• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Resistance in Iraq Is Home Grown

BOBDN

Banned
If true a very disturbing development.

It is the opinion stated in this piece I read from the LA Times

September 2, 2003

THE WORLD

Resistance in Iraq Is Home Grown

Nationalists and Islamists are among diverse groups joining the attacks. Foreign fighters are present in moderate numbers.


Quote

'One claimed he was doing it for Allah. Another claimed he was doing it for money.'
-- Col. Rob Baker, discussing disparate motives of suspected resistance fighters


By Tracy Wilkinson, Times Staff Writer


BAGHDAD ? The men attempting to recruit a former soldier in the Fedayeen Saddam militia for today's war against the Americans took him to a bearded sheik seated in a pickup truck.

They appealed to the mortar expert's sense of nationalism and then to his religious conviction. The Americans have done nothing for Iraqis. They defile the homeland. Attacking the American occupiers is the only way to make them leave, the recruiters argued.

In their shadowy guerrilla war to drive American forces out of Iraq, hundreds of insurgents have organized into cells, especially in Al Anbar province west of Baghdad and Diyala province to the northeast, both strongholds for Saddam Hussein, the Sunni tribes that supported him and Wahhabi and other Islamic fundamentalists.

Despite the U.S. government's insistence that Iraq has become the new battlefield of global terrorism, most of the resistance is home grown. The guerrillas are militants from the deposed regime, but they are also ordinary Iraqis opposed to occupation. They are ex-intelligence officers and farmers, militiamen and merchants, bombers and fishermen, according to more than a dozen interviews with Americans and Iraqis.

Added to this mix of Iraqis are the Islamic fundamentalists, especially Sunnis who have stepped into the power vacuum created by the war and its aftermath to take leadership roles in the resistance. Foreign fighters from Syria, Yemen and Saudi Arabia have infiltrated in moderate numbers, working alongside some of the Iraqi groups. The first arrests in last week's bombing of the Imam Ali Mosque in the Shiite holy city of Najaf, for example, were said to be of two Saudi nationals allied with two Fedayeen militiamen.

The Najaf attack and the bombings in Baghdad at United Nations headquarters and the Jordanian Embassy, all within 22 days, reflect a new, higher level of coordination. For the dozen or so daily ambushes targeting American troops, however, there is little indication of an overarching coordination uniting cells.

Instead, the groups remain largely localized and their weapons of choice remain readily available from the Hussein government's leftover arsenals, according to Iraqis familiar with the resistance as well as U.S. field commanders battling it day in, day out. Bombs are made of dynamite or plastic explosives planted in discarded canisters, bottles or, more recently, the bodies of dead dogs left on the side of the road and detonated by remote control.

A guerrilla fighter from Fallouja, 35 miles west of Baghdad, said in an interview that his cell was not working with foreign fighters but is willing to do so in the future. For now, he said, his unit is adequately equipped and trained.

"The former regime left behind a huge military arsenal, and it's enough to fight for tens of years," he said.

Criminal gangs in many cases have entered a temporary marriage of convenience with the groups, according to Iraqi sources. Within the epidemic of kidnappings plaguing Baghdad, some are staged to earn ransoms to finance attacks on U.S. soldiers. And insurgent chieftains often hire common criminals to pull off bombing or shooting attacks.

About 145 U.S. soldiers have been killed since major combat was declared over May 1; 282 have been killed since the war began March 20.

Islamic Alliance

An alliance with Islamic extremists allows guerrillas to cast their fight in religious terms, which also helps to distance them from the discredited Hussein regime. The puritanical Wahhabi brand of Islam, for example, is especially anti-Western. Adherents believe that any non-Muslim who trespasses on Islamic land is an invader who must be repelled. Its members have also clashed with the Shiites for generations.

"Our religion asks of us jihad whenever we are being occupied," said the guerrilla, who insisted on responding to questions in writing and declined to describe specific operations. Contact with him was made through an imam. "America now is an occupying country, so jihad is a must for every single Muslim in the East or West."

The guerrilla also revealed his Sunni bias against Iraq's Shiites, who have gained power in the new Iraq at Sunni expense.

"The Americans are in harmony with the Shiite, but the Shiite will not be useful to them ? their loyalty is to Iran," he said. "They are mistaken to trust the Shiite. Why such wrongful thinking?"

The mortar expert being recruited by the resistance said the bearded sheik who urged him to join the movement was a Wahhabite, probably from central Iraq.

"He spoke to me like officer to soldier, master to slave," said the man, who did not want his name used because he fears for his life. "We want you to teach your brothers how to use the mortar," the man told him. "Money is no object."

The mortar expert, 26 and unmarried, said he refused to go along with his recruiters when they approached him a final time the day after Hussein's sons, Uday and Qusai, were killed by American soldiers. Angrily, the sheik branded him a traitor who deserved to die. He has gone into hiding.

His efforts to pass information to the American military, he said, were rebuffed, mostly because he could not provide the addresses of his recruiters.

Mortars are notoriously imprecise weapons. The expert, a stocky man who chain smokes out of nervousness, said he received top honors in the Fedayeen because he could hit a tank at 400 yards. The sheik's interest in mortars suggested that the insurgency was expanding its repertoire of targets from convoys ? a moving target against which a remote-controlled bomb is more useful ? to fixed installations such as military bases.

To battle the insurgents, U.S. troops have launched hundreds of raids across central Iraq, rounded up numerous suspects and confiscated tons of weaponry and ammunition.

On Aug. 1, U.S. forces acting on a tip raided a Baghdad hotel and captured two men suspected of having ties to Ansar al Islam, a radical militant organization based primarily in the north. As the soldiers searched, the hotel proprietor alerted the Americans to four additional men from the same network who had just checked in.

The military emerged with six suspects identified as part of a financing cell for Ansar. Based on information from the men, additional raids were conducted in the city of Mosul and in Saudi Arabia, said Army Col. Rob Baker, commander of the 1st Armored Division's 2nd Brigade, which oversees a large part of central Baghdad.

The significance of the raid was the confirmation that elements of Ansar ? which U.S. and Kurdish forces pounded during the war ? have returned and reached the Iraqi capital, something that top Pentagon officials had recently asserted.

The arrests had the bonus of supplying intelligence that enabled U.S. forces to pursue other leads, a rare event because of the compartmentalized nature of the cells.

"You take one cell down, it doesn't necessarily lead to a series of takedowns," Baker said.

Dwindling Patience

Hardly a day goes by in which U.S. soldiers don't capture military materiel. On Aug. 15, for example, one raid turned up 123 pounds of plastic explosives, seven rocket-propelled grenade launchers and 47 warheads. Baker keeps a confiscated RPG on top of the television in his office.

Interrogations of suspected resistance fighters have further persuaded the military of the disparate nature of their attackers. "One claimed he was doing it for Allah," Baker said. "Another claimed he was doing it for money."

Army Maj. Tony Aguto, a commander at the American base at Ramadi, deep in the hostile Sunni heartland, said his forces have captured numerous foreign infiltrators who appear to be bringing money but not weapons. Aguto's jurisdiction is an immense swath of western Iraq, including the porous borders with Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. The volume of people illegally crossing is huge, he said. The U.S. military says Iraq's borders are being patrolled by 4,700 Iraqi guards but that 25,000 are needed.

Hostility from local townspeople has diminished in the four months his unit has been stationed in Ramadi, Aguto said, but the concentrated mortar and grenade attacks have increased. "What I'm seeing is not coordinated region to region," he said. "I see local attacks, coordinated by five or six guys with [improvised bombs] or AK-47s. We are weeding them out of our area."

Purported resistance fighters have sent videotaped messages to several Arabic-language television stations. Wearing checked kaffiyehs and brandishing rifles, they use names like Muhammad's Second Army and vow to eject the occupier.

The insurgents are able to blend into their villages and towns, eluding capture, thanks largely to tribal networks and ancient friendships. Those connections also help pay their bills.

"It was a mistake to let Saddam sit and rule us as he did, and not resist," said the affluent manager of an import-export business from Fallouja. "We won't make that mistake again."

The list of Iraqis' grievances against their occupiers is long and accented by unrealistic expectations and cultural xenophobia. Rather than feeling safe and free, Iraqis feel less secure than ever. They accuse soldiers of humiliating their men in raids and searches and abusing their women.

So far, most religious leaders have discouraged violence against the U.S.-led forces and have urged followers to give the Americans time. But each new disappointment and each new outrage erodes such restraint.

"After this occupation, the American government became the enemy," said Sheik Annas Mahmoud Aisawi, an imam from Fallouja who was leading prayers recently in Baghdad's Gilani mosque.

"If the Americans do not keep their promises of allowing Iraqis to govern themselves and restoring security, then Iraqis must find a solution. They cannot be motionless and surrender.

"We tell our people they must be patient, but patience will not last."
 
If true a very disturbing development.

acutally, this development is typical, predictable, and constitutes a minority similar to the one that savaged the nation for 4 decades. saddam was homegrown too, and neither he nor these animals will prove to be very lasting.
 
Originally posted by: syzygy
If true a very disturbing development.

acutally, this development is typical, predictable, and constitutes a minority similar to the one that savaged the nation for 4 decades. saddam was homegrown too, and neither he nor these animals will prove to be very lasting.

Has it occured to you that some people do not like having their country occupied and will fight against it? It is indeed entirely predictable, and was before this war began.
 
Originally posted by: syzygy
If true a very disturbing development.

acutally, this development is typical, predictable, and constitutes a minority similar to the one that savaged the nation for 4 decades. saddam was homegrown too, and neither he nor these animals will prove to be very lasting.

syzygy

The "minority" that savaged Iraq for four decades was made up of about 40% of the Iraqi population.

(Kinda' like the Republicans here in America, huh?) 😉

This isn't a foreign invader fighting against Iraqis. This is Iraqis fighting against a foreign invader.

Might be the start of a very long hard road for the Bush administration in their plan to have a foothold in the middle east and their neo-con PNAC pal's goal of world domination.

George might have bit off a bit more than he can chew. Little wonder he's turned tail and run to the UN begging for help.

The dumbass should have thought about this when he went running headlong into Iraq without UN assistance.

But it's becoming quite apparent the Bush administration didn't think too much about anything as they went rushing into Iraq for none of their stated reasons.
 
PS

No need to refer to people in their own country fighting an invading army as "animals." If it's OK to call them animals I wonder what they're calling us?
 
Despite the U.S. government's insistence that Iraq has become the new battlefield of global terrorism, most of the resistance is home grown. The guerrillas are militants from the deposed regime, but they are also ordinary Iraqis opposed to occupation. They are ex-intelligence officers and farmers, militiamen and merchants, bombers and fishermen, according to more than a dozen interviews with Americans and Iraqis.
The US has never 'insisted' the resistance they are encountering to be from a single source.

Military and US officials have repeatedly stated in no uncertain terms that the resistance is multi-faceted: Iraqis loyal to the Hussein regime, Baathists, Islamic fundamentalists who are scrambling to seize power in the political vacuum with aims of an Islamic State, as well as an increasing number of foreign fighters such as Al-Qaeda.

Just your balanced media at work. The title of the article should be "Much Ado About Nothing".
 

Neo Con's. Reguardless of how they feel, bombing the UN Embassay and Jordan Embassay is no way to show they are ready for their own goverment. I still dont think the majority of shitie muslims would enjoying have the rest of the religions in their contrey 😛
 
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: syzygy
If true a very disturbing development.

acutally, this development is typical, predictable, and constitutes a minority similar to the one that savaged the nation for 4 decades. saddam was homegrown too, and neither he nor these animals will prove to be very lasting.

Has it occured to you that some people do not like having their country occupied and will fight against it? It is indeed entirely predictable, and was before this war began.
has it occured to you that the operative word is 'some', because that was the original point i made, although 'some' would be an exaggeration. as
the article points out, these animals are ba'athist leftovers, foreign detritus, misguided simpletons, and other loose nuts who have made life for
the native majority more difficult with their acts of sabotage - against critical infrastructures - and general mayhem. so the fact that these 'people
do not like having their country occupied' isn't even in the scope of relevant issues, and granting their violence such rationale insults the vast
majority of iraqis who happen to be abiding by the law. try not to forget them, ok ?

 
Originally posted by: syzygy
Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
Originally posted by: syzygy
If true a very disturbing development.

acutally, this development is typical, predictable, and constitutes a minority similar to the one that savaged the nation for 4 decades. saddam was homegrown too, and neither he nor these animals will prove to be very lasting.

Has it occured to you that some people do not like having their country occupied and will fight against it? It is indeed entirely predictable, and was before this war began.
has it occured to you that the operative word is 'some', because that was the original point i made, although 'some' would be an exaggeration. as
the article points out, these animals are ba'athist leftovers, foreign detritus, misguided simpletons, and other loose nuts who have made life for
the native majority more difficult with their acts of sabotage - against critical infrastructures - and general mayhem. so the fact that these 'people
do not like having their country occupied' isn't even in the scope of relevant issues, and granting their violence such rationale insults the vast
majority of iraqis who happen to be abiding by the law. try not to forget them, ok ?

Mmmm. OK. I won't forget about the Saddam supporters and you won't forget about those who see themselves as fighters against an occupation. Deal.
 
The "minority" that savaged Iraq for four decades was made up of about 40% of the Iraqi population.
and ? is this a liberal's sense of moral justification ? the sunnis who reaped the ba'ath spoils were mainly tikriti loyalists,
and they consituted a minority percentage within the dubious 40% you claim, a questionable figure that i wont quibble with.

saddam began with his immediate clan relations and then fanned out in awarding his ill-gotten gains. the fact you fumbled
the important details should lead you to be wary.

This isn't a foreign invader fighting against Iraqis. This is Iraqis fighting against a foreign invader.

these 'iraqis' is not worthy of the name. very predictable how you laud these animals in such a proper manner for all their criminality.
the only persons worthy of the title 'iraqis', imho, are those who abide by the law, use legitimate means to vent their frustations, and
who have shown more hatred for their own animalistic criminals than any duplicitous liberal could ever fathom. and if this is what
'liberal concern' amounts to, we might as well put saddam back on the throne.
 
Originally posted by: syzygy
If true a very disturbing development.

acutally, this development is typical, predictable, and constitutes a minority similar to the one that savaged the nation for 4 decades. saddam was homegrown too, and neither he nor these animals will prove to be very lasting.

Predictable, yet the U.S. military doesn't seem to have an effective plan to counter it. Either that or they lack the numbers of troops necessary to do so.
 
Originally posted by: syzygy
The "minority" that savaged Iraq for four decades was made up of about 40% of the Iraqi population.
and ? is this a liberal's sense of moral justification ? the sunnis who reaped the ba'ath spoils were mainly tikriti loyalists,
and they consituted a minority percentage within the dubious 40% you claim, a questionable figure that i wont quibble with.

saddam began with his immediate clan relations and then fanned out in awarding his ill-gotten gains. the fact you fumbled
the important details should lead you to be wary.

This isn't a foreign invader fighting against Iraqis. This is Iraqis fighting against a foreign invader.

these 'iraqis' is not worthy of the name. very predictable how you laud these animals in such a proper manner for all their criminality.
the only persons worthy of the title 'iraqis', imho, are those who abide by the law, use legitimate means to vent their frustations, and
who have shown more hatred for their own animalistic criminals than any duplicitous liberal could ever fathom. and if this is what
'liberal concern' amounts to, we might as well put saddam back on the throne.


I make no justification for anyone. But I know I can only speak for or against what my country does. In this case my country pre-emptively invaded a nation which posed NO THREAT to us. You won't quibble with the fact that the Sunni's make up 40% of Iraq's population because it is a fact. Period.

I "fumbled" no details. You are simply a captive of your western views. And why do you have to frame everyone who disagrees with you and every argument in terms of "liberal"? Let's talk about the facts. It doesn't matter to me Bush is a conservative. What matters to me is he is completely wrong in his invasion of Iraq. You continue to refer to Iraqis as "animals" and that tells more about you and your support of Bush's immoral invasion than anything else you say. You don't even consider these people human. How dare you? And yet you support Bush who sent troops in to THEIR nation unilaterally and without authority of the UN or any other governing body to kill them and destroy their nation. Look at the results. Who is the animal?

Iraq is their nation. You have NO right to determine who is or isn't an Iraqi. You or Bush have no right to determine how these people govern themselves. We've done more than enough damage in Iraq. The Iraqi people want us GONE. They can govern themselves without US troops threatening their lives.

As for putting Saddam back on the throne we have little room to criticize them when have Bush on the throne right here at home.
 
I make no justification for anyone. But I know I can only speak for or against what my country does. In this case my country pre-emptively invaded a nation which posed NO THREAT to us. You won't quibble with the fact that the Sunni's make up 40% of Iraq's population because it is a fact. Period.
here's your 40%

I "fumbled" no details. You are simply a captive of your western views . . . Let's talk about the facts.
uh, see above - and the fact you cannot make the simple distinction between people who observe the law and those who cannot points to
your pathological shortcomings.

'captive of your western views'? i see. so if i sympathize with murderers and tyrants i'll liberate myself, eh ?

You continue to refer to Iraqis as "animals" and that tells more about you and your support of Bush's immoral invasion than anything
else you say.

i make the essential distinction above between people who observe the law and are worthy of the honorific 'iraqis', and those who do not
and are worthy of the denigrating 'animal'. its not like i wrote it above in english . . . ooops . . . i did . . .sorry. . . . well, maybe next time i'll
try esperanto with flash card aids.

You don't even consider these people human. How dare you?
hush now, flower child. i know your buddy saddam is on the run; has to change location every two hours; lost both his butcher boys; his daughters
fled and found safety in jordan; his palaces have been turned into toilets by our imperialist troops; and all those wonderful posters with his ugly
mug were turned into target practice by the same people who voted him another 5 year presidential term by a 99.8% majority in 2002. how
difficult this must all be for. but you should digress. grow up - and root for the winners.
 



syzygy's official "CIA connection" map and intel gallery
Sunni 32%-37%
Close enough. If you can believe the CIA. After all, they were a LITTLE off on the WMD, weren't they?

As for the flower child BS you can use any of the usual conservative mumbo jumbo if you really feel you have to (and you people always have to since you're arguments lack any validity). I'd rather be called a flower child than be a warmonger. But it obviously doesn't bother you. Why am I not surprised?

But the Saddam BS has to stop. Opposition to your madman's war doesn't equal support for Saddam. The suggestion that anyone who disagrees with Bush and the lies he told to invade Iraq, killing thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians - including women and children, hundreds of US troops, costing billions of US dollars and then sharing those billions with Cheney's Halliburton while completely losing track of the war on terrorism, must therefore support Saddam is just another typical piece of conservative trash.

That Bush would lie to an entire nation and have people like you still support him is indicative of the true nature of the conservative mind. Blindly following without regard to truth or decency. Just find a way to make a few billion off the lives of the Americans Bush uses like so many toy soldiers. Not to worry, if any of them are damaged beyond repair they are easily replaced. What a disgrace.

And I don't "root" for anyone. If you feel you must you may don your cheerleader costume (Is it the same style Bushie wore when he was on the "pep squad"? You must look darling in it, he did!). And don't forget you pom-poms, sweetie.

Now run along and see if you can find some other foreigners to classify. We must keep the "animals" in their place for the good of conservatives everywhere.
 
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: syzygy
If true a very disturbing development.

acutally, this development is typical, predictable, and constitutes a minority similar to the one that savaged the nation for 4 decades. saddam was homegrown too, and neither he nor these animals will prove to be very lasting.

Predictable, yet the U.S. military doesn't seem to have an effective plan to counter it. Either that or they lack the numbers of troops necessary to do so.

Not anymore 😀
 
Sunni 32%-37%
Close enough. If you can believe the CIA. After all, they were a LITTLE off on the WMD, weren't they?

yeah, i was grading you on a curve too 🙂

but you spoke of facts (40%! ! ! ), and being close doesn't constitute a fact - unless, we're redefining the scope and nature
of fact, which since you've already can't make distinctions between people who commit murder and those who do not, why
not blur other 'annoyances' too ? or have you learned to distinguish between the iraqi natives who condemn the violence
and the iraqi perpetrators who commit this violence ? surprise me, puuleeeze 😉

But the Saddam BS has to stop. Opposition to your madman's war doesn't equal support for Saddam. The suggestion that anyone
who disagrees with Bush and the lies he told to invade Iraq, killing thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians - including women and children,
hundreds of US troops, costing billions of US dollars and then sharing those billions with Cheney's Halliburton while completely losing track
of the war on terrorism, must therefore support Saddam is just another typical piece of conservative trash.

predictably, you did not re-read my posts. perhaps you did and forgot what you read ?

where did i link this 'saddam bs' to any disagreement with your anal bush fixation ? i specifically linked this to something very, very
specific. i mean very, very, very specific (hint !). now, can you tell me what that was by re-reading my replies above and reporting back.
try. i think you are going to amaze yourself. hint # 2 : it wasn't bush 2.0

That Bush would lie to an entire nation and have people like you still support him is indicative of the true nature of the conservative
mind. Blindly following without regard to truth or decency. Just find a way to make a few billion off the lives of the Americans Bush uses
like so many toy soldiers. Not to worry, if any of them are damaged beyond repair they are easily replaced. What a disgrace.

bush didn't lie. the evidence bush based his decision on at the time was credible. the evidence itself jibed with saddam's known predilections
and the evidence itself was unveiled to the whole world by secretary powell in his february speech to the u.n. how can you accuse him of lying
when the evidence he based his decisions on was presented to the international community for their scrutiny ?

you can thank our unilateral initiaitve for the clarifications that have surfaced since then 😉

as for your haliburton fetish, tighten your aluminum beanie and the phantoms will go away.
 
Originally posted by: syzygy
Sunni 32%-37%
Close enough. If you can believe the CIA. After all, they were a LITTLE off on the WMD, weren't they?

yeah, i was grading you on a curve too 🙂

but you spoke of facts (40%! ! ! ), and being close doesn't constitute a fact - unless, we're redefining the scope and nature
of fact, which since you've already can't make distinctions between people who commit murder and those who do not, why
not blur other 'annoyances' too ? or have you learned to distinguish between the iraqi natives who condemn the violence
and the iraqi perpetrators who commit this violence ? surprise me, puuleeeze 😉

But the Saddam BS has to stop. Opposition to your madman's war doesn't equal support for Saddam. The suggestion that anyone
who disagrees with Bush and the lies he told to invade Iraq, killing thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians - including women and children,
hundreds of US troops, costing billions of US dollars and then sharing those billions with Cheney's Halliburton while completely losing track
of the war on terrorism, must therefore support Saddam is just another typical piece of conservative trash.

predictably, you did not re-read my posts. perhaps you did and forgot what you read ?

where did i link this 'saddam bs' to any disagreement with your anal bush fixation ? i specifically linked this to something very, very
specific. i mean very, very, very specific (hint !). now, can you tell me what that was by re-reading my replies above and reporting back.
try. i think you are going to amaze yourself. hint # 2 : it wasn't bush 2.0

That Bush would lie to an entire nation and have people like you still support him is indicative of the true nature of the conservative
mind. Blindly following without regard to truth or decency. Just find a way to make a few billion off the lives of the Americans Bush uses
like so many toy soldiers. Not to worry, if any of them are damaged beyond repair they are easily replaced. What a disgrace.

bush didn't lie. the evidence bush based his decision on at the time was credible. the evidence itself jibed with saddam's known predilections
and the evidence itself was unveiled to the whole world by secretary powell in his february speech to the u.n. how can you accuse him of lying
when the evidence he based his decisions on was presented to the international community for their scrutiny ?

you can thank our unilateral initiaitve for the clarifications that have surfaced since then 😉

as for your haliburton fetish, tighten your aluminum beanie and the phantoms will go away.

I'll be more than happy to tighten my aluminum beanie if you'll go away!

 
Now I don't particularly care for our government, even my local government. However, if say the Chinese showed up to "liberate" us from our criminal regime, would I (normally peaceful person) start exercising my 4th amendment right - and then some?

Oh yeah! Especially if the invaders had killed hundreds or thousands of innocent people and needlessly vandalized our infrastructure.

Our troops deserve a competent commander-in-chief. GWB Jr. is a coke-sniffing-awol-going-draft-dodging-figurehead for the oil and weapons industries. Yup, and he set the presidential record for most vacation time taken before the first year of his term ended.
 
Originally posted by: MrColin
Now I don't particularly care for our government, even my local government. However, if say the Chinese showed up to "liberate" us from our criminal regime, would I (normally peaceful person) start exercising my 4th amendment right - and then some?

Oh yeah! Especially if the invaders had killed hundreds or thousands of innocent people and needlessly vandalized our infrastructure.

Our troops deserve a competent commander-in-chief. GWB Jr. is a coke-sniffing-awol-going-draft-dodging-figurehead for the oil and weapons industries. Yup, and he set the presidential record for most vacation time taken before the first year of his term ended.

MrColin

I sure hope syzygy reads your post.

He has some silly ideas about Bush and his Iraq invasion. The concept of a people defending themselves from an invading army somehow eludes him.

He won't believe me. I hope hearing this from another source will help convince him of the validity of this concept.

Thanks
Bob
 
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: MrColin
Now I don't particularly care for our government, even my local government. However, if say the Chinese showed up to "liberate" us from our criminal regime, would I (normally peaceful person) start exercising my 4th amendment right - and then some?

Oh yeah! Especially if the invaders had killed hundreds or thousands of innocent people and needlessly vandalized our infrastructure.

Our troops deserve a competent commander-in-chief. GWB Jr. is a coke-sniffing-awol-going-draft-dodging-figurehead for the oil and weapons industries. Yup, and he set the presidential record for most vacation time taken before the first year of his term ended.

MrColin

I sure hope syzygy reads your post.

He has some silly ideas about Bush and his Iraq invasion. The concept of a people defending themselves from an invading army somehow eludes him.

He won't believe me. I hope hearing this from another source will help convince him of the validity of this concept.

Thanks
Bob
i think you have already demonstrated you cannot read and understand materiel presented to you. you shun details you cannot exploit, misread
others, mouth the same witless ideological platitudes ad nauseum, confuse extremely simple facts (that you can verify !!) with your own biases,
and ignore inquiries that pin you in a corner (see above - as if that will help).

if you want me to demonstrate this again, i'll oblige. i suppose i'm late to all this fun. what i have pointed out must be brutally obvious to others who
have rolled around in the mud with the likes of you. more humiliation will serve you well as an important teaching aid
rolleye.gif
rolleye.gif
 
Thank God the Iraqi people are getting stronger and can put up a front against the American occupiers.

The US illegally cleared out Iraq's President, it made its objective, no go home. If Iraq is but a country filled with radical islamics, then thats what its government is going to represent.

Not some puppet faux-"democracy" like bush jack-offs to at night.

Let the Iraqi's kill any foreign invader that is behind her borders. I have no problem with that. And that's nothing against my American troops, I'd say that for any foreign invaders.
 
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
Thank God the Iraqi people are getting stronger and can put up a front against the American occupiers.

The US illegally cleared out Iraq's President, it made its objective, no go home. If Iraq is but a country filled with radical islamics, then thats what its government is going to represent.

Not some puppet faux-"democracy" like bush jack-offs to at night.

Let the Iraqi's kill any foreign invader that is behind her borders. I have no problem with that. And that's nothing against my American troops, I'd say that for any foreign invaders.

You wish to see American's die for removing a brutal dictator. That's pretty sick phillyTM. But than you want Pres. Bush to be assassinated also so killing doesn't bother you or removing someone by force that you happen to disagree with is ok. That also makes you a hypocrite.
 
It's YOU guys are are repeatedly posting about the assassination of a certain high-level individual, and keep spreading that around. Who's the problem now?!!

I'm not a hypocrite, I said that it was justified for any foreign invaders to be killed within the invaded country's bounds. And I stick to that, for ANY foreign invaders.
 
Originally posted by: etech
....removing someone by force that you happen to disagree with is ok. That also makes you a hypocrite.
That's exactly what the Bush Regime thinks & did, and so it makes THEM hypocrites too, right?!!

 
acutally, this development is typical, predictable, and constitutes a minority similar to the one that savaged the nation for 4 decades. saddam was homegrown too, and neither he nor these animals will prove to be very lasting.
---------------------------------------
My take is that we are in massive retreat. Looks to me like we're losing our way. We're looking to the UN to bail us out.
-------------------------
has it occured to you that the operative word is 'some', because that was the original point i made, although 'some' would be an exaggeration. as
the article points out, these animals are ba'athist leftovers, foreign detritus, misguided simpletons, and other loose nuts who have made life for
the native majority more difficult with their acts of sabotage - against critical infrastructures - and general mayhem. so the fact that these 'people
do not like having their country occupied' isn't even in the scope of relevant issues, and granting their violence such rationale insults the vast
majority of iraqis who happen to be abiding by the law. try not to forget them, ok ?
----------------------------------------------------
I think the admin, not now or ever, was worried about the vast majority of Iraqis. We claimed only to be there for WMD and an immediate threat. We really went in for strategery and are getting handed our head, no? Being objective rather then idealistic, that is...... I see no evidence that your concern for the victims was ever a factor for the admin.
---------------------------
these 'iraqis' is not worthy of the name. very predictable how you laud these animals in such a proper manner for all their criminality.
the only persons worthy of the title 'iraqis', imho, are those who abide by the law, use legitimate means to vent their frustations, and
who have shown more hatred for their own animalistic criminals than any duplicitous liberal could ever fathom. and if this is what
'liberal concern' amounts to, we might as well put saddam back on the throne.
--------------------------------------
The problem with a compassion that is also filled with hate is that it has sown within it itself the seeds of its own destruction. It will do what it hates as a justification of its ends. It kills to end killing. It's how the devil stays alive, as a parasite within the good. No?
----------------
hush now, flower child. i know your buddy saddam is on the run; has to change location every two hours; lost both his butcher boys; his daughters
fled and found safety in jordan; his palaces have been turned into toilets by our imperialist troops; and all those wonderful posters with his ugly
mug were turned into target practice by the same people who voted him another 5 year presidential term by a 99.8% majority in 2002. how
difficult this must all be for. but you should digress. grow up - and root for the winners.
--------------------------
The battle for the peace has just begun. It is far from settled.
-------------------------------
bush didn't lie. the evidence bush based his decision on at the time was credible. the evidence itself jibed with saddam's known predilections
and the evidence itself was unveiled to the whole world by secretary powell in his february speech to the u.n. how can you accuse him of lying
when the evidence he based his decisions on was presented to the international community for their scrutiny ?
------------------------------------
We don't know if he lied or not. A mountain of facts imply that he did. Here you strike me as a person of faith rather than reason.
-------------
-------------
It strikes me that there are limits to power, limits on the persuasive power of the shrill, limits on how much good is done through moral outrage. Of what use is a position that pushes away as much as it attracts? I sympathize with your concern but I'm not sure I'd want you as an advocate of my cause. Could you make the moral case?
 
Back
Top