Iraq Revisited

[CptSternn]

Lets look at some news...

http://news.**********/s/usatoday/20...A2BHNlYwM3NDI-

http://news.**********/s/usatoday/20...A2BHNlYwM3NDI-


The best part of Iraq/Afghanistan is this:

As the various experts agree, the us military is at its lowest point, ever.

Over 2,700 dead and 20,000 wounded. That keeps them from trying to start shite with any other countrys bush feels needs to be invaded. On a daily basis, this number grows. As long as right-wingers keep 'staying the course' we can watch the us military being rund across a cheese grater - everyday there is a little less of them to have to bother with.

I mean, they are in a hopeless war they cannot win. America is facing a crushing defeat at the hands of a 3rd world rag-tag army. There is nothing they can do to stop it.

Those who argue for more of the same, or for a military escalation requiring substantially more troops, must answer several questions: What is the definition of success? How many more troops should be sent? Where do you expect them to come from? Should they withdraw more troops from the worsening situation in Afghanistan to send to Iraq? What difference do you believe they can make?

Answer - they can't do anthing except watch more needless deaths as the american military machine dies under its own policies.

Kenneth Pollack, a Middle East expert at the Brookings Institution, suggests an effective counterinsurgency would require 450,000 troops. But large numbers of troops aren't available. Many have served two or three tours in Iraq. Increasing their numbers would either require a large coalition won by patient diplomacy, as in the 1991 Gulf War, or drastically expanding the U.S. armed forces, perhaps even with a draft. Even if they were available, it's unclear whether tens or hundreds of thousands more troops could achieve victory. There's a danger, as in Vietnam, that a huge infusion could only increase casualties and prolong defeat.

So as you sit here, blasting me on my views of Iraq, know this - the people you supposedly support are getting shipping back home in body bags - and as bush 'stays the course', the american military becomes the new world joke.

Who would have thought a buncha shoe-less camel riding farmers in the middle of the desert with little or no military training could beat the american war machine?

[Binkie]

I love how you link to articles that can't be visited due to word censorship on these boards obscuring the links. Try clicking on your own links, Sternn, and see what comes up. If you're web browser can read websites with numerous asterisks in the domain name, you'll have to point me towards that one so I can view them too. I'm certainly interested in knowing who you view as an expert that backs up your claim that the US is going to lose and there's absolutely no way they can ever win because they're America and Sternn doesn't want America to succeed in anything.

At any rate, I'd still like you to answer my previous questions about the report and how you came to know it was completely classified and how you know the titles of the wrong reports without knowing the titles of the right ones.

That, or I can play your game and say every source you ever cite is wrong without further elaboration on what's right, completely ignoring legitimate calls for backing up those assertions.

As for the rest of your remarks, you're just repeating yourself from earlier in this thread where you were first repeating those remarks from a Ted Rall comic strip. I guess when I said you should stick with the "funnies" in the paper, I didn't mean the political cartoons. "Garfield" is more suitable for your knowledge-base.

[nuksaa]

I love how you link to articles that can't be visited due to word censorship on these boards obscuring the links.

Agreed. While it is an improvement that you are actually providing links to information, they do not work.

Originally Posted by CaptSternn

the us military is at its lowest point

very interested in the analysis that generated this statement.

[CptSternn]

Gothic.Net is blocking news dot yahoo dot com - replace that in the starred out text to view the links. Dunno why yahoo dot com is blocked out.

Try posting a link yerself and see that its on ban from Gothic.Net. I thought one of the mods did it just to kill my links so ye could bitch about it, but I dunno. It just started doing that a week ago.

Also, here is a link for you Binkie... (NOT a Yahoo site so it should work)

http://cbs5.com/topstories/local_story_269173225.html

Intel Report Says Iraq A Terrorist 'Cause Celebre'

(AP) WASHINGTON By offering the public a glimpse of a once-secret analysis on global terror trends, the White House gave an election-year gift to both parties: the document bolsters President Bush's argument that the only choice is to stay in Iraq and win. But, perhaps even more, it helps his critics who argue the war was a mistake almost from the start.

In the bleak report, released Tuesday on Bush's orders, the nation's most veteran analysts conclude that despite serious damage to the leadership of al-Qaida, the threat from Islamic extremists has spread both in numbers and in geographic reach.

RELEASED TUESDAY! Thats YESTERDAY! So how did you 'find' a CIA classfied report that wasn't available to the public until YESTERDAY and READ it a WEEK before it was made PUBLIC? Oh yeah, you made it all up. Again.

Also for reference they HAVE the de-classified part of the report there and you can read it yourself, for real this time. It once again BACKS everything I posted.

[mansongothicmadonnababy14]

Those were two different reports dude. The report in that article was from the NIE while the report with the links statement comes from a CIA estimate but was in a senate intelligence committee report.

[Darkbender423]

Sternn-

I can understand what you are saying about the people of Iraq handling the Sadam but I don't fully agree with you, the people did not have the power they need to overthrow Sadam. Secondly, they were living in a state of fear. You would not last 10 minutes living there and neither would I and you know it. We speak our minds and live outside what is acceptable under that dictatorship. I do believe that those type of issues should be handled from within. I wouldn't want people coming here to overthrow our government for whatever reason. I do however believe that it was needed in that country and that they did need help in doing so. I don't approve of the way the entire thing has been handled though, there were so many mistakes and that is the reason we have all this controversy now. I think it could have been handled in a way that would have been more acceptable in the world view. Things are the way they are now and we haev to figure a diplomatic way to fix the problem and pull our people out without causing a huge nightmare in that country. What do you think would happen there if we were just to leave tommorrow? Do you think things would just fall to peace? I'm sure that we will be out of there before much longer, I hope we will. I'd like to see an end to it so we can have our family members and friends back in one peice.

Don't think for a second that we can't fight them, we could turn that place into a fucking parking lot if we really wanted. Granted the tactics they are using are difficult to combat give the restrictions place on our troops. And I do agree that our troops have become somewhat of a police force, perfoming security and such. I think we have painted ourselves into a corner in some ways and we have to find some way out of it.

You assume that I only watch American news, you don't know what you are talking about once again. I don't like CNN so much and hardly ever watch Fox. I have like 400 channels and I watch news from all over. I try to formulate my own opinions about what I'm being told rather than swollowing what they say. As opposed to some who simply post whatever headline they read. I actually have a mind of my own. The media is a big part of the problem in all of this. There is so much shit flying from every direction it's so stupid. I think all any of us should do is hold out hope for a rational solution that would benifit all invloved. When they bring the war to my door step, I am ready for them. People aren't interested in rationality at this point they are all blinded by hate and rage. It's coming from everywhere and every side is throwing out there own version of how things are and how things should be. No one is taking time to think of a real solution that will work. War, terrorism, murder, genocide, espionage, greed, oppression, lies, torture----these are the things that are holding our world prisoner a slave to suffering!!

[knightmare]

I don't think anyone can defend all hostile acts that are done by their countries. Every empire is built on violence and corruption since the beginning of history since the Persian, Roman Empires. Not to sound pessimistic, but I think all these acts will never end due to evolution, the survival of the fittest, competition over resources etc. It is inherent in nature. Just my humble opinion..

[Darkbender423]

There really is no excuse for all the hostile acts. However I like to think that as evolution continues and people become more enlightened and begin to see the horror of their actions and understand the true essence of their spiritual nature that conflict will subside. But we have so far to go before that will happen, it will most certainly get worse before it gets any better. I would like to gather all the world leaders and shove them in a room together, give them all a ten strip each and then see who wants to fight. Maybe play some loops of war footage and starving and murdered children from all over the world. Then they could see what a bunch of fucking idiots they are.

[CptSternn]

DarkB -

You say 'they were living in fear'. Were they? Thats what the us government would have yo believe, that everyone hated Sadaam and their lives.

How many Iraqis have you spoke with? As I mentioned before, we have a refugee centre here and I work with MANY Iraqis who are now homeless and here, bombed out of their country by americans, who they despise. Most never had any issues with Sadaam. The whole 'Sadaam was a bad man' is tripe the us government is spewing trying to justify its actions. In reality, most Iraqis think of Sadaam like most americans think of bush - they didn't vote for him, they don't like his policies, but thats IT.

Also, your arguement they were 'too scared' to rise up is also crap. If they were 'so scared' of Sadaam, why are they not cowering in fear from the american forces? Why are they shooting and blowing up american soldiers at a rate of 2 an hour? Doesn't sound like a bunch of cowards to me.

If they were so weak, they wouldn't have been able to take the americans either. To even suggest that is an insult to their people.

If you don't believe me, I think this report from today says even more...

http://news.**********/s/ap/20060928...ltBHNlYwM3MTY-

Poll: Iraqis back attacks on U.S. troops

WASHINGTON - About six in 10 Iraqis say they approve of attacks on U.S.-led forces, and slightly more than that want their government to ask U.S. troops to leave within a year, according to a poll in that country.

It's about time that they start asking THE PEOPLE what they want. The only people who can 'fix' Iraq, is the Iraqis.

In the past few days, the us administrationss remaining arguments for invading Iraq have been blown away. First to go was the view that the overthrow of Saddam Hussein had improved the lot of Iraqis - no more arbitrary arrest and torture, no longer an absence of democracy, no more crumbling infrastructure.

Of course this week not only the terror report but the UN report from Kofi Annan was published. It shows that in every respect Iraq has deteriorated since Saddam Hussein was in power. There is MORE human rights abuse. Arbitrary detention and torture of detainees in Iraqi prisons is widespread. An inspection on 1 June found 1,431 detainees - about 10 per cent of the total in custody - with signs of physical and psychological abuse. Some 52 arrest warrants have been issued against officials of the Ministry of the Interior but they have yet to be served. In all aspects of life, since the invasion, the Iraqis have SUFFERED more than they every would have if they had been left under Sadaams rule. More Iraqis have DIED than were ever even thought to have been killed by Sadaam.

To argue that they are somehow better off now is to complete ignore all the facts, not to mention the actual words of the people who are living there.

And I AGREE 100% with your last post. Americans only understand and react to one thing - dead americans. One american teen gets shot and its national news for a month. A thousand Iraqi teens are blow up by american war planes and its a foot note on page A-4 of the local paper with no mention on the news. The ONLY way to get the troops out of Iraq is to kill enough american soldiers that the public wakes up and sees whats going on.

And the Iraqis know this.

[knightmare]

hello Capt. Stern,
You do make some substantiated points, but I think your argument of the cowardice of Iraqis if flawed. I think you can not compare the dictatorship under Saddam Hussein to the American presence for the following reasons: the risk of peril is greater in the dictatorship since dictatorships are not bound by rules such as the US is (like Geneva Conventions), also the presence is much more personal in the dictatorship since it is the cruel leader of their own country, compared to the relatively new intrusion of foreigners.

[Binkie]

I see this was largely ignored:

Originally Posted by mansongothicmadonnababy14

Those were two different reports dude. The report in that article was from the NIE while the report with the links statement comes from a CIA estimate but was in a senate intelligence committee report.

[Darkbender423]

Sternn-

Do you believe that Sadam is a great and noble man full of compassion for his people and the welfare of his country? Do you think he cared about anyone beyond himself? Do you believe that he was a good leader, a fair and just leader? You just want to sit there behind your screen and bash on America because it makes you feel good for some reason. Do you think you are a facist? Do you really believe all that shit that you spew from your brain. I've met people from Iraq and many other middle eastern countries and I've talked with them about what it was like living there. You act as if we live behind some wall or something protected from the rest of the world. There are people living here from all over the world. You know that right? Hell I've seen the interviews of Sadam's own daughter talking about how much of a prick the guy is. He's a fucking lunitic! I hate that American's, Iraqis or anyone else has to die. How smart is it to blow yourself up? Come on! I didn't mean that the people of Iraq are weak, I simply meant that they did not have sufficent force to overthrow the government. Don't go making my words into such statements. Do you think the people of Iraq had a choice to elect Sadam? In this country we are at least given the opportunity to voice an oppinion. I personally haven't seen a candidate worth voting for in a very long time. It will be intersting to see what stance our next president will do about the situation. Hopefully something slightly more rational.

[CptSternn]

Knight -

Good points. I see where your coming from with that. An invading force versus institutionalised abuse is easier to rally against, true, but the thing your missing is people weren't angry enough to rally against Sadaam. Do I think he was a good person? Well, I honestly have no opinoin either way. I have heard from people who lived in Iraq that some liked him, others didn't. Either way having never lived there it is not my place to make such judgements as nothing Sadaam ever did effected me in the slightest. Those decisions/judgements are reserved to the people who lived there while he was in power.

Another big thing I think people are forgetting is all the 'crimes' he supposedly committed were reported by the same people who said he had tonnes of WMD's. That turned out to be false, but still for some reason americans hold on to the other hald of the same intellegence claiming he brutalised his people. Once again I point out two things:

1. The first half of the intellegence was 100% wrong, why do you still try and justify your actions based on intellegence from the same source that has proven to be wrong? Why not ask the actual Iraqis?

2. The Iraqis are not angry and fighting against the americans. Yes, it is easier to put a face on an outside invader but realsie these people COULD have done the same when Sadaam was in power, but they didn't. Many of the 'crimes' he is accused of are not considered crimes in the Muslim religion, and therfore they don't get upset about it. For example, forcing women to wear burkhas, not drive, not attend college, etc - those 'crimes' everyone from the west like to throw up in arugments about why Sadaam had to go merely reflect the cultural norm in that part of the world. To them, they SUPPORT that lifestyle and SUPPORT a ruler who backs it.

Binkie -

Is the SAME report you spoke of - check the links. I just re-checked the links - YOU show me a link with the report you claimed to have read five days before it was released. Please do. So far we have you claiminng to have read the report, now claming, with the help of some new account with 2 posts that your right, neither post offering any links to the report you supposedly read. Once again, I call bullshite.

DarkB -

See the beginnig of this post in reference to Knight. Same applies. What you claim to know about Sadaam is what you have been told through american media.

The latest example is here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14975282/site/newsweek/

Newsweeks cover for this week - they publish Newsweek around the world. Every edition NORMALLY has the saem cover, with little exeception, when the US Superbowl or World Cup is on the cover they sometimes switch the cover in Europe/america as they know readers in america don't like reading about soccer and the rest of the world doesn't care about american football.

But THIS week the cover was this:

Losing in Afghanistan : Five years after the Afghan invasion, the Taliban are fighting back hard, carving out a sanctuary where they—and Al Qaeda's leaders—can operate freely.

HOWEVER the american cover had 'my life in pictures' a tribute to some photographer. They LEFT OUT the articles on the new rise of the Taliban and the fact the american forces are LOSING ground in the war - a topic thats all over the news here, where as the americans current have a school shooting as the lead storey.

There is a nice side bar to show the covers and demonstrate what I was telling you. Yes, you get SOME of what we get, but ONLY if you look real heard and access places on the net - the common man in america is kept under wraps and the news the average person gets is biased as well as filtered.

[CptSternn]

I thought this article says alot -

http://news.**********/s/afp/2006101...4yBHNlYwNmYw--

Iraq loses 25 police to violence each day: US trainer

CHICAGO (AFP) - Violence in Iraq forces the interior ministry to budget a loss of 25 police officers each day to death or permanent injury, a US security advisor said.

"We budgeted for 10 Iraqi policemen killed every day and 15 wounded in action to the point where they had to be retired from action" in 2006, Gerald Burke, National Security Advisor to the Iraqi Ministry of Interior said.

Burke described the appalling conditions facing police whom he helped train, to a meeting of the Democratic Policy Committee, which includes Democratic legislators.

He blamed much of the current bloodshed on the US government's "failure to recognize the importance of security in the immediate post-conflict environment, in particular our failure to support the rule of law."

An army veteran with more than 25 years' experience in law enforcement, Burke was one of six specialists sent to Iraq in May 2003 by the US Department of Justice to conduct an assessment of the Iraqi criminal justice system. His team recommended that 6,000 civilian police trainers and advisors be sent to Iraq but the administration determined that only 1,500 were needed.

It was six months before any advisors arrived and there were only 24 of them, he told the Senate Democratic Policy Committee Hearing. Funding was not made available to train Iraqi police forces until eight months after the war began even as insurgents attacked embassies, the Red Cross and the United Nations.

By mid-2004 fewer than 100 civilian trainers had arrived, and Marines were pressed into training the rest, he said.

"One of the unfortunate side effects of the militarization of the police training mission was that the soldiers and Marines trained best at what they knew best: military skills and tactics," he said.

"Issues such as the rule of law, human rights and treatment of suspects and prisoners, the concept of probable cause under Iraqi law and policing in a democracy received less emphasis."

The training process was appallingly short and completely inadequate, said Stephen Pierson, a police officer who volunteered for military service so he could help train Iraqi police.

Unlike US police officers who receive six months of intensive training, Iraqi police were allotted one week. Because they were working in an open-air stadium, classes could not be taught in the afternoon and the fifth day of class was designated as a graduation ceremony.

"This in effect left only 16 hours of class time to teach up to 200 students, using an interpreter," Pierson said.

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid decried the fact that despite widespread reports that Iraqi police officers "have actively engaged in or supported the activities of sectarian militias," this was the first time that Congress has examined the problem or looked to find a solution.

After nearly two hours of testimony, the senator was disheartened.

"We're spending three billion dollars a week in Iraq. I come to this hearing hoping the 2,700 Americans who have died there and 22,000 who were injured -- I hope it's going to amount to something," he said. "I don't leave this hearing with a lot of hope or confidence that we're going the right way."


Right now bush is out there telling everyone alongside rumsfeld that Iraq forces are being trained and soon will take control.

But look at those stats - by their own numbers - they claim to train 800 recruits a month - 200 a week. And the same numbers show 25 A DAY or killed or permanately disabled - meaning 750 a month are either killed or wounded so bad they can no longer work.

That means at a cost of 3 billion a day the us is training 50 police a week in a country of millions.

At the current rate they should have the 140,000 troops ready to relieve the us forces by the end of 2239.

[DarkHeartedDemoness]

Your link has been censored, would you mind re-posting?

[CptSternn]

Copy and paste that link (or click it) and then replace the asterix (****) with YAHOO DOT COM - for some reason the new mods here are blocking all Yahoo! links to groups, images, and news.

OR an alternate method I have found is to take the title of the article - and copy/paste it into google and search - you will find ample links to the same article this way whenever a link I post (or anyone posts) is censored here.

[TSW|Abaddon]

Hello all! New to the forum. I was actually suprised that there was a political section on here. But I figured that politics is always going to come up at some point so hey why not. Well here goes my $0.02

I think that the major crime here is that people over simplify the Iraq war. Doing this on either side is not the proper way to go about things. I served in the US Army for 4 years. I was a 13P stationed at Fort Sill, OK. In March of 2003 I deployed to Iraq as part of Enduring Freedom. After the main push into Baghdad my unit was part of something called Task Force Bullet. TFB mission was the capturing and removal of enemy ammunition. This was extremly important because if left unchecked the insurgency would have a huge supply of weapons (yes thats right we were aware that there would be an insurgency in Iraq) The mission also helped to save curious children that were blowing themselves up with 30 year old russian ammo. During my time in Iraq I had a chance to speak with many Iraqis. The overall opinion in Iraq is quite massive so I can't really sum it up into a single post. What most people assume though is that the average Iraqi is stupid, this is FAR from the truth. They understand why America came in and they understand our mission. The majority of the people I spoke to dearly wanted control of their nation but also realized that America has a role to play in Iraq. Not only do we need to rebuild the infastructure which was still heavily damaged from the Iraq/Iran war, The first Gulf war and the latest, we need to leave them with the tools to fully control their country. Yes it is a difficult and trying job over there but it is something that is happening right now. We don't have a time machine we can't go back and change our minds. The reality is that were there and we need to get the job done and leave. The only thing that anti-war rhetoric is going to do is piss off former soldiers like myself and interfere with the ongoing mission in Iraq. CptSternn I feel that your energy would better be spent on other matters. You have little understanding of the complexity of war. Also never EVER speak on my behalf. I knew what I was in for and my fellow soldiers know what they are doing as well. Don't talk to us about dead GI's like you care, I'm sure you do but your understanding will never come close to what we have to deal with. Ask almost every soldier and they will say that they WANT to go back. Were doing good over there, I just wish you could see it. Yes I am aware that things are screwed up but only looking at the nagative to any issue isn't the proper way to look at anything at all.

[CptSternn]

I have never spoke on the behalf of any american soldiers.

And your posts make me laugh.

TFB mission was the capturing and removal of enemy ammunition. This was extremly important because if left unchecked the insurgency would have a huge supply of weapons

Good job there. Judging by the news reports you lads got 'em all.

They understand why America came in and they understand our mission. The majority of the people I spoke to dearly wanted control of their nation but also realized that America has a role to play in Iraq.

Once again, the news now shows 3.4 yanks are getting killed a day, over 30 are getting shot. Yeah, the Iraqis support you alright.

Ask almost every soldier and they will say that they WANT to go back. Were doing good over there, I just wish you could see it.

Except the thousands that have gone AWOL, written reports to the contrary, or the pictures we see on the news. Other than that you mean?

I say you should go back. If you feel so strongly - don't waste your time posting on a Gothic message board - you should get in uniform and hop the first plane back. One less yank the world has to worry about.

You actually think that america will WIN? The best they can hope for is to pull out now and hide their shame. I mean, america has lost. Ol' gw even has removed his cheery views from his speeches, from a turning it into a 'democracy' to now 'sorting out some area where there won't be chaos.

It doesn't bother me either way. I'm not in the states, and not an american, so my tax dollars are being pissed away while you lose this war. I am however working with refugees who lost their homes, families, and lives to american soldiers - and to the opposite of what you say, they have no good will towards ANY americans.

The best way to show how weak the us military has gotten due to their losses is N. Korea. They were able to aquire a nuclear weapon. The us did nothing to stop them. Even now, after they have begun the second nuke test, the best defense bush can come up with is 'let china handle it or something'.

Yeah, thats a defence policy with teeth. Ooooh, Iran better knock it off or bush will ring Syria and tell them to go over there and search their trucks.

[TSW|Abaddon]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

I have never spoke on the behalf of any american soldiers.

Really? Because at the top of this thread you did that.

Good job there. Judging by the news reports you lads got 'em all.

I think its interesting how you skipped over the fact that I helped save innocent lives and went into a snide remark about the insurgency. Also I should have mentioned that my unit alone removed over 40 million tonnes of enemy ammo. That made a HUGE difference in the insurgency.

Once again, the news now shows 3.4 yanks are getting killed a day, over 30 are getting shot. Yeah, the Iraqis support you alright.

Yes actually many of them do. I'm not saying that everyone loves us, that would be foolish. However ignoring the fact that Iraqis do support us and only looking at what you want to see is foolish. I accept that there are opposing sides to the issue in Iraq. That's because war is complex. Your guilty of oversimplifying it.

Except the thousands that have gone AWOL, written reports to the contrary, or the pictures we see on the news. Other than that you mean?

Have any proof that they went AWOL because of the war? Do you have a report to back up your claim? BTW wouldn't that be speaking on behalf of soldiers? What Generals said the war is pointless or lost? How are their opinions any more valid that say Gen Abizaid the CENTCOM Commander? The news? I thought the media was Bush controlled? How on earth did negativly toned reports get in there?? I will agree that the media spends to much time looking at the nagatives and not the good things going on in Iraq.

I say you should go back. If you feel so strongly - don't waste your time posting on a Gothic message board - you should get in uniform and hop the first plane back. One less yank the world has to worry about.

Well actually when I'm done with college I very well might go back. How am I wasting my time posting on a gothic message board? You have roughly 100 times the number of posts that I do. How am I wasting my time again? That is unless you were implying that I'm not gothic. I doubt that though because a goth "pissing contest" is a rediculous idea. Plus this is the political section I have every right to voice my opinion in here. As for that last remark you truly are a cold unforgiving jerk. I respect you for working with refugees maybe you could respect me for putting my life on the line to protect people I had never even met before.

You actually think that america will WIN? The best they can hope for is to pull out now and hide their shame. I mean, america has lost. Ol' gw even has removed his cheery views from his speeches, from a turning it into a 'democracy' to now 'sorting out some area where there won't be chaos.

Well it depends on your definition of win. I have every confidence that we will be able to rebuild their infastructure to a sutable point as well as train their Military and police forces to control the violence in Iraq. We were the ones that went into their country, we have an obligation to hold our word.

It doesn't bother me either way. I'm not in the states, and not an american, so my tax dollars are being pissed away while you lose this war. I am however working with refugees who lost their homes, families, and lives to american soldiers - and to the opposite of what you say, they have no good will towards ANY americans.

I never said all Iraqis support America. Hell who do you think I was fighting. Good friends don't shoot at each other. However you fail to account for the Iraqis that do like Americans. You also ignore Iraqis killed by means other than the Americans. I admit that there are civilian casualties and it is very very terrible. Unlike the insurgents we try to limit civilian casualties as much as possible. What is more terrible though is someone who ignores sectarian violence when it doesn't suit him.

The best way to show how weak the us military has gotten due to their losses is N. Korea. They were able to aquire a nuclear weapon. The us did nothing to stop them. Even now, after they have begun the second nuke test, the best defense bush can come up with is 'let china handle it or something'.

Ok so we should invade them because of WMD's? Oh wait you oppose the Iraq war. You can't have it both ways. Diplomacy is always the first solution. I know your thinking "That doesn't apply to Iraq" but your not thinking of the decade between the first Gulf war and this one. I might also add that out of 1.5 million troops only 180,000 are overseas. America still has bite my friend. Nice paraphrasing of Bush, you clearly have no concept of foreign policy. NK and China are strong allies and we also have economic and political ties with China. We can't ignore China and only look at NK.

[CptSternn]

You continue to claim you 'saved innocent lives'. Would that include the 655,000 that died so far thanks to you 'saving' them?

As I said before, if your so gung-ho for the military go back. I'll be happy to fly over and piss on your grave once they mail the bits of you back in a bag.

As far as N. Korea - I'm just pointing out how america only attacks weak countries. They never go after any country who can fight back - they only go after ones they think they can take. Of course, this time they over estimated. I mean, in a country where the us troops are constantly making racial comments about people living in mud huts and riding camels you have to admit - the Iraqis are really handing the yanks their asses in a teacup. Hell, 10 more idiots dead today. If they keep that up, america will be forced to run away and hide sooner than planned.

They have no chance of ever stopping N. Korea or Iran. Iran proved recently through Beruit they could hold off israel with america backing it with the best weapons in the world. The israeli army was supposed to be the best - much better than the yank army. Now we see neither stands a chance in the middle east. And N. Korea? Forget about it. They have missles pointing at the 30,000+ us troops stationed in S. Korea. If the us trys anything, its back to the old idea of MAD - mutual assured destruction - S. Korea gets it, along with 30,000+ us troops at the same time. And bush knows it. Tis why now he is back peddling - trying to find someone else to fight another war the cowards in the white house, and the american military, can't win.

[TSW|Abaddon]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

You continue to claim you 'saved innocent lives'. Would that include the 655,000 that died so far thanks to you 'saving' them?

Well its no suprise that you quote a rediculous "survey." I'll take it that you never majored in Statistical analysis in college? Here is why that survey is total psuedo-scientific junk:


First off we have the use of geographically contiguous cluster sampling. Not only can cluster sampling lead to innacurate results, checking clusters in one contiguous location in a war zone is the absolutly worst way to go about collecting statistical data. The Lancet Survey even says that they go into little detail about how the person actually died. By not taking into account airstrikes, insurgent "death squads", or the quality of the local infastructure you have no basis to extrapolate what is happening in any one area. It's like trying to find out how many people are murdered in the US by checking the murder rate in the inner cities of New York, Chicago and Los Angeles then expanding on that to include the whole nation. Your results would be so far off it would be comical. This is exactly what that sampling does.

Second the governates that were chosen were done so with a high degree of bias. If find it convenient that out of a "random sampling" they chose the worst combat zones and ignored less violent areas. Not only that but they combine similar governates based on violence in an attempt to gather further data. Once again not taking into account military actions the idea of combining like zones on the basis of violence is a poor method of collecting statistics. Without knowing how the military was operating at the time you can't gather proper data. Simply put it's like blaming somone for an action that they couldn't have done because they weren't even in the area.

Lastly the CI for the survey is only 95% That may seem like a lot to a layperson but in reality its on par with guessing. Hell even the survey says that the death toll is anywhere between 392,979 to 942,636. Even with their bias attitude towards data collection they can't get a reasonable estimate. It's like if you went to a used car dealership and you asked for an estimate on a car and they said "Well it's somewhere between $4,000 and $96,000. Tell me with a straight face that that's a reasonable estimate.

Finally the survey makes no atempt to catagorize who died. They lump insurgents, police men, soldiers, and civilians all into one group. That alone makes the survey useless. Even the survey admits that the majority of deaths are from sectarian violence and not direct US action.

In reality the death toll is a fraction of what they say it is. You don't even need to look to America for the statistics, the Iraqi Ministry of Health has a good grasp on how many people are actually dying.

Anyways I'm hungry after intellectually handing you your arse so I'm going to go eat. I'll be back later to show you the other falsehoods in your debate. Hey if your gonna piss on my grave the least I can do is show you how grossly uninformed you are

[CptSternn]

The simple way to debunk the tripe yer spewing there is to say - check the number of deaths prior to the us invasion and compare them to now. Would those people be affected if the us did NOT invade a sovern nation without cause? The answer is no.

http://news.**********/s/ap/20061019...BhBHNlYwM5NjQ-

Bush said the news of casualties "breaks my heart" but said it is surrender "if you pull the troops out before the job is done."

So pulling out is surrender. Ol gw's own words. The question is, when will america SURRENDER?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/...gress.iraq.ap/

War plans: Congress OKs $20 mil for victory parties

Will they still spend the $20 million they ear-marked this year for Iraq celebrations after they surrender? I mean, can they get a cake that says america surrenders? How about some RSVP cards with a big white flag on them, that would be appropriate.

Much like the israelis found out a few months ago, america can't win. Tis a matter of time before bush, now having put it in his own words, will surrender.

Forget the blue and red, the new color of the american flag is all WHITE.

[TSW|Abaddon]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

The simple way to debunk the tripe yer spewing there is to say - check the number of deaths prior to the us invasion and compare them to now. Would those people be affected if the us did NOT invade a sovern nation without cause? The answer is no.

So statistical analysis is "tripe?" I suppose all higher learning is "tripe" to you. I have a better question how many people has the Coalition saved? Had Saddam stayed in power how many would he have killed? I supose you have never heard of the Al-Anfal campaign? At least 50,000 were killed in that alone. But I guess Saddam wasn't that bad of a guy. You really are a loving caring leader when you torture, ****, amputate, brand, and kill you citizens in the thousands.

So pulling out is surrender. Ol gw's own words. The question is, when will america SURRENDER?

Actually his own words were "pull the troops out before the job is done." Jesus your thick. You can't even get a quote right and it was two spaces above you.

Much like the israelis found out a few months ago, america can't win. Tis a matter of time before bush, now having put it in his own words, will surrender.

As stated above those were not his words. You are a flat out LIAR. Binkie called you out on it and so am I. Israel also stopped because of a UN cease-fire, they didn't lose, nor did they surrender. You might want to quit your job as a military advisor, your not very good at it.

This is really easy. It's like shooting fish in a barrel..........with a cannon.

[CptSternn]

Had Saddam stayed in power how many would he have killed? I supose you have never heard of the Al-Anfal campaign? At least 50,000 were killed in that alone. But I guess Saddam wasn't that bad of a guy. You really are a loving caring leader when you torture, ****, amputate, brand, and kill you citizens in the thousands.

Yada, yada, yawn. Your simply copying and pasting binkies worthless posts from before. Lets not forget who has more people on trial for r-ape. I haven't seen r-ape listed in the charges against Sadaam, even though the neocons like yourself list that in arguments constantly when trying to justify the pre-emptive strike against a sovern nation.

I have seen the news where 11 american soldiers r-aped, then set afire to a little girl. Bet your proud of yer mates there, eh? True american patriots in your eyes, no matter what?

As far as trying to claim israel won that battle is feckin hilarious. They didn't even get the two soldiers back, they didn't stop Hezzbullah, and they ran away with mounting causalties - top generals were fired. But hey, if thats what you equate to a win, then I see how you think we are winning in Iraq.

If you were egven slightly correct about all the atrocities Sadaam was to have committed, your not, then the people wouldn't be fighting so hard against the yanks. To say they are grateful and love america when on average 4 american troops a day are sent to hell, is just laughable. Thats also not including the 40+ who are shot or blown up, just not killed, on a daily basis as well. Yeah, don't think they like ye at all and dont' think its going well for ye either.

As I said before - sit back and try and justify whatever lets you sleep better at night. While you do that, think of this - a dozen more yanks were sent home in boxes yesterday, and for what?

I laught at the thought some idiot died for bush's oil war - and their wives will be banging some other dude in a couple of months, and their kids will grow up calling some other, non-military guy, daddy.

Whos the real winner? Or more importantly - whos the real loser?

[TSW|Abaddon]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

sit back and try and justify whatever lets you sleep better at night.

Same to you liar. Same to you.

P.S. I didn't say Israel won, I said they were in a "cease-fire." But you were a soldier and already knew that right? I guess I should have wikified it for your dumbass.

Click me to learn the f#$king obvious definition of a cease fire...

I'm done with you. Your the perfect example of what's wrong with the world. If you reply to this your admiting that your to stupid to even see that your defeated. Go home and get a life.