits. In 2/1 the ghost company was "Hotel Co." I'd be very interested in reading any more stuff from him. Are you in direct contact with him, or indirect, through someone else?

[TheoHuxtab|e]

Originally posted by KaBar2
Where did you find that on-site report from Marine 1st Sgt Bill Skiles in Fallujah? Second Battalion, First Marines was my old unit. I wasn't in Echo Co., though, I was in Headquarters and Service Company for most of my tour. H&S 2/1 was the Marine company that contained the Admin (S-1) section, Intelligence (S-2), Training (S-3) and Logistics (S-4). I worked in the Battalion Armory, so technically we were S-4, but we spent most of our time in the field out with the line companies (Echo, Fox and Golf.) Marine battalions also have what is called a "ghost" company--the weapons and equipment are in storage, and there are no troops, but in a national emergency (like a declaration of war) they would draw some experienced officers, NCO's, and non-rates from the other companies, and then fill up the ranks with new recruits. In 2/1 the ghost company was "Hotel Co." I'd be very interested in reading any more stuff from him. Are you in direct contact with him, or indirect, through someone else?

Nah I got it through someone else. It's out there on the internet so just search it by typing a phrase from that sit rep and you may dig up some more info...

That's cool though that that's your same unit. Were you in Vietnam?

[KaBar2]

This is the second reply that I made to posts that disappeared. I replied to this post a couple of days ago. What happened? Did 12 oz. have a crash or something?

Anyway. No, no Vietnam for me. I was a anti-war protester back then. I joined the Marines after Vietnam, because I realized I was not a pacifist deep in my heart. I became a conscientious objector when I was 18 years old (1968.) I was very young, really. I thought I knew what was right, but as I got older, I realized I had made a mistake. And how do you make up for a mistake like that? I dropped out of art school and enlisted in the Marines in 1976, and requested "infantry." Jimmy Carter was President. I went to Boot Camp at MCRD San Diego, then was shipped to the U.S. Army Chemical & Ordnance School at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD., where I was assigned to a infantry small arms repairman's school (known colloquially as "armorer's school.") After that, I went to a Marine Reserve unit for a year, then "augumented" to the 1st Marine Division at MCB Camp Pendleton in 1977, and served in the Second Battalion, First Marine Regiment, known as "2/1," or "Second Battalion, First Marines." We trained a lot in the desert at 29 Palms, CA (it's called the "National Training Center" now, I believe) with live fire exercises--tanks, artillery, mortars, helicopters and fixed wing aircraft.
We went overseas on a "float" to Okinawa, where our battalion served with the Third Marine Division. We were "primary air contingency battalion" in the western Pacific when Ronald Reagan took office (Jan 1980.) We did a "WestPac float" to the Phillipines, Mindinao, South Korea and then back to the NTA (the Northern Training Area) on Okinawa. I got out in July 1980. I often think I should have made the Marine Corps a career. If I had, I could have retired from the Marines in 1997 with half pay, full medical benefits for life, and lifetime commissary benefits. But I chose to get out.

[StarzAbove]

When has it not been a disaster

[ralphy.sj]

no shit....Bush is a motherfuckin idiot...hail to the theif...if reelected we are doomed to get fuck 4 more years then the rest of the world will join the other half who already hates us....bomb walls not iraq....use the war machine money to help any of the countless masses inside of america who need it...buck fush:mad:

[TheoHuxtab|e]

Originally posted by KaBar2
This is the second reply that I made to posts that disappeared. I replied to this post a couple of days ago. What happened? Did 12 oz. have a crash or something?

Anyway. No, no Vietnam for me. I was a anti-war protester back then. I joined the Marines after Vietnam, because I realized I was not a pacifist deep in my heart. I became a conscientious objector when I was 18 years old (1968.) I was very young, really. I thought I knew what was right, but as I got older, I realized I had made a mistake. And how do you make up for a mistake like that? I dropped out of art school and enlisted in the Marines in 1976, and requested "infantry." Jimmy Carter was President. I went to Boot Camp at MCRD San Diego, then was shipped to the U.S. Army Chemical & Ordnance School at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD., where I was assigned to a infantry small arms repairman's school (known colloquially as "armorer's school.") After that, I went to a Marine Reserve unit for a year, then "augumented" to the 1st Marine Division at MCB Camp Pendleton in 1977, and served in the Second Battalion, First Marine Regiment, known as "2/1," or "Second Battalion, First Marines." We trained a lot in the desert at 29 Palms, CA (it's called the "National Training Center" now, I believe) with live fire exercises--tanks, artillery, mortars, helicopters and fixed wing aircraft.
We went overseas on a "float" to Okinawa, where our battalion served with the Third Marine Division. We were "primary air contingency battalion" in the western Pacific when Ronald Reagan took office (Jan 1980.) We did a "WestPac float" to the Phillipines, Mindinao, South Korea and then back to the NTA (the Northern Training Area) on Okinawa. I got out in July 1980. I often think I should have made the Marine Corps a career. If I had, I could have retired from the Marines in 1997 with half pay, full medical benefits for life, and lifetime commissary benefits. But I chose to get out.

Wow KaBar. Is the Aberdeen Proving Grounds near a town called Indian Head in Maryland? If so, that's probably the same school my dad went to during the Vietnam era. He was a mortarman -- I assume that's where mortarmen go. I spent a couple weeks in San Diego, but over at 32nd Street on the Navy side.

Also, for the WestPac float, what ship did were you embarked on? Then again, it's been so many years that many of those ships swapped duty stations with other ships, so chances are it ain't in the WestPac region anymore. I made several visits to Okinawa too. White Beach and Kadena Air Force base to name a couple. I was stationed in Yokosuka, Japan and took part in plenty of WestPac operations. Also where in South Korea did y'all go. I'm assuming Chinnhae, where the South Korean naval base and a small U.S. base is.

They may have "officially" changed the name to Northern Training Area, but I still hear everyone refer to it as 29 Palms.

[KaBar2]

It's been like twenty-four years ago, but I think the LPH we were on was named something like the U.S.S. "Tarawa" or the "Guadacanal"--it was a famous WWII Marine Corps battle. When we were in the Med, in '76, in the Reserves, were were on the U.S.S. Raliegh.

29 Palms is the old name of the National Training Center. It used to be called MCB 29 Palms, and was right outside the town of 29 Palms, California. Marines call it "29 Stumps", or sometimes just "The Stumps." It's the bleakest fucking desert terrain you ever saw in your life.

The Northern Training Area is on the island of Okinawa itself. By now it may have been closed, but back in the day, it was the premier training area on the Rock.

I don't remember the name of the area we went to in Korea. It was out in the boondocks--no town, no liberty, and no women, anywhere. All we did was train and watch the ROK Marines blow the everlovin' shit out of everything in sight. Those guys are genuine no-shit bad asses. They train a lot harder than the U.S. Marines, and discipline within the ranks is fucking brutal, or at least, it was back then. I saw ROK Marine sergeants beat the crap out of their men for pretty minor shortcomings. They would get punishment tours of guard duty at night, and the sergeant would show up with a bucket of water and "whoosh." "See if THAT doesn't improve your behavior, shitbird!" The ROK Marines are fucking hard core.

We were stationed at Subic Bay in the Phillipines. Olongapo was the biggest whorehouse of a town I have ever seen. There have been so many generations of hookers grown up there that the hookers often look very much like American girls--some African-American-Filipino, some Caucasian-American-Filipino, from all the hooker babies fathered by American G.I.'s. Some of my buddies had bar girl "girlfriends" (for the duration of our stay) as young as thirteen or fourteen.

[Dick Quickwood]

Dead GI's mom disrupts Laura Bush speech (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040917/ap_on_el_pr/laura_bush_protester)

McCain Urges Court to Put Nader on Ballot (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040917/ap_on_el_pr/nader&cid=694&ncid=2043)

hmm

[mental invalid]

700 iraqi police officers have been killed so far....

[POIESIS]

man..shit is so bad its astonishing.
i can't fucking believe bush's happy face rhetoric..
dude needs to get socked.

undeniable. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1305441,00.html)

kabar, i'm curious what your stance on iraq is now?

[KaBar2]

I think the Bush Administration make a grave error when they invaded Iraq with such a small force. We should have hit them with overwhelming, vast numbers of troops, and secured the borders to prevent any cross-border movement of guerrillas, munitions and weapons. I guess hindsight is 20-20, but I thought that back then too. The administration was trying to wage war the cheap way.

We cannot just pull out and say. "Well, if you don't want democracy, then fuck ya." Millions of Iraqis do want a democratic nation, but Saddam has done an excellent job of driving out or killing every Iraqi person who would normally serve as the grass-roots leaders. There ARE no labor unionists, no independent, tenured college professors, no loyal opposition political parties, no moderate or liberal business leaders, no independent judiciary. It's like a nation built around strict nepotism, tribalism, mafia-like loyalties and corruption. Everybody is on the take. Everybody owes loyalty to their tribe, and the tribal and religious leaders see society as a zero-sum game: "If I don't dominate, then I will be dominated." Nobody is willing to compromise or back down unless he is facing imminent destruction.

The efforts of the Iraqi government to prepare for elections is being disrupted and sabotaged by the Islamist extremists. It would be the equivalent of having the Christian right wing attack polling places here in the U.S., killing precinct judges and shooting election workers. They do not believe that it is acceptable for people to vote in secular politicians. The Islamists want NOBODY but their people elected, and certainly not any moderates.

But look at Indonesia. It's election went fine, mainly due to the fact that the Indonesian nation is much more developed and well-educated than the Iraqi nation, and Indonesia does not want to ever undergo another upheaval like it did under the dictator, Sukarno.

I think we must stay until the Iraqi government is on it's feet, and there will probably be a substantial American military presence there for quite a few years. Hopefully, this will be accompanied by a vast infusion of American capital investment, rebuilding of schools, hospitals, roads, military hardware and so forth. I hope someday Iraq will be an American ally on the same plane as Turkey.

[OriginalSin]

"IRAQ IS ARABIC FOR VIETNAM."

[SWIMS]

This shit has gotten quite heavy to say the least. I participated in many of these boards last spring but spent the majority of the summer traveling in europe and eastern Africa. Now I find myself back at school w/in the scholarly bubble so to say, and the tone is the same. I was not really expecting things to be different, but it is quite a shock to see how much has happened in the world, how much these evnts have had on my life and the way I think, and how little it has affected the two cities I call home (STL and NO). Besides twenty or so pictures on the wall at the airport, and the daily news reports, the pulse of things seems ill effected. I don't like to draw very conclusive opinions on matters of politics, but there is an understanding of an apathetic construct that effectivly dulls the reality of world events. From Iraq to the 9th ward I learn of things every day that wrench at my gut and bring everything to bear at once. I watched a man get his head slowly sawed off by a group of men in Iraq, and then turn on the tv and see a cut of this clip before sports and the weather. When Pearl (?) was executed in pakistan it warented an Paki/Amer co-op that brought a number of men to court. These latest actions have just become part of the daily meele. This is looking at our perception of IRAQ as a reality, This i think is the root of why I just thought this stuff up, If I use the daily sources papers, tv, internet.. to educate myself on Iraq I see a perpetual conflict in the midst of an area that as your average joe know very little of. The point is that I can't understand what is going on I might revert to the elected leaders and their beurocrats for answers and they tell me that Iraq was posing an iminent threat to american interests in the world. This is why we invaded their country and established military order. This is why we are trying to consruct a new government that will somehow bridge the poliical cultures of the east and west. This is why american soldiers are being cut down every day. Freedome and liberty form the cornerstone of our civilization, but does that mean that an evolved form of this system (evolved in the sense that it incorperates our structure to their reality) will emrge from a reality that is percieved as near complete chaos. I am fighting with myself over critical opinion and have been trying to type this as an observer, an attempt to understand someone who does not know alot about this place and gathers his/her opinion from daily media sources. Is it just that people see thses clips and gather that that is all that matters. It does not have a direct effect on their day to day lives, but is it realy a suprise when a family down the streete has one of it's children killed, and should it be expected that violent acts will harm the civilian polulation of the US. This instills fear, but how is this fear directed and marginalized into daily affairs? and what does daily affairs entail, Going to work and producing something, An average Iraqi's daily affair might consist of a war breaking out on his way to work, their daily events are being attempted in an arena of violent conflict. Are they even going to be considering the possibilities for leadership. Isn't that a major thing behind all of this, to give Iraqi's the ability to choose. and if so is the reality that most Iraqi's are forced to make life and death choices. And is the choice of who may eventually lead evn seen as a hopeful thought or is the fear that they might become a civilian casualty enough to make them pick up arms and defend themselves against an invading force who wishes to impose laws that reflect a radical evolution in local ways of life. And what s the eventual reality- can Iran as an islamic state, Iraq as a rep democracy, and saudi arabia whose princes have a monoploly on political power relly co-exist. Not to exclude turkey, it is home to everyone from kurds to europeans and lay claim to one of the most impressive empires in history. Is iraq's survival connected indefinantly to ionternations security support, and if this is true then doesnt this secure american involvement for years to come, and prove critics of so called american imperialism. This doesn't even incorperate the actions of arab compacts or the UN, the one organization that may be able to secure elctions, but may have to sacrifice itself in the precess. one thing all this rambling is missing is accountability and that is what will begin to define the historical contexts of the present conflict.
OR, the way our kids will learn about it.
-As noted I had not visited these boards in a while, I need to collect my thoughts, paiint, think and come back with some sound opinions. Man this hsit is overwhelming. Peace Love Conflict.

[SmeechLizard]

I shouldn't have to say this... but...

VOTE!

Get tha fucker out of office. If you're not registered, then either register, or shut the fuck up.

[Dr. Dazzle]

Without reading 7 pages of this, does anyone know what's going on with the other countries fighting in Iraq? Specifically on the British side. Are they experiencing the same casualties as America? And why the fuck do I never hear anything about them?

[T=E=A=S=E]

its all over rated.

[omar]

www.ogrish.com (http://www.ogrish.com)

[justaname]

im hoping to get an answer from kabar2 and others reasonable peoples in here but here's the question
what the us should do if the iraqis ppl vote for one of the islamic extremists to be the next president of iraq?

[Casual T.]

Originally posted by justaname
im hoping to get an answer from kabar2 and others reasonable peoples in here but here's the question
what the us should do if the iraqis ppl vote for one of the islamic extremists to be the next president of iraq?


I don't think the interim Iraqi government will allow an "extremist" candidate to run for office.

But if that were to happen, it would look bad of the US and the Iraq. It would look bad for the US to sit idle and do nothing about it, but it would also look bad if the US were to have to go in and cause a "regime change" all over again.

[KaBar2]

I suppose it is possible. It would roughly be the same situation as if the American people elected Jerry Falwell to be President of the U.S. If he is legitimately elected in free and fair elections, I don't see how the U.S. could do anything but accept it. One would hope that if a Muslim extremist were elected he would have the good sense to work on building Iraq into a modern, prosperous state, but that has not really been the model put forth by other Islamic republics.

However, down the road twenty or thirty years, we might see change brought about by the repressive atmosphere usually created by religiously motivated government functionaries. In Iran, for instance, young Muslims make fun of the imams anf the self-appointed Morality Police, right to their faces. The days of whipping immodest people in the streeet are gone. Young Iranians know they are being left behind by the world, and they resent it. I think that eventually, something similar will occur in Iraq. Most of the people in Iraq are normal, rational people. They just want to have a better life. On the Iraq-Iraqis blog, the writer makes it clear that hundreds of thousands of new cars clog the streets, blackouts are at least partially created by the big influx of new electricity-consuming appliances like refrigerators, washing machines and air conditioners. He states "anybody with any ability who wants a job can find one anywhere." Maybe an exaggeration, but it points up a certain positive attitude about the future.

[SWIMS]

Elections, yeah right. We are perpetuating an arena in which political progression has always come in the form of open violence or forcefull subordination. Without drastic changes elections will be impossible, or at least not by january.

check it out www.icg.org (http://www.icg.org) some of the best.

[KRON KING]

Originally posted by T=E=A=S=E@Sep 23 2004, 09:59 PM
its all over rated.
Quoted post

[ZedIsAlive]

any opinions on fahrenheit 9/11, or did i miss it.

[southrngent]

Originally posted by ZedIsAlive@Oct 11 2004, 01:41 AM
any opinions on fahrenheit 9/11, or did i miss it.
Quoted post

iraq and afgn are complete disaters. taliban and insurgants are flooding across the borders like a blue light special in kmart. i have family in the military, srgnt in the marines things are a complete mess. we will not have the military presents to contain the resistance. bush is lieing there will be a DRAFT if we stay in these countriesssss!!!!!!!!!!! :burn: :evil2:

[niseNSF]

Originally posted by ZedIsAlive@Oct 11 2004, 01:41 AM
any opinions on fahrenheit 9/11, or did i miss it.
Quoted post



"FOX NEWS" for lazy liberals. the leftist equivalent to O'Reilly.

you cant conflate all the dynamics of this conflict into a 2 hour mtv attention span film. the way to stay abreast of everything is to READ. read both the left and the right literature...the truth is usually somewhere in the middle. lots of mainstream journalism is more even-keeled, particulary NYTIMES columnists like Friedman and Dowd. Watching *just* FOX news or *just* M Dot Moore's Ego-mentary will leave you with no real intelligent position, and no real perspective on whats going on.

Also, as per all these comments, i just notice a recurring theme of oversimplification...you cant sum up this situation in a few buzz words or placard slogans. there are real reasons why it was important to go into the middle east, regardless of botched this administration did it....analogies to Roman Imperialism is just exaggerated and uninformed.

[NOT GUILTY]

I BELEIVE THIS WHOLE IRAQ THING WAS STARTED TO SET UP A BASE IN THE MIDDLE EAST....COME ON ,THE U.S HAS MILITARY BASES SET UP ALL OVER THE WORLD ,EXCEPT WHERE? THE MID-EAST...SO TO DO WHAT EVER THERE GONNA DO OVER THERE , THEY GOTTA HAVE A PLACE TO LAUNCH ATTACKS FROM.....IRAQ IN THE IDEAL LOCATION (center of the mid-east) & BEING RUN BY A FUCKED UP DICTATORSHIP.....AMERICA SEIZED THE OPPERTUNITY TO GO IN AND CREATE WHAT THAY ALWAYS WANTED,A PLACE TO SET UP SHOP..........ALL UNDER THE COVER-UP THAT WE WERE GOING IN AS FREEDOM FIGHTERS TO REMOVE A HORRIBLE MAN FROM POWER(and i do beleive he was ) BUT WASNT THIS THE SAME EVIL MAN THE U.S WAS FUNDING AT ONE TIME.....HOW DOES THAT MAKE THE PEOPLE OF IRAQ FEEL?????DO YOU THINK THEY JUST FORGOT ABOUT THAT SHIT ????IM MORE THAN SURE THEY FEEL A LITTLE CONFUSED........PLUS IT SEEMS LIKE THERE USING DIFFERENT RELIGIOUS GROUPS AGAINST ONE ANOTHER FOR CERTAIN POLITICAL PURPOSES........I THOUGHT WE WERE THERE TO UNITE AND ESTABLISH FREEDOM????THE THINGS THAT WERE HEARING ABOUT THIS WAR SEEMS TO BE HEADING IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION,THE WRONG DIRECTION.........AND ITS SEEMIN TO BE MORE OF A WAR ON MUSLIMS NOT A WAR ON TERRORISTS.....AND THATS SAD ....HOPELY THE PEOPLE OF IRAQ CAN COME UP WITH SOME KIND OF SOLUTION TO FIX THIS MESS......AND THE TROOPS CAN COME HOME...........IRAQ HAS TO FIX IRAQ.......GOOD LUCK TO THEM............

[Eric Clapton]

Saying the regime is over is only telling half a story, we don't yet know the ending because it isn't written, so let's not presume suddenly the middle East is going to be a democracy. We don't yet know what the hell is going on. The Iraqi's are going to probably get a bum deal and still have no control over their own lives (in the same way that we don't in Western 'democracies') so to pretend they are, or might, is just stupidity.

The sole problem is that we don't have a democracy in this country so how the fuck can we go about establishing it in other countries? Human rights activists, careerist politicians (especially careerist politicians) and the majority of the public have had a close eye on Hussein's brutality since he came to power. Over twenty years now in fact. It's no great secret that he's been bumping off loads of Iraqi folk in a variety of horrible ways. Why did nobody lift a finger when it was quite well known about by those who cared (enough people to raise world-wide awareness and motivate a nation into helping defenceless people who are being brutalised)? Ask these questions, think about it. Think about that stupid thing that every dumb twat talks about, Oh we should've got rid of him 10 years ago. You know why we didn't? BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A FUCKING DEMOCRACY TO GO AHEAD AND DO THIS INDEPENDENTLY! We have to wait for the men in suits to grumble about this year in and year out before anything gets done, and even when it gets done there's a horrible mess.

The way to stop terrorism - especially terrorism from States - is to stop participating in it. Turkey wouldn’t be able to attack Kurdistan every year without weapons we supply. Israel wouldn't be able to massacre Palestinians en masse without the 3 billion of mostly military aid it receives every year from the US. That's all it takes - a refusal to give weapons to people who use them against civilians.

To win a 'war on terrorism', the solution is to stop creating it, and to stop participating in it.

If we look at the long line of US-installed and backed dictators around the world, we find that they were able to retain power only because of the support they received from Washington and Wall Street. That's why Pinochet's murderous regime was able to keep right on massacring, it's why South Africa was able to keep Apartheid in place for so long, and it's why there have been so many bloodbaths around the world in the last fifty years. These things are not 'ignored' by Washington, they are given their very lifeblood from Washington.

However, the Bush-Blairite position is beyond the scope of reality, because it is based on fanatical beliefs about markets, enabled by Propaganda and lies, to achieve a result on behalf of those who Blair and Bush work for, which of course is not the Iraqi people, and it's certainly not us!

[hobo knife]

I haven't read through this whole thread...but what I have read is interesting.

One thing I think is certain, is the Iraqi occupation is permanent. Like someone said above me, we're basically setting up a very large us military base there as well as another puppet regime. I'm sure the suicide attacks and subsequent us military retaliation will continue untill the end of time. (similar to the palestinian situation)

If things continue on the same course as today, Kerry might reinstate the draft. (or Bush)...I would look for the draft in 2-3 years...thats 18-26 year old males, no defferments allowed. Although, the draft could be much smaller than the last draft this country experienced.

...We'll see though, theres a slight chance Kerry could pull in some allies and maybe contain the insurgency without a draft.

I think one big misconception is that, we didn't invade Iraq to have the oil for ourselves, to "steal the oil." We invaded becuase we have to control the oil. We have to control who is able to buy that oil and at what price. The european union is seen as a threat to american dominance, along with certain asian countries. Hence the france and german opposition to the war...If we can control the sale of oil to our enemies we can keep them in check.

From an American world domination standpoint...it's not that surprising we invaded Iraq. We really had no choice if we are to continue to dominate the world and it's resources. So now that it's done we're there for good...this isn't like vietnam where after 7-8 years we can just decide we lost and go home...if we're still losing this war in 7-8 years, we still wont be able to just walk away from an area of such vast resources and wealth.

[Casual T.]

Originally posted by NOT GUILTY@Oct 16 2004, 03:21 AM
I BELEIVE THIS WHOLE IRAQ THING WAS STARTED TO SET UP A BASE IN THE MIDDLE EAST....COME ON ,THE U.S HAS MILITARY BASES SET UP ALL OVER THE WORLD ,EXCEPT WHERE? THE MID-EAST...SO TO DO WHAT EVER THERE GONNA DO OVER THERE , THEY GOTTA HAVE A PLACE TO LAUNCH ATTACKS FROM.....
Quoted post


That's fucking not true. The U.S. has plenty of bases in the Middle East. There's a huge U.S. naval base for sailors and marines in Bahrain, which is an island just south of Kuwait. There's also a U.S. Air Force base in Qatar and Saudi Arabia. There's U.S. Air Force bases in Turkey as well. And I believe Saudi Arabia has U.S. Army and Marine bases there as well.

[Nekro]

I was about to say what casual T said, with the preface "You fucking moron," added for good measure.

"There are some problems for which there is no immediate and obvious solution" - Robert MacNamara, "In Retrospect" 1995

[hobo knife]

yeah, we do have military bases set up here and there...but nothing like what we'll have in Iraq in the years to come...I think the only country that allowed us to launch attacks against Iraq using their soil was kuwait (which is basically us/british territory these days) ...I also think US military bases abroad are technically there to supplement the native military in keeping their nation secure.

Iraq is strategically located in the middle east...and now that we're setting up a regime that will do whatever we tell them, we will be much more threatening to countries such as syria and iran (seeing that they neighbor Iraq) Of course this is one of the reasons we invested so much time and money in Iraq and Saddam in the late seventies and through the eighties. Although I think it all comes down to controlling the oil. Controlling who can buy oil and at what price.

[NOT GUILTY]

^^^^^^^^^
TRUE ABOUT BAHRAIN & TURKEY, BUT WE DONT HAVE ANY MORE TROOPS IN SAUDI ARABIA AT ALL........AND NOT VERY MUCH TROOPS IN KUWAIT .(A FEW HUNDRED).AND THEY MOSTLY ONLY FOCUSE ON MISSLE DEFENSE FOR THAT NATION......BUT THE THING ABOUT BAHRAIN & TURKEY .......THERE ARE NOT THAT MANY TROOPS THERE,MOST WERE DEPLOYED TO IRAQ.AND THE PEOPLE OF THOSE COUNTRIES ARE TRYIN HARDER AND HARDER EVERYDAY TO HAVE THE U.S TROOPS REMOVED.......SO MY POINT IS :THOSE COUNTRIES YOU SPEAK ABOUT DONT HAVE REAL BASES THERE.....,JUST A FEW TROOPS AND REMEMBER THEY ALSO HAVE TO HAVE PREMISSION TO OPERATE FROM THOSE BASES,SO BEFORE THAY MAKE ANY MOVES THEY GOTTA GO THROUGH THOSE NATIONS GOVERNMENT FIRST....HEY WE MAY DISAGREE, BUT WHY YOU GOTTA BE SO HOSTILE.....REMEMBER THATS HOW WARS GET STARTED ........

[NOT GUILTY]

^^^^^^^
IN MY REPLY I WAS REFERRING TO NEKRO & CASUAL T

[random]

Originally posted by Nekro@Oct 18 2004, 02:49 AM
I was about to say what casual T said, with the preface "You fucking moron," added for good measure.

"There are some problems for which there is no immediate and obvious solution" - Robert MacNamara, "In Retrospect" 1995
Quoted post


fog of war is very pertinent these days

[Nekro]

http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2004/10/04/tomo/story.jpg

Where do you think we invaded Iraq from? Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

Personally I don't think Iraq is another vietnam. The situations are very very different. However, we have made the same mistakes.

I was at this travelling mini-version of the vietnam war memorial wall and I picked up a couple of the handouts they were giving away. One of them was a list of quotes from Mr. MacNamara's book on the lessons of Viet Nam. On there were quotes like "we failed to understand the culture of the region" (I'll post them all tomorrow afternoon, when I'm not trying to distract myself from writing a paper that's due tomorrow). I was reading through them, and I got the strong sense that we still have not learned them at all.

[ModelCitizen]

Originally posted by hobo knife@Oct 18 2004, 03:21 AM
Although I think it all comes down to controlling the oil.
Quoted post


The whole "it all comes down to ___" angle seems like such a popular media thing these days -- some kind of blueprint element to drive interviews and shape editorials. Like if someone mentions the right catch-issue it gives the audience its queue to automatically pick a category. "Oh he blames oil? This guy's a democrat" ... "She thinks saddam was down with osama? Total republican"

Most popular one of all: "Oh he's voting for nader? _____ <-- insert choice of insult here."

[random]

nekro have you seen fog of war?

[Nekro]

Random: No, should I?

[imported_El Mamerro]

Hell yes you do, Nekro. Not only pure sickness in documentary form, but incredibly pertinent to today's events.

[hobo knife]

Originally posted by Ten Cents+Oct 18 2004, 12:26 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Ten Cents - Oct 18 2004, 12:26 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-hobo knife@Oct 18 2004, 03:21 AM
Although I think it all comes down to controlling the oil.
Quoted post


The whole "it all comes down to ___" angle seems like such a popular media thing these days -- "Oh he blames oil? This guy's a democrat" ... "She thinks saddam was down with osama? Total republican"


Quoted post
[/b][/quote]

Actually, I disagree.... I WISH the media was talking about oil more. The funny thing is the osama - hussein connect is non-existant. But the oil does exist....

The only divider on wether or not someone believes oil was a motive, is the people that have been duped and those who haven't...and I guess that might be the difference between a lot of democrats and republicans

[random]

Originally posted by Nekro@Oct 18 2004, 07:01 AM
Random: No, should I?
Quoted post



yeah it's a documentary about McNamara and his role in Vietnam.. it's very worthwhile

[fatalist]

Pretty much every day now the President is telling us that things are improving in Iraq and the Iraqi people really desire freedom and the democracy that comes with it - if only they'd stop blowing us up for long enough to realize it.

But has anyone ever thought of the possibility that maybe freedom just isn't the most important thing to that society? I mean America was founded on freedom. It's definatly what's important here. But here's a news flash to those who had absolutly no foreign policy experience before they took office (that means you Mr. President) - societies don't always value certain aspects of life equally. The Iraqis happen to be muslims that value their religon more than their freedom. I think I heard the perfect example of this the other night, "Ask an Iraqi man if he'd rather give up his freedom and be placed under the rule of Sadam again or get to have his freedom but his sister gets to wear a miniskirt in public, I promise you he'll choose Sadam." I totally agree, he would choose Sadam. That's because his religon is more important to him than his freedom. Maybe we should consider that the next time we decide to go bring freedom to an oppressed society - unless that society happens to live on top of billions of barrels of oil, then they deserve freedom and they deserve it now.

This fact that religon is more important to the muslims than freedom is also why the President's claim that, "The terrorists hate us because we're free." is so ridiculous. Again religon is more important to these people than freedom. The terrorist don't hate us because we're free. They hate us because ever single fiber of American society is completly at odds with their interpretations of the Koran. They hate us because of our strip clubs, violent video games, undisciplined kids, and fast food. They hate us because of the decline in the family structure, the secularization of our schools, our acceptance of homosexuality. They hate us because we support Israel. They hate us because of our history of imperialistic foreign policy. And now they hate us even more because we invaded Iraq. But they most certainly do not hate us because we're free.


damn...govenment class is the shit...

[NOT GUILTY]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

GOOD POINTS YOU MADE ,I TOTALLY AGREE .............

[KaBar2]

I'd say that the statement "They hate us because we're free" pretty much sums up what was just listed up here^^^. Free to do what? Free to go to a strip club if you want to. Free to worship however you want to, or to refrain from worshiping anything if you don't want to. Free to drink alcohol, or to refrain.

"Freedom" means that you get to choose what you want to do, within the law, rather than being forced to obey, or being denied any choice whatsoever.

You aren't free to attend a mosque if there ARE no mosques, and you are forbidden to build any. You aren't free to go to school if there ARE no schools, Etc.

Most strict Islamic societies regulate behavior through force. The good news is that it causes a backlash, and a countervailing social force against the strict behavior code.

We fail to see the extremely bigoted nature of most Third World societies. The U.S. is very open and welcoming to different cultures, religions, etc. compared to someplace like Iran or Saudi Arabia. Within a mile or two of my home there are probably five or six mosques and Islamic religious schools and organizations. This cannot be said to be true in Iran, or most other Islamic countries.

[!@#$%]

it's interesting to me that people don't realize that when john kerry voted against the first persian gulf invasion, if that vote had won, there might not have been a 9/11
no one ever talks about that.


of course I, probably because i'm a woman, understand and am well aware of the bigoted nature of third world countries.

thats partly why the hypocrisy in bush's war rhetoric is so glaring.
why isn't he trying to liberate the citizens of OUR FRIEND Saudi Arabia?!??!!?!?

those people aren't living in a fucking democracy, and we have healthy relationships with that government.
the u.s is only interested in governments it's controlling.

i think people aren't seeing the bigoted nature of the goddamn united states.

sure, we are free ..compared to a fucking hellhole like Iran and saudi arabia!
where they would rather burn schoolgirls alive before they unlocked the doors to their buildings.
but compared to many socialist european or south american democracies, we are NOT free!

terrorists hate america because it is an imperialist warmonger that is the slaughterer of thousands of innocent people who stood in the way of our world vision.

and thanks for the clarification on islamic conditions in iran.
when were you there?

[KaBar2]

I just know what I read in the papers--I've never been to Iran. You? I spent a couple of weeks in Turkey on a NATO war exercise, a long time ago. I would not care to live there. The part I saw was like the poorest part of Mexico, appalling conditions, barefoot boys (I did not see a single woman or girl the entire time I was in Turkey--we were in a remote farming area where the females apparently only rarely emerge from their homes.)

For a NATO ally, the Turks were pretty fucking hostile. And they are supposed to be a secular nation.

As far as that goes, we had a week's cinderella liberty in Athens (our LPH was berthed in the port city of Piraeus), and the Greeks weren't too damned friendly, either.

I was not unhappy to be going home, for certain.

[BROWNer]

kabar, your thing on freedom is pretty good, but why do you
exclude the facts?
the facts are we (G7, primarly the US) support brutal and harsh regimes time and again, with zero concerns for human rights.
turkey is a good example. under clinton, with massive arms sales to turkey, they committed incredibly brutal state violence which resulted in 10's of thousands of deaths, all kinds of brutal torture etcetry. the list goes on and on. you always exclude these incredibly pertinent facts when you talk about your country in relation to the rest of the world. that's not to say you have no point when it comes to american freedom, but..

[imported_Tesseract]

Originally posted by KaBar2@Oct 26 2004, 02:24 AM

As far as that goes, we had a week's cinderella liberty in Athens (our LPH was berthed in the port city of Piraeus), and the Greeks weren't too damned friendly, either.

I was not unhappy to be going home, for certain.
Quoted post


Well it makes sense Kabar, i live in athens and this country has suffered from many serious things...right after ww2 we got fucked up by a civil war between communists and noncommunists and right after that we had a dictatorship..all that while the rest of europe was healing and really evolving. In both cases the US played a major role in how things went..playing both sides at the same time and pushing a clear agenda. If you think thats all bullshit the year had to be 1999 to have presidnt Clinton to address the people of Greece from athens and publically apologise on US's behalf for helping General Papadopoulos to establish a 7 year dictatorship where thousands of rebellious students, and normal people aswell were getting killed/tortured/monitored everysingle day. Thats not my view on it. Its the truth since everyone admits it 30+ years after.
Of course we also got benefitted from the aid the US gave to europe after ww2 but with a cost like that would you be feeling gratefull?

[imported_Tesseract]

As far as turkey goes, turkey is a country controlled by the military 100%...freedom is a word that no dictionary there includes, their economy is at a state where without the MONTHLY US income they'd collapse in a minute. They survive because they offer their services to the US army and thats all there is to it.

[KaBar2]

There must be a little more to it than that. If they were all that dependent upon our military largesse, then when we requested to launch air attacks against Iraq from U.S. BUILT TURKISH AIR BASES they would have said "Sure, Boss, no problem." Instead, they said "No fucking way."

We are not getting our money's worth, if it is, in fact, a relationship we bought with cash. If it is, then apparently they don't feel like they are getting paid enough, or something.

[imported_Tesseract]

They told you to go eff your self and they paid for it instantly...the thing you have to know about turks is that they are probably the best diplomats and they play HARD, i dunno the details over this but the moments the turks said no to the US you guys gave the kurds more power and independency dreams plus you cancelled some major biz with the turks. I cant specify a link or something since that stuff that was on the news (european news at least) a year+ plus ago.

Nice to see you ignored the whole why greeks werent friendly explanation ;)

[imported_Europe]

Turkey has tried to join the EU for almost 20 years now. We dont want them in. Why? Cause they are 65 million poor islamic people ruled by the army in a medieval way.
On one hand they need to work with the US to get money, on the other they dont want to assist the US in killing their islamic brothers.

[imported_Tesseract]

We dont want them in the EU for the reasons you mentioned and because the only nation that pushes their entrance is the US...turkey would be america's trojan horse in the EU....above all that: Turkey isnt europe, plain and simple. different culture, different religion, different everything.

As far as not wanting to help murder their islamic brothers they didnt seem to bother last time father bush was around...its a poker game for them and usually they get what they want..turkey is like a poor israel.

[icetray]

iraq... the modern day babylon..

warring for peace..
is that supposed to be okay?

[KaBar2]

Gee, EUROPE, that sounds an awful lot like RACISM. Funny how when Americans voice opinions like this, we're all a bunch of bigoted bastards, but when Europeans voice this racist shit, it's just common sense talking.

UN-FUCKING-BELIEVEABLE. Next you'll be telling us you don't want your sister marrying one.

The EU is going to be CRAWLING with ZILLIONS of Islamic immigrants, all poorer than shit, with a huge birth rate, diseases, etc., etc. The Turks are going to be on you people like white on rice.

TOUGH SHIT. Deal with it. The U.S. is now the most "diverse" country in the world. You can't even buy a six-pack of beer in this motherfucker unless you can speak a foreign language. The only upside, as far as I can tell, is we have plenty of interesting restaurants. In Houston, every day I see scores of Muslim women wearing headscarves and even the fucking burqua, which is more than you can say for FRANCE. They say there are now more than 300 languages being spoken in Houston. When I was a kid, I had only heard three---English, Spanish and Chinese. That's gotta be progress, eh?

[imported_Tesseract]

EUROPE YOU FUCKIN BIGGOT!!!

Europe is already filled with turks, germany has millions of them and we all deal with it.Should we allow them (the country) in the EU? NO...its different to be humanitarian and its different to sabotage your own shit. In my country immigrants get free health care instead of letting them die on the sidewalk because they're uninsuranced...and hey, europe isnt the force that invades countries every two years to make their goverment members richer..so yeah, you get the drift

[BROWNer]

wasn't papadopoulos generally regarded as a CIA asset?
i know he was KYP which i'm pretty sure was funded and
set up with/by the CIA....

[imported_Tesseract]

KYP is was the greek National Service of Information...and its like you say it. The trick is that not only Papadopoulos was an asset, his opposition also was..when i say that the CIA played multifield i mean it. I had very funny pictures in a book i cant find now but you'd be amused to see the same CIA agent shaking hands with Papadolpulos and on another picture with the communist leader WEARING THE SAME CLOTHES....

[imported_Europe]

Kabar:
If the EU countries dont want another country to join them, Turkey, how is that racism? Turkey simply doesnt fit in the EU, too many differences in the way they run their country and their religion.
Yes we have millions of turkish people in Europe, they are welcome here. Cause there is nothing wrong with the PEOPLE of Turkey (so this isnt racism!) but there is something very wrong with the COUNTRY of Turkey.

[NC]

Im not sure what sort of history the amerikans learned in their 'public schools' :lol:... (mind you this was probably before america was 'created')
Anyways, turkey has always had a very nice reputation of conquering 1/2 of europe by ravaging, destroying, killing, impaling people on stakes (i forgot the term but its where they impale you on a pole of sort and do it in such a way where it would miss your vital organs so you wouldnt die instantly but live for a few days) and of course kidnapping young children which they would train into soldiers, and then years later they would send them to kill their own parents!

[imported_Tesseract]

Originally posted by NC@Oct 28 2004, 07:08 AM
) and of course kidnapping young children which they would train into soldiers, and then years later they would send them to kill their own parents!
Quoted post


Genitsari

[Catch22]

At an airport rally at a hangar in Montoursville, Pa., Cheney said the U.S. invasions of "Afghanistan and Iraq will be studied for years for their brilliance."

One of the problems with the bush administration is that they don't take responsibility. They preach about everyone else not being accountable for their actions yet the Bush administration STILL has not admitted to making any mistakes.

Do you remember when JFK took responsibility for the Bay of Pigs? It takes a man to admit when he is wrong. Bush is a Punk Ass Bitch! What a fuckin pussy!

[Poop Man Bob]

Iraq declares a 60-day state of emergency. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3990141.stm)

I love how shit like this just "coincidentally" occurs right after the election. Along with the assault of Falluja which is about to happen any day now.

[BROWNer]

^isn't it amazing?

[ledzep]

I was expecting something like this.

[KaBar2]

Catch 22---
The reason Kennedy had to admit he made a mistake was because the CIA stupidly allowed the anti-Castro Cubans in Brigada 2506 to attempt to carry out Operation Mongoose without any American firepower. The Cubans were convinced that once they made the beach that the U.S. would provide them with air cover from U.S. aircraft carriers steaming offshore. In fact, U.S. Navy fighter planes with the U.S. insignia painted out with grey deck paint kept Castro's forces at bay for a little while by making repeated low-level passes down the beach, in the hopes that the Castro forces would hit one of them, and they could then use that as an excuse (like the Gulf of Tonkin incident was used during the Vietnam War) to "defend" themselves and begin close air support of the anti-Castro forces on the beach.

Whether the Castro forces were smarter than that, or whether they were just lousy shots isn't clear. They did manage to hit Operation Mongoose's logistical supply lines by setting the freighters carrying their ammunition and fuel on fire out in the Bay of Pigs. Once the ammunition resupply ships were put out of action, the fate of the troops dug in on the beach was pretty much sealed. Castro's troops had them boxed in with their backs against the ocean. When they ran out of ammunition, they were forced to surrender.

Kennedy was facing a military disaster. Either he had to be willing to invade Cuba, or he had to cut his losses. It had only been 16 years since the end of the South Pacific island-hopping of WWII, where the U.S. lost thousands and thousands of men taking islands less than 1/10th the size of Cuba. As I've said before, the Marines lost 10,000 men the first three days taking Okinawa. That works out to about 140 men per hour of battle. If Kennedy was willing to follow through on the bet that the CIA had laid, it could wind up costing 50,000 American lives, or more. He wasn't willing, so he folded. That left 1,300 Cuban boys as POW's in Castro's prisons, where they were tortured, starved, allowed to die from lack of medical care and executed in mass firing squads. If memory serves, about 600 of them were eventually repatriated to the U.S., years later, in a trade for spare parts, fuel and medical supplies.

The CIA had made a terrible miscalculation, ostensibly because they were depending upon intelligence smuggled out to them from the anti-Castro resistance. This intelligence indicated that the people of Cuba despised Castro and couldn't wait for a chance to revolt and kick him out of power. This may have been true of the friends and family of the anti-Castro underground, but for the rank-and-file Cubans, it was not true. The Cuban Army defeated Brigada 2506 handily. The Bay of Pigs made Kennedy look like an idiot in front of the entire world, encouraged the Soviet Union to install nuclear missles in Cuba, and eventually led to the Cuban Missle Crisis. Kennedy fired the head of the CIA, John Foster Dulles, humiliating him for his error.

Guess who Dulles' brother was?

The mayor of Dallas, Texas.

(badda BOOM.)

[Juan Fuentes]

FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!FREE IRAQ!!!!!

[SWIMS]

It is good to see the opinions expressed, and the information being made available on this board. I have been off it for a while, but this has stayed at the forefront of my thoughts. The great opportunity that could have become a reality has now passed. New minds ready for action now must continue to have their voices silenced. The backlash from the latest incursion into falluga (sp) will have major ramifications. The question of weather or not it is the right move is illigit. We want to support the govt. we created and these guys stand in opposition of it. The machines that act within most conflicting areas to marginalize radical/separatist elements into newly established bodies have been, and will continue to be suppressed. Yet we see our population being told that because the IGC has approved the action they are acting within the bounds of the wishes of the Iraqi people. The news coverage has been exceptionally supportive of the opinion that this specific action is catering to the wishes of the Iraqi people. Yet even this term has begun to loose any resemblance to the wishes of the Iraqi, a voice that I still search to hear and eventually understand in some capacity. The situation is fucked, this seems to be a radical yet meaningless conclusion that I can draw from it. Anything else is caught up in the mix of so many other questions that it leaves my mind in a constant revolution of conflicting thoughts.
I have spent some time studying both the regions history, and the relevance of actions within the mid east during the 20th and now the 21st centuries, and it pains me to great extent the negative conclusions that often are the result of thorough analysis on Iraq. Compromise is than manor in which diplomacy, and politics survives, but hypocrisy and unilateral thought breed conflict. I do not understand how a foreign governing body, established by an invading foreign army, and legitimated by their force has any ability to create a system that balances authority and power in a way that represents the thoughts of it’s constituents, and can evolve itself to cater to the needs of these very people.
The very consideration of such a body is very far off, yet the seeds of it, and those in opposition to it, may still be found in the ideological rhetoric of those trying (I don’t like the word) to create it, and those vying to destroy the very institution that is the forced parent of it. The key has been those willing to be co-opted into a system that represents at least some fraction of their interests, and gives promise to diplomacy and compromise in a way that will heed their inclusion. This is a very long way away. These bodies emerge when street politics allows it, yet their voice has not been amplified or even promoted. The US has constructed a body that will give them the freedom to operate in the capacity they deem necessary, but nobody can side with them without alienating themselves from the local elements that the average person holds as the core of their identity. They do not see promise, only conflict and death.
If I had been drawn out ten years ago in open defiance of a suppressive leader, and had to hide as my fellow brothers were massacred, then had to face years of sanctioned poverty while my children withered away, and then again live through the terror of war only to find myself operating within a society governed by a foreign army, legitimated by leaders, many of whom already bear national disgraces, who must bow to their benefactors above establishing stability and the mere semblance of governance I would have become devoid of rational and would succumb to radical reasoning.
The NYT is right here next to me and I see rebels and invaders fighting while at least one of the greatest tyrants of our nation is stepping down. Yet all of this has no effect on my life within the context of day to day. I choose to direct myself toward the east, and therefore these actions have a great effect on the reality I exist in. Maybe that is why so many people voted for bush. His actions will keep the fight somewhere else, out of state, out of mind, out of worry. This hip-hop group Immortal Technique has a verse we fucked the Mid East and gave birth to a demon. I think the child will be a traveler; he will bring conflict, and destruction as gifts for Ramadan and Christmas. The fruits ours to bear, but we should not be so sympathetic to national outcries when the response hits us in the face. It is the reality as I see it, and my reality exists very far from what I observe.
-These are my thought as a young, educated yet ignorant male living within the United States. These thoughts poured out as they were conjured and constantly evolve and change. Like them, hate them? I want to hear your reactions!
The only point I make as fact is Knowledge, educate yourself. Books are good, but people are better, and it is this very reason I reply to the opinions expressed on these boards with my own. Peace

-www.ICG.org- these people are the most intelligent informers of world politics that I have come across. A lot of the information is pretty thick but it is being compiled by people in the areas they reference and promote questions and ideas that bring some understanding to the conflicts in the world. Notably Iraq

[villain]

Yeah, it is very clear to me that the US is still in control and not the Interim Government of Iraq.
Allawi is pretty much being used as a yes man to give the appearance of wide approval for the US' actions. I have not seen any significant and independent policy from this interim government. They can't enact any significant civil initiatives because first of all, they must be approved by the US, and secondly, they don't have the money because it is clear now that Halliburton is abusing funds. 400 pages of documents have just been released from the Pentagon Audit agency.... Check it out:

http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Docu...02533-65318.pdf (http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20041110102533-65318.pdf)

Looks like the case is getting stronger and stronger against this administration.
I would urge everyone to donate to this fund:

http://www.helpamericarecount.org/

And also please sign this petition:

http://www.petitiononline.com/uselect/petition.html

[Carl Winslow.]

Originally posted by hobo knife@Oct 17 2004, 08:21 PM
yeah, we do have military bases set up here and there...but nothing like what we'll have in Iraq in the years to come...I think the only country that allowed us to launch attacks against Iraq using their soil was kuwait (which is basically us/british territory these days) ...
Quoted post


Kuwait wasn't the only one. We've launched attacks against Iraq from Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, Turkey, and if I'm not mistaken Diego Garcia (small island-base in Indian Ocean used by U.S. and British troops)

[Carl Winslow.]

Originally posted by NOT GUILTY@Oct 17 2004, 08:28 PM
^^^^^^^^^
TRUE ABOUT BAHRAIN & TURKEY, BUT WE DONT HAVE ANY MORE TROOPS IN SAUDI ARABIA AT ALL........AND NOT VERY MUCH TROOPS IN KUWAIT .(A FEW HUNDRED).AND THEY MOSTLY ONLY FOCUSE ON MISSLE DEFENSE FOR THAT NATION......BUT THE THING ABOUT BAHRAIN & TURKEY .......THERE ARE NOT THAT MANY TROOPS THERE,MOST WERE DEPLOYED TO IRAQ.AND THE PEOPLE OF THOSE COUNTRIES ARE TRYIN HARDER AND HARDER EVERYDAY TO HAVE THE U.S TROOPS REMOVED.......SO MY POINT IS :THOSE COUNTRIES YOU SPEAK ABOUT DONT HAVE REAL BASES THERE.....,JUST A FEW TROOPS AND REMEMBER THEY ALSO HAVE TO HAVE PREMISSION TO OPERATE FROM THOSE BASES,SO BEFORE THAY MAKE ANY MOVES THEY GOTTA GO THROUGH THOSE NATIONS GOVERNMENT FIRST....HEY WE MAY DISAGREE, BUT WHY YOU GOTTA BE SO HOSTILE.....REMEMBER THATS HOW WARS GET STARTED ........
Quoted post



You originally said there were no U.S. bases in the Middle East. After you were proved wrong, now you're trying to say that these bases that I mentioned aren't really bases and don't have a lot of troops. That is absolutely false. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Kuwait, and Bahrain houses several thousand troops in the 5 digits. I spent time in Bahrain. It is a huge naval base that is the headquarters of the U.S. Third Fleet. The headquarters of the Air Force base in the middle east was located in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia... but I believed they moved it to Qatar.' The point is, these are not small temporary encampments -- these are huge "permanent" bases that are to remain there indefinitely.

[Poop Man Bob]

Raw footage from the Fallujah assault. (http://members.cox.net/macallan_the/falluja.asf)

[effyoo]

that's crazy, Poop.

[ledzep]

dude thanks man, I needed that.

[KaBar2]

Great video, Poop Man. How did you get it? I've tried a couple of times to find an online source for video being re-broadcast to the U.S. or sent by satellite, but I have no idea what I'm doing and couldn't figure out a way to find it. IIf I did, I probably would have difficulty figuring out how to access it....)

[Poop Man Bob]

I got the link off of www.fark.com.

[fatalist]

this may be the wrong thread...but i didn't feel like making a new one...anyway peep this...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/graphics/phantom_fury/flash.htm

go to picture 2, look at what the top of the box says in the middle and the one on the left. these 40 vials of sarin gas were found in a briefcase in fallujah. The other inscriptions on the boxes are in german and cyrillic (russian).

[villain]

yeah i heard about this. there is also a box in english. but i don't know what you are trying to imply by this. as if this justifies bushs "intelligence" which is an oxymoron. That is a small quanitity that is not weaponized and not equipped with a warhead and the missles or the production capabilities and it was probably smuggled in by some foreign fighters in an attache case. given that it was found in falleuja and not in some secret bunker laboratory where saddams mad scientists had some evil take over the world plots cooking up. Shoot you can get russian sarin off ebay.

[BROWNer]

on the flipside of these reports, there are reports the US has used illegal and
experimental weapons. in the early stages of the war they used a new napalm
weapon(incidentally, napalm is internationally banned and the US claims it
stopped using it in the 70's). now there is some iraqi physician claiming they
used chem weapons(no idea how solid this info is), and witness reports that they
used experimental bombs that burn skin even when water is poured over wounds..
this second report, although not thoroughly confirmed, is consistent with what the new napalm incendiary weapons do..which is a mix of jet fuel and polystyrene that adheres to the skin as it burns.

[BROWNer]

well i just looked it up, and it appears that technically speaking, these new
napalm weapons are not 'technically' napalm. so they've given these
weapons a new name, but apparently they are essentially napalm version 2.

[villain]

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cf...=40&ItemID=3410 (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=40&ItemID=3410)

There's an article on some of the irregular weapons being used. I actually know someone who accidentally drove over an unexploded cluster bomblet.
I've always been concerned about the amount of DU being used. It seems kinda pointless to use SABO rounds anymore with the abscense of any enemy tanks.
Here's some more interesting stuff:

http://nucnews.net/nucnews/links.htm

http://www.uwec.edu/grossmzc/schmolaj.html

I hadn't heard about this "new" napalm. Sounds like something you could make in your garage though. I don't see how this is new.
Let's not forget the tactical nukes that bypass treaty laws somehow.

[KaBar2]

A depleted uranium APDS round ("sabot", not SABO--it's French) does not explode. It is a SOLID DART PROJECTILE like a great big uranium "nail." The term "APDS" stands for "Armor Piercing Discarding Sabot." The projectile is fired from a 105mm tank gun. The projectile part that actually strikes the enemy tank is made of DU, which is a VERY DENSE (not "hard") metal, considerably denser than steel. The DU projectile is carried down the tank gun's barrel rifling cradled in and partially enclosed within the "sabot", which is made out of aluminum, and is more or less about like a motorcycle engine crankcase. As the projectile-sabot combination exits the tank gun barrel, the two-piece sabot opens up from wind resistance and falls off the DU projectile, striking the ground and then bouncing and tumbling along the ground in the direction of the target. Tankers must be careful when firing APDS rounds if there are allied troops dug in out in front of the tank, because the "discarded" sabot bouncing along the ground could easily kill anyone they struck.

The DU projectile is much smaller than 105 mm in diameter, about 2-1/2 feet long, and shaped like a sharp pointed "dart" with flight-stabilizing wings in the back. Because the DU projectile is much smaller than a regular HE tank round, IT'S VELOCITY IS MUCH GREATER. It travels much faster towards the target, and strikes the enemy tank with tremendous power. Sometimes it penetrates the tank, but often they hit and distinegrate (resulting in DU fragments, powder and dust in the area of the target) or hit and ricochet off. Even if the projectile doesn't penetrate, it causes "spalling" of the armor ON THE INSIDE OF THE ENEMY TANK TURRET, and the spall flies about inside the enemy tank like shrapnel, killing the tank crew, and sometimes detonating the enemy tank rounds in their turret racks, resulting in a series of large explosions and a fire.

There are hunting rifle cartridges that use this same principle, called "Accelerator" rounds. If one uses a 7mm/ .30-'06 Accelerator cartridge in a .30-'06 rifle, the 7mm bullet is carried down the .30-'06 barrel (.30 inch is the same as 7.62mm) incased in a plastic "sabot", which is blown off the 7mm projectile when it exits the barrel. This makes the 7mm bullet much, much higher velocity than a 7.62mm bullet, and is a much "flatter shooting" "flat trajectory" bullet. (Most bullets travel in an arc like a rainbow--the slower and heavier the bullet the greater arc the trajectory will have.) Accelerator bullets are used to kill medium sized game (white-tailed deer, for instance) at a little bit of a distance (say 200 yards or more) because the trajectory is "flat."

APDS rounds do not "explode." They are SOLID DEPLETED URANIUM. They crash through cast steel tank hulls like a piece of hard cheddar through chilled butter.

I would definately agree, however, that breathing delpleted urarium dust is very bad for one's health.

[villain]

Ahhh... Kabar you are right. I'm obviously not armor, I've never studied armor TMs.... I've only heard about it from talking to armor people. So I assumed it was spelled "SABO" and was an acronym for somthing. So thanks for correcting me. It turns out that I can correct you on something as well. I found this on periscope:

The M32 76-mm gun is the main armament of the U.S. M41 Walker Bulldog light tank.

The gun fires the following projectiles: armor-piercing with tracer (AP-T), fin-stabilized discarding sabot AP (APFSDS-T), canister (CAN), high-explosive (HE), HE anti-tank (HEAT-T), high-velocity AP (HVAP-T), HVAP-DS-T and smoke (WP).

[KaBar2]

Villain---

You are correct about the DU rounds for the newer, faster wheeled combat vehicles. It has been over twenty years since I was a tanker (in the National Guard) and the tank I crewed on was outdated even then. I was tank crew on an M60 tank, which was so old, it used optical convergance to range the main gun. The tanks with which our unit replaced the M60, the M60A3, used much more modern IR gunsights to range the main gun.

I never actually got to shoot a DU round, which doesn't exactly bring tears to my eyes, frankly. I wasn't too interested in being around DU if I didn't have to be. We fired APDS training rounds (painted blue) which were loaded with a steel projectile the same weight and shape as the DU live round.

I started off as a loader, worked up to tank driver (now that was fun!) and then tank gunner. I shot "Expert" the very first time I went to the gunnery range. Next step up was Tank Commander ("TC") but I got out of the Guard and joined a motorcycle club.

I know very little about modern combat armor. The young Marines and soldiers of today are equipped with totally different weapons and gear than we had. I got out of the Marines when we still had the M16A1. Since then, the infantry was issued updated M16A2 rifles, and then the new M4 (which is based on the M16A2, but with a collapsible stock, a much shorter barrel, and a Picatinny rail from which to hang all manner of accessories like flashlights, etc.)

Most of my acquaintences own AR15 rifles very similar to the M16A1, but the younger guys are switching to AR15's that look very much like the M4, because that's what they were trained on in the Army.

[Dick Quickwood]

Fallujah refugees denied aid (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/oneworld/20041201/wl_oneworld/6573987711101868549&e=3)

[AbovE]

Originally posted by fatalist@Oct 21 2004, 11:19 AM
Pretty much every day now the President is telling us that things are improving in Iraq and the Iraqi people really desire freedom and the democracy that comes with it - if only they'd stop blowing us up for long enough to realize it.

But has anyone ever thought of the possibility that maybe freedom just isn't the most important thing to that society? I mean America was founded on freedom. It's definatly what's important here. But here's a news flash to those who had absolutly no foreign policy experience before they took office (that means you Mr. President) - societies don't always value certain aspects of life equally. The Iraqis happen to be muslims that value their religon more than their freedom. I think I heard the perfect example of this the other night, "Ask an Iraqi man if he'd rather give up his freedom and be placed under the rule of Sadam again or get to have his freedom but his sister gets to wear a miniskirt in public, I promise you he'll choose Sadam." I totally agree, he would choose Sadam. That's because his religon is more important to him than his freedom. Maybe we should consider that the next time we decide to go bring freedom to an oppressed society - unless that society happens to live on top of billions of barrels of oil, then they deserve freedom and they deserve it now.

This fact that religon is more important to the muslims than freedom is also why the President's claim that, "The terrorists hate us because we're free." is so ridiculous. Again religon is more important to these people than freedom. The terrorist don't hate us because we're free. They hate us because ever single fiber of American society is completly at odds with their interpretations of the Koran. They hate us because of our strip clubs, violent video games, undisciplined kids, and fast food. They hate us because of the decline in the family structure, the secularization of our schools, our acceptance of homosexuality. They hate us because we support Israel. They hate us because of our history of imperialistic foreign policy. And now they hate us even more because we invaded Iraq. But they most certainly do not hate us because we're free.


damn...govenment class is the shit...
Quoted post
Yeah you think they give a fuck about religion they dont give two shits about they own fam nevermind religion theyre just trying to survive people here (Iraq for all the tube watchers and college types) dont give a fuck about that shit they might play that shit off like they do but when it comes down these motherfuckers will stab their brothers sisters freinds lol lol I like that word in the back so they can what surivive make a buck thats the true face of Islam here and you ask me how I know ,I interact with these fucks all day I study them because thats what I do I study people find out what makes em tick so I can kill em you might hear the call for prayer 5 times a day but most of em all they wanna do is make some quick cash

[ledzep]

now that was one long ass sentence.

[imported_Tesseract]

Quoted post
Yeah you think they give a fuck about religion they dont give two shits about they own fam nevermind religion theyre just trying to survive people here (Iraq for all the tube watchers and college types) dont give a fuck about that shit they might play that shit off like they do but when it comes down these motherfuckers will stab their brothers sisters freinds lol lol I like that word in the back so they can what surivive make a buck thats the true face of Islam here and you ask me how I know ,I interact with these fucks all day I study them because thats what I do I study people find out what makes em tick so I can kill em you might hear the call for prayer 5 times a day but most of em all they wanna do is make some quick cash
Quoted post
[/quote]

....

[KaBar2]

AbovE--

Well, guy, I for one, am just glad that the U.S. is sending such compassionate, sensitive and well-educated soldiers such as yourself to trouble spots around the world to represent our nation and our values. No doubt, the experience of a few months association with conscientious American idealists such as yourself will bring democracy that much quicker to that sad, troubled land, and to it's long-suffering people.

And I agree, that was one long-ass sentence. Were you like, under fire or something when you wrote it? It seems a little manicky.

[imported_Tesseract]

I hope thats sarcasm..can never be sure with you old man

[KaBar2]

Sarcasm? Me?

[AbovE]

Originally posted by KaBar2@Dec 4 2004, 08:02 PM
AbovE--

Well, guy, I for one, am just glad that the U.S. is sending such compassionate, sensitive and well-educated soldiers such as yourself to trouble spots around the world to represent our nation and our values. No doubt, the experience of a few months association with conscientious American idealists such as yourself will bring democracy that much quicker to that sad, troubled land, and to it's long-suffering people.

And I agree, that was one long-ass sentence. Were you like, under fire or something when you wrote it? It seems a little manicky.
Quoted post
1.I started out being compassionate doesnt work they still try to kill you
2.I know who and what Im fighting for no need for your liberal sarcasm
3.Giving a gift to someone who doesnt want it tends to be
pretty frustrating
4.We were under attack so yeah I had to type fast
5.I hate punctuation leatherneck

[effyoo]

haha, dude called KaBar liberal.

[villain]

Originally posted by AbovE@Dec 4 2004, 06:38 PM
Yeah you think they give a fuck about religion they dont give two shits about they own fam nevermind religion theyre just trying to survive people here (Iraq for all the tube watchers and college types) dont give a fuck about that shit they might play that shit off like they do but when it comes down these motherfuckers will stab their brothers sisters freinds lol lol I like that word in the back so they can what surivive make a buck thats the true face of Islam here and you ask me how I know ,I interact with these fucks all day I study them because thats what I do I study people find out what makes em tick so I can kill em you might hear the call for prayer 5 times a day but most of em all they wanna do is make some quick cash
Quoted post



What's up AbovE? I saw your tag up in Fort Benning.
Yeah I know... you can't do much with people who are in survival mode. These most basic needs can't be met so why the hell are they going to go along with some bullshit rhetoric? It ain't helping them telling them they are free and things are better when they are saying it was better under saddam. That's sad right there.

*you know i often like to type all lowercase as protest against capital letters (hahaha) but it makes it kinda hard to read*
BE SAFE!

[AbovE]

I probably shouldnt of called him a liberal that was pretty low maybe frustration is the level Im way beyond. Thanks for shout out Villian Im just trying to get by here as we all are.

[villain]

Alright bro... I know you are frustrated. I hope other people here would understand that, and cut you some slack.

[villain]

Alright bro... I know you are frustrated. I hope other people here would understand that, and cut you some slack.

[fatalist]

Homeless Iraq vets showing up at shelters
By Mark Benjamin
Published 12/7/2004 1:40 PM

WASHINGTON, Dec. 7 (UPI) -- U.S. veterans from the war in Iraq are beginning to show up at homeless shelters around the country, and advocates fear they are the leading edge of a new generation of homeless vets not seen since the Vietnam era.

"When we already have people from Iraq on the streets, my God," said Linda Boone, executive director of the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans. "I have talked to enough (shelters) to know we are getting them. It is happening and this nation is not prepared for that."

"I drove off in my truck. I packed my stuff. I lived out of my truck for a while," Seabees Petty Officer Luis Arellano, 34, said in a telephone interview from a homeless shelter near March Air Force Base in California run by U.S.VETS, the largest organization in the country dedicated to helping homeless veterans.

Arellano said he lived out of his truck on and off for three months after returning from Iraq in September 2003. "One day you have a home and the next day you are on the streets," he said.

In Iraq, shrapnel nearly severed his left thumb. He still has trouble moving it and shrapnel "still comes out once in a while," Arellano said. He is left handed.

Arellano said he felt pushed out of the military too quickly after getting back from Iraq without medical attention he needed for his hand -- and as he would later learn, his mind.

"It was more of a rush. They put us in a warehouse for a while. They treated us like cattle," Arellano said about how the military treated him on his return to the United States.

"It is all about numbers. Instead of getting quality care, they were trying to get everybody demobilized during a certain time frame. If you had a problem, they said, 'Let the (Department of Veterans Affairs) take care of it.'"

The Pentagon has acknowledged some early problems and delays in treating soldiers returning from Iraq but says the situation has been fixed.

A gunner's mate for 16 years, Arellano said he adjusted after serving in the first Gulf War. But after returning from Iraq, depression drove him to leave his job at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. He got divorced.

He said that after being quickly pushed out of the military, he could not get help from the VA because of long delays.

"I felt, as well as others (that the military said) 'We can't take care of you on active duty.' We had to sign an agreement that we would follow up with the VA," said Arellano.

"When we got there, the VA was totally full. They said, 'We'll call you.' But I developed depression."

He left his job and wandered for three months, sometimes living in his truck.

Nearly 300,000 veterans are homeless on any given night, and almost half served during the Vietnam era, according to the Homeless Veterans coalition, a consortium of community-based homeless-veteran service providers. While some experts have questioned the degree to which mental trauma from combat causes homelessness, a large number of veterans live with the long-term effects of post-traumatic stress disorder and substance abuse, according to the coalition.

Some homeless-veteran advocates fear that similar combat experiences in Vietnam and Iraq mean that these first few homeless veterans from Iraq are the crest of a wave.

"This is what happened with the Vietnam vets. I went to Vietnam," said John Keaveney, chief operating officer of New Directions, a shelter and drug-and-alcohol treatment program for veterans in Los Angeles. That city has an estimated 27,000 homeless veterans, the largest such population in the nation. "It is like watching history being repeated," Keaveney said.

Data from the Department of Veterans Affairs shows that as of last July, nearly 28,000 veterans from Iraq sought health care from the VA. One out of every five was diagnosed with a mental disorder, according to the VA. An Army study in the New England Journal of Medicine in July showed that 17 percent of service members returning from Iraq met screening criteria for major depression, generalized anxiety disorder or PTSD.

Asked whether he might have PTSD, Arrellano, the Seabees petty officer who lived out of his truck, said: "I think I do, because I get nightmares. I still remember one of the guys who was killed." He said he gets $100 a month from the government for the wound to his hand.

Lance Cpl. James Claybon Brown Jr., 23, is staying at a shelter run by U.S.VETS in Los Angeles. He fought in Iraq for 6 months with Alpha Company, 1st Battalion, 2nd Marines and later in Afghanistan with another unit. He said the fighting in Iraq was sometimes intense.

"We were pretty much all over the place," Brown said. "It was really heavy gunfire, supported by mortar and tanks, the whole nine (yards)."

Brown acknowledged the mental stress of war, particularly after Marines inadvertently killed civilians at road blocks. He thinks his belief in God helped him come home with a sound mind.

"We had a few situations where, I guess, people were trying to get out of the country. They would come right at us and they would not stop," Brown said. "We had to open fire on them. It was really tough. A lot of soldiers, like me, had trouble with that."

"That was the hardest part," Brown said. "Not only were there men, but there were women and children -- really little children. There would be babies with arms blown off. It was something hard to live with."

Brown said he got an honorable discharge with a good conduct medal from the Marines in July and went home to Dayton, Ohio. But he soon drifted west to California "pretty much to start over," he said.

Brown said his experience with the VA was positive, but he has struggled to find work and is staying with U.S.VETS to save money. He said he might go back to school.

Advocates said seeing homeless veterans from Iraq should cause alarm. Around one-fourth of all homeless Americans are veterans, and more than 75 percent of them have some sort of mental or substance abuse problem, often PTSD, according to the Homeless Veterans coalition.

More troubling, experts said, is that mental problems are emerging as a major casualty cluster, particularly from the war in Iraq where the enemy is basically everywhere and blends in with the civilian population, and death can come from any direction at any time.

Interviews and visits to homeless shelters around the Unites States show the number of homeless veterans from Iraq or Afghanistan so far is limited. Of the last 7,500 homeless veterans served by the VA, 50 had served in Iraq. Keaveney, from New Directions in West Los Angeles, said he is treating two homeless veterans from the Army's elite Ranger battalion at his location. U.S.VETS, the largest organization in the country dedicated to helping homeless veterans, found nine veterans from Iraq or Afghanistan in a quick survey of nine shelters. Others, like the Maryland Center for Veterans Education and Training in Baltimore, said they do not currently have any veterans from Iraq or Afghanistan in their 170 beds set aside for emergency or transitional housing.

Peter Dougherty, director of Homeless Veterans Programs at the VA, said services for veterans at risk of becoming homeless have improved exponentially since the Vietnam era. Over the past 30 years, the VA has expanded from 170 hospitals, adding 850 clinics and 206 veteran centers with an increasing emphasis on mental health. The VA also supports around 300 homeless veteran centers like the ones run by U.S.VETS, a partially non-profit organization.

"You probably have close to 10 times the access points for service than you did 30 years ago," Dougherty said. "We may be catching a lot of these folks who are coming back with mental illness or substance abuse" before they become homeless in the first place. Dougherty said the VA serves around 100,000 homeless veterans each year.

But Boone's group says that nearly 500,000 veterans are homeless at some point in any given year, so the VA is only serving 20 percent of them.

Roslyn Hannibal-Booker, director of development at the Maryland veterans center in Baltimore, said her organization has begun to get inquiries from veterans from Iraq and their worried families. "We are preparing for Iraq," Hannibal-Booker said.



Copyright © 2001-2004 United Press International

Want to use this article? Click here for options!
Copyright 2004 United Press International

Copyright � 2004. United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us


DAMN THIS IS SOME FUCKED UP SHIT................

[ledzep]

^that is some fucked up shit.

[LadyNapua]

thanks for posting that clip....that is hard for me to watch. i can't imagine how those soldiers feel.

[villain]

Yeah I hear the navy will scoot and boot you real quick. It would be interesting to keep an eye on the VA as well since the Army is passing the buck to them more and more.

[BROWNer]

so i watched bush award 'freedom medals' to tenet,
franks and bremer this morning...all for doing such
a splendid job on iraq.
fucking amazing.

[robJ]

.................

[BROWNer]

http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2004/0412iraq.html

[Carl Winslow.]

Suicide bomber believed behind Mosul attack
U.S. investigators believe device detonated inside mess tent

Updated: 3:25 p.m. ET Dec. 22, 2004

WASHINGTON - U.S. military investigators examining evidence in a mess tent at a U.S. camp near the northern Iraqi city of Mosul believe that a suicide bomber was responsible for the devastating lunchtime explosion that killed 22 people and injured 69 others, Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Wednesday.

He said the investigators were expected to announce the results of their investigation shortly, but that their preliminary conclusion was that a suicide bomber was responsible for the attack, one of the deadliest of the war.

Myers provided no details on the identity of the bomber at a Pentagon news briefing, saying only that the blast was triggered by "an improvised explosive device worn by an attacker."

Earlier in the day, military experts had debated whether the source of the blast Tuesday at Forward Operating Base Marez was a rocket fired by insurgents or a suicide bomb.

Pentagon officials, who initially told NBC News that the explosion appeared to be caused by a 122mm rocket fired into the tent by insurgents, later backed away from that assertion and stated that investigators had reached no conclusions about the source.

Device was loaded with pellets
Prior to Myers' announcement, military officials said one of the most compelling pieces of evidence collected so far was that the explosive device contained BB-sized pellets, which could indicate a bomb, either planted or carried by a suicide bomber.

On Tuesday, a radical Sunni Muslim group, the Ansar al-Sunnah Army, claimed responsibility for the attack and said it was a “martyrdom operation” — a reference to a suicide bomber — that targeted the mess hall.

Whatever caused the explosion, the officials acknowledged that the attack appeared to have been well-planned, and precisely timed to strike the mess hall tent just as hundreds of American and Iraqi soldiers, and private contractors, sat down to lunch.

13 soldiers among dead
The dead included 18 Americans — 13 service members and five U.S. civilian contractors — and three Iraqi National Guard members. The 22nd victim was listed by the U.S. military command in Baghdad as an "unidentified non-U.S. person."

Halliburton Co., a Houston-based company whose subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root supplies food service and other support activities for U.S. troops in Mosul, on Wednesday said that four of its employees had died in the attack, correcting an earlier statement that put the toll at seven. It was not immediately clear who the fifth U.S. civilian contractor listed by the U.S. military command worked for.

Of the 69 wounded, 44 were U.S. military personnel and the remainder American civilians, Iraqi troops, and other foreigners, the military command said.

About 50 people — most of them injured soldiers from Mosul — arrived on an Air Force C-141 transport plane at Ramstein Air Base in Germany on Wednesday for treatment at nearby Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, said Maj. Mike Young, a base spokesman.

The hospital was expecting at least eight patients who were in critical condition, Landstuhl spokeswoman Marie Shaw said.

At the military hospital near Mosul airfield, doctors and orderlies treated dozens of soldiers for burns, shrapnel wounds and damage to their eyes.

“This is the worst we have seen in the 11 months since we have been here,” said Master Sgt. David Scott, chief ward master for the hospital.

As the injured received treatment, their comrades fanned out through the city in a new effort to root out insurgents.

Troops block five bridges
Early Wednesday, the U.S. troops blocked Mosul’s five bridges over the Tigris River that link the western and eastern sectors of the city. As warplanes flew overhead, U.S. soldiers could be seen conducting sweeps through the eastern neighborhoods of Muthanna, Wahda and Hadabaa.

In a sign of the of the simmering tensions, most schools in the city were closed and few cars and people could be seen on the streets. Even traffic policemen were not at major intersections as usual.

Tuesday's attack was the latest in a week of deadly strikes across Iraq that highlighted the growing power of the insurgents in the run-up to the Jan. 30 national elections.

President Bush said Tuesday the explosion should not derail the elections and that he hoped relatives of those killed know that their loved ones died in “a vital mission for peace.”

“I’m confident democracy will prevail in Iraq,” he said.

Mosul, Iraq’s third-largest city, was relatively peaceful in the immediate aftermath of the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime last year. But insurgent attacks in the largely Sunni area have increased dramatically in the past year — particularly since the U.S.-led military offensive in November to retake Fallujah from militants.

Mortar attacks on U.S. bases, particularly on the huge white tents that serve as dining halls, have been frequent in Iraq for more than a year. Just last month, a mortar attack on a Mosul base killed two troops with Task Force Olympia, the reinforced brigade responsible for security in much of northern Iraq.

Horrific scene
Jeremy Redmon, a reporter for the Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch, who was in the mess tent when the attack occurred, described a chaotic scene.

The force knocked soldiers off their feet and out of their seats as a fireball enveloped the top of the tent and shrapnel sprayed into the area, Redmon said.

Then, with people screaming and thick smoke billowing, soldiers turned their lunch tables upside down, placed the wounded on them and gently carried them into the parking lot, he said.

Sgt. Kyle Wright said he was about to take a bite of chocolate cake when the blast knocked him out of his chair. Two other Virginia National Guardsmen picked him up and rushed him out of the chow-hall tent on Forward Operating Base Marez.

“I kind of went into the air,” Wright told Redmon as he lay in a hospital near Mosul airfield, recovering from wounds to his leg and back. “When I came to, I looked up and I saw open sky.”

[BROWNer]

guess how many gulf war vets have died since that war ended? somebody, anybody...

[<KEY3>]

here's something to think about.....

In Iraq gasoline for cars is free, BUT there can be up to a 24 hour wait to get it.
Yes... people will sit in their cars for a full day just to get the tank filled.
The insurgence blame the americans for taking all the oil,
the US supporters blame the insurgence for blowing up pipelines.
Saddam used to pay tribes to protect the lines on their turf.
Now the US does but other tribes will sabotage the lines to steal the job.

so what do gas sellers do?
a - Play legal and give away free gas to very angry people.
b - sell the gas at a markup of 100X cost
c - smuggle their gas out of the country to sell

[hobo knife]

LONDON, England -- Public health experts have estimated that around 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died since the United States invaded Iraq in March last year.


that will teach those terrorists a lesson!!!


While the major causes of death before the invasion were heart attack, stroke, and chronic illness, the risk of dying from violence after the invasion was 58 times higher than in the period before the war.

"With the admitted benefit of hindsight and from a purely public-health perspective, it is clear that whatever planning did take place was grievously in error,"


hmmm, public health perspective?...

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/...aths/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/iraq.deaths/index.html)

[-MOE LESTER-]

my boy just got back from iraq...he was in the marines and was 2nd wave going into fallujah, which was 7 minutes after the first....he said he was manning the SAW and had killed people...he also said he saw lots of fucked up shit lke little kids being killed


that video made my day....i want to see more live iraq footage...the fucking media makes iraq look look like a picnic to the american public

[BROWNer]

The Ground War (http://gnn.tv/videos/video.php?id=31)

[villain]

I've heard about this op truth guy on Air America Radio.... I like what he's doing.
Watching these trailers is crazy. I actually recognize some of these people. Talked to some of them. Like Denver, the national guardsman who shattered his back. Nice guy. We talked about hunting one day.

[villain]

You know I was thinking about this all day and then it hit me... Eureka! I actually know the guy running this op truth. Next time I see him I'm going to talk to him about this.

[!@#$%]

Baghdad governor assassinated
Suicide truck bomb kills at least 10 near Green Zone

Tuesday, January 4, 2005 Posted: 7:46 AM EST (1246 GMT)
story.alhaidri.ap.jpg
Baghdad Governor Ali Al-Haidri survived a previous assassination attempt in September.

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Baghdad Governor Ali Al-Haidri was assassinated Tuesday morning in Baghdad, according to an Iraq Interior Ministry official.

One of the governor's bodyguards was killed and two wounded in the road ambush, officials said.

Witnesses said there was an intense gunbattle between the assassins and the governor's bodyguards.

Al-Haidri survived a previous assassination attempt in September when his convoy was ambushed by attackers using a roadside bomb and firing machine guns, the Interior Ministry said.

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, speaking to reporters in Thailand, said he was saddened by the assassination report.

"It once again shows that there are these murderers and terrorists, former regime elements in Iraq that don't want to see an election," Powell said. "They want to go back to the tyranny of the Saddam Hussein regime, and that's not going to happen. The Iraqi people don't want it to happen.

"The Iraqi interim government is determined to fight this insurgency, and you can be sure that the coalition will do everything it can to fight the insurgency so that the Iraqi people can have a successful election at the end of the month."

Also on Tuesday, a suicide truck bomb killed 10 people and wounded 60 others near Baghdad's Green Zone, where the Iraq government and U.S. Embassy are based.

Eight of the dead were Iraqi police commandos and two were civilians, an Iraqi Interior Ministry spokesman said.

The explosion happened near an Iraqi Security Forces compound and a palace used by coalition forces at about 8:45 a.m. (12:45 a.m. ET) Tuesday, according to an Iraqi police spokesman.

The truck was a fuel tanker laden with explosives, the Interior spokesman said.

It was the second time in as many days that the Green Zone area was targeted by a bomb.

On Monday, a car bomb exploded at a checkpoint west of the Green Zone, hitting a three-vehicle civilian convoy. There was no immediate word of casualties.

The bomb exploded at a checkpoint used by Green Zone personnel to get to and from Baghdad's airport, officials said.

Earlier Monday, a suicide car bomb attack near the political party headquarters of interim Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi killed at least two Iraqi police officers.

A U.S. military spokesman said three Iraqi police officers were killed in addition to the bomber. But in a written statement, the Iraqi Police Services said two police were killed and 12 people wounded, including seven officers.

A hospital reported receiving three bodies.

An orange and white vehicle loaded with explosives tried to ram through a police checkpoint, the U.S. spokesman said.

The police statement said Iraqi officers shot at the vehicle, preventing the driver from crashing through the checkpoint.

The explosion did not damage Allawi's Iraqi National Accord headquarters -- which was about 400 yards from the checkpoint, an employee of the party said. Allawi was not near the scene of the blast, the employee said.

The street where the party headquarters is located also houses offices of many other political leaders.

The militant group Jaish Ansar al-Sunna claimed responsibility for the attack, citing Iraq's January 30 elections.

In an unverified claim posted on its Web site, the group said it launched the attack "as the infidels were preparing to have a meeting to discuss the elections." The group said it killed guards who were protecting the building.

Jaish Ansar al-Sunna has claimed responsibility for previous attacks in Iraq, including a December 21 bombing that killed 22 people at a U.S. base near the northern city of Mosul. (Full story)

The Web site message warned of future attacks: "We will finish you one at a time."

Earlier Monday, a suicide bomb attack killed four Iraqi soldiers and wounded 14 other people at a checkpoint in Balad, north of Baghdad, a U.S. military spokesman said.

A fourth bomb attack Monday wounded two U.S. soldiers riding in a humvee along a northern Baghdad road, the military said.

The attacks are the latest against Iraqi authorities, including soldiers, police and politicians, in advance of this month's elections. U.S. and Iraqi officials have warned insurgents would likely step up attacks in an attempt to derail the elections.

Iraqi voters are expected to choose a 275-member transitional national assembly. That body will put together a permanent constitution that will go before voters in a referendum. If the law is approved, the plan calls for elections for a permanent government.

Insurgent attacks have prompted calls from many Iraqis to delay the January vote. Iraq's interim government and the United States appear determined to leave the date unchanged.
Other developments

# A U.S. Marine was killed in action Tuesday morning "while conducting security and stabilization operations in the Al Anbar Province" of Iraq, the U.S. military said. This latest death brings to 1,335 the number of American troops killed in the Iraqi war beginning in March, 2003.

# A surprisingly frank hourlong call-in program, "The Iraqi Podium," is giving Iraqis the chance to pepper interim Prime Minister Allawi with questions, from the mundane to the serious. Judging by the show's popularity, Iraqis are taking advantage.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/01/04/...main/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/01/04/iraq.main/index.html)

[KING BLING]

This is from CNN.com...the reality of the bolded text is that the National Guard here decided to ignore the Bush policy of no media. I like the way it never explains who decided to make the exception but allows for the assumption that the pentagon was responcible when it wasn't...


HOUMA, Louisiana (AP) -- In civilian life, Bradley Bergeron was an air conditioning technician. Kurt Comeaux was a probation officer and Warren Murphy a tugboat deckhand.

You could find Christopher Babin behind the wheel of his truck. Armand Frickey and Huey Fassbender III worked in restaurants. Each of the six also had another job: Members of the Louisiana National Guard.

All were killed last week in a single bomb blast in Iraq. They came from the same company and grew up in towns along the bayous of southeast Louisiana.

Their bodies were returned home Wednesday. Dozens of family members sobbed and hugged each other as the flag-draped caskets were unloaded from a cargo plane and carried into hearses.

"They trained together, they fought together, they went to war together, they died together. The families wanted them to come home together," said Hunt Downer, assistant adjutant general in the National Guard.

Full media coverage was allowed, including photographers and television news crews -- an exception to a Pentagon edict generally banning media coverage of America's war dead as their remains arrive.

More bodies are on the way: Two more Louisiana guardsmen were killed Monday. Ten from the Louisiana guard have died in Iraq in less than a month, from a total of 4,000 members in Iraq.

The deaths have given the rest of Louisiana a stark reminder that its National Guard members -- men and women once considered "weekend warriors" -- are now soldiers on the front lines.

"When you sign up with the Guard, you're in the Guard with family and friends and people you grew up with, people you went to school with," said Anthony Manuel, a former Louisiana guardsman whose brother, Bill, was killed in Monday's explosion.

When one soldier is killed, he said, "It's a big family that gets hurt. It's all of us."

In honor of the hometown heroes, flags have been at half staff in all parts of the state, from the capital city of Baton Rouge to Houma, a fishing and oil city near the Gulf of Mexico, to Bossier City, near the Arkansas state line.

"This is a sad time for Louisiana," Gov. Kathleen Blanco said Wednesday. "The families have a lot of grieving to do and we grieve with them. We appreciate them, we love them and we remember them in our prayers."

In all, Louisiana has lost 29 soldiers in Iraq: the 10 guardsmen, plus 15 U.S. Army soldiers and four Marines.

But the sudden killings of six soldiers at once -- all from the same part of the state -- was particularly stunning. That news, with banner headlines in newspapers around the state, was followed four days later by another explosion that killed two more.

In interviews, relatives of the killed soldiers have maintained a common theme: Their sons loved their work in the guard, thought of their fellow guardsmen as family and believed strongly in their mission.

"He loved his country and never gave a second thought to what he was doing in Iraq," Angela Bergeron, of Houma, said of her son Bradley, a specialist killed in the Jan. 6 explosion. "He talked about the National Guard as if it were his extended family. Those men were like his brothers."

Bill Manuel, a staff sergeant who was killed Monday, was one of three brothers who spent time in the guard. The Manuel brothers grew up fishing for bass in the Calcasieu River, and hunting rabbit and squirrel in woods around Oberlin, their tiny hometown about 175 miles west of New Orleans.

Then one by one, they enlisted. Part of the guard's appeal was the money, to pay for college. But the military also offered a chance to spend some time away from their small hometown.

"You got away from the farming community, you were able to experience something a little different, experience a piece of the military," Anthony Manuel said. "At the same time it was good because we were able to go off and do our training, then we were back at home in Oberlin."

Kermit and Anthony later left the military. Bill stayed in.

"My brother stayed in for the love of it, knowing he's fighting for our country," said Kermit, 33, Bill's youngest brother. "That's why most of the young men sign up, and that's why most of the young men stay in."

[villain]

sad.....

[GEEB]

putting our troops through this, and america is not in any danger of iraq? Its alomost pointless, even if bush gets his hands on some oil(this isnt what the whole conflict is about) will any of the soldiers who gave thier lives and are still risking thier lives get any part of this oil profit? nope. how could he have won another term? I just dont get it.

[BROWNer]

^what's it about then?

[Dick Quickwood]

Charles Graner found guilty, i wonder if that motherfucker is so smug now

[KaBar2]

Yup, Justice is served. Okay, how about the twenty or thirty civilian intelligence guys that encouraged Graner and Lynndie England and all of those people to hassle the Iraqi prisoners. Where are they now? Graner should get the "I did something stupid and got manipulated by the CIA" Award. Lynndie got a bun in the oven (oh yeah, war is hell) and a month from now it will be "Graner? Who's that?" at the CNN News Desk.

I guess he'll make some new friends now, up at Leavenworth. Maybe he'll get a bun in the oven.

[dojafx]

they just gave his ass 10 years, thats gonna be a looong ten years

[!@#$%]

Wave of suicide blasts kills at least 25
Al-Zarqawi network claims responsibility on Web sites

Wednesday, January 19, 2005 Posted: 8:34 AM EST (1334 GMT)

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- In 90 minutes, four suicide car bombings Wednesday killed at least 25 Iraqis in and around Baghdad, the U.S. military said.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/01/19/...main/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/01/19/iraq.main/index.html)

[villain]

The army is always talking about this force transformation stuff....
But I think if the US is serious about winning this war, they should have arabic language classes mandatory for all soldiers.
However this may conflict with the Bush plan, since communication leads to understanding, and understanding often leads to empathy and compassion.... (and not that compassionate conservative bullcrap either....)

[!@#$%]

Deadliest day for U.S. in Iraq war
31 Marines killed in chopper crash; 5 troops in other incidents
Wednesday, January 26, 2005 Posted: 9:32 AM EST (1432 GMT)


Four U.S. Marines were killed during combat in Iraq's Al-Anbar province, and a U.S. soldier died when insurgents attacked a combat patrol north of Baghdad, according to the U.S. military.

The cause of the chopper crash was not immediately known and is being investigated, according to the military.

Wednesday's death toll surpassed the 31 U.S. forces killed on March 23, 2003 -- four days after the start of the war in Iraq. Twenty-nine of them died in combat that day.

Wednesday's incidents brought the U.S. death toll in the war to 1,417.

The CH-53 Sea Stallion chopper crashed near Ar Rutbah in western Iraq about 1:20 a.m. local time (5:20 p.m. Tuesday ET). It was carrying personnel from the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing and the 1st Marine Division.

Military officials said a search and rescue team was at the site and an investigation of the crash was under way.

The four Marines who died Wednesday were killed during combat operations in Iraq's Al-Anbar province, according to a military news release. The Marines were assigned to the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force. Ar Rutbah is also in Al-Anbar province.

Elsewhere, a U.S. soldier was killed Wednesday when insurgents attacked a combat patrol with grenades near Ad Duluiyah, military officials said.

The soldier, from the 1st Infantry Division, died and two others were wounded in the attack about 11:20 a.m. (3:20 a.m. ET). The injured were taken to a military hospital for treatment; one was in serious condition.

Five Iraqis killed
Four multinational soldiers were wounded Wednesday when a car bomb exploded near a convoy in southwestern Baghdad, along the road to the city's airport, a source with the U.S. Army's 1st Cavalry Division said.

The attack took place about 10 a.m. (2 a.m. ET) on the road, which has been one of the country's bloodiest locations in recent months. The nationalities of the wounded soldiers were not immediately known. U.S. troops sealed off the area after the explosion.

In Tamin province, also on Wednesday, three car bombs within an hour killed five Iraqis and injured six other people, according to the police chief in Kirkuk.

The bombs exploded between 11 a.m. and noon (3 and 4 a.m. ET), said Maj. Gen. Torhan Abdul Rahman. The first was in the town of Riyadh, about 30 kilometers (19 miles) west of Kirkuk, and targeted a police station, he said. Three Iraqi police officers were killed and three civilians injured.

The second detonated outside the Riyadh mayor's office, killing two Iraqi soldiers. The third bomb exploded outside Riyadh and targeted a U.S. military convoy. Three other Iraqi civilians were wounded.

Insurgents attacked the offices of two political parties in Baquba on Wednesday, triggering clashes that left an Iraqi police officer dead and four others wounded -- three of them working as guards for the parties, Baquba police said.

The insurgents used grenades and small arms fire to attack the Kurdish Democratic Party office and the office of the Iraqi Patriotic Gathering Alliance about 6:30 a.m. (10:30 p.m. Tuesday ET), police said, and the resulting battles lasted two hours.

In al-Nahrawan, a southeastern suburb of Baghdad, city council leader Karim Sarhan was gunned down Wednesday morning in a drive-by shooting on his way to work, Iraqi police said.

Three government employees were shot and killed in attacks Tuesday, according to police.

Three Baghdad schools to be used as polling centers in Sunday's election were attacked Tuesday night, an Iraqi police officer said. A bomb planted at a fourth school was defused.

About 8 p.m. (noon ET), Salah al-Deen school in northern Baghdad was damaged when insurgents threw a grenade at it, authorities said. Thirty minutes later, a bomb exploded near the main gate of Al-Fursan school in southeast Baghdad, causing damage, police said.

About 10:30 p.m. (2:30 p.m. ET), Al-Balquees school in northern Baghdad was damaged when it was hit by a rocket, police said.

About 90 minutes later, experts defused a bomb planted near al-Yemen school in al-Gazaliyah neighborhood in western Baghdad.

Iraqis go to the polls Sunday, and U.S. and Iraqi officials have been warning that insurgents would ramp up their attacks in a bid to derail the vote.

On Tuesday, a high-ranking official in Iraq's Justice Ministry was gunned down in a drive-by shooting as he was leaving his home southeast of Baghdad, police said. A group calling itself the Army of Ansar al-Sunnah claimed responsibility for the attack on Judge Qais Hashim al-Shonmari, and warned of more attacks to come. Shonmari's son was also killed in the shooting


RIP.

yeah, so that's 1,417

when, exactly, does it become "militarily siginificant" ??

[Dick Quickwood]

today was a shitstorm

[Æ°]

http://www.aljazeerah.info/Cartoons/cartoon%20originals/June/carhnbgt1.jpg

[Æ°]

Link here (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/01/26/MNGKQB0FSQ1.DTL)


Bush adds $80 billion to wars' costs
Afghanistan, Iraq tally would pass $300 billion if OKd


Washington -- The White House said Tuesday that President Bush will ask Congress for another $80 billion to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, an appropriation that would bring the total spent for the two wars to more than $300 billion.

The Bush administration announcement fueled anew the growing debate over whether the United States should start withdrawing some of its 150,000 troops from Iraq, a suggestion the White House and its supporters reject because they say it would hand a victory to anti-American insurgents.

The request for more money for the wars came the same day the Congressional Budget Office estimated the federal budget deficit will hit $368 billion in the current fiscal year and $855 billion over the coming decade. But the CBO estimate, which is sharply lower than previous deficit estimates because of bookkeeping quirks, doesn't include the continuing costs of the wars.

The White House said additional war spending would push the federal deficit to a record $427 billion for fiscal 2005, according to administration budget forecasts unveiled Tuesday. Bush said the new infusion of money will pay for essential equipment and supplies.

"First, our troops will have whatever they need to protect themselves and complete their mission; and second, the United States will stand with the Iraqi people and against the terrorists trying desperately to block democracy and the advance of human rights,'' the president said in a statement.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, said that while she supports the troops the request for another $80 billion raises many questions.

"What are the goals in Iraq, and how much more money will it cost to achieve them? Why haven't the president and the Pentagon provided members of Congress a full accounting of previous expenditures? Why, after all the effort dedicated to training Iraqi troops, aren't more Iraqi troops trained, equipped and prepared to play a bigger security role?" she asked.

The administration said $75 billion of the $80 billion request, which won't be formally sent to Congress until after the president unveils his budget for fiscal 2006 on Feb. 7, would go for military operations.

Most of the money would pay for equipment and to train Iraqi security forces. About $1 billion would go for new defenses against the roadside bombs in Iraq that have killed hundreds of Americans.

Another focus is on creating and equipping 10 new combat brigades, part of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's program to make the Army more mobile and nimble.

Most of the remaining $5 billion would go to the State Department, in part to pay for a new embassy in Baghdad and reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan. Funds also would help aid the new Palestinian government of President Mahmoud Abbas and for relief operations in Darfur, the region of Sudan where a civil war has raised allegations of genocide.

Passage in the Republican-controlled Congress seems certain. It would be the third special appropriation for Iraq, following $87 billion in September 2003 and $25 billion approved in May. It's estimated the United States is spending $4.6 billion a month in Iraq and $800 million in Afghanistan, where 20,000 soldiers are based.

Before the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, estimates of the war's cost were $50 billion, with assurances from administration officials that Iraqi oil revenues would pay for much of the effort.

Asked Tuesday how the administration's estimates could be so far off, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said, "you have to be prepared for the unexpected, and you have to be flexible enough to adapt to circumstances on the ground. And it's important that you give the commanders on the ground the flexibility they need to adapt to changing circumstances. And that's what we will always do. That's how you are able to succeed and complete the mission.''

Bush's proposal came one day after Army Lt. Gen James J. Lovelace Jr. said about 120,000 U.S. troops will stay in Iraq at least through 2006. That position, largely reflecting Bush's thinking, flies in the face of calls to set a timetable for withdrawing most U.S. forces.

Rep. Martin Meehan, D-Mass., proposed Tuesday that the United States and the new Iraqi government that will take office after Sunday's elections set a 12- to 18-month timetable for removing all but about 30,000 Americans.

Meehan's idea is similar to those put forward in recent weeks by such Republicans as former Secretary of State James Baker and former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft, both of whom served under Bush's father, President George H.W. Bush.

"As long as the thrust of our policy continues on the same course, we will stay on a downward spiral,'' Meehan said in a speech at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank. "The most compelling reason not to continue down the same path is that the occupation has grown counterproductive. ''

But Meehan's position was assailed by William Kristol of the Weekly Standard, one of the capital's leading neo-conservatives. "Focusing on an exit strategy rather than a victory strategy is a mistake,'' he said. "Announcing a date for withdrawal just tells the terrorists they have to hang on to a certain date.''

[SWIMS]

-check it out-
http://www.icg.org/home/index.cfm

-look at the report on Iraq from december, and the one on kurdish/turkish conflicts.

[villain]

SHOCKING AND AWFUL (http://www.deepdishtv.org/)

[KaBar2]

Militarily significant? Well, even one death is a tragedy, but if the current casualty figure is 1,417, and the current troop deployment to Iraq is 150,000, then do the math.

1,417 divided by 150,000 is 0.9%. That's not even 1% of the troops deployed. Significant casualties would probably be in the ballpark of 10 or 15%, or about 15,000 to 22,500 troops killed. Out of a 41 man infantry platoon, that would be about 6 deaths, approximately 1-1/2 fire teams.

Nobody wants to see people get killed, and I especially hate hearing about when American soldiers get killed, but our casualties in Iraq are "light." Very light, compared to WWII and pretty light compared to Vietnam.

I'm interested to see how the vote went.

[heavyLox]

dude i wish you woke up in the middle of no where as well. you should really get on that.

[wiseguy]

Originally posted by KaBar2@Jan 31 2005, 06:11 PM

Nobody wants to see people get killed, and I especially hate hearing about when American soldiers get killed, but our casualties in Iraq are "light." Very light, compared to WWII and pretty light compared to Vietnam.


Quoted post

the significantly lower bodycount of american troops is due to the fact that there have been major advancements in long range missiles, as well as mobile hospital units. this doesnt mean that iraq is a safer battlezone than vietnam or any of the WW2 theatres of war. i also read that due to the advancements in medical technology, many injured soldiers who would have died in earlier wars are now being saved, minus an arm or a leg, or with brain damage... does anyone have these figures?
anyway, i would like to see an accurate estimate of the number of dead civilians in iraq.

[villain]

There are about 20,000 soldiers WIA.

[ledzep]

Originally posted by KaBar2@Jan 31 2005, 04:11 AM
Nobody wants to see people get killed, and I especially hate hearing about when American soldiers get killed, but our casualties in Iraq are "light." Very light, compared to WWII and pretty light compared to Vietnam.
Quoted post



Ok, Nazi Germany = Very Potent Military oriented nation with technology roughly equal to the USA, and a large organized army.

Vietnam = Very Very large army, not nearly as technologically advanced as the USA but in comparison to the insurgents with the USA now, Also backed by China and USSR, fighting in the Jungles with their crazy interconnected tunnels.

Iraqi Insurgents = Semi Organized group of about 200,000 or so rag tag Iraqis and Foriegners who are not backed by a government.

That considered I think the casualties are pretty heavy, not numerous (though 1,500 killed and 20,000 wounded is a hefty number) in comparison, but heavy.

Also not to mention what wiseguy said about the advances in missle and medical technology.

And even then, light casualties desn't mean something was the right course of action.

If the U.S. had sided with the Nazis instead of the Allies in WW2 they probably would have experienced less casualties (Britain would have fallen without USA support) but this doesn't mean it would have been the right thing to do.

And it is militarily significant (if not by casualties) in the way that the USA army is basically tied up there right now, as well as that the invasion of Iraq has alienated the USA from it's allies and has caused alot of hatred toward the USA from other countries.

[POIESIS]

you guys hear about this $9billi gone missing?
what the fuk yo

[KaBar2]

Somebody got paid, eh? Now that's a score--9 billion bucks, LOL. Be hard to pack that out of there in a shopping bag!

Originally posted by POIESIS@Feb 2 2005, 02:22 AM
you guys hear about this $9billi gone missing?
what the fuk yo
Quoted post

[Dick Quickwood]

Kabar do you consider dead Iraqis casualties?

[POIESIS]

..you never hear the amount of carnage induced by
the invaders, always what the insurgents are incurring though.
and presidential longshot dennis kucinich is on the trail
of that 9billion. go dennis!

[Æ°]

say no to drugs

[SF1]

anyway, i would like to see an accurate estimate of the number of dead civilians in iraq.
Quoted post
[/quote]

<----ANYBODY???

[SF1]

Originally posted by Armenhammer+Feb 1 2005, 10:02 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Armenhammer - Feb 1 2005, 10:02 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-KaBar2@Jan 31 2005, 04:11 AM
Nobody wants to see people get killed, and I especially hate hearing about when American soldiers get killed, but our casualties in Iraq are "light."*** Very light, compared to WWII and pretty light compared to Vietnam.
Quoted post



Ok, Nazi Germany = Very Potent Military oriented nation with technology roughly equal to the USA, and a large organized army.

Vietnam = Very Very large army, not nearly as technologically advanced as the USA but in comparison to the insurgents with the USA now, Also backed by China and USSR, fighting in the Jungles with their crazy interconnected tunnels.

Iraqi Insurgents = Semi Organized group of about 200,000 or so rag tag Iraqis and Foriegners who are not backed by a government.

That considered I think the casualties are pretty heavy, not numerous (though 1,500 killed and 20,000 wounded is a hefty number) in comparison, but heavy.

Also not to mention what wiseguy said about the advances in missle and medical technology.

And even then, light casualties desn't mean something was the right course of action.

If the U.S. had sided with the Nazis instead of the Allies in WW2 they probably would have experienced less casualties (Britain would have fallen without USA support) but this doesn't mean it would have been the right thing to do.

And it is militarily significant (if not by casualties) in the way that the USA army is basically tied up there right now, as well as that the invasion of Iraq has alienated the USA from it's allies and has caused alot of hatred toward the USA from other countries.
Quoted post
[/b][/quote]



<----THANK YOU!!!!

[KaBar2]

ARCEL---
Sure, dead Iraqis are casualties. But not our casualties. Dead Iraqi insurgents are their casualties. Dead Iraqi civilians who were unfortunately killed during the battle are "collateral damage." We did not intend to kill them. If they are anybody's responsibility, they are the Iraqi insurgency's responsibility, for waging war against American troops from a civilian-occupied residential area.

Not a single one of these people needed to die. Had they simply accepted that their nation was defeated in war fair and square, and surrendered, the transition from dictatorship to a constitutional republic with a democratic form of government would have been a lot smoother.

But, the dead-enders chose to conduct an illegal, immoral guerrilla war, without even wearing uniforms, or any sort of identifying marks. BY ALL RIGHTS AND BY INTERNATIONAL LAW, WE COULD SHOOT ANY INSURGENT WE CAPTURE WHO IS NOT WEARING AN IRAQI UNIFORM AND CARRYING IRAQI MILITARY I.D.

It is only the inherent decency of the American people, and the humane, law-abiding nature of the U.S. armed forces that prohibits it. Personally, I would have had them shot right on the spot, with their own rifles. They are criminal, fascist terrorists. They do not obey the Geneva Convention. They attack U.S. forces from ambush, using innocent Iraqi civilians as shields. They kidnap and murder innocent civilian NGO workers, Iraqi civilians working towards democracy and civil government, and civilian contract workers who are legally non-combatants. They represent the aspirations of the remains of an extremely cruel, authoritarian, fascistic former government. If we did shoot them, it would be PRECISELY the same thing, legally and morally, as executing the captured Nazi Wolverines in Occupied Germany after World War II.

We don't owe them shit. THEY LOST. If they fail to conduct themselves according to the accepted rules of war, and we capture them as armed, fascist, guerrilla bandits, we have the right to shoot them after a military courts martial. In the real world, the capturing troops just take care of business in some alley or in a ravine.

Honorable Iraqi soldiers in uniform were taken prisoner as EPW's (enemy prisoners of war), treated fairly, given food and water, and held in EPW camps until they could be released. They walked home.

Terrorist, fascist guerrillas that were captured attacking U.S. troops or plotting terrorist attacks were arrested, and imprisoned in country. The worst ones and the terrorists that seemed like the most likely intelligence sources were transported to Guantanamo Bay, and interrogated.

I feel sorry for the poor Iraqis stuck in a society filled with these fascist, terrorist turds. All you need to do is look at the election and that tells the story. They want to live in a FREE, DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY. And the sooner their government and Army is up and running, the sooner we can get our troops the fuck out of there.

[villain]

Kabar... that is all well and good but you are neglecting the fact that this war is largely viewed as illegal, we have been viewed as an occupying force, and these "insurgents" are often viewed as "freedom fighters" over there.
Everyone was glad to be rid of Saddam, but since we failed to plan for the peace, maintaining order and stability in Iraq, we have been seen as only concerned with the oil and not the welfare of the Iraqi people. Which for the Bush administration is largely true.
And the elections worked. They worked for the popular majority. The Shiite were more than willing to cooperate for the elections since they are garunteed to attain power. The CIA's worst case scenario for Iraq was civil war, and this is precisely the kind of imbalance in power and strain among ethnic tensions that could set off a civil war. Not to mention Iranian influence in Iraq will be much larger, and there is already talk of making Shariah official law. So then we will have a theocracy of religious fundamentalists with close ties to Iran. This is actually americas worst nightmare we are creating. Saddam may have been an evil, evil man but at least he was secular..... From the very day that Saddam fell, the wahabiists have increased in power and influence. And henceforth fundamentalism, extremism and terrorism.
Eh, but what do I know? Look the Iraqis are happy to be free! Look they want democracy! Yay! All this talk of elections (which is good) but very little acknowledgement of it's real world implications.
The Shiia could implement a constitution (hopefully) that will have protection clauses for the rights of Iraqs minorities.... I dunno.... It took minorities hundreds of years to get on semi equal foothing in the US... and there are still major, major race and gender discrepancies.

[hobo knife]

Originally posted by KaBar2@Feb 4 2005, 03:41 AM

They are criminal, fascist terrorists. They do not obey the Geneva Convention. They attack U.S. forces from ambush, using innocent Iraqi civilians as shields. They kidnap and murder innocent civilian NGO workers, Iraqi civilians working towards democracy and civil government, and civilian contract workers who are legally non-combatants. They represent the aspirations of the remains of an extremely cruel, authoritarian, fascistic former government. If we did shoot them, it would be PRECISELY the same thing, legally and morally, as executing the captured Nazi Wolverines in Occupied Germany after World War II.

We don't owe them shit. THEY LOST. If they fail to conduct themselves according to the accepted rules of war, and we capture them as armed, fascist, guerrilla bandits, we have the right to shoot them after a military courts martial. In the real world, the capturing troops just take care of business in some alley or in a ravine.


Quoted post



I love the good versus evil angle...we are automatically good and whoever we are at war with is evil....

but honestly, do you not realize how many "terrorist, facist, guerilla armies" the US has supported...for one SADDAM HUSSEIN. what about the terrorist guerilla army we trained at the school of americas to overthrow the Sandinistas of nicuragua...which was a democratically elected gov't...i guess the school of americas is where the "good" terrorists train.

[s.urkaleeno]

1) get a dictionary
2) look up the words fascism and corporatism
3) realize how uninformed you sound
when you call a religious fundamentalist a fascist


" what amazes me more than all else? The impotence of force to organize anything." Napolean

[angelofdeath]

ANIRCHEEEE!

[KaBar2]

Urkaleeno---

Saddam Hussein is not a religious fundamentalist. His party, the Baath Party, is strongly supported by American and European fascists, neo-Nazis and racists. Apparently operating under the adage "The enemy of my enemy is my friend," the American and European neo-Nazis see Iraq and Syria as the principle military threats to Israel. Of course, they loathe and despise all Jews, and especially the Zionist Israeli government. The neo-Nazis consider the war in Iraq to be a war designed to help Israel. They could not care less about democracy, because they are not democrats, they are national socialists. Nazis do not elect leaders. The party selects the leaders, the rank-and-file Nazis just get to follow orders. They do not vote.

The Islamic fundamentalists have allied themselves with their former bitter enemies, the Baathists. They have a lot in common. They hate Americans and everything for which elections stand. They hate the idea of Iraqis voting and establishing a representative form of government. But more than ANYTHING else, they loathe and despise the Jews.

[<KEY3>]

You and seeking should agree on that (in principle).

[quote]
Dead Iraqi insurgents are their casualties. Dead Iraqi civilians who were unfortunately killed during the battle are "collateral damage." [quote]

no. wrong. not correct.

a human life, no matter where it was born,
is worth just as much as the next human life.
One american life is NOT worth more than 1.00000001 iraqi life.
If we actually have a value, then it's the same for every human.

[<KEY3>]

and kabar...
if you were born in Iraq in 1950,
you would be the roughest, toughest insurgent.

just look at the other side,
no matter how back water they might seem to your perspective now..

[POIESIS]

fallujahspy

http://images.military.com/pics/FallujahOverhead2.jpg

[Theodore Huxtable]

^i'm feelin that photo.

[CACashRefund]

Whats there to feel about it?

[ledzep]

It's cool looking. I've been a fan of Satellite imagery for a while.

http://www.12ozprophet.com/forum/index.php...topic=25171&hl= (http://www.12ozprophet.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=25171&hl=)

[POIESIS]

it's totally cool looking...& it gives you some geographical understanding
of what size of city the americans went in and totalled.

here's imint of baghdaddy:
http://images.military.com/pics/BaghdadOverhead2.jpg

and mosul:
http://images.military.com/pics/MosulOverhead2.jpg

[ledzep]

Mosul looks pretty nice, with the exception of the occasional burnt looking patch.

[Theodore Huxtable]

yeah i was thinkin the same thing armen. it looks nicer than baghdad or fallujah. wide paved streets and highways, and greenery... compared to baghdad or fallujah with desert and dirt roads and small shacks packed together. at first i thought that mosul flick was in the united states.

[CACashRefund]

PHOTOS THAT WILL NEVER MAKE THE NEWS
http://www.veteranscava.org/image001.jpg@01C4BC03.jpg
http://www.veteranscava.org/image002.jpg@01C4BC03.jpg
http://www.veteranscava.org/image003.jpg@01C4BC03.jpg
http://www.veteranscava.org/image004.jpg@01C4BC03.jpg
http://www.veteranscava.org/image005.jpg@01C4BC03.jpg
http://www.veteranscava.org/photos_that_wi...er_make_the.htm (http://www.veteranscava.org/photos_that_will_never_make_the.htm)

[CACashRefund]

I didnt feel like making a new thread for this seeing as how it pertains to the topic at hand.

http://www.drudgereport.com/mw.jpg
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) - A female member of a National Guard military police unit was demoted for indecent exposure after a mud-wrestling party at the Army-run Camp Bucca detention center in Iraq, a military spokesman said Sunday.

The party occurred Oct. 30, as the 160th Military Police Battalion, an Army Reserve Unit from Tallahassee, Fla., prepared to turn over its duties to the Asheville-based 105th Military Police Battalion, said Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, spokesman for detainee operations at Camp Bucca.

In the course of the transfer of duties, "some individuals in their exuberance decided to put together a mud-wrestling thing," Johnson said Sunday by telephone. "There were females involved, and some members of the 105th also became involved, one female soldier in particular."

Following an inquiry, that soldier was demoted and placed on restriction for participating in the event, specifically for indecent exposure, he said.

Four or five other members of the 105th who were spectators received counseling, Johnson said.

Johnson did not release the name of the demoted soldier. However, she was identified by the Daily News as Deanna Allen, 19, and the New York newspaper's identification was confirmed by her mother, Ladyna Waldrop of Black Mountain.

Allen was demoted from specialist to private first class. She is still a guard at the camp, the newspaper said.

The Daily News said it was given 30 of the party photos, and it printed several in Sunday's editions.

Waldrop said her daughter is devastated by the events.

"It was just a thing where she was coerced by a bunch of people, and with all the excitement, she lost her sanity for a moment and that's all it took," she said.

"It seems like they're just singling her out," Waldrop said. "She's the one getting all the publicity and punishment, and that's not right."

The 105th took over Camp Bucca on Nov. 1, and photos of the party were found after the 160th had left Iraq, Johnson said, adding that he understood a soldier had turned over the photos to commanders.

Results of the inquiry were sent to the commander of the 160th, he said. "It appears from the commander's inquiry that this was primarily put on by troops of the 160th, who are no longer under our command," Johnson said.

It wasn't immediately clear Sunday if any members of the 160th had been disciplined.

The party was isolated, Johnson said. "Detainees were nowhere in the vicinity," he said. "They had no possible way of seeing what occurred."

A scandal involving the separate Abu Ghraib prison erupted last spring when photographs were made public showing soldiers taunting naked Iraqi prisoners.

Waldrop said she communicates with her daughter almost every day via Internet instant messaging, and they also see each other by means of a Web camera. "She's very tearful, very upset," Waldrop said.

Waldrop said she was proud of her daughter for joining the National Guard. "But I hate that this happened, and so does she," she said. The party "just got way out of hand, and before you know it, pictures were taken, and she didn't have time to react.

"My mom and I have both had talks with her that she's supposed to be an example for her country."
Source (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050207/D883DUN00.html)

I guess this must be the "new Army" that Ive been reading about.

[villain]

Recap: chronology of events


CHRONOLOGY-Main events in Iraq since Saddam Hussein's fall
13 Feb 2005 14:12:19 GMT
Source: Reuters
LONDON, Feb 13 (Reuters) - Here is a short chronology of events in Iraq since Saddam Hussein was overthrown.

April 9, 2003 - U.S. forces sweep into Baghdad as Saddam Hussein's 24-year rule crumbles into chaos and looting.

May 1 - U.S. President George W. Bush declares major combat in Iraq over.

May 12 - Paul Bremer becomes head of U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority ruling Iraq. He swiftly dissolves Iraqi army, security agencies, and defence and information ministries.

July 13 - A 25-member U.S.-backed Iraqi Governing Council holds its inaugural meeting in Baghdad.

July 22 - U.S. military confirms Saddam's two sons, Uday and Qusay, were killed in a gun battle in Mosul.

Aug 19 - Truck bomb at U.N. headquarters in Baghdad kills 22, including U.N. envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello.

Aug 29 - Car bomb in Najaf kills more than 80, including Shi'ite faction leader Ayatollah Mohammed Baqer al-Hakim.

Dec 13 - U.S. troops capture Saddam near his hometown Tikrit.

Jan 15, 2004 - Banknotes printed with Saddam's face cease to be legal tender.

March 2 - Bomb and mortar attacks near mosques in Baghdad and Kerbala kill at least 171 people as Shi'ites mark Ashura.

March 8 - Iraqi Governing Council signs interim constitution.

March 31 - Four U.S. private security guards are killed and bodies mutilated by crowds in Sunni city of Falluja.

April 4/5 - U.S. Marines begin big assault on Sunni insurgents in Falluja. Uprising by militiamen loyal to Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr begins in Baghdad and southern Iraq.

April 14 - Kidnappers kill Fabrizio Quattrocchi, an Italian. More than 120 foreigners have been kidnapped in Iraq since then. About a third of them have been killed, some beheaded.

May 17 - A suicide car bomb kills head of Iraqi Governing Council, a Shi'ite best known as Izzedin Salim.

June 1 - Iraqi Governing Council is dissolved to make way for interim government led by Iyad Allawi. Ghazi al-Yawar is appointed president.

June 28 - The United States formally returns sovereignty to Allawi's interim government two days earlier than expected. The Coalition Provisional Authority is dissolved. Bremer leaves.

July 1 - Iraqi tribunal informs Saddam and 11 senior associates they will be charged with crimes against humanity.

Aug 18 - Conference of Iraqi political and religious leaders selects 100-member interim national assembly to oversee the government and prepare for elections in January 2005.

Aug 26 - Top Shi'ite cleric Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani strikes deal with Sadr to end uprising by Sadr's militiamen in Najaf.

Oct 1 - U.S.-led forces storm rebel stronghold of Samarra.

Nov 7 - Interim government declares state of emergency for 60 days.

Nov 8 - U.S. troops launch full-scale offensive on Falluja. A week later the U.S. military says it controls all the city after killing 1,600 insurgents and capturing 1,052.

Nov 20 - Iraq's main creditors at Paris Club of wealthy nations agree to cancel 80 percent of Baghdad's debt to them.

Dec 6 - Main Shi'ite political parties set up United Iraqi Alliance to fight elections.

Dec 21 - Suicide bomber kills 21 at U.S. base near Mosul.

Jan 30 - Elections to choose a 275-member national assembly, charged with drafting permanent constitution.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L13712618.htm

[hobo knife]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/03/03/...main/index.html (http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/03/03/iraq.main/index.html)

There has been no official figure for the overall number of Iraqis killed since the conflict began, but some non-government estimates have ranged from 10,000 to 30,000.

Last October, public health experts published a survey in the British health journal The Lancet that estimated 100,000 Iraqi civilians had died since the U.S.-led invasion.



so which is it 10,000 to 30,000 or 10,000 to 100,000....

straight from cnn...fudgin the numbers.

[Theodore Huxtable]

ITALY BEGINS PULLING OUT TROOPS

The Associated Press
Updated: 9:41 p.m. ET March 15, 2005

ROME - Italy’s prime minister announced plans Tuesday to start drawing down his country’s 3,000-strong contingent in Iraq in September, putting a fresh crack in President Bush’s crumbling coalition. Bulgaria also called for a partial withdrawal, and Ukraine welcomed home its first wave of returning troops.

The moves come on top of the withdrawal of more than a dozen countries over the last year and could complicate efforts to keep the peace while Iraq’s new government builds up police and military units capable of taking over from foreign forces.

Two years after the U.S.-led invasion toppled Saddam Hussein, the coalition is unraveling amid mounting casualties and kidnappings that have stoked antiwar sentiment and sapped leaders’ resolve to keep troops in harm’s way.

Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi, who confirmed he would seek re-election next year, alluded to the rising public discontent and said he had spoken with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, another strong Washington ally. “We need to construct a precise exit strategy, also because our publics’ opinions expect this communication and we agree to talk about it soon.”

‘Gradual reduction’
“Starting with the month of September, we would like to proceed with a gradual reduction of our soldiers,” Berlusconi said on a state TV talk show that lasted into early Wednesday. He added that the withdrawal would be tied to the Iraqis’ ability to secure the country.

As of now, the reduction in the Italian contingent will start “even before the year’s end, in agreement with our allies,” Berlusconi added.

Italy’s government, a staunch U.S. ally, had vowed to stay despite suffering 21 casualties and enduring fierce public opposition that escalated this month after U.S. soldiers in Baghdad fatally shot an Italian intelligence agent escorting a newly freed hostage.

Asked whether the shooting played a role in Berlusconi’s decision, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said, “I’m not sure I’d make a connection there ... I haven’t heard any comment to that effect from Italian officials.”

The Italian opposition criticized Berlusconi for making the announcement on a talk show instead of before lawmakers, who were debating whether to extend financing for the deployment through June. That extension was approved by the lower house of Parliament. The Senate already voted to extend the mission last month.

Declining numbers
Thirty-eight countries have provided troops in Iraq at one point or another. But 14 nations have permanently withdrawn since the March 2003 invasion, and today’s coalition stands at 24. Excluding U.S. forces, there are 22,750 foreign soldiers still in Iraq.

The scramble to get out has taken the multinational force from a high of about 300,000 soldiers in the region early in 2003 to 172,750 and falling. About 150,000 U.S. troops shoulder the bulk of the responsibility and suffer the most casualties.

A Pentagon spokesman, Lt. Col. Barry Venable, said the decisions by some nations to reduce or end their presence in Iraq was not a threat to security. “The coalition is strong,” he said.

Venable said the reductions are part of the natural process of turning security over to Iraq’s government. “The plan is to have the Iraqis fill in everywhere,” he said. “That process will continue and indeed accelerate.”

U.S. drawing down
The United States also is drawing down its troop levels. After bolstering the U.S. force to about 155,000 during Iraq’s recent elections, the Pentagon is bringing some units home and expects to be down to 138,000 soldiers in a few months.

Some 137 Ukrainian servicemen returned home Tuesday, part of a gradual pullout of a 1,650-strong contingent to be completed in October. Ukraine has lost 18 soldiers in Iraq, and its people overwhelmingly oppose the deployment.

The Netherlands formally ended its mission March 7, and the bulk of its 1,400 troops return home this month. The U.S. and British governments urged Dutch leaders to extend the mission, but they refused, saying they had met their commitments.

Other countries follow suit
Poland, which has command responsibility for a large swath of central Iraq, plans to withdraw several hundred of its 1,700 soldiers in July and hopes to pull out completely by year’s end or early in 2006.

Among the nations that withdrew last year were Spain, which pulled out 1,300 soldiers; Tonga, 44; New Zealand, 60; Thailand, 423; the Philippines, 51; Honduras, 370; the Dominican Republic, 302; Singapore, 160; Nicaragua, 115; and Hungary, 300. Norway withdrew 150 troops but left 16 liaison officers.

Last month, Portugal withdrew its 127 soldiers, and Moldova pulled out its 12.

The Associated Press tally is based on queries to military officials in the various coalition nations. The trend isn’t closely tracked on Web sites maintained by the Defense Department or the U.S. Central Command, which offer dated information.

Presence increases security fears
Ferocious insurgent attacks, coalition casualties and a spate of civilian abductions and beheadings have rattled ordinary citizens in many countries.

“If we continue to keep our troops in Iraq, Koreans — not only here but also abroad — will be subject to terrorist attacks. It only puts our security in danger,” said Ryu Jae-yoon, a 22-year-old office worker in Seoul.

Anti-war sentiment boiled over there last June when a South Korean military contract worker was beheaded by militants after the Seoul government refused a demand to withdraw its forces.

In Bulgaria, which has 460 troops in Iraq, the deaths of eight soldiers have heightened public calls to bring them home. On Tuesday, President Georgi Parvanov urged a partial withdrawal, a proposal that parliament must now decide.

Some resolve to stay, despite calls to leave
To be sure, America’s top two allies in Iraq — Britain, with about 8,000 soldiers, and South Korea with 3,600 — are standing firm. Australia, Albania and Georgia are boosting their presence, and NATO is expanding its training mission in Baghdad.

Yet surveys suggest opposition is running at roughly two-thirds in most coalition countries.

In Albania, a staunch U.S. ally that plans to enlarge its 71-member contingent to 121 in April, there are fears the troops could end up paying with their lives.

“Our men should be back, alive, as soon as possible,” said Qerime Haxhia, a 54-year-old woman selling vegetables in downtown Tirana. “Can our small group help big America’s army keep Iraq calm? I doubt that.”

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

[Æ°]

I know it's beating a dead horse, as everyone should know this by now.

Link here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7331220/


Bush panel rips U.S. intelligence abilities
'Dead wrong' on Iraq; little known about today's enemies

NBC News and news services
Updated: 9:26 a.m. ET March 31, 2005

WASHINGTON - In a scathing report released Thursday, President Bush’s commission on weapons of mass destruction found that America’s spy agencies were “dead wrong” in most of their judgments about Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction capabilities.

The commission was also highly critical of U.S. abilities to assess what existing adversaries have, stating that the United States knows “disturbingly little” about their weapons programs.

On Saddam, the commission stated that “we conclude that the intelligence community was dead wrong in almost all of its prewar judgments about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. This was a major intelligence failure.”

The main cause, the commission said, was the intelligence community’s “inability to collect good information about Iraq’s WMD programs, serious errors in analyzing what information it could gather and a failure to make clear just how much of its analysis was based on assumptions rather than good evidence.

“On a matter of this importance, we simply cannot afford failures of this magnitude,” the report said.

But the commission also said that it found no indication that spy agencies distorted the evidence they had concerning Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction, a charge raised against the administration during last year’s presidential campaign.

“The analysts who worked Iraqi weapons issues universally agreed that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments,” the report said.

But it added: “It is hard to deny the conclusion that intelligence analysts worked in an environment that did not encourage skepticism about the conventional wisdom.”

Unanimous advice: Strengthen intel chief
The commission called for dramatic change to prevent future failures. It outlined more than 70 recommendations, saying that President Bush must give John Negroponte, the new director of national intelligence, broader powers for overseeing the nation’s 15 spy agencies.

“It won’t be easy to provide this leadership to the intelligence components of the Defense Department or to the CIA,” the commissioners said. “They are some of the government’s most headstrong agencies. Sooner or later, they will try to run around — or over — the DNI. Then, only your determined backing will convince them that we cannot return to the old ways,” the commission told Bush.

The panel, which was unanimous in its report and advice, also recommended that Bush demand more of the intelligence community, which has been repeatedly criticized for failures as various investigations have looked back on the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

“The intelligence community needs to be pushed,” the report said. “It will not do its best unless it is pressed by policymakers — sometimes to the point of discomfort.”

It said analysts must be pushed to explain what they don’t know and that agencies must be pressed to explain why they don’t have better information on key subjects. At the same time, the report said the administration must be more careful about accepting the judgment of intelligence agencies.

“No important intelligence assessment should be accepted without sharp questioning that forces the (intelligence) community to explain exactly how it came to that assessment and what alternatives might also be true,” the report said.

The commission also called for sweeping changes at the FBI to combine the bureau’s counterterrorism and counterintelligence resources into a new office.

Problems with 'Curve Ball'
The proposals were prompted in part by an Iraqi defector code-named “Curve Ball” who may have had a drinking problem and who provided suspect information on Saddam’s purported mobile weapons labs, officials said. The defector and the questions about his veracity have been described in recent government reports.

The information the defector provided was included in the much-maligned October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, a high-level collection of intelligence that the White House used to argue for invading Iraq. That document said Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, but no such weapons have been found.

The commission's report will single out that document, which said there was “compelling evidence” that Iraq sought uranium for nuclear weapons.

The document included dissent in the form of cautionary footnotes from the State Department’s intelligence bureau, the Energy Department and the Air Force.

But a senior administration official acknowledged in July 2003 that Bush and then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice did not read footnotes in the 90-page document.

By glossing over or omitting dissenting views about Iraq’s weapons programs, the estimate overstated the accuracy of U.S. intelligence, according to an official who described the commission’s report.

“There’s a need for more complete reporting,” the official said.

The estimate was also the basis for then Secretary of State Colin Powell going to the United Nations Security Council in February 2003 to lobby for military action.

Powell this week told the German magazine Stern (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7334576/) that he was “furious and angry” that he had been misinformed about Iraq’s capabilities.

“It was information from our security services and from some Europeans, including Germans. Some of this information was wrong. I did not know this at the time,” he said. “Hundreds of millions followed it on television. I will always be the one who presented it. I have to live with that.”

600-page report
The commission released its final report, spanning more than 600 pages, after more than a year of work that included closed-door sessions with Bush and other top administration officials.

Numerous government reports have detailed intelligence failures since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. This commission is the first formed by Bush to look at why U.S. spy agencies mistakenly concluded that Iraq had stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction, one of the administration’s main justifications for invading in March 2003.

The panel also considered a range of intelligence issues beyond Iraq, including congressional oversight, satellite imagery and electronic snooping. Among numerous soft spots, officials familiar with the findings say “human intelligence” — the work of actual operatives on the ground — is lacking.

Some of the recommendations
Among other things, the report:

Recommends forming a new intelligence center to focus on weapons proliferation.

Chastises intelligence agencies for their continued failure to share information, despite numerous reforms aimed at improving coordination.

Stresses the need for ongoing training for analysts and operatives and new procedures for considering dissenting intelligence analysis.

Calls on intelligence agencies to take concrete steps to ensure information from their sources is valid — a move prompted in part by 'Curve Ball'.

Proposes updating the FBI’s computers and creating a new national security division within the Justice Department.

Bush formed the commission — led by Republican Laurence Silberman, a retired federal appeals court judge, and Democrat

Charles Robb, a former senator from Virginia — as it became clear that U.S. weapons inspectors were not going to find stockpiles of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

Top intelligence officials were already taking steps to soften the impact of the criticism. The head of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, which analyzes satellite imagery, told employees in an e-mail that they should “take on the lessons learned, and drive on.”

“You may find the report difficult to read and you may not agree with the commission’s analysis, opinions, or recommendations,” retired Air Force Lt. Gen. James Clapper wrote. “I understand that it’s much more difficult to be criticized rather than praised in public.”

Little known about adversaries
The unclassified version of the report does not go into significant detail on the intelligence community’s abilities in Iran and North Korea because commissioners did not want to tip the U.S. hand to its leading adversaries. Those details are included in the classified version.

“The bad news is that we still know disturbingly little about the weapons programs and even less about the intentions of many of our most dangerous adversaries,” the report said.

The commission did not name any country, but appeared to be talking about nations such as North Korea and Iran.

“Our review has convinced us that the best hope for preventing future failures is dramatic change,” the report said. “We need an intelligence community that is truly integrated, far more imaginative and willing to run risks, open to a new generation of Americans and receptive to new technologies.”

[Æ°]

Coincidence?

This report hits the news the exact day that Schiavo dies.

[POIESIS]

well, for one thing, the cia isn't an intelligence agency, it's a covert action
agency. secondly, if anyone has payed any attention to cia, dia, or any other
serving and retired insiders, you'll know that there are two pretty different
accounts of the US intel situation on iraq and in general. so....it's hard to tell
what's windy bullshit and what's not.

[Æ°]

true

and the more i read about this the more it's starting
to look like bush shifting the blame onto the intel
community, so i'm becoming more skeptical of the intentions

[villain]

The only "intelligence failure" was in Bushs brain.

[POIESIS]

iraq is one thing, and it's obvious.
9/11 and the propaganda that US intel,
hence the executive branch,
was in the dark is the real game.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

its not like we didn't know this months ago.

[bobthebuilder]

For those of you keeping up with the current events..

The rate of attacks has slowed down from 65 or so a day to 40 or so a day... US soldiers are no longer the primary targets.

The Iraqi Army is doing most of the raids... US Forces serve as back up.

A KURDISH president was selected- This is very very very positive.


We will remove most of your soldiers by 06-07... there will be around 10k placed near oil refinaries for about another 7 or more years...

I believe the situation in Iraq is stabilizing... slowly and painfully but its happening.


1st Medal of Honor will be awarded.. There should be plenty more.

[bobthebuilder]

In short, he saved the lives of about 100-125 men. Killed around 30(according to those who were there) attackers before a bullet stuck him down. He went into a voulnrable position instead of ordering one of his subordinates to do it.



Bush To Present Medal Of Honor
Associated Press
April 4, 2005


WASHINGTON - Outnumbered and exposed, Army Sgt. 1st Class Paul Ray Smith stayed at his gun, beating back an advancing Iraqi force until a bullet took his life.

Smith is credited with protecting the lives of scores of lightly armed American soldiers who were beyond his position in the battle, on April 4, 2003, near the gates of Baghdad International Airport.

On Monday, exactly two years after his death, President Bush is awarding Smith the Medal of Honor, the nation's highest award for valor, and presenting it to his widow, Birgit, daughter and son.

It is only the third Medal of Honor given for actions since the Vietnam War, and the first from the Iraq war.

Smith, 33, was the senior sergeant in a platoon of engineers during the 3rd Infantry Division's northward sprint toward Baghdad.

By the morning of April 4, elements of the division had reached Baghdad and captured Baghdad International Airport, a key objective. Encircled Iraqi militiamen and Special Republican Guard forces inside launched counterattacks.





Near the eastern edge of the airport, Smith, a veteran of the first Gulf War, had been put in charge of his unit - 2nd Platoon, Bravo Company, 11th Engineer Battalion - while his lieutenant went on a scouting mission.

Smith's mission was mundane enough - turn a courtyard into a holding pen for Iraqi prisoners of war. The courtyard, just north of the main road between Baghdad and the airport, was near an Iraqi military compound.

Soon after Smith and some of his platoon began work, records show, one trooper spotted dozens of armed Iraqis approaching from beyond the gated walls of the courtyard. Another group of Iraqis occupied a nearby tower.

Smith summoned a Bradley Fighting Vehicle, and he and his troops gathered near the courtyard gate to fight the counterattack. An M113 armored personnel carrier joined the fray.

The Iraqis, perhaps as many as 100, attacked with rifles, mortars and rocket-propelled grenades, or RPGs. Smith threw a grenade over a wall to drive back some of the Iraqis, then fired a rocket.

Incoming RPGs battered the Bradley, which retreated. Then a mortar struck the M113, wounding the three soldiers inside and leaving its heavy machine gun unmanned. After directing another soldier to pull the wounded M113 crewmen to safety, Smith climbed into the machine gun position and began firing at the tower and at the Iraqis trying to rush the compound.

His upper torso and head were exposed as he manned the gun.

"This wasn't a John Wayne move," said Command Sgt. Maj. Gary J. Coker, the top enlisted man in the 11th Battalion, who was near the battle. "He was very methodical. He knew he had the gate and he wasn't going to leave it and nobody was going to make him leave it."

Still, Coker said, "it was absolutely amazing to stand up in that volume of fire."

During a stretch of 15 minutes or longer, Smith fired more than 300 rounds as Pvt. Michael Seaman, protected inside the M113, passed him ammunition.

Then he was struck by enemy fire and mortally wounded. At almost the same time, 1st Sgt. Timothy Campbell ended the threat from the tower with a grenade, and the surviving Iraqis withdrew. Medics tried to save Smith, and he died about 30 minutes later.

He and his comrades are credited with killing between 20 and 50 Iraqi soldiers.

Beyond his position were American medics, scouts, a mortar unit and a command post - all lightly armed and vulnerable.

"Sgt. 1st Class Smith's actions saved the lives of at least 100 soldiers," according to an Army narrative.

Smith was born in El Paso, Texas, and moved to Tampa, Fla., when he was 9. He enlisted in the Army in 1989.

He was known for being tough on the men under his command, Coker, who has returned to Iraq with the 3rd Infantry Division, said in a weekend telephone interview.

But Smith held himself to the same standard, Coker said, and he took care of his young soldiers when they needed it. Back in the United States, when one private's wife fell seriously ill, Smith drove four hours to bring toys to their children.

The other two post-Vietnam Medals of Honor went to Army Master Sgt. Gary I. Gordon and Army Sgt. 1st Class Randall D. Shughart, two Delta Force troopers who died defending the crew of a helicopter that was shot down in Mogadishu, Somalia, in events depicted in the book and movie "Black Hawk Down."

More than 3,400 Medals of Honor have been awarded since the decoration was created in 1861, of which more than 600 have been given posthumously.

Military officials rigorously review any nomination for the medal in a process that can last 18 months or more. Only about 840 have been given since World War II, when the requirements were made more stringent.

[CACashRefund]

I give mad props to medal of honor recipients, those guys are fucking savages.
Paul Ray Smith
RIP

[villain]

Yeah SFC Smith has quite a story...
RIP

[KING BLING]

Lets not get ahead of ourselves...though you may want to be an expert...

Originally posted by bobthebuilder+Apr 8 2005, 02:33 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bobthebuilder - Apr 8 2005, 02:33 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>For those of you keeping up with the current events..

The rate of attacks has slowed down from 65 or so a day to 40 or so a day... US soldiers are no longer the primary targets.

The Iraqi Army is doing most of the raids... US Forces serve as back up.

Quoted post
[/b]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/n...a_casualties_dc (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050324/ts_nm/iraq_usa_casualties_dc)
Good: "March is on pace for the lowest monthly U.S. military death toll in 13 months, and the rate of American fatalities has fallen by about 50 percent"

Not Good: "I think what you get is a mixed picture in Iraq," said Pena of the Cato Institute. "Whatever progress we're making in terms of violence against U.S. troops, it is being offset by violence against Iraqis and Iraqi security forces."
Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, seemed to agree.

Conclusion: Less Americans dying and more Iraqi's dying does not inevitable or immeadiate success make.


<!--QuoteBegin-bobthebuilder@Apr 8 2005, 02:33 PM

We will remove most of your soldiers by 06-07... there will be around 10k placed near oil refinaries for about another 7 or more years...

I believe the situation in Iraq is stabilizing... slowly and painfully but its happening.

Quoted post
[/quote]


Where do you get this? I mean, if these are opinions so be it, but, honestly, offer some personal credentials or a referance point. I looked for credible, real info on this but all there is is speculation - the republicans in fact will commit to nothing. My counter point to you is that we will never leave and US tropps will breed and create an unholy Iraqi-American race of children through mating with emboldened sinful Muslim women. These children will gather in strength and topple the U.S. government and replace the president with a bag of sand...my opinion is as valid as yours...but mine is protected by 10k troops...




I read about the Medal of Honor recepient, what he did was really amazing. It's cool his son accepted the award...

[ledzep]

Of course the attacks are being aimed at the government. Those dudes flourish under anarchy.

[bobthebuilder]

By 06-07 the Iraqi National Guard will have enough troops to protect itself. Don't forget that the Kurds and Shittes are trying heavily to supress the Sunni insurgency, they are getting blown up on a daily basis... What I mean by Iraq is slowly improving is that the Civilians are now attacking insurgents in the streets... You can't be part of an insurgency if you don't have the peoples support.

[villain]

Hey, the Iraqis want us out too:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...2005Apr9_2.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A39331-2005Apr9_2.html)

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=8132567 (http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=8132567)

The insurgency is primarily sunni now. This is a matter of bringing the sunni into the fold, not of squashing them.

[bobthebuilder]

No, it is a matter of squashing them, they wage war against women and children. The only reason they wage that war is since Saddam(he was a Sunni) is gone they have lost all the power... this is all its about, power. I will be happy the day each and every one of those motherfuckers gets shot square in the face.

[ledzep]

^yea because every last one of them Sunnis is an insurgent.

THEY MUST ALL SUFFER BECAUSE PEOPLE SIMILAR TO THEM HAVE DONE BAD THINGS.

[bobthebuilder]

What are you talking about similar to them? IM saying every Sunni Insurgent needs to die. Not all sunnis are insurgents, many of them did vote in the election-many did not.

They were given a fair chance into the democratic process, they refused; now the insurgents must be anhaliated.

[villain]

Voter turn out in Sunni areas was low because security is bad.

Oh and if you mean the religious fundamentalism by this "war on women and children" you should know that the shiite party in power now is very theocratic.... so much so they have been trying to make shariah official law.

[bobthebuilder]

Thats because Iran is heavily influencing rule. We will not leave till there is a democratic constitution, and there will be one... If you still recall, we invaded Iraq (Doesen't matter what for but we did) Once you invade a country and win,you make the rules... its just how it goes.

You guys should really stop bashing America over this shit, if you look over history we are not the first or the last country to invade for resources... money is not what makes this world go round, its war.


If I were you guys Id be worried about china, last month China made a law which declares the use of military power against Taiwan if Taiwan were to declare itself a free democratic state.

If you recall... Taiwan is our ally and we have to protect them if any country wages war against them...

Also please be aware that China has more foot soldiers than we have civilians in this country.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

Originally posted by bobthebuilder@Apr 9 2005, 04:52 PM
If I were you guys Id be worried about china, last month China made a law which declares the use of military power against Taiwan if Taiwan were to declare itself a free democratic state.

If you recall... Taiwan is our ally and we have to protect them if any country wages war against them...

Also please be aware that China has more foot soldiers than we have civilians in this country.
Quoted post

[!@#$%]

there is already an Iraq thread, you didn't have to start a new one.

merge.

[bobthebuilder]

This is a perfect example of the Iraqi people being fed up with the bullshit that insurgents put them through. In my opinion, pretty strong video -emotionally wise.

http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_...D=52815&ak=null (http://switch5.castup.net/frames/20041020_MemriTV_Popup/video_480x360.asp?ClipMediaID=52815&ak=null)

[bobthebuilder]

Look at those pieces of shit, they can't even anwser why they are fighting.

[!@#$%]

once again, we have a thread on iraq already.

[bobthebuilder]

Change this threads name to IRAQ not "Iraq is a Disaster" because it not a fucking disaster, the Tsunami in asia was a disaster.


The american media is responsible foe everyone thinking that the war is a complete failure and bush is doing a horrible job. This is the context in which you all try to argue, things you see in the american media.

Iraq is not a failure and is only getting better and better.

Pictures above: Cats rule.

[hard a slead]

But what you might have to realise, is that ever since vietnam, the american media has been banned from inderpendently reporting
anything that indicates the true nature of what is happening, i mean they are not allowed to show things that make america look that bad.
In vietnam the americans were saying how they are winning the war etc,
and then showing images of burnt and shot up soldiers. It did not make sense and the fact that they were losing the war was taken on board.
Since then things like that have been banned from being shown. The american media only shows you things that are good for its national interest, and for their image.....take this into account when you watch american news.
Americas realpolitik is hopefully universally understood with the propaganda being hopeefullu doubted by now, but what is actually happening in iraq is not being told to us, Iraq is a disaster!
not only did the americans not understand the iraqi peoples general hatred for them after the gulf war.
but the also miscalculated the iraqi peoples determination to defend their
homeland from the "peacekeepers". I think if we look at the situation realistically that we will understand that the american troops will not be out of iraq for years, there is really no easy solution
there is basically a notion in iraq of disaster, and the americans and the slowly disolving "coalition of the willing" are doing little good, fighting with no real outcomes reached.
They invaded a country for oil of which america uses 20% of the worlds
oil which they only hold 5% of, This liberating iraq bullshit should be understood as a load of crap and complete propaganda, as if white
christian conservative leaders really give a flying fuck about a bunch of
inpoverished arabs, they dont, they only want oil and feed the world this
do gooder bullshit, how dumb do they think we are.
And in the state iraq is in at that moment i cant see this war ending for a long long time........
Peace in the middle east (hopefully some time soon)

[POIESIS]

the media showed some of the most brutal shit..burnt american
soldiers dragged around, beat with sticks and hung from a bridge.
doesn't get much worse. if you're only speaking about the big mainstream
hitters in america, then it's true to an extent, but not that simple.
on the other hand, you can't honestly say the media fabricated the
theatre, all it's actors, scenes, and directors, that is operation iraqi freedom.
...that's bordering on complete farce.
beyond that, you're living in a dreamworld if you think iraq will be allowed to have a normal, functioning democracy made in our image. not a fucking chance.
there is way way too much at stake to let the general population take control of
their own affairs.

[!@#$%]

does anyone remember that iraqi general who kept saying over and over that the americans weren't in baghdad or anywhere near it and that they didn't have any chance against the iraqi army? just as we were invading?
wasn't that guy called baghdad bob?

i think i know another bob like that...

[WhiteOx]

Originally posted by CACashRefund@Feb 9 2005, 12:29 AM
PHOTOS THAT WILL NEVER MAKE THE NEWS
http://www.veteranscava.org/image003.jpg@01C4BC03.jpg

I'd probably try to rock the Nam stylee if I was over there as well

[bobthebuilder]

Originally posted by symbols@Apr 12 2005, 08:15 AM
does anyone remember that iraqi general who kept saying over and over that the americans weren't in baghdad or anywhere near it and that they didn't have any chance against the iraqi army? just as we were invading?
wasn't that guy called baghdad bob?

i think i know another bob like that...
Quoted post


Symbols you have no clue what is going on around you, you are a fabrication of the media.
You a. Don't have ANY military experience.
b. You HAVE NO political experience.
c. There is no possible way for you to be knowledgeable on issues in Iraq beyond what you see on the news.

Don't attack me personally just because you can't deal with what is the truth.

[!@#$%]

are you dumb?

a personal attack would be saying that your mom and dad were brother and sister
that you like to fuck your dog
that you don't know shit except how to follow orders
that you a useless human being.

the media didn't create me you fucking moron.
i'm a fabricatin of Carbon, Water and DNA.
grow up, this is basic biology here, i am not an automaton (unlike, hmm..some people who are part of an organization that discourages individualism?)

i don't get my news from major news outlets, i'm sorry that makes you so uncomfortable.
i don't fit into your opinions and assumptions and stereotypes, but you shouldn't feel so threatened by me.

how would you even know what kind of political experience i have?
until about two weeks ago, YOU DIDN'T EVEN KNOW I WAS FEMALE
how would you know what kind of news i have been getting about iraq and who i;ve been getting it from?
don't assume you know who my friends are and what they do.

shows how much you know and can pick up on from observation alone.

bob you're grasping at straws now.

[villain]

Well bob, if you consider that instead of EVERYONE attacking us, we have the Sunnis attacking us, or that Iraq will most likely be absorbed into Iran as soon as we pull out, or the potential for civil war as progress, well then by golly you are right, we have made progress.
I however believe that this "progress" is debatable.

[bobthebuilder]

Ok, Ok, you got me there. New rule.

Unless you are actually part of the fight on the front lines in the military, you have no right to complain about Iraq. A lot of people think they are protesting to help out the soldiers, guess fucking what, we don't want it, 95% of the soldiers in Iraq don't have a problem with being there fact is 100% of the people in Iraq are volunteers and 75% volunteered to go to serve in Iraq.

If you want to protest about something protest about the lack of armored humvees and shit, that’s what kind of help we need. We don't need fagmos talking shit against what we are doing, the world has made it choice your comments are all based on news you hear, it needs not be main stream media, every media outlet has something to gain and they will always bias towards that.

I suggest you sign up to the military, go to Iraq (or Afghanistan), SEE HOW IT REALLY IS out there. Maybe your news outlets didn't show that the people of Iraq are happy with what we did, people who had their families killed still support us? Thats right, what kind of news would that be? BAD news thats why it wont be posted. Based on intl there is about 20k insurgents and those supporting insurgents in Iraq.... guess how many fucking people there are in Iraq.

There is no discussion here, you are a repeat of what you see.

Do you have any political experience? And im not talking about running for your local block leader.

[bobthebuilder]

Iraq won't turn to Iran, we won't allow it. You also have no fucking clue about Iraq, no progress? We built thousnads of schools for those kids to get an education, we did so much positive shit thta no one hears about because ITS NOT IN THE NEWS, ask the soldiers who are in Iraq.

[villain]

okay fine ignore me bob (http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/oct2004/a102704a.html)

[bobthebuilder]

Thank you for posting that.

[bobthebuilder]

Also, for your Iran concern- it is legitimate but unlikley, a Kurdish president has been elected... I believe we sent Iran a warning message of, get the fuck out of Iraq or we will look at it as an premptive strike on the Iraqi people...

[villain]

It won't be so easy to draw a definitive line with Iran...

[bobthebuilder]

Militairly they are not any type of threat, politically they are a threat just because of the influance they can put on the Iraqi Government and its people... The leader of Iran is a fuckbag and will need to be moved. All these guys claim religion so heavily yet they slaughter and starve their own people.

Iran is likley to be next, think about it from a military perspective... we have them cornered... Iraq...Afghanistan, look at the geographic locations of those countries.

Like I stated before, China could be the next threat... thats the only threat im really concerned about for this country.

[InfiniteWisdomOfThePezDispenser]

I believe ALL TAXPAYING Americans have a right to complain about Iraq, after all it is their money that is funding the war effort.

Frontline/Military vs. Main Stream vs. Nontraditional news media outlets. I think its pretty safe to say that each and every one of them puts their own spin on things and yes, positive items rarely make the broadcasts or papers.

I don't think I'd go throwing around military intel as a quality source. After all, didn't that same intel tell us that there were WMD and that resistance would be low?

One last thought. I don't think the majority of people that don't support or are protesting this war have a problem with the individual service men and women involved. They all know you're just following orders. Don't take the protests as a personal attack.

[villain]

"Deployment after Deployment after Deplo....

We can in the Amry to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I fully agree with it. But when you take soldiers and continuously deploy them here and there it wears on them. Families fall apart. The soldiers become basket cases bacause they don't know if they will come back into the green zones gate after a patrol on a daily basis. If the deployments were 6 months it would be far less stressful on the soldier and their families. I've been on numerous deployments. I'm at 18 (+) years of service so I know what it's like. I've seen my buddies die and people I did'nt even know splattered all over the place. The world and the military is changing. Soldiers are getting paid 3 times the amout outside than inside doing the same job."

"RE: Deployment after Deployment after Deplo....

Yeah, constant deployments suck, and in my opinion the shorter the tour in a combat zone, the more unpopular the war is. Short combat tours seem to me to be a political action against opposition to the war at home.

In every war up through the Korean conflict, tours of duty in combat zones were "for the duration." In Vietnam, they were for one year--with incentives to extend. (E.g., extend your tour in Nam for six months, and you get 30 days free leave to anywhere in the free world, with free transportation.)

BTW, I had planned to extend my tour in Nam and take advantage of that free leave, but the CO of the Engineer company a click down the road from us did the same thing, and two weeks after he got back from that leave, he was dead. That made me reconsider; why give Charlie a second chance at me?"

"RE: Deployment after Deployment after Deplo....

When was the last time we had a protracted war without a draft?
I think it was the Spanish-American War .
The political decision not to draft for this war has led to many unforeseen/unpleasant
consequences for our volunteer force including
back-to-back deployments (of 1 year sometimes extended), STOP LOSS,
IRR usage, ILOs, cross-mobilizations, and posssible destruction of our Guard and Reserve.
My point is that it is very difficult to maintain a quality VOLUNTEER
force in the face of a protracted struggle given the mounting unforseen
consequences and second and third order effects.
On another issue - did we really learn the right lessons from the individual replacement
system used during most parts of the Vietnam War? I think the idea (individual replacements)
might need to be revisited (with or without a draft)."

""BTW, I had planned to extend my tour in Nam and take advantage of that free leave, but the CO of the Engineer company a click down the road from us did the same thing, and two weeks after he got back from that leave, he was dead. That made me reconsider; why give Charlie a second chance at me?"

Amen to that, after being wounded twice in Vietnam and about 20 days to my DEROS, my Commander offered me to reenlist for 6 yrs, $10,000 bonus and the 30 day free leave, I said no way...then he offered me to extend in country 45 days and ETS from the Army since I was not planning to stay in, I also said No..Charlie had two strikes against me and I wasn't willing to give me a third one..

I ETS in 1970 and returned to active duty in 1976..retired in 1996."

"RE: Deployment after Deployment after Deplo....

Mr. Lopez, I swear that was my dad writing your story. He told me the same thing happen to him in Vietnam. I am a Reservist and the deployment are ruff. I work for the Federal Govt and I have co-worker that has deployed 3 times since Sept 11. I say bring back the draft. I work in a Federal Prison and some of the guys in prison for these small non-violent crimes should orderer to spend three years in the Army or Marines. Thats what they use to do doing your Vietnam days."

"RE: Deployment after Deployment after Deplo....

Do you really want a crook who is in the army only to avoid prison time being the one to watch your back in combat?


----On 03/28/05 18:03 GMT eddie.l.jones Wrote ----
I work in a Federal Prison and some of the guys in prison for these small non-violent crimes should orderer to spend three years in the Army or Marines. Thats what they use to do doing your Vietnam days."

"RE: Deployment after Deployment after Deplo....

he won't be watchin my back... he will either be in the infantry or some unit that does not need a get score higher than a 30... almost as high as mine... but just a tad bit lower...

----On 03/29/05 04:17 GMT michelle.a.steiner Wrote ----
Do you really want a crook who is in the army only to avoid prison time being the one to watch your back in combat?"

"RE: Deployment after Deployment after Deplo....

There are some smart infantry guys and there are some I went to AIT with (96B) that seemed to have lucked out on their ASVAB, and probably weren't smart enough to be there. Besides, I don't want a couple of cons armed with automatic weapons around me. If this were to work, DS's would have to start throwing crappy soldiers out of basic again, something they weren't doing when I went.


----On 03/29/05 05:10 GMT manuel.alejandro.perez Wrote ----

he won't be watchin my back... he will either be in the infantry or some unit that does not need a get score higher than a 30... almost as high as mine... but just a tad bit lower...

----On 03/29/05 04:17 GMT michelle.a.steiner Wrote ----
Do you really want a crook who is in the army only to avoid prison time being the one to watch your back in combat?"

"I am all for re-instating the draft, I believe that there are a lot of young men out there without a clue of what they want to do in life, the draft will do good to some of them, it did to me. The draft will also lessen the # of people living of the government, ie welfare, food stamps.

I do believe on the other hand that the Army at the time I was drafted instilled discipline better than today, it was normal for a Drill Sergeant to give you a good ass whip behind the barracks, now Dril Sergenta are limited to what they can do, it was funny to see a soldier pull out a "Stress Card" is a DS scream at them when I was a First Sergeant, of course I was always told not to compare my generation with the current one.

Anyway, bring back the draft and the soldier by soldier replacement instead of deploying an entire unit."

"RE: Deployment after Deployment after Deplo....

I am a 23 yr old SGT in 3-7 cav... Currently in Iraq. I was here the first time to start this political mess, and now Im here again to continue it, Why, because its my job. No where in your contract does it say you have to agree with orders, but you do have to carry them out.
I was married before the war (long), Divorced after the war, gained custody of my 9 year old daughter. If there is one thing it has taught me, Is Only the Strongest of relationships will withstand the ARMY LIFE. me personally, Being in the Cav, we came back from war, took a couple 4 days, then its straight to the field.."Gunnery". Back to work, Spartan Focus, back to work, Marne Focus, Back to work, NTC, back to work, JRTC, back to work... BAM... Welcome back to Doja Kuwait. The Family? left standing with whatever time they had, teary Eyed at the Airport Waving again. All of you who have been deployed know this, you've experienced it, and you know, it is going to weigh heavily upon your mind, but you carry on, simply out of sheer determination. But at what point do you say, "OK, now this is just getting rediculous".
I am in Iraq right now... When Someone dies, which is entirely too Often, there is a commo black out..
I look at it like this, the first war, we spearheaded the entire division, 3-7 lost not one person, even after being extended several times to pull security for other f.o.b.'s, we drove on. The war was declared over, or at least a cease fire . At that time it was August 2003, I believe there was a little over 100 american casualties.
What is the ratio now ? How many people must die for a cause to have the credibility we seek ? It doesnt matter how many people you kill, As long as there is a man or woman willing to Strap a bomb to themselves, the vehicle thier in, just plain ready to die for thier cause, that is something you CANNOT beat. Americans believe strongly in our causes, but how many would actually DIE , not for thier own beliefs, but for whatever thier country deems worthy of sending them to fight for. I can tell you, according to the military numbers... a little over 4 %, and steadily decreasing, but that is the conviction these people fight with. Why dont more people enlist, because.. we're the LAND of the FREE.. we are what every one wishes to attain, right ? I mean, if we initiate the Draft, well thats not the freedom of choice now is it ? the oppertunity to pursue your own goals and ambitions, the american dream. And even though Im in the army, I dont believe they should initiate a draft. The reason being, I hold nothing againts any man or woman who doesn't wish to fight, its thier choice, Just because I made the decision to Make this a career, doesn't mean I should feel others are obligated to do the same. Some people are just not cut out for the military. I look right and left of me daily, and see people who Dont want to Be here, what do you thing the Mindstate of someone who had no choice of being here would be.. It wouldn't be something I would want to be around. So my opion.. Draft.. Horrible Idea.

As far as constant deployment.. Were exhausting our resources, spending money we really cant afford to be spending, spreading ourself extremely thin amongst all these various countries, not to mention pissing off numerous political figure heads with our inability to mind OUR buisness, or leave things well alone. We spend Billions weekly to FUEL tanks and BRADS, We arent going to be able to enlist enough new soldiers to replinish the one that are getting out because thier are tired of fighting a politcal war that will never end. Im sorry, I am a very strongly opinionated individual, but I've earned the right to be, Opinion, and common sense are two things no one can take from you. So I will continue fightin in this deployment, in a war I dont believe in, the same war that basically ended my marriage. I figure, We only got 4 more years, and we'll see what the next guy can bring to the plate. Now while your sitting back thinking.. this guy is a freakin idiot, or a ticking time bomb.....

.... Imagine what a person who unwillingly was forced into service would be like."

"RE: Deployment after Deployment after Deplo....

Any of you chicken-hawks sucking up your retirement for service form 1970-90 wanna tope that one ?

God bless you son
"

"RE: Deployment after Deployment after Deplo....

Well, I'm not much of a hawk and I'm not retired, but I'll take a bit of a shot at this.

I think a point is being missed. I too favor a universal draft because I see a lot of adults who will never outgrow their juvenile behaviors if someone doesn't take them and push them as should be done in Basic. But while I do want a universal draft I don't want most of them to be serving in a combat role. We could take the few who are the brightest and who voluntarily opt to be in a combat MOS rather than going out and planting trees in the forest or some other civil service which they should perform under the UCMJ. Even some of those who are not in combat roles could provide much of the support currently done by civilians.

So far as voluntary service is the only acceptable type? I don't voluntarily pay taxes which means that much of my employment is really involuntary servitude to the government (I'm National Guard). I've been involuntarily called to court to testify as a witness and as a juror. There are many other ways in which we as a society compel service if one merely thinks about it.

Oh, and on the war and its advisability/conduct? One must remember that there are many different aspects to wars and some may be predominantly one or the other. Some wars are primarily strategic, some wars are more tactical, some mostly political, some mostly martial, etc.

In this case one must understand that in fighting an insurgency with a terrorist component that it can be argued that it can be won - and that we don't have to. The point of the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan isn't to take and hold land but to allow non-hostile regimes to acquire the power and expertise to administer and police their own countries. At the same time we're cutting communications and logistical lines for terrorists and pressuring terrorist regimes. There are many other aspects to it but that'll have to do for now.

Today I read a newsletter which addressed the activities of my assigned battalion in Iraq (I'm attached to a unit in Afghanistan). My assigned battalion is commanded by a LTC who first served in Vietnam and is ensuring that there are aggressive patrols with a soft touch when it comes to dealing with civilians. They're getting better intel and the number of IED's on at least one of the routes in their AO dropped about 75% in their first 1.5 months in the area. Now that must be interpreted in a post-election era in which the Pentagon is investigating the distinct possibility that the number of deployed soldiers may be able to be substantially reduced in 2006.

We're slowly winning the politcal war in Iraq and in Afghanistan. There will certainly be reversals and the Kurds may screw things up for us in Iraq (the insurgency/terrorists aren't nearly as likely to be the spoiler), but at this time the trends are in our favor and if we play it smart we should be able to reasonably claim a victory from our point of view.

And the idea that some have that we can never defeat terrorism is unsupportable. We're defeating terrorists on a daily basis and that's really the key.
There will always be a criminal element which may have political or religious trappings - but if we continually press the attack on them we can continue to defeat them daily.

In fact, to the same extent that Osama Bin Laden and his Al Qaida were a coherent and decisive force - they no longer are. There are still active components of the Al Qaida network, but they no longer have the global reach or power that they once had. It is inconceivable to imagine that if Al Qaida were able that they would not have already carried out a massive attack on U.S. soil. But we've so damaged their Command, Control, Communications, and logistics that they simply are far less capable than before.

As someone old enough to remember the Vietnam War (but not old enough to serve in it) I have great respect for those people who were drafted and served not only honorably but with great courage and skill. Your average Vietnam Veteran deserves great respect even though their service may not have been voluntary or "professional". Just look at what the Tunnel Rats did as one small example. Those were real warriors and soldiers.

To those who went before we owe a debt of gratitude whose extent we can never truly understand.

----On 04/02/05 12:01 GMT joseph.e.justice Wrote ----
Any of you chicken-hawks sucking up your retirement for service form 1970-90 wanna tope that one ?

God bless you son"

"Whats your thoughts of this

Stop lost and too long of deployments. they should make deployments 6 months"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

SGT-

How many posts are you going to make to tell the world that you feel that you are getting screwed? I'll say Again, you made choices that are now steering your life in a direction you don't prefer, but YOU MADE THE CHOICES?..Join the Army or not? Have a Child or not? Now do your job SGT and live with the CHOICES YOU MADE!"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

First off I didnt start these I was the first to post on them. I found the post on the last page. I thought it would be a few good subject to talk about. This one I just posted why I thought the army was lossing soldiers. I also posted what I thought they could do to fix it.

All you did Wells ( dont know your rank) is point out you dont like what I write and you didnt even coment about this topic."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

There are many many reasons soldiers are getting out.

Why am I getting out? At the end of this enlistment, I will have ten years of service, active duty the whole time.

I have changed MOSs twice, and have deployed.

I have been divorced twice. I have packed up and moved, across country, repeatedly.

I have seen people who dont deserve to be promoted get ahead by the good old boy system, saw people work themselves literally to the point that broke their bodies...only to be cast aside by the Army.

I am tired of having the flag waved in my face, being told that I am not patriotic, ect. I have given enough without enough in return.

And that is why I am getting out."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

I think it's pretty obvious really...Soldiers are simply sick and tired of being deployed/re-deployed time and time again. It's too much to ask of most people, so they're leaving."

"Choices

Who cares. Yeah we all made choices and its everyones right to nag on and on how they are getting hose layed to them. He is not the only one. If you did your time and its your turn to get your shit and go from "Army Green to Coperate Gray" or to whatever your dreams are then you should be able to. I mean officers can just say I don't want to be a LT anymore and payback some college. I would take that trade. Its not as though I had time to just take a bunch of school anyway. Anyway the real reason for this post is I wondered if anyone had heard the anything about the possible stop loss this year. I heard that it was at Division Level now. Just curious to know if anyone might be preve to some grape vine information. Thanks"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Check your other Stop Loss Post, I think I clearly expressed my opinion.

Again, I wish you no ill-will, I hope your deployment goes smooth and your young family is strengthened, in the long run, by your willingness to complete your obligation.
"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Call me a wimp, but I think SGT Brotherton has a valid point.

I'm finishing up a year deployment and while it was an easy assignment by Army standards, I'm run down. There are soldiers in my unit that are on their second deployment. When they return, many will get out or retire.

Let's remember some of the principles the Chinses general Sun Tzu said over 2000 years ago.

"There is no instance of a country benefited from prolonged warfare."

"When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be damped. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength."

"If the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain."

Those principles still apply today. If you don't rotate your troops and rest them, you will burn them out.
Remember, the U.S. doesn't have a draft anymore.

Nobody said this would be an easy campaign. However, like it or not, time is on the side of the terrorists."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

The Army traditionally brings in around 80K new soldiers each year. Well that means around 80K ETS's each year. That is around 1/5th the total Army strenght turning over every year. Duh! that is normal business for the Army. That is how the Army stays young enough to fight these wars.

Guess what? The country and US Army have been around a lot longer than YOU. It will continue to exist long after you get out, retire, or die on the battlefield. All of us play small parts in the existence of the World.

Do your part, leave on your own terms if you can and just realize that you as an individual reallly aren't overly significant in the big picture of this Life. Big deal!!!!!!!!!!"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

And the Army goes rolling along

Its not like a Civilian Corperation where you hire someone and they work until they are 65 and retire. One of the reasons for a retirement option at 20 years is there is room for growth of the force. Younger Soldiers are taught by the older ones then are left to make their impact on the force, and teach younger Soldiers the lessons of the past as well as the lessons they learned. Otherwise our leaderhip would become old, outdated, and no longer relivent. Plus 20 years is hard on the mind, body, and soul not to mention everything else.

"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Michael Hair (sorry for speaking for you) and I were taught lessons from the Viet Nam Era vets. We were charged to learn from them and all the other conflicts that we (the nation) participated in, pass on knowledge to our subordinates and train them to replace us before leaving the service. If we did our job correctly the force grew stronger by the knowledge and experience passed on for future generations to follow. If we failed our Army does not grow and becomes weaker due to others growing while we mark time. The fact that our Army is keeping us free and compelling the enemy to resort to other tactics attests to leaders teaching and subordinates learning the lessons of the past. Learn form your leaders, teach your subordinates and continue to pass on strengh before you leave the service. Our Country is counting on you to keep its forces strong."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Because the Army sucks my a$$"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

----On 03/09/05 15:28 GMT kenneth.sallee Wrote ----
Because the Army sucks my a$$


That was certainly an intelligent and well informed response. Bet your fellow soldiers are proud to serve with you."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

;) And you will be 1 of the 80K that ETS each year. You will not be missed, Bye Bye!!!!


----On 03/09/05 15:28 GMT kenneth.sallee Wrote ----
Because the Army sucks my a$$"

"E: Whats your thoughts of this

Ok My thoughts arent about the topic because I really don't know what your talking about. But I do know that most of you sound like big babies. If you want to be in the Army good stay if you don't then good leave. No one wantes to hear you complain, because some people make the army a life time Commitment."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

I love the military because I love America. Serving with other patriotic men and women who love their country motivates me like nothing else, and I fully intend to stay for as long as I can!!

HOOAHHH!!
SPC Spalding


"Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way!!""

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

No, actually I am getting Med Boarded out after 6 years of good, faithful service. This injury has made me hate the army. So yes, I am getting out, and getting paid....And as far as me not being missed......I might cry myself to sleep on that one...NOT! And don't worry, I'm not gonna miss this BS either so it works both ways.


----On 03/09/05 15:47 GMT michael.e.hair Wrote ----
;) And you will be 1 of the 80K that ETS each year. You will not be missed, Bye Bye!!!!


----On 03/09/05 15:28 GMT kenneth.sallee Wrote ----
Because the Army sucks my a$$"

"E: Whats your thoughts of this

Guy, I took 108 troops to Iraq for a year, of which about 1/3 rd shouldn't even be in the Army. That's just the way it is. They came in looking for college money and all the other benefits they seem to forget when their asses have to deploy. Then complain about the choice they made to come it. STFU!!!!!!!!!!

I personally don't give a rats ass if you/ they think the Army is BS or their experience has been bad. My point is 80 thousand troops will leave the Army annually. And another 80 thousand will join up. Thats the way it is. The Army will be here when you are dead and gone.

Good luck to you and I hope you do get paid.
"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

I can see both sides of the isuue. I'm sure there's more than 80K getting out each year, but I know there's less coming in. I'm in a shortage MOS (EOD) and I was an instructor at EOD school. Because of the soldiers and I say good ones getting out, we the Army has lowered the standards to replace these soldiers. These students are getting 4-5-6-7 chances to pass tests were in the past it was 1 time.
In my MOS there offering 100-300K a year jobs to do what an EOD soldier does now. I don't blame any EOD guy who bales and takes the cash. But the problem is that it takes about 3 good years to train an EOD tech and we are pumping out 9 month wonders and they're getting blown up while defusing IED's."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Well, what it boils down to is compensation for the service we perform for this country, not being adequate.

A professional athelete makes more money in 1 year than I did in 23 years service. Thats just wrong!!! No one can ever be accused of getting rich serving in the Army.

The Army recruit's people with incentives and usually it is the lower class that are inticed with these incentives. Thats just the way it is. We will never run out of the lower class to fill the ranks.
"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Yeah lots of reasons. Some legit some bogus. One reason I know from first hand knowledge is the cloud some got lost in concerning money and school. Cloud kinda blinded some to the fact that the army is a war machine instead of an banking institution. Get in the green cloud go where the green cloud goes. What recruits need to hear up front is join to serve your country not your wallet. I know there's alot of soldiers who feel they have been wronged, hey it happens on every job post, civilian or other. Suck it up, Drive On, do your duty, serve your time, retire, die and go to heaven. Hooah, Hooah!"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Wow SFC Hair.
"we will never run out of the lower class to fill the ranks"

Wait till Mr Freeman gets ahold of this thread. He's gonna call you a Marxist.


People getting out of the Army is nothing now. What matters is that we keep quality people IN the Army. As long as we arent tossing out the baby with the washwater, we will be fine.
Soldiers of all ranks dont get paid enough to do the jobs they do. Soldiering sucks sometimes, some folks arent a good fit with the Army. It is no surprise that Soldiers get disenchanted with the Army and get out after thier first enlistment. There is nothing inherently wrong with that."

"Money

There is no lower class. There's just people who haven't got rich yet.

Congress needs to give the Army leadership more discretion in allocating pay. This is not a union shop. I am a musician, who is lucky to run 2 miles in 16 minutes. I should not be earning as much as a ranger.

Elite professional killers should be paid commensurate with their duties and abilities. To get the top athletes and students, they need to up the pay for warrriors without worrying about "fairness" and pay grades. Somebody should get rich in the Army.
"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

I agree that a professional athelete makes a butt load of money, but their entertainers, am I wrong. Just like actors they make millions for shit!
Yes you're 100% right about the incentives the Army gives to new recruits. Besides SF, EOD has the highest bonus in the Army. That attracts people who are not qualified to do EOD, but the recruiters want numbers, the Army wants numbers, so the Army gets numbers by lowering the standards and now I'm worried about these morons getting killed because it's about money. I know this because we are lossing EOD guys to stupid mistakes that they commit. Knowing that they shouldn't be there in the first place.
The lower class is somewhat confusing. I grew up in a family that my parents make almost 200k a year. But I didn't know that the Army classifies anyone by social class. But that's just me, what do I know

SFC Wolak"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Because, they are a bunch of little, wimpy, baby, girlie men who miss their mommies and thought they could get some extra money for doing diddly. The truth sometimes hurts."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Disagree: I am old army and from what I have seen most of our Army has in deed become a Army of One. We have lost the espri de corp that we once had in team. We have become a touchie feelie Army made up of namsy pamsey individuals who would rather go home to mommy because we are too tough and we expect too much. I thank God that I had a DI who would kick my butt if I messed up, and I did. A Platoon SGT (who we now call DIs) who would run my butt ragged if I let my squad or platoon members down and God help me I didn't pull my share. I've had my buttons cut off of my fatigues because I failed to button a pocket, had to dry shave because I missed a spot. What this did do for me is to bring me home after two tours in Vietnam, two in Bosnia and one in Saudie. Also, as a SGT I can say I NEVER lost a man under my command because like my Platoon SGT I demanded and got the Best out of every one of my subordinates.

By the way I just retired in July 2004 after 43 years in the Military so some people might say I know what I am talking about. Sure our soldiers are smarter, and unfornatley we as leaders have not."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Thank you.....you know, being a free country, FREE SPEECH and all.


----On 03/10/05 03:20 GMT gregory.hipps Wrote ----
Nice post Specialist...:0 I wish you were in my platoon for just 1 day. You are entitled to your oppinion, but not to post it in such a immature, unprofessional, and totally disloyal manner. Please feel free to separate ASAP, we don't need attitudes like yours in the military.


----On 03/09/05 15:28 GMT kenneth.sallee Wrote ----
Because the Army sucks my a$$"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Ken-

It has nothing to do with free speech and everything to do with your lame Bart Simpson comment.

If you want your opinion to be taken seriously then state it with professionalism and points of fact, not guteral immaturity.

I will be the first to say I dislike many aspects of the modern Army. However I still believe in the Fact that we have the best Army on the planet dispite the flaws.

Too bad you can't seem to find the good and the Army Sux Ass for you. I guess that would make you a pessimist.

"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

My reasons:

1) My heart is not as motivated in it as it once was.
2) I am finishing up my 2nd year long deployments into hot combat zones
3) I feel I have served my country and helped it as I could in my 4.5 years. Now I am at a point where I feel that by helping myself. I want a stable life, to start a family and going into the civilian sector.
4) Pay sucks a$$. I understand and believe in selfless service but there comes a point when you need to break out of the military shell and grow.
5) I want to live and experience new things."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

All good reasons.
Thank You for being there when you were needed.
Go forth and live a long happy life, you have earned it.

"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Why stay in the Service?

My reasons for retiring after 21 years are the BS politics ad the favoritism shown at branch. It literally is "who you know, or who knows you" more so than what you know or where you've been. If I ask my branch for assistance, I get "needs of the Army". If someone else asks of the same grade and location, they get several choices.

Hey 21 years of honorable service is enough, I can go to work as a contractor knowing I served my country."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

The army may not be a corp, but it is certainly starting to behave like Enron and dozens others.

The big guys serve up the little guys when things srew up.

Every body is still trying to sleep with the person at the next desk

You will go along with any dumb ass plan the boss comes up hoping you can just hang on till retirement

You eat buckets of shit for decades, then somebody loots the retirement fund.

You bust your ass, fix the unfixable, win the unwinable, then the chick the boss has been sleeping with gets the promotion and the bonus.

Some jive EO beef will collapse the company and the " victum " is set for life

Coicendence ?"

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Oh lighten up. How many old viet-nam photos have you seen with " FTA " painted on the side of the steel pot.

It's a soldier's right to bitch, one of the few rights he's got.

I used to get a bunch of super-lifers in my unit coming to me all the damn time bitching about the bitching.

Look, I tell you what I told them:

A bitching soldier is like a ticking time bomb.
When a soldier suddenly stops bitching, that bomb has just stopped ticking.

When the ticking stops, you had better look under your own rack and make sure there isn't a present there with the pin out and the spoon missing."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

LOL

Yeah, lots of people in my unit think I am completely nuts, and will come in one day shooting.

MY answer? If I stop laughing, it is time to start running.

Why am I getting out on 1 Dec 2006, with ten years of service?

LEt me count the ways......

1 Time for something new. I stayed in this long for the wife and kids. Wife left, and took the kids. IF I get promoted, the bitch gets more paid.

2. I have changed MOSs three times. I have plenty of varied experience, and lots of good Army knowledge and technical knowledge. Who gets promoted? SUck ass board jockeys who can't do their job.

3. Politics.

4. I have broken my body over the years.

5. Tired of this: Soldier A takes initiative, accomplishes a mission with no guidance from his NCOs or Officers. IF successful, he gets little credit, cuz everyone with rank in arms reach is sopping up their share of the glory. IF he screws it up, he has just as many people falling over themselves to hang him.

6. EO complaints misused.

7. Dont Ask Dont Tell gets rid of good soldiers, yet we have fat useless PT failures that you cant get rid of.

8. No compensation for working off shifts, extra hours, extra duties, ect. SO in essance, the slacker gets paid as much as the hard worker...Now where is MR. Freeman and his cries of Marxism?

9. The good old boy system, and the My Brotha system.

10. The nice tits, heres your E5 system.

11. Just tired of getting held back for having an honest opinion, and not kissing ass."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Why will I probably get out after my 6 year enlistment (if stop loss doesn't hold me back).

1. I want to start a family and see my children grow up. Some people can keep re-enlisting knowing that they will likely miss out on a large portion of their childs life. Not me. My family comes first because they will be there long after I'm out of the Army.

2. Army politics. This can include anything from awards, promotions, reductions, chapters, ect... ect... My first experience with this was when my supervisor, who was a hard working get it done female soldier, was chaptered out because she was overweight. If she can do her job then why kick her out. Top didn't like her that's why. Others include watching people get DUI's and still make or keep their E-6 while one of my well deserving soldiers was passed over for promotion because of a rocky start in a board.

3. Self serving commanders. My platoon (my section to be more accurate) has been short manned for a year and a half and the officers of the unit haven't done a thing to get more people into the unit. A previous commander went so far as to tell us he was taking his time with the situation so he could cover his own ass. In the mean time the 14 or so shift workers in my platoon have been driven nearly to the breaking point (some over it) by being worked 70-80 hours a week on average going on a year now. At least 2 soldiers in my platoon worked 12 hrs a day 7 days a week for 3 months straight, no shit. No one doing a damn thing.

4. Screwed up priorities. When I have a mission to do and I need to get communications online I don't need to be calling someone every 15 to 20 minutes giving a status report so they can tell the next person up the line whats going on just to look good. There's many more examples but I know everyone has experienced this in their career.

5. Preferential treatment because of who you know. This can affect anything from housing to boards to promotions.

6. Pay inequality. Everyone gripes about this but the point still stands.

7. Freedom of movement. I am the type of person who likes to get up and go. If it's the weekend and I want to go farther than 50 k from my house then why should I have to notify a single person or have my trip approved by the 1SG or commander. Am I on probation?

8. Did I mention Army politics?

There are more that I can't think of right now. There are several reasons I might stay in the Army but my experience so far hasn't been very favorable. I'm sure plenty of people have had it worse, in fact I know of many. But I have to work with what I've got. I also have to think of my wife and future kids. That's probably the biggest factor here. The Army would have to make some serious promises to keep me at this point. But who knows, I might change my mind."

"RE: Whats your thoughts of this

Oh lord, please protect thee from thy optimists"

[bobthebuilder]

Good read.


I guess that somewhat is my problem, I see people portesting against the war I feel like they are protesting against the soldiers, I guess it is just a response to the Vietnam Era protesters...

I don't know anything of Army politics, im not in the army and rearly have contact with people who are in the Army, especially any high ranking officers.


You must understand that when you sign a contract with the military you should knwo what you are doing, its all explained in the contract, your tours will last as long as are required with as many deployments as needed. I don't know what more to say, I guess these kids don't take their time to actually think about what they are signing.

[villain]

Well I joined about 3 months before Sept 11th 2001. (although I suspected Bush would get us into some bullshit). And some of us just don't believe in this war... especially after that whole WMD thing. And some of us (especially senior NCOs) only go back because we feel an obligation to protect our fellow soldiers. Some of us are just plain tired. I don't know... there's all sorts of reasons.

I think protestors these days are putting a priority on letting people know that they support the troops, just not the war.

[!@#$%]

Originally posted by bobthebuilder@Apr 12 2005, 01:44 PM
I guess that somewhat is my problem, I see people portesting against the war I feel like they are protesting against the soldiers, I guess it is just a response to the Vietnam Era protesters...

I don't know anything of Army politics, im not in the army and rearly have contact with people who are in the Army, especially any high ranking officers.

You must understand that when you sign a contract with the military you should knwo what you are doing, its all explained in the contract, your tours will last as long as are required with as many deployments as needed. I don't know what more to say, I guess these kids don't take their time to actually think about what they are signing.
Quoted post


i'm glad you relaxed a little bob.
yes, i understand your frustration with protesters.
please know that i fully support the guys who have dedicated themselves to this action regardless of consequence. it's a terrible position we've put them in, and i feel shitty for them.
i know vets (vietnam, gulfwarI and II) and army grunts so i have some idea of what they might be experiencing in all this.

i understand the contract those kids signed, but i also understand their position.
when i thought about signing up years ago, it was pretty much for college money, and i did a lot of soul searchng about whether or not it was the right thing for ME to do, which i eventually decided not to do.

it's funny too, back then, before september 11, i sued to wonder who we would even go to war against.

i know saddam was a piece of shit
i know the iraqis deserve to govern themselves
but invading a sovereign nation struck me as a dangerous turn in our foreign policy, especially one so oil rich..
and occupying a middle eastern country seemed like it would fuel the flames of hate against the u.s.

that is my most basic problem with the war.
i see the soldiers as victims of this reckless foreign policy
(and whether they agree with the war or not fine, i still think they should come home)

what to do?
i don't know.
but i think if the u.s. got out now, it would help curb at least some of the insurgent violence by simply removing the catalyst.

i started the "12oz soldier appreciation" thread in channel zero months and months ago
so don't get angry at me for hating my government
last time i checked, that was allowed in this country.

[KaBar2]

The real problem with military service, from my viewpoint, is that you can't quit, and it doesn't pay enough.

Get out, and become a mercenary soldier for one of those "private military contractor" companies. Seems like the best of situations for a soldier. As far as I can see, "All-Volunteer Army" means poorly paid mercenaries.

[villain]

Originally posted by KaBar2@Apr 15 2005, 02:21 AM
As far as I can see, "All-Volunteer Army" means poorly paid mercenaries.
Quoted post


:lol2:
With companies like Blackwater Security getting paid $1000 a day we are feeling awfully cheap.

Most of us don't want to fight for a living, just do our duty and go home to our families at the end of the day (or month, or year).

The majority of those guys becoming mercenaries are former green berets, rangers, delta force, etc...

[hobo knife]

Originally posted by bobthebuilder@Apr 12 2005, 11:55 AM
Ok, Ok, you got me there. New rule.

Unless you are actually part of the fight on the front lines in the military, you have no right to complain about Iraq. A lot of people think they are protesting to help out the soldiers, guess fucking what, we don't want it, 95% of the soldiers in Iraq don't have a problem with being there fact is 100% of the people in Iraq are volunteers and 75% volunteered to go to serve in Iraq.

If you want to protest about something protest about the lack of armored humvees and shit, that’s what kind of help we need. We don't need fagmos talking shit against what we are doing, the world has made it choice your comments are all based on news you hear, it needs not be main stream media, every media outlet has something to gain and they will always bias towards that.

I suggest you sign up to the military, go to Iraq (or Afghanistan), SEE HOW IT REALLY IS out there. Maybe your news outlets didn't show that the people of Iraq are happy with what we did, people who had their families killed still support us? Thats right, what kind of news would that be? BAD news thats why it wont be posted. Based on intl there is about 20k insurgents and those supporting insurgents in Iraq.... guess how many fucking people there are in Iraq.

There is no discussion here, you are a repeat of what you see.

Do you have any political experience? And im not talking about running for your local block leader.
Quoted post



alright, I gotta jump in here..."the world has made its choice?" which world are you talking about?? honestly...by "world" do you mean the coalition (third reich)...

guess how many people are in Iraq? hmm, I dont know, I'd say since the war started there are a lot less Iraqis and possibely a few more americans than before the war...I guess once you kill 100,000 citizens of a country and destroy most of their infrastructure they are happy with pretty much what ever you give them (ie. new schools, new oil refineries, new power plants)

[bobthebuilder]

100,000 dead Iraqis is an absurd figure

[bobthebuilder]

Originally posted by KaBar2@Apr 15 2005, 02:21 AM
The real problem with military service, from my viewpoint, is that you can't quit, and it doesn't pay enough.

Get out, and become a mercenary soldier for one of those "private military contractor" companies.*** Seems like the best of situations for a soldier.*** As far as I can see, "All-Volunteer Army" means poorly paid mercenaries.
Quoted post


problem with that is that those companies will hire just about anybody, I dont want to be stuck with a bodybuilder who had 3 weeks weapons training and got a blackwater T-Shirt, I was in Force Reconissance for 3 years and I will not work with anyone who has less than 3 years of any SF expiriance.

Blackwater also just takes the regular grunts, they are good but they don't know small team tactics and small team dependancy, they are trained on the fact that you have more than one squad to support you, SF teaches you to work alone-if your little team fails, there is no back-up.

[!@#$%]

Iraqi war deaths 'total 13,000'
US air raids targeted military and government facilities


About 13,000 Iraqis, including as many as 4,300 civilians, were killed during the major combat phase of the Iraq war, according to a US research group.

It said the estimates were based on US combat data, battlefield press reports, and Iraqi hospital surveys.

Despite the advent of precision weapons, more civilians died in the latest conflict than in the 1991 war, the group suggests.

The US military has published no details on Iraqi deaths in either war.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3223523.stm


OR

"War may have killed 10,000 civilians, researchers say":


At least 5,000 civilians may have been killed during the invasion of Iraq, an independent research group has claimed. As more evidence is collated, it says, the figure could reach 10,000.


Iraq Body Count (IBC), a volunteer group of British and US academics and researchers, compiled statistics on civilian casualties from media reports and estimated that over 10,000 civilians died in the conflict.

Minimum: 17384

Maximum: 19770

http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/

[hobo knife]

Originally posted by bobthebuilder@Apr 15 2005, 11:57 AM
100,000 dead Iraqis is an absurd figure
Quoted post


true...but the main point there is that we dismantled the entire country and killed thousands or tens of thousands of innocent people as well as thousands of "freedom fighters"
...in the months after the "liberation" most of the country was without water, without power, food was scarce, jobs were lost, schools were shut down, hundreds of thousands of middle-class Iraqis were turned into refugees living out in rural areas to avoid being a victim of another US airstrike...
..2 years later the country is still suffering from a military takeover...so, it's really no surprise that there are a lot of Iraqis who are happy that their schools are finally being rebuilt. But that doesn't mean they are glad their wife or husband was killed by a precision airstrike. Or that their country could now be considered an american territory.

[KaBar2]

The vast majority of Iraq is peaceful, and life is improving every day. There are isolated incidences of attacks here and there, but the loss of five or ten soldiers a day is far from a crisis. In the U.S., about 1,200 people a day die from cigarette-related diseases, and about thirty a day die from drunk-driving accidents. I don't see any snivelling about tobacco casualties.

The bottom line is that the U.S. and it's allies overthrew a brutal dictatorship and seized control of the country with an INSIGNIFICANT CASUALTY RATE. The casualty rate is about 1.4 %, if we have, what, 140,000 troops in-country? We'd lose that many from alcohol-related accidents on liberty, probably.

If the former Baathist fascist dead-enders and the Sunni crybabies would lay down their weapons, Iraq would have lights, power, clean water, schools and hospitals, etc. in less than a year. All they are doing is running up their tab, and when it's finally all over, they are going to owe quite a bill. I'm willing to bet Iraq pays for it's own liberation, eventually.

I also think that as soon as the Iraqi Army is strong enough to defend Iraq against terrorism, we are outta there.

[POIESIS]

i feel like a skipping cd but the bottom line is that 'removing the tyrant' for the iraqi masses was not a war aim until it became politically convenient.
furthermore, the argument that hussein had to be removed becuz he was a)a
depraved dictator, and/or b)was a threat to the US and might have WMD is totally out of the realm of legitimacy. nobody considered him a threat in the region, not even israel. the US supported him for decades when he was a much bigger threat and had all sorts of weapons capabilities, up and past the
height of his depravity, with full knowledge of his actions. in fact, support
increased after his most heinous atrocities. i don't know how this isn't a central
issue in any person's argument for the war.
it's true, once the iraqi army is set up things could simmer down and the
US will 'pull out', as in stop policing, but still have 3 or 4 fully operational military bases inside the country. after this, iraq will start to resemble, once again, an
iron fisted dictatorship, with a pro-US strongman at the helm.

[SPORTO]

BOMB
BOMB
BOMB
BOMB
BOMB
BOMB
BOMB
BOMB
BOMB

[SPORTO]

civilian casualties

17384 est min
19770 est max

If you could sacrifice yourself in return
for these civilian casualties resurection,
would you?

No! because your westernised ass
is more valid than than a million
middle eastern humans.

I mean they wear scarfs on thier head for fuck sake.


I belive this to be the honest view of more than just
the 55% or so of Americans that voted for Bush.


and those BOMBS (yesterday) were just the ones that were reported
in U.S. media,

[CACashRefund]

Its not that, its because we dont know them. Would those same iraqis trade one of their lives for the dead of iran?

More than likely no, because its human nature not to care about people you dont know. Thats why people who care for each other are hailed as heroes and shit. Mother theresa for example, she went around helping people in the shittiest places and we call her a saint, to her it was nothing because she just thought it was the thing to do.

Im not going to lie, i dont give a fuck about those iraqis. Im here trying to get by each day. Yeah im not shit poor or have soldiers around my neighborhood barge in my house whenever they can. But i dont live in iraq,so i dont care. And that goes the same for alot of people. Yeah, its fucked up, but look at this way, why should i care about people across the earth who i will never meet. When theres people who need help right around the corner from me.

And by the way i didnt vote for bush.

[Theodore Huxtable]

US Forces in Iraq Come Close to Capturing Zarqawi
By Robert Raffaele & Amy Katz
Washington, D.C.
27 April 2005

The U.S. Defense Department confirms that U.S. forces in Iraq just missed capturing one of the most-wanted terrorists in that country, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, during a raid which netted two Zarqawi associates. It was an Iraqi tip which led to that operation and U.S. military officials say they are getting more and more intelligence information from Iraqis.

Richard Myers, the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the report, but he would not reveal any operational details. General Myers told reporters at the Pentagon Tuesday the near capture was due to an increase in information coming from Iraqi civilians.

"I think, in general, intelligence is getting better. Having said that, we still don't have Zarqawi, and there are other leaders we are looking for as well. But, in general, it's getting much better," says General Myers.

General Myers used the shooting down of a commercial helicopter in Iraq last week as an example. It was a tip from an eyewitness that alerted U.S. military officials to that attack. General Myers says because of information from Iraqis, ten suspects are now in U.S. custody, just a few days after the helicopter was hit by a missile.

The recent attempt to capture Zarqawi also began with a tip from an Iraqi source. Though they haven't officially been made public, ABC News obtained details of the operation -- from a senior U.S. military official. According to that source, Zarqawi was heading to a secret meeting in Ramadi on February 20. Checkpoints were set up around the perimeter of the city, and predator drones tracked movements in and out of Ramadi. According to the source, authorities pulled over a car approaching a checkpoint. And almost immediately, a pickup truck nearly a kilometer behind the car, turned around, and headed in the opposite direction. That convinced officials Zarqawi was in that truck. U.S. teams stopped it several kilometers later. Zarqawi was not in the vehicle by then, apparently he had jumped out, but his driver and his bodyguard were. So was more than $100,000 worth of Euros. But perhaps the biggest discovery was Zarqawi's computer, which a source says was packed with information that could help track the terrorist leader.

Thomas Sanderson, from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, says "it could yield a tremendous amount of clues as to the nature of his organization, the insurgency, where they get their money, where their operations are planned and carried out."

The Jordanian-born terrorist is the self-described leader of "Al Qaida in Iraq," a group which has claimed responsibility for multiple bombings, assassinations, kidnappings, and attacks on aircraft. U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said Tuesday, Zarqawi's network is responsible for a large number of attacks in Iraq, despite its small size.

"In terms of lethality, I would rank him quite high. He may be doing it through proxies, through criminals, in some cases. But there have been quite a few suicide attacks in Iraq, and that is not something that criminals tend to get up in the morning and say, 'Gee, I think I'll do engage in a suicide attack," says Donald Rumsfeld.

Secretary Rumsfeld added that Sunni insurgents are also not likely to carry out suicide attacks. That, he said, is being done by extremists, mostly coming into Iraq from other countries.

[CACashRefund]

Report fuels Iraq WMD debate

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A long-awaited report which concluded Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of illicit weapons at the time of the U.S. invasion has intensified the debate about the decision to go to war.

The CIA report, authored by Charles Duelfer, who advises the director of central intelligence on Iraqi weapons, said Iraq's WMD program had essentially destroyed in 1991 and Saddam ended Iraq's nuclear program after the 1991 Gulf War.

The report did say, however, that Iraq worked hard to cheat on United Nations-imposed sanctions and retain the capability to resume production of weapons of mass destruction at some time in the future.

In the U.S., Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, seized on the report as political ammunition against the Bush administration.

"Despite the efforts to focus on Saddam's desires and intentions, the bottom line is Iraq did not have either weapon stockpiles or active production capabilities at the time of the war," Rockefeller said in a press release.

"The report does further document Saddam's attempts to deceive the world and get out from under the sanctions, but the fact remains, the sanctions combined with inspections were working and Saddam was restrained."

British Prime Minister Tony Blair said the report demonstrated the U.N. sanctions were not working and Saddam was "doing his best" to get around them.

He said the report made clear that there was "every intention" on Saddam's part to develop WMD and he "never had any intention of complying with U.N. resolutions."

But Britain's opposition Conservative Party said the report again proved Blair had lied about Saddam's weapons.

Tory leader Michael Howard said the premier "did not tell the truth about the intelligence he received."

The Liberal Democrats said the report was further proof that the government had been wrong to take Britain to war. The party's foreign affairs spokesman, Sir Menzies Campbell, said: "Brick by brick, the government's case for going to war is being demolished."

Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Barham Saleh backed Blair's remarks, pointing to evidence that Saddam was diverting money from the U.N. food-for-oil humanitarian program to buy new weapons.

"We know Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. We know Saddam Hussein used weapons of mass destruction. Those who see evidence should go to Halabja and to the mass graves.

"Saddam Hussein was evil. Saddam Hussein was himself a weapon of mass destruction."

Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda said Japan -- a staunch U.S. ally -- stood by its decision to back the war because Iraq still posed a threat because it had previously been developing such weapons and it was not clear whether it had abandoned those programs.

"The Japanese government concludes that the nonexistent of facilities would not question the responsibility of our government, and we believe other governments reached the same conclusion," Hosoda told reporters.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard also refused to apologize for Australia's role in the Iraq war.

In a nationally televised speech Thursday ahead of Saturday's national elections, Howard did not mention the war, to which he sent 2,000 Australian troops.

But he remained defiant as journalists later questioned him about the report.

"I stand by the decision we took in relation to Iraq," Howard said. "I have no regrets at all about the fact that Saddam Hussein is no longer leading Iraq."

David Kay, former Bush-appointed head of the Iraq Survey Group, talked to CNN Thursday about the report issued by his successor.

He said "the most meaningful conclusion of" the report "is the failure of our intelligence services and the intelligence services of other western countries" to determine that Iraq had no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction nor means to build them.

"We need to take that lesson to heart so a next president does not have to go through the same trauma that this one has when you turn out the reasons for going to war to be so different than the actual facts," he said on CNN's American Morning.

Speaking on the campaign trail in Pennsylvania, Bush maintained Wednesday that the war was the right thing to do and that Iraq stood out as a place where terrorists might get weapons of mass destruction.

"There was a risk, a real risk, that Saddam Hussein would pass weapons or materials or information to terrorist networks, and in the world after September the 11th, that was a risk we could not afford to take," Bush said.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/07/wmd.report.reax/

[Dick Quickwood]

G.I. Denied Conscientious-Objector Status (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050430/ap_on_re_us/objecting_soldier)

sounds like they're trying to make an example out of this guy, due to the impending shortage of soldiers (or is there already a shortage)

[SPORTO]

NOT CAUSE I HATE YA

HOORAY, HOE, FUCK'N... RA

ANOTHER 25 BOMBES DETONATED IN IRAQ, ON U.S. FUCKS & (CIVIL SETUPS) SUNI PEOPLES TODAY.

ITS THE BIGGEST LOSS OFF LIFE (MEDIA REPORTED) SINCE FEB LAST YEAR '75+,' AND IT COMES BRONZE IN THE NEWS REPORTS..



?????



NAUGHTY BY NATURE

[Theodore Huxtable]

STUDENT SUSPENDED FROM SCHOOL FOR TALKING ON CELLPHONE TO MOM IN IRAQ

Posted on Sat, May. 07, 2005

Knight Ridder Newspapers


COLUMBUS, Ga. — Kevin Francois gave up his lunch break to talk with his mother, but it ended up costing him the rest of the school year.

Francois, a 17-year-old junior at Spencer High School, was suspended for disorderly conduct after he was told to give up his cell phone while talking to his mother, who is deployed in Iraq.

The incident happened when Francois received a call from his mother at 12:30 p.m. Wednesday, which he said was his lunch break. Francois said he went outside for better reception.

Cell phones are allowed on campus but may not be used during school hours. When a teacher told him to hang up, Francois refused. He said he told the teacher, “This is my mom in Iraq. I’m not about to hang up on my mom.”

Alfred Parham, assistant principal, said the teen’s suspension was based on his defiant reaction.

[KaBar2]

This principal was a dumb ass, and he got about 500 pissed-off emails and phone calls about the decision to suspend the kid for 10 days, so he reduced it to three, and the kid returns to school on Monday, probably to be treated like a hero by his fellow students.

This sort of decision gets created by the "If I let you talk on your cell-phone to your mother in Iraq, I'll have to let everybody else talk on their cell phone to their crack dealer" thing. If we didn't live in such a PC world, children of mothers in Iraq would get a pass on the cell phone thing, and everybody else could just shut up about it. Sheesh!

Bad call, Principal. Five yard penalty.

[SF1]

Originally posted by hobo knife+Apr 15 2005, 05:42 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (hobo knife - Apr 15 2005, 05:42 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-bobthebuilder@Apr 15 2005, 11:57 AM
100,000 dead Iraqis is an absurd figure
Quoted post


true...but the main point there is that we dismantled the entire country and killed thousands or tens of thousands of innocent people as well as thousands of "freedom fighters"
...in the months after the "liberation" most of the country was without water, without power, food was scarce, jobs were lost, schools were shut down, hundreds of thousands of middle-class Iraqis were turned into refugees living out in rural areas to avoid being a victim of another US airstrike...
..2 years later the country is still suffering from a military takeover...so, it's really no surprise that there are a lot of Iraqis who are happy that their schools are finally being rebuilt. But that doesn't mean they are glad their wife or husband was killed by a precision airstrike. Or that their country could now be considered an american territory.
Quoted post
[/b][/quote]

Exactly!

[SF1]

Is Bobthebuilder still alive? I aint seen a post by him in a minute.

[SF1]

Originally posted by POIESIS@Apr 17 2005, 01:49 AM
the bottom line is that 'removing the tyrant' for the iraqi masses was not a war aim until it became politically convenient.
furthermore, the argument that hussein had to be removed becuz he was a)a
depraved dictator, and/or b)was a threat to the US and might have WMD is totally out of the realm of legitimacy.
Quoted post


What fucks me up is that you don't hear about how Bush is a depraved war-mongering dictator with WMD that needs to be "disarmed" due to the fact that he is the BIGGEST threat to the world.

[SPORTO]

...

these are the shoulders that are 'meant'
to be carrying the weight of the world ..

[SPORTO]

I think Koehler had to take a leak
& maybe Jintao was hold'n his dick.

[SF1]

Originally posted by SPORTO@May 10 2005, 12:07 AM
...

these are the shoulders that are 'meant'
to be carrying the weight of the world ..
Quoted post


Well then we're fucked! :yuck:

[(-_-)HELLO(-_-)]

;) U BEARLY NOTICE HOW FUKED UP IT IS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[NoamChomsky]

i just saw a really good documentary about reservists called up to war called "off to war" at the tribeca film festival. i've been in the army for like 3 years now and been to iraq 3 times. twice with ranger batt and once with the 82nd. i feel fucking worn down. alot of the leadership is getting out not to mention all the joes getting out. the back door draft shit is kicking in seeing alot of old faces who got out that were forced back in. fuckin sucks.

[SF1]

Hang in there man.

[CACashRefund]

http://www.unit731media.com/frames/center.htm
This site has a grip of videos that show whats going on in iraq, worth a look around.

[BobTheBuilder.]

Surprise surprise, more assholes still talking about shit that they don't know jack fuck about because they're not in Iraq.

[prophet1]

Originally posted by BobTheBuilder.@May 24 2005, 12:27 PM
Surprise surprise, more assholes still talking about shit that they don't know jack fuck about because they're not in Iraq.
Quoted post



Bob the whatever ... i dont respect you just because you SAY u experienced some shit in Iraq and blah blah blah ... and if you did, SO WHAT?? WHO GIVES A FUCK??? ... if u went, u volunteered, they called you, whatever, i dont give a shit, you are still just another stupid motherfucker, a meaningless fucking puppet, that got tricked into serving the RACIST,NAZI,IMPERIALIST army of ameriKKKA, that has done nothing for the Iraqi people ... you said "they have build thousands of schools" .. WHAT GOOD IS TO HAVE ALL THOSE SCHOOLS WHEN HALF OF MILLION OF IRAQI CHILDREN HAVE DIED FROM 1991 TO 2000 BECAUSE OF WAR AND THE US EMBARGOS. Think you idiot ... this invasion is a bigger plan than to "rebuild" or "free" a nation, an Empire needs resources to survive, YOUR FUCKIN SUV NEEDS TO RUN.. its not coincidence that the US is invading the country where 90% of the worlds oil comes from.

[BobTheBuilder.]

Originally posted by prophet1+May 24 2005, 02:48 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (prophet1 - May 24 2005, 02:48 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-BobTheBuilder.@May 24 2005, 12:27 PM
Surprise surprise, more assholes still talking about shit that they don't know jack fuck about because they're not in Iraq.
Quoted post



Bob the whatever ... i dont respect you just because you SAY u experienced some shit in Iraq and blah blah blah ... and if you did, SO WHAT?? WHO GIVES A FUCK??? ... if u went, u volunteered, they called you, whatever, i dont give a shit, you are still just another stupid motherfucker, a meaningless fucking puppet, that got tricked into serving the RACIST,NAZI,IMPERIALIST army of ameriKKKA, that has done nothing for the Iraqi people ... you said "they have build thousands of schools" .. WHAT GOOD IS TO HAVE ALL THOSE SCHOOLS WHEN HALF OF MILLION OF IRAQI CHILDREN HAVE DIED FROM 1991 TO 2000 BECAUSE OF WAR AND THE US EMBARGOS. Think you idiot ... this invasion is a bigger plan than to "rebuild" or "free" a nation, an Empire needs resources to survive, YOUR FUCKIN SUV NEEDS TO RUN.. its not coincidence that the US is invading the country where 90% of the worlds oil comes from.
Quoted post
[/b][/quote]

You fucking retard, shut up. I stated numerous times that we did invade Iraq for its oil. You're a fucking genious for figuring that out. Why were embargos placed on Iraq? Saddam. Yes we are a Nazi Imperialist nationt that is looking to kill idiots like you. Fucking idiot, take a History class and learn what Nazisim is. Yes, I got tricked. You reflect nothing but stupidity. Compare Gross income per capita of Iraqis now and Gross capita before. Despite your retarded observations, the MAJORITY of Iraq is stable and peaceful. Im not going to sit here and argue with you because you already have your mind set. Now.. locate the nearest bridge and jump head first- prefrebly aim for jagged rocks.

[prophet1]

[

You fucking retard, shut up. I stated numerous times that we did invade Iraq for its oil. You're a fucking genious for figuring that out. Why were embargos placed on Iraq? Saddam. Yes we are a Nazi Imperialist nationt that is looking to kill idiots like you. Fucking idiot, take a History class and learn what Nazisim is. Yes, I got tricked. You reflect nothing but stupidity. Compare Gross income per capita of Iraqis now and Gross capita before. Despite your retarded observations, the MAJORITY of Iraq is stable and peaceful. Im not going to sit here and argue with you because you already have your mind set. Now.. locate the nearest bridge and jump head first- prefrebly aim for jagged rocks.
Quoted post
[/quote]






compare nothing you mindless drone, death, racism and genocide is not acceptable, stop trying to convinve yourself that you did something productive in IRAQ, look at reality you shit head, you fucked up .......... " locate the nearest bridge and jump head first- prefrebly aim for jagged rocks." ....... thats how fucked up in the head you are ... after war trauma ...

[BobTheBuilder.]

Death is not acceptable? Genocide? Go look in the dictionary to see what Genocide means. Quit smoking crack which is laced with pcp and served on LSD paper you dipshit, people die, get over it. Join the fucking Peace corps or something.

There is/was a recent genocide situation in Africa... did you bother to check on that? No. shut the fuck up.

[SF1]

Prophet has a point. Stop convincing yourself that you were sent there to do "good". You are a soldier of an evil empire not some "hero" nation spreading Democracy, shit WE aint even a democracy anymore. Nobodies blaiming you for doing your job but don't get it twisted, we aint helping nobody over there.

[BobTheBuilder.]

How would you know? Were you in Iraq? Don't forget that EVERY news outlet has something to gain from what they report, this is all you guys watch, a fixed opinion of some news outlet... even those far out there right wing news outlets you so despratley rely on have something to gain.

Go on the DOD website and read about the positive things from Iraq. Also visit Military.com forums to see non biased pictures brought from Iraq by soldiers WHO SERVED THERE. You can see positive changes, kids going to school like they should and their parents making enough money to support a family... shit like that, shit that wasn't there before we invaded.

How come non of you guys state facts about Saddam killing thousands of his people, slaughtering them? At least we don't kill civilians on purpose.

[SF1]

Originally posted by BobTheBuilder.@May 25 2005, 12:14 AM
How would you know? Were you in Iraq? Don't forget that EVERY news outlet has something to gain from what they report, this is all you guys watch, a fixed opinion of some news outlet... even those far out there right wing news outlets you so despratley rely on have something to gain.

Go on the DOD website and read about the positive things from Iraq. Also visit Military.com forums to see non biased pictures brought from Iraq by soldiers WHO SERVED THERE. You can see positive changes, kids going to school like they should and their parents making enough money to support a family... shit like that, shit that wasn't there before we invaded.

How come non of you guys state facts about Saddam killing thousands of his people, slaughtering them? At least we don't kill civilians on purpose.
Quoted post


What's funny is that every person that I've talked to that's in the millitary and going back and forth to Iraq has a brainwashed hatred for them. They talk about "blasting Habeeb" like it's some fun game and refuse to recognise that "Habeeb" is a human being fighting for his country and culture while we are only there to rape their country and culture. Also the heads I'm talking about don't really make much of a distinction between millitants and civilians they are all animals to them. And yes, civilians are killed on purpose often.


"How come non of you guys state facts about Saddam killing thousands of his people, slaughtering them? "--->

Because it's none of America's buisiness and it has NOTHING to do with why were there. We have a fucking coup going on right here in the US. We have our own tyrant dictator destroying our country and outlawing freedom and soon thanks to the Patriot Act, common everyday people will start being disapeared, jailed, executed for everything from drug crimes to speaking out against the government like we are doing right now, what the fuck we care about another tyrant in another culture on the other side of the planet?


And another thing, if civil war breaks out here, who's side are you gonna be on the Army's or the Peoples? Just out of curiosity.

[BobTheBuilder.]

We will be on the Shitt'es and Kurds side. Just because you speak to a few soldiers does not mean that they represent anything. Once again, you are in no position to speak about the killing of civilians on purpose. If you kill an unarmed civilian you are charged with first degree murder just as you would be back here.

Their culture? Fuck their culture, it revolves around beheadings, robbing females of rights and slavery.

The world is revolving, you're not. Get over it, we got in and we will finish the job. If there will be a civil war it will be better for US from a military standpoint. Currently, not every Sunni is an enemy, if civil war occurs any male of fighting age who posseses a weapon or poses a threat will be killed.

I personally don't approve of any 'unarmed civilian' killing. A military member recently got 10 year in prison for shooting some 18 year old kid or something of that nature who had stacked weapons in his house such as RPG IEDS and had possesion of numerous humvee and U.S. military manuals. In which case, the person who shot teh unarmed kid did the right thing, you kill U.S. personel and you get killed. Never the less, the soldier who was told by his country to fight is serving time in Prison.

[BobTheBuilder.]

Also I just read a Rolling Stone article stating that a mass grave was found in Iraq with 30,000 people who were murdered.

Fuck Saddam. Crimes by Muslims against Muslims is forbidden by Islam.

[villain]

Originally posted by BobTheBuilder.@May 24 2005, 07:57 PM
We will be on the Shitt'es and Kurds side.



Watch your step. This is the kind of attitude that foments civil war.

[BobTheBuilder.]

Based on my knowledge, that statment is correct. But let me go into more detail.. The Kurds want their own government and country ak. "Kurdsitan" . Problem resides in the fact that they wanna take some oil fields with em... anywho this won't be relevant till the sunnis are made the imperial bitches.

A civil war in Iraq would bring support from mmmmmaaaannny ME countries... for example since Iran is like 98% Shitte, they will support the Shittes... While im on that, if some of you guys don't klnow why the Sunnis are killing the Shittes its because the new Shitte gov is heavily influenced by Iran- or at least they think it is... right now its influenced by the US but once we leave then Iran will take that spot.

Anyways back on track, since the countries will all wanna kill each other, we will not be involved in the fighting but we will support the Kurds no matter what- they have been our Iraqi friends for the longest. (For the followers of MERO: They are the Realest Niggas on the Block.) But we won't have to support them individually they are on the Shittes side.

While all of this is happening, we will be securing the oil pipelines.
More to come later... im going to deposit my semen.

[POIESIS]

whoa BOB!!
good to have you back lashing out and serving everybody
a big dose of mini-dink tantrums! YAY!

btw, all this whining about biased news sources, and your answer
is to visit the what? oh yea, the pentagon's website.
smooth move x-lax.

[BobTheBuilder.]

Thats the only place where you will see anything positive. Because bad shit sells. Know it. If you want me to stop posting here all you gotta do is ask...

[POIESIS]

as true as that may be, i'm more inclined to believe the fact of
the matter is war, and specifically iraq, was(from the get go), is, and will likely continue to be lopsidedly bad.
i'm not holding my breath for this great triumph of
democracy in iraq, especially the way it's been foisted, and by who.
i personally believe that vision, while commendable, is
very, very faulty. but what do i know! i never served and i read a whole
lot of varied, make-believe news stories.
as far as you posting, you are completely welcome..it seems to me you like to come around once in awhile and try to steamroll people, alot of the time with insults..if that's your perogative, then so be it.
you're not gonna steamroll me though.

[prophet1]

Originally posted by BobTheBuilder.@May 24 2005, 10:19 PM
Thats the only place where you will see anything positive. Because bad shit sells. Know it. If you want me to stop posting here all you gotta do is ask...
Quoted post




BOBTHEBUILDER ...... why dont you build a fucking rocket launcher with one of your water pipes at home, use some TNT, stick the pipe up your ass... lite it up, and put an END to your shitty life. Because it seems like you dont have SHIT to do but to sit your fat ass infront of your PC monitor, and waste the energy and blood that flows through your hands, by typing your desperate and angry comments in defense of YOUR ARMY...

fuck you and your "POSITIVITY" ... MILITARY.COM ??? thats your un-biased news resource?? ..... dont shit your self, please!!

[POIESIS]

^that type of shit is just as bad.
are we intelligent adults around here or not?