• news
  • THURSDAY AUGUST 16 2007 9:00 AM

Remember When There Weren’t Massive Terrorist Attacks In Iraq?

Submitted by FearTheReaper

Edited by erin_broadley

Tags: Yazidi, The surge, George Bush



500 people. That is the number of dead from yesterday’s truck bomb attacks in the towns of Qahtaniya, al-Jazeera and Tal Uzair. The towns are near the Syrian border and all of those killed were from the Yazidi religious sect. The bombs wiped out entire families.

The Yazidi are an isolated sect of around 500,000 people, who believe Jesus and Mohammed were prophets, but worship an archangel named Malak Taus above all others. There is one big drawback to worshipping the archangel Melek Taus; his other name is Shaytan, which happens to be the name of Satan in the Koran. Big oops. Muslims consider the Yazidi to be devil worshippers, which has led to oppression of the sect for hundreds of years. The Yazidi avoid outsiders, do not allow converts and do not marry outside of their religion. You may recall a video of a young Iraqi woman being stoned to death in April because she was seen with a Sunni Muslim man. Her fellow Yazidi killed her, so they are not all that great.

The stoning inflamed tensions between the two religions. Muslims vowed revenge and they have apparently backed up their threats. The bombings are the worst the world has seen since 9/11. It is by far the worst attack since the war began. One witness said the damage looked like a “mini nuclear explosion.”


The blasts injured at least 350 others and pulverized about 400 mud-walled homes, burying victims and body parts in a gruesome landscape of gore and charred debris, local officials reported.

Many of the victims were blown to pieces, and grieving relatives were combing the ruins of their homes for limbs or other body parts and taking them to hospitals and morgues in hopes of identifying their lost loved ones.


That is about as fucked up as it gets. The US was, of course, quick to toss out the al-Qaeda card.


Iraqi and U.S. officials immediately blamed Al Qaeda-affiliated insurgents for the devastation near the Syrian border, claiming that the scope and sophistication of the coordinated detonations of four gas tankers bore the hallmarks of the militant group's followers.


That’s great, but don’t forget to blame yourselves, you stupid assholes. George Bush and the military leaders behind the surge can also be partly blamed for this hideous attack.

The surge is a load of shit. We put 25,000 soldiers into Baghdad in an attempt to quell violence in the city. So, what the fuck did they think the insurgents would do? Go hang out at the beach on the Red Sea and wait for the surge to end? Of course they left Baghdad and are now hitting soft targets far from the city. It’s a game of Whack-A-Mole, except we don’t win a stuffed animal when it’s over. A surge would only work if we sent a couple hundred thousand more soldiers to secure the entire nation. As it is, we are just forcing them to go somewhere else. In this case they found a town highly populated with very poor people.

I’d like to take one of those severed body parts and cram it in Bush’s mouth, to stop him from saying anything about these attacks. Preferably it would be a foot.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 9

Next

Comments
_kungfoo_

_kungfoo_

Los Angeles, CA
April 2005

AUG 16, 2007 05:42 PM

graphicsman77 said:
Frequent tours for U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan have stressed the all-volunteer force and made it worth considering a return to a military draft, President Bush's new war adviser said Friday.

"I think it makes sense to certainly consider it," Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute said in an interview with National Public Radio's "All Things Considered."

"And I can tell you, this has always been an option on the table. But ultimately, this is a policy matter between meeting the demands for the nation's security by one means or another," Lute added in his first interview since he was confirmed by the Senate in June.

President Nixon abolished the draft in 1973. Restoring it, Lute said, would be a "major policy shift" and Bush has made it clear that he doesn't think it's necessary.


Reinstitute the Draft?



The Bush Administration has a long history of resisting any increase on spending for actual military members. While the defense budget has increased quite a bit under Bush, it's because we are in the middle war-profiteering gold rush for military contractors. Civilian defense contractors now outnumber U.S. military members in Iraq. That might bring up images of people working on reconstruction projects. That's also largely false. The majority of military contractors in Iraq are private military firms (mercenaries) like Blackwater and the other military support functions (Chow Halls, Laundry, Housing) are handled by companies like KBR. These companies have strong proven ties to the Bush Administration. While this was going on, the Bush Administration cut the size of the Air Force and Navy by upwards of the hundreds of thousands. The Bush Administration has and continues to outsource the military.

The Bush Administration will resist all calls for a draft just like they resisted calls to increase the size of the Army and Marines and basically why they resist pulling out of Iraq, simply because it's bad business for the defense/war industry.

If there's was any actual honesty and integrity in the Bush Administration's "vision" of bringing peace and stability to Iraq, the would Administration would have resigned long ago. The Bush Administration has no integrity left. They are the boy that cried al-Qaeda.

photoline

photoline

Edmonton, AB
January 2005

AUG 16, 2007 06:17 PM

graphicsman77 said:
The violent acts in Qahtaniya are the cowardly acts of a cowardly enemy...



They are the act of combatants who were forced into the rural areas by the increased military presence in Baghdad.

Saddam has been out of power for over 4 years. Too bad there wasn't a follow-up plan to deal with law and order rather than columns of abandoned tanks and non-existent WMD's.

VinnyVidiVici

VinnyVidiVici

Orange Park, FL
February 2006

AUG 16, 2007 06:45 PM

Metaverse said:

Vinny_Blaze said:
As terrible as it is, the crime is the responsibility of the criminal who committed it, not George Bush.



What planet are you living on again?



George Bush doesn't make these guys murder innocent people. It's as simple as that. These people were not occupation troops, they were not government troops. They were civilians, they were slaughtered.

You put the blame wherever you want, I'll put it where it belongs, the criminals who slaughter people in such ways.

VinnyVidiVici

VinnyVidiVici

Orange Park, FL
February 2006

AUG 16, 2007 06:47 PM

photoline said:

They are the act of combatants who were forced into the rural areas by the increased military presence in Baghdad.



And they were forced to massacre hundreds of unarmed people?

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

AUG 16, 2007 06:48 PM

graphicsman77 said:
More violence means we're winning in Iraq, less violence means we're winning in Iraq.



Just paraphrasing what you said.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

AUG 16, 2007 06:49 PM

Vinny_Blaze said:

photoline said:

They are the act of combatants who were forced into the rural areas by the increased military presence in Baghdad.



And they were forced to massacre hundreds of unarmed people?



No they were forced into rural areas. You should try reading what you are quoting.

VinnyVidiVici

VinnyVidiVici

Orange Park, FL
February 2006

AUG 16, 2007 06:50 PM

FearTheReaper said:

Vinny_Blaze said:

photoline said:

They are the act of combatants who were forced into the rural areas by the increased military presence in Baghdad.



And they were forced to massacre hundreds of unarmed people?



No they were forced into rural areas. You should try reading what you are quoting.



I'm sorry Photoline, I didn't know you posted under two different names.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

AUG 16, 2007 06:52 PM

Vinny_Blaze said:

FearTheReaper said:

Vinny_Blaze said:

photoline said:

They are the act of combatants who were forced into the rural areas by the increased military presence in Baghdad.



And they were forced to massacre hundreds of unarmed people?



No they were forced into rural areas. You should try reading what you are quoting.



I'm sorry Photoline, I didn't know you posted under two different names.



First time on a message board? Did you know that other people respond to what you write? It's not a private conversation. Just a tip.

VinnyVidiVici

VinnyVidiVici

Orange Park, FL
February 2006

AUG 16, 2007 06:54 PM

FearTheReaper said:


First time on a message board? Did you know that other people respond to what you write? It's not a private conversation. Just a tip.



Did you notice that I was asking him a question? Sure you can answer for him if you like. But I was wondering if that was what he was getting at or not.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

AUG 16, 2007 07:02 PM

Vinny_Blaze said:

Metaverse said:

Vinny_Blaze said:
As terrible as it is, the crime is the responsibility of the criminal who committed it, not George Bush.



What planet are you living on again?



George Bush doesn't make these guys murder innocent people. It's as simple as that. These people were not occupation troops, they were not government troops. They were civilians, they were slaughtered.

You put the blame wherever you want, I'll put it where it belongs, the criminals who slaughter people in such ways.





"contingency plan"

From Department of Defense
Definition: (DOD) A plan for major contingencies that can reasonably be anticipated in the principal geographic subareas of the command.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

AUG 16, 2007 07:02 PM

Vinny_Blaze said:

FearTheReaper said:


First time on a message board? Did you know that other people respond to what you write? It's not a private conversation. Just a tip.



Did you notice that I was asking him a question? Sure you can answer for him if you like. But I was wondering if that was what he was getting at or not.



Sorry, it was such a stupid question, I thought I'd take a crack

VinnyVidiVici

VinnyVidiVici

Orange Park, FL
February 2006

AUG 16, 2007 07:15 PM

FearTheReaper said:
Sorry, it was such a stupid question, I thought I'd take a crack



Wow, you're a fucking asshole. Congrats.

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

AUG 16, 2007 07:29 PM

Watch out FTR, he's got your number!

DrStinkypants

DrStinkypants

Saint Paul, MN
October 2002

AUG 16, 2007 08:24 PM

FearTheReaper said:

DrStinkypants said:

Now that is true. The war in Iraq has destabilized it and created an environment for suicide bombers to flourish. BUT that environment would be present surge or no surge. The surge has almost nothing to do with the attack, above and beyond where it happened to take place.
FTR's anger and poor command of the english language is, as usual, misplaced. Though, I do appreciate the humor in him accusing someone else of being too "black and white". That in itself was worth reading the article.



Yes, you have made a good point. It was obviously a very "black and white"a article I wrote. I only explained the religious hatred behind the attack, as well as recent reasons why their was an escalation in animosity. And then tied in the surge. Sorry I was so black and white.

I was, of course, angry at the death of 500 people. You obviously were not. Let me know when you become a human.

Your assumption about the surge and it's effects is ignorant.

Last time you submitted an article, I spent more time correcting mistakes than any article I have ever had to edit. Just so you know....



Human? That's ridiculous. You're taking a tragic event and using it as ammunition for your own political agenda.

Whatever. I don't care about how much you and I hate each other. The fact of the matter is, there is no way that you can logically assert that the surge caused this attack, especially when you began the argument by claiming that this was inistigated by tribalistic revenge

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

AUG 16, 2007 08:31 PM

DrStinkypants said:
Whatever. I don't care about how much you and I hate each other. The fact of the matter is, there is no way that you can logically assert that the surge caused this attack, especially when you began the argument by claiming that this was inistigated by tribalistic revenge


I don't think anyone is genuinely arguing that the surge caused the attack, so much as that the surge (more specifically, the typically stripped-down, cheap, and incomplete and incompetent implementation of the ISG's recommendations) played a role in where it happened.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 9

Next

featured interviews