us planes unleash 40,000 pounds of bombs

reply to post by noangels


So what attitude should one have towards those trying to kill them and their coworkers? The "boogereaters" as he referred to them are scumbags, who wouldn't hesitate in harming anyone on this site. The fewer scumbags amongst us the better. I know I wouldn't want to go downrange, and entrust my life to anyone that wasn't fully prepared to terminate with extreme prejudice, anybody that was a hostile combatant.

reply to post by birchtree


As a member of the military, it is your duty to disobey an unlawful order.
An order to shoot US citizens would fall into that category, and no US military commander would go along with that. One thing that folks who ask questions like that fail to take into consideration is- members of the military are US citizens too, we're not in the military for life, we would have to live in whatever draconian fantasy that anti military types think we would willingly bring about. Soldier, Marines, etc... are not unthinking, unfeeling, unquestioning robotic killers. We have the same hopes, dreams, desires as anyone else might.

Originally posted by noangels

yeahh yeahh yeahh,your nothing but a racist.

If your lucky!So you enjoy killing boogereaters then?

well I hope your never lucky,your a disgrace.

Hopefullysome police division monitors this site as your a threat to soceity if you count killing people as lucky.

Shamefull

Oh, my. Someone took offense to my calling the enemy a "boogereater". I just might die of shame. I'm so crushed.

Hmmm....your grandfather, if he were in WW2, called them "Japs" and "Krauts".

If your dad was in Korea or Vietnam, they were "Gooks" or "slopes", "slants" or "dinks".

I didn't enjoy what I did, but if it kept US troops safe, and prevented some suicide bomber from killing kids in the marketplace, it was no sweat off my brow. I sleep well at night.

"Boogereater" isn't racist.

"Wow, I guess you have it all figured out now. Let's see.......the initial reasoning was Bush wanted the cheap oil and he would take it by force to bring prices DOWN to help his poll numbers and reduce gasoline costs. Now you are saying its to bring UP the prices.

Look, you cannot have it both ways and your theory just does not hold up against logical reasoning."

What are you blabbering on about "both ways"? I never have said he wanted cheap oil or wanted to bring prices down? Go back and read my original post, and in that post I gave reference to a one BBC investigative and award winning journalist Greg Palast who wrote "Armed Madhouse". In that book he talks about how and why the Bush crime family and big oil barons around the world including SA wanted oil to go up. Oridinarily I wouldn't respond to such a poorly thought out and researched reply, but this topic is really important that we all understand. It's not difficult logic at all sir. This country voted in Oil executives....higher prices means more money,. One way to get those prices up is decrease supply.

With all due respect sir, read the book first before attacking me or the theory. Second learn some critical thinking skills and logic, and third if you don't understand these concepts (supply & demand curves) perhaps you could enroll in some basic economics classes at your local University or community college (if they offer them). The information is out there, perhaps not though on Fox news or the daily GOP talking points.

Originally posted by skyshow
What are you blabbering on about "both ways"? I never have said he wanted cheap oil or wanted to bring prices down? Go back and read my original post

Yeah, you feel this way now, today.
But people with thought processes the same as yours were screaming just the opposite early on.
So please take your faux outrage elsewhere.

I don't know anybody who believed or believes that anyone in the oil business or with ties to it would ever want the price of oil to go down, ever. Anyone with a brain larger than a pea knows this, and has known this for a long time. We got big oil into power, then this phony war, chaos for what is it now, some six years? The chaos of war means oil doesn't get pumped and distributed, thus does not make it onto the market. Oil was $20 a barrel before Bush and this occupation, now it's damn near $100 a barrel. As I have said, the Saudi economy was a wreck before the occupation and with oil at $20, then we have the attacks, followed by the pictures of Bandar smoking a cigar and having a Brandy out on the balcony of the Bush White house a few days later, and now voila the Saudi economy is doing great, All shares in energy great, all evidence of Enron scandel and W.H. implications, gone whiped away in the ash, Halliburton now with H.Q. off shore in United Arab Emerites and all making money (Cheney can cash his checks Following the January inoguration---everyone is fat and happy, and Rice even has top of the line new shoes (yeah, while New Orleans floods, she shops at the worlds finest shoe stores in Manhatten...BTW, I'm sure you remember the oil Tanker that was named after her right? ). Are you beginning to see things now almost 8 years later???

Originally posted by skyshow
I don't know anybody who believed or believes that anyone in the oil business or with ties to it would ever want the price of oil to go down, ever. Anyone with a brain larger than a pea knows this, and has known this for a long time.

Well of course people involved with the oil business would not want the price of oil to drop. The posts above were not about the people involved with oil but people of the liberal mindset who have Bush derangement syndrome.

I must be mistaken, I thought this thread was about the bombs dropping on the poor people of Iraq.

Originally posted by skyshow
I must be mistaken, I thought this thread was about the bombs dropping on the poor people of Iraq.

You must be since your post above is nothing about oil.

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan

Originally posted by skyshow
I must be mistaken, I thought this thread was about the bombs dropping on the poor people of Iraq.

You must be since your post above is nothing about oil.

Offtopic- No offence by this, I just find it funny, you seem to have a habit of using this symbol in almost every post, haha, your eyes must hurt.



[edit on 11-1-2008 by _Phoenix_]

I knew you would bit on that one....you didn't think first the first time, what would make me think you would start now...

If you look at my very first post on this thing, I wrote my take on why I believed the 40,000 pounds of bombs got dropped in the first place...go back and read it.

My god, this isn't about hanging on to some ideology...this is about corruption like nothing ever in the history of the USA. The USA invades a sovereign nation who did absolutely nothing to provoke the attack, other than not play ball by the rules with OPEQ, and then the worst of all is the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi citizens...women, children, grandparents, teachers, doctors, baby sitters, aunt's, uncles, grandparents...REAL PEOPLE who did not have die because of these bombs...that's what this is about.

Go look up the term "cognitive dissonance". You may need to visit the library or University book store for it, but it's in every Social Psychology text book...anyway, this may perhaps help to describe for you and others why people feel they need to hang on to their right wing ideology and the cronies who promote it, even in the face of all evidence pointing in the contrary. Just because you voted for them, and now see how crooked they truly are, does not mean you must continue to defend them and their practices at all costs. It's ok to do a little free thinking every now and again you know?

Progress has it's way of steaming on forward. You can get out of the way, or stand there in effort to impead it, but eventually it will arrive and run you over. Why be roadkill?

reply to post by skyshow


Nice post, I feel your passion, I feel the same.

Originally posted by _Phoenix_
Offtopic- No offence by this, I just find it funny, you seem to have a habit of using this symbol

in almost every post, haha, your eyes must hurt.

I don't take offence. I am very sarcastic and can be a 'a-hole' sometimes so the 'rolleyes' is my favorite symbol. Got it! j/k

[edit on 11-1-2008 by 4thDoctorWhoFan]

Originally posted by skyshow
I knew you would bit on that one....you didn't think first the first time, what would make me think you would start now...

If you look at my very first post on this thing, I wrote my take on why I believed the 40,000 pounds of bombs got dropped in the first place...go back and read it.

My god, this isn't about hanging on to some ideology...this is about corruption like nothing ever in the history of the USA. The USA invades a sovereign nation who did absolutely nothing to provoke the attack, other than not play ball by the rules with OPEQ, and then the worst of all is the hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi citizens...women, children, grandparents, teachers, doctors, baby sitters, aunt's, uncles, grandparents...REAL PEOPLE who did not have die because of these bombs...that's what this is about.

Go look up the term "cognitive dissonance". You may need to visit the library or University book store for it, but it's in every Social Psychology text book...anyway, this may perhaps help to describe for you and others why people feel they need to hang on to their right wing ideology and the cronies who promote it, even in the face of all evidence pointing in the contrary. Just because you voted for them, and now see how crooked they truly are, does not mean you must continue to defend them and their practices at all costs. It's ok to do a little free thinking every now and again you know?

Progress has it's way of steaming on forward. You can get out of the way, or stand there in effort to impead it, but eventually it will arrive and run you over. Why be roadkill?

Please, Saddam Hussein was a criminal who was taken out of power a decade to late. I don't agree with everything Bush did. I didn't even want the U.S to invade Iraq because I thought there were more important issues to focus on, but let's stop using the whole, Iraq was innocent garbage. Saddam Hussein was found guilty of war crimes and was put to death. Can you understand that?

Oh yeah, I am free thinking. I know all about how we supported Saddam against Iran history when we knew he was a psycho. It's pretty clear that the, the enemy of my enemy is my friend theory, back fires quite often. I think taking this man out of power was the right thing to do, even if I don't like the method, time, or how it happened. America has made some very bad foreign policy decisions in the past and present, I will agree with that. The fact is, people need to take everything that happened during the Cold War with a grain of salt.

Originally posted by indierockalien
This is such a joke. It's pure genocide. "Insurgents" and "al qieda" are huge cop outs. The only thing that's there against us are native people who's lives have been ruined by our holier than thou meatheaded gi joes blowing up their homes and ramsacking what government they did have fir almost 5 years now. They aren't terrorists, most of them. They are just very very angry, and they have a right to defend themselves against our fascist armies. deltaboy, you need to get over your ignorance and your apathy, because it's just adding to the pile of dung that's completely screwed this world up.

Yep, anti American here. I can prolly juts "Giiiit out" as far as a lot of people are concerned. Obviously, it's that easy.

Pure genocide?

If it were "pure genocide" there wouldn't be any U.S. troops in country trying to root out terrorists. There would just B-52 raids dropping iron bombs on every Iraqi city 24/7 until everything was obliterated. You need to get a grip on reality and move out of your idiotic liberal bubble. Educate yourself.

Originally posted by Clan in da front

Iraq has made some very bad foreign policy decisions in the past and present, I will agree with that. The fact is, people need to take everything that happened during the Iran/Iraq/Kuwait War with a grain of salt.

reply to post by BlueRaja


That is what I was trying to convey myself to the respondant. I have 13 yrs military myself. I totally agree with you.

My point to watchZEIG is even if you were to refuse any order of the "I do not agree with that" type you might get it for disobeying a lawful order, but still they could not MAKE YOU do it against your will.

Look at Michael (I cant remember his name) refused to put the UN patch on his uniform above the American Flag....He got discharged but hey IMO he was a Patriot to this Country.

That was my point.

Yes it would be an unlawful order, but in times of Martial law Executive orders can call for the suspension of Bill of Rights. Then there will be a choice to make....I think you will prob agree with me that nobody in the Military or Law Enforcement arena is going to follow it.....I think our government knows that......so if that is their intent they must have options that do not include us.

Originally posted by Vanguard223

Pure genocide?

If it were "pure genocide" there wouldn't be any U.S. troops in country trying to root out terrorists. There would just B-52 raids dropping iron bombs on every Iraqi city 24/7 until everything was obliterated. You need to get a grip on reality and move out of your idiotic liberal bubble. Educate yourself.

Granted CNN isnt the best educational source but ok,

(CNN) -- "A study published Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine estimates that 151,000 Iraqis died of violent causes between March 2003, when the war began, and June 2006."

Does that 150K fit into or outside the liberal bubble?

-and this comment is not meant to disparage those in the military!!

[edit on 11-1-2008 by scrapple]

I agree with you Clan in da Front. He was all that you said and then some. So are many others in places of power, yet why have we not gone into S. Korea for example and taken hom out, or what about Venezuela, or Iran, or Pakistan, or name your place with "evil" regimes in power?

What I was trying to say was that the last straw was when he wouldn't behave with the price fixing game that the rest of OPEQ was trying to orchestrate and so he had to be taken out (you'd have to research this all, but he would flood the markets with oil to confound plans and drop the price, then he would tighten up the spickets and back up it would go...he was not in control, and so something had to be done...but we didn't invade because he was a rotten scoundrel...if you believe that, then it adds new meaning to the word naive.

How are those freedom fries? Please pass the katsup!

reply to post by scrapple


Is that number including insurgents, or just innocent bystanders, or a total of everyone? If it does include insurgents, I think you'd need to exclude them from claims of genocide, as killing enemy combatants doesn't usually fall under that term. Additionally if we look at the death totals of civilians, and what the cause of death was(primarily IED and executions, by a large margin), then it must be argued that it's the insurgents who are committing the genocide, if that term is going to be used. Even if we were to accept as being remotely realistic, the numbers ranging from 655k to 1.2 million Iraqis killed, that would just mean that the insurgents had killed even more civilians, as they are the cause well over 95% of the time.