Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: _Schadenfreude_ on July 17, 2004, 12:28:02 PM
-
http://www.time.com/time/photoessays/purplehearts/#
-
Iraqi casualties (http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/)
:(
Not to mention all the civilian men women and children casualties. Its estimated between 11252 and 13213. For every one terrorist, several hundred lives have to be killed. That is the true cost of war.
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
-
take a look at this....
http://www.careusa.org/newsroom/featurestories/2004/may/05072004_sudanfeature.asp?source=170540490000
-
I thought the idea of this thread was to post links about anything and have someone "take a look"
-
people (http://www.robert-fisk.com/iraqwarvictims_mar2003.htm)
-
http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/~jobrien/reference/ob62.html
-
mrcofee,
I wonder how many of those civilians in those pictures were killed/wounded by the fedayeen? or by the terrorist? or used as human shields by the fedayeen?
-
Children who die in war deserve to be heard. So I thought I would post this for them in case some people werent aware that this sort of stuff can happen.
-
Originally posted by MrCoffee
Children who die in war deserve to be heard. So I thought I would post this for them in case some people werent aware that this sort of stuff can happen.
I love how that person solicits more photos.... just send in any ole photo, and he will guarantee it is because of anglo-american aggression. What a fraud... he is lucky to have the freedom to post bullchit like that. My bet is the majority of those photos are caused by insurgent actions, although I will agree that the coalition is surely repsonsible for some unintended deaths as well.
-
Originally posted by Lizking
http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/~jobrien/reference/ob62.html
those figures are very innaccurte LizKing. The deaths of Japanese civilians alone are way off, as are US caualties.
-
Off by what, a couple hundred thousand here or there?
-
the Japanese lost well over a million citizens during the war. As I can recall, US total casualties are around 350k. I will have to dig to find the actual list...
-
Bodhi, it doesn't matter, what matters is the scale.
-
The aggressor determines what the conditions for war will be and how it will be fought. We were attacked. We have not responded in kind.
The WTC was not a legitimate military objective furthermore these people hide behind women and children.
They want those photo opportunity casualties.
Did you lefties learn nothing from Vietnam? We lost that war at home not in Vietnam.
Walter Crankcase, the entire liberal news machine and the rest of you liberal ultra melons were the cause of that defeat.
Don't think for a minute that those muslim extremist aren't currently playing you like a cheap violin.
How ever many of their dead, man, woman or child it takes to subdue and subjugate them is fine with me.
How ever many of our young people it takes is a price we must be willing to pay.
Even if it's one of my own, even if it's me. Think past the immediate and look at what might be if we don't take the fight to them.
-
http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=426561
"Death loomed everywhere in Iraq under the Ba'ath Party regime, which killed some 2 million people, both old and young. Its agents removed the mentally ill and the disabled from the care of their families and shot them dead. Saddam's Republican Guards raped women and children and tortured those suspected of being disloyal to Saddam."
-
very well said storch
why does all of ours always have to fight and die for these jerks,do you think someday along with fighting for freedom we can take care of these sorry excuses for humans beings too.
-
Hey Storch!
I thought you promoised not to do this sort of thing!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3903967.stm
:D
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by storch
The aggressor determines what the conditions for war will be and how it will be fought. We were attacked.
Iraqies attacked us? Amazing, and all this time the liberal media led us to believe they were Saudis under Al Qaeda. Those lying scumbags!
Originally posted by storch
We have not responded in kind.
Damn right, we skipped over atleast 3 countries of higher threat that have far more real abilities to attack us to go after a feebled nation.
-SW
-
:rofl :rofl
Yeah this is an informed news source! Just read these guys qualifications. A professor of MUSIC!
Not one of these Jerk-offs is even in Iraq. I'm sure their "contacts" in London keep them up with the latest update's!!
http://www.iraqbodycount.net/contacts.htm
Thier "top expert" uses:
"who pioneered a media-based methodology for estimating civilian deaths in the Afghan war of 2001-2."
HE READS THE PAPER AND GUESSES!
:rofl
What does a sheep say? BAAAAAAA BAAAAAAAA
Crumpp
-
Damn right, we skipped over atleast 3 countries of higher threat that have far more real abilities to attack us to go after a feebled nation.
No we did not. Iraq was not only a very dangerous unknown with weapons of mass destruction it is strategically located. We now border all the major countries which exported terror AND have Iran sandwiched. AQ was reconstituting in Iraq on the Iranian border. Iraqi intelligence operatives met with AQ operatives in Europe on several occasions and prior to Sept 11th a high ranking Iraqi Intelligence official (a policy maker) met with OBL in Afghanistan. We don't know the content of the meetings but that they took place is a fact.
Crumpp
-
Everybody dies. Some valiant souls risk dying earlier to enable their countrymen to live a better life.
P.S.- I'm talking about U.S. servicemen here.
-
Yes, we did. Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia are by far more dangerous than Iraq.
If its an unknown WITH WMD, where the shreck are they? According to the commission, not there. If they did exist, where are they? If they went to any of the countries surrounding Iraq, we just escalated the danger ten fold.
-SW
-
If its an unknown WITH WMD, where the shreck are they? According to the commission, not there. If they did exist, where are they? If they went to any of the countries surrounding Iraq, we just escalated the danger ten fold.
If they went to other countries it happenend years ago while the UN played footsie with Saddam and Europeans got rich off the oil for food program.
Crumpp
-
Then rather than invading the country in the name of world safety, we invaded a country in the name of establishing a forward assault base and bringing "democracy" to those who weren't willing to fight for it.
Hooray for that war.
-SW
-
Then rather than invading the country in the name of world safety, we invaded a country in the name of establishing a forward assault base and bringing "democracy" to those who weren't willing to fight for it.
Actually we accomplished several goals. All of which in the end not only make the United States safer but help out the world.
1. We removed a horrible tyrant and are giving the Iraqis a chance at a better life.
2. We denied shelter and "breathing" space to AQ.
3. We are providing a "forum" in which AQ can come out into the light so we can destroy them. Most of the bad guys fighting us are NOT Iraqi but are rather "foreign" fighters. The Saudis you mentioned earlier, Syrians, Jordanians, Chechens, and other Arabs. Same goes with Afghanistan. There is no doubt we have to fight these guys to win this. I for one would rather fight them at their doorstep as opposed to ours.
http://www.meib.org/articles/0405_iraq1.htm
4. It's ok to be scared AKS\/\/ulfe. War is a scary thing. However you have to take risks to win it. Right now, we are winning. If AQ had the capability to attack the US they would have already. Not only that, their level of skill and professionalism has taken a NOSE DIVE. Their attacks have been clumsy and executed against the softest of targets, civilians. That is not say the United States won't experience another attack. In all likelihood we will. It takes a long time to win this kind of war. Osama Bin Laden is banking on the fact we have such a fast food MTV culture that can't stay focused for more than 10 minutes. He knows we don't have the will to stick it out. So go back to your Super sized fries and lollapalooza T-shirts. Things are under control.
5. Not only are we winning, but also the vast majority of our troops are doing the right thing every day. Making tough decisions and putting themselves in harms way ESPECIALLY to protect innocent lives.
Crumpp
-
Ah, reciting the mantra I see.
Point #1: We sure missed the point on dealing with some other far more horrible tyrants - that again pose more of a threat than Iraq.
Point #2: Not so much. If Iraq was their shelter, then there must only be a dozen or so Al Qaeda left. Somehow, I have a feeling its that times a thousand.
Point #3: Not so much. We are fighting more insurgents than Al Qaeda. How many of those terrorists there did WE create by invading Iraq? Me thinks way more than there would have originally been.
Point #4: Of all things, scared I am not. Naturally, someone who insinuates something as asinine as that from a few posts regarding a questionable conflict appears themselves as ridden with fear. You're wrong about Osama Bin Laden, he's using us to destroy ourselves. He's not attacking civilian targets so we'll forget and he can attack again. He's attacking civilian targets so people will become scared and allow the government to lead them around by the collar, and at the same time allow us to destroy ourselves. So far, he's got people damned scared. "*******s", "Sand ******s", etc. Use of those terms is fear to the bone. If you can't seperate normal muslims from the extremists in regards of who to fight, you ARE scared and Al Qaeda has you by the testicles.
Point #5: Believe what you want. I personally see this as the tip of the iceberg and its only begun to gain momentum.
-SW
-
Originally posted by MrCoffee
Iraqi casualties (http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/)
:(
Not to mention all the civilian men women and children casualties. Its estimated between 11252 and 13213. For every one terrorist, several hundred lives have to be killed. That is the true cost of war.http://www.iraqbodycount.net/
August 13, 1999 BBC Iraqi children under five are dying at more than twice the rate they were 10 years ago, a report by the United Nations' children's fund says. ... Unicef estimates that over the last 10 years at least 500,000 child deaths could have been prevented.
Sanctions... 50,000 children die annually
War... 11,252 to 13,213 civilians die annually
-
1st off lets not confuse with look at this......with read this................2nd of on either side lets not fight about the war and or each other opionins lets discuss the issue! and show the pix of what 99% of us Angalo Americans never see (not to mention the 99% of the afro,euro, asian, etc ..Americans)!
Boy be civil and show what the casualties or war are!
And Holden you made me cry!
:(
-
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Point #4: Of all things, scared I am not. Naturally, someone who insinuates something as asinine as that from a few posts regarding a questionable conflict appears themselves as ridden with fear. You're wrong about Osama Bin Laden, he's using us to destroy ourselves. He's not attacking civilian targets so we'll forget and he can attack again. He's attacking civilian targets so people will become scared and allow the government to lead them around by the collar, and at the same time allow us to destroy ourselves. So far, he's got people damned scared. "*******s", "Sand ******s", etc. Use of those terms is fear to the bone. If you can't seperate normal muslims from the extremists in regards of who to fight, you ARE scared and Al Qaeda has you by the testicles.
-SW
So basically you are saying that Bin laden's goal of the 911 attacks was to have the government take away our civil liberties?
-
Hmmm, no.
-SW
-
He's attacking civilian targets so people will become scared and allow the government to lead them around by the collar, and at the same time allow us to destroy ourselves.
Explain plz.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
I love how that person solicits more photos.... just send in any ole photo, and he will guarantee it is because of anglo-american aggression. What a fraud... he is lucky to have the freedom to post bullchit like that. My bet is the majority of those photos are caused by insurgent actions, although I will agree that the coalition is surely repsonsible for some unintended deaths as well.
Are they not still a result of Anglo-American troops being there?
-
Are they not still a result of Anglo-American troops being there?
Why yes they are.....
Just like the 9/11 is Bush's fault.
:rolleyes:
Crumpp
-
In this country, I think its different than many others. You can't expect the government to go, "Whoops, we took away all of your rights." and everyone to sit around on their hands murmering "Damn, I hope I don't say anything stupid and get sent to the gulag." There would be repurcussions not seen since our Civil War, more than likely right on that scale. Anyway, thats just an explanation for why I don't think 9/11/2001 could have had stripping the populace's civil liberties away.
However, we have been allowed to see that there are indeed a large amount of the population willing to give up civil liberties in the name of fighting terrorism. A big mistake, IMO, because this "war" will go on for hundreds of years. Security in the name of freedom as it were.
But, I don't think that was in Al Qaeda's primary or secondary objectives.
It certainly would appear to me, that they (A.Q.) wish to polarize this country's population. Form two distinct factions that vehemently hate each other. With all of the liberal and conservative labelling and **** flinging, I'd say they were fairly successful. Those who hate or despise all middle easterners, and those who want to only fight terrorists - regardless of their skin color or religious preference.
Another goal I percieve is theirs, which sort of follows along the lines of polarizing the country, is to give credence to the leadership's goals - whatever they may be - without any second guessing. Allowing them to enforce martial law, or worse - invade any country they saw fit. We see it on this board all the time. Anyone who criticizes the current administration is labelled as a (and this sort of proves that this country is polarized and scared) Bush hater, or Bush is hitler recitation. It scares me when criticism of the leader is met with such blind loyalty, would we really have seen this prior to 9/11/2001 - I haven't ever witnessed anything like that here in the US. Scary to say the least.
Simply put, I believe their goals were to scare us into choosing sides. Then having these two sides live in fear while we attack each other, various other nations who use to be allies, and nations which we percieve as direct threats that may or may not be and also may or may not even have real terroristic ties.
I see no way they could beat us by just blowing up building after building, not a snowballs chance in hell. What they needed to do was inflict fear (by definition, what terrorism is) and allow us to use that fear on each other in a self destructive manner.
Maybe I'm wrong, but they did accomplish a major victory here in the US. We have changed dramatically after 9/11/2001, now we are all under surveillance and all a potential enemy.
-SW
-
It's funny, the inherent irony in posts that purport to be defiant of terrorism's goal, expressed in a manner veritably dripping with fear, while showing anger with those that don't share it.
-
It certainly would appear to me, that they (A.Q.) wish to polarize this country's population. Form two distinct factions that vehemently hate each other. With all of the liberal and conservative labelling and **** flinging, I'd say they were fairly successful. Those who hate or despise all middle easterners, and those who want to only fight terrorists - regardless of their skin color or religious preference.
Grow a thicker skin, It's an election year. While your halucinating please point out where I state I hated all Muslims or Middle Eastern people?? Having spent the majority of my time since 9/11 in the Middle East I can tell you for a fact that 99 percent of the folks over there are good people who just want to live their lives in peace.
Simply put, I believe their goals were to scare us into choosing sides. Then having these two sides live in fear while we attack each other, various other nations who use to be allies, and nations which we percieve as direct threats that may or may not be and also may or may not even have real terroristic ties
9/11 was a message to stay out of Middle Eastern affairs allowing AQ to operate freely. OBL saw what happenend in every other Terrorist attack on US soil, NOTHING, and figured we would pull out completely. Just like we did in Somalia.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
Grow a thicker skin, It's an election year. While your halucinating please point out where I state I hated all Muslims or Middle Eastern people?? Having spent the majority of my time since 9/11 in the Middle East I can tell you for a fact that 99 percent of the folks over there are good people who just want to live their lives in peace.
A) The liberal/conservative BS has been going on since the end of 2001.
B) My skin is thick enough. My feelings are not hurt. BTW - liberal and conservative is not a party, its a sub-category. I said nothing about republican or democrat, so you get minus ten points for stating its an election year. There are liberal republicans and conservative democrats, you did know that - right?
C) While you're hallucinating, take note I did not say any one person said anything about Muslims or Middle Eastern people. As a matter of fact, I made it quite clear the statement was about all Americans.
Originally posted by Crumpp
OBL saw what happenend in every other Terrorist attack on US soil, NOTHING, and figured we would pull out completely.
That sentence I really can't make sense out of.
-SW
-
"*******s", "Sand ******s", etc. Use of those terms is fear to the bone. If you can't seperate normal muslims from the extremists in regards of who to fight, you ARE scared and Al Qaeda has you by the testicles.
I guess you were just ranting in General then?
That sentence I really can't make sense out of.
Then look up AQ attacks:
USS Cole
First WTC bombing
Somalia
US embassy, Kenya
US embassy, Tanzania
And see what the US response has been. A whole lot of hot air without a whole lot of action. Guess you don't know.
From the provided link
In 1996 Sudan made repeated overtures to the United States to extradite Osama bin Laden, arrest him, monitor him, and/or provide intelligence on the activities of him and his associates, but the Clinton administration never accepted their offers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden
Percieved weakness in America caused Bin Lauden to believe he could attack us and we would do nothing. After all, he had done it before.
Crumpp
-
Originally posted by Crumpp
I guess you were just ranting in General then?
That reply was to Grunherz, and it was about America in general. It was no rant, it is fact based on observations.
Originally posted by Crumpp
And see what the US response has been. A whole lot of hot air without a whole lot of action. Guess you don't know.
Percieved weakness in America caused Bin Lauden to believe he could attack us and we would do nothing. After all, he had done it before.
That is what confused me. You said we did nothing in response to prior Al Qaeda attacks. This I knew, and this is where your point failed to make sense. If we did nothing, didn't alter our course, just exactly where did Bin Laden get the idea we'd pull out if he hit our homeland? From Somalia? Are you stretch armstrong, because there is no way either of those have anything in common.
-SW
-
If we did nothing, didn't alter our course, just exactly where did Bin Laden get the idea we'd pull out if he hit our homeland? From Somalia? Are you stretch armstrong, because there is no way either of those have anything in common.
Look at the number of attacks and numbers of Americans he killed BEFORE 9/11. We had 8 years of running from any personal violence committed against Americans. Lots of my friends were in Somalia. We all said the same thing when we pulled out so fast after the world saw American soldiers bodies being drug through the street. The world perception was "US is weak and will not stand to take casualties". The public does not have the stomach for it.
Read the link. Educate yourself on the War on Terrorism and the current laws. They do not impead your freedoms nor do are curtailing civil liberties.
Crumpp
-
Read the link. Educate yourself on the War on Terrorism and the current laws. They do not impead your freedoms nor do are curtailing civil liberties.
I never really stated that, but I believe there are several loop holes that were introduced with the Patriot Act. I would list them, but that is a topic for a different thread.
My original point, which we have substantially deviated from, was that Iraq was very low on a list of far higher priorities in the middle east with regards to threat and striking abilities.
Maybe you're right, and all Bin Laden wants is to get the US out of the middle east. To me, though, it seems more along the lines of Bin Laden wants us to fight ourselves and destroy ourselves. I'm not entirely sure what Bin Laden's stance is in Israel, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were also part of the plan.
-SW
-
Check out this article.
However, the article is written by a business journalist with a decent reputation. What is more important is that his essay is about 80 percent on track with what is going on. Keep in mind though:
1. These Muslim extremist organizations do not have a unified chain of command BUT have a common goal.
2. They are taking their General direction from One source. This is evident by tracking AQ's web activity. Instructions are put out and several months later ALL of these extremist organizations are adopting the same tactics as per those instructions. This does not mean though they have the neccessary military skills to carry them out or that the operations are especially sophisticated.
3. I don't agree with the Personal attack on Democrats. The point is we need a leader who will act, not consult popularity poles for his decisions. The United States does have some tough times ahead. We need a Leader who will make decisions that are best for the country. Ones that may not be neccessarily the best for him personally. I am not a Democrat or a Republican. I do believe that Kerry has shown himself to be a poll consulter and not a leader.
http://braden.buzzword.com/2004/05/02
Crumpp
-
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/7/18/162425.shtml
-
Originally posted by Udie
mrcofee,
I wonder how many of those civilians in those pictures were killed/wounded by the fedayeen? or by the terrorist? or used as human shields by the fedayeen?
No one can answer that. Civilian loss is a part of all wars. Dont really think about it much until I ran into this while net surfing.
Originally posted by Bodhi
I love how that person solicits more photos.... just send in any ole photo, and he will guarantee it is because of anglo-american aggression. What a fraud... he is lucky to have the freedom to post bullchit like that. My bet is the majority of those photos are caused by insurgent actions, although I will agree that the coalition is surely repsonsible for some unintended deaths as well.
Bodhi, its important for these things to be published. I can not guess which victim was cause by whom however the overall thing here is that modern warfare always produces these uneccesary casualties. I agree in your viewpoint that the US goes out of its way to avoid civilian casualties when possible where as the terrorists use that as a means to their own ends. Still, these people are casualties of a war. Thats just the realities of it.
-
Originally posted by demaw1
very well said storch
why does all of ours always have to fight and die for these jerks,do you think someday along with fighting for freedom we can take care of these sorry excuses for humans beings too.
Wow. Who is it you and yours are dieing for that you want to take care of exactly?
-
Storch
"
How ever many of their dead, man, woman or child it takes to subdue and subjugate them is fine with me.
"
shame on you for your hatred.
-
the patriot act does affect civil liberties...every time a AQ gang makes reservations to fly from Paris to Wash DC the flight gets canceled. Disruption of their vacation travel plans impacts their "civil liberties",
I, the UN and the ACLU are OUTRAGED
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
So basically you are saying that Bin laden's goal of the 911 attacks was to have the government take away our civil liberties?
His main stated goal was to get US troops out of Saudi Arabia.
Mission accomplished.
-
Great post, Shaden, thanks.
Really brings home the 'lions led by donkeys' thought.
Ravs
-
Actually, MZ, the main goal of the Iraq war was to get our troops out of Saudi. It appears to me that the Saudis have been kicking AQ bellybutton since we left. Coincidence? No.
-
The Saudi's have been kicking AQ's arse?
Are you sure about that?
Ravs
-
Pretty sure, do have any indications they aren't?
-
Depends...are you talking about the ruling family who are so far into debt that they just do what they're told by the people they owe money to,
or are you talking about the lower classes?
Ravs
-
Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah has warned imams they are being closely monitored and reminded the Muslim preachers they had to battle extremists.
http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=87184&Sn=WORL&IssueID=27121
Senior al Qaeda activist surrendered to Saudi authorities
http://www.albawaba.com/headlines/TheNews.php3?action=story&sid=280922&lang=e&dir=
Those are big steps.
-
Hmm by the ruling family.
How many of the people who have been denied the oil wealth are listening?
Ravs
-
Originally posted by Lizking
Actually, MZ, the main goal of the Iraq war was to get our troops out of Saudi.
Agree.
It appears to me that the Saudis have been kicking AQ bellybutton since we left. Coincidence? No.
The connection may be that our leaving has denied AQ their main argument against the ruling family, and now they have the political cover to go after AQ. Or maybe the Royal family finally came to their senses and realised that AQ wants them dead.
It is difficult to know what is happening over there, Saudi Arabia controls information as much as it can, like other totalitarian states.
-
the patriot act does affect civil liberties...every time a AQ gang makes reservations to fly from Paris to Wash DC the flight gets canceled. Disruption of their vacation travel plans impacts their "civil liberties",
And if the flight was blown up with you on it, who would you be blaming?
Crumpp
-
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the patriot act does affect civil liberties...every time a AQ gang makes reservations to fly from Paris to Wash DC the flight gets canceled. Disruption of their vacation travel plans impacts their "civil liberties",
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"sarcastic"...:rolleyes: ...why do i always have to explan
-
If you guys are seriously interested, read this site often. Click the tabs up-top, then select the various media on those pages. Most can be accessed in English.
http://www.albawaba.com/main/index.ie.php3?lang=e
You can learn a lot.
-
Originally posted by -MZ-
Agree.
The connection may be that our leaving has denied AQ their main argument against the ruling family, and now they have the political cover to go after AQ. Or maybe the Royal family finally came to their senses and realised that AQ wants them dead.
It is difficult to know what is happening over there, Saudi Arabia controls information as much as it can, like other totalitarian states.
Or maybe it's because the Saudi ruling family owe such a shedload of money to creditors that happen to be in the US that they will do what they are told?
If anyone thinks that this conflict is about love and peace and fair play, they are sadly mistaken.
Ravs
-
AQ "activist"???????
Have you checked out who maintains this site? Why don't they have any "about us" links? Do you even know where you information is coming from?
Crumpp
-
Contact us links?
Now...that would be useful!
Ravs
-
Yeah, Dahmer was a cannibal activist. Get with the politically correct times, man. Nothing is wrong, they are just victims!