Violence in Iraq has dropped by 70 percent

[Angus]

Originally posted by LEADPIG
Lasz i've already said what i would propose to do many times... So that empty rhetoric that you and all the other folks try to repeat is hollow. Not agreeing with something is not called whining. Get some new bougeois cliched phrases.

The current strategy is something only a retrded person would go for.  To keep getting soldiers killed over nothing is useless. Let me lay it out for you since you apparently can't see 5 minutes into the future.

1.You can stay in Iraq for the next 20 years and it will not bring an end to terrorism.

2.You cannot truly identify who is a terrorist, that puts the army at a great disadvantage, making the effort truly useless.

3. The army is easily recognizable and attacked, thus the terrorists will always have the upper hand with the element of surprise.

4.The presence of the army is and will continue feeding terrorists.

5. We are breeding more future terrorists than we are killing.

And Lasz if you think the violence will stay low you must be kidding me right?  You are just the same as the lefties that cling on to the nearest report of an increase in violence and use that to say how feeble the effort is. So your report of a decrease in violence does as little for me as hearing there is an increase in violence, it's the ebb and flow, the point is it will not stay the same.

Who is killing ladies in the Marketplace in an unnamed Iraqui city with a hidden bomb under the vegetables???

Who was the force behind executions as well as some purgings in Iraq before getting knocked over?

What was a typical death toll, as far as known (growing number)  ??

(same questions for Afganistan)

Who was in charge of the state funds, in particular when funds were low so people were starving and children dyings in hospitals etc...

What were the available resources being routed for?
(oh, funds, WMD projects, and palaces maybe?)


I think you are missing the big picture. There was a wannabee Saladdin. He would go to any length for his goal. The USA lead the lance and knocked him out before he had a chance to step into the saddle.
And now everybody is blaming the USA for not leading a "fair play".

IMHO those arsehats that blow up ladies in marketplaces as well as launcing rockets at civilian suburbs from school playgrounds (recent case from Gaza), while whining about their conditions, deserve no handling with soft gloves. Those are the real thugs.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Hmm so from 700 in -78 to 650 000 in 1998 (by coalition). I can see a positive trend there..

Did you know that Turkey is currently striking the same Kurds Saddam gassed earlyer, in the mountains of Iraq? You gonna overthrow a Nato country next?

[AKIron]

Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Hmm so from 700 in -78 to 650 000 in 1998 (by coalition). I can see a positive trend there..

Did you know that Turkey is currently striking the same Kurds Saddam gassed earlyer, in the mountains of Iraq? You gonna overthrow a Nato country next?

I guess you missed the 1.7 million Iraq/Iran war Saddam started along with the other hundreds of thousands of his own? That article didn't even mention the Kuwaitis he murdered.

[x0847Marine]

Originally posted by lazs2
xmarine.. you are a strange guy... you do know that you can go to deathrow.com and hear interviews with the inmates and see that they are just regular guys like you and well.. not me but.. you get the point?

how frigging "just like us" is a guy who blows up his own civilian neighbors in a mall cause he is mad at someone they had nothing to do with?   what are you on?

You say that if someone invaded us we would all fight..  depends.    We asked for french help in the revolution.   the confederates asked for french help.   If the confederates would have won they would have welcomed the french staying and helping against northern terrorists after their army and government and infrastructure had been all but wiped out.   At least till the government got a grip on it.

You miss the biggest point.. the government in power was elected by the biggest majority a free election has ever seen...  you miss the point that everyone knows that... far from being invaders.. we will leave when the government (freely elected) tells us we should or can.

you miss the point that these sweet and wonderful "just like us" terrorists blowing up women and kids in the mall are just pissed cause they lost a free election.... nooo.. they are pissed because the country is even able to have a free election.

Now if you can't see the difference then you are even farther off in la la land than even I had thought.

lazs

I might agree with you on the deathrow.com thing if I hadn't sat watching dozens of those videos, these are not convicted criminals in a prison. Some of them allege they took up the fight for reasons as simple as a US troop allegedly killed the families beloved 12 year old dog "for no reason"... one 1 hand I trust the troop killed the dog to protect himself / his pals... I'm fine with that, but on the other hand I can understand how an "occupation" infidel making the kids cry by blowing up scruffy would pissoff the average Akmed.

Another set of brothers said they were tortured in Abu Ghraib and watned some payback for being disrespected & humiliated; cuffed naked together in the bufu position. There are stories of Blackwater killing tailgaters, sanctions killed my kid, they bombed my aunts house, I have no flush toilet or electricity, millions have been displaced (homeless), my uncle died in the Iraq / Iran war with US made weapons... and so on.

Its entirely possible some of these videos are fake propaganda, concocted stories intended to cause an emotional reaction.... but I have a hard time believing every last one of them is lying.. and the few that are telling the truth have stories that any one of us can look at and say "yeah, I'd get some payback for that"

And I really don't think it "depends" weather or not the average US Joe would fight back against, say, Chinese troops for US soil. I cant think of any scenario where gun owning Americans et al would stand for being occupied, door kicked in, family pet shot dead, detained with zero rights... seems you expecting the Iraqi people to put up with a lot of grief many Americans would violently reject with patriotic pride.

[SteveBailey]

"yeah, I'd get some payback for that"

I can understand  some poor soul taking up arms against us because he lost his wife or family member as a result of this war. I really do.

I would take up arms too probably.  I wouldn't plant roadside bombs that are as likely to kill innocent countrymen as they are my enemy.
I wouldn't go down to the local watering hole and blow myself up along with a hundred or so non-combatants.

Herein lies the difference

[LEADPIG]

Originally posted by Angus
Who is killing ladies in the Marketplace in an unnamed Iraqui city with a hidden bomb under the vegetables???

Who was the force behind executions as well as some purgings in Iraq before getting knocked over?

What was a typical death toll, as far as known (growing number)  ??

(same questions for Afganistan)

Who was in charge of the state funds, in particular when funds were low so people were starving and children dyings in hospitals etc...

What were the available resources being routed for?
(oh, funds, WMD projects, and palaces maybe?)


I think you are missing the big picture. There was a wannabee Saladdin. He would go to any length for his goal. The USA lead the lance and knocked him out before he had a chance to step into the saddle.
And now everybody is blaming the USA for not leading a "fair play".

IMHO those arsehats that blow up ladies in marketplaces as well as launcing rockets at civilian suburbs from school playgrounds (recent case from Gaza), while whining about their conditions, deserve no handling with soft gloves. Those are the real thugs.

Man do you think i'm siding with those idiots...?  Nope, i'm saying the current way we are fighting them is a war of attrition that will dwindle our side not theirs. A catch 22. How many times must America try to fight a guerilla war with conventional tactics and get their arse handed to them by a bunch of people with no technology or special equipment. Thats not very cost effective in lives or achievements. The terrorists have the all important element of surprise and anonymity and that will always win over a conventional technological army in the end.

A tank, a missile, smart weapons, airplanes, half that equipment is useless against these people. What the hell do you drop a bomb on over there, shoot a tank at, launch an artillery assault? Some Arab wearing streetclothes? How do you take out there weapons stashes? They could be hiding stuff in the basement of an innocent grandmothers house. Or a terrorists leaders house. If you try to go after them they can deny it, then you'll look like your harrassing the population of a country your trying to establish good relations with in the first place. Guess what, you've just created more terrorists, when little kids watch them harrassing what they don't know is a bad guy or their father who might not even be a terrorist at all.

Where does all this ill planning put the soldier, the guy at the sharp end of all this. In the middle of the *****, trying to figure out who the enemy is before the enemy finds him. America better start fighting fire with fire before they have nothing left to fight with at all.

[LEADPIG]

Originally posted by AKIron
I guess you missed the 1.7 million Iraq/Iran war Saddam started along with the other hundreds of thousands of his own? That article didn't even mention the Kuwaitis he murdered.

Saddam can kill his own people, or whoever. It is not worth American lives to die for something that has nothing to with the lives of Americans. The U.S. military is designed to be used as the protector of this country it's resources and the American people, not to be going around saving the world like Robbin Hood or Mother Teresa. When there is a New World Order and America becomes the world's government, then America can dabble in other peoples affairs and who they're killing.

[bj229r]

Leadpig, I'd say we HAVE figured out how to fight this war, and it's becoming pretty damn obvious to everyone but the die-hard left

[AKIron]

Originally posted by LEADPIG
Saddam can kill his own people, or whoever. It is not worth American lives to die for something that has nothing to with the lives of Americans. The U.S. military is designed to be used as the protector of this country it's resources and the American people, not to be going around saving the world like Robbin Hood or Mother Teresa. When there is a New World Order and America becomes the world's government, then America can dabble in other peoples affairs and who they're killing.

If we were a remote island or China of ~2000 years ago I would agree. Since the world has gotten much smaller someone has to try to keep the peace. I trust us more than anyone else.

[x0847Marine]

Originally posted by SteveBailey
I can understand  some poor soul taking up arms against us because he lost his wife or family member as a result of this war. I really do.

I would take up arms too probably.  I wouldn't plant roadside bombs that are as likely to kill innocent countrymen as they are my enemy.
I wouldn't go down to the local watering hole and blow myself up along with a hundred or so non-combatants.

Herein lies the difference

Well the roadside bombs these guys use are pretty exact, there are literally 100's of IED videos on terroristmedia.com and unfortunately they rarely miss.. these arent always crude explosives, they use infa-red and fairly sophisticated triggers.

I get the point that innocents could die. But I don't see why the difference between what you personally would do, and what they do matters in the overall scheme of things. Its ok to stay in Iraq because some of them are more creatively violent that you?

If China invaded the US, I'd be out there causing hate & discontent with whatever I could get my hands on; collateral damage to my fellow Joe would suck, but as they say "war is hell"...

I still don't get how people expect the Iraqis to put up with crap most of us would violently reject, contrary to popular belief they're not all uncultured raised by wolves sand simps who cant spell their own name, or religious wack-jobs who used to wake up in the morning and hate on people 1/2 a world away because we can vote... to the average Iraqi the Saddam administration was as distant as DC is to most every one of us... when he killed his own peeps, he had spin control too, labeling them terrorists or criminals in the press, accusing the foreign media of dessiminating western sponsored lies... sometimes blaming Iran. Saddam was a politician who could lie, deny and spin bullcrap just like ours.

All universities in Iraq were free, a dirt poor Iraqi could attend the Harvard of Iraq for nothing... they're, were, a-lot of well educated folks there who used to enjoy a civilized life.

[Angus]

And now they run around and blow each other up,,,

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Originally posted by AKIron
I guess you missed the 1.7 million Iraq/Iran war Saddam started along with the other hundreds of thousands of his own? That article didn't even mention the Kuwaitis he murdered.

Rofl! Are you serious? This war was sponsored by US full time. You can't hold something that you financed against him.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Rofl! Are you serious? This war was sponsored by US full time. You can't hold something that you financed against him.

You have evidence that the US sponsored that war? Link?

[MrRiplEy[H]]

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

[Fishu]

Originally posted by AKIron
You have evidence that the US sponsored that war? Link?

Huh? You don't know the US supported Iraq directly in the war?

Instead of falling back to the "show me the proof!" stance, go study the US support yourself. It's not a secret and never was, there was no attempt to really cover it.

Google it.