When they shoot your helicopters out of the sky, and the people below cheer finding the bodies of your soldiers, then throw rocks at the people who come to assess the damage, and set on fire with gasoline bombs armored vehicles. The war is over, folks, the hearts and minds are completely lost.
And the sad thing is that there were sharp minds who knew the difficulty of fighting an effective war against a rising insurgency movement. But of course the Dick didn't listen: he said, "We'd be greeted as liberators," a claim that has turned out to be bullshit.
So what else is new?
9 comments:
Talking about U.S. praising itself of liberating the Iraq, have a look at how especially Iraqi women "are being liberated."
http://thewomaniwasblog.blogspot.com/2006/05/iraq-before-and-after-liberation.html
Jája
Thank you, Jaja. Very pertinent.
Sorry, but I do know that they were British forces. And if you can tell me where I made a misstatement, I'd love that. British have done things markedly differently from the Americans? You mean like peeing on them? Beating them? Trying to set car bombs, getting caught, and then using tanks to bust down Basra prisons?
Puhleez, maybe you're in denial about British troops, but the Iraqis were throwing stones AT BRITISH TROOPS, they threw gasoline AT BRITISH TROOPS, and they were pee'ed on, and beaten BY BRITISH TROOPS, and that's why in Basra the Iraqi police stopped cooperating WITH BRITISH TROOPS.
I read the articles that I post. Unfortunately, I read many, many more that I don't post. If you want me to fully explore and explain why the Southern Iraqis of Basra hate the British troops, I'd be more than willing to do that.
With folks like you Weaz, what chance of surving as a nation does the USA have?
It's folks like me who represent the only chance that America has of surviving as a nation. With folks advocating the types of policies that you seem to approve of, it's bringing my country to its knees faster than anyone could've imagined. With these folks running the show, America has absolutely no chance of surviving. None.
9/11 happened because you all took your eyes off the events around you,
9/11 would be my fault if my name ended in Rice, Bush or Cheney and it was my responsibility for the protection of my country. Unfortunatly, my name isn't any of those and my job is not to protect the nation.
I doubt if you are a lawyer because you spend to much time blogging.
I couldn't care less what you think is my history. There are many people on this blog who know me on a personal basis, with whom I can eat lunch with, who can call me on my personal telephone line, who have come to my apartment, and who have been taught by me in my classes. So my credentials are attested to by many people who will in fact read these posts. I don't need to lie about myself. Period.
now go ahead and practise some expletives on me.
Sorry, but you're not even worth using expletives on. I use expletives for fun or for effect. You've really made no point other than to try to attack me on a personal level without any idea of what you're talking about. You make a fool of yourself by challenging things that are beyond dispute. You would like me to use expletives somehow as a reflection that you have or could get on my nerves. Sorry, you can't. You've spent a whole lot of time writing, but you've made precious few coherent points.
See, that's the value of expletives. They sometimes can save you a lot of time. You should've just called me an asshole or something and saved yourself all that lengthy, incoherent, meaningless mush that you wrote.
And you may question my civic duties, but I feel quite comfortable that there is little else I could do, than what I have done to express my great dispeasure with this "leadership." And this blog is simply one example of me doing something that I feel contributes to the larger movement which has resulted in "President" Bush's approval rating moving over the course of years from an 88% approval rating to 32%. And as more people read the things that weazl and other like minded people write, and more people feel that there's a community of like minded people willing to say what others may have only thought, and that something has gone dangerously and critically wrong with the direction of the country, then "President's" popularity will continue to fall.
And frankly engaging in such discourse is far more imporant than writing my Congressman. My Congressperson is one of the most liberal and feisty in the entire country. Writing her wouldn't accomplish anything: she knows exactly how criminal and corrupt the Bush cabal is. But thanks for your recommendations. ;-)
Yeah, Ducky, I didn't even respond to the Clinton reference because it was so stupid. It's like the reflexive spasms of a dying man: it's what all the Right wingers to when they have absolutely no point to make, blame Clinton.
On the other winger sites, they'll have hoards with whom to genuflect in humble appreciation for such a zinger comeback. Here it will just stand out as pathetic and desperate as it is.
Interesting article on Morocco:
http://english.daralhayat.com/opinion/OPED/05-2006/Article-20060508-1460e2a4-c0a8-10ed-01d1-b9b76b91182d/story.html
Weaz lived in Morocco, and it was a very interesting place. Was much more religous than neighboring Algeria that then decended to civil war hell.
Bush has messed up a whole lot. In fact, he's improved nothing.
And the myrmidons keep carping Clinton. I wonder if their lives were better or worse six years ago.
"When they shoot your helicopters out of the sky, and the people below cheer finding the bodies of your soldiers, then throw rocks at the people who come to assess the damage, and set on fire with gasoline bombs armored vehicles. The war is over, folks, the hearts and minds are completely lost."
No doubt. At the beginning of the war this area was considered "friendly" when compared to the Sunni triangle. I think that Iran has a lot of influence in this area plus nobody likes having another country's military inside their country.
When I saw this on the news, I said we've got to find a way out.
"We didn't invade with the intention of establishing democracy. We invaded with the intent of establishing a state who's resources could be raped.."
Ducky still is a master of the overstatement. I said before that we never went into war to STEAL their oil but I will say we have gone to PROTECT our oil interests. Major difference that some don't understand.
Our original intention was not to establish a democracy but to overthrow Saddam Hussein and rid the country of WMD's. After no WMD's were found, then we switched to the "establish democracy" reason.
At the time of the invasion I supported it and I think that we need to establish some type of government before leaving. If Iraq cannot form a government than I don't have an answer.
No doubt. At the beginning of the war this area was considered "friendly" when compared to the Sunni triangle. I think that Iran has a lot of influence in this area plus nobody likes having another country's military inside their country.
When I saw this on the news, I said we've got to find a way out.
Every day that you post, you seem to be making more and more sense. It is a nice thing to watch. I just wish it could spread to some of your friends, but I wil simply tip my hat to your willingness to keep a fairly open mind.
Simply put, I don't remember calling you such term. It's possible. But it definitely wasn't here. And I'm sure that if I did, I had a reason. So if you want to cut and paste whatever discussion we here having, I'll gladly revisit the issue.
But weazl generally stands by his words. Doesn't take drugs, get really drunk et al.
And it's most likely that if I called you something like that, if I reviewed the issue, I would likely repeat the charge. But let's see.
By the way, Clinton doesn't set bombing plans, generals do. Wanna bitch about Serbia, Wesley Clark is probably the man to address. Wanna bitch about deaths? George Bush has savagely authorized the bombing for a lot more civilian deaths than Clinton has. So be consistent: otherwise your just another Right wing hypocrit.
Sorry, the attack by NATO in Europe didn't do nearly the damage to America's reputation as this Iraqi debacle has. Maybe in FPM circles it has, but not for the rest of the world. Want proof? Look at how difficult it is to get any other countries besides Britain and Israel to go along with Bush's proposed attack on Iran.
Dropping bombs is the easy way to "influence" foreign Governments but it does little to influence the Peoples hearts
Then you should be against the attack on Iraq and against the prospective attack on Iran.
Where are you going to get the juice to put in your cars when you have used it all.
I've sold my cars. And I don't believe stealing other people's natural resources is an appropriate way for me to drive my Rausch Ford Mustang or the two 944's that I had.
And if my standard of living is based on the suffering of others in the Third World, I am not giving anything away. It was never mine in the first place.
Here, the effect of the demographic challenge of moslims is very real.
What exactly is this "demographic challenge"? Are they preventing little Christian British boys from dating, marrying and procreating?
The results of the clash of these impacting cultures is becoming more unavoidable in Europe, and could well lead to civil-war at some point
Only if people like those on the sites you frequent continue to hatemonger against Muslims. Muslims in Europe are for the most part simply try to fit into cultures that are increasingly becoming hostile to them because of scare tactic propaganda. The likelihood of civil war is pretty remote.
You would be appalled at some of the vicious crime that happens here
Crime happens in a lot of place. But I doubt that much of it has to do with religion.
Blair is about as Socialist as night is day. I don't think many Socialists would have a cup of coffee with that bastard.
I appreciate your interest in my blog, and would welcome your continued comments and participation. I, however, am not ready to so quickly disavow any previous statements that I made. While it is certainly true that you are fairly intelligent, I have and would likely continue to use such an offensive shorthand for someone who refers to others, such as Muslims in generalized, hate filled screeds about their essential qualities. While the aforementioned term may then refer less to one's cognitive capabilities, it may refer then to one's moral worth. It is possible that I overreacted, but as I said, I don't often write things that I don't stand by, so I would reserve judgment until I understood the context in which I called you anything.
Hope this addressed your issues.
Post a Comment