You’d be surprised at the amount of people who would prefer Saddam to the US. I’m surprised by that, too, but apperently there are such people*
After three summers in Iraq with no air conditioning I’m surprised there are any who DON"T
Okay, then what is the term used when you are killing people in uniform in the hope that you will influence their government or people to remove said people in uniform from your country, so that you can put your own leader into power who will continue to kill others in your country (but not your group/tribe/sect what have you, praise God!), hmmm? I don’t know what the term is, but it ain’t ‘freedom fighter’.
Missile deaths unite Pakistan anti-US groups in outrage
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/95804914-8634-11da-bee0-0000779e2340.html
Ok, we’ll do this like mayors.
A night at the Mitchell Brothers against your city’s equivalent emporium of ecdysiasis
The terms to be “fleshed out” as it were, I say six months to a death, b, coup or c. renunciation of us alliance.
I wouldn’t call Iraqi insurgents “freedom fighters” simply because there is no evidence they are seeking freedom for the Iraqi people. I think you call such folks “insurgents” or “rebels” or “the resistence”.
LA RESISTANCE?
Sorry, you are correct.
I was stuck in an either/or mindset and couldn’t get my thought process out of that box. :smack:
I guess if you equate the US with WW2 Germany. Are you doing that?
And why, specifically, would you fight the Russians? Oh yes, because you have a history of animosity and violence with them. If only Iraq and America shared that same past. If only America had supplied Iraq with a lot of the weapons they used against their people.
Oh wait…
They will. This is a good thing - No snark.
Not unless it fills the definition of terrorism, and as John Mace has said, terrorism cannot be carried out on the uniformed armed troops representing a country/organisation.
But killing not your own people, that’s fine? So the coalition forces can kill as many Iraqis as they want! Hey, they’re not our people!
To kill an** innocent ** is murder. To kill a member of the **armed forces ** is war. To kill an innocent may also be terrorism.
Ok. Pull out the coalition forces. Oh, wait, when you said fighting is futile, you just meant them fighting? And them getting over their personal gripes and prejudices?
For a terrorist, fighting is most certainly not futile - unless you’re willing to say to me that if terrorism were still happening in 5-10 years time, the coalition forces would still be there to help defend Iraq.
This amuses me. So, when the coalition forces entered Iraq, and sent out their “playing cards” of the top “people in uniform”, to use your phrase, in order to “influence their government or people to remove said people in uniform”, so that you can “put your own leader in place” (a democratically elected one, indeed, but with approval from the US) who so far have “continued to kill others in your country” (“but not your” forces, people, what have you, praise God!), that was terrorism, too?
You make several assumptions, here, which are little more than personal opinion.
I suspect that there are a number of Iraqis who are most concerned with the fact that they perceived the IRC to be U.S. puppets and the Constitution one that was imposed by foreigners through massive fraud. Now, you, personally, may not believe that to be the case and it may be possible to find some objective criteria to support your view, but that hardly matters to the Iraqi who either does not have access to your “objective” data or who believes it is all the result of manipulated lies.
As to your claim that any insurgent wishes to impose their own leader who will “continue to kill others in your country,” that is little more than your own desire to believe propaganda that makes you feel good.
Currently, the insurgents are willing to kill other Iraqis whom they perceive to be traitors for aiding the U.S. occupation. Do you have any evidence (a published declaration by Mukti al-Sadr, for example) that shows a desire to continue killing other Iraqis once the U.S. has been expelled?
Now, I believe that the insurgents are misguided. I also believe that there is a high probability that there will be a civil war in Iraq regardless who is in power when Iraq is finally “free.” (Countries as disparate as Columbia, Yugoslavia and Ireland have gone through civil wars as soon as they achieved independence, so there is historical precedent.) However, your attempt to portray all the current insurgents as either or both evil or stupid tends to demonstrate your preconceived notions rather more than the reality of the situation in Iraq.
In Iraq, alas, yes.
A resisted occupation will become, by definition, a brutal occupation.
See, inter alia, the west bank, northern ireland, etc.
We have become the perpetrators of a brutal occupation, that, incidentally, is soon to pass the nazi occupation of Europe in duration.
from THE OBSERVER
“The missiles were deadly accurate. In the pitch dark of a night in Pakistan’s sparsely populated North West Frontier Province, they not only located the three targeted houses on the outskirts of the village of Damadola Burkanday but squarely struck their hujra, the large rooms traditionally used by Pashtun tribesmen to accommodate guests.”
doesn’t this someone on the inside dropped a homing device in the rooms at issue OR a laser pointing guidance system was used?
could gps alone do this?
Cite for alaric’s quote.
Uhm, wasn’t that a bit redundant?
Right.
This truly is the most deranged thing I’ve read so far on the SDMB.
Where are your ovens?
do you quibble over “brutal” or “duration”?
d’oh
I thought (like so many on this board, that you were challenging the bona fides of my quote, which I had, (in fact) neglected succesfully to append to the text.
No.
I quibble about millions of people who died in gas ovens.
as we are proving in iraq, and as the Israelis demonstrate in Palestine, you can be brutal without ovens…
Yes.
You are absolutely right.
Americans are the same as Nazi’s
(Sorry, I don’t debate with people like you)