Bloodiest week this year for U.S. troops in Iraq

SuperLib

If you cared about getting a bus out of a ditch, you'd need identify how bus got there in the first place. But you can't, because the driver and his crew are stoping you from doing it.

So, the first thing is you'd do is can the driver. Then you try to shut up the fools who put the driver in the the drivers seat, and continue to so loudly sing sang camp songs that the rest of us who are trying to figure out how to get the bus out of the ditch can;t concentrate on the problem of getting the bus out.

The song-singers, of course, sing so loudly because they don't want to get nailed for having supported the stupid fool of a bus driver in the first place.

Never forget, this has been a partisan war from the get-go.

They're

Westurn, The fact you've hijacked the topic of this thread to make it about Europe is an obvious attempt to divert attention from the situation the US finds itself in. Our bloodiest week in Iraq in 2008 was the same week GWB announced he'll give General Petreaus "all the time he needs," underscoring the White House's utter cluelessness on how to achieve the "victory" they speak about. Needless to say, it's all the time GWB needs to get out of office and pass this mess on to his successor. I thought the Republican mantra was "personal responsibility." Sure don't any evidence of that here....

Just because Europeans took bribes from Saddam Hussein and armed him to the teeth does not mean you can try and guilt trip em.

Did I get it right?

Oh and Betzee... trust me, the guilt trips being laid on Europe have been going on since day one ! Remember freedom fries ? Now look at Frenchie, fighting off muslim youths as they rampage in the streets and put the burn on Paris as they demand that France change her laws to meet the needs of the new muslim population. All after France declared she would not support the fighting in the M.E. region... odd, didn't seem to matter a bit as France's newest guests felt free to loot, burn, destroy city after city for nights and days in France ! Now "that" Betzee is "amusing" !

No FromEurope... you still haven't gotten my point, even though you clearly "claim" the same reason for Europes success in WWII !

"many allies fought together"

I rest my case !!! Europe failed to act in Bosnia, The Middle East (hey it wasn't the Americans that divided up that region after WWII now was it ?), and currently today in Africa... which continues to fester right at your doorstep !!! The Americans saved you from the horror of the Nazis and a lifetime of speaking German, they are now doing the same to keep the Koran from being forced down yer throat by some religious zealot ! I simply recognize this and support their efforts... you don't ! You whine, I don't ! You'll be brushing up on your Islam... I won't, I got a baseball game to attend !

"The extremists in Iraq are the Americans"

You really believe that, don't you, Grouchy? With views like that it's no wonder you're grouchy.

Personally, I find it amusing that guilt trips are being laid on Europeans for not helping out now the war is extending into a sixth year after major combat operation were declared over when most Americans haven't lifted a finger because, you know, it's a volunteer effort....

westurn

“And the fact that you speak English, as I do, on this forum is proof enough that the Americans saved your Euro hide from the Nazis in WWII...”

This proves only that you can only speak or write in English. (In Europe, many people speak and write in several languages, but it’s not because of the WW2) This doesn’t prove anything that America saved Europe. This shows only your arrogance about the America in which you certainly were not born yet. I told you before, without the USSR victory in the east front, America lead allies couldn’t win against Nazis. But you didn’t get my point. In the WW2, many allies fought together, because there was a real threat to the world. But this Iraq invasion by the US lead allies had no justification and that’s why not only the European countries, but also most of the world’s countries didn’t follow the US. And the allies could win theWW2 thanks to all the other countries. The proof is that the US troops alone still can’t win in Iraq, without the “real” reason and the other countries.

I have been mostly ignoring threads like this from Iraq since every one turns into a debate about whether the invasion was justified or not. It's a bit difficult to believe people are still bringing up the same recycled material on a near daily basis here.

Why not just call a truce. With respect to whether the invasion was justified or not, just accept the fact that the other side is not going to agree with you and you are not going to agree with them. You guys get in the way of discussion of things that are important to Iraq today, still hoping that you can produce some kind of "check mate" situation that will shut up the other side forever. It's just not going to happen.

If you care about the country then talk about what should be done today to make it better. At this point you're nothing more than a complete jerk-off if you don't.

Betzee... I'm not going to waste too much time on you, so lets just cut to the chase... stop believing everything you hear or read in the mass media ! Believe you me, sound bites and political propoganda have nothing in common with the way wars are actually fought, won, or lost. I can't help but laugh at the likes of you, RJD, Colmer etc who fill these sites with quotes from various politicians and heads of state... yeh, like they've invited you into the real world of what goes on in the war room ! Get a grip on yerself... its a bit embarrasing for the rest of us to watch you naively regurgetate quotes that you've been fed to ease your simplistic little mind... like it ever really mattered ! Betzee, trust me, you have no idea what the strategies for this war are nor the real reasons behind it. Just go home, enjoy your oishii sushi and be assured that the sun will come up tomorrow and you really have no care in the world... the US military is seeing to that ! A little gratitude thrown their way I'm sure would be greatly appreciated.

War is never a cakewalk !

"Six weeks to six months" ring a bell? We'll be greeted as liberators? All of this, incidentally, was used to dismiss those who pointed out war is never a cakewalk in the run-up to the invasion.

I'd be careful about comparisons to WWII when the American public was heavily invested in winning and every family was in the same boat as far as sacrifice and service were concerned.

Betzee... "realists" would never believe this nonsense you post:

"This woulda worked if it had been the promised cakewalk." War is never a cakewalk !

FE: You are wrong again ! The Europe of today is making the same mistakes it made 90, 60, even ten years ago ! And the fact that you speak English, as I do, on this forum is proof enough that the Americans saved your Euro hide from the Nazis in WWII... yer damn welcome ! Now a little more humility would be greatly appreciated, your Candian friends and them Aussies would have never been able to throw the manpower, technology, and sure fire determination into the battle the way the Americans did. Again folks... as we can plainly see, the Europeans have learned absolutely nothing from their past and are doomed to repeat their miserable failures again and again and again... I'm off this topic, you all can wallow in your self rightiousness alone !

westurn

You claim yourself to be a realist??? The Europe of 90, 60 years ago or even 10 years ago are not the same countries as now. The UK of Brown and France of Sarkozy are not the same as the Blair’s and Chirac’s. But you put them all in the same basket as “Europe”. The realistic people who opposed to this invasion from the beginning know that America isn’t the same country as before G.W.Bush stole the US presidency.

And don’t believe that only the US saved France in the WW2. Without the victory of the USSR on the east front against Nazis, the allies couldn’t defeat Nazis that easily, without saying that the sacrifices of the Canadians, Australians, and other allies in the war against the real threat to the world. That’s what lacked in Iraq. The real reason. Without it, nobody would follow the idea.

Leave the world's major issues to the realists !

And who would that be? As Senator George Voinovich, R-Ohio, observed last week at the Petreaus hearings, “The truth of the matter is that we haven’t sacrificed one darn bit in this war, not one. Never been asked to pay for a dime, except for the people that we lost.”

This woulda worked if it had been the promised cakewalk. But as this thing has dragged on for five years after major combat operations were declared over, the majority of the American people are not invested to "win." Perhaps the effort on the ground can continue to be subcontracted to a small group of volunteers. An ailing economy, however, cannot afford the USD 3 billion a week we're now spending and why, in the absence of a draft, mounting cost is what has finally prompted the American people to ask hard questions about the value of this ongoing conflict to American security.

"Why do you think that the European countries should have get involved with this..."

For the same reason they shoulda pulled their collective heads outta the sand before WWI,WWII,Bosnia etc !!! Learn from yer own history for cripes sake ! We Americans are gettin' damn tired of coverin' yer asses everytime you run to hide from the realities of the world... the biggest being, there are evil people out there ! They'll find you whether you want them to or not ! Now, back to your lovefest kumbaya around the campfire ! Leave the world's major issues to the realists !

westurn

Well, you still dodge the point. Why do you think that the European countries should have get involved with this failed invasion based on lies ?

BTW, I'm not Yôroppa jin, and I don't live in EU country. But still, it's geographically it's an European country.

FromEurope remains full of himself !

"You clearly were expecting the European countries to get involved in this invasion based on lies."

Once again, your words...Not mine ! When will you stop that idiotic bad habit ?

What I expect from Europeans is involvement ! But then again they didn't see WWI, WWII, Bosnia, or Africa coming till it up and smacked em in the mug ! Learn from your own history Europa jin !

"If Saddam lied or not has nothing to do with this invasion.."

Yes it does ! If you act criminally and then tell the world yer gonna do worse next time... well, it's equivelant to yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre. But no you out there in Euroland know better. OK wise acre... try this, walk onto a plane out there in euroland and tell everyone you got a bomb in yer pants. Now if there's a marshall on board... you could get shot. And believe me "nobody" would blame anyone but you ! Sorry, Saddam got what he deserved... a short walk off a long plank !

Again, the rest of your post is absolute foolish warbling. If you are any representative of whats out there in Europe... well, you all be doomed ! Good god... "What were his lies on these anyway?" 'nough said folks... no reasoning with the IQ challenged !

westurn

“Hmm, I never said that ! Why are you trying to put words in my mouth ? For the record though... Saddam was the one telling lies.”

” Europe should be ashamed ! Their selfish attitudes have allowed deaths in Iraq to spiral. Trust me, if France, Germany, and a half other dozen European nations got involved... this woulda been over years ago !”

You clearly were expecting the European countries to get involved in this invasion based on lies. So I believe it’s fair to say that “you presumes that this invasion based on lies was right” Or maybe you think this invasion was wrong after all?

“He told so many, so big, so believable... especially when he went out and gassed the Kurds, the Iranians, and invaded Kuwait !”

If Saddam lied or not has nothing to do with this invasion based on lies. Don’t try to justify yourself by changing the point. What were his lies on these anyway? He actually did gassed Kurds and attacked Iran with the help of the US. He also invaded Kuwait, but what did he tell as a lie? He said that Kuwait used to be an Iraqi province, so he wanted it back. It’s not completely a lie. (But of course it doesn’t give him the right to invade Kuwait)

Your statement doesn’t have the coherency. You are just defending your first comment, but you don’t give any explanation why European should have joined this invasion based on lies, which became a complete failure, ideologically and practically. Why refusing this invasion is a selfish attitude? The “deaths in Iraq to spiral” is only the consequence of this US led invasion. It’s not the fault of the other countries that didn’t agree with the US.

If you support this illegal invasion, just say so, but don’t blame the others because they didn’t agree with you. You are just whining because some European countries didn’t join your failed invasion.

Stuck......Dedicated to those that gave their lives in Iraq.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjS3X4lk56A

A soldiers point of view.

Typical European response... nothing but myopic selfish denials and finger pointing... all awhile just waiting for the dust to settle so they can move in and reap the benefits of Americas victory ! Now to respond...

"You presume that this invasion based on many lies was right."

Hmm, I never said that ! Why are you trying to put words in my mouth ? For the record though... Saddam was the one telling lies. He told so many, so big, so believable... especially when he went out and gassed the kurds, the Iranians, and invaded Kuwait ! He supplied training and funding to various terrorist organizations and openly snubbed his nose at UN sanctions and a dozen resolutions... of course paying bribes and kickbacks to that same UN in the oil for food program had a lot to do with their ineffectiveness. In short, the worlds police was comprimised due to greedy selfish attitudes by individuals under Koffi Annans watch ! Shameful ! So basically, Saddam stuck his finger in his coat pocket and attempted to rob a bank ! And now you all want to cry me a river cause he got caught, tried, and hung ! Boo hoo hoo ! That still doesn't address the issue of international complaceny by the Europeans !

"You agree with the idea of invading a sovereign country by force, without any “right reason”

Again, mind reading "fromEurope" ??? Gee, you might wanna take yer show on the road... but I think that you would find that you are just as lame out there as you are on this site. Flat wrong you are ! Obviously your idea of a "right reason" is different from mine. I think when you gas yer countrymen, invade yer neighbours, and openly fund terrorist activities... well... you get what's comin'. I'd think that being from Europe, you'd know first hand about the bus bombings in London, the bombings in Spain, the murders in the name of terrorist organization that plague your continent. You are a fool if you think that Americas actions in Iraq started all that ! Open a history book for cripes sake... France has been under seige since the 80's !

As for the rest of your post... blind ignorance. I will ask you about this though...

"It is clear that Bush’s main preoccupation is not to stabilize Iraq, but to stay in Iraq as the commanding occupier."

Really ? Begs the question... why ? He's not going to be the President much longer, he has no vested interest in Iraq. He's simply done what he was elected to do... Keep Americans safe ! He's done that by taking the battle to terrorists on their turf not ours ! Tough beans if you Europeans don't like that, Bush was not elected to save yer arse and you all best jump on board before it's too late... seems like France may be finally wising up... only after muslim youths threatened to burn down Paris though ! Cmon now Europe shake yerself ! No action is action !

i am tired of laugh, insult, humiliate and acuse the other side and offer no credible option. I think that that dont solve nothing. I say that the longer that we all assume that everyone want peace, we can reach an agreement. We all just need to stop acting like if these was a score game.

War suppporters know how much I dislike the invasion of Irak and they can say that I expressed my opinion against the invasion many times. i dont know why some people can think that I am a silent supporter.

But also I am not naive to think that if the US withdraw the ocupation force sudenly, Irak is not going to explode in a civil war, with Iran, Siria and Saudi Arabia sending wepons to Shia and Sunnis; Turkey Invading the Kurds and Al-Qaida killing people of all sides for perpetuate the chaos.

1- The main contribution of the US to the irakis negotiating peace in Irak, is that the US agree to withdraw from Irak if a peace and disarmament agreement is reached. That vanish the main excuse for many Shia and Sunni nationalist and Al-Qaida to wage violence in Irak.

2- That the US must to accetp the reality that in Iran is going to have some influence Irak, like it or not. Because the Shia, the main sectarian group is 44,67% of the population, more or less 13 millions of irakis. Even if US backed Al-Maliki stay in power, he is a Shia and have conections with Iran.

From my, point of view. From the three US presidential candidates, Obama showed more disposition in he's questions to Petraeus and Crook, to find and agreement with Iran and slowly withdraw the troops to force the gov to reach a peaceful agreement with the leaders of the others factions.

But for all these is critical that the US force Al-Mali to a cease-fire with Al-Sard, so the american and irakis soldiers can focuse in finish the Al-Qaida that is the main destabilizing influence in Irak.

westurn

” Europe should be ashamed ! Their selfish attitudes have allowed deaths in Iraq to spiral. Trust me, if France, Germany, and a half other dozen European nations got involved... this woulda been over years ago !”

Your logical is wrong. You presume that this invasion based on many lies was right. You agree with the idea of invading a sovereign country by force, without any “right reason”. Most of the European people and many European governments knew from the beginning that Bush & Co.’s invasion was not what they claimed to be. (9/11, Al Qaeda and Iraq link, then threat of WMD, then topple of Saddam etc.) As many posters say here, this invasion shouldn’t have been started. There were many nations in the world opposed to this invasion at UN assembly. Few years ago, Bush demanded UN to help this situation. The UN replied if the US troops withdraw, they will send the UN troops, but some US troops can stay in Iraq under UN commandment. Bush ignored this response and didn’t ask again. It is clear that Bush’s main preoccupation is not to stabilize Iraq, but to stay in Iraq as the commanding occupier. So before you put the blame on the other nations for this America’s failure, think how you could help Iraqi people as an occupier of the country that should have never been invaded.

The follies continue...

"the main priority is stop the violence in Irak. People is dying rigth now..."

Umm, moreo2, people have been fighting and killing each other in the middle east for centuries. Why is it that many of you all have been silent supporters of "that" strategy, but so bitterly dispute America's attempts to stop it ? I for one have little respect for the RJD's and Colmers of the world that sit by on their collective cans and piss and moan about those that go out and attempt to do something about the ongoing slaughter and mayhem going on in many parts of the world. Europe should be ashamed ! Their selfish attitudes have allowed deaths in Iraq to spiral. Trust me, if France, Germany, and a half other dozen European nations got involved... this woulda been over years ago ! But instead, like the Europeans have learned already, they sit back and allow another sore to fester in their backyard ... Africa !

You can debate "how" this war is being waged all you want... but until you actually get out and do something, you are just as guilty of the death of innocents and American soldiers as those that actually pull the triggers and launch the bombs. One of the wisest posts I've ever seen at this site said it best... "no action "is" action" !

"no rational person want to see more civilians irakis dead "

On the contrary, "anti-war" types like grouchy gaijin and sushisake3 - anyone who uses the bogus Lancet figures of 1 million plus dead since regime change in 03 - seems to me quite eager for as much death as possible, if it can be seen to discredit US foreign policy in even the slightest way.

no matter how much we dislike "or support" the invasion no rational person want to see more civilians irakis dead in a retreat or a military campaign against sectarian factions only for probe our political opinions.

Like I said before, I fully agree that these war was unnecessary and the cost of bringing "Fredom" and "Democracy" is pyrrhic and must to not to be repeated.

But right now, I think that no matter if we support or not the Invasion of Irak, the main priority is stop the violence in Irak. People is dying rigth now, later everyone can discuse til the end of the time who is right or who is wrong. For make peace, we must put aside our political divisions and work united for an impartial solution of the Irak conflict. If the US cant show these by the example, how the US can expect that irakis do the same and agree to disarm their sectarian militas after so much sectarian violence? Avoid more deaths, means negotiate peace, not finding a militar victory. The only faction that everyone agree that is not going to negotiate peace in Irak is Al-Qaida, that want to see Irak destroyed for harm more the US image, no matter how much we dislike the invasion no rational person want to see more civilians irakis dead in a retreat or a military campaign against sectarian factions only for probe our political opinions. Right? First take Al-Qaida out of Irak, next make all irakis sides negotiate peace and disarmament. These sound impartial and logic for both sides?

"Iraqbodycount.org, hardly pro-America, puts the number killed at between 80 and 90 thousand."

The vast majority being at the hands of Islamic extremists, fundamentalists, et al. Again... it's a war zone ! Seperating fact from fiction is nearly impossible. Just ask the Japanese about Nanking !

"Bush's war has multiplied that x82.6 for a total of 1.2 million+ in 5 years."

It's clear, when you post figures as wildly inflated as those, that you couldn't care less about the Iraqi people.

Iraqbodycount.org, hardly pro-America, puts the number killed at between 80 and 90 thousand.

mareo2, you said a mouthful there. "Don't risk unnecessary deaths" Unfortunately, I think all of the deaths since March 20 2003 have been unnecessary. Saddam's supposed to have "disappeared" 29,000 people per year. Bush's war has multiplied that x82.6 for a total of 1.2 million+ in 5 years. I doubt anything the fratricidal killings, possible results of withdrawal, would come even close to that. America has strayed from its founders' wisdom: "Peace is our most important interest, and a recovery from debt." --Thomas Jefferson to William Short, 1801. ME 10:287

I never supported the invasion and I still think that the presence of the US make Irak a battlefield for the US, Al-Qaida and Iran in a proxi war. But I recognize that the US cant withdraw without make the armed factions in Irak meet some accord between them.

For avoid rhetoric, let's try to keep a neutral political point of view and focuze in what everyone agree. Stop the violence in Irak.

From a militar point of view, is not possible considerate that is better for minimaze the death of irakis and americans lifes to take only one enemy at time? If the US pushed Al-Qaida in retreat in to the north, why the Bush administraction support Al-Maliki breach of the cease-fire with Shia militias in the south, several months before planned? Why dont tell him "Waith... is to soon, after finish Al-Qaida whe can go against them and negotiate a disarmament of the militias in a position of full strength. With a cease-fire there is no rush with the Shia militias. Show some patience and dont risk unnecessary deaths."

jeancolmar I agree with you wholeheartedly. This war should never have been started in the first place. It was based on lies from the very beginning. On the morning of 9/11 Richard Clark was told by Paul Wolfowitz to "find a way to connect Iraq" to these attacks. "Slam dunk!" according to Tenet. Slam dunk my astrolabe! Sarge I think my key point went over your head like a squadron of F-15s. The extremists in Iraq A R E the Americans. Iraq posed NO THREAT to the US of A on April 19 2003. The 'war' was won in both the Iraqi theatre when Saddam fell, and in Afghanistan when the Taliban ran, respectively. After that it's not a war for the winning or the losing. Nation building was/is for the indigenous populations to do themselves, with the right tools and minimal interference. What you have now is an occupation. Nobody wins an occupation. It either continues with endless bloodshed or it ends. Better it ends. Al Sadr is a lot less extreme than Bush or Cheney, face it. So, the continuing propaganda about winning the war and preventing Iran from having influence is bunkum. 100% bovine excrement. As for the possibility of expanding this illegal war to Iran read: http://www.antiwar.com/prather/?articleid=12681 Iran's nuclear program is legitimate according to the IAEA. The US simply cannot declare the UNSC or the IAEA "irrelevant" and act unilaterally. Iraq has proven this. America and Israel would do so to their peril. And no, I am not an extremist, lefty, pinko commie. I would like to see a just peace in the Middle east region for all parties involved. I would also like to see the dignity of America restored. The world needs America, as a shining light of all that is positive and optimistic about humanity. Not the consumptive over-libidinous trollop she has become under this current hateful administration. You and I are on the same side. I would employ less "bomb"astic means to achieve the goal. And, for the record, Tom Clancy has Pentagon access, concurs with many of the JCS, and characterizes this war of aggression as "Armed Robbery Writ Large." His words, not mine.

Very incisive post there, Ms Colmar.

Yes, why would Iran want the largely Shia swath of Iraq that runs from Basra up to Baghdad? I mean, it's not like this would allow them a direct link to Syria and from there vastly enhanced capability to arm Hamas and Hezbollah, fighting Iran's proxy wars, intent on destroying Israel and recreating Lebanon to their advantage.

No, Muslim nations like Iran are through with imperialism. This is a sin only America can be guilty of.

A couple of points to make here.

First, I thought le 'surge' was supposed to take care of the Sunni jihadists and extremists, or was it the Iran backed Shiites? Anyhoo, this latest "surge" in deaths is caused by none other than the old thorn in the U.S. military's side, Al Sadr. That's gotta suck. If it ain't the sunni's it's the shiites. What a mess.

Second, it may "only" be 19, 10, or even 4 U.S. military personnel being killed, but those "only" killed have real loved ones back home that are grieving their loss. To say that things are o.k. because only a handful of military got killed is disrespectful to them and their loved ones.

Last, comparing casualty figures from past and present is like comparing apples and oranges. WW2 is an entirely different 'war' from what is going on in Iraq in terms of scale and other factors. WW2 was fought on many battle fronts by many nations, and it was an all out battle to destroy each other to the last man standing, no mercy and no quarter. There were clear metrics in WW2, namely destroy Japan and Germany's will to fight. There are no such clear metrics in Iraq. The only clear objective was to apparently dispose of Saddam. Everything else including post occupation was given as much thought by the administration as someone taking a dump. That's why to this day the administration is scratching their heads wondering why we are stuck in Iraq with no end in sight, and soldiers keep dying, dying for a lost cause.

Not no but not.

No fist but first.

Opps. Fist word should read "ratios."

Rations be damned. This is a war that should not have been started. All the tens of thousands of Bush's victims could still be alive and unharmed.

The US is preparing for a war on Iran. The build up to war hysteria is there, from Gen. Betrayus to Bush. These people have shown absolutely no evidence of Iranian involvement in the war. The bit about Al-Sadir "believed" to be in Iran is weasel-wording. There is no proof he is there. You might as well say he is believed to be on the moon.

Bush will make waqr come election time. The media will buy into it. Most Americans will buy into it. Hair-brain McCain will become president. And then it will be discovered the new war was based on lies. There will be outrage but it will be too late. Just like with Iraq.

A 1 for 20 kill ratio in Vietnam was too shocking for the American public. Now a 1 for 140 kill ratio in Iraq is proving too much ot handle. If you support the war, get used to it. People die in war. If you oppose the war, don't use the number of dead soldiers to back your cause. See above, It's war, people die. And it's just in bad taste to use soldiers who died bravely to sell a political viewpoint.

Bloodiest week ? 19 ?

Face the facts world ! In terms of wartime casualties, the US armed forces has become an efficient killing machine. Comparing US casualties to past wars, 19 in a week is a mere drop in the bucket. Try 6,000 in two days at the battle of the bulge in Germany during WWII ! Condolences and deep respect to those and their families of lost ones in war, both past and present !

' Invading another country for oil for Israel is, as Tom Clancy calls it, "Armed Robbery Writ Large." '

What is Ronald McDonald saying about this war?

Grouchy - You really do think that leaving now and allowing Iraq to fall into the hands of these extremists would be good for Iraq and the world, don't you? Amazing...

It's been even bloodier for the MSM's "freedom fighters."

Sadrist officials told The Associated Press they had received orders from their headquarters in Najaf to avoid confrontations with Iraqi and U.S. forces unless the Americans try to move deep into Sadr City, which has been under siege for two weeks.

Soldiers Weed Out Sadr City Terrorists

http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18413&Itemid=1

Sarge, "Wonder why killing of liberator Americans never sparks outrage?" America is located on the other side of the globe from Iraq, Iran, Syria and anyone else "W" declares he doesn't like, because AIPAC told him to. Given that Iraq is majority Shia, as is al Sadr, that would make him mainstream, and Sunni's "the extremists", along with the invading/occupying forces. Disagreement with America does not make one an extremist. Resisting their occupation does not make one an extremist. Invading another country for oil for Israel is, as Tom Clancy calls it, "Armed Robbery Writ Large." That is the real extremism here. Killing 1.2+ million civilians, displacing 2 million, poisoning their water and air with DU, smashing their economy, infrastructure and anything else to smithereens, well, that is extremism, in the extreme. Related link and interesting comment under the video screen at http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/32710 "Wonder why killing of liberator Americans never sparks outrage?" The message is clear, "Go home! And stay there!"

Bloodiest week this year for U.S. troops in Iraq...God, everyday has been bloodiest day for millions of Iraqis ever since this country was invaded by foreign troops.

"Al-Sadr, who is believed to be in Iran,..."

Pussy.

"... repeated his demand..."

He is in position to demand nothing.

"... for American soldiers to leave the country"

Sure, so he and the extremists can take over Iraq. Ain't gonna happen.