Constructive gadfly
Published on January 18, 2006 By stevendedalus In Politics

Insurgents in Iraq have kidnapped more than 240 foreigners and killed at least 39 of them. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, more Iraqis have been abducted either by insurgents or gangs seeking ransoms.

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Insurgents carried out two dramatic ambushes Wednesday, killing 11 people including two American civilians in a roadside bombing in Basra and an attack on an Iraqi convoy in Baghdad.

In the most gruesome development, police said militants used this week's downing of a U.S. helicopter to carve out a killing field north of Baghdad, slaying more than 40 people on remote roads that Iraqis were forced to use after American troops cordoned off the crash zone.

Thirty people were dragged from their cars Wednesday at crude checkpoints erected on unpaved roads and shot dead execution-style in farming areas in Nibaei, a town near Dujail, about 50 miles north of Baghdad, said police Lt. Qahtan al-Hashmawi.

 Two policemen were killed and five were wounded when a suicide bomber targeted a police patrol near the Baghdad home of Shiite politician Abdul Aziz al-Hakim.

 Meanwhile, Iraqi officials expressed hope that American hostage Jill Carroll would eventually be released, and kidnappers freed the sister of Iraq's Interior Minister after holding her hostage for two weeks. [It seems all we can do is hope and pray for the terrorists to show compassion!]

Why do we keep tolerating this shit? Or is it simply that only the bad news is disclosed? Yet I doubt the good could outweigh the bad.

 


Comments
on Jan 18, 2006
Why do we keep tolerating this shit?

'Cause we're supporting the troops, Goddammit, by asking they continue to keep their lives on the line no matter what questions are asked or continued uncovered evidence mounts supporting opposition to continued occupation.


That's why we need no questions, or facts - to comfort the 'enemy' against continued occupation.

In fact.

Stop all this talking...
..right now.

Seriously, you've killed enough troops already.
on Jan 19, 2006
Seriously, you've killed enough troops already.
I take this in the spirit of satire and not literally.

on Jan 19, 2006

The good does out weigh the bad, they just dont print it.  You can find it if you look for it, try Shadowar's blog for starters.

No one is claiming that Iraq is Eden, but then the level of violence has decreased and will continue to. Did the US take out Al Capone in one day?  And they were not even fighting a war when he did all his killing back 70+ years ago.  You look at Iraq and expect it to be perfect.  It never will be, but it is getting better.

on Jan 19, 2006
No one is claiming that Iraq is Eden

Funny you say that, since archaeologists and theologians believe Iraq to be the "cradle of civilization".

Insurgents in Iraq have kidnapped more than 240 foreigners and killed at least 39 of them. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, more Iraqis have been abducted either by insurgents or gangs seeking ransoms.

Staying the course means standing toe-to-toe with insurgent scum who have crossed the porous borders into Iraq in order to kill some American Zionist imperialist pigs. It means not showing weakness by vacillating on every little whiff of doom or hint that soldiers are in harm's way. As I have said before on other threads, Iraq is our mess and our responsibility to clean it up. We certainly can't go back and prevent the invasion from having happened. Therefore, right or wrong, we gotta clean it up: AKA install a working democracy and the veneer of peace/prosperity before we can legitimately call it a day and bring home the soldiers.
on Jan 19, 2006
What I notice alot that people tend to ignore is that the one reason that insurgents get away with doing such horrible crimes is that they don't go by the rules of war like we do. We don't go about killing innocent people to get to the criminals, we try our best to kill them without hurting innocent but sometimes in unavoidable except not trying to get them at all. In my heart I believe that every innocent life lost in Iraq was not done intentionally by the American forces and it's allies but the insurgent, terrorist, criminals, freedom fighters, militants, what ever you want to call them, will kill anyone near their target cause it only makes it worse for us by not being able to stop them from doing it. It's like someone here in the US killing someone and blaming the police for not stop them from doing it and so the cops get all the bad PR.
on Jan 19, 2006
Staying The Course=More of The Same


It actually means taking responsability. It means that whether we were right or wrong for waging a war in Iraq that we must, now, finish what we started. IMO, only a fool would believe that the war in Iraq would have solved all the worlds problems in one quick swoop and that it would be as easy and 1-2-3.
on Jan 19, 2006

It's like someone here in the US killing someone and blaming the police for not stop them from doing it and so the cops get all the bad PR.
good point, but criminal justice here is not that great and requires more police on the beat--not just cruise cars patrolling nilly willy. In Iraq, we need smarter military strategy that would facilitate clamping down on these bastards; to stay the course asĀ is insults the troops there--like Rummy would say, "Oh, well, what else is new?"

Staying the course means standing toe-to-toe with insurgent scum who have crossed the porous borders into Iraq in order to kill some American Zionist imperialist pigs. It means not showing weakness by vacillating on every little whiff of doom or hint that soldiers are in harm's way.
I agree--so why not get down to the grim business? You're insulting if you think I'm advocating weakness and vacillation.

on Jan 19, 2006

What I notice alot that people tend to ignore is that the one reason that insurgents get away with doing such horrible crimes is that they don't go by the rules of war like we do.
Well, I don't happen to be one of them who ignore the obvious. It is all the more reason why a strong offense and more clandestine operations are needed to root out the thugs. Troops are sitting ducks when on defense and just react.

You look at Iraq and expect it to be perfect.
You're talking to an old marine--I know better than that!

And they were not even fighting a war when he did all his killing back 70+ years ago.
Yes, but within a short period the G-Men said, "Dammit, we're not going to take this shit anymore and did something about. 

on Jan 20, 2006

Yes, but within a short period the G-Men said, "Dammit, we're not going to take this shit anymore and did something about.

Actually, no.  The IRS got him. The G-Men never could.

on Jan 25, 2006
Yes, but Elliot Ness had the goods on him and couldn't make it stick, so as in many other cases, relegated the crimes to tax evasion.btw IRS is government.
on Jan 25, 2006

Why do we keep tolerating this shit?


We have seen the alternative.


Or is it simply that only the bad news is disclosed?


That's a part of it. Few people know that many Iraqis went without tap water until the Americans took over, for example.


Yet I doubt the good could outweigh the bad.


It does. But believe me, you probably don't want to know why. I have read what Saddam did, up to the end. I have seen pictures of the mass graves. I have read testimonies of survivors. It was the worst thing I had heard of since I read "The Yellow Star" (which had pictures too, unfortunately).
on Jan 27, 2006
I take this in the spirit of satire and not literally.

Actually, no, I've got link-loads of facts to support this rhetoric.

Damn...

I can't find them now, hey JU!

You got those facts to support how a flower throwing peacenik utterly diminishes battle-hardened soldiers to peace-loving hippie bullshitters?

Doc Guy, you've got those facts and links, right??

wait, no, Bakerstreet, you've got 'em, right?

Rightwinger?

Moderateman?

.....drmiler?!!
on Jan 28, 2006
You got those facts to support how a flower throwing peacenik utterly diminishes battle-hardened soldiers to peace-loving hippie bullshitters?

You are still in the rhetoric of the 60s.
on Jan 28, 2006
You are still in the rhetoric of the 60s

No, and I don't see how your reply applies to the point I've made, please clarify.