community-based, non-corporate, participatory media
Absolute Heroes
by backdraft
Monday, Sep. 29, 2003 at 12:54 PM
Blair the comrade-in-arms has declared on Sunday the occupation troops as Absolute Heroes
Nerve-shattered trigger happy computer kids put their experience in shooting games into action now as mercenaries shooting on kids, women and everybody who looks like a terrorist. It's easy because the simulations burned-in into their brains the undifferentiated truth that brave soldiers have to fight against ugly terrorists dark skinned, veiled or bearded. This remote-controlled criminal mutants dead from the neck up, now pull on the trigger on slightest protest. They believe to represent the absolute good one and they get a backing from their criminal politicans that all their exploits display the 'Absolute Hero'
There is no food, no water, no current supply, no job and absolute no perspective only the total obedience from the good will of an fat, crammed, perverted and self-righteous nation and if this proud Iraqi folk want to protest there is a high probability to catch a bullet from a self-defined hero of this master race.
"No one feels safe in Iraq now and not a day goes by without more civilians being killed or injured by U.S. soldiers" Amnesty said and nobody can help the Iraqi folk against this murderer troops so for survive they have only one choice to do what Comical Bremer said
'Kill them before they kill you'
The Pest has a Name
PS:
US occupation forces have shot dead today a 10-year-old child near the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk.
Soldiers opened fire at hundreds of stone-throwing demonstrators in Hawija, west of the mainly Kurdish city Kirkuk on Monday, said a hospital director. The US raid-army did not confirm the report.
Your ignoring the facts
by hank $
Tuesday, Sep. 30, 2003 at 9:21 AM
If the Iraqi's did not want us in their country, then there would be more than a handfull of casulties every week.
All of the attacks are being conducted by Al gayda, and it is far better to fight them over there than on our soil.
The fact is that the people of Iraq perfer our occupation is better than Sadam's govt.
Your right. Rape rooms and acid dips, genitals attached to car batteries are better than the 'evil' western forces any day.
Rehire 'em
by h.s. grad
Tuesday, Sep. 30, 2003 at 9:57 AM
and the US is giving these savages their jobs back. There have been many corporate media articles about the rehiring of Iraqi cops. This will just continue the tortures that you kinky Bushmen like to revisit. So I guess it's win-win.
Brutality takes place at the local level. The ridculous notion that Hussein and his lousy kids were going door to door every night is ludicrous. It would be like blaming Bush, the Elected for the beating of Rodney King. Local cops do most of that kind of thing. As far as that goes, the US has no room to talk.
hs grad: stop crying
by hank $
Tuesday, Sep. 30, 2003 at 10:14 AM
You stupid rich kids who go to protest wearing your designer protest uniforms and sipping latte. Why don't you idiot s go and try to protest in a country like Cuba or Iran or N. Korea - or some other 'workers paradise'?
The fact is that Sadam's Fedacream were the ones going around and tourturing people and you see how they are being eliminated. And don't think for a minute that all of the people who carried out Sadam and Uday and Qusay's orders have not 'disapeared' since the fall of the Baath party. Believe that any of the torture merchants have been eliminated by Iraqs who are exacting revenge. Again, look at the facts. A few soldiers dying a week prove that there is no 'Iraq resistance', if they didn't want us around then bet that there would be thousands of Coalition dead...it just isn't happening so all of you left wing cry babys can eat it.
Go to Red China
by h.s. grad
Tuesday, Sep. 30, 2003 at 10:30 AM
hank, you should maybe relocate to one of these so-called 'workers paradises'. Like yourself, they don't take kindly to those who disagree with the gov't. It's sounds like you'd be much happier.
Read up, there's plenty of resistance. The low US/UK death rate has to do with Kevlar vests, and trauma bandages which contain platelets and clotting factor. There would be 1000's of dead if not for their gear.
to hank $'s mommy and daddy
by h. s. grad
Tuesday, Sep. 30, 2003 at 10:54 AM
You should really invest in some net-nanny type of software as your baby is at grown-up sites using bad words.
Heroes, indeed.
by Smedley Butler
Tuesday, Sep. 30, 2003 at 3:25 PM
Based on the 21st century definition of hero now interchangable with "victim", i.e. the people who died in their WTC cubicles were heroes.
Badass Green Berets see one grubby Iraqi, hide and call in an airstrike.
Heroes.
Think again HS grad (must be a city school product)
by hank $
Wednesday, Oct. 01, 2003 at 10:31 AM
Soldiers are being issued vietnam era body armor that doesn't work with todays weapons. The following editorial from the LA TIMES - i don't think that all the hundreds of thousands of soldiers over there have had relatives buy their body armour...
Why must Americans in Iraq face death because of outmoded body armor?
Suzanne Werfelman is a mother and a teacher who has been shopping for individual body armor. This is not in response to threats from her elementary-class students in Sciota, Pa.; it's a desperate attempt to protect her son in Iraq.
Like many other U.S. service members in Iraq, her son was given a Vietnam-era flak jacket that cannot stop the type of weapons used today. It appears that parents across the country are now purchasers of body armor because of the failure of the military to supply soldiers with modern vests.
Werfelman's son, Army Spc. Richard Murphy, is a military policeman in Iraq. He was also one of my law students last year before being sent off for a 20-month stint. Upon their arrival, members of Murphy's unit were shocked to learn that they would be given the old Vietnam-era vests rather than the modern Interceptor vest. (They were also given unarmored Humvees, which are vulnerable to even small-arms fire.) Military officials admit that the standard flak jacket could not reliably stop a bullet, including AK-47 ammunition, used in Iraq and the most common ammunition in the world.
Developed in the late 1990s, the Interceptor vest is made of layered sheets of Kevlar with pockets in front and back for ceramic plates to protect vital organs. These vests - one-third lighter than the old ones - have stopped machine-gun bullets, shrapnel and other ordnance.
They can mean the difference between living and dying, which was made all too clear to Sgt. Zachariah Byrd, a soldier with the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, who was shot four times with AK-47 bullets (twice in the chest and twice in his arms) when his unit was ambushed. The vest protected his chest and he survived. Byrd had been issued a standard flak jacket and, if he had been wearing it during the attack, he'd probably be dead. However, at the beginning of the patrol, his buddy who was driving that night gave his Interceptor vest to Byrd - a passing kindness that saved Byrd's life.
Others don't have the Interceptor option - including some of the soldiers in Murphy's unit who are still wearing flak jackets. Congress has received reports of soldiers killed while wearing the old flak jackets. One from a mother related how three soldiers in her son's unit were killed while wearing the outmoded vests. The unit reportedly had only 30 modern vests for 120 men. Army Staff Sgt. Dave Harris wrote a letter to Stars and Stripes that related how his friend, Mike Quinn, was killed in Fallouja. Quinn's unit didn't have enough vests, so he gave his to a young soldier. The decision saved the young soldier's life, but resulted in Quinn's death when he was shot.
The greatest shortfall in vests and plates appear to be National Guard and reserve units, though full-time soldiers like Byrd also have reported shortages. Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed last week that it would not be until December before there were enough plates for all of our people in Iraq.
Murphy's reserve unit, which initially had no modern jackets, was eventually given some Interceptor vests weeks after they arrived in Iraq, but even then the new vests were missing the essential ceramic plates. That is when Werfelman went out and bought some plates for $650 - more than her weekly salary - and sent them to her son so he'd have basic protection. Workers at one armor company she called said that they had been deluged with calls from parents trying to buy vests and plates for their sons and daughters overseas.
Of course, many soldiers do not have even empty Interceptors. When they have received plates from home, they have reportedly used duct tape to attach them to the backs of their flak jackets.
This is a dangerous practice, according to William "Butch" Hancock, who recently retired from the Army after 30 years and currently consults for Point Blank, a body armor manufacturer. He says that some of these plates are designed for front pockets and will not work in such circumstances.
In speeches, President Bush has attributed the record federal budget deficit, in part, to his insistence that U.S. soldiers have the resources they need: "My attitude is, any time we put one of our soldiers in harm's way, we're going to spend whatever is necessary to make sure they have the best training, the best support and the best possible equipment." When Bush later taunted gunmen in Iraq to "bring it on," many GIs must have nervously tugged at their obsolete flak jackets.
For many GIs, Iraq appears to be a strictly BYOB war - Bring Your Own Bulletproofs.
The shortages come down to money and priorities. In 1998, Interceptors were available and issued to armies around the world. However, the U.S. military treats the replacement of body armor as any other "general-issue item." Thus, five years ago the military brass decided to implement a one-for-one exchange of new-for-old vests over a 10-year period. The military recently moved to increase production. The belated priority given to replacing the vests is particularly shocking considering their performance in Afghanistan, where they are credited with saving the lives of 29 soldiers. This is why American mothers are mailing armored plates rather than the traditional baked goods.
It is unclear how we got into this predicament, but it is worthy of a congressional investigation - particularly when it comes to the failure to equip all military units with the modern vests before the Iraq war. After all, the military brass appears to be spending in other areas.
For example, the Air Force announced that it had cut a deal with Boeing to lease airplane tankers for billions more than it would cost to buy them outright. According to the Congressional Research Service, the Air Force will waste almost $6 billion by leasing the planes rather than buying them. Congress is looking into the deal. By comparison, outfitting all of the 150,000 soldiers in Iraq with Interceptor vest plates would cost less than $97 million at retail prices. Because many have already been outfitted, the actual cost would be a small fraction of this amount. Congress should insist that body armor be designated a "sensitive item" and that every soldier be given an Interceptor with plates without delay.
One approach might guarantee results. Any member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who does not secure such vests for his service should be required to sit at an outdoor cafe in Tikrit and drink a cup of tea while wearing an old flak jacket. That might focus the general staff on the problem more concretely.
Once the government makes sure all our soldiers receive vests, only one thing would remain: Someone should send Suzanne Werfelman $650 and an apology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Turley is a professor at George Washington Law School.
The devil can cite scripture for his own purposes
by h.s. grad
Wednesday, Oct. 01, 2003 at 12:10 PM
It's funny that the blindly obedient hank $ would cut and paste an article that was so obviously critical of his hero and object of lust, G.W. Bush.
Even the crappy vests save lives, especially with all the friendly fire from the dainty .223 that the US uses.
But don't tell me, as I am a vet. People like you and the Connecticut Cocaine Cowboy cheerlead from the sidelines and tell us how it is and was.
HS grad showing his mis education
by George K
Thursday, Oct. 02, 2003 at 11:32 AM
dodgerambler@yahoo.com
Hank does correctly make a correlation between the number of deaths and outrage against US occupation. There are more deaths in regions of the United States similar in size to Iraq than there are in Iraq. Are we supposed to hunt for some kind of mysterious reason? A conspiracy of occupation within that is obvious from the number of murders that indicates rebellion against an occupying force in those regions of the US? You know that is a silly scenario.
A majority of the citizens in Iraq want the US forces there to stabilize their country. Their country WAS one of the threats to world stabilty, plus it WAS a major violator of human decency. It is no longer since the US took ACTION. Do you understand the nature of ACTION? That there may be repercussions, but, on the whole, the outcome is GOOD?
I am done for now. I find explaining simple things over and over to simple people very tedious.
army of love
by me
Sunday, Oct. 05, 2003 at 4:15 PM
The Iraqis want the US forces there? I think you have been duped, like many people. The majority of the Iraqis are not happy with the US occupation. They are outraged and angry. The number of US soldiers killed is plenty enough to demonstrate that. There would be more if the Iraqis were not up against machine guns, bullet proof vests, and tanks.
The little fish have met the shark of the waters and have no retaliation.
For example, the toppling of the Saddam statue drew much criticism and seemed to point to the large hoax the media was pulling over our eyes.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2842.htm
http://www.funkspace.com/flipnews/propastatue.html
http://www.alternativeinsight.com/Media_Incompetence.html
Wrong Again Me
by 3Pepsis
Sunday, Oct. 05, 2003 at 4:27 PM
So the IRaqis are pissed off that the Americans removed the dictator that treated them worse than cattle on his ranch. A man nad his regime that raped for sport and profit. You are the one who has been duped. And you are the only one angry and outraged. You so hate anything American that you can not accept that this was a good thing that America had the fortitude to undertake. Why don't you try opening your eyes to sonething more than your leftist america hating bullshit. The condition of the Iraqi people is defintiely better than it was under Saddam and is improving every day. The Baathist hold outs want America to leave so they can get on with the killing and torture that kept them in power. They are not the Iraqi people. But your distaste for an America willing to undertake the responsibilities of the only superpower on earth would have you siding with the regime of a heartless despot like Saddam. ME you need help. You need a soul. You need a brain. Call the Wizard now, Dorothy.
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely...
by BraveNewWorldOrderFighter
Sunday, Oct. 05, 2003 at 5:53 PM
It is not responsible of the only superpower on earth to invade and conquer other countries and overthrow their governments, for any reason.
The responsibility of the only superpower on earth is to help defend AGAINST the invasion and conquering of smaller nations by larger, more powerful ones.
If the point was to liberate Iraq from Saddam, forgetting the erstwhile WMD, then by BushCheney's own words, that mission is accomplished. So, now it's time for our military occupation to end so Iraqis can go about their own business again. The Iraqi people own their oil wells, and if they want to blow them up to resist foreign military occupation, that's their right.
And is the USA the only superpower on earth? Remember the Russian Bear? It's ba-a-a-ack.
And don't forget China, which has one of every four people on earth...
Wrong again BNWOF
by 3Pepsis
Sunday, Oct. 05, 2003 at 6:05 PM
It is the responsibility of the only superpower to work to maintain stability. Sometimes this means protecting against invasions. Sometimes this means invasion and overthrowing a troublesome regime. BNWOF, if you were in Iraq you opinion would certainly be different, because your opposition politics lifestyle would have found you on the receiveing end of Saddam's sovereign right that you are so urgently protecting.
So, let me get this right...
by BraveNewWorldOrderFighter
Sunday, Oct. 05, 2003 at 6:43 PM
Invasion protects against invasion. Hm. Oh, yeah, I get it now. Invasion protects against invasion. Invasion protects against invasion. Why couldn't I see that? Invasion protects against invasion.
It was Bush the father who personally armed Saddam and provoked him into invading Kuwait.
When it was all over, US military forces proudly turned the retreating Iraqi army into hard black shells of bodies.
Might does not make wrong right.
It always comes back to Bush
by 3Pepsis
Monday, Oct. 06, 2003 at 2:10 AM
Look BNWOF, cut it with the sillinesss and maybe you will get it. Take a course on international politics. Or just try reading and listening without the jaundice of everything havng to be GW's fault. And yes, in the arena of world affairs, might very often does makes right.
Invasion does even protect against invasion. In fact, if we invade first it will most likely prevent the invaded from invading anyone else. Why do you think that Billl Clinton used NATO to invade the Balkans? Was it the continuing genocide in the region? NO. It was the fear in greater Europe that the conflict would escalate beyond the borders of the former Yugoslavia. And why NATO (just as an aside)? Because the UN was refusing to act. The UN had its "peacekepers" on the ground doing little more than being wiling particpants in a culture of genocide and ethnic cleansing. Yes, it took a few NATO backed airstrikes (complete with video cam shots broadcast across the internet) to subdue the murderers of that region.
Face it, the invasion of Iraq was a good thing. The removal of Saddam Hussein was a good thing. The presence of the US in the region can only work to keep the traditionally lawless leaders of the region in check. Of course, that is why the leaders of the region are so quick to send their own mercenaries (Jihadists) into Iraq to stir things up.
The Pepsi Generation
by 2beers
Monday, Oct. 06, 2003 at 5:51 AM
You should realize, Mr. Pepsis my tea-totaling friend, that these nimwits do not understand concepts such as fighting for freedom, having a backbone to support your own ethics and morality, or the fact that oppression in one part of the world begets oppression elsewhere with regimes like those in the Arab nations. Save your breath. "Might Does Not Equal Right" is the international motto of every feeble weak-ass.
BTW: All that caffeine in those colas isn't good for your health.
Iraq
by GeorgreBOOSH
Tuesday, Dec. 16, 2003 at 11:59 AM
Have any of you actaully been to Iraq , or anywhere in the Mideast for that matter? Do you even know anyone who has? Probably not. So where do you get inforamtaion from? electronic & print media. thats right. so until you've been there like a journalist and have asessed the situation for yourself mabey we should all quit talking about this like we know whats best.
Iraq. I know it well.
by 2Beers
Tuesday, Dec. 16, 2003 at 2:14 PM
GeorgeBoosh, you are wrong. I know Iraq. I know people who are in Iraq. I may not have been there "like a reported" because that would mean that I went there with a prejudice against America. But I know enough to know that the liberation of Iraq was a good thing for the world. Not as you leftists believe, that it is good to have the Iraqi people continuing to live under a regime that was supported by the UN only for prolonging their suffering.
I have not posted here for a while, and I know you all have missed me dearly. Indeed, the discourse has deteriorated and slowed to a crawl without the presence of 2Beers. I have just checking in and noticed the BraveNewWorldLook of the PGH IMC. I commend the hard work and technical effort of the IMC Editorial Collective. Very Nice. And you can easily get to the Hidden Comments. I like that. It helps keep the editorial policies in the open. Good move.
Well I have to go. However, I will not deny you all my wisdom for such long periods. I am working on a special project for IMC which I beleive you will all find useful and insightful. It should be completed soon. For now I must get back to interogating a certain Arab dictator most recently reknown for his miserably failed efforts at deep mining. Maybe he should have been dealing with the Welsh and not the French. But I must say he seems to have taken his French military lessons to heart very well, for he has mastered the art of retreat and surrender.
Don't forget to attend the IMC Christmas Party !!! Hope to see you all there.
![[masthead]](/images/masthead_140.png)