Paying a price for ignoring the truth

[Razor]

A great news article taken from a very good blog
http://minstrelboy.blogspot.com/



The Anniston Star - Paying a price for ignoring the truth
The Anniston Star - Paying a price for ignoring the truth: "This administration, from President George W. Bush to Vice President Dick Cheney to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, has sowed the seeds of a bitter harvest in the Middle East that Americans will reap for decades, if not generations.

That harvest includes but isn't limited to a war bill that's approaching $400 billion and growing by $100 billion a year, an American military ground down by unceasing combat deployments and a casualty count that doesn't include thousands of troops who are coming home with psychological problems."

We can never know how many of the 2,298 dead soldiers and 16,906 wounded might have been saved by better body armor, more and better armored vehicles and, above all, an honest assessment of the enemy they were sent to fight.

The invasion and occupation of Iraq that was going to be over by the summer of 2003 is entering its fourth year. The violence is unabated. The numbers of Americans and Iraqis dying daily haven’t dropped.

It’s not as if the triumvirate wasn’t warned, though they would like you to believe that. It’s that they chose to believe their own rose-colored vision of what was happening in Iraq and what wasn’t, reinforced by the likes of Ahmad Chalabi.

As Iraq now trembles on the brink of all-out civil war, my Knight Ridder colleagues Jonathan S. Landay and Warren P. Strobel reported this week that a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) requested by the U.S. Central Command was delivered in October 2003. It warned that the real danger we faced in Iraq was homegrown Sunni insurgents, not just the foreign terrorists and Baath Party dead-enders that the White House and the Pentagon kept holding up as the bogey-men.

By twisting or ignoring the warnings of senior intelligence analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, the nation’s civilian leaders allowed a small Sunni insurgency to grow like cancer.

The authors of that NIE sounded the warning but offered hope of improvement, saying that the insurgency could be tamped down if Iraq’s economic condition improved. Other civilian and military officials sought increases in the number of American troops in Iraq, as well as some role for the Sunni minority in any new government.

The NIE’s authors were dismissed as “nay-sayers” and “not team players” by the administration. The vice president was so out of touch with reality that as recently as May of 2005 he was declaring that the Iraq insurgency was “in the last throes.”

So what we now know is this: The administration was told again and again what was wrong and what ought to be done, and the principals chose to ignore the truth.

I keep coming back to the failure to properly arm and protect our soldiers, and to send enough of them in the beginning to get the job done and keep the lid on a huge, fractious country with 25 million people with even more old hatreds. When a soldier in Kuwait challenged him on the issue of vehicle protection, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld replied: “You have to go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you want.”
At the time, Rumsfeld was sending American divisions to Iraq without their Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles, and sending their crews out to patrol the most dangerous roads in the world in light Humvees.

Some 60 percent of our casualties in Iraq have been from the improvised explosive devices (IEDs) that any idiot can plant beside or beneath a highway or road or city street and then hit the call button on a cell phone when an American convoy drives into the kill zone.

Three years into the war, the Pentagon only now has named a retired four-star general to head a search for technical solutions to the enemy’s prime weapon.

History is going to judge these men harshly for what they did, and also for what they did not do, when the lives of American soldiers and the future of Americans yet unborn were in their hands.

To paraphrase Mr. Rumsfeld: You must fight the war you have, not the one you want; and you must fight it with the leadership you have, not the leadership you want.

Joe Galloway is the senior military correspondent for Knight Ridder.

 

[dream431ca]

good post and good read.

 

[SAJ]

Question is, who really pays the price for this massive "mistake" ?

The following are the remarks of Dr. Entissar Mohammad Ariabi, a pharmacist from Yarmook Hospital who is part of an Iraqi women's delegation touring the United States, organized by CODEPINK and Global Exchange. She spoke on March 18 in West Palm Beach, Fla.

I came on this speaking trip to the U.S. because when I was home in Baghdad, I watched on TV what President Bush was telling the American people about democracy, freedom, security, and the help that the U.S. is giving the Iraqi people, and I couldn't believe the lies. So I decided to take the risk to come to the U.S. and share with you what's really going on. I do not represent any political organization or ethnic group. I come only as a mother of five, a pharmacist and a human being.

I work in one of the largest hospitals in Baghdad. I stood by helplessly during the 13 years of sanctions and watched my people -- especially children -- die from lack of medicines and poor sanitation. UNICEF estimated that over 200 children died everyday as a direct result of sanctions.

Many people thought that after the U.S. occupied our country and the sanctions were lifted, the health care of the Iraqi people would improve. But the occupation has made it worse. Many of the Iraqi hospitals in cities like Baghdad, Al-Qaim, and Fallujah were bombed and destroyed. Many ambulances were attacked and health workers killed, despite the fact that it is illegal under international law to attack hospitals, ambulances and health workers.

After our hospitals were bombed and looted, millions of dollars were given to contractors to repair them. We suggested that this money be used to buy things that we urgently need, but the contractors refused and instead bought furniture and flowers and superficial things. Meanwhile, we suffer from a critical shortage of medicines, emergency supplies and anesthesia, and there is no sterilization in the operation rooms. As the director of the pharmacy department in my hospital, I refused to sit on a new chair while there were no sterile operating rooms.

Diseases that were under control under the regime of Saddam Hussein, diseases such as cholera, hepatitis, meningitis, polio, have now returned to haunt the population, especially the children. Death due to cancer has increased because treatment programs stopped and medicines are not available. The health of the Iraqi people is also devastated by environmental contamination due to the destruction of our water and sewage systems.

The health of women, particularly pregnant women, has deteriorated. Many pregnant women suffer from malnutrition. When it comes time to give birth, many women prefer to give birth at home because they fear being shot on their way to the hospital and they know the bad conditions in the hospitals. As a result, more women are dying in childbirth, and more babies are dying.

Before the occupation, with all the problems we had under sanctions, Iraq ranked number 80 in the worldwide list of deaths of children under 5. Today, we have jumped up to number 36. UNICEF has said that the rate of severe malnutrition among Iraqi children has almost doubled since the occupation.

We have also lost our most important resources -- our doctors. Iraqi doctors are under attack from all sides. Many have been killed or very badly beaten or arrested by the American troops. In Fallujah, the hospital was bombed and doctors were killed inside. In Haditha, the Americans arrested the doctors in the hospital and beat them very badly. I saw Dr. Jamil, the only surgeon in the hospital, 21 days later. His face was still swollen and his nose was black and blue. The director was also beaten and held for a week inside the hospital.

With the chaos that has reigned since the invasion, over 200 Iraqi doctors have been kidnapped for ransom. Sometimes their families pay money and they are released, and then the whole family, terrified, flees the country. Others are killed by their kidnappers.

In all, more than 1,000 doctors have left the country. Many of them are our most experienced, most specialized doctors.

Doctors and health workers who stay are overwhelmed by the sheer number of patients and their inability to help them. Where there is a bombing or shootings, dozens of bleeding, mutilated people are rushed to the hospital; there is panic everywhere, and because we don't have the proper care, many of them die. Sometimes the staff are beaten by the patients' families. The families get desperate after seeing their loved ones die because of inadequate care, and take out their frustrations on the hospital staff.

I have seen too many bodies of Iraqis maimed, bleeding, destroyed. They are shot by U.S. troops, blown up by roadside bombs, caught in the crossfire, mutilated by kidnappers. Iraq has become a continuous river of blood. The most beautiful thing God created is the human body. It should not be treated so violently.

I have seen too much suffering, too many orphaned children, too many mothers crying. I cry with them every day. I cry because I can't bear their pain. I cry because I feel so guilty that I can't help the sick and the injured. I cry because I see my people come to the hospital and die.

I remember one day in the hospital we started talking about the Americans and asking if they had brought us anything good. No, we said, with all their wealth and knowledge, they haven't shared their great technology, they haven't given us new equipment, they haven't even given us basic medicines. "Yes, they have given us something," said one doctor. "They brought us cold storage for the corpses."

The U.S. invasion has killed our people, destroyed our lives, ruined our health care system. I want the U.S. troops to get out of my country. I want them to go home now. I think that if the Americans leave, we Iraqis will have more of a chance to come together to heal our wounded nation.

Since the day I arrived in the United States, people ask me if I have any hope. Of course. No one can live without hope. My one sliver of hope lies with the American people. No other force in the world can make the American troops leave our country. No other force in the world can make this government hear our cries. Please don't let us down.


Dr. Entissar Mohammad Ariabi is a pharmacist from Yarmook Hospital who is part of an Iraqi women's delegation touring the U.S., organized by CODEPINK and Global Exchange. She spoke on March 18 in West Palm Beach, Florida.

 

[jverne]

sorry to be rude...but what's good about this blog? any redneck could come up with ideas like this! it is nothing new, just som babling over and over again!
they will be judged by who, God? oh please...they write the laws, they are above the law!

 

[Razor]

Question is, who really pays the price for this massive "mistake" ?

The soldiers, their families and the people of Iraq.

Jverne, it's a great blog with some very good news stories posted, seems to be a very honest blog. And as for Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld being above the law, i might have to agree with you on that, but i hope you're wrong.

 

[CptStern]

they are above the law ..they cant be tried for war crimes

 

[Razor]

they are above the law ..they cant be tried for war crimes

The American people voted them in again...even after a lot of stuff was uncovered.

 

[CptStern]

the media ignored the most damning evidence

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2511

 

[Mr-Fusion]

I have seen too many bodies of Iraqis maimed, bleeding, destroyed. They are shot by U.S. troops, blown up by roadside bombs, caught in the crossfire, mutilated by kidnappers. Iraq has become a continuous river of blood. The most beautiful thing God created is the human body. It should not be treated so violently.

I have seen too much suffering, too many orphaned children, too many mothers crying. I cry with them every day. I cry because I can't bear their pain. I cry because I feel so guilty that I can't help the sick and the injured. I cry because I see my people come to the hospital and die.

Big thanks to the American people for voting in the warmongers and supporting this war. Thankyou! You've brought glorious freedom and democracy to Iraq!

It's interesting to see the cultural response of the U.S. During vietnam there was a general feeling of disgust, culturually. Look at the music from the vientam era, fortunate son by creedence. War pigs by black sabbath

Generals gathered in their masses
Just like witches at black masses
Evil minds that plot destruction
Sorcerers of death's construction
In the fields are bodies burning
As the war machine keeps turning
Death and hatred to mankind
Poisoning their brainwashed minds, Oh Lord yeah

The response to war today is almost one of apathy.

Once again full credit to the American people for voting in GWB, Rumsfeld etc. Great stuff!

 

[VirusType2]

Big thanks to the American people for voting in the warmongers and supporting this war. Thankyou! You've brought glorious freedom and democracy to Iraq!

It's interesting to see the cultural response of the U.S. During vietnam there was a general feeling of disgust, culturually. Look at the music from the vientam era, fortunate son by creedence. War pigs by black sabbath


The response to war today is almost one of apathy.

Once again full credit to the American people for voting in GWB, Rumsfeld etc. Great stuff!

Thankyou! You've brought glorious freedom and democracy to Iraq!

Yes as we all know America was founded "overnight", in 3 years. :|

Iraq - a war torn country, should just become a beautiful democracy overnight becuase America is some magical savior that does everything perfectly, and is run by perfect people who never make any mistakes.


Now you just sit there in your country and just let the world go on around you unaffected. It's not your problem right?

They hate any religion except thier own and will not accept you for what you are either.

The fact that you live in the middle of the ocean, isolated means that you are safe, so I guess the middle east is not your problem, right? Just let them be?

They will kill you just the same, given the chance.


Here maybe this will remind you of whats going on there:

I HAVE studied the Quran and I hate to tell you, Mohammed was an ultra-violent lunatic. He took the Torah and basically reworte it to justify his murderous rampage through arabia. "Oh, I think I'll go slaughter that village of Jews and rape their women. Hmmm, let me write this down about how Allah thinks it's a good idea."

There are literally hundreds of violent passages in the Quran that all advocate terrorism as a tool to force the "infidels" (defined in the Quran as Christians) to submit to Allah. The Quran says to hate and kill the jews, take slaves, murder all infidels, and a slew of other fun stuff.

Qur’an 8:12 “I shall terrorize the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and His Apostle.”

Bukhari: V4B52N220 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror.’

Tabari IX:69 “Killing disbelievers is a small matter to us.”

Qur’an 8:59 “The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them.”

Yeah, peaceful religion my ass...

The Quran further states that the VIOLENT Islamists are the good Islamists and those that DO NOT Jihad against us "Infidels" are considered hypocrites and are destined for hell. In other words, if you're a peaceful Muslim, Allah considers that NOT following his law and you go to hell...

 

[Mr-Fusion]

Now you just sit there in your country and just let the world go on around you unaffected. It's not your problem right?

That's right. It's not my problem and it shouldn't be your problem. I assume most Americans couldn't give a crap about the outside world either , until a warmonger Rumsfeld or one of his acolytes starts with the "Iraq has aluminium that can be used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons, invade invade invade!" or some such rhetoric. Do Americans actually want to help the Iraqis?

They hate any religion except thier own and will not accept you for what you are either.

The fact that you live in the middle of the ocean, isolated means that you are safe, so I guess the middle east is not your problem, right? Just let them be?

They will kill you just the same, given the chance.

I live on the doorstep of the biggest Mulsim country in the world (230 million people), Indonesia and for the most part the relationship between our countries is pretty good. Sure we've been bombed by a few extremists in Bali, but it's no need for an all out war and an attempt to change Indonesias culture (who is now democratic btw). I've seen this video of Americans, which compounds my view Americans generally don't give a toss what's happening in the world.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3uAl5L6Oer4&search=americans Australia
I'm glad you actually know where Australia is!

You want to invade a country? Learn about the history and culture of it first. Realise the ramifications of your blind ignorance. Saddam, though a ruthless dictator, understood the hate between shiites and sunnis and enforced secularism to keep a level of peace and to maintain his own power. Now that America has opened pandoras box you have a situation worse than before.

Then onto the technical details of the fight

I keep coming back to the failure to properly arm and protect our soldiers, and to send enough of them in the beginning to get the job done and keep the lid on a huge, fractious country with 25 million people with even more old hatreds. When a soldier in Kuwait challenged him on the issue of vehicle protection, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld replied: “You have to go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you want.”
At the time, Rumsfeld was sending American divisions to Iraq without their Abrams tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles, and sending their crews out to patrol the most dangerous roads in the world in light Humvees.

Incredible. With the amount of money invested into defence you'd think the U.S could create a vehicle impervious to the primitive roadside bombs.

 

[VirusType2]

until a warmonger Rumsfeld or one of his acolytes starts with the "Iraq has aluminium that can be used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons, invade invade invade!" or some such rhetoric.

So thats a big joke to you? Rumsfeld a warmonger? Fair enough, well he is secretary of defense - i should ****ing hope he is fit to do his job. Of course he thinks militarily. That is all he knows. The reason he is active is becuase we are at war, not the other way around mind you.

So you think that people that want to kill you and I should have some nuclear weapons? Pretty cool, fine with you ay? Maybe if Australia was right next door to Iran or Iraq you would be singing a different song. Like, "help america, the land of the free! Home of the brave! HELP"

Do Americans actually want to help the Iraqis?

Yes we want to help the Iraqis. We spend more money in the way of donations trying to help other countries than we spend on our own country for the same disasters, poor, homeless, etc. Im not sure thats a good idea, but thats the track record so far.

That's right. It's not my problem and it shouldn't be your problem.

If its not your problem, then why are you even getting involved? Why shit on my country? Why post these things about America that you hear? And you say our media is biased, is your source some how more reliable than mine? Is your internet telling you one thing and me another? You say the media tells us lies, what does your media tell you? You say you don't want to get involved then please don't.

News is and always has been BAD. Thats what makes it interesting. Do you really want to hear about some people making a donation to the childrens charity? Naw, you want to hear the shootout at the bank, or something horrific.

There is no good news when watching the news. If the news was good news people change the channel and then don't buy the new Viagra drugs or whatever car advertisement comes on. So I think that good news is quickly overlooked.




- imagine some passenger planes filled with your citizens start flying into your buildings filled with your innocent civilians in your country.
Then would it be your problem?

What about Israel? Guess you could care less what happens in Israel too right?


America, although democratic, was founded on Christianity and Muslims hate Christianity. The Quran says to torture, terrorize, and kill anyone who doesn't believe what they do.

I guess thats easy for you to forget since it doesn't affect you living in your moderately safe country of Australia.


Since you believe that its not your problem, then please, stop shitting on america with your hate. You are hurting everyone.

Incredible. With the amount of money invested into defence you'd think the U.S could create a vehicle impervious to the primitive roadside bombs.

Yes like I said, America is some magical place where our money can buy metals from another planet that are invulnerable to damage. Our soldiers have been injected with a polymer that increases explosion resistance. //

Primative or not, i've seen some of these roadside bombs explode and the explosions can be earth shattering and I don't care what you make a tank or vehicle out of, it's history if caught in the enormous blast radius. You really have to see video footage of a roadside bomb exploding to realize how powerful they are.

You won't really see much but some smoke rising if you see a picture of it becuase if they knew there was going to be a bomb exloding they wouldn't have walked into it. It's not like they can say, "let me take a snapshot right when it explodes."

However I saw one explode when they were filming, driving down the road and it was really powerful. I was shocked.

spell check: Enormous- Very great in size, extent, number, or degree. Archaic. Very wicked; heinous.

I live on the doorstep of the biggest Mulsim country in the world (230 million people), Indonesia and for the most part the relationship between our countries is pretty good. Sure we've been bombed by a few extremists in Bali, but it's no need for an all out war and an attempt to change Indonesias culture (who is now democratic btw). I've seen this video of Americans, which compounds my view Americans generally don't give a toss what's happening in the world.

Well there are many people in America that think like you. "its not my problem" They just want to live their lives in peace - don't we all? Is the freedoms we enjoy worth fighting for? If need be, I will get in a plane right ****ing now and fight with all my heart.

I've seen this video of Americans, which compounds my view Americans generally don't give a toss what's happening in the world.

I'm glad you actually know where Australia is!

So look who is talking. You are stereotyping all Americans becuase some video you saw on eBaums world.

These are the retards you hear about becuase they are easy to ridicule and aren't speaking in complicated scientific jargon about some thing you don't understand. I didn't even see the video but they have things like that on TV all the time.

Some random people walking down the street get asked some random world geography question. How convienient that they omit all the people that DO KNOW where it is.


America is huge, and I hardly travel out of my state, but Australia is my little brothers favorite country. I couldn't tell you why but thats what he said he wants to move there, "the land down under." It might be that Men At Work song...

or the Crocodile hunter... who knows but Yes I know where it is on the globe, although not from experience.

Now I know you are thinking, " is this all he knows about australia? Is this what Americans think about us? Thats such a stereotype!" I know becuase I had a relationship with a girl from australia and we talked about things like this.


Lets be fair now, a lot of americans don't know jack about the world, but they also don't know anything about their own country... or math, or science, or anything. We have had some problems with education in this generation, but I think that trend is getting better.


For example my parents both excelled in school and were at the top of their class, my Sister got straight A's her entire life, getting a B only once even throughout college. One of my brothers got all A's and B's throughout his life as well.

But there are many other people that got poor grades, so our education level in America is mostly average students.

You want to invade a country? Learn about the history and culture of it first. Realise the ramifications of your blind ignorance. Saddam, though a ruthless dictator, understood the hate between shiites and sunnis and enforced secularism to keep a level of peace and to maintain his own power. Now that America has opened pandoras box you have a situation worse than before.

Like I said, things won't change overnight or in just 3 years, this is an extremely complicated issue.

Sure we've been bombed by a few extremists in Bali,

Not enough of your innocent civilians have been blown apart yet? Not enough to care about just yet? You might think different if that was you or someone you love.

I think it's interesting that some of Saddams main leaders are comming forth in the news this past few days, clammoring about how wonderful America is for what we have done and how much better it is there now, how much hope they have for their future, and how Saddam really did have Weapons of mass destruction and how they were hidden in Sieria right underneath the noses of the U.N.

But I guess it's our word against theirs, since it's not your country's problem, I guess you don't have any intelligence on whats going on, and you DON'T know.

You hear things from both sides and you believe what you will.

But I guess we are such horrible people and you have choosen your side, so believe what you want.

The world goes on with or without me or you, regardless of what either of us think or say.


This is not a perfect world, and everyone just can't get along becuase we wish it so.


You can't make everyone happy.
Have you ever been with a few other people and you all decide to rent a movie and no one can agree on what movie to see? Now imagine trying to get the entire world to agree with what movie to see. It's just not possible.


I think all religions are bad and religious people scare me.

It seems it is always the most religious people that are the first to murder people for some being talked about in a book or some magical "heaven" in the sky.

Anyone reading this may or may not agree with me, but thats what I believe.

 

[Sulkdodds]

So it's a military failure as well as a humanitarian one? Whee!
Virustype, stop appealing to emotion. Of course you'd think differently if your family had been blown up. That's why you shouldn't think as if your family had been blown up.

Here maybe this will remind you of whats going on there:

Because Christianity is so much less of a hateful religion?

Leviticus 20:13
'If a man has sex with a man in same way as with a woman, they have committed an abomination. They are certainly to be put to death.'

Deuteronomy 21:10
'When you go to war against your enemies and you take prisoners, put the entire male population to death.'

Deuteronomy 13:6
'If a prophet comes among you, and if he then tells you to follow other gods and worship them...That prophet must be put to death. You must banish this evil from among you.'

Deuteronomy 13:13-15
'If you hear that in one of the towns, there are men who are telling people to go and worship other gods, it is your duty to look into the matter and examine it. If it is proved and confirmed, you must put the inhabitants of that town to the sword.'

Every holy book has a load of bullshit somewhere in it.
Of course, you could argue that Christians follow Jesus while Muslims follow Muhammed, but what I'm saying is, stop going on about how much better Christianity is.

 

[VirusType2]

So it's a military failure as well as a humanitarian one? Whee!
Virustype, stop appealing to emotion. Of course you'd think differently if your family had been blown up. That's why you shouldn't think as if your family had been blown up.

Why shouldn't I? My brother was working in a building when a plane full of people flew into it.

Because Christianity is so much less of a hateful religion?

Every holy book has a load of bullshit somewhere in it.

Leviticus 20:13
'If a man has sex with a man in same way as with a woman, they have committed an abomination. They are certainly to be put to death.'

Deuteronomy 21:10
'When you go to war against your enemies and you take prisoners, put the entire male population to death.'

Deuteronomy 13:6
'If a prophet comes among you, and if he then tells you to follow other gods and worship them...That prophet must be put to death. You must banish this evil from among you.'

Deuteronomy 13:13-15
'If you hear that in one of the towns, there are men who are telling people to go and worship other gods, it is your duty to look into the matter and examine it. If it is proved and confirmed, you must put the inhabitants of that town to the sword.'

Of course, you could argue that Christians follow Jesus while Muslims follow Muhammed, but what I'm saying is, stop going on about how much better Christianity is.

Well thats a great point but when have you ever in your lifetime heard of anyone put to death for any of these reasons?


I think modern Christianity is alot further from the extreme.

And I know I went on and on but in case you missed it I did say this:

I think all religions are bad and religious people scare me.

It seems it is always the most religious people that are the first to murder people for some being talked about in a book or some magical heaven in the sky.

I've said it before and many won't agree but ironically, I think if there were no religions people wouldn't be so evil.

 

[$kelet0r]

Why shouldn't I? My brother was working in a building when a plane full of people flew into it.

because you are arguing blinded by your passion not your logic

 

[VirusType2]

Well he asked, "why is it America's problem?" , "Why did we go to war?".

I was merely giving some reasons. If I am guilty of appealing to emotion then so be it. It's not the first time I've been guilty of something.

I just wanted to make sure my reasons weren't dismissed as no big deal as so often is the case. Imagining someone he knows being killed in world trade center or an airplane was intended to make it more real instead of a statistic.

 

[CptStern]

I just wanted to make sure my reasons weren't dismissed as no big deal as so often is the case. Imagining someone he knows being killed in world trade center or an airplane was intended to make it more real instead of a statistic.

what does 9/11 have to do with iraq?

 

[VirusType2]

what does 9/11 have to do with iraq?

The last straw.

 

[CptStern]

what does that mean? again I ask you, what does 9/11 have to do with iraq?

 

[VirusType2]

what does that mean? again I ask you, what does 9/11 have to do with iraq?

As I've said in nearly every post, it was one of the reasons we sent troops to Iraq Stern. I don't think you need to play dumb becuase I know you are not, why don't you just say what you want to say? You wouldn't dismiss this as a valid reason for counter-attack? Another conspiracy theory? Im tired of it all. I'd like to hear some facts if you know something I don't - not unanswered questions or whatever.. anyway that would be off topic, and this thread isn't about all that.

 

[CptStern]

As I've said in nearly every post, it was one of the reasons we sent troops to Iraq Stern.

while I agree it was indirectly a reason you went to iraq but none of the evidence panned out ..every single attempt at linking saddam to 9/11 failed because the evidence didnt support it. Iraq was no threat to you or anyone else for that matter, humanitarian concerns were never an issue, and you knew saddam didnt have wmd ..no, iraq was a calculated deception by the bush admin to overthrow saddam and set up a stepping stone into the middle east ..and he used 9/11 as a justification, playing on america sympathies after the worst attack on american soil in history ..pretty dispicable if you ask me

I'd like to hear some facts if you know something I don't

I've laid them out, now the burden is on you to disprove them

 

[Mr-Fusion]

- imagine some passenger planes filled with your citizens start flying into your buildings filled with your innocent civilians in your country.
Then would it be your problem?

I'd be smart enough to not start invading random countries fighting a faceless enemy. An enemy that can't be defeated because it's not a country, it's not a group situated in one neat area. And if you do decide to start fighting it, you just help it grow. It's like that purple ooze in ghostbusters 2.

I'm sorry but this just wreaks of alterior motives. Oil + keeping the war industry pumping. Like stern said, Iraq was zero threat to the U.S, there were no ties to Alquaeda.

Virus your responses epitomize the reasons i believe the U.S went to war. You were angry you were attacked and had to fight back against arabs. It didn't matter who, it just had to be someone...preferably arabs.

The last straw.

You are aware of your countries meddling in middle eastern politics for the past 40 or so years? How you allied with Saddam in Iraqs war against Iran? What last straw? You'll have to explain that.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Do Americans actually want to help the Iraqis?

As an American, I want to.

primitive roadside bombs.

Mr-Fusion, you sir, are overlooking one fact. Those bombs, some of them 400mm Artillery Shells, are meant to destroy tanks and armored vehicles. Did you overlook this? You make them sound like their twigs blowing up tanks, which is not the case.

Virustype, stop appealing to emotion. Of course you'd think differently if your family had been blown up. That's why you shouldn't think as if your family had been blown up.

Sulkdodds, stop appealing to rhetoric. Your family has also not been blown apart, and I'm sure most of us here would appreciate if you would'nt throw that arguement around as if your family has.

Plus, what an irresponsible way to justify pasting some 20 kids at a Pizza Parlour in Israel. Is that the passion you would have if your family was killed?

As I've said in nearly every post, it was one of the reasons we sent troops to Iraq Stern. I don't think you need to play dumb becuase I know you are not, why don't you just say what you want to say? You wouldn't dismiss this as a valid reason for counter-attack? Another conspiracy theory? Im tired of it all. I'd like to hear some facts if you know something I don't - not unanswered questions or whatever.. anyway that would be off topic, and this thread isn't about all that.

We've been asking CptStern to tell us what he knows, and when a man can't tell you anything, how obviously knows very little.

You are aware of your countries meddling in middle eastern politics for the past 40 or so years? How you allied with Saddam in Iraqs war against Iran? What last straw? You'll have to explain that.

Why not just post, all you know, in one thread? I think its a good idea.

 

[CptStern]

We've been asking CptStern to tell us what he knows, and when a man can't tell you anything, how obviously knows very little..

I've laid it all out here

http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1824996&postcount=21

...perhaps you'd like to take a stab at disproving the facts, or are have you resigned yourself to regurgitating lip service to those that blatantly lied to you?

 

[K e r b e r o s]

...perhaps you'd like to take a stab at disproving the facts

Sure, I'll give it a shot.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Sulkdodds, stop appealing to rhetoric.

lol? How can I appeal to 'the art of using language pursuasively'? Especially when my words have logic and reason behind them?

Your family has also not been blown apart, and I'm sure most of us here would appreciate if you would'nt throw that arguement around as if your family has. Plus, what an irresponsible way to justify pasting some 20 kids at a Pizza Parlour in Israel. Is that the passion you would have if your family was killed?

lol? I didn't attempt to justify anything of the sort?

And that question...ugh.

Let me tell you what I don't like about appeals to emotion.

1. "If your brother had been killed, wouldn't you want revenge?"

Let's imagine this statement in the context it's often used - the context of death penalty arguments. However, it works equally well in the context of this argument where he was using it, and where you're using it.
Wouldn't you want revenge? Of course you would. You would want revenge because you would be overwhelmed by the feelings of grief, despair and rage that would flood you as soon as you heard the news. But actions motivated purely by these feelings are as far from the logic and calm that are essential to dealing with matters that concern a human life, or fifty, as America is from Australia or Britain. People do lots of crazy things when they're pissed off. Most murders are motivated by anger, and often the killer is extremely sorry they did it. Ever seen Star Wars? Anakin was wrong for slaughtering all them Tusken just because a few of them killed his mother.


2. "Your family has also not been blown apart, and I'm sure most of us here would appreciate if you would'nt throw that arguement around as if your family has."

Let's ignore the fact that I have in no way acted as if my family has been blown apart.
So unless my family has been blown apart, I can't argue against taking courses of action motivated purely by rage against my family blowing apart? Even if that action, the vision of the taker clouded by said rage, is not necessarily the best one? What you are suggesting is that nobody can truly understand the situation unless they feel such grief and rage too. I'm not allowed to tell my crazy friend to calm down and be reasonable and stop trying to strangle his girlfriend because mine hasn't just left me for another man. That's what Virustype was saying (or so it seemed at first): 'oh, you can't say 'it was wrong to invade Iraq' because it wasn't YOUR country that was attacked!' That's what you're saying. I'm not allowed to argue because my country hasn't been attacked. Oh wait. It has.


3. "Is that the passion you would have if your family was killed?"

This implies that your opponent is an emotionless robot, and that if they cannot understand how actions motivated by rage are right then they obviously have no human empathy.

EDIT: Please note: none of this would be applicable to this argument if Saddam was actually linked/responsible for 9/11.

He wasn't.

You go to war because someone attacks you and kills people and that is wrong. You don't or shouldn't go to war merely because you're angry.



Appeals to emotion such as "if YOUR brother was killed, would you?" are not only inherently stupid (I like to think that people can conquer their instincts :| ), but attempt to exclude the person they are directed at from the argument while simultaenously insulting their humanity.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

How can I appeal to 'the art of using language pursuasively'?

Ok, so now believing Bush's rhetoric is now somehow not as bad or damning? After all, he just being persuasive.

Especially when my words have logic and reason behind them?

Thats a little arrogant to assume of yourself.

Wouldn't you want revenge? Of course you would. You would want revenge because you would be overwhelmed by the feelings of grief, despair and rage that would flood you as soon as you heard the news. But actions motivated purely by these feelings are as far from the logic and calm that are essential to dealing with matters that concern a human life, or fifty, as America is from Australia or Britain. People do lots of crazy things when they're pissed off. Most murders are motivated by anger, and often the killer is extremely sorry they did it. Ever seen Star Wars? Anakin was wrong for slaughtering all them Tusken just because a few of them killed his mother.

So, saying your sorry undoes the damage done? Murder does not justify murder. Justice does not come from killing.

Let's ignore the fact that I have in no way acted as if my family has been blown apart.

No, let's just ignore the entire idea that you could even half sympathize with bombing victims altogether because first:

You have nothing in common. [He's been bombed, you have'nt]

Why would you tell someone, "Oh well, you dont know what its like. You have'nt lost your family in a bombing so nya!", when even you have no real good sense of what thats like.

3. "Is that the passion you would have if your family was killed?"

Can you answer this question for yourself? Is that the kind of passion you'd have against another group of people, if your family was killed?

 

[Sulkdodds]

First: you appear to have ignored the fact that Saddam likely had nothing to do with 9/11, and that even if he did, the Iraqi people likely had nothing to do with 9/11.
You're so fond of telling everybody how the US is there to help the Iraqi people.
This implies that the people did not agree with Saddam.
So if he was behind 9/11, the the Iraqi people had nothing to do with it.
But they're still suffering.
So whether Saddam was behind 9/11 or not, acting in anger is wrong in this situation because said acts are against people who weren't responsible for the crimes against the US.
Oops.

Ok, so now believing Bush's rhetoric is now somehow not as bad or damning? After all, he just being persuasive.

'Rhetoric' is a term which has come to mean something negative. It should not have done. However, the bad-ness of Bush's speeches stems not from his use of persuasive language but from the non-virtues of the content.

The fact remains that you can't 'appeal to rhetoric'.

Thats a little arrogant to assume of yourself.

I explained my reasoning below and on the politics forum, where every post is an argument, must we litter them with 'THIS IS ONLY MY OPINION' tags? That it's just my opinion is surely taken as a given?

So, saying your sorry undoes the damage done? Murder does not justify murder. Justice does not come from killing.

Once again, I didn't say anything of the sort. I was merely pointing out that even murderers acknowledge that the actions they've performed in the heat of their anger are wrong.

No, let's just ignore the entire idea that you could even half sympathize with bombing victims altogether because first:
You have nothing in common. [He's been bombed, you have'nt]

Immediate problem: my country has been attacked by terrorists numerous times before. So you can't claim that I can't sympathise with your citizens.

I'm not entirely clear on what you're saying but I'm thinking it's this: victims are the only ones qualified to make decisions on how their assailants should be punished.
You're saying I can't even attempt to emphasise with someone whose parents are dead, or whose mother has cancer. And you're denying that a decision taken purely on the basis of anger is wrong?

Why would you tell someone, "Oh well, you dont know what its like. You have'nt lost your family in a bombing so nya!", when even you have no real good sense of what thats like.

Yet again, I didn't say that.

Is that the kind of passion you'd have against another group of people, if your family was killed?

Probably.

Throughout that post you've ignored and skated round my arguments, been confusing as hell and straw-manned twice.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

First: you appear to have ignored the fact that Saddam likely had nothing to do with 9/11, and that even if he did, the Iraqi people likely had nothing to do with 9/11.

Ignored them? It's not apart of the debate where having, Sulkdodds. Between you and me, this is the first time you've accused me of 'ignoring facts' about it. Sheesh. You want this to be apart of our discussion, thats fine with me. Just let me know ahead of time.

However, the bad-ness of Bush's speeches stems not from his use of persuasive language but from the non-virtues of the content.

Some of what you use has also a lacking content of virtue. Don't think your perfect, or should be at least, the model for this forum to follow.

I explained my reasoning below and on the politics forum, where every post is an argument, must we litter them with 'THIS IS ONLY MY OPINION' tags? That it's just my opinion is surely taken as a given?

I agree. Assuming your points have logic and reasoning behind them is only your opinion, and nothing more.

Once again, I didn't say anything of the sort.

Yes you did, read below:

1. "If your brother had been killed, wouldn't you want revenge?"

Let's imagine this statement in the context it's often used - the context of death penalty arguments. However, it works equally well in the context of this argument where he was using it, and where you're using it.
Wouldn't you want revenge? Of course you would. You would want revenge because you would be overwhelmed by the feelings of grief, despair and rage that would flood you as soon as you heard the news. But actions motivated purely by these feelings are as far from the logic and calm that are essential to dealing with matters that concern a human life, or fifty, as America is from Australia or Britain. People do lots of crazy things when they're pissed off. Most murders are motivated by anger, and often the killer is extremely sorry they did it. Ever seen Star Wars? Anakin was wrong for slaughtering all them Tusken just because a few of them killed his mother.

The entire context of that arguement is based upon excusing killings all on apologies. Sorry's will not excuse murders.

Immediate problem: my country has been attacked by terrorists numerous times before. So you can't claim that I can't sympathise with your citizens.

On a scale like 9/11? No, what your country has done, is traded its own national pride and identity as Britain in for several other countries. You've become a trade show of Foreign Interests, and because of such, you remain a social slave to popularists.

Yet again, I didn't say that.

No, you did, and here it is below:

Of course you'd think differently if your family had been blown up. That's why you shouldn't think as if your family had been blown up.

Post number 13 Sulkdodds. Look it up for yourself. I think you'll find that ... it is your post, and that, you also wrote it.

Probably.

And how then, would you justify murdering another man and his family, in exchange for what he did to yours?

 

[Sulkdodds]

This post will sound pissed off and irritable, but there you go. Sorry.

Are you making no sense on purpose? You're consistently failing to actually argue with anything I've said, rather choosing to answer statements that I never made, misconstrue everything I've said, nit-pick at irrelevant details, miss the point and even, at times, put words in my mouth that are in direct opposition to everything that I've actually been saying.

I am arguing that using an appeal to emotion in an argument is inherently bad. I have explained my reasoning clearly and I am, in fact, backed up by thousands of years of thinking. This may be somewhat of an appeal to authority but what the hell.

At the same time, I have argued that said appeal to emotion is meaningless anyway, because it is appealing to strike against an enemy which has nothing to do with the crimes committed against the US. I have shown my reasoning. If you simply want to argue about the virtue of appeals to emotion, then okay. It was in fact a bit random to bring in, so let's forget it. Maybe it can wait until we've established that appeals to emotion SUCK BIG FLOPPY NON-CONSENSUAL ZOMBIE DONKEY DICK.

Some of what you use has also a lacking content of virtue. Don't think your perfect, or should be at least, the model for this forum to follow.

I'm not. But that isn't relevant. I was demonstrating how your Bush analogy was not a good analogy - you were accusing me of...actually, I'm not sure what you were accusing me of because it didn't make any sense. You cannot 'appeal to rhetoric' any more than you can 'appeal to argument' or 'appeal to juggling'. If what you meant was that my statement was not backed up, and that it merely attempted to capitalise on skilled use of language (thanks for the compliment, I guess) then fair enough. However, I then backed up my statement with my reasoning later.

I never claimed that murder is justified if the victim is sorry. I did not imply it i any way. I am, in fact, claiming the opposite. I am claiming that decisions based on anger ARE NOT GOOD DECISIONS. Emotion has no place when you're weighing up someone's death. I demonstrated that even murderers often realise, all too late, that what they've done was wrong, and that their decision was NOT A GOOD DECISION.

Thus, while I will say nothing about arguing in favour of the death penalty, it is CRAZY to argue in favour of such solely on the basis of appeals to emotion.
In a similiar way, it is CRAZY to argue in favour of invading a foreign country solely on the basis of anger. You don't need the basis of anger, because you've got the basis of them attacking you.
What that appeal to emotion does is endorse the taking of crucial decisions based solely on anger. Murderers all over the world have proved that taking crucial decisions based solely on anger is not a good idea.

Your assertion that the argument against death penalties - the context which I was using - is based on 'excusing murder' is frankly ridiculous.

You then said this, "Murder does not justify murder. Justice does not come from killing."

So you claimed that arguing against the death penalty was excusing murderers, but then argued against the death penalty. Brilliant.

Now this is the bit of your post that made the least sense:

"Of course you'd think differently if your family had been blown up. That's why you shouldn't think as if your family had been blown up," is a statement by me saying that decisions taken in an extremely angered state may be compromised. If your family had just been blown up, you would be in a horrible state and might lash out at anyone at all in your anger. That's why it's useless to tell people they'd think differently if it was their family - because they would think differently. In a bad way.

If you get mad and smash your computer with a hammer, you will later realise that this decision, taken in the lunacy of anger, was a bad one. If you weren't so crazy with anger you would have realised that at the time.

THIS IS NOT THE SAME THING AS:

"Oh well, you dont know what its like. You have'nt lost your family in a bombing so nya!"
A statement NOT by me. It is, in fact, a statement that directly opposes mine.

DO YOU SEE THE DIFFERENCE?
DO YOU SEE HOW MY STATEMENT AND THE STATEMENT YOU PULLED OUT OF YOUR ASS AND SHOVED UNCEREMONIOUSLY INTO MY MOUTH ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT?

And how then, would you justify murdering another man and his family, in exchange for what he did to yours?

I wouldn't. I haven't. This is true lunacy!

 

[Solaris]

Roffle Sulkdodds I've been reading this and it is pure brilliance, I can't imagine your frustration, last line ftw. And I agree I have no Idea what he's on about either.

I wouldn't. I haven't. This is true lunacy!

Fantastic, Kerebosa is really just..... well being kerebosa,

 

[$kelet0r]

have to say - i've been following this little tiff and that's quite a rebuttal by Sulkdodds, well thought out and argued
new balls please, kerberos to serve...

 

[kirovman]

That's just your opinion sulkdodds. You weren't attacked :thumbs:

N.B. my poor attempt at sattire.

 

[gick]

What I find absolutely hilarious about this thread is that Kerberos actually thinks he's making sense, and arguing properly.

 

[VirusType2]

while I agree it was indirectly a reason you went to iraq but none of the evidence panned out ..every single attempt at linking saddam to 9/11 failed because the evidence didnt support it. Iraq was no threat to you or anyone else for that matter, humanitarian concerns were never an issue, and you knew saddam didnt have wmd ..no, iraq was a calculated deception by the bush admin to overthrow saddam and set up a stepping stone into the middle east ..and he used 9/11 as a justification, playing on america sympathies after the worst attack on american soil in history ..pretty dispicable if you ask me



I've laid them out, now the burden is on you to disprove them

Oh SHIT! We are all SO TOTALLY ****ED! Run for the hills!



oh wait! thankfully America is getting a regime change every 4-8 years. Woot! we are saved!

 

[CptStern]

my sarcasm detector is buzzing



while "regime" change in the US is necessary, I have little faith the democrats will conduct themselves any better then the next republican presidential nomination. The neo-cons have consolidated their power ..with key members in high positions of power they'll have undue influence for years to come ..the road to imperialism doesnt stop with bush leaving office

 

[VirusType2]

For the record my older brother worked in the pentagon at the time and the plane struck the newly reinforced side of the building where no one worked at the time... hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

He worked on the F22 and then the Unmanned attack fighters and is now working on these Octagon-shaped Unmaned booster equiped attack fighters that launch from under the ocean and fly back - I was at his house a few days ago and he showed it to me in some magazine, so this leads me to believe that this RAD defense outline is real.

 

[CptStern]

? are you responding to my post or are you just going off on some tangent about unmanned reinforced buildings and Octagon shaped RAD outlines?

 

[VirusType2]

? are you responding to my post or are you just going off on some tangent about unmanned reinforced buildings and Octagon shaped RAD outlines?

OOPS!

No I wasn't meaning to respond to anyone or go off on a tangent.

Kerberos, I think, was saying that my brother had been killed. He wasn't harmed.

I was also adding some things that the RAD pointed out that encourages me to be inclined to believe that the RAD is real and not something some conspiracy tool made up.


For example, the following bold text emphasis, I've heard my brother talk about these things he has worked on, but most of it is top secret so of course I don't know.

MODERNIZE CURRENT U.S. FORCES SELECTIVELY, proceeding with the F-22 program while increasing purchases of lift, electronic support and other aircraft; expanding submarine and surface combatant fleets; purchasing Comanche helicopters and medium-weight ground vehicles for the Army, and the V-22 Osprey 'tilt-rotor' aircraft for the Marine Corps.

CANCEL 'ROADBLOCK' PROGRAMS such as the Joint Strike Fighter, CVX aircraft carrier, and Crusader howitzer system that would absorb exorbitant amounts of Pentagon funding while providing limited improvements to current capabilities. Savings from these canceled programs should be used to spur the process of military transformation.

there are many others too ( like unmanned fighters, and he has worked on jet propulsion((lift)) powered crafts that can take-off straight up in the air like a heli-copter, and land in it's own footprint, instead of requiring a runway ) but I don't have time to search the RAD right now.

So either the RAD is real or someone who knows what the hell they are talking about it wrote it - that's all I'm saying.

 

[CptStern]

.... my brain is starting to hurt ..backtrack a second ..what's a RAD and how does it fit with what kerberos said? (curiosity is killing me)