In response, we could wear something stinky and brown, for Bullshirt Saturday.
See, the reason nobody debates you is your total ignoring of anyone who states anything that you dont’ want to believe.
The job of the US in Iraq is to prevent the insurgents from killing people. It is also to protect themselves. They are trying to stabilize the country as best they can given the rules they are forced to work under.
But, I expect you to not believe that, because it doesn’t fit your narrow US-hating world view. Why you haven’t moved to Iraq to fulfil your desire to kill American soldiers is beyond me.
Oh, right, because then you would be forced to actually learn the realities of the situation, which might disrupt your worldview. My bad.
If the US is really trying to kill and grind down Iraqi’s, why are there restrictions on engaging those that are trying to kill them? Why have we not carpet bombed places like Sadr City? Why have we not killed those that openly call for violence against us, like Muqtada al Sadr?
As for the power being better in Iraq, well, finding non-US sources is going to be difficult. I heard it yesterday on NPR, when they were interviewing some member of the US Army Corps of Engineers (whose job is to build infrastructure, despite your theories of US genocide). Being 1- An American, and 2- associated with the US Army, despite the fact that he outright criticized the polices, I imagine you will just assume he’s lying.
CNN.BBC. Al Jazheera. youtube. blogosphere. Canon. Sony. Nokia.Motorola.
That’s why.
Or, alternatively, its that if an American soldier killed al-Sadr, the trajectory of the shit would intersect the locus of the fan.
:rolleyes: People debate me all the time. YOU are debating me.
Because I’m neither militarily trained, nor wanted by the locals I’m sure, nor interested.
So that we can pretend to be civilized. It’s not like we actually refrain from killing them after all.
We have, such as in Fallujah.
And yet, we do. At any given point, there are Madrasas filled with people, and markets full if Iraqis. And yet, even if there are US soldiers there, they aren’t shooting folks by the carload. Iraqis regularly travel through US checkpoints without being pulled out of their cars and shot in the back of the head!
It’s almost as if we’re actually NOT trying to kill every single Iraqi! Weird, huh?
Bullshit. The fact that there is still a city there stands as evidence that we haven’t carpetbombed it. We have fought there, yes. And we have dropped ordinance on it during combat operations, yes. But we have no carpet bombed it, and in fact, I doubt we have EVER carpetbombed a civilian populated area in Iraq.
I didn’t realize that refraining from killing every last citizen of a conquered nation was all that’s required to make you the good guy. :rolleyes:
I never said we were trying to kill them all.
Not much of a city. And this is the same kind of nitpicking as I hear from people who get worked up over white phosphorus and napalm being dropped on Iraqis being referred to as “chemical weapons.” We wrecked the place and killed a great many people; whether we used the specific technique called “carpet bombing” doesn’t matter.
Weren’t you in the thread saying that the US gov’t is currently trying to pull a behind the back Genocide on the Iraqi people? Honestly can’t tell, your posts all kind of blur together about this subject…
Yes, it appears about 60% of the houses in the city were damaged or outright destroyed. That’s bad. If only the insurgents had, you know, left. Or surrendered. But instead, a joint US-Iraqi force had to go in and retake the city, and restore it to the control of the government of Iraq.
We dropped leaflets on the town ahead of time, and it’s not like the insurgents could have possibly thought they would be able to fight off the US military in full combat mode. Maybe if they had stopped rounding up and executing anyone that maybe thought it was a bad idea to think about it for a bit, they would have realized this was a bad idea in truth.
And while a great number of people were killed, pains were taken, as always, to minimize the civilian impact. This is why the freedom fighters that you idolize so much love to pick hideouts with kids and families inside. They KNOW they’re going to die, they WANT to die, and they want the families to die, so that the US gets a black eye.
Classy bunch you support there.
Ah, yes, the people we defined as “insurgents” because they were in the city. Whether or not they could get out of the city, or had a place to go, or were one of the men or boys we forced back into the city at gunpoint so we could slaughter them later while calling them “insurgents”. And why would people, “insurgents” or otherwise, surrender to barbarians like us ?
You mean like those Blackwater scum they killed ? Good for them.
Yeah, sure they did. I recall hearing at the time about how people were shot trying to retrive friends and relatives, how families trying to escape in rafts were killed by helicopters, how we used napalm and white phosporus and lied about it.
Or because those ARE their families. Or because they aren’t fighters of any kind, just people we killed and claimed were fighters after the fact.
Good Lord, I thought you people knew better than to say Der Trihs’s name three times!
Back on the red shirt thing. Daughter of a Vietnam vet and another former Army enlisted… woman. Brought up in the military. Love my country.
I’m wearing this tomorrow.
So, it was necessary to destroy the city to save it, then?
Years from now, when the truth about the destruction of Fallujah is more widely acknowledged, those who currently argue for its necessity will hang their heads in shame.
I don’t know what you are good-lording about. Military age men, up to a late age WERE not allowed to leave the city. They were turned back when they tried to leave.
Actually I don’t debate **Der Trihs ** 'cos for the most part I agree with him. Occasionally a little over-zealous in his arguments perhaps, but IMO far more clued-in than some of the “liberals” here who cluck humourlessly about his ‘extremism’. :dubious:
Though* they’re * still preferable to your ilk of course 
Ah, friends made all around, no doubt
Runs away
I like the cut of your jib, matey.