[kvm_mkdb]

Please read this article in its entirety.

Notable quotes (emphasis is mine):

Fallujah is littered with graffiti. Some is pro-Saddam. None is pro-bin Laden. All encourage local citizens to harass and kill American soldiers. Posters plastered across the city warn everyone to stay very far from US convoys to avoid being hit. In the kebab shops, people say, "The Americans are cowards. They are now afraid of any gunshot coming from anywhere."

The resistance officially began on June 28. "A peaceful gathering went to the mayor's building. There were troops inside. Then it went to a school: there was a military base inside. People were shouting: 'We want democracy, electricity, water'. The Americans opened fire, at first in to the air. Then against people. An old woman in her house beside the base was hit, along with her three sons: one was dead, one lost his leg, another lost his kidney. Many people went to hospital to donate blood. There were 73 wounded. They had to wait for more than two hours to be sent to hospital. No car could carry more than one wounded - and one car only every 30 minutes. The next day people went to the cemetery. As is our custom, they opened fire in the air to celebrate the dead. Many American helicopters and convoys then came and opened fire. That's how it started. There were 21 dead in two days."

Dr Kamal Aldien Alkisim, born in the ancient city of Heet on the Euphrates, tortured by Saddam's regime and general secretary of a new political party - the Iraqi National Fraction, which "emphasizes Iraq's unity and independence on all its land" - supports the struggle in Fallujah. "The resistance here does not have any relation with any groups. It is led by families. The main reason is the bad behavior of the Americans. There is no relationship with Saddam or Islamic groups. These groups are using the name of Fallujah." The locals are adamant that they have never seen anybody from self-described resistance organizations like Owda (Return), led by one Mohammed al-Samidai from Mosul, or Afaa ("Snake"), which sprang up from the Ba'ath Party in Kirkuk, or even an alliance of the Ba'ath with tribal elders coordinated by one Abu Hasan from Hajiwa.
The citizens of Fallujah don't care about Saddam's cassettes routinely broadcast by Arab satellite networks: "Saddam is a spy. He sold Iraq. When CDs of Saddam calling for a jihad were distributed, people in Fallujah stopped the resistance for a few days." They insist on a big mistake made by the West is "to think that Saddam is the resistance just because he is a Sunni".

[Spheric Harlot]

Nono - they're dancing.

Dance, I say!



-s*

[Zimphire]

Asia times..

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Asia times..

Hey Zimpo -something went wrong with your post - only two words and a smiley came trough.

[kvm_mkdb]

* BUMP *

[Zimphire]

This needed bumped after 7 months why?

It was OBVIOUSLY a HUGE hit back in Feb.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Zimphire:
This needed bumped after 7 months why?

It was OBVIOUSLY a HUGE hit back in Feb.

As were Americans.

You really don't see the connection to current events, Kevin?

-s*

[Ω]

RIP

And good to see Zim in fine form, completely oblivious to what is happening in the real world.

[Millennium]

So in other words, because of the actions of a few psychos, the occupation of Iraq is a complete and utter failure?

I don't follow the logic. The actions of a few do not reflect the attitudes of the many.

[Developer]

Originally posted by Millennium:
So in other words, because of the actions of a few psychos, the occupation of Iraq is a complete and utter failure?

The article claimed that there is strong resistance in Fallujah. Which appears to be right.

How do you come to the conclusion that it wants to say that the occupation is a complete and utter failure?

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Developer:
The article claimed that there is strong resistance in Fallujah. Which appears to be right.

How do you come to the conclusion that it wants to say that the occupation is a complete and utter failure?

It is necessary to assume that this is what the article is saying in order to safely ignore it.

Zimphire tactic. Completely over-interpret, then claim it's exaggerated and label it FUD.

Mission accomplished.

-s*

[voodoo]

Originally posted by Developer:
The article claimed that there is strong resistance in Fallujah. Which appears to be right.

How do you come to the conclusion that it wants to say that the occupation is a complete and utter failure?

Millennium just made a textbook example of a straw-man logic.

[quandarry]

these people are just doing their patriotic duty of killing and terrorizing the invaders of their country.

we would most likely do the same if our country was invaded by a foreign power that we all despised.

just think, they no longer have to go to extremes to kill their enemy...the enemy has come to their doorstep and the mighty bush said "bring it on".

and they brungest...

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by quandarry:
these people are just doing their patriotic duty of killing and terrorizing the invaders of their country.

we would most likely do the same if our country was invaded by a foreign power that we all despised.

just think, they no longer have to go to extremes to kill their enemy...the enemy has come to their doorstep and the mighty bush said "bring it on".

and they brungest...

Which will lead to many, many of their deaths. So, not only are the Iragis in Falluja idiots, they're also suicidal.

From what they've shown, they're only animals, and it's time to revoke their breathing privileges.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Which will lead to many, many of their deaths. So, not only are the Iragis in Falluja idiots, they're also suicidal.

From what they've shown, they're only animals, and it's time to revoke their breathing privileges.

That's pretty stupid: circular logic.

Someone desperate enough to kill himself just to take out a few of YOU will sure re-think his position if he knows you're looking to kill him.

That'll stop the attacks, fer sure.



-s*

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
That's pretty stupid: circular logic.

Someone desperate enough to kill himself just to take out a few of YOU will sure re-think his position if he knows you're looking to kill him.

That'll stop the attacks, fer sure.



-s*

No, what's circular logic is trying to say that those people are "good" when they allow this type of bahavior to continue. Again, I don't think Mohammad ever advocated BBQing people in the street.

and a suicide bomber isn't "desperate", just demented (and damned, if you actually follow their religion).

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
No, what's circular logic is trying to say that those people are "good" when they allow this type of bahavior to continue. Again, I don't think Mohammad ever advocated BBQing people in the street.

and a suicide bomber isn't "desperate", just demented (and damned, if you actually follow their religion).

I agree. The problem is, that attitude is totally useless as a basis for action.

You can ridicule them and put them down as "demented" or "insane", then go and kill a few if you catch them before they do their damage.

But not taking them seriously doesn't make them any less deadly or any fewer, since every time you show your arrogance towards those demented, rabid fanatics, perhaps even killing a handful, you turn another dozen into determined time-bombs.

-s*

[Millennium]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Millennium just made a textbook example of a straw-man logic.

Actually, I was speaking more of the poster and the person who bumped this post than the article itself. Forgive me if I had not made that clear.

[chabig]

these people are just doing their patriotic duty of killing and terrorizing the invaders of their country.

These people are terribly misguided. The Americans are not the invaders of their county. We are the liberators of their country. Our occupation is temporary. Without us, they would still be under Saddam's thumb.

Would have said the United States "invaded" France and Germany at the end of WWII? Would you have wanted the French and Germans to "kill and terrorize" the American soldiers who freed them?

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by Millennium:
So in other words, because of the actions of a few psychos, the occupation of Iraq is a complete and utter failure?

I don't follow the logic. The actions of a few do not reflect the attitudes of the many.

I'll bite:

Yes, because of the actions of a few psychos in the White House and surrounding, the occupation of Iraq is a complete and utter failure. Because of the actions of a few psychos shooting at people demonstrating for democracy, water, electricity the occupation of Iraq is a complete and utter failure. Because of the actions of a few psychos that have no clue about local customs and attack mourners celebrating the dead victims of the above-mentioned psychos, the occupation of Iraq is a complete and utter failure.

Have you ever been to Falluja? I did. It's a town of regular people, like me and you. Most of them are farmers, blue collar and construction workers. Once they noticed you as a foreigner, many would go great lengths to show their hospitality. Once they knew you are American, they would become extremely friendly, as if everyone tries to mend the bad political relationship. There was no hatred of Americans or Westerners.

So what happened (besides the 'incident' above) ?

• Remember the friendly-fire accident when we massacred their policemen?
  Apart from the bloodshed, the incident is a serious blow to an American campaign to get on reasonable terms with local people.
  The initiative was already under strain from another case of mistaken identity two days ago when soldiers caught in a roadside bombing shot at Iraqi policemen, killing one, south of the town.
  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ixnewstop.html
  
• Or when we arrested a religious figure?
  US forces also arrested the imam of the Great Mosque of Fallujah, another flashpoint town in central Iraq.
  Military officials said they detained 61-year-old Shaikh Jamal Nizzal after a search overnight on Monday of the mosque premises.
  neighbour told AFP that four students of the shaikh were also arrested in the search which took place overnight.
  http://www.matamat.com/fullstory.php...;cd=2003-10-14
  
• And the constant nightly raids?
  Repeated large-scale swoops on the northwest by US troops have done little to stem the violence. Without accurate intelligence and local knowledge such raids do, slowly, locate the remaining key players of Saddam's ruling elite.
  But in the process they alienate considerable sections of the population. Large numbers of arrests, harsh detention conditions and ramshackle methods of interrogation and trial are bound to fuel resentment and swell the ranks of the violent and disaffected.
  The final source of violence is certainly the most worrying and the hardest to deal with. This can be usefully characterised as Iraqi Islamism, with both Sunni and Shiites variations. An early indication of this phenomenon was in the town of Falluja, northwest of Baghdad.
  In spite of Wolfowitz's assertions to the contrary, Iraqis did not regard Falluja, prior to the war, as a 'hotbed of Baathist activity'. To the contrary, Falluja has a reputation as a deeply conservative town, famed for the number of mosques and its adherence to Sunnis.
  The fact that this became a centre of violent opposition to occupation so soon after liberation is explained by Iraqis I interviewed in May as a result of heavy-handed searches by troops looking for Saddam's sons. The repeated violation of private domestic life caused deep resentment, especially when combined with the seizure of weapons and money. It has to be remembered that, as brutal as Saddam's regime was, it never sought to disarm the population.
  http://www.gulf-news.com/Articles/Op...rticleID=99918
  
• Dismiss it like you want, but using criminal tactics hasn't helped the cause of democracy either:
  Fallujah - United States soldiers on Monday arrested a young Iraqi bride as they hunted for her husband in the rebel town of Fallujah, west of Baghdad, just five days after their marriage, witnesses said.
  "American soldiers surrounded the home in the Golan district of Saber Turki, whom they wanted to arrest," said neighbour Abdel Nasser Mahmud.
  "After failing to find the husband, the Americans who pulled up in about 13 vehicles arrested and led away the wife, who has been married five days, and told neighbours she will not be released unless he gives himself up."
  http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?sf=28...2&set_id=6
  
• We've made new enemies where there were none:
  Tribal leaders have been subjected to humiliating arrests in front of their tribesmen, hooded and handcuffed. US troops also were accused of putting their boots on the back of men's heads as they lay face down.
  http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/worl.../08/2003101671

And that is only a small selection of all the sh¡t that has been going on since we came to 'liberate' them...

[kvm_mkdb]

Originally posted by voodoo:
Millennium just made a textbook example of a straw-man logic.

Yup.

[eklipse]

kv,

[MacNStein]

So, we go in and save the lives of some 90K people this year, and despite a pitched battle and radical opposition, the US is able to keep casualties down. AND while the Int'l community is pissing and moaning we coordinate a transition of gov't in a year.... you know, where they'll actually be able to hold their OWN elections.


aka, the liberals saying "WHAA! We didn't think of it first!"

Hey, it's not our fault that the Democrats don't have the cojones to do what's neccessary.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by eklipse:
kv,

Nice thumb there, I can tell you where the Liberals have had theirs for the last several years.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Nice thumb there, I can tell you where the Liberals have had theirs for the last several years.

Run out of arguments, I see.

But apparently, kvm actually had his thumb stuck out in Falluja at some point, which is more than ANY of you ad-hom "humanitarian" right-wingers have going for you.

-s*

[eklipse]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
Run out of arguments, I see.

But apparently, kvm actually had his thumb stuck out in Falluja at some point, which is more than ANY of you ad-hom "humanitarian" right-wingers have going for you.

-s*

Exactly. It's amazing how keen some people are to write off a place they've never been to and know very little about.

[angaq0k]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Exactly. It's amazing how keen some people are to write off a place they've never been to and know very little about.

Reminds me of what a "pop" culture is.

Easy come, easy go.

When you don't need it, throw it away...

If it hurts, let's destroy it.

They don't like us, therefore they're evil.

[Millennium]

Originally posted by kvm_mkdb:
I'll bite:

Yes, because of the actions of a few psychos in the White House and surrounding, the occupation of Iraq is a complete and utter failure.

Because they couldn't wave some kind of magic wand and fix everything painlessly in a matter of weeks?

This is reality. Things take time. This concept is, admittedly, strange to many people in Western nations; even myself sometimes. How could it not be, in an era of microwave ovens and instant messaging and Web-based discussion forums like this one?

But most things, particularly not in the real world, don't happen instantaneously. There's an old saying you've probably heard about Rome not having been built in a day. Cities take years to build, and Iraq is much larger than any city. Granted, we're not starting from zero, but we're not starting from the greatest of baselines either.

Because of the actions of a few psychos shooting at people demonstrating for democracy, water, electricity the occupation of Iraq is a complete and utter failure. Because of the actions of a few psychos that have no clue about local customs and attack mourners celebrating the dead victims of the above-mentioned psychos, the occupation of Iraq is a complete and utter failure.

Because a few soldiers went bad? Yes, those soldiers should be punished, and punished severely, and frankly using methods that I'm pretty sure most people would consider unconstitutional. Certainly the soldiers responsible for this should not be allowed to inflict themselves on the population of Iraq. But what makes you think that the majority, or even a significant minority, of soldiers do this?

Have you ever been to Falluja?

Admittedly, no. However...

I did. It's a town of regular people, like me and you. Most of them are farmers, blue collar and construction workers. Once they noticed you as a foreigner, many would go great lengths to show their hospitality. Once they knew you are American, they would become extremely friendly, as if everyone tries to mend the bad political relationship. There was no hatred of Americans or Westerners.

I have no doubt in my mind whatsoever that this is true. Most cities are like this, in Iraq and elsewhere; the vast majority are generally-friendly people. And in fact, I would wager that this is still true, that the majority do not in fact boil over with this kind of hate. I believe that on both sides of this, the brutality is committed by a small but very loud minority. And on both sides, justice needs to be served; the people doing this should be hunted down and punished according to their crimes.

But none of this means that the occupation is a failure.

Remember the friendly-fire accident when we massacred their policemen?
Apart from the bloodshed, the incident is a serious blow to an American campaign to get on reasonable terms with local people.
The initiative was already under strain from another case of mistaken identity two days ago when soldiers caught in a roadside bombing shot at Iraqi policemen, killing one, south of the town.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ixnewstop.html

A horrible thing, yes, but an accident. These things happen sometimes. This is why war sucks. This is why nation-building sucks. It does not, however, eliminate the reality of the situation.

Or when we arrested a religious figure?
US forces also arrested the imam of the Great Mosque of Fallujah, another flashpoint town in central Iraq.
Military officials said they detained 61-year-old Shaikh Jamal Nizzal after a search overnight on Monday of the mosque premises.
neighbour told AFP that four students of the shaikh were also arrested in the search which took place overnight.
http://www.matamat.com/fullstory.php...;cd=2003-10-14

What were the charges? Where is the evidence? Doubtless this is a tragic thing for the community, but let us see the man brought to a proper trial. Ought religious figures be above the law?

And the constant nightly raids?
Repeated large-scale swoops on the northwest by US troops have done little to stem the violence. Without accurate intelligence and local knowledge such raids do, slowly, locate the remaining key players of Saddam's ruling elite.
But in the process they alienate considerable sections of the population. Large numbers of arrests, harsh detention conditions and ramshackle methods of interrogation and trial are bound to fuel resentment and swell the ranks of the violent and disaffected.
The final source of violence is certainly the most worrying and the hardest to deal with. This can be usefully characterised as Iraqi Islamism, with both Sunni and Shiites variations. An early indication of this phenomenon was in the town of Falluja, northwest of Baghdad.
In spite of Wolfowitz's assertions to the contrary, Iraqis did not regard Falluja, prior to the war, as a 'hotbed of Baathist activity'. To the contrary, Falluja has a reputation as a deeply conservative town, famed for the number of mosques and its adherence to Sunnis.
The fact that this became a centre of violent opposition to occupation so soon after liberation is explained by Iraqis I interviewed in May as a result of heavy-handed searches by troops looking for Saddam's sons. The repeated violation of private domestic life caused deep resentment, especially when combined with the seizure of weapons and money. It has to be remembered that, as brutal as Saddam's regime was, it never sought to disarm the population.
http://www.gulf-news.com/Articles/Op...rticleID=99918

Again, true, but demonstrate to me some alternate means of rooting out the last of the ruling elite. Show me proven alternate methods. Show me that this does not have to be done. And yes, it breeds resentment. Of course it breeds resentment. Does that make it unnecessary?

Dismiss it like you want, but using criminal tactics hasn't helped the cause of democracy either:
Fallujah - United States soldiers on Monday arrested a young Iraqi bride as they hunted for her husband in the rebel town of Fallujah, west of Baghdad, just five days after their marriage, witnesses said.
"American soldiers surrounded the home in the Golan district of Saber Turki, whom they wanted to arrest," said neighbour Abdel Nasser Mahmud.
"After failing to find the husband, the Americans who pulled up in about 13 vehicles arrested and led away the wife, who has been married five days, and told neighbours she will not be released unless he gives himself up."
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?sf=28...2&set_id=6
[*]We've made new enemies where there were none:
Tribal leaders have been subjected to humiliating arrests in front of their tribesmen, hooded and handcuffed. US troops also were accused of putting their boots on the back of men's heads as they lay face down.
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/worl.../08/2003101671[/list]

These things are despicable, and the soldiers involved should be punished. But again, these are the actions of a few; you have yet to show the many.

Frankly, I'll tell you what I'd like to see: troop rotation. It is true that when people get used to a position of power, some of them go bad. This phenomenon has also been found in prison guards. The best way to remedy this is to root out the ones who go bad and get them the hell out of there; discharge them dishonorably, compensate whatever victims arose, and rotate in new troops from elsewhere.

This is ugly business, and the ones who make it uglier on both sides need to be dealt with. But that does not make the business itself flawed or unnecessary. Have you ever seen a sculptor working in clay? Creating a sculpture or vessel out of clay is filthy, hideous work, and yet out of it comes objects of great beauty that could not have come to be otherwise. Sometimes, to get to the good times, one must go through the bad. I do not pretend to think that what is happening there now is in any way moral or good. But neither do I pretend that there is another way.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Exactly. It's amazing how keen some people are to write off a place they've never been to and know very little about.

Oh really. No, I've never been to Fallujah, but I have been to Al Basrah and Umm Qasr. When you gonna take your trip there?

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by angaq0k:
They don't like us, therefore they're evil.

Then send us a nastygram or hide behind France in the UN, but when you drag our people (who are trying to help you) into the street and roast them alive for sport, you're evil. Period.

[eklipse]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Oh really. No, I've never been to Fallujah, but I have been to Al Basrah and Umm Qasr.

Good for you.

When you gonna take your trip there?

I lived in Baiji for about 2 years.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Then send us a nastygram or hide behind France in the UN, but when you drag our people (who are trying to help you) into the street and roast them alive for sport, you're evil. Period.

Strange, where are all the warm and fuzzy vibes of the humanitarian right who are "liberating" Iraq?

I and others told you before the invasion this sort of thing would happen.
No country likes to be occupied oppressively, even if they didn't like their previous overthrown government.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
Strange, where are all the warm and fuzzy vibes of the humanitarian right who are "liberating" Iraq?

I and others told you before the invasion this sort of thing would happen.
No country likes to be occupied oppressively, even if they didn't like their previous overthrown government.

And the liberals start with the monday morning quarterbacking. Have anything constructive to add, or a constructive fix? Or just more ad hom conservative bashing?

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Good for you.

I lived in Baiji for about 2 years.

So, I was in Iraq for church relief work, what drew you to such a "resort"?

[Spliffdaddy]

*SMACKDOWN*

[lil'babykitten]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
our people (who are trying to help you)

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by lil'babykitten:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

I think he means: Our people, who are trying to help (themselves) to you(r) oil.

[MacNStein]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
I think he means: Our people, who are trying to help (themselves) to you(r) oil.

Tell that to the 100K people we saved from Saddam's torture camps this year, Mr. MMQB.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
I and others told you before the invasion this sort of thing would happen.
No country likes to be occupied oppressively, even if they didn't like their previous overthrown government.

I read this with the similar quiet desperation I felt back when you and others predicted it and were shouted into the ground by the same right-wingers now none the wiser.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Millennium:
So in other words, because of the actions of a few psychos, the occupation of Iraq is a complete and utter failure?

I don't follow the logic. The actions of a few do not reflect the attitudes of the many.

The sky is falling.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
Strange, where are all the warm and fuzzy vibes of the humanitarian right who are "liberating" Iraq?

I and others told you before the invasion this sort of thing would happen.
No country likes to be occupied oppressively, even if they didn't like their previous overthrown government.

It's a good thing that it's not the MAJORITY that is doing this now isn't it?

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
I think he means: Our people, who are trying to help (themselves) to you(r) oil.

Ah to this day, it still amazes me people using the "War for Oil" schtick.

[nam_pog]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:

No country likes to be occupied oppressively, even if they didn't like their previous overthrown government.

Do you have anything to back up such a loaded statment? Or are you simply around for comic relief for your followers in this forum? All you do is write a semi-logical statement, and toss in a few keywords that are meant to insight others, and then sit back and wait for the ruckus to commence. Is that your purpose in here? I also have noticed when you have nothing to say in regard to a topic, you simply put a one word post meant to act as a taunt. I am amazed at what you are allowed to say to people.

The only people to ever not like being occupied are/were those that were in power previously or those that supported the previous regime. Why would you twist such historical events to suit your partisan and hatefilled views? Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been spared from living in fear of the governement's torture tactics. Are you blind to that fact? or do you choose not to see the truth for yourself? Are you political leanings that encroached and embedded that you cannot even admit and support something that is obviously better than what was there before?

The United States and Coalition forces are not an oppressive regime, we are a liberating force as much as you want to believe and convey to the contrary.

[eklipse]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
So, I was in Iraq for church relief work, what drew you to such a "resort"?

Oil.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by nam_pog:
Do you have anything to back up such a loaded statment?

Don't bother thanking me.

-s*

[Spliffdaddy]

there are people who honestly don't share that opinion, nam_pog.

all America-bashing and Dubya-hating aside, there are folks who do not interpret our actions in Iraq as being beneficial to Iraqis.

right or wrong, they have an opinion that differs from ours.

Americans being killed, dragged, hung from bridges would be no less ugly if Clinton was president right now. We would have no more support from countries that don't support us under Dubya now. The same countries that were anti-America before the liberation of Iraq are still anti-America. Therefore, I conclude that it doesn't make any difference who our president is AND there has always been anti-Americanism. These differing opinions you're hearing are honest ones. They are rooted in firm belief.

Are the Iraqi citizens better off as the result of our actions?

The answer seems obvious to both sides.

odd, huh?

Our goal is to convince the Iraqi citizens that we are, indeed, there for their (potential) benefit. I don't think they would believe ANY government was there to "protect" citizens. They likely haven't known anything resembling a caring, friendly government. I reckon they see westerners as occupiers and governing authority - and immediately assume the worst, having never known anything good to come from governments. Even in a country founded "for the people and by the people" we see a government that is very detached from its citizens. There aren't many "friendly" governments, I'm afraid. Which makes our goal of convincing Iraqis that we are 'good' all that much harder to attain.

Can we do it? Eventually, yes I believe we can. As long as we continue to *be* beneficial to the Iraqis - then I reckon there's no way they could believe otherwise. Until enough Iraqis see it and believe it, they'll continue to think we're just another oppressive regime...smaller, but way more heavily armed than the last one.

As long as our actions and intentions are good ones, we'll achieve our objective in Iraq. When we can make reality override the Iraqis' pre-conceived (and historically accurate) notion that government is inherently bad, then we will succeed. Until then, they'll kill us - just to be on the safe side.

[Zimphire]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
Don't bother thanking me.

-s*

The actions of few do not = the thoughts of all. Nice spin you got there.

[nam_pog]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:


Don't bother thanking me.

-s*

How does this prove anything except that there is a holdout group of Baathist party supporters intent on intimidating the local Iraqis and infuriating the rest of the world? If on the other hand you had posted pictures of multiple cities where they are revolting against the forces that have liberated them, then maybe I would support that you had some credibility. As it stands you only come across as a spiteful, partisan, angry person willing to use these pictures for your own twisted purposes other than what they really represent. They represent what I stated in the first sentence.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by MacNStein:
Tell that to the 100K people we saved from Saddam's torture camps this year, Mr. MMQB.

sure, as soon as you tell it to the thousands lost to "collateral damage" from our occupation...oh wait, that's right, you can't.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by eklipse:
Exactly. It's amazing how keen some people are to write off a place they've never been to and know very little about.

I've been there, and even left a couple of pints of my own blood there when I left. The difference is, unlike some people on this board, I don't think spending some time somewhere makes me an expert on the place, nor does it give me the false impression that I accurately know the hearts and minds of an entire country. I've been living in the US for 20 years, and I would never presume to know the hearts and minds of the entire country, even though I have lived here for more than half my life.