Skip to main content

Why They Hate Us: Some Examples
Sunday, February 4th in News by Eric Garris | WATCH VIDEO

YouTube gives some examples of why Iraqis may have a less than positive view of US occupiers. I am not only amazed at what some of these videos show, but also the fact that the soldiers who shot the videos were apparently proud of their behavior.

Driving in Baghdad
first saw this one on MSNBC. Col. Jack Jacobs explained that this is the way US forces in Iraq are now trained to drive in Baghdad.

Number 2 video, Soldiers Taunt Kids With Water

US soldiers conduct “kid races” where they use precious clean drinking water in the same way they use the fake rabbit at the greyhound races.

http://antiwar.com/blog/

number 3 video.US Soldiers Punish Looters of Firewood
Original Post
The video of the soldiers driving is an example of typical leftist propaganda. Iraqis are supposed to yield right of way to military vehicles the same way we do with emergency vehicles. Do we know if that unit was on the way to help fellow soldiers in combat? Are they rushing a wounded soldier or Iraqi to a hospital? No, all we see are the mean soldiers bumping other cars. Did you ask yourself any of those questions or did you simply assume they were just mean?

As for the second video the soldiers are acting immature. They're 18-20 year olds, this is typical frat boy behavior. What they're doing is wrong, but is this the majority of soldiers' behavior? I don't think so.

The third video is narrated. We have no way to prove if the narration is correct. As an editor I know how easy it is to make video appear as something it's not. What we do hear is a soldier scolding a looter for bringing his kid with him, telling him the kid should be in school.

You say you support our troops, yet you slam them every chance you get. Instead of filling your brain with propaganda and hate, find some positive things to say about the men and women who are doing their duty. I'll help you get started.

http://www.operationiraqichildren.org/

"November 1 , 2006 A New Jersey National Guard unit delivered Operation Iraqi Children supplies to a local school with around 500 students in village outside of Balad, Iraq on October 16, 2006. During the distribution, a member of the unit spoke to a local official about a possible expansion of the crowded school."

"October 2 , 2006 LTC Brett Hale of Tennessee and his unit helped to deliver OIC supplies to Iraqi children in a village school north of Baghdad."

"May 18 , 2006 Soldiers from Company B, 1-8 Combined Arms Battalion Distribute Supplies Sent by Operation Iraqi Children

In an effort to decrease mortar and rocket attaches on the city of Balad, Iraq, soldiers recently conducted a patrol in the southern part of the city. With them, they brought School Supply Kits and stuffed animals from OIC, to demonstrate their desire to assist the children and families."

http://www.iraqischools.com/

"Despite the conditions, they will continue to hold classes. In many respects, the Iraqis put a greater premium and priority on education than we do in the US. The problem lies in the lack of resources and infrastructure. Under Sadam's regime, resources were used as a weapon to influence and control the people. Even water and electricity were engineered such that he could turn it on and off as a way of rewarding those who supported him, while punishing those he did not trust.

Our soldiers have had to endure a full spectrum of emotions and feelings, not to mention hazards while confronting the task of improving the schools. We do what we can with what we have, but it is difficult at best given our situation. Perhaps the most difficult part for many of our soldiers is balancing the desire to truly help the Iraqi people, and even more so the children with the hopeless frustration of acquiring the resources to do the job. To many of us, there is an endless list of those who would advertise to help, but in the end these bureaucrats are seemingly more interested in getting their name in the press than they are getting the job done."
1.Here you go Accusing me of being agaisnt our troops, Not True! 2. You put up a link that shows the good side of Iraq and what our troops have done,this is good if its not just PR to fool the American people.OH, SO,YOU SAY The video of the soldiers driving is an example of typical leftist propaganda. Iraqis are supposed to yield right of way to military vehicles the same way we do with emergency vehicles.How do you know this and can you back that up? OH,Thats right, I forget we dictate Iraq. You know Iraq has been driving the way they were use to for so long, they just have not caught on the way we do things here in America. Yes,I'am so glad I get my self out of the way,because them there cops just might knock me out of the way. Hey,did you like the other two video's? you did'nt say anything about them. How did you like the part when those troops were teasing the kids with water, the kids wanted water and guess what they didn't get any clean water.Well what the heck just kids that was suppost to be in a class room on a soldiers lap getting their picture taken to send back to sell the war to American.

You call my post the left propagada but you can't prove it. The Right Wing is and has been propaganda for years,the people in the south are waking up slow but better than never. you know whats going on in Iraq but you shut your eyes to it. the truth always comes out, sometimes too late.

Anyone dat dares to talk bad about r prezident is one of them there unamerikan Liberals...
Last edited by Jan55
quote:
1.Here you go Accusing me of being agaisnt our troops, Not True!


Then why post something so obviously slanted against them? Anyone with half a brain can see that site is trying to make our troops look like criminals. Are you supporting the troops by posting something like that?

quote:
2. You put up a link that shows the good side of Iraq and what our troops have done,this is good if its not just PR to fool the American people.


Provide evidence that proves the sites I posted are fictitious as you claim.

quote:
Iraqis are supposed to yield right of way to military vehicles the same way we do with emergency vehicles.How do you know this and can you back that up? [/quote

I have family who has been to Iraq and driven in exactly those situations. I've heard about that first hand, not from a propaganda web site.

[quote]You call my post the left propagada but you can't prove it.


Again, you obviously did not read what I've written in the first post. I did prove it and very easily. I used common sense. I questioned the validity of what I saw and could very clearly tell the videos were misrepresented. If you thought for yourself for once you could see the same thing. You cannot say you support our troops and post slanderous garbage like that. If that's not hypocrisy, I don't know what is. Learn to think on your own instead of being spoon fed your opinions.
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
quote:
1.Here you go Accusing me of being agaisnt our troops, Not True!


Then why post something so obviously slanted against them? Anyone with half a brain can see that site is trying to make our troops look like criminals. Are you supporting the troops by posting something like that?

quote:
2. You put up a link that shows the good side of Iraq and what our troops have done,this is good if its not just PR to fool the American people.


Provide evidence that proves the sites I posted are fictitious as you claim.

quote:
Iraqis are supposed to yield right of way to military vehicles the same way we do with emergency vehicles.How do you know this and can you back that up? [/quote

I have family who has been to Iraq and driven in exactly those situations. I've heard about that first hand, not from a propaganda web site.

[quote]You call my post the left propagada but you can't prove it.


Again, you obviously did not read what I've written in the first post. I did prove it and very easily. I used common sense. I questioned the validity of what I saw and could very clearly tell the videos were misrepresented. If you thought for yourself for once you could see the same thing. You cannot say you support our troops and post slanderous garbage like that. If that's not hypocrisy, I don't know what is. Learn to think on your own instead of being spoon fed your opinions.


NashBama
I am personally astounded by your apparent attitude. EVEN IF YOU FAVOR THE AGGRESSION AGAINST IRAQ, HOW CAN YOU RATIONALIZE GRATITUTOUS BRUTALITY.
It would seem that you will defend anythng a uniformed soldier does to anyone and say you support the perpetrator.

IT IS SUPPORT OF THE TROOPS THAT LEADS TO PUNISHING THOSE WHO COMMIT THESE ATROCITIES.
I am in shock at so many posts of false patriotism. Simply because one puts on a uniform does not excuse any and all acts persons do while wearing that said uniform.
What you say nash is correct of what our soldiers endure,BUT MAYBE that is a key factor for those of power pushing this war should consider, what this is doing to our uniformed men!
Building schools? I am absolutly sick of even hearing about this. Iraq is a very wealthy country,,WHERE is their monies? WHERE are their men that should be doing the labor to build these schools? Our soldiers are now construction workers? I am sorry but in every film,yes even those shown by the precious RIGHT always shows perfectly healthy Iraqian men just sitting around.I have yet to see any PROOF of the Iraqi peoples doing one thing for themselves! Are we now going extending our welfare programs internationally?
The third film looks almost like a propagada film made to show Iraqis want happens when if you loot. But why make it if it can be turned against you?

As for the driving film, like Nash said, we have no idea where these soldiers are going or what they are doing. I would imagine in every war the US has been in, the soldiers have driven like madmen. A moving target is harder to hit. From personnal experience, watch out when two US convoys meet.

I can't condone being mean to kids anywhere, but, agian like Nash said, it's no different than a stupid frat boy stunt.

I didn't see any "atrocities" in these three videos.
To EdKit, please actually read my posts before you respond. I can't actually respond to you if you aren't reading it in the first place.

To Smurph, Iraq is not a wealthy country. They made a lot of money but it was all controlled by Hussen. He and his family built lavish palaces while his people starved. Now that he's gone, his people will start to see the wealth they were deprived of for so long. It takes time to repair that kind of damage.
By Lisa Myers & the NBC investigative unit
NBC News
Updated: 3:17 p.m. CT Feb 17, 2005
After the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the United States took control of all of the Iraqi government’s bank accounts, including the income from oil sales. The United Nations approved the financial takeover, and President Bush vowed to spend Iraq’s money wisely. But now critics are raising serious questions about how well the United States handled billions of dollars in Iraqi oil funds.

Iraq's oil resources generate billions of dollars — money the United States promised to protect after overthrowing Saddam Hussein.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6621523/

Go read this entire article
besides that Saddam has not been in power for several years now,where is their oil money going? maybe private American oil companies perhaps?
Sure Iraq has been mishandled and serious mistakes made, but things are better now than they were when Saddam was still in power. The infranstructure of the country was on the verge of collapse because he was hording all the money. It costs a lot to rebuild a country's infranstructure from the ground up. Are there people getting a cut of the pie who aren't supposed to, I have no doubt.
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
To EdKit, please actually read my posts before you respond. I can't actually respond to you if you aren't reading it in the first place.

To Smurph, Iraq is not a wealthy country. They made a lot of money but it was all controlled by Hussen. He and his family built lavish palaces while his people starved. Now that he's gone, his people will start to see the wealth they were deprived of for so long. It takes time to repair that kind of damage.


Until the NEXT one comes in to build his Empire.
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:

quote:
2. You put up a link that shows the good side of Iraq and what our troops have done,this is good if its not just PR to fool the American people.


Provide evidence that proves the sites I posted are fictitious as you claim.



Oh, my! We're bordering on an "argumentum ad ignorantiam" argumentative fallacy on both sides here! Now it gets interesting. Carry on.
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
quote:
1.Here you go Accusing me of being agaisnt our troops, Not True!


Then why post something so obviously slanted against them? Anyone with half a brain can see that site is trying to make our troops look like criminals. Are you supporting the troops by posting something like that?

quote:
2. You put up a link that shows the good side of Iraq and what our troops have done,this is good if its not just PR to fool the American people.


Provide evidence that proves the sites I posted are fictitious as you claim.

quote:
Iraqis are supposed to yield right of way to military vehicles the same way we do with emergency vehicles.How do you know this and can you back that up? [/quote

I have family who has been to Iraq and driven in exactly those situations. I've heard about that first hand, not from a propaganda web site.

[quote]You call my post the left propagada but you can't prove it.


Again, you obviously did not read what I've written in the first post. I did prove it and very easily. I used common sense. I questioned the validity of what I saw and could very clearly tell the videos were misrepresented. If you thought for yourself for once you could see the same thing. You cannot say you support our troops and post slanderous garbage like that. If that's not hypocrisy, I don't know what is. Learn to think on your own instead of being spoon fed your opinions.


You are full of the far right bull!!

Censorship by the tyranny of the few ... The religious right does it; they want to stop us from watching our TV shows and ...Censorship Iraq, what they don't know want hurt them.I'am not for Censorship like you are nash.
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
Sure Iraq has been mishandled and serious mistakes made, but things are better now than they were when Saddam was still in power. The infranstructure of the country was on the verge of collapse because he was hording all the money. It costs a lot to rebuild a country's infranstructure from the ground up. Are there people getting a cut of the pie who aren't supposed to, I have no doubt.


Why don't you tell that to our dead troop's family? IT WOULD TAKE SOME BIG AND I MEAN BIG BALLS TO TELL THE FAMILY WHAT AND HOW YOU THINK. Anyway where do you get your facts on all is well in 1raq? fox news
quote:
Originally posted by smurph:
By Lisa Myers & the NBC investigative unit
NBC News
Updated: 3:17 p.m. CT Feb 17, 2005
After the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the United States took control of all of the Iraqi government’s bank accounts, including the income from oil sales. The United Nations approved the financial takeover, and President Bush vowed to spend Iraq’s money wisely. But now critics are raising serious questions about how well the United States handled billions of dollars in Iraqi oil funds.

Iraq's oil resources generate billions of dollars — money the United States promised to protect after overthrowing Saddam Hussein.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6621523/

Go read this entire article
besides that Saddam has not been in power for several years now,where is their oil money going? maybe private American oil companies perhaps?



Good post!!

Post Traumatic Stress effected tens of thousands of returning vets and many went untreated. They do have problems with violence, especially domestic violence and incarceration and homelessness.

We were not attacked by Iraq and the war is a lie. It was promoted by what are termed "Chicken Hawks." The list of those who did and did not serve is highly enlightening. The majority of those who are the loudest and most emphatic war hawks never served at all. The Democrats who did serve are portrayed by the right wing and in the media as "unpatriotic" and weak. Yet the record shows it is actually the majority of democrats that served and not the war hawks, or "Chicken Hawks" as they are referred to.

Granted, there are Chicken Hawks on both sides of the aisle but we find more democrats served then republicans.

Our government is corrupted by corporate money and power and controls both parties. The corporate republicans led the way to the Iraq War but the spineless corporate democrats followed. It's happening again with Iran.
quote:
I'am not for Censorship like you are nash.


Umm, I work in television. Why would someone who works in television be in favor of government censorship? FCC regulations are enough of a headache, and you think I want more government involvement? Another example of you being completely off the mark because you're simply not using your head. Besides, I never said anything about censorship, this post was about slanderous propaganda about our soldiers.

When someone is proven wrong, they either admit it, ignore it, or attack it. These recent posts show that you are choosing the last option. Once again you've proved Robert Kennedy correct.

"What is objectionable, what is dangerous, about extremists is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents. "
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
quote:
I'am not for Censorship like you are nash.


Umm, I work in television. Why would someone who works in television be in favor of government censorship? FCC regulations are enough of a headache, and you think I want more government involvement? Another example of you being completely off the mark because you're simply not using your head. Besides, I never said anything about censorship, this post was about slanderous propaganda about our soldiers.

When someone is proven wrong, they either admit it, ignore it, or attack it. These recent posts show that you are choosing the last option. Once again you've proved Robert Kennedy correct.

"What is objectionable, what is dangerous, about extremists is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents. "


FCC regulations are not like they use to be. Long time ago,I would have agree with you,not this time.FCC regulations is no where as strong as it was. Our government is corrupted by corporate media,money and power and controls both parties. corporate media CONTROLS IT All!They will not tell us the Truth until the people demand it.
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
Pretty sad attempt at changing the subject, I guess you're going for the second option now. Besides, after Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction, the FCC cracked down. That hasn't let up. Potentially offensive content is just the tip of the iceberg, the FCC does more than just bleep cuss words.



>>>>I never said anything about censorship, this post was about slanderous propaganda about our soldiers.<<<<
you say my post is propaganda right? Then Prove it!!!! All you can do is,knock any site that you don't agree with. Are you saying if its not from fox news then its not Bible, I mean not true? You post your rightwing stuff and I will post my stuff and let the readers decide for themselfs.You think and act like a right winger,you will say anything is propaganda, if it goes against what you think. you don't want people to see the facts, the otherside of the coin. They might not vote the way you like, if they could see the truth.



Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction, the FCC cracked down LOL!!

I bet you watched it!!! I bet you said mmmmm

So, you call that the big crack down? you don't get it do you?
I haven't mentioned Fox news or the Bible on this thread, why did you mention it?

When have I posted an article from an extreme right wing web site?

You disagree that the FCC cracked down after the Janet Jackson incident? Read for yourself.

http://broadcastengineering.com/news/networks-courts-fcc-indecency/

I'll help you out a little.

"Legal filings last Wednesday followed one by CBS to the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia on Monday challenging the $550,000 fine levied by the FCC after Janet Jackson’s “costume malfunction” during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show. CBS told the court the FCC’s new “zero tolerance” policy for indecent broadcasts is threatening to stifle free speech, and “is flatly inconsistent with the bedrock principle that First Amendment freedoms require breathing space to survive.” "

So explain to me what it is that you think I don't get?
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
I haven't mentioned Fox news or the Bible on this thread, why did you mention it?

When have I posted an article from an extreme right wing web site?

You disagree that the FCC cracked down after the Janet Jackson incident? Read for yourself.

http://broadcastengineering.com/news/networks-courts-fcc-indecency/

I'll help you out a little.

"Legal filings last Wednesday followed one by CBS to the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia on Monday challenging the $550,000 fine levied by the FCC after Janet Jackson’s “costume malfunction” during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show. CBS told the court the FCC’s new “zero tolerance” policy for indecent broadcasts is threatening to stifle free speech, and “is flatly inconsistent with the bedrock principle that First Amendment freedoms require breathing space to survive.” "

So explain to me what it is that you think I don't get?


Prove to me that my post is propaganga,and I will explain what you don't get.
what tha crap does Janet Jackson doing a staged boob shot have to do with this subject?????
I doubt very seriously you are going to find anything anywhere in main stream media addressing the mental shape our soldiers are returning, mostly caused by conditions over there,,and certainly not the rise in the number of suicides!
When there are videos, and stories similiar to the ones posted in the original thread everyone wants to jump on that bandwagon of discrediting, and screaming lefty,lefty,lefty
WHAT is friggin LEFT,(or right for that matter) about bad behavior by some of our soldiers? EVERYONE should be concerned,reguardless of party affiliation!
quote:
Prove to me that my post is propaganga,and I will explain what you don't get.


Already did, apparently you didn't get it.

Janet Jackson and the FCC really has nothing to do with the original subject, just pba's attempts at trying to change the subject once he's been proven wrong.

I agree that soldiers are suffering mentally from what they experience in Iraq, I've seen it first hand. More should be done to help them deal with such traumatic experiences, instead the military expects them to rejoin society as if nothing happened. That's just not right.

As for the videos, only one shows soldiers behaving inappropriately and what they did wasn't even that serious. The others were examples of people trying to misrepresent the facts in order to slander the soldiers.
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
quote:
Prove to me that my post is propaganga,and I will explain what you don't get.


Already did, apparently you didn't get it.

Janet Jackson and the FCC really has nothing to do with the original subject, just pba's attempts at trying to change the subject once he's been proven wrong.

I agree that soldiers are suffering mentally from what they experience in Iraq, I've seen it first hand. More should be done to help them deal with such traumatic experiences, instead the military expects them to rejoin society as if nothing happened. That's just not right.

As for the videos, only one shows soldiers behaving inappropriately and what they did wasn't even that serious. The others were examples of people trying to misrepresent the facts in order to slander the soldiers.



you mean Nash's attempts at trying to change the subject once he's been proven wrong.

look I can't play your games,sorry you are lonely,but you must find someone else to play with.
I will go back and see if you proved any propaganda,just to be sure.But you have been ask each time on every post,and so far you can't prove anything. go watch the 700 club with your buddy Pat.
NashBama, pba,

CHILL chillllll

pba, you're are looney liberal. That is what everybody knows, I am too. Everybody knows that as well.

Nashbama, You're a radical reactionary, That is what everybody kows.


That out of the way, Get Back on the issue. SOME US SOLDIERS ARE COMMITTING CRIMES. SOME ARE COMMITTING ACTS OF KINDNESS.

All of them are commiting these acts in a war zone. Crime and Kindness and just general mayhem and collateral damage are ALL being commited under the COVER OF THE US FLAG.

NashBama you consistantly come to the defense of the American Soldier who commits mayhem. EVERY TIME

pba brings up ONLY MAYHEM

I find both of your positions objectionable, no reasonable purpose is served by bringing up mayhem, and none is served by defending it.

GET TO THE POINT FELLAS, TELL ME WHY YOU OPPOSE THE WAR, pba

TELL ME WHY YOU SUPPORT IT, NashBama
quote:
Originally posted by smurph:
I am in shock at so many posts of false patriotism. Simply because one puts on a uniform does not excuse any and all acts persons do while wearing that said uniform.
What you say nash is correct of what our soldiers endure,BUT MAYBE that is a key factor for those of power pushing this war should consider, what this is doing to our uniformed men!
Building schools? I am absolutly sick of even hearing about this. Iraq is a very wealthy country,,WHERE is their monies? WHERE are their men that should be doing the labor to build these schools? Our soldiers are now construction workers? I am sorry but in every film,yes even those shown by the precious RIGHT always shows perfectly healthy Iraqian men just sitting around.I have yet to see any PROOF of the Iraqi peoples doing one thing for themselves! Are we now going extending our welfare programs internationally?




Actually when Saddam seized power in 79 he began a program of building Iraq into a modern secular western style country. He spent the treasury on building an infrastructure to promote economic development, education for both men and women, and culture like archtectural buildings, Museums and such, which were looted in his fall while US troops stood by and watched. They did however protect the oil ministry. A fact that did not go by unnoticed by the Iraqi people. He did also build lavish Palaces for himslef and his family and ruled with an iron fist. He allowed no dissent. Most, not all, but most of his atrocities were committed when he was a US ally during the 1980's.

Saddam wanted Iraq to be the leader and "Jewel" of the Mideast. A place that Lebanon had once held before it's civil war.

The reason the people were starving was US/UN imposed UN sanctions after the first Gulf War that destroyed the country. They targeted the people to force "regime change." They were a war crime which killed a million people, half a million children.
It was one of the reason bin Laden stated in his first tape after the 9/11 attacks. The sanctions and "Foreign Troops" occupying Palestine.

The sanctions restricted Iraq's ability to rebuild it's economy and caused severe shortages but according to the UN Saddam made sure the food was distributed equally. He was repressive but he wasn't stupid and knew the purpose of the sanctions. Instead of forcing the people to rise up they caused the Iraqi people to rally together. He continued to build Palaces, as well as his military, and began a program of building Mosques. He was secular and had no tolerance for religious extremists and was known to deal with them brutally but he also knew when times were tough people seek comfort in religion. he also used it as a propoaganda techique to show he was a Muslim and it was a binding force in Iraq and the region.

Though food and medicine were in short supply the majority of the people died due to drinking contaminated water. Under the sanctions Iraq was prohibited from obtaining Chlorine to purify it's water. It was a deliberate policy by the Pentagon, again, targeting civilians. They bombed the water purification plants then denied them chemicals to purify their water. Mostly the weak, elderly and children died. Half a million children. When asked on the program "60 Minutes" was the death of half a million children worth the price of the sanctions Madeline Albright responded, "Yes, we think it's worth the price."

After the US invasion the society basically collapsed and the majority of Iraqi's still have not seen the country provide it with security or the basic services while gasoline and food prices have risen ten fold. The rebuilding was left to US companies that charged twice as much as Iraqi contractors who brought in outside workers while Iraqi's went unemployed. Most projects were either not completed or the work was done shoddily and inadequately. It was nothing but a huge rip-off of tax payer money.

After the first Gulf War, despite sanctions, Saddam was able to have basic services of electric and sanitation within the first year and continued to rebuild the infrastructure to have as much basic services as possible.

The reason for the invasion was to control the oil. If Saddam would have sold out his country and allowed US bases in the regionand privatized the oil he would still be president.
quote:
you mean Nash's attempts at trying to change the subject once he's been proven wrong.

look I can't play your games,sorry you are lonely,but you must find someone else to play with.
I will go back and see if you proved any propaganda,just to be sure.But you have been ask each time on every post,and so far you can't prove anything. go watch the 700 club with your buddy Pat.


First of all, I don't watch the 700 club and I think Pat Robertson is a right wing extremist nut. The only difference between the 700 club and the crap sites you post is that one is on the left, the other the right. Both are radical and both skew facts in an effort to promote their political agenda. You are no different than the 700 club viewer, both of you are allowing yourselves to be brainwashed.

quote:
you mean Nash's attempts at trying to change the subject once he's been proven wrong.


Second, reversal of an argument is a sign of mental weakness. It's the "I know you are but what am I" trick, that's pretty sad.

Third, I am anything but a radical reactionary. I did not defend the American soldier who commits mayhem, I did just the opposite. If you read my posts you would understand that.

Lastly, I have never said I support the war in Iraq. I have said countless times that the situation has been mishandled. I do think it was the right decision to take out Saddam's regime, what the administration has done since has been a complete mess.

Why is it that the two people who disagree with me so vehemently don't actually read what I write? I should let my wife see that someone said I watch the 700 club, she'll get a kick out of that.
Nash I think you missed an obvious point on PBA's propaganda...It is from a site called antiwar.com. If George Bush was wielding his almighty staff of censorship do you think any of this would be out? Do you think he would have his dismal approval ratings? I am sorry he didn't kiss Lefty butt and your feelings are hurt.
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
quote:
you mean Nash's attempts at trying to change the subject once he's been proven wrong.

look I can't play your games,sorry you are lonely,but you must find someone else to play with.
I will go back and see if you proved any propaganda,just to be sure.But you have been ask each time on every post,and so far you can't prove anything. go watch the 700 club with your buddy Pat.


First of all, I don't watch the 700 club and I think Pat Robertson is a right wing extremist nut. The only difference between the 700 club and the crap sites you post is that one is on the left, the other the right. Both are radical and both skew facts in an effort to promote their political agenda. You are no different than the 700 club viewer, both of you are allowing yourselves to be brainwashed.

quote:
you mean Nash's attempts at trying to change the subject once he's been proven wrong.


Second, reversal of an argument is a sign of mental weakness. It's the "I know you are but what am I" trick, that's pretty sad.

Third, I am anything but a radical reactionary. I did not defend the American soldier who commits mayhem, I did just the opposite. If you read my posts you would understand that.

Lastly, I have never said I support the war in Iraq. I have said countless times that the situation has been mishandled. I do think it was the right decision to take out Saddam's regime, what the administration has done since has been a complete mess.

Why is it that the two people who disagree with me so vehemently don't actually read what I write? I should let my wife see that someone said I watch the 700 club, she'll get a kick out of that.



You don't read what we write! lol
quote:
Originally posted by dkn:
Nash I think you missed an obvious point on PBA's propaganda...It is from a site called antiwar.com. If George Bush was wielding his almighty staff of censorship do you think any of this would be out? Do you think he would have his dismal approval ratings? I am sorry he didn't kiss Lefty butt and your feelings are hurt.


Nash,gets all up set if I post something that he don't agree with. So, Nash would like to have censorship on the forum.I agree Bush did not kiss Butt's of The Right or Left! Bush had and still has a rubber stamp!
quote:
Originally posted by NashBama:
To EdKit, please actually read my posts before you respond. I can't actually respond to you if you aren't reading it in the first place.

To Smurph, Iraq is not a wealthy country. They made a lot of money but it was all controlled by Hussen. He and his family built lavish palaces while his people starved. Now that he's gone, his people will start to see the wealth they were deprived of for so long. It takes time to repair that kind of damage.


NashBama,

I NEVER RESPOND TO ANYTHING I HAVE NOT READ. FOR ONE THING I AM NOT CAPABLE OF THAT. I HAVE TO READ IT TO RESPOND TO IT.

NashBama I cannot help it that you don't know the meaning of the things you say.

NashBamaIs it your belief that BLIND SUPPORT OF THE TROOPS REQUIRES YOU TO BLINLY SUPPORT ATROCITIES? You are at the very least attacking pba for bringing atrocities to your attention. And accusing him of being unsuportive of troops who take teddy bears to little children.

When you can find it in your heart to ATTACK ATTROCITIES COMMITED BY OUR TROOPS,I WILL RETRACT THIS.
quote:
Originally posted by dkn:
Nash I think you missed an obvious point on PBA's propaganda...It is from a site called antiwar.com. If George Bush was wielding his almighty staff of censorship do you think any of this would be out? Do you think he would have his dismal approval ratings? I am sorry he didn't kiss Lefty butt and your feelings are hurt.

dkn, antiwar.com is not just some site full of loonies. But that's not the point. HAVE YOU SEEN ANY OF THE EXAMPLES ON THE NETWORKS, OR ON Cable news. Censorship is NOT only a matter of government, it is also a personal thing. Why you censor yourself all the time. How do I know, EVERYONE DOES. The reason everyone does is exemplified by the rather infantile battle going on over who and what it means to support the troops.

AS A VETERAN, and I mention that fact occasionally, I DEEPLY RESENT THE "THANKS FOR SERVING US" COMMENTS THAT OFTEN FOLLOW.
I would stop people from saying that, may have stopped a few with that one remark, and that's censorship.

Bush has terrible ratings becaus of antiwar.com, and dozens of like sites. Bush has terrible ratings because he is obviously rewarding cronies, and penalizing the "commoners." Bush has low ratings for the same reason some Kings had low ratings and severed heads. HE IS UNCOMPASSIONATE, AND SELF CENTERED AND ARROGANT.
First of all, I never said I want censorship on the forum due to ideas. I don't get upset when someone doesn't agree with me, it's when someone isn't reading my responses or not smart enough to understand them that bugs me.

quote:
I NEVER RESPOND TO ANYTHING I HAVE NOT READ. FOR ONE THING I AM NOT CAPABLE OF THAT. I HAVE TO READ IT TO RESPOND TO IT.


Ok, let's see how well you've been reading. I wrote...

"What they're doing is wrong, but is this the majority of soldiers' behavior? I don't think so."

You respond...

"I am personally astounded by your apparent attitude. EVEN IF YOU FAVOR THE AGGRESSION AGAINST IRAQ, HOW CAN YOU RATIONALIZE GRATITUTOUS BRUTALITY.
It would seem that you will defend anythng a uniformed soldier does to anyone and say you support the perpetrator."

Does that response fit my original statement? Doesn't look like it. So apparently you either did not read my post or you simply missed the point.

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×