1 Darn all those povocative Iraqi women and children. We sure taught them a lesson. None of their friends or relatives are gonna mess with us again.

I say that for every American patriot that gets killed over there, we pick out 25 civilians at random, line em up and let em have it.

Our Furher will be very proud.

hog

2 Hog certainly demonstrates the typical inability of moonbats to read with comprehension. But, after all, how can external reality compete with voices in the head.

3 It sure wasn't voices in my head that read CY's declaration that our troopers were "Not by any means unprovoked"

That is a wingnut reality.

hog

4 hogwild, if someone blew up your wife (or whatever) right before your eyes, would you be the slightest bit "provoked" into some sort of action?

5 You bet I would..! And if I saw and caught the sucker it would be all she wrote. Kinda like the husband of that pregnant lady that was gunned down yesterday feels.

I also understand the troopers position. She was most certainly carrying a pre-terrorist fetus, so they had every right...

hog

6 Here's a question for you Old Soldier, from another old soldier:

Let's say the good ol' U.S. of A. was being occupied by a bunch of scared trigger happy foreign troops, and you had friends and relatives killed by em.

Now, if someone handed you an IED, a shovel and cellphone, just what would YOU do..?

hog

7 Here is another specific word: Ishaqi.

And here is a specific and related url: http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ifs_news/hi/newsid_5030000/newsid_5039500/nb_wm_5039548.stm

And finally few more specific words:

splitting hairs

and

major denial.

8 Ah yes, Ishaqi. The wonderful videotape provided by Sunni insurgents to the BBC, where American soldiers admit to pouring heavy fire into an insurgent occupied building, and the people fighting inside--apparently along with some civilians they were using as cover--are found with bullet holes in them. Absolutely Pulitzer stuff there, Jeff.

If you think having a friend blown up beside you isn't going to provoke some sort of reaction (and not necessarily the best one, either) and that it is just "splitting hairs," then I'd suggest you have a lot more to learn about life, son.

As for denial, I've never passed judgment on what happened at Haditha, nor have I made any excuses for the Marines. I have stated from the very beginning of this (March 20 was my first post on the sugject) that I want a full and complete investigation done, with no corners cut.

It is pretty pathetic that you don't feel American troops deserve due process, but then, I guess I have to consider the source.

9 Jeff. The guys at this site don't give a bats butt about murdered Iraqi women and children. They just simply don't want anyone to find out about it. The ultimate cowardly trait. Faux patriots if you will.

The military solution... Ethics classes for the troops. Remember when Repug congressmen got the same treatment, and what a joke it was..? Looks like KKKarl's still callin' the shots.

When our over-extended, severly stressed, brave and seriously ticked off soldiers get into more and more situations like this, does anyone think their gonna remember a few hours of "Ethics Training".

All they're gonna want is REVENGE.

This is gonna get much worse.

hog

10 Where I live used to be under Nazi occupation, which was resisted fiercely--and ultimately successfully--by the local population. Any attack by insurgents on German soldiers triggered massive reprisals. There was even a Nazi directive that for every soldier killed, 100 local civilians should be executed.

I guess one could argue that these massacred civilians brought it on themselves, by "provoking" the occupiers.

And it sure was provocative of Saddam to claim to not have WMD that he in fact did not have, and to allow UN inspectors in to verify. It completely undermined the Bush administration's rationale for "pre-emptive" war. Now THAT's provocative.

11 Jeff. The guys at this site don't give a bats butt about murdered Iraqi women and children. They just simply don't want anyone to find out about it. The ultimate cowardly trait. Faux patriots if you will.

Posted by hogwild

Not only is the statement very untrue (I do care, and I also care about our servicemen who should be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law) but it is totally A**NINE.

To NOBORDERS.

Read the reports. Saddam has said for years that he had WMD. Wether you believe it or not is probably a moot point as the reports won't mean much if your mind is already made up. I will also state that had his military fire on our aircraft that patrolled in the no-fly zone, that in itself was a violation of the U.N. Sanctions and an ACT of WAR. We could, and should have taken care of him during the Clinton years when he kept taking pot-shots at our planes but Billy-boy was too busy watching golf or playing with interns in the oval office to do anything about it.

Read the reports, not Daily KO's.

12 We can argue to kingdom come about what or who provoked who. The bottom line is the neo-cons messed up this war from the git go, and our sons and daughters have paid the price for their gross incompetence, and will continue to with no end in sight..Except maybe in 2009.

Just how can you 29% mandate continuing the insanity. Do you expect things to change by continuing with the same inept policies.

The local VA hospital is only eight miles from here. I've made some visits and paid some respects to guys who have no face, arms or legs. It's heartbreaking. And yes, I blame Bushco for their lot. (todays top posting).

We've been in Iraq over three years now. That's just six months short of the length of WW II. Nobody has sacraficed anything except our brave and honorable soldiers and the Iraqi people. And you can bet we'll be there much longer than WW II.

This is no war on terra. It's simply a corporate excursion at the expense of our brave troops.

Thanks for letting me post here. You fellas are a bit more tolorant than most conservative sites.

hog.

13 To Retired Navy:

Read the reports. Saddam has said for years that he had WMD. Wether you believe it or not is probably a moot point as the reports won't mean much if your mind is already made up. I will also state that had his military fire on our aircraft that patrolled in the no-fly zone, that in itself was a violation of the U.N. Sanctions and an ACT of WAR. We could, and should have taken care of him during the Clinton years when he kept taking pot-shots at our planes but Billy-boy was too busy watching golf or playing with interns in the oval office to do anything about it.

I have read the reports, enough to know that lots of countries, including us, have WMD's. I was really surprised that there were not more chemical munitions found post-war. But just because our repsonse to any sort of WMD attack in battle is based on "a gas is a germ is a nuke" doesn't mean that they are equivalent, particularly as a threat to the United States. Chemical weapons, common to pretty much every country that got old Soviet equipment and doctrine, are bulky, quirky, and degrade your capability nearly as much as they do the enemy's. You doubt my word, take a forced march in a MOPP suit sometime.

Basically what I am saying is that "we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud" coming out of the mouth of the National Security Advisor was not based on hard evidence, or anything like a consensus. If terrorists want to use chemicl weapons, they don't need state sponsors to use them.

Next, about the "no-fly" zones. They were supposed to be based on Security Council Resolution 688. You can find the text here: http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0688.htm

Please read that carefully and tell me where it mentions No-fly zones, to be carried on 12 years after the cease fire. I do see a mention of "Reaffirming the commitment of all Member States to the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of Iraq", which is apparently a "chocolately" sovereignty lite, in that foreign powers can fly armed aircraft over your territory, shoot at anything flying, shooting or radiating, and if you shoot back you are commiting and act of war. This is even true if you have only the intention of looking beligerent in order to keep your job ... somehow, despite the proven indifference of the Iraqi armed forces, you would think that even though they never managed to actually shoot anything down, they would manage to at least put a hole in something. If you know of one, show me a picture.

Last, although I am no particular fan of William Jefferson Clinton, he was a model of the Puritan work ethic compared to the current incumbent, who gets to bed by ten every night and is setting new records for executive vacation days.