Jump to content

Wednesday: 285 Iraqis, 1 GI Killed; 295 Iraqis Wounded


Fidel

Recommended Posts

Congress has the purse strings. How is he gonna pay for it? Two things work against Bush. Congress and public opinion. Everyone, even a lot of Republicans are simply tired of the present mess and other than Bush and a few of his minions, not even the Republicans in congress want to escalate things. They have elections to worry about. Its simply not popular. All Bush has now is words...and very little bite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 35
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Funny though, isn't guys. In Pakistan, a country full of Muslims, crawling with terrorists and over-flowing with weapons, where wars are being fought on at least 3 fronts, they still come nowhere near killing as many of each other as the US citizens do.

 

In 2006, US citizens killed 10 times as many of their fellow citizens, per head of population, as did Pakistanis.

Source

 

Hmm, this data would seem to refute your claims, Flasher & Kojis.

 

Last year, the number of Pakistanis killed in conflict was about 1,600.

 

In the US something like 16,000 people were killed in gun related incidents.

 

Well at least the last time I looked, local courts in the US were not having women gang-raped for something their brother or uncle may have done.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it strange that the Allies invaded and destroyed Germany in 1944-45, looting and raping (in the east), driving millions from their homes as refugees, with the country divided and reduced by one-fourth, self-government completely abolished, funny money issued, its former leaders on trial and the people impoverished and lucky if they had a roof to take shelter under ... yet Catholics and Protestants didn't start killing each other, Bavarians and Saxons, Hessians and Prussians etc did not start blowing each other up.

 

Maybe the religions and cultures of the Middle East have something to do with the situation in Iraq???

 

:dunno:

 

 

Why didn't they start killing each other? apart from having spent a dozen years doing just that, the whole country had been beaten and they realised and accepted it......it was not just that their army and government had lost a war. PLUS most importantly they had the same very large incentive to behave in the western part as in the eastern part - it was called the Red Army.

 

You can only beat an enemy when THEY say you have won. or you have killed them all. In Germany (and Japan) the locals accepted that they had been defeated and acted accordingly. In Iraq (and Vietnam) the locals did not......plus of course throw in the simple fact that Iraq is in fact 3 seperate countries that do not (and never have) liked each other very much.......it's like putting cats in sack - don't put yer head in to have look to see how they are getting on :grin: , let alone yer tadger :shocked: .

 

BTW I would not entirely believe any history books that state the Soviets were the only Allies into rape and pillage, let alone when it comes to prisoner and POW "disposal".........of course always a question of scale.......

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only after a lot of arm twisting from BP, Shell, the Bank of England and Jim Baker. The Saudis could have lived with Kuwait as part of Iraq. They tried to make the Kuwaitis stop cross border drilling, stop undercutting Iraqi oil exports and lease Babayan to Iraq which was what Saddam wanted. Greedy Kuwaitis wouldn't agree to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...