New (old) Iraq "Policy"

Gonz

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
They want us to hit civilians & it ain't gonna work. If we do bite that means they have no more civilians.

By ALMIN KARAMEHMEDOVIC, Associated Press Writer

IN THE IRAQI DESERT - A bomber posing as a taxi driver summoned American troops for help, then blew up his vehicle Saturday, killing himself and four soldiers and opening a new chapter of carnage in the war for Iraq.

An Iraqi official said such attacks would be "routine military policy" in Iraq — and, he suggested chillingly, in America.

"We will use any means to kill our enemy in our land and we will follow the enemy into its land," Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan said at a Baghdad news conference. "This is just the beginning. You'll hear more pleasant news later."
Click to expand...

Yahoo
 
I had a feeling this was going to happen since in Israel, Iraq has been funding this type of thing for quite awhile. Makes me think saome of the funds and intel came from Iraq in the WTC disaster.
 
Maybe, just maybe, surrender would be the wisest option. They will lose, on our terms. A 24 million person massacre is easily feasible. That is what they're trying to get us to do, or so it looks to me.
 
A 280 million person massacre. Difference is, we don't have a dictator running the show. If we did, I'd throw down my arms. I'd even keep my arms to defend Slick Willie if he were still boss. :D
 
I think most of them believe even their dictator is preferable to occupation by another country.
 
Who's going to occupy them?

While we're at it, what about these protesters in Boston today:

Eric Weltman, one of the protest organizers, said it was intended to show opposition not only to the Iraq war but to potential U.S. military action elsewhere.

"We're working now to stop the next invasion," Weltman said. "We've invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. Who's next? Iran? North Korea? Colombia?"
Click to expand...

Yahoo

Short term memory loss? They weren't in NY on 09/11? You asked why I thought of them the way I do, there's your answer.
 
You're trying to generalize all protestors?

THe guy in Boston might have a point. I think maybe it wasn't that invading Afghanistan was wrong but that there's a good chance that we will go into another country after Iraq.

Do you think there's a chance we will invade another country after Iraq?
 
It's quite possible. No idea on who yet so, no opinion on it. They may bring the war to us, in Iraq or Afghanistan or...

Yes, I'm generalizing the protesters, especially when I know for a fact that many of them are the college professors, reliving their wasted youth. I haven't met a single person that has gone to one but I read & use my eyes...I still say it's 60/40 anti-Bush more than anti-war. Maybe even 70/30.
 
I think they may be anti-Bush because of his decisions on this thing. There weren't to many protestors before the war.

I don't know, but I don't think generalizing large masses is a good idea. What if I generalized all the pro-war people by a few comments I've seen on this board?

Stuff like "all Muslims should be killed", "we should bomb every one of their cities, or "Kill, Kill them all".
 
The generalization would be incorrect because you're read enough less than lethal info too. My generalization are based on what I've read. Specifics & innuendo lead to my conclusion. That's why I'm giving 30-40% margins.
 
Oh well, I think you're way off and trying to discount them. No way to prove it one way or the other though.

:shrug:
 
0000.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top