And boy-oh-boy, don't we know how successful revolutionary governments are against brutal, murderous dictators!
Romania and the rest of eastern Europe. And historically france, russia, Cuba, china, turkey, etc. etc.
Quote:
But Gore had your idea in the presidential debates, he called for "robust support" of revolutionary groups within Iraq.
That way you can just arm other people, have no control over their actions and act like you aren't involved. Kind of like Reagan in South America.
hehe, you really are stupid, arn't you. Back then you were mostly arming people to fight against democratic goals.
Quote:
It has happened to a lot of comparable regimes.
like?
Why don't you read about the previous leaders in Iraq, Iran and throw in the rest of the mid-east. make sure to check out how Saddam gained power while your at it.
I was thinking more like Romania, which was pretty fierce, but where fewer people died than have already been killed by American bombs, indiscriminately, women and children.
Indiscriminately? What an idiotic load of inflammatory bullshit!
I guess you comparison to Romania would be meaningful if we didn't already have an example of how Saddam deals with revolution. 50,000 dead from the '91 uprising and today he's shelling Basra.
Quote:
With the advantage that they didn't get to be humiliated, resentful, and then governed by an American ex-general who is the President of the company that makes Patriot missiles.
Is this how it is going to be. Nice to talk about unbacked theory as if it is fact and then expect to be taken seriously.
Don't forget this governor's steady diet of Iraqi babies.
Quote:
You're arguing that American military intervention is BETTER than an Iraqi revolution.
In this situation, under these specific circumstances, absolutely.
Quote:
These "brown people" who can't be trusted to revolt properly, can't even get it together to decide their own destiny. Arabs are like children, are they not? In need of a proper masser, with the whip and all.
No, I assert that Hussein is a brutal, evil mother****er who needs to be killed with a quickness. He has savaged his people long enough.
They tried to revolt before and they were slaughtered. That is actual history you seem to be eager to ignore. Didn't happen, eh?
Unless in your mind "revolt properly" is their indiscriminate slaughter to the tune of 100,000+ at the hands of Hussein's regime only to wake up the next tday with a decimated infrastructure and no international peacekeeping force their to maintain territorial integrity.
Kind of sad that you put Bush-hating above human life and reason. Sucks to be you.
I guess you comparison to Romania would be meaningful if we didn't already have an example of how Saddam deals with revolution. 50,000 dead from the '91 uprising and today he's shelling Basra.
No, I assert that Hussein is a brutal, evil mother****er who needs to be killed with a quickness. He has savaged his people long enough.
They tried to revolt before and they were slaughtered. That is actual history you seem to be eager to ignore. Didn't happen, eh?
Unless in your mind "revolt properly" is their indiscriminate slaughter to the tune of 100,000+ at the hands of Hussein's regime only to wake up the next tday with a decimated infrastructure and no international peacekeeping force their to maintain territorial integrity.
of course it happend, why was saddam allowed to use helicopter gun-ships to quell that uprising? given the imposed no-fly zones and so on?
Kind of sad that you put Bush-hating above human life and reason. Sucks to be you.
Groverat, you have me. I hate Bush. I hate him all day. I don't eat. I don't sleep. My girlfriend has left me. I am wasting away. I do not work. I haven't bothered to shave for heaven knows how long. I HATE that shrubbery.
It sucks to be me.
I'm having organic poached eggs on toast for breakfast tomorrow! Yum!
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
Is this how it is going to be. Nice to talk about unbacked theory as if it is fact and then expect to be taken seriously.
Indiscriminately? What an idiotic load of inflammatory bullshit!
In the sense that you have the chance to be blown to pieces going about your everyday business in Iraq right now, yes, that seems pretty 'indiscriminate' to me.
By the way, Iraqi soldiers are defending their homeland fiercely. With ferocity.
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
No, I assert that Hussein is a brutal, evil mother****er who needs to be killed with a quickness. He has savaged his people long enough.
They tried to revolt before and they were slaughtered. That is actual history you seem to be eager to ignore. Didn't happen, eh?
I agree. Mother**** him. He has savaged his people long enough. They tried to revolt before. Indeed, they were encouraged to.
Etc.
The rest of your post is excellent, well researched and articulate.
Although American and British troops should not be there in the first place.
Regardless of how much you hate Saddam and his, er WOMD, which I'm sure he has, and has supplied to, er, Al'Qaeda, and whatnot, this war is a disaster for the Middle East, for global security and for America.
It sucks to be us, actually, and it's going to carry on sucking.
Conditions for democracy in Iraq? Easy. Prolonged American occupation. If this was a goal of the current war I would feel VERY comfortable putting my full support behind it, but it isn't, and the aftermath will be a mess, the middle east is simply too rife with corruption, they NEED to be policed, but we don't have the guts. We'll take a few cities, drop a few bombs and then run, assuring that all the gains of war willbe lost in as much time as it takes for the next ethnic battle to start.
Occupation works, if you have the balls, mention the jews, and I'll slap you, that's a different beast entirely.
Conditions for democracy in Iraq? Easy. Prolonged American occupation. If this was a goal of the current war I would feel VERY comfortable putting my full support behind it, but it isn't, and the aftermath will be a mess, the middle east is simply too rife with corruption, they NEED to be policed, but we don't have the guts. We'll take a few cities, drop a few bombs and then run, assuring that all the gains of war willbe lost in as much time as it takes for the next ethnic battle to start.
Occupation works, if you have the balls, mention the jews, and I'll slap you, that's a different beast entirely.
It has to be honest and involved, and mebbe, the world is just to costly for anyone to care to attempt it ever again, colonization by proxy doesn't work, it's what created this mess in the first place. Of course you can't over-extend either, ask the brits how that went?
In the sense that you have the chance to be blown to pieces going about your everyday business in Iraq right now, yes, that seems pretty 'indiscriminate' to me.
I guess if you change the definition of the word "indiscriminate" then it really is "indiscriminate". I can be run over by a car, I guess everyone drives indiscriminately.
The bombings are not indiscriminate. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
It's not even confirmed that the market explosions were US missiles.
Quote:
By the way, Iraqi soldiers are defending their homeland fiercely. With ferocity.
It's a subjective word. When they can do something successful that has real strategic value I'll agree with you.
Quote:
The rest of your post is excellent, well researched and articulate.
ALL my posts are excellent.
Quote:
Although American and British troops should not be there in the first place.
Circular.
Quote:
... this war is a disaster for the Middle East, for global security and for America.
It is?
Quote:
It sucks to be us, actually, and it's going to carry on sucking.
My girlfriend has left me. I am wasting away. I do not work. I haven't bothered to shave for heaven knows how long. I HATE that shrubbery.
Well most women will respond in a similar fashion if you don't start to view bush in a more favorable light immediately. Or even with the lights out just so long as your assessment of the bush is positive.
Oh Groverat, be an absolute darling: put down that copy of Playpresident and pick me one of those lovely £50 notes growing on that vine behind you.
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
We'll be fine.
Dude, I just read your blog. You actually write your own propaganda.
Good luck!
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
I guess if you change the definition of the word "indiscriminate" then it really is "indiscriminate". I can be run over by a car, I guess everyone drives indiscriminately.
The bombings are not indiscriminate. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
Bombs do not choose who they kill; hence I use the word 'indiscriminate'.
Well most women will respond in a similar fashion if you don't start to view bush in a more favorable light immediately. Or even with the lights out just so long as your assessment of the bush is positive.
You have a very wide definition of "indiscriminate".
No, I don't, I have a different definition of "indiscriminate" to you. Mine's the correct one.
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
If we start carpet bombing then you'll have a point.
Do cluster bombs count? Because you're killing civilians with them now!
They really are the créme-de-la-créme (if you'll forgive me soiling your forum with French) of the precision-guided surgical munitions, are they not?
Quote:
At least 11 civilians, nine of them children, were killed in Hilla in central Iraq yesterday, according to reporters who said they appeared to be the victims of bombing.
Reporters from Reuters said they counted the bodies of 11 civilians and two Iraqi fighters in the Babylon suburb, 50 miles south of Baghdad. None of the dead were children, one a baby.
[Piece goes on to describe wounds and how a Reuters reporter filmed the carnage - a good word meaning 'blood as stuff' - and then decided not to send more than extracts, one of which was of a father holding up bits of his baby and shouting "cowards cowards" because it was impossible to show on television. ]
This is on page 6 of today's 'Independent' newspaper.
Oh oh oh! And on page 3, a British reporter found shrapnel from the missile that landed on that shopping centre in the Shu'ale district of Baghdad (you know, the missile that's supposed to be an aging anti-aircraft missile) and, heh, wouldn't you believe it but it's got a serial number on it.
Yes, it's 30003-704ASB7492, followed by a MFR 96214 09; a quick scan of the on-line database of the Logistics department of the Department of Defense tells us it's the "cage" number of the Raytheon plant in the city of McKinney, Texas. Yes indeed, its a HARM anti-radar missile, made by a company called Raytheon. They make Patriot. (Heh, ironically the future Governer of Iraq, Jay Garner, is the President! Dear Reader's Digest...)
No, I don't, I have a different definition of "indiscriminate" to you. Mine's the correct one.
...
Do cluster bombs count? Because you're killing civilians with them now!
Depends on where you drop them.
Quote:
They really are the créme-de-la-créme (if you'll forgive me soiling your forum with French) of the precision-guided surgical munitions, are they not?
Certainly not, but not exactly used in an indiscriminate manner.
Quote:
news article snip
Oh my god, well I guess we really *are* bombing indiscriminately.
Looks like Iraq might have lured the missile into the marketplace. Kinda telling.
A government official with ties to big business! Holy Jesus your revelations are compelling! Next you'll be telling me we have put a man into orbit in "outer space"!
Comments
Originally posted by groverat
And boy-oh-boy, don't we know how successful revolutionary governments are against brutal, murderous dictators!
Romania and the rest of eastern Europe. And historically france, russia, Cuba, china, turkey, etc. etc.
But Gore had your idea in the presidential debates, he called for "robust support" of revolutionary groups within Iraq.
That way you can just arm other people, have no control over their actions and act like you aren't involved. Kind of like Reagan in South America.
hehe, you really are stupid, arn't you.
It has happened to a lot of comparable regimes.
like?
Why don't you read about the previous leaders in Iraq, Iran and throw in the rest of the mid-east. make sure to check out how Saddam gained power while your at it.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
I was thinking more like Romania, which was pretty fierce, but where fewer people died than have already been killed by American bombs, indiscriminately, women and children.
Indiscriminately? What an idiotic load of inflammatory bullshit!
I guess you comparison to Romania would be meaningful if we didn't already have an example of how Saddam deals with revolution. 50,000 dead from the '91 uprising and today he's shelling Basra.
With the advantage that they didn't get to be humiliated, resentful, and then governed by an American ex-general who is the President of the company that makes Patriot missiles.
Is this how it is going to be. Nice to talk about unbacked theory as if it is fact and then expect to be taken seriously.
Don't forget this governor's steady diet of Iraqi babies.
You're arguing that American military intervention is BETTER than an Iraqi revolution.
In this situation, under these specific circumstances, absolutely.
These "brown people" who can't be trusted to revolt properly, can't even get it together to decide their own destiny. Arabs are like children, are they not? In need of a proper masser, with the whip and all.
No, I assert that Hussein is a brutal, evil mother****er who needs to be killed with a quickness. He has savaged his people long enough.
They tried to revolt before and they were slaughtered. That is actual history you seem to be eager to ignore. Didn't happen, eh?
Unless in your mind "revolt properly" is their indiscriminate slaughter to the tune of 100,000+ at the hands of Hussein's regime only to wake up the next tday with a decimated infrastructure and no international peacekeeping force their to maintain territorial integrity.
Kind of sad that you put Bush-hating above human life and reason. Sucks to be you.
Yeah, and seven of those women and children who faild to halt in time at an american roadblock...
Sucks to be an iraqi, I think is the case...
Originally posted by groverat
No, I assert that Hussein is a brutal, evil mother****er who needs to be killed with a quickness. He has savaged his people long enough.
They tried to revolt before and they were slaughtered. That is actual history you seem to be eager to ignore. Didn't happen, eh?
Just felt the need to say that I agree completely. I can logically support the war and not support Bush (and plan on not voting for him in 2004).
Weeee, pragmatic decision-making is fun!
Originally posted by groverat
I guess you comparison to Romania would be meaningful if we didn't already have an example of how Saddam deals with revolution. 50,000 dead from the '91 uprising and today he's shelling Basra.
No, I assert that Hussein is a brutal, evil mother****er who needs to be killed with a quickness. He has savaged his people long enough.
They tried to revolt before and they were slaughtered. That is actual history you seem to be eager to ignore. Didn't happen, eh?
Unless in your mind "revolt properly" is their indiscriminate slaughter to the tune of 100,000+ at the hands of Hussein's regime only to wake up the next tday with a decimated infrastructure and no international peacekeeping force their to maintain territorial integrity.
of course it happend, why was saddam allowed to use helicopter gun-ships to quell that uprising? given the imposed no-fly zones and so on?
Sucks to be an iraqi, I think is the case...
Absolutely it sucks to be an Iraqi.
of course it happend, why was saddam allowed to use helicopter gun-ships to quell that uprising? given the imposed no-fly zones and so on?
Was the no-fly zone in effect at that time? Apparently not.
Most likely it was some evil action from an American. That's my guess.
Originally posted by groverat
Kind of sad that you put Bush-hating above human life and reason. Sucks to be you.
Groverat, you have me. I hate Bush. I hate him all day. I don't eat. I don't sleep. My girlfriend has left me. I am wasting away. I do not work. I haven't bothered to shave for heaven knows how long. I HATE that shrubbery.
It sucks to be me.
I'm having organic poached eggs on toast for breakfast tomorrow! Yum!
Originally posted by groverat
Is this how it is going to be. Nice to talk about unbacked theory as if it is fact and then expect to be taken seriously.
Gott in Himmel! Jay Garner, Iraqi baby-eater
Originally posted by groverat
Indiscriminately? What an idiotic load of inflammatory bullshit!
In the sense that you have the chance to be blown to pieces going about your everyday business in Iraq right now, yes, that seems pretty 'indiscriminate' to me.
By the way, Iraqi soldiers are defending their homeland fiercely. With ferocity.
Originally posted by groverat
No, I assert that Hussein is a brutal, evil mother****er who needs to be killed with a quickness. He has savaged his people long enough.
They tried to revolt before and they were slaughtered. That is actual history you seem to be eager to ignore. Didn't happen, eh?
I agree. Mother**** him. He has savaged his people long enough. They tried to revolt before. Indeed, they were encouraged to.
Etc.
The rest of your post is excellent, well researched and articulate.
Regardless of how much you hate Saddam and his, er WOMD, which I'm sure he has, and has supplied to, er, Al'Qaeda, and whatnot, this war is a disaster for the Middle East, for global security and for America.
It sucks to be us, actually, and it's going to carry on sucking.
Originally posted by groverat
Was the no-fly zone in effect at that time? Apparently not.
Most likely it was some evil action from an American. That's my guess.
The allies at the time protected the kurds while leaving the Shia's for Saddam.
Occupation works, if you have the balls, mention the jews, and I'll slap you, that's a different beast entirely.
Originally posted by Matsu
Conditions for democracy in Iraq? Easy. Prolonged American occupation. If this was a goal of the current war I would feel VERY comfortable putting my full support behind it, but it isn't, and the aftermath will be a mess, the middle east is simply too rife with corruption, they NEED to be policed, but we don't have the guts. We'll take a few cities, drop a few bombs and then run, assuring that all the gains of war willbe lost in as much time as it takes for the next ethnic battle to start.
Occupation works, if you have the balls, mention the jews, and I'll slap you, that's a different beast entirely.
We'll talk again in 40 years then, hehe.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Gott in Himmel! Jay Garner, Iraqi baby-eater
Ooooh, content! Thanks for the link.
In the sense that you have the chance to be blown to pieces going about your everyday business in Iraq right now, yes, that seems pretty 'indiscriminate' to me.
I guess if you change the definition of the word "indiscriminate" then it really is "indiscriminate". I can be run over by a car, I guess everyone drives indiscriminately.
The bombings are not indiscriminate. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
It's not even confirmed that the market explosions were US missiles.
By the way, Iraqi soldiers are defending their homeland fiercely. With ferocity.
It's a subjective word. When they can do something successful that has real strategic value I'll agree with you.
The rest of your post is excellent, well researched and articulate.
ALL my posts are excellent.
Although American and British troops should not be there in the first place.
Circular.
... this war is a disaster for the Middle East, for global security and for America.
It is?
It sucks to be us, actually, and it's going to carry on sucking.
We'll be fine.
My girlfriend has left me. I am wasting away. I do not work. I haven't bothered to shave for heaven knows how long. I HATE that shrubbery.
Well most women will respond in a similar fashion if you don't start to view bush in a more favorable light immediately. Or even with the lights out just so long as your assessment of the bush is positive.
Originally posted by groverat
We'll be fine.
Dude, I just read your blog. You actually write your own propaganda.
Good luck!
Originally posted by groverat
I guess if you change the definition of the word "indiscriminate" then it really is "indiscriminate". I can be run over by a car, I guess everyone drives indiscriminately.
The bombings are not indiscriminate. Not by any stretch of the imagination.
Bombs do not choose who they kill; hence I use the word 'indiscriminate'.
Originally posted by ColanderOfDeath
Well most women will respond in a similar fashion if you don't start to view bush in a more favorable light immediately. Or even with the lights out just so long as your assessment of the bush is positive.
You, on the other hand, I am buying a pizza.
Bombs do not choose who they kill; hence I use the word 'indiscriminate'.
Bombs don't drop themselves. They don't wake up one day and decide to go on a lark around Baghdad.
You have a very wide definition of "indiscriminate". If we start carpet bombing then you'll have a point.
Originally posted by groverat
You have a very wide definition of "indiscriminate".
No, I don't, I have a different definition of "indiscriminate" to you. Mine's the correct one.
Originally posted by groverat
If we start carpet bombing then you'll have a point.
Do cluster bombs count? Because you're killing civilians with them now!
They really are the créme-de-la-créme (if you'll forgive me soiling your forum with French) of the precision-guided surgical munitions, are they not?
At least 11 civilians, nine of them children, were killed in Hilla in central Iraq yesterday, according to reporters who said they appeared to be the victims of bombing.
Reporters from Reuters said they counted the bodies of 11 civilians and two Iraqi fighters in the Babylon suburb, 50 miles south of Baghdad. None of the dead were children, one a baby.
[Piece goes on to describe wounds and how a Reuters reporter filmed the carnage - a good word meaning 'blood as stuff' - and then decided not to send more than extracts, one of which was of a father holding up bits of his baby and shouting "cowards cowards" because it was impossible to show on television. ]
This is on page 6 of today's 'Independent' newspaper.
Oh oh oh! And on page 3, a British reporter found shrapnel from the missile that landed on that shopping centre in the Shu'ale district of Baghdad (you know, the missile that's supposed to be an aging anti-aircraft missile) and, heh, wouldn't you believe it but it's got a serial number on it.
Yes, it's 30003-704ASB7492, followed by a MFR 96214 09; a quick scan of the on-line database of the Logistics department of the Department of Defense tells us it's the "cage" number of the Raytheon plant in the city of McKinney, Texas. Yes indeed, its a HARM anti-radar missile, made by a company called Raytheon. They make Patriot. (Heh, ironically the future Governer of Iraq, Jay Garner, is the President!
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
No, I don't, I have a different definition of "indiscriminate" to you. Mine's the correct one.
...
Do cluster bombs count? Because you're killing civilians with them now!
Depends on where you drop them.
They really are the créme-de-la-créme (if you'll forgive me soiling your forum with French) of the precision-guided surgical munitions, are they not?
Certainly not, but not exactly used in an indiscriminate manner.
news article snip
Oh my god, well I guess we really *are* bombing indiscriminately.
Looks like Iraq might have lured the missile into the marketplace. Kinda telling.
A government official with ties to big business! Holy Jesus your revelations are compelling! Next you'll be telling me we have put a man into orbit in "outer space"!