AP Photographer Flees Fallujah

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: DashRiprock

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: cwjerome
t's a shame the insurgents have brought it to this.

There were no anti-American insurgents before Iraq was invaded under false pretenses. So the insurgents did not bring it to anything. The US created these insurgents.

The insurgents existed before...if not in Iraq they'd be in Chenya, southern Philippines, Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia, Saudia Arabia, Yemen, etc...

It depends on how you define insurgents. Those sound like "foreign fighters." When I hear "insurgents" I think of Iraqis fighting foreign occupation. And the foreign fighters came to Iraq because of the US invasion.

 

[Format C:]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: DashRiprock

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: cwjerome
t's a shame the insurgents have brought it to this.

There were no anti-American insurgents before Iraq was invaded under false pretenses. So the insurgents did not bring it to anything. The US created these insurgents.

The insurgents existed before...if not in Iraq they'd be in Chenya, southern Philippines, Sudan, Ethiopia, Somalia, Saudia Arabia, Yemen, etc...

It depends on how you define insurgents. Those sound like "foreign fighters." When I hear "insurgents" I think of Iraqis fighting foreign occupation. And the foreign fighters came to Iraq because of the US invasion.

See? Toldya it was all our fault.

 

[SP33Demon]

I'm sure the US provided the Fallujah civilians sufficient time to leave to get to shelter. If they choose not to leave, what can you do? This is a war, not a human rights convention.

 

[cwjerome]

So infohawk, what you really mean is the US didn't create them... you're just being fast and loose with goofy language. What you meant to say is that various people have CHOOSEN to oppose an independent, democratic Iraq. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Red Dawn]

The more we kill now the less we will have to kill later?

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: cwjerome
t's a shame the insurgents have brought it to this.

There were no anti-American insurgents before Iraq was invaded under false pretenses. So the insurgents did not bring it to anything. The US created these insurgents.

And what is the purpose of the insurgents. Political/Military/Economic.

For every answer, I should think that examples can be found to dispute that logic (from a Western standpoint)

 

[skyking]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I'm sure the US provided the Fallujah civilians sufficient time to leave to get to shelter. If they choose not to leave, what can you do? This is a war, not a human rights convention.

Mighty large assumption there. Do you think it was safe to just walk out of there, with who knows how many insurgents watching your back? I don't know how easy or hard it was for the civilians to get out, or where in that war torn and blasted district they could go.

 

[maddogchen]

Originally posted by: skyking

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I'm sure the US provided the Fallujah civilians sufficient time to leave to get to shelter. If they choose not to leave, what can you do? This is a war, not a human rights convention.

Mighty large assumption there. Do you think it was safe to just walk out of there, with who knows how many insurgents watching your back? I don't know how easy or hard it was for the civilians to get out, or where in that war torn and blasted district they could go.

well...I read that out of an estimated population of 300,000 in Fallujah, 2/3 of the population left before the assault. This has helped skyrocket apartment prices in Baghdad and neighboring cities.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
What you meant to say is that various people have CHOOSEN to oppose an independent, democratic Iraq.

They decided to fight against a foreign invader, a very common and understandable reaction. But for the US invasion they would not have had to make that decision. The US is a but-for cause.

 

[skyking]

Originally posted by: maddogchen

Originally posted by: skyking

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I'm sure the US provided the Fallujah civilians sufficient time to leave to get to shelter. If they choose not to leave, what can you do? This is a war, not a human rights convention.

Mighty large assumption there. Do you think it was safe to just walk out of there, with who knows how many insurgents watching your back? I don't know how easy or hard it was for the civilians to get out, or where in that war torn and blasted district they could go.

well...I read that out of an estimated population of 300,000 in Fallujah, 2/3 of the population left before the assault. This has helped skyrocket apartment prices in Baghdad and neighboring cities.

Thanks. So if you have money, you can get out.................if not, welcome to the war.

 

[cwjerome]

Yes, they DECIDED to fight... they decided to oppose Iraqi freedom and deomcracy. And it's not all that common considering they are a tiny fraction of the Iraqi population, and it's not really understandable until you see WHO is fighting and WHY they are fighting a "foreign invador" (even though their attacks are mainly against other Iraqis).

Wow, look at what you're saying... "But for the US invasion they would not have had to make that decision."

You mean they wouldn't have had to make a decision between tribal authoritarianism and democracy? Gosh, aren't we just the bad people for "forcing" thugs to choose between their violent oppression of others and peaceful democracy. Shame on us for putting them in such a horrible position. Maybe we should allow a miniscule group to dictate our policies because we certainly don't want to put them in a position of having to fight against democracy, freedom, and justice.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
Yes, they DECIDED to fight... they decided to oppose Iraqi freedom and deomcracy. And it's not all that common considering they are a tiny fraction of the Iraqi population, and it's not really understandable until you see WHO is fighting and WHY they are fighting a "foreign invador" (even though their attacks are mainly against other Iraqis).

Wow, look at what you're saying... "But for the US invasion they would not have had to make that decision."

You mean they wouldn't have had to make a decision between tribal authoritarianism and democracy? Gosh, aren't we just the bad people for "forcing" thugs to choose between their violent oppression of others and peaceful democracy. Shame on us for putting them in such a horrible position. Maybe we should allow a miniscule group to dictate our policies because we certainly don't want to put them in a position of having to fight against democracy, freedom, and justice.

Well if those Insurgents were as convinced as you seem to be about our motives then there wouldn't be any fighting..at least not of the scale it is now. I wonder why they aren't convinced? Could it have been something we did?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
Yes, they DECIDED to fight... they decided to oppose Iraqi freedom and deomcracy.

There is no reason for them or us to assume any Iraqi freedom or democracy is happening or will happen at the hands of the US government.

 

[Alistar7]

How about the comments from Iraqis themselves? I can't believe you are so uninformed, you really think they don't enjoy far more freedom now? What about religious activites Saddam barred from happening that routinely are practiced openly? What about the freedom of press, what about the freedom of access to the outside world?

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
How about the comments from Iraqis themselves? I can't believe you are so uninformed, you really think they don't enjoy far more freedom now? What about religious activites Saddam barred from happening that routinely are practiced openly? What about the freedom of press, what about the freedom of access to the outside world?

The only information you get is US government propaganda. I am aware of the official party line. I am also aware of other accounts of what is happening in Iraq.

 

[Alistar7]

The only thing you believe is anti bush propaganda.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...2481&enterthread=y


Read what IRAQIS have to say about the FREEDOMS they now enjoy and who they give crdit to for their fortune.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
The only thing you believe is anti bush propaganda.

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...2481&enterthread=y


Read what IRAQIS have to say about the FREEDOMS they now enjoy and who they give crdit to for their fortune.

Soldier to soldier, do you really, REALLY believe that the Iraqis will be truly free under US rule (for the next decade)?

I would like you to think before you answer, an honest answer.

 

[cwjerome]

Reddawn: They aren't convinced and they won't be, hence the fighting. Are you saying there is no "right" or truth... that their attitudes and concerns are as legitimate as ours? Do you actually expect them to suddenly see our position and become rational people who renounce their oppresive, terroristic, theocratic, violent ways? That's like asking how come the Nazis just didn't see things our way... was the fact they were "unconvinced" mean their cause was legitimate? I don't understand.

Infohawk: There's plenty of reasons to believe Iraq can and will become an honorable memeber of the world community. I can see many hardships, including how your line of thinking causes more suffering and frustration than necessary, but there is definately reason for hope. I don't know what your solution is... maybe to pack up and leave or something, but your sheer unwillingness to see anything positive from the US ("at the hands of the US government") has rendered you irrelevant in the future-of-Iraq debate, because the US obviously IS involved. It's plain that your hatred for Bush has metasticized not only into a hatred for his supporters, but even more alarming is a hatred for America and its ability to achieve anything worthwhile. I know you'll whine "I didn't say that!", but I'm confident many others see through your words.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
Infohawk: There's plenty of reasons to believe Iraq can and will become an honorable memeber of the world community. I can see many hardships, including how your line of thinking causes more suffering and frustration than necessary, but there is definately reason for hope. I don't know what your solution is... maybe to pack up and leave or something, but your sheer unwillingness to see anything positive from the US ("at the hands of the US government") has rendered you irrelevant in the future-of-Iraq debate, because the US obviously IS involved. It's plain that your hatred for Bush has metasticized not only into a hatred for his supporters, but even more alarming is a hatred for America and its ability to achieve anything worthwhile. I know you'll whine "I didn't say that!", but I'm confident many others see through your words.

You haven't offered any reasons to suggest that either Iraqis or Americans would be correct to assume that the US is interested in bringing democracy to Iraq. You have howevered veered into attacks on me and my motives-- useless. Cheers.

 

[Alistar7]

They are already free klixxer, no matter how long it takes the US to help rebuild their great country.

 

[GrGr]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
How about the comments from Iraqis themselves? I can't believe you are so uninformed, you really think they don't enjoy far more freedom now? What about religious activites Saddam barred from happening that routinely are practiced openly? What about the freedom of press, what about the freedom of access to the outside world?

Now I see why the Allawi government had to declare a state of emergency. The Iraqi people are simply celebrating their new found freedom with excessive joy and fireworks.

Oh, and Al-Jazeera has been banned since August. The "freedom of the press" is only for government approved news.

 

[Kadarin]

If you believe that the US is there to preserve anyones interests than the US you are sadly mistaken an YOU should know better.

The US (and US military) should *always* be acting to preserve US interests, and *only* US interests.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

If you believe that the US is there to preserve anyones interests than the US you are sadly mistaken an YOU should know better.

The US (and US military) should *always* be acting to preserve US interests, and *only* US interests.

But sometimes preserving other peoples interests preserves our interests.

 

[cwjerome]

A free, stable, democratic Iraq is in our national interests... why else would we be doing it?

Infohawk says, "You haven't offered any reasons to suggest that either Iraqis or Americans would be correct to assume that the US is interested in bringing democracy to Iraq. You have howevered veered into attacks on me and my motives-- useless. Cheers."

I haven't... does that mean it isn't so? Are you arguing a position simply because me, cwjerome, hasn't offered any reasons contrary? I'm glad I hold such a high level in your thought process, but it's a stupid thing to do. Example: I believe that Arizona is a very hot state, even though I have heard nothing concerning this issue from YOU. I can formulate opinions regardless of whether or not a particular person has offered evidence on the subject. So forget the games and cowardice and come out clean as to why you think the US can't or won't bring democracy to Iraq. It can't be because little 'ol me hasn't offered evidence to the contrary....

BTW, :beer: (I'll always cheer an honest dig against you)

 

[jpeyton]

In the end, US foreign policy always comes back to haunt us. I don't see this war as being any different.