Bush Back
With King Bush confirmed for a second reign, I expect that the impending assault on Fallujah, long delayed and postponed, will now get a green light. It was patently obvious that he wanted to delay the spectacle of several hundred US troops and several thousand Iraqis being slaughtered until after the elections. But there isn’t much time left before January, when the Iraqi elections are apparently scheduled to occur…
Hey Damian. It’s been at least four years since I used tghat email. Where have you been? I can’t list the real email here or website crawlers will find it and start spamming it. I am sorry but your email address has now probably been forwarded to five billion spammers by now.
Why not upload the photo to one of the photo sharing websites – that way you just have to send (or post) a link.
Mike
“the spectacle of several hundred US troops being slaughtered” is not a demonstrable fact, as none have been killed in the assult on Fallujah, and certainly hundreds have not been slaughted — just like big pink fluffy bunnies, it doesn’t exist, and, therefore, my comparison holds.
Given the historical record I can reasonably ascribe a non-zeri probability to the liklihood of the deaths of severla hundred Coalition troops.
However, there is no evidence with which to extrapolate the existence of big pink invisible fluffy bunnies, or Sky Gods. Or Fire Gods for that matter. Therefore the current probability of their existence in the future is zero.
Given that the majority of humans believe in God, to put the probabilty at zero would be typical arrogance in assuming that you are 100% correct and the majority are 100% wrong. Good open-minded demonstrated, yet again.
Given that a vast majority of the human race once believed that the world was flat and probably carried on the back of a tortoise did not alter the fabric of reality sufficiently to make this fable become true.
So it is with all superstitions. They have no remit beyond the confines of the skull and the edicts of humans. Gods did not make humans, humans made gods.
Can’t believe you’re making the absurd argument. Regardless, let’s go back to “the spectacle of several hundred US troops being slaughtered”…
38 U.S. troops had been killed. Natonski described the first six days of ground war as a “flawless execution of the plan we drew up. We are actually ahead of schedule.” Natonski put the toll of guerrillas killed at more than 1,200. As troops uproot the insurgents, contractors are supposed to swarm into Fallujah in coming weeks to cart away rubble, repair buildings, and fix the city’s water, sewer and electricity systems. The Iraqi government has already picked leaders for Fallujah, and thousands of Iraqi police and paramilitary forces have been recruited to try to impose order. Hugs
Before the seige, I heard estimates ranging from 3000-5000 active guerillas in Fallujah. Given the violence of the assault, and the indiscriminate bombing of the city, it would be highly unusual if all “1200” dead were guerillas. Or perhaps there is another, higher figure for civilian casualties that the Pentagon knows, but is withholding.
This reminds me of Vietnam, where every person slaughtered was a “VC” and the military measured their “success” in increasing kill ratios every month. I think the Pentagon “won” every one of those mortality contests, but it evidently proved in the end a fruitless endeavour.
It appears that most of the heavy hitters melted away days before the seige, and escalated their attacks within the rest of Iraq. The death toll of Coalition troops and Iraqi allies has risen sharply outside Fallujah.
Given that the Coalition has as yet been unable to effectively fix Baghdad’s infrastructure, and this was not so heavily damaged during the invasion, why do you think they will have better luck or more success in the now-devastated Fallujah?
What exactly is your argument here? I stated that Fallujah would be assaulted, and I was right. I stated “several hundred US slaughtered” where I should have said “Several hundred US troops and casualties”.
I was right about the Iraqi death toll however. I wonder does this new carnage raise the number of Iraqis killed as a result of the invasion conclusively above 100,000? How many deaths will it take before you would decide that a diplomatic solution might have been preferable to a military solution, or does might always make right in your book?
And why don’t you have anything better to do than endlessly troll in these comment boxes? I get email alerts when someone posts here – what’s your excuse? Why don’t don’t you do something more productive? Why is almost the entire character of your contribution one of lame thread crapping?