We are Retaliating For Fallujah!!!

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
We are Retaliating For Fallujah!!!
161
Mon, 04-05-2004 - 1:42pm
I am happy to see that we are doing something!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4667031/

FALLUJAH, Iraq - Hundreds of U.S. and Iraqi troops in tanks, trucks and other vehicles surrounded the turbulent city of Fallujah on Monday ahead of a major operation against insurgents blamed for the grisly slayings of four American security contractors last week.

U.S. commanders have been vowing a massive response to pacify Fallujah, one of the most violent cities in the Sunni Triangle, the heartland of the anti-U.S. insurgency north and west of Baghdad.


(For the rest of the story, click the link above)

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Wed, 04-07-2004 - 11:05am
If they can, then great.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-27-2003
Wed, 04-07-2004 - 11:37am
So you are the new spokesperson for America? You certianly don't speak for me or anyone I know.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-27-2003
Wed, 04-07-2004 - 11:46am
We did not invade Iraq because of the so called sanctions. Please check to last year when Bush was on Tv saying that whole WMD issues and that they new where where they were. Powell has even recanted that speech he made at the UN. Our real threat is OBL and now we are so wrapped in Iraq that that has placed on the back burner. I do not agree with invading Iraq. After 9/11 we had a perfect opportunity to show the world that we will not tolerate that kind of violence in America. We went after OBL and rightfully so. Then we went into IRAQ unprovoked and showed the world that we are exactly what they thought we were bullies and aggressors. We were not in any danger from Iraq. There are many other counties that have extreme dictators why Iraq?? Oil maybe because of the supposed threat against Bush Sr. or maybe because Jr. wanted to flex his muscles. Whatever the reason he now has a mess. Saddam didn't even put up a fight. Doesn't that say something to you about his threat level?
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-25-2003
Wed, 04-07-2004 - 12:19pm
<>

Lots of ugly very disturbing pictures.

Do you have any understanding of who is doing what and why?

Renee

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-25-2003
Wed, 04-07-2004 - 12:22pm
<>

And their news is filtered through their own biased media which is often not interested in presenting anything but the point of view their eletists in the government & media have decided on.

Renee

Avatar for moon627
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 04-07-2004 - 1:21pm
i hate to say it minnie but you come across sounding like a propaganda machine for the Bush administration. Doesnt it bother you in the least that in all the time that we've been in Iraq that things keep going from bad to worse ? Are you so blind in your defense of the right wing that you cant see whats going on over there ? Instead of our occupation improving relations with the Iraqi peoples their hatred of Americans escalates daily and the violence increases and more families here at home are dealing with the death of their loved ones in the military. I read the Houston newspaper article you posted from the serviceman in Iraq who also speaks for the Republican party (duh) saying how well things are going and how much the people want them there ... huh ? I'd rather hear the truth from an unbiased group or individual who is not supporting "the cause".
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-25-2003
Wed, 04-07-2004 - 1:40pm
Middle East expert Amir Taheri:

SUNDAY'S deadly riots look like the worst nightmare of Iraqis coming true: a Shiite uprising that could trigger not only a clash with the forces of occupation but also a civil war in the newly liberated country.

There is no doubt that the recently created Iraqi police force and the Coalition troops were taken by surprise, giving the armed rioters an initial advantage. For a few hours, parts of the affected cities looked like war zones. But take a deep breath: This is not the start of the much-predicted Iraqi civil war...

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04062004/postopinion/opedcolumnists/22305.htm

Pentagon advisor Austin Bay:

It's no Mogadishu, it's no Tet -- in fact, the ugly, baiting murders in Fallujah and Muqtada al-Sadr's made-for-Tv rebellion may be an extraordinary opportunity for the United States and Iraqi democrats, if the military operations and politics are handled with finesse...

http://www.strategypage.com/onpoint/articles/200446.asp

Rowan Scarborough

Sheik Muqtada al-Sadr, the fiery Iraqi Shi'ite cleric who ordered his fanatical militia to attack coalition troops, is being supported by Iran and its terror surrogate Hezbollah, according to military sources with access to recent intelligence reports...

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040407-124311-9361r.htm





Renee

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-25-2003
Wed, 04-07-2004 - 4:36pm
First, I'm not minnie.

Second, the value of the artilce was only in that it corroborates what many others with varying opinions of the war, but all with first hand experience in Iraq, have observed.

Third, the artilce was not witten by a Republican spokesperson, but by a conservative one; it's not the same thing, and in either case, it doesn't mean that it doesn't hold any value. A critical reader can easily separate the facts from the opinions.

Fouth, there is no such thing as an unbiased source, just a source who is unwilling to admit where they are coming from.

Fifth, my view of how things are going in Iraq is based on numerous first hand accounts by GIs, politicians of both parties who voted both for and against the war, journalists, and Iraqis and the expert opinions of foreign policy experts, Middle East analysts, and military advisors whom all have a track record that is worthy of respect.

Renee

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Wed, 04-07-2004 - 5:11pm
No, I'm pro-America. I couldn't possibly speak for you, nor would I want to. What was *that* all about?

minnie?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Wed, 04-07-2004 - 5:27pm
I never said anything that came remotely close to "we invaded Iraq because of the sanctions" - (nor would I since that would be a stupid thing to say). Who do you think you are arguing with? Maybe you have me confused with someone else.

Bush never said he *knew* where the WMD's were. This statement will be impossible for you to prove, but you are welcome to try if you wish. If you can, I will apologize.

We invaded Iraq after threatening to do so if Saddam didn't comply to UN resolutions. He didn't comply so we took him out of power. We gave him more than enough time to comply. This is the only reason given that we gave for invading Iraq. The other things mentioned are the *benefits*, the good things that have come out of this decision.

True, the resolutions were enacted due to the belief of the *INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY* that Saddam had something major to hide regarding WMD. It would be foolish to think that he was willing to risk so much if he were really innocent all he had to do was prove he had complied. This thinking defies all common sense or rules of logic.

Pages