Things Going Great in Iraq

[Prakosh]

I do hope you have since come to your senses. Bush's approach was erroneous from the start. Nothing would have flummoxed the 9-11 terrorists and their aims more than if Bush had instead of attacking Afghanistan, had sent his deep condolences and a monetary payment to the families of the terrorists and then building on that goodwill had, instead of bombing a country which was already living in the stone age back to the stone age (obviously an exercise in futility) had actually concentrated, as he said he was but obviously wasn't (remember "Wanted Dead or Alive") on the capture and trial of Osama bin Laden and his gang. That would have been, in spite of all the America calls for revenge, death to the terrorists, etc., a much cheaper (in terms of lives, dollars and U.S. prestige) and rational approach to the greater problem of global terrorism than the strategy that Bush has pursued which has alienated much of the Muslim World and has only produced more terrorists and produced a death toll which is now nearly twice what the original attack produced. For What?????

And of course even more ignorant, was their pre 9-11 disregard for the warnings. The whole 9-11 incident could have been forstalled by someone in the administration actually reading and heeding the numerous and unmistakable warnings in the intelligence reports and saying, "Wow, looks like they are planning to fly planes into buildings, let's put locks on the cockpit cabin doors so they can't get in there and commandeer the planes." You'd think that someone, in an administration as smart as the Bush administration is widely proclaimed to be, would have thought of that rather simple and easily accomplished solution;if they gave a damn at all...In other words,why didn't they put locks on those doors...

 

[uscitizen]

I think we have about 300 US deaths in Afganistan , where those responsible for 911 were from vs about 10 times that many deaths in Iraq which had nothing to do with 911.

 

[bob]

I think we have about 300 US deaths in Afganistan , where those responsible for 911 were from vs about 10 times that many deaths in Iraq which had nothing to do with 911.

so you dont think that the AQ insergents in iraq right now have no connection to the people who attacked us on 9-11

wouldnt you say that 9-11 pretty much forced us to change the way we deal with threats...

 

[maineman]

I am a democrat, bob.... I disagree with the republican view of the world. I have never been a bigtime member of Bush's fan club...except I was certainly on his side in his foreign policy moves after 9/11...all the way up until he let OBL slip away and lost interest in him.

Like I said....I volunteered to go back on active duty - after retiring.... while chickenhawks like Dixie - who never served ONCE - were cowering behind anything they could find to avoid serving in the war on terror.

 

[Prakosh]

I think we have about 300 US deaths in Afganistan , where those responsible for 911 were from vs about 10 times that many deaths in Iraq which had nothing to do with 911.

Actually this statement and its implications are erroneous, if I remember correctly, 15 of the 9-11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, 1 was Egyptian, 1 was Lebanese, and 2 were from the Arab Emirates. None were from Iraq or Afghanistan. Yet, hundreds of thousands of innocent people were killed in both countries for no other reason than revenge and blood lust; that revenge and blood lust has netted nothing tangible. The 19 perpetrtaors are dead! Revenge denied in their case. So someone else had to pay; unfortunately as far as I can seeit was the American people who have paid twice and will evidently pay twice or three times more for tragic and unnecessary act. Try to remember, as hard and painful as it is, that 9-11 didn't have to happen. Bush and his ignorant cronies throughout the administration stood by in spite of dire and repeated warnings about Osama and his plans and did NOTHING!!!

To quote Aleister Crowley completely out of context; "That is all ye need to know"!!!

 

[uscitizen]

so you dont think that the AQ insergents in iraq right now have no connection to the people who attacked us on 9-11

wouldnt you say that 9-11 pretty much forced us to change the way we deal with threats...

the insurgents in Iraq are by definition not AQ. some AQ has moved in since Bush invaded though. It has proven to be a great training ground for them.

do you still believe the myth that Iraq was behind 911 or something ?

 

[uscitizen]

I do believe the AQ headquarters were in Afganistan and those players as well, even though they came from different countries.

 

[Prakosh]

While some of the attackers had gone at one time or another to Afghanistan, most of them had been living in the United States for sometime, some for more than a year before the incident on 9-11 occurred. Yet no one suggested that we bomb San Diego, Florida, Arizona or Boston. The proper response would have been to make friends with all Muslims and to seek through forgiveness and friendship to defang the actual beast rather than to bomb and destroy all those who may have seen the beast or to destroy the country where the beast was last seen. The war against Afghanistan was no more justified than the war against Iraq--it only appeared to be, becuase that was were bin Laden was. But if bin Laden was the problem Afghanistan was not the answer; since bin Laden is still free and Afghanistan is now condisered a bigger threat for a variety of reasons, including the enormous increase in heroin production and the still vibrant Taliban movment there. In the meantime, Bush says, that he doesn't think about bin Laden anymore. Of course not, he's trying to save his own ass now!!!!!

 

[uscitizen]

does anyone thingk that the curiously timed Sadam verdict will get the rebutlikens over 50 votes ?

 

[Prakosh]

does anyone thingk that the curiously timed Sadam verdict will get the rebutlikens over 50 votes ?

There was nothing curious about it. The U.S. designed the court, the charges and even ordered andcpontrolled the physical construction of the court and the actual design and dimensions of the courtroom itself. It was a kangaroo court from beginning to end. The date of the actual verdict was ordered by the Bush administration to coincide with the election. More on this later as the testimony about it becomes available. Go to the website of the Iraqi blogger Riverbend where today she has posted this assessment of the trial and the current situation in Iraq:

Sunday, November 05, 2006

When All Else Fails...
… Execute the dictator. It’s that simple. When American troops are being killed by the dozen, when the country you are occupying is threatening to break up into smaller countries, when you have militias and death squads roaming the streets and you’ve put a group of Mullahs in power- execute the dictator.

Everyone expected this verdict from the very first day of the trial. There was a brief interlude when, with the first judge, it was thought that it might actually be a coherent trial where Iraqis could hear explanations and see what happened. That was soon over with the prosecution’s first false witness. Events that followed were so ridiculous; it’s difficult to believe them even now.

The sound would suddenly disappear when the defense or one of the defendants got up to speak. We would hear the witnesses but no one could see them- hidden behind a curtain, their voices were changed. People who were supposed to have been dead in the Dujail incident were found to be very alive.

Judge after judge was brought in because the ones in court were seen as too fair. They didn’t instantly condemn the defendants (even if only for the sake of the media). The piece de resistance was the final judge they brought in. His reputation vies only that of Chalabi- a well-known thief and murderer who ran away to Iran to escape not political condemnation, but his father’s wrath after he stole from the restaurant his father ran.

So we all knew the outcome upfront (Maliki was on television 24 hours before the verdict telling people not to ‘rejoice too much’). I think what surprises me right now is the utter stupidity of the current Iraqi government. The timing is ridiculous- immediately before the congressional elections? How very convenient for Bush. Iraq, today, is at its very worst since the invasion and the beginning occupation. April 2003 is looking like a honeymoon month today. Is it really the time to execute Saddam?

I’m more than a little worried. This is Bush’s final card. The elections came and went and a group of extremists and thieves were put into power (no, no- I meant in Baghdad, not Washington). The constitution which seems to have drowned in the river of Iraqi blood since its elections has been forgotten. It is only dug up when one of the Puppets wants to break apart the country. Reconstruction is an aspiration from another lifetime: I swear we no longer want buildings and bridges, security and an undivided Iraq are more than enough. Things must be deteriorating beyond imagination if Bush needs to use the ‘Execute the Dictator’ card.

Iraq has not been this bad in decades. The occupation is a failure. The various pro-American, pro-Iranian Iraqi governments are failures. The new Iraqi army is a deadly joke. Is it really time to turn Saddam into a martyr? Things are so bad that even pro-occupation Iraqis are going back on their initial ‘WE LOVE AMERICA’ frenzy. Laith Kubba (a.k.a. Mr. Catfish for his big mouth and constant look of stupidity) was recently on the BBC saying that this was just the beginning of justice, that people responsible for the taking of lives today should also be brought to justice. He seems to have forgotten he was one of the supporters of the war and occupation, and an important member of one of the murderous pro-American governments. But history shall not forget Mr. Kubba.

Iraq saw demonstrations against and for the verdict. The pro-Saddam demonstrators were attacked by the Iraqi army. This is how free our media is today: the channels that were showing the pro-Saddam demonstrations have been shut down. Iraqi security forces promptly raided them. Welcome to the new Iraq.

For Complete Blog And More Iraqi Views From the Ground in Iraq

 

[Prakosh]

so you dont think that the AQ insergents in iraq right now have no connection to the people who attacked us on 9-11

wouldnt you say that 9-11 pretty much forced us to change the way we deal with threats...

Nothing and nobody forced the US government to do anything after 9-11. Bush and others freely chose, from a wide range of possible options, to do everything that he and they did. It is clear that the U.S. had ample time and opportunity to deal with the threat from the terrorists prior to 9-11 and they did nothing. In the trial of Zacarias Moussoui the FBI agents themselves testified that over 70 emials regarding the possibility that many terrorists might be in the U.S. attending flight training schools and in fact, that there was ample evidence that they were doing just that were completely and surreptitiously if not suspiciously ignored by higher ups in the FBI itself. The problem with 9-11 was not a lack of information or intelligence it was an unwillingness at the highest levels of government to either take the information seriously or to do anything at all about it.

Your statement, bob, indicates you understand next to nothing about the cause and effect relationship of the Bush administration’s pre- and post-attack response to 9-11.

Forced, coerced, hardly, they chose a certain response and like everything else Bush does he is stubbornly sticking to it, no matter how confused, convoluted or incompetent that response or strategy proves to be in practice. Because like the Pope, who considers himself infallible in things religious, Bush considers himself and Rove infallible when it comes to politics and running the country. I, of course, believe that tomorrow's election is about nothing so much as the truth or falseness of that basic belief.

 

[LadyT]

While some of the attackers had gone at one time or another to Afghanistan, most of them had been living in the United States for sometime, some for more than a year before the incident on 9-11 occurred. Yet no one suggested that we bomb San Diego, Florida, Arizona or Boston.........The war against Afghanistan was no more justified than the war against Iraq--it only appeared to be, becuase that was were bin Laden was.

I completely disagree with this analogy. He didn't just 'happen upon afghanistan' unbeknownst to the taliban. He was fully supportive of the Taliban they were fully supportive of his jihad against the united states. They absolutely refused to give him up despite the circumstances.

Side note: I somehow think if he were somewhere inside the US and he was given such support, the federal gov't would have no problems taking over/shutting down/ and eliminating said state or any other entity for that matter.

I agree that we need to enlist the support of the islamic world in order to prevent future attacks such as 9/11, however, the focus should have been from the very start should have been eliminating the persons responsible. If anything Bush wasted way to much time asking them to hand him over.

 

[Prakosh]

I can live with your disagreement. The biggest problem from the standpoint of those few of us who take my position is that the kind of carnage we have seen in Iraq was never shown in Afghanistan even though it occurred and who knows to how high a level. One other thing, I heard on either FOX or MSNBC is that I was correct; the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan War has not been added to the deficit. In other words, the President's deficit numbers do not reflect in any way the cost of these two wars. What else is Bush hiding?????

 

[uscitizen]

What else is Bush hiding?????
//

It will all start to come out as his power falls. Bush might have to worry more about assination vs impeachment once it all comes out.