Bush's Plan: One Army Unit's Reaction

[suckseed]

I haven't been around in ages, busy doing other things, not that i flatter myself anyone gives a damn :wink: , but I just read this and thought of you ragtag bunch. I put more stock in what these guys think than just about anyone else.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/11/AR2007011102219.html

[White_Male_Canada]

Interesting article,but Wapo doesn`t put up pretense on their supposed "objectivity" any longer.

Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,"(Our commanders) have asked for additional forces and are happy to have additional forces in the pipeline,” These additional troops will give them the flexibility they need to “to reinforce success” already made or respond to unexpected increases in enemy action, If conditions on the ground demonstrate the troop surge isn’t needed, the pipeline “can be turned off,”.

I think Pace is a more qualified 'stategerist' than the vast majority of Pfcs.

The majority of violence in Iraq comes within 3 provinces with the center of gravity being in Baghdad,naturally.

Sadr`s gang and he himself should have been eradicated ASAP. There are now new ROE where previously if a terrorist layed down his weapon you were NOT allowed to shoot.Did you know that on D-day,seeing thousands and thousands of soldiers being cut down within hours Omar Bradley was actually considering a withdrawal of the forces early in the morning, but the troops on the ground did what they needed to do and pushed ahead, inches at a time, and accomplished the mission.

As for violence,the annualized Iraqi civilian death rate is about 27.5 per 100,000. Venezuela has 31.5 violent deaths per 100,000 –14.5 percent higher than Iraq. Columbia`s,61.7 per every 100,000.South Africa looses 49.6 per 100,000 to violent deaths every year. In Jamaica it is 32.4. Russia in 1998, there were 30.6 homicides per 100,000 population.

And in Washington, D.C., it is 45.9 violent deaths per 100,000. That means DCites are about 63.5 percent less safe than Iraqi civilians.Detroit: 41.8 per 100,000, Baltimore: 37.7 per 100,000,etc.

What`s the difference? The left-wing media focuses on one thing, get Bush at all costs.

[LG]

As for violence,the annualized Iraqi civilian death rate is about 27.5 per 100,000. Venezuela has 31.5 violent deaths per 100,000 –14.5 percent higher than Iraq. Columbia`s,61.7 per every 100,000.South Africa looses 49.6 per 100,000 to violent deaths every year. In Jamaica it is 32.4. Russia in 1998, there were 30.6 homicides per 100,000 population.

And in Washington, D.C., it is 45.9 violent deaths per 100,000. That means DCites are about 63.5 percent less safe than Iraqi civilians.Detroit: 41.8 per 100,000, Baltimore: 37.7 per 100,000,etc.

Really? Well there's two things we can do. Firstly, we can bring all the troops back home and let them protect the US, since they seem to be doing such a great job over there. Or, we can send all the republican politicians over to Iraq. You know, for their own protection...

I can think of a few we can start with...

I'm sick and tired of rightwingers claiming that the Iraqi economy is booming and Iraq has no crime and that Iraq is heaven on earth or this or that. It's not. I'm not sure where you all get your stats from, but I've only seen them on a couple of rightwing news sites.

A report in today's Telegraph (a rightwing paper before you claim it as leftist propaganda) cites a UN report that claims nearly 35,000 Iraqi deaths due to the fighting in 2006 alone. It was estimated that there were 120 violent deaths every day in October 2006.

There have been reports that the death toll in Iraq so far has exceeded 600,000 (Johns Hopkins University estimated 100,000 Iraqi civilians had died by mid-late 2004- these numbers, I believe were also published in the Lancet, a very prestigious British scientific and medical journal). The US governments own predictions have been slightly more conservative.

Johns Hopkins' and the Lancet's current estimates top 600,000 and these figures have been published in the prestigious and respected newspapers across the world (including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and elsewhere) .

The population of Iraq is just 26 or 27 million. 35,000 violent deaths in 2006 means something like 120 deaths per 100,000 population per year. And if you go with the higher figure of 600,000 deaths since the invasion, the death rate is many, many times higher than that.

The numbers you give were given out by Rep Steve King (R-IA), a man who frankly doesn't know what he's talking about.

Don't just repeat every piece of propaganda you hear, WMC, just because someone has the nerve to make shit up and spew it up then spread it around like the word of God. Steve King (who has claimed that Joseph McCarthy was "a hero for America") is full of shit and newssites that claim to be truthful while promoting conservative propaganda, bias and plain simple lies are not to be trusted. You're better than that, WMC: use your head.

Peace.

[guyone]

IRAQ IS HEAVEN ON EARTH!

600,000 Iraqi deaths is bullshit. Think of the logic behind the numbers man! And I don't know quite what you're arguing about? Why engage in anti american propaganda simply to bash anti socialists governments who are protecting the people of earth from the totalitarianism of the evil Stalinist governments afoot in the world today?

In other words why NIFONG the situation?

Unless your motives should be scrutinized. Should they be scrutinized LG?

[guyone]

...AND THEIR ECONOMY IS STILL BOOMING!!!


(heh heh)

[White_Male_Canada]

Really? Well there's two things we can do. Firstly, we can bring all the troops back home and let them protect the US, since they seem to be doing such a great job over there.

The Posse Comitatus Act. You`re challenging the reigning village idiot for it`s crown.

It is pointless pointing out the obvious to the radical left-wing reationaries who are fueling themselves on pure emotion. Because common sense means nothing to their radical neo-marxist cause



Johns Hopkins' and the Lancet's current estimates top 600,000 and these figures have been published in the prestigious and respected newspapers across the world (including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and elsewhere) .

The population of Iraq is just 26 or 27 million. 35,000 violent deaths in 2006 means something like 120 deaths per 100,000 population per year. And if you go with the higher figure of 600,000 deaths since the invasion, the death rate is many, many times higher than that.


Your Lancet "study" was exposed long ago as garbage. The NY Times has criticized the liberation of Iraq more than any other major American newspaper, but they stuck their story about the Lancet study on page A-16 and began debunking it in the second paragraph. The Washington Post gave it similar treatment, and put it on page A-12.

The error filled Lancet study is based on interviews with randomly selected Iraqi families, who were asked if they had lost a close relative to violence since the invasion. To believe the results, one must only believe the following:

1. Fifteen thousand Iraqis are being killed by violence each month, even though that would mean (for example) that over 14,000 Iraqis died each month from 2003-2005 without the media noticing or the bodies seeing the inside of a morgue.

2. The terrorists found a way to kill civilians (or our forces have found a way to accidentally kill them) so super-efficient that 95% or more of the victims are killed before they can be treated at a hospital. Maybe it’s some sort of disintegrator ray, which would explain the missing bodies.

3. As Robert Blendon, director of the Harvard Program on Public Opinion and Health and Social Policy pointed out to the times, you have to believe that you can extrapolate over 650,000 deaths from the 547 death reports the families gave to the researchers. They based their extrapolation of the pre-invasion death rate on only 82 death reports This led them to a “finding” of 426,369 to 793,663 deaths. In other words, give or take 56%.

At Houston’s M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, the chairman of biostatistics, Donald Berry, told the Times the study has “a tone of accuracy that’s just inappropriate.” Now that’s understatement, ladies and gentlemen.

4. You have to ignore the realities of Iraqi tribal life. As radio producer Franklin Raff, who did a stint in Iraq as an embedded reporter, points out, a study by Arab scientists in 1986 found that 58% of Iraqi marriages were consanguineous, or between blood relatives, usually first or second cousins. A similar study found that 30% of Iraqi marriages were between first cousins. How would this affect the study? “In a city of 100,000,” Raff wrote, “one hundred men can say ‘my cousin died - Mahmoud was his name.’ …Same dead Mahmoud, 100 reported deaths.”



The numbers you give were given out by Rep Steve King (R-IA), a man who frankly doesn't know what he's talking about.

It is now established fact that you yourself,know nothing of what you speak for you simply regurgitate the pablum your are fed by the stalinist left. Yes I said stalinist. For any who oppose your ideology are branded nazi`s,mentally ill,to be hopefully one day placed in gulags. Why do I say this? Watch. The "fairness doctrine" will be resurrected again in Congress. And we are all well versed on the stalinist left`s double-speak. We know what "fairness" means.

[LG]

IRAQ IS HEAVEN ON EARTH!
Why don't you go and live there then, dude?


Think of the logic behind the numbers man!

Yes, the mind boggles. But that doesn't mean it's untrue. And even if you use the most conservative estimates, the death rates are higher that WMC has stated.


And I don't know quite what you're arguing about?

Merely debunking your buddy WMC's bullshit argument, that's all.


Why engage in anti american propaganda simply to bash anti socialists governments who are protecting the people of earth from the totalitarianism of the evil Stalinist governments afoot in the world today?

If only you could make more sense, maybe I'd answer the question...


Unless your motives should be scrutinized. Should they be scrutinized LG?

What, you mean like those of Dick Cheney and his Halliburton buddies. Scrutinize all you want, buddy. My only motive is the truth.


...AND THEIR ECONOMY IS STILL BOOMING!!!
(heh heh)

Definitely. And the sky is always blue and the weather is always temperate and the birds are always singing, flowers are in bloom, children play, people are happy, their beers are never flat, their hamburgers never cause botulism, their TV programmes always run on time and their cars never run out of gas. Their computers never crash, their airconditioners never conk out, even though they don't need them, they never get junk mail and their lottery tickets always win...

I'm off now. That's all the bullshit I can take in one day. You've provided me my full daily quota- I suppose I should be grateful- and my bullshit detector has reached its limit. Thankyou and goodnight.

[White_Male_Canada]

IRAQ IS HEAVEN ON EARTH!
Why don't you go and live there then, dude?


Think of the logic behind the numbers man!

Yes, the mind boggles. But that doesn't mean it's untrue. And even if you use the most conservative estimates, the death rates are higher that WMC has stated.


And I don't know quite what you're arguing about?

Merely debunking your buddy WMC's bullshit argument, that's all.


Why engage in anti american propaganda simply to bash anti socialists governments who are protecting the people of earth from the totalitarianism of the evil Stalinist governments afoot in the world today?

If only you could make more sense, maybe I'd answer the question...


Unless your motives should be scrutinized. Should they be scrutinized LG?

What, you mean like those of Dick Cheney and his Halliburton buddies. Scrutinize all you want, buddy. My only motive is the truth.


...AND THEIR ECONOMY IS STILL BOOMING!!!
(heh heh)

Definitely. And the sky is always blue and the weather is always temperate and the birds are always singing, flowers are in bloom, children play, people are happy, their beers are never flat, their hamburgers never cause botulism, their TV programmes always run on time and their cars never run out of gas. Their computers never crash, their airconditioners never conk out, even though they don't need them, they never get junk mail and their lottery tickets always win...

I'm off now. That's all the bullshit I can take in one day. You've provided me my full daily quota- I suppose I should be grateful- and my bullshit detector has reached its limit. Thankyou and goodnight.

Yes,please leave. Your emotion rants are destroyed the second they are posted:

Your Lancet "study" was exposed long ago as garbage. The NY Times has criticized the liberation of Iraq more than any other major American newspaper, but they stuck their story about the Lancet study on page A-16 and began debunking it in the second paragraph. The Washington Post gave it similar treatment, and put it on page A-12.

The error filled Lancet study is based on interviews with randomly selected Iraqi families, who were asked if they had lost a close relative to violence since the invasion. To believe the results, one must only believe the following:

1. Fifteen thousand Iraqis are being killed by violence each month, even though that would mean (for example) that over 14,000 Iraqis died each month from 2003-2005 without the media noticing or the bodies seeing the inside of a morgue.

2. The terrorists found a way to kill civilians (or our forces have found a way to accidentally kill them) so super-efficient that 95% or more of the victims are killed before they can be treated at a hospital. Maybe it’s some sort of disintegrator ray, which would explain the missing bodies.

3. As Robert Blendon, director of the Harvard Program on Public Opinion and Health and Social Policy pointed out to the times, you have to believe that you can extrapolate over 650,000 deaths from the 547 death reports the families gave to the researchers. They based their extrapolation of the pre-invasion death rate on only 82 death reports This led them to a “finding” of 426,369 to 793,663 deaths. In other words, give or take 56%.

At Houston’s M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, the chairman of biostatistics, Donald Berry, told the Times the study has “a tone of accuracy that’s just inappropriate.” Now that’s understatement, ladies and gentlemen.

4. You have to ignore the realities of Iraqi tribal life. As radio producer Franklin Raff, who did a stint in Iraq as an embedded reporter, points out, a study by Arab scientists in 1986 found that 58% of Iraqi marriages were consanguineous, or between blood relatives, usually first or second cousins. A similar study found that 30% of Iraqi marriages were between first cousins. How would this affect the study? “In a city of 100,000,” Raff wrote, “one hundred men can say ‘my cousin died - Mahmoud was his name.’ …Same dead Mahmoud, 100 reported deaths.”

[LG]

My bullshit detector will have to wait for now...Before I clean it, I must comment on your last paragraph, WMC:


It is now established fact that you yourself,know nothing of what you speak for you simply regurgitate the pablum your are fed by the stalinist left. Yes I said stalinist. For any who oppose your ideology are branded nazi`s,mentally ill,to be hopefully one day placed in gulags. Why do I say this? Watch. The "fairness doctrine" will be resurrected again in Congress. And we are all well versed on the stalinist left`s double-speak. We know what "fairness" means.

This is most offensive, malodorous and nasty bit of crap you've ever spewed, WMC. I really did think you were better than this. I never mentioned Nazis, mental illness or gulags. I am not a Stalinist by any sense of the word, but a Liberal Democrat. I have not been fed anything by anyone. I shudder to think what you have been on.

Just because you pulled some statistics out of your ass (or out of Steve King's ass in this case) doesn't make you more right than me or better than me.

I refuse to sink to your level anymore. At least guyone has a sense of humour whereas you only have spite. I might argue on some of the points you made, but your concluding paragraph has surprised me. Were you frothing at the mouth when you wrote it?

I have had enough of you. Goodnight.

[White_Male_Canada]

My bullshit detector will have to wait for now...Before I clean it, I must comment on your last paragraph, WMC:


It is now established fact that you yourself,know nothing of what you speak for you simply regurgitate the pablum your are fed by the stalinist left. Yes I said stalinist. For any who oppose your ideology are branded nazi`s,mentally ill,to be hopefully one day placed in gulags. Why do I say this? Watch. The "fairness doctrine" will be resurrected again in Congress. And we are all well versed on the stalinist left`s double-speak. We know what "fairness" means.

This is most offensive, malodorous and nasty bit of crap you've ever spewed, WMC. I really did think you were better than this. I never mentioned Nazis, mental illness or gulags. I am not a Stalinist by any sense of the word, but a Liberal Democrat. I have not been fed anything by anyone. I shudder to think what you have been on.

Just because you pulled some statistics out of your ass (or out of Steve King's ass in this case) doesn't make you more right than me or better than me.

I refuse to sink to your level anymore. At least guyone has a sense of humour whereas you only have spite. I might argue on some of the points you made, but your concluding paragraph has surprised me. Were you frothing at the mouth when you wrote it?

I have had enough of you. Goodnight.

Your feigned outrage is one poor bit of acting but a tad better than Matt Damons`.

Your Lancet "study" stands as yet more evidence as to how far the stalinist left will go to destroy individual liberty here and elsewhere around the globe.

You`re a Stalinist and soon you will be joining the outted others in supporting the "Fairness Doctrine" :

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) made an surprise appearance at the convention to announce that he would be heading up a new House subcommittee which will focus on issues surrounding the Federal Communications Commission.

Also in consideration is the "Fairness Doctrine," which required broadcasters to present controversial topics in a fair and honest manner. It was enforced until it was eliminated in 1987.

Kucinich said in his speech that "We know the media has become the servant of a very narrow corporate agenda" and added "we are now in a position to move a progressive agenda to where it is visible." http://www.fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=333927

[guyone]

LG I have only one thing to say to you...


RED CHINA!

[LG]

Your feigned outrage is one poor bit of acting but a tad better than Matt Damons`.

Your Lancet "study" stands as yet more evidence as to how far the stalinist left will go to destroy individual liberty here and elsewhere around the globe.

You`re a Stalinist and soon you will be joining the outted others in supporting the "Fairness Doctrine" :

WMC,

I won't bother to correct your spelling and punctuation (although someone really should). It seems that the less sense your arguments make, the worse your writing becomes.

In case you never noticed, the Lancet Study was one of many that I cited. You failed to mention or debunk any of the others. Instead, you spouted out all kinds of rubbish about Nazis and gulags and brought the conversation down to depths that had never been plumbed before.

Apart from the studies published in the Lancet, there are the results of other studies, plus the UN estimate, the Iraq Body Count Project stats and estimates coming from the Iraqi government. And though the accuracy of the Lancet studies may be doubted (in fact, like all good statisticians, the researchers themselves gave an estimate and noted how far out they might be) I think the Iraqi Health Ministry would know what they're talking about. You can check out the Iraqi Health Ministry's estimate here: http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2006/11/11/2003335773
If this more conservative figure is accurate- and I see no reason why you should doubt it- it throws your arguments in disarray. The average death rate in Iraq is many, many times higher than you suggested.

Add to that the number of people injured, the hundreds of thousands displaced and the hundreds of thousands or millions of refugees and the seriousness of the issue becomes apparent. Iraq is not a barrel of laughs. And if rightwingers think the death rate is lower than where they live, why don't they just fuck off to Iraq and shut up about it?

Give me a break, WMC. All you did was take a single point- just one point- of my argument and twist it and turn it and then attack me and call me a Stalinist (again...). Your debating skills leave much to be desired.

Grow up and smell the body count, mate. Just because you read it on some republican news site doesn't make it gospel. Just because you want something to fit in with your own warped viewpoint, WMC, doesn't make it true.

As for Matt fucking Damon, he ain't got nothing on me.

8)

[White_Male_Canada]

Apart from the studies published in the Lancet, there are the results of other studies, plus the UN estimate, the Iraq Body Count Project stats and estimates coming from the Iraqi government. And though the accuracy of the Lancet studies may be doubted (in fact, like all good statisticians, the researchers themselves gave an estimate and noted how far out they might be) I think the Iraqi Health Ministry would know what they're talking about. You can check out the Iraqi Health Ministry's estimate here: http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2006/11/11/2003335773


Same article:

It is an estimate," he said.

He blamed Sunni insurgents, Wahhabis -- Sunni religious extremists -- and criminal gangs for the deaths… Iraq's health ministry is controlled by supporters of radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and has often been accused by US authorities of exaggerating casualty counts.




Grow up and smell the body count, mate. Just because you read it on some republican news site doesn't make it gospel. Just because you want something to fit in with your own warped viewpoint, WMC, doesn't make it true.

Body counts? You attempt to place the blame on the liberation of Iraq and the USA for all the deaths in Iraq? And you call that debating skills.

As Paul Harvey says,” and now,the rest of the story.”
"I don't know of these numbers," said Health Ministry spokesman Qasim Yahya. "The Ministry of Health does not give out such numbers."

He referred all comments to the Interior Ministry, which he said was responsible for releasing such statistics.

Brig. Abdul-Karim Khalaf, an Interior Ministry spokesman, said the Health Ministry was "not authorized to give out such statistics. It's a very big number. It's not close to the truth."

Associated Press count for last year, assembled from its daily dispatches, is roughly 13,700 civilians, police and soldiers, but the news service has said that it believes its figures are substantially lower than the actual number of deaths because it lacked access to government data. Iraq Body Count, a British-based research group that reports on civilian deaths in Iraq, says the number is at most roughly 58,000 since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion.

The Iraq Health Ministry's full-year death toll was placed at 22,950.(WaPo)

Since the US coalition liberated Iraq in 03 of 2003 then that could mean that 87,975 have died in Iraq,according to now dubious sources inside the Iraq Health Ministry. Of violent causes alone we do not even know. We do know 50,000 die each year in the USA of violent causes(CDC).

Human Rights Watch estimated that up to 290,000 people had "disappeared" since the late 1970s and were presumed dead. The Coalition Provisional Authority's human rights office estimates that 300,000 bodies are contained in the numerous mass graves. "And that's the lower end of the estimates," said one CPA spokesperson. In fact, the accumulated credible reports make the likely number at least 400,000 to 450,000. So, by a conservative estimate, the regime was killing civilians at an average rate of at least 16,000 a year between 1979 and March 2003.

U.N. economic sanctions were also killing civilians. Critics regularly claimed sanctions caused 4,000 to 5,000 Iraqi children to die per month from poor nutrition and health care. UNICEF attributed some 500,000 unnecessary deaths to the sanctions in the 1990s. The sanctions remained in place as long as Saddam's regime refused to comply with international requirements. Liberation made it possible to lift the sanctions almost immediately--thus saving approximately 60,000 lives a year, if we use UNICEF's numbers.

Using your Stalinist logic that means that murderers and terrorists choosing to murder other murderers,terrorists and people in Iraq means we haven't won the war on terrorism.

Using you flawed logic, you would argue in favor of bringing the Ba`ath party back into power.

You come from the Burger King generation,you want results now,immediately. Imagine your kind commenting on the landing at Normandy.


Give me a break, WMC.

[LG]

What a load of wank!

You've just gone and disproved your original argument. According to the death rates you gave of 27.5 per 100,000 population, the number of violent deaths per year should be closer to 7500. By all accounts, including the ones you quote and seem to accept as being relatively accurate, the death toll each year is several times that. This invalidates your original argument, which isn't saying much, because your argument was rubbish to begin with.

As for your statement "we do know 50,000 die each year in the USA of violent causes(CDC)", I think you should also know that the population of the US is about 10 times higher than that of Iraq, which kind of explains the (allegedly) higher body count (or shows how shocking the death rates in Iraq are).

Your mathematics skills leave me unimpressed. As for the rest of your text, I won't waste my time replying apart from telling you that comparing the pre-emptive strike on Iraq to the Normandy landings is like comparing the sounds of a slaugterhouse to an infinite choir of angels.

[White_Male_Canada]

You've just gone and disproved your original argument. According to the death rates you gave of 27.5 per 100,000 population, the number of violent deaths per year should be closer to 7500. By all accounts, including the ones you quote and seem to accept as being relatively accurate, the death toll each year is several times that. This invalidates your original argument, which isn't saying much, because your argument was rubbish to begin with.

As for your statement "we do know 50,000 die each year in the USA of violent causes(CDC)", I think you should also know that the population of the US is about 10 times higher than that of Iraq, which kind of explains the (allegedly) higher body count (or shows how shocking the death rates in Iraq are).

You have the cognative abilities of a gnat.

I trust the conservative numbers of 27.5 per 100,000 because:


"I don't know of these numbers," said Health Ministry spokesman Qasim Yahya. "The Ministry of Health does not give out such numbers."

He referred all comments to the Interior Ministry, which he said was responsible for releasing such statistics.

Brig. Abdul-Karim Khalaf, an Interior Ministry spokesman, said the Health Ministry was "not authorized to give out such statistics. It's a very big number. It's not close to the truth."

You are consistant at failing to prove how many innocent deaths were caused coalition forces,how many were accidents,how many were crime victims,natural causes,etc. Perhaps now you realize why the CDC numbers.

I`ve also led you to unwittingly argue in favor of state sponsored massacres and the return of the good old days of the Ba`ath party.

Good luck junior. Keep up the good work and you`ll seize the crown of Village Idiot off the head of it`s current resident.

[suckseed]

WMC - politics aside - seriously dude, learn to spell.
Remember this simple rule: "It's" = "it is" - always.
And I'm a liberal myself, which I define as being in favor of social justice for all. I don't even know what the hell Stalin's or Marx's arguments were or how they relate to today's issues.
Can't you see that taking the extreme view of things, like if I'm a liberal I must believe in free handouts and color tv's for every wino, as a silly exercise in lazy debating?
Why must you be so intense about everything? We're all just people, probably with a lot more common ground than you think. Is it just a kneejerk reaction that you have to get so hot under the collar? Just try chilling out a little.
Two guys that spent some time in Lebanon and Abu Dabi (am I spelling that right?) have talked to me recently - it's their view that this is mostly about tribal feuds that go way back, with religion being used to legitimize things.
It doesn't seem to me that we're going to be able to have any lasting impact on that. It's not our fight - we just made it so for the wrong reasons.
One of these same guys was telling me that one of the main reasons Israel is as well off as it is is that they've got Palestinians doing the manual labor for chicken feed. Now, I've always liked Jewish people, and want to think good things about them, so this is disturbing to me, but I guess that's just the way things are. If it's true.
One last thought - I try to leave room for doubt in what I think to be true. I keep my mind open that way. Are you afraid to ever admit doubt about your beliefs, WMC?
I'm not your enemy, man.

[LG]

You have the cognative abilities of a gnat.
Really? And you have the spelling and intellectual ability of a head of cabbage. And I don't like cabbage.


You are consistant at failing to prove how many innocent deaths were caused coalition forces,how many were accidents,how many were crime victims,natural causes,etc. Perhaps now you realize why the CDC numbers.

You are consistent at failing to make your point. It would help if you could finish your sentences.

Your original point did not make the distinction of how deaths were caused, by the way, merely that the death rate was higher in Washington DC than in Iraq (which is a load of crap, anyway). How many could have been accidents anyway? Do you think more accidents tend to happen to people in Iraq than elsewhere?

And, at the risk of being repetitive, let me say it again: If all these right-wing politicians think Iraq is so safe and Washington is so dangerous, why don't they fuck off to Iraq and leave everyone in peace?


I`ve also led you to unwittingly argue in favor of state sponsored massacres and the return of the good old days of the Ba`ath party.

Once more, you are full of shit. I never even mentioned the Ba'ath party, nor did I say that things were good under Saddam's regime (although things are probably not better now). What I have always questioned are the motives behind the attack and the effectiveness of the attack itself.


Good luck junior. Keep up the good work and you`ll seize the crown of Village Idiot off the head of it`s current resident.

Who? Oh, you mean you! No, you can keep your crown.

Actually, a crown cannot have a resident, but a wearer. It is not possible to reside inside a crown. Unless, of course, you are a gnat, like me.

:)

[White_Male_Canada]

I`ve also led you to unwittingly argue in favor of state sponsored massacres and the return of the good old days of the Ba`ath party.



Once more, you are full of shit. I never even mentioned the Ba'ath party, nor did I say that things were good under Saddam's regime (although things are probably not better now). What I have always questioned are the motives behind the attack and the effectiveness of the attack itself.

No,you just strongly imply it,over and over.

If you don`t know the "motives" behind the attack,then you are one of those conspiracy whackos. Or perhaps jean pierre kerreeee is just a sock puppet,

" A brutal, oppressive dictator, guilty of personally murdering and condoning murder and torture, grotesque violence against women, execution of political opponents, a war criminal who used chemical weapons against another nation and, of course, as we know, against his own people, the Kurds. He has diverted funds from the Oil-for-Food program, intended by the international community to go to his own people. He has supported and harbored terrorist groups, particularly radical Palestinian groups such as Abu Nidal, and he has given money to families of suicide murderers in Israel.

I have said publicly for years that weapons of mass destruction in the hands of Saddam Hussein pose a real and grave threat to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. Saddam Hussein's record bears this out.

I have talked about that record. Iraq never fully accounted for the major gaps and inconsistencies in declarations provided to the inspectors of the pre-Gulf war weapons of mass destruction program, nor did the Iraq regime provide credible proof that it had completely destroyed its weapons and production infrastructure.

I will support a multilateral effort to disarm him by force..."

If you don`t know by now then your a hopeless marxist. If you`re one of those marxists who goes around trying to argue that the ONLY country in the middle east who did not sponsor terrorism was Iraq,then you`ve just become the new Village Idiot.

[White_Male_Canada]

WMC - politics aside - seriously dude, learn to spell.
Remember this simple rule: "It's" = "it is" - always.
And I'm a liberal myself, which I define as being in favor of social justice I try to leave room for doubt in what I think to be true. I keep my mind open that way. Are you afraid to ever admit doubt about your beliefs, WMC?
I'm not your enemy, man.

Bully for you.

I mostly speak extemporaneously with little regard to punctuation or spell-check.

Secondly,you leftists believe government is your god so you`re easily offended when I pop your balloon.

That`s the diff, we believe in fundamental truths.

Nothing personal.

My beliefs? Who cares. Besides , I think you could deduce them by reading my posts.

[LG]

WMC blurted out:

I mostly speak extemporaneously with little regard to punctuation or spell-check.

You forgot to add "or logic".


My beliefs? Who cares. Besides , I think you could deduce them by reading my posts.

Actually, no one cares anymore.

But let me see...I think I have them.

Below are the 10 pillar's of WMC's faith.

1. The Christian right is ALWAYS right. That is why it is called "the right". The left should therefore be called "the wrong".
2. Everything I say is right and anyone who doesn't agree with me is a communist, a Stalinist or worse
3. My sources are gospel. All other sources are leftist propaganda unless I choose to use them myself.
4. George Bush is the second coming, Condi Rice is Mary Magdalene and Dick Cheney is Peter and Paul rolled into one.
5. Environmentalists are wrong. Conservatives like me, who've never read a single scientific paper know more than all those guys with PhDs. Global warming is not happening. If it is happening, it's normal. If it's not normal, it's not caused by carbon emissions.
6. If they really want a clean environment, poor people should cut with the graffiti and go to the toilet less.
7. The war in Iraq was justified. It was won. Nobody is dying. Crime rates in Iraq are lower than in downtown Detroit. The economy is booming.
8. Gay people are sick, demented pervs.
9. Annoying people for the hell of it is fun. The purpose of a trangender forum isn't to communicate with and about transgirls but to annoy the hell out of all the other members.
10. Annnoying people can best be done by making no sense at all and by always insisting I am right. Which, of course, I am.

Am I close, WMC?

:D

[White_Male_Canada]

WMC blurted out:

I mostly speak extemporaneously with little regard to punctuation or spell-check.



Am I close, WMC?

:D


Only in the sense that you seem frustrated that your junk science GIGO is laughed at. Your government is god ideology , exposed as childish hate and envy that fails every time it is tried, and your personal and intellectual growth level as stunted or suffering atrophy.

Enjoy combat in the arena of ideas? Then bring some. Otherwise this is what happens to you leftists.

Other than that your a great guy 8)

[chefmike]

WMC blurted out:

I mostly speak extemporaneously with little regard to punctuation or spell-check.

You forgot to add "or logic".


My beliefs? Who cares. Besides , I think you could deduce them by reading my posts.

Actually, no one cares anymore.

But let me see...I think I have them.

Below are the 10 pillar's of WMC's faith.

1. The Christian right is ALWAYS right. That is why it is called "the right". The left should therefore be called "the wrong".
2. Everything I say is right and anyone who doesn't agree with me is a communist, a Stalinist or worse
3. My sources are gospel. All other sources are leftist propaganda unless I choose to use them myself.
4. George Bush is the second coming, Condi Rice is Mary Magdalene and Dick Cheney is Peter and Paul rolled into one.
5. Environmentalists are wrong. Conservatives like me, who've never read a single scientific paper know more than all those guys with PhDs. Global warming is not happening. If it is happening, it's normal. If it's not normal, it's not caused by carbon emissions.
6. If they really want a clean environment, poor people should cut with the graffiti and go to the toilet less.
7. The war in Iraq was justified. It was won. Nobody is dying. Crime rates in Iraq are lower than in downtown Detroit. The economy is booming.
8. Gay people are sick, demented pervs.
9. Annoying people for the hell of it is fun. The purpose of a trangender forum isn't to communicate with and about transgirls but to annoy the hell out of all the other members.
10. Annnoying people can best be done by making no sense at all and by always insisting I am right. Which, of course, I am.

Am I close, WMC?

:D


BWAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!

[Legend]

LG nice ownage!

[LG]

LG nice ownage!

Thanks Legend. I really enjoyed that one. White_Male_Canada made it all worthwhile.

:)

[Quinn]

That's Fucking hysterical. Nice slam dunk, LG.

-Quinn

You forgot to add "or logic".

Please. This is just more rah-rah-rahing amongst the liberals. No substance, just high-school cheerleading.

BWAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!

Thanks for your thoughtful contribution, sheep.

[LG]

You forgot to add "or logic".

Please. This is just more rah-rah-rahing amongst the liberals. No substance, just high-school cheerleading.

Not really. But I'd wear this if I were your cheerleader, TFan!

Not really. But I'd wear this if I were your cheerleader, TFan!

I bet you'd wear any feminine clothing, but that really belongs in the main forum.

[LG]

I bet you'd wear any feminine clothing, but that really belongs in the main forum.
Whatever... :shrug