It ain't all negitive...

"Medal of Honor in Operation Iraqi
LAST UPDATE: 4/4/2005 4:59:52 AM


WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush today will award the first Medal of Honor stemming from action in the Iraq war.

The nation's highest honor for military valor will be awarded posthumously to Sergeant First Class Paul Smith. He served with the Eleventh Engineering Battalion of the Third Infantry Division and lost his life engaging Iraqi troops in the fight for control of Baghdad's airport two years ago.

Smith's platoon was setting up a prisoner detention area when Iraqi troops attacked them. Several Americans were injured.

Smith commandeered a vehicle with a 50-caliber weapon mounted at the rear and with his entire upper body exposed to Iraqi fire, he got off an estimated 300 rounds to protect his troops and repel the Iraqis.

Military officials believe he saved the lives of dozens of soldiers."

Smith basically took on 100 enemies and wiped out about half of them alone. Good for him and those he protected. This is the first MoH since Somalia.

All we hear or read is a casuality list as if nothing happens but our guys getting killed.

Back in November a Marine named Sgt. Rafael Peralta took incoming AK rounds wounding him as his squad probed into a house or building in Faluja. When a grenade came through the doorway he immediately grabbed it and stuck it under his body saving the rest of the squad.
THIS stuff we almost never hear.

I don't care who sent our guys where or what for. All I care about is that they have the chance to vanquish the enemy and as many as possible stay alive. It ain't about political loyalties. It's about supporting the guys- our fellow citizens.

Valour in combat. Hoo-rah.

Too bad it's posthumous.

Twitch I know we have some heroes in Iraq and alot of very brave men fighting right now. But its a waste of time posting it here because the anti-Bush faction will twist it.

I am proud of the US soliders fighting and dying in Iraq and nothing will take that away from us Americans.

This post is for the normal people here. Scoundrels have no idea what valor and honor are anyway so who cares about them, bro.

Politics aside from this about whether the war is right or not. These guys are braver than I'll ever be and know true sacrifice. It's an honor to have guys like this serving your country because it makes you...proud to be an American.

Politics aside from this about whether the war is right or not. These guys are braver than I'll ever be and know true sacrifice. It's an honor to have guys like this serving your country because it makes you...proud to be an American.

True. I have a friend in the army who was just riding with a group to pick up a pack of cigarettes, they took fire, the guy who was on the big gun (whatever the hell its called, its on the back of the hummer thinggys) got shot so my friend hopped on it and took out 7 people, got some medals, I was proud of him...politics aside.

Twitch I know we have some heroes in Iraq and alot of very brave men fighting right now. But its a waste of time posting it here because the anti-Bush faction will twist it.

I am proud of the US soliders fighting and dying in Iraq and nothing will take that away from us Americans.

I've yet to see anyone in this forum make any criticism of those who are actually fighting.

The venom is reserved for the lying asshole that sent them there.

We all just want our brothers back and they need to do whatever it takes to stay alive. Smith just did a little more to make certain some more will return home. Why would Sgt. Peralta cover a grenade with his body? Same reason- protecting his pals. That's all there is in combat. No political parties or tired dogma- just death.

Every professional politician is worth a buck of spit to me. Both demos and republicans hosed us in Nam. Pretty much the same all over the world. To arrive at a lofty position in a government anywhere means you are realtively slimy. Only when a neophyte comes unexpectedly from the ranks of the citizens, thrust into the political arena for some reason is there reason to be positive.

I support the troups.




Go Iraq Go!

Raz,

Why don't you go pack your bags and lend them a hand if you like them so much?

So the only way to support troups is to join them on the battlefront?




If so, then all those who aren't fighting right now are all anti-american, soldier hating tree huggers.

No, it was a joke. Albeit, not a very funny one.

So the only way to support troups is to join them on the battlefront?




If so, then all those who aren't fighting right now are all anti-american, soldier hating tree huggers.

Owned. :iceslolan

With no disrespect to those who show valour in the face of danger and adversity, I think it's much more important to see the negative stories, instead of the heartwarming propaganda fodder such as this one. Not because I'm a pessimist or because I hate America(which if you all remember, I am and I do, right?), but because it reminds us that for every Sgt. Paul Smith who courageously gave his life covering his unit, there are a hundred John Does who never even saw it coming, and went home in body bags.

War is messy business, there is no glory in war, and glorifying acts of valour misses teh entire point of them.

cbass- I ain't sure if you're kidding or what but if not that attitude is why media outlets the world over dwell on sadness, death, accidents, conflicts and negative things. To appease the many like you who feed on negativety, media exploits the dark feelings of "I'm glad that ain't me!" when folks hear about a plane crash, building exploding or a tsunami. It's a sad thing that one refuses to celebrate the triumphs of humanity of a person that survived alone the plane crash or burning building or saved another person. To rub one's hands in glee at another's misfortune is truly the pit of dispair.

See, this is why this forum is such a fug-a-thon for negative mopes. It is perfectly OK to post about something negative like a GI accidently shot another who ran into his line of fire or something. Then the hoots, cat calls and degrading begins. Lets pile up on it!

And what makes anyone so bitter about the US that it invades his daily routine? Did an American keep you from eating today? Or cause a traffic jam on your way to work? Did they attach your paycheck to buy M-16s? You don't even have a good reason. It's just chic to say you hate the US. HAHAHAHA!

And as a pessimist the glass isn't just half empty instead of half full, it's going to break anyway so why bother1? Yep, folks like you are a perfect tool for the international negative media.

The whole point of Smith's action was so that the 100 others would NOT go home in bags!! How is that glorifying war? We as humans glorify acts of valor in every race, society and ethnic culture on the planet! This is normal. Should "that guy saved the little girl from the tsunami" be exploited as a bad thing? How sick is that?

Raz if you're for Iraq )Go Iraq go!) that means you are for a democratically elected nation of people and not foreign or domestic insurgents. Yeah Raz!

Iraqi troups...the ones fighting off the American imperialists.

The only Iraqi "government" troops are those loyal to the new regime. The rest are insurgents and are not wearing the Iraqi military uniform. Some come from outside the country also. Since they are not invited by the legal government they are invaders.

American imperialists HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You couldn't be more funny and cliche like right out of some 1960 Maoist propaganda literature. What's next? "Yankee dogs, you die!"

They have been calling them insurgents even before America instated their puppy leaders.


Whatever you call them.. I'm for whoever is standing up aganist Americas bullshit.

And what makes anyone so bitter about the US that it invades his daily routine? Did an American keep you from eating today? Or cause a traffic jam on your way to work? Did they attach your paycheck to buy M-16s? You don't even have a good reason. It's just chic to say you hate the US. HAHAHAHA!


You can ignore the horrors committed by the Bush administration all you want. That doesn't mean they didn't happen. Thousands of people have died because our elected leader repeatedly lied to go to war for god knows what reason. Maybe you're ok with the 20,000 dead civilians
in Iraq. Maybe you're ok with the fact that no WMD's have been found, that no connection between Iraqi government and al qaeda existed, and that the US rushed into war against the advice of most the entire world.
But the rest of us can't ignore such atrocities. It's that simple.

Nobody here is denying the fact that brave and honorable soldiers exist. I will applaud them as vigorously as I will denounce the utterly braindead men and women in uniform. I would have them all come home safe, IQ, bravery and accomplishment aside. Naturally, I detest the administration that sent them and the bullshit justification given for doing so...

RSX- I respect your point of view!
Thrasher- I am more inclined to be moved by Hussein's attempt at genocide against his own ethnic groups and the death of 300,000+ found in mass graves before US soldiers set foot in the country. Show us where American troops have tortured, murdered, raped, sacked and pillaged the innocent citizens of Iraq. If you want to bandy the word 'atrocity' about please apply it to the poster boys Hussein and his fruitcake, perverted kids. When you have evidence of that, then you can take your foot out of your mouth.

So are you saying no American troups have tortured Iraqi civilians?

I am confused about something I keep hearing repeated over and over again in this thread and others. I keep hearing that the current administration has lied to us about Iraq and why we went. I am no fan of the current administration. I didn't vote for Bush in the last election.
I am trying to find where the lies are in what we were told. Is it the WMD thing? If so then wasn't that found to be faulty intelligence? Not only faulty American intelligence but also faulty intelligence from a great many sources. Maybe I am being a bit naive but I would like to know what I am being lied to about.

Sorry about getting this thread a little off track but it appears to have veered off a bit anyway.

Thanks
Later

So are you saying no American troups have tortured Iraqi civilians?

Putting words in his mouth. There's a big difference between "torture" and "abuse". Putting a leash on a prisoner is abusive, but it's not the same as cutting someone's arms over and over.

Fred, DGB454- it's the Big Lie syndrome at work. Hitler perfected it during WW2. If you tell a lie often enough and with practiced conviction not only do others believe it but you do too! After hearing it long enough people become apathetic to reality of the repitition and accept the lie as fact.

Please post a link or scan and post a newspaper story of sadistic, painful, demented torture with American perpetraters and not just the prison debacle with the chick pointing at the Iraqi guys' schlongs. Come on where is it?

Dozens were on the tube describing Hussein's pervert sons abuses in great detail but I guess all that is insignificant since it's not anti-American. I've never seen such people with such obsessive compulsions to manufacture tripe for absolutely no reason other than to prop up their own demented philosphies.
http://www.emotipad.com/newemoticons/Noooooooo.gif

Putting words in his mouth. There's a big difference between "torture" and "abuse". Putting a leash on a prisoner is abusive, but it's not the same as cutting someone's arms over and over.
Torture isn't just physical pain, it can consist of mental anguish caused by certain actions as well. Are you telling me that none of those prisoners that have to go through those events are perfectly fine today?

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=389941
even Mr.SuperBushSupporter codycool agree's there has been forms of torture by the american troups...the sad thing is he says it like theres nothing wrong with it.

You have witnesses saying Saddam's kids raped people...you have reports saying prisoners have been tortured. Why is it that you're so reluctant to believe that the saints on your side can't commit such actions and you're so eager to gobble up anything supporting your view?

The big lie syndrom obviously worked on some since many are still disillisional about the whole purpose of the war.

Thrasher- I am more inclined to be moved by Hussein's attempt at genocide against his own ethnic groups and the death of 300,000+ found in mass graves before US soldiers set foot in the country. Show us where American troops have tortured, murdered, raped, sacked and pillaged the innocent citizens of Iraq. If you want to bandy the word 'atrocity' about please apply it to the poster boys Hussein and his fruitcake, perverted kids. When you have evidence of that, then you can take your foot out of your mouth.

One evil does not justify another. Hussein was a worthless piece of shit who should have been removed from power long ago. But that doesn't give us the right to continue to kill innocent civilians. So we've killed 20,0000-25,000 innocents so far. When does it stop? When the US has also killed 300,000? That's absurd.

I am confused about something I keep hearing repeated over and over again in this thread and others. I keep hearing that the current administration has lied to us about Iraq and why we went. I am no fan of the current administration. I didn't vote for Bush in the last election.
I am trying to find where the lies are in what we were told. Is it the WMD thing? If so then wasn't that found to be faulty intelligence? Not only faulty American intelligence but also faulty intelligence from a great many sources. Maybe I am being a bit naive but I would like to know what I am being lied to about

The Bush administration claimed WMD's without evidence from the CIA. Then, they spoke of a meeting between Mohammed Atta and a senior Iraqi gov. official, which has repeatedly been shown to have never taken place.

Torture isn't just physical pain, it can consist of mental anguish caused by certain actions as well. Are you telling me that none of those prisoners that have to go through those events are perfectly fine today?

Nope, that's not what I said. I agree that torture can be mental as well as physical. Humiliation could be considered torture, but I'd think that a few incidences of it wouldn't hurt an adult. If it went on for quite a long time, then yes it could possibly be considered torture. Frankly, we just don't know how long things went on in Abu Ghraib, or exactly what went on. We can only speculate. In my mind however, there's a huge difference between butchering people and forcing them to sit naked with a leash on. Quite a lot of difference.




You have witnesses saying Saddam's kids raped people...you have reports saying prisoners have been tortured. Why is it that you're so reluctant to believe that the saints on your side can't commit such actions and you're so eager to gobble up anything supporting your view?


I've never said that the US soldiers were unable to commit atrocities. Again, you're putting words in my mouth. I'm sure that in ANY country you can find people willing to perform heinous acts on fellow humans. Especially during wartime, when you have to release the usually suppressed instincts that allow you to live during combat. But there is a huge difference between what Saddam was definitely doing, intentionally, for 25 years, and what the US soldiers may have been doing for the last year and a half.

Nope, that's not what I said. I agree that torture can be mental as well as physical. Humiliation could be considered torture, but I'd think that a few incidences of it wouldn't hurt an adult. If it went on for quite a long time, then yes it could possibly be considered torture. Frankly, we just don't know how long things went on in Abu Ghraib, or exactly what went on. We can only speculate. In my mind however, there's a huge difference between butchering people and forcing them to sit naked with a leash on. Quite a lot of difference.

How many burning babies do you have to see in person for it to impact you? You cannot deny that one single incident can leave long lasting mental scars. Not to say that because you ahven't turned psycho that it doesn't accuont for mental torture.



I've never said that the US soldiers were unable to commit atrocities. Again, you're putting words in my mouth. I'm sure that in ANY country you can find people willing to perform heinous acts on fellow humans. Especially during wartime, when you have to release the usually suppressed instincts that allow you to live during combat. But there is a huge difference between what Saddam was definitely doing, intentionally, for 25 years, and what the US soldiers may have been doing for the last year and a half.

Sorry let me clarify...the last part was directed to Twitch1.
It's beyond a year and a half because they found smimilar activites in Afghanistan. Who knows how far back it goes. Sure you can say that Saddam's actions were worse (they were) but at least he's being brought to justice...let's see the same to the others.

I support the troops, just not why they are there, or who sent them.

The Bush administration claimed WMD's without evidence from the CIA. Then, they spoke of a meeting between Mohammed Atta and a senior Iraqi gov. official, which has repeatedly been shown to have never taken place.
OK. Someone answered. Thanks.

I have a couple follow up questions. What were the administations claims based on? Were they simply made up or were they based on faulty or misleading intellegence reports? If they were made up then why didn't any other country that followed us into war realize that there was nothing to the claims made? Didn't they have access to any intelligence reports of their own or at the very least access to our reports backing up the claims?

I know a lot has come out since the war started that have shown many of the things this administration has claimed have turned out to be false. Have they proven them to be false because of error on the part of intelligence gathering or false by design? If they have been proven to be false by design then why hasn't impeachment proceedings began by the democrats?

OK. Someone answered. Thanks.

I have a couple follow up questions. What were the administations claims based on? Were they simply made up or were they based on faulty or misleading intellegence reports? If they were made up then why didn't any other country that followed us into war realize that there was nothing to the claims made? Didn't they have access to any intelligence reports of their own or at the very least access to our reports backing up the claims?

I know a lot has come out since the war started that have shown many of the things this administration has claimed have turned out to be false. Have they proven them to be false because of error on the part of intelligence gathering or false by design? If they have been proven to be false by design then why hasn't impeachment proceedings began by the democrats?

The claims were made on the assumption that the intelligence was good. I think there was a little "made up" in there, too - because that is what was wanted by the Bush administration. This begs the question: what if someone fabricated the "bad intelligence" in order to make a case for Bush to go to war? Not outside the realm of possibility.

Impeachment may not happen; while there's anough circumstantial stuff floating around, there may not be enough hard evidence to oust a president.

I guess that's where I get a little concerned. There is a lot of "stuff" floating around about the administration purposely lying to everyone on a lot of issues but I can't seem to find proof. There may be proof out there that I haven't seen or possibly simply forgot about over time.

I don't for a second believe that they are being honest with the public but at the same time I don't for a second think that any politician is honest with the public. This especially goes for the heads of all countries.

As for the impeachment question. Is it possible that there isn't enough hard evidence because it was simply a mistake or a misjudgement on the part of the administration to go to war rather than a huge cover up of lies? Obviously they were too eager to jump into a war with Iraq but it seems that there were also too many other countries ready and waiting to jump into it along with us.

Either way I am not happy about this war and I am never happy with the worlds leaders.

Beating the hell out of prisoners is not torture boys! With all due respect you have no concept of what torture is. I saw real torture in Southeast Asia and let me tell you, you don't want to know the details. It ain't dog bites, macing, fists or nightstick thumping no matter how severe.

I'll describe the least horrid routine the Pathet Lao liked to do when they were in a hurry. If you don't know who they were you better google it since for some of you that's the only concept of history you have.

This is one of more direct and actually less brutal plays in their game book. Take a prisoner and a 9mm pistol. Ask him for the answer to the information you want. No response? OK now bust a cap into him left kneecap? Nothing? Do the right kneecap. Silent yet? Left elbow. Nothing? Right elbow. Well, no response so pop one into the left shoulder. Quiet yet? Round to right shoulder. Boy this guy is a glutton for punishment, huh? Now put the muzzle alongside his head and squeeze on off into the right so it blows his ear off. Repeat on other ear.

At this point you subject can't hear you anymore anyway so that 9th round to the forehead will end the fun. These guys had a boatload of Spanish Star 9mms with 8 round clips that they carried. With one in the chamber you could end the guy's misery. But if you were a mean commie that day you left him there unable to move. It'd take the victim a few days to die that way.

The stuff they'd do when they weren't on the move and had time to enjoy the torture was much more protracted and painefull.

Burning babies? What sensationist drivel. Where's the documentation on baby torture. Or it that just a shotgun blast verbal zinger in hope of snaring some sympathy for fictional victims? I saw the VC eradicate whole vills beacuse it was rumored that a couple of its inhabitants were sympathetic to the government's philosophies, babies included. That's right, killed for thinking! And killed for living in the same vill with those that think.

The Khmer Rouge's final solution against their own people took 2 million lives. This was purposeful genocide. When anyone can substantiate an American plan to purposfully and on a willful, ongoing basis- not an isolated occurrance- then you can strut around like a ruptured duck in some holier than thou attitude.

The whole perversion of this original topic into allegations of premeditated, organized prisoner torture is pure, unalderated grandstanding for the sake of it. Those buying into this and secret conspiracy with outer space aliens to rule Earth are simply deluded.

Freddie J- I was in the job of intel and recon in Southeast Asia. You are correct. Any intelligence organization bases its conclusions, predictions and recommended courses of action based on input from the field operatives.

Here was Hussein actually perpetuating the myth that he was building of a bio-chem arsenal and had revived the nuke program. The ex-head of the Iraqi nuke/bio-chem programs admitted on TV to working on stuff while the UN inspectors were in an adjoining room!

Hussein's bragging about how he had all this bad crap was his downfall. He had created enough plausible smoke and mirrors that intel deduced he was telling the truth. BTW- how much bio-chem toys got shipped to Syria before we took Badgag?
http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung0304/waffen/violent-smiley-090.gif

Freddie J- I was in the job of intel and recon in Southeast Asia. You are correct. Any intelligence organization bases its conclusions, predictions and recommended courses of action based on input from the field operatives.

Here was Hussein actually perpetuating the myth that he was building of a bio-chem arsenal and had revived the nuke program. The ex-head of the Iraqi nuke/bio-chem programs admitted on TV to working on stuff while the UN inspectors were in an adjoining room!

Hussein's bragging about how he had all this bad crap was his downfall. He had created enough plausible smoke and mirrors that intel deduced he was telling the truth. BTW- how much bio-chem toys got shipped to Syria before we took Bagdad?

If Hussein said he had WMD's, and several intel sources agreed that he had WMD's, and Bush wanted to believe they had WMD's, then for all intents and purposes they HAD WMD's. None have been found, but I wouldn't discount your statement that they were moved during the invasion.

Another indicator that Hussein had something going on, were the repeated difficulties that UN inspectors had with their visits. I no longer have the link, but read a story about satellite intel from the area, wherein the inspectors were on their way to a location, there was a lot of truck activity at the location, and the trucks scattered prior to the arrival of the inspectors. Several instances of this same behavior were recorded by intel, so something was up. I doubt that this behavior would have existed if there was nothing to hide.

Yeah it's tantamount to hassling Mike Tyson and telling him how you're gonna kick his ass for several years and then you're surprised when he flattens you with one punch.
http://www.emotipad.com/newemoticons/Want-Some.gif

Yeah it's tantamount to hassling Mike Tyson and telling him how you're gonna kick his ass for several years and then you're surprised when he flattens you with one punch.
http://www.emotipad.com/newemoticons/Want-Some.gif
Nice try, but inaccurate.Tysons swung, missed by a mile, and now his supporters are trying to beat up the commentator for telling it how it is.

The conclusive evidence is the absolute lack of evidence.The WMD never exisited,and on the face of it, Bush fucked up.If he was actually personally responsible for the decision to invade Iraq, he shoould have been impeached by now, but he was only following orders.The party knew there were no WMD, they were more interested in strategic control in the oil-rich nations.Pump the Iraqi oil fast enough, and they will break OPEC forever.Perhaps that's why the 'insurgents' are doing everything they can to sabotage the theft of their oil.

Anyway Twitch, what do you know about Iraq?Using your logic in the 'Minutemen' thread, you live nowhere near Iraq, so you don't know shit.

Naki, I agree with your oil analogy/theory in part.

However to make a statement that WMD never existed isn't right, IMO. There's too much hearsay about it, and Hussein himself said for years he had them. Personally, I think that there's many things that no one outside a certain circle of knowledge is being told. There could have been WMD's found, and not told about. They could have been hidden prior to the Americans' arrival. They could never have existed in the first place, as you maintain.

The fact of the matter is that there is a wealth of disinformation coming from the region, and always has been. Too many lies over too many years and no one knows what to believe. I also believe that there is much censorship and slant to the information that does come out of there, so when we get A story we're not necessarily getting THE story.

Until the facts, uncolored by bias, are received, it's all really conjecture.

.The party knew there were no WMD, they were more interested in strategic control in the oil-rich nations.

What party was that? Aslo; could you please supply a link or an accurate quote from a reputable news source or reputable witnesses. Not saying it's wrong I am just trying to get things straight.

Thanks

I think that's a referral to the Republican party and GW.

These links are old, but interesting nevertheless:

http://www.aaiusa.org/republican_mideast.htm

http://www.counterpunch.org/goldstein03142003.html

http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief2-30.htm

He could have hid them just to make Bush look bad. People love it when Bush looks bad. They would have been more than willing to forgive saddam than accept that WMDs are still possibly hidden in iraq.

It's not just about WMD's though. One of the major justifications used by the Bush administration to attack Iraq was that Iraq was harboring and supporting al Qaeda terrorists. As evidence for this they said that Mohammed Atta (one of the leaders of the 9/11 attacks) had a secret meeting with a high ranking Iraqi government official, thus providing a connection between Saddam and al Qaeda. Yet the CIA has repeatedly said that they NEVER had evidence of such a meeting, nor did they provide such false info to the president.

I think that's a referral to the Republican party and GW.

These links are old, but interesting nevertheless:

http://www.aaiusa.org/republican_mideast.htm

http://www.counterpunch.org/goldstein03142003.html

http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief2-30.htm


I guess I already knew that he meant the Republican party. I was just giving him a hard time about that one.

Anyway...Thanks for the links. I will read through them once get back home.

He could have hid them just to make Bush look bad. People love it when Bush looks bad. They would have been more than willing to forgive saddam than accept that WMDs are still possibly hidden in iraq.
Let's see. They've been in Iraq for how long? How long have they taken control of Iraq? Didn't they say something about being able to launch a WMD within 1 hour or something...obviously they must be already prepped for launching and with the hurry the US went to war, Saddam couldn't possibly have hid them that well.

Twitch1, the burning baby anology wasn't saying American troops are burning babies alive. It was just said to proove that one incident can leave lifetime mental scars.

The whole abuse thing kinda makes sense. Think about it, you started a war based on something you thought true and it turned out to be false. Now you try and throw any reasons for why the war was started. You take a bunch of civilians prisoner, terrorist links or not, and beat them snesless just to have them say anything to your favour. That way when confronted about the abuse you can tell whoever is questioning you that your methods are paying off because your getting information.

Who cares about Iraq, what they should further report on were the documents about Osama getting away from US troops in Afghanistan. Not recent news but fairly new.

Who cares about Iraq, what they should further report on were the documents about Osama getting away from US troops in Afghanistan."

Why, so someone can be persecuted because you think they should?

Why the heck do you all care what Bush does anyway? How is it affecting you in your lives? There isn't a US person here not connected with the military that has had any hardship about Iraq. And, sorry, but all you in other countries it's affecting you even less. You could kamikazi the White House if it really bothers you all and if you had the guts. But you won't and you don't. You'll just run your mouths about nothing.

I would think that it would be hard to find things that are buried out in the desert.

Our tanks could have driven right over them on the way in.

Remember that Saddam was a tyrant, but he wasn't an idiot

Why, so someone can be persecuted because you think they should?
Are you saying Saddam is a more important person to catch then Osama? If so, how?

Why the heck do you all care what Bush does anyway? How is it affecting you in your lives? There isn't a US person here not connected with the military that has had any hardship about Iraq. And, sorry, but all you in other countries it's affecting you even less. You could kamikazi the White House if it really bothers you all and if you had the guts. But you won't and you don't. You'll just run your mouths about nothing.
I happen to have many families in the States. Furthermore, when the whole 9/11 thing happened, there was alot of heckiling towards the family that lives in New York. They were constantly in fear of the police even. Always being stopped for no reason, asked very perosnal questions and sometimes even being questionned about their faith and how they can continue to be a muslim after what they did. Many of my Iraqi friends also lost relatives, some close some distant...all for what?

I think that's a referral to the Republican party and GW.

These links are old, but interesting nevertheless:

http://www.aaiusa.org/republican_mideast.htm (http://www.aaiusa.org/republican_mideast.htm)
I'm not sure what to make of this site. There is a lot of good info focused on Arab Americans but the arlicle about the Republican party platform in 2004 was to me a little confusing. Was the article based on what the Republicans themselves said was their platform or was it based on the writers perception of their platform? Very cool that they went all the way back to 68. http://www.counterpunch.org/goldstein03142003.html
I liked this one. There was a little more meat to it. It does implicate both parties which is a good start as far as I am concerned.
I do remember when I first heard mention of this quote: "energy and resource issues will continue to shape international security" .
I wasn't suprised that it was said and I can even understand why it was said. I think that was always the case not only in this country but in every country that doesn't posess vast oil fields. The only thing that will change that line of thinking is an alternate energy source that is readily available to everyone and is able to be manufactured in every country. Another possibility is that we change our view on what it takes to secure the energy needed to sustain a country. That change is security through friendships and equal trade among friends and allies.
There is a huge stumbling block in that road called Israel. My personal feelings is that we should continue to support Israel but continue to push towards peace with Israel and it's Middle East neighbors. The way those other countries feel about the Jewish people I doubt that a long lasting peace will ever happen though.

For the part on the NEPDG. I will have to hold off on making any judgement on that until more facts come out. (Hopefully they will come out) I must admit that I don't like the way it's being covered up but it seems like that is always happening with the Government. Too many secrets from publicly appointed officials as far as I am concerned.

http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief2-30.htm
Didn't have time to get into this one yet but I will.

I have been saying this a lot lately.
Sorry for side tracking this thread.

Loved your comment on alternative energy. Imagine what would happen to OPEC, and the middle east, if an alternate source was implemented.

Raz- I'm just saying what's the difference? Who cares what they do? It don't shorten my commute in the morning at all.



You have just shown why the whole world hates Americans. It doesn't shorten your commute? Are you fucking kidding? People are dying, and all you're worried about is your commute? That is pathetic. As long as it doesn't affect your life, who cares. What an attitude.

But you have to admit that that attitude does reflect the attitude of many Americans. We've all seen the low voter turnouts and other disinterest.

That's also part of why US citizens are seen as rich, fat, dumb, and happily ignorant of the greater world around them by people overseas.

I'm agreeing with lamehonda on this one here. How long did we give Sadam to leave the country, a week, two weeks? This was more than enough time to destroy, hide, or export whatever WMD he had, evidence he had them, and anything else that would of backed up America's claims. Also, if we invaded Iraq for oil, where is it? Last time I checked gas prices are going up and not down.

You have just shown why the whole world hates Americans. It doesn't shorten your commute? Are you fucking kidding? People are dying, and all you're worried about is your commute? That is pathetic. As long as it doesn't affect your life, who cares. What an attitude.
Why should he care about anything else? We have been raised to not care about anything but ourselves. That is one of the downsides of an individualistic society like ours. Not saying its right, but I do understand where his comments come from.

Why? Because if you stick your head in the sand for long enough, something will come up and bite you in the ass.

My :2cents:

I agree.

Here's a little photo essay that some might like- turn on the sound:
http://www.iwo.com/heroes.htm

Nice, that one picture with the guy getting water poured on his head looked kinda strange. I just hoped that wasn't gasoline and the guy behind him wasn't striking a match.

I hope my childish observation didn't ruin it.