This Story is Archived
Iraqi bomb factory destroyed »
Posted by: okitech 1 year, 9 months agoThe fighting comes in the wake of anescalation in the sectarian violenceThe US military says it has killed 22 armed men in two separate clashes north of Baghdad, shortly after carrying out air strikes that destroyed a bomb-making factory.
Read Full Story at english.aljazeera.net »
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 138
-
slate
Nov. 25, 2006, 8:40 a.m.Funny, I wake to page after page of hate Bush in one thread and not one post in a thread that has something positive in it.
Go Army, get the job done quickly, you'll soon have your fett kicked out from under you.
-
tchef
Nov. 25, 2006, 6:50 p.m.Yes it is good to hear good news from Iraq. Our troops are doing the best they can in a situation that they should have never been put in.
Our armed forces are the best in the world, too bad our leaders arn't.
-
-
blinkers
Nov. 25, 2006, 9:01 a.m.Good point, slate, so here's another one.
(Yes, there is a smattering of out-and-out "hate-Bush" mail in many threads, but the majority of posters who do not support the president or his policies back up their opposition (and actions) with argument and evidence. There is usually less invective as well, although that's an impression rather than a scientific fact. But compare, say Ruff111/FSU with Bubba/Frankie, or Froggy/DocJ with Diogenes/Amplee, for example. Although you may call me biased
Regarding the bomb factory, good work US military. This is half the reason they are in Iraq - but the suspicion remains that for every bomb factory destroyed, another will soon appear. It would also be interesting to know whether any foreign bomb-makers were among those killed. We constantly read of "foreign insurgents" but has a single non-Iraqi terrorist been captured? If so, I missed it.
-
Bopi365
Nov. 25, 2006, 3:56 p.m.Yes thats right, Hoorah for our boys in Iraq and the Bush/Rumsfeld war on terror. At least for 2 billion a week ,we are certainly getting our monies worth. 22 terrorists/resistance fighters down and 20 thousand or so to go. Keep up the good work.
-
-
felipe
Nov. 25, 2006, 9:31 a.m.Good job by US Military.
Its amazing to see that this was published by aljazeera.
These kinds of news seems to be of least priority to get into US news media.
-
NavArmy
Nov. 25, 2006, 9:44 a.m.Our military doing what it does best, "Getting the job done"!!!!! Good post blinkers!
-
Vim99
Nov. 25, 2006, 9:59 a.m.It would be a shame if public arguments over the merits of this war reduce to the military having to defend what it is doing in Iraq and how it is doing it. It seems to me that this can only happe if we confuse Bush and the Washington based policy makers with the generals and soldiers on the ground. The best criticism so far has been directed to the former category as far as I am concerned. The American military, as in institution, has always done what it it called upon to do. When the goals are not met and the prosecution of the war itself seems flawed we should point the criticism in the right direction.
Viva army!!!
-
Bopi365
Nov. 25, 2006, 3:59 p.m.Of course they often get confused, Bush has been calling the shots from DC all along. If the generals had their way, we'd have been outta there a long time ago.
Do your homework.
-
-
factsonly
Nov. 25, 2006, 10:08 a.m.I'm proud that we have a miliary that performs so well and shows the results to go along. This is one of the reasons we are in Iraq and I wish they would show our progress on the others, like the number of schools and community centers built or the effective military that is being trained for Iraq or even the freedoms we have afforded the people, not to mention the lack of slayings, rapes, and tortchers being done, and generally the Iraqi people are happy we are there. But I'm sure some extreme leftist liberal will attack me and my comments and start talking about oil, even though we have not taken a drop or will, which is stated in the peace agreement with the Iraqi government. If you ask me how I know this, because I've read the agreement, which anyone can read, but those lacking in education or the will to know the truth would not do so. And the rest of the things I've mentioned, I know because I was there. I would like to thank all my fellow bothers and sisters who served.
-
Bopi365
Nov. 25, 2006, 4:03 p.m.Read again
The "war on terror" is designed to bring stability to a region who will then sell us oil. We as a democratic free enterprise society cannot just go in and take the oil. Whomever is left standing after this fiasco will undoubtedly be in the debt of the US and more than willingly sell us the oil at discounted prices of course.
No , we're just in it to bring democracy to a third world nation because we care so much.
-
-
slate
Nov. 25, 2006, 10:20 a.m.Yes Blinkers the right does it as well. Some do it because they hate the left as much as Bush is hated, some do it because the atmosphere of 6 years of hearing their side demeaned. I wish people could argue on the merits of their thoughts and see that their own side does wrong as well. I voted for Bush but there are many things that he's done that I disagree with. At least with him and the right I know how they stand on issues, the left never once had a plan to coax me into voting for them. Their only platform was ABB, anyone but Bush. How will you get others to vote for you if you don't get an actual message to us?
-
factsonly
Nov. 25, 2006, 10:23 a.m.These retired generals have all these comments to make, now that theyare retired. People will try to defend them and say, "oh, they had no choice before they retired." WRONG! Military personnel who are restricted from speaing on said matters as active military, would also be restricted, being retired as well. Generals have only teir political carrers to defend. Just like the media will never retract or apologise or even resolve any mistakes they have made, they just go on printing what sells, not necessarily the truth, which I dought most will find in their publications. How many people are aware that these dictators tell their people one story in their own controlled press and the American press something totally diferent. Our press is aware of this or at least they should be, but they don't report it. I wonder if it is because of political biased. Well, whatever they are waiting for to tell you the truth, it had better be before Iran gets nuclear weapons.
-
factsonly
Nov. 25, 2006, 10:38 a.m.slate, you make an excellent point. I myself sometimes take a moment to find the center and choose where I want to go from there. I would advise everyone to do this. Today I understand when they asked Pres. Regan why he had left the party (went from DEM to REP), Pres. Regan responded, "I did not leave the party, it left me." History can teach us so much, but there is another issue, people are tring to change history and the eay it is taught for political purposes. I should stop now, because even though I made no political suggestions by taking a side or showing political biased, I will be interpreted that way, but everyone knows what I am talking about. GOD BLESS AMERICA!
-
-
emckane
Nov. 25, 2006, 11:35 a.m.factsonly
while I agree with your comment somewhat, taking the center on every issue can lead to more 911's. It's always better to be proactive than reactive. America has been fighting proactive battles for freedom for over 200 years. When we stop, that will be the end of America.
-
spkguy
Nov. 25, 2006, 1:32 p.m.Ruff1111 hey! I'm surprised you didn't same something negative about the source!Brought to to you by that wonderful network
Aljazeera! So thats ok with you now! You right wing hypocrite!
Good job army!
-
slate
Nov. 25, 2006, 12:12 p.m.I'm thankful that we didn't have the same media during WWII! Can you imagine what would have happened when they heard how many of our soldiers died in just one battle?
-
emckane
Nov. 25, 2006, 12:18 p.m.slate
the media was pro US back then during WW2 and battlefield losses weren't a hot news item on CNN every night.
"Can you imagine what would have happened" yes, we'd all be doing the German goosestep.
-
AmpLee
Nov. 25, 2006, 9:09 p.m.Comparisons-really just about ANY comparison, between today's 'war on terror' and WW2 are totally invalid.
Different world, technology, media, people, everything.
My uncle was in WW2, one of the few surviving vets, so I talk to him and WW2 when I get the chance.
He was on the isle of Samoa before we 'civilized'it and turned it into a s***hole, back when no woman wore a top.
He got beer and cigarettes in his air drop rations on Guadal canal. Got paid in whiskey by medics to tend to the battle fatigued on the ocean cruise home. Didn't even SEE a black person let alone serve in battle next to one.
Ever see those propaganda cartoons with the buck-toothed Japanese with the glasses and coolie hats?
-
-
TwiceBorn
Nov. 25, 2006, 12:21 p.m.Regrettably another case of "win every battle, but lose the war".
You can not bomb democracy onto a people who will give democracy away as soon as a crisis erupts.
You can not bomb democracy onto a people who would rather kill members of another religious sect than have peace.
You can not bomb democracy onto a people who have hundreds of years of hate and revenge to settle.
-
JackofallChems
Nov. 25, 2006, 4:10 p.m.you're so correct. that's what public floggings are for. ;-)
* THE FLOGGINGS WILL CONTINUE UNTIL MORALE IMPROVES *
(translation for the feebleminded liberals: if you treat them badly AS INDIVIDUALS when they support something other than a well-ordered, representative - rather than parliamentary or pure - democracy, and refuse to accept any religious or nonreligious ideology that endorses something else as a valid viewpoint, it puts a PERSONAL price tag on their stupidity. let them put a stop to the beatings AFTER they accept a real form of government, by a real majority vote, and it becomes obvious to one and all that there's true benefit to a government that gives one voice - rather than one or no vote - per adult. if they need a better sales pitch than that, which is highly unlikely, then is the time to give up on them as hopelessly stupid.)
-
Bopi365
Nov. 25, 2006, 4:16 p.m.Who gets sacrificed for the spoils of war
Is it your son
No I didn't think so
Keep thinking your noble thoughts but lets hope people like yourself, safe in your beds , understand that real americans are dying for you to have that privilege. No not the privilege of freedom and democracy but the privilege of driving a gas sucking SUV or of living in the Burbs and commuting to the city if only to maintain your way of life.
Thank the US military for that you condescending hypocrite.
-
-
emckane
Nov. 25, 2006, 12:31 p.m.when you realize how the media has crucified the government over New Orleans and Iraq, its no wonder the Dems are back in
power. If you throw enough mud at the wall, some is bound to stick.
I guess Americans think that 911, hurricanes and everytime someone slips in the bathtub are always the presidents fault.
It's easier to blame the president than hold Mayor Nagin, the Democratic Government of Mississippi and Saddam responsible for some of what has gone wrong.
-
emckane
Nov. 25, 2006, 12:36 p.m.TwiceBorn
your statement is a little obvious. I take it that your solution is to allow things to fester in Iraq where it eventually ends up on America soil. Your solution brought on 911.
I think you need to be reborn 3 times ;) just kidding
-
Bopi365
Nov. 25, 2006, 4:19 p.m.And so is yours
Bush's "proactive" stance on iraq has been a dismal failure and at what cost.
-
-
factsonly
Nov. 25, 2006, 1:40 p.m.emckane, no I'm not taking the center, just trying to figure out where it is from time to time, so I know where to stand. Most of my issues tend to side with the right, more so in this day in age to balance out the center. I'm not one to think we should always talk, action is very much required at times. I believe when someone says they are going to kill you, they mean it. When people say we should talk to people like that, it is a problem for them and if we allow them, it will be a problem for us too. I apologize if I was not clear earlier. But thank you for bringing it to my attention. I will remark further that people will read my earlier comments and claimed to have thought that way, "BUT" and that is a big but because it means BS is what they said and will most likely follow. I will also mention that the only thing they can do is speculate what they believe we will do not what we have done. P.S. emckane, I like your hummor with twiceborn.
-
sheolraver
Nov. 25, 2006, 1:33 p.m.factsonly said: " ...start talking about oil, even though we have not taken a drop or will, which is stated in the peace agreement with the Iraqi government. If you ask me how I know this, because I've read the agreement,..."
I used to think our wars in Iraq were not about oil. Now I'm not so sure. While certainly, such would be stated in any written agreement, do you not think that a successfully established presence in Iraq would give us significant influence over what happens to the oil there?
-
-
TwiceBorn
Nov. 25, 2006, 1:57 p.m.Maybe some of the people who have posted here should read the book that George H. W. Bush and Brent Scowcroft wrote in which they explain why the USA military did not take out Saddam Hussein in 1991 after Kuwait was liberated.
Hussein was a buffer against Iran both in 1991 and in 2003. Now Iran has no one to reign them in. Hussein did not get along with Osama Bin Laden, but now Al-Quaida has a stronghold in Iraq.
The US occupation of Iraq is the best recruitment tool that Osama could ever hope for.
I realize to many when military force does not succeed, the only plausible solution is to use more force, but you can not beat democracy into a nation or a region. The solution to the Iraq problem is talks between the USA, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Jordan, Syria and the government of Iraq. Even that may be too late, but sending more US soldiers to die for a lost cause is not going to fix anything.
AND IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 911.
Even George W. BuSh admitted that.
-
SouthernBoy
Nov. 25, 2006, 3:24 p.m.The strategic reason for leaving Saddam in power as a balance to Iran was understandable, but did greater harm than good in the long run, I think. Bush senior had promised to take Saddam out of power, so there was an uprising among the Kurds to help throw him out. When America backed out of its' promise, Saddam turned on the Kurds and massacred them. That event likely created more hate and distrust againt the U.S. than any of us realize. We are perceived in the middle east as not being capable of following through on our commitments, and recent political movements in America may just verify that perception.
-
joemont
Nov. 25, 2006, 4:16 p.m.Try doing a Google search and typing in...Salman Pak...look at what you get back.
That story, which was done by the group that does the Frontline Show for PBS (not exactly a Liberal outlet), was aired a few years ago.
There has been zilch--nada--NO coverage of it by the media here. Why not? I have no answer. But, the show clearly shows that at Salman Pak, a military base about 30 miles South of Baghdad, there was terrorist training. They had been for years.
This is an old, many times disproved argument, that that Saddam was not involved with terrorist.
This show PROVES that he was in fact helping to train terrorist!!!
Go Chiefs!!!
(:>)
-
-
factsonly
Nov. 25, 2006, 2:27 p.m.Twiceborn, that book is old and has no bearing as to why we are in Iraq. It was an imperfect solution to an imperfect world and it worked at the time, but things change. Try reading Treachery, by Bill Gertz for some enlightenment. The US occupation of Iraq is more of a deterrance for terrorism than 911 was and most particullarly the talks people like you want. When someone tells you they want to kill you, believe them. Terrorist are terrorist, nothing changes that only to what they will act on and it seems to me they were already acting long before US occupation of Iraq. You incorrectly quoted Pres. Bush, he said, "at this time we have no evidence that directly links Iraq with 911." Get the facts right. I served with those men and not one who would say that we are not doing more good than harm for Iraq and America, you have no room to talk. In fact you people have been talking for years and where has it got us, TC bomb, Africa Embassy bomb, USS Coal, 911, Shut up and fight.
-
Allee
Nov. 25, 2006, 2:37 p.m.It's too bad the military has to continue to hold down collateral damage when they have a war to fight. Our guys could go in and take the enemy out if we didn't have to worry about the civilian damage we might do.
Go Military, Go....At least the Repubs are with you all the way.
-
Allee
Nov. 25, 2006, 2:42 p.m.Hey twitborn - get a load of this ---
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with
weapons of mass destruction is real ... Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
-
Allee
Nov. 25, 2006, 2:52 p.m.Twitborn - "You cannot beat democracy into a nation or a region".
How about Germany, It had Hitler, a dictator and now it hasfree elections.
How about Japan, It had an emperor, and still has an emperor with no power, instead it has free elections.
The first 46 comments are shown. Show all 138 comments »
Submitted By:
okitech
Make this community awesome. Submit, comment and vote folks. It will only get better. If it is a duplicate story "report". If it is an ...
