Major U.S.-Iraqi operation begins

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
reply to post by BlueRaja

 

Right here.

The way to make the violence stop is to remove those folks from the gene pool that are causing the violence.

The Sunnis and the Shiites are causing the violence, iiuyc. You are advocating their removal from the gene pool. That's genocide.

Did I say remove Sunnis and Shiites from the gene pool, or...........did I say remove Sunnis and Shiites that were causing the violence from the gene pool? There's a pretty big distinction there. That's akin to saying that it was genocide when we killed Germans and Japanese in WWII, or the NVA and VC in Vietnam. In the future I'd appreciate you not putting words in my mouth for me. Thanks.

-Halliburton/KBR work for the US government
-Hitler didn't ask us to enter either
-Is bad intel a lie?
-Casualty estimates by a poll? How scientific was their methodology?
"Excuse me, but how many people do you think have died?"x the number polled =an accurate count?
-You said lethal and non-lethal weapons were being tested in Iraq so they'll be ready to use back home- give me one example of any lethal or non-lethal weapon that the military has developed for Iraq, that has been used here.
-What's more noble than removing a brutal dictator, and giving 25-30 million people the opportunity for freedom?
-You do understand that by simply pulling out of Iraq, would be highly irresponsible, and set a terrible precedent. It would not only cause mass chaos and violence orders of magnitude higher, but it would embolden our foes. Victory is the only honorable way to come home, with victory being defined as the Iraqi security forces are capable of unilaterally securing the country, and setting favorable conditions for the Iraqi government to function. The time has past for arguing the merits of going to Iraq. We are there, and as Colin Powell says- you break it, you fix it.

reply to post by BlueRaja


Did you see the iiuyc? That means "If I understand you correctly." Get it? And I still think I do. I am not putting words in your mouth. You are doing a fine job of spewing hate and vitriol all on your own.

There is no correlation to WWII here, unless you count the false flag element in the US letting Pearl Harbor get attacked with the 9/11 red cell op.

And yes, the ridiculous Gulf of Tonkin pretext, let us not forget, did precede what I consider an effort at genocide on the Vietnamese people.

Look at all the violence in our this country. Good ole USA.

We are so busy running everyone else's show that the curtain is falling on our own.

We can't even begin to handle our own personal level of violence, what business do we have anywhere else when we can't even clean up our own backyard.

reply to post by BlueRaja

Originally posted by BlueRaja
-Halliburton/KBR work for the US government

Yeah, facilitating the theft of resources from Iraq and transfering the wealth of American taxpayers into the pockets of their corporate masters.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
-Hitler didn't ask us to enter either

Not the point of my reference to Hitler, don't spin the subject.

The techniques used by Hitler's Third Reich to assume and consolidate his power are now being used by today's pawns of the elite to destroy our constitution and enslave us all.

Besides, Hitler's actions forced our participation in WWII, we were under no similar obligation to enter Iraq and stick our nose in their business.

But the same greedy elite entities profited from both sides of WWWII, just like they're racking in the profits on this one.

Paid for with the blood of our sons and daughters.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
-Is bad intel a lie?

Is lying about good intel the truth?

Originally posted by BlueRaja
-Casualty estimates by a poll? How scientific was their methodology?
"Excuse me, but how many people do you think have died?"x the number polled =an accurate count?

Suggest a better method.

Is believing the count of those with a vested interest in lowballing the figures a better method?

Originally posted by BlueRaja
-You said lethal and non-lethal weapons were being tested in Iraq so they'll be ready to use back home- give me one example of any lethal or non-lethal weapon that the military has developed for Iraq, that has been used here.

Nice spin.

They will be used here, mark my words.

Example:

The Active Denial System (ADS) is a non-lethal, directed-energy weapon system under development by the U.S. military. It is a strong millimeter-wave transmitter used for crowd control (the "goodbye effect"[1]). Informally, the weapon is also called pain ray.[2] Raytheon is currently marketing a reduced range version of this technology.[3]

The military expects deployment of the weapon to Iraq by the end of 2008...

...The ADS is currently only a vehicle mounted weapon, however, U.S. Marines and police are both working on portable versions...

...The defense contractor, Raytheon, has developed a smaller version of the ADS, named the Silent Guardian. This stripped down model is primarily marketed for use by law enforcement agencies, the military and other security providers. The system is operated and aimed with a joystick and aiming screen. The device can be used for targets up to 550 m away...

Source | Wikipedia | Active Denial Sysytems

And who would the "police" and "other security providers" use this system on?

Each other?

More info, not the most current, but relevant:

Louis Slesin, editor of Microwave News, a leading newsletter on non-ionizing radiation, calls VMADS a "significant development" in directed energy weapons. However, he says that possible injuries, particularly to the eye, could lead to stopping further development and actual deployment of the device-as the Pentagon did in the mid-1990s when it was trying to develop blinding lasers. "The real question is whether it will go the way of the lasers," Slesin says. Like laser, exposure to the microwave beam could cause eye damage. "People will get out of the beam, but [injury to the eyes] depends on how much exposure they get," Slesin says. Slesin also notes that "the only people who are doing health research on the effects of electromagnetic radiation are the people who are developing this weapon-the Air Force Lab. . . . They're the only people who have any money in the United States to do research on the health effects, and they're in firm control of the [safety] standard-setting process. . . . That's a clear conflict."

Source | GlobalSecurity.org | Vehicle-Mounted Active Denial System | (V-MADS)

"We're from the government, and we're here to help..."

Originally posted by BlueRaja
-What's more noble than removing a brutal dictator, and giving 25-30 million people the opportunity for freedom?

What's less noble than wrapping your goals in a noble cause to satisfy a hidden agenda?

If "we're" so noble, why didn't "we" step in to stop the genocide of 800,000 people in Rwanda by Jean Kambanda in 1994? ( Number eleven on the list, two steps above Saddam)

Hell, why didn't we stop our own Presidents Johnson (Vietnam, 1963-1968, 30,000 dead) or Nixon (Vietnam, 1969-1974, 70,000 Vietnamese civilians) when they decided to bomb the rice fields in North Vietnam, knowing that they would only kill women and children?

Yeah, noble, right.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
-You do understand that by simply pulling out of Iraq, would be highly irresponsible, and set a terrible precedent. It would not only cause mass chaos and violence orders of magnitude higher, but it would embolden our foes. Victory is the only honorable way to come home, with victory being defined as the Iraqi security forces are capable of unilaterally securing the country, and setting favorable conditions for the Iraqi government to function. The time has past for arguing the merits of going to Iraq. We are there, and as Colin Powell says- you break it, you fix it.

It was more than irresponsible to go in there to begin with, it was criminal.

It is never past time to bring war-criminals to justice.

That's the responsible thing to do.

That's the right thing to do.

We're in the wrong here, and the sooner we admit it to the people who've been wronged, including ourselves, the sooner we can turn our "foes" into friends.




[edit on 9-1-2008 by goosdawg]

reply to post by BlueRaja

You do realize that when translated - thou shalt not kill, means thou shalt not commit murder. There's a difference between homocide and murder.

You almost got this one past me. Let's see what the Bible really says about killing people.

Genesis 9

6 Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

I'd say that is pretty clear.

reply to post by Icarus Rising


The Bible also says that there is a time and season for everything.

A Time to Kill and a Time to Heal.

If you look at the greek and hebrew you will see the diff in the meaning of the words. You do not suppose that the Lord would say thall shall not kill and turn right around and say there is a time to kill? That does not make sense... Look it up

[edit on 10-1-2008 by birchtree]

I would like to say that perhaps the surge is slowing things down a bit, the problem is that there is a limitless influx of insurgents gaining access to and obtaining military experience. This will inevitably continue, unfortunately pressure from the US and World community will bring a withdrawal of US troops leaving a generation of trained opposition(in other words the insurgents will outlast the US attrition game. It is wrong to say but one can only hope a power struggle between factions or religious sects will insue to draw these oppostion forces to another conflict, otherwise the US will be leaving the door open to bring these fighters to the US doorstep, with the opposition believing they have expelled the US and that it is time to take the fight to them, and deliver a war to America.

The cause of all this can be linked to former SECDEF Rumsfield who failed to allow Commanders to implement the troop levels needed to dominate and secure the battle space in the first place

In addition implementing a surge in Baghdad and in the Mosul regions is pushing insurgents from place to place. Troops should be being deployed in full force to the border regions of Iraq to stop the influx of insurgents stopping the flow (Cut off the head of the snake) establish a outer perimeter and surge from the outer perimeters falling in on the rural areas supporting existing troops in combat areas and stopping fighters from withdrawing. The use of ambush/counter ambush and choke point suppression is key

Anyone who thinks it will stop with the US having a hasty withdrawal is going to horribly suprised.

Another thing everyone fails to realize about the so-called faulty intelligence is.....the bunkers that were suppose to have chemical weapons in them.....did after shield/storm have chemical weapons in them and were inspected and sealed by UN weapons inspectors.....they did have it....the question we should be asking as a world community is not did they have chemical weapons (that is already known) but where did those weapons go.........This argument about Iraq not even having WMD was never about Nuclear, it was always the fact that Chemicals weapons WERE used against its own populace and the kurds, and were sealed in bunkers after shield/storm. Those are facts. The other fact is that they are not where they were left.

[edit on 10-1-2008 by birchtree]

reply to post by birchtree


I have "looked it up," several times, and again I say to you, who is the one that decides who to kill and when to kill? If man tries it, then Genesis 9:6 still applies. It makes perfect sense. Think it over.

One more reference for you.

Matthew 26

52 Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.

Still pretty clear to me.

reply to post by birchtree

The cause of all this can be linked to former SECDEF Rumsfield who failed to allow Commanders to implement the troop levels needed to dominate and secure the battle space in the first place

I completely agree with you here. General Shinseki told Rummie it would take 300k troops to do the job properly, and he got canned for it. Treasury Secretary O'Neill told Bush that we couldn't afford more tax cuts, and he got canned. Bunny Greenhouse blew the whistle on the no-bid contracts to Halliburton and KBR, and she got canned. At least they're consistent.

I am also impressed by your plan to secure the borders in Iraq and work our way in to the trouble spots. Good strategy. Why aren't we using it?

reply to post by Icarus Rising

Originally posted by Icarus Rising
reply to post by birchtree

 

Originally posted by birchtree
The cause of all this can be linked to former SECDEF Rumsfield who failed to allow Commanders to implement the troop levels needed to dominate and secure the battle space in the first place.

I completely agree with you here.

As do I, with reservations...

Originally posted by Icarus Rising, referring to birchtree's proposal
I am also impressed by your plan to secure the borders in Iraq and work our way in to the trouble spots. Good strategy. Why aren't we using it?

The reservations for the former may lie in the answer to the latter question:

Just like the "War on Drugs" and the "War on Terror" this "war" was never meant to be "won" in a conventional sense of the concept.

It was meant to be a sustained engagement from the outset, never finished, never "won."

"War" is good for the corporations that profit from it, and this "war" was conceived and has been and will continue to be, waged for the corporations who stand to profit the most.

This was the plan for Vietnam, and, from that, they've learned their lessons well...

Or, they were all incompetent beef-witted canker blossoms.

Or, and most likely, IMHO, they meticulously planned the former, and take refuge in appearing to be the latter.

Why do you think they picked bumbling Junior to be the front man?

Right on.

That is exaclty why we are not using a winning strategy. I was kind of trying to lead birchtree to that realization, and you have spelled it out brilliantly.

Nicely done.