News – At least 44 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq in April, making it the deadliest month for U.S. forces since September.
When you invade and occupy another country, it is logical to expect resistance from people who oppose the occupation leading to riots, violence and death. You kill them and they kill you.
Unless you ask Bush & Cheney, they will say we will be welcomed with flowers and cakes.
So, sit back, relax (quote: Rumsfield) and enjoy the adventure. In the end, the taxpayers will pay to fix all the damage and destruction caused by the invasion and occupation.
Riots? Haven't had any of them there. Iraqi leaders have begged us to stay, and we liberated them. Now if only they'd learn how to handle freedom.
It seems the current "leaders" DO want us to stay. I begin to wonder: WHY? Is it so they can continue to take advantage of their privileges for awhile longer - and take long summer vacations - without having to actually GOVERN their country? At OUR expense? While WE provide security for them? I think 5 years is damn well long enough for them to get their feet under themselves. They need some additional incentive to get their shi-ite together. Starting to withdraw the troops right now should about do it, I think. Besides, we can't AFFORD to stay there any longer. Seriously.
"Besides, we can't AFFORD to stay there any longer."
Sure we can. If we can afford to blow trillions and trillions and TRILLIONS of dollars on social programs, welfare payouts and the "war on poverty", we can afford another few hundred billion dollars to protect our MidEast oil and business interests, maintain a degree of stability in an otherwise nasty, hostile region, and babysit rogue leaders bent on violently shoving their wack religion down everyone's throats. A few hundred billion is a drop in the bucket compared to what's been wasted domestically. And unlike the war on poverty, the war in Iraq is results-oriented.
And you can support those numbers rather than sounding like Rush Limbaugh told them to you. Be specific. I really want to know (no lib here, just tired of BS).
9 Trillion dollars and counting, as of 2005, with no end in sight - either for poverty, or the rampant spending and government bureaucracy that goes along with it.
"Since President Johnson's War on Poverty, controlling for inflation, the nation has spent $9 trillion on about 80 anti-poverty programs. To put that figure in perspective, last year's U.S. GDP was $11 trillion; $9 trillion exceeds the GDP of any nation except the U.S. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita uncovered the result of the War on Poverty â;; dependency and self-destructive behavior.
Guess what the president and politicians from both parties are asking the American people to do? If you said, "Enact programs that will sustain and enhance dependency," go to the head of the class."
Now put ALL spending in constant dollars and make the comparison. You have only convinced yourself.
Earlier you asserted that we only spent a few hundred billion on Iraq, but now you're going back to the Johnson years and equating all spending (indeed much of it wasted and futile and intended for vote grabbing) since the Johnson years (40years) on social programs in today's currency. Come on, you can do better than that. Do the same for military spending. I really want to know.
Trillions spent on the "war" on poverty? Maybe over 100 years. Otherwise, there would BE no more poverty. A couple trillion ought to set up pretty much EVERY homeless person in a nice apartment, and have a nice stipend. I know your million dollars doesn't go as far as it used to, but a TRILLION is still a hell of a lot of money. Blowing money on the "war" on drugs is even stupider. At least the "war" on poverty is putting food onto the plates of some Americans.
"Since President Johnson's War on Poverty, controlling for inflation, the nation has spent $9 trillion on about 80 anti-poverty programs. To put that figure in perspective, last year's U.S. GDP was $11 trillion; $9 trillion exceeds the GDP of any nation except the U.S. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita uncovered the result of the War on Poverty â;; dependency and self-destructive behavior.
Guess what the president and politicians from both parties are asking the American people to do? If you said, "Enact programs that will sustain and enhance dependency," go to the head of the class."
If you go back and look at how the current leaders beecamne leaders its poretty evident. When the Iraqi's had their election the candidates had to be approved byu Bushco, hence they owe their jobs and most probably their continued existence to the Cons. I can see where they would want them to stay, for us to leave is a death sentence for them. Unless of course we repeat the fall of Saigon.
If somebody was handing you billions of dollars a month, would you be anxious for them to leave?
The Iraqi leaders need to be weaned from the U.S.-provided gravy train. The Iraqi leaders need to get their act together and take care of their country.
"If somebody was handing you billions of dollars a month, would you be anxious for them to stop?
Welfare recipients need to be weaned from the taxpayer-provided gravy train. The American people need to get their act together and take care of themselves."
Funny, isn't it cracksnot, how just changing a couple of your words around can also apply directly to the problems we face domestically?
does that mean you agree that the US payola should stop and we should withdraw from Iraq and they should learn to take care of themselves, like those on welfare here?
Does it mean that you've seen the light that we are setting up chronic cash-draining dependency in Iraq akin to the dependency trap of welfare?
so now you've convinced yourself that we should pull out of Iraq
good
So there is agreement that both policies provide very little return?
I don't understand the name calling. Do you feel it strengthens your argument or position? Who do you believe reacts favorably to such behavior? This behavior may lead one to believe that your argument or position isn't strong enough to stand on its own and needs help using bully tactics.
I am not sure the golden rule goes by the "Do onto others before they do it to you" mantra.
How wonderful that libsRfunny liberated the Iraqis. Thank you so much for all you've done. Why don't you teach the Iraqis how to handle all that freedom they have - freedom from what libsRfunny? Oh libsRfunny you're my hero. NOT.
Freedom from Saddam as his mass graves testify.
won't be long and we will have killed almost as many INNOCENT Iraqis as Saddam did.. and we called him a mass murderer..
The insurgents are doing the vast majority of the killings. When exactly was the last time we lined up tens of thousands of Kurds and shot them in the head?
we do it the civilized way ... hellfire missle
"Freedom from Saddam as his mass graves testify."
At least George Bush buries our soldiers in neat little rows.
The casualty rate is actually quite small compared to the average of 200 casualties per day during Vietnam.
1 dead American is 1 too many...
So never fight a war. Not an option.
how many men did Clinton lose in combat combat.. department of defense classified HOSTILE ACTION... go look it up I'll wait..
Two words: Blackhawk Down. That sums up the Clinton military legacy. You're also not including dead Christian Serbian civilians.
not considered a HOSTILE ACTION .. terrorist act.. as was the Cole..
Combat is initiated by the President the same as Iraq.. so again how many did Clinton lose..
Blackhawk.. those troops were committed by Daddy Bush.. not Clinton.. happened under his watch ..but Repubs in congress would have had a hissy if he had gotten out ...
They died under Clinton, on his watch, due to a lack of support and allowing them to operate under ineffective international command. Willy's fault. Dead Serbian children don't count.
you're not answering the question.. exactly how many military personal died in the 8 years of the Clinton presidency as a result of HOSTILE ACTION.. as classified by the Department of Defense....
i'll give you a hint.. it's less than mentioned in this article...
if you wish to bring up terrorist acts no problem Reagan Beirut Marines enough said..
If you bring up Somalia, you need to bring up Kosovo. No US personal killed in hostile action.
When things became untenable in Somalia, at least Clinton was smart enough to get out.
If you want to bring up Christian Serbian civilians and Saddam together as people involved in genocide, that's fine, though I doubt if that is really a conversation you want to have.
The Serbian civilians are being ethnically cleansed from Kosovo as we speak. A fact conveniently overlooked by the media.
Please present evidence to support the fact.
There is plenty of evidence of the ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the Serbians.
Here you go. It even discusses the fact that Saudi money is paying for the construction of radical Wahabbist mosques and encouraging the introduction of the veil for women in Kosovo.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?x...
Churches are being burned there also
http://physics.harvard.edu/~milan/kosovo/
Now you provide actual data on the number the Serbs cleansed. The figures have been exaggerated.
Not a member? Sign-up today!
slashup67
nopatacious
rylandl831968
lonelyknight
soulkeeper009
adamhowe1980
jorgepratt19711962
BJTJ
djapollo2k
daducha
factoring2117
baldieadelphe
alexander1380
Goppy
antonio55
whodey08
crespi
chillosoph
Helixbuilder
ameliog
mesodude
kwilco
augustine974
kafia1
capn_caveman
hurr1
Generica
IneedIwantIgottahave
dunkirk
thinkingserious
amyjl148
SuburbanHouseHunters
idyll
time4change
ninfri
ellison.alma
elizabeth.brnrd
truekolin
ana.breece
BillyGreat
gloumark
gorger.hans
feedmich
bionick
Mrina
goryatom
marksflou
dashaIzdoma
olegolds
lXkoch
91)
It has long been clear that the "surge" was nothing more than a temporary blip that solved nothing. Meanwhile, zionist general Petraeus has again fallen upward.
Petraeus, Falling Upwards. Selling the President's General
Politics â;; Petraeus's record, -- in Iraq, not Washington -- for each of his previous assignments proved dismal. What the record shows is a man who, after each tour of duty, seemed to manage to make it out of town just ahead of the posse. Zionist Petraeus is the product of a disinformation campaign by the Bush regime.
http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/04/28/...
The Jews are responsible for Iraq too, eh? Zionist everywhere!
How is a race-hating idiot allowed to remain on here?
Hyper-
I looked at your cite.
I can't believe that you're a professor. You call the general, "zionist general Petraeus. Yet you offer no evidence to support your position. Even the article that you link to from Tomdispatch offers no support for your claim that Petraeus is a Zionist.
The Tomdispatch article has to do with generals pushing Pentagon propaganda in the Media and the general's ascent.
It truly is flaccid writing and reasoning by you. I hope you wouldn't give one of your student's a passing grade for practicing your type of logic and reasoning.
For that you earned a negative.
Militants shelling the Green Zone!
Hell, that's one way to make sure that Cheney and Rice don't come within a thousand miles of the place!
Sorry Walden,that was to be a pos.
Well Walden, this is well known and pretty obvious from the positions that Petraeus takes. Here is what a member of the Reagan administration has to say about Petraeus.
Petraeus Testimony May Signal Iran Attack
... The neocon lackey Petraeus has had his script written for him by Cheney, and Petraeus together with neocon warmonger Ryan Crocker, the U.S. governor of the Green Zone in Baghdad, will present Congress next Tuesday and Wednesday with the lies, for which the road has been well paved by neocon propagandists such as Kimberly Kagan, that "the U.S. must recognize that Iran is engaged in a full-up proxy war against it in Iraq."...
http://antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=12644
Just as the corporate media do not tell us about the israel-first dual-citizen traitors in our government, they do not dare tell us that Petraeus is a zioncon. What would americans think if our government contained Russian or Chinese citizens directing foreign policy relevant to those two countries? Do you suppose the media would not tell us?
Dual Citizenship -- Loyal to Whom?
Do No Evil â;; So, you might ask, are there any other dual Israel-American citizens who hold US government positions that could compromise American security? Yes....
http://donoevil.propeller.com/story/2008/03/05/...
Still no proof of Petreaus being a Zionist. If someone's mother or father was an Israeli then they are automatically granted Israeli citizenship whether or not they seek it. Like being an American.