Blogcritics: Comments on Soldiers Pissed

Comment by barticus

Sat, 3 Jul 2004 05:03:42 EDT

Paying little mind to your statements is no problem!

Comment by Shark

Sat, 8 May 2004 10:29:25 EDT

"...we can abondon Iraq to implode in the brutal civil war that will inevitably follow if we don't stabilize it from Ba'athist Sunnis... and the fundamentalist Shiites, who long to see Iraq a theocracy in the vein of Iran or Taliban Afghanistan." Oh, never mind then. I retract all of my previously stated doubts. This place sounds like it's ripe for a western-style democracy.

Comment by CPL Dilmore-Iraq

Sat, 8 May 2004 01:35:42 EDT

"Don't worry, "Cpl. Dilmore" of Iraq, me and a few million other American Einsteins will have you out of there in no time." That's good news- so that becouse some of you lack the will to finish what we started- right or wrong, it's now our responsibility- we can abondon Iraq to implode in the brutal civil war that will inevitably follow if we don't stabilize it from Ba'athist Sunnis, looking to go back to the good ol days of Saddam so they can feed of the corpse of a nation, and the fundamentalist Shiites, who long to see Iraq a theocracy in the vein of Iran or Taliban Afghanistan, and feed off the coprse of a nation. That way, all of my brothers and sisters in arms who sacrificed life and limb will have done so completely in vain, all for the sake of those who feel war must be avoided at all costs, even if that cost is freedom- ours or someone elses. Good luck with that.

Comment by Ms. Tek

Fri, 7 May 2004 17:28:33 EDT

our boys at war- more pics from Iraq

Comment by mike

Fri, 7 May 2004 16:12:28 EDT

"Or maybe those people don't exist." They exist, they've just become so incoherent in their rationale for the war that they are impossible to take seriously.

Comment by Natalie Davis

Fri, 7 May 2004 12:58:37 EDT

"what about the people who support the war who aren't 'a bunch of flaccid Neo-cons can go to bed with hard-ons every night over their fake war for fake weapons of mass destruction.'" I pray for their souls too.

Comment by Shark

Fri, 7 May 2004 08:58:37 EDT

"...what about the people who support the war who aren't "a bunch of flaccid Neo-cons can go to bed with hard-ons every night over their fake war for fake weapons of mass destruction."? Or maybe those people don't exist." Just give it a few months; they're quickly becoming a minority. YANKEE COME HOME!

Comment by Eric Olsen

Fri, 7 May 2004 08:47:17 EDT

Hmm, but what about the people who support the war who aren't "a bunch of flaccid Neo-cons can go to bed with hard-ons every night over their fake war for fake weapons of mass destruction."? Or maybe those people don't exist.

Comment by Shark

Fri, 7 May 2004 06:45:19 EDT

Don't worry, "Cpl. Dilmore" of Iraq, me and a few million other American Einsteins will have you out of there in no time. We don't want to see you or any more of your contemporaries become "brain-dead dildo" cannon-fodder sacrificed so Bush, Cheney, Rummy, and a bunch of flaccid Neo-cons can go to bed with hard-ons every night over their fake war for fake weapons of mass destruction. "YANKEE COME HOME!" [heh]

Comment by CPL Dilmore-Iraq

Fri, 7 May 2004 06:16:02 EDT

"At least we now know why the Bush junta refused to sign onto the International Criminal Court, not because they didn't trust it to fairly provide justice, but because they really intended to commit war crimes." That's right, Einstein, a few brain dead dildos decide to fuck with some EPWs and are bright enough to take pictures, y'know, to make into Christmas cards, and that qualifies as an Executive level conspiracy to commit war crimes. Do you even think before shooting off at the mouth?

Comment by RJ Elliott

Fri, 7 May 2004 00:37:10 EDT

RJ, media rule #1: "It isn't news unless there's a picture." Very true, Shark. Good point.

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Thu, 6 May 2004 23:45:21 EDT
At least we now know why the Bush junta refused to sign onto the International Criminal Court, not because they didn't trust it to fairly provide justice, but because they really intended to commit war crimes. As Mark Slackmeyer said about another Prez: "Guilty, Guilty, Guilty".

Comment by Jim Carruthers

Thu, 6 May 2004 23:35:14 EDT
What really pisses me off about this whole mess (let's not get into the mass murder and torture of prisoners in Afghanistan) is that it was engineered and carried out by mercenaries, sorry, "contractors", y'know, the guys who deal in death drywall and torture roofing, but US troops are taking the fall. It gives the term "plausible deniability" a whole new perspective. And Bush and his junta are not responsible, how?

Comment by Natalie Davis

Thu, 6 May 2004 22:24:10 EDT
The only thing I want the Shrub to do is to go away. Far, far away. Any apology from him is meaningless anyway: It certainly won't bring back all those killed by his say-so.

Comment by Chris

Thu, 6 May 2004 16:09:53 EDT
Actually, there has been a UMCJ case underway since late January. Which seems to get lost in all of the grandstanding going on.

Comment by Ms. Tek

Thu, 6 May 2004 16:01:24 EDT
My thing is this: Considering how everything else has been fucked up thus far, as IF this is going to be handled correctly. Whatever. Heads will roll, la-dee-da.

Comment by sheri

Thu, 6 May 2004 15:57:13 EDT
Hmmmm...apology does imply guilt. Wow, what an interesting observation, Debbie.I shall chew on that awhile.

Comment by Debbie

Thu, 6 May 2004 15:54:10 EDT
The only thing I want Bush to do is to order the investigation, see that these idiots are court marshalled and brought up on charges in the Military Code of Justice. That to me is much more important than an apology from someone that didn't take part in it to begin with.

Comment by Debbie

Thu, 6 May 2004 15:51:58 EDT
"This is ridiculous - Bush should unequivocally apologize himself, period. He should say exactly what our man Joe Roche said, that the soldiers themselves are pissed, that this makes their job that much harder and more dangerous, and he should apologize." What is the hang up with meaningless apologies? If Bush didn't order it, didn't partake in it, didn't cover it up and allow it - what is there for HIM to apologize for? I can't apologize for something that somebody else did and have it mean anything, it's worthless unless the person responsible apologizes.

Comment by boomcrashbaby

Thu, 6 May 2004 12:07:33 EDT
no, Truth-Minister. I don't do it as a way of life. I don't put panties on my head, only a jockstrap and only when I go grocery shopping. Panties we reserve for formal occasions.

Comment by Truth-Minister

Thu, 6 May 2004 12:00:58 EDT
[Admin: Comment from Roger Ely of Asheville, NC, deleted.]

Comment by CPL Dilmore-Iraq

Thu, 6 May 2004 11:16:29 EDT
Amazing how many of you decided to post childish jabs at President Bush than to comment on the article. Anyway, I agree whole-heartedly with the soldier quoted in the article: when news reached us in Baghdad about the abuse and, even worse, some tired-ass excuses about not knowing the rules of the Geneva Convention, I was enraged. These idiots have tarnished the honor of the U.S. Military, and Americans everywhere. And trying cop a plea of ignorance- COME ON! I think any numbskull with half a functioning brain would realize making people stand on a box, naked except for a sheet, blindfolded, and told they were wired with electrical cables was not kosher, in any way, shape or form.

Comment by Shark

Thu, 6 May 2004 08:28:37 EDT
RJ, media rule #1: "It isn't news unless there's a picture." Given a choice between: 1) Photo of mass grave: expanse of desert with bulldozer in foreground. 2) Torture pic: christ figure in a black klan outfit testing out a new form of muscle stimulation made by Westinghouse. Which would you choose? (um... assuming you weren't the news editor at FOX)

Comment by Natalie Davis

Thu, 6 May 2004 02:38:44 EDT
How about coven? Yeah, fundamentalist coven, that's the ticket.

Comment by RJ Elliott

Thu, 6 May 2004 00:59:46 EDT
Okay, fair enough. ;-]