Log in

No account? Create an account
Adventures in Engineering
The wanderings of a modern ronin.

Ben Cantrick
  Date: 2006-10-21 19:44
  Subject:   We're losing badly in Iraq.
  Music:GWAR - War Party

On Monday, September 18, former Secretary of State and longtime Bush family confidant James Baker sat in a room full of recognized national security analysts gathered at the U.S. Institute for Peace in downtown Washington. Each expert expressed his or her views on the situation in Iraq. Baker was there as co-chairman - along with former Rep. Lee Hamilton, D-Ind. - of the Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan assemblage of foreign-policy luminaries tasked with charting a new course in Iraq that might win the support of the White House and Congress, Democrats as well as Republicans. The study group is expected to release its recommendations shortly after the November elections, to avoid sullying them with the muck of Washington's bitter partisan politics.

"There must have been 25 experts in that room from every part of the political spectrum, and I was absolutely struck by how the overwhelming consensus was that things are very bad and getting worse in Iraq," said one participant, a description that was confirmed by others. "The only real debate centered on the need to lower our expectations, and to try to extract some stability out of a failed democracy-building experiment."

The gloom in the room reflected the unmistakable downward trajectory of a failing state beset by insurgency, a sustained assault by foreign terrorists, and a civil war of sectarian slaughter. This summer about 3,500 Iraqis died violently in a single month, the highest monthly total since the United States invaded in March 2003. The number of sectarian killings in Baghdad each month has more than tripled since February. In September, for instance, an estimated 1,450 Iraqis were killed in the capital; many of the victims were rounded up en masse from their workplaces and tortured by death squads before being dispatched with a bullet to the head. Sectarian violence, according to press reports, has already "ethnically cleansed" or displaced from their homes more than 300,000 Iraqis, and an estimated 1 million more have left the country to escape the unrelenting bloodshed.


The violence aimed at U.S. and coalition forces has likewise risen sharply. Between January and July of this year, the number of improvised explosive devices that were either detonated or defused nearly doubled, marking a record high. Insurgent attacks against U.S. and coalition forces occur every 15 minutes on average, or more than 100 times each day, according to a new book by Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward. At least 69 American troops have been killed in Iraq so far this month, making it one of the deadliest stretches for coalition forces since the 2003 invasion. U.S. intelligence analysts predict that next year will be worse.


I'm sure glad there was some actual reason that all those soldiers we sent got killed horribly. Oh wait, there were no WMDs there, you say? And we've totally failed to make it a Democracy, you say? And it's become a hot-bed breeding ground for terrorists, too? Hmm, let me go ask the NeoCons why we went into Iraq again...

You people who were in favor of this war sure would like it if I didn't shove this in your face, wouldn't you? You'd just prefer to ignore the problem, and hope it goes away. You're really happier not knowing. You want to ignore the consequences of your stupidity, and pretend there's nothing wrong.

TOO FUCKING BAD. You created this problem, you are responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands, and I'm going to keep rubbing your nose in it until the mindless, senseless, meaningless slaughter (of Americans and Iraqis both) stops.

You made this bed, and now you're going to lie in it.

(P.S. Where's that Osama bin Laden guy? You know, the one who crashed the planes into the towers on Sept 11th? Oh, he's STILL sitting in his hut in the mountains of Pakistan, laughing at us, planning his next attack?)
Post A Comment | 5 Comments | | Link

  User: (Anonymous)
  Date: 2006-10-21 23:42 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
It's disgusting. There's no other way to put it. The sad thing is that the tards who support Bush will still say that Iraq is better off without Saddam. Ignore the fact that *no one* I know would dispute that ousting of a horrible despot as bad.

Except, it really wasn't the reason we went into Iraq. As rehashed as the following is, we were told there was 'slam dunk' evidence that Iraq had or was in the process of achieving wmds. Evidence they couldn't tell us because it would compromise our intelligence network. Evidence which turned out to be bullshit. They also tried to tug on our heartstrings and patriotism by claiming a connection between Iraq and 9/11. Which also turned out to be bullshit.

So, then, it became a, "Hey, at least we got Saddam and damn it, we freed the Iraqis from his ruthless regime! Aren't we great?" While the perpetrator of 9/11 walks free *five fucking years later*.

Pay no attention to these facts 1) There are no wmds in Iraq 2) There is no connection between 9/11 and Iraq 3) Osama is still free

Keep up with your rhetoric, you fuckwits.

Reply | Thread | Link

Ben Cantrick
  User: mackys
  Date: 2006-10-22 00:29 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
The sad thing is that the tards who support Bush will still say that Iraq is better off without Saddam. Ignore the fact that *no one* I know would dispute that ousting of a horrible despot as bad.

With the casualty numbers cited above, we're making Saddam look good, and that's a scary thing. If "Iraq is better off now than under Saddam" is their excuse, it's wearing awful thin...
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

  User: osmium_ocelot
  Date: 2006-10-22 00:55 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
It is no longer an excuse.

For more just search Google News for : torture in Iraq worse now than under Saddam.

And that's without even going into the complete lack of infrastructure, you know, things like electricity, running water, sewer, etc. All indications are that things were _better_ in that respect under Saddam. Given that we've had three years to fix what we bombed into oblivion, I'd say that's pretty poor performance.

Oh, and did you see that little bit on the Republican's Osama ad?
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

Ben Cantrick
  User: mackys
  Date: 2006-10-22 01:14 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
Yeah, what riot! And you know like half the people are going to swallow it hook, line and sinker too.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

  User: (Anonymous)
  Date: 2006-10-22 08:23 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
Well, I was thinking about the estimate of people killed during Saddam's reign and since the US has been in Iraq. I saw a figure for it once or maybe it was just the Kurds that he used the chemical weapons on. In any case, it's getting close enough that it did have me thinking about it as I posted my reply above.

Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

May 2015