War Pictures (not for the weak)

BTW the pic with the tank and the kids looks like a setup to me...

Photographer to kids "Go and lie over there by that tank", takes picture...

Originally posted by bodrul
so saddam did all that **** to his people
killing thousends,

does that mean the US has to kill thousends like he did
on their path to democricy?

The US didn't have to kill anybody the last 8 or 9 days. They could have laid down their arms and acted like normal people.

There were three possible alternatives. Either:

A> The Fallujans (jihadists) quit the mass murder
B> We turn the town into a parking lot
C> The bombings, beheadings, and executions continue unfettered

There is no moral relativity here. They did it because they want to. We did it because we had no other choice. It's THEIR FAULT.

Originally posted by dh

Originally posted by dgtempe

____________________________________________________________


WHY DONT WE GO AFTER OSAMA?

Cos we got him in our protection, Nice lady.
He was always one of ours

well, i know that. My tongue was on my cheek, and my eyes rolling...

Originally posted by verfed
Marg, Saddam was not a merciful benevolent ruler who gave all of the oil money back to his people.

He didn't waste the money on his palaces. He didn't operate torture chambers in his prisons. He didn't have his political opponents daughters raped in prison. He didn't have mass graves all over the country to bury the Shiites and Kurds he killed.

Cmon Marg.......Iraq was stable under Saddam because Saddam killed hundreds of thousands of people to keep it stable. He was evil.......atleast admit that.

Well, so far the US has sold (or attempted to sell) the entire country, oil included, off to Internationals, raped and tortured Iraqis to accomplish this, and killed approximately 100,000 civilians to these ends. So I'm glad that now that Saddam's gone the country is stable. Oops. we can't even accomplish that over there. Well, things will get better... someday.

Originally posted by Ibn Iblis
The US didn't have to kill anybody the last 8 or 9 days. They could have laid down their arms and acted like normal people.

There were three possible alternatives. Either:

A> The Fallujans (jihadists) quit the mass murder
B> We turn the town into a parking lot
C> The bombings, beheadings, and executions continue unfettered

There is no moral relativity here. They did it because they want to. We did it because we had no other choice. It's THEIR FAULT.

yeah i was really refering to falluja alone
( where did i say just falluja )

saddam killed sh*t loads of people
and the US is cathing up fast with the number of cuvilians being killed

thats what i was saying

Watch them kill Jack Hensley



It didn't have to be this way.

Let me reitterate a point I made on another topic about civilians:

Everyone involved in combat has a responsibility for their safety, including the civilians themselves.

The attackers must avoid them at all reasonable costs.

The defenders must not put them in harms way.

And the civilians must take every reasonable precaution to make sure they are not in the line of fire.

This is international law.

We warned them for WEEKS that we were coming in hell-bent for leather. If they were dumb enough or stubborn enough not to get out of there then that is not our fault.

It's like living on the coast and refusing to evacuate with a category 4 hurricane approaching.

So Ib in your mind American lives are worth thousand of children and women Iraqis death.

What you don't realize is that we when freely into that country the Iraqis are from Iraq we are not.

Like I said death only brings more death.

where would they go though? to safety you say but where is "safety"? a desert? a dry barren desert.
the US military wont help because if you go near them they will shoot or arrest you. because you might be a terrorist.
you think the red cross will be that close to the front?
also what about the male's that where not allowed to leave?

Originally posted by devilwasp
where would they go though? to safety you say but where is "safety"? a desert? a dry barren desert.
the US military wont help because if you go near them they will shoot or arrest you. because you might be a terrorist.
you think the red cross will be that close to the front?
also what about the male's that where not allowed to leave?

I dont think they can check into the nearest Holiday Inn and head for the basement either. Seek shelter? Has anyone thought of where these innocent people would go for shelter? There are NO shelters-

There are relief agencies they could find refuge with. I realize the instinct not to abandon your home, but if the alternative is death, you can always rebuild your home. ESPECIALLY if you have young children.

And al-Zarqawi is a JORDANIAN. These insurgents are mostly Iraqi, but they also include Syrians, Iranians, and Chechens, among others, and they are largely funded by Iran, and possibly an untold amount of Saddam's Oil for Food money. This certainly isn't a case of Iraqis fighting for freedom, even if we don't have a right to be there.

[size=0]we do

most people there dont even have a car, and who's going to venture out looking for help? Be realistic.

The majority of the city was already emptied.

There's no excuse, really.

Originally posted by bodrul
ps i have seen worse ( affects from chemicals used by US forces in vietnam )

You better get your facts straight, bodrul. The US never used a chemical weapon in Vietnam any stronger than CS.

dgtempe is developing a reputation for sedition equal to that of Axis Sally, Tokyo Rose, Baghdad Betty, Hanoi Jane, and Hanoi John.

Pretty fine company for a traitor to keep.

Grady:

You angry at me because i posted pictures for all to see as to the reality of this war?

You're starting with the personal attacks? If you dont like this thread then stay away. Some of us like to talk about the truth.

There's a good 600 posts here. Take your pick.

Originally posted by bodrul

Originally posted by Ibn Iblis
Hey while we're at it why not have a look at the way Saddam treated the Shi'as while he was in power:

TORTURE.

wasnt most of that just after george bush ( the old one )
told them to start a up rising and would get help from the US ( but the US turned a blind eye )

*cough* *cough* that would be because we listened the the UN and pulled out before finishing the job.

Originally posted by marg6043
So Ib in your mind American lives are worth thousand of children and women Iraqis death.

What you don't realize is that we when freely into that country the Iraqis are from Iraq we are not.

Like I said death only brings more death.

Interestingly many of the insurgents that you see dead in the streets are not Iraqi's

Allawi said up to 400 insurgents have been captured, including fighters from Syria, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Morocco, but he gave no figures.

www.buffalonews.com...

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by bodrul
ps i have seen worse ( affects from chemicals used by US forces in vietnam )

You better get your facts straight, bodrul. The US never used a chemical weapon in Vietnam any stronger than CS.

dgtempe is developing a reputation for sedition equal to that of Axis Sally, Tokyo Rose, Baghdad Betty, Hanoi Jane, and Hanoi John.

Pretty fine company for a traitor to keep.

You sure nailed that one, marg is getting close but is not there yet. DG just loves to see America downtrodded.....it is her style.

Originally posted by BlackJackal

Interestingly many of the insurgents that you see dead in the streets are not Iraqi's

Allawi said up to 400 insurgents have been captured, including fighters from Syria, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Morocco, but he gave no figures.

This should not surprise anyone in the least. That has been known for a long time, although some in here DENIED it, but the facts remain.

This is a war.

There are going to be casualties civilian and millitary. It's sad see'ing casualties of either side. But in my opinion the assault on Fallujah was necessary.

You will see atrocious deaths, some of them un-necessary

The events in the middle-east are extremly complex, there are both facts and conjecture that are confused with each other.

Was the war necessary? You have to make up your own minds.

But lets say... Saddam did have WMD's...

You wake up one morning, make a cup of coffee turn on the tv watch the news.
"[Insert major US city] is gone... rumours of a nuclear detonation"
or
"Thousands dead in [Insert major US city] after dispersal of a deadly chemical agent"

Would you risk your family?.. live in fear every day or do something about it.

It doesnt matter if he had any or not, if saddam needed money and terrorists had it, he would of funded them.

Bush is the president, he wanted to protect the lifes of his people. He wanted to protect his family.

And to those who say he just wants to make a few bucks? maybe he does, but hes not the only one, anyone know how much the drivers in convoys make over there?

But, better than facing a nuclear/chemical attack.

"The needs of the many outway the needs of the few."

Vorta