from a real news reporter in Iraq...

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/baqu...y-2007.htm

highlight:

Quote:At first, he said, they would only target Shia, but over time the new al Qaeda directed attacks against Sunni, and then anyone who thought differently. The official reported that on a couple of occasions in Baqubah, al Qaeda invited to lunch families they wanted to convert to their way of thinking. In each instance, the family had a boy, he said, who was about 11 years old. As LT David Wallach interpreted the man’s words, I saw Wallach go blank and silent. He stopped interpreting for a moment. I asked Wallach, “What did he say?” Wallach said that at these luncheons, the families were sat down to eat. And then their boy was brought in with his mouth stuffed. The boy had been baked. Al Qaeda served the boy to his family.

Al-Qaeda's number 2 recently in new video, Al-Zawahari:

Quote:The first thing which our beloved brothers in Iraq must realize is the critical nature of unity and that is the gateway to victory.

he's called Iraq the Central Front before, in the war on terror back in 2005:

Quote: I want to be the first to congratulate you for what God has blessed you with in terms of fighting battle in the heart of the Islamic world, which was formerly the field for major battles in Islam's history, and what is now the place for the greatest battle of Islam in this era, and what will happen, according to what appeared in the Hadiths of the Messenger of God @ about the epic battles between Islam and atheism. It has always been my belief that the victory of Islam will never take place until a Muslim state is established in the manner of the Prophet in the heart of the Islamic world, specifically in the Levant, Egypt, and the neighboring states of the Peninsula and Iraq;

heh, no wonder Al-Qaeda is funneling recruits into Iraq and cooking children and serving to their parents.

Sounds like the ultimate Urban Myth to me. One that you neo cons lick up like dog puke. Any corrobation? Any witnesees? Just this one free-lancer whose funded by watchers of the 700 club? How much did you give niner?

yea, id have to have some proof of this. i agree that they are capable of most anything, but this does seem outlandish.

so you guys don't think they are capable of this? wealthy aq jihadist fly planes into buildings killing themselves in the process for 72 virgins....they are capable of absolutely anything.

Michael Yon is a very respected reporter, Bruce Willis was looking into making a movie about his 'Duece-Four' story....he is actually imbedded with the troops and is financed by his readers, not big news orginizations.....

anyway, here are pics of bodies of people and livestock in this village, killed by Al-Qaeda.

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/bles...ildren.htm

In today's Op-ed page on the Washington Post print edition (I could not find it on the internet), Henry Kissinger wrote one of the most cogent reasons why we can't just leave Iraq. He espoused a domino theory of sorts. Iran is trying to dominate Iraq. There is sectarian strife between three groups, the Kurds, the Sunni's and the Shiites. If we just leave, then the Kurds will want to form their own country which will get Turkey involved. The Shiites in Iran will try and take Iraq so that they can then branch out of Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the other gulf kingdoms to re-establish their goal of a Persian Empire. His view is that we can't leave, but we can try and get all the groups together to say, if this doesn't work out, then you guys will be fighting each other without our intervention. In other words, Saudi Arabia, are you prepared to go to war with Iran? Turkey, are you prepared for war with the Kurds? Russia are you prepared for Shiites to act up in your country? Iran, do you really think you can conquor the entire middle east? In other words, his call is to get everyone together to talk. If Iran says they won't play nice and will keep sitrring things up, then at least we know that our war is with them and not with other Arab and Kurdish folks and can focus on isolating them and then we can say with a straight face, look we tried to get you guys to play nicely together.

My view is that the other problem for us is that the US is a benign occupier. Unlike any superpower in history, we don't crush the countries that we conquor. If we were a normal occupier, every time a suicide bomber pulled something, we would line up his family and kill them and kill their children and their children's children or just round up ten random people and hang them and leave their bodies out to be a warning to others. Because we don't act this way, the people we conquor think we're somehow weak. So, those that don't want to go along feel bold about creating havoc. These people have never been free in their entire lives and that is something you can't just snap your fingers and create that free mindset for them. This is also where Protestant Christian doctrine and Islamic doctrine collide. Islamic doctrine teaches that when you conquor someone you step on their throat. Protestant Christian doctrine teaches compassion in all things and freedom of man. We believe that men long to be free, but I am not sure that is the case in the middle east.

No Stang. There is no valid reason for staying in Iraq. Can anyone say the people in Iraq have it better since we intervened? And that story about the boy sounds half-baked. Typical war time propaganda.

EastStang Wrote:We believe that men long to be free, but I am not sure that is the case in the middle east.

if its not, then they should've taken the Rumsfeld plan which was to install a pro-western dictator in Saddam's place that would allow our military a base there to put heat on Iran and Syria......removing Saddam and what to do afterwards are two seperate subjects.

its easy to see why they took the Democracy route, promoting Liberty and Democracy was the straw that broke the back of our enemies in the 20th century....I just wonder how things would be in Iraq if Iran and Syria, along with AQ in general weren't funneling terrorist in to blow stuff up, i.e. if Iraq was left to itself internally.

my question, are we at war with Al-Qaeda or not?? They are clearly all over Iraq which is a huge prize for them, much bigger than Afghanistan. They have an infrastructure, educated people, main source of Water in ME and of course all the historical reasons.

the media is also largely guilty in this mess, if we withdrawal I hope they make it plain as day that it was the work of the Democrats that forced withdrawal. Because, long-term nothing will be over.

EastStang Wrote:Islamic doctrine teaches that when you conquor someone you step on their throat. Protestant Christian doctrine teaches compassion in all things and freedom of man. We believe that men long to be free, but I am not sure that is the case in the middle east.

No, it does not. Such instances are the result of cultural influences and greed, not religious doctrine. Don't ruin a good post with that. It appears this thread is just going to become another religious pissing contest to see which religion has been more evil. The Middle East never did have what the Western world calls the "Enlightenment" and reject religious power and corruption on society, and they will continue to kill each other until they do.

And the eating of children? who repoted that? Gulla Bull?

Quote:I hope they make it plain as day that it was the work of the Democrats.

When we drawdown it won't fall at the feet of the Democrats. We don't have thr troops to sustain the surge. What happened to the coalition of the willing GG? The planning or lakk of planning will be the culprit of our draw down. Republican cracks are what's causing any talk here. 73% of Americans disagree with you GG. Lugar, Domenci, Voinovic. More are on the way............ Are these guys Democrats? Hmm must of changed party affiliation.

Andy McCarthy had a great point about this story:

Quote:Planet Earth to President Bush and the Republicans: Al Qaeda — having killed nearly 3000 Americans on 9/11 and promising to do it again — is baking 11-year-old Iraqis and serving them as cannibal fare to their own parents!!! The impediment between these barbarians setting up shop and civilization is OUR TROOPS. Do you think, maybe, there might kinda, sorta be something here we could work with — y'know, assuming, just for argument's sake, of course, that we might possibly want to, um, take on the Left and rebut their insanity before we go along with all this?

Do you think maybe if you — repeatedly and convincingly — made clear to Americans what is going on over there, they might think, like, maybe we really do have to kill these savages — whose biggest target is us and who will get bigger and stronger if we leave? Do you think the American people, no matter how unhappy they are with you and how low your approval numbers are, will be content to lose a war to al Qaeda?

Is it possible that, instead of filling the media with stories about how your administration is trying to find a way out, we might possibly have you get on TV with some of the pictures Michael Yon has been publishing — and, y'know, like, friggin' P-E-R-S-U-A-D-E the American people that our troops are over there for a reason that makes a difference for AMERICAN lives.

I disagreed with our invasion of Iraq, but if we leave now, we're doing a disservice to the people of Iraq and creating even more anti-American sentiment than there is if we stay there.

Also, regarding the first post: Are you sure that you weren't reading Jonathan Swift this morning?

Fanatical Wrote:And the eating of children? who repoted that? Gulla Bull?

Quote:Also, regarding the first post: Are you sure that you weren't reading Jonathan Swift this morning?

interesting, so which part of this to you guys find impossible. That AQ is in Iraq or they are killing kids and forcing parents to eat them. Whichever it is, why is that so hard to beleive?

The Nazi's took the fat they burned off the Jew's bodies and turned it into Soap, AQ is every bit as evil, except even worse. They are capable of aboslutely anything!!!!!!! Where were you guys on 9/11 anyway? Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg, etc.??? Just look at the pics and read the report.

you guys are helping me understand how the Left looks at this thing though....this is going to be an ugly century unfortunately, I suggest reading up..

http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam101/

Daniel Pearl's father has a message for you:

Quote:Danny’s tragedy demands an end to this logic. There can be no comparison between those who take pride in the killing of an unarmed journalist and those who vow to end such acts–no ifs, ands, or buts. Moral relativism died with Daniel Pearl, in Karachi, on January 31, 2002.

There was a time when drawing moral symmetries between two sides of every conflict was a mark of original thinking. Today, with Western intellectuals overextending two-sidedness to reckless absurdities, it reflects nothing but lazy conformity. What is needed now is for intellectuals, filmmakers, and the rest of us to resist this dangerous trend and draw legitimate distinctions where such distinctions are warranted.

Observer Wrote:Can anyone say the people in Iraq have it better since we intervened?

Yes. Tell me, if we portrayed America to the world by only showing South Central L.A., what would we look like? The media has an agenda. You'll do yourself a disservice if you believe otherwise.

RebelKev Wrote:

Observer Wrote:Can anyone say the people in Iraq have it better since we intervened?

Yes. Tell me, if we portrayed America to the world by only showing South Central L.A., what would we look like? The media has an agenda. You'll do yourself a disservice if you believe otherwise.

Did you just compare South Central LA to Iraq? The death tolls are NO WHERE NEAR the same levels.

Plus, even if South Central WERE as bad as Iraq, it's even WORSE that we're not doing more to change things here in our own country.

Sophandros Wrote:Did you just compare South Central LA to Iraq? The death tolls are NO WHERE NEAR the same levels.

Plus, even if South Central WERE as bad as Iraq, it's even WORSE that we're not doing more to change things here in our own country.

No. I simply took a ****** area of the United States and made an analogy on how we would be portrayed if we only used SC LA to show the world what is America. All you see in the press, pertaining to Iraq, is turmoil. That's it. When the press rolls up on prosperity and peace, they get the hell out of Dodge. It's a non-story. Blood sales and they know the American public is dumb enough to take them at their word.

I also want to remind you, we are still at war with Islamic fundamentalists.

RebelKev Wrote:

Sophandros Wrote:Did you just compare South Central LA to Iraq? The death tolls are NO WHERE NEAR the same levels.

Plus, even if South Central WERE as bad as Iraq, it's even WORSE that we're not doing more to change things here in our own country.

No. I simply took a ****** area of the United States and made an analogy on how we would be portrayed if we only used SC LA to show the world what is America. All you see in the press, pertaining to Iraq, is turmoil. That's it. When the press rolls up on prosperity and peace, they get the hell out of Dodge. It's a non-story. Blood sales and they know the American public is dumb enough to take them at their word.

I also want to remind you, we are still at war with Islamic fundamentalists.

I get what you're saying, but I disagree with using such an example, since people have tried to use that example as justification for the war.

And we agree with whom we're at war. It's certain fundamentalists, not all of Islam.

EastStang Wrote:In today's Op-ed page on the Washington Post print edition (I could not find it on the internet), Henry Kissinger wrote one of the most cogent reasons why we can't just leave Iraq. He espoused a domino theory of sorts. Iran is trying to dominate Iraq. There is sectarian strife between three groups, the Kurds, the Sunni's and the Shiites. If we just leave, then the Kurds will want to form their own country which will get Turkey involved. The Shiites in Iran will try and take Iraq so that they can then branch out of Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the other gulf kingdoms to re-establish their goal of a Persian Empire. His view is that we can't leave, but we can try and get all the groups together to say, if this doesn't work out, then you guys will be fighting each other without our intervention. In other words, Saudi Arabia, are you prepared to go to war with Iran? Turkey, are you prepared for war with the Kurds? Russia are you prepared for Shiites to act up in your country? Iran, do you really think you can conquor the entire middle east? In other words, his call is to get everyone together to talk. If Iran says they won't play nice and will keep sitrring things up, then at least we know that our war is with them and not with other Arab and Kurdish folks and can focus on isolating them and then we can say with a straight face, look we tried to get you guys to play nicely together.

Some interesting stuff here.

What strikes me is that none of this is mutually exclusive.

In fact Obama's been talking about doing exactly that. You announce you're withdrawing troops in one year's time. You convene the interested parties, internal and external, and you start the horse-trading and consensus building. None of these parties has an interest in seeing Iraq go to hell in a hand basket, but if all parties pursue their own interests independently and react to one another ad-hoc, it will turn out that way. Its a typical security dilemma. But you have to announce that we are going to prepare for withdrawing troops, because only that realization that the status-quo is coming to an end is going to provide the impetus for these parties to get to work seriously on what comes next.

Now, secondly, its odd that this comes from Kissinger. He's essentially outlining all the reasons why this war was a bad idea from day one. Of course, he supported it initially, not taking into account these "unintended consequences" that he is now citing for why we can't leave.

Quote:We believe that men long to be free, but I am not sure that is the case in the middle east.

And that is why this war was a mistake, and what is at the heart of the neo-conservative fallacy. You can't make people want to be free when there is no history of that word having any meaning in the region. And you certainly can't do that through a 5 year (and counting) military occupation.

Its hard to explain the feelings that occupations engender if you've not experienced one. Now, I have not either, but I've only recently seen something very close. I was just in Kashmir last month, in the mostly Buddhist part near the Chinese border. Now, this part of Kashmir (called Ladakh) is not usually an ethnic conflict zone, but due to the closeness of China and Pakistan (the Pakistanis have provoked incidents nearby at Kargil) and the fact that 14,000 feet carries a lot of strategic importance, the place is FULL of military cantonments. There are troops and military installations all over the place, and they represent a disproportionate share of the population of Ladakh. The Ladakhis are buddhist and mostly Tibetan ethnically. The soldiers are almost entirely (if not actually entirely) Hindus and Sikhs from Punjab, and various states in the Hindi belt -- i.e., they look nothing like Ladakhis, they don't speak the language, and generally have nothing in common with them culturally.

Well, despite the fact that Ladakhis are pretty well-off by Indian standards due to trade with China and tourism, they aren't real warm to the idea of having no autonomy. They don't want independence, and they aren't attacking troops, but there is no love lost either, and they are desperate for what the Indians call Union Territory status. There's real resentment there. And objectively there's no reason for there to be -- other than military troops that don't come from their communities essentially running their villages which have been around for a thousand years. While they aren't trying to leave India -- they really dislike and mistrust Indian people generally. So its a subtle effect, but you can see how it works on a larger and more extreme scale like Iraq. Occupations engender resentment, and its hard to "sell freedom" under those conditions.

Sophandros Wrote:And we agree with whom we're at war. It's certain fundamentalists, not all of Islam.

....and if what they are saying is correct, that only 10% are radical, that's about 180 million people. I would venture to say that 85% either agree with them, or remain silent for their own safety and the last 5% that does speak up is being silenced by far-leftists with an agenda.

180 million people is more than twice our population. This is why I contend this war will last generations, but it must be fought. We only have two choices, fight or submit. Doesn't seem like the 85% not saying anything is going to do anything to reform their religion.

RebelKev Wrote:

Sophandros Wrote:And we agree with whom we're at war. It's certain fundamentalists, not all of Islam.

....and if what they are saying is correct, that only 10% are radical, that's about 180 million people. I would venture to say that 85% either agree with them, or remain silent for their own safety and the last 5% that does speak up is being silenced by far-leftists with an agenda.

180 million people is more than twice our population. This is why I contend this war will last generations, but it must be fought. We only have two choices, fight or submit. Doesn't seem like the 85% not saying anything is going to do anything to reform their religion.

We have over 300 million people in the US, but that's not the point. The point is that we agree that this will take decades.

The 85% aren't saying anything to reform their religion because to them, THEIR religion (that is, how they practice it themselves) does not need to be reformed.

BTW, if we pull out of Iraq, we better close ALL borders, and I mean halt all immigration, pull all troops back to the United States, and no, not just from Afghanistan and Iraq, but Germany, Okinawa, Korea, etc., and re-populate military installations around the country, and especially near borders. We also need to tell Russia to "F" off and start building the missile-defense system. They WILL be coming after us.