Is genocide OK, if you're polite? (1 Viewer)

[Billo_Really]

Recently, on another thread, I was discussing my outrage with the US occupation of Iraq, when this poster responded that my position was just "partisan" talking points. After posting several links (from un-related sources) depicting the war crimes and the carnage caused as a result of the un-provoked attack and illegal occupation of that country by the US, this poster complimented me on my research and data collection. But never commented on the content of what was being stated in the links.

This is the same person who recently took issue with my use of profanity. So it started me thinking, he's offended by fowl language, but is indifferent to almost 3000 American GI's and a half a million Iraqis dying because of faulty intelligence.

So I pose the question to the "marketplace of ideas":

"Is genocide okay, if your polite about it?"

 

[CurrentAffairs]

Recently, on another thread, I was discussing my outrage with the US occupation of Iraq, when this poster responded that my position was just "partisan" talking points. After posting several links (from un-related sources) depicting the war crimes and the carnage caused as a result of the un-provoked attack and illegal occupation of that country by the US, this poster complimented me on my research and data collection. But never commented on the content of what was being stated in the links.

This is the same person who recently took issue with my use of profanity. So it started me thinking, he's offended by fowl language, but is indifferent to almost 3000 American GI's and a half a million Iraqis dying because of faulty intelligence.

So I pose the question to the "marketplace of ideas":

I'm not indifferent to them. Not in the least. I'm grateful and very proud of the brave men and women who serve. But you don't have to thank them. I've done it for you.

It's a screwed up world, Billo. I know you want utopia to exist, but war happens. It's happened down through history (thank God) and will continue to happen in the future. It sucks, no doubt. But sometimes it's necessary.

By the way, Billo, you only told part of the story above. Tell the people what you said about my mother.

 

[Hatuey]

Recently, on another thread, I was discussing my outrage with the US occupation of Iraq, when this poster responded that my position was just "partisan" talking points. After posting several links (from un-related sources) depicting the war crimes and the carnage caused as a result of the un-provoked attack and illegal occupation of that country by the US, this poster complimented me on my research and data collection. But never commented on the content of what was being stated in the links.

This is the same person who recently took issue with my use of profanity. So it started me thinking, he's offended by fowl language, but is indifferent to almost 3000 American GI's and a half a million Iraqis dying because of faulty intelligence.

So I pose the question to the "marketplace of ideas":

Ummm - sure but how are you polite when you're about to commit genocide?

is it something like this ? :

"Hi buddy, my name is Dave but you can call me D. How are ya? Good? Thats fantastic. Hey litsen bud - I've noticed some of the stuff thats been going on in your country and I'm kinda concerned so I'm going to help you out. I'll kill a few hundred thousand people in your country and fix the problem. How does that sound? Good? Great. Should I start with the men? No? Women and children? Great! Thanks man - I really appreciate this chance you've given me to kill a few people without consequence."

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Recently, on another thread, I was discussing my outrage with the US occupation of Iraq, when this poster responded that my position was just "partisan" talking points. After posting several links (from un-related sources) depicting the war crimes and the carnage caused as a result of the un-provoked attack and illegal occupation of that country by the US, this poster complimented me on my research and data collection. But never commented on the content of what was being stated in the links.

This is the same person who recently took issue with my use of profanity. So it started me thinking, he's offended by fowl language, but is indifferent to almost 3000 American GI's and a half a million Iraqis dying because of faulty intelligence.

So I pose the question to the "marketplace of ideas":

Well A) you claim to care about U.S. GI's out of one side of your mouth and call them war criminals and genocidal out of the other side, don't pretend to care about the troops Billo everyone knows it's ****ing bullshit the only troops you care about are those fighting for the enemy. And B) Your 1/2 a million figure is ****ing bullshit.

Billo supports the murder of U.S. servicemen by Islamic Fascists:

"They have a legal right to resist an illegal occupation of their country.

Don't ever dare say you care about the troops again. And even if we were to take your bullshit 1/2 a million dead Iraqi's figure seriuosly the Lancet study also makes it clear that 70% of those killed have been caused by your beloved "resistance," so don't claim that you give a sh!t about the Iraqi's either, all you care about are the Islamic Fascists which is made perfectly clear by you constantly spouting their propaganda.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by TOT:
Well A) you claim to care about U.S. GI's out of one side of your mouth and call them war criminals and genocidal out of the other side, don't pretend to care about the troops Billo everyone knows it's ****ing bullshit the only troops you care about are those fighting for the enemy. And B) Your 1/2 a million figure is ****ing bullshit.

Billo supports the murder of U.S. servicemen by Islamic Fascists:

Angry little TOT, aren't you? I don't have to lie to make my point. Post where I said "Islamic Fascists". I know you won't. Because I didn't say that. I don't have to lie to make my point. If you disagree, then post the proof! Post it, or STFU!

Originally posted by TOT:
Don't ever dare say you care about the troops again. And even if we were to take your bullshit 1/2 a million dead Iraqi's figure seriuosly the Lancet study also makes it clear that 70% of those killed have been caused by your beloved "resistance," so don't claim that you give a sh!t about the Iraqi's either, all you care about are the Islamic Fascists which is made perfectly clear by you constantly spouting their propaganda.

I care about the troops.

With that being said, I also care about innocent civilians. I don't like hearing about a half a million people being killed and the systematic destruction of a country that didn't do anything to us. It is against the Geneva Conventions and the Laws of War to dessimate the civilian infrastructure by an occupational force.

Your spouting a lot of crap right now. Are you an evil person? Do you have to kill others? You say 70% was caused by resistance, yet the Pentagon admits to dropping the equivelant of 7 hiroshima bombs on Iraq.

Who are the War Criminals?

The Pentagon admitted that US aircraft dropped the equivalent of seven point five Hiroshimas, intended to destroy the life support system of the country.

Crimes against Humanity was committed and all you can do is fabricate things I've said and restate them out of context with completely different meanings to them.

Who are the War Criminals?

In strict contravention of the Geneva Convention, all 'necessary to sustain life' was destroyed within the first hours of bombing (January 17th 1991) water, electricity, health infrastructure, communications, schools, food stores, large scale farms, productions units, bridges, roads, all industrial infrastructure. All needed for repair was denied under the US/UK driven embargo. During 1991, 'baseline mortality for the under fives, rose from 43.2 per thousand to 128.5 per thousand. A formerly largely well nourished nation was being compared in health and diet, to Mali and other of the world's poorest countries, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. An estimated one and a half million souls died from 'embargo related causes', to the 2003 invasion.

Every citizen of a nation has the right to resist an occupational force. All citizens of all nations have this right. You and I have this right. Although, you admitted to wanting to put a bullet in my head if you had your druthers. I no just where that bullet would go......... in the BACK of my head.

War Crimes Committed by the United States in Iraq
and Mechanisms for Accountability
The report was prepared by Consumers for Peace (www.consumersforpeace.org)

3. The on-going insurgency

Civilians in an occupied country have no obligation of loyalty towards the Occupying Power regardless of the motives of the invading forces. The only obligations they have relate to their civilian status: civilians are protected by applicable human rights law as well as by Geneva Convention IV relating to civilians and the provisions relating to civilians in Protocol Additional I. A civilian who takes ups arms against the Occupying Power loses rights as a civilian, but takes on the rights and obligations of combatant forces. This is the situation of the classic levee en masse: the Geneva Conventions recognize the combatant status of persons who spontaneously
take up arms on the approach of the enemy.

This rule is augmented by the principle of self-determination: under the law of selfdetermination, a people have the right to resist, with force if necessary, an alien or foreign occupier. The fact that some of the people resisting the U.S./British occupation of Iraq were not part of the pre-invasion Iraqi armed forces is not relevant, as persons who were civilians can take up arms as insurgents against any occupier. As protected combatants they have the right to take up arms against the Occupying Power and cannot be criminally charged except for acts that violate the laws and customs of war. The reason for this rule is obvious: were civilians who spontaneously take up arms and organize themselves into defense forces to be considered “terrorists” instead of combatants, this would mean that persons under attack from a foreign or oppressive force would not be able to fight back and resist without being considered terrorist.

The U.S. administration has generally succeeded in its political rhetoric on the issue: practically no U.S. politicians and very few scholars in NGOs in the U.S. have challenged the false labeling of the Iraq resistance as “terrorist.”

How come no one with any level of intelligence or expertise in these areas stand by your view? Why do you think you know and they [the experts] don't? You'll grow out of that.

You can huff and puff all you want. But we are a nation of laws. Laws you apparently do not want to obey.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by CurrentAffairs:
I'm not indifferent to them. Not in the least. I'm grateful and very proud of the brave men and women who serve. But you don't have to thank them. I've done it for you.

It's a screwed up world, Billo. I know you want utopia to exist, but war happens. It's happened down through history (thank God) and will continue to happen in the future. It sucks, no doubt. But sometimes it's necessary.

By the way, Billo, you only told part of the story above. Tell the people what you said about my mother.

I said that I was sure "...she was a nice person."

Your still avoiding the issue. Just can't bring yourself to deal with it, can ya?
Comment on the content of those links. It's too easy to sit back and throw out bullshit buzzwords that are nothing more than fluff conversation.

• War is hell
• It's a screwed up world
• Ya, it sucks!

Say whatever you want. It's a lot easier than dealing with truth and reality. A lot easier than dealing with a half a million people losing their lives in our name.

 

[dragonslayer]

Who ever this person was that was offended by your language and thought that genocide is Ok. Is a ****ing dumbass. We have killed over 300,000 Iraqis and thousands of American, Italian, and British troops etc.

This person has no respect for the United States or it's constitution. After WW2, the US emerged as a great power, mainly because our industry had not been bomb during the war. We gave aid to the world we were helpful. We had a pretty good reputation until the Reagan.

Now look at the United States and see where we have fallen. We attacked Iraq for no reason. In fact Bush was told that Iraq was not involved in 911, and Bush told the CIA to find reasons to attack Iraq after 911. It was not faulty intelligence. It was fake intelligence at the order of Bush and Cheney.

Now we are feared, and disrepected all over the world. Tourists in some countries have been spit upon just because they are American. The right wing idiots in our government are responsible for our new culture of lies.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Angry little TOT, aren't you? I don't have to lie to make my point. Post where I said "Islamic Fascists".

Ya I know that just makes it worse you refer to them as a "resistance" as if they're a legitimate freedom fighting force.

I care about the troops.

Ya the troops of the enemy, Billo in reference to the terrorists in Iraq murdering our troops:

They have a legal right to resist an illegal occupation of their country.

With that being said, I also care about innocent civilians.

No you don't or you wouldn't support the people who are trying to overthrow their Democratically elected government and replace it with a theocratic Islamic Fascist state.

I don't like hearing about a half a million people being killed and the systematic destruction of a country that didn't do anything to us.

A) That figures bullshit.

B) Even if we were to take the lancet study figure at face value the study also says that 70% of those killed have been killed by your beloved "resistance."

It is against the Geneva Conventions and the Laws of War to dessimate the civilian infrastructure by an occupational force.

It was Saddam who deccimated the infrastructure by building lavish palaces for himself and allowing the infrastructure to go to sht as punishment to his people.

Your spouting a lot of crap right now. Are you an evil person? Do you have to kill others? You say 70% was caused by resistance, yet the Pentagon admits to dropping the equivelant of 7 hiroshima bombs on Iraq.

Your own god damn Lancet study concludes that 70% have been killed by the insurgency. We use guided missilles and minimize civilian casualties, the insurgency which you support specifically targets civilians.

Every citizen of a nation has the right to resist an occupational force. All citizens of all nations have this right.

Hay well guess what kid genious that is not what the insurgency is doing they want to overthrow the Democratically elected and legitimate government of the Iraqi people that is what you are supporting.

How come no one with any level of intelligence or expertise in these areas stand by your view? Why do you think you know and they [the experts] don't? You'll grow out of that.

You can huff and puff all you want. But we are a nation of laws. Laws you apparently do not want to obey.

Your article is complete bullshit it is propaganda created by supporters of the tyrant Hugo Chavez who also support Islamic Fascists, it is quoting sections of the GC that we have not ratified because they were written by terrorist states for terrorists. Your assertions that it is a resistance movement is complete bullshit, the Iraqi people came out to vote in mass risking life and limb by the terrorists (not a resistance) that you support, to Democratically elect a legitimate government of, by, and for the Iraqi people. What you support is not a resistance movement, what you support are Islamic Fascists plain and simple. You call our troops war criminals while referring to the enemy they are fighting (whose tactic of choice is the intentional murder of civilian men, women, and children) a legitimate resistance. You are a traitor to your country and a supporter of Islamic Fascism after your jihadist propaganda posts over the course of the last weeks that reality is now impossible to deny. GFYS!!!

 

[Kandahar]

Is genocide okay, if your polite about it?

Sure. There's nothing wrong with a little genocide now and again, as long as you don't overdo it. All things in moderation, as the Confucians like to say. But being polite is essential; Nazis have feelings too.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Now look at the United States and see where we have fallen. We attacked Iraq for no reason. In fact Bush was told that Iraq was not involved in 911, and Bush told the CIA to find reasons to attack Iraq after 911. It was not faulty intelligence. It was fake intelligence at the order of Bush and Cheney.

You are a lier and a Jihadist propagandist. The Senate Select Intelligence Committee on Pre-War intelligence found the exact opposite of your assertions:

The Committee did not find any evidence that intelligence analysts changed their judgments as a result of political pressure, altered or produced intelligence products to conform with Administration policy, or that anyone even attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to do so. When asked whether analysts were pressured in way to alter their assessments or make their judgments conform with Administration policies on Iraq’s programs, not a single analyst answered "yes." Most analysts simply answered, "no" or "never," but some provided more extensive responses. Some of their responses are below:

• A Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) biological weapons (BW) analyst said, “NO,never. Never. Matter of fact, the assessments we make have always tried to -we always tried to be as accurate and always as truthful as we can, and it might be that our assessments suited what they needed. But we were never pressured to make an assessment a certain way or anything.’’

• The National Intelligence Officer (NIO) for Science and Technology said, “my answer to all of those is there was no pressure on me throughout that entire period. I did not have any analysts come to me with any information about the fact that they were feeling pressure to change their judgments. And I was certainly not aware of any, whether I heard it or not. So there were really no -as far as I’m concerned, there were no such things happening.”

• A CIA chemical weapons (CW) analyst said, “there was no pressure at all. They didn’t tell us what to say or anything like that.”

• Another CIA CW analyst said, “I did not feel any pressure, nor would I have done anything if they tried to pressure me.” A Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear analyst said, “ . . .no one influenced me. I think the NIE as it stands, although it was a rushed process like we talked about, but as it stands our position is adequately represented in there.”

• A National Ground Intelligence Center (NGIC) analyst said, “my assessment was based purely on, as I’ve said and I keep saying, on my research and what I was able to find out and then thinking about it and writing and giving out the information.”

• A Department of State Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR) WMD senior analyst said, “Not at all. . . . lNR has a pretty solid track record of stating its views, whether they are in sync with the prevailing winds of policymakers, but we have never shied away from stating our view where it diverges . . .’’

• A Defense IntelligenceAgency (DIA) nuclear programs division chief said, “We had absolutely no contact with Administration or policy folks while we were preparing our work. We had no internal or external influences on what [the analysts’] judgments were.”

http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/....gov/serialset/creports/pdf/s108-301/sec9.pdf

WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (WMD) PRESSURE CONCLUSIONS

(U) Conclusion 83. The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities.

(U) Conclusion 84. The Committee found no evidence that the Vice President's visits to the Central Intelligence Agency were attempts to pressure analysts, were perceived as intended to pressure analysts by those who participated in the briefings on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs, or did pressure analysts to change their assessments.


TERRORISM PRESSURE CONCLUSIONS

(U) Conclusion 102. The Committee found that none of the analysts or other people interviewed by the Committee said that they were pressured to change their conclusions related to Iraq's links to terrorism. After 9/11, however, analysts were under tremendous pressure to make correct assessments, to avoid missing a credible threat, and to avoid an intelligence failure on the scale of 9/11. As a result, the Intelligence Community's assessments were bold and assertive in pointing out potential terrorist links. For instance, the June 2002 Central Intelligence Agency assessment Iraq and al-Qaida: Interpreting a Murky Relationship was, according to its Scope Note, "purposefully aggressive" in drawing connections between Iraq and al-Qaida in an effort to inform policymakers of the potential that such a relationship existed. All of the participants in the August 2002 coordination meeting on the September 2002 version of Iraqi Support/or Terrorism interviewed by the Committee agreed that while some changes were made to the paper as a result of the participation of two Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy staffers, their presence did not result in changes to their analytical judgments.

Full text: Conclusions of Senate's Iraq report - Conflict in Iraq - MSNBC.com

 

[CurrentAffairs]

I said that I was sure "...she was a nice person."

I said tell the entire story, billo.

You said she was a nice person only after you were warned for this:

Originally posted by Billo Really
Your mother should of had an abortion!

 

[CurrentAffairs]

Who ever this person was that was offended by your language and thought that genocide is Ok. Is a ****ing dumbass.

Except there's only one problem. No one said that. Billo made it up.

 

[aquapub]

Recently, on another thread, I was discussing my outrage with the US occupation of Iraq, when this poster responded that my position was just "partisan" talking points. After posting several links (from un-related sources) depicting the war crimes and the carnage caused as a result of the un-provoked attack...

Being a genocidal terror-sponsor who had tried to assassinate one of our presidents, having started wars with virtually every neighbor he had, having repeatedly attacked our allies in the region....

This is what liberals mean by "unprovoked."

Your application of "genocide" to our liberation of Iraq is equally absurd. :roll:

 

[DeeJayH]

we are not commiting genocide
we are not responsible for the genocide
they are killing each other
we have to deal with it, instead of cutting and running like you and your ilk want
another flawed premise by none other than Billo
:applaud

 

[DeeJayH]

Your spouting a lot of crap right now. Are you an evil person? Do you have to kill others? You say 70% was caused by resistance, yet the Pentagon admits to dropping the equivelant of 7 hiroshima bombs on Iraq.

and yet nothing you posted shows any connection between the amount of explosives used by the US and the # dead in Iraq as a result
I guess if you throw enough bullshit up against a canvas
some sucker will call it art :doh

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by DeeJayH:
we are not commiting genocide
we are not responsible for the genocide
they are killing each other
we have to deal with it, instead of cutting and running like you and your ilk want
another flawed premise by none other than Billo

This would not be going on if we had not invaded. We are responsible for all of it!

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by aquapub:
Being a genocidal terror-sponsor who had tried to assassinate one of our presidents, having started wars with virtually every neighbor he had, having repeatedly attacked our allies in the region....

This is what liberals mean by "unprovoked."

Your application of "genocide" to our liberation of Iraq is equally absurd.

How many times can a man turn his head,
pretending he just doesn't see?

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by CurrentAffairs:
Except there's only one problem. No one said that. Billo made it up.

I didn't make anything up. To date, you still haven't commented on the content of those links or responded to the point I was making before you tried to highjack with one of those neocon bullshit buzzwords that I blew out of the water.

When I see I'm wrong, I admit it!

What say you?

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by CurrentAffairs:
I said tell the entire story, billo.

You said she was a nice person only after you were warned for this:

Originally posted by Billo Really
Your mother should of had an abortion!

That wasn't about your mother, that was about you!

I think it is obscene the indifference you show towards the deaths of a half a million people as a result of our illegal occupation of Iraq being done in our name. You, on the other hand, go off on profanity!

Big god-damn crime there!

 

[hipsterdufus]

Recently, on another thread, I was discussing my outrage with the US occupation of Iraq, when this poster responded that my position was just "partisan" talking points. After posting several links (from un-related sources) depicting the war crimes and the carnage caused as a result of the un-provoked attack and illegal occupation of that country by the US, this poster complimented me on my research and data collection. But never commented on the content of what was being stated in the links.

This is the same person who recently took issue with my use of profanity. So it started me thinking, he's offended by fowl language, but is indifferent to almost 3000 American GI's and a half a million Iraqis dying because of faulty intelligence.

So I pose the question to the "marketplace of ideas":

Certainly the Christian "Charities" are committing genocide in Africa and other 3rd World nations by prohibiting the use of condems in a countries plagued by AIDS.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by TOT:
Ya I know that just makes it worse you refer to them as a "resistance" as if they're a legitimate freedom fighting force.

My "them" and your "them" are two different "them's"..................... there!

Originally posted by TOT:
Ya the troops of the enemy, Billo in reference to the terrorists in Iraq murdering our troops:

I don't have to lie to make my point. Prove my reference to terrorists! Prove it. Post the proof, or stop making statements you can't back up.

Originally posted by TOT:
No you don't or you wouldn't support the people who are trying to overthrow their Democratically elected government and replace it with a theocratic Islamic Fascist state.

So now your telling me what I think. And don't give me this crap about you being sensitive to a democratically elected government. The hypocrisy of your statements gets old. When I pointed out the democratically elected governments of Nicaragua, Chile, Palestine, Lebanon and Iran, you had a much different reaction. So spare me this bullshit!

Originally posted by TOT:
A) That figures bullshit.

B) Even if we were to take the lancet study figure at face value the study also says that 70% of those killed have been killed by your beloved "resistance."

A half a million people are dead and all you can do is argue about the number. I have to leave it at that. Because the next statement that would have been out of my mouth to you, is not only against DP rules, it is against the law!

Originally posted by TOT:
It was Saddam who deccimated the infrastructure by building lavish palaces for himself and allowing the infrastructure to go to sht as punishment to his people.

Keep playing make believe.

Originally posted by TOT:
Your own god damn Lancet study concludes that 70% have been killed by the insurgency. We use guided missilles and minimize civilian casualties, the insurgency which you support specifically targets civilians.

Bad TOT, Bad TOT,
Boo hoo hoo,
What ya gonna do,
When they say...

Originally posted by TOT:
Hay well guess what kid genious that is not what the insurgency is doing they want to overthrow the Democratically elected and legitimate government of the Iraqi people that is what you are supporting.

...........................!

Originally posted by TOT:
Your article is complete bullshit it is propaganda created by supporters of the tyrant Hugo Chavez who also support Islamic Fascists, it is quoting sections of the GC that we have not ratified because they were written by terrorist states for terrorists. Your assertions that it is a resistance movement is complete bullshit, the Iraqi people came out to vote in mass risking life and limb by the terrorists (not a resistance) that you support, to Democratically elect a legitimate government of, by, and for the Iraqi people. What you support is not a resistance movement, what you support are Islamic Fascists plain and simple. You call our troops war criminals while referring to the enemy they are fighting (whose tactic of choice is the intentional murder of civilian men, women, and children) a legitimate resistance. You are a traitor to your country and a supporter of Islamic Fascism after your jihadist propaganda posts over the course of the last weeks that reality is now impossible to deny. GFYS!!!

You can't even discuss this without getting hysterical. I post comments from Iraqi journalists and you call them jihadists without any proof to back it up. You say I support Islamic Fascists, yet you cannot provide one post of mine where I said that. Your only proof is the make believe scenario you chant like a mantra. But you can't prove any of it, because its a lie! It is also irresponsible to make statements like that without any justification whatsoever.

I've posted reports from experts in the know and you call me a traitor. You also stated you want to put a bullet in my brain for reasons only you concocted.

Your 23, and yet you stated you know everything about politics. That one is okay. Because we all did when we were 23. Your not alone on that one. In a few years, you will see what I mean.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

My "them" and your "them" are two different "them's"..................... there!

No your them and my them are one in the same you call the Iraqi insurgency which murders innocent men, women, and children, as well as, our soldiers, a "legitimate resistance," and I call them "Islamic Fascists," which they are.

I don't have to lie to make my point. Prove my reference to terrorists! Prove it. Post the proof, or stop making statements you can't back up.

No you are lobbying for their surrender to the enemy in defeat in humiliation.

They have a legal right to resist an illegal occupation of their country. So, what enemy? You just want to kill more GI's.

So now your telling me what I think.

I judge people on this forum based on what they say, and given your support for the so called "Iraqi restance," it is clear that support Islamic Fascism and oppose the Democratically elected government of the Iraqi people.

And don't give me this crap about you being sensitive to a democratically elected government. The hypocrisy of your statements gets old. When I pointed out the democratically elected governments of Nicaragua, Chile, Palestine, Lebanon and Iran, you had a much different reaction. So spare me this bullshit!

The Sandinstas were an evil totalitarian regime modeled after Castro's Cuba, Allende raped the Chilean Constitution and was attempting to install a totalitarian regime based on Marxism, fuc/k Palestine they elected Hamas they may be a Democracy but through the voice which Democracy has given them they have only proven one thing that they support terrorism, I support the Democracy of Lebanon and I don't want to see it become a client state of Syria and Iran which is exactly what Hezbollah is trying to do to that country, and Mossadeq was appointed by the Shah and comfirmed by parliament but then he dissolved parliament and granted himself dictatorial powers.

A half a million people are dead and all you can do is argue about the number. I have to leave it at that. Because the next statement that would have been out of my mouth to you, is not only against DP rules, it is against the law!

I will argue the number because it is incorrect not to mention that even if the number is correct 70% of those people have been killed by your beloved "resistance."

You can't even discuss this without getting hysterical. I post comments from Iraqi journalists and you call them jihadists

Middle Eastern journalism is nothing more than Jihadist propaganda.

without any proof to back it up. You say I support Islamic Fascists, yet you cannot provide one post of mine where I said that.

That's because you call the Islamic Fascists a legitamate resistance.

I've posted reports from experts in the know

No you haven't you have posted jihadist propaganda nothing more.

and you call me a traitor.

That's cuz you are.

[quoe]
You also stated you want to put a bullet in my brain for reasons only you concocted. [/quote]

I believe what I said is that I hope you join your beloved "resistance" so I can put a bullet in your head.

Your 23, and yet you stated you know everything about politics.

No I said that I am knowledgable about politics given that political science and international relations are my majors.

 

[Billo_Really]

Are these jihadists too?

Why we’re against the war
Q: Why are veterans, active duty, and National Guard men and women opposed to the war in Iraq?

A: Here are 10 reasons we oppose this war:

1. The Iraq war is based on lies and deception.
The Bush Administration planned for an attack against Iraq before September 11th, 2001. They used the false pretense of an imminent nuclear, chemical and biological weapons threat to deceive Congress into rationalizing this unnecessary conflict. They hide our casualties of war by banning the filming of our fallen’s caskets when they arrive home, and when they refuse to allow the media into Walter Reed Hospital and other Veterans Administration facilities which are overflowing with maimed and traumatized veterans.
For further reading: Lie By Lie

2. The Iraq war violates international law.
The United States assaulted and occupied Iraq without the consent of the UN Security Council. In doing so they violated the same body of laws they accused Iraq of breaching.
For further reading:
The Avalon Project : Charter of the International Military Tribunal
Home

3. Corporate profiteering is driving the war in Iraq.
From privately contracted soldiers and linguists to no-bid reconstruction contracts and multinational oil negotiations, those who benefit the most in this conflict are those who suffer the least. The United States has chosen a path that directly contradicts President Eisenhower’s farewell warning regarding the military industrial complex. As long as those in power are not held accountable, they will continue...
For further reading:
Advocates of War Now Profit From Iraq's Reconstruction
Windfalls of War - The Center for Public Integrity

4. Overwhelming civilian casualties are a daily occurrence in Iraq.
Despite attempts in training and technological sophistication, large-scale civilian death is both a direct and indirect result of United States aggression in Iraq. Even the most conservative estimates of Iraqi civilian deaths number over 100,000. Currently over 100 civilians die every day in Baghdad alone.
For further reading:
NoMoreVictims.Org - Advocating and Educating For Peace and Victims of War
100,000 Iraqi civilians dead, says study | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited
THE REACH OF WAR: CASUALTIES; Number of Civilian Deaths Highest in July, Iraqis Say - Free Preview - The New York Times

5. Soldiers have the right to refuse illegal war.
All in service to this country swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. However, they are prosecuted if they object to serve in a war they see as illegal under our Constitution. As such, our brothers and sisters are paying the price for political incompetence, forced to fight in a war instead of having been sufficiently trained to carry out the task of nation-building.
For further reading:
Thank You Lt. Ehren Watada - Lt. Watada addresses national veterans convention
YouTube - First Lt. Watada (Part one)
YouTube - First Lt. Watada (Part two)
The GI Rights Hotline (800) 394-9544

6. Service members are facing serious health consequences due to our Government’s negligence.
Many of our troops have already been deployed to Iraq for two, three, and even four tours of duty averaging eleven months each. Combat stress, exhaustion, and bearing witness to the horrors of war contribute to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), a serious set of symptoms that can lead to depression, illness, violent behavior, and even suicide. Additionally, depleted uranium, Lariam, insufficient body armor and infectious diseases are just a few of the health risks which accompany an immorally planned and incompetently executed war. Finally, upon a soldier’s release, the Veterans Administration is far too under-funded to fully deal with the magnitude of veterans in need.
For further reading:
War in Iraq: Information // National Center for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
Vets 4 Vets: Outreach to Iraq War vets by vets

7. The war in Iraq is tearing our families apart.
The use of stop-loss on active duty troops and the unnecessarily lengthy and repeat active tours by Guard and Reserve troops place enough strain on our military families, even without being forced to sacrifice their loved ones for this ongoing political experiment in the Middle East.
For further reading: "Stop Loss" Continues

8. The Iraq war is robbing us of funding sorely needed here at home.
$5.8 billion per month is spent on a war which could have aided the victims of Hurricane Katrina, gone to impoverished schools, the construction of hospitals and health care systems, tax cut initiatives, and a host of domestic programs that have all been gutted in the wake of the war in Iraq.
For further reading:
National Priorities Project - Cost of War

9. The military uses racism and discrimination as tools.
In order to recruit for the Iraq War, the most vulnerable minority and social groups in the United States are preyed upon to be used as cannon fodder. Once inside the military, they are subject to racism, sexism including harassment and assault, homophobia, and religious intolerance. When at war, the troops are taught to dehumanize the people of Iraq as an enemy with intolerance and racist epithets.
For further reading:
The Council on American-Islamic Relations - CAIR: Article Contents
Unclaimed Territory - by Glenn Greenwald: Fear-mongering leads to anti-Arab hysteria on airplanes

10. Today’s youth face aggressive recruitment tactics that don’t tell the whole story.
Popular perception of the military as an “all-volunteer force” hides the fact that our future troops are aggressively recruited from our lowest income neighborhoods. Economically conscripted, the poor and socially vulnerable young are bought with the lies of discipline, education and civilian job training to carry out the wishes of powerful political individuals who are far from war’s true horror.
For further reading:
Press-Telegram - Military recruiting too aggressive, report finds

Pacific News Service > News > Immigrant Teens Subject to Aggressive Military Recruiting

We'll see if your singing the same tune after you get drafted and get sent over there to "get some"!

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Are these jihadists too?

We'll see if your singing the same tune after you get drafted and get sent over there to "get some"!

Why we’re against the war
Q: Why are veterans, active duty, and National Guard men and women opposed to the war in Iraq?

A: Here are 10 reasons we oppose this war:

1. The Iraq war is based on lies and deception.
The Bush Administration planned for an attack against Iraq before September 11th, 2001.

That's a lie, all 16 members of the Intelligence Community determined Iraq had WMD's and we have infact found 500 sarin filled binary warheads with an indefinate shelf life in Iraq.

2. The Iraq war violates international law.
The United States assaulted and occupied Iraq without the consent of the UN Security Council. In doing so they violated the same body of laws they accused Iraq of breaching.

That's a lie, nowhere in international law does it say that the U.S. has to hand over the sovereignty of its military to the United Nations.

3. Corporate profiteering is driving the war in Iraq.
From privately contracted soldiers and linguists to no-bid reconstruction contracts and multinational oil negotiations, those who benefit the most in this conflict are those who suffer the least. The United States has chosen a path that directly contradicts President Eisenhower’s farewell warning regarding the military industrial complex. As long as those in power are not held accountable, they will continue...

We have privately contracted soldiers and linguists because we don't have adequete public sources, and these are no-bid contracts because there are only a handful of corporations that can handle reconstruction projects of this magnitude, and if this was a war for oil then why is that we didn't install a puppet dictator beholden to U.S. interests instead of granting the Iraqi people Democracy which they used to keep Iraqi oil nationalized? From the Iraqi Constitution:

Article 108: Oil and gas are the ownership of all the people of Iraq in all the regions and governorates.
​

Article 109: First: The federal government with the producing governorates and regional governments shall undertake the management of oil and gas extracted from current fields provided that it distributes oil and gas revenues in a fair manner in​

proportion to the population distribution in all parts of the country with a set allotment for a set time for the damaged regions that were unjustly deprived by the former regime and the regions that were damaged later on, and in a way that assures balanced development in different areas of the country, and this will be regulated by law.

Second: The federal government with the producing regional and governorate governments shall together formulate the necessary strategic policies to develop the oil and gas wealth in a way that achieves the highest benefit to the Iraqi people using the most advanced techniques of the market principles and encourages investment.

http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/files...itution_en.pdf​

4. Overwhelming civilian casualties are a daily occurrence in Iraq.
Despite attempts in training and technological sophistication, large-scale civilian death is both a direct and indirect result of United States aggression in Iraq. Even the most conservative estimates of Iraqi civilian deaths number over 100,000. Currently over 100 civilians die every day in Baghdad alone.

This is true many people have died but the majority of these deaths are on the hands of the Islamic Fascists.

5. Soldiers have the right to refuse illegal war.
All in service to this country swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. However, they are prosecuted if they object to serve in a war they see as illegal under our Constitution. As such, our brothers and sisters are paying the price for political incompetence, forced to fight in a war instead of having been sufficiently trained to carry out the task of nation-building.

This presupposes that the war in Iraq is illegal, it is not the Congress passed the AUMF against Iraq in concordance with the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

6. Service members are facing serious health consequences due to our Government’s negligence.
Many of our troops have already been deployed to Iraq for two, three, and even four tours of duty averaging eleven months each. Combat stress, exhaustion, and bearing witness to the horrors of war contribute to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), a serious set of symptoms that can lead to depression, illness, violent behavior, and even suicide. Additionally, depleted uranium, Lariam, insufficient body armor and infectious diseases are just a few of the health risks which accompany an immorally planned and incompetently executed war. Finally, upon a soldier’s release, the Veterans Administration is far too under-funded to fully deal with the magnitude of veterans in need.

The government has increased veterans benefits under this administration on a far greater scale than previous administration:

FactCheck.org Funding for Veterans up 27%, But Democrats Call It A Cut

7. The war in Iraq is tearing our families apart.
The use of stop-loss on active duty troops and the unnecessarily lengthy and repeat active tours by Guard and Reserve troops place enough strain on our military families, even without being forced to sacrifice their loved ones for this ongoing political experiment in the Middle East.

This is a volunteer army and upon signing up they agree to a minimum 8 years of service.

8. The Iraq war is robbing us of funding sorely needed here at home.
$5.8 billion per month is spent on a war which could have aided the victims of Hurricane Katrina, gone to impoverished schools, the construction of hospitals and health care systems, tax cut initiatives, and a host of domestic programs that have all been gutted in the wake of the war in Iraq.

This is just a generalized blanket statement with no basis in fact, I'm going to need proof that these things are true and the war in Iraq is the cause.

9. The military uses racism and discrimination as tools.
In order to recruit for the Iraq War, the most vulnerable minority and social groups in the United States are preyed upon to be used as cannon fodder. Once inside the military, they are subject to racism, sexism including harassment and assault, homophobia, and religious intolerance. When at war, the troops are taught to dehumanize the people of Iraq as an enemy with intolerance and racist epithets.
For further reading:
The Council on American-Islamic Relations - CAIR: Article ContentsUnclaimed Territory - by Glenn Greenwald: Fear-mongering leads to anti-Arab hysteria on airplanes

10. Today’s youth face aggressive recruitment tactics that don’t tell the whole story.
Popular perception of the military as an “all-volunteer force” hides the fact that our future troops are aggressively recruited from our lowest income neighborhoods. Economically conscripted, the poor and socially vulnerable young are bought with the lies of discipline, education and civilian job training to carry out the wishes of powerful political individuals who are far from war’s true horror.
For further reading:

These last two are simply factually inaccurate:

Pen4agon Opposed To New Draft - CBS News

The Pentagon countered Monday that while blacks make up 20 percent of enlistees and only 12 to 14 percent of the general recruit-age population, there tends to be fewer in combat jobs. They make up only 15 percent of the combat force, while accounting for 36 percent of support and administration and 27 percent of medical and dental positions, the Pentagon said, citing a 1999 report.

On social and economic status, it said 32 percent of recruits come from homes where the father is a high school graduate compared to 31 percent of the general population in their age group. Twenty-two percent of recruits have fathers who have at least a college education, compared to 30 percent of the general population in their age group.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by TOT:
That's a lie, all 16 members of the Intelligence Community determined Iraq had WMD's and we have infact found 500 sarin filled binary warheads with an indefinate shelf life in Iraq.

It must be weird for you making a statement like that and having no one in the Administration echo your sentiments. In fact, what the Administration has said publically is just the opposite:

White House Admits WMD Error
Withdraws Claim That Iraq Tried To Buy Uranium From Africa

Originally posted by TOT:
That's a lie, nowhere in international law does it say that the U.S. has to hand over the sovereignty of its military to the United Nations.

That's not what their saying. But since you took this position, you can't use 1441 as a precedent for attacking.

Originally posted by TOT:
We have privately contracted soldiers and linguists because we don't have adequete public sources, and these are no-bid contracts because there are only a handful of corporations that can handle reconstruction projects of this magnitude, and if this was a war for oil then why is that we didn't install a puppet dictator beholden to U.S. interests instead of granting the Iraqi people Democracy which they used to keep Iraqi oil nationalized? From the Iraqi Constitution:

Lets just see what the law says, shall we?

Iraq and the Laws of War
by Professor Francis A. Boyle

The United States government's installation of the so-called Interim Government of Iraq during the summer of 2004 did not materially alter this legal situation. Under the laws of war, this so-called Interim Government of Iraq is nothing more than a "puppet government." As the belligerent occupant of Iraq the United States government is free to establish a puppet government if it so desires. But under the laws of war, the United States government remains fully accountable for the behavior of its puppet government.

These conclusions are made quite clear by paragraph 366 of U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10 (1956):

366. Local Governments Under Duress and Puppet Governments

The restrictions placed upon the authority of a belligerent government cannot be avoided by a system of using a puppet government, central or local, to carry out acts which would be unlawful if performed directly by the occupant. Acts induced or compelled by the occupant are nonetheless its acts.

As the belligerent occupant of Iraq, the United States government is obligated to ensure that its puppet Interim Government of Iraq obeys the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949, the 1907 Hague Regulations on land warfare, U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10 (1956), the humanitarian provisions of Additional Protocol I of 1977 to the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949, and the customary international laws of war. Any violation of the laws of war, international humanitarian law, and human rights committed by its puppet Interim Government of Iraq are legally imputable to the United States government. As the belligerent occupant of Iraq, both the United States government itself as well as its concerned civilian officials and military officers are fully and personally responsible under international criminal law for all violations of the laws of war, international humanitarian law, and human rights committed by its puppet Interim Government of Iraq such as, for example, reported death squads operating under the latter's auspicies.

Furthermore, it was a total myth, fraud, lie, and outright propaganda for the Bush Jr. administration to maintain that it was somehow magically transferring "sovereignty" to its puppet Interim Government of Iraq during the summer of 2004. Under the laws of war, sovereignty is never transferred from the defeated sovereign such as Iraq to a belligerent occupant such as the United States. This is made quite clear by paragraph 353 of U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10 (1956): "Belligerent occupation in a foreign war, being based upon the possession of enemy territory, necessarily implies that the sovereignty of the occupied territory is not vested in the occupying power. Occupation is essentially provisional."

This brings the analysis to the so-called Constitution of Iraq that was allegedly drafted by the puppet Interim Government of Iraq under the impetus of the United States government. Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations on land warfare flatly prohibits the change in a basic law such as a state's Constitution during the course of a belligerent occupation: "The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure as far as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force in the country." This exact same prohibition has been expressly incorporated in haec verba into paragraph 363 of U.S. Army Field Manual 27-10 (1956). To the contrary, the United States has demonstrated gross disrespect toward every law in Iraq that has stood in the way of its imperial designs and petroleum ambitions, including and especially the pre-invasion 1990 Interim Constitution for the Republic of Iraq.

The law is not on your side. Obey the law!

Originally posted by TOT:
This is true many people have died but the majority of these deaths are on the hands of the Islamic Fascists.

Prove it!

Originally posted by TOT:
This presupposes that the war in Iraq is illegal, it is not the Congress passed the AUMF against Iraq in concordance with the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

We attacked in violation of Article 51 of the UN Charter. Which is also part of our Constitution. It is illegal. I'll leave out all the lies to justify it, for now.

Originally posted by TOT:
This is a volunteer army and upon signing up they agree to a minimum 8 years of service.

A couple of posts ago, you said you cared about them. Now you don't. You care, you don't care. I don't think you know what you care about.

Originally posted by TOT:
This is just a generalized blanket statement with no basis in fact, I'm going to need proof that these things are true and the war in Iraq is the cause.

I will concede that you do know something about "...generalized blanket statement..."

Originally posted by TOT:
These last two are simply factually inaccurate:

Inaccurate? Your a classic example of this one...

When at war, the troops are taught to dehumanize the people of Iraq as an enemy with intolerance and racist epithets.

...when I said this a few posts back...

Originally posted by billo:
I post comments from Iraqi journalists and you call them jihadists

...and when I said we are not talking about the same group of people, you said (without any proof of such)...

Originally posted by TOT:
No your them and my them are one in the same you call the Iraqi insurgency which murders innocent men, women, and children, as well as, our soldiers, a "legitimate resistance," and I call them "Islamic Fascists," which they are.

...which is doing this...

"dehumanize the people of Iraq as an enemy with intolerance"

...Inaccurate? I don't think so!