Hate speech from Liberal Mainstreamists

Discussion in 'Politics' started by estrader, Mar 12, 2006.

  1. Ricter

    Ricter

    If a bunch of foreign troops were all over our soil, no matter how noble their motive, we'd be right pissed off and we'd be battling to get them the fuck out. That's 'cause we're proud.
     
    #11     Mar 12, 2006
  2. Do you think we would be blowing up our own churches, marketplaces and police stations and murdering hundreds of our own countrymen because they were of the wrong brand of our religion? There is a vast difference between a guerilla movement and terrorism. What we see in Iraq is almost totally the latter. MOst of the rest is more in the nature of low level civil war.
     
    #12     Mar 12, 2006
  3. Ricter

    Ricter

    I think it's possible we fight that way if certain conditions were extant: 1) We couldn't meet their forces directly. 2) We felt helpless. 3) We ceased fearing death. 4) We believed that violence, senseless or otherwise, will eventually force the more powerful party to the table.
     
    #13     Mar 15, 2006
  4. If you defend your country against an invading army, you are a terrorist. Remember, it's only terror when THEY do it to us! When we do it to them it's sweet, glorious democracy.

    Especially so when the entire military-industrial complex sends its most sohphisticatd WMD into civillian towns. Yes folks, I pray each day that the US liberates my country.

    Still waiting for those flowers to be thrown at someone's feet.

    Remember folks, the enemy now are the non-violent peace activists. They are a huge threat to us.
     
    #14     Mar 15, 2006
  5. Guess who lives in these cities? Yup people like you and me. But your media would never let you show the true toll of these WMD being dropped on people. You don't have the freedom to show that.

    I know liberators like you are really concerned over this. You only want to help people.


    "The numbers also show that U.S. forces dropped bombs on more cities during the last five months than they did during the same period a year ago. Air strikes a year ago struck at least nine cities, but were mostly concentrated in and around the western city of Fallujah. This year, U.S. warplanes have struck at least 18 cities. "


    ""Residents worry that their homes will be bombed at any time," said Hussein Ali Jaafar, who owns a stationery shop in the town of Balad, north of Baghdad, which was targeted by bombs or missiles at least 27 times between October 2005 and February 2006. "Most of the bombing is unjustified and random. It does not differentiate between militants and innocent people." "

    <B>U.S. military airstrikes significantly increased in IraqBy Tom LasseterKnight Ridder NewspapersBAGHDAD, Iraq - American forces have dramatically increased airstrikes in Iraq during the past five months, a change of tactics that may foreshadow how the United States plans to battle a still-strong insurgency while reducing the number of U.S. ground troops serving here.
    A review of military data shows that daily bombing runs and jet-missile launches have increased by more than 50 percent in the past five months, compared with the same period last year. Knight Ridder's statistical findings were reviewed and confirmed by American Air Force officials in the region.
    The numbers also show that U.S. forces dropped bombs on more cities during the last five months than they did during the same period a year ago. Air strikes a year ago struck at least nine cities, but were mostly concentrated in and around the western city of Fallujah. This year, U.S. warplanes have struck at least 18 cities.

    The spike in bombings comes at a crucial time for American diplomatic efforts in Iraq. Officials in Washington have said that the situation in Iraq is improving, creating expectations that at least some American troops might be able to withdraw over the next year.
    On Monday, President Bush stopped short of promising a withdrawal. But he said he expects that Iraqi government forces will control more of Iraq, allowing U.S. forces to carry out more targeted missions.
    "As more capable Iraqi police and soldiers come on line, they will assume responsibility for more territory - with the goal of having the Iraqis control more territory than the coalition by the end of 2006," Bush said. "And as Iraqis take over more territory, this frees American and coalition forces to concentrate on training and on hunting down high-value targets, like the terrorist (Abu Musab al) Zarqawi and his associates."
    There are risks to a strategy that relies more on aerial bombings than ground combat patrols. In the town of Samarra, for example, insurgents last month were able to spend several hours rigging explosives in the dome of a Shiite shrine that they later destroyed, in part because American troops patrolled less. The shrine's destruction triggered a week of sectarian violence that killed hundreds. U.S. soldiers interviewed in Samarra three weeks earlier said patrols in the city had been significantly reduced because the number of troops had been reduced by two-thirds.
    Airstrikes also risk civilian casualties, driving a wedge between American forces and Iraqis, Iraqis say.
    Osama Jadaan al Dulaimi, a tribal leader in the western town of Karabilah, a town near the Syrian border that was hit with bombs or missiles on at least 17 days between October 2005 and February 2006, said the bombings had created enemies.
    "The people of Karabilah hate the foreigners who crossed the border and entered their areas and got into a fight with the Americans," al Dulaimi said. "The residents now also hate the American occupiers who demolished their houses with bombs and killed their families ... and now the people of Karabilah want to join the resistance against the Americans for what they did."
    The U.S. military has said repeatedly that it uses precise munitions and targets insurgent locations that are verified by various intelligence sources.
    Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, a top U.S. military spokesman in Iraq, said that the airstrikes reflected U.S. soldiers' ability to target more sharply insurgents across Iraq.
    "This is one more tool that they have pulled out ... as they have been able to better refine their tactics and procedures," Johnson said. "Airpower has always been available. I don't see a ramping-up; I see a refinement" of intelligence that allows for more airstrikes.
    Johnson also disputed the idea that the bombings exact a political cost.
    "The same thing could be said of anything we use to target the enemy," Johnson said. "If they take up arms against Iraqi and coalition forces, they are going to be targeted with the weapons the commander on the ground deems most effective to eliminate the threat."
    Knight Ridder compiled the statistics from about 300 daily press releases provided by the U.S. Central Command's air forces unit, which describes itself as the "predominant owner of air assets in the region." The releases detailed bombing activities, but they didn't include actions of Marine Corps units, so the number of bombings probably is higher.
    Air Force officials who reviewed the statistics confirmed that they were correct.
    The statistics show that U.S. and coalition planes dropped bombs or missiles on Iraqi cities on at least 76 days from Oct. 1, 2005, through Feb. 28, 2006 - or one out of every two days. During the same period a year earlier, bombs or missiles struck on only 49 days, the tabulation showed.
    Bombs were dropped on more days in each of the last five months than they were for the same months the previous year. For example, the U.S. military launched bombings and missile strikes on 20 days in December 2005, compared with 12 in December 2004, and 10 in January 2006, compared with five in January 2005.
    The figures also indicate that the insurgency has branched out after American forces retook the city of Fallujah in November 2004, robbing the insurgents of their main base of operations in Iraq.
    In Anbar province, Fallujah was hit hardest in the 2004 to 2005 period. During the heaviest fighting there in 2004, from Nov. 10-16, American aircraft dropped at least 54 bombs or missiles on the town.
    But from October 2005 to February 2006, at least eight cities in Anbar were hit, from Fallujah to the dusty towns on the far western border that abuts Syria.
    Stories of American missiles hitting the homes of innocents are passed between Iraqi men at teahouses and during Friday worship services.
    "Residents worry that their homes will be bombed at any time," said Hussein Ali Jaafar, who owns a stationery shop in the town of Balad, north of Baghdad, which was targeted by bombs or missiles at least 27 times between October 2005 and February 2006. "Most of the bombing is unjustified and random. It does not differentiate between militants and innocent people."
    A tribal sheik who lives on the outskirts of the troubled Anbar town of Ramadi, who asked that he be identified as Abu Tahseen instead of by his full name out of fear of possible retribution, said that the strikes create more insurgents than they kill because of the region's tribal dictates of revenge.
    "They (the Americans) think: `As long as there are resistance fighters operating in this spot, we will wipe it out entirely,'" Abu Tahseen said, using the term for insurgents favored by Iraqis sympathetic to their cause. "As you know, our nature is a tribal one, and so if one from us is killed, we kill three or four in return."
    Comparing the total number of bombs and missiles dropped from one year to the next isn't possible because the Central Command releases began late last year to refer to "precision guided bombs" or "precision guided munitions" instead of the actual number and type of bomb used.
    "The change in nomenclature reflects internal angst about whether or not it is appropriate to give the specific types of ordnance dropped,'" said Air Forces spokesman Maj. Robert P. Palmer in an e-mail exchange.
    Knight Ridder special correspondents Zaineb Obeid and Hassan al Jubouri contributed to this report.
     
    #15     Mar 15, 2006
  6. Only complete idiots don't understand the difference betweeen liberals and commies. You're so predictable.
     
    #16     Mar 15, 2006
  7. No kidding?

    Bush job approval rating - 33%
    http://people-press.org/reports/questionnaires/271.pdf



    Democratic Congressional Lead Among Registered Voters Largest Since '82 Midterm
    Lead by 55% to 39% on generic ballot
    http://poll.gallup.com/content/?ci=21928



    Republicans are not going to win another election until they find a way to disassociate themselves from Bush. Kinda hard to do for natural born dittoheads though, don't you think?
     
    #17     Mar 15, 2006