Through the looking glass: Since when does the country you INVADED count as an ally?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

What an assholish statement. First of all, they are representing a sovereign nation. Sovereignty was transferred over on June 28th you dumb fuck.

Bwaaa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!
Good one.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

It’d also be different if, for example, we were talking about an established anti-Saddam force that was self-governing and with whom we’d been cooperating before the war began and whose leaders were self-determined and with whom we’d negotiated treaties allowing us to be there and who could kick us out at any time. I’d be willing to consider such a force a vital member of the coalition.

Instead, we’re talking about police who are being trained with the assistance of Farid the Crime-Fighting Falcon, police that really consist of out-of-work Iraqi civilians who are desperate to find a way to feed their families and who see the influx of American dollars as one of the few ways to do this.

Iraq could be an ally, were the situation different. Currently, they’re not. That’s not impugning them, or belittling their deaths; agan, it’s saying that their deaths are tragic and that they are victims of the war between the US and the anti-US forces there, rather than major participants in that war.

Daniel

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Debaser

It doesn’t matter if they are representing a sovereign nation or not, they are fighting and dying and fuck you for wanting to ignore that.

Good point; on that grounds, I can’t believe you’re ignoring our allies who died in that elementary school in Russia. How dare you diminish their deaths? Asshole.

Daniel

[Debaser]

@Diogenes the Cynic

Either you get that it’s stupid to call Iraq an “ally” against itself or you don’t.

Nobody is doing this. You people seem to be making shit up as you go along.

Here is the transcript:

Edwards: You know, we’ve taken 90 percent of the coalition casualties. American taxpayers have borne 90 percent of the costs of the effort in Iraq.

And we see the result of there not being a coalition: The first Gulf War cost America $5 billion. We’re at $200 billion and counting.

John Kerry will never give up control over the security of the United States of America to any other country. We will not outsource our responsibility to keep this country safe.

IFILL: Mr. Vice President, you have 90 seconds to respond.

CHENEY: Well, Gwen, the 90 percent figure is just dead wrong. When you include the Iraqi security forces that have suffered casualties, as well as the allies, they’ve taken almost 50 percent of the casualties in operations in Iraq, which leaves the U.S. with 50 percent, not 90 percent.

Cheney clearly differentiates between the “allies” and the “Iraqi security forces”. Cheney’s point is that Edwards is ignoring the fact that the Iraqis are in this fight too. It’s disrespectful to them.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

Debaser, can you cite an example of Iraqi casualties being included amongst “coalition casualties”–using that exact phrase–at any point prior to September 30, 2004?

Give me a single example of anyone in the Administration doing so, and I’ll concede the point that Cheney’s perspective is not a novel one. But your example needs to be of exactly that: of the Administration listing Iraqi casualties as part of “coalition casualties” prior to 9/30/04.

You can shove your accusations of ignoring the deaths of Iraqis up your ass, meanwhile. That’s not what this debate is about, and a less hateful person would recognize it.

Daniel

[Debaser]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

Iraq could be an ally, were the situation different. Currently, they’re not. That’s not impugning them, or belittling their deaths; agan, it’s saying that their deaths are tragic and that they are victims of the war between the US and the anti-US forces there, rather than major participants in that war.

So, even though they are 50% of the casualties, they are not “major participants”? This is just flat out stupid.

To not count them is to impugn and belittle them.

[The_Flying_Dutchman]

Seems like everyone has forgotten the rebellion of the Kurds and the Shiites following GWI for which Bush I was roundly criticised for encouraging but not helping. Does anyone need a cite for that ?

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@grienspace

Seems like everyone has forgotten the rebellion of the Kurds and the Shiites following GWI for which Bush I was roundly criticised for encouraging but not helping. Does anyone need a cite for that ?

Since it’s wholly irrelevant to what I’m arguing, no thanks. If said Kurds and Shiites fit the qualifications for allies that I gave above, and if they were the major parties in Iraq with whom we were treating, then I’d concede the point.

Debaser, put up or shut up. Show me that this is not a novel argument.

Daniel

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Debaser

Nobody is doing this. You people seem to be making shit up as you go along.

Here is the transcript:

Cheney clearly differentiates between the “allies” and the “Iraqi security forces”. Cheney’s point is that Edwards is ignoring the fact that the Iraqis are in this fight too. It’s disrespectful to them.

The Iraqis are not on our side. THAT’S the fucking point.

[Avenger]

Cheney clearly differentiates between the “allies” and the “Iraqi security forces”.

And clearly includes the Iraqis as ‘coalition forces’. What was your point?

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

Meanwhile, explain to me why Cheney isn’t disgracing and dishonoring the deaths of Iraqi civilians by insisting that US casualties make up less than 10% of the total number.

Daniel

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@grienspace

Seems like everyone has forgotten the rebellion of the Kurds and the Shiites following GWI for which Bush I was roundly criticised for encouraging but not helping. Does anyone need a cite for that ?

Sure, I remember when Poppy hung the Kurds out to dry after the GWI. What does that have to do with this thread topic?

[Debaser]

@Left Hand of Dorkness

Debaser, can you cite an example of Iraqi casualties being included amongst “coalition casualties”–using that exact phrase–at any point prior to September 30, 2004?

It’s funny that you still don’t get it. Read the transcript. Cheney isn’t saying that Iraq is part of the “coalition” or that Iraq is an “ally”. It’s you who is making these statements. He is simply saying that they are fighting and dying and they should be counted. To ignore those casualties is an insult to them, regardless of what label you choose to put on them.

You can shove your accusations of ignoring the deaths of Iraqis up your ass, meanwhile. That’s not what this debate is about, and a less hateful person would recognize it.

That is exactly what the debate is about, you fucking idiot. You just don’t get it.

[Desmostylus]

@Debaser

To not count them is to impugn and belittle them.

To not count them in the “coalition of the willing” is simply accurate. They didn’t willingly enter into this. There’s no impugning or belittling of them here.

Their deaths do need to be counted, however, in the list of awful shit that Bush is responsible for. Again, no impugning or belittling of them going on.

You are one fucked up individual.

[Debaser]

@Diogenes the Cynic

The Iraqis are not on our side. THAT’S the fucking point.

Heh.

[sarcasm]
Nope. You’re not insulting them at all. No insulting of them going on here.
[/sarcasm]

The Iraqi security forces are fighting alongside our troops and dying in equal numbers to them. They certainly are on our side, and suggesting otherwise is even more insulting to them than just not counting them.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Debaser

Heh.

[sarcasm]
Nope. You’re not insulting them at all. No insulting of them going on here.
[/sarcasm]

No, I’m insulting you, dipshit. I lament the loss of life by Iraqis but I also acknowledge that we are the ones who fucking killed them.

The Iraqi security forces are fighting alongside our troops and dying in equal numbers to them. They certainly are on our side, and suggesting otherwise is even more insulting to them than just not counting them.

From what I hear, most of them are refusing to fight alongside our troops.

[Debaser]

@Desmostylus

To not count them in the “coalition of the willing” is simply accurate. They didn’t willingly enter into this. There’s no impugning or belittling of them here.

I disagree.

Sure, you can say that they aren’t included in the “coalition of the willing”. That’s not the point. You could say that “American’s suffered 100% of the casualties on Utah and Omaha beaches in Normandy”. This isn’t technically incorrect. But it does disrespect our allies on Gold, Juno and Sword beaches. Even more so if it’s said over and over as if we’re the only ones fighting and dying.

You are one fucked up individual.

Don’t take me too seriously. I’m in a bad mood, and this is the closest I’ve ever come to being pitted. I figured I’d come in swinging.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Debaser

That is exactly what the debate is about, you fucking idiot. You just don’t get it.

Your insults are foolish. Maybe that’s what YOU’RE debating, but that’s not what EDWARDS was debating.

He was saying that, because the administration didn’t work to get more allies in this debacle, 90% of the deaths among the force going into Iraq were American. He was saying that, if the Administration had built a better coalition, that wouldn’t be the case.

But don’t take my word for it–take the word of the nonpartisan site that Cheney tried to refer people to, factcheck.org:

Cheney disputed Edwards’s statement – often repeated by Kerry – that US forces have suffered “90% of the coalition casualties” in Iraq, saying that in fact Iraqi security forces “have taken almost 50 percent” of the casualties.

Both men have a point here, but Edwards is closer to the mark.

Edwards is correct counting only “coalition” forces – those of the US, Britain and the other countries that took part in the invasion and occupation of Iraq. According to CNN.com, which keeps an updated list, 1,066 US service men and women had died from hostile action and other causes during the Iraq operation as of Oct. 5, of a total 1,205 for all coalition countries. That’s just over 88% of the coalition deaths.

We know of no accurate count of deaths suffered by Iraqi security forces, but an estimate reported both by the Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post puts the figure at 750. Lumping those estimated Iraqi deaths with fatalities suffered by coalition forces produces a total of 1,955. Of that, the estimated Iraqi portion is 38% (not “almost 50%” as Cheney claimed) and the US total amounts to 55%.

[emphasis added]

Are they dumb fucks, too? Is everyone who disagrees with how the dead should be categorized a dumb fuck? Are you behind on your medication?

Daniel

[Debaser]

The section you bolded is something that’s not in dispute. You still don’t get it. Try re-reading the thread. Take your time.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Debaser

The section you bolded is something that’s not in dispute. You still don’t get it. Try re-reading the thread. Take your time.

Debaser, you cretin, tell me exactly what you think I’m denying. You’re arguing something that nobody disagrees with, claiming we all hold to this nonexistent position, and then getting outraged at our callousness.

It’s better when you come out swinging with something more than a nerf bat; if you lack substantive argument, at least you could try some respectful listening.

Daniel