14 US Marines killed in Western Iraq

[RickSp]

Quote by: dotcoma Oh my god..you are so confused lol... I know the Iraqis did not cause 9/11, but the insurgency group in Iraq is related to those who hit us on 9/11...sheesh. You just do not understand that Iraq could have been invaded in an attempt to transform the greater Middle East thus reducing the possibility of another 9/11.

What planet are you from? By invading Iraq we created a training ground for Al Queda, something it never was under Saddam, and have given the Islamists a worldwide rallying point. You may have noticed that those arrested in the London bombings said they got involved because of anger over Iraq. No, not likely that you noticed.

Our stupid and bloody invasion has made us less safe not more, though you seem sufficiently disconnected from reality to notice.

[dotcoma]

Insult me one more time Rick and I am reporting.

I understand that it is a war, and that there will be a backlash/major insecurities while the war is going on. The point is that if we succeed then we will have a stable and secular democratic ally in the middle east (even if it is a pawn).

All of this depends on how we do. How the security forces turn out and how likely we are to quell the insurgency is yet to be determined.

Oh and if you base what right and wrong on the outbursts your enemy will potentially unleash on you then I truly am a different person than you. If it is in our overall interest to transform the Middle East then I could not give a damn what a minority of extremists do to us in the meantime. They only justify our reason for going-to crush this hillariously confused ideology. These guys think they are going to heaven for blowing themselves up near civilians :rolleyes:

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: dotcoma These guys want power and they want to kill anyone who does not follow their insane ideology.

Doesn't this observation apply to all parties in the mideast conflicts? How can you hold the US blameless, dotcoma? Only pure motives from those "good guys" in Washington, huh?

Here's what Peter Tosh wrote and sang:

Everyone is crying out for peace yes None is crying out for justice (2x) I don't want no peace I need equal rights and justice(3x) Got to get it Equal rights and justice (CHORUS) Everybody want to go to heaven But nobody want to die Everybody want to go to up to heaven But none o them(2x) want to die CHORUS Just give me my share What is due to Caesar You better give it on to Caesar And what belong to I and I You better(2x) give it up to I CHORUS (I'm fighting for it) Everyone heading for the top But tell me how far is it from the bottom Nobody knows but Everybody fighting to reach the top How far is it from the bottom CHORUS Everyone is talking about crime Tell me who are the criminals I said everybody's talking about crime, crime Tell me who, who are the criminals I really don't see them CHORUS There be no crime Equal rights and justice(Precedes each line below) There be no criminals Everyone is fighting for Palestine is fighting for Down in Angola Down in Botswana Down in Zimbabwe Down in Rhodesia Right here in Jamaica

[dotcoma]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Doesn't this observation apply to all parties in the mideast conflicts? How can you hold the US blameless, dotcoma? Only pure motives from those "good guys" in Washington, huh?

Of course not, but we are not following some insane exploitation of Islam that encourages the poor treatment of women and the death of anyone we deem a threat to Islam (civlians included). This is an ideology that truly is wrong. We may cross the line in the name of greed, but at least we do not think we are going to heaven for strapping explosives to our chests like these terrorists do.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: dotcoma We may cross the line in the name of greed

People die anyway, though, because of greed and desire for power. US Soldiers, in misdirected hope of serving their nation, and civilians in the occupied nations who are called collateral damage when US weapons kill them.

All parties to the conflict are motivated by their failed ideology. But you continue to attempt to justify the US.

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: dotcoma I understand that it is a war, and that there will be a backlash/major insecurities while the war is going on. The point is that if we succeed then we will have a stable and secular democratic ally in the middle east (even if it is a pawn).

The atrocities that we are committing, and those that we condone by Iraqi's that we hire, are building resentments and hatreds that are going to last for many generations. The simplistic belief that the "insurgents" are attacking innocent civilians and police is generally untrue. Those people are being attacked because they are colaborating with and directly supporting the invaders, something that I believe would also happen in this country if we were invaded.

The fact that you see Iraq becoming a "pawn" of the U.S. is certainly not lost on them, and will continue to inspire and motivate them to defend their country.

[ibm]

there are wars and there are casualties. whether or not our soldiers died in vain is another issue. my anger lies in the fact that the news was nowhere close to a first page story anywhere. goes to show how weak those who started the war and those who have been benefitting from it really are.

criminals and cowards usually go together.

[dotcoma]

Quote by: PatrickHenry All parties to the conflict are motivated by their failed ideology. But you continue to attempt to justify the US.

Their fanatic side is worse. A world under them would be far worse-so our cause is more justified in my mind.

Quote by: Zeebadee The fact that you see Iraq becoming a "pawn" of the U.S. is certainly not lost on them, and will continue to inspire and motivate them to defend their country.

So you think these people are regular Iraqis who care about their country? lol

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: dotcoma A world under them would be far worse-so our cause is more justified

You think that Islamic fundamentalists have a chance of world dominion if the US fails in Iraq?

I disagree, but also hope you are wrong, for I fear that the US effort in Iraq has already failed.

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: dotcoma Their fanatic side is worse. A world under them would be far worse-so our cause is more justified in my mind.

Ah yes, a rehash of the domino theory. If we get out of Iraq, the whole world will fall to the fanatics, and if we stay and "win" the Islamic fundmentalists will simply surrender and everything will be fine again.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Zeebadee Ah yes, a rehash of the domino theory. If we get out of Iraq, the whole world will fall to the fanatics, and if we stay and "win" the Islamic fundmentalists will simply surrender and everything will be fine again.

The interesting thing about the Domino Theory was that after we lost the war in Vietnam our maniacal Communist enemy collapsed in a relatively few years. Hard to say in which direction the dominoes fell. China is one of our biggest trading partners. And the last school backpack I bought for my son was from that fine US company L.L. Bean bore the label "made in Vietnam". The Communists were once described in the same monsterous terms as Islamists are described by the dim but excitable in this thread.

Of course we should fight terrorism. We just shouldn't practice it. We shouldn't invade countries that never attacked us and we shouldn't be so blindingly stupid as to think that we can force nations at bayonet point to be "democratic." Anyone who thinks that will work clearly doesn't understand the word.

[Trotsky]

Quote by: RickSp The interesting thing about the Domino Theory was that after we lost the war in Vietnam our maniacal Communist enemy collapsed in a relatively few years. Hard to say in which direction the dominoes fell. China is one of our biggest trading partners. And the last school backpack I bought for my son was from that fine US company L.L. Bean bore the label "made in Vietnam". The Communists were once described in the same monsterous terms as Islamists are described by the dim but excitable in this thread. Of course we should fight terrorism. We just shouldn't practice it. We shouldn't invade countries that never attacked us and we shouldn't be so blindingly stupid as to think that we can force nations at bayonet point to be "democratic." Anyone who thinks that will work clearly doesn't understand the word.

I didn't think the US lost the war in Vietnam, in fact Militarily speaking didn't they win almost every single major engagement? Vietnam from my understanding was lost at home rather than in South East Asia. Also wasn't there peace for a while until the US renaiged on reparations to the North Vietnamese so they just invade and took the south in '75 wasn't it?

[RickSp]

Quote by: Trotsky I didn't think the US lost the war in Vietnam, in fact Militarily speaking didn't they win almost every single major engagement? Vietnam from my understanding was lost at home rather than in South East Asia. Also wasn't there peace for a while until the US renaiged on reparations to the North Vietnamese so they just invade and took the south in '75 wasn't it?

Certain military apologists continue to claim that the Vietnam war was never lost, but rather that they were stabbed in the back by opposition to the war at home. Anyone with a knowledge of history might find this familiar. Similar claims were made by the National Socialists regarding World War I in which they claimed that Germany didn't lose the war either. The Nazis blamed Jews for stabbing the Fatherland in the back. The post Vietnam militarists blame Jane Fonda and John Kerry, but the refrain is about the same.

Sure the US won "almost every single major engagement" in Vietnam. The same thing was true of the British in their North American colonies in 1775-1783, which didn't change the outcome of that war either.

There was never any real period of peace in Vietnam that you refer to. There was a partial withdrawal of US troops to let the South Vietnamese Army defend itself, which they failed to do.

General Westmoreland, the US commander in Vietnam, went to his grave claiming that he could have won the war if only the politicans had given him an unlimited number of troops. With 500,000 US troops in Vietnam he asked for another 200,000 and was told "no." Given that almost 60,000 Americans died in Vietnam, one wonders how many more would have died if Westmoreland had gotten all the troops he asked for.

So, yes, the US lost the war in Vietnam. Claims to the contrary are shoddy revisionism at best.

[righthand]

Quote by: RickSp Sure the US won "almost every single major engagement" in Vietnam. The same thing was true of the British in their North American colonies in 1775-1783, which didn't change the outcome of that war either.

Sorry if we area bit of thread, but was it the FRENCH navy that was the deciding factor in shortening this war by years. Hate one lines but this is all I can contribute.

[RickSp]

Quote by: righthand Sorry if we area bit of thread, but was it the FRENCH navy that was the deciding factor in shortening this war by years. Hate one lines but this is all I can contribute.

What a complete non-sequitor, as well as being absurdly off target. What I said was:

Sure the US won "almost every single major engagement" in Vietnam. The same thing was true of the British in their North American colonies in 1775-1783, which didn't change the outcome of that war either.

How the French participation in Yorktown has anything to do with the statement I made is not clear to me. The British did win most major battles while at the same time being unable to crush the rebellion. In two major battles that they did lose, they lost two armies, the first at Saratoga, without outside assistance, and the second at Yorktown, with French help.

To return to the topic, six more US soldiers have died in Iraq. There have been 27 American military deaths in five days.

[righthand]

Quote by: righthand Debating the merits of this war at an emotional time like this is a bit macabre. I have no wish to cause any further hurt. Intellectual debate doesn't cut it at an emotional time like this. There are a few thoughts that have being bothering me.{1-5} 1. After the capture of Baghdad, US soldiers in the main stood about while Iraqis looted their hospital, schools, museums, anything. Why. Under Martial Law it is perfectly acceptable to shoot looters. It's one of the few times that summary execution is OK with me. Five, ten dead looters would have indicated to all that the US was in charge. Iraqis would have understood too. As it was it was downhill all the way thereafter. It was never explained why. It's clear Rumsfeld didn't send enough to do the job - yet he kept his - but it doesn't explain the inactivity of those there. 2. I learnt shortly after the US arrived in Iraqi about this 'blood' thing. If hurt or killed my brother/sister then family members are bound to revenge this whether the hurt/killing was justified or not. This had nothing got to do with religion. It's more jewish than anything, you know 'an eye for an eye'. Even if compensation is paid, family members are honour bound to seek revenge. This may explain why Iraqis are prepared to die. I know little more than this, but if I was facing Iraqis in a war zone, I'd find out if this is what drives them.

Today I read a returnee soldier's one hour account of his time in Iraq. It's very long. I'll only quote a bit but it's well worth reading in full.

Title "A Soldier Speaks: Zechariah" on AlterNet By Celina R. De Leon August 4 2005
http://www.alternet.org/wiretap/23882/ First is an introduction to the story.

Iraq combat veteran talks about his motivations for joining the army, the horrors of war and the anguish of returning home...This is the first in a continued series of profiles of some of the tens of thousands of Iraq War veterans who have come home bearing the scars of battle -- emotional and physical wounds that may never heal unless the nation pays them the attention and care that they deserve. We at AlterNet believe it is the one issue that can and must bring us all together as Americans. ... So he signed up to be a parachute infantry medic for the job experience, money for school, and a little adventure. He spoke to AlterNet about the war, his hopes and fears, and the hard road ahead.

Zechariah

Iraq combat veteran talks about his motivations for joining the army, the horrors of war and the anguish of returning home...This is the first in a continued series of profiles of some of the tens of thousands of Iraq War veterans who have come home bearing the scars of battle -- emotional and physical wounds that may never heal unless the nation pays them the attention and care that they deserve. We at AlterNet believe it is the one issue that can and must bring us all together as Americans. ... So he signed up to be a parachute infantry medic for the job experience, money for school, and a little adventure. He spoke to AlterNet about the war, his hopes and fears, and the hard road ahead. "I think my beliefs had changed once we were on the ground. Within days we had seized all of the oil fields in northern Iraq and our primary mission was to protect them. Bush had said this war wasn't about oil, but there I was defending oil fields at all costs in the middle of Iraq. A lot of the piping and workings of the fields had been destroyed by the fleeing army and before we even started to help the people by fixing the power or water supplies, they had construction crews trying to get everything up and running on the oil fields. I also worked with a lot of the local hospitals. The whole time we were there, the hospitals kept getting worse and worse. They never had any supplies or new machines installed. Even some of the more simple machinery, like X-ray machines, were never replaced. Every time I went into one of the hospitals I almost emptied my aid bag so they could have sterile catheters and needles. ... We personally re-supplied three schools in a Turkmen [Turk] neighborhood through family donations and personal contributions for the help they gave us in finding weapons, caches, and insurgent hideouts. I questioned the war from the start so the whole thing was hard. Especially after watching one of my really good friends that I had trained day in and day out with for the past three years die while I was trying to do all I could to make sure he made it home to his wife and for what reason? I think he needs to spend some time over there and see how out of control it has gotten in just two to three years. If he thinks that we are going to somehow magically regain control of that country, he really has no idea as to the severity of the situation over there. I have nightmares almost every night involving Iraq and those that died. I have been working with someone that specializes in war PTSD [Post Traumatic Stress Disorder]. I just know that when I talked to the guys that were my brothers while in Iraq, I feel like a traitor or ashamed. Being their medic or "doc" was the best feeling in the world, but when soldiers die in your care and my platoon watched as I tried to do what they were counting on me to do, I felt like I lost their respect. I remember after Kyle was killed, I sat in my sleep space and cried for almost an hour praying that this would end and I was on my way home over and over. I keep hearing that the troops' morale is high over there. When you have a high-ranking officer standing next to you prepping your answers, it's hard to speak your mind . We weren't allowed to talk to media unless a Major or above was with us to prep our answers and screen certain questions. President Bush, like Cheney, obviously has no idea as to what is going on over there and doesn't care. This whole thing about taking the fight to the terrorists has got me mad. He already proved to us and himself that Iraq wasn't a threat and that they had no WMDs and he is still trying to say they were terrorists and we need to stop them . They weren't terrorists until we killed off parts of their family. Now they are terrorists because they have lost something that the U.S. took from them, parts of their families.

No words of mine could add to this brave man's words.

.['Sean' if this is not OK, then take it off, whatever.

[righthand]

Quote by: Trotsky I didn't think the US lost the war in Vietnam, in fact Militarily speaking didn't they win almost every single major engagement? Vietnam from my understanding was lost at home rather than in South East Asia. Also wasn't there peace for a while until the US reneged on reparations to the North Vietnamese so they just invade and took the south in '75 wasn't it?

Well, it's a bit like Neapolitan in Russia. He also could claim to have won the battle of Bordino. Yet he lost an army and the war as a consequence. So the expression "there are many ways to skin a cat".

[oranged]

Quote by: dotcoma A real shame. Righthand, do you not understand what sort of people are killing our soldiers? The same people who round up police and shoot them kneeling, and the same who drive car bombs indiscriminately into crowds. These are not Iraqis; these are monsters that need to be stopped from controlling a vital region of the Middle East. These soldiers did not die in vain as you say.

They won't do anything if the US leaves, that's they're only goal. To remove US control of Iraq, once Americans are gone the insurgence will leave to.

[rmnunez]

They won't do anything if the US leaves, that's they're only goal. To remove US control of Iraq, once Americans are gone the insurgence will leave to.

I'd dispute this, for one I suspect the insurgents, if indigenous, wouldn't leave Iraq, at best they'd just abandon insurgency, more likely they'd seek a political role that would further their worldviews which I suspect go beyond mere repudiation of the US and foreign occupation. If the Coalition were to leave the insurgency would continue its attacks on Iraqis until the government accomodated their demands. If their only demand was ending the occupation it shouldn't be a problem, but we have reason to suspect there is more. For one we've got the ethnic breakdown with mostly Sunnis behind the insurgency and very few Shia or Kurds involved in this. Additionally there is evidence many high ranking Baathist ex military involved and apparently their efforts are financed at least in part by Saddam. If the insurgency includes Saddamite loyalists, Baathists and racial supremacists, plus at least some foreign religious fanatics, it is easily foreseable the changes some of them seek go beyond just expelling foreigners.

Whether the Domino Theory could be analogized with Islamic fundamentalist terrorism in the event the Coalition fled Iraq depends on how well thusly inspired terrorism can be 'exported'. Insofar as islamic fundamentalist inspired terrorism is known to involve people all over the world from a great variety of nationalities, it would seem this is exportable, though not as universal as comunism (only Muslims are involved).

[righthand]

Quote by: rmnunez Whether the Domino Theory could be analogized with Islamic fundamentalist terrorism in the event the Coalition fled Iraq depends on how well thusly inspired terrorism can be 'exported'. Insofar as islamic fundamentalist inspired terrorism is known to involve people all over the world from a great variety of nationalities, it would seem this is exportable, though not as universal as comunism (only Muslims are involved).

I may not be right but has not the Domino Theory not proved disreputable. Was it not made up later to justify US involvement in Vietnam and as a theory, it was an invention.