Cool News
Sound Off About STOP-LOSS!!
Merrick here...
A few weeks back, we posted a piece about a movie called STOP-LOSS from BOYS DON'T CRY director Kimberley Peirce.
The movie stars Ryan Phillippe and is about a soldier who returns home from Iraq, only to confront "stop-loss" - a military policy retaining servicemen beyond the time length of time they were supposed to be deployed. I.e. he is sent home...told he has to go back to Iraq...and refuses to go.
You can find out more about the film HERE, and see its trailer HERE. Over the Summer, we ran two early reviews of STOP-LOSS, which can be found HERE and HERE.
Every time we post about this film, we see very interesting Talkbacks and e-mails; the subject of servicemen in Iraq & the nature/purpose of their deployment is clearly a hot topic for discussion and debate.
Appropriately, a new STOP-LOSS website (evidently peripheral to the "Official" website) has opened a "Sound Off" section featuring videos/stories from folks deployed overseas, their families, and an intro from director Kimberley Peirce. Perice will also be responding to folks using the message boards there. There's also a message board where opinions and links to resources (some pertaining to ending the Stop-Loss policy) can be shared & pointedly discussed.
You can get there by CLICKING THIS!
There are some interesting...and very important...notions to be considered here & I thought this site might be interesting to readers who've been tracking the film (which opens March 28).
-
+ Expand All
-
It isn't working, folks. And while the subject matter is serious, this sounds more like documentary fare. Does anyone really feel like seeing this as "entertainment"?
-
Nov 29, 2007 9:48:19 AM CST
RYAN PHILIPPE HAS CHOSEN TO FIGHT STOP-LOSS HERE'S WHY ....,
by bringingsexyback
He doesn't want to put his life on the line for armchair warmongers like Anchorite anymore. And he wants to be with his wife and chillen.
-
Give us one damnit!
-
Straight Men Can't Design, apparently..
-
damn
-
the project runway talkback is/node/34908
-
Damn it, I can't get that song "Girls Night Out (Let's go, GNO) by Hannah Montana out of head. Curse that CD player I got for my three year old daughter.
-
/talkback_display/34908#comment_1788552
-
not a political board. And when is Hollywood going to realize that these Iraq/current war movies are going to fail at the BO?
-
See article above
-
Oh, and you lost me at "The movie stars Ryan Phillipe..."
BSB: if there comes a time when project runway makes the level of TB, between you and I, it may set an all-time record for ALL CAPS USAGE. I say, bring it on. -
Christian is hotter than any of them!
-
Isn't Jack like, the ideal gay guy? More composed, very neat and tidy with a rock hard body? Not a flamer? Why do I even care?
-
The fat guy reminds me of the guy who plays Hagrid or Oliver Platt. I laughed when he cried that Sarah Jessica parker was on. Also, Tiki Barber's teeth are so fricking white that I thought he had marshmallows for teeth.
-
and by 'interesting' you mean, 'angry, virulent and bile-filled' right Quint?
like a lot of AICN talkbacks, some talkbackers can't help but turning it into a whinge about politics/religion or whatever social issue they see the film as addressing. perhaps that's fair game seeing how filmmakers are seem to be addressing these issues in an increasingly self-conscious way (e.g. Lions for Lambs, Rendition, and pretty much every documentary post-Bowling for Columbine). but it makes for fucking tedious reading.
some of the blame goes to the filmmakers themselves - not, i must stress, for addressing the issues, or even their particular take (even if it's simplistic or in some cases plain moronic) - but for the hokey way that some of them shoehorn the issue into the film. unless it's outright polemic posing as a documentary (which is fine, so far as it goes), it generally makes for terrible filmmaking.
but most of the blame goes to the talkbackers themselves. can't you guys discuss anything without it turning into a polarized bitchfest about Iraq/the Bush Administration/Red State vs Blue State bleargh? it's like Crossfire for the insane.
i don't have a solution, mind. i'm just saying how sucky it is.
-
Where you can escape the creaters political agenda. Even where we seek an escape in entertainment you get AICN cramming movies that have no appeal other than to drive their agenda. This movie will bomb like all others but you will still get people that should spend their time writing on movies people actually care about, instead we get the same crap. AICN is just like everywhere else.
-
The surge worked and violence is way down in Iraq. What a shame!
-
what about creators?
-
Whoops, them too!
-
Did you see Heidi Klum salivating over Tiki? You KNOW she wanted a Klum sandwich between Seal and Tiki. That girl just LOVES herself some hard black men ...
-
To making good movies who have a message that doesnt have to be spelled out in a boring way, see Lions for Lambs, or need a gimmick, see Redacted. I disagree w/ the message in those films but they would work on so many more levels if they were clever in delivering their message like more classic movies, see A Clockwork Orange or Dr. Strangelove.
-
Nov 29, 2007 10:38:07 AM CST
NEWC0253 - GO SUCK CHENEY'S COCK YOU FUCKING WINGNUT
by bringingsexyback
Just kidding. Actually, the last few 'political' TBs have been extremely civilized, thoughtful and enlightening. I had some very good exchanges with Holy Hell, Xiphos, Bill Brasky, IndustryKiller, and many others whose handles escape me at the moment (sorry). Ironically, I've not encountered a more balanced message board anywhere else. There are plenty of people on both sides of the fence, and I've discovered that in many cases, a fence does not even exist because we share so many common beliefs and values.
-
She was staring off into space thinking about his butt. She loves Oreos.
-
Would you guys still bash it as just another movie that will tank?
-
You are forgetting that is a great movie that is driven by the characters, not the agenda.
-
Yes it would probably, like many classics, tank if it came out now.
-
Was Tiki's Asian wife hot? I was in the kitchen washing dishes and missed her.
-
Would make a great Lifetime Channel movie of the week: KHARTOUM, Sudan — Sudan charged a British teacher Wednesday with inciting religious hatred after she allowed her students to name a teddy bear Muhammad, an offense that could subject her to 40 lashes, the country's official news agency reported. The teacher, Gillian Gibbons, was arrested after one of her pupils' parents complained, accusing her of naming the bear after Islam's Prophet Muhammad."What has happened was not haphazard or carried out of ignorance, but rather a calculated action and another ring in the circles of plotting against Islam," the Sudanese Assembly of the Ulemas said the statement.
"It is part of the campaign of the so-called war against terrorism and the intense media campaign against Islam," they said.
The clerics said the "plot" was exemplified "in the writings of renegade Salman Rushdie and the blasphemous caricatures of Prophet Muhammad." Rushdie has received multiple death threats from hardline Muslims for publishing a novel questioning Muhammad's morals. -
I agree. I thought Rendition was severely flawed as a movie, despite my passion about the subject matter.
-
She was good looking but not like drop dead gorgeous.
-
That just reaffirms my daily and everlasting belief that religion is the most horrendous affliction mankind has ever suffered.
-
like a bad joke..and hiedi klum seemed hot, but i saw her on oprah recently, and she sounds just like my stupid fucking insane sister in law, hiedi also doesn't understand the concept of sarcasm..zee chermanz, no humour. but at least hiedi probably hasn't tried to shake her newborn baby.the difference between inlaws and outlaws is that outlaws are wanted.
-
Face: 6
Body: 10 plus
Personality: Who care if you are tapping that
-
she was detained, and may face jailtime. lashings are considered overkill, even by some officials over there.
-
Which only supports Rickey's theorey they Tiki likes dudes. Rickey can't stand that fucker.
http://ridingwithricky.blogspot.com
-
Nov 29, 2007 11:22:32 AM CST
Was there any movie about the Iraq war that didn't flop?
by jackpumpkinhead
Here's another one to join their ranks.
-
"lashings are considered overkill, even by some officials over there" wow how progressive of them.
-
Who wants to be reminded about our shame? No one today wants to see a movie pointing out how the weak-minded sheep in this country allowed neocon fascists to illegally invade a sovereign country under false pretenses. Who wants to be reminded that we're running a concentration camp in Guantanamo Bay? These movies will be ignored today, but will point out our culpability to future generations.
-
Yummy!
-
Lighten up Francis.
Three meals a day and a prayer rug sounds better than getting your head cut off for driving a truck full of medicals supplies. Maybe Berkley could become a sanctuary city for people who blow up bombs intentionally while candy is being handed out to children.
Of course when they start throwing acid in women's faces because they don't have them covered or rape them because their "courts" sentenced it, you might rethink it, but it will be too late.
-
You're wasting your time trying to argue that our atrocities are less harsh than other's atrocities. Once upon a time, probably long before you were born, we were considered to be the 'good guys'. Part of that creed was that we wouldn't stoop as low as our enemies, even during the real World Wars. Today, the intellectually lazy are ready to burn the Constitution if that makes it easier to torture a cab driver for information on his neighbor. We can't protect our country by destroying everything it stands for from within.
-
I'm not saying I agree with it, but if there's anyone on the planet who deserves it KSM is the guy.
-
We weren't fighting sub-human animals who think it is cool to die will killing scores of infidels. At the same time, they don't belong to a country's army, or wear a uniform, or play by any of the rules the UN types up. If we were sinking as low as our enemies, the middle east would have carpet bombed years ago, and this would be over very very quickly. Can you the Jolly Jihads would keep their gloves if they had the same weapons to use?
-
Dance of the Living Dead!!! Beat your feet! I hear some guy stuck his finger in a turkey's virginia!! Hell in a hand basket! Hell in a HAND basket I say! All sinners! All saints! Slogans and bumper stickers. Insult to injury. Lies and truth. An individual is smart, people are "dumb, panic-y animals"...and you know it. God is a bullet. Personally, I'm all for the classic devil; you know, horns, pitchfork, red tights...hunched over and jumping and dancing while laughing manically. It's full of stars!!!!
-
...isn't the political point they're making. Weather you're pro-war, against the war, whatever...the simple fact is people aren't going to pay ten bucks to see what they've seen every night on the news for the past four years. And while it may be hard for people in Hollywood to understand, most people in America are dealing with the effects of the war in real life. Weather it is their children, friends, neighbors- the war has an actual real impact on people and the last thing they're going to do is pay to see more of it at the movies... where most people go to escape.
-
I'm sure the millions of victims of the Nazis would disagree with you. And we didn't win that war by becoming Nazis ourselves.
-
Instead of sending some poor schmuck back to Iraq for a fifth, sixth, or twelfth tour of duty, I think the political fuckwads who ordered this muckfest should have to march their tired old asses over there to fill in the gaps in the military presence. They should bring their kids, too.
In the old days, leaders didn't wage wars they weren't willing to fight themselves. Washington was ON THE FIELD. Alexander The Great stood on the battlefield. Napoleon wasn't always hiding on another continent while his soldiers were charging the enemy.
Today, we have pussies for leaders. People who pull the trigger from afar and then sit in a comfortable chair and watch their soldiers die on CNN.
I think there should be an international law that makes it a war crime for a leader to wage a war, or call for a major battle, without being physically present on the battlefield. They don't have to lead the troops, but they should at least share the danger. That way, we'd be a lot less likely to see war-- Leaders would think twice before putting soldiers in mortal peril.
Right now, wars are started by people who are least affected by them. Armchair commanders. Fucking unconscionable. -
he said that Jenna should be waterboarded so she can report back to her father as to if it should be considered torture or not. How many more days until he's finished being president?
-
Most Germans fought because they were forced too. The only true believers were in the elite SS. Jihad Johhnies come from all over the globe to fight the Jihad. There maybe some poor 16 kids forced in blow up a jewish hotdog stand, but that is the make up of the fine folks at Gitmo. Were talking the types who planned a chemical attack on Jordan, the African Embassy bombings, and yes Loose Change Moobbats, 9/11. Stop think in terms of singulary country, these are true Jihad warriors who flock from all over tthe fucking place.
-
ALL CAPS!!! Please MandalorianSage, don't ever post again.
-
or jail, if you prefer.
-
Pretty fascinating stuff. I think at the very least that no matter our political affiliation we can all agree that this is a subject that needs to be discussed. It's an awfully dirty practice no matter how you feel about the war.
-
ROCKET CARS!!! Who cares about blowing shit up and jihad this and jihad that! Everybody here is like "Jihad on the asshole in a hat who cut in the drive-thru line at the Taco Bell!!!". ME? I want my fucking rocket car now!!!!
-
Nov 29, 2007 1:50:46 PM CST
I'll be more interested in Iraq war movies 15 years from now
by magic rat
It's stupid to do movies about stuff that's happening right now. Regardless of the political slant of the movie. And I hate Bush and want the war to end as much as anyone.
-
Not THAT Mohammed. The Mohammed I bought halal chicken from last week and got a stomach ache. Tasted good though.
-
but my man Xi just arrived stateside from Iraq and suffered an injury. He's a hero.
Yo Xi are you back home yet? -
Actually Xiphos has a more extensive background than I am qualified to discuss, involving his work in Afghanistan. But I think his point was not to lump all soldiers in a category - many of them are there out of a admirable sense of duty and sacrifice. Don't let the bad apples spoil the bunch, or however the saying goes ...
-
Nov 29, 2007 2:45:56 PM CST
The current box office failings are ABSOLUTELY because of the li
by aggimundo
If Hollywood put out an Iraqi war movie with no political agenda (right or left) that showed our soldiers and their actions in a brave and positive light, but didn't cover up the horror and grotesqueness of war (ie Saving Private Ryan) the American people would see it in droves. People are tired of going to the movies to be preached at about how evil and wrong the country they love is, and they damned sure don't want to see movies that try to portray our entire military as fascist rapists and brutes. Who wants to pay $10 to see that over and over?
With the exception of the political extremists in this country, we all love our boys over there. Whether we agree with the war or not, the vast majority of Americans believe our solidiers are honorable men and women who really want to help the Iraqi people get on their feet, and bring to justice the Islamic militants who want them and us re-enslaved. Right, left, middle -- I think the majority of us agree on that, even if we disagree about the methods necessary to accomplish it. Show us a movie about the nobleness of our soldier's intents over there and the American people will reward you with their dollars. -
Clearly Hollywood is defining insanity as doing the same thing over and over again, hoping for a different result.
-
...that since Kimberly Pierces brother is a combat veteran who wanted to share his story, and his fellow servicemens stories and home videos with the world, she could use her opportunity to follow up her first amazing film with Stop Loss. Heres a film thats anti-war, yet pro-soldier. But that still somehow equates with islamocidal treachery. Like the trailer alot, looks like it will be a good film, but waaay to topic specific, which will leave it to anonymity in years to come. Must remark how strange it has gotten now though, that the warmongers don't want ANY iraq stories to be told, wether they are pro-troop or not. Its like they want to the whole thing to just go away and be forgotten about. Kind of pathetic. Should add that The Kingdom, Rendition and Lions For Lambs were all bad movies, that looked like turds. This flick looks moderately entertaining. Don't like the cast though.
-
...This is a film made with the collaboration of, and highlighting issues that actual Troops want to share. And your telling them to shut up. Strange way to be "patriotic" and support your boys in uniform. "Keep your mouth shut cannon fodder, your interupting O'rielly's talking points about border hoppers"
-
I think thats an excellent point. As one of the "warmongers" I don't want to see this movie silenced or not shown by any means, and very few of us on the right side of the aisle (including O'Reilly I'd imagine) would want that either. In fact Stop-Loss does look much more intriguing than the other Iraq movies that have come out EXACTLY because it is, as you said, "pro-Soldier" even if against the war. I think movies such as this one would have more credibility and pull if Hollywood would ever allow my side to have a voice to present our case as well. Unfortunately, because all the movies are so stridently one-sided, it makes potentially insightful ones such as this seem to be continued preaching and vilification even though it may not be.
-
Nov 29, 2007 3:30:32 PM CST
Please don't call Saving Private Ryan the pinnacle of war movies
by phool2056
It's a decent movie, but far from fair. Watch it again, and notice how every American death involves horror and gore, but most of the German deaths involve maybe a spray of blood, but mostly clutching the chest and falling over like a Bond villain's henchmen. Most of the guys fighting on the German side in Normandy, particularly on the beaches, were the very bottom of the Wehrmacht barrel, including guys who had been captured on other fronts and reshuffled and thrown into the trenches with a gun. Their deaths were just as unfortunate as those of the Americans.
I haven't seen any Iraq movies. I don't know if the Hollywood machine is capable of making a good one nowadays, and if one does get made, I imagine it will have a mediocre box office take. Hollywood just isn't set up to deal with such a polarizing topic anymore, if it ever was. Don't forget, by the time The Deer Hunter came out, there was pretty much a consensus that the conflict in Vietnam was a tragic, monumental cock-up. When everybody, or almost everybody, is back home and has had a few years to think it over, and I do believe that history will see this as yet another monumental cock-up, maybe we'll start getting some good movies about it. -
Since we haven't heard any news (on a scale of quixotic to boner-killing) in the past couple of weeks, may we reasonably conclude that George Miller's ill-conceived Justice League film is finally deader than shit? If not, I just saw High School Musical with my niece, and that coked-up cast of barely-pubescent fuck-wits would be right up Miller's alley!
-
I'm not going to get into the tragedy or lack-there-of of the deaths of German soldiers who were willingly or forcedly protecting a genocidal dictatorship. I understand your point, but I disagree and I'll leave it at that. However, what movie have you seen where the deaths of developed characters are shown as casually as the deaths of nameless faceless ones?? The death that stands out the most to me (other than the D-Day deaths, which were just factually more gruesome than the deaths of the defending Nazi's) is the death of the bell-tower sniper. His death looked a lot more gruesome than Vin Diesel's death, which was exactly like the Bond henchman shot you describe. You're reaching BIG TIME on that one.
-
First I heard it on a new Rambo TV spot and now this?! That song fucking sucks...let it die!
-
I hear that there are previews of I Am Legend tomorrow, so I expect to start seeing the reviews coming in over the weekend. End of newsflash!!
-
...Did kind of stumble and fall as it progressed, almost hitting Chuck Norris levels of fantasy and sentimentallity. Well made though. It's a shame we can't have ten hour screenings, because Band Of Brothers was amazing, and pretty much improved upon everything in Ryan, including rounding out the realities of conflict. I don't think either film/show has a bearing on Iraq though. Different kind of wars. Probally look more towards Korea or Vietnam era based flicks. Platoon is still probally tops for me in that regard. Even if it was crazily melodramatic and over the top.
-
and stop loss is a part of life for us. I have not seen this movie and don't intend to. Anyone in the military that does not know what stop loss is, is an idiot. Everyone I know knows about it. From what I'e seen of the trailer, the guy says he did his 4 years and wants out. The truth is this, you don't sign up for 4 years. You sign up for 8. 4 active and 4 inactive. I can't say I feel too bad for anyone that is oblivious to this. I will say that if someone wants out, they should let them go. I do not wish to serve next to someone who does not want to be there. I see the Air Force let too many good people go every day to put up with babies like this.
-
I think I'll leave the hate filled, grammatically incorrect drivel to you. You're much better at it than me, and your points are so insightful that they are impossible to argue!
-
I just think its funny that someone who hurled that many unfounded insults in three sentences thinks I'M in the hate-filled, braindead imbecile. Seriously, which of your "points" is it that I'm supposed to argue?
-
"1. Not based on fact or sound evidence; groundless." Which crime was it Bush committed exactly? We should really rush your proof of this to the media! As for not attacking me personally -- yes you did. I'm not a fan of Bush, but I very much believe our continued presence in Iraq is justified and necessary, thus those insults were guided towards me. No, I wasn't offended by them at all. They made me smile because I'm used to baseless namecalling being the primary means of debate from extremists on the left. Reasonable liberals are much more fun to talk to because they understand their positions rather than getting them spoon-fed to them from DemocraticUnderground.com or MTV.
-
Can we just do "Love and HUGS"? I'm not really a fan of the whole...you know...kissing thing...
-
We have created a power vaccuum. There's nothing left to argue there...its done. When we leave a country with a power vaccuum horrible atrocities occur against the innocent people we leave behind. It would be inconcionable for us to leave that country before the government is in place and able to protect itself. They are not there yet, and likely won't be for some time. Its frustrating, its annoying, but its a fact. I anticipate US bases in Iraq for decades to come, just as we still have in Germany. Also, (just so you know) no matter who gets elected in the next election, be it Hillary, Obama, Giulianni, or Huckabee...we will still have a large presence in Iraq at the end of their first term. No matter what any of them say, we cannot leave now and all of them (Dems included) know it. Our bed is made and we must lay in it.
-
For someone so anti-war you sure do like violence... ;-)
Pray tell, why do you feel our continued presence in Iraq is unjustified and unnecessary? This is not a question about going in in the first place...we're there now, why leave? -
It's their money and they can be stupid with it if they want. Your insults aren't helping anything any more than theirs are. And please please please, push the capslock key on the left side of your keyboard.
-
Is it safe to assume that since you hate Bush for going into Iraq and getting our serviceman killed, that you support Bush for bravely keeping troops out of Darfur? And that you supported Clintons brave decision to ignore Rwanda even though a million people died? Are you only in favor of saving American lives, or is there some other criteria for using the US military?
-
For the love of God man, I never said anything about the surge. It is working, hence very little reporting on Iraq from most media outlets as of late. But if you think the Iraqi government is up and running you're out of your mind. They are still a fledgling democracy with a lot of kinks and flaws to work out before they can stand against Islamic militants who would easily overrun them without our protection. God man, you're making me wonder if Gridbug isn't right about the reading comprehension skills of conservatives...
-
If people don't go to see these movies because they supposedly portray the soldiers in a negative light, then how can they possibly know how the soldiers were portrayed? It's not fair to the films or filmmakers to blame them for their lack of success if people are being discouraged from seeing them because they think they're something that they're not. The media is going after these movies because they don't really want people to question the war. They want people to keep ignoring it and worrying about gas prices instead. In my opinion, these movies are just trying to get people to think and that's exactly what we're being conditioned not to do.
-
Thats a fair point. I hate people who just attack a movie without having seen it, and I don't think its a good idea generally. I don't want to be that guy. However, with the exception of Redacted (which the mainstream media won't touch, and Fox News and talk radio has attacked mercilessly...rightfully so in my opinion) I don't think you can make a case that the media is out to get these movies. Lions for Lambs was touted like crazy by every outlet and many in the media was screaming its praises, but the American people read the plot reviews, and the movie description and decided it wasn't for them. If Hollywood really cared about making people think they would make movies like Lions for Lambs and also one that presented the more conservative side. As it is only one side is presented so it just seems like propoganda, and that THEY are the ones who are afraid to be made to think about opposing arguments. I don't want the Hollywood of the 40s with nothing but mindless patriotism (although those movies have their refreshing and fun qualities), but this constant negative view of our country isn't good either. There is a middle ground. I would like to be able to make my own opinion about Redacted by seeing it myself, but there is little doubt in my mind from the wide variety of descriptions I've read that it is a movie I do not want to support with my dollars, and thats the way I think a lot of thinking individuals feel.
-
I won't even consider seeing a Hollywood movie that shows the worst of the US until they have the actual courage to show just who it is we are fighting. How about a flick that shows the true evil of the jihadis and who they are?
-
Very interesting analysis. See, we have a lot more in common than we thought! You know what's wrong with the system? The Republicans told me, "look thats an evil Democrat!!! Don't bother even talking to him he's trying to kill us all! Vote for me so his candidate doesn't get into power!" and the Democrats told you the same thing about Republicans. Then all they have to do is point fingers at each other, convince their bases that the other is evil, DO NOTHING of any real value to America, and they stay in power. If we ever really started talking to each other and realizing how much we all just want whats best for this country and the world, they'd actually have to do something or we'd vote their lazy asses out. Anyways, I disagree with some of your basic premises (ie Most Iraqis want us to leave immediately...where are those figures?). I also find the attrocities committed horrifying (Redacted shows one, though skewed a little) but I think they're much fewer and far between than it appears when thats all we hear about. Most of our guys are incredibly good folks, who just want to come back from there knowing they helped some people across the pond achieve the kind of happiness and prosperity we have here in the States. We can't paint them all as those bad apples which are the ones that get so much media attention and are in the miniscule minority. Good discussion!
-
I've haven't seen such pasionate talkbacks since the release of Van Helsing.
-
The only remotely political movie that has a prayer of not belly-flopping. I agree that stop-loss sucks as a policy. It also looks like it's going to suck as a movie. Unless I want to be put to sleep. Yawn.
-
Is Sark, and the Master Control Program. I would thing a gridbug would appreciate that. And our only hope now is Tron. He fights for the Users.
-
This is what happens when your military is not designed to be an occupational force. Our military is designed to be a surgical, lightning strike force that blows things up and moves on. The civilian leadership of this country is completely clueless when it comes to waging war. When you ignore your dad's book on why he didn't go into Baghdad and then ignore the entire military when they tell you they don't have the man power to wage this kind of war, this is what you get. My heart, prayers and gratitude go out to everyone associated with our armed forces. They do the job so I don't have to and I am grateful for that. I hope they get to come home sooner rather than later.
-
About how people who disagree with them need to pull their heads out of their asses need to more soberly and accurately assess the current position of their own head, irrespective of their personal opinion of the superiority of their own political enlightenment.
-
Of shit. Let's not go there, okay?
-
From what I've read and heard, most Iraqi's are grateful that we got rid of Hussein, but now would like us to get out and let them run their country. Democracy may very well work for Iraq, but it's naieve to think our brand of democracy is the ticket for the rest of the world. Remember, it took us over 200 years to get to this point -Iraq or anyone else isn't getting there in four years. Also don't think the soldiers don't know why they are there or are being lied to. Yes, they may be being lied to, but they have a much better understanding of the picture than we do sitting behind our computers.
-
you always talk, you Americans. You talk and you talk and say 'let me tell you something' and 'I just wanna say this'. Well, you're dead now, so shut up!
-
Who won Vietnam by the way...oh yeah, nobody! How will the Iraq war be looked upon in a few years. My guess would be, where the US sent some of it's young men to the slaughter. Btw, am I just dumb.. Why did the US invade Iraq? I know the original excuse was weapons of mass destruction, but we all know how that turned out. So again, why did the US go to war with Iraq and why are they still there? If the excuse was to get rid of a brutal dictator I think that's a pretty lame excuse, as there are a lot more countries around the world that would rate a lot higher on the scale of things to do. I could understand they invaded Afghanistan, but Iraq I just dont get. Let me just finish by saying that I used to have great respect for America as did a lot of countries, but with all the choices that the US government has made since 911,the line between good guys and bad guys has become very grey.
-
If you're American and just read my last post, open your eyes and try not to label me as a Democrat because I dont agree with the war. Other countries do exist outside your own you know, and I'm just a neutral looking from an outside point of view.
-
Because you seem to know exactly everyone's feelings in the military. Have you done a poll about the military not "being told the truth about what they are doing"? Excuse me, but what the h--l do you think we see on TV every night? They don't know there's a war on? Or where? Or why? Okay. Is that the stupidest remark ever. Second point, you don't think 9/11 wasn't a declaration of war? How much does it take for you? More than the 3,000 people killed that day? How about 10,000? Or 20,000? That enough for you? Oh, I guess you would just sit back home, waiting for more deaths to happen. Right. And third, why should our president go help Darfur after all the flack he's taken for Iraq?? Then he gets accused even more of being an "invading" force, right? How pathetic your arguments are - well, they can't even be called arguments.
-
It didn't tank. Redacted isn't out yet, but just looks like it almost certainly doomed (Entertainment Weekly didn't give it a good a particularly good review). But the Kingdom looked like a halfway decent movie. While I am sympathetic with the legitimate criticisms of Stop-Loss policy (of course, I think there's lots of blame to go around there, including Bush Sr. and Clinton's fantasy "peace dividend" that slashed forces, bases, and military resources, and Donald Rumsfeld's "lean mean military" fantasy machine. But the movie doesn't look all that great.
-
"The true enemy is ignorance"? Are you serious? Do you honestly think there is a way we can talk to the jihadis and achieve peace? What's knee jerk about this? Are you denying that there is any terrorist threat in the world? Or are you saying that Bush is just as bad?
-
I should clarify. It didn't flop. But it wasn't a hit, or particularly profitable, although by the time DVD and cable is figured into it, it probably will make money. Not so for Rendition, probably not for Lions and Lambs, doubtful for Redacted. Profitable at the box office and afterwards: Charlie Wilson's War. Mark my words.
-
What was the link between 911 and Iraq? I've heard Mr Bush mention 911 and Iraq in sentences together but never understood the link. Was Bin Laden hidding in Iraq when the US invaded?
-
to your question...Sadamm Hussein was in touch with many Al-queida before 9/11, supporting attacks on America (also giving money to terrorists). After 9/11, American policy became that of pre-emptive strikes against those countries that were a threat to us.
-
terrorists to tea, you know, in a little tea shop with buttered scones and an English tea set with marmalade included. By sitting down and calmly having this discussion over a polite and very British tea, all of our problems with terrorists in the future will be avoided forever!
-
Sounds like the situation the American military is in right now. Being forced to fight an unjust war against a country that never attacked us. And the Fox News watching sheep are keeping them there while Herr Bush waves the flag.
-
Again I have another question. Would there be any chance that maybe Sadam had a chip on his shoulder against america after they invaded Iraq in 1991. Also, has it ever been explained why the Bin Laden family were flown out of the US in the following days after 911 when all other planes were grounded? Why didnt Bush mention the Sadam supporting terrorists when he went to try and get support from the UN to invade Iraq instead of using the weapons of mass distruction line?
-
Last I heard, there wasn't a draft. No-one is being "forced to fight" - and there are soldiers signing up to return two, three or even four times to go back. Last I heard too, that Bush didn't put in anyone in prison for disagreeing with him - unlike Hitler - so to call him "Herr" is simply buying into the liberal leftie "lockstep", which is a lot more dictator-like and Stalinist that Bush could ever be.
-
The ONLY reason violence has decreased in Iraq is because we are spending 1 BILLION dollars a WEEK to put a tank on every corner. The slaughter will resume as soon as we stop babysitting their civil war, whether we leave next year or 20 years from now.
-
If people were signing up to return to Iraq in any reasonable numbers, the military wouldn't need to force Stop Loss on them, dude. You really need to read up on current events.
-
Sadaam was anti-American BEFORE and after the Iraq war in 1991...he tried to kill George Bush's father, for one thing, and Clinton ordered missile strikes in retaliation. Not all planes were grounded when some Saudi Arabia families flew back. Most of the planes were grounded for the first few hours after 9/11, and then they allowed some planes to go out. In answer to your third question, all the other nations already knew about Sadaam supporting terrorists way before Bush went to the UN for support.
-
First of all, many German soldiers wanted to fight in WWII and VOLUNTEERED. They especially volunteered for units that killed Jews. Take it from someone with WWII veterans in the family. With Stop Loss, exactly how many people is this happening to? Do you have numbers? It sounds like you are the one who needs to read up on current events.
-
any films you watch? In that case, you should go watch Enchanted - it's a lot better than the anti-war, anti-soldier crap that's out right now, and plus, you'll believe that fairytales DO come true!
-
Sorry I had to go there but I couldn't help myself.
-
I believe the term you are thinking of is "friends with benefits". And what a great term it is! Glad to see you warmly welcomed back with some nice poon bud! Hope all is well with ya.
-
We went into Iraq for a myriad of reasons, but first and foremost was that our intelligence agency, and those of most other democratic countries around the world (Great Britain, Australia, Germany, Italy, Spain, etc) all agreed that Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons. Hussein and Iraq had repeatedly defied UN resolutions for 12 years. Negotiations were attempted repeatedly in those 12 years, and when all security organizations agreed that Iraq had nuclear weapons the US felt compelled to act before we got hit again. Our way of life could likely not survive even one nuclear strike on our soil. It now certainly appears there were no nuclear weapons there, and that Saddam was indeed making it look as if he had WMDs to keep Iran afraid of him. It also does seem possible to me that any nuclear weapons Saddam had may have gone across the border to Syria as his family did. There has been no definitive evidence to prove that theory to my knowledge, but it is within the realm of possibility. We made a mistake on that, but there was nothing nefarious about it on America's part. We also went into Iraq because after 911 we needed a militarily strategic position in the Middle East. I don't think many politicians would admit it, but I think it was a definite factor. As long as they are focused on attacking our troops there, they will be less focused on attacks against our civilians at home. Also, with troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan we have Iran surrounded, and can now keep a very dangerous Ahmadinejad in check. So far, despite him clanging his sword from time to time, that is working. If Iraq becomes a success in democracy, it is possible that the very westernized Iranian populace would overthrow the mullahs and take hold of democracy themselves. That would be ideal, as Iran is probably the largest supporter of terrorism in the world. Finally, we went in because there were in fact terrorist training camps in Iraq with airplane fuselages that they were using for training in 911 style airline takeovers. Saddam was aware of these camps, and there is evidence he was funding them. Have we made mistakes? Dear god yes. Were our intentions noble? Yes, I truly believe we wanted to protect the world from a danger posed by a dictator with nuclear weapons, and also to give freedom and prosperity to a people who were long oppressed by that brutal dictator.
-
Nov 29, 2007 8:22:16 PM CST
So there ARE some people who still think The Deer Hunter is some
by i am_notreal
And most of them are in this talkback, apparently.
-
"So there ARE some people who still think The Deer Hunter is something more than pretentious, contrived, faux-Hemingway claptrap." Whoops, forgot the character limit on post titles.
-
An attempt at one mans life isnt a good reason for a whole country to go to war. The fact that many Saudi's were flown out within the first few hours doesnt answer my question. Is it not rational thinking that if you suspect someone of murder that you'd interview and hold the closest people you know to them who may have valuable information as to their whereabouts rather than letting them go on the first flight out. But the support asked from the UN was based on Iraq having WOMD and the UN disagreed. From an outside point of view, would it not have been better to focus all the US military's power on the terrorists in Afganistan rather than one man. Either way, Terrorists will always find a way to terrorise whether funded or not.
-
That just didn't happen. It has been spouted by the tin-foil hat wearers, and some on the extreme left, but there were no flights of OBL's family out of the US. See here, which has info directly from the 9/11 Commission report (written by a committee led by Democrats).
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp -
Thanks aggimundo. A lot of what you said makes sense including your speculation. On a personal level I do feel that going into Iraq was rushed and there was never a proper strategy in place, which leaves you in the situation that your troops are now in. Do you jump ship and dessert a country in civil war only to have more martyrs who will ultimately blame the US for creating their woes,ie. more enemies, or do you stay and fight a war with no end in sight. God Bless and wishing you all the best. You folks have some serious responsibility next year when it comes to voting. I dont envy you! Goodnight.
-
Your comment is similar to a lot of other falsehoods that were spread before we went into Iraq. The "intelligence" you speak of was manufactured. Essentially, any intelligence that showed Husseinw as not a threat to us or was not producing or capable of producing WMDs was covered up, ignored, or twisted by the Bush administration (see: 60 minutes, on numerous occasions, for proof of this).Bush was determined, in his stubborn, obsitnate way, to lead us into war, even if the evidence showed over time there was no need to attack Hussein. He simply didn't care. Once he made up his mind to go to war, no evidence would sway him to the contrary, which is a standard way of thinking among fundamentalist Christians. So, yes, there was nefarious reasoning behind us going to war.More importantly, you write as though "we" went to war for reasons. The ONLY reason "we" went to war is because the president ordered America to go to war. The correct question is, why did George Bush send us to war? He certainly may have had those things on his mind you mentioned, but he was incorrect. We already have multiple "strategic positions" in the mideast, namely Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Turkey (more or less). We did not need Iraq as a Strategic Base.This is the who fallacy of the Neo-conservative position, which you clearly espouse. George Bush was too smart by half..."if we do this, then this will happen, then we can do this, then we can do this, then we can do this." A reverse Domino theory, where all of the nations over there would fall to Democracy if we can just get Iraq to be democratic.Never mind that Islam in general is hostile to democracy, and when it works it serves only, with very few cases, to elect people to power to further repress Jews, women, Christians, and others. It is better to have a dictator rule and support the rights of the repressed than to give power to the people who will guarantee, by electing radical Imams and muslim leaders (see recent elections in Turkey), that sharia law will be enforced over time.So, the point is, we didn't just "make mistakes" going into Iraq. Going into Iraq was a Bad Idea. It was a Stupid, Poorly Planned idea.And george Bush did indeed act nefariously, and in fact criminally, in getting us into this mess. He is a criminal for lying us into a war, and should be impeached.That is all.
-
Evidence the President had info we did not need to invade Iraq for WMDs:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/04/23/60-minutes-cia-official-reveals-bush-cheney-rice-were-personally-told-iraq-had-no-wmd-in-fall-2002/
And of course, the "Curveball" source, totally discredited:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/60minutes/main3440577.shtml
-
Calling people names just proves that you have no argument. And if you're unfamiliar with the Stop Loss crisis, please switch off the MTV and try a news channel.
-
No offense meant with the "shmuck" comment. You're right. Soldiers are men doing a job. That's why I don't believe the term "hero" should apply to someone just because they happen to be a soldier, firefighter or cop. (my father was both a soldier (a veteran of The Korean Conflict) and a firefighter, btw). If you're getting paid to put your ass on the line, then when you DO put your ass on the line it's not heroic. It's brave, certainly. It's honorable, to a degree. It's also admirable, respectable, and appreciated.
Howeber, "heroic" is when you go out of your way and put yourself at risk when it's not part of your job, in order to save someone/something. People throw the word "hero" around so much these days that it's losing its meaning.
I mean no slight or insult to soldiers. I'm sure, Xiphos, that you're a kickass soldier and a good, honorable person who did his job to the best of his ability. Most soldiers are. Heroism, however, requires a step beyond simply doing what it is you do for a paycheck, no matter how dangerous that job might be. If you use the "dangerous job" criteria, then coal miners are heroes, as are tiger tamers and guys who work the night shift in gas stations in Detroit.
All my original post was trying to say was that I dislike the idea that men who are somehow supposedly "better" than you have a scary amount of control over your destiny when you're sent to war, and they do it without any risk to themselves or their families. Indeed, the majority of them make sure their families are well clear of the action before they send you off to fight. I think that should change. They should have to deal wih the risks, too.
Maybe you are a hero-- I don't know what you, personally, have done. I know my father saved many lives in his life, between his military duty and his work as a firefighter. He has pulled many a person from a burning house or car, and he would never accept being called a hero--- He was just a guy doing his job.
I worked in gas station in Detroit in the 1990s. I was held up at gun point twice, and was once punched by thugs prior to the store being robbed. I managed to survive, get their description and license plate number (despite being told to "stay in here on the floor until we're gone or I'll kill you") and in doing so made sure the guys were caught before they harmed anyone else. Am I a hero?
I don't think I am. I took the job knowing full well what I was getting into. I got paid for managing the store and preventing financial losses. But maybe I am a hero, after all. I mean, by the criteria of FOX News, just *taking* the job of cop, firefighter, or soldier is heroic on its own. Surely, that makes me a hero, too?
Or maybe we just need to do our jobs and it's our social responsibility to do what we can to help people and deal with the bad guys..?
A speedy recovery to you, Mr. Xiphos. I hope you aren't sent back to fight again when you're an old man. -
I was reading some of your earlier posts. Compared to the tactics the U.S. used to win World War II, the modern military comes across as a branch of Amnesty International. Don't fool yourself, the Western powers killed hundreds of thousands of Axis women and children. And it was ultimately the right move to make. War is brutal but it was a fight for survival. If we could do that, than a little waterboarding doesn't bother me very much, particularly on the bastards behind 9/11. (And in point of fact my history teacher was a Navy pilot who was waterboarded during SERE training. He didn't like it very much but if we can do it to our own people than its only right we use it on somebody who actually deserves it.)
-
That figure says it all right there. The Bush propaganda machine led the lemmings by the media nose until they were crying for blood from the WRONG country. Then when that lie was exposed, Herr Bush switched to WMD's as his excuse. Then when THAT lie was exposed, he used the generic "freedom" excuse as to why he has sacrificed 4,000 American soldiers and 100,000 Iraqi civilians in an illegal invasion. I wonder when Herr Bush plans on bringing "freedom" to Saudi Arabia, the country that WAS responsible for 9/11?
-
Since you're such a History Channel fan, you do know that after WWII we prosecuted our enemies as war criminals for waterboarding American prisoners. But now it's not a crime any more when we do it? Sounds like a moronic position to me.
-
It was I, not Xiphos, who used the term hero. I don't think the onus is on Xi to prove or defend himself because I considered his service heroic. I can understand your argument, but I see soldiers' service as more than just a job. First of all, military pay is shit. I can't imagine sufficient pay to put your ass on the line in Afghanistan and Iraq and become a walking target, feeling your life can end at any moment. Sorry, but to put yourself in that position, especially out of a strong sense of duty to self and country, I consider that extremely heroic.
-
Excellent post, sir. Bravo.
-
Christ, everything you said was debunked 3 years ago. Yet you still peddle that crap like it has anything to do with the truth?
-
...who think "anything goes" in the generic war on terror - it's not just the 'sub-human' enemy that suffers. Take a good long look at the so-called Patriot Act and other actions the Bush administration has taken. In today's America every citizen's phone calls, mail, email, and personal records can all be monitored in secret without any court oversight or permission. Any American can now be arrested by the Federal government in secret, held indefinitely without being charged, denied access to counsel, and even removed from US soil without due process.
Those type of actions were once what we expected from Soviet Russia or Mao's China. If you think that is acceptable in the USA, then you ain't a real American, friend. -
We had much bigger things on our minds during the post-war trials than waterboarding. Little things like the genocide of millions. And had we lost the war, Roosevelt and Churchill would have been hung with piano wire for their bombing campaigns. (And my your standards apparently that would be a fitting punishment.) And no, ZeroCorpse you AREN'T a hero for working in a gas station in Detroit. (Just brave.) Soldiers, firemen, and cops do something noble for society and its not just for the paycheck. They aren't paid enough.
-
Yes, I would consider your actions heroic. Because your actions helped the police catch the criminals, and not only that, you likely prevented someone else from becoming a victim.
Perhaps my definition of hero is a little loose and runs too large a gamut of actions. Maybe I like to reward and recognize positive things as I see them. But that's my opinion. But Again, Xiphos never proclaimed himself as such, that was all me. -
That was an amazing argument, "YOU'RE WRONG!!!!" I just can't battle that stellar commentary. I concede.
-
I didn't ask you to 'battle' my comment. And I'm not in a mood to pick your posts apart. I'm just astounded that you believe the things you're saying, when everything has been debunked. I suggest you read Richard Clarke's book Against All Enemies to update yourself.
-
Fine if you're too lazy to actually support your claims (typical) at least tell me which of my claims is blindingly ignorant?
-
Your non-answer showed that you have no argument. Back to history class, son.
BTW, you were right on one point. I DO deserve a raise. ;) -
Now yours is a post actually worth reading! Sorry I didn't see it earlier. You make good points on our strategic position in the region. That theory is largely my own so I admit it has its flaws. However, while we do have bases in those locations you and I both know that none of those nations will allow us to use those bases for any offensive that might be necessary against Iran no matter what Iran does. I don't really think an offensive is planned, but we want to keep Iran guessing just in case one becomes necessary. Iraq currently will have no such say in how we use our troops in their territory and Iran's knowledge of that could be enough to spark change. As for democracy in Islamic nations I fear you may be right and that is certainly what we were seeing happen before the troop surge. At the end of the day this is an experiment in the theory that some form of democracy can be comaptible with Islam, but we may not get the results we hope for. As far as the domino effect, I think thats more a hope than it is a policy. Democratizing Iraq was not the primary reason for the invasion, its a secondary objective that we're hoping we can turn into a large positive for the future. Maybe its a pipe dream, but its the best we have in our current position. One thing you said I have to contest though. When has the world ever seen a dictator who was interested in the rights of the repressed???? Saddam certainly didn't fit that bill! Dictators pretend to be interested in the rights of the repressed by lying to those repressed and turning them into a hate-filled weapon used to protect their own power...ie Hugo Chavez.
-
I mean, nothing constructive is being said. No one here is going to change his mind. Everyone's pretty much just name-calling and spouting their party line. Party line as an expression, not as accurate description-many of us peaceniks are not Democrats, and some freedomniks may not be Republican.
-
I thought Merrick said TBs like this were supposed to be interesting.Conversely, I just saw Richard Clarke the other day; gave him a sheepish, little wave. He's rather an imposing fella...looks every bit the counter-terrorism badass as he does on TV in front of Congressional committees.
-
This film was made over a year ago. Not just been green lit as you stated! Matter of fact, every fucking thing you posted is bullshit! You're a dipshit and that's a put down to regular dipshits.
-
"and those of most other democratic countries around the world (Great Britain, Australia, Germany, Italy, Spain, etc)". No They didn't. Some lied to their populace, who were skeptical. But they didn't believe it for a second. I'm sick of all the bullshit regarding Americas occupation of Iraq. Your there to set up a fucking puppet state. A friendly presence in the middle east. Like Israel: The Sequal. Not that there is anything necessarily wrong with that concept, but jesus, the flat out lying about terrorism and WMD is irritating. Saddamn kept the fucking terrorists in check. His biggest support was donating to Hamas, a quasi terrorist group, for PR reasons.
-
Yea!!! I need to learn more about this war. I never see anything about it in the paper, never see anything about it on tv, and never hear anyone talking about it in public. I'll watch this and all other 10-12 made recently. By the way, I am bullshitting in this posting. I am sick and tired of hearing about this damn war/occupation. Thanks George for sinking BILLIONS of dollars into that frickin' hell hole! By the way, WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, that were supposed to kill all of us Americans????? We shouldn't have let them hang Saddam, maybe we could have waterboarded him and found out where he buried them!!
-
OBL considered Saddam a "false Muslim" and labeled him as an infidel on TV. It is fair to say that OBL and his organization al Qaeda would not (and did not) support Saddam or the ruling Ba'ath Party.
Even Colin Powell now freely admits in interviews that there was never any threat from Iraq. At least HE has the decency to admit they were wrong all along. He also says Bush and especially Cheney ignored reports and intelligence that were contrary to their agenda.
The tragic part is that he probably could have singlehandedly stopped this war if he would have spoken up - or at least delayed it long enough for the truth to catch up - but he followed orders and placed personal duty to his bosses above loyalty to his country. From listening to him in interviews now, I get the feeling he deeply regrets not taking a stronger stand against the rush to war by the administration of which he was an integral part. The media and the world would have listened to what he had to say, and Bush & Co. would have been forced to answer tough questions and defend their actions instead of rushing to war.
But hey, important people with connections in high places had lots of money to make and they were growing impatient, so what's a poor lackey to do? -
Thank you for replying.
You are very incorrect about Iran. No one wants Iran no have nuclear capabilities...not anyone int he region, not anyone in Europe, not the Israelis, and certainly not US. Saudi Arabia, because we buy a lot of their oil and are strategic allies, WOULD allow us to use their soil for an attack on Iran, just as they allowed us to do so for Kuwait,Afghanistan, and Iraq. They would require more politcal cover, but they would certainly not ban us from using their soil. The same goes for Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain.
Isalm is fundamentally at odds with democracy. The muslim nations where democracy has worked has twisted the Quran to fit western ideals so they could reap the benefits of western ideals, ie, women in the workforce, women governing men, and so forth. The sharia, the laws written int he Quran, along with Muhammad's sayings in the Hadith, are to be part and parcel of any Muslim government. That is the LAW. In Islam, anyway. Government by the people and for the people is to be replced by government by those who can interpret the Quran correctly, i.e., the Imams. This is why, even in iran, Achmedinejad, a "democratically" elected president, derives his TRUE power from the Imams, or the Ayatollahs.In older times the person who was the guradian of the law, the one who could best interpret the Quran and sharia law, AND who could best govern, was the Caliph...the leader of all muslims. This is when so-called radical muslims aspire to regain.
I bring this up because Bush's failure to understand this is at the heart of our failure in Iraq and in the region. Right before we invaded he wasn't even aware of the differences between Sunni and Shia, or what those terms even referred to.
War is not to be an experiment. We should be invading countries to install democracy UNLESS that nation is a threat to us. Hussein was never a thret to us. A threat to the region. But not a threat to us. This is the tragedy of the current war, of all the lives lost, of all the soldiers and heroes sacrified...for an experiment. War is a deadly serious undertaking. If you are going to war, you must pull out all the stops, including nukes, torture, and massive amount of death and destruction, to "win". If all you are doing is some fucking neo-con experiment, you have commited, like this current President, the gravest of evils.
Look at it like this: Even if you are right, and Iraq turns out to be peachy, and turns into a democratic state...put that on one scale of the balance int he future. Now ont he other put all the emnity we have earned, all the goodwill we have lost since 911, all the innocent Iraqis died while Al Qaeda tried to destroy democracy in Iraq just to get at us and ruin our little experiment, all the soldiers maimed and killed, all of our newfound lack of influence and our weakend state in the world on the other scale. I ask every fucking republican in here: was it worth it? Will it be worth it? We both know the answer.
Finally, by dictator, I meant it is better to have a ruler, a king, like the House of Saud in Saudi Arabia (a "benevolent dictator" running things than a radical group of muslim imams whou would certainly be put into power in the most holy of holy Muslim palces if Saudi Arabia ever went democratic. We all know that.THE DIRTY FUCKING HIPPIES WERE RIGHT! THE DIRTY FUCKING HIPPIES WERE RIGHT! -
Thank you for replying.
You are very incorrect about Iran. No one wants Iran no have nuclear capabilities...not anyone int he region, not anyone in Europe, not the Israelis, and certainly not US. Saudi Arabia, because we buy a lot of their oil and are strategic allies, WOULD allow us to use their soil for an attack on Iran, just as they allowed us to do so for Kuwait,Afghanistan, and Iraq. They would require more politcal cover, but they would certainly not ban us from using their soil. The same goes for Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain.
Isalm is fundamentally at odds with democracy. The muslim nations where democracy has worked has twisted the Quran to fit western ideals so they could reap the benefits of western ideals, ie, women in the workforce, women governing men, and so forth. The sharia, the laws written int he Quran, along with Muhammad's sayings in the Hadith, are to be part and parcel of any Muslim government. That is the LAW. In Islam, anyway. Government by the people and for the people is to be replced by government by those who can interpret the Quran correctly, i.e., the Imams. This is why, even in iran, Achmedinejad, a "democratically" elected president, derives his TRUE power from the Imams, or the Ayatollahs.In older times the person who was the guradian of the law, the one who could best interpret the Quran and sharia law, AND who could best govern, was the Caliph...the leader of all muslims. This is when so-called radical muslims aspire to regain.
I bring this up because Bush's failure to understand this is at the heart of our failure in Iraq and in the region. Right before we invaded he wasn't even aware of the differences between Sunni and Shia, or what those terms even referred to.
War is not to be an experiment. We should be invading countries to install democracy UNLESS that nation is a threat to us. Hussein was never a thret to us. A threat to the region. But not a threat to us. This is the tragedy of the current war, of all the lives lost, of all the soldiers and heroes sacrified...for an experiment. War is a deadly serious undertaking. If you are going to war, you must pull out all the stops, including nukes, torture, and massive amount of death and destruction, to "win". If all you are doing is some fucking neo-con experiment, you have commited, like this current President, the gravest of evils.
Look at it like this: Even if you are right, and Iraq turns out to be peachy, and turns into a democratic state...put that on one scale of the balance int he future. Now ont he other put all the emnity we have earned, all the goodwill we have lost since 911, all the innocent Iraqis died while Al Qaeda tried to destroy democracy in Iraq just to get at us and ruin our little experiment, all the soldiers maimed and killed, all of our newfound lack of influence and our weakend state in the world on the other scale. I ask every fucking republican in here: was it worth it? Will it be worth it? We both know the answer.
Finally, by dictator, I meant it is better to have a ruler, a king, like the House of Saud in Saudi Arabia (a "benevolent dictator" running things than a radical group of muslim imams whou would certainly be put into power in the most holy of holy Muslim palces if Saudi Arabia ever went democratic. We all know that.THE DIRTY FUCKING HIPPIES WERE RIGHT! THE DIRTY FUCKING HIPPIES WERE RIGHT! -
This TB is lacking flava because the usual suspects - Anchorite, Cygnus, AnimalStructure - have chosen to cut and run from this argument. They can carelessly pollute a Rendition (torturing Muslims) or Redacted (raping and killing Muslims) Talkback but when it comes to the subject of the backdoor draft, I knew they'd keep their mouths shut. Because despite their proclamations of "supporting the troops" and calling Libs "anti-military", this subject, more than any other, really determines who actually supports our soldiers.
-
Thanks for sharing your personal thoughts. FWIW I also hope you don't get called back, but respect your decision to for the reasons you expressed. If that doesn't define the term "sacrifice" I don't know what will. Not sacrificing for a stupid fucked up NeoCon policy, but true sacrifice for your brothers-in-arms.
-
America is not tired of war movies. America is tired of war movies where America is constantly portrayed as the bad guy. What is ironic is that pacifists/anti-war people won't even go see their own message movies. People would go and show up to a well done movie that was actually patriotic. Look at the old World War II movies -- how many of them were about how horrible the US was? They were about us kicking the bad guys asses -- and we loved them! And we would love them again too, if Hollywood cared AT ALL about it's audience when it comes to political movies -- for some reason, a political movie can be made that lectures the audience and beats them over the head with an anti-war/we are evil message, but movies that support the war or even the troops or our country don't get made.
As for where the WMDs were:
"After confessing to slaughtering 180,000 Kurds and plotting to build a doomsday nuke, Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was so upset when his FBI interrogator left for home that he cried like a baby. FBI Special Agent George Piro whipped out two Cuban Cohibas - Saddam's favorite cigar - and they smoked on the patio behind his cell at Baghdad's airport.
"When we were saying bye, he started to tear up," Piro recalled in the new book "The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack."
The self-effacing G-man was hardly surprised - he had spent nearly a year carefully becoming Saddam's best friend in a successful ploy to extract confessions from the notorious brute.
Piro's inside account of spending up to seven hours a day, every day, for eight months with Saddam is revealed in the new book by journalist Ronald Kessler.
I suspect Saddam's tears weren't tears of repentance, but rather an acknowledgment that he knew the end was near and that the things he confessed to doing were the reason he wasn't long for this world.
Here's a bit more from the article:
Saddam never used body doubles - as was widely believed - because no one could "play" him, Piro quoted Saddam as saying.
He admired Americans, particularly ex-Presidents Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan - but loathed the two Bushes he fought wars with.
The "Butcher of Baghdad" also confessed he ordered Kurdish civilians gassed and slaughtered thousands more, their remains left in mass graves.
Until 9/11, Saddam thought UN sanctions would go away and he could make a nuclear bomb. His prewar weapons of mass destruction deceptions were a ruse to convince Iran - whom he feared - that he had an arsenal." -
And that, when all is said and done, was the main reason why we were attacked on 9/11. The Saudi Arabian Osama Bin Laden and his Saudi Arabian followers declared jihad against the rulers of Saudi Arabia and the US for putting American military bases on Saudi soil after Gulf War I. In their extremist view, the rulers of Saudi Arabia are allowing infidels to occupy Muslim land. Sure, Bin Laden also has a problem with our support of Israel. But the key point that turned Bin Laden from our close ally, in the Afghan-Soviet war, to our current enemy was US military presence in Saudi Arabia.
Unfortunately, the mainstream media rarely digs back that far to show us our enemies' motivations. Instead we get sound bites from speeches where our leaders tell us they hate us because "they're bad guys" and "they hate freedom". Maybe if most Americans had realized that we were attacked on 9/11 by disgruntled Saudi Arabians angry about their government's cooperation with the US, they might not have been duped into rushing into an unnecessary and illegal war with Iraq, an uninvolved bystander. -
Are the folks who fly planes into office buildings or detonate on crowded buses or in dance clubs.Or Sark.
-
That doesn't agree with him. Or subscribe to his conspiracy theories. It must be a boost to the ego to be smarter and better than everybody else. To see what no one else can see. Ooooh.
-
You are right, that was Bin Laden's motivation for attacking us, one of them anyways.My point was that if we were to have a good reason to attack Iran, SA eould still allow us to do so from it's soil, regardless of how much hatred it stuirs up. There are PLENTY of Muslims who despise the Iranian leadership just as much as we do.Basically SA would need more political cover to allow it...more nations chipping in, and definitely a new president on our end.
-
There was no "clockwork-like precision" to the 9/11 hijackers plan. It was a cluster-fuck that could have fallen apart at any number of points along the way. A "Hail Mary" against a free,open and very lax(not to mention trusting) society/culture caught with it's pants down. And BSB is right,this TB is lame. Same old tired tripe from the same old tired hippies. Go pay your $9.50 ticket to see Redacted and slap that Question Authoriity sticker on your car. The world is a peachy place.Only America sucks.
-
I have no doubt that talking to you . . . and reading what you write . . . is a waste of my time and energy. You're quite right. Shame on me! Besides, you're smarter than everybody who doesn't see "the real truth". If only everybody would open their eyes and be smart like you!
Yawn. -
Protect yourself from the government brainwashing rays now!
-
It's called the Bible Code! It's really there! Check it out! Google it! It's all over the place. Open your eyes, sheeple!
-
There is no objective truth anymore. The miracle of the new age is the death of truth and the triumph of personal (or group) conviction. Of course...I couldn't care less cause I want my ass kicking rocket car!!!!!! Give me my rocket car now! ZoomZoom!!!!
-
But I'm ignorant. Because ignorance is to not subscribe to irrational conspiracy theories. If only I had gotten my tinfoil earlier. I could have protected my head from the government brainwashing rays, and been able to think myself, like gridbug. Sheesh. The ego on some people.
-
Later Grid
-
...that was "slinging a barb", then you're obviously way too sensitive. Lighten up. OOPS...was THAT an insult too??!! Please
-
It's one thing to question events, facts, and national intentions. It's another thing to draw assumptive conclusions based upon erroneous data that's often mired in half-truths and misrepresentation. Paranoia and anger often lead folks down those types of world perspectives.To the best of my knowledge, Operation Northwoods was neither approved or implemented. And the Joint Chief who penned the proposal stepped down from his position. (From what I understand, he was probably told to do so.) As chilling as the concept of Operations Northwoods may appear, I don't find its inclusion in what was most likely a large batch of potential scenarios all that surprising. It's an excellent representation of all that's ugly and sad about psychological warfare and counter-intelligence. A few more digs in the National Archives and a few more Freedom of Information Requests and you could probably find some stuff that's twice as chilling.As for Cheney's actions on 9/11, whose to say. Personally, I do not trust the man. But there has been so much speculation on his role that it's hard to obtain a clear view through all the hubris that surrounds him.I guess I'm just not surprised to see that the "Alex Jones Book of False Flag Talking Points" is still alive and well despite a lot of evidence to the contrary.
-
Right back at ya. I'll dismiss your ravings and you'll dismiss my accurate critique of your self-indulgent egotism masquerading as ideology. And in case anyone is wondering, posting to Talkbacks with an iPhone sucks balls.
-
Read: "Dirty Jews". Maybe you and BSB can get together and figure out what can be done about the "Jewish Problem". Mmmhmm.
-
This is the fundamentalism Libs defend if not by their support, then by their silence.... 200 lashes/prison time to a woman for getting gang raped. How dare her! (The lashes have to be spaced out because all 200 at once would be fatal.) Now armed mobs demanding lopping off the teacher's head for naming a Teddy Bear. But Christians are the dangerous ones, wanting to protect the lives of the unborn. Monsters! Just wait 'til the coming of the 12th Imam. You ain't seen nothing yet infidels. "He will come in one of the pre-chosen forms. During the rectification of the Vuldrini, he came as a large and moving Torg! Then, during the third reconciliation, that of a giant Slor! Many Shuvs and Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Slor that day, I can tell you! " Oops, sorry. Wrong murderous nut job religion that needs to lighten up and join the civilized world. My bad.
-
For anyone who really cares---
Stop Loss does not happen that often. In actuality, it was implemented during the first Gulf War as well as the campaign to get rid of Milosovic. It is normally used early in a war or military campaign(first year or so) because we weren't PLANNING to be at war at the time force projections were made for recruiting.
In other words, very little STOP LOSS occurs now that our force projections have factored in this war. I am not saying it doesn't happen, just not very often.
And for those WMD questions: Saddam told a person who befriended him he wanted America to THINK he had WMDs because if we think he has WMDs, then Iran will think the same. Then he can keep that country worried and deter them from making a move against Iraq. He was playing a game of poker and lost. -
It's Clear that Dick Cheney, Using Mind Control, teamed up with the Jews--I mean, Zionists--I mean, NeoCons--and forced those airplanes to fly into the World Trade Center just before George Bush, who is retarded, brought them down by controlled explosion. But only I and people who agree with me are smart and know the truth. Wake up, people! Listen to BSB! Listen to Gridbug! Tin foil hats keep the bad Jew--I mean, NeoCon--radiation from infecting your brains. Such as they are.
-
The Army Times newspaper reported in 2003 that 25,000 soldiers were held over by Stop Less. And that's just one branch of our military. The Marine Corps in 2003 had 3,400 active duty troops and 440 reservists held in service under the authority of Stop Loss. That's hardly 'not that often'.
-
Nov 30, 2007 11:03:10 PM CST
Personally I am glad I live in Canada, were in Afghanistan so do
by stormwatcher
But seriously, why the whole Iraq thing? Your dollar has dropped from 1.5 vs. ours to being work .87cents to ours. Its crazy. Never in my life time, and I am 31, has the US dollar been worth less than mine. I work in the service industry and when Americans hand over a twenty I have to hand them a bunch of coins, (we use 1 and 2 dollar coins here) their all' WTF? Like somehow it seems US citizens aren't aware that along with being disliked in other countries their money is severely plunging. Truth is, I don't see US hate in Canada, I know College students like to rally and whatnot but I can't tell most US citizens apart from Canucks unless they are from Texas or New York. Its sad to think what the 2 Trillion wasted on Iraq could have been spent on in terms of upgrading your infrastructure or instituting education programs to better prepare for the future. It seemed that in the 90's all innovation was coming out of the US (internet bubble and all) but now it really isn't save for maybe things like YouTube which really only made their creators rich and no one else. The US buck being weak is worse for my bottom line than our beef being banned, cattle farmers don't travel that much and US citizens do, our country is expensive and now unless we price match to the US we only have the fact that its cheaper than going to Europe to get US travel. Also, I haven't seen or met many service men or women from the states so I guess all those yellow ribbon videos are fake as it seems your troops aren't really coming home at all. All in all, I don't care whose right, the NEOCONS or the Liberals ect... I just want things from an economic sense and a social relevance to go back to the days where your biggest problem was wether the President got a blowjob or not.
-
Why are you acting like a ranting loon all of a sudden? You're doing a disservice to world Jewry by trying to link them with the NeoCons. Seriously, don't you know that some of the harshest critics of the NeoCons are Jews? Al Franken, Barbara Streisand, Seymour Hersh, Norman Finkelstein, etc. (including every Jew in Hollywood except Ron Silver). Please don't denigrate Jews by association with the NeoCons.
-
What kind of 3rd grade mentality you must have to think that Libs would defend the Sudanese for punishing Gillian Gibbons. Firstly, there is no "200 lashes", moron. She's being imprisoned for 15 days, which in itself is too harsh - because she did nothing wrong. I hope they do deport her, and quickly, so she can get the fuck out of there fast. And the fact is, she's likely a Lib herself as I can't see someone like you dedicating your life to teaching the poor and destitute in Sudan.
-
That's my all time favorite bumper sticker.
It illustrates the insanity of the US. Bill Clinton was put through the impeachment process for lying about an extramarital affair. Bush lied and manipulated intelligence to goad us into an unnecessary war that has cost a hundred thousand lives and bankrupted the US economy, and he's still sitting in the White House with that smirk on his face. -
After re-reading my review, I think I was too kind. The main problem with the movie is that the soldiers we're supposed to feel bad for because they're being stop-lossed are complete douchebags, so you could care less. And I don't mean they're douchebags because they are from Buttfuck America and like to shoot shit up in their spare time, so no offense to those talkbackers from Buttfuck America who like to shoot random shit up, but Ryan Phillipe and Channing Tatum just come off as douchebags, even when they're trying to act noble. And the movie is so disjointed, going from war movie, to post-war movie, to road trip movie...its all over the place.
-
I don't see where Bill Clinton lied to get us involved in the Somalia or Balkan conflicts. It's not like he told us that Milosevic was building a nuclear bomb, or that Somalia was behind the Oklahoma City attack.
-
I said Stop Loss happens very early on in a campaign. The Iraq War started in 2003. Those papers reported those numbers in 2003. The point I was making is it usually happens when a conflict begins because the troop projections have not taken into account being in the conflict. It subsides a year and a half to 2 yrs later.
yes I know it happens to people. My brother was in the Army and part of the push to Baghdad. He and several other soldiers in theater at that time were stop lossed for a couple of months. -
Clinton lied about the number of Albanians killed in order to get us into Kosovo. Turns out it was 4000-8000 not 400,000, but few people even know this today because the media takes such pains to protect the Clinton legacy. Media bias is truly a wonderful thing.
-
Stop Loss has not subsided since the start of the war. Although the military drags their feet on releasing official numbers, more than 14,000 troops were held over by Stop Loss in 2005, and 12,500 were held over in 2006. So far almost 10,000 are being held over in 2007. While the numbers have slightly dropped, that hardly qualifies as 'subsiding'.
-
I don't find it comforting that 'only' 10,000 were slaughtered in Kosovo. Most of the stories I read about the lower death estimates sound like they were written by Holocaust Deniers. Some of your 'unbiased media' claim that only a few hundred were killed in total!
Everyone overestimated the scale of genocide at the beginning of the campaign. The only intel they had to estimate the casualties came from traumatized refugees. Bottom line, Slobodan Milosevic and his fascist buddies got what they deserved. -
I'm just saying I know what you guys are talking about, is all. You just won't admit it.
-
Just see "Path to 9/11" - or else read the testimony of U.S. intelligence (non-partisan) agents who said that Clinton had three solid chances to kill Osama Bin Laden (they had "boots on the ground") and didn't. Thanks Clinton! Don't know how he could look at himself in the mirror these days, knowing that.
-
you're glad you live in Canada, snug against the U.S. borders so that you are protected from the terrorist threats all over Europe. Must be nice, eh?? That way you can easily criticize the U.S., meanwhile we have tons of your citizens streaming across the borders to pay for healthcare since your own healthcare is killing your citizens with bad doctors and cheap hospitals. Have a spot of tea on me!
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 325 total posts 322 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 106 total posts 106 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 63 total posts 60 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 74 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 159 total posts 51 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 47 total posts 41 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 161 total posts 34 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 488 total posts 33 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 121 total posts 23 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 70 total posts 20 posts