[quote]Gkhan wrote:
Chushin wrote:
lixy wrote:
Waving sticks or swords when faced with F-16s and tanks is useless.
More astounding insight from Qom Lixy.
Qom Lixy?
lol, ha.[/quote]
C’mon guys, explain that. I highly doubt I’m the only one who don’t get the joke.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
lixy wrote:
So, Al-Sadr’s crew is giving the finger to Al-Maliki, the Americans and everybody else.
Iraqi militia defy call to disarm
The radical Shia Iraqi cleric Moqtada Sadr has defied a call by the Iraqi government for his powerful Mehdi Army militia to lay down its weapons.
If we had done our job the first time we beat these bastards, we wouldn’t be dealing with this crap right now. That’s what you get for running a PR, PC war while the enemy is bombing civilians, chopping off heads and using Iranian made mines.[/quote]
You really want to play the “if” game? Well, if Lennon didn’t meet Yoko, the Beatles’ discography would be even more impressive. If we mastered cold fusion, the world would be a better place. If you had a reasonable president, Saddam would still be cracking Al-Sadr’s head. And if you folks didn’t fall for that pre-war blatant propaganda, 4005 Amerians and God knows how many Iraqis would still be alive. Millions of people would not be refugees and your treasury wouldn’t be a trillion short.
And as far as waging a more brutal war, I don’t see how you can sell it to your compatriots. A lot of them are already pissed beyond belief as it is. Any more crap and Bush will literally have riots on his hands. And the way things are going, he won’t be able to contain it militarily.
I believe Ron Pau’l position was “play nice but if somebody touches a hair on your head, exterminate 'em”. That is a defendable position. Go to war to win, or don’t go to war at all. And when you’re defending yourself (as opposed to being the aggressor in the current situation), you can be sure that the population will be behind you till the end even if it has to tighten its collective belt. But I’m going off topic here…
[quote]lixy wrote:
I believe Ron Pau’l position was “play nice but if somebody touches a hair on your head, exterminate 'em”. [/quote]
Using that logic, would it have been right in your opinion to exterminate the Iranians circa 1979 for taking our embassy employees hostage?
correct me if I’m wrong:
Tokyo Rose=Qom Lixy
An Iraqi caught in he crossfire offering his perspective.
http://last-of-iraqis.blogspot.com/2008/03/what-was-under-table-has-been.html
Man, you know I was just realizing something.
The kind of political debates that go on this forum, are probably as charged if not less, than those that go in Baghdad markets.
No wonder, people are killing eachother.
Imagine if we all knew eachother and lived around eachother.
Rainjack prolly would have behead someone, and Lixy prolly would have blown himself up.
I would have been brutally mob murdered.
Ahhhh, the real Iraq.
Iraqi casualties at highest level since mid-2007
Fresh news from “The Real Iraq”:
More Than 1,000 in Iraq�??s Forces Quit Basra Fight
BAGHDAD �?? More than 1,000 Iraqi soldiers and policemen either refused to fight or simply abandoned their posts during the inconclusive assault against Shiite militias in Basra last week, a senior Iraqi government official said Thursday. Iraqi military officials said the group included dozens of officers, including at least two senior field commanders in the battle.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
lixy wrote:
Fresh news from “The Real Iraq”:
Don’t you mean “Good news from ‘The Real Iraq’?”[/quote]
The only good news that can come from there at this point, is the foreign troops getting out before they do any more damage. I hear that Afghanistan and Waziristan are falling apart.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
One really has to wonder what you’d have to write about if they DID leave…[/quote]
We both know it’s never going to happen.
Meanwhile, it’s the regular Iraqi who’s paying the price of America’s thirst for military bases and presence all over the world…
Iraq bomber kills many at funeral
Iraqi police say a suicide bomber has killed at least 15 people in an attack on a funeral procession in the province of Diyala.
Lo and behold, Iran doesn’t want people shooting at each other on its borders.
Officials confirm Iran’s role in brokering truce between Iraqi government and Shiite cleric
[i]TEHRAN, Iran: Officials in Iran confirmed for the first time Saturday that the country played an important role in brokering a recent truce between the Iraqi government and anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Shiite Iran helped end the clashes between Iraqi government troops and al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army militia for the sake of Shiite unity, said a senior Iranian official who deals with Iraq.
“It is in Iran’s best interests to see unity among Shiite factions,” said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki heads a Shiite-dominated government in Iraq, but has clashed with other Shiite factions in the country, including the one led by al-Sadr.
The Iraqi prime minister sparked clashes with al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army over a week ago when he sent government troops to Basra to crack down on Shiite militias. The fighting eased last Sunday after al-Sadr ordered his men off the streets and called on the Iraqi government to end its attacks.
The Iranian government helped broker the truce during high-level talks in Iran’s holy city of Qom with Shiite Iraqi officials and senior supporters of al-Sadr, said a prominent Iraqi party official based in Tehran.
“Iran played a mediating role and helped ease things a lot,” said the Iraqi official, also speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
“Given its influence over al-Sadr, Iran convinced the Sadrists to stop fighting,” he said.[/i]
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/05/africa/ME-GEN-Iran-Iraq.php
[quote]lixy wrote:
Lo and behold, Iran doesn’t want people shooting at each other on its borders.
Officials confirm Iran’s role in brokering truce between Iraqi government and Shiite cleric
[i]TEHRAN, Iran: Officials in Iran confirmed for the first time Saturday that the country played an important role in brokering a recent truce between the Iraqi government and anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Shiite Iran helped end the clashes between Iraqi government troops and al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army militia for the sake of Shiite unity, said a senior Iranian official who deals with Iraq.
“It is in Iran’s best interests to see unity among Shiite factions,” said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki heads a Shiite-dominated government in Iraq, but has clashed with other Shiite factions in the country, including the one led by al-Sadr.
The Iraqi prime minister sparked clashes with al-Sadr’s Mahdi Army over a week ago when he sent government troops to Basra to crack down on Shiite militias. The fighting eased last Sunday after al-Sadr ordered his men off the streets and called on the Iraqi government to end its attacks.
The Iranian government helped broker the truce during high-level talks in Iran’s holy city of Qom with Shiite Iraqi officials and senior supporters of al-Sadr, said a prominent Iraqi party official based in Tehran.
“Iran played a mediating role and helped ease things a lot,” said the Iraqi official, also speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
“Given its influence over al-Sadr, Iran convinced the Sadrists to stop fighting,” he said.[/i]
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/05/africa/ME-GEN-Iran-Iraq.php[/quote]
Well, yeah. Iran doesn’t want to see all the training and smuggled weapons wiped out in an open conflict. Who will shoot women for not covering themselves if that happened? They can’t afford for Iraqi and US forces to fight an all out battle, stopping only when Sadr and his minions are annihilated.
They prefer more unconvetional attacks by “rogue” elements of the Sadrists. So, a little rest for now, but the militias will be back out on the street, terrorizing young women. Those big tough guys.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Well, yeah. Iran doesn’t want to see all the training and smuggled weapons wiped out in an open conflict. Who will shoot women for not covering themselves if that happened? They can’t afford for Iraqi and US forces to fight an all out battle, stopping only when Sadr and his minions are annihilated. They prefer more unconvetional attacks by “rogue” elements of the Sadrists. So, a little rest for now, but the militias will be back out on the street, terrorizing young women. Those big tough guys.[/quote]
Do you honestly believe Iraqis want what you call “an open conflict”? Do you think they can afford it more than Iran does?
It don’t compute.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, yeah. Iran doesn’t want to see all the training and smuggled weapons wiped out in an open conflict. Who will shoot women for not covering themselves if that happened? They can’t afford for Iraqi and US forces to fight an all out battle, stopping only when Sadr and his minions are annihilated. They prefer more unconvetional attacks by “rogue” elements of the Sadrists. So, a little rest for now, but the militias will be back out on the street, terrorizing young women. Those big tough guys.
Do you honestly believe Iraqis want what you call “an open conflict”? Do you think they can afford it more than Iran does?
It don’t compute.[/quote]
Iran and the Sadrist most certainely don’t. Their “rogue” elements, the terrorists and death squads, would be wiped out. You can’t shoot women for not covering themselves, if you’ve provoked the Iraqis into destroying your thugs once and for all.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
lixy wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, yeah. Iran doesn’t want to see all the training and smuggled weapons wiped out in an open conflict. Who will shoot women for not covering themselves if that happened? They can’t afford for Iraqi and US forces to fight an all out battle, stopping only when Sadr and his minions are annihilated. They prefer more unconvetional attacks by “rogue” elements of the Sadrists. So, a little rest for now, but the militias will be back out on the street, terrorizing young women. Those big tough guys.
Do you honestly believe Iraqis want what you call “an open conflict”? Do you think they can afford it more than Iran does?
It don’t compute.
Iran and the Sadrist most certainely don’t. Their “rogue” elements, the terrorists and death squads, would be wiped out. You can’t shoot women for not covering themselves, if you’ve provoked the Iraqis into destroying your thugs once and for all.[/quote]
You don’t seem to understand my question. Or, you are under the impression the both Iran and Al-Sadr are more interested in the way women dress than power.