posted on May 14, 2004 05:57:33 AM new
helen - You so easily and with such a broad brush paint the actions of a few.....a very few....to be the actions of what our soldiers and our country stand for.
posted on May 14, 2004 06:05:06 AM new
Here helen - take a look for ONCE at what your country does right.....what your country really stands for.
Want a Different
Abu Ghraib Story?
Try This One
Saddam had their hands cut off. America gave them new ones.
BY DANIEL HENNINGER
Friday, May 14, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT
By now, some Americans may feel the need for respite from the images of Abu Ghraib and the five hooded barbarians standing behind Nick Berg. This week's column will try to provide some measure of respite.
It is the story of Americans, in and out of the U.S. government, who moved mountains to help seven horribly maimed Iraqi men. It is not always pleasant reading, but there are rewards to staying with it, especially now.
Quite obviously it has been decided, as the handling of the Abu Ghraib story makes plain, that when America stumbles, we are going to have our faces rubbed in it. And rubbed in it and rubbed in it. As far as I can make out, the purpose of this two weeks of media humiliation is that we--the president, all of us--are being asked to morally prostrate ourselves before the rest of the world. Some may choose to do so, but this story should make a few Americans want to simply stand up straight again.
As perfect justice, the story in fact begins in Abu Ghraib prison, in 1995. With Iraq's economy in a tailspin, Saddam arrested nine Iraqi businessmen to scapegoat them as dollar traders. They got a 30-minute "trial," and were sentenced, after a year's imprisonment, to have their right hands surgically cut off at Abu Ghraib prison.
The amputations were performed, over two days, by a Baghdad anesthesiologist, a surgeon and medical staff. We know this because Saddam had a videotape made of each procedure. He had the hands brought to him in formalin and then returned to Abu Ghraib.
Oh, one more thing: The surgeon carved an X of shame into the forehead of each man. And the authorities charged the men $50.
It represents systemic abuse and torture of people we supposedly went to Iraq to liberate. It represents failed Bush foreign policy, with an out of control war militarily, in purpose and in cost.
posted on May 14, 2004 06:17:01 AM new
helen - I will challenge you, ONCE AGAIN, to list the names of those in our House and our Senate who are calling for our withdrawl from this war......those who didn't oppose it from the very beginning.
I want to know just how many extremists, like yourself, believe our country's actions, our war to bring peace and stability to the ME was the wrong thing to do.
posted on May 14, 2004 06:18:03 AM new
And there you go...comparing our torture with saddam's torture in a pitiful maneuver to make our torture seem OK since it pale's in comparison to torture by Saddam.
But then convoluted logic is your game. How else can you justify such horror.
posted on May 14, 2004 06:24:54 AM new
helen - WHAT???? You can't give us just a couple of names of those who have decided they want us OUT????
Even kerry, while using this to his political advantage is NOT calling for our withdraw. And those who are complaining about the additional $25B dollars....are not saying they'll vote against this funding....just that they want more oversight to how it's being spent. INCLUDING kerry who when asked said he plans on voting for it THIS TIME AROUND.
Don't try to change the subject and compare what we did wrong with what happened under saddam's leadership and call your say your own country is equal to saddam because of the actions of a few.
That's nuts and I doubt there are few who would agree that behavior is what our nation supports OR stands for. Only those on the very far left....those, like you, who are so quick to comdemn your own country's actions, but always ready to blame American first for everything YOU decided it does wrong.
I didn't hear the likes of you calling for the Red Cross to give a list of all the atrocities that saddam was committing against his own people.
Re-elect President Bush!!
posted on May 14, 2004 06:25:32 AM new
I've answered that question several times, just as I have answered your whining about Clinton. My opinion doesn't represent an "extremist view", linda. Now, the question of how to exit Iraq is on the mind of many who once supported this war. I know that such change is difficult for you to comprehend but it's happening.
posted on May 14, 2004 06:34:54 AM new
Yes - you are an extremist helen.
Can't name any huh? figures. It would be hard to admit that most American's can see the wrongs a few have shamed this nation with.....but they, unlike you, don't put their form of government on the same level of saddams.
posted on May 14, 2004 06:43:41 AM new
From your right wing, fundamentalist position I can understand how almost any thought could be considered extremist. I've wasted enough time with you today, linda. Get your club and crawl back to the cave.
posted on May 14, 2004 07:07:05 AM newFrom your right wing, fundamentalist position I can understand how almost any thought could be considered extremist.
No helen....that's where you appear to not be able to support your statements.
Is kerry a right wing, fundamentalist? Are other democrats who are reported to have said we can't lose this war - are they all right-wingers in your mind. If so...it's a destorted view to say the least.
Kerry's saying we need to continue in this war as are many liberals who also voted for this war.
I'm asking you to name any of these ultra-liberals/liberals/moderate liberals/democrats WHO VOTED FOR THIS WAR who agree with your extremist position.
You can't....that's clear and now have once again resorted to the sarcasm you cling to when you can't answer a challenge you've been given.
posted on May 14, 2004 07:17:19 AM new
Again - When referencing my club and my cave....I'll remind you of your own comments when debating others....
maybe you might like to copy them and put them next to your monitor so when you can't meet the next challenge your given....you can use them rather than resorting to insults/putdowns.
helenjw - posted on May 8, 2004 01:02:45 PM
Why is it that name calling seems to be the only level on which the right wing can function?
posted on May 14, 2004 07:21:35 AM new
I think it's very sad to compare the amputations that Saddam did to the abuse that these soldiers inflicted on the prisoners. All of those deeds were very wrong no matter who was responsible. The world holds the US to higher standards than many other countries and didn't expect these actions from them.
Why would anyone here spend one day after another, for more than a week now trying to defend it and justify it and make excuses for it unless they think the abuse was okay for a few of the US soldiers to do?
I think it's very sad to compare the amputations that Saddam did to the abuse that these soldiers inflicted on the prisoners.
Yes - I can see why you and helen only want to focus on the few soldiers that acted inappropriately while turning your head to the atrocities that were committed each and every day under saddam's rule.
And no suprise you'd find an example of the type of good people America really stands for as being sad....it doesn't keep keeping the focus where you want it to be.... on the shameful actions of only a few.
All of those deeds were very wrong no matter who was responsible.
Agreed...but there still is a HUGE difference between it being accepted behavior under saddam's rule and unacceptable behavior under our government.
The world holds the US to higher standards than many other countries and didn't expect these actions from them.
That's sounds to me like some here may be doing exactly what they claim others are doing [in the reverse].......excusing the behavior of saddam because they allowed/accepted it under his rule.
Why would anyone here spend one day after another, for more than a week now trying to defend it and justify it and make excuses for it unless they think the abuse was okay for a few of the US soldiers to do?
unless I can only speak for myself.....but I don't think the behaviors of a very few were okay....and no where have I said that. Wouldn't be trying to put words in anyone's mouth - would you?
posted on May 14, 2004 09:00:31 AM new
Linda, you can take each little word I say and then copy it, paste it, twist it, turn it, analyze it, dissect it, distort it, digest it and then regurgitate it and do whatever you want with it but you're wasting your time.
Saddam was the leader in Iraq. He did torture some of the Iraqis and it was very wrong.
America invaded Iraq supposedly to 'liberate' and 'win hearts and minds" but then some of them tortured Iraqis and it was very wrong.
I think any kind of abuse to another human or animal that is inflicted by another human is wrong, no matter if it's done by Saddam, a US soldier or a neighbor. I think it's wrong to even try to compare them or justify either method. Those are my thoughts. Is it that hard for you to understand something that simple?
posted on May 14, 2004 05:44:47 PM new
My position, in case anyone is interested, is that the war in Iraq was and should have been undertaken for several reasons, the elimination of any of which(womd) does not invalidate the rest. Once there, it is imperative to support the troops 110%. The degree of resistance may have been underestimated but does not mean we should withdraw now. We must commit as many troops as necessary to bring the fighting to a minimal level in Iraq, while at the same time going after as many terrorists worldwide as humanly possible. Yes, Helen, the question of how to exit Iraq is on the minds of all but to greatly differing degrees. Those who would leave hurredly, accomplishing nothing and causing the deaths of many Americans and Iraqis, and those who would stay and make a difference, while yes causing some additional loss of life. The Gandhi-like idealist approach that the ultra-liberal extremists such as yourself take is naively ignorant in this suddenly changed world. If 9/11 did not wake you up nothing will.
posted on May 14, 2004 07:03:23 PM new
Besides WMD which were not found, you fail to state your reasons for the preemptive invasion of Iraq. Why was a war waged on false premises by an administration that intentionally lied to Congress and the American people? The Iraq war is not only without purpose but is out of control militarily with no exit strategy in sight.
Of course we should support the troops. Unfortunately, they have been let down by the Bush administration on several scores with the chief failure in going to war without a plan. Lack of planning also led to a shortage of armored vehicles and protective clothing. Lack of planning led to POW abuse in the prisons. Now lack of planning leaves us facing a political situation that cannot be won militarily.
I haven't stated that we should leave in a "hurry". I have stated that we should leave as soon as possible and not irresponsibly.
You mention again, 9/11. There is absolutely no relation between 9/11 and Iraq. The war in Iraq is an imperialistic power move.
Instead of waging combat in Iraq, we should be making an effort to attract international support in our effort to eliminate terrorism. The idea that you can bomb terrorism away is naively ignorant.
- I hope it's not, truly.