100,000 Iraqi Widows

Discussion in 'Politics' started by arkfarmbear, Jul 6, 2010.

  1. arkfarmbear

    arkfarmbear New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Well folks, we have one more bit of news about the endless tragedies caused by the Bush/Cheney Regime's invasion of Iraq.
    For those who are going to blast me and make ignorant comments about why we shouldn't give a shit, well, we should:
    1. We are spending billions in military costs on a direct basis every month. The costs of keeping our troops and equipment in the quagmire is horrendous.
    2. We are spending as much or more for the same purposes in Afghanastan.
    3. We are spending undisclosed billions in Pakistan.
    4. Our enemies use this type of news to foment increased hatred of us around the world. And, it apparently is working!
    5. We spend even more billions in defense of our country and our "interests" around the globe.
    6. The widows and other refugees are ending up in Syria and other countries in the region. None of them can really afford the costs and civil unrest this creates for them. I expect we will soon be hearing about the US taxpayers providing "aid" to these countries. It will be couched in "moral obligation" and "compassion" and while those are valid reasons it is not something we can afford.
    7. We will continue to provide billions to the Iraqi government so they can pass it along to the victims. Shortly after the Bush/Cheney Regime got bogged down in the country, after Bush announced "Mission Accomplished", you and I started carrying the costs of providing every Iraqi with free medical care. That Regime was cold-hearted and cruel about uninsured Americans and spread lies and misinformation to the public at large so that we would not support giving welfare to lazy, whining Americans.
    8. We will be spending untold amounts each year, for decades to come, to care for our mangled and disabled veterans. The emotional crises faced by them and their families/friends/communities are not really known but, what the govt does readily admit it that is and will continue to be astonishing. The suicide rate of returning vets is so high that it is considered an epidemic.
    Feel free to add to the list!

    Oh, and did you hear about how one base commander came up with an idiotic way to fix it? (Idiots like him are who we are supposed to rely on to lead us and keep us free and safe.) He was probably a protege of General McChrystal.
    He gave a speech to the troops about how suicide caused lots of problems,, therefore, there would be no suicides at his base in the future! And that was an order!

    God help us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! No one else will.
     
  2. luka82

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Messages:
    5,182
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    somewhere
    War is shit! there is NEVER a winner!
    Trust me!
     
  3. Northland

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    6,082
    Likes Received:
    4
    Oh goody goody gumdrops another idiot emerges from the left wing cellar.

    You are far far VERY FAR, beyond any sort of help Ark. You jhave made a ranty thread opener whiich at no point in time indicates where you grabbed the statistic of 100,000. Add to that how long it takes before you even address the widows of the war- not until point 6, and even then it's extremely vague.

    Your garbage goes from:
    1)financial cost

    2)financial cost

    3)financial cost

    4)how the rest of the world views the United States of America

    5)more financial costs

    6)mention of widows- though you don't state from where and points 2 and 3 mentioned Afghanistan and Pakistan, not Iraq.

    7)back to financial costs, this time on medical care of Iraqis

    8)financial costs and emotional strain caused to veterans.

    Out of 8 points, only once did you mention widows, making your thread title an obvious lure to drag people into your Bush bashing frenzy. Then agan, you didn't provide a source for the 100,000 number so why should I expect you to actually make any points regarding your alleged thread topic, which was not addressed in your opening post.

    You finish off with a shot at a base commander who supposedly ordered his troops not to off themselves. Care to provide a source? Even if you can provide a source, again, what does that (base commander comments regarding suicide) have to do with 100,000 Iraqi war widows?
     
  4. B_starinvestor

    B_starinvestor New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Midwest
    ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

    Which is better:

    1. To be married to a murderous terrorist killer savage

    or

    2. To be widowed from a murderous terrorist killer savage
     
  5. D_Andreas Sukov

    D_Andreas Sukov Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,933
    Likes Received:
    3
    Because only murderous terrorist killer savages have been killed in Iraq....
     
  6. luka82

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Messages:
    5,182
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    somewhere
    How true!
    Hats down Sir!:wink:
     
  7. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Really? Wow... :rolleyes:
    Here - The Human Cost of the War in Iraq

    The Bush Administration started the war in Iraq (as well as admitting that he and Cheney did torture making them war criminals in the process). He does shoulder some of the blame because it takes two sides to fight. Plus, there are innocent victims on both sides of the battlefield. Just because you refuse to allow yourself to see that thanks to your blind, zealot-like devotion to this country, is a problem that you need to fix. Not everything on this board is fueled by extreme left or right ideologies. Just because someone has an anti-war stance or criticizes Bush does not automatically label them as "left". Try thinking outside of them once in a while, if you can.
     
  8. arkfarmbear

    arkfarmbear New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Northland. The "help" I need will have to come from someone less ignorant and more informed than you choose to be.
    The 100,000 widows was in my local newspaper. It was from an AP newswire.
    The base commander "story" was reported on the NBC Nightly News.
    Both sources are available, free of charge, I think, for anyone with the ability to access their websites. If not free, the charge for doing so is very tiny.
     
  9. B_crackoff

    B_crackoff New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    1,742
    Likes Received:
    0
    Unless there is complete anihilation of the enemy.
     
  10. arkfarmbear

    arkfarmbear New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Arkansas
    One more thing Northland.
    You missed the overall theme of the post.
    The theme was to demonstrate that US taxpayers (I'm assuming you are one of us) are going to pay for all of the obvious and hidden costs of the Bush/Cheney Regime's stupid decision to invade Iraq.
    Neither of them will suffer. And, neither has shown any remorse for our troops or the others around the world who have suffered and will, for decades, continue to suffer.
    I believe that more LPSG folks will read my post if I used the 100,000 widows as the headline. I further expect that most of the LPSG readers will not give a shit about the widows. So far, the posts in response have proven my beliefs correct.
    Ask any newspaper, magazine, etc. editor and they will be quick to admit that the purpose of a headline is to lead the reader to go beyond the headline and read the entire story.
    Forgive me for using what I was taught over the past 30+ years.
     
  11. arkfarmbear

    arkfarmbear New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Crackoff - when has that ever happened?
    Maybe that is the message you intend to convey. I hope so.
     
  12. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    While I do not doubt your intentions nor the veracity of much of what you wrote in the OP, by not providing links to key points you have left yourself open to such criticism.

    I know it takes a few minutes, but you really do have to research and link relevant, legit news sources when you post something as heart-felt and emotional (justified, IMO) as your OP. Without such links, it's simple (not to mention facile) to dismiss it all as a "rant".
     
  13. Northland

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    6,082
    Likes Received:
    4
    YES, really.

    You provided a link, ark did not. My comment about the link was directed towards him, not you. Your jumping in and defendiing him with a frothy "Really? Wow:rolleyes:" does not negate the fact that he did not provide a link. Nor does it negate the fact that his title is misleading.

    The title: "100,000 Iraqi Widows" would lead us to believe the opener of the thread is planning to address the issue of Iraqi widows. Instead, arkfarmbear gives us a talk on financial costs- in a full 6 of his points, 1 mention of widows and having mentioned other Nations along with Iraq, it makes his thread title all the more vague.

    He (arkfarmbear), then takes a shot at a base commander.

    While none of the points placed by arkfarmbear are necessarily in dispute by me, it was and is the misleading title which is why I label it for what it is, another far left rant. If the OP had stuck to, or at the very least actually addressed the matter of Iraqi widows in his thread, rather than babble about other things, then it would have been a topic worth discussing.

    You, VinylBoy, by jumping in and defending arkfarmbear, and then questioning the veracity of what I had written by providing a link and saying: "Really? Wow:rolleyes:" fully satisfies what I have long perceived your agenda to be. Again, his opening post is not solely (or even 1/3)about Iraqi widows, it is about many things, and is clearly a rant, made with a title, designed to bring in the Anti-Bush league. Hows about we also start shifting some of the direction towars President Obama, seeing as how he has a hand in this now. This not about me being an essentially blind zealot for The United States of America, it is about what was a clearly, not cleverly, designed thread title with a different agenda in the opening post.
     
  14. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Stop overreacting.
    First off, a lack of a link doesn't mean that you need to fly off the handle with the typical and tiresome "left vs. right" banter that you love to engage in. Secondly, what does your unnecessary ranting say about you... the one that was too lazy to do a Google search on their own? Even if someone provides a link to back their claims, I ALWAYS do my own search to double and sometimes even triple check the topic that is being discussed. What's your excuse?

    Stop being so disingenuous. That is what you assumed so stop using the word "us" as if you're speaking for anyone else here but yourself.

    The same way you take shots at other people on here as well as Obama and other politicians in the current administration and other notable people in government or publicly recognized high positions. What's your gripe here? That it's only OK or valid when you do it? Don't play yourself out here...

    And there's the problem. First off, complaining about the costs of the Iraq War has been done on both sides of the political battlefield, as well as heavy criticism regarding Bush's handling of it (if for different reasons). Labeling this as a "far left rant" is a cop-out. Instead of just making this an issue regarding a misleading thread topic, you had to label it and then try to insult it in a generalizing form suggesting that only people "on the left" would do such a thing. You're just as disingenuous as the OP if not more.

    Don't you get sick and tired of the Hatfield/McCoy bickering around here?

    Don't flatter yourself, Northland. You'll NEVER be able to figure out my so-called "agenda". Whether it be a liberal, conservative, an independent, libertarian, tea bagger or whatever political affiliation you can find on this board, I have had heated debates with them all and have disagreed with some of their views. Can't say that much about you, now can we? :rolleyes:
     
  15. Northland

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    6,082
    Likes Received:
    4
    So, your linkless OP was not about what your title screamed. I am proven right, you are proven little more than a Charlatan.



    They might.

    No, it has not proven any such thing, since, your talking points were not about Iraqi widows, and in fact of your 8 numbered points and the follow up base commander point, only 1 made mention of any widows.

    Here's the thing, I have worked in journalism, and while it's true that an enticing headline is important, it is equally true that the gist of the article should be addressing the subject listed in the title (even if in a circuitous way). If any self respecting newspaper or magazine fails to adhere to that directive on a continued basis, the periodical will be seen as unable to follow the basic rules of journalism, it will become known as a tool of propaganda, will lose any respect, and face a stronger liklihood of folding.

    At any rate, you have now admitted that you yourself didn't give a damn about the Iraqi widows and just wanted a venue to yammer on about your deep seated hatred of Bush and Cheney.

    It is not the talking points of your OP, with which I am at odds, it is how it was in no way related to your title.
     
  16. Mr. Snakey

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    24,702
    Likes Received:
    25
  17. arkfarmbear

    arkfarmbear New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Northland
    Your derisive comments about me are something I don't really give a shit about. I certainly am not motivated to argue with you or (anyone else) to defend myself from your attacks.
    This is the first time I have encountered you in a forum but it appears that this is your typical MO.

    For all of your ranting, I have not seen one scrap of your sympathy for the widows or our troops.

    So, tell us how you plan to help the widows?
     
  18. arkfarmbear

    arkfarmbear New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    863
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Mr Snakey. I am aware of the claims about Hussein and I agree it is terrible.

    However, he is not alone in murdering millions of citizens of his country. If the Bush/Cheney Regime invaded Irag as a mission of mercy, why didn't they invade other countries experiencing genocide?

    We know the reason. OIL. The oil and oil related companies that dumped untold amounts of money into getting that Regime into office certainly did not do so just because they agreed with the Regime's political rhetoric. They did so, as do other groups, with a "gentlemen's agreement" that they will see a "return" on their investment. They have done so, and continue to do so, in multiples.
     
  19. Mr. Snakey

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    24,702
    Likes Received:
    25
    My friend, you make a very good point. Part of the reason was about oil. And why shouldn't we protect our national interest? However it was more than that. He invaded Kuwait. He killed 5,000 Kurds. I feel if we let him go he would have become as bad as Hitler. There are many things going on in the world our leaders (left and right) just ignore. Slavery has be going on in the Sudan for a few years now. Many black women, men and children are being sold as slaves and driven from their homes. Many of them are just being murdered. Bush did nothing about it and i don't expect Obama to do anything about it.

    Slavery in the Sudan :: Middle East Forum
     
  20. t9

    t9
    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    314
    Likes Received:
    156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    i'm there now under the cloud,
    Verified:
    Photo
    Who bombed who first? I think the world trade centers and the pentagon was bombed by our enemies and killed more then 3000 people. Quit bashing people,not nice. You fuss about us being n Iraq but in the same breath YOU want us to get involve in Sudan as if we are the world's police force..Wake up.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted