BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 19 Feb 06 - 10:42 AM

By the way, where in Iran are British troops now?--just guarding the embassy in Tehran, I would think.

But I'm still waiting for the Bush apologist spin on my news about British troops in Basra.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 19 Feb 06 - 10:38 AM

Check my post of 18 Feb 2006 8:54 AM--I told you directly. I do read the Wall St Journal--and carefully.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Feb 06 - 02:49 AM

Sorry Ron, I thought that it was Iran, not Iraq, that was demanding British Troops to withdraw. Please verify source - honestly

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 Feb 06 - 08:57 AM

Honestly.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 Feb 06 - 08:56 AM

Also, I certainly hope Chris is in no danger in Basra now.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 Feb 06 - 08:54 AM

From the Wall St Journal 18 Feb 2006--"Iraq demanded British troops depart Basra, calling their presence destabilizing. London refused".

OK Teribus, Doug R, BB et al--let's hear the Pollyanna spin on this one.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Feb 06 - 04:14 AM

At thed moment a bloody great dust storm in Basrah

Wassali!! Chris

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Feb 06 - 04:38 AM

Do you mean everything and everywhere? or just the things that YOU dont like.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Feb 06 - 09:08 PM

"...change the trading of oil into another currency?"

Thats exactly what Saddam was threatening to do and you know what happened to him.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 01 Feb 06 - 03:40 PM

heres another way of looking at the war on iraq,

In 1971 when Nixon dismantled the Bretton Woods system of backing the US dollar with gold - it was essentially a tax on passed on to the rest of the world since the US dollar became devalued.

In 1972 the US agreed to support the House of Saud in return for making the US $ the currency of the oil trade.

(note that in 2000 Saddam Hussein wanted to sell oil for Euro's)

a tax on the rest of the world

again in 2004, facing the deepest deficit of any nation in history the US govt devalued the US dollar (now 50% of what it was when Bush was appointed) again this was an indirect tax on the rest of the world

another reason to change the trading of oil into another currency.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Jan 06 - 09:43 PM

The cost of this war cannot be measured in dollars unless you are Halliburton/KBR. The dollars are not going to equip the troops or re-build the infrastructure. The dollars are being lost by white collar criminals who see this as an opportunity to de-fraud the American public.

What a joke. They squander your tax dollars and spy on you at the same time.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 30 Jan 06 - 04:18 PM

since were talking about money..
initially Wolfowitz predicted this war would pay for itself from the rich Iraqi oil revenues.. of course he was totally 'offbase' (to use his own term) in his prediction..

here is what Joseph Stiglitz (the former Chief Economist of the World Bank) has to say about the cost (in a downloadable pdf) click on economic costs of Iraq war

taking into account the macroeconomic costs the conservative estimate ranges from 1 trillion to a moderate estimate of 2.23 trillion..

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Jan 06 - 02:38 PM

I gotta ask if anyone even read my link. It starts out by saying:

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates - Iraqi money gambled away in the Philippines. Thousands spent on a swimming pool that was never used. An elevator repaired so poorly that it crashed, killing people.

"A U.S. government audit found American-led occupation authorities squandered tens of millions of dollars that were supposed to be used to rebuild    Iraq through undocumented spending and outright fraud.

"In some cases, auditors recommend criminal charges be filed against the perpetrators. In others, it asks the U.S. ambassador to Iraq to recoup the money.

"Dryly written audit reports describe the Coalition Provisional Authority's offices in the south-central city of Hillah being awash in bricks of $100 bills taken from a central vault without documentation.

It describes one agent who kept almost $700,000 in cash in an unlocked footlocker and mentions a U.S. soldier who gambled away as much as $60,000 in reconstruction funds in the Philippines."

And much more. There appears to be no accountability.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Jan 06 - 02:28 PM

and more -

http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/hearings/hearing27/may.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Jan 06 - 02:23 PM

Straight from the horse's mouth"

http://democrats.senate.gov/dpc/hearings/hearing27/carter.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Amos
Date: 30 Jan 06 - 12:00 PM

Link to above Sun Times article.


A

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Jan 06 - 11:38 PM

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Jan 06 - 04:38 PM

This is what is really going on in Iraq. It has nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with political corruption and corporate profit.

http://www.suntimes.com/output/iraq/cst-nws-hall29.html

The only people I know that support what is really going on in Iraq, are those who stand to make a profit and people who fear that, because of their governments aggression, might fear terrorists.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Jan 06 - 04:23 PM

"Those deficiencies were so significant that we were precluded from accomplishing our stated objectives," the auditors said of U.S. officials in Hillah being unable to account for $97 million of the $120 million in Iraqi oil revenues earmarked for rebuilding
projects." - from the article posted above.

The worst I have heard is that Halliburton is serving contaminated water.

So much for re-building. Most of the money went to security.

For this the Iraqis are supposed to be grateful.

So what if they have no water or electricity. They have U.S. style democracy.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Jan 06 - 03:21 PM

I'm downright ashamed of us.

Ha! Don't Make Me Laugh.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 12 Jan 06 - 10:23 PM

3 Dec 2005 12:21 PM--- I said:    "Especially significant will be how content the Sunnis are after the election--particularly if--as is likely--they propose amendments to the constitution which are all defeated..."

12 Jan 2006 (today)--Wall St Journal- front page----"An Iraqi Shiite leader vows his ruling bloc won't permit any substantive changes to the constitution. Promise of such amendments enticed Sunnis into political participation."

If this is not just political jockeying prior to forming a government, it does not sound good.

We'll see.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Stephen L. Rich
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 08:53 PM

What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
Nothing. Why? Don't you believe our leaders?

Stephen Lee

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: TIA
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 10:42 AM

On December 3, 2005, Ron Davies said

..."the real question will be what happens after the December election."

Yes, and we had all hoped it would not be this .

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 07:23 AM

Oh c'mon LH, let him use it. You'll take all the fun out it--then we'll all have to go back to reading, helping out around the house, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 01:14 AM

Wolfgang -

You'll have to be a little more specific.

Your use of sarcasm is baffling.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 12:41 AM

"forfend", Teribus?

That's a word that is used strictly to patronize people, heap derision on their heads, and put them down, isn't it? A word that implies that they are useless gits with nothing of value to say about anything...a word that is spoken with a contemptuous curl of the mustachio'd lip.

When I hear it used, it seems to summon up the vision of a hand (the hand of your erstwhile opponent, of course) daintily holding a teacup, with his little finger sticking out.

"Oh, heaven forfend that blah, blah, blah...."

If you say it again, we shall have to get someone to slap your face, my lad, for showing such thoughtless cheek to your peers.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: number 6
Date: 11 Jan 06 - 12:01 AM

The war (sacrifices) in Iraq is all about bringing democracy and freedom to that nation ... and last week Microsoft concedes to the Chinese government in blocking out any websites (using their product Netscape in China)that questions the totalitarian regime of that country. ...HuH ?!?!?

Americans are very contradicting and very confusing.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 11:20 PM

Gee, Teribus, so sorry not to respond to you earlier. And I can't tell you how it hurts me that you don't like my criticism of Bushites for citing editorials and columns as authorities.

Maybe you can find someone to explain to you the difference, in reputable media at least, between editorials and actual reporting.   Of course if your main sources are such stalwarts as Fox News, the Washington Times and the like, you wouldn't have much contact with reputable media. So it's understandable that you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between editorials and reporting.

I assure you the Wall St Journal is a good-- or even better-- newspaper. Therefore there is a clear distinction between the editorials and the reporting. Pardon me for preferring the reporting as a reliable source.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 10 Jan 06 - 06:13 AM

I wonder if some people who have contributed fanciful interpretations of the attack on the Sunni leaders have questioned their judgement retrospectively when seeing or hearing yesterday's news:

Two suicide terrorists wearing security uniforms and showing security identification have killed 29 people, most of them police, and al Qaeda, signed Zarqawi, has boasted to be responsible for that attack.

Is someone willing to amuse me by arguing that this attack too has been done by police or army claiming to be insurgents and wearing official uniforms just to fool the world into thinking they must be insurgents...?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Dec 05 - 09:18 AM

Ron Davies - 03 Dec 05 - 11:26 AM

Perhaps Ron could supply us all with a list of approved reading sources. Then, heaven forfend, should we disagree with anything stated in those sources so close to Ron's heart, he can ask us to back up or arguements with the relevant sources, and because they are not on his list he can dismiss them.

That works well up to a point, it completely falls down when you refer to the text Ron's approved reading sources were reporting on. It is the media that puts on the spin, it does that to sell, Ron hasn't cottoned onto that yet, hopefully he will.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: dianavan
Date: 04 Dec 05 - 12:38 AM

Iraqi troops have cleared one third of Baghdad and the terrorist-controlled cities of Fallujah, Mosul and Tal Afar?

One-third means two thirds to go.

That the U.S. cleared the cities is not in doubt. I think it was criminal. Whether it did any good, remains to be seen.

Its 'the remains to be seen bit', that worries me.

Was Lieberman trying to make a joke?

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Dec 05 - 12:10 AM

Yes, I said those things. But what I am talking about is the agendas people have now, and that they want to implement in the future. What you put in the post to which I referred, happened in the past. Learn the difference between those two things, and you'll understand my last post. Time will tell whether or not I am right.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Dec 05 - 10:53 PM

CarolC - 03 Dec 05 - 08:04 AM

Teribus, unless you are trolling (and I tend to think you are), I really can't see any reason why you would include my name in your 03 Dec 05 - 07:32 AM post.

Hey CarolC - I wasn't the one that came out with the following bullshit as the second post in the thread!!

CarolC - 23 Nov 05 - 02:17 PM

Some of the people who wanted the US and other Western countries to invade Iraq (and destroy Saddam's government) want Iraq to dissolve into smaller units (like in the Balkans). Those people want the various religious and ethnic groups in Iraq to be fighting each other. So my guess is that at least some of the kind of stuff you have reported here in this thread is an effort by these people to create the conditions that will have that result (of splitting Iraq up). And I also think that they are probably some of the people who are agitating for the US to withdraw from Iraq now.

There are other people who want the US to maintain a continual, long term presence in Iraq, in the form of a puppet government and permanent military bases, for the purpose of controling Iraq's oil resources. I think these people are the ones who are saying we should stay the course and finish the job.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Dec 05 - 12:21 PM

As I've said elsewhere, the real question will be what happens after the December election.

Will Iraqis, having participated in the election, expect magical improvement in all aspects of their lives--and therefore be bitterly disappointed when it doesn't happen? (24-hour electricity, for instance).

Especially significant will be how content the Sunnis are after the election--particularly if--as is likely-- they propose amendments to the constitution which are all defeated. ( And amendments are a certainty--since the constitution itself only postponed many crucial questions of governing.)

If the Sunnis then increase support of the insurgents, all this supposed progress could be easily undone.

Everybody wants the US troops home--but they may have to come home leaving behind chaos in Iraq, despite what Bush now says.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 Dec 05 - 11:45 AM

From Mr. Lieberman's speech: "The Sixth Infantry Division of the Iraqi Security Forces now controls and polices more than one-third of Baghdad on its own. Coalition and Iraqi forces have together cleared the previously terrorist-controlled cities of Fallujah, Mosul and Tal Afar, and most of the border with Syria. Those areas are now being "held" secure by the Iraqi military themselves. Iraqi and coalition forces are jointly carrying out a mission to clear Ramadi, now the most dangerous city in Al-Anbar province at the west end of the Sunni Triangle."

Let's hope he is correct. However, recent developments in Fallujah, Mosul and Tal Afar don't bode well.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 03 Dec 05 - 11:26 AM

Doug R, Teribus et al.--

Wall St Journal editorials and columns frequently do nothing but parrot the Bushite line (or accuse him of not being conservative enough.)

Citing a Journal column as supporting Bush therefore proves nothing.

Try branching out for once and reading the actual Journal reporting--which very often directly contradicts the editorial line.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Dec 05 - 08:04 AM

Teribus, unless you are trolling (and I tend to think you are), I really can't see any reason why you would include my name in your 03 Dec 05 - 07:32 AM post.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Dec 05 - 07:32 AM

Dianavan & CarolC,

For your information. You know those evil PSA's that Dianavan mentioned whereby all those big bad Western Oil Companies are forcing the Iraqi Government to sign, in order to "steal" Iraq's natural resources.

Well research, indicates that only three have ever been signed with regard to Iraq oil fields:
- Lukoil (Russian) when Saddam Hussein was in power
- Total (French) when Saddam Hussein was in power
- DNO (Norwegian) see below

OSLO (AFX) - The Norwegian oil company DNO ASA said it has begun oil prospecting in Iraqi Kurdistan, in what Norway's media said was the first drilling by a foreign group since the 2003 fall of Saddam Hussein's regime.

DNO said drilling in the Tawke 1 well is expected to take 60 days to reach a depth of 3,000 metres in a zone that is believed to contain three separate oil reserves.

The company, which is the operator of the block and has a 40 pct stake, said this was the first oil exploration undertaken following a production sharing agreement signed with the Kurdish authorities in June 2004.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Dec 05 - 06:50 AM

Ebbie - 29 Nov 05 - 05:42 PM

Lieberman Article WSJ

"Our Troops Must Stay"
America can't abandon 27 million Iraqis to 10,000 terrorists.

BY JOE LIEBERMAN
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood--unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.

Progress is visible and practical. In the Kurdish North, there is continuing security and growing prosperity. The primarily Shiite South remains largely free of terrorism, receives much more electric power and other public services than it did under Saddam, and is experiencing greater economic activity. The Sunni triangle, geographically defined by Baghdad to the east, Tikrit to the north and Ramadi to the west, is where most of the terrorist enemy attacks occur. And yet here, too, there is progress.

There are many more cars on the streets, satellite television dishes on the roofs, and literally millions more cell phones in Iraqi hands than before. All of that says the Iraqi economy is growing. And Sunni candidates are actively campaigning for seats in the National Assembly. People are working their way toward a functioning society and economy in the midst of a very brutal, inhumane, sustained terrorist war against the civilian population and the Iraqi and American military there to protect it.

It is a war between 27 million and 10,000; 27 million Iraqis who want to live lives of freedom, opportunity and prosperity and roughly 10,000 terrorists who are either Saddam revanchists, Iraqi Islamic extremists or al Qaeda foreign fighters who know their wretched causes will be set back if Iraq becomes free and modern. The terrorists are intent on stopping this by instigating a civil war to produce the chaos that will allow Iraq to replace Afghanistan as the base for their fanatical war-making. We are fighting on the side of the 27 million because the outcome of this war is critically important to the security and freedom of America. If the terrorists win, they will be emboldened to strike us directly again and to further undermine the growing stability and progress in the Middle East, which has long been a major American national and economic security priority.

Before going to Iraq last week, I visited Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Israel has been the only genuine democracy in the region, but it is now getting some welcome company from the Iraqis and Palestinians who are in the midst of robust national legislative election campaigns, the Lebanese who have risen up in proud self-determination after the Hariri assassination to eject their Syrian occupiers (the Syrian- and Iranian-backed Hezbollah militias should be next), and the Kuwaitis, Egyptians and Saudis who have taken steps to open up their governments more broadly to their people. In my meeting with the thoughtful prime minister of Iraq, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, he declared with justifiable pride that his country now has the most open, democratic political system in the Arab world. He is right.

In the face of terrorist threats and escalating violence, eight million Iraqis voted for their interim national government in January, almost 10 million participated in the referendum on their new constitution in October, and even more than that are expected to vote in the elections for a full-term government on Dec. 15. Every time the 27 million Iraqis have been given the chance since Saddam was overthrown, they have voted for self-government and hope over the violence and hatred the 10,000 terrorists offer them. Most encouraging has been the behavior of the Sunni community, which, when disappointed by the proposed constitution, registered to vote and went to the polls instead of taking up arms and going to the streets. Last week, I was thrilled to see a vigorous political campaign, and a large number of independent television stations and newspapers covering it.

None of these remarkable changes would have happened without the coalition forces led by the U.S. And, I am convinced, almost all of the progress in Iraq and throughout the Middle East will be lost if those forces are withdrawn faster than the Iraqi military is capable of securing the country.

The leaders of Iraq's duly elected government understand this, and they asked me for reassurance about America's commitment. The question is whether the American people and enough of their representatives in Congress from both parties understand this. I am disappointed by Democrats who are more focused on how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq almost three years ago, and by Republicans who are more worried about whether the war will bring them down in next November's elections, than they are concerned about how we continue the progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead.

Here is an ironic finding I brought back from Iraq. While U.S. public opinion polls show serious declines in support for the war and increasing pessimism about how it will end, polls conducted by Iraqis for Iraqi universities show increasing optimism. Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year from now than they are today. What a colossal mistake it would be for America's bipartisan political leadership to choose this moment in history to lose its will and, in the famous phrase, to seize defeat from the jaws of the coming victory.

The leaders of America's military and diplomatic forces in Iraq, Gen. George Casey and Ambassador Zal Khalilzad, have a clear and compelling vision of our mission there. It is to create the environment in which Iraqi democracy, security and prosperity can take hold and the Iraqis themselves can defend their political progress against those 10,000 terrorists who would take it from them.

Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do. And it is important to make it clear to the American people that the plan has not remained stubbornly still but has changed over the years. Mistakes, some of them big, were made after Saddam was removed, and no one who supports the war should hesitate to admit that; but we have learned from those mistakes and, in characteristic American fashion, from what has worked and not worked on the ground. The administration's recent use of the banner "clear, hold and build" accurately describes the strategy as I saw it being implemented last week.

We are now embedding a core of coalition forces in every Iraqi fighting unit, which makes each unit more effective and acts as a multiplier of our forces. Progress in "clearing" and "holding" is being made. The Sixth Infantry Division of the Iraqi Security Forces now controls and polices more than one-third of Baghdad on its own. Coalition and Iraqi forces have together cleared the previously terrorist-controlled cities of Fallujah, Mosul and Tal Afar, and most of the border with Syria. Those areas are now being "held" secure by the Iraqi military themselves. Iraqi and coalition forces are jointly carrying out a mission to clear Ramadi, now the most dangerous city in Al-Anbar province at the west end of the Sunni Triangle.

Nationwide, American military leaders estimate that about one-third of the approximately 100,000 members of the Iraqi military are able to "lead the fight" themselves with logistical support from the U.S., and that that number should double by next year. If that happens, American military forces could begin a drawdown in numbers proportional to the increasing self-sufficiency of the Iraqi forces in 2006. If all goes well, I believe we can have a much smaller American military presence there by the end of 2006 or in 2007, but it is also likely that our presence will need to be significant in Iraq or nearby for years to come.

The economic reconstruction of Iraq has gone slower than it should have, and too much money has been wasted or stolen. Ambassador Khalilzad is now implementing reform that has worked in Afghanistan--Provincial Reconstruction Teams, composed of American economic and political experts, working in partnership in each of Iraq's 18 provinces with its elected leadership, civil service and the private sector. That is the "build" part of the "clear, hold and build" strategy, and so is the work American and international teams are doing to professionalize national and provincial governmental agencies in Iraq.

These are new ideas that are working and changing the reality on the ground, which is undoubtedly why the Iraqi people are optimistic about their future--and why the American people should be, too.

I cannot say enough about the U.S. Army and Marines who are carrying most of the fight for us in Iraq. They are courageous, smart, effective, innovative, very honorable and very proud. After a Thanksgiving meal with a great group of Marines at Camp Fallujah in western Iraq, I asked their commander whether the morale of his troops had been hurt by the growing public dissent in America over the war in Iraq. His answer was insightful, instructive and inspirational: "I would guess that if the opposition and division at home go on a lot longer and get a lot deeper it might have some effect, but, Senator, my Marines are motivated by their devotion to each other and the cause, not by political debates."

Thank you, General. That is a powerful, needed message for the rest of America and its political leadership at this critical moment in our nation's history. Semper Fi.

Mr. Lieberman is a Democratic senator from Connecticut.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: dianavan
Date: 02 Dec 05 - 10:46 PM

What's really going on?

In case you missed this link from a guest on another thread:

http://www.rainews24.rai.it/ran24/inchiesta/video/fallujah_ING.wmv

You'll need a strong stomach but anyone who thinks that what the U.S. and its allies in Iraq have done and continue to do to the civilians, must know what happened in Fallujah.

Doesn't anyone ever wonder why no film or documentation or news ever came out about Fallujah? It was an atrocity committed by the U.S. It is ironic that we deposed Saddam because of false imprisonment, torture and chemical weapons but guess what? George Bush is doing the same thing.

Iraq is not a better place, its just as bad or worse.

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 Dec 05 - 04:05 AM

So will I find it on FOX, Doug? Or in the Washington Times? Or in Bill's Fear Factor?

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: DougR
Date: 01 Dec 05 - 11:04 PM

I'm not surprised that you could not find the Wallstreet Op-Ed piece written by Senator Lieberman by googling it, Ebbie. The mainstream press has largely ignored his report on conditions in Iraq because they have no interest in reporting positive things that are going on there.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 01 Dec 05 - 07:11 AM

Perhaps this is what is really going on in Iraq?:
U.S. Occupation Is Worse Than Hussein

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 Dec 05 - 06:41 AM

This place is a Discussion Forum

Forum and Aginem...

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: TIA
Date: 30 Nov 05 - 06:02 PM

Fir is clearly the opposite of agin

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Bobert
Date: 30 Nov 05 - 05:10 PM

"Fir" is simply fir as in what "fir" ya ask???

Yeah, you can tell that some folks is gettin' wored down arguin' fir why we is in Iraq-mire and now they gonna start pickin' on spellin' an' such...

Geeesh!!!

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST,David
Date: 30 Nov 05 - 09:01 AM

Wot is "fir?"

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Nov 05 - 09:00 AM

What is fir

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Bobert
Date: 30 Nov 05 - 08:23 AM

Dianavan makes a very interesting point in pointing out that Mr Chalibi has somehow positioned himself to be making decisions about the future of Iraq'a oil reserves... Hmmmmmmmmm

Given the fact that it was Mr Chalibi who was a source of so much of the bogus so called "intellegence" that got the US into Iraq-mire, and given the bogus governemnt that the US/Uk have put in power, and given the fact that Mr. Chalibi hadn't evn lived in Iraq-mire in two decades, isn't it now concieveable that...

... the US is in Iraq-mire fir Mr. Chalabi???

Heck, all the other excuses have turned out to be LIES...

Hey, I could live with that... Well, no I couldn't but I'd much rather Bush just get on the TV and say, "Ahhhh, I've lied about why we are in Iraq. We're there for oil and we got our boy Chalabi right where we need him..."

Yeah, at least that would be leveling with the American people fir a change!!!

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: What's REALLY Going on in Iraq?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 30 Nov 05 - 08:10 AM

Susanne Osthoff and the Christian peacemaker teams have both been mentioned in an article posted by robomatic (thanks for that). It won't help her if she is in the hands of the wrong group, but Ms. Osthoff is Muslim since long.

Wolfgang