Suicide bombers kill over 110 in Iraqi cities

[Apeman81]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Only because you think that the precious US military wouldn't do such a thing. I don't expect you watch this video, Ape. It might undermine your misplaced confidence in the US military. http://novakeo.com/?p=315 Yes, they target civilians, and always have, going back to the first days of white people on the shores of the Caribbean, right up through the slaughter of Indian women and kids on the frontier, to the terror bombings of Hamburg, Dresden and Hiroshima. It ain't over, and the lying propaganda continues. I see that you are victimized by the same lies as large portions of America. What a shame...

http://www.spectator.se/stambord/?p=1039

May want to check out this site.

[PatrickHenry]

Touché. Good rebuttal, Ape. Still doesn't explain the use of napalm and WP in civilan areas, and sorry, kal, forcing civilians out of their homes to create free fire zones isn't allowed.

Not to mention that the invasion was unjustified in the first place.

OK. So it's brave to use cluster bombs against civilian targets , too, huh? And shooting up the electric plant and the water works is brave right?

Then there's the hospital invasions...REAL brave going against doctors and nurses, and lighting up ambulances.

I guess I got it all wrong. Those who are willing to die for their own country's liberation from a foreign occupier are cowards, while the invader can do anything he pleases and must be brave because he is a US soldier...

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: tinybear Soldiers who deliberately target civilians are rogues/criminals and should be severely dealt with (and, yes, that includes high ranking military commanders who order such acts to be committed).

ANY time you target a city you are aiming at civilians, there are NO exceptions as there are no such things as cities populated by only soldiers.

[bishop]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Touché. Good rebuttal, Ape. Still doesn't explain the use of napalm and WP in civilan areas, and sorry, kal, forcing civilians out of their homes to create free fire zones isn't allowed.

shit... it wasn't even a rebuttal in the slightest. even his own bushbot link admitted that WP was used in civilian areas.

doesn't the usage of chemical weapons constitute a war crime???

NOTE: Before any of you start emailing, I should state for the record that it is clear that WP was used in Fallujah, though how frequently is unclear.

nice to see that saddam used chemical weapons against his own people.. and now, we're also using chemical weapons against those we're supposedly liberating. what irony.

it's just a damn shame that we can't have bush end up in some dirty hole in the ground, just like how we supposedly found saddam. and when they check his head for lice, maybe they can see if there's a brain up there as well.

[dilligras]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Touché. Good rebuttal, Ape. Still doesn't explain the use of napalm and WP in civilan areas, and sorry, kal, forcing civilians out of their homes to create free fire zones isn't allowed. Not to mention that the invasion was unjustified in the first place. OK. So it's brave to use cluster bombs against civilian targets , too, huh? And shooting up the electric plant and the water works is brave right? Then there's the hospital invasions...REAL brave going against doctors and nurses, and lighting up ambulances. I guess I got it all wrong. Those who are willing to die for their own country's liberation from a foreign occupier are cowards, while the invader can do anything he pleases and must be brave because he is a US soldier...

Gee whiz, Patrick can't you paint a bleaker picture than that? Sheeesh.

I should give credit for your acknowledgment of Ape81's great link, and might add that I found some very interesting surfing beyond that link.

Surfing which, coincidentally, addresses the fallujah issue, the issue of the culture war against Christians, and the one of lefty bias in the media ......simultaneously.

To whit:

From Apeman's link, at the bottom of the first paragraph are two links......clicking the second shows a "page not found" page with a link to this site, which has a hyperlink in the right sidebar to this article about lefty defeatist thinking, which in turn contains a hyperlink within the words, "quote shopping", to this article about media bias/perfidy in targeting Christians.

A most interesting journey.

[bishop]

typical bushbot tactic - endlessly argue about sources and ignore the real issue that we used illegal chemical weapons in iraq. definitely not the first time we've seen that whitty diversionary tactic.

[RickSp]

Quote by: bishop typical bushbot tactic - endlessly argue about sources and ignore the real issue that we used illegal chemical weapons in iraq. definitely not the first time we've seen that whitty diversionary tactic.

The bushbots seem immune to the bizarre irony of invading a country because of non-existent illegal weapons and then turning around and using napalm and white phosphorus, both illegal weapons, in residential areas. There may be nothing cowardly about dropping naplam and Willie Pete in cities. It is, however, probably criminal.

[dilligras]

What are these "bushbots" to which I keep seeing reference made?

Robots who look like topiary?

Topiary that look like robots?

Whoopie robot grabbing its crotch?

[bishop]

those who follow the rove/bush propagandized gospel = bushbots.

using the prescripted apology/response to every single misleading action, mistake, whatever = bushbots.

those who can never be found criticizing the dear leader = bushbots.

[tinybear]

What should we call those who seek to justify the actions of terrorists and those who wish America ill and threaten to do harm to our national interests?

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: tinybear What should we call those who seek to justify the actions of terrorists and those who wish America ill and threaten to do harm to our national interests?

Umm...The President of the United States?

[tinybear]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Umm...The President of the United States?

Hahahaha! Which one? The present one? Or all of them?

[PatrickHenry]

Well, I don't wanna name any names...

[Samildanach]

Being intelligent enough to see the reasons behind the guerilla forces actions does not necessarily correspond with wishing America ill. The only way it harms American national interests is potentially shortening the war ie the amount of time America has to steal Iraqi oil.

[tinybear]

The reason behind the Iraqi insurgents' actions is quite obvious ain't it? They were ousted from their position of power and privilege and now they now want to create as much havoc as possible.

[dilligras]

Quote by: bishop those who follow the rove/bush propagandized gospel = bushbots. using the prescripted apology/response to every single misleading action, mistake, whatever = bushbots. those who can never be found criticizing the dear leader = bushbots.

My my my, are we now reduced to insulting nicknames as a subsititute for intellectual discourse? Somebody apparently ran out of coherent arguments and has decided instead to sink to grade-school epithets.

I expected no less, from those with nothing to say.

[pubmanager]

Quote by: dilligras My my my, are we now reduced to insulting nicknames as a subsititute for intellectual discourse? Somebody apparently ran out of coherent arguments and has decided instead to sink to grade-school epithets. I expected no less, from those with nothing to say.

I almost bought that one for a split second....No really.....I mean really.....I really did.

But then I remembered that you have yet to enter into intelligent discourse and have not yet made a coherent argument yourself so your above post was probably a projection of your own idiosyncrasies.

jihadi doucebags, my my my the intelligence, the sheer cognitive brilliance
:rolleyes:

[dilligras]

Quote by: Samildanach Being intelligent enough to see the reasons behind the guerilla forces actions does not necessarily correspond with wishing America ill.

I see......so you wish us to see your position as "intelligent", rather than treasonous.

Rather self-serving aren't we?

The only way it harms American national interests is potentially shortening the war ie the amount of time America has to steal Iraqi oil.

What a load of horseshit. What it does is undermine the morale of our troops while they're in harm's way, while simultaneously giving their enemy cause to continue murdering innocents in hopes of reinstating their dictatorship and dominance over the majority of Iraqi citizens.

Iraqis must not be seen as worthy of the same freedoms the lefties so vigorously defend for themselves.

As for "stealing oil", isn't that what Saddam was doing to the Kuwaitis, when we intervened? And didn't he break every single stipulation of the cease fire that left him in power, including firing on our planes over the no-fly zone on a weekly basis?

So, what insulting nickname shall we invent for these traitors?

Lemmeeseenow......how about Husseinbots? Noooo......doesn't sound right........how's about traitorbots? Wait!! I have it!

Jihadibots.

Pretty much sums up their loyalties, n'est pas?

[dilligras]

Quote by: pubmanager I almost bought that one for a split second....No really.....I mean really.....I really did. But then I remembered that you have yet to enter into intelligent discourse and have not yet made a coherent argument yourself so your above post was probably a projection of your own idiosyncrasies. jihadi doucebags, my my my the intelligence, the sheer cognitive brilliance :rolleyes:

Note to self:
Don't bet on a blind guy in a game of nine-ball, and don't ask pubmanager to identify examples of Intelligent discourse or coherency.

You remembered? Hah! That's rich, that is. Who do you think you're fooling with that unlikely claim?

As if the "loyal opposition" has ever entertained such rational interaction, instead of ad hominem attacks and fallacious logic leading to conclusions based in ignorance, arrogance, and an abiding hatred and phobia of all symbols of authority which inclines them to adhere to the vile doctrines and propaganda of any enemy we happen to face.

Jihadibots, all.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: tinybear The reason behind the Iraqi insurgents' actions is quite obvious ain't it? They were ousted from their position of power and privilege and now they now want to create as much havoc as possible.

As far as I know, the insurgents come in several categories so your assumption that they are all Baathists or Saddam loyalists serves no purpose.