Iraq Attacks Kill 3 Marines, 1 Soldier, U.S. Says

same people running it too

58,000 lives and how many more must die for this lie, we are never leaving Iraq, they can change their slogans all they want, they are going to keep those soldiers there for a long time, and these thugs who are in charge are re living their Vietnam dream.

New party motto, offered for free as a public service by your friendly neighborhood gratuitous.

A lifetime to get back to the debacle. You have to admire the amazing amount of arrogance and stupidity that went into recreating the worst policy fuckup of a generation.

Cheney, and Nixon's old boys, they have a vendetta against Dems and the American public. It's all about them isn't it? How much money and power they can get and hold onto to, these are our terrorists right here.

what boggles my mind is how they are able to fool people in to actually VOTING for them

at the stunning dullness of americans.

am I....becoming one of them.....by hoping for results, some sign they're catching on......finally........

15 years to drive the U.S. out (or at least force the beginning of the U.S. troop withdrawals under Nixon). It has only taken the Iraqi resistance between 3-5 years to achieve the same strategic stalemate, aka, U.S. defeat.

or about 5-6 years after the war got hot (62-63), not 15, and 3 years after LBJ escalated with 500,000 grunts on the ground. We haven't removed any troops from Iraq.

history repeats itself, the first time as tragedy, the second as farce.

LOL

introduced in '65. I used the 15-year figure, because most historians date our involvement in Vietnam from 1954 when French forces surrendered at Dien Bien Phu.

How to date the start of U.S. involvement in any foreigh invasion\occupation is always a matter of definitions. So I take your point, provided we agree that U.S. involvement began in 1963. Some would say, I suppose, that we didn't get involved in a combat capacity until after LBJ's re-election in Nov. 64.

One irony is that U.S. military "advisors" and support personnel had been involved in combat operations against forces of the NLF long before Marines landed at DaNang. But US govt. always took great pains to keep that combat involvement secret from American public. (Sorry I don't have sources at hand, am at work typing as I eat.)

Our involvement in Iraq started in 1990 with Gulf Farce I. We are in the 16th year of our military conflict with Iraq.

inside Iraq proper post Gulf War I until early 2003, whereas U.S. forces were omnipresent in South Vietnam from 1954 onward until 1974.

We actually did have a rather large military presence inside Iraq, although not on the ground, in the form of the 'no fly zone' from GFI right up until the resumption of the ground war with Gulf Farce II. I really do view this as one military conflict with two ground invasions. In an even longer view our military involvement starts with the Iran-Iraq war where we used Iraq as our proxy to fight a debilitating war against Iran, not so much so that Iraq could conquer Iran, we made sure that never happened, but so that Iran would be economically devastated and unable act as a power in the region.

characterize your position, our involvement in Iraq has lasted about as long as our involvement in Southeast Asia.

I wonder what your opinion is of the military effectiveness of the Iraqi Resistance when compared\contrasted to that of the NLF and NVA. Setting aside nationalist considerations (I'm American), I have come to think of the Iraqi Resistance as actually more effective militarily, since the NLF had the support of various mentors (USSR and China for material and training), wherease the Iraqi Resistance has acheived a similar outcome pretty much on a self-sustaining basis.

class don't have a dog in the fight (no draft).

This is PIERCE BUSH nephew of the Chimpanzee and his Babes



Like Cheney he has "OTHER PRIORITIES"

I'd love to be his Drill Sgt.

Country" on PBS' Point of View series a couple nights ago? My wife and I were blown away by it. We both feel it should be required viewing in every classroom in the U.S.

Have the Corporate Media run out of names to call those who inflict harm on our troops?

First they were "Saddam loyalists," then "terrorists" and "insurgents, then "terrorists" again, and finally "Islamic-fascists" (with a few other names in between that I've forgotten). So what are they now? Just "Iraq?"

Like "United States rapes and murders 14-year-old Iraqi girl?"

on edit: OK, I see now what the headline is saying, but I still think the Corporate Media doesn't know what is really going on over there...

RIP