Guantanamo Bay

Sauron said (click to hear)

And, lo, the Wise Man known as Coanda was proven to be correct 😀

Steve

From Coanda

The country is insanely paranoid and is a flock of willing sheep at the shepherds call of whatever propaganda leaves the government offices.

You read a comment like this and you try and understand it and you can’t because there is no link to reality, no context. It suggests the paranoia liies elsewhere.

As someone pointed out in a pervious U.S. bashing thread, there are millions of routine and painless entries into the U.S. each year.

Sauron

Yes, that scathing brutal attack of: “You appear to have your dates and history confused ”

Yeah, Damn, Steve, no holds barred with you, you tiger. A bit over the top though don’t you think? I mean “confused”. Your mother will wash your mouth out with soap if she hears you use foul language like that. I am surprised boil didn’t complain to the Webmaster. He is probably just trying to recover from the shock of it all…

I know, I’m pure evil aren’t I :rolleyes:

It’s funny, but I’d have thought even the most ardent and staunch supporter of OIF would at least be realistic enough to recognise that after Desert Storm, ten years of isolation and embargoes and a gradual denuding of air defence capabilities thanks to ONW and OSW that Iraq was the least able to defend itself out of the list of “rogue states” cited by Dubya.

But apparently I’m not entitled to have an opinion on that as I wasn’t put in harm’s way as a member of the services. Ho hum.

Steve

Sorry – cheapshot coming up…

I was trying to defend the honor of the RAF and allied service members lost in Iraq over the last decade.

This could be taken as an admission of gungho-ism.;) – Nermal

You need a history lesson it was’nt Bush Sr, who left the Shiats in the wind it was the UN and the rest of the Arab Collition. After we kick the Iraqies out of Kuwiat we want to keep going but no the UN/Arabs say no we did what we said we where going to do.

When the Shiats start there little uprising we want to send in troups but are so-call allies the Saudis said if you go in then you can’t use are land. Also in the uNSC France said it would ask for the UN to break up its military group in Kuwiat if we took any steps inside Iraq with out UN approval.

Look if we had gone straight to Bagadad in 91 none of the happy Horse Sh1t would be going on now.

Desert Storm was a UN approved action. The purpose was to remove Iraqi forces from Kuwaite. The purpose was not to invade Iraq and remove Saddam from power and never was. The reality is that Bush wanted to remove Saddam now that he had strayed just like the current bush wanted him gone… the difference is the latter got what he wanted. It was Bush snr that called for the Shia majority to rise up and overthrow Saddam. It was Bush Snr that also promised assistance to aid in that uprising though that assistance was never defined. When the Saudis pointed out that the Shia majority were the same Muslim sect as the Iranians and different from the sunni muslims in Saudi Arabia Bush decided to stand by and watch Saddam brutally crush the uprising. Blaming the UN, Saudi Arabia and anyone else is a cheap evasion of the truth.

What? We invade Iraq, take down Saddam, and set up free elections, and that is supposed to give any disgruntled Muslim in the theater the right to enter Iraq and blow things up?

The irony… just because you removed the government of a country what gives anyone the right to interfer? How does the US get the right to invade countries, but individuals cannot resist that invasion if they see fit? Besides what has this to do with rights? There is nothing right about anything going on over there.

Don’t have to …we’ve already heard it from you and your buddies

Well Boil there is a month starting in a few hours from now…

Sorry, but “hold elections and leave” just doesn’t wash.

No, you’ve spent a lot of money there… you need a base or two at least.

Couldn’t care less, as long as we are free from the tryanny of Islamofascism/Pakislamism.

But trapped by the tyranny of the US…

but if they enter Iraq to join the cool kids club and blow up Americans then they have no right th be there either, using that logic (their logic, not yours).

I don’t think you have the hang of this… using their logic if they wanted to kill americans they would have every right to do it in Iraq… by definition if they wanted to kill americans for invading Iraq the best place to actually kill them is in Iraq isn’t it?

I’ll leave you to make the cheap shots…there is nothing wrong with my history…

Don’t have to …we’ve already heard it from you and your buddies….

And if you’ll end your personal attacks for a moment, you’ll note I said “wasn’t it?” about the cause of the Herk downing/crash…last time I read anything they thought it was enemy action…

Yes, that scathing brutal attack of: “You appear to have your dates and history confused “

Yeah, Damn, Steve, no holds barred with you, you tiger. A bit over the top though don’t you think? I mean “confused”. Your mother will wash your mouth out with soap if she hears you use foul language like that. I am surprised boil didn’t complain to the Webmaster. He is probably just trying to recover from the shock of it all…

You appear to have your dates and history confused (what a shock). Think about when the ‘Axis of Evil’ speech was. It has nothing to do with Desert Storm. If you know what brought the Herc down then you’re better informed than the board of enquiry.

Please don’t try cheap shots about Tonka crews in Desert Storm: I had mates on 12, 13 and 617 Sqn flying ops, thanks. :rolleyes:

Steve

I’ll leave you to make the cheap shots…there is nothing wrong with my history…
Hardly a cheap shot…you implied Iraq was a “piece of cake”.
Recent history (and 1991 is recent) shows it wasn’t.
I was trying to defend the honor of the RAF and allied service members lost in Iraq over the last decade.

As the UK found out in the Falklands, the USA in Vietnam, and the USSR in Afghanistan…there is no such thing as a piece of cake when your enemies are shooting at you with modern weapons.

The date of the “Axis of evil” speech has nothing to do with Iraqs military power.

And if you’ll end your personal attacks for a moment, you’ll note I said “wasn’t it?” about the cause of the Herk downing/crash…last time I read anything they thought it was enemy action…

I have no desire to go to america SPECIFICALLY because I would be treated as a terrorist when entering and leaving the country. Plain and Simple.

Does that mean I shouldn’t visit the UK because they make me go through customs..…why they must think I’m a smuggler!

And I better stay away from a Virgin Superstore because I pass through an anti-theft machine on the way out… they must think I’m a thief!!!

I hear that in some countries they won’t let men into ladies loos…they must think all men are perverts!rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I have no desire to go to america SPECIFICALLY because I would be treated as a terrorist when entering and leaving the country. Plain and Simple.

This is not ‘innocent until proven guilty’ The country is insanely paranoid and is a flock of willing sheep at the shepherds call of whatever propaganda leaves the government offices.

The british government has every right to request the american government detain anybody associated with fundraising for republican paramilitary forces, at any time, in any place within the united states. They are supporting a terrorist faction, and the american governments of recent history have actively turned a blind-eye to this subject, as it did not suit them to do otherwise. (in fact the american government even invites the BAS****s to frikkin dinner with them.) granted the last visit didnt go so well for ‘im not a terrorist honest guvnor’ sinn fein head.

It seems to me that the ‘All Mighty’ government has once again underestimated its enemy, which its patriotic soldiers realised a long time ago……good job only a ‘few’ syrian soldiers fought with the die-hards in iraq.

How could the americans not have expected huge swathes of the Iraqi military not to run-away and re-group to form a huge insurgency faction???, how insanely stupid and non-observant is THAT?? this will go on for a decade at least.

As ever, tony kept his best mate happy, but it is telling to see what forces were sent for this action.

Heres one for you:

Financial Advisor:-Mr President, the iraq no-fly zone effort is proving to be mighty cost-non-efficient(stupid financial advisor cra*)

Mr. President:-What do you suggest billy-bob?? (because of course all his staff are texan)

F/A:-We reckon we could go to war for the price of another years budget……we’ll break even in five years time….

Good Ol’ Tone:-(winning smile-slight endearing stutter)well…..you know dubya, he’s right!

Dubya:-Ok honey lets do it!!

it seems to me a similar amount of thought went into how the iraq action would pan out…………Iraq not really actually being a functional terrorist supporter, lets say, compared to saudi arabia, or Boston Ma.

Mind you, the iraqi nation are there own worst enemy….they seem to even like the situation they are in, theres no sign of an up-rising AGAINST the insurgency? theres no shopping of people known to support it…nothin.

But maybe I am just too cynical…….

anyhew………what american (I assum non-spook) mil forces were allowed to make arrests in PAKISTAN?????

If you’ve had to keep people for four years without questioning, I think you need to sack the interrogators……….The brits are very good……….The israeli’s are too ya know?

Crazymainer….I just love your spelling……..’shiats’………man that had me in fits of non-pc laughter.

I believe the correct terminology is ‘sh*tes’

A good book:In the company of soldiers by someone Atkinson I think it is

Sean, what Dave said was “more and more of your troops”: that doesn’t mean it has to be an “upswing”, does it? It’s just a continual list of increasing casualties and incidents. You’ve turned what Dave said into what fits your point.

Well if that’s what he meant, then I stand corrected. I wasn’t trying to skew what he said, I just took “more and more” to mean an increase.

I’d say that, in their minds, they have more right to be there than than the Coalition does.

You might be right, but if they enter Iraq to join the cool kids club and blow up Americans then they have no right th be there either, using that logic (their logic, not yours). I still say we way underestimated the insurgency problem, or figured we’d have a much easier time dealing with it.

But the point is there wasn’t an overall exit strategy in place: ask the Italian, Bulgarian, Polish, Ukrainian governments and armed forces what their view of that point is. It won’t be long until it’s just the Brits and Yanks left there. Two Armies doing policing duties for years to come. Is that really how it was planned? I’d be amazed if it were.

It’s been my understanding that our exit was contingent upon the new government taking power, the military being sufficiently trained to deal with the insurgnecy themselves, and our being asked to leave by the government. Since we can’t put a firm date on those things, this can be perceived as an unclear exit strategy, when in fact our strategy is clearly outlined. People just tend to get miffed when we can’t tell them “oh, well, the Iraqi Army will be capably trained at 0830 AM GMT on July 31st, 2005”. The other thing to consider is that if the Not-So-Smart bombs would leave us alone, our objectives would be completed and we’d be out that much quicker. All attacking us does is makes us have to chase down the attackers, taking time away from making progress and prolonging the whole endeavor.

My original point in responding to Dave was that an increase in attacks on US soldiers is unlikely at this point, given the upswing in civillian attacks. That is what I was specifically referring to when responding to his specific point. Nobody is saying that no US soldiers are being attacked or killed.

Sean, what Dave said was “more and more of your troops”: that doesn’t mean it has to be an “upswing”, does it? It’s just a continual list of increasing casualties and incidents. You’ve turned what Dave said into what fits your point.

What? We invade Iraq, take down Saddam, and set up free elections, and that is supposed to give any disgruntled Muslim in the theater the right to enter Iraq and blow things up?

Why are you asking me that? What does our opinion count? I’d say that, in their minds, they have more right to be there than than the Coalition does. That isn’t my own opinion but it wasn’t hard to predict, was it?

I’d call a major shift in objectives and strategy news, but that’s just me.

Sure: but the shift came about as soon as the “new Iraqi” institutions were being set up. Again, hardly a shock is it? There was a figure I recall from a BBC documentary that aired at the time of the elections: Mosul had something like 3,000 Iraqi policemen a few days after the new force was set-up. After a few insurgent attacks, several of quite some ferocity, that force dropped to below a 1,000. They jihadists have seen it’s a policy that works: terrorism in it’s purest definition.

Sorry, but “hold elections and leave” just doesn’t wash. We are committed to actively improve and renovate the infrastructure in Iraq (and would be a lot further along if idiots weren’t trying to blow things up all the time), but these kinds of successes just don’t make the news for some reason.

You already probably know I get every single press release that comes out of MSNTC-I, CENTCOM, DoD etc. etc. so, if anything, my view of what’s happening in Iraq is probably extremely skewed in a positive way! I agree though, the good works don’t make the mainstream media. But the point is there wasn’t an overall exit strategy in place: ask the Italian, Bulgarian, Polish, Ukrainian governments and armed forces what their view of that point is. It won’t be long until it’s just the Brits and Yanks left there. Two Armies doing policing duties for years to come. Is that really how it was planned? I’d be amazed if it were.

Best regards

Steve

Ok whatever, I got it wrong but I can admit when I’m wrong! 😀 So couldn’t he make his mind up which church to follow then? :rolleyes:

Couldn’t care less, as long as we are free from the tryanny of Islamofascism/Pakislamism.

Iraq soft? Tell that to the Tornado crews lost in 1991. Or the C-130 that wnet down…it was enemy fire wasn’t it?

You appear to have your dates and history confused (what a shock). Think about when the ‘Axis of Evil’ speech was. It has nothing to do with Desert Storm. If you know what brought the Herc down then you’re better informed than the board of enquiry.

Please don’t try cheap shots about Tonka crews in Desert Storm: I had mates on 12, 13 and 617 Sqn flying ops, thanks. :rolleyes:

Steve

You can’t really complain at that when your brave Pres picked the softest target in the Axis of Evil to begin with though.

Steve

Iraq soft? Tell that to the Tornado crews lost in 1991. Or the C-130 that wnet down…it was enemy fire wasn’t it?

Fighting in Iraq must look like a pice of cake from your pub stool…with a copy of Air Forces Monthy in one hand and a pint in the other.

Should have slotted the b@st@rds on sight, would have saved a lot of taxpayers money and a lot of left-wing ‘civil rights’ nonsense.

Amen to that.

NO! Of course I’m not! I’m merely pointing out that your dsimissive comments about “troops” not being attacked and killed in Iraq any longer is complete nonsense, Sean.

My original point in responding to Dave was that an increase in attacks on US soldiers is unlikely at this point, given the upswing in civillian attacks. That is what I was specifically referring to when responding to his specific point. Nobody is saying that no US soldiers are being attacked or killed.

Of course the insurgents/jihadists etc. are attacking softer targets. You can’t really complain at that when your brave Pres picked the softest target in the Axis of Evil to begin with though.

What? We invade Iraq, take down Saddam, and set up free elections, and that is supposed to give any disgruntled Muslim in the theater the right to enter Iraq and blow things up?

Those attacks on non-US military targets have been going on for 18 months or so, it’s not “news” really.

I’d call a major shift in objectives and strategy news, but that’s just me.

It still seems to me the only exit strategy was to hold elections and then bug out because the population would be satisfied with that.

DID YOU KNOW THIS?

Did you know that 47 countries have re-established their embassies in Iraq?

Did you know that the Iraqi government employs 1.2 million Iraqi people?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 schools are now under construction and 38 new schools have been built in Iraq?

Did you know that Iraq’s higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers?

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in
January 2004 for the re-established Fulbright program?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5- 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a navel infantry regiment.

Did you know that Iraq’s Air Force consists of three operation squadrons, 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft which operate day and night, and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 bell jet rangers?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers each 8 weeks?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq?They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69 electrical facilities.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received
the first 2 series of polio vaccinations?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004?

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a recent televised debate recently?

Sorry, but “hold elections and leave” just doesn’t wash. We are committed to actively improve and renovate the infrastructure in Iraq (and would be a lot further along if idiots weren’t trying to blow things up all the time), but these kinds of successes just don’t make the news for some reason.

Are you denying that the insurgency is increasing their focus on IIG, TNA, and civillian targets? That is the trend I see, and it has the potential to cause much larger problems and create much greater instability than focusing on US military targets. Sure, we’re still targeted, and there are numerous IEDs scattered about, but the focus now seems to be on demoralizing the civillian polulation and causing a rift between Sunni and Shia.

NO! Of course I’m not! I’m merely pointing out that your dsimissive comments about “troops” not being attacked and killed in Iraq any longer is complete nonsense, Sean.

Of course the insurgents/jihadists etc. are attacking softer targets. You can’t really complain at that when your brave Pres picked the softest target in the Axis of Evil to begin with though.

Those attacks on non-US military targets have been going on for 18 months or so, it’s not “news” really.

This just dropped into my inbox literally moments ago:

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 29, 2005 – Several car bombs have rocked Baghdad, Iraq, today, and elsewhere another car bomb killed a U.S. soldier.

Multiple car bombs in and around Baghdad today killed at least 24 Iraqis and wounded at least another 80, according to news sources. Reports say that the wounded were mostly police and military patrols.

“While there has been an overall downward trend in attacks since elections, terrorists have still proven they can execute or surge their capability to conduct limited attacks,” a Multinational Force Iraq spokesman said in a statement.

Coalition officials see the string of attacks “as another desperate attempt by the terrorists to discredit the newly formed Iraqi government,” the spokesman noted.

“The attacks today, mostly directed against innocent Iraqi civilians, perpetuate the terrorists’ failing attempts to drive a wedge between the Iraqi people and their right to choose their own destiny,” the spokesman added.

Also today, a separate car-bomb attack killed a U.S. Army soldier from the 1st Corps Support Command. Two other soldiers were wounded in the attack, which occurred miles north of Taji.

The three soldiers were evacuated to the theater hospital at Logistics Support Area Anaconda, where one died. The other two soldiers are being treated at the hospital.

The previous evening, an improvised explosive device detonation near Hawija killed one U.S. soldier from Task Force Liberty and wounded four others. The wounded soldiers were evacuated to a coalition medical facility and are in stable condition.

The names of the soldiers killed and wounded are being withheld pending notification of their families.

Elsewhere in Iraq, coalition forces from 1st Brigade, 25th Infantry Division (Stryker Brigade Combat Team), detained six suspected terrorists and seized a number of weapons during operations in northern Iraq on April 28.

Soldiers from 1st Battalion, 5th Infantry Regiment, detained three individuals suspected of terrorist activity following an attack on their patrol in southern Mosul. The soldiers also identified a weapons cache while conducting search operation in the same area. The weapons were confiscated for future destruction.

Soldiers from 1st Battalion, 24th Infantry Regiment, detained two individuals suspected of terrorist activity after they stopped the individuals’ vehicle in southern Mosul. The soldiers also detained another individual suspected of terrorist activity during a raid in western Mosul. The suspects are in custody, and no injuries to coalition force were reported.

Compiled from Multinational Force Iraq news releases and other news sources.

It still seems to me the only exit strategy was to hold elections and then bug out because the population would be satisfied with that.

Steve

I am thinking of picking a month this year where I will actually be anti American just to show the thin skinned lilly livered whiners what anti american would really be like.

Don’t have to …we’ve already heard it from you and your buddies…. 😀 😀 😀

I expected better of you than that, Sean.

Are you denying that the insurgency is increasing their focus on IIG, TNA, and civillian targets? That is the trend I see, and it has the potential to cause much larger problems and create much greater instability than focusing on US military targets. Sure, we’re still targeted, and there are numerous IEDs scattered about, but the focus now seems to be on demoralizing the civillian polulation and causing a rift between Sunni and Shia.

Troops? Please, they’ve moved on to unarmed civillians now for the most part, don’t you watch the news?

I expected better of you than that, Sean.

Incredible to hear Dubya’s Canadian cheerleader harping-on about perceived “anti-Americanism” in this forum. I’m 100% sure that nobody here celebrates these casualty lists coming out of OIF and OEF day after day, week after week, month after month……

04/28/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/28/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/28/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/27/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/27/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/27/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/26/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/25/2005: DoD Identifies Navy Casualty
04/25/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/25/2005: DoD Identifies Marine Casualty
04/23/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/21/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualties
04/21/2005: DoD Identifies Marine Casualties
04/20/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/19/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/19/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/19/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualties
04/18/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/18/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/18/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/18/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/18/2005: DoD Identifies Marine Casualty
04/15/2005: DoD Announces Change-in-Status of Army Soldiers
04/15/2005: DoD Identifies Marine Casualty
04/14/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/13/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/13/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/12/2005: DoD Identifies Marine Casualty
04/11/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualties and Soldiers as Whereabouts Unknown
04/11/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/09/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualties
04/08/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/08/2005: DoD Identifies Marine Casualty
04/07/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/06/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/06/2005: DoD Identifies Marine Casualty
04/06/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/05/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/05/2005: DoD Identifies Marine Casualty
04/04/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/04/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/04/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/04/2005: DoD Identifies Marine Casualty
04/01/2005: DoD Identifies Army Casualty
04/01/2005: DoD Identifies Marine Casualty

R.I.P. every last one of them.

Steve

Garry

You are correct, everyone here should refrain from personal comments and adhere to logical debating rules. :diablo:

Sauron