|This was very disturbing to see!||Live Steam|
Mar 27, 2003 7:19 AM
|I case there was some doubt about the reason for this war ...|
Mar 27, 2003 7:52 AM
|The plane has an Iraqi insignia on it. Was Saddam claiming responsibility?? Sickening.
I was just watching MSNBC. One of the announcers held up a full page photo from one of the NY papers showing an American soldier carrying a wounded Iraqi soldier on his back! Carrying his 'enemy' to an aid station. That photo, in conjunction with the Post photo, should be flashed around the world. To the anti-war protestors: Who are the bad guys now???
If I can find the photo, I will post it. I haven't had any luck finding it yet.
Mar 27, 2003 8:04 AM
|I agree, the poster of the plane hitting the towers is disgusting. But do me a favor and don't assume that people who opposed the war are pro-Saddam or think the US military are the bad guys. Its possible to think it wasn't a necessary or useful action and may end up being very counter productive without being pro-Saddam or anti-US. It's also possible to think that some wars are necessary and still oppose this one.
War is clearly the purest for of hell for those who have to experience it and often brings out a lot of the best in people (as well as some of the worst). The fact that people do heroic and good things in war isn't a justification for it.
|Sorry for posting this if upsets some forum members||Live Steam|
Mar 27, 2003 8:08 AM
|It is also not meant to cause a flame war. I just thought that people outside of NYC and outside the US may want to see these pic, since it appears that the international press is bent on pounding the USA because of this war.
Evidently Iraqi soldiers were still firing on these Marines, even as they were taking injured Iraqi soldiers off of the field of battle, to get first aid for the wounded.
|anti war protesters should be shot||weiwentg|
Mar 27, 2003 8:36 AM
|they are among those many who hate you because you're free. most of the people who hate you, hate you because you're free.
seriously, do you buy all that? an American division, I believe it was the 24th armored, under one General McCaffrey, massacred retreating Iraqi forces. there were some reports that elements of the retreating force fired on American units. as a result the whole force was annihilated, and your soldiers cheered (some of them, anyway). do you really think the Iraqis hate you because you're free? do you really think that anyone against the war is the bad guy? you people pay such lip-service to democracy.
go ahead, flame me back. or do you want to contact me by email, to get another side of the story?
|anti war protesters should be shot||Live Steam|
Mar 27, 2003 8:59 AM
|Since this has yet to be moved or deleted I will respond to you. I don't think that the Iraqi people hate us at all. I do believe that SH and his military machine do, however, as a result of the US and coalition's attack against their agression on Kuwait back in 1992.
As for the 24th eliminating a retreating force, I believe this is within the acceptable bounds of war. If they were surrendering, it would be a different story.
I do not think that people against the war are "bad guys." Similarly I would hope that you would also believe that those that feel eliminating this regime, after 12 years of terror and lies, are not neccessarily "bad guys" either.
The fact that this mural exists at all, and in a government building in Iraq, says to me that they at the very least have agressive, hateful feelings toward the US and at the worst may have had a hand in 9/11.
|Reportedly 20,000 dead in two hours in that massacre.||retro|
Mar 27, 2003 9:08 AM
|This is second-hand from an old Army friend who stayed in when I got out and wound up retiring as a full colonel in 1998: That American force (not sure it was the 24th) killed about 20,000 people in two hours, mainly by shooting from helicopters and fighters--just flew up and down the highway killing folks. You've probably seen pictures of the road, with thousands of burned-out vehicles.
To be honest, I don't know what to think. I've called in fire on troops, and I'm probably responsible for their deaths. I don't think I have any illusions about war being fair or sportsmanlike. But that does seem a little excessive....
|Let me get this straight||PaulCL|
Mar 27, 2003 10:05 AM
|First of all...this should be moved to another forum. But as long as its' here...
Let me get this straight...if an army is advancing on us -we can kill them. If an army is in retreat (to regroup/resupply/re-arm/ attack again??) then we can't shoot?? Them surrendering is one thing, but retreating???
I'm no tactician. I have never been in the military. But if we allow a retreating army to re-group when we had a chance to eliminate them, aren't we making the mistake?? They were active combatants, they were not surrendering, they had weapons, they are the enemy, the enemy that could come back and kill our men. Excessive?? No. It is war.
Hearing of 20,000 deaths is horrifying. But hearing of 1000's of US/British casualties because we didn't take advanctage of an opportunity would be worse. IMHO
|Well, I said I didn't know what to think...||retro|
Mar 27, 2003 2:18 PM
|I was serious. I called in gunships without a single moral qualm, and I assume I'd do it again in the same circumstances. But I was 35 years younger, with a different perspective. In 2003, I'm not even sure an American life is worth more than an Iraqi life. The sons of three of my friends are in Iraq right now, and my personal choice, if it came to that, would be for them to live and three Iraqis to die. But I'm not sure God feels that way, and I'm sure the Iraqis don't. I'd be a lot happier if NOBODY had to die, and I don't buy the argument that this was unavoidable.|
Mar 27, 2003 3:03 PM
|Wasn't it your job, your duty to the men that relied upon your leadership and your duty to country that required you act as you did? You must know better than any who have not served in the military, that personal feelings, beliefs -both moral and religious, cannot color your judgment regarding military tactics and protocol.
Is one life worth more than another? No I don't believe so, but that is not what is at issue in any war. It is the preservation of an ideal and the preservation of the sanctity of life that must be defended. Yes there is an undeniable conflict when prosecuting a war to protect freedom and the sanctity of life, but it appears from the history of Man, that it is also an undeniable reality.
Could this war have been averted? Well it was for the past 12 years with little to no results. This is because the UN failed to act upon the rules it set. I and many believe that if the World stood together - read if France, Germany, Russia and China - backed the original UN resolutions, Iraq would have had no where to turn and may have surrendered their weapons without conflict. Obviously we will never know the answer to that, but leaving SH, a man , and I use that term loosely, in his middle 60s, could live many more healthy years and spread his WMD to those cloaked in anonymity, to use against the US and others in the free world. I know this is what many perceive as an unfounded argument, but there is no way to refute SH hatred and no way to prove his intentions until he either uses them and/or passes them off to others to use, which would be tragic, or we find them secreted during the prosecution of this war.
I hope those that are dear to you come home safe and unharmed. I respect and value their service to this country.
|so your saying...||Fender|
Mar 27, 2003 4:13 PM
|that 1000 US/British deaths are worse that 20,000 Iraquis? It is precisly that arrogant and selfish attitude that has created hatred towards the US, and not only by the Iraqi people, but by the entire world!!! It some how reminds me of the Nazi mentality of killing Jews in WWII. What's even more sicking is refering to the killing of 20,000 people as an opportunity. You must be related to Bush!!!|
|My point ..||PaulCL|
Mar 27, 2003 4:51 PM
|is not that one American/British life is more important than an Iraqi life. My point was that any military leader who allowed a retreating, and dangerous, enemy to go re-arm and attack again (thus killing even ONE of his soldiers)has made a critical - unforgiveable - error in judgement. That military leaders' hesitation to act in war would be responsible for the needless death of his troops...in this specific case - American and British troops.
I am sorry I sound cold hearted. I don't think I am. But in war, it is better to kill the enemy than to have your own people killed. I didn't make the rules. I would sure make a bet that the Iraqi's (or ANY other army) would do the same thing in the same position.
As a reminder: Like it or not, we are at war. We have an enemy that is trying to destroy our troops. Why we are in Iraq is of no consequence to the discussion of the acts of war. We, meaning our military, has to carry out the war to win. And yes, I am an American and I am "rooting" for our side and I am "rooting" against the Iraqi's even if I appear to view the killing of 20,000 of the ENEMY as an opportunity to SAVE American lives. If that bothers you, maybe you are related to Martin Sheen.
|You had me with you until||Mel Erickson|
Mar 28, 2003 7:32 AM
|you said this "If that bothers you, maybe you are related to Martin Sheen." Your arguments were rooted in some good logic until this last sentence. Attempts at character assasination ruins a good argument and you did yourself in with that statement. I pay little attention to celebrity pronouncements and don't even know (or want to know) why Martin Sheen is being vilified. What does the implied relationship have to do with your argument?|
|my last line was a mistake||PaulCL|
Mar 28, 2003 8:25 AM
|It was my version of a 'snappy retort' to the previous posters' final line: "You must be related to Bush!!!" It was meant as a joke but, alas, it did not work. Please don't hold one lousy joke against my arguement.
FYI: Martin Sheen (aka: the President from West Wing) is an avowed liberal, anti-war type who has been demonstrating on the streets of NY to San Francisco. In my own opinion, he stands out among the celebrity activists as very narrowed minded. I can't watch the West Wing becuase I just can't stand the guy. Just my own hangup. Paul
By the way...to Fender: I am not related to Bush. But I have met the man, met his father, met his brother and met his mother. All of whom were very nice people. And yes, I did vote for the man (and his Dad). Someday, I'll post the story of the private party I got to go to during Bush #1's initial election bid. Those secret service guys have no sense of humor.....
Mar 28, 2003 4:17 PM
|Don't worry guys. He's just another sad sack college punk just spoilin for a fight. Ain't cha? He's full of piss and vinegar AND hopelessly slanted against anything america does. He's one of those who thinks Bush is a war criminal and should be put in the same cage as SH. Kooky kid.
Start patronizing him and he'll light up like a pinball machine.
|Americans are not the only people who feel pain and outrage||dzrider|
Mar 27, 2003 10:05 AM
|Every bomb that hits Baghdad leaves people feeling exactly what we feel about the 9/11 attack.|
|can we take all the political/war stuff to noncycling forum? nm||DougSloan|
Mar 27, 2003 7:59 AM
|Wow, a mural on a barracks wall. Irrefutable evidence...||serbski|
Mar 27, 2003 8:01 AM
|...and an excellent reason to go to war and destabilize and entire region? Of course Hussein is a dangerous tyrant who needs to go, however, this photo is really propaganda (the New York Post for chrissakes) embarrassingly similar to what one might expect from Hussein's side. As to a U.S. soldier carrying his foe to safety: they are both uniformed soldiers and likely share the common bond of being sh#t-scared in combat and the American is acting honorably without question, no argument there.|
|Just what I was thinking: Our enemies hate us? Oh, no!||retro|
Mar 27, 2003 8:53 AM
|Sometimes I think people who seem normal are living in a parallel universe or something. I mean, A) it's the NY Post; B) it's a mural in a barracks; C) armies everywhere, including ours, teach hatred and anger at the enemy (I'm not a critic of the U.S. military, but I am a veteran and I remember being urged to "stick your bayonet right in that yellow c--ksucker's guts"). You'd find similar graffiti in American military installations all over the world. Eventually it may dawn on people that this is a war, not a competition in sportsmanship. If I were in the Iraqis' position, I'd be faking surrender and hiding out in hospitals, too. Why should I come out and line up so people can shoot me from helicopters?|
|Gregg please move this to the non-cycling forum.||Live Steam|
Mar 27, 2003 8:12 AM
|I didn't even realize one existed here. I have a desktop link fir the "General Discussion" board, and haven't accessed the board through the other links in quite a while. If you can't move it, delete it. Sorry for creating a problem, if that is how it is perceived.|
|Just what does "General Discussion Forum" mean? nm||eschelon|
Mar 27, 2003 8:21 AM
|General "cycling" discussion (nm)||mickey-mac|
Mar 27, 2003 8:23 AM
|exactly; that's why there is a "Noncycling" forum nm||DougSloan|
Mar 27, 2003 8:26 AM
|Gregg please move this to the non-cycling forum.||jtolleson|
Mar 27, 2003 9:31 AM
|Yes, it is a problem. The dominance of politics and war talk (and related flaming) has pretty much destroyed the boards at bicycling.com in my view, and this board has largely remained above the fray. Please help us keep it that way.
There are excellent war discussions on "non-cycling discussions." Enjoy that if it turns your crank, but please don't bring it in here.
|I emailed Gregg about this nm||DougSloan|
Mar 27, 2003 10:03 AM
|Welcome to BICYCLING.COM ! - nm||filtersweep|
Mar 27, 2003 8:52 AM
|Don't even joke around like that! nm||steve-z|
Mar 27, 2003 10:45 AM
Mar 27, 2003 11:53 AM
|Anyone who has any interest in the war, either for or against, needs to pay attention to the History Chaannel. They have a series of documentaries on Iraq. They aired them a couple of weeks ago, I imagine they will air them again soon.
Very informative and quite interesting.
Watch them and learn.
I try to avoid this debate on an internet forum, especially one about BICYCLES, but I'm convinced that most folks don't have a clue as to what Iraq is all about.
|Come on - debate away!||sacheson|
Mar 27, 2003 2:56 PM
|This is a non-cycling forum that resides within a cycling web-page.
As one who is not privvy to the History Channel, I'd appreciate someone who has some education beyond Rush Limbaugh contributing.
|Come on - debate away!||noveread|
Mar 28, 2003 9:06 AM
|Let's just say the History Channel documentaries changed my opinion on the war with Iraq.
The documentaries I watched focused on a few things:
Iraq under Saddam
Iraq's inventories (Post Gulf War-Pre Current War)
The UN inspections after the Gulf War
Iraq's current capabilities
Iraq's current weapons programs
It was very, very interesting. What Saddam did to the Kurds was incredible (not to mention to Iran during the Iraq/Iran war). The pictures were the saddest things I have ever seen.
I won't say I was adamantly opposed to the war prior to viewing them, but after viewing them I wanted the US (rest of the world be damned) to invade that very minute. And this after watching a cable channel not known to be a bastion of conservatism.
I wish we didn't ahve to go to war, but the danger of not going to war to oust Saddam is far greater IMHO. This war will likely forever damage the United State's standing in the the Muslim world. That is too bad (not that we were in great standing b4). But I had no idea what Saddam was up to. And a man that evil, with that much hatred is without doubt a threat to the security of our nation. And folks who think we could have just left well enough alone and the guy would just stay in his part of the world are naive.
My heart goes out to all the families that have lost loved ones over in the middle east. They have put themselves into great danger to protect me and my family. For that they have my gratitude.
|True words. Thanks.||sacheson|
Mar 28, 2003 10:42 AM
|I watched what seems like a similar documentary on China during the mid 30s invasion by Japan. Horrific footage.
Like you, I wish we didn't have to be there. We've committed ourselves and I stand behind everyone that is defending / protecting the freedoms we take forgranted.
|Thanks for relocating this Gregg. nm||Live Steam|
Mar 27, 2003 2:44 PM
|How does this prove why we are at war?||sacheson|
Mar 27, 2003 2:54 PM
|Because someone made a disgusting mural to show their anti-American stance?
You're way off base by concluding we're at war because of this mural (or the message it sends).
We're supposed to be at war because Sadaam didn't disarm per UN resolutions, not because the Iraqi regime is anti-American. Get it right.
|How does this prove why we are at war?||Live Steam|
Mar 27, 2003 3:20 PM
|That is a very simplistic view of why I posted the picture. The World knows SH hatred of the US and of the free thinking and free living people. However the mural was in an official government building. It was posted as somewhat of a badge of victory. Many said that they would support this war effort is there was a direct link between 9/11 and SH. Well the mural does not prove that, but it may lead to that. SH regime is a military regime. Military regimes glorify their conquests and the mural may represent just that. The WTC was a civilian occupied entity. To glorify it's destruction is almost as hyenas as the actual act.
As for WMD, well don't you think it would be too late for those that would suffer from their use, to wait for them to actually be used? I am continually dumbfounded by those that choose to come to defend SH and his regime. I hope that this conflict ends quickly and with as little death and destruction as possible, but it could have been avoided if SH put the Iraqi people first. He could have lived the remainder his life living like a king in asylum in some country that would have him, but he chose to see his own destruction as well as cause the loss of many innocent Iraqi civilians. Get it right!
|This mural proves nothing. . .||czardonic|
Mar 27, 2003 5:25 PM
|. . .other than the fact that the Iraqi military is anti-American. It is propaganda meant to recall that as powerful as America is, it is not invulnerable.
The same "logic" that you apply to Iraq could justify a premptive strike against anybody. Saddam was once our ally, but now he is our enemy and he has deadly weapons. Hmm. . .the British are our allies now, but they've got nuclear weapons and can anyone of us say with absolute certainty that they will never turn against us? Isn't it better to strike them now (or as soon as this war is over and we don't need them) than wait for them to act against us first? They tried to take over the world once. We even had to fight a war against them.
Come to think of it, we fought a war against Texas too, and they have some pretty deplorable human rights practices, what with their mania for executing people. I bet we could even get France on board for a regime change in Texas.
|This mural proves nothing. . .||Live Steam|
Mar 27, 2003 5:49 PM
|You are mentally challenged! I would suggest that if you deplore the US and what it represents, that you move to some other country that employs ideals that you respect. Why stay somewhere that you obviously deplore?
What is the "czar" in your handle for? You do realize that Czars tend to rule with iron fists and have no regard for the proletariat? You must be a very confused individual.
|Wow. You weren't kidding about being "dumbfounded". nm||czardonic|
Mar 27, 2003 5:51 PM
|Hey Live Steam||sacheson|
Mar 27, 2003 9:17 PM
|Don't bash czardonic. That person (don't even know the gender!) is one of the best expressed and most educated people on this board. He/she has some great points, even if you don't agree with them.
Everyone here hides behind a pseudo name. Don't start picking trivial fights with someone because they are a challenge to you.
|I think we fought that war FOR Texas...foolish for different||sn69|
Mar 27, 2003 6:33 PM
I spent 9 years of my silly misspent youth in Houston, where junior high and high school only guarantee a youth ome year of American civics, but three full years of Texas history (at least in the early 80s that's how it was).
That said, if I remember correctly (something I rarely do), President Polk invaded Mexico shortly after the annexation of the Republic of Texas to ensure that there would be no more Mexican incursions. ...Thus the Vera Cruze amphibious landing by the Marines and their semi-famous posting of Marine guards in Mexico City and at various Indian holy sites in full dress regalia, soliciting a sentiment of awe and wonder from the Mexican peasants. Marines will tell you this is because their dress uniforms in the mid-1800s were so ornate that they elicited racial memories of Montezuma-inspired awe among the peasants. Mexican lore, however, suggests the peasantry stood in amused horror, waiting for the feather-festooned and wool-wearing fools to melt into puddles of Marine Corps goo in the Mexican heat and humidity.
In any case, everything was precipitated by the independence of the Republic of Texas, hard won by Stephen F. Austin and Gen. Samuel Houston. That, too, has many interesting levels, the most compelling of which might be the Yellow Rose of Texas, of musical fame. She, it seems, was an octaroon or high yellow slave/lover of Houston's. At his request she infiltrated Santa Ana's encampment the night before the San Jacinto assault and bedded Generalisimo Happy Pants. Thus, as Houston's assault began, she literally ensured Santa Ana was caught with his pants down. So to speak.
...Like I said, more evidence of a misspent youth.
|But weren't they on the wrong side of the Civil War? (nm)||czardonic|
Mar 27, 2003 6:42 PM
|Of course, but only because John Wayne told them to be. nm||sn69|
Mar 27, 2003 6:43 PM
|Not following you.||sacheson|
Mar 27, 2003 9:13 PM
|All this mural depicts is an idiot using any propoganda to further his cause. You say hanging this mural creates a relationship between Iraq and 9/11. Would you mind elaborating on the conclusion you draw?
As I see it, this mural is nothing more than a little man bragging about something he didn't do. It makes him feel big in his little, ingsignificant pond. It's vile to the American people, true - but it's supposed to be. It still doesn't even remotely establish a connection between Iraq and 9/11 ... at least with people who think logically. Remember the flag burnings? Same thing. Remember burning the images of our Presidents? Same thing. It is all designed to piss Americans off.
And regarding the WMD and why we are invading Iraq, I think you have been sucked into the media propoganda machine. This war is supposed to be a forced compliance with resolutions put forth by the UN - nothing more. We were supposed to have unquestionable proof Iraq harbored these weapons. We failed to prove that (the documents provided were found to be forged), but we went ahead with our military action anyway. All of these "liberating the people" and "removing a horrible dictator" reasons are nothing more than facts presented to us to cloud the real issue: we NEVER proved we have a reason to be invading this country. In no way, shape, or form is saying that we didn't prove our accusations supporting Sadaam or his regime.
For what it's worth, I do think Sadaam has these weapons. I do think we are there for the right reasons. And I do think our President is doing what he thinks is best for the American people (understanding anyone can disagree with what GW thinks is best). I just feel that we should have been more methodical in proving to the world that he does pose a threat to more than his own people.
Let me ask you a question - do you support the US extending their/our presence anywhere in the world that doesn't jive with our ideals?
|Not following you.||Live Steam|
Mar 28, 2003 6:46 AM
|"Let me ask you a question - do you support the US extending their/our presence anywhere in the world that doesn't jive with our ideals?"
As for the mural - I do not think it is the same as burning American flags in the streets or hanging an effigy of our president. The mural is an official fixture in a government building in Iraq depicting a tragic moment in our history where thousands of civilians died and were injured. It memorializes it and lends to the idea that they may have had some hand in it. It is like hanging a badge of honor on it.
As for proving beyond a doubt about the weapons prior to going in to take out this regime, I do not think that would have been possible. This regime has been deceiving the World for decades. To further complicate the job, countries that are purported to be our allies, have been obfuscating and hindering the process. Hans Blix has deep financial ties to France and Russia. This why France an Russia vetoed the nomination of all others who were under consideration to head the inspection teams. The inspections and the reports coming from his administering of the 1441 resolution, were a farce. He had no interest in finding out the truth. It was shown that he was hiding important information deep within the reports instead of highlighting them.
The only way we will know the truth is to get it for ourselves. That is the reason the press is imbedded with the troops. We have nothing to hide -not the way we are prosecuting the war nor what we will or will not find there once it is over.
Mar 28, 2003 10:46 AM
|I just have doubts Iraq had much to do with 9/11 and still don't see where the mural draws a relationship. To me, it's nothing more than the big, bad (perceived) bully getting knocked down, and all the rest of the school yard geeks taking some credit for the action.
Anyway, I guess that's one of the great things about this place we take so for granted. We can express our views and not fear severe repurcussions for it.
|Livesteam, go for a ride!||cycleaddict|
Mar 28, 2003 1:44 PM
|Like I've told you in the past--grow up and go for a ride.
Wear a set of headphones so you don't miss out on El Rushbo!!
Don't be a moron.
|Livesteam, go for a ride!||Live Steam|
Mar 30, 2003 8:24 AM
|I haven't said this to you yet, but why don't you go f#ck yourself while watching Bill Maher? He is probably among those that your admire.|| |