You're missing the point: in the case of Haditha, the reports of the massacre would have meant that it was more than just a few grunts going all "Full Metal Jacket" on civilians. This would have had to have been a vaguely premeditated action (since the time b/t the initial car bomb attack and the massacre was a few hours) and one that involved higher ups in the chain of command. Moreover, the cover-up was perpetuated by people still higher up on the chain of command. I'm not talking 5 star general or anything, but in this situation, we're talking about more than just a lone shooter going nuts on women and children.
The point about mismanagement has to do with whether those soldiers should have been in that place to begin with. It's not obviating accountability - it's widening accountability. The soldiers, if guilty, deserve the full weight of the law but one has to ask the larger question of why are Marines serving as an occupying, policing force when that is NOT what they are trained to do.
I would be hard pressed to believe that US soldiers are raping Iraqi women for the following reasons:
1) Iraq is not like any other major combat situation the U.S. has been involved in to my knowledge. This is not like Vietnam where US soldiers actively congregate in civilian areas during their time off. US soldiers are in their camps/forts or out in the field doing force protection or counterinsurgency sweeps most of the time. Iraqi civilian areas are VERY dangerous for any American soldiers or otherwise right now. The Green Zone in Baghdad might be the only place where soldiers could congregate with Iraqi women.
2) If Iraqi women had been raped it would've probably been made public through 1) The internet by Sunni insurgents who have extensive web networks boasting about their activities if it had been Sunni women, 2) If it were Shiites the various militias would've probably gotten involved.
I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but I very much doubt it.
Motown.......If our enemy wanted to create propaganda that would make our troops look bad.....how would/could they do it??
The Islamists and Saddamists are already doing that very easily. They came and invaded our country! They came to destroy Islam! Seems to be working pretty good from where I'm sitting. If you want to get into specifics there was a lot of complaining by Sunnis about how US soldiers disrespected them and broke customs, such as entering mosques, looking at Iraqi women, etc. Did you ever read the reports about how many Sunnis were convinced that US night goggle visions could see under people's clothes and that US soldiers were using these to look at Iraqi women?
WHAT!!!!! The city I live in has Black, Hispanic, Asian and Aryan street gangs!!
Your statement that... "My explanation that they must be Black"[/b] is offensive and a lie.....sort of like the lies that you claim offends YOU when our Government spews them.
And to make excuses for criminal behavior by saying the Leadership "MAY" have failed is absolute bullshit.
Are you saying that these soldiers didn't KNOW that killing and raping innocent people was wrong??
And that poor leadership drove them to commit heinous crimes??
Friggin amazing!!
I think what Dan is ultimately getting at is, none of this would be happening if our "leaders" never put them there. Poor planning of this war on a whole, lack of troops and stress thereof, extended tours of duty (can you imagine thinking you're going home to your family only to be told "6 more months" again and again?), etc. etc. You can see how little it would take to be pushed over the edge after being desensitized surrounded by death and destruction for prolonged periods of time. IN NO WAY AM I CONDONING OR MAKING EXCUSES - I'm trying to point out that there are bigger factors involved in all of this. Personal accountability is first and foremost, of course, but you can't ignore the reasons they are there in the first place.
PLAESE TO NAME ONE GOOD THING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS ACCOMPLISHED
Tax cuts, booming economy, I dont know how many millions of new jobs, low unemployment, highest number of minority home and business owners, higher minority test scores, lower drug use among teenagers
Some soldiers, like any gathering of humans, are scum.
There have been reports of members of American Street Gangs infiltrating our Armed Forces and perpetuating the same crimes in Iraq that they do in our cities.
Any soldier who rapes anyone/thing should be tried as a criminal in the U.S. Court System.
Instead of blaming those responsible for our troops you blame the troops. Your explanation is that they must be Black just like the street gangs in American cities. A convenient way to give the military brass and civilian leadership an easy pass.
WHAT!!!!! The city I live in has Black, Hispanic, Asian and Aryan street gangs!!
Your statement that... "My explanation that they must be Black"[/b] is offensive and a lie.....sort of like the lies that you claim offends YOU when our Government spews them.
And to make excuses for criminal behavior by saying the Leadership "MAY" have failed is absolute bullshit.
Are you saying that these soldiers didn't KNOW that killing and raping innocent people was wrong??
And that poor leadership drove them to commit heinous crimes??
Friggin amazing!!
Good point about the street gangs. I will retract that unfair attack and offer my apologies. It was not nice. I was angry.
It is not bullshit to say that there was a failure of leadership in Haditha specifically and Iraq in general. It is bullshit to say that there was not. No one's life is more controlled than a soldier. Soldiers who commit crimes while on duty, as in Haditha or Abu Garib, are victims of failure of leadership.
I am saying that leadership allowed and covered up the killing of innocents in Haditha. I am saying that the leadership encouraged the rape and abuse of prisoners at Abu Garib.
I do not believe that you would truly believe that our troops are out of control street gangs who signed up for the military so that they could rape and kill because they love raping and killing.
Unlike Shabadaba, my beliefs are based on facts. It is known that stress, poor support and poor leadership will lead to the events we have witnessed. I have never heard that US street gangs are joining the army so they can rape and murder. Sounds like something you got from Bill Oreilly.
You do a disservice to humanity when you confuse war crimes with street crimes. They are not the same.
If you support the troops, like you say you do, you wouldn't blame them for the crimes of their superiors.
Again, I apologize for implying you are racist. We're cool.
The report I read about the Gangs stated that they were committing the SAME street crimes there that they did here as far as drug dealing, extortion, gambling, etc.
To make a sweeping indictment against all military LEADERS(especially at battleground level)is as ridiculous as making a sweeping indictment of all soldiers.
All it takes is 0.01% of bad apples to create a Haditha and that can be on the soldier AND leadership level.
Face it...some soldiers and their leaders are bad people...they would be scum here in the States and they are scum in Iraq.
I support the 99.9% of the soldiers that do NOT commit crimes.
And those who do....from the lowest level to the highest....should be treated like criminals and held accountable for their personal actions. And if they committed murder of innocent people they should rot in hell.
Killing in War is not a crime....Murder of non-combatants is.
When soldiers are placed in impossible situations, and receive inadequate leadership, bad things are bound to happen.
This is the full essence of what I meant to say initially. When I wrote what I wrote, I was extremely angry at the Iraq War in general and Haditha in specific when, clouded by this anger, I failed to elucidate in regards to instances of murder and rape in Iraq. I fully apologize for my exaggeration and in no way meant to imply that rape was anything more than an isolated crime rarely committed in this war by desparate individuals acting alone. My family has honorably served for 4 generations in active combat service to this country, and I by no means intended to slander innocent members of the armed forces who are trying to stay alive whilst being mismanaged by the leaders of this country. At the time, I was extremely upset over the situation on both sides of the coin (both suicide bombings and soldier misconduct). When you can imagine your cousin potentially slaughtered due to upper-level mismanagement, it is possible to overstate your anger in an unconstructive manner. Our leaders' intransigence and our Nation's apathy redoubles this ire.
I repeat: I am sorry for my mis-statement. If any members of this board were offended by my crude diatribe, I hope that they can forgive me.
Most sincerely, -W.
Some soldiers, like any gathering of humans, are scum. Any soldier who rapes anyone/thing should be tried as a criminal in the U.S. Court System.
I fully agree.
The longer this war continues, the more the opportunity for aggregious actions like those in Haditha and reports that trickle out of Iraq by the week. May others forgive us one day for our Nation's missteps.
PLAESE TO NAME ONE GOOD THING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS ACCOMPLISHED
Tax cuts, booming economy, I dont know how many millions of new jobs, low unemployment, highest number of minority home and business owners, higher minority test scores, lower drug use among teenagers
PLAESE TO NAME ONE GOOD THING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS ACCOMPLISHED
Tax cuts, booming economy, I dont know how many millions of new jobs, low unemployment, highest number of minority home and business owners, higher minority test scores, lower drug use among teenagers
He answered the question here.
I would reply with the following. When Bush came into office there was a recession. Capitalism is a boom and bust economic system with recessions every decade and then recoveries afterwards. How much is Bush responsible for the economic growth with the recovery and how much is it the normal cycle of capitalism? The unemployment rate is right under 5% which has been the historical average unemployment rate for the U.S. since the end of WWII. There has also been an increase in poverty during this recovery just as there was in the 1980s during Reagan. I would argue that it's because Republicans favor trickle down economic programs which obviously favor the upper class. I didn't know Bush mounted an anti-drug campaign so I don't know how he's responsible for lower drug use among teens.
All it takes is 0.01% of bad apples to create a Haditha and that can be on the soldier AND leadership level.
Face it...some soldiers and their leaders are bad people...they would be scum here in the States and they are scum in Iraq.
I support the 99.9% of the soldiers that do NOT commit crimes.
And those who do....from the lowest level to the highest....should be treated like criminals and held accountable for their personal actions. And if they committed murder of innocent people they should rot in hell.
Killing in War is not a crime....Murder of non-combatants is. I think this a head in the sand view. These things do not happen because some troops are bad apples. It happens as a predicatable (and predicted) result of the situation. I am not talking about Iraq and GW Bush, I am talking about the history of war. People were not gassed in Germany because of a few bad apples. Nor were they gassed because because Germans are bad. They were gassed because of leadership. That is a bad example because that is not a battlefield situation. But look at any battlefield war crime and you will find that it is the result of leadership and support and stress and desensativation, and not a few bad apples. Likewise blaming a battlefield leader for carrying out what amounts to the policys of the administration is foolish. Fighting an insurgency that operates in civilian population is the administrations policy and is a direct result of not commiting an overwhelming force at the start of the war and using enough troops to secure the peace. Bush likes to blame all that on the military but it was a political decision.
PLAESE TO NAME ONE GOOD THING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS ACCOMPLISHED
Tax cuts, booming economy, I dont know how many millions of new jobs, low unemployment, highest number of minority home and business owners, higher minority test scores, lower drug use among teenagers
He answered the question here.
I would reply with the following. When Bush came into office there was a recession. Capitalism is a boom and bust economic system with recessions every decade and then recoveries afterwards. How much is Bush responsible for the economic growth with the recovery and how much is it the normal cycle of capitalism? The unemployment rate is right under 5% which has been the historical average unemployment rate for the U.S. since the end of WWII. There has also been an increase in poverty during this recovery just as there was in the 1980s during Reagan. I would argue that it's because Republicans favor trickle down economic programs which obviously favor the upper class. I didn't know Bush mounted an anti-drug campaign so I don't know how he's responsible for lower drug use among teens.
Just guessing here but I'd think that since 9/11 the increased security has prevented at least a percentage of drugs from coming into the country....hence a reduction in use.
All it takes is 0.01% of bad apples to create a Haditha and that can be on the soldier AND leadership level.
Face it...some soldiers and their leaders are bad people...they would be scum here in the States and they are scum in Iraq.
I support the 99.9% of the soldiers that do NOT commit crimes.
And those who do....from the lowest level to the highest....should be treated like criminals and held accountable for their personal actions. And if they committed murder of innocent people they should rot in hell.
Killing in War is not a crime....Murder of non-combatants is.
I think this a head in the sand view. These things do not happen because some troops are bad apples. It happens as a predicatable (and predicted) result of the situation. I am not talking about Iraq and GW Bush, I am talking about the history of war. People were not gassed in Germany because of a few bad apples. Nor were they gassed because because Germans are bad. They were gassed because of leadership. That is a bad example because that is not a battlefield situation. But look at any battlefield war crime and you will find that it is the result of leadership and support and stress and desensativation, and not a few bad apples. Likewise blaming a battlefield leader for carrying out what amounts to the policys of the administration is foolish. Fighting an insurgency that operates in civilian population is the administrations policy and is a direct result of not commiting an overwhelming force at the start of the war and using enough troops to secure the peace. Bush likes to blame all that on the military but it was a political decision. Then riddle me this.....
Of the 100,000+ troops that we've deployed to Iraq, what percentage would you say had "bad leadership" and committed crimes as a result??
we are talking about an incompetent administration.
what - was this on a talking points memo or something? I thought in light of their own disapproval ratings and scandals the dems shelved this bullet point. Or wait, that was "culture of corruption" wasn't it.
DUDE. I can't beleive I am getting drawn into this.
PLAESE TO NAME ONE GOOD THING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS ACCOMPLISHED OUTSIDE OF THE TOPPLING OF THE TALIBAN (which is already totally unraveled due to incompetence and skewed priorities).
Millions disenfranchised; millions without health care; mounting debt; crumbling public school system and social services; a foolish and deadly military adventure...and a bunch of GOP divorcees and wife-cheaters are currently trying to amend the Constitution to "protect" marriage.
WAKE THE FUCK UP. WHERE ARE YOUR PRIORITIES? PLAESE TO ADMIT COLLOSAL FAILURE OF CURRENT ADMINISTRATION. THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU SO WHY DO YOU SPEND YOUR TIME DEFENDING THEM!?!?!
they are even incompetent at succeeding at their own agenda.
that's no talking point. just a simple fact.
6 years and what?
now they're slipping...and calling up the old bitch: gay marriage. but even the rightwing base that has rallied behind these kind of bullshit issues, in both 02 and 04, is calling the bluff.
PLAESE TO NAME ONE GOOD THING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS ACCOMPLISHED
Tax cuts, booming economy, I dont know how many millions of new jobs, low unemployment, highest number of minority home and business owners, higher minority test scores, lower drug use among teenagers
He answered the question here.
I would reply with the following. When Bush came into office there was a recession. Capitalism is a boom and bust economic system with recessions every decade and then recoveries afterwards. How much is Bush responsible for the economic growth with the recovery and how much is it the normal cycle of capitalism? The unemployment rate is right under 5% which has been the historical average unemployment rate for the U.S. since the end of WWII. There has also been an increase in poverty during this recovery just as there was in the 1980s during Reagan. I would argue that it's because Republicans favor trickle down economic programs which obviously favor the upper class. I didn't know Bush mounted an anti-drug campaign so I don't know how he's responsible for lower drug use among teens.
I think that the average since the 70's has been significantly higher, although you could argue that the lowest levels were during the Clinton administration, to which I could respond that it was the result of the Rebublican Congress elected midway into his first term. I could make an argument about poverty, how its measured and based on the mobility afforded by capitalism that allows one to move throughout the system as well as the fact that a majority of the people living in "poverty" probably have microwave ovens and cable TV. But, I really dont know enough about it to take you on. As for drug use and minority home ownership and test scores and the rest, I'm not a Bush apologist and would credit a more conservative legislature. I also think the tax cuts spared the economy what was shaping up to be a severe recession ala 1980's, but I'm not happy with the deficits and would blame congress for that republicans and democrats alike.
***and I dont think that the tax cuts caused the deficits nor can higher taxes alleviate them. A flat tax or even a simplified tax code would be a start, but it all comes down to spending.
PLAESE TO NAME ONE GOOD THING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS ACCOMPLISHED
Tax cuts, booming economy, I dont know how many millions of new jobs, low unemployment, highest number of minority home and business owners, higher minority test scores, lower drug use among teenagers
He answered the question here.
I would reply with the following. When Bush came into office there was a recession. Capitalism is a boom and bust economic system with recessions every decade and then recoveries afterwards. How much is Bush responsible for the economic growth with the recovery and how much is it the normal cycle of capitalism? The unemployment rate is right under 5% which has been the historical average unemployment rate for the U.S. since the end of WWII. There has also been an increase in poverty during this recovery just as there was in the 1980s during Reagan. I would argue that it's because Republicans favor trickle down economic programs which obviously favor the upper class. I didn't know Bush mounted an anti-drug campaign so I don't know how he's responsible for lower drug use among teens.
Just guessing here but I'd think that since 9/11 the increased security has prevented at least a percentage of drugs from coming into the country....hence a reduction in use.
I disagree, its a suply and demand drug economy and no security can keep it out. The teen drugs mentioned in the study I read about, and Im sorry I cant reference it, was concerned with the domestic type recreational abuse drugs like LSD and marijuana. I think people are just healthier, albeit fatter?
Look, what Bush has done, what he hasn't...the majority of Americans still think he's doing a bad job. Those who can't fucking stand the dude should at least take some solace in that.
I'm curious from Saba - who seems to be fiscally conservative - what do you think of the adminstration's embrace (some would say pandering) to the religious right? Are you at all concerned by the new moral agenda that's being pushed?
Look, what Bush has done, what he hasn't...the majority of Americans still think he's doing a bad job. Those who can't fucking stand the dude should at least take some solace in that.
I'm curious from Saba - who seems to be fiscally conservative - what do you think of the adminstration's embrace (some would say pandering) to the religious right? Are you at all concerned by the new moral agenda that's being pushed?
The REAL agenda is the repeal of the Estate Tax. They're just trying to levee the inevitable loss of the House by checking the flag burning faggits who are destroying America.
i think that you are right that it is pandering. As for the Defense of Marriage Act, I do think it is important institution. I think the studies are pretty clear that the most important factor in an individuals success in life irrespective of class, race, etc. is a two parent stable home. I dont know if the Act is the best way to foster the institution though. It would be better for a child to be in the home of a loving gay couple than to be alone. On the other hand, human beings are involved in all types of relationships that dont necessarily amount to marriage and are not recognized as such so I'm not sure that gay marriage is right either. It could be just a question of symantics, but Im still trying to figure that one out. There is also the issue of whether these matters are best left to the states to decide.
I disagree, its a suply and demand drug economy and no security can keep it out. The teen drugs mentioned in the study I read about, and Im sorry I cant reference it, was concerned with the domestic type recreational abuse drugs like LSD and marijuana. I think people are just healthier, albeit fatter?
I thought LSD use dropped because of supply problems after the arrest of William Leonard Pickard and Clyde Apperson in 2000. They produced enormous quantities of the drug for many years, apparently a significant percentage of the market.
- what do you think of the adminstration's embrace (some would say pandering) to the religious right? Are you at all concerned by the new moral agenda that's being pushed?
The true "Religious Right" is a very small minority of fringe lunatics that have perverse, yet pseudo-puritanical beliefs and they get alot of attention from the Media.
A large segment of America.....primarily the population that lives outside of urban areas....rural, farm and some suburban areas are worried about becoming an "immoral" country......and the choice of what they perceive as a "more moral" right is more attractive than what they perceive as the "immoral" left who publicly support such activities as homosexuality and abortion....they think these Liberals are dangerous.
And the opposite of the "Religious Right......the "Extreme Left", scares the shit out of Aunt Ida in Boise, Idaho and Grandma & Grandpa in Ida, Oklahoma.
So unfortunately, people are willing to support a more extreme "Right" than they would typically be comfortable with, to avoid supporting "baby killers" or the Extreme Left.
- what do you think of the adminstration's embrace (some would say pandering) to the religious right? Are you at all concerned by the new moral agenda that's being pushed?
The true "Religious Right" is a very small minority of fringe lunatics that have perverse, yet pseudo-puritanical beliefs and they get alot of attention from the Media.
A large segment of America.....primarily the population that lives outside of urban areas....rural, farm and some suburban areas are worried about becoming an "immoral" country......and the choice of what they perceive as a "more moral" right is more attractive than what they perceive as the "immoral" left who publicly support such activities as homosexuality and abortion....they think these Liberals are dangerous.
And the opposite of the "Religious Right......the "Extreme Left", scares the shit out of Aunt Ida in Boise, Idaho and Grandma & Grandpa in Ida, Oklahoma.
So unfortunately, people are willing to support a more extreme "Right" than they would typically be comfortable with, to avoid supporting "baby killers" or the Extreme Left.
Just my opinion.
I would add that in a square-off between the Mmarine Corps and the Press Corps over Haditha, who do you think Aunt Ida and Grandpa and Grandma are going to support.
I also think the tax cuts spared the economy what was shaping up to be a severe recession ala 1980's, but I'm not happy with the deficits and would blame congress for that republicans and democrats alike.
***and I dont think that the tax cuts caused the deficits nor can higher taxes alleviate them. A flat tax or even a simplified tax code would be a start, but it all comes down to spending.
Bush's 1st Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neal, Bush's 2nd Secretary of the Treasure (can't remember his name, but he just stepped down), Alan Greenspan and the current Comptroller General would disagree with you.
All of them were against the tax cuts (Greenspan at first supported them, but then turned against them). All of them also believe that the tax cuts have increased the deficit. The tax cuts were made for ideological reasons, not economic ones.
i thik o'neil was for the first round of tax cuts and even wanted to accelerate them but balked at later tax cuts, but there is probably some truth to your argument that they were ideoligiacl. But lower taxes is the ideology of the party.
i thik o'neil was for the first round of tax cuts and even wanted to accelerate them but balked at later tax cuts, but there is probably some truth to your argument that they were ideoligiacl. But lower taxes is the ideology of the party.
Running up a gazillion dollar deficit is not, however, the ideology of party. Neither is a huge expansion of governmental bureaucracy. Let's face it, there'd be even more dissension amongst the GOP against Bush if not for the fear that such internal divisions would cost the party dearly come election time. United front and all that.
i thik o'neil was for the first round of tax cuts and even wanted to accelerate them but balked at later tax cuts, but there is probably some truth to your argument that they were ideoligiacl. But lower taxes is the ideology of the party.
Running up a gazillion dollar deficit is not, however, the ideology of party. Neither is a huge expansion of governmental bureaucracy. Let's face it, there'd be even more dissension amongst the GOP against Bush if not for the fear that such internal divisions would cost the party dearly come election time. United front and all that.
cutting taxes without parallel reductions in spending is irresponsible and exemplary of incompetent management.
thank you.
'scuse me while I go water my private victory garden.
Bush has increased the deficit by cutting taxes and increasing spending through his Drug Benefits program and not vetoing any bill from Congress, plus the Iraq war. That's on top of the huge increases in government spending that are requirements of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The Comptroller General in a speech to a meeting of state assemblies said that Bush's economic program is untenable. Bush has argued that the U.S. can grow its way out of the deficit, but that's bascially impossible because SS, Medicare and Medicaid are increasing at something like 6-8% each year and the U.S. economy has hardly ever grown that fast in modern history.
cutting taxes without parallel reductions in spending is irresponsible and exemplary of incompetent management.
thank you.
'scuse me while I go water my private victory garden.
While your out there smelling tulips let me assure you cuts were made, just ask any teacher, politician, social worker or homeless shelter.
Those are mostly state and local spending. The Comptroller General noted that when the Federal government can't meet its own payments on social programs, they usually pass on the bill to state and local governments. Example, No Child Left Behind, the states got left holding most of the bill for that program.
Comments
You're missing the point: in the case of Haditha, the reports of the massacre would have meant that it was more than just a few grunts going all "Full Metal Jacket" on civilians. This would have had to have been a vaguely premeditated action (since the time b/t the initial car bomb attack and the massacre was a few hours) and one that involved higher ups in the chain of command. Moreover, the cover-up was perpetuated by people still higher up on the chain of command. I'm not talking 5 star general or anything, but in this situation, we're talking about more than just a lone shooter going nuts on women and children.
The point about mismanagement has to do with whether those soldiers should have been in that place to begin with. It's not obviating accountability - it's widening accountability. The soldiers, if guilty, deserve the full weight of the law but one has to ask the larger question of why are Marines serving as an occupying, policing force when that is NOT what they are trained to do.
(Or am I wrong about that?)
The Islamists and Saddamists are already doing that very easily. They came and invaded our country! They came to destroy Islam! Seems to be working pretty good from where I'm sitting. If you want to get into specifics there was a lot of complaining by Sunnis about how US soldiers disrespected them and broke customs, such as entering mosques, looking at Iraqi women, etc. Did you ever read the reports about how many Sunnis were convinced that US night goggle visions could see under people's clothes and that US soldiers were using these to look at Iraqi women?
I think what Dan is ultimately getting at is, none of this would be happening if our "leaders" never put them there. Poor planning of this war on a whole, lack of troops and stress thereof, extended tours of duty (can you imagine thinking you're going home to your family only to be told "6 more months" again and again?), etc. etc. You can see how little it would take to be pushed over the edge after being desensitized surrounded by death and destruction for prolonged periods of time.
IN NO WAY AM I CONDONING OR MAKING EXCUSES - I'm trying to point out that there are bigger factors involved in all of this. Personal accountability is first and foremost, of course, but you can't ignore the reasons they are there in the first place.
Tax cuts, booming economy, I dont know how many millions of new jobs, low unemployment, highest number of minority home and business owners, higher minority test scores, lower drug use among teenagers
Good point about the street gangs. I will retract that unfair attack and offer my apologies. It was not nice. I was angry.
It is not bullshit to say that there was a failure of leadership in Haditha specifically and Iraq in general. It is bullshit to say that there was not. No one's life is more controlled than a soldier. Soldiers who commit crimes while on duty, as in Haditha or Abu Garib, are victims of failure of leadership.
I am saying that leadership allowed and covered up the killing of innocents in Haditha. I am saying that the leadership encouraged the rape and abuse of prisoners at Abu Garib.
I do not believe that you would truly believe that our troops are out of control street gangs who signed up for the military so that they could rape and kill because they love raping and killing.
Unlike Shabadaba, my beliefs are based on facts. It is known that stress, poor support and poor leadership will lead to the events we have witnessed. I have never heard that US street gangs are joining the army so they can rape and murder. Sounds like something you got from Bill Oreilly.
You do a disservice to humanity when you confuse war crimes with street crimes. They are not the same.
If you support the troops, like you say you do, you wouldn't blame them for the crimes of their superiors.
Again, I apologize for implying you are racist.
We're cool.
The report I read about the Gangs stated that they were committing the SAME street crimes there that they did here as far as drug dealing, extortion, gambling, etc.
To make a sweeping indictment against all military LEADERS(especially at battleground level)is as ridiculous as making a sweeping indictment of all soldiers.
All it takes is 0.01% of bad apples to create a Haditha and that can be on the soldier AND leadership level.
Face it...some soldiers and their leaders are bad people...they would be scum here in the States and they are scum in Iraq.
I support the 99.9% of the soldiers that do NOT commit crimes.
And those who do....from the lowest level to the highest....should be treated like criminals and held accountable for their personal actions. And if they committed murder of innocent people they should rot in hell.
Killing in War is not a crime....Murder of non-combatants is.
This is the full essence of what I meant to say initially. When I wrote what I wrote, I was extremely angry at the Iraq War in general and Haditha in specific when, clouded by this anger, I failed to elucidate in regards to instances of murder and rape in Iraq. I fully apologize for my exaggeration and in no way meant to imply that rape was anything more than an isolated crime rarely committed in this war by desparate individuals acting alone. My family has honorably served for 4 generations in active combat service to this country, and I by no means intended to slander innocent members of the armed forces who are trying to stay alive whilst being mismanaged by the leaders of this country.
At the time, I was extremely upset over the situation on both sides of the coin (both suicide bombings and soldier misconduct). When you can imagine your cousin potentially slaughtered due to upper-level mismanagement, it is possible to overstate your anger in an unconstructive manner. Our leaders' intransigence and our Nation's apathy redoubles this ire.
I repeat: I am sorry for my mis-statement. If any members of this board were offended by my crude diatribe, I hope that they can forgive me.
Most sincerely,
-W.
I fully agree.
The longer this war continues, the more the opportunity for aggregious actions like those in Haditha and reports that trickle out of Iraq by the week. May others forgive us one day for our Nation's missteps.
Sabadaba, anyone? is this an admission of guilt?
NevaaaaAAAAAAAAAAR!
He answered the question here.
I would reply with the following. When Bush came into office there was a recession. Capitalism is a boom and bust economic system with recessions every decade and then recoveries afterwards. How much is Bush responsible for the economic growth with the recovery and how much is it the normal cycle of capitalism? The unemployment rate is right under 5% which has been the historical average unemployment rate for the U.S. since the end of WWII. There has also been an increase in poverty during this recovery just as there was in the 1980s during Reagan. I would argue that it's because Republicans favor trickle down economic programs which obviously favor the upper class. I didn't know Bush mounted an anti-drug campaign so I don't know how he's responsible for lower drug use among teens.
All it takes is 0.01% of bad apples to create a Haditha and that can be on the soldier AND leadership level.
Face it...some soldiers and their leaders are bad people...they would be scum here in the States and they are scum in Iraq.
I support the 99.9% of the soldiers that do NOT commit crimes.
And those who do....from the lowest level to the highest....should be treated like criminals and held accountable for their personal actions. And if they committed murder of innocent people they should rot in hell.
Killing in War is not a crime....Murder of non-combatants is.
I think this a head in the sand view. These things do not happen because some troops are bad apples. It happens as a predicatable (and predicted) result of the situation. I am not talking about Iraq and GW Bush, I am talking about the history of war. People were not gassed in Germany because of a few bad apples. Nor were they gassed because because Germans are bad. They were gassed because of leadership. That is a bad example because that is not a battlefield situation. But look at any battlefield war crime and you will find that it is the result of leadership and support and stress and desensativation, and not a few bad apples. Likewise blaming a battlefield leader for carrying out what amounts to the policys of the administration is foolish. Fighting an insurgency that operates in civilian population is the administrations policy and is a direct result of not commiting an overwhelming force at the start of the war and using enough troops to secure the peace. Bush likes to blame all that on the military but it was a political decision.
Just guessing here but I'd think that since 9/11 the increased security has prevented at least a percentage of drugs from coming into the country....hence a reduction in use.
I think this a head in the sand view. These things do not happen because some troops are bad apples. It happens as a predicatable (and predicted) result of the situation. I am not talking about Iraq and GW Bush, I am talking about the history of war. People were not gassed in Germany because of a few bad apples. Nor were they gassed because because Germans are bad. They were gassed because of leadership. That is a bad example because that is not a battlefield situation. But look at any battlefield war crime and you will find that it is the result of leadership and support and stress and desensativation, and not a few bad apples. Likewise blaming a battlefield leader for carrying out what amounts to the policys of the administration is foolish. Fighting an insurgency that operates in civilian population is the administrations policy and is a direct result of not commiting an overwhelming force at the start of the war and using enough troops to secure the peace. Bush likes to blame all that on the military but it was a political decision.
Then riddle me this.....
Of the 100,000+ troops that we've deployed to Iraq, what percentage would you say had "bad leadership" and committed crimes as a result??
they are even incompetent at succeeding at their own agenda.
that's no talking point. just a simple fact.
6 years and what?
now they're slipping...and calling up the old bitch: gay marriage. but even the rightwing base that has rallied behind these kind of bullshit issues, in both 02 and 04, is calling the bluff.
see ya!
I think that the average since the 70's has been significantly higher, although you could argue that the lowest levels were during the Clinton administration, to which I could respond that it was the result of the Rebublican Congress elected midway into his first term. I could make an argument about poverty, how its measured and based on the mobility afforded by capitalism that allows one to move throughout the system as well as the fact that a majority of the people living in "poverty" probably have microwave ovens and cable TV. But, I really dont know enough about it to take you on. As for drug use and minority home ownership and test scores and the rest, I'm not a Bush apologist and would credit a more conservative legislature. I also think the tax cuts spared the economy what was shaping up to be a severe recession ala 1980's, but I'm not happy with the deficits and would blame congress for that republicans and democrats alike.
***and I dont think that the tax cuts caused the deficits nor can higher taxes alleviate them. A flat tax or even a simplified tax code would be a start, but it all comes down to spending.
I disagree, its a suply and demand drug economy and no security can keep it out. The teen drugs mentioned in the study I read about, and Im sorry I cant reference it, was concerned with the domestic type recreational abuse drugs like LSD and marijuana. I think people are just healthier, albeit fatter?
I'm curious from Saba - who seems to be fiscally conservative - what do you think of the adminstration's embrace (some would say pandering) to the religious right? Are you at all concerned by the new moral agenda that's being pushed?
The REAL agenda is the repeal of the Estate Tax. They're just trying to levee the inevitable loss of the House by checking the flag burning faggits who are destroying America.
I thought LSD use dropped because of supply problems after the arrest of William Leonard Pickard and Clyde Apperson in 2000. They produced enormous quantities of the drug for many years, apparently a significant percentage of the market.
The true "Religious Right" is a very small minority of fringe lunatics that have perverse, yet pseudo-puritanical beliefs and they get alot of attention from the Media.
A large segment of America.....primarily the population that lives outside of urban areas....rural, farm and some suburban areas are worried about becoming an "immoral" country......and the choice of what they perceive as a "more moral" right is more attractive than what they perceive as the "immoral" left who publicly support such activities as homosexuality and abortion....they think these Liberals are dangerous.
And the opposite of the "Religious Right......the "Extreme Left", scares the shit out of Aunt Ida in Boise, Idaho and Grandma & Grandpa in Ida, Oklahoma.
So unfortunately, people are willing to support a more extreme "Right" than they would typically be comfortable with, to avoid supporting "baby killers" or the Extreme Left.
Just my opinion.
http://www.henryholt.com/holt/whatsthematter.htm
I would add that in a square-off between the Mmarine Corps and the Press Corps over Haditha, who do you think Aunt Ida and Grandpa and Grandma are going to support.
Bush's 1st Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neal, Bush's 2nd Secretary of the Treasure (can't remember his name, but he just stepped down), Alan Greenspan and the current Comptroller General would disagree with you.
All of them were against the tax cuts (Greenspan at first supported them, but then turned against them). All of them also believe that the tax cuts have increased the deficit. The tax cuts were made for ideological reasons, not economic ones.
thank you.
'scuse me while I go water my private victory garden.
Running up a gazillion dollar deficit is not, however, the ideology of party. Neither is a huge expansion of governmental bureaucracy. Let's face it, there'd be even more dissension amongst the GOP against Bush if not for the fear that such internal divisions would cost the party dearly come election time. United front and all that.
ill cosign on that 100%
While your out there smelling tulips let me assure you cuts were made, just ask any teacher, politician, social worker or homeless shelter.
Bush has increased the deficit by cutting taxes and increasing spending through his Drug Benefits program and not vetoing any bill from Congress, plus the Iraq war. That's on top of the huge increases in government spending that are requirements of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. The Comptroller General in a speech to a meeting of state assemblies said that Bush's economic program is untenable. Bush has argued that the U.S. can grow its way out of the deficit, but that's bascially impossible because SS, Medicare and Medicaid are increasing at something like 6-8% each year and the U.S. economy has hardly ever grown that fast in modern history.
Those are mostly state and local spending. The Comptroller General noted that when the Federal government can't meet its own payments on social programs, they usually pass on the bill to state and local governments. Example, No Child Left Behind, the states got left holding most of the bill for that program.