Falluja operation underway

[Ned]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
You lost.

Please explain how "we" lost.

[Pax]

Originally posted by Ned


A generic statemtent that is fair. It would be unfair to say, however, that people who oppose democracy are freedom fighters, or that people who rule by terror are mere rebels, a term that can apply to good guys and bad guys equally.

We made a mistake in Vietnam? What was that mistake?

Being there.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Drachasor
I wager more civilians will die than insurgents by at least a factor of two.

Care to set the terms?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

The bigger tragedy to all was not being there when we needed to honor the peace treaty accord to provide security to the SV circa 1975.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Ned


Please explain how "we" lost.

How about the Fall of Hanoi and the commie takeovers of SVN, Cambodia and Laos?

[Ned]

Originally posted by problem_child


People who oppose what some guy calls 'democracy' aren't necessarily terrorists. Just because someone says they intend to bring 'democracy', don't mean they want people to elect the government the majority of said people want.

"You can have any car you want as long as it's black"

-Henry Ford

If someone says you can have any democracy you want as long as it's controlled by those guys over the sea, then 'democracy' in that sense is just a slogan. Besides, there's evidence to argue that USUK are specifically trying to prevent certain politically representative groups in Iraq from partaking in any election or democratic prosses by making them 'Outlaws', fit only for extermination, and thuroughly out of the political process. Rinsing the deck so to speak. It's easy, back em into a corner, call em fanatics, terrorists, insurgents, Saddamists whatever. Say they're controlled by Iran, or Al Qaeda. Then you don't have to oppose em in an election.

I didn't say that people who oppose democracy are terrorists. I say they are not freedom fighters. If they fight fairly and do not commit terrorists acts, but are fighting for some sort of right wing totalitarian rule (as the Islamo-fascists are) then I would call them fascists.


I think what Hitchens is trying to say is that just because these fascists are fighting Bush does not excuse the left for idolizing them. They after all, are fascists, some of who seek to impose radical Islam as a form of government.

[Ned]

Originally posted by germanos
The BBC has excelent links to various other news agencies. I find them very usefull.

From these combined sources, indeed a picture emerges of heavy fighting in various cities. Airstrikes on Mosul isn't having a picknick, and it does seem heavy fighting in parts of Baghdad does take place.

Falluja appears to be a hellhole, not only for the civilians, but for the US/Iraqi forces as well.

Looks like Tet II. If so, the outcome may be the same as Tet I, a decisive victory by the good guys.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Pax
Being there.

PAX, agreed. Hindsight is a very good way of managing one's affairs. I would never have sent in ground troops in the manner Johnson did. If we were going to fight a war, we fight it to win. That required a declaration of war on NV.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
The bigger tragedy to all was not being there when we needed to honor the peace treaty accord to provide security to the SV circa 1975.

Agreed in spades. 1) We had a Democrat controlled Congress determined to see SV lose the war; and 2) we had mentally retarded president who had no balls.

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Care to set the terms?

Sure, the relevent time from is November 1st to the end of hostilities in Falluja--this is when the Bush-team declares major/significant hostilities are over in Falluja (e.g. they declare victory or Bush makes an "aircraft-carrier"-like statement)--, or 2 months time, whichever you prefer.

If during that period, the number of civilian deaths is not at least twice the number of insurgent deaths (both estimated, of course), then I will equip an avatar of your choice. If I am right in the number of civilian deaths is twice the insurgent deaths or more, then you will have the avatar of my choice.

Deal?

-Drachasor

[DinoDoc]

You have to pick a reasonably respected source for the info or no deal.

[Serb]

May I suggest www.iraqwar.ru ?

[Ned]

Originally posted by Last Conformist

How about the Fall of Hanoi and the commie takeovers of SVN, Cambodia and Laos?

1) Hanoi -- French lost that
2) SVN -- We were out of the war when that happened
3) Cambodia and Laos could not be against communist ground power with airpower alone.

So again, how did we lose the Vietnam War?

[Drachasor]

Originally posted by Serb
May I suggest www.iraqwar.ru ?

I can't seem to access that site.

How about CNN or the BBC, Dino?

-Drachasor

[Serb]

What? Somebody killed this great source of information? Bastards.