THE US ATTAKS KARBALA

The Untold Story

from JoeUser Forums
All over the world people are reading alarming news coming out of Karbala, Iraq. Three days age, the Anglo-American Forces launched a combined attack on Karbala. TThe British, who unlike the Americans are somewhat sensitive to world public opinion,for the first time decided to use their air force against the civillian piopulation of Karbala. The US ariforce has trained bombs and cluster boms at civillian target in Falujjah and other places including Bagdad, but this is the first time since the War began that the Royal Air Force is being deployed. This at a time when even Republicans like Biden have started speaking out against the War. In fact the ratings of Bush has dropped below 40% and there is no letup.

The combined troops are conducting door to door searches and the civillian loss of life is horrendous. Dodies are left rotting on the streets and no Iraqi male from6 to60 feels safe from the AngloAmerican troops who have been authorises to use extreme force in the search and destroy operations. The loss of the lives of children is particularly sad and the Iraqis are bracinfg themselves for the worst. This city has a substantial number of Baa'th Party loyalists and the struggle is deadly.

The Iraqi War has already been lost and it is time for the Americans to come home. Mission Accomplished, in deed.
politics
7,914 views 22 replies
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
I have one word for this guys posts.. TROLL .. Thats all and not worth the effort to counter.. Ltr..
The Political Machine 2024
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
I have one word for this guys posts.. TROLL .. Thats all and not worth the effort to counter.. Ltr..
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top

The US ariforce has trained bombs and cluster boms at civillian target in Falujjah and other places including Bagdad,


I'm sorry, but this is an outright LIE and utter BS! The US military has NEVER targeted civilians! Now retract your ignorant statement!
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
This at a time when even Republicans like Biden have started speaking out against the War


i KNEW there was a reason he voted to gut the bankruptcy laws.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
The US military has NEVER targeted civilians!


the untargeted collateral casualties of dresden and hiroshima can feel so much better now you've straightened that out for them.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
the untargeted collateral casualties of dresden and hiroshima can feel so much better now you've straightened that out for them.


When you say "Targetting civillians" you also must take into consideration the civillian casualities from the bombs dropped. The intention may be to kill the militants but in the process the carnage unleashed on civillian life is lgreat. Believe me the population of both Fallujah and Karbala are counting their dead in the hundreds. Many are only living in these cities. The US cannot decided thtat Zarqawi in hiding and destror the city. You dont burn the grannary down to get rid of a few pests.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
I notice there is no all-caps "Terrorist blows up 20 Iraqi policemen" blog from you today, Bahu. I think you don't care much about Iraqi civilians, unless they are being killed by US soldiers. As long as it is Arabs killing Iraqis you don't seem to mind.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
the untargeted collateral casualties of dresden and hiroshima can feel so much better now you've straightened that out for them.


When you say "Targetting civillians" you also must take into consideration the civillian casualities from the bombs dropped. The intention may be to kill the militants but in the process the carnage unleashed on civillian life is lgreat. Believe me the population of both Fallujah and Karbala are counting their dead in the hundreds. Many are only living in these cities. The US cannot decided thtat Zarqawi in hiding and destror the city. You dont burn the grannary down to get rid of a few pests.


No, you VERY specifically said "targeted" civilians! And we do not nor have we EVER "targeted" civilians. So what you wrote is pure, unadulterated CRAP!



The US ariforce has trained bombs and cluster boms at civillian target in Falujjah and other places including Bagdad,
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
the untargeted collateral casualties of dresden and hiroshima can feel so much better now you've straightened that out for them


--that was a different time,different administration...

When you say "Targetting civillians" you also must take into consideration the civillian casualities from the bombs dropped. The intention may be to kill the militants but in the process the carnage unleashed on civillian life is lgreat. Believe me the population of both Fallujah and Karbala are counting their dead in the hundreds. Many are only living in these cities. The US cannot decided thtat Zarqawi in hiding and destror the city. You dont burn the grannary down to get rid of a few pests


--Wow, some of this statement was logical, then it became a little...well...*coughs* never mind...
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Recipe for inflammatory blog.
1 part facts
2 parts half-truths
2 parts rhetoric

Twist facts, mix in other parts and blend until the proper consistency. Serve with a heaping amount of absurd allegation.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
"The US cannot decided thtat Zarqawi in hiding and destror the city. You dont burn the grannary down to get rid of a few pests"


Not sure where you get this. Of course you can burn down the granery, if it isn't YOUR granery. Where does this silly idea that civilians don't die in war come from? If terrorists use a granery, an orphanage, or a mosque as a bunker, then THEY have brought the war to somewhere it shouldn't be.

It's sad, but there are places in Iraq where Iraqis work with security forces, and there is no necessity to bomb. There are other places where the residents make it too dangerous for US troops to function. Sadly, the only way to deal with such is from a distance.

So, if people don't want to face bombs, they should make their neighborhoods safe for policemen and security forces. They are making bunkers out of their homes, so they shouldn't be surprised when they become targets.

Regardless, insurgents and ex-baathists kill many,many more Iraqis than American soldiers, but that seems to be okay with Bahu. This isn't really about civilians, it's just a way to vent irrational hatred for the US.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
notice there is no all-caps "Terrorist blows up 20 Iraqi policemen" blog from you today, Bahu. I think you don't care much about Iraqi civilians, unless they are being killed by US soldiers. As long as it is Arabs killing Iraqis you don't seem to mind.


I knew this kind of criticism is coming. I think Baker Street, you are ignoring the political context in which these Arab on Arab violence is taking place. It is highly deplorable and bad. But remember that a titanic struggle, a Resistance, if you will, is going on in Iraq. The political strategy is to deny the Americans the luxury of using Irais to fight their battle in Iraq. In other worlds the Resistance is targetting tow kinds of targets only:Military /police recruits and those perceived as Collaborators. Many in this Resistance have faced bravely the thugs Saddam Hussain threw at them. This violence will cease the ay the Occupation ends.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Just like it ceased in Afghanistan? hardly. Iraq would be a bloodbath, and either split into partisan territories, some of which would be easily as bad as Afghanistan under the Taliban.

You terrorism apologist stuff is pretty transparent. You don't see car bombers as terrorists, evidently, rather you see them as "Resistance".

Pretty sad, and a good example of how opposition to the war always ends up admitting too much and negating their high moral ground. If you really think it is so deplorable, you would spend more time condemning it, I think. Instead, you espouse the idea that we should abandon Iraq to the very people who want to divide it amongst warring factions and control those parts they can.
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top

I knew this kind of criticism is coming. I think Baker Street, you are ignoring the political context in which these Arab on Arab violence is taking place. It is highly deplorable and bad. But remember that a titanic struggle, a Resistance, if you will, is going on in Iraq. The political strategy is to deny the Americans the luxury of using Irais to fight their battle in Iraq. In other worlds the Resistance is targetting tow kinds of targets only:Military /police recruits and those perceived as Collaborators. Many in this Resistance have faced bravely the thugs Saddam Hussain threw at them. This violence will cease the ay the Occupation ends.



Sorry but with this line you lost any and ALL credibility that you ever had! Resistance my A**! GD terrorists is what they are! Plain and simple!
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
You terrorism apologist stuff is pretty transparent. You don't see car bombers as terrorists, evidently, rather you see them as "Resistance".


Sorry but with this line you lost any and ALL credibility that you ever had! Resistance my A**! GD terrorists is what they are! Plain and simple


This is a point of view. I condemn the killing of innocent civillians and hold no brief whatsoever for the kind of violence that is going on in Iraq. I do not accept the use of car bombs as weapons and I deplore all that is taking place. Having said that we must face aquestion or two:Put yourself in the Iraqi position facing foreign occupation. How will you react? Secend, it is only after the invasion of Iraq that this spiral of violence began. I do know and understand that the point about Resistance can be taken as an apologia for Terrorism, but that is certainly not my intention.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
Put yourself in the Iraqi position facing foreign occupation. How will you react? Secend, it is only after the invasion of Iraq that this spiral of violence began. I do know and understand that the point about Resistance can be taken as an apologia for Terrorism, but that is certainly not my intention.


--Two things, 1) It would depend on the situation, if the "invading" country was there to conquer, then i would kick ass, but if they were there to free us from the former tyrranical dictator,then i would be happy....

2) BULLSHIT! The violence in iraq started long ago, Saddam mass murdered! innocent kurdish,etc... were killed because, either a) they opposed him or b) they were kurdish,etc...he didn't like them either because of race, or whatever....

--Bahu, you are ignorant, truly ignorant of how the iraqi's feel...
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
The violence in iraq started long ago, Saddam mass murdered! innocent kurdish,etc... were killed because, either a) they opposed him or b) they were kurdish,etc...he didn't like them either because of race, or whatever....


The two are quite distinct. You are right that the Iraqis hated Saddam and his goons, but you are wrong when you say that they Love the Americans for having got rid of him.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
The two are quite distinct. You are right that the Iraqis hated Saddam and his goons, but you are wrong when you say that they Love the Americans for having got rid of him


--Not really, i didn't say they loved americans, I am guessing, cause i haven't had the opportunity to go question an iraqi or two, perhaps i will go do that...

I said, putting myself in their shoes:

Two things, 1) It would depend on the situation, if the "invading" country was there to conquer, then i would kick ass, but if they were there to free us from the former tyrranical dictator,then i would be happy....


--For all i know, half of them could hate us, and the other half could love us, i don't know, but i can tell you one thing i am certain of, that they are humans, and just want to get on with life...and that we are their and have helped lift a small burden off of their shoulders.....having to live in fear from a tyrrant who would love to get rid of you permanently...is hard, ask those jews that lived in germany before ww2 was full bore and during...
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
certain of, that they are humans, and just want to get on with life...and that we are their and have helped lift a small burden off of their shoulders.....having to live in fear from a tyrrant who would love to get rid of you permanently...is hard, ask those jews that lived in germany before ww2 was full bore and during...Bonus Rating:


Again a misplaced comparison:Germany in 1939-45 and Iraq are totally different. While Saddam was certainly a dictator, he did not order the extermination of a whole group like did HItler. You will say that the massacre of the Shias after the Ist Gulf War constitutes a genocide. Yes it was bad and evil act. The American troops were just accross the border and could have intervened. They chose not to do that.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
Instead, you espouse the idea that we should abandon Iraq to the very people who want to divide it amongst warring factions and control those parts they can.


Walking out of Iraq is not the solution. Involving the UN in amajor way and arranging a cease fire between the warring factions through the good offices of Jordan, Iran and Syria would be a starting point. There will not be peace as long as the Occupation continues. We need a halt to the gunfire and then talks.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
Again a misplaced comparison:Germany in 1939-45 and Iraq are totally different. While Saddam was certainly a dictator, he did not order the extermination of a whole group like did HItler. You will say that the massacre of the Shias after the Ist Gulf War constitutes a genocide. Yes it was bad and evil act. The American troops were just accross the border and could have intervened. They chose not to do that


--When did i ever compare saddam and hitler, he [Saddam] did order mass executions and was biased against kurds..it is well known...maybe not to you...i don't know...one of the main reasons he didn't wipe them out completely was he had other interests...back then, it was a diferrent time and diferrent administration (and don't BS in that it was george sr.'s admin...)

Walking out of Iraq is not the solution. Involving the UN in amajor way and arranging a cease fire between the warring factions through the good offices of Jordan, Iran and Syria would be a starting point. There will not be peace as long as the Occupation continues. We need a halt to the gunfire and then talks

--Of course not, but then what do you think we should do? The UN got nowhere when dealing with anything, (I wish the us would reveal info on the countries that are guilty of helping,etc...saddam) http://lucasbailey.joeuser.com/index.asp?AID=79151

--why syria,jordan, and iran? do you think we want more people to get hurt...and there will always, and has always been violence in iraq...