Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 71
  1. #41  
    We own them nothing, they need to stop funding terrorism, directly or indirectly !
  2. #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    How many of the enemies have died during that same period?
    According to http://www.iraqbodycount.net/press/pr12.php (prob biased on their message, but I assume the numbers are correct):

    Who was killed?
    24,865 civilians were reported killed in the first two years.
    Women and children accounted for almost 20% of all civilian deaths.
    Baghdad alone recorded almost half of all deaths.
    When did they die?
    30% of civilian deaths occurred during the invasion phase before 1 May 2003.
    Post-invasion, the number of civilians killed was almost twice as high in year two (11,351) as in year one (6,215).
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  3. #43  
    and the nr of american (casualties)
    http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/
    Date Total In Combat

    American Deaths
    Since war began (3/19/03): 2047 1642
    Since "Mission Accomplished" (5/1/03) (the list) 1910 1534
    Since Capture of Saddam (12/13/03): 1580 1338
    Since Handover (6/29/04): 1181 1009
    Since Election (1/31/05): 609 534


    Which makes me wonder how many other 'alliance of the willing' soldiers died and what the total is..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    I never claimed they are the same, but I do say there are more similarities than we'd like to admit..

    <edit> reading back I may have worded it a bit strongly..
    My point is that if you don't look at it from the other side you will never find a sollution, just an escalation..
    I learned this myself in speakers corner on hyde park where I was discussing with a radical muslim. We both didnt really listen to each others argument so the discussion lead nowhere..
    (for the record I was attacking him with the insaneness of these terrorist attacks)
    Actually, before you look at it from the other side, you must define "it."

    Until there is an agreed upon destination, it matters not from which side you approach.
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Actually, before you look at it from the other side, you must define "it."

    Until there is an agreed upon destination, it matters not from which side you approach.
    lets define it loosely then: the current political situation in the world.
    I see that the west focuses on the harm done by 'terrorist' activity and the muslims on the harm done by 'zionist' politics.

    What most people fail to see that they are all related.. unless you see the whole picture (pretty much starting with the foundation of Israel) you cannot find a sollution..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  6. #46  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    Iraq is not about saving the iraqui's from saddam, if you believe that you have been watching fox too long. it is a nice side-effect but not the aim of the game.
    I never said that was the primary reason for the invasion.
    It isnt to save the US from el Quaida from attacking them, there was no link between el Quaida en Iraq (untill the US invaded and muslim extremists started to use that to enlist people).
    It was all about power and revenge..
    *sigh*

    As has been pointed out too many times to keep track of - it was about preventing a regime that was a proven supporter of trans-national terrorism and a proven possesor of WMD from ever supplying said WMD to said trans-national terrorists. Additionally, it was about applying pressure on Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Syria to reduce their above and below-board support of the jihadists. Also it was about trying to establish democracy in an Arab Muslim country as an example. Also it was about helping the Iraqi people.

    Now Iraq is also about eliminating jihadists in larger numbers than we ever could by hunting them down around the world. They are flowing from around the world into the gaping maw of the US Army and Marines. Good riddance.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  7. #47  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    I'm not sure the relatives of the fallen soldiers share your enthusiasm.
    On the contrary - that is exactly the mission many of those volunteers signed up for. Jihadists dying in Iraq are jihadists who are not dying in New York.
    The war in Iraq also did not save the 200 civilians in Spain from being blown to pieces, and neither the dozens of victims of the London bombings. To the contrary, the war in Iraq has raised the radicalization and facilitated those terrorist acts.
    Sorry, that's a load of cr@p. You're asking me to disprove something that can't be known. I can play that game, too. There have been no attacks in the US since 9/11. I say it's because of Iraq. Prove me wrong.
    Since the US soldiers have been dying at an increasing rate during the past two years, the numbers of enemies seems to rise faster than you can kill them. Those too young to fight two years ago are ready now, and many more are motivated to attack due to successful bombings in Iraq. As the CIA reported, Iraq is an ideal training ground for urban warfare, and the veterans of the Iraq war will have all the skills needed to kill people in the West, too, such as making home-made bombs, conceal them, remote-detonate them... indeed, the war in Iraq needs a genius of George junior's proportions. Funny though that you applaud him.
    Yeah. They had neither the will nor proven ability to attack before Iraq.

    Fighters who see battle are more prepared for the next battle. Awesome insight. Thank you CIA! The alternative would be what? Show the jihadists how spineless the West is? Cut and run? Confirm everything Bin Ladin has been saying about our weakness?

    All great ideas. If only you were in charge...
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth

    As has been pointed out too many times to keep track of - it was about preventing a regime that was a proven supporter of trans-national terrorism and a proven possesor of WMD from ever supplying said WMD to said trans-national terrorists. Additionally, it was about applying pressure on Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Syria to reduce their above and below-board support of the jihadists. Also it was about trying to establish democracy in an Arab Muslim country as an example. Also it was about helping the Iraqi people..
    I can't believe you are bringing up WMD.. unless I missed something there never was any real proof of those..
    And as for their regime, why did the US create that regime in the first place?

    And if that was the cause why did they single out Iraq?

    As for trying to establish democracy in an Arab Muslim country.. isnt that just as bad as muslims trying to make a muslim state out of a western country?
    What bussiness is it of the US to impose their way of life on others? Who granted them that right?

    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Now Iraq is also about eliminating jihadists in larger numbers than we ever could by hunting them down around the world. They are flowing from around the world into the gaping maw of the US Army and Marines. Good riddance.
    Yeah that really worked well in Madrid and London..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    According to http://www.iraqbodycount.net/press/pr12.php (prob biased on their message, but I assume the numbers are correct):

    Who was killed?
    24,865 civilians were reported killed in the first two years.
    Women and children accounted for almost 20% of all civilian deaths.
    Baghdad alone recorded almost half of all deaths.
    When did they die?
    30% of civilian deaths occurred during the invasion phase before 1 May 2003.
    Post-invasion, the number of civilians killed was almost twice as high in year two (11,351) as in year one (6,215).
    The question was, how many enemies, not how many civilians.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  10. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #50  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    lets define it loosely then: the current political situation in the world.
    I see that the west focuses on the harm done by 'terrorist' activity and the muslims on the harm done by 'zionist' politics.

    What most people fail to see that they are all related.. unless you see the whole picture (pretty much starting with the foundation of Israel) you cannot find a sollution..
    2 questions
    What or who do you consider the West?
    What is your definition of the foundation of Israel
  11. #51  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    and the nr of american (casualties)
    http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/
    Date Total In Combat

    American Deaths
    Since war began (3/19/03): 2047 1642
    Since "Mission Accomplished" (5/1/03) (the list) 1910 1534
    Since Capture of Saddam (12/13/03): 1580 1338
    Since Handover (6/29/04): 1181 1009
    Since Election (1/31/05): 609 534


    Which makes me wonder how many other 'alliance of the willing' soldiers died and what the total is..
    The US total includes deaths from all causes (accidents, etc...). This doesn't diminish the cost or sacrifice, but it's important to note they are not all "combat" deaths.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  12. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #52  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    The question was, how many enemies, not how many civilians.
    Good point. Terrorist are not considered military, so they are included in the civilian total. Civilians killed by terrorist are not military, counted in the civilian total. Just like stats, you can make numbers say anything you want as long as you use the right question/numbers.
  13. #53  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    lets define it loosely then: the current political situation in the world.
    I see that the west focuses on the harm done by 'terrorist' activity and the muslims on the harm done by 'zionist' politics.

    What most people fail to see that they are all related.. unless you see the whole picture (pretty much starting with the foundation of Israel) you cannot find a sollution..
    So we should do what?

    Eliminate Israel? Can't really do that, can we?
    Cede territory back to the Palestinians? Done that. I haven't noticed a change in jihadist attitudes, have you?
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  14. #54  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    You're asking me to disprove something that can't be known. I can play that game, too. There have been no attacks in the US since 9/11. I say it's because of Iraq. Prove me wrong.Yeah. They had neither the will nor proven ability to attack before Iraq.
    It can be known since they people who did the attack said why they did..

    http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/warwithoutborders/bombing.html
    He said he was the military leader of al-Qaeda in Europe, that he belonged to a group called Ansar al-Qaeda, a group unknown to police. The reason given for the attack at Atocha station in Madrid was Spain's participation in the Iraq war.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3512748.stm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/11_Marc...train_bombings
    Osama bin Laden issued a public threat in October 2003 to carry out suicide bombings against any countries joining the US-led invasion of Iraq: "We reserve the right to retaliate at the appropriate time and place against all countries involved, especially Britain, Spain, Australia, Poland, Japan and Italy."

    etc etc
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  15. #55  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    The US total includes deaths from all causes (accidents, etc...). This doesn't diminish the cost or sacrifice, but it's important to note they are not all "combat" deaths.
    The second figure is 'in combat' the first is in total, the layout got a bit screwed up.. but look at the link and you'll see both figures more easily..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  16. #56  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Good point. Terrorist are not considered military, so they are included in the civilian total. Civilians killed by terrorist are not military, counted in the civilian total. Just like stats, you can make numbers say anything you want as long as you use the right question/numbers.
    Indeed, it is a problem since there are no (public) figures I could find on proven terrorist..
    So I guess you are right it is hard to tell that figure.. I'm sure the military has some kind of body count.. but with a guerilla war it is hard to tell enimy from civilian.. the line is real thin..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  17. #57  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    I can't believe you are bringing up WMD.. unless I missed something there never was any real proof of those..
    You're not really going to deny Iraq ever had them are you? This revisionism is getting tiresome. True, large quantities haven't been found since the invasion. You think there never were any? What about the Kurds Saddam gassed? What about the Iranians he gassed? Did we all imagine it?
    And as for their regime, why did the US create that regime in the first place?
    The US did not "create" the Baathist regime. The US supported them in opposition to the Iranian revolutionaries, true. At any rate, it's not at all relevant to the issue at hand and is a change of subject.
    As for trying to establish democracy in an Arab Muslim country.. isnt that just as bad as muslims trying to make a muslim state out of a western country?
    What bussiness is it of the US to impose their way of life on others? Who granted them that right?
    Impose freedom? Listen to yourself.
    Yeah that really worked well in Madrid and London..
    See my other recent post.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  18. #58  
    Quote Originally Posted by ToolkiT
    It can be known since they people who did the attack said why they did..

    http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/warwithoutborders/bombing.html
    He said he was the military leader of al-Qaeda in Europe, that he belonged to a group called Ansar al-Qaeda, a group unknown to police. The reason given for the attack at Atocha station in Madrid was Spain's participation in the Iraq war.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3512748.stm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/11_Marc...train_bombings
    Osama bin Laden issued a public threat in October 2003 to carry out suicide bombings against any countries joining the US-led invasion of Iraq: "We reserve the right to retaliate at the appropriate time and place against all countries involved, especially Britain, Spain, Australia, Poland, Japan and Italy."

    etc etc
    Wow. Newsflash - the enemy might fight back.

    And this means we shouldn't fight them? OK.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  19. #59  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    So we should do what?

    Eliminate Israel? Can't really do that, can we?
    Cede territory back to the Palestinians? Done that. I haven't noticed a change in jihadist attitudes, have you?
    What my best sollution would be is get all the leaders around the table and come to an agreement that is statisfactory to all parties.

    Things to include are:
    -get Israel back to the size of the orignal 1947 UN Partition Plan.
    -Create a barrier between Israel and arab world
    -Muslim countries promise to stop supporting terrorist activities
    -West promises to stop interfering in the middle east.
    -Muslims stop their 'holy war'
    -A unpartial party (UN?) controls disputes.
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
  20. #60  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    You're not really going to deny Iraq ever had them are you? This revisionism is getting tiresome. True, large quantities haven't been found since the invasion. You think there never were any? What about the Kurds Saddam gassed? What about the Iranians he gassed? Did we all imagine it?
    Sure they were there, they were supplied by the west remember?
    But they were way past their due date when the US invaded iraq and I havent seen any evidence that there was a new stockpile..
    Even Blair admits he was wrongly informed.. and he is one of Bush's biggest ally.. so why would you?

    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    The US did not "create" the Baathist regime. The US supported them in opposition to the Iranian revolutionaries, true. At any rate, it's not at all relevant to the issue at hand and is a change of subject.
    It supported it and it kept supporting it even after it turned out it was an evil regime that killed its own people..
    Without that support Saddam could not have taken power and keep it..

    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Impose freedom? Listen to yourself.See my other recent post.
    I thought you said democracy, not freedom.. in our opinion democracy is a good thing, but not everybody feels that way.. if they want democracy we should support them, however imposing it on them is not the right way..
    <IMG WIDTH="200" HEIGHT="50" SRC=http://www.visorcentral.com/images/visorcentral.gif> (ex)VisorCentral Discussion Moderator
    Do files get embarrassed when they get unzipped?
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions