Geneva Convention Outdated?

[xrayzebra]

A speech that was made that some of you really don't
want to read. But it hits upon a topic that surely will
be faced by this nation in the coming months/years.

Do We Need a Geneva Convention for Fighting Terrorism?

By Newt Gingrich

I want to talk about the genuine danger of terrorism, in particular terrorists using weapons of mass destruction and weapons of mass murder, nuclear and biological weapons. And I want to suggest to you that right now we should be impaneling people to look seriously at a level of supervision that we would never dream of if it weren't for the scale of threat.

Let me give you two examples. When the British this summer arrested people who were planning to blow up ten airliners in one day, they arrested a couple who were going to use their six month old baby in order to hide the bomb as baby milk.

Now, if I come to you tonight and say that there are people on the planet who hate you, and they are 15-25 year old males who are willing to die as long as they get to kill you, I've simply described the warrior culture which has been true historically for 6 or 7 thousand years.

But, if I come to you and say that there is a couple that hates you so much that they will kill their six month old baby in order to kill you, I am describing a level of ferocity, and a level of savagery beyond anything we have ever tried to deal with.

And, what is truly frightening about the British experience is they are arresting British citizens, born in Britain, speaking English, who went to British schools, live in British housing, and have good jobs.

This is a serious long term war, and it will inevitably lead us to want to know what is said in every suspect place in the country, that will lead us to learn how to close down every website that is dangerous, and it will lead us to a very severe approach to people who advocate the killing of Americans and advocate the use of nuclear or biological weapons.

And, my prediction to you is that either before we lose a city, or if we are truly stupid, after we lose a city, we will adopt rules of engagement that use every technology we can find to break up their capacity to use the Internet, to break up their capacity to use free speech, and to go after people who want to kill us to stop them from recruiting people before they get to reach out and convince young people to destroy their lives while destroying us.

This is a serious problem that will lead to a serious debate about the first amendment, but I think that the national security threat of losing an American city to a nuclear weapon, or losing several million Americans to a biological attack is so real that we need to proactively, now, develop the appropriate rules of engagement.

And, I further think that we should propose a Geneva convention for fighting terrorism which makes very clear that those who would fight outside the rules of law, those who would use weapons of mass destruction, and those who would target civilians are in fact subject to a totally different set of rules that allow us to protect civilization by defeating barbarism before it gains so much strength that it is truly horrendous.

This is a sober topic, but I think it is a topic we need a national dialogue about, and we need to get ahead of the curve rather than wait until actually we literary lose a city which could literally happen within the next decade if we are unfortunate.

# #

[George Gervin's Afro]

A speech that was made that some of you really don't
want to read. But it hits upon a topic that surely will
be faced by this nation in the coming months/years.

Do We Need a Geneva Convention for Fighting Terrorism?

By Newt Gingrich

I want to talk about the genuine danger of terrorism, in particular terrorists using weapons of mass destruction and weapons of mass murder, nuclear and biological weapons. And I want to suggest to you that right now we should be impaneling people to look seriously at a level of supervision that we would never dream of if it weren't for the scale of threat.

Let me give you two examples. When the British this summer arrested people who were planning to blow up ten airliners in one day, they arrested a couple who were going to use their six month old baby in order to hide the bomb as baby milk.

Now, if I come to you tonight and say that there are people on the planet who hate you, and they are 15-25 year old males who are willing to die as long as they get to kill you, I've simply described the warrior culture which has been true historically for 6 or 7 thousand years.

But, if I come to you and say that there is a couple that hates you so much that they will kill their six month old baby in order to kill you, I am describing a level of ferocity, and a level of savagery beyond anything we have ever tried to deal with.

And, what is truly frightening about the British experience is they are arresting British citizens, born in Britain, speaking English, who went to British schools, live in British housing, and have good jobs.

This is a serious long term war, and it will inevitably lead us to want to know what is said in every suspect place in the country, that will lead us to learn how to close down every website that is dangerous, and it will lead us to a very severe approach to people who advocate the killing of Americans and advocate the use of nuclear or biological weapons.

And, my prediction to you is that either before we lose a city, or if we are truly stupid, after we lose a city, we will adopt rules of engagement that use every technology we can find to break up their capacity to use the Internet, to break up their capacity to use free speech, and to go after people who want to kill us to stop them from recruiting people before they get to reach out and convince young people to destroy their lives while destroying us.

This is a serious problem that will lead to a serious debate about the first amendment, but I think that the national security threat of losing an American city to a nuclear weapon, or losing several million Americans to a biological attack is so real that we need to proactively, now, develop the appropriate rules of engagement.

And, I further think that we should propose a Geneva convention for fighting terrorism which makes very clear that those who would fight outside the rules of law, those who would use weapons of mass destruction, and those who would target civilians are in fact subject to a totally different set of rules that allow us to protect civilization by defeating barbarism before it gains so much strength that it is truly horrendous.

This is a sober topic, but I think it is a topic we need a national dialogue about, and we need to get ahead of the curve rather than wait until actually we literary lose a city which could literally happen within the next decade if we are unfortunate.

# #


Do you mean the rules Ray? I've got one great suggestion on how to keep our cities safe. Don't start unecessary wars that help foster more hate for the USA than was previously known. Please tell me Ray how creating more terrorists is good thing Ray?

[clambake]

We have all these nukes just laying around, doing nothing.

Bush has no balls. vote for newt

[PixelPusher]

The Geneva Conventions isn't the only thing Newt thinks is "outdated"


And, my prediction to you is that either before we lose a city, or if we are truly stupid, after we lose a city, we will adopt rules of engagement that use every technology we can find to break up their capacity to use the Internet, to break up their capacity to use free speech, and to go after people who want to kill us to stop them from recruiting people before they get to reach out and convince young people to destroy their lives while destroying us.

This is a serious problem that will lead to a serious debate about the first amendment, but I think that the national security threat of losing an American city to a nuclear weapon, or losing several million Americans to a biological attack is so real that we need to proactively, now, develop the appropriate rules of engagement.

Surrender the 1st Admendment, or your cities will go up in mushroom clouds. But no worries, he didn't mention the 2nd Admendment. I'm sure the government won't mess with you because you still have a semi-automatic firearm.

[boutons_]

Grinch doesn't say exactly what his Newteva Conventions for Terrorists would be.

It's more fear-mongering, just like the lies that got the US snookered into Iraq.

The rules of evidence, habeas corpus, right to legal representation .etc, etc. have served well until dubya/dickhead/Gonzo/Rummy decided they were worthless.

[xrayzebra]

Do you mean the rules Ray? I've got one great suggestion on how to keep our cities safe. Don't start unecessary wars that help foster more hate for the USA than was previously known. Please tell me Ray how creating more terrorists is good thing Ray?

Oh, is that why they bombed our embassies, WTC twice, the
barracks in Saudi Arabia. I didn't know we had gone to
war with them. Could you please tell me when we did,
was it during the Clinton Admin?

[xrayzebra]

Grinch doesn't say exactly what his Newteva Conventions for Terrorists would be.

It's more fear-mongering, just like the lies that got the US snookered into Iraq.

The rules of evidence, habeas corpus, right to legal representation .etc, etc. have served well until dubya/dickhead/Gonzo/Rummy decided they were worthless.

Did all this apply to the German spies captured during
WWII and hung in record time.

[xrayzebra]

Well like I said in the original post, didn't expect the normal
liberal crowd to like what he said.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Oh, is that why they bombed our embassies, WTC twice, the
barracks in Saudi Arabia. I didn't know we had gone to
war with them. Could you please tell me when we did,
was it during the Clinton Admin?


Can we at least acknowldege a couple of things? For one there has always been Muslims who want us off the face of the eart? Agreed? So in essence they have been at war with us for 60 ,70 80 yrs? Now they have escalated the fight and we have to respond. Can we agree on this? it just didn't happen in the 90's ray. I know your talk radio heroes like to tell it all happened under a Dem but that's not true. Secondly do you think it's smart to enrage some of the folks who are on the fence is this fight? I believe this would bring more peolpe into the fight. Agreed? So invading a country , let's say, under shaky pretenses might not have been the smartest move. Agreed?
Probably made things worse..

[George Gervin's Afro]

Did all this apply to the German spies captured during
WWII and hung in record time.



Well this is similar to the Iraq war argument.." but,but,but the dems said it too.."
"but,but,but germany does it so we can too.."

[spurster]

I agree with Newt. Among other things, we need an International Criminal Court to deal with the problem.

[fyatuk]

Newt has always been an idiot. Not even worth paying attention to usually.

He's basically asking to remove a citizens rights when they are arrested in relation to a terrorist plot. That's stupid. There are too many correlations that would eventually be drawn to other crimes as well and eventually the rights he's trying to subvert for a specific group of criminals will end up being subverted for all violent criminals. It's the way it works. The government always expands definitions, never narrows.

[ChumpDumper]

Who is this guy names after a lizard?

[xrayzebra]

Well this is similar to the Iraq war argument.." but,but,but the dems said it too.."
"but,but,but germany does it so we can too.."

Youngster, do I have to teach you history too. Read the
following and note the time it took to try them and hang
them. All this occured during WWII in the United States.

Shortly after midnight on the morning of June 13, 1942, four men landed on a beach near Amagansett, Long Island, New York, from a German submarine, clad in German uniforms and bringing ashore enough explosives, primers, and incendiaries to support an expected two-year career in the sabotage of American defense-related production. On June 17, 1942, a similar group landed on Ponte Vedra Beach, near Jacksonville, Florida, equipped for a similar career in industrial disruption.

The purpose of the invasions was to strike a major blow for Germany by bringing the violence of war to our home ground through destruction of America's ability to manufacture vital equipment and supplies and transport them to the battlegrounds of Europe; to strike fear into the American civilian population, and diminish the resolve of the United States to overcome our enemies.

By June 27, 1942, all eight saboteurs had been arrested without having accomplished one act of destruction. Tried before a Military Commission, they were found guilty. One was sentenced to life imprisonment, another to thirty years, and six received the death penalty, which was carried out within a few days.

Those sentenced to death were executed at the District of Columbia Jail on August 8, 1942.


Hmmmmm, wonder where the ACLU was at?

[xrayzebra]

The Geneva Conventions isn't the only thing Newt thinks is "outdated"

Surrender the 1st Admendment, or your cities will go up in mushroom clouds. But no worries, he didn't mention the 2nd Admendment. I'm sure the government won't mess with you because you still have a semi-automatic firearm.

You mock the 2nd admendment. It just might be the
salvation of this country. The Russians thought of it
often during the cold war.

[medstudent]

sweet ray, you're all in favor of a police state.

http://www.new-enlightenment.com/SS1.jpg

[xrayzebra]

Can we at least acknowldege a couple of things? For one there has always been Muslims who want us off the face of the eart? Agreed? So in essence they have been at war with us for 60 ,70 80 yrs? Now they have escalated the fight and we have to respond. Can we agree on this? it just didn't happen in the 90's ray. I know your talk radio heroes like to tell it all happened under a Dem but that's not true. Secondly do you think it's smart to enrage some of the folks who are on the fence is this fight? I believe this would bring more peolpe into the fight. Agreed? So invading a country , let's say, under shaky pretenses might not have been the smartest move. Agreed?
Probably made things worse..

Talk radio has nothing to do with our problem. People
like you and you mind set are. For some reason you
think we are the problem. We aren't.

I concede nothing to you. Nothing! I agree with
nothing you say nor will I in regards to this.

Why? Because you are wrong as two left feet. The
people we are fighting are killing others in their own
countries because they do not believe as they think
they should. Get a brain, use it. Quit making excuses
for them and face the fact they want to kill you. You
got that, K I L L Y O U. We are not the bad guys.
Never were. Never will be.

Enrage people on the fence, get a life. There are no
one over there on the fence. There are only those
that kill and those that will be killed or give in to
those that do the killing. Why do you think Saddam
killed anyone who even thought of opposing him.
Including his own son-in-laws.

Twerp, you better grow up and start acting like someone
who knows something and give up on the BS put
out by those who want power at any cost.

[xrayzebra]

sweet ray, you're all in favor of a police state.

http://www.new-enlightenment.com/SS1.jpg


No I am in favor of the United States going onto a
war time footing like we have in the past. There is
considerable difference. But how would you know. I
doubt you have much knowledge of our history.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Talk radio has nothing to do with our problem. People
like you and you mind set are. For some reason you
think we are the problem. We aren't.

I concede nothing to you. Nothing! I agree with
nothing you say nor will I in regards to this.

Why? Because you are wrong as two left feet. The
people we are fighting are killing others in their own
countries because they do not believe as they think
they should. Get a brain, use it. Quit making excuses
for them and face the fact they want to kill you. You
got that, K I L L Y O U. We are not the bad guys.
Never were. Never will be.

Enrage people on the fence, get a life. There are no
one over there on the fence. There are only those
that kill and those that will be killed or give in to
those that do the killing. Why do you think Saddam
killed anyone who even thought of opposing him.
Including his own son-in-laws.

Twerp, you better grow up and start acting like someone
who knows something and give up on the BS put
out by those who want power at any cost.

I see so now your relegated to comparing saddam's regime to terrorists organizations. got it ray..

You say terrorists want to kill us.. I think at this point that's a bit obvious don't you think?


Enrage people on the fence, get a life. There are no
one over there on the fence. There are only those
that kill and those that will be killed or give in to
those that do the killing. Why do you think Saddam
killed anyone who even thought of opposing him.
Including his own son-in-laws.

Well ray YOUR WRONG AGAIN. There are many instances that have been reported that people who were either on our side of the fence or sitting on the fence that that decided after we invaded Iraq they wanted to kill us too. WOuldn't that be counter-productive Ray?

[medstudent]

dont make me go V for Vendetta on your sorry old ...

[George Gervin's Afro]

No I am in favor of the United States going onto a
war time footing like we have in the past. There is
considerable difference. But how would you know. I
doubt you have much knowledge of our history.


which would be shut up and let bush do anything he wants. Ray's American Way!!

[fyatuk]

Talk radio has nothing to do with our problem. People
like you and you mind set are. For some reason you
think we are the problem. We aren't.


Admittedly, there's some rudimentary problems between outlooks that cause some of the strife, but you're fooling yourself if you think we didn't do plenty to dig our own hole here.

We've been breeding hate towards us in the Muslim world for 50 years by arming and then abandoning militant groups, as well as by helping ruthless dictators into power because they state a pro-US view, and then turning against them because they are too ruthless, etc. It's a simple fact, that at the very least our foreign politics over the last several decades have given extremists plenty of ammunition to recruit followers and push their jihad mentality.

Not just the US either, but European countries as well. They did a poor job of ending their colonial reign and drew some rather poor and arbitrary borders which helped to create a culture of distrust and violence. Blind backing of rather violent and aggressive Israeli regimes hasn't helped either.

IMO, our foreign policy decisions have turned what should have been a relationship of distrust and dislike into a relationship of blind hatred, which the extremist/jihadists have used to their advantage. With a more conservative foreign policy that didn't involve dictating regimes in foreign countries probably would have prevented much of the strife we have now.

The funny thing is we still haven't learned our lesson. We proclaim we want democracy in the middle east, then cut off foreign aid when Hamas comes into power, but now want to re-instate it by putting it directly into Fatah's control? We're still trying to force pro-us regimes into power while saying "we want to give you freedom" and that's only going to continue to ascerbate the problems.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Admittedly, there's some rudimentary problems between outlooks that cause some of the strife, but you're fooling yourself if you think we didn't do plenty to dig our own hole here.

We've been breeding hate towards us in the Muslim world for 50 years by arming and then abandoning militant groups, as well as by helping ruthless dictators into power because they state a pro-US view, and then turning against them because they are too ruthless, etc. It's a simple fact, that at the very least our foreign politics over the last several decades have given extremists plenty of ammunition to recruit followers and push their jihad mentality.

Not just the US either, but European countries as well. They did a poor job of ending their colonial reign and drew some rather poor and arbitrary borders which helped to create a culture of distrust and violence. Blind backing of rather violent and aggressive Israeli regimes hasn't helped either.

IMO, our foreign policy decisions have turned what should have been a relationship of distrust and dislike into a relationship of blind hatred, which the extremist/jihadists have used to their advantage. With a more conservative foreign policy that didn't involve dictating regimes in foreign countries probably would have prevented much of the strife we have now.

The funny thing is we still haven't learned our lesson. We proclaim we want democracy in the middle east, then cut off foreign aid when Hamas comes into power, but now want to re-instate it by putting it directly into Fatah's control? We're still trying to force pro-us regimes into power while saying "we want to give you freedom" and that's only going to continue to ascerbate the problems.


I'll save ray the post. You don't know anything you twerp.

[fyatuk]

I'll save ray the post. You don't know anything you twerp.

1) I'm a bit too old for twerp, thank you. But thanks for insinuating I'm still young.

2) We HAVE done everything I said and more. If you disagree on the impact of it that's fine, but it hardly means I know nothing. Might mean I misinterpret a few things, but hardly what you said.

3) Guess this part of the forum isn't as fun as the rest. Should probably stick to my normal talk-shop with politics since people there at least explain themselves when they disagree with you. usually.

[George Gervin's Afro]

1) I'm a bit too old for twerp, thank you. But thanks for insinuating I'm still young.

2) We HAVE done everything I said and more. If you disagree on the impact of it that's fine, but it hardly means I know nothing. Might mean I misinterpret a few things, but hardly what you said.

3) Guess this part of the forum isn't as fun as the rest. Should probably stick to my normal talk-shop with politics since people there at least explain themselves when they disagree with you. usually.


Actually I agree with you. Your original post was well thought out and passed the common sense test in my view. On the other hand people like Ray will never agree with your opnion and will rely on calling you names. i was actually mocking xray more than your post.

[fyatuk]

Actually I agree with you. Your original post was well thought out and passed the common sense test in my view. On the other hand people like Ray will never agree with your opnion and will rely on calling you names. i was actually mocking xray more than your post.

Heh, guess I need to learn the people over here better, huh.

[medstudent]

when ray has no real idea what to say he calls us younguns who have no sense of history.

just cause we didnt live it, doesnt mean we can't read/learn about it from an objective point of view that is free from confounding personal experience

[Yonivore]

when ray has no real idea what to say he calls us younguns who have no sense of history.

just cause we didnt live it, doesnt mean we can't read/learn about it from an objective point of view that is free from confounding personal experience
And just where do you go for that "objective point of view?"

[medstudent]

why here of course. You and Nbadan supply me with enough bullshit to know that I don't want to be on either of your sides.

[Yonivore]

why here of course. You and Nbadan supply me with enough bullshit to know that I don't want to be on either of your sides.
I see.

[xrayzebra]

Well ray YOUR WRONG AGAIN. There are many instances that have been reported that people who were either on our side of the fence or sitting on the fence that that decided after we invaded Iraq they wanted to kill us too. WOuldn't that be counter-productive Ray?

GGA I am posting a video you really do need to watch.
I wonder why these fence sitters are where they are.

I warn you before hand, don't watch this if you are squeamish.
It is very graphic but it does show the foe we are facing.

http://s191.photobucket.com/albums/z273/xrayzebra/?action=view&current=iraqisPOLICE_executed.flv

[boutons_]

XZ can claim he lived it, but he's really a tourist surfing superficially, "unexamining" life, and he's still as dumb and ignorant as a pair of old Army boots.

[xrayzebra]

XZ can claim he lived it, but he's really a tourist surfing superficially, "unexamining" life, and he's still as dumb and ignorant as a pair of old Army boots.


http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z273/xrayzebra/TiresomePeople.gif

You are going to hurt my feelings one of these days if
you aren't careful......

[Yonivore]

Yeah, these people deserve Geneva Convention protections...

Nato accuses Taliban of using children in suicide missions (http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,2109574,00.html)


Children as young as six are being used by the Taliban in increasingly desperate suicide missions, coalition forces in Afghanistan claimed yesterday.

The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), to which Britain contributes 5,000 troops in southern Afghanistan, revealed that soldiers defused an explosive vest which had been placed on a six-year-old who had been told to attack Afghan army forces in the east of the country. ...

The boy had been ordered to target a check point in Miri, in the Andar district of Ghazni province.

“They placed explosives on a six-year-old boy and told him to walk up to the Afghan police or army and push the button,” said Captain Michael Cormier, the company commander who intercepted the child, in a statement. “Fortunately, the boy did not understand and asked patrolling officers why he had this vest on.”

Lieutenant Colonel David Accetta, ISAF eastern regional command spokesman, told the Guardian: “In the past we have not seen the Taliban sink that low, to use children as suicide bombers. The personnel secured the vest to make sure the child was safe.”

Lt Col Accetta said the procedure for dealing with an armed minor had so far been untested in Afghanistan. “It would have been difficult to know what to do considering it was a six-year-old boy and he was presumably going to push the button himself or someone was going to detonate it for him remotely,” Lt Col Accetta said.

The rules of military engagement are easily muddied when a child poses a direct threat, he explained. “What we do if we identify the fact that an adult is wearing a suicide vest is we use whatever force we deem necessary to protect the lives of our soldiers and any civilians. Of course it makes it more difficult - it’s a six year-old child.”

[ChumpDumper]

Nato accuses Taliban of using children in suicide missionsWell, they are home-schooled.

[xrayzebra]

Funny, none of the liberals want to comment on the execution.
I guess it is alright for them to kill those who support a
duly elected government. You know like the police.

And it is all the fault of the Bush and the U.S.

Does it bother anyone that these are YOUR enemies who are
doing this and would do it to you in a blink of an eye and
celebrate your death.

[ChumpDumper]

Funny, none of the liberals want to comment on the execution.It probably violates photobucket's terms of service.



I guess it is alright for them to kill those who support a
duly elected government. You know like the police.No.


And it is all the fault of the Bush and the U.S.Inasmuch as he paid very little attention to the very serious consequnces of an invasion and occupation of Iraq, Bush absolutely bears a huge amount of responsibility for the current situation.


Does it bother anyone that these are YOUR enemies who are
doing this and would do it to you in a blink of an eye and
celebrate your death.Not enough to abandon the principles and morals that make us better than those who would kill us.

[ChumpDumper]

Youngster, do I have to teach you history too. Read the
following and note the time it took to try them and hang
them. All this occured during WWII in the United States.BTW, those convicted to death here were electrocuted, not hanged. The two that weren't comdemned were the ones that turned themselves and the others in to the FBI.

And we were actually at war with the nation of Germany, and the penalties for espionage were clear from the outset.

[xrayzebra]

BTW, those convicted to death here were electrocuted, not hanged. The two that weren't comdemned were the ones that turned themselves and the others in to the FBI.

And we were actually at war with the nation of Germany, and the penalties for espionage were clear from the outset.

Your point being?

[xrayzebra]

It probably violates photobucket's terms of service.


No.

Inasmuch as he paid very little attention to the very serious consequnces of an invasion and occupation of Iraq, Bush absolutely bears a huge amount of responsibility for the current situation.

Not enough to abandon the principles and morals that make us better than those who would kill us.


You like most liberals never tire of
defending those that do things like
were shown and blaming Bush.

[George Gervin's Afro]

You like most liberals never tire of
defending those that do things like
were shown and blaming Bush.


Well ray Bush DID ORDER THE INVASION.

[George Gervin's Afro]

GGA I am posting a video you really do need to watch.
I wonder why these fence sitters are where they are.

I warn you before hand, don't watch this if you are squeamish.
It is very graphic but it does show the foe we are facing.

http://s191.photobucket.com/albums/z273/xrayzebra/?action=view&current=iraqisPOLICE_executed.flv


Ray we all realize people want to cut our heads off. It's just now there are more of them because we started the unecessary war..

[xrayzebra]

Well ray Bush DID ORDER THE INVASION.

With Congress backing and approval. Twice!

[xrayzebra]

Ray we all realize people want to cut our heads off. It's just now there are more of them because we started the unecessary war..

Your wrong again. There are not more of them, they are
just more visible. And they have always wanted to kill
us, they have told us so and continue to tell us so and
have shown through their acts they meant what they said.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Your wrong again. There are not more of them, they are
just more visible. And they have always wanted to kill
us, they have told us so and continue to tell us so and
have shown through their acts they meant what they said.


Oh ok there just more visible ray..gotcha.

[ChumpDumper]

ray, it's Bush's fault he and his underlings didn't even think those types of executions were possible in postwar Iraq and didn't send in enough troops to actually secure the country. The US alone sent 575,000 troops to liberate tiny Kuwait (6880 square miles, 3 million population) and only go into part of Iraq which they did not occupy, not to mention the 300,000 coalition forces that helped us out then. For the 2003 invasion and occupation, the US sent in about 120,000-150,000 for the entire country (169,234 square miles, 26 million population).

Does that look like WWII to you, ray?

[xrayzebra]

ray, it's Bush's fault he and his underlings didn't even think those types of executions were possible in postwar Iraq and didn't send in enough troops to actually secure the country. The US alone sent 575,000 troops to liberate tiny Kuwait (6880 square miles, 3 million population) and only go into part of Iraq which they did not occupy, not to mention the 300,000 coalition forces that helped us out then. For the 2003 invasion and occupation, the US sent in about 120,000-150,000 for the entire country (169,234 square miles, 26 million population).

Does that look like WWII to you, ray?

Live in your world. We didn't go on into Iraq because
the politicians insisted that it would create a vacuum
in that part of the world. See what politicians do?
They look at the political side of everything (read that
elections, keeping their power). Only when forced into
taking the hard road will they do it. WWII was one of
those times. The politicians had no choice but to
support it, the left in this country were for the war
because their Mother Land, the USSR, was also under
attack. Casualties were high and the news media
didn't keep a running box score of those killed or wounded.
our casualties now are small, although if it is one of
yours killed they are large.

I was looking at an article in the San Antonio E-N Sunday,
they were talking about the September deadline for
Petraus (sp) report. And they are were already telling
their readers how it was going to be a failure. And his
report wouldn't solve anything.

So much for un-biased reporting and supporting the
country.

[ChumpDumper]

Live in your world. We didn't go on into Iraq because
the politicians insisted that it would create a vacuum
in that part of the world. See what politicians do?
They look at the political side of everything (read that
elections, keeping their power). Only when forced into
taking the hard road will they do it. WWII was one of
those times. The politicians had no choice but to
support it, the left in this country were for the war
because their Mother Land, the USSR, was also under
attack. Casualties were high and the news media
didn't keep a running box score of those killed or wounded.
our casualties now are small, although if it is one of
yours killed they are large.That has nothing to do with the force level committed to the invasion and occupation of Iraq. The politicians had alrady approved the use of force. Bush just ended up not using very much at all, with the glaringly obvious consequences.


I was looking at an article in the San Antonio E-N Sunday,
they were talking about the September deadline for
Petraus (sp) report. And they are were already telling
their readers how it was going to be a failure. And his
report wouldn't solve anything.

So much for un-biased reporting and supporting the
country.What does that have to do with the initial force level sent into Iraq?

Nothing.

Bush didn't send in enough troops to do a proper job of occupying Iraq.

Period.

[xrayzebra]

What part of politicians didn't you understand?

[ChumpDumper]

What part of politicians didn't you understand?We didn't send in enough troops because of a politician -- George W. Bush.

[xrayzebra]

We didn't send in enough troops because of a politician -- George W. Bush.

You forgot to add the "s" .....politicians

[ChumpDumper]

You forgot to add the "s" .....politiciansRumsfeld? Appointed by and reporting to....

....George W. Bush.

Bush is responsible for this mess, no matter how you try to deny it. The buck stops there.

[Yonivore]

Yeah, these guys are all about the Geneva Conventions...

Taliban Tells 6-Year-Old His Suicide Belt Will Spray Flowers (http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070626/FOREIGN/106260070/1001)


The story of a 6-year-old Afghan boy who says he thwarted an effort by Taliban militants to trick him into being a suicide bomber provoked tears and anger at a meeting of tribal leaders.

The account from Juma Gul, a dirt-caked child who collects scrap metal for money, left American soldiers dumbfounded that a youngster could be sent on such a mission. Afghan troops crowded around the boy to call him a hero.

Juma said that sometime last month, Taliban fighters forced him to wear a vest they said would spray flowers when he touched a button. He said they told him that when he saw U.S. soldiers, "throw your body at them."

...The militants cornered Juma in a Taliban-controlled district in southern Afghanistan's Ghazni province. Although he is but an impoverished youngster being raised by an older sister — he proved too street-smart for their plan.

"When they first put the vest on my body, I didn't know what to think, but then I felt the bomb," Juma told the Associated Press as he ate lamb and rice after being introduced to the elders at the joint U.S.-Afghan base in Ghazni. "After I figured out it was a bomb, I went to the Afghan soldiers for help."

20 Afghan elders clicked their tongues in sadness and disapproval. When the boy and his brother were brought in, several of the turban-wearing men welled up with tears, wiping their eyes with handkerchiefs.

"If anybody has a heart, then how can you control yourself [before] these kids?" Mr. Deciwal said in broken English.

Wallets quickly opened, and the boys were handed $60 in American and Afghan currency — a good chunk of money in a country where teachers and police earn $70 a month.

Afghan officials described the boys as extremely poor, and Juma said he is being raised by his sister because his father works in a bakery in Pakistan and his mother does domestic work in another village.

"I think the boy is intelligent," Mr. Deciwal said. "When he comes from the enemy, he found a checkpoint of the [Afghan National Army], and he asked the ANA: 'Hey, can you help me? Somebody gave me this jacket, and I don't know what's inside, but maybe something bad.' "

[George Gervin's Afro]

Yeah, these guys are all about the Geneva Conventions...

Taliban Tells 6-Year-Old His Suicide Belt Will Spray Flowers (http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070626/FOREIGN/106260070/1001)


I say we torture all of the taliban's kids..

signed
yoni

[Yonivore]

I say we torture all of the taliban's kids..

signed
yoni
You're an idiot.