Quote:
|
Originally Posted by matthew330
"A Danish intelligence officer and four military policemen have been charged with abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Danish headquarters in southern Iraq. "
End of story. These people are being investigated and charged. If they did something wrong, the western world will make them pay the price.
...and exactly what club are you talking about. The one you can count on both hands, and every single one are being prosecuted. Pretty large club there bro. Your self-percieved liberal humanistic insight is limited to situations that alansmithee referenced. You hear of a handfull of situations and "want to believe" it is reflective of coalition intentions, you want to chalk up the mistaken death of a mother and father at a checkpoint as a reason for Iraqi resistance.
You're insight provides you with every justification on the planet for the actions of these fundamentalist muslims....but zero for those who are protecting the "average iraqi" from these nutcases. You're provided with all the ammunition you need from the "media" to feed your misguided agenda, yet you complain about them being to biased.
Ask yourself - are these fundamentalist bombers acting in the interest of iraqi's as a whole? You know the answer is "no", so what is your motivation for continually posting these articles. it happens, it's war, they are being punished. End of story. There is only one group of people (excluding rdr4evers of this world), that is fucking up the future of iraqi's, and that is the fundamentalist muslims.
Put me alone in a room with them, i wouldn't mind getting a couple good hits myself.
|
Why did the President Bush order U.S. forces to go into Iraq ?
Do you believe that the U.S. military and civilian administration of post
Saddam Iraq has been performed in a way that would do the least subsequent harm to the Iraqi populace ?
Remember that the Bush administration picked the time and the place
to enter Iraq with overwhelming force and to destroy the former
regime's military and strategic infrastructure, and then to disband all of
it's civilian and military security organization and administration.
Have you really considered these questions before you lay all of the blame
for "fucking up the future of iraq's on the "fundamentalist muslims" ?
Bush's father seemed to have given much more consideration to the
potential for what is now happening in Iraq, than his son and his
appointees have. What changed in Iraq between 1991 and 2003 that
would have justified the risk of instability inside Iraq and in that part of
the middle east, enough to contradict the well articulated and executed
policies of Bush Sr. and Clinton ?
Bush Sr. and his appointees could not plan for regional or internal stability
in a post Saddam Iraq, so they wisely left him in place in a dramatically
weakened state, further neutralized by the northern and southern no fly
zones. Twelve years of experience reinforced the wisdom and efficacy
of their 1991 decision. Bush Sr. took "fundamentalist muslims" into account.
Now you blame them for a situation that seems much more likely to go
down in history as the most serious U.S. military, planning, and policy
failure since the Vietnam war.