Suicide Bomber kills 22 in Iraq

[Mr. President]

so it's ignorant to look at the statistics and see that the violence has NOT been reduced in Iraq? I see how that works...thanks for the 411

Statistics say violence has been reduced.

if the purpose of the surge and the purpose for the continued occupation of Iraq is to bring peace and stability to the region then they are failing miserably IMO.

The purpose was to reduce violence not eliminate it. I refer you to my above comment.

as for the comparison of what if someone committs a murder in my town do I fault the government or police? well if the government or police took what was before a pretty stable neighborhood (even if I didn't agree with how it was run), rolled their forces in, took out the mayor of that neighborhood and allowed unfriendly and dangerous insurgents from other neighborhoods to set up shop there and people were dying in mass suicide bombings? then yeah, I'd say I'd blame them...damn right.

Yes the government was stable for Sadam and his regime but not for the millions murdered on his whims.

personally I'm disgusted that ANYONE would think that the life of ONE American serviceman/woman is worth the lives of 100 muslims.

Personally Im disgusted at anyone who thinks that American soldiers should be killed instead of the enemy who is killing civilians.

and not all muslims are the enemy strolling, think that's true is feeding into the propoganda that the muslims on those planes are just regular muslims. There were extremists. There are extremists in every religion that would just as soon kill you as allow you to believe different than they do.

But strolling is not an extremist and is simply stating that the life of a soldier is worth more than the life of a terrorist and i agree. In this case the terrorist happen to be muslim or islamic extremist.

were there suicide bombers killing innocents prior to our occupation? yes, were they an every day occurence? not to my knowledge.

You are absolutely right they were not suicide bombing because they could walk into a city and kill anyone they pleased. If they walked into a city with ak47's and tried that now the US military would destroy them with minimal effort thus they had to change their killing tactics. They did not however change their targets, iraqi civilians.

the beheadings are wrong no doubt about that....but in their CULTURE that is how the deal with what they deem criminal behavior. In Saudi do they not chop off the hand of someone who steals? also they behead people in public too. why do we look the other way for them and not for Iraq?

So if their culture says violence is the answer should the United States behead every person we capture as a criminal of war in order to respect their culture?

 

[sealybobo]

Statistics say violence has been reduced.




The purpose was to reduce violence not eliminate it. I refer you to my above comment.



Yes the government was stable for Sadam and his regime but not for the millions murdered on his whims.



Personally Im disgusted at anyone who thinks that American soldiers should be killed instead of the enemy who is killing civilians.



But strolling is not an extremist and is simply stating that the life of a soldier is worth more than the life of a terrorist and i agree. In this case the terrorist happen to be muslim or islamic extremist.



You are absolutely right they were not suicide bombing because they could walk into a city and kill anyone they pleased. If they walked into a city with ak47's and tried that now the US military would destroy them with minimal effort thus they had to change their killing tactics. They did not however change their targets, iraqi civilians.




So if their culture says violence is the answer should the United States behead every person we capture as a criminal of war in order to respect their culture?

Violence can go up just as fast as it went down. And keep in mind that in the past week we renigged on a deal with the Sunni's, so expect violence to go back up again. Wackamole. Doesn't matter, we need to turn it over to the Iraqi's and go back to Afganistan.

We killed more people in Iraq

If it were reverse and Iraq invaded America, you'd call them the terrorists, so I find it funny you call the Iraqi's in Iraq that are fighting America TERRORISTS. Was George Washington a terrorist? It depends on who you ask. Plus, we handed Iraq over to Iran. Just about the dumbest thing ever done by an Administration.

What did Reagan do when Marines were killed in Lebanon? He brought them home.

Who thinks American soldiers should be killed? No one, that's who.

No, the terrorists are Christian extremists.

 

[eots]

Silence Wrote:


Even Obama states that the surge has been a remarkable success. Careful here, Silence, it looks a bit like you're gloating over the senseless deaths of 22 innocent people just because it advances your political beliefs.

the SURGE what a bunch of assholes...the surge..it is just a word..they sent more troops ,spent more money and it allowed for a llittle more control...hey guess what Einstein ...if we send even more troops and even more money we probably can exercise a little more control...

 

[Mr. President]

Violence can go up just as fast as it went down. And keep in mind that in the past week we renigged on a deal with the Sunni's, so expect violence to go back up again. Wackamole. Doesn't matter, we need to turn it over to the Iraqi's and go back to Afganistan.

We do need to hand Iraq over but not at this moment. The Progression is further than you are led to believe it wont be much longer.

We killed more people in Iraq

Please prove that!

If it were reverse and Iraq invaded America, you'd call them the terrorists, so I find it funny you call the Iraqi's in Iraq that are fighting America TERRORISTS. Was George Washington a terrorist? It depends on who you ask. Plus, we handed Iraq over to Iran. Just about the dumbest thing ever done by an Administration.

No I call Iraqis who are slaughtering Iraqi's and attempting to slaughter Americans terrorists.

What did Reagan do when Marines were killed in Lebanon? He brought them home.

Welcome to war.

Who thinks American soldiers should be killed? No one, that's who.

Then why defend those trying to kill them.

No, the terrorists are Christian extremists.

If this is indeed true it would be a religious genocide and we would destroy the full islamic nation which we are capable of doing and have not done.

 

[HoleInTheVoid]

[with full US backing and support].

Just fixing it up.

This may come as a shock to you--you being as dutifuly steeped in your masters' propaganda--but T-72's, MiG's, ZSU's, AK-47's, RPG's et al are not manufactured by the US.

 

[Silence]

Statistics say violence has been reduced.

violence against American troops, perhaps but we're still losing too many in this unnecessary war and even one soldier dead in a conflict that should've never taken place is too many

The purpose was to reduce violence not eliminate it. I refer you to my above comment.

well if the purpose is to just reduce it and they've done that then they can leave now right?

Yes the government was stable for Sadam and his regime but not for the millions murdered on his whims.

again I refer you to the government of Saudi Arabia and other third world countries who don't necessarily practice peace against their people. Are we to believe that the United States military should go into those countries as well and "keep the peace"?

Personally Im disgusted at anyone who thinks that American soldiers should be killed instead of the enemy who is killing civilians.

who said anything about the terrorists? you and others equate terrorist with muslims. I do not do that. I am able to know there is a difference, I am sorry you are not. and by the way, the terrorists who killed americans on 9/11 are still at large.

But strolling is not an extremist and is simply stating that the life of a soldier is worth more than the life of a terrorist and i agree. In this case the terrorist happen to be muslim or islamic extremist.

the life of a terrorist yes...the life of a muslim? NO and that is what strolling said... read it again

You are absolutely right they were not suicide bombing because they could walk into a city and kill anyone they pleased. If they walked into a city with ak47's and tried that now the US military would destroy them with minimal effort thus they had to change their killing tactics. They did not however change their targets, iraqi civilians.

I think you believe the media propoganda pushed on us. I choose to do a little more than watch Fox news for my information. Try it, you might be enlightened.

So if their culture says violence is the answer should the United States behead every person we capture as a criminal of war in order to respect their culture?

their "culture" does not say this...extremists within their culture say this. Just as extremists in our culture believe that violence is how you get results. Timothy McVie ring any bells? Wacco? c'mon don't act as if there aren't militant groups in this very country who believe the same thing, they just call their God something else.

and we already torture people who haven't even been convicted of a crime so we're not really much different...we just think we can claim righteous justification as our reason behind our behavior.

 

[dilloduck]

and saying he murdered millions? yes okay...but what about Darfur? Kosovo, Bosnia, Rwanda? Democratic Republic of the Congo? c'mon people if you're outraged about Iraq don't you have to be outraged about them too?


Mass crimes against humanity and genocide since World War II

I am and so was America when we intervened in Kosovo and Bosnia.--and that was to protect Muslims.

 

[Mr. President]

violence against American troops, perhaps but we're still losing too many in this unnecessary war and even one soldier dead in a conflict that should've never taken place is too many

One soldier dead is always too many but death is a sacrifice we are willing to make not wanting. The necessity of this war is questioned by you not me and there are justifications for this conflict.

well if the purpose is to just reduce it and they've done that then they can leave now right?

I take it you are unfirmiliar with war zones it takes a while to make changes become a normality.

again I refer you to the government of Saudi Arabia and other third world countries who don't necessarily practice peace against their people. Are we to believe that the United States military should go into those countries as well and "keep the peace"?

I believe that the military should have unrestricted permission to destroy all those who wish to commit genocide and torture innocent people I never argued against that.

who said anything about the terrorists? you and others equate terrorist with muslims. I do not do that. I am able to know there is a difference, I am sorry you are not. and by the way, the terrorists who killed americans on 9/11 are still at large.

I do not equate muslims with terrorists if so I couldnt be in Iraq or serve in the military for that matter. There is a difference the terrorists we are facing happen to be muslim. If you can find an instance where i said we are against the muslim world and not islamic extremist then please bring that to my attentio i would gladly correct myself.

the life of a terrorist yes...the life of a muslim? NO and that is what strolling said... read it again

Yes that is what strolling said that could be equated with patriotism if they asked me to save one American or 100 Italians I would save my countrymen.

I think you believe the media propoganda pushed on us. I choose to do a little more than watch Fox news for my information. Try it, you might be enlightened.

I do more than watch fox i camp out in the war zone and fight the war come on over and discuss it over some coffee

their "culture" does not say this...extremists within their culture say this. Just as extremists in our culture believe that violence is how you get results. Timothy McVie ring any bells? Wacco? c'mon don't act as if there aren't militant groups in this very country who believe the same thing, they just call their God something else.

Exactly so you say that because we havent eliminated extremism world wide we shouldnt do it in one place.

and we already torture people who haven't even been convicted of a crime so we're not really much different...we just think we can claim righteous justification as our reason behind our behavior.

HAHA not convicted but not innocent either you cant wage war by two sets of rules.

 

[Red Dawn]

Suicide bomber kills 22 in attack on party

A suicide bomber blew herself up Monday among police officers who were celebrating the release of a comrade from U.S. custody, killing at least 22 people, Iraqi officials said. Separate bombings in Iraq killed 13 other people.



I guess the surge really worked eh?

Iraq is still one of the most violent places on earth.

It's good that less people are dying than in 2006.

Anyone who thinks we're on the verge of victory, and creating a strong, pro-american ally in the middle east - I would ask them if they would like to wander around Tikrit, Sadr City, or Mosul alone, unarmed, and unescorted for a couple hours

 

[dilloduck]

Iraq is still one of the most violent places on earth.

It's good that less people are dying than in 2006.

Anyone who thinks we're on the verge of victory, and creating a strong, pro-american ally in the middle east - I would ask them if they would like to wander around Tikrit, Sadr City, or Mosul alone, unarmed, and unescorted for a couple hours

I wouldn't do that in east Austin.

 

[MichaelCollins]

Let me just make something clear to the retards who try to fool themselves that the US is a force for good in the world.

The US NEVER invades or bombs a country for the good of those people....

The Saddam was evil argument...and the US went in..to save the Iraqi people is so laughable...that i find it hard to read those who propagate this bile and not cringe.

The US were the main supporters of Saddam when he committed most of his attrocities... and it was certainly not in the millions.


Now then... Rwanda, the Congo, Sudan, Camobodia etc etc etc etc...These were in the millions. Millions of civilians being massacred....Where was this "fighter for freedom and democracy" USofA then? It was safely at home and tucked up in bed...because it was not in their interest to get involved.



I know that the hatefilled supporters of the US terrorism in Iraq know the truth...deep inside they know the truth.

US military action is only ever committed in self interest..... NEVER to help others.

 

[dilloduck]

Now then... Rwanda, the Congo, Sudan, Camobodia etc etc etc etc...These were in the millions. Millions of civilians being massacred....Where was this "fighter for freedom and democracy" USofA then? It was safely at home and tucked up in bed...because it was not in their interest to get involved

and where was Jolly Old England ?

 

[MichaelCollins]

and where was Jolly Old England ?

Jolly old English people do not claim to be a force for democracy and justice in the world....as jesus freak americans do regularly on this forum.

FACT.. the US totally ignored genocide and genocide in Africa..

The US SUPPORTED Saddam attrocities against his own people.

BUsh is a great mate with Karimov ... a much more evil man that Saddam...nearly as good a mate as DUmbsfeld was with Saddam..but not quite.

 

[Jeepers]

Good thing the war is over... people could actually get hurt when bombs and shit go off...

 

[strollingbones]

Let me just make something clear to the retards who try to fool themselves that the US is a force for good in the world.

The US NEVER invades or bombs a country for the good of those people....

The Saddam was evil argument...and the US went in..to save the Iraqi people is so laughable...that i find it hard to read those who propagate this bile and not cringe.

The US were the main supporters of Saddam when he committed most of his attrocities... and it was certainly not in the millions.


Now then... Rwanda, the Congo, Sudan, Camobodia etc etc etc etc...These were in the millions. Millions of civilians being massacred....Where was this "fighter for freedom and democracy" USofA then? It was safely at home and tucked up in bed...because it was not in their interest to get involved.



I know that the hatefilled supporters of the US terrorism in Iraq know the truth...deep inside they know the truth.

US military action is only ever committed in self interest..... NEVER to help others.

look you wanker.....did the us not come to britains aid in ww2? why dont you go out and look at them poppy fields ...why dont you pull your head out of your ass....

 

[MichaelCollins]

look you wanker.....did the us not come to britains aid in ww2? why dont you go out and look at them poppy fields ...why dont you pull your head out of your ass....

It is just as easy to say that Britain came to the aid of the US for many years fighting the germans...and thus preventing a unified Nazi Germany...which the US could not possible have dealt with.

Anyway we have had this argument before.... Russia won WW2... 70% of german forces were used to deal with Russia.

THe US was a speck in a desert of death and suffering.

 

[eots]

they have been martyred for the jihad ...they are in a better place now

 

[Gunny]

Let me just make something clear to the retards who try to fool themselves that the US is a force for good in the world.

The US NEVER invades or bombs a country for the good of those people....

The Saddam was evil argument...and the US went in..to save the Iraqi people is so laughable...that i find it hard to read those who propagate this bile and not cringe.

The US were the main supporters of Saddam when he committed most of his attrocities... and it was certainly not in the millions.


Now then... Rwanda, the Congo, Sudan, Camobodia etc etc etc etc...These were in the millions. Millions of civilians being massacred....Where was this "fighter for freedom and democracy" USofA then? It was safely at home and tucked up in bed...because it was not in their interest to get involved.



I know that the hatefilled supporters of the US terrorism in Iraq know the truth...deep inside they know the truth.

US military action is only ever committed in self interest..... NEVER to help others.

Right. Because we had some self-interest going in the UK and Europe when we bailed your asses out in WWII.

Shut the fuck up, nimrod.

 

[Gunny]

Jolly old English people do not claim to be a force for democracy and justice in the world....as jesus freak americans do regularly on this forum.

FACT.. the US totally ignored genocide and genocide in Africa..

The US SUPPORTED Saddam attrocities against his own people.

BUsh is a great mate with Karimov ... a much more evil man that Saddam...nearly as good a mate as DUmbsfeld was with Saddam..but not quite.

The US did NOT support Saddam's attrocities against his own people, shit for brains. The US supported Saddam in the Iran-Iraq War.

Do you purposefully spew lies in real life as you do on this board? Or don't you have the balls to act out your fantasies?

That's right ... i forgot. Obviously you don't, the names you call Marines on this board because your ass would be buried somewhere if you said that to one's face.

Loser.

 

[MichaelCollins]

Right. Because we had some self-interest going in the UK and Europe when we bailed your asses out in WWII.

Shut the fuck up, nimrod.

AS an administrator...should you not possess even the smallest bit of knowledge about WW2 or EU/US relations?

The US became involved in WW2... primarily to prevent a unified Nazi Europe... not to save John Smith of Manchester....ok? Once again...the US like most nations ..do not act altruistically in foreign affairs... the US is by far the least generous. If we want to look at altruistic nations..it would be more scandanavian and Uk and even Japanease.

The central focus of US Foreign Policy over the past 100 years...has been to divide and disrupt a single Europe.

Initially they feared a unified Nazi Europe...subsequently the focus has been to prevent a unified Europe.... European Union... they failed on the crucial economic front...where the EU now pisses on the US... .however they have been much more successful in disrupting a united EU foreign policy and defence policy.....shown by the Uk's split from the rest of Europe over Iraq.

I have written several articles and papers on NATO and the US fear of a politically unified Europe.

I cannot believe that i am actually engaging with people of your academic level.... initially it was just to put my toe into the morass of american ignorance ....just to experience something that we dont really have in Europe (utter ignorance)... but didnt realise just how deep the pool of jesus freak retards was.

To conclude... the US only ever acts out of self interest.... recently it is not even the interest of the US people...but the interests of a small group of powerful people who profit from a JOKE US defence budget.... only the US people would be stupid enough to pay it.

Why? because they are drenched in fear and hatred... and think they need to spend 100x more than every other western nation! LMAO