CARNAGE IN IRAQ

Published on July 10, 2006 By COL Gene In Politics

This weekend should convince anyone that Iraq is falling into Civil War. For eight hours bands of masked Shiite gunman rampaged through Baghdad killing 41Sunnis. Neither the new police nor military we have been training were able to stop this violence. After this rampage there were two bombings close to a Shiite Mosque killed another 17 and wounded 38 more in a reprisal for the earlier attacks. Even the Iraqi Prime Minister said after these attacks that the nation stood, "in front of a dangerous precipice".

Bush told us all we needed was a new government, and then we needed the major government officials to be appointed for the violence to be brought under control. NOTHING is helping and anyone that believes Iraq will become a stable democracy is on drugs!

Comments (Page 2)

COL Gene

on Jul 10, 2006

If a rooming gang went into Washington D C executing people there would be a panic in the nation's Capital. Iraq looks like Northern Ireland some years ago.

singrdave

on Jul 10, 2006

Saddam was NEVER a threat to this country. The other reasons were developed by Bush AFTER we invaded.

So Colin Powell's anthrax speech was to convince the UN that Saddam was a threat to America? Or that he was in material breach of UN obligations dating back to 1991?

Holding Iraq in “material breach” of its obligations under previous resolutions, the Security Council this morning decided to afford it a “final opportunity to comply” with its disarmament obligations, while setting up an enhanced inspection regime for full and verified completion of the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991).

By the unanimous adoption of resolution 1441 (2002), the Council instructed the resumed inspections to begin within 45 days, and also decided it would convene immediately upon the receipt of any reports from inspection authorities that Iraq was interfering with their activities. It recalled, in that context, that the Council had repeatedly warned Iraq that it would face "serious consequences" as a result of continued violations.

Link

Regardless of what you want to think, the truth bears out every time.

Island Dog

on Jul 10, 2006

If a rooming gang went into Washington D C executing people there would be a panic in the nation's Capital.

Roaming gangs are in most major cities. The violence they bring to neighborhoods is really no different. I'm sure you will find a way to blame Bush for that also.

singrdave

on Jul 10, 2006

I'm sure you will find a way to blame Bush for that also.

That's a domestic policy subject. Give him time to be defeated in this thread and I'm sure he will move on(.org?) to other topics soon...

Bahu Virupaksha

on Jul 11, 2006

Iraq is a good example of all that is wrong with US policy in the region, and I have been saying this for the last several years to anyone who cares to read my posts. First: Instead of Terrorism becoming weaker, Bush and the Bushmen have made their Iraq policy the best bet for strengthening the Al Qaeda. Without the occupation of Iraq, the recruitment to Al Qaeda would have declined. Second: The Sectasriasn strife between then Shiaas and Suinnis is a direct result of the Americasn style Identty Politics introduced and encouraged in Iraq. The Americans successfully created the impression that the Saddam Hussein regime was a Sunni one, when in reality Saddam was an Arab nationalist and tried to subsume sectrian idntities under the carapace of Arab natiionalist idrntity. Third: The Iraqis know that the Quisling Government in the Green Zone will not last a day without the US marines and privater security contractors. The people have utter contempt for al Maliki and the Shiaa goons in his regime. His ministers are actively encouraging death squads to hunt and kill suspected Sunni resistance fighters. Unless the Americans distance themselves from this regime there will be no peace in Iraq. Fourth: The record of US occupation is dismal to say the least. Security is so poor that Baghdad is unsafe except for the Green Zone. Abu Gharaib, Mahamoudiya and Haditha are metaphors of a war gone horribly wrong.

COL Gene

on Jul 11, 2006

Virupaksha

What you say is correct. We have used our resources to help those that hate us become stronger. No matter what happens in Iraq, we have lost this round in the war on Terrorism.

Singrdave and others talk about U N resolutions. When did the United States become the enforcement agent for the U N? The reason Bush gave to invade Iraq was BECAUSE SADDAM was a DANGER to our country. Those mushroom clouds over our cities! Powell has admitted the worst thing he did in his career was the U N Speech supporting the invasion of Iraq. Bush made two basic errors--

Invading Iraq

Sending troop levels that could not prevent the development of the sectarian violence we see every day.

Island Dog

on Jul 11, 2006

First: Instead of Terrorism becoming weaker, Bush and the Bushmen have made their Iraq policy the best bet for strengthening the Al Qaeda.

Wrong. Terrorism was just as much strength when we didn't act against them. The first WTC attack and the others following it during the Clinton administration. Osamam himself said our failure to respond showed weakness and gave them strength.

Second: The Sectasriasn strife between then Shiaas and Suinnis is a direct result of the Americasn style Identty Politics introduced and encouraged in Iraq.

Wrong again. This violence was going on way before the war. There were pro and anti-Saddam factions in Iraq before we invaded. The only difference now is the liberal media is reporting it.

What you say is correct. We have used our resources to help those that hate us become stronger. No matter what happens in Iraq, we have lost this round in the war on Terrorism.

What a defeatist liberal you are. I will never refer to you as an American again. You have disgraced our troops once again by saying we have lost.

Singrdave and others talk about U N resolutions. When did the United States become the enforcement agent for the U N?

The United States has enforced U.N. resolutions before. Were you complaining about them too?

The reason Bush gave to invade Iraq was BECAUSE SADDAM was a DANGER to our country. Those mushroom clouds over our cities! Powell has admitted the worst thing he did in his career was the U N Speech supporting the invasion of Iraq. Bush made two basic errors--

Saddam was a danger. Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and other prominent democrats said that also. I see that in your other post where we corrected you on your Powell bs that you still use it. What a pathetic terrorist supporting liberal you are.

drmiler

on Jul 11, 2006

Singrdave and others talk about U N resolutions. When did the United States become the enforcement agent for the U N?

Hey clueless, it happened when the US became a permanent member of the UN Security Council.

COL Gene

on Jul 11, 2006

Wrong again. This violence was going on way before the war. There were pro and anti-Saddam factions in Iraq before we invaded. The only difference now is the liberal media is reporting it.

The violence BEFORE we invaded was created by Saddam who attacked anyone that opposed him. Now the violence is between the factions that were kept in check under Saddam. The death and destruction is the same. OUR POLICY has killed over 2,500 Americans, Injured about 35,000 more and will end up costing a Trillion dollars we BORROWED to exchange one type of killing for another type of killing. Great POLICY King George!!!!!

Island Dog

on Jul 11, 2006

The violence BEFORE we invaded was created by Saddam who attacked anyone that opposed him. Now the violence is between the factions that were kept in check under Saddam.

No col. Saddam had his part in the violence but these factions in Iraq were fighitng among each other also. This is nothing but a pathetic attempt to blame Bush for something else. What a sad individual.

COL Gene

on Jul 11, 2006

The violence today has been caused by us deposing the old government without being able to prevent the factions from fighting with each other. If Bush had sent the 500,000 troops the Generals said were needed, we could have prevented these factions from organizing and conducting the terrorist attacks that are taking place. Bush did not listen to the military experts that understood what was required to properly control Iraq when Saddam was no longer in power!

Island Dog

on Jul 11, 2006

No col, the violence is because of different factions that never got along. The difference now is the media and you are blaming Bush for something that has been going on for decades. How pathetic.

singrdave

on Jul 11, 2006

Singrdave and others talk about U N resolutions. When did the United States become the enforcement agent for the U N?

Hey clueless, it happened when the US became a permanent member of the UN Security Council.

Or don't you remember who led the Inchon landing in Korea? Ummm, GEN Douglas MacArthur. Duh.

Island Dog

on Jul 11, 2006

Don't you know everything is Bush's fault. Any good news about the economy they will find something to say about it. What a bunch of losers.

singrdave

on Jul 11, 2006

Singrdave and others talk about U N resolutions.

Besides, I talk about them because they're RELEVANT. I never, not once heard the UN say they were going to enforce the unanimous adoption of resolution 1441 (2002) to defend America alone. This is a worldwide problem. The UN had employed sanction after sanction, resolution after resolution... eventually the US saw the writing on the wall and realized it must act against Iraq through the coalition of the willing. Or no one would.

The US had a pretty open-and-shut case to get a unanimous resolution in the UN, my friends. That body doesn't agree on much, if ever. But it did that day.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!