What Is Really Going on...

[sam i am]

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/iraq

^^^^^
I LOVE it when those who most think that all we have to do is "give peace a chance" are the ones to face the sheer lunatic evil that is the enemy.

[Qdrop]

i shouldn't laugh at this....
but it's hard not to.

if your beliefs don't match reality, well.....you get what you deserve.

[valvano]

more detailed info on the "peace" activist:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/11/29/D8E69AT81.html

I love this:

The organization said it "does not advocate the use of violent force to save our lives should we be kidnapped, held hostage, or caught in the middle of a conflict situation."


The US should be like "fine, find your own way out of this mess you created"

:rolleyes:

[D_Raay]

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/iraq

^^^^^
I LOVE it when those who most think that all we have to do is "give peace a chance" are the ones to face the sheer lunatic evil that is the enemy.

The Swords of Righteousness Brigade said the four were spies working undercover as Christian peace activists, Al-Jazeera said.
I suppose you aren't taking this into account? Or maybe you just completely discount it.

Btw they hate all Americans, regardless of their political ideology. Maybe if we didn't have insane leaders and barbaric followers, peace activists, if that's what they are, might actually have an influential position with these people.

I suppose all the dead Iraqis are somehow supposed to be forgotten when we see stories like this? What's the difference anyway right? Well, to them it makes quite a difference.

Pull your heads out of your asses.

[D_Raay]

more detailed info on the "peace" activist:

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/11/29/D8E69AT81.html

I love this:

The organization said it "does not advocate the use of violent force to save our lives should we be kidnapped, held hostage, or caught in the middle of a conflict situation."


The US should be like "fine, find your own way out of this mess you created"

:rolleyes:
So nobility is something that is lost on you? Not surprising. What if it were you or one of yours that was kidnapped in a country we shouldn't be in to begin with?

[valvano]

So nobility is something that is lost on you? Not surprising. What if it were you or one of yours that was kidnapped in a country we shouldn't be in to begin with?


i would recommend they put on a john lennon CD and get everybody to hold hands and sing "give peace a chance" with their captors....


:D

[D_Raay]

i would recommend they put on a john lennon CD and get everybody to hold hands and sing "give peace a chance" with their captors....


:D
I sometimes wonder what sort of fellow with what sort of collective intelligence could actually root for the current administration, and ally themselves with the same sort of fools that tell us that we are safer NOW with Saddam gone.

It is this sort of arrogant, self righteous, flag waving idiot that got us into this mess in the first place. So, banter away if you must. Be ignorant in the fact that you ARE the problem, not the selfless individual that is actually trying to help.

[valvano]

[QUOTE=D_Raay]I sometimes wonder what sort of fellow with what sort of collective intelligence could actually root for the current administration, and ally themselves with the same sort of fools that tell us that we are safer NOW with Saddam gone.

[QUOTE]


do you think all the families of those people buried in the iraq desert think things were better when sadam was in control??

sounds to me like you hope that the US fails at whatever it does.....
:rolleyes:

[greedygretchen]

do you think all the families of those people buried in the iraq desert think things were better when sadam was in control??

they're probably not alive to know or think anything (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/)

and really like you cared *so much* about the iraqi people when Sadaam was in power...I'm sure that above any other issue prior to the war you were thinking "Oh, we've gotta save those Iraqis from the evil clutches of Sadaam!"

[sam i am]

they're probably not alive to know or think anything (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/)

and really like you cared *so much* about the iraqi people when Sadaam was in power...I'm sure that above any other issue prior to the war you were thinking "Oh, we've gotta save those Iraqis from the evil clutches of Sadaam!"

Just as I'm sure you really cared *so much* about the US servicemembers that died when Clinton sent them into the former Yugoslavia or the poor US citizens who died when the planes crashed into the twin towers....

Cry me a river

[D_Raay]

[QUOTE=D_Raay]I sometimes wonder what sort of fellow with what sort of collective intelligence could actually root for the current administration, and ally themselves with the same sort of fools that tell us that we are safer NOW with Saddam gone.

[QUOTE]


do you think all the families of those people buried in the iraq desert think things were better when sadam was in control??

sounds to me like you hope that the US fails at whatever it does.....
:rolleyes:
I hope no such thing, and I'm smart enough to know when they WILL fail. Case in point, Iraq.

You guys really have to make up your minds. You hate them, but you want to save them from themselves.

Oh, and our government had a great deal to do with Saddam being in power in the first place, so by your logic, you are actually what you potray me as.

[greedygretchen]

Just as I'm sure you really cared *so much* about the US servicemembers that died when Clinton sent them into the former Yugoslavia or the poor US citizens who died when the planes crashed into the twin towers....

Cry me a river

:confused:
what does that have to do with anything? you're really reaching- for the record I don't like to see any innocent people/soldiers die under any administration or catastrophe, man-made or natural disasters, furthermore, i think that Democrats and Republicans are both self-serving bold-faced liars/hypocrites and I have criticized the Democratic party harshly as well-so I guess you really don't know what I think about Bill Clinton or the Democratic party now do you?

however, i'm not the one claiming that the people of a country are better off without their previous leader and that our hard-earned American tax dollars should be tangled up in this ridiculous quagmire over (what you seem to think this war is about) the civil rights of Iraqis. I guess in that sense I am somewhat of an isolationist...i personally think revolution has to come from within


and lastly even if I thought Bin Laden was behind 9/11...i'd still have to question- why the fuck are we in Iraq?

so cry your own fucken river, bub

[valvano]

and lastly even if I thought Bin Laden was behind 9/11...i'd still have to question- why the fuck are we in Iraq?



so you'd prefer to fighting them here on US soil?

or do you prefer to just letting them do their thing, and we do our own thing, and hope for peaceful coexistence ala Peter, Paul and Mary???


:rolleyes:

[Schmeltz]

The record's broken, valvano. Stop playing it.

[greedygretchen]

so you'd prefer to fighting them here on US soil?

we're not fighting "them (bin laden + crew)" on their soil either

The record's broken, valvano. Stop playing it.

Word.

[Hiebz]

I LOVE it when those who most think that all we have to do is "give peace a chance" are the ones to face the sheer lunatic evil that is the enemy.

ummm, those people are much more brave and much more committed to peace than you or I, bub. They are putting themselves, clearly in dangers way to help bring medical aid to people in need. So, yes they are right now face to face with the sheer evil. They are there with good intentions to help out, just like many soldiers are too. They deserve just as much respect as the soldiers do.

If they are in fact spies and CPT didn't know that, then it is not the fault of the agency trying to help out people in need. And consider the source of who said they were spies: the evil lying terrorists. I'd be willing to bet they think most outsiders are spies. If they are spies and CPT knew, well I feel that is an awful mistake that endagers the legitamacy of their work.

i shouldn't laugh at this....
but it's hard not to.

if your beliefs don't match reality, well.....you get what you deserve.

really? I find the situation of someone being taken hostage pretty damn unfunny, but I guess that's me. It seems to me they are trying to make their dreams reality - I don't see how they deserve this situation. I see that they very much put their foot in the trap, yes, but that doesn't exactly mean they were trespassing or doing something wrong so to speak

[Ace42X]

do you think all the families of those people buried in the iraq desert think things were better when sadam was in control?

The pro-US puppet prime-minister thinks so.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1651789,00.html

The statistics SAY so...

But don't let that get in the way of your opining.

Why not ask what the families of all those incubator babies think? Oh that's right, because there were no incubator babies, it was a lie made up by the exact same people who are waging this war now.

Valvano, you are one dumb fuck.

[valvano]

Ace my friend,

Can you word your own arguements without quoting some radical website?

Since you know so much, so tell us all, what is your solution to Iraq? Just up and leave? Continue the fight? Don't argue that we shouldnt be there because you cant change the past. How would you, in all your wisdom, deal with Iraq going forward??

And don't consult the moveon website, the DNC, your history professor there in college...use your own brain!!
:)

[fucktopgirl]

The pro-US puppet prime-minister thinks so.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1651789,00.html

The statistics SAY so...

But don't let that get in the way of your opining.

Why not ask what the families of all those incubator babies think? Oh that's right, because there were no incubator babies, it was a lie made up by the exact same people who are waging this war now.

Valvano, you are one dumb fuck.



it's been a few time that i read about incubator babies!
seriously,what this is all about?

[valvano]

it's been a few time that i read about incubator babies!
seriously,what this is all about?

i know that in the 1940s they used to exhibit premature babies at Coney Island in their incubators:

http://www.neonatology.org/pinups/coneyislandnurses.html

[QueenAdrock]

so you'd prefer to fighting them here on US soil?


:rolleyes:


Hahaha, you think we're over there fighting terrorists. That's so adorable. :)

Let me tell you this: if we were over there for Bin Laden, a LOT more Democrats would be for this war. We're over there because of Saddam Hussein, who actually is hated by Al Qaeda, and his "getting WMDs," or whatever else bullshit reason Bush has been using this week. It's just so sad that we're over there now and creating MORE terrorism where there wasn't before. I feel more vulnerable than before the war. Hussein wasn't a threat. Bin Laden is. But like Bush said in 2003, "I don't know where he is. And I'm not that concerned." So I guess if Bush said he's not concerned about the #1 most wanted terrorist in the world, I should feel safe, right?

[fucktopgirl]

osama is not a threat either!
he's an old cia agent,form in the usa!

[QueenAdrock]

Yeah the man who murdered 3,000 Americans and releases tapes that say he's planning on more isn't a threat?

[fucktopgirl]

hahah well ,my opinion is that osama has nothing really to do with it,they had to put the fault on somebody!

if you think that they lie about saddam,well they did the same with osama!

[valvano]

i'm surprise nobody has blamed the Free Masons for everything.

:rolleyes:

[QueenAdrock]

I don't see why Osama wouldn't be at fault. He was behind the bombings in '93 when Clinton was in office, and a few other miscellaneous things. He's notorious for terrorizing, so him crashing planes into the WTC's is quite believable.

[fucktopgirl]

i'm surprise nobody has blamed the Free Masons for everything.

:rolleyes:


yea,,bush is part off them!

and for osama,i am looking to proove what i believe,so i will get back with a information on the matter.
one thing i know BUsh had a oil company with osama benladen brother,and like 60 members of this family was leaving in the usa.

[QueenAdrock]

No, according to Farenheit 9/11 where it sounds like you got your information, Bush's oil company Arbusto was being funded by James Bath, who was being paid by the Bin Laden family. The Bin Ladens wanted to strengthen their position in the oil industry, so they assigned Baker to invest in up-and-coming oil tycoons. Needless to say, he invested poorly.

Either way, what the documentary doesn't say is that the Bin Ladens are a huge family. Not only that, Osama was considered the "black sheep" of the family, and they had severed ties years before. The Bin Ladens had not had contact with Osama for a very long time. To connect Osama directly to Bush is then a mistake. To even connect Osama remotely to Bush would also be a mistake, since the one tie he had severed THEIR connection to Osama.

[D_Raay]

Ace my friend,

Can you word your own arguements without quoting some radical website?

Since you know so much, so tell us all, what is your solution to Iraq? Just up and leave? Continue the fight? Don't argue that we shouldnt be there because you cant change the past. How would you, in all your wisdom, deal with Iraq going forward??

And don't consult the moveon website, the DNC, your history professor there in college...use your own brain!!
:)
I will answer for him if I might... Your logic is flawed. The very people who are most concerned with human rights and the people of Iraq are who you are arguing with. Just what exactly do you personally care about whether we are there or not? Because you believe that we are "fighting them over there" so we won't have to fight them here? Who exactly? The terrorists we created over there or the ones who migrated over there to take a shot at killing an innocent American soldier?

I believe enough blood has been spilled on both sides, and the only way to fix this situation is peaceful negotiation. So , a scheduled gradual pull-out is in order, yes, with remaining diplomats to aid the Iraqis in getting there infrastructure and security back up to par. It would be the least we could do. And if they don't want us there, as their polls show overwhelmingly, then we should leave posthaste. As much as we like to believe it we are not the "Captain" of the civilized world.

I think first and foremost, however, the partisanship and corruption needs to end right here before we can move forward with anything. It has become quite clear that leadership change is necessary for that to happen.

[fucktopgirl]

No, according to Farenheit 9/11 where it sounds like you got your information, Bush's oil company Arbusto was being funded by James Bath, who was being paid by the Bin Laden family. The Bin Ladens wanted to strengthen their position in the oil industry, so they assigned Baker to invest in up-and-coming oil tycoons. Needless to say, he invested poorly.

Either way, what the documentary doesn't say is that the Bin Ladens are a huge family. Not only that, Osama was considered the "black sheep" of the family, and they had severed ties years before. The Bin Ladens had not had contact with Osama for a very long time. To connect Osama directly to Bush is then a mistake. To even connect Osama remotely to Bush would also be a mistake, since the one tie he had severed THEIR connection to Osama.


first my source is not the farenheigh9/11
and i dont think its a so big mistake to relate osama with bush,even if you say that he is the black sheep,like come on.Bush did make $$$$ with is brother salem!

http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_07_01/Bush___Bin_Laden_-bush and salem make love together (http://www.americanfreepress.net/10_07_01/Bush___Bin_Laden_-_George_W__B/bush___bin_laden_-_george_w__b.html)

[fucktopgirl]

fuck my link is broken

anyway here it is

"President Bush and the bin Laden family have been connected through dubious business deals since 1977, when Salem, the head of the bin Laden family business, one of the biggest construction companies in the world, invested in Bush's start-up oil company, Arbusto Energy, Inc."

[D_Raay]

No, according to Farenheit 9/11 where it sounds like you got your information, Bush's oil company Arbusto was being funded by James Bath, who was being paid by the Bin Laden family. The Bin Ladens wanted to strengthen their position in the oil industry, so they assigned Baker to invest in up-and-coming oil tycoons. Needless to say, he invested poorly.

Either way, what the documentary doesn't say is that the Bin Ladens are a huge family. Not only that, Osama was considered the "black sheep" of the family, and they had severed ties years before. The Bin Ladens had not had contact with Osama for a very long time. To connect Osama directly to Bush is then a mistake. To even connect Osama remotely to Bush would also be a mistake, since the one tie he had severed THEIR connection to Osama.
Hate to disagree with you queenie, but Bin Laden's ties are pretty firm to our government, and they have gone out of there way to keep that on the "down-low".

Most of us never heard of Osama bin Laden before August 21, 1998, but by saying he was "the preeminent organizer and financier of international terrorism in the world today," President Clinton conjured up images of rage and random mayhem that seemed to justify swift, strong action.

We were told the main target of the missile attack was not just bin Laden, but: "...terrorist facilities and infrastructure in Afghanistan. Our forces targeted one of the most active terrorist bases in the world...a training camp for literally thousands of terrorists from around the globe." (NY Times, 8/21/98, p. a12. )

This theme - that there is a terrorist organization which links the terrorist base in Afghanistan with a terrorist factory in Sudan - is repeated throughout the August 21st NY Times.

The Afghan "terrorist base" is of course Clinton's strong suit. A "terrorist base" is a place where terrorists prepare for war; a "terrorist base" is fair game. Factories, on the other hand, are a problem. Americans are squeamish about bombing factories and burning the skin off the workers' backs. The trick is: link the base to the factory.

Here's the argument: terrorists, financed by the rich Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the Embassy bombings, built a complex of terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. The U.S., arch-enemy of terror, rolled up its sleeves and destroyed these training camps and a bin Laden-owned factory in Sudan as well. The U.S. has thereby sent a message to terrorists around the globe. They can read our missiles. They will be hunted down and destroyed without mercy. The U.S. is on the job.

But wait. What if the training camps were falsely portrayed? What if they had been built by the U.S. government? What if bin Laden and his associates were in fact old CIA hands?

It would be a bit awkward, wouldn't it?

If this was true, and if the Times knew it was true on August 21st, wouldn't the Times' failure to print this information on page one constitute a profound betrayal of trust?

BUT THAT WAS THEN, THIS IS NOW...

The complex the U.S. attacked on August 20th is located near the Pakistani border:

''The camps, hidden in the steep mountains and mile-deep valleys of Paktia province, were the place where all seven ranking Afghan resistance leaders maintained underground headquarters and clandestine weapons stocks during their bitter and ultimately successful war against Soviet troops from Dec. 1979 to February 1989, according to American intelligence veterans…The Afghan resistance was backed by the intelligence services of the United States and Saudi Arabia...[and this camp represents] ‘the last word in NATO engineering techniques.’" (NY Times, 8/24/98, p.A1 & A7. )

And the "resistance fighters" whom the U.S. backed in the Afghan war during the 80s?

"Some of the same warriors who fought the Soviets with the CIA’s help are now fighting under Mr. bin Laden’s banner." (ibid., p.A1)

So. These people, whom the U.S. government calls the worst terrorists in the world, were set up in the business by the U.S. government. And the Times knew this on August 21st when it devoted many articles to covering the missile attacks. The Times management chose to withhold this critical information from the public.

The August 24th article quoted above unwittingly betrays the method by which the U.S. government's sponsorship of bin Laden is justified. When the U.S. openly supported bin Laden and friends, they were give a label ("resistance fighters") so they were ok. Now they have been given a new label ("terrorists") and thus they are transformed. The U.S. government is absolved of guilt because the people it supported in the past weren't these terrorists it is bombing today, they were those resistance fighters. Amazing.

* '"When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean— neither more nor less.'" (Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass, ch. 6.)

Once renamed, these people, or anything or anyone the U.S. government accuses of being linked to these people, can be bombed. No need for UN discussion, no need for proof, no need for nothing: the U.S. is covert investigator, unyielding judge, impartial jury and invincible executioner, all sanctified by the struggle against "terrorism."

Will bin Laden have his label changed back to "resistance fighter" when the U.S. government once more requires his services?

This may sound preposterous. But consider that the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) has made just such a transformation - in fact the KLA people have not just gone from terrorists to freedom fighters, they have gone from terrorists/drug dealers all the way up to Nation Builders. And incidentally, it is widely reported that Islamic Fundamentalist terrorists have helped train and fought with the KLA. These KLA-helpers apparently include Osama bin Laden's associates. So perhaps bin Laden has been rehabilitated and re-transformed (!) already.

Was the U.S. government in actual partnership with bin Laden and other "resistance fighters" during the Afghan war? Or was it just giving these guys a little support against a common (Russian) foe?

Since the U.S. side of the relationship with bin Laden and friends was handled by CIA, much of what took place is unknown. But we do know about one very important thing: money.

How much money do you think the US and Saudi Arabia gave the "resistance fighters?" I asked several people this question.

One guessed "a few hundred thousand dollars."

Another thought this was way to low. She guessed "$10-15 million."

The highest guess: $20 million.

The correct answer is: More than 6 billion dollars. (ibid.)

That's in 1980s money. And that’s just what they admit publicly. Remember, the paymasters were the CIA and Saudi Arabian Intelligence, so the real figure could be twice as high, or higher. The sky's the limit...

The U.S. SPENT more than 6 billion dollars to support terrorism - and that’s just in Afghanistan. In other words, the US no longer has the 6 billion bucks. And how many billions have been funneled to similar resistance fighters in other lands? Such as the Kosovo Liberation (?) Army, or KLA?

[Ali]

do you think all the families of those people buried in the iraq desert think things were better when sadam was in control??The ones he killed while Ronnie was in Charge?

D raay, everybody knows that Osama Bin Laden fought the Russians in Afghanistan with US Taxpayers' money and CIA support.

Post something new ;)

Some people think that Osam is still working for the CIA (http://washingtontimes.com/upi/20051129-030939-1051r.htm), scaring the People of the United States into agreeing to give up all their rights and allowing their rulers to invade oil-rich, strategically important Middle-Eastern countries.

But they are all conspiracy (http://news.google.com/news?sourceid=gmail&tab=wn&ie=UTF-8&q=conspiracy+charge) theorists, so ignore them.

[ms.peachy]

fuck my link is broken

anyway here it is

"President Bush and the bin Laden family have been connected through dubious business deals since 1977, when Salem, the head of the bin Laden family business, one of the biggest construction companies in the world, invested in Bush's start-up oil company, Arbusto Energy, Inc."

How exactly is this "proove" of anything you've said?

[Ali]

How exactly is this "proove" of anything you've said?Beacause it's on the internets, dummy.

[valvano]

I believe enough blood has been spilled on both sides, and the only way to fix this situation is peaceful negotiation. .

peaceful negotiations with terrorists??????????

:D :D

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

:D :D

[Ali]

peaceful negotiations with terrorists??????????

:D :D

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

:D :DGive Peace a chance, dude.

[valvano]

as somebody told me....
that's a broken record
:D

[fucktopgirl]

anyway ,you can call me a conpiracy theorist,but i called it lucidity!

you guuys are full blind about what going on in your governement and ali your source on the internet is really flasified.All the major media are own by corporation sharks,governement,,,,,information is under a strick controlled.For shure they will make us,people who believe that their arelying ,look like fool in every way possible.

So ,if the family of osama live in the usa,is brother who works really closely with bush on a oil company ,if that does not ring a bell in your hear !
Well,pity on you!
you guy ,who believe your governement is clean, are just really brainwash!

but i respect,let argue ! :D

[ms.peachy]

It is not a matter of believing the government - any government - is 'clean'. It's a matter of being able to present a logical, cogent, concise argument based on facts and not conjecture.

The fact that members of the Bush family have had business relationships with members of the bin Laden family does not prove that the current administration was in any way involved in the Sept 11 attacks.

Does it mean that those relationships should be examined critically? Certainly. But it's a far cry from 'proof'.

Let's say I know a guy named Fred. Fred is a client of mine; he buys soap from me. One day Fred's brother Joe sets fire to my sister's house. By your logic, my business relationship with Joe's brother Fred implicates me in the burning of my sister's house for no other reason than that I sold Fred some soap.

[fucktopgirl]

yes ,i understand your view,but we are not talking about soap here!

the only thing i want to point out,is that,benladen family and bush are related somewhere in the chain of power and money.Do i imply that the goevernement was involved or aware in the 9/11.I do believe they is something that smell bad .

So what astonished me ,is people who blindly believe that bush and is admisnistration are angel and the action they take upon terrorist are justified.

[D_Raay]

peaceful negotiations with terrorists??????????

:D :D

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

:D :D
As I said before, they are "terrorists" when it suits us, "freedom fighters" when it suits us.

Kings will be tyrants from policy, when subjects are rebels from principle.

[Ace42X]

Can you word your own arguements without quoting some radical website?

Some radical website? Do you even know what the Observer is? Its a UK broadsheet that was first printed in 1791 for fuck's sake. Get over yourself you ignorant backwards pig-fucking stooge.

It's one thing to be stupid, insular and have the weakest of grasps on current affairs, it is quite another to try and put your opinion forward as anything other than a sick joke.

"Radical website" ?!? The newspaper is only 20 years younger than your country, you sack of shit. Chances are your state of residence didn't even exist when it was first printed!

And you have the arrogance to marginalise them as "radical". It speaks volumes about your self-satisfied ideology. When presented with facts, you arbitrarily dismiss it because it doesn't fit your perverse world view. What part of the direct Allawi quotes (the prime minister that is part of a puppet government if you believe me, or democratically elected fairly and justly as a beacon of progressive Iraq if you believe your own horse-shit, either way he is pro-American) do you think the "radical" (read: middle of the road) newspaper has sensationalised?

If you knew ANYTHING about the world outside your own egosphere, you'd know that your brand of insipid neo-conservatism is anything but "normal."

You're like the guy wearing his underwear on his head hopping backwards down the street on one leg going "wow, look at all those freaks walking forwards!"

You're so far out to the right you can't even see the centre ground anymore. And that isn't just sad, that's deplorable.

I'm the first to admit that I'm quite a liberal lefty - but to call the *Spectator* radical? What on earth have you been smoking?

You are suffering from cognitive dissonance, and before you venture even one more opinion, you should take steps to SERIOUSLY unfuck yourself.

Since you know so much, so tell us all, what is your solution to Iraq? Just up and leave? Continue the fight?

'Solution' ? There can be no solution. Bush & co have fucked it up beyond reparation. You think the damage your military have done since the previous Gulf war, more than a decade of antaongism and destruction, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths, can be "fixed" by a good idea?

I know that, as a dumb worthless fuck, you believe in the power of the soundbite, but in reality (come here and join us, please) the world doesn't work like that.

Now, if idiots like you had asked me this BEFORE the war (and I was here, saying this same thing I am saying back now then) then maybe this whole mess could be avoided. But no, you BASTARDS made this quagmire unavoidable - and now you have the nerve to say "what, can't do anything about it?"

Guess what, it is too late to ask me to bail you fuckers out. You guys were busy telling me about WMDs and Al Qaeda links, and how peachy-kean everything will be to listen to the facts then, so I know that no matter WHAT I say, you'll just ignore it, then rewrite history when your gross incompetence is undeniably exposed.

All the while matching us all past the point of no return... How dare you say "oh, but now we've gone past the point of no return..."

Yeah, now that you've fucked up, ask me how I'd put right a cock-up that to 60 million dumbass hicks, 200,000 gun toting cranks, and billions and billions of dollars worth of a media that only managed to push short-sighted fools like you into the ugly reality of the present.

Continuing to fight won't solve anything. As the statistics show quite clearly, incidences of dissent are on the increase, the insurgency is getting more powerful. No matter how long you stay, it'll be another Vietnam. The question thus remains - how many more yank soldiers and Iraqi children do you want butchered between now and the withdrawl?

Don't argue that we shouldnt be there because you cant change the past.

"Don't tell us that we shouldn't've been beating the patient with sledgehammers in order to cure his fever. Tell us how to sellotape his head back together."

FUCK YOU.

How would you, in all your wisdom, deal with Iraq going forward?

I'd wipe the slate clean. Eliminate everyone who has a hand in this travesty, irrevocably preventing it from happening again.

Of course, that would mean murdering you, your countrymen, everyone in Iraq and the entire population of several other countries... But hell, that's not so different to your current policy. The difference is that your mass-murdering of civillians only targets 'Sand-niggers'.

[valvano]

Some radical website? Do you even know what the Observer is? Its a UK broadsheet that was first printed in 1791 for fuck's sake. Get over yourself you ignorant backwards pig-fucking stooge.

It's one thing to be stupid, insular and have the weakest of grasps on current affairs, it is quite another to try and put your opinion forward as anything other than a sick joke.

"Radical website" ?!? The newspaper is only 20 years younger than your country, you sack of shit. Chances are your state of residence didn't even exist when it was first printed!

And you have the arrogance to marginalise them as "radical". It speaks volumes about your self-satisfied ideology. When presented with facts, you arbitrarily dismiss it because it doesn't fit your perverse world view. What part of the direct Allawi quotes (the prime minister that is part of a puppet government if you believe me, or democratically elected fairly and justly as a beacon of progressive Iraq if you believe your own horse-shit, either way he is pro-American) do you think the "radical" (read: middle of the road) newspaper has sensationalised?

If you knew ANYTHING about the world outside your own egosphere, you'd know that your brand of insipid neo-conservatism is anything but "normal."

You're like the guy wearing his underwear on his head hopping backwards down the street on one leg going "wow, look at all those freaks walking forwards!"

You're so far out to the right you can't even see the centre ground anymore. And that isn't just sad, that's deplorable.

I'm the first to admit that I'm quite a liberal lefty - but to call the *Spectator* radical? What on earth have you been smoking?

You are suffering from cognitive dissonance, and before you venture even one more opinion, you should take steps to SERIOUSLY unfuck yourself.



'Solution' ? There can be no solution. Bush & co have fucked it up beyond reparation. You think the damage your military have done since the previous Gulf war, more than a decade of antaongism and destruction, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths, can be "fixed" by a good idea?

I know that, as a dumb worthless fuck, you believe in the power of the soundbite, but in reality (come here and join us, please) the world doesn't work like that.

Now, if idiots like you had asked me this BEFORE the war (and I was here, saying this same thing I am saying back now then) then maybe this whole mess could be avoided. But no, you BASTARDS made this quagmire unavoidable - and now you have the nerve to say "what, can't do anything about it?"

Guess what, it is too late to ask me to bail you fuckers out. You guys were busy telling me about WMDs and Al Qaeda links, and how peachy-kean everything will be to listen to the facts then, so I know that no matter WHAT I say, you'll just ignore it, then rewrite history when your gross incompetence is undeniably exposed.

All the while matching us all past the point of no return... How dare you say "oh, but now we've gone past the point of no return..."

Yeah, now that you've fucked up, ask me how I'd put right a cock-up that to 60 million dumbass hicks, 200,000 gun toting cranks, and billions and billions of dollars worth of a media that only managed to push short-sighted fools like you into the ugly reality of the present.

Continuing to fight won't solve anything. As the statistics show quite clearly, incidences of dissent are on the increase, the insurgency is getting more powerful. No matter how long you stay, it'll be another Vietnam. The question thus remains - how many more yank soldiers and Iraqi children do you want butchered between now and the withdrawl?



"Don't tell us that we shouldn't've been beating the patient with sledgehammers in order to cure his fever. Tell us how to sellotape his head back together."

FUCK YOU.



I'd wipe the slate clean. Eliminate everyone who has a hand in this travesty, irrevocably preventing it from happening again.

Of course, that would mean murdering you, your countrymen, everyone in Iraq and the entire population of several other countries... But hell, that's not so different to your current policy. The difference is that your mass-murdering of civillians only targets 'Sand-niggers'.

so, in other words, you have no solution other than to complain?
:confused:

[fucktopgirl]

so, in other words, you have no solution other than to complain?
:confused:


ok valvano,do you have a solution?

yes, you think that what is happening right now over there,is the solution?

[Ace42X]

so, in other words, you have no solution other than to complain?
:confused:

Of course I don't, you boob. It took all of the vested powers of the US plus a coalition to destroy Iraq, and destruction is a piece of piss compared to construction.

You think ANYONE can put that right?

When your country spends trillions of dollars on PEACE instead of WAR for, ooooh, fifty years - THEN it might be possible to undo the damage of this conflict.

But, and this is a pretty 'way out there' suggestion, perhaps if you guys put as much effort into taking down your domestic tyrants as BURNING MEN WOMEN AND CHILDREN ALIVE, maybe then it would be harder for people to decide you guys deserve to die?

Crazy, I know...

[Qdrop]

really? I find the situation of someone being taken hostage pretty damn unfunny, but I guess that's me. It seems to me they are trying to make their dreams reality - I don't see how they deserve this situation. I see that they very much put their foot in the trap, yes, but that doesn't exactly mean they were trespassing or doing something wrong so to speak

it's the irony that is so entertaining.

basically, i see this the same way i would see a warhawk on the otherside of the fence getting HIS come-up-ens (sp?).

warhawks and peacenicks are both ignorant and stubborn.

[Qdrop]

It is not a matter of believing the government - any government - is 'clean'. It's a matter of being able to present a logical, cogent, concise argument based on facts and not conjecture.

The fact that members of the Bush family have had business relationships with members of the bin Laden family does not prove that the current administration was in any way involved in the Sept 11 attacks.

Does it mean that those relationships should be examined critically? Certainly. But it's a far cry from 'proof'.

Let's say I know a guy named Fred. Fred is a client of mine; he buys soap from me. One day Fred's brother Joe sets fire to my sister's house. By your logic, my business relationship with Joe's brother Fred implicates me in the burning of my sister's house for no other reason than that I sold Fred some soap.

exaclty.

and this why i had such a problem with the first half of Farenheit 9/11....

[QueenAdrock]

Hate to disagree with you queenie, but Bin Laden's ties are pretty firm to our government, and they have gone out of there way to keep that on the "down-low".

I'm not saying that Bin Laden doesn't have ties to Bush or our government. I said that in her example, it would be a mistake to tie Bush to Bin Laden based on his family, who have had no contact with Osama for quite some time.

[QueenAdrock]

anyway ,you can call me a conpiracy theorist,but i called it lucidity!

you guuys are full blind about what going on in your governement

So ,if the family of osama live in the usa,is brother who works really closely with bush on a oil company ,if that does not ring a bell in your hear !
Well,pity on you!
you guy ,who believe your governement is clean, are just really brainwash!


Ha! Who said any of us believe our government is clean?! None of us are "fully blind," some of us just don't believe on jumping on the train whenever anything comes out against the Bush administration (especially using your evidence. Take a lesson from D_Raay, the man knows how to do his research).

I hate this government and administration more than anyone I can think of. However, I realize that doesn't give me the right to say "Bush and Osama are practically best friends!" unless I have good, solid evidence to back it. I'll only subscribe to ideas once I have been convinced with irrefutable evidence, and not just crap like "his brother gave money to be invested in the United States and the man in charge of investing decided to give money to Bush," because that is a weak link.

[sam i am]

Ha! Who said any of us believe our government is clean?! None of us are "fully blind," some of us just don't believe on jumping on the train whenever anything comes out against the Bush administration (especially using your evidence. Take a lesson from D_Raay, the man knows how to do his research).

I hate this government and administration more than anyone I can think of. However, I realize that doesn't give me the right to say "Bush and Osama are practically best friends!" unless I have good, solid evidence to back it. I'll only subscribe to ideas once I have been convinced with irrefutable evidence, and not just crap like "his brother gave money to be invested in the United States and the man in charge of investing decided to give money to Bush," because that is a weak link.

Queen -

I can't express how much I admire you. Good for you, sticking to your rational guns.

It SEEMS that some on these boards have been irrefutably duped into believing anything and everything bad about the US and Bush and have devolved into vitriolic hyperbole rather than rational, cogent thought.

Even D_Raay, as you stated, at least has come back to citing sources and having a semblance of positivity about his posts...but fucktopgirl and ace have irreconciably gone off the deep end.

I hope ace cleans up his language and revolves into his lucid thought...but those delusions of grandeur conjured up by living exclusively amongst socialists and the titularity of his "king Ace"-hood has obviously obliterated his ability to employ the English language in anything other than latent hostility and overt vulgarity....sad, really.

[fucktopgirl]

I hate this government and administration more than anyone I can think of. However, I realize that doesn't give me the right to say "Bush and Osama are practically best friends!" unless I have good, solid evidence to back it. I'll only subscribe to ideas once I have been convinced with irrefutable evidence, and not just crap like "his brother gave money to be invested in the United States and the man in charge of investing decided to give money to Bush," because that is a weak link.


Well ,first i never said that osama and bush are like the best friend,i said bush family and benladen family are or where involved togetehrs for oils business at one time!

even if i'd bring up some source,still you will be,like sam,in complete denial because you believe in your shit and i believe in mine!

Sam, why because i dont have the same view as you , i am in the deep end.Ok ,so i have to think like you,worship you then i will be accept by you

:rolleyes: (n)

[QueenAdrock]

Well ,first i never said that osama and bush are like the best friend,i said bush family and benladen family are or where involved togetehrs for oils business at one time!

Yeah, and from there you insinuated that that link actually MEANT something, otherwise you wouldn't have brought it up in the first place. And the link doesn't mean anything.

even if i'd bring up some source,still you will be,like sam,in complete denial because you believe in your shit and i believe in mine!


No, actually. D_Raay brought up some very good points in his post. I have an open mind. However, if you want to be taken seriously and have some sort of swaying power, come up with actual evidence to support your claims rather than hazy generalizations.

[fucktopgirl]

well ,the link mean what it mean,,what do you want more!

[valvano]

Of course I don't, you boob. It took all of the vested powers of the US plus a coalition to destroy Iraq, and destruction is a piece of piss compared to construction.

You think ANYONE can put that right?

When your country spends trillions of dollars on PEACE instead of WAR for, ooooh, fifty years - THEN it might be possible to undo the damage of this conflict.

But, and this is a pretty 'way out there' suggestion, perhaps if you guys put as much effort into taking down your domestic tyrants as BURNING MEN WOMEN AND CHILDREN ALIVE, maybe then it would be harder for people to decide you guys deserve to die?

Crazy, I know...

i appreciate your honesty, you have no solution and chose to complain....

:rolleyes:

so, we just up and leave? what would that teach our enemies, that if you wait long enough the USA will through in the cards and take their toys home?

you can argue the would coulda shoulda, doesnt change a thing. we are in iraq, fighting a war, and there would be severe counsequences if the bad guys win. either get with the program, support the effort, or stand on the sidelines and not say a thing.

(!)

[QueenAdrock]

i appreciate your honesty, you have no solution and chose to complain....

:rolleyes:

so, we just up and leave? what would that teach our enemies, that if you wait long enough the USA will through in the cards and take their toys home?


Sure, that's what we did in Vietnam.

A quagmire's a quagmire. If it's unwinnable, there's no use staying there. What important lesson did we learn today kids? Don't go into a country to totally half-assed unless you have a palpable exit strategy!

"Winners never quit, and quitters never win. However, if you never win AND never quit, you're a fucking idiot." -Anonymous

[valvano]

Sure, that's what we did in Vietnam.

A quagmire's a quagmire. If it's unwinnable, there's no use staying there. What important lesson did we learn today kids? Don't go into a country to totally half-assed unless you have a palpable exit strategy!

"Winners never quit, and quitters never win. However, if you never win AND never quit, you're a fucking idiot." -Anonymous

why do you think its unwinnable?

and, good win tonight for the terps by the way, tough first half...

[QueenAdrock]

Because, if in fact the reason why we're over there now is to defeat terrorism, that's not possible. Terrorism is an ideology, not an actual enemy. It's guerrilla warfare, no one knows who the enemy is. My friend in the military told me the insurgents were capturing children of local villagers and told they'll shoot them in the head if the villager doesn't go out with a gun and shoot an American. He doesn't know if local people are friends or enemies. And plus, with terrorism, if one dies, there's always another to take his place. Us being over there is fueling their fire, they tell their recruits that the infidels are on their holy land, and what a great injustice that is. It's not an army we're fighting, it's people with bombs strapped to their chests and no one has any idea of who is who.

What I do think we should do, first and foremost, is increase our security at home. We should recruit better intelligence, weed out terrorists cells that are in our own country, fully fund Homeland Security. If we won't be able to stop terrorists, perhaps we can prepare for and perhaps prevent their impact.

[D_Raay]

Because, if in fact the reason why we're over there now is to defeat terrorism, that's not possible. Terrorism is an ideology, not an actual enemy. It's guerrilla warfare, no one knows who the enemy is. My friend in the military told me the insurgents were capturing children of local villagers and told they'll shoot them in the head if the villager doesn't go out with a gun and shoot an American. He doesn't know if local people are friends or enemies. And plus, with terrorism, if one dies, there's always another to take his place. Us being over there is fueling their fire, they tell their recruits that the infidels are on their holy land, and what a great injustice that is. It's not an army we're fighting, it's people with bombs strapped to their chests and no one has any idea of who is who.

What I do think we should do, first and foremost, is increase our security at home. We should recruit better intelligence, weed out terrorists cells that are in our own country, fully fund Homeland Security. If we won't be able to stop terrorists, perhaps we can prepare for and perhaps prevent their impact.

Well said queenie...

[D_Raay]

Queen -

I can't express how much I admire you. Good for you, sticking to your rational guns.

It SEEMS that some on these boards have been irrefutably duped into believing anything and everything bad about the US and Bush and have devolved into vitriolic hyperbole rather than rational, cogent thought.

Even D_Raay, as you stated, at least has come back to citing sources and having a semblance of positivity about his posts...but fucktopgirl and ace have irreconciably gone off the deep end.

I hope ace cleans up his language and revolves into his lucid thought...but those delusions of grandeur conjured up by living exclusively amongst socialists and the titularity of his "king Ace"-hood has obviously obliterated his ability to employ the English language in anything other than latent hostility and overt vulgarity....sad, really.

Mine is only to inform, if I can, and sometimes amuse (which I am very bad at).

You are being too hard on Ace. He is, without question, quite intelligent and gets frustrated with people he deems not up to his mental prowess. Can you blame him? It's frustrating to lay out carefully thought out ideas and have them debated poorly and haphazardly as happens so frequently on this board. I thought with sisko gone we were past that.

Not trying to offend anyone, but the old excuses are getting quite old.

How about some of you conservative minds out there explain to me why we are in Iraq if not to take their oil? I've gone over it hundreds of times now , and I can't logically come to any other conclusion *unless* there is something I may be unaware of. In which case either I missed it, or everybody did.
Don't give me 9/11 either we all know where that goes.

[Ali]

we are in iraq, fighting a war, and there would be severe counsequences if the bad guys win. That depends, I think, on whom you perceive the bad guys to be.

You think it's the insurgents, everybody else thinks it's you.

Your presence in Iraq is doing nothing to alleviate the situation, you are an aggravation and an irritation and a danger to yourselves and everybody else. You have evicted one tyrant, killing and maiming tens of thousands of civillians in the process and he's been replaced by another. What good have you done?

Leave.

If Iraq needs help in restabilising, then the UN will have to help. It's a complete mess, but nothing will start to improve until your troops go home and are replaced with UN Peacekeepers. Nobody's saying that the Blue Helmets won't be attacked, but chances are that they'll be perceived as Peacekeepers, rather than invaders and the Iraqis who help the insurgents fight the Americans will be less likely to help them attack UN Peacekeepers.

Surely this must be a more acceptable solution to you than trying to keep it all going on your own? If the real reason for you going to Iraq was to fight terrorism and remove a threat, then your next move should be to go home and let Iraq govern herself, even with the help of the UN (which you helped create, remember). What other reason could there be for you to stay?

[Ali]

How about some of you conservative minds out there explain to me why we are in Iraq if not to take their oil? Because you get it all from Canada, or you get all of Canada's oil. Whatever. You aren't in Iraq for oil because you don't need the oil. You get it from Saudi Arabia and, uh, well Saddam was threatening the Saudis and he did invade Kuwait before and he was being bad to his people, and you thought he had WMD's, so you had to take him out and make sure that the next government would sell you Iraqi oil... but you weren't there to TAKE anybody's oil.

[D_Raay]

Because you get it all from Canada, or you get all of Canada's oil. Whatever. You aren't in Iraq for oil because you don't need the oil. You get it from Saudi Arabia and, uh, well Saddam was threatening the Saudis and he did invade Kuwait before and he was being bad to his people, and you thought he had WMD's, so you had to take him out and make sure that the next government would sell you Iraqi oil... but you weren't there to TAKE anybody's oil.
How is that any different? As I said, I thought this through from every angle. It certainly wasn't to liberate Iraq. If they had told us in the beginning that we were going in there to liberate Iraq the American people wouldn't have gone along with it.

[Ali]

How is that any different? As I said, I thought this through from every angle. It certainly wasn't to liberate Iraq. If they had told us in the beginning that we were going in there to liberate Iraq the American people wouldn't have gone along with it.Dude, read the post again.

[fucktopgirl]

Because you get it all from Canada, or you get all of Canada's oil. Whatever. You aren't in Iraq for oil because you don't need the oil. You get it from Saudi Arabia and, uh, well Saddam was threatening the Saudis and he did invade Kuwait before and he was being bad to his people, and you thought he had WMD's, so you had to take him out and make sure that the next government would sell you Iraqi oil... but you weren't there to TAKE anybody's oil.


ha c'mon,they are there for oil reason too ,in canada we have oil but not a lot!Anyway the point is that more is always better=$$$$$$The usa implant their so called democratic system there,they are taking the power form the iraquis people,why?MAybe they want to have hand down on the oil business!

[ms.peachy]

Oh poor poor misunderstood Ali, pearls before swine I tell you ;)

[Rich Cheney]

A rocket launcher is a bit overkill for a 10x12 room. Don't they play Quake over there?

[D_Raay]

Dude, read the post again.
Hehe, oh yeah, that's what I get for glancing quickly.

[Ace42X]

i appreciate your honesty, you have no solution and chose to complain...

You'd rather I took up arms against the US soldiers in Iraq and joined a Jihadi movement in throwing the aggressors (the occupying US army) out of the country? Would that help anything? Because, ethically speaking, that would be the "right" military thing to do, and you are clearly deluded into thinking this thing can only be resolved militarily.

so, we just up and leave? what would that teach our enemies, that if you wait long enough the USA will through in the cards and take their toys home?

Like you did with Vietnam? Like you are going to do in Iraq eventually anyway? You might not have checked the newspapers recently, but the insurgency is GAINING momentum, not being 'defeated' - and as Bush is already outlining plans to turn tail and run as it stands, I find it ridiculous that you could venture an opinion to the contrary without a shred of evidence and expect to be taken seriously.

But then, I find your entire position preposterous.

Quite how you think you are going to "stop the bad guys from winning" with your current strategy is quite confusing, given that the only reason "the bad guys" you are now fighting are there and able is because you invaded in the first place.

But hell, you're a dumbass yank, of course you are going to think that if you do something wrong for long and hard enough it will magically turn out for the best.

you can argue the would coulda shoulda, doesnt change a thing.

No, you're right, it doesn't change a thing. You and your kind were talking ignorant codswallop when you walked the world into this mess, and you are talking bollocks now. Walk away from the problem and let adults try to deal with it, because idiots like you are part of the problem, not the solution.

we are in iraq, fighting a war, and there would be severe counsequences if the bad guys win.

A war which your actions started, have maintained, and exacerbated. Given that it is precisely these policies that CREATED the problem, what on earth makes you think they are going to unmake them?

Oh, that's right, total and complete incompetence.

either get with the program, support the effort, or stand on the sidelines and not say a thing.


"Support the effort" ?

YOU ARE MAKING IT WORSE... You're pouring petrol on the fucking fire, and you are saying "Hey, don't tell me not to pour petrol on the fire - it's in the past, it's done, quit telling us to stop pouring petrol on it, and tell us how to put it out!!!"

And when we keep saying "STOP WITH THE PETROL, YOU FUCKING MORON" you come out with shit like that... "What, put some cloth over the flames and stamp it out? That'll never work, the flames are 50 foot high!"

Because of you, you fucker! It's not my fault that your gross stupidity has made a minor chip-pan fire into the towering fucking inferno!

Well, guess what asshole, it's easy for you to sit in your ignorant world and tell everyone "no, really, if they just pour enough petrol on it, the wetness will put it out! They just aren't pouring enough, and they have to keep doing it and doing it, if they give up it won't work!" While *I* am sitting on the sidelines watching people burn to death because of your opining...

You're the one that needs to get with the program. Seriously, unfuck yourself before it's too late.

It's your philosophies that got us into this, and until you and your ilk accept just how wrong you were and still are, and PUT DOWN THE EFFING PETROL CAN, then all of our efforts are doomed to failure.

Like you guys mocking that peacenik that got kidnapped - he jsut ran into the heart inferno with a tiny little foam extinguisher, and you jsut sat back, shrugged, and said "hah, what a loon!" as you kept on pouring on the flammables right behind him.

[greedygretchen]

or stand on the sidelines and not say a thing.

wtf? how fuckin' un-american is that? i thought freedom of speech was one of the things we were fighting to protect...

do you think all the families of those people buried in the iraq desert think things were better when sadam was in control??

valvano the paper boy (http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d145/Selenie/ljd051203.gif)

[D_Raay]

wtf? how fuckin' un-american is that? i thought freedom of speech was one of the things we were fighting to protect...



valvano the paper boy (http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d145/Selenie/ljd051203.gif)
Conjures images of good ol' Nazi Germany it does...

[sam i am]

Alright....back to the argument :

First of all, we're being a bit premature here with the elections just a week and a half away for the first democratically-elected parliament in the Middle East's entire history. Seems to me that election will determine way more about the hows and whys of the continued US effort there than anything we can envision or enact here on the BBMB.

Second, has anyone been watching Sadaam Hussein's trial? What a pathetic piece of crap that guy is. He's full of rhetoric and lack of contrition.

Third, as for the continuation of US forces in Iraq : the bottom line, at this particular juncture, is that the Iraqi Shiites are slowly but surely building their strength....and they outnumber the Sunnis 2 to 1. A day of reckoning is soon to be had for those who perpetrated offenses against the Shiites. The Sunnis have this last chance, in the election, to choose to join the process and get themselves into elected office, where they can actually pull the strings of power and make a difference, instead of the endless low-level warfare they're attempting.

Fourth, once the election is had and a new leadership takes over in Iraq, the US has already agreed to abide by THEIR decisions as to the efficacy and longevity of US presence in the country. MOST Shiites like having the US there, to train and mobilize the army, continue to provide basic services, and setup the laws necessary to have a stable stock market, oil supply shipments (which have increased over the past twelve months), and system of governance. One of the most critical components in this debate is to ensure a bureacracy that is focused on internal and external security, and to allow for the proliferation of businesses that provide JOBS and incentive for those who currently are outside the system to come in from the cold and JOIN the system.

Finally, I believe one of the key conditions for undermining and ending the "insurgency" is a complete grant of clemency for past offenses. There has been so much history of shit and hatred and reprisals at this point that the clear solution is to absolve all past guilt and allow for the reintegration of the Sunnis who have turned to violence without fear of reprisal. Hand in hand with this, of course, will be a drawdown of US forces as Iraqi forces are built up to full capability and the complete smashing of any resistance after a certain "clemency drop-dead date."

This seems to be the best solution, as a conservative, in my mind, at this time....