TK-8252 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/19/world/middleeast/19iraq.html?hp&ex=1153368000&en=6c076f1256a16662&ei=5094&partner=homepage NOW can we say it's a civil war?? The official civilian death toll since the invasion: 50,000. It is estimated that 100 people are being killed EVERY DAY in Iraq as a result of sectarian violence. These numbers don't even include the number of those injured, and god knows how many police and soldiers have been killed or wounded. Republican politicians have decided to not talk about Iraq. At all. They distance themselves from the issue. I guess it's gotten to the point where they'd seem insane if they attempted to put a positive spin on such a horrible situation. You still have the Ann Coulter neocon types who literally think that Iraq is a great free country. "Oh, they don't have rape rooms or mass graves anymore! People don't have to worry about being pulled from their homes and shot anymore!" Yeah right. It is a failed state. We invaded a sovereign (albeit crappy) country and turned it into a failed state. Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Doesn't that mean that 1 in every 500 people has been killed? Thats like killing off the population of Washington to save the USA. Still i guess you cant make an omlette without breaking some eggs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 I could take the opportunity to shout-out to all the pro-war brigade that I ever debated with before the troops shipped out, and say "Ha. I told you so, didn't I." But I feel that with the sheer loss of life and the gravity of the situation, that would be immature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 My sentiments exactly. Still i guess you cant make an omlette without breaking some eggs...Which is why, of course, certain omelettes should never be made in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlib Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 You still have the Ann Coulter neocon types who literally think that Iraq is a great free country. "Oh, they don't have rape rooms or mass graves anymore! People don't have to worry about being pulled from their homes and shot anymore!" And yet, you still don't see too many of them packing up their families to move there. (Or even visiting any places outside of the Green Zone.) Strange, that... Don't worry, your link will be discredited soon enough, just by virtue of being associated with the N.Y. Times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 They have mass graves in lebanon now.. but i'm suspectng the people who were deeply, religiously pro-war in the case of iraq would also be deeply pro israel in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 And yet, you still don't see too many of them packing up their families to move there.'be nice if she did. I hate that chick. Iraq has become a Viet Nam. Lots of casualties, lots of people getting killed, lots of international hostility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider AL Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Iraq has become a Viet Nam. Lots of casualties, lots of people getting killed, lots of international hostility.This is what happens when the US tries to "spread democracy" through acts of violence. Not that the US has a true democracy to spread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 This is what happens when the US[, or any other nation,] tries to "spread democracy" through acts of violence.Yesh. You still have the Ann Coulter neocon types who literally think that Iraq is a great, free country.That's probably because they predominately get their news from a certain propaganda sender (hint: Name starts with 'F') which hushes the spectacle down as much as humanly possible as it's damaging to the Bush Administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapNColostomy Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 You know, as it turns out, I think maybe the best thing to do would be to put Saddam right back in office. Yeah, he was a tyrant, but folks knew not to **** around when he ran things, as opposed to now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted July 24, 2006 Author Share Posted July 24, 2006 You know, as it turns out, I think maybe the best thing to do would be to put Saddam right back in office. Yeah, he was a tyrant, but folks knew not to **** around when he ran things, as opposed to now. We wouldn't have to put him back in. They'd vote him back in in a heartbeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 Probably very, very true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 When U look at what happens to these kind of countries when you remove the dictatorial leadership you realise WHY the leadership was that way in the first place.... rival ethnic and religious groups, deep seated ancient hatreds and grudges, local warlords and drugs barons... artificially lumped together into a countries that only a dictator could hold together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted July 24, 2006 Author Share Posted July 24, 2006 The only way I could imagine an Iraq without the widespread violence is if Iraq broke into three parts. It's really that simple. Give the Kurds their part, the Sunnis a part, and the Shi'ites a part. And they have to make it as fair as possible, or they will still have their reasons to kill eachother. There would still be sectarian violence, because there will always be the types who think they should have ALL of Iraq, but it's really the only hope for the peaceful people of Iraq who just want to be able to go to the market without having to question "are the risks worth it." All the *actual* conservatives, like Pat Buchanon, say that Iraq is certainly going to prove to be one of the worst foreign policy disasters in U.S. history. And I think it's a shame that the innocent people of Iraq must suffer because of it. If ANYONE still thinks that Iraq was a good decision, then apparently they don't understand what it must be like to not be able to go to the store to get some milk or some bread because you're too scared to leave your house. And you're scared to be in the house too, because of men in police and army uniforms roaming the streets pulling people out of the homes and torturing and executing them based on what sect they belong to. All the intellectual, upper-class people in Iraq have already fled the country to live elsewhere. Perhaps that's why they can't keep the electricity and water running. Iraq is doomed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datheus Posted July 24, 2006 Share Posted July 24, 2006 When U look at what happens to these kind of countries when you remove the dictatorial leadership you realise WHY the leadership was that way in the first place.... rival ethnic and religious groups, deep seated ancient hatreds and grudges, local warlords and drugs barons... artificially lumped together into a countries that only a dictator could hold together. Quoted for truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Splitting Iraq into different nations might actually be an idea. Not that I think it'd doable, but it's a thought. All the *actual* conservatives, like Pat Buchanon, say that Iraq is certainly going to prove to be one of the worst foreign policy disasters in U.S. history. And I think it's a shame that the innocent people of Iraq must suffer because of it. If ANYONE still thinks that Iraq was a good decision, then apparently they don't understand what it must be like to not be able to go to the store to get some milk or some bread because you're too scared to leave your house. And you're scared to be in the house too, because of men in police and army uniforms roaming the streets pulling people out of the homes and torturing and executing them based on what sect they belong to. "(...) We've learned a lot. We've learned that terrorism isn't actually the act of creating terror. It isn't the act of killing innocent people and frightening others… no, you see, that's called a 'liberation'. It doesn't matter what you burn or who you kill- if you wear khaki, ride a tank or Apache or fighter plane and drop missiles and bombs, then you're not a terrorist- you're a liberator."--Riverbend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted July 25, 2006 Share Posted July 25, 2006 Its weird, cos a lot of the other guys fighting in iraq call themselves liberators too, and the ones fighting in afganistan, and hamas, and hezbollah, and the IRA, and ETA, and Tim McVey... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted July 25, 2006 Author Share Posted July 25, 2006 I wonder if Nazi Germany claimed to be "liberating" Europe from the Jews... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nancy Allen`` Posted July 26, 2006 Share Posted July 26, 2006 Yeah I think it was actually. I'm sure Hitler did see himself liberating Germany from the Jews. Don't forget the financial cost in Iraq, I think it costs tens of millions of dollars there each day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted July 26, 2006 Share Posted July 26, 2006 Don't forget the financial cost in Iraq, I think it costs tens of millions of dollars there each day. Yesh. According to the counter, it's more than $1,000 a second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datheus Posted July 27, 2006 Share Posted July 27, 2006 I remember it being something like $200 dollars per American for this war. It's probably gone up since then. Edit: Yes it has. It's about $1500 per American now. That's 3.5 month's pay if you work below the Federal minimum wage for only 20 hours a week, or about 1-2 weeks at a full time job at $15/hr. What a value for quality television, eh? I mean, come on. A cable bill is $40 a month, making a year of cable $480. You can justify one third of the cost right there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nancy Allen`` Posted July 27, 2006 Share Posted July 27, 2006 I think I preferred the war games before Iraq if you want me to be entirely honest. Somehow weapons of mass destruction, MOABs and war for oil doesn't hold much appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datheus Posted July 27, 2006 Share Posted July 27, 2006 I think I preferred the war games before Iraq if you want me to be entirely honest. Somehow weapons of mass destruction, MOABs and war for oil doesn't hold much appeal. What? That's what makes it gripping. It's like how the audience interacts with Survivor or American Idol. Watch the footage of an explosion or assault on the tube, discuss it at the water cooler the next day, and see the results in your gas price the NEXT AFTERNOON! God bless the wonders of modern technology. And imagine the bragging rights you get if one of the Americans who boldly sacrificed his life was from your town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nancy Allen`` Posted July 27, 2006 Share Posted July 27, 2006 Teh, yeah, fuel barons came when that idea came to light. Another reason to criticise the situation in the Middle East, how every little thing is an excuse, however legitimate, to hike up fuel prices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapNColostomy Posted July 27, 2006 Share Posted July 27, 2006 I wonder if Nazi Germany claimed to be "liberating" Europe from the Jews... Were said "Jews" being opressed by anyone other than Nazi Germany? No? Right then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.gif.24edface7c76d897543b1e05da64a97d.gif)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.