OT: Followers Vow War
Question:
Still think Dubya’s not in way over his empty, pointed little head? Think again — he’s a five-foot-nine non- swimmer in a ten-foot pool! ____ Sadr’s Followers Vow War if U.S. Attacks Iraq City By Khaled Yacoub Oweis Reuters, Friday, April 16, 2004 http://wireservice.wired.com/wired/forms/printstory.asp?section=Break… BAGHDAD (Reuters) – Moqtada al-Sadr’s core supporters vowed on Friday there would be all-out war if U.S. forces stormed Najaf, saying Iraq’s Sh’ite Muslims would not let another of their leaders be killed with impunity. A 2,500-strong U.S. force is poised near the holy city of Najaf to kill or capture the young cleric, but has not yet attacked the city. The chances of peaceful compromise appeared to dim after Sadr vowed not to disband his Mehdi Army militia. "You Americans, do not fall into a quagmire and storm Najaf. Rivers of your blood will flow," Sheikh Nasser al-Saedi told tens of thousands of Sadr supporters in Baghdad’s Sadr City slum, named after the cleric’s revered father and uncle. The mood in Sadr City, from where Moqtada — like his late father — drew his main support, was charged with defiance. Chants such as "Yes, yes, Moqtada" thundered from the crowd. Saedi said Sadr would triumph against an overwhelming enemy force, even if he died. "We killed the American dream. You will not take over this country. You do not understand what martyrdom means. Look at our imams, who died for principle and belief," Saedi added. He was referring to Sadr’s uncle, Imam Mohammad Baqer, one of Islam’s foremost thinkers, and father Sayyed Mohammad Sadeq, who courted impoverished Shi’ites marginalized politically under former President Saddam Hussein. The two men are widely believed to have been killed by Saddam’s agents. Moqtada al-Sadr was himself quoted on Friday by the Lebanese newspaper as-Safir as saying that if he was killed or detained, Iraqis would respond with unimaginable "force and severity." The young Sadr rose to prominence after the toppling of the Baathist government a year ago, taking advantage of a political vacuum and a slow pace of restoring basic services. His followers rose against the U.S.-led occupation two weeks ago after the United States closed down the cleric’s newspaper and arrested one of his top aides. The clashes killed dozens in Sadr City, but there was no sign of U.S. forces there on Friday. U.S. tanks that were deployed withdrew and calm returned to the poor district. MASS FOLLOWING Outside the mosque, children played football in streets flowing with sewage. Skinny donkeys and goats scavenged on garbage in the middle of the road. Saedi told the mostly young crowd that their lot had not improved under the U.S.-led occupation. "The Americans said 400 projects have been executed costing billions of dollars. Where are these projects? Tell me, has the water you drink and electricity improved? Where is the security?" he said. "They have no shame. Damn them always. Damn them until the apocalypse." Residents said low living standards fueled support for Sadr and hostility toward the U.S. occupation. "The Americans occupied the whole of Iraq in three weeks, but they cannot build one sewage pipe in the year since," said Abu Qada, an officer who lost his job when the United States disbanded the Iraqi army a year ago. "Moqtada has risen to become the foremost Arab leader. His creed is Arabism and Islam, which the Americans are trying to destroy. Unlike what America thinks, Sadr has the support of the majority of the Shi’ites." Many of Sadr’s supporters say mainstream Shi’ites, such as leading cleric Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani and his followers, have no choice but to support Sadr. Sistani, seen as a moderate, has urged Sh’ites to respect law and order while warning Washington against using force in Najaf, but he has stayed away from commenting directly on how to deal with his political rival Sadr. "Sistani remained silent when Saddam killed Moqtada’s father and millions here never forgave him for that," said merchant Abu Ghaith al-Aibi. "Sistani knows he cannot afford to stay asleep again if the Americans kill Moqtada." Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
Big deal. Ragheads pissed-off and screaming death to America, Isreal again. Its gotten to be boring in its predictability. Level the entire fucking city. Leave nothing but rubble. Salt the earth. It worked for the Romans. — Dr. Nuketopia Sorry, no e-Mail. Spam forgeries have resulted in thousands of faked bounces to my address.
Response:
>Big deal. Ragheads pissed-off and screaming death to America, Isreal again. >Its gotten to be boring in its predictability. >Level the entire fucking city. Leave nothing but rubble. Salt the earth. It >worked for the Romans.
It’s really amusing to hear the dwindling Dubya- can-do-no-wrong crowd, so many of them avowed Christians, advocate the very same Roman tactics that destroyed the "holy city" of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Meanwhile, back stateside, the legions will rebel and topple Nero W. Bush in November. The real story behind the extended tours of duty in Iraq is that they keep the real combat vets out of the media — Dubya can’t afford to let the true futility of his pet war hit home before the election. If that happens (and I understand Michael Moore has people in-country getting footage for his next film), it’s no longer a contest — it’s a Kerry landslide that will leave the G.O.P. in disarray and disrepute for at least a decade. What people don’t seem to get is that John Kerry is very pro-Israel and all for increasing American influence in the Middle East and adjacent Asia — he’s just smart enough to know that not even an alchemist can turn infamy and ineptitude into that influence! Iow, you don’t liberate people by leveling cities and sowing the salt of resentment — iow, your "Isreal" (that’s "Israel," btw) parallel is more apt than you know. At this point our troopers and marines have become the IDF and Iraq has become America’s very own and very populous — not to mention very well-armed — West Bank. This is what our dear president has purchased with the blood of our children and the taxes their survivors will be paying for generations: a notably bloody and intractable political and military black hole from which nothing good can emerge. Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
Yeah. Funny, isn’t it? What do they think is going on now, a friendly game of hopscotch? They’re afraid to come out and play as it is, and then they throw idle threats in case we go in after them. And these are the great warriors…[snort] What a bunch of putzes. You’d think they’d have figured out by now that Bush don’t play that. Get on with it, I say… The quicker we go in, the quicker the job is done. Freep – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text —— Original Message —– Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 2:47 PM > Sadr’s Followers Vow War if U.S. Attacks Iraq City
Response:
Even Dubya isn’t stupid enough to follow Clueless Creep’s advice, which would most likely further unite Iraqis against the occupation. He’s well and truly fucked — unfortunately, so are a lot of Americans who were promised they’d be home after their year in the hell of "liberated" Iraq. There are between 24 and 25 million Iraqis. If only five percent are armed and pissed, that’s as many combatants on the ground as the so-called "coalition" has. Iow, Clueless, maybe you’d better plan on nuking and paving the whole damned region, not just leveling a city or two. It’s one thing to be a decisive wartime leader, quite another to be an arrogant and bellicose putz in way over ones head. Btw, the Iraqi insurgents (if they were Americans in 1776 we’d be calling them patriots, of course) aren’t going to "come out" and fight pitched battles against a professional enemy with armor and air support — they’re going to draw our people in and harass them where those advantages don’t mean a damned thing. As soon as the shooting stops, they will be indistinguishable from their peacable neighbors. Virtually any scenario where the U.S. triumphs convincingly will be indistinguishable from genocide — no wonder the administration was so dead-set against international war crimes tribunals! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >Yeah. Funny, isn’t it? What do they think is going on now, a friendly game >of hopscotch? They’re afraid to come out and play as it is, and then they >throw idle threats in case we go in after them. And these are the great >warriors…[snort] >What a bunch of putzes. You’d think they’d have figured out by now that Bush >don’t play that. >Get on with it, I say… The quicker we go in, the quicker the job is done. >Freep >—– Original Message —– >Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps >Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 2:47 PM > Sadr’s Followers Vow War if U.S. Attacks Iraq City
Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
>Big deal. Ragheads pissed-off and screaming death to America, Isreal again. >Its gotten to be boring in its predictability. >Level the entire fucking city. Leave nothing but rubble. Salt the earth. It >worked for the Romans.
Invoke the Patriot act and send Morgoon and his terrorist supporting buddies there first. The time to flush the turds is getting near. Claude
Response:
Excellent info, Bruce. Thanks for the updates. arrogant bellicose putz = fraidy creep ha ha ha ha, I like that, depicts the jingoistic jerkoff perfectly. Kabong!~!~!~!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Even Dubya isn’t stupid > enough to follow Clueless > Creep’s advice, which > would most likely further > unite Iraqis against the > occupation. He’s well > and truly fucked — > unfortunately, so are a > lot of Americans who were > promised they’d be home > after their year in the > hell of "liberated" Iraq. > There are between 24 and > 25 million Iraqis. If > only five percent are > armed and pissed, that’s > as many combatants on the > ground as the so-called > "coalition" has. Iow, > Clueless, maybe you’d > better plan on nuking and > paving the whole damned > region, not just leveling > a city or two. It’s one > thing to be a decisive > wartime leader, quite > another to be an arrogant > and bellicose putz in way > over ones head. > Btw, the Iraqi insurgents > (if they were Americans > in 1776 we’d be calling > them patriots, of course) > aren’t going to "come out" > and fight pitched battles > against a professional > enemy with armor and air > support — they’re going > to draw our people in and > harass them where those > advantages don’t mean a > damned thing. As soon as > the shooting stops, they > will be indistinguishable > from their peacable > neighbors. Virtually any > scenario where the U.S. > triumphs convincingly > will be indistinguishable > from genocide — no > wonder the administration > was so dead-set against > international war crimes > tribunals! >Yeah. Funny, isn’t it? What do they think is going on now, a friendly game >of hopscotch? They’re afraid to come out and play as it is, and then they >throw idle threats in case we go in after them. And these are the great >warriors…[snort] >What a bunch of putzes. You’d think they’d have figured out by now that Bush >don’t play that. >Get on with it, I say… The quicker we go in, the quicker the job is done. >Freep >—– Original Message —– >Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps >Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 2:47 PM >> Sadr’s Followers Vow War if U.S. Attacks Iraq City > Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access > >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< > -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
>>Big deal. Ragheads pissed-off and screaming death to America, Isreal again. >Its gotten to be boring in its predictability. >Level the entire fucking city. Leave nothing but rubble. Salt the earth. It >worked for the Romans. >Invoke the Patriot act and send Morgoon and his terrorist supporting >buddies there first. The time to flush the turds is getting near.
Well, at least you got it right in the last sentence — the voters will pull the handle, and the watery gurgling will be coming from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and everywhere else where Dubya’s minions continue to anal-rape our country and the world. Of course for folks like you who enjoy the current state of ongoing anal rape and consider anyone who doesn’t seditious, the freedom-hating "Patriot Act" will be the next item going down the tubes — then it’ll be time to jump into your old camos, grab your Chinese-made AK-47, and resume your fantasy life as an illegal militiaman playing soldier in the woods somewhere in Idaho. Considering your joyful willingness to be butt-fucked by Dubya & Co. in exchange for a trivial tax cut, we could even arrange to start a new state for you somewhere up in the frozen north and call it "Youdaho!" Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
> Even Dubya isn’t stupid > enough to follow Clueless > Creep’s advice, which > would most likely further > unite Iraqis against the > occupation. He’s well > and truly fucked — > unfortunately, so are a > lot of Americans who were > promised they’d be home > after their year in the > hell of "liberated" Iraq.
Ah, the time-scarred "you’ll inflame the Arab street" ploy. Yawn. Heard it in 91. Heard it again and again since then. There’s never been any difference that anyone could detect. I’d say they’re about as inflamed as they can get, and have been for long enough that it’s a pretty well known quantity by now. If you believe their threats (or peddle them yourself on their behalf — how pathetic is THAT?) you clearly aren’t one who learns by experience. Next… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> There are between 24 and > 25 million Iraqis. If > only five percent are > armed and pissed, that’s > as many combatants on the > ground as the so-called > "coalition" has. Iow, > Clueless, maybe you’d > better plan on nuking and > paving the whole damned > region, not just leveling > a city or two. It’s one > thing to be a decisive > wartime leader, quite > another to be an arrogant > and bellicose putz in way > over ones head.
Yeah. It’s *real* bellicose to have given them these days while we stand ready, to see if they might finally know better than to ask for it, and send out the troublemaker. From the defiant tone, it sounds like they’re about as stupid as YOU are. …Or maybe just on the same side. Next… > Btw, the Iraqi insurgents > (if they were Americans > in 1776 we’d be calling > them patriots, of course) > aren’t going to "come out" > and fight pitched battles > against a professional > enemy with armor and air > support — they’re going > to draw our people in and > harass them where those > advantages don’t mean a > damned thing.
That’s not working anymore, either. If they hide in mosques, they get shot in mosques. Bush ain’t playing THAT one anymore, either. Or haven’t you been watching the last few weeks? And finally… > As soon as > the shooting stops, they > will be indistinguishable > from their peacable > neighbors. Virtually any > scenario where the U.S. > triumphs convincingly > will be indistinguishable > from genocide — no > wonder the administration > was so dead-set against > international war crimes > tribunals!
Or maybe we’ll get enough of the Sadr-ites that they will fold up their tents and run back to Iran. Why do you think they’re trying to frighten us (wow, THAT sure is to laugh…) into not coming in, because they’re oh so worried about their fellow Fallusians? Watch and learn, man. You could *use* a good object lesson in the wages of betting against a good, decent, and determined commander in chief. I’ll say this, for you: you’re dumber than Khaddhafi; at least he wised up when he saw that there was no pulling back before victory for THIS American president. Bye, Freep – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Yeah. Funny, isn’t it? What do they think is going on now, a friendly game >of hopscotch? They’re afraid to come out and play as it is, and then they >throw idle threats in case we go in after them. And these are the great >warriors…[snort] >What a bunch of putzes. You’d think they’d have figured out by now that Bush >don’t play that. >Get on with it, I say… The quicker we go in, the quicker the job is done. >Freep >—– Original Message —– >Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps >Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 2:47 PM >> Sadr’s Followers Vow War if U.S. Attacks Iraq City > Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access > >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< > -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Even Dubya isn’t stupid > enough to follow Clueless > Creep’s advice, which > would most likely further > unite Iraqis against the > occupation. He’s well > and truly fucked — > unfortunately, so are a > lot of Americans who were > promised they’d be home > after their year in the > hell of "liberated" Iraq. >Ah, the time-scarred "you’ll inflame the Arab street" ploy. Yawn. Heard it >in 91. Heard it again and again since then. There’s never been any >difference that anyone could detect. I’d say they’re about as inflamed as >they can get, and have been for long enough that it’s a pretty well known >quantity by now. If you believe their threats (or peddle them yourself on >their behalf — how pathetic is THAT?) you clearly aren’t one who learns by >experience. >Next…
You haven’t refuted anything. The Iraqi so-called insurgents are already operating on a larger scale that the Palestinians, and if you don’t think leveling a mosque (let along a city) or two wouldn’t kick it up a notch, you’re dreaming. We are *not* as good at suppression as the Israelis — they’re still having major problems even though they’re the best in the world at it, so it stand to reason that we’ll have a harder time against much more numerous opponents. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> There are between 24 and > 25 million Iraqis. If > only five percent are > armed and pissed, that’s > as many combatants on the > ground as the so-called > "coalition" has. Iow, > Clueless, maybe you’d > better plan on nuking and > paving the whole damned > region, not just leveling > a city or two. It’s one > thing to be a decisive > wartime leader, quite > another to be an arrogant > and bellicose putz in way > over ones head. >Yeah. It’s *real* bellicose to have given them these days while we stand >ready, to see if they might finally know better than to ask for it, and send >out the troublemaker. From the defiant tone, it sounds like they’re about as >stupid as YOU are.
They’ve got us by the short hairs — the Marines don’t see it that way because they know they’re much better man-for-man than the opposition. However, that’s not the issue — a crushing American victory in Sunni Fallujah or Shiite Najaf will be the start of a martyrdom-driven intifada that we simply don’t have enough people to handle. As a matter of fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if the extended stand-down outside Fallujah is an Israeli idea — unlike us, they know the danger inherent in a brute force response. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->…Or maybe just on the same side. >Next… > Btw, the Iraqi insurgents > (if they were Americans > in 1776 we’d be calling > them patriots, of course) > aren’t going to "come out" > and fight pitched battles > against a professional > enemy with armor and air > support — they’re going > to draw our people in and > harass them where those > advantages don’t mean a > damned thing. >That’s not working anymore, either. If they hide in mosques, they get shot >in mosques. Bush ain’t playing THAT one anymore, either. Or haven’t you been >watching the last few weeks?
Clueless, they can move in with local families and redeploy whenever and wherever we don’t have sufficient surveillence — it’s not a question of assuming a mosque is effective sanctuary for a posted unit, it’s a matter of units melting back into the populace only to reconstitute on opportunity. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->And finally… > As soon as > the shooting stops, they > will be indistinguishable > from their peacable > neighbors. Virtually any > scenario where the U.S. > triumphs convincingly > will be indistinguishable > from genocide — no > wonder the administration > was so dead-set against > international war crimes > tribunals! >Or maybe we’ll get enough of the Sadr-ites that they will fold up their >tents and run back to Iran. Why do you think they’re trying to frighten us >(wow, THAT sure is to laugh…) into not coming in, because they’re oh so >worried about their fellow Fallusians?
You dumbass, the Sadr-led "Mahdi Army" isn’t in Fallujah — that’s a Sunni city that’s been a thorn in the side from day one. Btw, the Iraqi Shiites have no problem with Iranian help — their top cleric, Grand Ayatollah Sistani, is an Iranian, and his word is law to about half the population. >Watch and learn, man. You could *use* >a good object lesson in the wages of betting against a good,
Spoiled. >decent,
Perfidious. >and >determined
He’s already counting on the U.N. to save his bacon — his only determination is to get himself reelected, and that’s fortunately getting more unlikely every day. >commander in chief. I’ll say this, for you: you’re dumber than >Khaddhafi; at least he wised up when he saw that there was no pulling back >before victory for THIS American president.
The British couldn’t conrol Mesopotamia militarily and neither could the Ottoman Turks before them — the chances of an undersized, unprepared "coalition" managing what two of the most successful empires in history couldn’t are pretty close to zero. As previously mentioned, the Israelis know the limitations of pigheaded determination — that’s why they’re pulling out of Gaza while pulling off a few face-saving assassinations so as not to appear defeated: they know they can’t govern a hostile population by force without resorting what amounts to genocidal tactics. Dubya has put our people into a meat grinder where any victory is Pyrrhic by definition — a classic lose-lose situation that’ll probably end in something very close to an "Islamic Republic Of Iraq." That’s what your "good, decent, and determined" leader has purchased with the blood of our children and the sweat of the multiple future generations who’ll be saddled with immense debts he’s incurred. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Bye, >Freep > >Yeah. Funny, isn’t it? What do they think is going on now, a friendly >game > >of hopscotch? They’re afraid to come out and play as it is, and then they > >throw idle threats in case we go in after them. And these are the great > >warriors…[snort] > >What a bunch of putzes. You’d think they’d have figured out by now that >Bush > >don’t play that. > >Get on with it, I say… The quicker we go in, the quicker the job is >done. > >Freep > >—– Original Message —– > >Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps > >Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 2:47 PM > >> Sadr’s Followers Vow War if U.S. Attacks Iraq City > Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access > >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< > -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
Here Here Mr. Nuke, This is long overdue. Truth told however, I am getting sick of this politically-correct war. It’s time to re-declare the war … start over – bring out the AC-130 gunships and blow these towelheads rags right off their dirty heads. They want to be sent to heaven so we should give them what they want. And OBL will be caught this year – you can take that to the bank! bass-player with the B-15 juice!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Big deal. Ragheads pissed-off and screaming death to America, Isreal again. > Its gotten to be boring in its predictability. > Level the entire fucking city. Leave nothing but rubble. Salt the earth. It > worked for the Romans. > — > Dr. Nuketopia > Sorry, no e-Mail. > Spam forgeries have resulted in thousands of faked bounces to my address.
Response:
Bruce, Whose side are you on??? From the tone of your posts it sounds like you would like the radical Islamists in Iraq to win this thing. That is ignorant at best. jvh
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Even Dubya isn’t stupid > enough to follow Clueless > Creep’s advice, which > would most likely further > unite Iraqis against the > occupation. He’s well > and truly fucked — > unfortunately, so are a > lot of Americans who were > promised they’d be home > after their year in the > hell of "liberated" Iraq. > There are between 24 and > 25 million Iraqis. If > only five percent are > armed and pissed, that’s > as many combatants on the > ground as the so-called > "coalition" has. Iow, > Clueless, maybe you’d > better plan on nuking and > paving the whole damned > region, not just leveling > a city or two. It’s one > thing to be a decisive > wartime leader, quite > another to be an arrogant > and bellicose putz in way > over ones head. > Btw, the Iraqi insurgents > (if they were Americans > in 1776 we’d be calling > them patriots, of course) > aren’t going to "come out" > and fight pitched battles > against a professional > enemy with armor and air > support — they’re going > to draw our people in and > harass them where those > advantages don’t mean a > damned thing. As soon as > the shooting stops, they > will be indistinguishable > from their peacable > neighbors. Virtually any > scenario where the U.S. > triumphs convincingly > will be indistinguishable > from genocide — no > wonder the administration > was so dead-set against > international war crimes > tribunals! >Yeah. Funny, isn’t it? What do they think is going on now, a friendly game >of hopscotch? They’re afraid to come out and play as it is, and then they >throw idle threats in case we go in after them. And these are the great >warriors…[snort] >What a bunch of putzes. You’d think they’d have figured out by now that Bush >don’t play that. >Get on with it, I say… The quicker we go in, the quicker the job is done. >Freep >—– Original Message —– >Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps >Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 2:47 PM >> Sadr’s Followers Vow War if U.S. Attacks Iraq City > Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access > >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< > -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
All’s I can say is it a good thing Bruce wasn’t in charge in 1941 – if he was the luckywould be speaking German right now! The unlucky would either be a lampshade or a bar of soap!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> Even Dubya isn’t stupid >> enough to follow Clueless >> Creep’s advice, which >> would most likely further >> unite Iraqis against the >> occupation. He’s well >> and truly fucked — >> unfortunately, so are a >> lot of Americans who were >> promised they’d be home >> after their year in the >> hell of "liberated" Iraq. >Ah, the time-scarred "you’ll inflame the Arab street" ploy. Yawn. Heard it >in 91. Heard it again and again since then. There’s never been any >difference that anyone could detect. I’d say they’re about as inflamed as >they can get, and have been for long enough that it’s a pretty well known >quantity by now. If you believe their threats (or peddle them yourself on >their behalf — how pathetic is THAT?) you clearly aren’t one who learns by >experience. >Next… > You haven’t refuted anything. > The Iraqi so-called insurgents > are already operating on a > larger scale that the > Palestinians, and if you don’t > think leveling a mosque (let > along a city) or two wouldn’t > kick it up a notch, you’re > dreaming. We are *not* as > good at suppression as the > Israelis — they’re still > having major problems even > though they’re the best in the > world at it, so it stand to > reason that we’ll have a > harder time against much more > numerous opponents. >> There are between 24 and >> 25 million Iraqis. If >> only five percent are >> armed and pissed, that’s >> as many combatants on the >> ground as the so-called >> "coalition" has. Iow, >> Clueless, maybe you’d >> better plan on nuking and >> paving the whole damned >> region, not just leveling >> a city or two. It’s one >> thing to be a decisive >> wartime leader, quite >> another to be an arrogant >> and bellicose putz in way >> over ones head. >Yeah. It’s *real* bellicose to have given them these days while we stand >ready, to see if they might finally know better than to ask for it, and send >out the troublemaker. From the defiant tone, it sounds like they’re about as >stupid as YOU are. > They’ve got us by the short > hairs — the Marines don’t > see it that way because > they know they’re much > better man-for-man than the > opposition. However, > that’s not the issue — a > crushing American victory > in Sunni Fallujah or Shiite > Najaf will be the start of > a martyrdom-driven intifada > that we simply don’t have > enough people to handle. > As a matter of fact, I > wouldn’t be surprised if the > extended stand-down outside > Fallujah is an Israeli idea > — unlike us, they know the > danger inherent in a brute > force response. >…Or maybe just on the same side. >Next… >> Btw, the Iraqi insurgents >> (if they were Americans >> in 1776 we’d be calling >> them patriots, of course) >> aren’t going to "come out" >> and fight pitched battles >> against a professional >> enemy with armor and air >> support — they’re going >> to draw our people in and >> harass them where those >> advantages don’t mean a >> damned thing. >That’s not working anymore, either. If they hide in mosques, they get shot >in mosques. Bush ain’t playing THAT one anymore, either. Or haven’t you been >watching the last few weeks? > Clueless, they can move > in with local families > and redeploy whenever > and wherever we don’t > have sufficient > surveillence — it’s > not a question of > assuming a mosque is > effective sanctuary for > a posted unit, it’s a > matter of units melting > back into the populace > only to reconstitute on > opportunity. >And finally… >> As soon as >> the shooting stops, they >> will be indistinguishable >> from their peacable >> neighbors. Virtually any >> scenario where the U.S. >> triumphs convincingly >> will be indistinguishable >> from genocide — no >> wonder the administration >> was so dead-set against >> international war crimes >> tribunals! >Or maybe we’ll get enough of the Sadr-ites that they will fold up their >tents and run back to Iran. Why do you think they’re trying to frighten us >(wow, THAT sure is to laugh…) into not coming in, because they’re oh so >worried about their fellow Fallusians? > You dumbass, the Sadr-led > "Mahdi Army" isn’t in > Fallujah — that’s a > Sunni city that’s been a > thorn in the side from > day one. Btw, the Iraqi > Shiites have no problem > with Iranian help — > their top cleric, Grand > Ayatollah Sistani, is an > Iranian, and his word is > law to about half the > population. >Watch and learn, man. You could *use* >a good object lesson in the wages of betting against a good, > Spoiled. >decent, > Perfidious. >and >determined > He’s already counting on > the U.N. to save his > bacon — his only > determination is to get > himself reelected, and > that’s fortunately > getting more unlikely > every day. >commander in chief. I’ll say this, for you: you’re dumber than >Khaddhafi; at least he wised up when he saw that there was no pulling back >before victory for THIS American president. > The British couldn’t conrol > Mesopotamia militarily and > neither could the Ottoman > Turks before them — the > chances of an undersized, > unprepared "coalition" > managing what two of the > most successful empires in > history couldn’t are pretty > close to zero. As > previously mentioned, the > Israelis know the > limitations of pigheaded > determination — that’s why > they’re pulling out of Gaza > while pulling off a few > face-saving assassinations > so as not to appear > defeated: they know they > can’t govern a hostile > population by force without > resorting what amounts to > genocidal tactics. Dubya > has put our people into a > meat grinder where any > victory is Pyrrhic by > definition — a classic > lose-lose situation that’ll > probably end in something > very close to an "Islamic > Republic Of Iraq." That’s > what your "good, decent, > and determined" leader has > purchased with the blood > of our children and the > sweat of the multiple > future generations who’ll > be saddled with immense > debts he’s incurred. >Bye, >Freep >> >Yeah. Funny, isn’t it? What do they think is going on now, a friendly >game >> >of hopscotch? They’re afraid to come out and play as it is, and then they >> >throw idle threats in case we go in after them. And these are the great >> >warriors…[snort] >> >What a bunch of putzes. You’d think they’d have figured out by now that >Bush >> >don’t play that. >> >Get on with it, I say… The quicker we go in, the quicker the job is >done. >> >Freep >> >—– Original Message —– >> >Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps >> >Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 2:47 PM >> >> Sadr’s Followers Vow War if U.S. Attacks Iraq City >> Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >> >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< >> -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=- > Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access > >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< > -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
>All’s I can say is it a good thing Bruce wasn’t in charge in 1941 – >if he was the luckywould be speaking German right now!
Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it, but to avoid that repetition one must look the relevant history — in this case that of Mesopotamia, not Europe or the Pacific rim. There are no relevant parallels between World War II and Gulf War II other than the fact that both Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein were murderous tyrants with mustaches — then again, so was our erstwhile and equially murderous ally, "Uncle Joe" Stalin. If FDR had run World War II like Dubya’s running this one, the major military response to the attack on Pearl Harbor would be a prompt, full- scale invasion of Peru or perhaps Mozambique. >The unlucky would either be a lampshade or a bar of soap!
Yeah, Dubya really invaded Iraq to prevent that sort of stuff. If you believe that, I’ve got a fine old bridge of the East River that might interest you…. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >> Even Dubya isn’t stupid > >> enough to follow Clueless > >> Creep’s advice, which > >> would most likely further > >> unite Iraqis against the > >> occupation. He’s well > >> and truly fucked — > >> unfortunately, so are a > >> lot of Americans who were > >> promised they’d be home > >> after their year in the > >> hell of "liberated" Iraq. > >Ah, the time-scarred "you’ll inflame the Arab street" ploy. Yawn. Heard >it > >in 91. Heard it again and again since then. There’s never been any > >difference that anyone could detect. I’d say they’re about as inflamed as > >they can get, and have been for long enough that it’s a pretty well known > >quantity by now. If you believe their threats (or peddle them yourself on > >their behalf — how pathetic is THAT?) you clearly aren’t one who learns >by > >experience. > >Next… > You haven’t refuted anything. > The Iraqi so-called insurgents > are already operating on a > larger scale that the > Palestinians, and if you don’t > think leveling a mosque (let > along a city) or two wouldn’t > kick it up a notch, you’re > dreaming. We are *not* as > good at suppression as the > Israelis — they’re still > having major problems even > though they’re the best in the > world at it, so it stand to > reason that we’ll have a > harder time against much more > numerous opponents. > >> There are between 24 and > >> 25 million Iraqis. If > >> only five percent are > >> armed and pissed, that’s > >> as many combatants on the > >> ground as the so-called > >> "coalition" has. Iow, > >> Clueless, maybe you’d > >> better plan on nuking and > >> paving the whole damned > >> region, not just leveling > >> a city or two. It’s one > >> thing to be a decisive > >> wartime leader, quite > >> another to be an arrogant > >> and bellicose putz in way > >> over ones head. > >Yeah. It’s *real* bellicose to have given them these days while we stand > >ready, to see if they might finally know better than to ask for it, and >send > >out the troublemaker. From the defiant tone, it sounds like they’re about >as > >stupid as YOU are. > They’ve got us by the short > hairs — the Marines don’t > see it that way because > they know they’re much > better man-for-man than the > opposition. However, > that’s not the issue — a > crushing American victory > in Sunni Fallujah or Shiite > Najaf will be the start of > a martyrdom-driven intifada > that we simply don’t have > enough people to handle. > As a matter of fact, I > wouldn’t be surprised if the > extended stand-down outside > Fallujah is an Israeli idea > — unlike us, they know the > danger inherent in a brute > force response. > >…Or maybe just on the same side. > >Next… > >> Btw, the Iraqi insurgents > >> (if they were Americans > >> in 1776 we’d be calling > >> them patriots, of course) > >> aren’t going to "come out" > >> and fight pitched battles > >> against a professional > >> enemy with armor and air > >> support — they’re going > >> to draw our people in and > >> harass them where those > >> advantages don’t mean a > >> damned thing. > >That’s not working anymore, either. If they hide in mosques, they get >shot > >in mosques. Bush ain’t playing THAT one anymore, either. Or haven’t you >been > >watching the last few weeks? > Clueless, they can move > in with local families > and redeploy whenever > and wherever we don’t > have sufficient > surveillence — it’s > not a question of > assuming a mosque is > effective sanctuary for > a posted unit, it’s a > matter of units melting > back into the populace > only to reconstitute on > opportunity. > >And finally… > >> As soon as > >> the shooting stops, they > >> will be indistinguishable > >> from their peacable > >> neighbors. Virtually any > >> scenario where the U.S. > >> triumphs convincingly > >> will be indistinguishable > >> from genocide — no > >> wonder the administration > >> was so dead-set against > >> international war crimes > >> tribunals! > >Or maybe we’ll get enough of the Sadr-ites that they will fold up their > >tents and run back to Iran. Why do you think they’re trying to frighten >us > >(wow, THAT sure is to laugh…) into not coming in, because they’re oh so > >worried about their fellow Fallusians? > You dumbass, the Sadr-led > "Mahdi Army" isn’t in > Fallujah — that’s a > Sunni city that’s been a > thorn in the side from > day one. Btw, the Iraqi > Shiites have no problem > with Iranian help — > their top cleric, Grand > Ayatollah Sistani, is an > Iranian, and his word is > law to about half the > population. > >Watch and learn, man. You could *use* > >a good object lesson in the wages of betting against a good, > Spoiled. > >decent, > Perfidious. > >and > >determined > He’s already counting on > the U.N. to save his > bacon — his only > determination is to get > himself reelected, and > that’s fortunately > getting more unlikely > every day. > >commander in chief. I’ll say this, for you: you’re dumber than > >Khaddhafi; at least he wised up when he saw that there was no pulling >back > >before victory for THIS American president. > The British couldn’t conrol > Mesopotamia militarily and > neither could the Ottoman > Turks before them — the > chances of an undersized, > unprepared "coalition" > managing what two of the > most successful empires in > history couldn’t are pretty > close to zero. As > previously mentioned, the > Israelis know the > limitations of pigheaded > determination — that’s why > they’re pulling out of Gaza > while pulling off a few > face-saving assassinations > so as not to appear > defeated: they know they > can’t govern a hostile > population by force without > resorting what amounts to > genocidal tactics. Dubya > has put our people into a > meat grinder where any > victory is Pyrrhic by > definition — a classic > lose-lose situation that’ll > probably end in something > very close to an "Islamic > Republic Of Iraq." That’s > what your "good, decent, > and determined" leader has > purchased with the blood > of our children and the > sweat of the multiple > future generations who’ll > be saddled with immense > debts he’s incurred. > >Bye, > >Freep > >> >Yeah. Funny, isn’t it? What do they think is going on now, a friendly > >game > >> >of hopscotch? They’re afraid to come out and play as it is, and then >they > >> >throw idle threats in case we go in after them. And these are the >great > >> >warriors…[snort] > >> >What a bunch of putzes. You’d think they’d have figured out by now >that > >Bush > >> >don’t play that. > >> >Get on with it, I say… The quicker we go in, the quicker the job is > >done. > >> >Freep > >> >—– Original Message —– > >> >Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps > >> >Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 2:47 PM > >> >> Sadr’s Followers Vow War if U.S. Attacks Iraq City > >> Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access > >> >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< > >> -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=- > Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access > >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< > -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
>It’s time to re-declare the war … start over – bring out the >AC-130 gunships and blow these towelheads rags right off their dirty heads.
Still more echos of Vietnam…
Response:
>Whose side are you on?
Looks like he’s on the side of the American fighting men and women that have been sent to fight and die in a stupid, unwinnable war brought about by a bunch of lying right wing politicians.
Response:
>Bruce, > Whose side are you on???
My country’s and my world’s "side." >From the tone of your posts it sounds like you would like the radical >Islamists in Iraq to win this thing.
I don’t want them to win anything, I’m just pointing out that our children have been put between a rock and a hard place by an miserably ignorant excuse for a leader who had no idea what he was getting them into and nobody around him with enough personal integrity and intestinal fortitude to set him straight. Moreover, neither Sadr nor the Sunnis in Fallujah are "radical Islamists," they are simply the most militant elements of two large factions that are an indigenous fact of life in that part of the world. It is our presence in what they regard as their land that is uniting them and driving them into the brotherly arms of the stateless terrorists who attacked our soil. So, instead of eradicating a serious threat, we are continuing to exacerbate it. You might as well try to douse a fire with gasoline! >That is ignorant at best.
Given the initial parallel you trotted out, I’d refrain from trying to pin that word on anybody else if I were you. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->jvh > Even Dubya isn’t stupid > enough to follow Clueless > Creep’s advice, which > would most likely further > unite Iraqis against the > occupation. He’s well > and truly fucked — > unfortunately, so are a > lot of Americans who were > promised they’d be home > after their year in the > hell of "liberated" Iraq. > There are between 24 and > 25 million Iraqis. If > only five percent are > armed and pissed, that’s > as many combatants on the > ground as the so-called > "coalition" has. Iow, > Clueless, maybe you’d > better plan on nuking and > paving the whole damned > region, not just leveling > a city or two. It’s one > thing to be a decisive > wartime leader, quite > another to be an arrogant > and bellicose putz in way > over ones head. > Btw, the Iraqi insurgents > (if they were Americans > in 1776 we’d be calling > them patriots, of course) > aren’t going to "come out" > and fight pitched battles > against a professional > enemy with armor and air > support — they’re going > to draw our people in and > harass them where those > advantages don’t mean a > damned thing. As soon as > the shooting stops, they > will be indistinguishable > from their peacable > neighbors. Virtually any > scenario where the U.S. > triumphs convincingly > will be indistinguishable > from genocide — no > wonder the administration > was so dead-set against > international war crimes > tribunals! > >Yeah. Funny, isn’t it? What do they think is going on now, a friendly >game > >of hopscotch? They’re afraid to come out and play as it is, and then they > >throw idle threats in case we go in after them. And these are the great > >warriors…[snort] > >What a bunch of putzes. You’d think they’d have figured out by now that >Bush > >don’t play that. > >Get on with it, I say… The quicker we go in, the quicker the job is >done. > >Freep > >—– Original Message —– > >Newsgroups: alt.guitar.amps > >Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2004 2:47 PM > >> Sadr’s Followers Vow War if U.S. Attacks Iraq City > Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access > >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< > -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
Not entirely. John Kerry won’t be allowed to lose us THIS one, and that is a BIG difference. We know that one by now. What is it they say about those who don’t remember the past? Been there, done that; Not this time. Freep
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->It’s time to re-declare the war … start over – bring out the >AC-130 gunships and blow these towelheads rags right off their dirty heads. > Still more echos of Vietnam…
Response:
>Not entirely. John Kerry won’t be allowed to lose us THIS one, and that is a >BIG difference. We know that one by now.
It’s already been lost, you just haven’t figured it out yet. >What is it they say about those who don’t remember the past? Been there, >done that; Not this time.
That’s exactly what you fail to understand. In Iraq, we are just repeating failed previous policy. beleiving we can impose "democracy" with violent intervention. Al – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Freep > >It’s time to re-declare the war … start over – bring out the > >AC-130 gunships and blow these towelheads rags right off their dirty >heads. > Still more echos of Vietnam…
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I don’t want them to win > anything, I’m just pointing > out that our children have > been put between a rock and > a hard place by an miserably > ignorant excuse for a leader > who had no idea what he was > getting them into and nobody > around him with enough > personal integrity and > intestinal fortitude to set > him straight. Moreover, > neither Sadr nor the Sunnis > in Fallujah are "radical > Islamists," they are simply > the most militant elements > of two large factions that > are an indigenous fact of > life in that part of the > world. It is our presence > in what they regard as > their land that is uniting > them and driving them into > the brotherly arms of the > stateless terrorists who > attacked our soil. So, > instead of eradicating a > serious threat, we are > continuing to exacerbate > it. You might as well try > to douse a fire with > gasoline! >That is ignorant at best. > Given the initial parallel > you trotted out, I’d > refrain from trying to pin > that word on anybody else > if I were you.
Your right, Bruce. The mission was to topple, and kill or capture, Saddam Hussein. That mission has been accomplished. Now, we should just totally pull our and let those simple minded Iraqi’s sort out their future for themselves. It will be the law of the jungle in Iraq for a year or two, as it has been in that part of the world since the Lord told Hagar that her son Ishmael would be a ‘wild ass of a man’ and that his offspring would be pitted one against the other. But once the civil strife is over, and a new tyrant has emerged, we will then have another readily defined target to go after…perhaps this time by covert assasination as we should have done in the first place. We don’t need to fight the Iraqi’s…they will fight amongst themselves if a third-party enemy is not readily available. They will destroy themselves because they are too stupid to manage themselves…it isn’t in their genes. They need a Saladin and they need an enemy to blame for their own shortcomings. Stupid people..We should let Iran have it’s way with them. Actually, I beleive that the Saudi’s/Whahabi’s would be in control of Iraq if not overtly then covertly, within 5 years.
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I don’t want them to win > anything, I’m just pointing > out that our children have > been put between a rock and > a hard place by an miserably > ignorant excuse for a leader > who had no idea what he was > getting them into and nobody > around him with enough > personal integrity and > intestinal fortitude to set > him straight. Moreover, > neither Sadr nor the Sunnis > in Fallujah are "radical > Islamists," they are simply > the most militant elements > of two large factions that > are an indigenous fact of > life in that part of the > world. It is our presence > in what they regard as > their land that is uniting > them and driving them into > the brotherly arms of the > stateless terrorists who > attacked our soil. So, > instead of eradicating a > serious threat, we are > continuing to exacerbate > it. You might as well try > to douse a fire with > gasoline! > >That is ignorant at best. > Given the initial parallel > you trotted out, I’d > refrain from trying to pin > that word on anybody else > if I were you. >Your right, Bruce. The mission was to topple, and kill or capture, Saddam >Hussein. That mission has been accomplished.
Wait a minute, wasn’t the reason to save the region and the world from WMDs? Then it was explained that we were defying th U.N. Security Council because Saddam Hussein had been defying the U.N. Security Council. It also was to "liberate the Iraqi people" — people who were so going to shower our people with praise and flowers in utter gratitude for their effort. At this point we’ve killed or captured, how many, about 40 of the 52 bad guys pictured in that deck of cards — and guess what? Still no praise, still no flowers, still no gratitude. The Iraqis seem be taking their attitude from the Pete Townshend songbook: "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss!" >Now, we should just totally >pull our and let those simple minded Iraqi’s sort out their future for >themselves. It will be the law of the jungle in Iraq for a year or two, as >it has been in that part of the world since the Lord told Hagar that her son >Ishmael would be a ‘wild ass of a man’ and that his offspring would be >pitted one against the other. But once the civil strife is over, and a new >tyrant has emerged, we will then have another readily defined target to go >after…perhaps this time by covert assasination as we should have done in >the first place.
Well, you do make one good point here: you could buy yourself one heck of a massive assassination plot with $100+ billion! Shoot, we could probably could have bought off Saddam Hussein’s whole government into exile and then given the Israelis or even some Euro-trash gangsters an address book for a tiny fraction of what we’re spending over there. Now we have thousands of vets who, if they survive, will be checking their home town’s roofs for snipers for the rest of their lives. >We don’t need to fight the Iraqi’s…they will fight >amongst themselves if a third-party enemy is not readily available.
It might be too late – their common resentment of foreigners has driven the Sunnis and Shi’ia into each other’s arms. Maybe Dubya *is* "a uniter, not a divider," if only in Mesopotamia. >They >will destroy themselves because they are too stupid to manage >themselves…it isn’t in their genes.
It may not be genetic, but it’s almost certainly part of their culture to be absurdly clannish — and utterly myopic about the consequences of their behavior. My Baghdad contact (he purely despises the Iraqis, so take this with a grain of salt) says these are people who can’t even deal responsibly with their own household trash, let alone govern themselves. >They need a Saladin and they need an >enemy to blame for their own shortcomings. Stupid people..We should let Iran >have it’s way with them. Actually, I beleive that the Saudi’s/Whahabi’s >would be in control of Iraq if not overtly then covertly, within 5 years.
That would certainly please the Bush family, which has been very lucratively in bed with a number of Saudi interests related or beholden to the royal family for decades — so maybe that’s been the plan all along, with our children’s lives and all that debt-financed spending as an elaborate political distraction. Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I don’t want them to win > anything, I’m just pointing > out that our children have > been put between a rock and > a hard place by an miserably > ignorant excuse for a leader > who had no idea what he was > getting them into and nobody > around him with enough > personal integrity and > intestinal fortitude to set > him straight. Moreover, > neither Sadr nor the Sunnis > in Fallujah are "radical > Islamists," they are simply > the most militant elements > of two large factions that > are an indigenous fact of > life in that part of the > world. It is our presence > in what they regard as > their land that is uniting > them and driving them into > the brotherly arms of the > stateless terrorists who > attacked our soil. So, > instead of eradicating a > serious threat, we are > continuing to exacerbate > it. You might as well try > to douse a fire with > gasoline! > >That is ignorant at best. > Given the initial parallel > you trotted out, I’d > refrain from trying to pin > that word on anybody else > if I were you. >Your right, Bruce. The mission was to topple, and kill or capture, Saddam >Hussein. That mission has been accomplished. Now, we should just totally >pull our and let those simple minded Iraqi’s sort out their future for >themselves. It will be the law of the jungle in Iraq for a year or two, as >it has been in that part of the world since the Lord told Hagar that her son >Ishmael would be a ‘wild ass of a man’ and that his offspring would be >pitted one against the other. But once the civil strife is over, and a new >tyrant has emerged, we will then have another readily defined target to go >after…perhaps this time by covert assasination as we should have done in >the first place. We don’t need to fight the Iraqi’s…they will fight >amongst themselves if a third-party enemy is not readily available. They >will destroy themselves because they are too stupid to manage >themselves…it isn’t in their genes. They need a Saladin and they need an >enemy to blame for their own shortcomings. Stupid people..We should let Iran >have it’s way with them. Actually, I beleive that the Saudi’s/Whahabi’s >would be in control of Iraq if not overtly then covertly, within 5 years.
If you believe that, then you wouldn’t want Iraq to fall into their hands. The Wahabis are the real terror sponsors. Weak states like war torn Afghanistan and potentially Iraq, are breeding grounds and hiding places for terrorism. CFJ
Response:
> If you believe that, then you wouldn’t want Iraq to fall into their > hands. The Wahabis are the real terror sponsors. Weak states like > war torn Afghanistan and potentially Iraq, are breeding grounds and > hiding places for terrorism.
I agree… so therefore I DISAGREE with Bush’s war, because it will only serve to CREATE MORE TERRORISTS. This will be the first year of my long life that I’ve voted against the Republican party, and for very good reason. Moose
Response:
>> If you believe that, then you wouldn’t want Iraq to fall into their > hands. The Wahabis are the real terror sponsors. Weak states like > war torn Afghanistan and potentially Iraq, are breeding grounds and > hiding places for terrorism. >I agree… so therefore I DISAGREE with Bush’s war, because it will only >serve to CREATE MORE TERRORISTS. This will be the first year of my long >life that I’ve voted against the Republican party, and for very good >reason.
That’s the intelligent, ethical, and dare I say patriotic thing to do this year! I salute you sir — and should there ever by a Democratic president of similarly dunderheaded disposition, I can assure you I will vote to oust his inept ass in favor of a sensible, capable, honorable Republican, if such an opponent is nominated! Posted via TITANnews – Uncensored Newsgroups Access >>>> at http://www.TitanNews.com <<<< -=Every Newsgroup – Anonymous, UNCENSORED, BROADBAND Downloads=-
Response:
>> If you believe that, then you wouldn’t want Iraq to fall into their > hands. The Wahabis are the real terror sponsors. Weak states like > war torn Afghanistan and potentially Iraq, are breeding grounds and > hiding places for terrorism. >I agree… so therefore I DISAGREE with Bush’s war, because it will only >serve to CREATE MORE TERRORISTS. This will be the first year of my long >life that I’ve voted against the Republican party, and for very good >reason. >Moose
It’s good to hear that there are still some people that can think for themselves. Bush’s policy support Sharon is further angering even moderate Arabs. He’s throwing gasoline on the fire… CFJ
Response:
Related Posts