Originally posted by pastorT

lilpixieofterror,

Thank you for your service to our country. I lost a son-in-law in 2002 in a training accident preparing for Iraq. He was in the army and stationed in Germany. My daughter has since remarried another military man and he is in his twelfth year of service.

I'm so sorry. It must have been so hard on you both.

Pastor T

Would you be so kind to explain in detail why we are fighting a Mideast war? What does Afghanistan have to do with fighting terrorists? Sure, Osama bin Laden was suspected to have taken cover there. IIRC the Taliban actually offered to arrest him for us, but Bush said no.

There's hardly any evidence Saddam had anything to do with al Qaida. If you disagree would you care to point it out? As for WMDs, you're the one full of crap.

I'm sorry for your loss.

Augustine, I am still wondering how you think the US military runs. Do you really think that we train day and night to go out and shoot people?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Augustine, I am still wondering how you think the US military runs. Do you really think that we train day and night to go out and shoot people?

I'm sorry I put you off, but I'm looking at the results. Must I repeat them?

Much more than 1 million Iraqi civilians killed. 3-5 million Iraqi refugees or displaced people. The numbers in Afghanistan may be comparable when adjusted for population size. Now we're threatening Iran and doing battle in Pakistan. People in the latter country are getting mad at the USAF, are they not? I have not looked into how many homes were destroyed, but there must be God Almighty many. Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Pakistan are among the poorest countries on earth despite tremendous oil wealth.


Your stupid crack about the Taliban not being able to mount a major military operation shows an obtuseness I am beginning to despair I could overcome. Google 4G war sometime? Vietnam?

Originally posted by Augustine2004

I'm sorry I put you off, but I'm looking at the results. Must I repeat them?

More standard soundbies eh?

Much more than 1 million Iraqi civilians killed. 3-5 million Iraqi refugees or displaced people.

That is highly exaggerated and something else that your hero took that he liked without getting the facts. Check out the UN official web site, they estimate about 100,000 killed for both wars (and I might add, that is counting terrorist who blow themselves up in marketplaces). 3 to 5 million are refugees? Can I see a source on that?

The numbers in Afghanistan may be comparable when adjusted for population size. Now we're threatening Iran and doing battle in Pakistan.

There has been plans to invade Iran since the 70's and yet... have we invaded Iran? There was also plans to invade the USSR and yet... did we ever invade the USSR? Nope. As for Pakistan, you do know that the Pakistan government has asked for aid because they are unable to deal with a serious threat of terrorism in their boarders, right? Are you also aware that Pakistan has nuclear weapons and the Pakistani government is having serious problems right now? Might want to stop letting Lew Rockwell tell you everything and start researching the facts for yourself.

People in the latter country are getting mad at the USAF, are they not?

People are also stupid and let the media tell them things they like to hear. Do you seriously think all that happens over there is bombs and things blowing up? There are many areas in both countries that have been fighting free for months on end.

I have not looked into how many homes were destroyed, but there must be God Almighty many. Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Pakistan are among the poorest countries on earth despite tremendous oil wealth.

I didn't know that Afghanistan and Pakistan had large oil reserves, when where they discovered? Just so you are aware, Afghanistan and Pakistan have been among the poorest countries for centuries and blaming it on the US is silly. As for Iraq, Saddam destroyed the economy of the country and sent it into ruins. The US has to rebuild one country (Afghanistan) that hasn't had a stable government or economy for centuries and Iraq was deviated by a mad man known as Saddam. Again, stop letting Lew Rockwell tell you what is going on and try to look up the facts for yourself.

Your stupid crack about the Taliban not being able to mount a major military operation shows an obtuseness I am beginning to despair I could overcome. Google 4G war sometime? Vietnam?

Just like in Vietnam the major problem is that the American pubic is stupid and politicians that don't have a clue are running the war. In Vietnam, the North Vietnamese army was in shambles and barely holding together. They knew they couldn't win the war on the battle field, so instead they fought the war in New York and basically fooled the American public into puressuring the military out. Same thing is going on here, you are not hearing the full story and letting mass exaggeration take over. Check the UN website for yourself, I have been looking for those numbers you reported and I can't find them published by the UN, the Iraqi government, nor the US government. Yet they are still reported, why?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

More standard soundbies eh?

Is this typical of how you disagree with things, eh?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

That is highly exaggerated and something else that your hero took that he liked without getting the facts. Check out the UN official web site, they estimate about 100,000 killed for both wars (and I might add, that is counting terrorist who blow themselves up in marketplaces). 3 to 5 million are refugees? Can I see a source on that?

I took the highest estimate that I could find. If you know REALLY KNOW the amount of exaggeration, we can arrive at a number we know REALLY KNOW to be accurate. However, I don't think you really know. You probably don't know that most deaths in Iraq and probably also in Afghanistan go undocumented because of the nature of the societies there and of war. So, if we have 100,000 documented deaths, but 5 or 10 deaths are undocumented for every documented deaths, then we have 600,000 to `1100,000 deaths.

I'm puzzled why you couldn't find the refugee numbers. Those are UN numbers for god's sake! Try again.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

There has been plans to invade Iran since the 70's and yet... have we invaded Iran? There was also plans to invade the USSR and yet... did we ever invade the USSR? Nope. As for Pakistan, you do know that the Pakistan government has asked for aid because they are unable to deal with a serious threat of terrorism in their boarders, right? Are you also aware that Pakistan has nuclear weapons and the Pakistani government is having serious problems right now? Might want to stop letting Lew Rockwell tell you everything and start researching the facts for yourself.

My god, have you no inkling that we're carrying out military operations in Iran right now? I didn't say Iraq. I said IraN.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

People are also stupid and let the media tell them things they like to hear. Do you seriously think all that happens over there is bombs and things blowing up? There are many areas in both countries that have been fighting free for months on end.

What has the media been saying? For the most part it supports the war, as far as I can tell.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

I didn't know that Afghanistan and Pakistan had large oil reserves, when where they discovered?

Good point, I overstated things. However, prosperity requires peace.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Just so you are aware, Afghanistan and Pakistan have been among the poorest countries for centuries and blaming it on the US is silly.

To be sure, it's not all our fault.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

As for Iraq, Saddam destroyed the economy of the country and sent it into ruins. The US has to rebuild one country (Afghanistan) that hasn't had a stable government or economy for centuries and Iraq was deviated by a mad man known as Saddam. Again, stop letting Lew Rockwell tell you what is going on and try to look up the facts for yourself.

What you say is true to some extent. However, again, prosperity requires peace.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Just like in Vietnam the major problem is that the American pubic is stupid and politicians that don't have a clue are running the war. In Vietnam, the North Vietnamese army was in shambles and barely holding together.

How can you say that, within years they were able to conquer South V, though they had weapons we left them.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

They knew they couldn't win the war on the battle field,

True, we did have a huge edge in firepower.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

so instead they fought the war in New York and basically fooled the American public into puressuring the military out. Same thing is going on here, you are not hearing the full story and letting mass exaggeration take over. Check the UN website for yourself, I have been looking for those numbers you reported and I can't find them published by the UN, the Iraqi government, nor the US government. Yet they are still reported, why?

You still don't understand 4G war. Wars must be won quickly and fairly cleanly. Otherwise, it's just not worth the tremendous financial stress, the psychological stress, the medical problems (PTSD, etc.) and other problems (poverty, etc.). Why the heck do you think the financial markets are collapsing? Just for the fun of it?



So far, nothing. I guess I gotta carry the water once again.


OK, then. Why the heck are we fighting these wars in the Mideast?

1. To capture or kill terrorists. That’s a goal that even I can applaud. However, we have to do that so that it does not create more terrorists. It’s the very height of folly if we kill 10,000 terrorists but there are the same number of terrorists at the end of the day as, or 5,000 more than, the beginning of the day. If there were 300 terrorists in the morning, we kill 200 of them but in the process create 400 more, then at the end of the day terrorists number 500. Progress, ha!

2. To create democratic societies in the Mideast. Probably if you were asked, “What is democracy?” you’d say something like, “Any sort of government whereby the people rule themselves.” Well, phooey. Look at the actual results. What nation does not have a ruling class and a ruled class? That includes the United States. Look at the polls: Most people don’t want the wars. Yet we continue to fight. Why? The ruler class want the wars. They’re getting filthy rich from them. They have power.

Our Founding Fathers didn’t want democracy. They sought to create a constitutional republic. Note the emphasis. Nobody was to rule. They failed, abysmally, unfortunately. The only thing that would work is, the people desire the ideal of Liberty and Justice for All and are willing to do whatever is necessary to bring us ever closer to it. The Maybury precepts would be good ones for everybody to practice.

People in the Mideast have been getting ‘democracy’ stuffed down their throats for decades now and are choking on it. So, what you would call terrorists are in reality freedom fighters - people who are trying to get rid of us democrats.

3. To prevent things from going to hell in the Mideast. What a load of poppycock. Sure, Iraq and Iran fought a bloody war, but the USA was an active instigator. Later we changed policy and went after the Taliban and Saddam, probably because the ruling class wanted war. A part of the ruling class, the neocons, probably also thought they could remake the world by force of arms.

We raised bloody hell there, and are continuing to do so. Today, Afghanistan and Iraq are wrecks of nations.

I do concede it’s reasonable to assume that sectarian or intramural war will continue or even escalate if we withdraw. OK. However, by withdrawing all our forces from the overseas bases, we can save God Almighty bucks. We can even pay the warring parties in the Mideast to make peace. Why not? We’re already paying the Sunni not to attack our boys and girls, and it seems to be working so far.

4. To grab the oil for the world’s benefit. I don’t know about you but I certainly don’t support that goal. It’s better stated, “To shed Muslim blood for the oil.”

5. To create better societies. What a load of ******. I’m not going to say any more.

6. Anything else?

Originally posted by Augustine2004

Is this typical of how you disagree with things, eh?

Back up your claims, got one.

I took the highest estimate that I could find. If you know REALLY KNOW the amount of exaggeration, we can arrive at a number we know REALLY KNOW to be accurate. However, I don't think you really know. You probably don't know that most deaths in Iraq and probably also in Afghanistan go undocumented because of the nature of the societies there and of war. So, if we have 100,000 documented deaths, but 5 or 10 deaths are undocumented for every documented deaths, then we have 600,000 to `1100,000 deaths.

So we just make up numbers on the spot to make our argument seem more valid.

I'm puzzled why you couldn't find the refugee numbers. Those are UN numbers for god's sake! Try again.

Really? Funny I read their web site a few months ago and didn't see it anywhere. Source please.

My god, have you no inkling that we're carrying out military operations in Iran right now? I didn't say Iraq. I said IraN.

Do you have any proof we do?

What has the media been saying? For the most part it supports the war, as far as I can tell.

Yeah, whatever.

Good point, I overstated things. However, prosperity requires peace.

Yeah, whatever this comes from.

To be sure, it's not all our fault. What you say is true to some extent. However, again, prosperity requires peace.

Ever read about the extent of terror that Saddam and the Taliban brought the people of their respective nations? We're still finding mass graves over 5 years after the invasion.

How can you say that, within years they were able to conquer South V, though they had weapons we left them. True, we did have a huge edge in firepower. You still don't understand 4G war. Wars must be won quickly and fairly cleanly.

Wars of this nature (like this war and Vietnam) are not going to fast, quick, or can be precisely planned. This war is fought in battles spread out by an enemy that will not come out and fight in a full battle because they know they can't win. So what they do is small attacks in which they hit and run away before their forces can be destroyed. What you fail to understand is this enemy knows that a head to head battle is something they would quickly loose at, so instead they do hit and run missions so that we can't bring our massive fire power to bear upon them. That is the idea and it seems the America people don't understand that.

Otherwise, it's just not worth the tremendous financial stress, the psychological stress, the medical problems (PTSD, etc.) and other problems (poverty, etc.). Why the heck do you think the financial markets are collapsing? Just for the fun of it?

The financial markets collapsing has zero to do with the war and has to do with lenders giving out loans to people who couldn't pay for them. The war has given people jobs who wouldn't have jobs and if you look at the numbers of those KIA, MIA, WIA, etc you'll discover that more people died in one year in Vietnam, Korea, or WWII than have died in the 7 years this one has gone on. So yet again it seems you just don't understand how this war is being fought and how it will be won. These groups know the US doesn't like a long drawn out war, so that is what their goals are... draw out it to the point where the US backs out.

1. To capture or kill terrorists. That’s a goal that even I can applaud. However, we have to do that so that it does not create more terrorists. It’s the very height of folly if we kill 10,000 terrorists but there are the same number of terrorists at the end of the day as, or 5,000 more than, the beginning of the day. If there were 300 terrorists in the morning, we kill 200 of them but in the process create 400 more, then at the end of the day terrorists number 500. Progress, ha!

Isn't it amazing that groups grow over time? Gosh... what is next... the US is going to grow in population by 2010?

2. To create democratic societies in the Mideast. Probably if you were asked, “What is democracy?” you’d say something like, “Any sort of government whereby the people rule themselves.” Well, phooey. Look at the actual results. What nation does not have a ruling class and a ruled class? That includes the United States. Look at the polls: Most people don’t want the wars. Yet we continue to fight. Why? The ruler class want the wars. They’re getting filthy rich from them. They have power.

Most Americans are stupid and have quickly forgot what happened 7 years ago it appears. Also, polls can be made to say anything you want, if you know who to ask and what to ask (after all, in 1948 the polls said that Dewy was going to win against Truman). Rich people are getting richer? Yep, that must be why the US economy is slowing down and many of these rich boys are finding themselves in hot water. More nosense i see.

Our Founding Fathers didn’t want democracy. They sought to create a constitutional republic.

Democracy in our modern sense means a republic.

Note the emphasis. Nobody was to rule. They failed, abysmally, unfortunately. The only thing that would work is, the people desire the ideal of Liberty and Justice for All and are willing to do whatever is necessary to bring us ever closer to it. The Maybury precepts would be good ones for everybody to practice.

I've never been in jail or arrested for doing something that the government doesn't like. But whatever you'd like to tell yourself.

People in the Mideast have been getting ‘democracy’ stuffed down their throats for decades now and are choking on it. So, what you would call terrorists are in reality freedom fighters - people who are trying to get rid of us democrats.

One persons terrorist is another persons freedom fighter. The same can be said for anybody fighting for a cause. Robert E Lee is seen as a terrorist by the North, but in the south to this day he is seen as a hero. This is just one example of many.

3. To prevent things from going to hell in the Mideast. What a load of poppycock. Sure, Iraq and Iran fought a bloody war, but the USA was an active instigator. Later we changed policy and went after the Taliban and Saddam, probably because the ruling class wanted war. A part of the ruling class, the neocons, probably also thought they could remake the world by force of arms.

The USSR gave away plenty of weapons themselves and most of the weapons being used against the US today do not say 'made in USA' they say, 'made in USSR'. I do love your fear mongering about 'the ruling class' in the US. That is pretty rich.

We raised bloody hell there, and are continuing to do so. Today, Afghanistan and Iraq are wrecks of nations.

They were wrecks of nations in the 1950's as well. Saddam sent Iraq into a hole and Afghanistan has been the playground of superpowers for centuries. Thanks for blaming the US on things it didn't do.

I do concede it’s reasonable to assume that sectarian or intramural war will continue or even escalate if we withdraw. OK. However, by withdrawing all our forces from the overseas bases, we can save God Almighty bucks. We can even pay the warring parties in the Mideast to make peace. Why not? We’re already paying the Sunni not to attack our boys and girls, and it seems to be working so far.

Might want to read up on what happened last time we tried that idea. It lead to this little thing known as WWII.

4. To grab the oil for the world’s benefit. I don’t know about you but I certainly don’t support that goal. It’s better stated, “To shed Muslim blood for the oil.”

Last I checked, gas prices were still over 2.50 all over the US. Please show that the US has got one drop of oil from Iraq as a result of this war.

5. To create better societies. What a load of ******. I’m not going to say any more.

Right. I guess you are unaware of the history of these nations.

6. Anything else?

I think you are quite done showing us that you haven't got the slightest clue how things work and how things are going over there. Any other silly thing you like to add?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

So we just make up numbers on the spot to make our argument seem more valid.

The organization that supplies the estimate claims that it derives that from surveys of households.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Really? Funny I read their web site a few months ago and didn't see it anywhere. Source please.

Don't you know how to use Google? This is not the refugee estimate but where I got the million deaths http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq/iraqdeaths.html

This is more than a year ago. If you want a more recent estimate, I'll go look, but I doubt things have changed much. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6339835.stm

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Do you have any proof we do?

Who does, Miss "I'm in the military, you're not"?


What, if any, TV news have you been watching?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Yeah, whatever this comes from.

I'm not sure what you're saying? From aggression, particularly an aggressive foreign policy, comes prosperity? Is that what you're thinking?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Ever read about the extent of terror that Saddam and the Taliban brought the people of their respective nations? We're still finding mass graves over 5 years after the invasion.

That would be in Iraq? Whatever, I do admit Saddam and the Taliban are not nice guys. Cheney and Bush aren't either. It's been suggested that some of the 'terror' in the Mideast were CIA operations or the results of them. I don't have as you put it 'proof', by which I think you really mean evidence of an arbitrarily high standard that is impossible to meet.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Wars of this nature (like this war and Vietnam) are not going to fast, quick, or can be precisely planned. This war is fought in battles spread out by an enemy that will not come out and fight in a full battle because they know they can't win. So what they do is small attacks in which they hit and run away before their forces can be destroyed. What you fail to understand is this enemy knows that a head to head battle is something they would quickly loose at, so instead they do hit and run missions so that we can't bring our massive fire power to bear upon them. That is the idea and it seems the America people don't understand that.

Except for the last sentence, you do seem to have some glimmering of what 4G war is. One problem is that we do bear our firepower on something all too often. Too indiscriminately and injudicously. We can't expect our boys and girls to just stand there and take fire. The best thing is to just withdraw, and let the people have at each other.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

The financial markets collapsing has zero to do with the war and has to do with lenders giving out loans to people who couldn't pay for them.

You simply have no idea how hugely expensive the wars have been and are.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

The war has given people jobs who wouldn't have jobs

What would happen if there were no wars? A huge jobless problem. Boy, you sure need an economics education.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

and if you look at the numbers of those KIA, MIA, WIA, etc you'll discover that more people died in one year in Vietnam, Korea, or WWII than have died in the 7 years this one has gone on. So yet again it seems you just don't understand how this war is being fought and how it will be won. These groups know the US doesn't like a long drawn out war, so that is what their goals are... draw out it to the point where the US backs out.

Once again those Muslim civilians don't count. if 23 million people die there, and all of them are Iraqi and Afghani, what's that to us? You've stated the goals quite accurately. So, what's the point? 100 years from now? 1,000 years from now? We're entering a Great Depression now, I'm afraid, partly as a result of the war. Sigh.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Isn't it amazing that groups grow over time? Gosh... what is next... the US is going to grow in population by 2010?

You seem not to understand what I wrote. First, do you agree we are there to kill terrorists?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Most Americans are stupid and have quickly forgot what happened 7 years ago it appears.

What a stupid statement, unless you were joking. If you were joking, I'm not amused.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Rich people are getting richer? Yep, that must be why the US economy is slowing down and many of these rich boys are finding themselves in hot water.

How is that responsive to my charge that many people in the ruling class are war profiteers?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Democracy in our modern sense means a republic.

Well that's not how the Founding Fathers viewed things, AFAICS. If you're not interested in what their thinking is, say so.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

I've never been in jail or arrested for doing something that the government doesn't like. But whatever you'd like to tell yourself.

Blah, blah, blah. 3 repetitions.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

They were wrecks of nations in the 1950's as well. Saddam sent Iraq into a hole and Afghanistan has been the playground of superpowers for centuries. Thanks for blaming the US on things it didn't do.

Are you denying that our foreign policy has been rather aggressive? Imperialist, even?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Might want to read up on what happened last time we tried that idea. It lead to this little thing known as WWII.

Huh? You mean the charge of appeasement? YOU read Patrick J Buchanan's book The Unnecessary War. He points out that by the time Chamberlain flew to Munich, British was hardly ready to take on Germany. Precious few fighters, for example.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Last I checked, gas prices were still over 2.50 all over the US. Please show that the US has got one drop of oil from Iraq as a result of this war.

You need to pay more attention to the news. Didn't our august leaders talk about using revenues from the sale of Iraqi oil to pay for things?

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

Right. I guess you are unaware of the history of these nations.

It takes a moral people to create a good society. We Americans are not moral. Too socialist and too imperialist. In fact I'd say the majority of Iraqi is more moral than the majority of Americans. You are just pfft!

Is it true, that Taliban attacks are beginning on the port of Karachi? That Karzai offered an olive branch to the Taliban? NATO’s secretary general NATO’s secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer admitted the war could only be ended by negotiations, not military means?

“The US and NATO forces in Afghanistan are essentially pipeline protection troops fighting off the hostile natives.

“Both Barack Obama and John McCain are wrong about Afghanistan. It is not a "good" fight against "terrorism," but a classic, 19th-century colonial war to advance western geopolitical power into resource-rich Central Asia. The Pashtun Afghans who live there are ready to fight for another 100 years. The western powers certainly are not.

“As that great American founding father Benjamin Franklin said, ‘there is no good war, and no bad peace.’ Time for the West to face reality in Afghanistan.” http://www.lewrockwell.com/margolis/margolis125.html

Lpo Terror pooh-poohed my assertion that the MSN is by and large a conduit for government propaganda. Here’s an example that she may be able to check out: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...es/023527.html

I’d be quite interested in her thoughts about this op-ed: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...es/023528.html I think this title would be more correct: “The Strafing of San Francisco.”

I’m quite curious what LPO Terror’s feelings would be if she read the following all the way to actually viewing the clip from “All Quiet on the Western Front” to the bitter end.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...es/023539.html

Some time ago LPO Terror brought up railroads in an effort to bolster her case. Unfortunately for her, the railroad boom is similar to the housing boom, whose bust is a major factor in our current financial difficulty.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff231.html

IIRC, LPO Terror said something to the effect that the sub prime mess is partly because of people who should not have taken loans in the first place. That’s true, but how ever did they manage to get those in the first place? Did they go into banks with guns and force the bank officials to grant loans? Nay, nay, my little girl. http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...es/023574.html

Possibly another guy for LPO Terror to emulate. http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...es/023593.html Note: the article cites the NY Times, so it’s not all Lew Rockwell. If LPOT wants to dispute the facts of the case, she will have to dispute the NY Times.


ETA: More noise, more risk of loss of life or limb: http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewr...es/023598.html

Sorry Augustine, like I said I'm not going to read anymore stupid articles by that liar known as Lew Rockwell. When you can show me a reliable news source written by reliable people, I'll follow it for now I find your ranting a waste of my time and not worth the effort.