A380 Impressed me

It seems that the best method to make Zembla look like a fool is to just let him speak his mind. Zembla is now most definitely a hypocrite, and twice a hypocrite if he tries to defend himself.

You don't have to look further than my above observations to realize how ironic it is that Zembla would judge somebody's logic.

 

And the 'whole picture' is the amount of insurgents killed by US forces?

First off, I dont care about any numbers. And you are obviously ignorant since you completely ignored that I said this earlier. Show me ONE SINGLE QUOTE in this thread from me where I have claimed xxx amounts of whoever killed. I pulled out numbers based on what was provided by both YOU and Malino (10k insurgents and 37k civilians) but I never at ANY time tried to say these numbers were wholly correct and factual.

You think this war is about numbers? You think this is about how many people the US forces can kill? The numbers mean absolutely nothing, its about the country and the lives that you are in the process of devastating. Perhaps in your 'Smallville' town in deepest mid-America, everything depends on numbers and statistics. Everyone else though is able to look at the bigger picture and see that it is not just deaths that you have caused, but unbelievable suffering and damage that might never be repaired.

And now, I demand that you show also that you have a realistic picture of what is happening over there, and provide numbers and reasons for the amount of innocent civilians killed over there, and also a brief paragraph about the 'potential' problems this invasion has created. Of course, 'we' have already seen the potential problems come to pass - I want to make sure that you can also see both sides of the coin.

 

Squirl, a little light reading for you;

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0512-03.htm

This, together with the poll results I published earlier, proves imo that few Americans know the true cost of the war.

I await your proof that your one of those few. Be quick please, if you dont post within the hour I will assume you cant prove it and I therefore cast you in to the fires of Mount Doom!

Errr...wrong ending....


Clock is ticking, you will be desperate to prove your correctness after all!!

 

You are lost, Glas. You cannot just make counter-demands to try to dodge your obligation to prove that you see the whole picture. It is not that way in real life and it will not be that way here. If someone is brought to trial he cannot accuse the prosecution of murder in order to postpone the proceedings. Address my point and then I will address yours. I will check back in about, say, 3 weeks to see what progress you have made. And I do mean 3 weeks.

 

Good, we have that length of time away from your fantasies.

But in case you ignored me yet again, numbers of deaths of anyone at all, is not a 'picture' of both sides of the war.

The potential or real positives;

1. Saddam Hussein removed
2. Potentially a chance for some stability
3. Potentially democracy for the citizens

The negatives;

1. The US continues its push for global dominance
2. Millions of people suffering or displaced
3. Thousands dead (but we dont know how many, cos the US just dont do body counts...)
4. A political system being enforced on to a people who had expressed no wish for it
5. The destruction of the infrastructure of Iraq
6. Suicide bombings resulting in the deaths of many
7. Potentially a civil war in the making

There are more. But the only definite improvement is the removal of Hussein. The rest of the perceived benefits have shown no signs of occuring, and instead the situation appears to worsen.

Your turn...

 

I give up.

This shit just gives me a headache. When you say something totally logical, he'll bring up something totally unrelated and say you're wrong.

So fucking silly.

 

Sigh, one last attempt.

Squirl, this isn't about statisitcs or how may Insurgents/Cvivilains have been killed its about the fact that if the US had planned about what to do after they invaded and instead of utilising the gung-ho shoot first look afterwards tactics they employ then maybe just maybe Iraq would have a chance at peace and democracy.

But the tactics you are using, shoot first look afterwards, over-whelming force, dodgy intelligence are creating a situation as follows

US blows up 1 insurgent using an airstrike.

X number of civilians killed.

7 number of civilians become Insurgents in retaliation.

The seven insurgents created for every one killed figure is that quoted by your own Department of Defense.

So it dosn't really matter how many you've killed because by killing them you're creating more.

And Speculation on not keeping a body count of civilians killed by the US military, well heres a couple of thoughts.

1. How long would the US public support the war for if they knew the civilain body count was as high as the number of insurgents killed.

2. The untold damage it would do to the already tattered reputation of the US if the figure ever came out.

If you're heartless and arrogant enough to not realise that creating heartache and suffering amongst others for no more reason than money is Wrong then god help us all.



Malin

 

Oh, goody!

That reminds me of a small video I recently saw: Check this out.

<Z>

 

Man, that was such an acrimonious argument. Putting these kind of "last words" out, I really don't get your indignation of blaming Squirl's tenacity. You must be a politician.

 

Zembla, that video has shocked me

 

Funny part is that squirl can't either find a correct (factual) figures for insurgents killed. So no-one knows it
We have to keep on living in distress...

 

Too bad i've been out some days and couldn't answer, but Glas made it in my name, it seems. Great words about surrendering and so. 100% agree

 

@Z

damn.. even more of a tragic video than the one with Apache killing 3 farmers with it's gun

Some will never understand

 

You have yet to prove that the world's media is not biased. If you use sources that are biased about the Iraq War then I am unable to verify your objectivity.

You should read this article. Many of you will ignore this link, but it distills my views quite clearly. Surprise me and read it.

 

Surprise!!!

Two things:

Are mr.Ryan also being selective with his info, or are Coalition forces really that accurate that they kill only terrorists?

And it requires a change of history, a change of lifestyle, a change of religion and death of few thousand innocent civilians. But hey, Rome wasn't build in a day....

I wonder what mr.Ryan would do if Pakistan would invade US and tell that their way of life is wrong......

 

My pakistani colleague reads alot of news from Iraq (i mean from Iraq). After chatting with him I was convinced that the tactics US and the british use are "kill and humiliate as much as possible". And they employ alot of the vicious experience they have from colonial times.
A few facts I can remember now - systematicly eliminating educated and important iraquis in the villages - doctors, directors, political activists; equipping kurdish "death squads" that disappear inconvenient people during the night; humiliating house checks (60 year old are put on the ground with shoe on the head and automat cocked in the back) and arrests for a couple of days and black bags on the head; before the attack on Fallujah only the women and children were allowed to leave, all men were turned back and then the city was shelled; Mosad is being invited to extend its network in Iraq and work with the americans; ...


I dont know what are their end purposes to do it. In the west alot of it is unreported, or more often reported in a way that does not deliver importance and emotional significance to it.
He told me the americans are not even trying to hide it. Some major US general in Irak mentioned "The population is not punished enough". That was in an american newspaper.

Even if you dont believe this - there is one simple fact:
Guerilla war is on full scale for so long!
Guerilla war is only possible with the full support of the peaceful local population. It gives the food and shelter to its defenders. It hides them from the occupational army.
That population should have reasons to risk its lives, freedom and property, no?

 

Every time that you hear about violence in Iraq you assume that the US is at fault for some crime against humanity. What kind of prejudice is this that you expect all news from Iraq to be bad news?

Not according to Redant's superb find.

"On the all-important question of whether they will vote or not in the election, 87 percent said they were very likely or somewhat likely to vote on Jan. 30."

"The survey showed that 63.6 percent of Iraqis believe there will be free and fair elections in the country, with 17.8 percent responding they do not believe the elections will be free and fair. The rest listed don't know or not applicable."

"Other interesting facets of the survey show that almost three quarters of Iraqis have at least some confidence in Iraq's interim government. A third of the people have some confidence, 29.5 percent have a lot of confidence and 10.8 percent have a little confidence. [highlight]Only 15.8 percent have no confidence in the interim government.[/highlight]"

And as far as the validity of the survey: "The survey contacted almost 2,000 Iraqis from all parts of the country. An [highlight]Iraqi[/highlight] company conducted the poll, which has a margin of error of plus or minus three points."

So it comes back to the article which I linked to. I have been able to demonstrate how most who oppose the Iraq War are biased enough so as to reject any positive news from the country.

 

Someone here should just take one for the team.

Get a cheap hooker, bang her bare-back, then rape squirl, thus giving him a hopefully terminal disease. AIDs would be nice.

 

plz post your mother's phone number