TIME TO GET REAL IN IRAQ - Iraqi Resisters are Patriots - By Ted Rall

[NNN0LHI]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030828/7/53ecc.html&cid=127&ncid=1501

NEW YORK--Nearly 70 percent of Americans tell Newsweek that "the United States will be bogged down in for years without achieving its goals." Yet 61 percent tell the same poll that invading Iraq was the right thing to do. The reason for this weird disconnect: people think that we're in Iraq to spread democracy and rebuild the Middle East. They think we're The Good Guys. But the longer we keep patting ourselves on the back, the more we tell ourselves that the Iraqi resistance is a bunch of evil freedom-haters, the deeper we'll sink into this quagmire.

It's time to get real.

In war, the side that most accurately sizes up the situation ultimately prevails. In this war in Iraq, our leaders thought the fall of Baghdad meant the end of the conflict. "Mission accomplished," as the banner behind George W. Bush read on the aircraft carrier. But Saddam understood the truth: the war began with the occupation. Guerilla warfare offered the only way for Iraq's tiny, poorly armed military to resist the U.S. The Baath Party planned to provoke U.S. occupation forces into mistreating the population.

It worked.

Random bombings and sniper hits have made the American occupiers jittery and paranoid. They've withdrawn into fortified cantonments where they've cut off contact with civilians. Their ignorance causes them to offend Iraqi cultural and religious sensibilities. Even better, from Saddam's perspective, U.S. troops push people around: shooting unarmed motorists, stealing their money and jewelry at roadblocks, breaking into houses in the middle of the night, manhandling wives and daughters, putting bags over men's heads and carrying them off to God knows where for who knows how long.

more

[nostamj]

1. this is a MUST READ

Rall is dead-on.

Under George W. Bush, truth and justice are no longer the American way. The U.S. occupation of Iraq is misguided, evil and doomed to failure. The sooner we accept this difficult truth, the sooner we decide to stop being the bad guys, the sooner we'll withdraw our troops. The bloodshed may continue after we leave--and we'll be partly to blame for that. But until we pull out, the carnage is all ours.

[paulsbc]

2. utter rubbish

Patriots. Bombing the UN, which is on a peace mission and who did NOT vote for the US to invade, is not the work of "Patriots". This person is seriously misguided....

[bahrbearian]

3. Lest you forget U.N. sanctions Killed a Million Iraqis

[NNN0LHI]

4. Oh, that was all Saddams fault because little boots told me so n/t

[leftchick]

6. from what I have seen...

paul here seems to skim over all those pesky details and cherry pick the ones that fit the into the imperialist regime's agenda and make it sound like, oh gee golly those Iraqis sure are better off now...Never provides and links or facts to that effect either. Could it be because there aren't any?

[paulsbc]

14. freedom

is always better than oppression.

[StandWatie]

22. yeah, right..

all that "freedom" over there in New Iraq. Tell ya what pal, if you love New Iraq so much why don't you move there (I've been itching to say that since the invasion ;) )

[DuctapeFatwa]

23. yes, now they have the freedom to be tortured and killed by AMERICANS!

They have been liberated from the tyranny of electricity, and empowered with cholera, their children have been liberated from their limbs, their lives, their skin - free at last to suffer burn infections without the oppression of painkillers! No longer must they hide away their desire to praise America, fearing Saddam's wrath, for Bremer has decreed that America will "impose its will."

Shocked and awed, all but the most recalcitrant of terrorists kneel in adoration to kiss the boots of their new masters, their only regret that they have so little oil to offer as a poor token of a gratitude that cannot be expressed in mere words.

Soon all the world will know the freedom, the joy of liberation at the terrible swift sword of Halliburton! Millions will thrill to the wondrous might of Bechtel and Mobil, the power of the New Gods is truly marvellous!

[paulsbc]

27. what a stupid post

our troops are trying to bring order and representative government to that area, and you shit on them. this board sounds a lot like islamonline.net, and that isn't a good thing...

[KG]

28. our troops are illegal occupiers of a soveriegn nation.

and a representative government is the last thing whistle-ass and his band of thieves want in iraq.

[oldcoot]

33. Why did U.S. military commanders cancel municipal elections in Iraq?

If the goal of the United States was to bring representative government to the Iraqi people, then why did the U.S. military commanders cancel municipal elections (see: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42905-2003Jun27.html) in June ?

[Eloriel]

36. Got a mirror?

I don't blame "our troops" (altho some of them have been engaging in war crimes, and I worry about that a lot) and no one's shitting on them, but I sure as hell blame all their bosses, and come to think of it that would include people like you who STILL support an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation.

And here's a clue for you: being against the war isn't the same thing as being against the troops. Being FOR war is being for war, not supporting the troops. Most DUers (by a huge majority) avidly supported both the troops and were adamantly against the war. Militarism isn't the same as patriotism, either, pal (bonus clue for ya).

Eloriel

[stickdog]

38. And what happens when 70% of them vote to expel half of us

and execute the other half?

Ain't democracy grand?

[paulsbc]

41. democracy is not the goal

representative government is.

which is why we are currently working on a Constitution before national elections and turning the country over.

If you want the worse solution possible going foward, turn tail and run from Iraq.

If you want the best solution, get the UN involved, get more troops from other lands, finish the Iraqi Constitution as quickly as you can, and hold real elections under UN approval and recognition.

Bush is wrong to keep the UN out, I hope that Powell wins this mini battle and gives the UN what it needs to help bring Iraq forward with representative, recognized government.

[NNN0LHI]

42. "If Powell wins this battle"? Bah! Powell is a neocon too

He is the good cop in this good cop/bad cop game that Bush has convinced you is reality. When in fact there are only bad cops in this administration. You fell for the scam my friend. I think the sooner that you quit staring at the smoke and mirrors, and look at what is really happening around you, the better off we will all be. Got time for a quick game of Three Card Monte. Mama needs a new pair of shoes.

Don

[paulsbc]

73. wrong

we can not leave Iraq and that area of the world now, after all we have done. going in was wrong. leaving now, unless the UN was ready to completely step in and take over, would be worse.

[Robin Hood]

85. Leaving now will be bad, but staying any longer would be worse.

Don't you see that Bush has played us right into Saddam and the ME hands. They hoped for us to come in on our high horse, just so they could knock our ass down.

So far, it's working.

[MSchreader]

43. If it is not democratic, it is not representative

I guess you never read that part about government deriving its power from the consent of the governed.

Martin

[paulsbc]

74. of course

but that is not the point. you aren't one of those that believes that the US is a pure democracy are you? We are a representative republic....

[oldcoot]

52. The Bush administration claimed that democracy was a goal

Do you believe Bush was lying?

[paulsbc]

75. they get it wrong so much

i call it stupidity more than lying. they don't know the difference between a real democracy and representative government, and it appears many on this board have that same lack of knowledge.

[oldcoot]

82. Direct verses Representative Democracy

The difference between a direct democracy and representative democracy is that in a direct democracy all citizens get to vote an every issue. In a representative democracy, citizens get the opportunity to elect representatives who will govern. Although a representative democracy is not a "pure democracy," most political scientists would still consider a representative democracy a democracy.

[sushi]

59. I thought

Bush wanted to introduce democracy to the Middle East, starting with Iraq, then the others will follow. That was the plan, wasn't it?

[Aidoneus]

66. representative of who?

if not the Iraqi people--for that would be the feared "democracy--, Chalabi and Halliburton? I have no doubt that such types will be represented just fine.

[homelandpunk]

69. I hope the UN gives Bush the finger

tit for tat.
Are you losing your short term memory paul?

[paulsbc]

76. not at all

the UN already HAS given Bush the finger, and now he is squirming trying to figure out what to do. Biden had a good point on Mahers' show tonight, all we had to do was ask nicely instead of this cowboy challenge crap. Bush's handling of foreign affairs sucks ass..

[homelandpunk]

68. as your hero O'Relly would say:

shut up.
Bush shits on our troops. So shut up.

[sushi]

58. What?

The Iraqis are not free. They are occupied by foreigners. And to make it worse, infidels!

[paulsbc]

77. your lost

as are many here. the Iraqis are more free today than at any point in the last 20+ years. do you honestly not see that? have you been hoodwinked by people so much that you don't understand basic freedom?

the goal of our involvement there now should be to stabilize the country, root out the former regime and other people out to do the new Iraq harm, and then leave.

[Ms. Clio]

79. such a strange definition of freedom you have

Freedom for 11-year-olds to be locked up without trial in Saddam's old prisons? Freedom to be detained and tortured by Saddam's old secret police? Do you have any actual facts to back up what you say, or do you just spout cliches? (The "representative republic" bit is oddly reminiscent of certain RW freeper types, in fact)

'It was punishment without trial'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1019096,00.html

Global Eye -- Die Laughing

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2003/08/29/120.html

Families Live in Fear of Midnight Call by US Patrols

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0709-06.htm

[Ani Yun Wiya]

87. The people of Iraq had more freedom...

Forty years ago, before the CIA assisted in the Baathist rise to power.
Forty years before that they had even greater fredom to be themselves, per their cultural norms.
But the British could not countenance that, so the "nation" of Iraq was put on the map and the oil profits flowed west.

[sushi]

91. That's what you think!

Put yourself in the place of an Iraqi. If you're a Sunni who had it good under Saddam Hussein (yes, there was such a group) you wouldn't be happy now being "free" with no power or frequent power cuts, shortages or no water, garbage bubbling onto the streets, no law and order, etc. etc., and you wonder how long this will last.

If you're a Shiite and a SH hating Sunni then, apart from all the above, you'd be happy that Saddam Hussein is gone but now you want the foreigners to leave because Muslims don't want to be occupied by infidels.

The Kurds must be glad that SH is gone but this is just another step towards their dream, their own homeland. They are not happy yet.

Yes, the coalition must reconstruct what they destroyed, and then leave, and let the Iraqis live their own lives. If there is "something western" the Iraqis want to adopt they will. Do not force western values on them. The "new Iraq" is their own business.

[Robin Hood]

83. Thank you, In Iraq, The UN is also the enemy.

Oh How we pick and chose what we hear.

[atreides1]

5. So...

...the French Resistance were "terrorists", they blew up trains, and
got medals.

By the way the French Resistance consisted of fighters from diverse political ideologies.

Let's not forget the Stern Gang, or the Haganah, these two Jewish groups killed civilians, as well as British military personnel. The Stern Gang was even responsible for the excutions of 250 Arab men.

Were they terrorists, or patriots?

If the current Iraqi fighters are terrorists, then so were the French,
the Greeks, the Czechs, and the Jews. But let us not forget that the founders of the US were considered "terrorists" by our former British
overlords.

One targeted building does not mean that they are not patriots to the
other Iraqi people. As a Green Beret Master Sergeant once told me, one
man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

[paulsbc]

18. equating

the French resistance fighting Nazi Germany is a completely wrong analogy.

[stickdog]

39. Yes. It's a "wrong analogy" because it shows you are wrong

and your biases are transparent.

[bpilgrim]

49. how bout the chinese fighting the imperial japanese in the 30's?

the imperial japanese army even used the term ILLEGAL COMBATANTS.

peace

[homelandpunk]

70. it's wrong because you say so???

what mighty critical thinking prowess.

[paulsbc]

78. as good

as your retort, move along.

[DuctapeFatwa]

9. The UN is the US, it does as it is told

It is the position of the bush regime that the first resolution approved the invasion.

Although some in the UN may have said it did not, the UN chose to take no action, not even a resolution of condemnation. They could not. The US would not allow it.

The UN rubber stamped the occupation and is about to sign on to orders given to the armies of other nations to present themselves for duty under US command, deploy to Iraq to slaughter Iraqis and seize the oil to defend Halliburton's freedom to have a very impressive fourth quarter.

While there may be a segment of the US affluent voting classes, including bush regime loyalists, who perceive the UN as a separate entity, globally, this is not a widely held view, especially in Iraq, where no one is quite sure how many children were murdered by UN sanctions,

[nostamj]

10. children are still dying

(as are American soldiers) from the DU poison left behind after Poppy's Iraqi Adventure...

[leftofthedial]

11. yeah rubbish

it's not like we're invading conquering occupiers or anything.

The UN bombing was a strategic move by those who want to make the US pay.

[Eloriel]

35. Who do you think bombed the UN building?

I don't think there's been an official answer to that, has there?

But in any case, I don't usually believe this administration's official answers anyway. I know of few times -- and can't think of any off the top of my head -- when they haven't been lying. Which means, basically, that once they attribute the UN bombing to someone, we'll know who it wasn't. Or I will at least have a pretty good idea who it wasn't.

YMMV, and if so, stick around. You too can grow to be as cynical (but not often wrong these days) as I.

Eloriel

[stickdog]

37. Exactly. So who is the most likely suspect? (NT)

[bigtree]

61. likley suspects

I would guess that the couple of hundred thousand former members of the Iraqi army will always make trouble there. Anything to destablize the status quo. Who else would blow up the mosque? Saddam hated that cleric.

And others get looped in by their anger at the occupation or the loss of home or family. You have to wonder at the level of anguish that has to proceed deliberately blowing oneself up in an attack. Then there are the rivalries that are resurfacing among the different factions. Looks like we are going to be the middle of a civil war.

It will be hard for the average Iraqi to value the US soldier's life anymore than his needs and security is at issue. Just human nature.
Most can't speak our language, don't understand anything about us,
never saw a bio or nuke. Probably would've greeted us with flowers if we hadn't rolled in there with our guns and bombs. Try being a pacifist on either side over there now. This is an active war zone with an active resistance.

[RobinA]

62. Aren't

"patriots" kind of in the eye of the beholder? Think Britain considered George Washington a patriot?

[lazarus]

84. ahem

notice that the UN is now pulling out, leaving the US alone there.

[Ani Yun Wiya]

89. Yes indeed,

The citizens of Iraq, patriots in THEIR land.
What would your reaction be if the Chinese invaded the US?
How would you feel about the UN if it had the US under harsh sanctions for 12 years before the Chinese invasion?

[leftchick]

7. Don't forget to rate it at the bottom....

thanks Don! Ted hits another one right on target...

[blm]

21. Rall has been on fire for a few years, now.

He has a keen sense.

[Dancing_Dave]

8. Right on, man!

Somebody has to express the truth somehow...
:hippie:

[KG]

12. Patriots and freedom fighters

that have taken up arms to expell an tyrannical invader that has come from half-way around the world to steal their resources, subvert their culture, and kill them in large numbers.

they want the US out of of their country, they want the UK out of their country, they want the UN out of their country.

can't say as i blame them.

[paulsbc]

13. amazing

did i enter the jihadunspun web site or something?

[NNN0LHI]

15. The truth shall set you free. Try it some time n/t

[KG]

19. what part of the fact that the westerners are unwanted invaders

do you have trouble wrapping your mind around?

and don't bring up the 'bringing democracy to the ME' BS, coz the US as been has been over throwing democratically elected gov't the world over since 1953, starting in Iran.

but really - if you don't like what you see on this web site - feel free to surf on out....

[leftchick]

26. there are many other websites that share your views if you are unhappy

freerepublic.com comes to mind....

[paulsbc]

32. that's all i need

is that bible thumping crew.

no thanks.

[MSchreader]

40. Nope. You have entered the real world

Where life is not a Fox News special.

Martin

[homelandpunk]

71. comparing us to radical islamists

TWICE now...
but it was just SOOOOO wrong for Rall to compare patriotic Iraqis to the French resistance.
HaHa...you are only good for laughs.

[Proletariat]

16. Terrorists are patriots? Nope.

[nostamj]

20. they are only defined as 'terrorists' by

bush propagandists.

if they had been french resistence fighters during ww2, they would have been defined as heroes. but they're brown and muslim and bush's friends can't get they oil with all this anger over illegal occupation.

stop listening to BushCo's lies already.

[Junkdrawer]

29. The Bush Muslim tolerance message...

Please do not label BROWN PEOPLE as TERRORISTS

Please do not label BROWN PEOPLE as TERRORISTS

Please do not label BROWN PEOPLE as TERRORISTS

[nostamj]

31. i can't HEAR you>>>>>>>

;-)

[donco6]

60. As usual, a terrifically insightful post

Why bother? You offer nothing of value to the argument. The point is that even terrorists don't just get up one day and think, "Gosh, I think it would be fun to blow up something - maybe myself and some ." They actually do have reasons for WHY they decided to do what they did - and "being evil" isn't it. Yes, they commit evil acts, but until we find out WHY they choose to respond that way, we'll never make any headway with solving this problem.

[RobinA]

63. It Seems To Me

that terrorists are OFTEN, if not always, somebody's patriot. Depends on where you sit.

[knight_of_the_star]

80. Yeah they are

Depends on who you ask. The Continental Army that fought against the British would have been considered terrorists in their day. The Lakota and the Shawnee and the Sioux and the Cheyenne would have been considered terrorists in their time when they were just fighting to protect their families and their homes.

[gulliver]

17. Rall has it wrong.

70% think it's going to be a quagmire and 61% think it was the right thing to do. That's no contradiction at all. Americans are saying they are glad Saddam is gone, but that they really don't want to stay in Iraq. What is contradictory about that?

[NNN0LHI]

24. That is not the way I see it

I believe that the 61% that think it was the right thing to do are only saying this because they don't want to admit the truth? Saying it was not worth it will mean hundreds of Americans have died for nothing, which many people are not ready to admit yet. I suspect that is what Rall is thinking too?

Don

[GreenArrow]

25. I think you see it right

Deep down most people see what is going on, both here and in Iraq, they see it in fleeting glimpses, and they push it down as deeply again as they can stuff it because to admit that what they see and sense and know in those transitory moments of illumination is real is a terror beyond reckoning.

[NNN0LHI]

30. I hate to admit it myself to be honest with you

But I learned that after Vietnam was over (even though I did not serve) was that we have to think of the living. If staying in Iraq would bring some of those soldiers back to life my opinion would be to stay. But they will never come back to life again. We should quit while we are behind in this type of situation. Because there will no such thing as quitting while we are ahead in Iraq.

Don

[gulliver]

34. I do think the 61% is a soft number.

We don't disagree. I think the 61% number is an over-valuation of the value of getting Saddam and will fall. I think I agree with you about why people are thinking this way. It's a defense mechanism against buyer's remorse.

[RobinA]

64. I Think

the 61% is saying that the end justifies the quagmire. (That's me being uncynical.) Me being cynical thinks that the 61% doesn't get the connection.

[DealsGapRider]

44. What a revolting column.

I've always known that Ted Rall has a few screws loose, but he crosses the line with this one. What a despicable column. Comparing US soldiers to Nazis, suggesting that the victims of Baathist terrorism "had it coming," recycling debunked lies about abuses by US forces, etc. Garbage. What a wretched man.

:puke:

[NNN0LHI]

45. But dropping bombs from 30,000 feet on sleeping Iraqi families...

...and killing thousands of them is just fucking hunky dory with you, huh? So as long as the good guys do it and those are just Iraqi heathens being killed thats just fine with you? I bet your opinion would change fast if it was your house that Bush and his minions dropped their bombs on.

Don

[DealsGapRider]

46. I was against the war.

Don't try to suggest that my revulsion at Ted Rall's column is indicative of my support for the invasion! I marched in Washington, DC twice, so my anti-war creds are firmly established.

Sorry, the people who are killing our troops, as much as I wish they weren't there, are not noble people. Their remnants of Saddam's Ba'athist regime, which I hope we can all agree was a monstrous, murderous thugocracy. Certainly not patriots as this assmouth suggests.

Rall's attitude reminds me of the people who marched against the war in Vietnam while carrying Viet Cong flags. Just because we shouldn't have been in Vietnam doesn't mean that the North Vietnamese forces was some kind of sainted agrarian poet army fighting for justice and truth.

[NNN0LHI]

51. "Their remnants of Saddam's Ba'athist regime"? What a joke

How do you know who is causing this? Listening to Bush and his minions again are you? They have not told us the truth about anything else, so what makes you fall for that silly line of BS? Is that what you want to believe? I don't care for Bush or his Republican administration, but I would fight any invader coming into this country like tooth and nail. Wouldn't you join me in repelling an outside force invading America? Or would you collaberate with the invaders? And after you began collaberating with the enemy would you be suggesting that I was a remnant of Bush's Republican regime because I was fighting against the occupiers?

Don

[bpilgrim]

54. they were FREEDOM FIGHTERS

just as they were when they were fighting the japanese imperial army during wwII who INVADED then...

"Just because we shouldn't have been in Vietnam doesn't mean that the North Vietnamese forces was some kind of sainted agrarian poet army fighting for justice and truth."

think about it...

peace

[DealsGapRider]

55. The North Vietnamese...

...who INVADED South Vietnam with Soviet and Chinese backing were Freedom Fighters?

[bpilgrim]

56. who faught the japanese invaders then the french invaders then the U.S.

INVADERS... then WON?

yes, them...

peacce

[sushi]

88. I notice you made the same mistake

made by many here, which is you seem to be unable to put yourself in another person's place! The people who are killing coalition troops are defending their country against foreign invaders. It doesn't matter that they're good or bad. They are trying to kick out invaders! They are not patriots to you, but can you see that they must be patriots to many of their own people?

I agree with you that the North Vietnamese forces were not "some kind of sainted agrarian poet army fighting for justice and truth,' and that the US shouldn't have been in Vietnam!

[ProfessorGAC]

47. You Need To Read More Carefully

Rall didn't say they had it coming. He stated that in the minds of the folks who did the bombing, they would believe the usurpers had it coming.

You read the column looking for a fight, apparently. Rall is trying to describe the disconnect between the "they'll throw flowers" crowd and those who believe they're fighting for their homeland.

It's not so despicable if you actually comprehend the point being made.
The Professor

[DealsGapRider]

48. I don't know how I could read this more carefully:

"Cops who work for a foreign army of occupation are not innocent. They are collaborators. Traitors. They had it coming."

Rall didn't say, "Iraqis BELIEVE that cops who work for a foreign army of occupation are not innocent."

He emphatically stated that these Iraqis were TRAITORS simply because they signed on with an indigenous police force and that they got what they deserved. Sorry, there's no way to spin that. IT'S A REVOLTING STATEMENT MADE BY A REVOLTING MAN.

[ProfessorGAC]

50. I'm Spinning NOTHING!

And the fact that you can take a quote out of context proves my point. The whole column is in regards to the disconnect of thought between the war planners (and i use that term loosely) and the occupied citizenry. That, you've clearly missed. Reading more carefully, and not just more slowly, would have revealed that.

There's no spin from me. You just read the column wrong. No spin, just fact.

You're being too literal because you want to have a problem with it. Your loss.
The Professor

[sushi]

57. If foreigners invaded

my country I would join the 'Resistance' and expect NOBODY to work with or for the invaders! If they do then they ARE collaborators. Traitors! If they then get killed then, sadly, they have it coming.
Putting myself in an Iraqi's place I would be happy that Saddam Hussein is gone but extremely unhappy to be occupied by foreigners.

People who work for a foreign army of occupation are certainly not innocent. The sad thing is that the Iraqi cops just wanted jobs.

I'll be celebrating the day the coalition forces get out of Iraq.

[bpilgrim]

53. i prefer the wwII imperial japanese army myself... they even used the term

ILLEGAL COMBATANTS.

they used to pick'em out of the crowd by their HAIRCUTS, TANS, and attitude, for starters.

what they did with them next only got worse as time went by and resistance continued.

if the japanese, russians, nazis, and others were capable of it, so are OUR neo-cons.

remember who was capable of NUKING a defeated nations cities filled with innocent men, women and children... TWICE.

BRING'EM HOME!
http://news.GlobalFreePress.com/flash

think about it...

peace

[jiacinto]

65. I don't see it that way

I don't see the Iraq "Resisters" as Patriots. They are very bad people. And the fact that they would blow up the UN shows that they are no heroes.

I really can't believe that I am seeing this posted here. I thought I had seen everhting before this.

[Forkboy]

67. he's shocked again

how shocking :eyes:

[Ms. Clio]

72. but I am never surprised by your posts

Utterly and completely predictable

blah blah blah blah blah

yawn

[iangb]

81. To the Iraqi's the UN has.....

.....been in cahoots with the US since '91.

The UN authorised the sanctions which have ruined their economy. The UN sent weapons inspectors who refused to believe that there were no weapons.......and from their perspective helped justify the war.

To many Iraqi's, these attacks are the work of patriotic heroes.

I would be disappoinred if most of you would not fight an invader with any/every means possible.

[Robin Hood]

90. Most of the people around you would surrender real fast to an invader

Why, because americans are de-tached, out of touch arm chair warriors that have no clue what is going on in the world, let alone in the three feet of space surrounding them. Cows are most likely smarter.

If it weren't for France saving our sorry asses, we would still be haeling the Queen of England and speaking funny. Home of the free my ass, more like, The land of wusses.

[sushi]

86. It is wrong

to go after soft targets, yes, and you don't see Iraqi resisters as patriots but I'm sure many Iraqis do. I can certainly understand how this can happen. I'm sure there are many Iraqis who wish the "baddies" haven't bombed the UN offices either, but the UN, no doubt under US pressure, has supported sanctions for many years resulting in a lot of deaths and suffering for the innocent people, so I bet there is support for these extremists.

The UN offices should have been better protected by the coalition forces. Bush's illegal invasion started this. Now the US taxpayers are paying for his mistake, and innocent Iraqis and others, like coalition troops and UN workers, are suffering and dying.