Senator Kerry

[vidcc]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@28 April 2004 - 20:24


The problem that I have with the suicide bombers is the method of delivery. What they're doing is calling out the troops and saying things like we need help or something to that effect, then when the soldiers go to see about them boom. There have even been scenarios where women have said that their baby was sick and needed attention and they did the same thing.

don't get me wrong hank, i agree with you 100%..this is a terrible thing and my arguement is more about labelling rather than method when i asked why some call insurgents terrorists when they are fighting in their own country.

it does raise a point about what is considered "moral" in any conflict...is a hidden landmine moral? Is an ambush moral when the attackers jump out from behind a hedge and would it be less moral if they put phoney intelligence out to draw the enemy into that area in the first place. Is it moral to shoot at the enemy with a gunship when all they have is a rifle?
In this case the USA has vastly superior firepower and we use it. These suicide bombers use what they have. I am not condoning it just trying to make sense of it.

To me it's immoral that man has to kill in the first place. I do realise that the world isn't a moral place and wars do exist because of immoral acts so nobody needs to put up an arguement about hitler for example (i know why we have wars)

just another point about views...these insurgents (terrorists) will view iraqi nationals that support the coalition as "collaborators"...as i said it depends on which side of the fence one sits (again just playing devils advocate) Do you think any of this would be happening if we haddn't gone in?

Just to be absolutely clear, i am against the killing of innocent people and am not keen on the killing of soldiers from either side, i support our troops but believe that we went into iraq because of oil and used the WMD and saddam as a cover to do so and that i can't support.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@29 April 2004 - 11:52

Would you indulge me please by stating precisely what it was that Bush "blatantly" lied about, to his own people or otherwise?

Which Lies are you after?


WMD?

After all he didnt just say Hussain had them, he knew where they were... and Mr Powell told the world this on his behalf..

Or on the home front... how about knowingly lying to Congress about the cost of Medicare?

Are Congress not the Representitives of the American people?


You really must elaborate which types of lies you wish to discuss in a thread....

Rat-

You have given me precisely what I asked for.

I will address the WMD question first, but I must beg off for a bit, here-I have a business venture beginning that requires I duck out for possibly the rest of the day, and attendence here will be touch-and-go.

Wanted to post to let you know I have been waiting for your response and let you know I'm not overlooking you.

Back when I can.

[BigBank_Hank]

The coalition have killed more Iraqi civilians in the last month than all the rebels have managed in a year

Can you point any of these out to me Rat?

I failed to see instances where US solders have placed bombs in cars then parked them in front of markets for them to explode.

How long have we sat on our hands in Fallujah trying to get these guys to lay down their arms? Then as a slap in the face they end us a truck load of rusty junk that was unusable.We've lost many lives trying to do this peacefully and not just level the whole city. Both sides signed a cease fire but they continue to break it every day and we only fire when fired upon.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@29 April 2004 - 19:43

The coalition have killed more Iraqi civilians in the last month than all the rebels have managed in a year

Can you point any of these out to me Rat?

I failed to see instances where US solders have placed bombs in cars then parked them in front of markets for them to explode.

How long have we sat on our hands in Fallujah trying to get these guys to lay down their arms? Then as a slap in the face they end us a truck load of rusty junk that was unusable.We've lost many lives trying to do this peacefully and not just level the whole city. Both sides signed a cease fire but they continue to break it every day and we only fire when fired upon.

You mentioned one place yourself...

So far the Coalition Artillery and Bombing has killed an Estimated 700 Iraqi's in Fallujah.

When you consider that this is a holy city, will you be surprised to hear that we are creating more enemies and not less throughout Iraq?

Indeed, Iraqi leaders and foreign analysts say the fighting in Fallujah, which has claimed around 700 Iraqi civilian lives and has turned the muddled center of Iraqi public opinion - where people were ambivalent about the occupation but not actively opposed - decisively against the US-led Coalition Provisional Authority and its local allies.

"Fallujah has created a major polarization of Iraqi public opinion. There is no middle ground any more,'' says an adviser to the CPA. "Two weeks ago Iraqis wanted to see us make promises and deliver on them - rebuild, improve - but then they saw pictures of US bombs falling on a mosque in Fallujah. Now they want us out."

And i assume that a "Ceasefire" only breaks down when you are attacked, and are not the one attacking in your opinion?

Neither side kept that fully, it just created a lull in relative terms

I was in Fallujah during the recent "ceasefire" – the brief lull in the bloody battle secured by Iraqi leaders who are trying to negotiate a truce. This is what I saw and heard.

Since the "ceasefire," large-scale bombing has become infrequent. The Americans are still using heavy artillery but mainly relying on snipers.

[BigBank_Hank]

What the failed to mention is that the mosques that we are bombing had troops hiding in them firing RPG's (rocket propelled grenades) at troops. It also didn't mention that troops were digging in mortar positions there and were planning to start shelling.

We sent in sniper's into the city to minimize what civilians are left in the city. Most of the people have already fled (around 2/3).

Iraqi leaders and foreign analysts

Also look at the source of the figures. Iraqi leaders and foreign analysts are hardly beacons of truthfulness.

[vidcc]

Hank one thing that seems to be consistant in your post is the theory that we are right and we only attack in response. i believe it was we that invaded the country. now we could go round in circles as to the reasons to justify why we did it however it won't change the fact that we invaded the country.
What is so surprising about resistance from the citizens of that country or any methods they use? Obviously some iraqi people didn't want us to do what we did (how many times have i read someone complain that they were ungrateful?) and we see this on the news every day.
They are an entirely different culture, they see things differently than we do, they want us out of their country.
In 2000 Bush stated that the usa shouldn't be going about nation building....now he says we will do whatever it takes to ensure democracy is taken to the world. Some nations prefer to decide for themselves how to live their lives and resent being told how to by someone else.

Again i state that i don't like our troops being killed and i don't like it all the more because i believe they have been put into this situation under false pretences

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@29 April 2004 - 20:51


Also look at the source of the figures. Iraqi leaders and foreign analysts are hardly beacons of truthfulness.

The Iraqi leaders in question are the ones the USA have put in charge...ie the Pro USA Provisional Government.

Are you suggesting that the US has delibrately put liers into office?

Now that would certainly make a change

[BigBank_Hank]

What I'm saying is that's quite a large innocent civilians to be killed and not for any of the news media here to pick up on that. If 700 on either side were lost this would be a big deal and I haven't heard anything like. And as far left as CNN is they would be showing that statistic over and over again. That's why I questioned the authenticity of the statistics.

[clocker]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@29 April 2004 - 21:00
And as far left as CNN is they would be showing that statistic over and over again. That's why I questioned the authenticity of the statistics.

You think CNN is "far left", eh?.

I suppose that Fox News is "fair and balanced, right?

[BigBank_Hank]

Fox News is conservative but not ultra conservative. At least they take points of view from both sides. Look at Hanity and Colmes for example; Hanity is conservative and Colmes is liberal, and Oreilly does the same thing by inviting guest from both sides to defend their points of view.

Then when someone goes on The Oreilly Factor at least Bill asks tough and important questions. Then you have Larry King who asks powderpuff questions and really doesn't talk about anything.

Edit: CNN is liberal but they aren't far left. I may have exaggerated a bit in the earlier post.