Go Back to the B3 Home Page
Complaints, compliments, arguments? Email me.
[<< "Smell The Fear."] [Archive Index] [>>"Below the fold..."]
04/01/2004 Archived Entry: "Revenge."
Revenge.
What are they going to do - kill everybody??
American officials in Baghdad vowed today to use "overwhelming" force to avenge the grisly killings of four American contractors in Falluja on Wednesday and establish control over the volatile city. But they cautioned that the American military would not move hastily for fear of worsening a perilous situation."We are not going to do a pell-mell rush into the city," said Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, chief spokesman for the American military command in Iraq. "It's going to be deliberate, it will be precise and it will be overwhelming."
L. Paul Bremer III, the top American administrator, said the contractors' deaths "would not go unpunished."
The point they seem to be missing is that while guerillas may have pulled off the attack, the atrocities seem to have been committed by regular citizens. That might be pretty difficult to avenge, short of imprisoning or killing large munbers of citizens of Falluja.
So is this bluster, or do they plan to wage war on Iraqi citizens? Either way, not good. Empty bluster would indicate weakness, waging war on citizens will turn the cycle back on itself.
So what are they going to do??
Replies: 18 people speak up
it would be a war crime to wage war on a civilian population
Posted by faulty_intelligence @ 04/01/2004 01:40 PM NY
It's not an easy job to root out 'insurgent's when they are seen as heroes by the general population, not even for Marines.
There's a delusion on the right that maintains that if we just remove the extremists everything will be ok, ordinary Iraqi's will be gratefull to the US for establishing 'law & order' and eager to accept the gift of democracy.
The recent incident at Fallujah proves this to be a fallacy. The mob did not kill the soldiers/contractors/mercenaries, insurgents did. Incidents like this are taking place about everyday somewhere in Iraq. The difference here is that bystanders, obviously unconcerned the cavalry might be on the way, decided to join in and 'celebrate'. The mob led the charge in this attrocity not insurgents. What more do we need as evidence of what will happen, without a heavy security presence, to prospective envoys from the IRC or whatever follows, contractors, soldiers or anyone else they deem responsible for the current predicament of the ordinary Iraqi of Fallujah.
Posted by postit @ 04/01/2004 02:18 PM NY
Our soliers get picked off daily and it is generally ignored.
Kill a carload of corporate contractors though and BOY, NOW YOU'VE DONE IT! TIME TO RETALIATE!
What does that tell you about who's REALLY running the show in Iraq?
Posted by Larry Dean @ 04/01/2004 03:03 PM NY
US intervention in Iraq reminds me of a man mired in quicksand: the harder you struggle, the faster the quicksand drags you down.
Let's pray the UN throws us a rope.
Posted by Metropolitan99 @ 04/01/2004 04:20 PM NY
The U (usually) N (nothing) give me a break, they have done nothing and will do nothing, end the UN now ! !
Not ALL iraqi's were involved with the aftermath of the deaths, I didnt see 250,000 ppl in the film, a few hundred at most and of them only half were involved.
It didnt take the death of a contractor or a marine to get this fired up , it took the mutilation after death.
As is the way of cowards, they ran back into their rat holes and slapped each other on the back saying good job. They are not seen as hero's by the general population, just the Democrates
I am ashamed to be affiliated with the parts of the party that spout this shit talk. I was born and raised in Minnesota, dont tell me about democrates, I may be further right than most of them, but there is now way this act of barbarism is all of Iraq or all of the people. the way you ppl talk you might as well of joined in.
Fuck you ! ! ! !
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 04/01/2004 05:06 PM NY
You may remember that Saddam didn't 'kill his own people' just for the sheer joy of it - they were rising up against him and harboring his enemies during a period of war. OK, Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, you're in charge now in a similar situation. Whatcha gonna do? Remember: Saddam evil, America good.
Suggestion: Quit occupying their country.
Posted by wfeather @ 04/01/2004 05:39 PM NY
Robin, you stepped over the line.
Show me one Democrat (not 'Democrate,' thanks) who is calling these guys heroes. Just one, from any source - internet, electronic or print. I don't think you can. In fact, I'm sure you can't.
You shot your mouth off, now back the shit up. Either that, or toddle on home to Freeperville, or LGF, or Lucianne, or wherever someone as completely ill-informed as you comes from.
Posted by editor @ 04/01/2004 06:40 PM NY
Pick a reply
so I hung an E , does that mean i have to vote for bush now ?
I think you need a fucking refresher in reading, i was implying the party was happy that this happend to further their blasting of the present administration. I dont think even you can deny that. And just for shits and giggles if Kerry voted for the war, how the hell do you think he would have done in this situation. Bushco said the insurgents were going to pay , they are not citizens, fucking wise up already. OH ! I know Mr Kerryco wouldnt have gotten us into this situation , correct. fuck off and eat shit, Ill take my president with a spine ,and without hanoi jane.
Im really disappointed Edwards didnt do better, in my mind he is the man for the job, he stayed above all the name calling shit and stuck to the issues, with a positive campaign, Ill probably write in in anyway
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 04/01/2004 07:52 PM NY
Dear Robin,
Many thanks for your insightful response. Perhaps you should stick another flag in your SUV and drive to your local NASCAR event.
Love and Kisses,
Metro99
Posted by Metropolitan99 @ 04/01/2004 07:59 PM NY
I'll continue echoeing what i hear being said by the Iraqi people...
"What part of 'Get the hell out of our country' Didn't you understand?"
Three letter words Synonymous in this case W-A-R........O-I-L......
The U.N. could do a helluva lot if we'd support them like we're supposed to instead of treading all over them when it's convenient or just for the Heck of it...cuz Heck, we're Just the biggest baddest dog on the block and ain't NO ONE better even Hint at challengin' US to a pissin' contest!....
C'mon folks our country is going down the toilet without even the tidybowl man to give us a salute..and we're going to elect the Dem. equivalent of B**h! How ridiculous is that???
We just that gung ho to see our sons and daughters drafted in June of 2005???
Posted by Joni @ 04/01/2004 09:28 PM NY
"Pick a reply
so I hung an E , does that mean i have to vote for bush now ?"
Neither stated nor implied, moving on.
"I think you need a fucking refresher in reading, i was implying the party was happy that this happend to further their blasting of the present administration."
I don't recall you stating that what you said was an implication, nor any conjugation of the word "imply". Seems you need a refresher in wrinting.
"I dont think even you can deny that. "
Sure I can, and do.
"And just for shits and giggles if Kerry voted for the war, how the hell do you think he would have done in this situation."
Dunno. I'm not him, and thus far NOONE has had access to ALL the facts.
"Bushco said the insurgents were going to pay , they are not citizens, fucking wise up already."
So, the insurgents are not Iraqis? Where and when was that shown to be fact. And please cite a verifiable reference.
"OH ! I know Mr Kerryco wouldnt have gotten us into this situation , correct."
Good, nice to see that you have at least grasped that point.
"fuck off and eat shit,"
The mark of a high intellect, and linguistic skills. I imagine Nader prolly thought the same thing as he hung up.
"Ill take my president with a spine"
Voting for Kerry I see. Congratulations on an informed choice.
",and without hanoi jane."
And just when you seemed to be redeeming yourself you spout off with some nonsense that has been shown to be, well, that. Nonsense. I've sat 2 rows behind, and 3 seats over from Denis Leary, but I wasn't there with him.
"Im really disappointed Edwards didnt do better, in my mind he is the man for the job, he stayed above all the name calling shit and stuck to the issues, with a positive campaign, Ill probably write in in anyway"
That's a nice sentiment and all, but why don't you just vote republican then? Writing in for a candidate, while you can sit there and justify to yourself that you are voting your conscience, you are still helping elect bush. Not voting against him, is voting for him. I loathe to use his simplistic thinking, but in this election it is applicable; if you are not with us you are against us. Knowing that Nader/whatever write in candidate cannot win, is taking votes away from a candidate that could remove him.
Posted by djdissent @ 04/01/2004 11:22 PM NY
Robin,
What school did you flunk out of, anyway?
They are not seen as hero's by the general population, just the Democrates (sp)
That's not an implication. That's a statement of your belief that Democrats think those guys are heroes.
And I knew you couldn't back up your trash talk. I set the bar extremely low, and you still couldn't clear it.
No wonder you drink the Bush kool-aid. He's about your intellectual speed, which in turntable terms is somewhat less that 16 RPM. Thanks for playing.
Posted by editor @ 04/01/2004 11:50 PM NY
Why dont you move right on to cencorship and quit the unwitty quip. Are you going to deny the UN has done nothing in the past or will in the future ? Or would that include Clinton not making payments to the UN for the same reason Bush dosent want to.
Just like you I dont have sources for everything and I dont have to, you seem to be able to spout off as you like and because your are the editor, what, your above us ?
On the kerry hanoi jane connection check out his veterans against war crap he was (is ) involved in. you may have sat next to Leary and not been with him and thats fine. I assume of course you had an investigation and 3 sources to prove you weren't with him.
editor you still cant deny the democrats were underlying happy about the events to further the cause to leave the war and promote the civil war that will happen after the un leaves. It seems a little issue called slavery put us into a civil war, are we better for it ? just as a little side bar
The “wedges of separation” caused by slavery split large Protestant sects into Northern and Southern branches and dissolved the Whig party. Most Southern Whigs joined the Democratic party, one of the few remaining, if shaky, nationwide institutions. The new Republican party, heir to the Free-Soil party and to the Liberty party, was a strictly Northern phenomenon.
quoted from causes of the civil war
editor get off you high horse and stand like a man. You complain about name calling and education levels and somehow you seem just like all the rest when confronted and not on your horse, just some twit with a blog thinking he is correct all the time
My vote , hmmmmmmmmm I thought I had the right to vote for the person "I" thought was the best , not who can get elected, wow , seems some civics are in order
set the bar or rpm as u like, editor, it dont change a thing. you didnt deny the underlying charge and u cant.
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 04/02/2004 05:25 AM NY
I do however apologize for my language and any resulting offence taken by anyone. It neither futher'd my position or debate here
Thank you
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 04/02/2004 05:32 AM NY
"My vote , hmmmmmmmmm I thought I had the right to vote for the person "I" thought was the best , not who can get elected, wow , seems some civics are in order"
I understand civics just fine, and you can vote for whomever you wish. However, my sense of civic duty requires me to do what is necessary to remove bush from the whitehouse. Just because "you" think a candidate is "best" doesn't mean that he is. People thought Bush was the best candidate, that has been proven wrong in spades.
Posted by djdissent @ 04/02/2004 08:42 AM NY
jeeeesss i thought bush was elected by the supreme court, that aside kerryco isnt doing much for me
Posted by Robin Hacker @ 04/02/2004 01:13 PM NY
Postit said:
"There's a delusion on the right that maintains that if we just remove the extremists everything will be ok, ordinary Iraqi's will be gratefull to the US for establishing 'law & order' and eager to accept the gift of democracy."
Probably true. But postit made me think that it's fully possible that the administration which started this vanity war couldn't care less if the Iraqis (or any of them eeevil ayrabs) want democracy or not. It's just a phoney front the admin mouthpieces toss out to the gullible american public.
I think that admin insiders knew that there would be violent and widespread dissent in Iraq when our "coalition forces" took control of the country, but believed they could cover it up or deny it and sell the heavily propagandized american public that this was about freedom and security. I think it was really always about oil and domination. For gwbush, it was a chance to look tough and be a "war president".
Posted by skywalker77 @ 04/02/2004 05:00 PM NY
During the reporting on Bremer's reactions to these murders, I heard the NPR reporter distinctly say "Bremer VOWED" these people would be caught; he SWORE they would be apprehended; etc.
But the AP and Reuters simply attributed "Bremer said." Bremer never used the words "swore" or "vow." I like NPR, generally, but whoever that reporter is (don't know offhand), he pulled a Nedra Pickler/WJI journalism insert on the listeners. Just one little word, but outrageously unobjective.
If he wanted to get to the truth, the reporter would have said Bremer didn't really give a shit about some stupid rent-a-cops who were so overconfident as to cruise Fallujah and got snuffed. Bremer was REALLY pissed about how impossible it is now to spin this, and that he has to work even harder to make the situation look "under control."
Ya think? I do. Later.
Posted by Daddy-O @ 04/03/2004 12:32 AM NY
