I can agree with your point that I think you were trying to make about how we don't want to give in to bloodlust, but frankly I think your title is in really poor taste.

Nothing like a single visceral and emotionally-charged act to rally the troops and give the U.S. president both the justification and resolve to continue an already protracted battle.

In response to this savagely inhuman deed, one can imagine the U.S. retaliating in such a way that makes the WWII bombing of Dresden look like a Fourth of July fireworks celebration by comparison.



And, I think you are desiring a nightmare, Peter. The last thing anyone should want is for the cycle of revenge to escalate. Yes, U.S. forces can abuse more innocent Iraqis. But, al Qaeda and other terrorists can also strike harder than they have so far, maiming and killing more innocent Americans. It seems that people like you did not learn the obvious lesson of 9/11: America is not impregnable, Americans are vulnerable.

I also must ask you the same question I ask other people who make posts like this: If you are so eager for blood, why haven't you volunteered to fight in Iraq?

Mac... I never said that's what I wanted. I merely pointed out it makes a convenient pretext for an escalation in bloodshed.

"...Nick Berg, a freelance communications worker from Pennsylvania... ...one can imagine the U.S. retaliating in such a way that makes the WWII bombing of Dresden look like a Fourth of July fireworks celebration..."

Maybe in the case of US military personnel, but a major military retaliation for a Jewish "freelance" worker who was told to get the hell out of Iraq more than once?

You pays yer money and takes yer chances.

-- or --

"Never give a foolhardy opportunist an even break." -- adapted from W.C. Fields

"...the Al-Zarqawi group claimed to be taking out revenge for the abuse of Iraqi prisoners held by the US military at Abu Ghraib."

Yet another difference between Us and Them:

We made the prisoners at Abu Ghraib simulate giving head.

The Islamic terrorists actually do it.

"Yet another difference between Us and Them:

"We made the prisoners at Abu Ghraib simulate giving head.

"The Islamic terrorists actually do it."


Flounder, that was low. Admit it.

i feel that we, yes i said we, were forced to coerce the iraqi prisoners by sexual humiliation. these are people ready to die for what they believe in. by saying that i mean how do you get someone to dish out information, who is ready to withstand anything(almost anything)? i'll tell you how... (or betteryet rumsfield will)you take them by humiliation. whether its sexual or physical, or mentally. now you all know how we got people to tell where sadam was at. they were not expecting anything like that. hell, we weren't either. but it works so we have to use this tactic. this is war people. many, not all but many were dancing in the streets on september 11. what type of mentallity do these people have? the mentallity to believe they will go straight to heaven if they kill themself and murder innocent victums. during war some times you haveto put your blinders on people.u hate it? face it. just embrace it. replace soldiers with ones that can take it.

Herman, keep that 'we' to yourself. Your abhorrent view that humiliation and torture of Iraqis are good things does not represent my thinking at all. I totally oppose the occupation of Iraq. In no way do I try to rationalize the abuse of those detainees. Millions of Americans feel the same way. Take that evil on yourself if you want to, but leave us out of it.

"Yeah, that makes sense. To avenge Iraqi prisoners abused by the U.S. military, they captured and butchered a civilian to death. That makes about as much sense as when, say, somebody shoots and kills a relative of mine so, "to get revenge", I go out and shoot a few innocent bystanders."

Peter, the above excerpt from your post completely encapsulates my feelings about the madness of the Islamic fundamentalists. I don't care if my reaction to acts like the above are seen as bloodlust or ignorance or racist or whatever. I refuse to understand that sort of barbaric reasoning. If that makes me a person who loves violence in the eyes of some..so be it. I can live with that. I can not live with trying to understand fundamental mental derangemnt.

If I disagree with Blair, Bush or some things we do here in the Western world..that's on one side and I will criticise as much as I want. I think Bush is a moron for a variety of reasons BUT I will not carry that view over to the otherside and use that distaste for Bush and his policies to find some understanding for the acts of these savages.

Whether you support the War in Iraq or not is completely different from accepting and understanding barbarians. Unfortunately, some on this site are unable to distinguish their "anti-violence" views from acknowledging that these terrorists are on a different plane from us. These people are evil personified. I'm afraid, in my view, there is no similarity in going to War and unfortunately causing civilian casualties on one hand, and on the other hand, car bombing embassies, flying planes into buildings, suicide bombing universities and restaurants. There is no relation. There is no similarity. People who find a similarity in the two are differently clued.

The Terrorists will butcher even those who try to support them if they know they can be headline news and get air time in their hoods.