Jump to content

AP article on the Iraqi insurgency


Shamrock
 Share

Recommended Posts

Full article

 

Insurgents aren't striving for revolution as much as they are trying to spoil the U.S.-backed interim Iraqi regime by inflicting as much pain as possible on the United States and its Iraqi and foreign allies.

 

"We want every U.S. dog to leave the country," said an insurgent leader in Fallujah who identified himself as Abu Thar, a 45-year-old former colonel in the Iraqi army.

Beyond that, the estimated 20,000 insurgents have little in common, although groups have occasionally work together in temporary alliances of convenience. U.S. commanders describe the war as a "compound insurgency" sorted into four groups with different tactics and goals.

 

Three are made up of Sunni Muslims, almost all of whom are Iraqis. A fourth group is radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's militia, formed of Shiite Muslims, Iraq's largest social grouping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Full article

 

Insurgents aren't striving for revolution as much as they are trying to spoil the U.S.-backed interim Iraqi regime by inflicting as much pain as possible on the United States and its Iraqi and foreign allies.

 

"We want every U.S. dog to leave the country," said an insurgent leader in Fallujah who identified himself as Abu Thar, a 45-year-old former colonel in the Iraqi army.

Beyond that, the estimated 20,000 insurgents have little in common, although groups have occasionally work together in temporary alliances of convenience. U.S. commanders describe the war as a "compound insurgency" sorted into four groups with different tactics and goals.

 

Three are made up of Sunni Muslims, almost all of whom are Iraqis. A fourth group is radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's militia, formed of Shiite Muslims, Iraq's largest social grouping.

582839[/snapback]

 

I saw a compelling report on News World International and it wasn't pretty. Let me tell you, if the administration bitches that the media only shows the "bad" things, they are being sarcastic. It is much worse. I wish they had an online video...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think many can deny thats true lcyberlina...but hey....some said Bush wont the debate, so you never know.

582858[/snapback]

 

Fortunately 62 Million people were watching and with such large an audience, the spin game on the GOP's part is major problem. Is one thing to dupe a couple hundred lemmings, but 62 million is another story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full article

 

 

"We want every U.S. dog to leave the country," said an insurgent leader in Fallujah who identified himself as Abu Thar, a 45-year-old former colonel in the Iraqi army.

 

582839[/snapback]

 

So let's f***in let them run things.

 

I'm sick of American blood being wasted on these people. Liberation = done. Let's go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full article

 

 

"We want every U.S. dog to leave the country," said an insurgent leader in Fallujah who identified himself as Abu Thar, a 45-year-old former colonel in the Iraqi army.

 

582839[/snapback]

 

So let's f***in let them run things.

 

I'm sick of American blood being wasted on these people. Liberation = done. Let's go.

582882[/snapback]

These people? You characterize all Iraqis with the insurgent leaders? Thats your biggest problem CF. Youve got serious issues with that.

 

 

But on to the next issue..you now assert the libertarian agenda? Basically youre all for invading a country and stating the rhetoric of helping people but then you want out when it gets rough? This is PRECISLEY why I never bought into the conservative argument of helping people. It has nothing to do with helping people. Its rhetoric.

 

btw, wouldnt the libertarians be against invasion in the first place? The only true libertarian Ive come across on this board, sorianofan, thought it was unneccesary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and foreign allies.

 

 

We're not supposed to have any of those according to Kerry. Obviously this makes the rest of the article suspect (or should in the mind of a dem)

582874[/snapback]

I know we have allies.

582877[/snapback]

 

I find it kind of disturbing that Kerry doesn't understand this though...

582881[/snapback]

 

Yeah... Let's see. Brittain,... :mischief2 Brittain.... :mischief2 Oh that's right Poland!, he forgot Poland!

 

 

 

 

Please! Get a grip! As if Bush knew what "allies" really meant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full article

 

 

"We want every U.S. dog to leave the country," said an insurgent leader in Fallujah who identified himself as Abu Thar, a 45-year-old former colonel in the Iraqi army.

 

582839[/snapback]

 

So let's f***in let them run things.

 

I'm sick of American blood being wasted on these people. Liberation = done. Let's go.

582882[/snapback]

These people? You characterize all Iraqis with the insurgent leaders? Thats your biggest problem CF. Youve got serious issues with that.

 

 

But on to the next issue..you now assert the libertarian agenda? Basically youre all for invading a country and stating the rhetoric of helping people but then you want out when it gets rough? This is PRECISLEY why I never bought into the conservative argument of helping people. It has nothing to do with helping people. Its rhetoric.

 

btw, wouldnt the libertarians be against invasion in the first place? The only true libertarian Ive come across on this board, sorianofan, thought it was unneccesary.

582897[/snapback]

F_M he eats out of the hand of Mike Savage one of the biggest racists I've ever heard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full article

 

 

"We want every U.S. dog to leave the country," said an insurgent leader in Fallujah who identified himself as Abu Thar, a 45-year-old former colonel in the Iraqi army.

 

582839[/snapback]

 

So let's f***in let them run things.

 

I'm sick of American blood being wasted on these people. Liberation = done. Let's go.

582882[/snapback]

These people? You characterize all Iraqis with the insurgent leaders? Thats your biggest problem CF. Youve got serious issues with that.

 

 

But on to the next issue..you now assert the libertarian agenda? Basically youre all for invading a country and stating the rhetoric of helping people but then you want out when it gets rough? This is PRECISLEY why I never bought into the conservative argument of helping people. It has nothing to do with helping people. Its rhetoric.

 

btw, wouldnt the libertarians be against invasion in the first place? The only true libertarian Ive come across on this board, sorianofan, thought it was unneccesary.

582897[/snapback]

F_M he eats out of the hand of Mike Savage one of the biggest racists I've ever heard.

582952[/snapback]

 

Fact: I listen to Mike Savage maybe one hour every two months.

 

No, I'm not characterizing all of Iraq with the "insurgents" AKA terrorists. It's funny I get accused of doing so when the liberal propaganda machine has been trying to make the case that no Iraqis wanted us there.

 

However, I can pretty damn well guarantee you that almost NO Iraqis want us there right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and foreign allies.

 

 

We're not supposed to have any of those according to Kerry. Obviously this makes the rest of the article suspect (or should in the mind of a dem)

582874[/snapback]

I know we have allies.

582877[/snapback]

 

I find it kind of disturbing that Kerry doesn't understand this though...

582881[/snapback]

 

Yeah... Let's see. Brittain,... :mischief2 Brittain.... :mischief2 Oh that's right Poland!, he forgot Poland!

 

 

 

 

Please! Get a grip! As if Bush knew what "allies" really meant.

582951[/snapback]

 

Absurd that you believe this is all personal. Ignorant to beleive that if Kery is in office that all of our allies and the UN will magically havea change of heart and bow at the feet of almighty Kerry and his international agenda.

 

For example, Chirac announced last week that he wouldn't send any frogs into Iraq or anywhee else in the middle east, regardless of who is in office next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah... Let's see. Brittain,... :mischief2 Brittain.... :mischief2 Oh that's right Poland!, he forgot Poland!

 

Please! Get a grip! As if Bush knew what "allies" really meant.

582951[/snapback]

 

Absurd that you believe this is all personal. Ignorant to beleive that if Kery is in office that all of our allies and the UN will magically havea change of heart and bow at the feet of almighty Kerry and his international agenda.

 

For example, Chirac announced last week that he wouldn't send any frogs into Iraq or anywhee else in the middle east, regardless of who is in office next year.

584356[/snapback]

 

Personal? No. Serious, yes. A grand coaliation is the one we had when we went into the first Gulf war where there were 130,000 arab troops on the ground. That is f***ing coalition. Don't give me crap.

 

Funny, how everyone loves to cite France. The favorite one to hate. Just remember that we would still be a colony of Brittain if it wasn't for the help of the French... Just a little perspective for the French bashing idiot.

 

Whether Kerry can convince Chirac that it is in his best interest to not have a failed Iraq is debatable. However, Bush doesn't even have the leverage or credibility to even try. Kerry would be a fresh start and they might be more open to listen to him. Will he be successful, we don't know, but we have to try, because as we stand right now with Bush in power, that possibility is nule.

 

Can you tell me what is Bush's exit strategy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) I'm not bashing france. It's what Chirac said during a PC last week. If citing quotes from a head of state is bashing then so be it. Besides, I didn't offer my opinion on his thoughts either way.

 

2) Are you trying to say that we should vote for Kerry because he's gonna try real hard to convince other nations to help him out? Even nations such as France that have consistently said no, and have declared that they will continue to say no, regardless of whether it's Kerry, Bush or the Tin Man in office?

 

3) Look at the numbers of your "grand coalition" back in 91. You shouldn't be criticizing the contributions of Poland and other smaller countries for this war and then cite a "grand coalition" that was staffed over 90 percent by American Forces.

 

4) Yeah, I'll tell you Bush's exit strategy. It's to stay the course and maintain a significant presence until some modicum of social control is implemented in Iraq. The funny thing is that this strategy is the same damn thing that Kerry has said he'd do as well. So before you go spouting about Bush and his exit strategy take a look in the mirror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stay the course when at best we have what we have now and at worst we have civil war? All they can do is point to El Salvador. So if you think they are the same and you accept Bush's strategy then why critisize Kerry's strategy? Out of your view, arent they the same?

 

And you match them perfectly as the same but they are not. There are key distinctions. The neocons still see Iraq as a beacon at which they can pivot their ideology. They want their based there. They want influence there. They want to keep these while pulling out in establishing security. This continues to feed the ideas that we want Iraq for ourselves. Kerry has been against the neocon ideology. He doesnt want the strong spheres of influence and military bases that feed that impression for the Iraqis. His fresh view can at least create much smaller semblence of occupation rather than handover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, how everyone loves to cite France. The favorite one to hate. Just remember that we would still be a colony of Brittain if it wasn't for the help of the French... Just a little perspective for the French bashing idiot.

584388[/snapback]

 

Whoa, you don't want to debate this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, how everyone loves to cite France. The favorite one to hate. Just remember that we would still be a colony of Brittain if it wasn't for the help of the French... Just a little perspective for the French bashing idiot.

584388[/snapback]

 

Whoa, you don't want to debate this.

584416[/snapback]

 

Why not? Feel like re-writing history today?

 

This is what amazes me, you are so quick to rename your fries, but you are quick to forget why this nation is free today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He doesnt want the strong spheres of influence and military bases that feed that impression for the Iraqis

 

If Kerry doesn't recognize the value of maintaining and further developing the sphere of American influence in the most volitile and potentially dangerous area of the world then he isn't fit to be drain commissioner, much less president.

 

As for France, if you want to play the little tit-for-tat game and cite them giving us a hand in the revolution then fine. How about WWI and WWII?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the sphere worth maintaining the current disaster fishfillet? What does Bush do when we leave but keep the influence and the anti American forces continue to hit hard? Are you seriously fine with having what we have now for the period of base presence?

 

You know there are other methods of spheres of influence besides the foolish neocon ones. How about a soverign ally who we can trust to make their own right choices?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the sphere worth maintaining the current disaster fishfillet? What does Bush do when we leave but keep the influence and the anti American forces continue to hit hard? Are you seriously fine with having what we have now for the period of base presence?

 

You know there are other methods of spheres of influence besides the foolish neocon ones. How about a soverign ally who we can trust to make their own right choices?

584458[/snapback]

 

Yeah, I'm fine with what we have now, as a matter of fact. And if you support Israel and the influence our support to them gives us in the region then you're fine with Iraq right now, too. Isreal/Arabia makes the Iraq "conflict" look like a couple of preschoolers playing in the sandbox during recess.

 

I refuse to turn into Neville Chamberlain and sell our soul in an effort to appease enemies that are so ideologically opposed to us that htey will never be appeased by our efforts.

 

A soviergn ally? How about the Saudis? Saudi Arabia is pretty much the best case scenario of what an ally can do for us in the Middle East.... Nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the sphere worth maintaining the current disaster fishfillet? What does Bush do when we leave but keep the influence and the anti American forces continue to hit hard? Are you seriously fine with having what we have now for the period of base presence?

 

You know there are other methods of spheres of influence besides the foolish neocon ones. How about a soverign ally who we can trust to make their own right choices?

584458[/snapback]

 

Yeah, I'm fine with what we have now, as a matter of fact. And if you support Israel and the influence our support to them gives us in the region then you're fine with Iraq right now, too. Isreal/Arabia makes the Iraq "conflict" look like a couple of preschoolers playing in the sandbox during recess.

 

I refuse to turn into Neville Chamberlain and sell our soul in an effort to appease enemies that are so ideologically opposed to us that htey will never be appeased by our efforts.

 

A soviergn ally? How about the Saudis? Saudi Arabia is pretty much the best case scenario of what an ally can do for us in the Middle East.... Nothing.

584472[/snapback]

 

 

The Iraqi people get no say in this do they? Were they conspiring with Saddam to terrorize while he was torturing them? Or maybe you see them all as a bunch of ingrades for neocon to play around with? This is the why the rest of the world hates us. Humanless attitudes towards the rest of the world. We go around screwin things up and are fine with the chaos because it benefits us to enough of a degree, then get pissed when they dont love us for it. Theyre supposed to live with daily bombings and their children needing body guards all because we choose to have it that way. And theyre supposed to like it.

 

And then you go about citing WW2. When an attack cant justify itself, youve gotta drag WW2 into it. You can go about doing whatever the hell you want to whoever the hell you want to, just as long as you remember that Chamberlain let Hitler kill all the Jews! Oh brother, admit it...you dont give a damn about the people of Iraq.

 

 

Essentially this is what it boils down to: The neocons and the proIraq conservatives want to have their cake and they want to eat it too. Theyve got their head in the sand on reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...when we went into the first Gulf war where there were 130,000 arab troops on the ground. That is f***ing coalition. Don't give me crap.

584388[/snapback]

 

Your math is no good.

 

BAHRAIN 400 (support)

EGYPT 40,000

KUWAIT 11,000

OMAN 25,500

SAUDI 118,000

SYRIA 17,000

UAE 40,000

 

Your ideal coalition pals:

 

FRANCE 18,000 troops

GERMANY 0 ground troops (they sent a wing of bombers though)

 

If we couldn't get anything of significance out of FR/DE in Desert Storm, what makes you think Kerry can get them onboard now? Explain.

584900[/snapback]

 

Notice how I said Arab countries. They were the ones must affected by Saddam's invasion of Kwait. What is your point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the sphere worth maintaining the current disaster fishfillet? What does Bush do when we leave but keep the influence and the anti American forces continue to hit hard? Are you seriously fine with having what we have now for the period of base presence?

 

You know there are other methods of spheres of influence besides the foolish neocon ones. How about a soverign ally who we can trust to make their own right choices?

584458[/snapback]

 

Yeah, I'm fine with what we have now, as a matter of fact. And if you support Israel and the influence our support to them gives us in the region then you're fine with Iraq right now, too. Isreal/Arabia makes the Iraq "conflict" look like a couple of preschoolers playing in the sandbox during recess.

 

I refuse to turn into Neville Chamberlain and sell our soul in an effort to appease enemies that are so ideologically opposed to us that htey will never be appeased by our efforts.

 

A soviergn ally? How about the Saudis? Saudi Arabia is pretty much the best case scenario of what an ally can do for us in the Middle East.... Nothing.

584472[/snapback]

 

 

The Iraqi people get no say in this do they? Were they conspiring with Saddam to terrorize while he was torturing them? Or maybe you see them all as a bunch of ingrades for neocon to play around with? This is the why the rest of the world hates us. Humanless attitudes towards the rest of the world. We go around screwin things up and are fine with the chaos because it benefits us to enough of a degree, then get pissed when they dont love us for it. Theyre supposed to live with daily bombings and their children needing body guards all because we choose to have it that way. And theyre supposed to like it.

 

And then you go about citing WW2. When an attack cant justify itself, youve gotta drag WW2 into it. You can go about doing whatever the hell you want to whoever the hell you want to, just as long as you remember that Chamberlain let Hitler kill all the Jews! Oh brother, admit it...you dont give a damn about the people of Iraq.

 

 

Essentially this is what it boils down to: The neocons and the proIraq conservatives want to have their cake and they want to eat it too. Theyve got their head in the sand on reality.

584773[/snapback]

 

While the situation in Iraq is far from optimal from a US perspective, let's not overstate the situation if the Iraqi people. Yeah, there are some unfortunate things going on, but even as the situation stands right now the Iraqis are far better off then they were. No more despotic regime murdering tens of thousands of civilians and billions of dollars coming into a country that wouldn't of got d*** otherwise.

 

This is much akin to cold war containment and the undue influence we exerted on eastern European, Pan Asian and central American countires to keep them from turning communist. To prevent complete communist control, we backed regimes and despots, many of whom were much more ruthless then anything we'll see in Iraq. That was fine and dandy, and so is this. Just substitute the evil Soviet influence back then with rogue fundamentalism now and it is very much the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the situation in Iraq is far from optimal from a US perspective, let's not overstate the situation if the Iraqi people. Yeah, there are some unfortunate things going on, but even as the situation stands right now the Iraqis are far better off then they were. No more despotic regime murdering tens of thousands of civilians and billions of dollars coming into a country that wouldn't of got d*** otherwise.

 

585286[/snapback]

 

I can't believe you have the nerve to say "some Unfortunate things going on"... Thousands have been killed by our troops. They are called "collateral damage" remember? Not even counting the fact that these people no longer have the infrastructure needed for daily survival. No garbage collection, no sewage, no water, no electricity, no LIFE.

 

And please, do not even compare the ill conceived war in Iraq with the cold war... That is just outrageous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...