Pages: (2) [1] 2  ( Go to first unread post ) Add Reply | New Topic | New Poll

 Attention Mahdi Army: US All Out Of Bubble Gum
JG2K7
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 03:37 PM


"Oooh...Guns, Guns, Guns!"


Group: Members
Posts: 17,735
Member No.: 28
Joined: 21-July 06



user posted image

It’s the second day of fighting in Diwaniyah, south of Baghdad, and the US is having it out with Sadr’s pallies:

QUOTE
American troops swept into the troubled, predominantly Shiite city of Diwaniyah before dawn on Friday, killing three militia fighters and capturing 27 in the first day of the assault, the military said. The attack — named “Operation Black Eagle” — targeted gunmen loyal to anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. Fighting continued Saturday.

Dozens of people have been killed in Diwaniyah during the past weeks and the attacks have been blamed by residents on the Mahdi Army, al-Sadr’s militia.
Many women, accused by the hard-line and fundamentalist militiamen of violating their interpretation of Islamic morality, are among the dead.


Interesting that we have apparently dropped the fiction of only targeting "rogue" Mahdi Army elements and are explicitly lighting up Sadr’s soliders.

Good.

I suspect Diwaniyah may be a precursor to a possible pacification of Baghdad’s Sadr City, and we are learning about their tactics when we are ready to snap the Mahdi Army in half for good.

Meanwhile.........NATO kicks some Taliban ass in Afghanistan's Helmand province. I’m not sure whether the objective is to cut off Taliban control of the opium revenues from the area around Sangin, or we’re just there because that’s where the Taliban and their "foreign fighters" are.

Nice to see we're on the offensive in both countries for a change, however.
Top
TheChinWins
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 03:55 PM


Did I say something to offend you?


Group: Members
Posts: 7,878
Member No.: 13
Joined: 21-July 06



Great stuff JG. Check your PM.
Top
The Iron Sheik
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 04:44 PM


Lobbyist


Group: Members
Posts: 13,552
Member No.: 17
Joined: 21-July 06



We . . . . laugh.gif
Top
JG2K7
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 04:45 PM


"Oooh...Guns, Guns, Guns!"


Group: Members
Posts: 17,735
Member No.: 28
Joined: 21-July 06



QUOTE (The Iron Sheik @ Apr 7 2007, 09:44 AM)
We . . . . laugh.gif

Wait....aren't you "AN AMURRRRICAN"?

"We" is a disconnection of "coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq", you know, our men and women in uniform?

I would expect an "AMURRRRICAN" to understand this.
Top
TheChinWins
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 04:53 PM


Did I say something to offend you?


Group: Members
Posts: 7,878
Member No.: 13
Joined: 21-July 06



I think 'this guy' pretty much says everything I want to say wrt to the "we'rs", the "I am patriotics", the "I support the troops...."

http://www.houseofchin.com/


Top of the page....the video is a little long. Nice rant though.
Top
The Iron Sheik
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 05:04 PM


Lobbyist


Group: Members
Posts: 13,552
Member No.: 17
Joined: 21-July 06



1 we: I and the rest of a group that includes me : you and I : you and I and another or others : I and another or others not including you -- used as pronoun of the first person plural; compare I, OUR, OURS, US

QUOTE
we are learning about their tactics when we are ready to snap the Mahdi Army in half for good.
we’re just there because that’s where the Taliban and their "foreign fighters" are.

Nice to see we're on the offensive in both countries for a change, however. 


None of the foregoing scenarios includes you, only US soldiers.

Tacit in the "we" statement is that all Americans support(ed) the invasion of Iraq or the current occupation.

You are posting messages.

US soldiers are fighting and losing their lives. Not you.
Top
TheChinWins
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 05:08 PM


Did I say something to offend you?


Group: Members
Posts: 7,878
Member No.: 13
Joined: 21-July 06



The fact that he used the word 'we' isn't really the substance of the post.

Do you have any thoughts on that?
Top
thelogo
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 05:13 PM


Junior Senator


Group: Members
Posts: 6,759
Member No.: 80
Joined: 6-September 06



QUOTE (TheChinWins @ Apr 7 2007, 04:53 PM)
I think 'this guy' pretty much says everything I want to say wrt to the "we'rs", the "I am patriotics", the "I support the troops...."

http://www.houseofchin.com/


Top of the page....the video is a little long. Nice rant though.

that dude is awesome- and he is dead on


Top
The Iron Sheik
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 05:14 PM


Lobbyist


Group: Members
Posts: 13,552
Member No.: 17
Joined: 21-July 06



Yes, I am against increased aggression in the region as, to date, it has not furthered the final objective, which changes on a daily basis.

There is discussion of "winning" but no one can provide a clear answer as to what that means.

The continued presence of US forces in Iraq has united Iraqis against us. Time for some diplomacy. Time to let the Arab leaders step in and lead and it's high time the US stops paying the full price for the Iraqis.

Time for Iraqis to take the reigns.
Top
TheChinWins
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 05:18 PM


Did I say something to offend you?


Group: Members
Posts: 7,878
Member No.: 13
Joined: 21-July 06



QUOTE (thelogo @ Apr 7 2007, 12:13 PM)
QUOTE (TheChinWins @ Apr 7 2007, 04:53 PM)
I think 'this guy' pretty much says everything I want to say wrt to the "we'rs", the "I am patriotics", the "I support the troops...."

http://www.houseofchin.com/


Top of the page....the video is a little long.  Nice rant though.

that dude is awesome- and he is dead on

LOL, yeah that's good shi isn't it? Forgot where i found that. The guy apparently does a cable access show somewhere.
Top
TheChinWins
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 05:22 PM


Did I say something to offend you?


Group: Members
Posts: 7,878
Member No.: 13
Joined: 21-July 06



QUOTE (The Iron Sheik @ Apr 7 2007, 12:14 PM)
Yes, I am against increased aggression in the region as, to date, it has not furthered the final objective, which changes on a daily basis.

There is discussion of "winning" but no one can provide a clear answer as to what that means.

The continued presence of US forces in Iraq has united Iraqis against us. Time for some diplomacy. Time to let the Arab leaders step in and lead and it's high time the US stops paying the full price for the Iraqis.

Time for Iraqis to take the reigns.

Sheik,

I don't disagree with much of your sentiment. However, the reality is that US troops will remain in Iraq for the immediate future. Granted, their role will gradually change and they will remain on base more as opposed to leading patrols. But a withdrawal will not happen. Now, I AM in favor of a shift in the funding. It is the Iraqi government who still wishes our presence. So the Iraqi government needs to start footing more and more of the bill.
Top
The Iron Sheik
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 05:47 PM


Lobbyist


Group: Members
Posts: 13,552
Member No.: 17
Joined: 21-July 06



QUOTE
However, the reality is that US troops will remain in Iraq for the immediate future. Granted, their role will gradually change and they will remain on base more as opposed to leading patrols. But a withdrawal will not happen. Now, I AM in favor of a shift in the funding. It is the Iraqi government who still wishes our presence. So the Iraqi government needs to start footing more and more of the bill.


Agreed on all points. Although I would prefer a withdrawal of our troops I realize that is not going to happen any time soon. At a minimum then, I think a phased withdrawal should be connected to specific targets to be accomplished by the Iraqis. The Iraqi government and it's citizens should have as an objective to assume control of security and their country. Continued US presence unites Sunni and Shiite against said presence.

Beyond that, the US should pursue diplomacy within the region along with support from the international community to stabilize Iraq.

After the phased withdrawal the US should aid in the reconstruction of Iraq.
Top
reddogrw
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 05:58 PM


Representative


Group: Members
Posts: 3,876
Member No.: 91
Joined: 24-October 06



QUOTE (The Iron Sheik @ Apr 7 2007, 01:47 PM)

Agreed on all points. Although I would prefer a withdrawal of our troops I realize that is not going to happen any time soon. At a minimum then, I think a phased withdrawal should be connected to specific targets to be accomplished by the Iraqis. The Iraqi government and it's citizens should have as an objective to assume control of security and their country. Continued US presence unites Sunni and Shiite against said presence.

Beyond that, the US should pursue diplomacy within the region along with support from the international community to stabilize Iraq.

After the phased withdrawal the US should aid in the reconstruction of Iraq.

well said - I agree - the Iraqi's need to step up to the plate and take their own destiny into their own hands
Top
TheChinWins
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 06:00 PM


Did I say something to offend you?


Group: Members
Posts: 7,878
Member No.: 13
Joined: 21-July 06



Continued US presence unites Sunni and Shiite against said presence.

Disagree. I think most acts against US troops are by former ba'athists, Foreign fighters.

After the phased withdrawal the US should aid in the reconstruction of Iraq.

Disagree. Iraq has more resources than it needs for reconstruction. The reopening of Embassies will bring foreign investment. Iraq has to learn how to operate in capitalism.

Top
LTW07
Posted: Apr 7 2007, 06:03 PM


The Tax Cutter


Group: Banned
Posts: 18,207
Member No.: 117
Joined: 9-February 07



QUOTE (The Iron Sheik @ Apr 7 2007, 11:44 AM)
We . . . . laugh.gif

yet another instance of adding completely nothing to the topic by a person who was crying about other peoples posting habits on this board.

And no shocker, its another leftwing drone.
Top


Topic OptionsPages: (2) [1] 2  Add Reply | New Topic | New Poll



Hosted for free by InvisionFree (Terms of Use: Updated 7/7/05) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.2087 seconds | Archive
Affiliates
SportsRefuge.com
mysmilies.com planetsmilies.com