Go get 'em boys!

CTRL-C, CTRL-V...

SEMPER-FI
"An eye for an eye, make'em die".

This may be, perhaps, an opportunity to finally break the back of the loyalists in Iraq. Thankfully, most Iraqis don't support the Thug who instigated all of this.

As hokie as this sounds, I wish I were there as part of the US forces. I feel worthless here reading about all this and not being able to do my part.

I have a good friend, my best friend from high school and college, over there now. I should be there too.

David

David,

--and I don't mean to be flippant -- but I really think you should be over there, too.

So what's stopping you?

Thanks
Shark

I really think you should be over there, too.

Age. I'm too old. And yes, you are being flippant but thats okay, I agree with you.

David

You are only as old as your last pro-War post, FF. Besides, there are reservists in their 50s in Iraq. You are in the reserves? No? Own a bomber jacket instead?

You are in the reserves? No? Own a bomber jacket instead?

No and no! Thank you for playing, better luck next time. ;-)

David

David, honestly, I wasn't being flippant. I just think that anyone as dedicated to the liberation of Iraq as you are should probably be serving our country over there, especially now that we have an all-volunteer Army. I'm sure you would be a valuable asset.

No insult intended or implied. Seriously.

(I think it's an automatic with me: when I hear a young, gung-ho guy who is all for the war as an abstraction; my first thought is, "why aren't you there?" I think it's a legitimate question, given the controversial nature of this 'war'.

But as to the age thing, man, do I understand that restriction!

Best,
Shark

Last I checked, the US was not seeking re-enforcements in Iraq. So why sign up?

If the government starts pleading for more people to sign up, because they need more troops in Iraq, then that's somewhat different.

Tens of millions of Americans support this war. They can't all join, can they?

I'm sure you would be a valuable asset.

Shark,

I appreciate the clarification and I truly appreciate the compliment. I apologize for not giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Thanks again.

David

RJ,

Perhaps I feel the pressure all the more because I grew up in a military town and the vast majority of my friends from high school went into the military. I didn't out of high school because I was tired of being told to stand in lines and to show my hall pass just to go to the bathroom.

I was right not to go at the time, but I wish I had gone into OCS after college. Hindsight is 20/20 of course.

Thanks.

David

David:

My father was a Marine. But when I mentioned the possibility of joining the armed forces after I graduated High School, he vetoed it (I was 17).

He was probably right. I don't like being told what to do. I probably would not make a great fit for the Marines, or the Army, or any of the rest of the branches of the US military.

But I support them. And I want them to crush the enemy.

I support the War wholeheartedly but I am not ready to die for it. Therefore, I do not want to be where grenades and kalashnikovs are being used. Thank you very much. That's why we have the Army. Those who are prepared to die defending their country, join. They deserve our gratitude and thanks for such selfless acts.

If politics can be taken out of military exercise, we will not be in this position. These people were trained to kill. Defend themselves. If they are being attacked, they should defend themselves even if that means killing Iraqis. I don't care how many Iraqis are announced dead on all the networks. Hearing how many coalition soldiers have been mutilated and strung up by the Euphrates river or how many helicopers have crashed or soldiers have died, only encourages these barbarians.

As I write, the Americans admit they have lost control of Kut and Najaf. There are no innocent Iraqis. If you are killed in the battlefield and not inside your home, you aren't innocent. God speed.

If diplomats and do-gooders can just shut the fuck up and let the coalition get to it, more innocent lives will be saved rather than lost. Kill the troublemakers without mercy,, be them in Mosques. End of story.

Sandra,

Perhaps your term "Barbarians" is not dehumanizing the enemy enough? Why not just call these humans "Things?" Then it will be even easier to kill them.....

If politics are ever taken out of military exercise, I don't think you would like the results. Although I understand you would prefer a world without diplomacy and doing good. The depth of your analasys brings tears to my eyes.

The rundown seems to be. Shut up, the liberated Iraqi people, ingratefull dogs that they are deserve to die. If you get in the way of a bullet you probably deserve to die anyway.

your halo runs a little thin when you ask for all the troublemakers to be killed. America was SAVING Iraq from the merciless, wasn't that it?

No you will tell me you need to be merciless to win peace. It's been tried, maybe true. But in the end, before good things happen you need patience, and some cultural sensitivity. America traditionally lacks both.

Maybe you just shouldn't be there.

Or maybe you will surprise me... I wonder

Wholeheartedly...

without mercy...

kill em all...

Hang THEM from bridges, or better yet find trees...

Can you feel the love, Sandra?

us good, them bad... US strong and big, they weak and little. Stomp on them.

But then again, the bigger they are.... etc.


end of story... indeed

Chris Kent: Sandra, Perhaps your term "Barbarians" is not dehumanizing the enemy enough? Why not just call these humans "Things?" Then it will be even easier to kill them.....

Sandra: Okay..Things.


Bernard, if only I could offer you some kleenex. I think it is clear what I mean. In my view, once the Policy has been adopted that Military action is needed, it is counter productive to allow Politics to interfere with the ongoing Military action. We went into the Iraq war to take out Sadaam and find WMD. We've accomplished one. Constant debates on the rights and wrongs of the War help no one. Constant debates on the soldiers continuous presence in Iraq, help no one. Therefore, in the efforts to prevent further outcry, soldiers are forced to stand with plastic shades for protection against people incensed for all varierty of reasons throwing stones, grenades, etc at them. Many dying in the process. A retaliatory attack will ofcourse lead in the do-gooders screaming of innocent Iraqis being killed and how the whole action was/is pointless.

Bernard, this is the problem with people like you. You get carried away in the euphoria of righteousness. I never said the Iraqi people should shut up. In fact, a majority of the Iraqi people are onside with the coalition. But yes, dear bernard, those who come out in arms now, causing chaos and the current unrest for whatever reason, are not innocent Iraqis trying to go on with their lives. They are indeed ungrateful because during the Sadaam reign, they suffered in silence lest they be slaughtered. Their first chance of freedom and some of them use it to cause civil unrest. It's not if you are caught in the line of fire..if you are on the attack and you are killed in the process, then you will die. Whether you deserve to die or not is another case.

My Halo? I'll leave that comment because it doesn't deserve a response.

We agree Bernard. Before good things happen you need patience and cultural sensitivity. If 12 years is not patience enough for Iraq, I don't know what patience is. Cultural sensitivity? What are you talking about? None of the coalition have gone in there trying to change the Iraqi religion or the Iraqi way of life. THE IRAQIS did not like or want Sadaam. The Iraqis want to rule themselves. This is what the co-alition are hoping to provide. call it liberation, call it what you will.

At times like this, I always say, you talk so because you are not an Iraqi who lived under Hussein's reign. If you were, you would not be so quick to criticise America's so called lack of patience and sensitivity. You should thank your God you live where you live. But for the Grace of God, you could have easily been any of the Iraqis killed by Sadaam simply because you dared voice your opinion as you are clearly doing now.

The rest of your post would bring tears to MY eyes if I didn't think it complete poppycock! Break out the Violins. Sing me another song. This is not a matter of good against Evil, or strong against weak. Your sympathies are misplaced and unnecessary.

The simple truth is that the Coalition did not go in there to kill innocent Iraqi citizens. They went in there after 12 yrs of PATIENCE to take out a tyrant and a threat be it a passive threat to the world. Directly or indirectly, Saddam was a threat. Now, that that has been done. It is International Law that they try to clear up the mess as there will always be in such cases. Ofcourse, there have been unfortunate losses of innocent lives on both sides along the way. This was not intended. However, it happens.

Nothing nauseates me more than when peace campaigners play this righteous card of "us big and strong so we are stomping on them" . please, that is not the point. I bet there are far smaller Countries to attack if it was all about a show of power. Yeah, the bigger they are, the harder they fall..

Then again, why is a man with a catapult for a weapon, fighting a man with an automatic machine gun?!

Now Sandra,

Your next step is to begin putting together a Final Solution.....I would advise to construction of concentration camps, and, of course, a furnace or two......

Please don't forget to build a bonfire with books.....:)

Sandra,

Take away 12 words in your post, and it's a damn letter from Heinrich Himmler to Adolph.....

Yikes!

Aah..alas Chris..if only the Iraqis are were Jews...concentration camps? That's been done already. Give me something original.

Never subtle, never diplomatic, Sandra is essentially correct here: we really ARE there to do good, to help one flipping Middle Eastern country become democratic, to rise above tribal and religious factionalism and function like a real, modern country. In the process there is much to overcome, including those who seek to impose their own specific factional will upon their fellow countrymen via brute force and terror. The most brazen, depraved and determined of these is who we are fighting now. We musrt crush these forces militarily in order to move forward with the democratic agenda.

I believe that is what Sandra is saying here, and as such she is correct.

delete "are" from my above post..leave were...again, take away 12 words from my post, it could also be a letter from White Supremacist leaders to caucasians like your middle class self..it could even be a letter demanding the destruction of 2 million during the Rwanda Genocide..we can go on and on, Chris. Let me know when you would like to stop:)

Thank you Eric. For understanding the point I am making.

Adolph, if only I could offer you some kleenex. I think it is clear what I mean. In my view, once the Policy has been adopted that Military action is needed, it is counter productive to allow Politics to interfere with the ongoing Military action. We went into Poland to take out the country. We've accomplished our goal. Constant debates on the rights and wrongs of the War help no one. Constant debates on the soldiers continuous presence in Poland, help no one. Therefore, in the efforts to prevent further outcry, soldiers are forced to stand with plastic shades for protection against people incensed for all varierty of reasons throwing stones, grenades, etc at them. Many dying in the process. A retaliatory attack will of course lead in the do-gooders screaming of innocent Jews being killed and how the whole action was/is pointless.

Adolph, this is the problem with people like you. You get carried away in the euphoria of righteousness. I never said the Polish people should shut up. In fact, a majority of the Polish people are onside with the coalition. But yes, dear Adolph, those who come out in arms now, causing chaos and the current unrest for whatever reason, are not innocent Jews trying to go on with their lives. They are indeed ungrateful because during the former reign, they suffered in silence lest they be slaughtered. Their first chance of freedom and some of them use it to cause civil unrest. It's not if you are caught in the line of fire..if you are on the attack and you are killed in the process, then you will die.

You're brainwashed Sandra.....and you don't even know it....

I like a few of your points Sandra (in other posts), but you make a stand for hatred.....and it's kind of scary.....Just wanted to make a point....

This is not a war between you and I.....nor a war of intelligence.....I am talking about human beings.....you're talking hatred....

Okay Chris. I did not think it was a War b/w you and I:) Just thought we were debating our disagreements. I don't think I am talking hatred. I also, fully understand your point though I think it is misguided. But I can't legislate for your perception of my point, nor you for my perception of yours. That's life. Please, feel free to take me to task on anything I say on any topic that you think is complete rubbish:) I won't hesitate to do the same on your points. That, to me, is what Blogcritics is for.

My only point, and I am not calling you a Nazi, is that our enemies cannot be categorized as Things. They are human like the rest of us. We must mourn the killing in general, which was not started by us, granted. If the answers were as simple as John Wayne, and they never are, then we would not be dying over there. They consider us evil, and they consider us the bad guys. We let the dogs loose, and women and children will be dead in piles......I hate these situations, but know in the long run, inevitably, it will most likely lead to changes in philosophy, perhaps religion and beliefs......We have tested our muscle in Iraq, now it's time to move on to the true business at hand. Catching the terrorists and executing each and every one of them....

Chris, YOU asked me to categorize them as things. I called them Barbarians. Which is what those I refer to..are. You are prepared to see the killing of terrorists but have a problem with the killing of Iraqi militants? The Iraqi Mujahadeen militia are terrorists you know? They are just small fry because they haven't had the opportunity to become big fish in their ponds. This is why they must be stopped before they get that chance.

So, please, allow me to believe that the muscle flexing in Iraq is well and truly justified and will only help in the execution of Terrorists.

I was being rather sarcastic with the "Things" comment Sandra, and you give me a pain between my ears akin to arguments with my ex-girlfriend.....

However, I don't entirely agree with your term about Iraq militants. They are fighting for every good damn reason God gave man to fight. They are defending home, country and a way of life......These people have been raised for generations in their beliefs.....We are asking them to disown the beliefs and life of their parents?......How much do you love your parents? How easy would it be to erase their memory?

There is no easy solution to the quagmire of Iraq....... But in less than four years, we will be going after the true terrorists......so I suppose the eventual sacrifice will be worthwhile.....Would Iraq have become active terrorists after 911? Most likely.....I have struggled with this war since Day 1. And I fluctuate back and forth. But I will never refer to these people as Barbaric.....Because then we risk making mistakes of the past......

Chris, you are yet to give me a pain in the neck akin to my ex-boyfriend and i hope for your sake that you do not:)

Terrorists too, believe they are defending a way of life. What do you think? you think they are just doing it for the hell of it? They believe they are defending a way of life. The comment you have made about the Iraqi militia shows me that you are not well informed.
The mujahadeens and other insurgents are fighting the co-alition not to protect a way of life but to become the power. In fact, the way of life the Mujahadeen are trying to protect is the life they lived under Sadaam. Where those that followed the leader lived in luxury while the vast majority of Iraqis died at an alarming rate, daily. Far more than the total number of casualties we've had since the War.

Where do you get the impression that we are asking them to disown their beliefs and their way of life? Where on earth do u come up with this stuff? I think you are getting carried away in a self-created drama. The Iraq War? Sadaam killing people..We took him out..Now, trying to sort the mess caused by War? Make it the democracy the Iraqis THEMSELVES desire? To run themselves? Does any of that ring a bell? Or are you still in la la land?

Once again Sandra, you are brainwashed and don't even realize it.....

These people have been raised for generations in their beliefs.....We are asking them to disown the beliefs and life of their parents?......

The problem, Chris, is that some of these people today threatened to burn their Japanese civilian hostages alive if Japan didn't pull out of Iraq.

Are we supposed to value those types of actions, which of course are based upon a set of beliefs?

As the conversation has progressed, I'm still pretty much with Sandra here: the people fighting aginst us in Iraq are either terrorist/insurgents from outside the country wh ohate everything Western, Sunni Baathist/Saddam sympathizers who got all the goodies under Saddam and don't want to share them, Shiiite Islamists who demand a Taliban-like theocracy and who hate everything Western.

None of these people are "normal" Iraqis, none of them are fighting for anything noble - the most committed must be killed and/or locked up and the others strongly dissuaded from pursuing their anti-democratic agendas.

For goodness sake, Eric. Don't try to make sense of all this. I am a hostile angry individual living up in the mountains who will come down and eat anything edible. I categorise races as Barbarians and I am brain washed. Do not dare to see any sense in my post on this topic. Please.

Threatening to kill the Japanese? These are their beliefs. It's their way of life and we have no business telling them to do otherwise. Afterall, they are trying to protect the way of life handed down to them by their parents.

Ah..crikey!..LOL. Too may freaks, not enough circuses.

The notion that we are exercising restraint with regard to civilian casualties is laughable. Not even Bill O'Reilly or George F. Will believe it anymore. Give it up. The United States government is reviled around the world for its behavior in Iraq, and rightly so. It is a despicable regime, utterly without legitimacy.

I am seriously coming around to the notion that we didn't inflict enough damage a year ago to demoralize and pacify these pricks - this time we should not make the same mistake.

the time has come: pork aerosol bombs.

Mike please be more specific. I'm a former military person stationed at Ft.Bragg, NC as a MP with the 82nd Airborne.

A US Soldier can't even smack a prisioner who has assaulted him/her without being fined or arressted.

82nd Air Borne: "DEATH FROM ABOVE"!
US MARINES: "SEMPER FI"!

"the time has come: pork aerosol bombs."

LOL...

Barbarian: a savage, cruel person; a brute.

The above from Webster's NewWorld Dictionary (Second College Edition).

Sounds like the thugs in Iraq who take civilian prisoners and threaten to burn them alive. Sounds like the kinds of Iraqis who attack civilians delivering food to children, and mutilate their burnt corpses, and hang them from a bridge, and dance and laugh.

Yep. These fuckers are "barbarians." And they need to die. For the sake of the rest of the world.

"I am seriously coming around to the notion that we didn't inflict enough damage a year ago to demoralize and pacify these pricks - this time we should not make the same mistake."

The apologetics for massive civilian casualties has begun. Now that these isolated dead enders have taken over whole cities--WHOLE CITIES--I think we'll be seeing a lot more of these apologetics.

By the way, "half these pricks" were on our side a year ago.

Some more pricks we need to kill:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62783-2004Apr8.html

These too:

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,9231695%255E2,00.html

Yup.

WWII would have been much bloodier for the Allies without Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Japan is now a decent, non-barbaric country.

There's no need to nuke Iraq. Just conventionally kill the scum who are trying to kill our boys (and girls) in uniform.

Long-term, everyone will be better off if a few more lunatics claim their 72 virgins a little earlier than planned...

The bottom line is that when you fight an ideologically-driven (including the ideology of self-interest), it is not enough to "win" - in order to snap ideologues - and especially their sympathizers and supporters - out of their misbegotten ideology they must be crushed and humiliated. Now is the time for such action.

This really doesn't come as a surprise. This is the "urban combat" that was a big concern in the beginning, it just came later than expected.

Regrouping and recruiting other extremist was the smartest thing they ever did. Unfortunately for us and our alis we were caught a little off guard.

It makes it even tougher when you're against people who has no regard for the lives of their own, much less anyone else.

"The bottom line is that when you fight an ideologically-driven (including the ideology of self-interest), it is not enough to "win" - in order to snap ideologues - and especially their sympathizers and supporters - out of their misbegotten ideology they must be crushed and humiliated. Now is the time for such action."

Since 1967, this strategy has proven extremely effective for Israel. The Palestinians have learned their lesson and no longer resort to terrorism.

The problem is that *everyone* fights for ideology, even if it's the ideology of democracy. Some ideologies are more palatable to the larger world, that's all.

So let's just admit that we think our ideology -- or beliefs -- are better than theirs.

The problem with ideology in Iraq is that there are more ethnic groups and diversity in a country the size of California than the whole US. What gives?

I seriously doubt the country will be stable enough a year from June much less this June.

US has been sniping civilians and ambulances in falluja:

From Jo Wilding who has been inFalluja:

'Screaming women come in, praying, slapping their chests and faces. Ummi, mother, one cries. I hold her until Maki, a consultant and acting director of the clinic, brings me to the bed where a child of about ten is lying with a bullet wound to the head. A smaller child is being treated for a similar injury in the next bed. A US sniper, they said, hit them and their grandmother as they left their home to flee Falluja.

The lights go out, the fan stops and in the sudden quiet someone holds up the flame of a cigarette lighter for the doctor to carry on operating by. The electricity to the town has been cut off for days and when the generator runs out of petrol they just have to manage till it comes back on. Dave quickly donates his torch. The children are not going to live.


For the Pentagon's reply to this article please click here



"Come," says Maki and ushers me alone into a room where an old woman has just had an abdominal bullet wound stitched up. Another in her leg is being dressed, the bed under her foot soaked with blood, a white flag still clutched in her hand and the same story: "I was leaving my home to go to Baghdad when I was hit by a US sniper." Some of the town is held by US marines, other parts by the local fighters. These people's homes are in the US controlled area and they are adamant that the shooters were US marines.

Snipers are causing not just carnage but also the paralysis of the ambulance and evacuation services. The biggest hospital after the main one was bombed is in US territory and cut off from the clinic by snipers. The ambulance has been repaired four times after bullet damage. Bodies are lying in the streets because no one can go to collect them without being shot.

...
'First we go down the street we were sent to. There is a man, face down, in a white dishdash, a small round red stain on his back. We run to him. Again the flies have got there first. Dave is at his shoulders, I am by his knees and as we reach to roll him onto the stretcher Dave's hand goes through his chest, through the cavity left by the bullet that entered so neatly through his back and blew his heart out.

There is no weapon in his hand. Only when we arrive, his sons come out, crying, shouting. He was unarmed, they scream. He was unarmed. He just went out the gate and they shot him. None of them have dared come out since. No one had dared come to get his body, horrified, terrified, forced to violate the traditions of treating the body immediately. They couldn't have known we were coming so it's inconceivable that anyone came out and retrieved a weapon but left the body.

He was unarmed, 55 years old, shot in the back.

We cover his face, carry him to the pick-up. There is nothing to cover his body with. The sick woman is helped out of the house, the little girls around her hugging cloth bags to their bodies, whispering, "Baba, baba." Daddy. Shaking, they let us go first, hands up, around the corner, then we usher them to the cab of the pick-up, shielding their heads so they can't see him, the cuddly fat man stiff in the back. '
http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article-2-95-1843.jsp

"I probably would not make a great fit for the Marines, or the Army, or any of the branches of the U.S. military."
- R.J. (Bobby) Elliott

For once I agree with you, Bobby. The military is looking for people with some backbone. Besides, you could'nt even make it through boot camp, let alone combat.

"But I support them. And I want them to crush the enemy."
- R.J. (Bobby) Elliott

But why make someone else fight (and die in) your battles for you, Bobby?

MCH, you have to ressurect a year old post just so that you can do some chickenhawk sniping at RJ? That's really kind of pathetic.

Dave