Armistice day

Rb

Bodhidharma wrote:

You drag up the numbers if you want to prove me wrong

You're the one making statements, the burden of proof rests on you. Also, an out and out civil war had not yet broken out in Iraq.

Bodhidharma

rb_ie wrote:

You're the one making statements, the burden of proof rests on you. Also, an out and out civil war had not yet broken out in Iraq.

OK, since i am not going to try to track down the numbers i will qualify my sentance with, "It is my belief that....."

Civil war doesn't need to be named as such to be one. Come on, at least you can see that.

Lust4Life

Bodhidharma, you are my Hero!
I wish I had the fortitude and political vocabulary to debate as you do. The points you make are spot on.

mickd

Regardless for what side one is on there is no justification for the nearly 4000 deaths of American service men and women. The fact is that the American invasion has acheived nothing, depose Saddam and you have civil war, the rest of the world has being saying this for long time, only now is it beginning to dawn in America. If they weren't so hell bent on this adventure thereby forgetting the traits of honour and integrity they wouldn't be in the mess they are in now.

Tar.Aldarion

Yes, yes, he is cream of the fortitude and political vocabulary crop...


Cause and effect, look it up.

Stephen

I appear to have taken a wrong turn and ended up on the f**king politics board.

deman

Stephen wrote:

I appear to have taken a wrong turn and ended up on the f**king politics board.

Exactly what I was thinking.

mickd

Yet you went to the 'trouble' of reading this thread

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

how else could he have graced us with his sarcasm

or was it irony

either way, big up stephen

big up

Mossy Monk

shame on you for watching CNN in the first place

faceman

Steffano2002 wrote:

Not one bit actually. That's how "terrorised" I am of the US.

Obviously you dont like Bush as many dont but the analogy you used is shameful and a nod to terrorists

There's alot of anti iraw war michael moore heads on this thread. I dont know if Bodhidharma's claim is correct. Can anyone dis-prove it?

For those anti-war heads here, what is/could have been the best solution in iraq?

PS. The scientist, no probs dude.

Terry

ok. let's get back to the original point of this thread, which was to point out that CNN seems to view the death of Iraqi civilians as business news.
i was really disgusted by this, especially on the weekend that the british (and many others) mourned those killed in wars over the years and that the death of one american soldier made the main headlines on that partiucular day.
judging by the reaction of CNN, Iraqi people are just numbers and this war is a business matter unless an american is killed. this, it seems, is an atrocity.

let's get some facts straight here.
1. America and britain were the main invasion forces (the 3rd largest, Spain, wisely pulled out after the Madrid bombings).
2. any country under invasion will have people fighting against the invaders. it's human nature. these people are not insurgents. they are just average people trying to defend what is theirs.
3. as for bush being more evil than those he refers to as "the axis of evil", they are all as bad as each other. the only difference being that bush actually followed through with his threats.
4. boards is slow today. i'm off to feedback to bitch and moan about it.

il gatto

And I thought this would be about Irelands belated, begrudging recognition of the many thousands of Irishmen who fought and died in the wars. Ah well.
It must be remembered, there were more resons than just oil. Bush's father had failed to complete the rout of Saddam, so there was a grudge element. It also gave Bush the chance to become a war president (the only ones most people remember). The "War on Terror" was a way of placating a scared and angry America, because it was big, obvious and in your face (how American), and suble, behind the scenes C.I.A. methods wouldn't have cut the mustard publicity wise. And lastly, American manufacturing was on the skids. Now, companies like Lockheed, General Dynamics Land Systems (make the Abrams tank) and their ilk, are flat out, now just supplying, but fixing and reconditioning (ah! clever you say). They're employing more people, leaving the U.S. government able to claim a healthy economy, and redistribute wealth, whilst having lower unemployment rates, and not having to implement a pesky social welfare system (as a european would recognise it).

Marksie

faceman wrote:

For those anti-war heads here, what is/could have been the best solution in iraq?

Possibly faceman just after desert storm when the iraqi army was in full retreat and the kurds rose up as they had been encouraged to do.
Stopping then and allowing them (the kurds) to be hung out to dry was the pits to be honest. and something we should in the west be ashamed of. After that who was going to truts the western powers to back them in an uprising.

Trying to get ontopic a little: i heard a reporter once saying that the degree of interest in the news is inversely proportional to its distance from the listener... and i recall the quote from hotel rwanda..sharp incisive and correct.
So deaths in iraq, or tsunamis for that matter may have little or no bearing for many people other than figures untilit happens on their back door.

Armistice day: Or remeberance day/ poppy day in the uk. It is for the dead in ALL conflicts. and the poppies are sold to give to charity to help the upkeep of the servicemen and their families.... strange i was listening to some people ranting about the wearing of poppies on rte radio yesterday.

My personal opinion is not of glory or heroes, but of those men and women, many of who were very young who were wasted in the first world war (PALS battalions being a great example), and who laid down everything in the second..so people like me and you could have some semblence of free speech on boards. You find that many of the survivors never talk about it anyways..it took years for my mother to winkle out of my father that he had been in the battle of the bulge and was responsible for minesweeping (in fact he was leading a company of 7 men when one triggered a huge german anti tank mine and 5 were killed outright). But i recall talking to one of his friends and as a very young child of 7 why his wife had numbers tattoed on her arm (he liberated her from bergen belsen and then married her).

Anyways i digress, but essentially it is a day for rememberance of the dead..and not jingoistic. Personally it keeps me cognisant that i dont want to see it happen again

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

For those anti-war heads here, what is/could have been the best solution in iraq?

leaving saddam in power would probably have been best in the short term, maybe even in the long term too.. that place could descend even further into **** over the coming years and there's no guarantee it will be able to climb out and clean itself off.

aidan_walsh

let's get back to the original point of this thread, which was to point out that CNN seems to view the death of Iraqi civilians as business news.

Unless you can show me either on the website or a video from the day in question that CNN were setting a deliberate policy of taking Armistance Day as business news (which is too ridiculous to even contemplate as credible), I'll just assume that this thread was written in an amazing acrobatic feat of kneejerking the likes of which may never be witnessed again.

Most likely an oversight on the part of whoever was organising the ticker. Thank God people don't react the same way whenever RTE News has a technical error, or A&E would be in a worse state than ever.