Eyewitness Interview:

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: irwincur

I would agree with your statement except for the fact that this war has created MORE terrorists.

It has also killed more terrorists.

You have to be stupid to miss the entire point of this war. It was to drag the terrorists out of the caves, and into the waiting hands of those that are best trained to kill them. 120,000 soldiers sitting here at home were not killing many terrorists, much less keeping them busy and occupied. Hence, they had time and money to plot and plan.

120,000 soldiers are now bringing the fight to them. Doing a few things.

1. Killing them.
2. Killing more importantly, experienced membership.
3. Forcing them to use resources (guns, ammo, explosives, etc...) that otherwise could have been used elsewhere.
4. Forcing the leadership to hide underground, limiting communication and training.
5. Did I say killing them?

It is pretty damn simple what the goal was here. In my opinion it was brilliant. We can just wait for them to either kill themselves or get killed by us. It is perfect in terms of strategy. What smarter than giving them a little kick in the a$$ to all congregate in one area for us.

1. Wrong
2. Wrong
3. Wrong
4. Not in Iraq
5. Did I say wrong?

In case you haven't read or watched the news in the last 18 months or so, the people we are fighting in Iraq are overwhelmingly NOT al Qaeda and other preexisting terrorists. They are mostly Iraqis who are, right or wrong, trying to defend their country from a foreign invader. Our actions in Afghanistan were legitimate actions against terrorist targets. Bush's invasion of Iraq was an unwarranted act of aggression and a diversion from the real "war" against terrorists.

Just for the record.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: charrison
It is only one persons opinion being posted from a less then credible source.

Less than credible source??? Journalist Michael Ware is the Baghdad Bureau Chief for Time Magazine! Get a grip, man, you are in such deep, deep denial.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
...

So was Dave or was he not saying my friends in the marines were "Fearless Liar Lemmings"?

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
...

So was Dave or was he not saying my friends in the marines were "Fearless Liar Lemmings"?

If you have questions about something Dave said, I suggest you address them to Dave. If you disagree with or have a question about something I wrote, please quote the comment in question and tell us what's on your mind about it. If you are unwilling to address anything I said ...

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
...

So was Dave or was he not saying my friends in the marines were "Fearless Liar Lemmings"?

If you have questions about something Dave said, I suggest you address them to Dave. If you disagree with or have a question about something I wrote, please quote the comment in question and tell us what's on your mind about it. If you are unwilling to address anything I said ...

You are replying to my reply to Dave. You directly addressed that in my post. Let's get that out of the way first, FIFO, then we'll go on to your points.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: irwincur
In Germany and Japan the US lost over 10,000 soldiers in the post war occupation. Hostilities occured for almost a decade after the official end of the war.

Wow, you are so full of shlt, it's unbelievable. You just made that up!

The post war occupations of both Germany and Japan were remarkably peaceful! My father led a 5-6 man Navy detail up from Yokahama Naval Base on the (still functioning!) light rail into Tokyo TWO DAYS BEFORE the armistice was even signed, on what proved to be a sightseeing tour. He told me it was eerie walking through the rubble of Tokyo while getting the blank, exhausted, mutely accusatory stares of the near destitute and war weary civilians. Somewhere, I have the tiny (victory?) size photos to prove it.

He told me that story once, but I only finally saw the dated photos after his death. In one, this group of strapping six foot plus young navy officers poses with their five foot something, possibly buck toothed, ill outfitted Japanese home guard type -- it's really comical in a deeply racist way!

Another is a photo of rows and rows of half finished kamikaze submarines. I say kamikaze because they look way too small for anything else. If and when I muster the courage to look through the boxes I brought up Florida again, I'll scan and share.

Anyway, back to main point: You're full of horse-doody. There were some mop-up operations in Germany involving "Werewolf" diehards, but the civilian populace was docile as hell. In Japan -- nada, bupkis, zilch. "Hostilities for over a decade', "Over 10,000 soldiers lost", you're just a really bad liar!

 

[Minchenden]

Did any of you even read the so called "letters" from a "US marine" that alchemize posted. They would not have been out of place in a Hallmark store. Anyone who believes they were written by an active duty soldier obviously still believes in the tooth fairy.
If one looks at the grammar, the tenses used, and the general language, one realises very quickly that this is just another "form letter", with no emotion, and very little else, within it or behind it.
And, by the way, as an ex Royal Marine, I will forego the kind offer of $5.00 for a replacement set of dentures. It would not be needed. At least, not by me.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Minchenden
Did any of you even read the so called "letters" from a "US marine" that alchemize posted. They would not have been out of place in a Hallmark store. Anyone who believes they were written by an active duty soldier obviously still believes in the tooth fairy.
If one looks at the grammar, the tenses used, and the general language, one realises very quickly that this is just another "form letter", with no emotion, and very little else, within it or behind it.
And, by the way, as an ex Royal Marine, I will forego the kind offer of $5.00 for a replacement set of dentures. It would not be needed. At least, not by me.

I'll gladly PM you the email address, names, and unit. I will expect a complete and full public retraction after I do so.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
...

So was Dave or was he not saying my friends in the marines were "Fearless Liar Lemmings"?

If you have questions about something Dave said, I suggest you address them to Dave. If you disagree with or have a question about something I wrote, please quote the comment in question and tell us what's on your mind about it. If you are unwilling to address anything I said ...

You are replying to my reply to Dave. You directly addressed that in my post. Let's get that out of the way first, FIFO, then we'll go on to your points.

OK, that's cool. Let me know if & when you're up to addressing my points.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
...

So was Dave or was he not saying my friends in the marines were "Fearless Liar Lemmings"?

What is so difficult???

In uniform, no.

Out of Uniform, yes.

No different than Retired Gen Tommy Franks.

 

[Perknose]

alchy, I just read those two letters you posted, and, no, I don't think they're lying. Nevertheless, not one thing either troop writes gainsays what Michael Ware, the Baghdad Bureau Chief for Time Magazine, said in his all too honest interview. I suggest you listen to it again, or listen to it for the first time, whichever, and then come back and tell me here which part of what he said you believe to be a lie.

You set up a false dichotomy when you pit those Marines against Michael Ware, and say Ware must be lying because of what the two troop wrote. Please take the time to listen to his interview. It is as honest as the day is long. If you still think he's lying", then please detail his lies to us.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Perknose
alchy, I just read those two letters you posted, and, no, I don't think they're lying. Nevertheless, not one thing either troop writes gainsays what Michael Ware, the Baghdad Bureau Chief for Time Magazine, said in his all too honest interview. I suggest you listen to it again, or listen to it for the first time, whichever, and then come back and tell me here which part of what he said you believe to be a lie.

You set up a false dichotomy when you pit those Marines against Michael Ware, and say Ware must be lying because of what the two troop wrote. Please take the time to listen to his interview. It is as honest as the day is long. If you still think he's lying", then please detail his lies to us.

well here was my crystallization of what I thought he was doing. "actually he's just accentuating the negative, and talking slippery reporter talk" It's basically his opinion. It's not reporting, its a big opinion piece, and an extremely leftist one at that. I mined a few gems...

Examples:

I mean, I wasn?t in the room when that happened. But I was in that battlefield, and I?ve certainly seen?. Put it this way, that? wouldn?t have been the first such occasion. If I had been there?. And even in Fallujah itself, I saw stuff that was very akin to that.

Very much akin. What exactly does that mean?? Nothing but innuendo in there, no facts.

I mean it would be glib to say that the hearts of minds of the people that we haven?t yet killed?

Oh yah that's nice biased reporting Heck, that's an ATPN post!

Truth to that. I mean, honestly, I see day by day as we add to the ranks of the insurgency?

How the fvck does he know?

Well, I?m often troubled by just exactly why it is that the West went into Iraq . Because, it seems to me that the best justification that was made was somehow it related to the war on terror, yet I?m afraid to say, as in Fallujah, with all of Iraq , if this is to prevent terrorism, then it?s failing. We?re promoting, or spawning, or giving birth to terrorism, by our presence there.

Some more unbiased journalism and ATPN posting

He was a human rights nightmare. But, was he exporting terror? No! Now, we are doing that. We?ve created the new Afghanistan .

Ah, the crux of it. The US is exporting terrorism...more ATPN posting.

Now, be it, I?ve been there? I?ve watched civilians atomized before my eyes by withering US fire. And?.

Oh really. He knows they were civilians. He was watching it. Even though every other reporter talks about how they rarely, if ever, saw the enemy because they were heads down, under fire.

In six days of non-stop combat I didn?t see a single civilian

Wow. Just those that got atomized, huh? Oh I see, you were talking about other civilians before Fallujah. Hmm...

I?m rarely sober enough to think about that.

That explains a lot

 

[Engineer]

Come on guys...didn't you get the memo?

Everything is all

's in Iraq. That guy didn't know what the fvck he was talking about....the Matrix...not real.

Even Powell isn't in the real world when he said that the Iraq insurgency "Will Not End". Of course it won't...it can't, otherwise we would have a good reason to leave. As long as they are there, we get to stay and play war and plan the NAC.

Let's give them their elections. It would be too much to do it on the up and up, so let's give them elections and then choose who we want in power. Once they have their governement, let's transition ourselves out of Iraq ASAP.

End Of Line

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: alchemize
well here was my crystallization of what I thought he was doing. "actually he's just accentuating the negative, and talking slippery reporter talk" It's basically his opinion. It's not reporting, its a big opinion piece, and an extremely leftist one at that. I mined a few gems...

LOL, crystallization of what you were saying, do tell! :laugh:

Here's your full quote, alchy: "Either he is lying (actually he's just accentuating the negative, and talking slippery reporter talk) or the marines I read letters from every day in Fallujah, some of them personal friends of mine, are lying. Guess who I believe."

There's your "crystallization" for you, LOL!

Now, the only example of his possible lying that you give is this:

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, be it, I?ve been there? I?ve watched civilians atomized before my eyes by withering US fire. And?.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh really. He knows they were civilians. He was watching it. Even though every other reporter talks about how they rarely, if ever, saw the enemy because they were heads down, under fire.


quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In six days of non-stop combat I didn?t see a single civilian
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wow. Just those that got atomized, huh? Oh I see, you were talking about other civilians before Fallujah. Hmm...

The first quote is NOT from his embedded Fallujah experience, alchy, which is why it doesn't conflict with his second quote. Remember, although he was embedded with the Army in Fallujah last month, he's been on Iraq covering the war since February of 2003 -- almost two years! And he spent the full year before in Afghanistan.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: irwincur
In Germany and Japan the US lost over 10,000 soldiers in the post war occupation. Hostilities occured for almost a decade after the official end of the war.

Wow, you are so full of shlt, it's unbelievable. You just made that up!

The post war occupations of both Germany and Japan were remarkably peaceful! My father led a 5-6 man Navy detail up from Yokahama Naval Base on the (still functioning!) light rail into Tokyo TWO DAYS BEFORE the armistice was even signed, on what proved to be a sightseeing tour. He told me it was eerie walking through the rubble of Tokyo while getting the blank, exhausted, mutely accusatory stares of the near destitute and war weary civilians. Somewhere, I have the tiny (victory?) size photos to prove it.

He told me that story once, but I only finally saw the dated photos after his death. In one, this group of strapping six foot plus young navy officers poses with their five foot something, possibly buck toothed, ill outfitted Japanese home guard type -- it's really comical in a deeply racist way!

Another is a photo of rows and rows of half finished kamikaze submarines. I say kamikaze because they look way too small for anything else. If and when I muster the courage to look through the boxes I brought up Florida again, I'll scan and share.

Anyway, back to main point: You're full of horse-doody. There were some mop-up operations in Germany involving "Werewolf" diehards, but the civilian populace was docile as hell. In Japan -- nada, bupkis, zilch. "Hostilities for over a decade', "Over 10,000 soldiers lost", you're just a really bad liar!

Indeed he is full of sh!t. I guess he didn't get the memo that it belongs in the toilet, not in this thread.

http://www.unknownnews.net/riceandrumsfeld.html

In practice, Werwolf amounted to next to nothing. The mayor of Aachen was assassinated on March 25, 1945, on Himmler's orders. This was not a nice thing to do, but it happened before the May 7 Nazi surrender at Reims. It's hardly surprising that Berlin sought to undermine the American occupation before the war was over. And as the U.S. Army's official history, The U.S. Army in the Occupation of Germany 1944-1946, points out, the killing was "probably the Werwolf's most sensational achievement."

Indeed, the organization merits but two passing mentions in Occupation of Germany, which dwells far more on how docile the Germans were once the Americans rolled in ? and fraternization between former enemies was a bigger problem for the military than confrontation. Although Gen. Eisenhower had been worrying about guerrilla warfare as early as August 1944, little materialized. There was no major campaign of sabotage. There was no destruction of water mains or energy plants worth noting. In fact, the far greater problem for the occupying forces was the misbehavior of desperate displaced persons, who accounted for much of the crime in the American zone.

So the biggest achievement of the feared german resistance was the predetermined assasination of a small town mayor 3 weeks after the surrender. Iraq's insurgency seems just a bit worse.

The Army history records that while there were the occasional anti-occupation leaflets and graffiti, the GIs had reason to feel safe.

Leaflets and Graffiti! OMG! Anything but that!

According to America's Role in Nation-Building: From Germany to Iraq, a new study by former Ambassador James Dobbins, who had a lead role in the Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo reconstruction efforts, and a team of RAND Corporation researchers, the total number of post-conflict American combat casualties in Germany ? and Japan, Haiti, and the two Balkan cases ? was zero.

Hmm..seems to me that 1000 and rising is more than 0.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: irwincur

I would agree with your statement except for the fact that this war has created MORE terrorists.

It has also killed more terrorists.

You have to be stupid to miss the entire point of this war. It was to drag the terrorists out of the caves, and into the waiting hands of those that are best trained to kill them. 120,000 soldiers sitting here at home were not killing many terrorists, much less keeping them busy and occupied. Hence, they had time and money to plot and plan.

120,000 soldiers are now bringing the fight to them. Doing a few things.

1. Killing them.
2. Killing more importantly, experienced membership.
3. Forcing them to use resources (guns, ammo, explosives, etc...) that otherwise could have been used elsewhere.
4. Forcing the leadership to hide underground, limiting communication and training.
5. Did I say killing them?

It is pretty damn simple what the goal was here. In my opinion it was brilliant. We can just wait for them to either kill themselves or get killed by us. It is perfect in terms of strategy. What smarter than giving them a little kick in the a$$ to all congregate in one area for us.

Wow that is brilliant! It worked so well in VN too! We killed all the worlds Commies, right? Sure.


WWII is the wrong analogy. What you ought to do is look at how well the Brits did in that area after WWI.

They created a "democracy" after years of strife and declared victory. That means they buggered out once they smartened up.

 

[Gamingphreek]

For everyone who is saying that we dont belong in Iraq. Why?

Do you expect the government officials to share every single bit of inteligence they ever recieve with the American People?? Because if they did it wouldn't be intelligence any more it would either cease to exist or become useless common knowledge.

-Kevin

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
For everyone who is saying that we dont belong in Iraq. Why?

Do you expect the government officials to share every single bit of inteligence they ever recieve with the American People?? Because if they did it wouldn't be intelligence any more it would either cease to exist or become useless common knowledge.

-Kevin

We are fighting a war, but we can't tell you why?

If it were so important IN FACT that we be there we would know about it.

 

[Gamingphreek]

They did tell you why. They even went into a little bit of specifics of the intel. But why would expect them to tell you everything.

If you remember on the news while Colin Powell was speaking to the UN, he showed pictures from satellite of an Iraqi mobile weapons "facility". That seems good enough reason right there. Also in case you haven't noticed we haven't had any more terrorist attacks. We brought the fight to them. Yeah are soldiers are dying over there but that happens in war. Im sure most all of them would rather fight and lose their life rather than the US be attacked again and lose 10x more innocent lives.

-Kevin

 

[OneOfTheseDays]

Do you Republicans ever get tired of being mercilessly beaten in the forum of public internet debate? I mean, every single one of you (alchemize, CAD, irwincur, etc.) has been disproven and made a fool of. I bet none of you even bothered to read or listen to the article that was linked. Your problem is that none of you are willing to give the time of day to anything which doesn't agree with your misguided POV. The only thing that would make you believe the Iraq situation is as bad as it is would be for you to physically go to Iraq and witness for yourselves.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
They did tell you why. They even went into a little bit of specifics of the intel. But why would expect them to tell you everything.

If you remember on the news while Colin Powell was speaking to the UN, he showed pictures from satellite of an Iraqi mobile weapons "facility". That seems good enough reason right there. Also in case you haven't noticed we haven't had any more terrorist attacks. We brought the fight to them. Yeah are soldiers are dying over there but that happens in war. Im sure most all of them would rather fight and lose their life rather than the US be attacked again and lose 10x more innocent lives.

-Kevin[/q

It is good that "facility" is in quotes, for in fact it was not. A reasonable amount of doubt would have helped analysis of data immensely. Unfortunately circumspection is not characteristic of this administration.

I hate to break it to you, but terrorists can be in more than one place at at time, and it is incredibly easy to accomplish chaos. Terrorists are many things, but idiots they are not.

Considering that the US is supporting Bin Ladens agenda of unrest in the Middle East, why do they need to strike? If they decide to do so, then they will.

Terrorism isn't blindly lashing out. It is a calculating business. If they decide to strike they will. If not they won't. Look at how afraid people are about little pissants in Iraq. Scared of their own shadows hoping for some Republican Cowboy to come riding in with the sunrise.

I believe that Bin Laden is waiting, and his supporters will strike with something big at what they consider the right moment. If they do set off a nuke in DC, I expect to hear people clamoring that we should have struck Saddam sooner.

 

[dmcowen674]

Some soldiers were here for the Holiday and this morning left for return to Afghanistan and Iraq.

Moral is extremely low.

The urban warfare and ambushes is wearing down on the guys

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Some soldiers were here for the Holiday and this morning left for return to Afghanistan and Iraq.

Moral is extremely low.

The urban warfare and ambushes is wearing down on the guys

And it is going to.

THis is unlike any war america has ever fought. It is even unlike Vietnam. In Vietnam there was one enemy just launching guerilla attacks everywhere. Here there is no enemy it is just crime at its extreme.

Also to the post before. Mobile weapons just dont pop into your country without you knowing. Saddam knew and we knew that he has harbored terrorists and supported them. If he is such an innocent man like some of you are making him out to be then why did you almost commit genocide on that one group (IIRC it was the Kurds).

-Kevin

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Some soldiers were here for the Holiday and this morning left for return to Afghanistan and Iraq.

Moral is extremely low.

The urban warfare and ambushes is wearing down on the guys

You're just so un-American for even suggesting that. I'm sending the Secret Service and the FBI over to your house RIGHT NOW!

 

[chipmonk]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Some soldiers were here for the Holiday and this morning left for return to Afghanistan and Iraq.

Moral is extremely low.

The urban warfare and ambushes is wearing down on the guys

You're just so un-American for even suggesting that. I'm sending the Secret Service and the FBI over to your house RIGHT NOW!

lol