Printable View
yes the UK has sood withe US, but the res of Europe has not. We (and I agree 100%) needed about 400,000 troops in Iraq to really do the job. We dropped the ball there. Bush screwed up that onerfor sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Nam, Cambodia and Laos were more wars were public opinion and pussy politicians tied the hands of the military and this lead to defeat.
Again history repeats itself. :confused:
^^ and the US has killed 1 million civialins in Iraq or is it the Mussies that do a majority of those killings?
I think the chaos unleashed has caused more deaths than the Us military alone, not sure on the numbers. But both the US and UK Intelligence people amply warned your government of this.
Agreed. Also if local people could trust the US in the first place (for instance in Iraq) there would be more informants, and more help in general.Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
Iraqis lined up at the gates of the Green Zone following the looting of Baghdad (which US troops could have easily stopped if so ordered) offering their services as translators, public servants, etc. They waited for three days and eventually just went away. This was followed by de-Baathification and finally the dissolution of the Iraqi Army, ultimately leading to the insurgency.
It's far too late in the game to expect any cooperation from anybody now, and water-boarding is GWB's brilliant solution :(
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabang
The majority of US citizens do not support this war and haven't for years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Driventowin
The team to rebuild Iraq was assembled a mere 2 months before the invasion and had a tiny budget. Without clean water, reliable electricity and security, millions of Iraqis have fled their own country. Is that winning "hearts and minds"? Do you think an Iraqi whose kid, spouse, family member or friend has been imprisoned, tortured, maimed or killed by US personnel or weapons is really going to have fond feelings toward the USA and its people? Every time this happens, another person full of hatred with absolutely nothing to lose is created: aka a terrorist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Driventowin
torrent:Quote:
https://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gifhttps://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2007/12/294.jpg
https://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gif
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2007/12/295.jpg Video: No End in Sighthttps://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gif
Nearly four years after President Bush declared an end to combat in Iraq, the country is still fraught with daily casualties, costly commitments, and an ongoing debate on how to end the violence. How did it come to this?
This week, NOW's David Brancaccio speaks with two very different, but unforgettable men who allege that U.S. bungling in Iraq created and fueled the deadly insurgency. Paul Hughes, a retired Army colonel, was part of the transition team after the U.S. invasion of Iraq. He says key decisions were made that ignored the realities of Iraq. Omar Fekeiki was a Washington Post reporter and translator who risked his life to help U.S. journalists.
https://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gif
https://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gifhttps://teakdoor.com/images/smilies1/You_Rock_Emoticon.gifBoth Hughes and Fekeiki are featured in a new Sundance prize-winning documentary, "No End in Sight," which exposes what it calls "a chain of critical errors, denial, and incompetence that has galvanized a violent quagmire." Fekeiki's identity was hidden in the documentary for his protection, but he chose to appear unmasked on NOW for the first time.
View Video Clips from "No End in Sight"
No End in Sight . NOW | PBS
Search results for No End In Sight - Mininova
US house of representives voted to ban waterboarding.
washingtonpost.comQuote:
The House approved legislation yesterday that would bar the CIA from using waterboarding and other harsh interrogation tactics, drawing an immediate veto threat from the White House and setting up another political showdown over what constitutes torture.
The measure, approved by a largely party-line vote of 222 to 199, would require U.S. intelligence agencies to follow Army rules adopted last year that explicitly forbid waterboarding. It also would require interrogators to adhere to a strict interpretation of the Geneva Conventions on the treatment of prisoners of war. The rules, required by Congress for all Defense Department personnel, also ban sexual humiliation, "mock" executions and the use of attack dogs, and prohibit the withholding of food and medical care.
^
It'll be vetoed...not to worry.;)
Department of Defense has reiterated, reinforced and restated it's goal of killing terrorists.
The US have always been known for being quick on the draw, + they have lots of new hard-ware they tested in real action..:) Most EU contries only want military action as a last solution (I dont agree with that) they will try to resolve the problems in a diplomatic way first. Sadly that way gives a potencial enemy time to become stronger and maybe carry out more terrorist attacks towards civilians.Quote:
Originally Posted by chitown
There are more than one way to skin a cat, the problem is to do it the best way.
and? what's your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by Texpat
but anyway, where does the DOD come down on waterboarding....which is the topic of this thread?
hmmm?
the DOD prints the army field manual right?
the army field manual does not approve of or permit waterboarding, right?
don't worry, i don't expect you to reply.
yeah, it will. keep playing short ball boonie. in the last week bush has vetoed a ban on torture, and giving health care to poor kids. the election is 11 months away!Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
heh :rolleyes:
^
Denying health care to the 'poor little children' - straw man argument if there ever was one. First, kids from families with incomes of ~65K USD was the cut-off if I recall plus, that bill had so much added pork in it, the only sensible thing to do was shit-can it...:rolleyes:
I am a Vietnam Vet. and to save lives you do it.
skycop51
and no talk about it
^
Got that right, skycop51...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
you've already been told about using words you don't understand.
you see boner, when you use them incorrectly, it only makes you seem more the fool....which is no mean feat.
do us all a favor (most importantly yourself) and buy a dictionary.
^
Ever on the losing side of the issue, ray attempts once again to deflect attention from the straw man he threw up.
Do yourself a favor ray & use that cap rack sitting between your shoulders for something other than spouting that never-ending, unwarranted liberal superiority you espouse.
Bwahahaha!:rofl:
There's already a thread about the SCHIP bill:
https://teakdoor.com/us-domestic-issu...-bill-aid.html
BM I responded over there ;)
more trouble for the torture administration...
Quote:
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2007/12/396.jpg
White House lawyers who were involved in discussions with the C.I.A. on its interrogation videotapes, from left: Harriet Miers, John Bellinger, Alberto Gonzales and David Addington.
WASHINGTON — At least four top White House lawyers took part in discussions with the Central Intelligence Agency between 2003 and 2005 about whether to destroy videotapes showing the secret interrogations of two operatives from Al Qaeda, according to current and former administration and intelligence officials.
The accounts indicate that the involvement of White House officials in the discussions before the destruction of the tapes in November 2005 was more extensive than Bush administration officials have acknowledged.
Those who took part, the officials said, included Alberto R. Gonzales, who served as White House counsel until early 2005; David S. Addington, who was the counsel to Vice President Dick Cheney and is now his chief of staff; John B. Bellinger III, who until January 2005 was the senior lawyer at the National Security Council; and Harriet E. Miers, who succeeded Mr. Gonzales as White House counsel.
It was previously reported that some administration officials had advised against destroying the tapes, but the emerging picture of White House involvement is more complex. In interviews, several administration and intelligence officials provided conflicting accounts as to whether anyone at the White House expressed support for the idea that the tapes should be destroyed.
One former senior intelligence official with direct knowledge of the matter said there had been “vigorous sentiment” among some top White House officials to destroy the tapes. The former official did not specify which White House officials took this position, but he said that some believed in 2005 that any disclosure of the tapes could have been particularly damaging after revelations a year earlier of abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
Some other officials assert that no one at the White House advocated destroying the tapes. Those officials acknowledged, however, that no White House lawyer gave a direct order to preserve the tapes or advised that destroying them would be illegal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/19/wa...xMPr4vuOpjHWcQ
Adopt tactics of the enemy. Put the videos on Al Jazeera. Turnabout is fair play.
why do you insist on overtly displaying your ignorance of the ramifications of such an action?Quote:
Originally Posted by Texpat
have you already forgotten abu ghraib?
[quote=raycarey;480188]more trouble for the torture administration...
[quote]
https://teakdoor.com/images/imported/2007/12/396.jpg
I am very confused. You said more trouble for the torture administration and then you did not post picks of Arabs sawing peooples heads off, stoning people, raping and beating women and blowing things up. Did you post the right pics?? :confused:
that's been evident for a while now.Quote:
Originally Posted by chitown
^" have you already forgotten abu ghraib?"
A fraternity hazing should be called torture then :doglol:
Just a question: If the US government is not going to behave morally superior to the terrorists they are fighting, then why exactly, should anyone support their "war on terrorism"?
Precisely. You will not defeat your enemy by resorting to their worst practises. You will entrench them, for generations.
Ultimately this is a 'War' for, and will be decided by, hearts and minds.
The BBC was reporting this morning that , ahem, "coalition forces" have discovered a torture chamber somewhere in Iraq. My GF changed channels before I found out if it was an Al Qaida torture chamber or a US Government torture chamber. Anyone know? :)
It was an Al Queda torture chamber. Somebody scrawled, "Ali Keda sux donky diks," on the wall.
An unflappable BBC reporter claimed it was Dick Cheney's personal Tongue-Loosening Chalet. Since Cheney didn't deny it, must be true.