I do not support the insurgents in Iraq

who are using terrorist tactics. Fight the U.S. forces? Fine. Sucide bombs on busy streets, excutions of kidnap victims and those who collaborate with the Americans or Iraqi government? Not fine. No I don't believe that every atrocity committed is committed by Americans in black ops.

I shouldn't even find it necessary to state that I deplore the war. I fought against it. I'll continue to do so. I think bush and cohorts are war criminals.

I am dismayed by the refusal of so many here who defend the insurgents no matter what they do. It is possible to condemn the U.S. war and the actions of those who use terror as their tactic. Is the U.S. more culpable? Yes. But that entirely misses the point.

End of rant. Have fun flaming.

war, especially the insurgents, but I would ask you what would you do if Putin decided he just didn't like George Bush, and decided to invade this country so he could set up a different government, for our own good of course. Would you fight back? If you didn't have the latest AK47, would you throw rocks or do anything you could to fight back. That's one of America's biggest problems; we can never put ourselves in the shoes of others. We cannot just kill all the terrorists; that's like fighting windmills, and in the meantime we are losing good people for absolutely nothing. We all need to look in a mirror and see what we've become.

Russia invades the U.S. For the sake of argument, they're far more powerful than we are. Also for the sake of argument, bush has murdered large numbers of godless liberals. Let's go further. bush is in prison, there's rampant violence perpetrated by his christian followers who wish to maintain his rule- and we know what they want. OTH the russians are bombing and killing large numbers of people. Yeah, I would definitely be fighting the russians- I'd also be fighting the fundamentalists. I would draw the line however at summarily executing them or going to kansas and setting off a bomb to kill red staters. This gets pretty silly, pretty quickly.
Look, I'm pretty good at putting myself in others' situations; I have great sympathy with Iraqis who want the Americans out, but I also have great sympathy with those who want the terrorists to stop they're actions. What do the majority of Iraqis want. Hard to know exactly. From what I've read, most of them do not want the terrorist to continue killing Iraqi citizens. They appear to have mixed feelings about the American troops. They want them out. They're afraid of what will happen if they leave. Understandable emotions.
I agree completely that we cannot kill all the terrorists. We're creating them faster than we can kill them and we're killing far, far too many innocents in the process. Collateral Damage is unacceptable. I believe we should leave Iraq. Pull out tomorrow.
I also realize that should we do so the likelihood of a bloodbath is all too real a possibility, and we will be culpable if it happens.
I don't have any answers. The only reason I posted this is because I've seen so many comments defending heinous acts, or discounting them as being committed only by Americans.

put yourself in the insurgent's place for a minute...they have no recourse but to use those tactics...imagine your nation was taken over by a avowedly well-meaning nation bent on, they said, your liberation but you watched them torture prisoners, take control of your country's most valuable natural resource, oil, and bomb and kill thousands of innocent civilians while corporations from that country raped and pillaged your economic landscape, unable to account for literally billions of dollars in funds that were supposed to be used to help you. Imagine also that you had nothing but rather, comparitively primative, weaponry at your disposal against this nation's cutting edge war technology.

What would you do..give in or resist? And how would you resist if not in the same way they are...?

I do not excuse terrorist atrocities, but neither do I excuse our own "terrorist atrocities" which bombing with "collateral damage" is.

As Robert McNamara said Curtis LeMay said in the Fog of War. If we hadn't won WWII, it would be us who were on trial for war crimes.

of George Washington to adopt the guerrilla tactics of those he had fought against in the French and Indian War.

He should have lined up his troops and marched them toward the redcoats.

It's just no fun when people won't fight fair. Long live the Queen!

They are Iraqi's. They live there. Arabs have a different culture and a different way of looking at things than we do. They are not going to abide to by what we, the US thinks they should do things.

IT IS THEIR COUNTRY AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS THE INVADER!

Why are we even there in the first place? We kill women, children, old men and call them insurgents, and commit other war crimes with impunity.
They are fighting us any way they can. We have killed more Iraqi's in just short of 20 months than Saddam did in 23 years. To say nothing of the physical damage we have and are continuing to do to their cities, towns and their country.

so what is the point of your rant...This sounds rather suspiciously like a republican rant against "liberal" democrats, though I know you to be far from such a one.

The best I can say is that you are mistaken in this myth of wide spread support for the tactics of insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan.Or for that matter anywhere that a people are being oppressed and enslaved by superior armed forces and wealthier governments.

That these people have no other recourse , that many of the kidnappings follow a tradition of such , carried out by real criminals and not terrorists, and then selling for profit the victims to such groups, that everyone here deplores such murders, while having sympathy for an exploited and brutally used people at the hands of a vast military machine for the express purpose of making a lot more money for a few wealthy white guys seems to escape you, Cali.

That you do seem to support the neoconservative movement in many of your rants does not escape me....Not that you are violating any rules or such, you are certainly free to express your own political views. What you are NOT free to do is to make shit up.

'That you do seem to support the neoconservative movement in many of your rants does not escape me.'

How you can say that is literally beyond me. I said in my post- in many posts- that I consider bushco to be a war criminal. I condemned the war six ways from Sunday. I said we should pull out immediately. Defend your statement about my alleged support for the neocons. Rationally, please.

My rant was indeed founded on comments that excuse or defend what I consider to indefensible. And it didn't come from a republican or democratic school of thought, but rather from a tradition of human secularism. And we all have a point of view. That's a large component of mine.

The group think that goes on around here is frankly, rather discouraging. I don't buy my ideas or my core beliefs wholesale by the lot.

"I am dismayed by the refusal of so many here who defend the insurgents no matter what they do"

Right wing rant straight out of the Rove playbook........and an outright distortion of th eposition of folks around here...read lie.

That's it? That's your response? How rovian of me to condemn rove and his boss as war criminals. What a clever and diabolical way of hiding my true neocon agenda. Just call me dr. evil. Oh, that's right, you already did in so many words. Too bad you didn't address what I'm saying. I can only repeat myself:

Pathetic.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Cali, if anything, there's plenty of arguing back and forth among all shades of Democratic Party positions. If you want to see "group think", it'll be more evident in right wing groups. Dems argue all the time about everything. It's the nature of our Party. As a Dem, you know this. So, please, I wish you wouldn't spread this kind of falsehood in the heat of an argument.

To speak to your original posting - I'm frightened when I hear about suicide bombings and beheadings. But I'll tell you this - I'm more frightened that we continue to drop 500 pound bombs in an effort to shock and awe in Iraq. The sight of little children with their limbs blown off is more than I can handle. Insurgents don't have 500 pound bombs to drop on us nor the air force carry it off. So they use what they have. War isn't born from the scent of a freshly opened history book. It's always a living hell minted in blood.

if we all agreed with you.Funny how that works :silly:

Jesus christ knock it off.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You might also read the rules for DU. Calling people names such as freeper or neocon isn't permitted.

:crazy:

You're making reference to my comments in another thread. Explain to me how you are making the connection between people specifically telling individuals to fuck off or go fuck themselves, specifically and directly calling individuals freepers or neocons, which is against the rules, or specifically attacking an individual -- and my saying that I'm sick the the fucking mccarthyism around here. Unless of course... you just object to my use of the word "fucking."

One is a personal attack. The other is a criticism of an attitude within the community that really needs to change, without a personal attack. Go figure.

given the 'insurgents' are Iraqis defending their country against invaders. By your take, those who fought the British to 'free' themselves from British rule were 'insurgents' using terrorist tactics that should be scorned.

Take off your blinders and stop thinking that even though 'you deplore war' you support the invaders over the defenders.

'Terrorist tactics' are simply low-tech methods of defending themselves against high-tech invaders. Would you feel better if they, too, could bomb from 5000 feet instead of using car bombs?

Many are nothing more than criminals who kidnap people for money. They don't give a damn about ideology or politics or religion.

Others are being paid to plant bombs, and/or fight agains the occupation. They may or not believe in the struggle, but they wouldn't be there if they weren't being paid to do it.

And "terrorist tactics" are merely "low-tech method" of defense. Defending oneself with a knife is low-tech, and is not terrorism if it's done in self-defense. And suicide bombers that kill innocent civilians are not acting in self-defense, as self-defense is considered to legitimate only when it's used against an *imminent* and the force used is used directly against the threat. Suicide bombings targetting innocent civilians do not fit these criteria.

as to your "others are being paid to plant bombs", would just like to remind you that "others" such as mercenaries are being paid by the US to do the same, they use different methods but they are just as culpable. I find your argument specious, but that's just me.

but wrong when we do it?

I think they're both wrong.

nor is violence, imho. I don't support those Iraqis who have resorted to this-but I do support the Iraqi people, especially those courageous enough to use non-violent methods to show their dissatisfaction with the American occupation of their country.

then you need to get the fuck out of that country.

If someone had told those "foreigners" who supported the American revolution that same message perhaps we'd all be saluting the Union Jack right now.....

Of course the foreigners who supported the US revolution were INVITED to join in by the insurgents.

And frankly there are worse things than the Union Jack.

like your inability to form coherent thoughts for one.

Are you such a font of knowledge that you know that none of the so-called foreign fighters in Iraq were NOT invited there by those fighting US imperialism within that nation? Make no mistake about it, our invasion of that nation was nothing less than a securing of oil fields for our own personal benefit and a forestalling of Hussein's plan to trade oil for Euros, leading quite possibly to a collapse or further weakening of the highly inflated Dollar...cant have THAT now can we?

Our foreign fighters were good guys, their foreign fighters are bad guys.....what a silly world you live in, sorry about that.

of western mecenaries, and assorted other capetbaggers, discibed as 'contractors'.

which, if you had been paying attention to my postings the last three years you might have inferred, and refrained from posting that assinine scolding.

I agree.

And Mr Crankly Pants needs to lay off the coffee.

KG has intellect going for him and we might possibly have had a misunderstanding.

You have not, nor did I misunderstand your silly raving. I guess that, with High School being out for the holidays, you've little else to do?

I like how you write things like this: "yeah there are worse things<...>like your inability to form coherent thoughts for one."

And then accuse others of pomposity.

Go, Mr. Cranky pants. I like the entertainment.

I recommend it...But the next time you are in a room full of laughing people, please try to note that it is YOU they are laughing at.......that's not so good.

But there is always hope that, as you mature, you will become smarter and more useful.

So one must be aware of the entire history of someones posts in order to frame a response to a one line uninformative post. I do not know your politics, nor do I much care, I responded in the vein of the discussion and if I mistook your intent that is the fault of your not-very descriptive post....

:scared:

is actually thinking, is understanding the basic tenet of the theory of apparent paradox, wherein two seemingly irreconcilable truths exist within the same space/time frame such a difficult concept to grasp?

And I have to add: I like being provocative, and I refuse to shut up because I'm going to be labeled as a nazineoconevilrepubwhatever. The people that think around here and read my posts, understand what I'm saying even if they don't agree, and they respond accordingly.

Oh, yea. I absolutely am an elitist intellectual snob from a long line of such.

:pals:

We have used billions of dollars and the world's most superior weaponry against a people who have pretty much nothing. When you have nothing, you use fear as a weapon (kidnappings and beheadings captured on video) and surprise attack (suicide bombers).

We invaded a country for some trumped up reason, tortured it's civilians in the same prison their dictator used, killed 100,000 more, destroyed cities and mosques, and used DU while doing it, which is going to have negative consequences on the population for years to come. How many civilians have we beheaded and ripped apart with our weapons? Granted, some of the insurgents are despicable characters who've come from within Iraq and surrounding countries to fight jihad, but many are Iraqi's fighting to get the land of their birth back.

It seems there are a group of insurgents who are targetting only the perpetrators, enablers and profiteers of this war. Then there is that despicable group who murdered Margaret Hassan. I don't know which is which, but I can't help but support people fighting to take their country out of the hands of foreign invaders. I do not support the actions of our government in this war, and I do not support using our troops as proxies in order to carry out PNAC.

we are against the war.

I support the troops in way of prayer and signing petitions to get them home, where they will be needed for real war, should that happen.

However, as the UN is more interested in Sudan than Iraq, it's quite clear the US has to clean up its own mess. So, in effect, this is our war. The civil war we bestowed upon Iraqis.

Sorry, this isn't a fucking football game. It's petty to put one side above the other except it's been proven the war started due to lies and deception. That is wrong. But the troops are doing what they are being told to do, that is their job. They I readily support. It's the commanding officers I'm worried about.

Or, the world wants us to disintegrate.

Does that somehow make anything that WE have control over any better? We can't control what they do, but we can control what WE do.

....which is exactly why we shouldn't be over there. This is a group of people we are not capable of dealing with. Total barbarians who know no taboo to get their point across. They use the "villagers" and "poor women and children" as shields to protect themselves and turn public outrage in their favor, just like a cowardly American president who uses the troops to deflect attacks against his policy of sending those soldiers over there.

Fine. Now I want to hear your outrage about the carnage of using bombs and artillery against cities. Killing tens of thousands of civilians because they had the bad misfortune of being in the vicinity of an insurgent.

Bombing is our preferred tactic, because we have the hardware. So you think anti-septic warfare is fine, where people kill each other at a distance. I don't see much of a moral distinction between those and a suicide bombing. Although ironically you have to admit that the suicide bomber has a proven strength of conviction -- he's literally willing to die right there for his belief.

And please, stop with straw man arguments like these: "No I don't believe that every atrocity committed is committed by Americans in black ops." Yeah, sure Cali, I still beat my wife, too...

I've repeatedly expressed my outrage over the U.S massacre of Iraqis, and the despicable use of bombs. I did so earlier in another thread today. I'm even handed with my outrage, though as I said earlier, U.S. culpability is greater as the U.S. set everything in motion. But I digress, because that's not the point I'm trying to make. Quite simply, and in terms we can all understand, one injustice does not justify another.

And there's no straw man argument to be knocked down, unless it's yours. The reason I felt compelled to add the bit about black ops is because I've seen posts that suggest the kidnappings and beheadings are US black ops. What that has to do with your beating your wife, I can't really say.

How are the atrocities of the insurgents so much more morally reprehensible than the atrocities of civilian bombing, or shelling a city? One side keeps their hands clean. But the dead people are still dead.

as we say in these parts. I never, ever claimed that the atrocities of the insurgents were more morally reprehensible than the atrocities of bombing. Didn't even hint it. Do people even bother reading what I've written, or do they just project their own fixed beliefs thereon?

Sometimes I think people are deliberately obtuse.

Here's what you wrote: "Fight the U.S. forces? Fine. Sucide bombs on busy streets, excutions of kidnap victims and those who collaborate with the Americans or Iraqi government? Not fine."

That statement is a comparison of tactics. Fighting in one way is acceptable, and fighting another way isn't. And I'm saying that fighting our way isn't terribly different to the innocent people who are dead. If you agree with that statement, then great, we're in violent agreement and we can have a beer together. Jeesh.

were portrayed as savages willing to die so they can also kill Americans.After reading about the Phoenix Program of assassinations and the Tiger program of wholesale murder by our troops ( revelaed by the Toledo Blade) we should think twice about accusing other people of savagery and barbarism, let alone Terrorism in their own land that has been invaded by a vastly well armed aggressor.

I think your post is despicable.

Do you support Israel? Ever heard of the Irgun?

not an absolute. Ever hear of Gandhi? And the British occupation of India was hardly pretty. What about Mandela who turned from violence and effected far greater change with peaceful means?

To your litmus test question: I do not support the Israeli occupation of Palestine. I think they should withdraw to the borders of 1967, dismantle all settlements, pay the Palestinian reparations. I utterly reject their policies and the violence they perpetrate against the Palestinian people. I also reject the idea that deliberately targeting civilians is legitimate.

Do I pass? Not that I give a damn.

Be an insurgent.

The picture always changes when you walk a mile in the other person's shoes.

Funny how that works.

in which I elaborate upon that particular scenario.

Making assumptions about where a person's walked and whose shoes they've worn, is always a bit dicy.

Funny how that works.

However, I do not find your "walk in their shoes" argument compelling.

There are a lot of scum in the anti-US forces. People like al-Sadr and al-Zarqawi are not good guys.

I go back to the story of Fallujah.

Over here we hear out of the blue, that civilian contractors in Fallujah are ambushed, killed, and their bodies burned/mutilated by an angry mob. Damn, that's pretty hostile, why would they do that?

What we don't hear is that the long lead-up to the event. Not surprising ~ we were also told that we were innocently minding our own business at the Gulf of Tonkin when we were attacked - ATTACKED! How shocking.

Based on my short life, I think there are very few Jesuses or Ghandis in the world. Most everyone has a breaking point at which rage overtakes human decency and compassion. We can argue that they have the wrong breaking point, but it's hard to argue that we have no breaking point.

I'm not trying to justify their methods (see subject line), but I am trying to say that we all have the capacity for violence. In a population, there will be some that will reach that point first, just as there are some who would be Ghandi-like to the end.

Rather than those at the top of the Normal distribution who break first, I'm more worried about what happens when we reach the middle of the bell curve - where 95% of the population resides. God help us if we push it that far.

I believe touchy, contentious subjects should be touched.
I don't believe in letting the prevailing "wisdom" silence one.

I just wish some people could rationally discuss this subject rather than name-call, rant, flame, diss, etc. Already I have seen some posts here that are stating things without substantiation and with the attendant flaming.

By either side.

"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy." - Gandhi

world leaders had to take a "Ghandi test" to first be certain they were worthy.

some don't.

I don't really support them either way, they are fighting a war that will result in nothing good for anyone.

I'd like to know.

asked sans attack, so I won't be cranky or snarky about my answer.

It's difficult to say. In my original post I drew the dividing line between fighting the occupying forces and killing Iraqi civilians.
then, perforce of following logic to it's rational conclusions, one has to consider whether the Iraqi police and army are fair game. I'd have to argue they are, but then I find exceptions, such as the summary execution of 30 something unarmed Iraqi policemen.
Civilians from other countries? Mercenaries? Legitimate. UN and CARE workers? No. In other words, I understand that making these distinctions is difficult, to say the least.

I don't find terms like "terrorist tactics" useful, because they appear to have more to do with who is engaged in the tactic than what the tactics are.

To the innocent who die, it doesn't make much of a difference if we're talking about a 2000 lb bomb or a car full of explosives.

there would be no insurgents

From November 16:

My little cousin flinched and dropped her spoon, face frozen with shock, eyes wide with disbelief, glued to the television screen, "Is he dead? Did they kill him?" I swallowed hard, trying to gulp away the lump lodged in my throat and watched as my cousin buried his face in his hands, ashamed to look at his daughter.

"What was I supposed to tell them?" He asked, an hour later, after we had sent his two daughters to help their grandmother in the kitchen. "What am I supposed to tell them- 'Yes darling, they killed him- the Americans killed a wounded man; they are occupying our country, killing people and we are sitting here eating, drinking and watching tv'?" He shook his head, "How much more do they have to see? What is left for them to see?"

...

It's typical American technique- every single atrocity is lost and covered up by blaming a specific person and getting it over with. What people don't understand is that the whole military is infested with these psychopaths. In this last year we've seen murderers, torturers and xenophobes running around in tanks and guns. I don't care what does it: I don't care if it's the tension, the fear, the 'enemy'… it's murder. We are occupied by murderers. We're under the same pressure, as Iraqis, except that we weren't trained for this situation, and yet we're all expected to be benevolent and understanding and, above all, grateful. I'm feeling sick, depressed and frightened. I don't know what to say anymore… they aren't humans and they don't deserve any compassion.

So why is the world so obsessed with beheadings? How is this so very different? The difference is that the people who are doing the beheadings are extremists… the people slaughtering Iraqis- torturing in prisons and shooting wounded prisoners- are "American Heroes". Congratulations, you must be so proud of yourselves today.
http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/

one moral edge the insurgents have over the U.S. military is that they didn't choose this fight.

Shiites.

I sympathize with the plight of the Iraqis. I do not fault them for fighting to defend themselves. I understand that they may feel desperate or powerless and take desperate measures. I am definitely sympathetic to their tragedy.

But that's not the same as condoning crimes against humanity, of which terrorism and torture are two. As absurd as this sounds at some level, there are rules to war. There are some things that you aren't justifiable no matter what the excuse. I don't condone torture and terrorism - neither when it is done in the name of governments like ours nor when it is done in the name of "freedom fighting" or any other cause.

I believe there are right and wrong ways to resist.
Sel

and their tanks and meet on the field in open battle! Yeah! And then they could fire up all their fighter jets and take back the skies!

Oh wait a minute. They don't have shit do they? Well then, if they can't match the mightiest military machine on earth they should just roll over.

Ugh.

I often wonder what people like you woudl do if we were occupied by another country and had no serious military to fight back with.

Julie

Ultimately it can be argued that we are fighting for the same causes as they - ensuring the survival of our people/culture/government.

If you say they can use any means to achieve those goals, so can we.

Could you explain to me--simply, for I am dense--just exactly which part of invading Iraq helps ensure the survival of our people/culture/government?

Iraq was going to...what? Make up a great flotilla of yachts, scows, tugboats, trawlers, and tankers and send their mighty army to take over this helpless nation of ours? They were going to lob their nonexistent nukes our way in such numbers as to glass over this tiny little country in which we live?

Whatever are you talking about?

The US is not using its might for strictly good purposes, but the insurgents in Iraq are no heroes either. Some may be defending their country, but I'll bet the minutemen in the American Revolution were above the destructive tactics that the insurgents in Iraq use.

You know, the actual group targeting civilians, not the insurgents (aka resistance fighters).

Thus, I see no problem with your stance.