READER COMMENTS ON
"VIDEO - New Projectile IED Increases Violence in Iraq"
(38 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 7:53 am PT...
If the population of Iraq is 25 million, and Murtha is quoting accurate polls, then:
80% of the Iraqi people want us out (20,000,000 Iraqis support the insurgency ideal)
45% of the Iraqi people say it is ok to use IED's to kill American occupiers (11,250,000 strongly support the insurgency).
Millions are against the 158 thousand troups.
How much democracy can we beat into Iraqis?
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
Kevin Mark Smith
said on 12/12/2005 @ 8:10 am PT...
Or we can assume that the polls he is quoting are not accurate. The fact that it's Syrians and Iranians training Al Qaeda tells me that the general population in Iraq want democracy to succeed, and that is only possible if American troops stay the course.
Iraqis are not fighting American troops hand-to-hand, as in Vietnam. Cowardly terrorists are exploding bombs blocks away.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
Rev. Patís best buddy
said on 12/12/2005 @ 8:11 am PT...
We will beat democracy into those heathen unchristian foreign devils, until cows come home. Murtha is a coward, he only was in the marines, went to war, and so what? Unlike Dubya, and Tricky Dicky , and the rest of the boys from AIPAC, who saved themselves to fight to the last drop of someone elseís blood. Thatís what counts, the cowards who went onto fight for their country, have no idea! Jeez boils my blood, and now my hypertension is all out of hand, best get to the bunker, and get some rest now!
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 8:17 am PT...
All for what? So, Dubya can claim we're at war, so he should be allowed all the powers of a dictator? What's he want with that kind of power anyway?
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 8:28 am PT...
He wants what every dictator wants. More.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 12/12/2005 @ 8:51 am PT...
Bush is in Philadelphia today, giving a speech that compares Iraqis struggling for freedom with American colonial patriots. This Yale history major might have gotten things a bit backward...in 1776 colonial America was being dictated to by a foreign king, George III. In 2003 Iraq was being dictated to by a local despot, Saddam Hussein. The foreign dictator in 2003 was another George, named Bush.
But never mind. In honor of Bush's faux analogy, here's a 2005 version of verse # 1 of The Concord Hymn, with apologies to R. W. Emerson. Still working on the later verses.
To the rude bridge that in Baghdad stood
Came American planes with flags unfurled
Bringing terror by night, like a Klansman's hood
Dropping bombs that shocked and awed the world
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 8:57 am PT...
Robert - Re #6 - I love your style of writing..please, continue.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 9:06 am PT...
The reason why threads like this are started is because it helps liberals if things go badly.
America wins=Liberals lose.
America loses=liberals win.
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 9:12 am PT...
Medium Right, a the risk of sounding cliche - I'm trying to se ethings from your point of view...
but I can't get my head that far up my ass.
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 9:56 am PT...
RLM #6 I listened to every word of the speech.
The president explained what neoCons believe about Iraq and he did a better job at it than usual.
What he has not explained is why his beliefs are so different than the majority of the American people and the majority of the peoples of the rest of the world.
What struck me as I watched the entire presentation was how detached from the reality the neoCon view is. The flowery phrases, quotes, analogies, and metaphors are impressive but they do not attach to current reality nor to the history referred to.
Iraq did not and does not want us there as invading occupiers. No amount of flowery rhetoric is going to change that. What these talks are doing is nodding the heads of those already nodding their heads, and perhaps waking up some of those who have been nodding off to sleep in the right wings of the political parties.
The rhetoric was not addressed to the eastern world where we claim to be invading and occupying a nation to bring it democracy.
Even tho admittedly that was not the first intent (WMD) nor even the second intent (being received as liberators), and in fact is a rhetoric of recent vintage.
None of those rhetorical and evolving (flip flopping) administrative "reasons" for invading the nation are in sync with the beliefs of the people of that region.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 10:32 am PT...
Medium Right - Doncha just hate it when the facts are so undeniable that all you can do is attack the messengers?
Bless your heart.
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 10:43 am PT...
You said "we can assume that the polls he is quoting are not accurate".
I do not think that assumption is the "quality" we should rely upon. We have done that too long. Assumption that WMD were in Iraq when governments and officials said otherwise well before the invasion (link here).
Since only 25% of Americans think the admin is honest about the reasons for invading, according to polls conservative Chris Matthews quotes, so the admin has unbelievers aplenty in the good ole USA.
No, assumption will not do.
You say "The fact that it's Syrians and Iranians training Al Qaeda tells me that the general population in Iraq want democracy to succeed, and that is only possible if American troops stay the course".
I say that is a great leap of "logic" without nexus. Even if I assume your premise that al Qaeda is being trained by those you say it is, that has no nexus to a statement that Iraqis want democracy to succeed, because even in the face of of all the forms of democracy advanced, the theocractic Islamic concepts are getting better traction. "Democracy" to the believer in Islam means a democracy like Iran. They vote, have elections, and use flowery rhetoric just like neoCons.
And "staying the course", which is really another way of saying "be stubborn in the face of reality", is going to stay the course of disaster heretofore experienced and found wanting by the American people and the people of the world. New Orleans still lies in substantial waste while we spend billions upon billions at nation building in yet another invaded nation.
No, assumption and stubbornness will not do and will not be the "victory". It will only be more of the same illusion.
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 10:51 am PT...
Dontcha hate when the American people decided election after election whose fit to run the country and whose fit to complain about it?
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 11:00 am PT...
It is fantastic to watch the minds of the cons spin "facts" out of supposition. Great example:
"The fact that it's Syrians and Iranians training Al Qaeda tells me that the general population in Iraq want democracy to succeed, and that is only possible if American troops stay the course."--Kevin Mark Smith
OK, so now it is a "fact". Funny how this evolved from:
"The Pentagon claims that Syrians and Iranians are coming across the borders to train insurgents how to build more sophisticated weapons."
So, Kevin, if the Pentagon "claims" something is so, then it must be a "fact". Wow, with that kind of logic you should be a Bush speechwriter. You may want to look into your other assertion as well: "Iraqis are not fighting American troops hand-to-hand, as in Vietnam. Cowardly terrorists are exploding bombs blocks away."
What a load of Al Qaqaa!
I know how you cons hate polls (unless of course they show that Bush is gaining popularity), but you may want to consider this: "Forty-five per cent of Iraqis believe attacks against British and American troops are justified - rising to 65 per cent in the British-controlled Maysan province"--source: UK CONSERVATIVE newspaper Telegraph.
As for the comments by Medium Wrong above, I am a very liberal American, and I want America to win more than anything. That is exactly why I am opposed to the disastrous, evil, manipulative, and dishonest policies of the Bush administration. Anyone who supports Bush clearly wants America to lose, just as we have lost support from all of our traditional allies, just as we have lost the battle for the hearts of the Iraqis, and just as we have lost interest in pursuing the REAL terrorist, Osama bin Laden.
Now both of you should immediately go back to FreeRepublic with your tails between your legs. You are way out of your leagues.
COMMENT #15 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 11:04 am PT...
Meduim Right #13
Your characterization of elections is wanting in as much as you compare it to American elections.
So, I doubt very much that if you and I sat down to a chat about constitutional law, or even debated it here, that you would fare as well as an American would.
American elections are not like Iranian, Iraqi, Egyptian, Russian, and similar elections, which are elections of the type you are talking about.
America does not vote on whether or not American people can be thrown in prison without charges, access to courts, or a fair trial. We settled all that in the Bill of Rights.
Get over it. Americans won that a long time ago and you and yours are not going to take it away from us.
COMMENT #16 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 11:08 am PT...
Hey, I can do this too!
America attacked on 9/11, Bush approval goes to 90% = Conservatives win
US citizens now treated as suspects, guilty until proven innocent = Conservatives win
Torture within legal right of military personnel = Conservatives win
Tax burden shift from wealthy to working poor = Conservatives win
Military budget increases, social programs cut = Conservatives win
Pentagon interference in Iraqi elections = democracy = Conservatives win
Unauditable elections held on electronic voting machines in US = Conservatives win
2100/15,000/30,000/100,000 (US dead, wounded, Iraqi dead, wounded) = Conservatives win
America loses = Conservatives win
Anyone else have anything to add?
COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 11:09 am PT...
No. But Americans vote on who is better to lead this country with the issues we face in our time. America has decided that you way is the wrong way. Its that simple.
COMMENT #18 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 11:11 am PT...
Oh another gem from Totally Wrong (yes you have succeeded in elevating your status--you're doing a heck of a job Rightie).
First off, even a foolish person would realize that Bush did not win 2000. Do a little research.
Second of all, real Americans are getting a little wary of Diebold. When exit polls are off by 7-10% you had better have your invite to hole up with Dick Cheney in a bunker somewhere, cause the shits really gonna hit the fan. Oh, sorry, I forgot that you are just an ignorant pawn in the chess game the war pigs are playing. I guess you are screwed.
Have you ever taken a look at the Brad Blog before? There's a lot of evidence out there that the "American people" had less to do with deciding the 2004 election than Diebold did.
You should be VERY nervous about 2006...
COMMENT #19 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 11:17 am PT...
Meduim Right #17
The exit polls and the current polls that say only 25% of the American people and even less of the peoples of the world have a vote of confidence in this admin.
Now is closer to reality than then. Nostalgia is fine for some things, as is the rear view mirror.
However, leadership has to be a view out the windshield, not the rear view mirror.
Your outback view is represented by this view out the back window (link here).
COMMENT #20 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 11:34 am PT...
Medium Right, did you feel that way when Gray Davis was recalled and Schwarzenegger installed? Probably not. The fact that Gray Davis was elected by the people of California (an election that was, by the way, not rigged) means nothing to you, I'm sure. Because you are a hypocrit. Chump.
COMMENT #21 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 12:36 pm PT...
Medium Right - Bless your heart, you're wandering again. I know it's hard sometimes, but stay with me sweety.
THIS thread is titled "New Projectile IED Increases Violence in Iraq" Do you understand what that means? If not, I'm sure someone here can break it down into simpler language for you.
Hon, if you're going to participate in the discussion, at LEAST try to stay on task please.
There are many threads on this blog that have to do with election fraud. You can post your fantasies about mandates and Bush winning the election on THOSE threads.
Or at the very least, post an "Off Topic" alert as a courtesy to those of us who are contributing members of the thread.
COMMENT #22 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 12:45 pm PT...
Elections =democracy until the results aren't convenient. Example: Haiti. The Bushies refused to recognize the Haitian democratic process. From what I understand, conditions in Haiti (never that great to begin with) have gotten worse. So much for elections/democracy there.
Back on US shores, Our democracy is only as strong as the transparency of the voting equipment.
But I'm growing a little bit more confident and hopefull each day. The Bushies willcontinue to saunter around the world, plucking lucrative tax-payer financed contracts, until election day 2006 draws near. Until then, I'm continuing to bug the crap out of my elected people to continue to fight the good fight.
COMMENT #23 [Permalink]
Robert Lockwood Mills
said on 12/12/2005 @ 1:09 pm PT...
When trolls cite crooked elections as if they represent the will of the people, and at once seek to diminish the credibility of the opposition through the same rigged outcomes, they are like people who cheat to win at golf and then suggest to give their defeated opponent that he take lessons before they play together again.
Ever know somebody like that? There are a few at every golf club...typically rich men's sons who can't make it on their own and need Daddy's help. In fact, I know of one who lives in Crawford, Texas.
COMMENT #24 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 2:15 pm PT...
This is horrible news! Shouldn't our troops be in armored vehicles? Why are people talking about elections on this thread. Our troops are in great danger. What is the administration going to do to protect them? This is the question that springs to mind here. There is a guy in Iraq right now who will be dead soon if this problem isn't addressed. We owe it to him and his loved ones to make sure he is protected.
COMMENT #25 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 3:43 pm PT...
This thread is about holes in humvees and who is making those holes.
If we define those who make holes as "our enemies", then millions of Iraqi folk are our enemies. Our troups are outnumbered astronomically, and ideologically. The thickness of the armor will not change the fact of this matter.
I think the religious morph of capitalism by neoCons is also to blame. Their current religion, called capitalism of the military industrial complex, required invasion of an oil rich but militarily weak nation.
Their form of capitalism did not work to put the lifeblood of western capitalistic economies in their own hands. Instead, middle eastern nations had the lifeblood of the western world's capitalism in their mostly Islamic hands.
If Jesus is the one who gives gold blessings to the religious right, as the televangelists proclaim, why then are Allah and the Islamists holding us by the arteries?
It must be a lefty conspiracy, so lets bomb the hell out of them, shock and awe them into the realities of capitalism. We are the capitalists by God, and therefore we will control the oil.
We will deal with faith and armor later.
In this view of capitalism, democracy is a weak notion floating upon a foundation of military might.
If you remove that might, the weak essence called democracy will fail. It is weak then.
After all, democracy is not something that can be transmitted, according to that neoCon view, via discourse and debate?
That is why I say it is not the same stuff that American democracy is made of. We do not vote about the Bill of Rights.
That is because the Bill of Rights election we all won a long, long, long time ago. Victory. Get over loosing that election in the 18th century neoCon fascists.
COMMENT #26 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 5:04 pm PT...
Dredd, My comment was not directed at you. I love your posts. My concern is for some poor guy who, right this minute, is in danger of losing his life from these IED's. Every American, right, left or in between should be concerned with this issue.
More powerful IED's=more dead and mangled troops (liberal and conservative)
Fortify their armor, bring them home, give them the tools to survive, come up with a plan....What is the administration doing about this?
COMMENT #27 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 7:56 pm PT...
I'll say it again: Why would Shiite Iranians be helping Sunni insurgents? This is bullshit! That is a valid question for the pentagon: Why would Shiite Iranians be helping Sunni insurgents kill Shiite Iraqi's???
COMMENT #28 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 7:58 pm PT...
Jo says "Why are people talking about elections on this thread?"
How about this answer: Because if our elections weren't hijacked, Bush wouldn't be president and these troops wouldn't be in Iraq getting killed. How's that for an answer?
COMMENT #29 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 9:34 pm PT...
You asked: "Why would Shiite Iranians be helping Sunni insurgents kill Shiite Iraqi's?"
Very good question. The obvious answer is that this is bullshit spin to cover up for the fact that our troops are being blown up with the powerful explosives looted from Al Qaqaa that BushCo failed to guard in their haste to get to the oil facilities so the occupation could "pay for itself" (or pay for Cheney's retirement, you know with Social Security being in trouble and all). Yeah these guys really care about our troops.
The good news is that I personally spoke with "Medium Right" today, and the reason he has not returned is that he is off to Iraq with a shitload of body armor for our troops. Maybe we misjudged him...
COMMENT #30 [Permalink]
said on 12/12/2005 @ 10:20 pm PT...
#28 Good answer.
#29 By the looks of the above photos a shitload of armor is what they are going to need...
COMMENT #31 [Permalink]
said on 12/13/2005 @ 2:25 am PT...
Yeah, I know. Also my comments are generic.
As to the troups, I think they are in a Blackhawk down scenario, because of bad planning on behalf of the neoCons who did the architect work on the invasion and its aftermath.
I see it as a scenario where the military did its job and that job was over in the first 90 days after the invasion (two years ago at least).
It was then time for the civilian aspect of the admin to do its thing, and for the military to rest up.
The civilian neoCons did not have any plan to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi folk, and thus, the military was and is left to shoot it out with those who where supposed to be the beneficiaries of the invasion and occupation.
What happens after invasion is not a military adventure, it is a civilian, political one.
The military did not fail in its mission, the civilians did. That would be Rumsfeld, the state department, and the white house. Not to mention the rubber stamps (congress).
Once the military succeeded they should have been removed, and the civilian forces injected into the Iraqi scene as guides. And the full blown UN process would have been much better, with use of arabian UN forces as the backdrop for the support of domestic tranquility while the process took place.
Instead the military was forced into a process it is not trained for, and thereby entered into an awkward mission which was not and is not natural.
COMMENT #32 [Permalink]
said on 12/13/2005 @ 3:59 am PT...
"No. But Americans vote on who is better to lead this country with the issues we face in our time. America has decided that you way is the wrong way. Its that simple."
What part of "52% of America think's they have been misled or lied into this war" do you have difficulty comprehending? (Besides America.. the rest are either one or two syllable words... so you should, really.. have figured it out.)
Your inability to understand this... is probably why you wrongfully act like you're in the majority.
Oh.. and Americans didn't vote on the issues they faced either... they voted on the intentionally bogus information being generated by this administration with the intent to mislead everyone.
And even at that... there's ample evidence to suggest that American's didn't actually vote for the criminals that ended up being in power.
In 2000, it may have been hard to know for sure... but we all watched 2004... we all saw the fraud, and now with the recent changes to laws.. laws solely in place to protect democracy... the intentions of this administration and the corruption of the GOP are obvious.
Medium Wrong... you are fighting a losing battle. The evidence, the statistics, the day-to-day exposure of seemingly endless GOP corruption. Are nothing for you to base your political rantings on.
It's not that your posts and your spin is changing... it's just that, with each new day, America gets another GOP kick-in-the-teeth, waking more and more Americans up from their slumber...
12-24 months ago... the average American may have listened to you... now... you're in a shrinking minority.. true conservatives and true Christians (the ones that are driven by principles rather than money!) are starting to turn their backs on this administration, the media knows it has to start reporting the truth or it's going to lose it's market shares.
I guess they realise there's not much point trying to defend or ignore the blatant issues:
torture, removal of voting-rights, pre-emptive wars/invasions based on intentionally bogus information, payola, govt. funded propaganda disguised as news, partisan control of vote and vote-counting technologies, vote-rigging that is to become illegal to challenge, trashing the constitution / bill of rights, extraordinary rendition to countries likely to use torture, imprisonment without reason or trial... the list goes on forever.
America isn't interested in what you have to say any more... too many people have woken up and it doesn't matter how you spin it or how you package it...
People can still smell the bullshit... and the stink of GOP corruption is getting unbearable... even to the point it's making conservatives feel sick.
COMMENT #33 [Permalink]
said on 12/13/2005 @ 5:02 am PT...
Is anyone watching the scary scenario developing inside Israel, as they contemplate Iranian nuclear ventures (link here)?
Humvees with holes in them could be replaced by many cities with very large holes in them.
US Soldiers in the area could be in danger even more if Iran and Israel start a shooting war.
The main arteries for the lifeblood of the western world are becoming endangered. This will incite the madness of the oil barons who currently wield power in the US and Britain.
What happens next is a roll of the dice, and no matter what, the world will be much more dangerous.
COMMENT #34 [Permalink]
said on 12/13/2005 @ 7:35 pm PT...
Dredd: How about this scenario: Since Americans are wise to Bush lying us into the Iraq War, the ONLY way to get us at war with Iran is if Israel strikes Iran. So they do it the ONLY way possible.
COMMENT #35 [Permalink]
said on 12/13/2005 @ 7:40 pm PT...
I am very pro-troops, by the way. I feel horrible that they were setup by the Bush administration. That's not what they're for. Bush ruined the military, because now Americans don't want to join, knowing they can be put in harm's way based on lies by a president who stole 2 elections. I'm very pro-military. It makes me absolutely sick to my stomach, everytime one of them gets killed. I question whether it makes rightwingers' sick, because all their comments are pro-war and nothing said about the welfare of our troops. How they are sitting ducks, how they lack proper body armor, etc... I feel that I am the real patriotic American, because I don't want our troops misused.
COMMENT #36 [Permalink]
said on 12/14/2005 @ 4:19 am PT...
Big Dan #34, #35
I think your statement "Since Americans are wise to Bush lying us into the Iraq War, the ONLY way to get us at war with Iran is if Israel strikes Iran" has merit.
The blogs will be all over it, and perhaps the skepticism of the public, which is growing, will lead to yet another credibility gap.
Lets just hope it does not get out of hand as it could ... and plunge us into a major draft and another endless war.
I share your distinction between troops and the military industrial complex. Troops come from the little people but the military industrial complex comes from the oil barons.
COMMENT #37 [Permalink]
said on 12/14/2005 @ 9:00 am PT...
Dredd: The credibility gap doesn't change the electronic voting machine gap, unfortunately.
I'll say it again: Santorum is down over 20% to Casey in polls now.
One of two things will happen, both resulting in Santorum winning:
1. The GOP spooks will start attacking pre-election polls and discreditting them or propogandizing them or somehow getting results they want from them.
2. Santorum will win a bottom-of-the-9th 51%-49% victory, regardless of how much the polls say he was down. They already used the "humidity - ballots stuck together" in the Hackett-Schmidt stolen election (which no one's covering), it's just a question of what excuse they'll use for the machines going down in the bottom of the 9th, and coming up with a Santorum victory.
They already used the "FBI had a terror alert" excuse in Ohio (boy, it's always in Ohio, notice?).
Maybe Brad Blog should have a "write-in" excuse for the upcoming 51%-49% Santorum win, kind of like that "name-the-dog" write-in thingy Brad had not too long ago. I think for Clint Curtis's dog. My submission was "Wang", but I meant "Wong", so I think Brad threw it out.
COMMENT #38 [Permalink]
Islamic fascist hater
said on 6/8/2006 @ 8:54 pm PT...
Do you think we can get some of those lefty candyass CNN correspondents to take a ride in a humvee?