Letter to the American people from a soldier in Iraq,

Originally posted by slank

SNIPPED


[edit on 5-10-2004 by slank]

Are you on shrooms?

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft

Why is it that if a Democrat happens to win an election, it is a "spontaneous outpouring of popular support," but if a republican wins, then a spin doctor "got them elected?"

That kind of an attitude shows a real contempt for the people who inhabit THIS democracy, as if their votes only matter if they support YOUR fellow.

This is a mute argument as both sides see it the same way. To democrates point of view it's exactly the opposite. Besides, talk to Jeb Bush about votes only mattering if they follow your view.

And a general comment on this thread. Regardless of which side it supports, I am skeptical of the acuracy of any kind of pole done in Iraq, be it pro-war, or anti-war. Is there information on the details of how these polls are conducted?

Originally posted by snoopy
And a general comment on this thread. Regardless of which side it supports, I am skeptical of the acuracy of any kind of pole done in Iraq, be it pro-war, or anti-war. Is there information on the details of how these polls are conducted?

In general I would agree with you, google "Good things happening in Iraq" . There are sources other than the mainline press....

Here are just a few:
Iraq - The Things That Were Good And The Things That Were Not Good

www.blackfive.net...





[edit on 14-10-2004 by edsinger]

Steven Moore is very brave for going to Iraq. However, his work is propagandist, not a pollster. As such, his version of the "truth" should be treated skeptically.

For example, on his blog page, scroll down to his "What do Americans think about Iraq" post. Here he shows how pollsters can bias their results by providing false information couched in biased terminology, before asking a question:

"...Saddam tortured and killed 750,000 of his own people - 5 times the number of people that were killed in the Hiroshima blast. The majority of Iraqis say that Saddam himself was a weapon of mass destruction.

This information makes 80% of Philadelphians, 72% of Pittsburgh registered voters, 71% of Columbus registered voters, 69% of Detroit voters and 64% of Cleveland voters more likely to support US efforts in Iraq."

Countering the "mainstream media bias" with even more bias isn't going to help.

[edit on 15-10-2004 by Damned]

A government is a government.

If Saddam chose to break the arms of criminals with a sledge hammer then so be it. They are criminals. If our government did that in place of giving criminals free room and board at the county Hilton then maybe our world crime would be down.

We also would'nt have to worry about pro-choice pro-life because the criminals would know what to expect before commiting rapes.

The good thing about Kerry is he is pro-choice. Now I know some of you will disagree but unless you have good reason please don't.

Why is it no one can believe that there is GOOD news in Iraq, so you slam the messenger? Typical vile......leftist agenda's.

Originally posted by edsinger
Why is it no one can believe that there is GOOD news in Iraq, so you slam the messenger? Typical vile......leftist agenda's.

I'm not a "leftist", but there is no good news because we never should have "liberated" them in the first place. I hate to tell you, but no problems will ever be solved by violence. I'm sure you've heard of the term "vicious circle"? Now, complete annihilation might "solve" a problem, but how realistic is that, and what monster can decide to annihilate all of a certain race or religion? There is no good answer, and war against an invisible enemy isn't solving a thing. If you don't really know who hit you (or where they are), you can't just go shooting at everyone in the area until you hit the right ones.

[edit on 19-10-2004 by Damned]

Iraqis didnt elected their reps

Hell WE DONT.

In Australia a body in each electorate votes inside each party who they are going to endorse, or the independent puts his hand up, they all pay thier enrollment fee.

and woll la...thier on the ballot.

Then the voters go in and have thier say....I like him I dont her I like her I dont like him.

Voting is mandatory for those enrolled. Most of us find out years after we have enrolled to vote that its the enrollment thats not mandatory. By then we have to vote every time it the election.

That way you can legitimately bitch when things don't go the way you want them "I didnt vote for him" or I voted him...but he LIED" Not I think its pointless so don't participate.

We also have preferential voting...you get five candidates (in our area for example) in an electorate on a ballot for the lower house.....you are required to mark the boxes 1 to 5. If your favoured candidate doesnt get the numbers then the prefence gets allocated to the next one. Parties he hand out how to vote cards (usually based on deals with other parties bar the enemy) but the voter votes how they like.

For the senate it is a bigger worry. Our seat had 51 names on the balllot, parties and independent totalled. There they give you an easy choice. Just mark one box for the main party you want to vote for,,,, or number all 51 boxes...ow!

The point is despite all the knocking, as long as Common Iraqis are allowed to stand , the Elections are properly supervised (and despite criticism the UN is the most independent body we've got) and it all doesnt get put off the rails by someone (wheeew...lota ifs) the Iraqis wil choose in the end.

And as we are fond of saying in Australia "the only poll worth a damn is the election" and even then the conspiracy fans beleive its rigged anyway, whoever they support or not.

The bottom line is we might be pleasantly surprised or we may not...but lets wait and see. Ok?



[edit on 19-10-2004 by craigandrew]

Sure...they love the coalition troops...thats why they are injuring them at every oppurtunity. Talk about blind faith in your leader.

Why is it, every time I point out something that makes perfect sense (as my last post), I get no response from these neocon supporting fanatics? Nothing to say about that?

Originally posted by SiRiNO

Sure...they love the coalition troops...thats why they are injuring them at every oppurtunity. Talk about blind faith in your leader.

Well ALL of them are? You had better check YOUR facts. Many of teh Iraqi's are not involved in the attacks, it is a select few who will stop at nothing to prevent an Islamic Democracy in Iraq.


It is like going to New York and claiming everyone is a Red Sox Fan.

Originally posted by edsinger
Many of teh Iraqi's are not involved in the attacks, it is a select few who will stop at nothing to prevent an Islamic Democracy in Iraq.

Yes, and many of the Iraqis that are not involved are also being attacked, by our military. It doesn't matter if it's intentional or not. It's happening. That alone makes those who were not involved, suddenly involved. This is why attacks are increasing, instead of decreasing. They're not coming over from Afghanistan. More Iraqis are just getting pissed off, and with good reason, IMO. You'd be mad too, if your country was being occupied.

I dont know about the NeoCons who havent got the message it was a stupid act in the first place, but what about the rest of us who have been responding by asking and you think its a good idea to wash our hands of it and let whats left of Iraq crumble into the hands of these twisted factional leaders to claw over, like Somalia?

I admit some have just gone straight for your jugular on this, but please acknowledge some of us are trying to have dialogue here, even if sometimes it seems pointless.

edsinger:

Why is it no one can believe that there is GOOD news in Iraq, so you slam the messenger? Typical vile......leftist agenda's.

The TRUTH has no political slant. The TRUTH is that Iraqis were better off under Saddam Hussein than they have been under the American military occupation. Thousands of dead civilians in 18 months, hundreds of thousands of them displaced, rampant crime and a failing economy.

Sure there's some positive things going on, but the TRUTH is that there is far more negative happening.

You know, the whole wanton death and destruction thing. Missiles raining down on them, night-time raids of Iraqi homes, and carbombs.

Sure, the carbombs aren't directly the US's fault, as many other things aren't.

BUT, the first step in this debacle was taken by the Americans, in their decision to illegally invade another sovereign nation. So EVERYTHING that happens BECAUSE of that, is attributable to the United States of America's current Administration.

And you know what, you gotta give it to those crazy Iraqi insurgents, they're taking on the world's most powerful military, and they are absolutely kicking your butts all over the place.

They may be suicidal maniacs, but they sure know how to fight a military occupation. Gotta give them some props for that.


jako

ps. Nice posts, Damned, lots of sense there. That's the reason you're not getting any comments from the neo-cons. Solid stuff.



[edit on 21-10-2004 by Jakomo]

Don't you think that they have a vested interest in making Americans believe that everything is just fine?

don't you think the world has this same vested interest?

Originally posted by craigandrew
I dont know about the NeoCons who havent got the message it was a stupid act in the first place, but what about the rest of us who have been responding by asking and you think its a good idea to wash our hands of it and let whats left of Iraq crumble into the hands of these twisted factional leaders to claw over, like Somalia?

What leaders? Didn't we already remove them? It's only insurgents now, right? There will always be "leaders". What gives anyone the right to choose who the leader will be for someone else? If they want their freedom, they'll just have to fight for it, as we did....and as we'll have to do again, one day...maybe sooner than you think. No matter how powerful Saddam was, he's no match for millions of angry people, even if they're unarmed. No government is, IMO. If we get pissed off enough, what's the US gov. going to do when we decide to fight back? Bomb their own land? That may work for a short while, but it's only going to make the rest of the country angrier. You can't battle shear numbers. There is a point that people reach where death is better than repression. I don't guess they've reached the point where freedom is more important. Indeed, they don't want it bad enough, IMO. When you're willing to take your freedom, or die trying, then you've earned freedom. No one can give it to you. Americans reached that point, remember? "Give me liberty or give me death!"

On second thought, maybe that's why terrorist aren't afraid to die for their cause, eh? Maybe they are indeed fed up, but obviously with us...not their leaders. Still, there is no evidence that Iraq had anything to do with it. Liberate Iraq? Pu-lease!!! I saw them in the streets holding loaded guns! Any one of them could've infiltrated and killed Saddam, point blank.

[edit on 21-10-2004 by Damned]

Originally posted by craigandrew
I dont know about the NeoCons who havent got the message it was a stupid act in the first place, but what about the rest of us who have been responding by asking and you think its a good idea to wash our hands of it and let whats left of Iraq crumble into the hands of these twisted factional leaders to claw over, like Somalia?

I admit some have just gone straight for your jugular on this, but please acknowledge some of us are trying to have dialogue here, even if sometimes it seems pointless.

Well please look at these threads and download the pdf and read it.

We NEED to be in Iraq and the stakes are high, the left just refuses to admitt that this IS a Legit war.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by Jakomo
The TRUTH has no political slant. The TRUTH is that Iraqis were better off under Saddam Hussein than they have been under the American military occupation. Thousands of dead civilians in 18 months, hundreds of thousands of them displaced, rampant crime and a failing economy.

Sure there's some positive things going on, but the TRUTH is that there is far more negative happening.

You know, the whole wanton death and destruction thing. Missiles raining down on them, night-time raids of Iraqi homes, and carbombs.


[edit on 21-10-2004 by Jakomo]

This is utter rubbish. THe Iraqi's are better off under saddam? Well being an engineer and I have engineering friends over there, the work that is NOT told by the press is quite impressive ...but you wouldnt believe it anyway...

Negativity..that is all some seem to see...

Originally posted by Damned


On second thought, maybe that's why terrorist aren't afraid to die for their cause, eh? Maybe they are indeed fed up, but obviously with us...not their leaders. Still, there is no evidence that Iraq had anything to do with it.

Liberate Iraq? Pu-lease!!! I saw them in the streets holding loaded guns! Any one of them could've infiltrated and killed Saddam, point blank.

[edit on 21-10-2004 by Damned]

You seem to have forgotten the initial reaction to the US troops, we took it without much combat at all, the people were HAPPY to be rid of saddam. I still remember the guy pissing on the portrait. But now all we see is car bombs..Fu&*k the press......They just want us to see the negative.

[edit on 21-10-2004 by edsinger]

[edit on 21-10-2004 by edsinger]

Bloody hell! Go for it you lot.You really do truly deserve each other.

Originally posted by Weller
First of all, I was hoping your information would have come from more than one source since we don't have a strong presence of reporters in Iraq but anyways...
I for one am happy that many Iraqi's want to embrace freedom, I can't think of many countries that would embrace dictatorships in any form. But the 'free Iraq' spin that has been thrust on this war due to original plans and statements being proved false doesn't make this war any better in my eyes.
[edit on 103131p://111 by Weller]

Excellent post Weller. No one gave you feedback that you deserve.

Why is it, every time I point out something that makes perfect sense (as my last post), I get no response from these neocon supporting fanatics? Nothing to say about that?

I'll tell you why. You see ed cares about the overall picture. He is the kind of guy that wants to get on with things over in Iraq and make it a better place for everyone as do many people. That is why he is posting the good things in Iraq as compared to the bad - to propose that good is coming out of us going over there and invading the Iraqi people. That they are indeed better off and will be better off I have no doubt. In fact I personally know that Iraqi will be a rich nation once again enjoying the fat suppleness of the corporate harlots.

However, what ed fails to realize is that Iraq has all to do with oil, power, and money. ed is an avid Bush supporter, a little infatuated, but you know where his loyalty is. He is the kind of guy that would give thumbs up to rolling over old ladies in bulldozers to make sure progress is ongoing.

He never has his hands stained with the very blood of an individual you blew away or exploded so he is the furthest from the reality of war looking at the 'high' end postulating points of progress and peace having never swam in the mud and mire of blood and filth.

The idea of progress by men of this fashion has nothing to do with body counts, as this is just a means to an end, or purging process, but everything to do with what the people feel, or what good can come about in the future for decisions and grandiose postures.

We can all enjoy an opinion on a subject and be loyal to a cause but those who shut their eyes and clamp their ears and refuse to recognize the atrocities of men when they are plain and clear are the salt of the earth that has lost it's savor.