Escalation of violence.
By on Feb 19th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Escalation of violence.
The New York Times reports a “coordinated assault on an American combat outpost north of Baghdad.” Suicide bombers drove three cars laden with explosives into a U.S. base, killing two American soldiers and wounding at least 17 more.
The brazen attack, which was followed by fierce gun battles and a daring evacuation of the wounded by at least four American helicopters, came on a day of deadly violence across the country, including shootings suicide bombings, mortar attacks and roadside explosions. Civilians, Americans and the Iraqi security forces all were targets.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Looks like the insurgents have their own “surge” going on.
This will not stop until we leave.
Support the Troops, Bring them home now.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:24 pmNow, which side is supposed to be surging?
February 19th, 2007 at 12:24 pmWe’ll really see the idiocy of the troop surge when an insurgent that has infilitrated the Iraqi army blows himself up in one of these joint bases. If our guys on the ground don’t trust the Iraqi soldiers then this whole venture is moot anyway. Just get the hell out of there. The Iraqi’s are incapable of “standing up” so what the hell is the point?
February 19th, 2007 at 12:30 pmSuicide bombers drove three cars laden with explosives into a U.S. base.
What security? If you can’t secure a US base, you sure can’t secure a city of 4 million.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:31 pmBring em on!
February 19th, 2007 at 12:32 pmA fine mess, indeed, bushie.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:37 pmJust this weekend an airhead anchor from MSNBC said that the security crackdown was already producing results! Is this another example of a “catastrophic success?”
February 19th, 2007 at 12:39 pmWell,golly,I thought the insurgents had skedaddled out of town with the surge announcement.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:39 pmI dont understand. Things were going to be better after the surge…right? Anybody?
Thats why the surge was for, to make things better…or not?
There go two more soldiers on the conscience of anybody that supported Iraq occupation. Congrats.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:44 pm*
February 19th, 2007 at 12:45 pmGET THEM OUT OF THERE.
.
Every time any enabler in the news squawks about supporting the troops, they must be called out and told that this administration and everyone who supports the continued occupation of Iraq has the blood of American soldiers on their hands. This administration and its enablers don’t care about spreading democracy, they just wish to fulfill their perverse desire to see this orgy of death in the news and if it includes the horrific death of our own soldiers for them to reach climax, then so be it.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:52 pmheres a great story please all read it ..IF AMERICA USES NUKES WE WILL ARREST EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS AND HOLD THEM ACCOPUNTABLE BECAUSE BUSH SAID
President Bush has threatened to use nuclear weapons against Iran, when, in response to the question “Sir, when you talk about Iran, and you talk about how you have diplomatic efforts, you also say all options are on the table. Does that include the possibility of a nuclear strike? Is that something that your administration will plan for?” he answered “All options are on the table.”
PLEASE READ ARTICLE YOU CANNOT USE NUKES ON IRAN OR ISREAL YOU WILL BE ARRESTED BY THE ICC ………
February 19th, 2007 at 12:56 pmAny downward wind froma Nuclear strike on Iran to any ICC member state and American Congress will be arrested for
Congress Providing the Weapons
Congress Cannot Claim Ignorance
And to be honest any of my children suffer from a Nuclear downwind effect of an Iran attack and the ICC will be NOTHING compared to what i will do
February 19th, 2007 at 12:59 pmWe can’t just leave those poor Iraqis to deal with each other, . . we need to protect them and the oilfields – but our troops are in a no-win situation, like we were in Vietnam.
The solution is simplicity itself: We send to the Red Zone all present and former members of the Bush Administration to take the places of our abused service personnel. This not only saves our troops, it gives those “patriots” a real chance to show their “honor”
In addition, all writers and pundits who supported this travesty get to prove their convictions in actual military experience.
Let’s see how Bill O’Reilly’s mouth saves us in Fallujah.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:03 pmWhy do we go to places where we are unwanted when wwe could be spending our money on helping those who want our help. We could be spending our money to eradicate world hunger- only $19 billion annually until 2015.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:06 pm#15 GKAM
heh, I’m sure Bill O’Really’s mouth would be a great asset, it could catch a lot of shrapnel.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:08 pm#16 KatieL
Because that would be productive, make a lot of sense, and wouldn’t benefit any corporations.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:09 pmThe lessons that are learned from this Iraq war is that important & crucial questions never were asked by the representatives of the American people about this war before they voted for it.
The approval was swift,but the consequences were not,and we are living it now after 4 years.
Americans are living this war daily…it is affecting hundreds of thousands of families, it is affecting almost every American pocket directly and indirectly.
To me , representatives cannot escape the questions of who is responsible for this war.
While Hillary and others trying to say…they did not give any authority to start a war…the evidence suggests that they did not ask the real questions instead,when they could.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:12 pmTurn Dubya’s Ranch Into VA Hospital!
19th of February 2007
by Jay Randal
The Washington Post has just published an article on severe neglect of injured soldiers returning from Iraq and how they are mistreated at decrepit VA hospitals.
Their mistreatment after being wounded, or maimed, is criminal neglect of men and women who served their country and they must be given the best care possible.
The number one priority of the US government must be to fully fund medical needs for every veteran who was forced to serve in the Iraq fiasco-debacle conflict.
Funds for doing this must NOT be tied into more funds for the Iraq quagmire itself, nor for general funding of Department of Defense, nor funding for more bombs.
If the existing VA hospitals cannot handle the veterans in a proper fashion, with top-grade medical facilities, then new VA hospital complexes must be constructed.
Pres. Bush has a several thousand acre ranch in Texas that can and should be used to build new VA hospital, since he is responsible for the soldiers being maimed.
( Jay Randal, political activist and writer in Georgia, USA.)
PS: Contact your Reps and Senators in DC to fund proper medical care for every soldier wounded in the Iraq Fiasco War and call on them to end the occupation of Iraq and bring the troops home now.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:13 pmAll the posts on this site are excellent. A very will educated blog.
This War of choice is indeed not only the worse military of the History of the US but maybe since Caser, sent his legions into Germany, only to be all killed and help speed up the Fall of the Roman Empire!
How many more people have to DIE for ExxonMobil and Bushits friends can increase their “Blood for Oil” profits.
Now bush want to use Nukes in IRAN to cover up his IRAQ failures.
This is all INSANE! IMPEACH now before it’s too late for the WORLD.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:21 pmWe can’t wait 2 more Years.
#21 marlon
actually i think you mean Octavius, and it wasn’t exactly his fault. Varus, the commander there, was duped by Hermann into leading his army into an ambush in Teutoberg.
And we have had more recent military blunders in history that led to the fall of empires. Napoleon’s march into Russia, and later Hitler’s march into Russia come to mind.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:28 pmThis is all INSANE! IMPEACH now before it’s too late for the WORLD.
We can’t wait 2 more Years.
Comment by marlon — February 19, 2007 @ 1:21 pm
whatever the history, this is a fact NOW… i agree…
February 19th, 2007 at 1:44 pmthough i’m not sure we CAN”T wait – as long as we keep up this SUNLIGHT and the SPEAKING OUT…
never give in… never give up…
#
While Hillary and others trying to say…they did not give any authority to start a war…the evidence suggests that they did not ask the real questions instead,when they could.
Comment by tarazan — February 19, 2007 @ 1:12 pm
#
There is a simple solution. Return to the Constitution, which clearly states that only Congress can declare war, and deep-six the War Powers Resolution.
“Sometimes referred to as the War Powers Clause, the United States Constitution, Article One, Section 8, Clause 11, vests in the Congress the exclusive power to declare war. Five wars have been declared in American history: the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, World War I and World War II. Some historians argue that the legal doctrines and legislation passed during the operations against Pancho Villa constitute a sixth declaration of war.
However, beginning with the Korean War, American presidents have not sought formal declarations of war, instead maintaining that they have the constitutional authority, as commander in chief (Article Two, Section Two) to use the military for “police actions”.
In 1973, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution, which requires the president to obtain either a declaration of war or a resolution authorizing the use of force from Congress within 60 days of initiating hostilities. Its constitutionality has never been tested as Congress has always passed the required authorization when requested by the president.
Some legal scholars maintain that all military action taken without a Congressional declaration of war (regardless of the War Powers Resolution) is unconstitutional; however, the Supreme Court has never ruled directly on the matter.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Clause
February 19th, 2007 at 2:00 pmIf you’re going to invade someone’s country:
1) have a damn good reason… (they’ve done or are about to do something really foul to you)…
2) and have enough anger towards them to want to thoroughly demolish any ideas they might have to resist…
These were lessons that history should have taught our leaders…
…yet they consistently fail to understand this…
…killing people is a very serious action, and should never be undertaken in a lighthearted, arrogant, or foolhardy manner…
…the thing that concerns me most of all…
…is that in spite of this Iraq debacle…
…the Bushites have STILL failed to learn anything…
…I’m afraid many more will die needlessly until there is regime change here in America…
February 19th, 2007 at 2:26 pm“Support the Troops, Bring them home now.
Comment by Zooey — February 19, 2007 @ 12:24 pm”
Support the troops? How?
-accusing them of torture?
-accusing them of flushing the koran down the toilet
-comparing them to Nazis?
-revealing their intelligence gathering methods?
-revealing their secret prisons?
-accusing them of terrorizing women & children in the middle of the night?
-kicking recruiters off campuses?
You don’t think that they see all this? They despise your traitorous ways. Support the troops? Don’t make us laugh!
February 19th, 2007 at 2:41 pmStop the genocidal killing of our troops – BRING THEM HOME!
February 19th, 2007 at 2:48 pmI believe Michael is indulging in “fantasy conversation” AGAIN! I’ve spoken to plenty of “our troops” and the commentary is always the same. They’re sick and tired of being pimped by this administration and that’s an overwhelming sentiment.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:49 pmI see michael has perfected his “cut & paste” routine.
I don’t think the troops are stupid, michael. Why do you?
Please back up your statement that the troops despise my traiterous ways — with links.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:54 pmESCALATION OF TROOPS/ESCALATION OF VIOLENCE – AREN’T THESE SYNONYMOUS? ANYONE WITH REASONABLE INTELLIGENCE KNOWS THIS….ER….EXCEPT A FEW OF OUR RESIDENT TROLLS AND THIS ADMINISTRATION.
February 19th, 2007 at 2:56 pm#24– I agree with you about the ‘Constitutionality’ of the issue of who has the ‘power to declare war’.. But enforcing the law is lacking.
This is why the Constitution gave the power of the ‘purse’ to the House of Representatives. Because without funding,wars cannot be waged.
The fear here is what if this administration started a war with Iran, then applied the same logic it is using now. ‘You cannot cut the funds while our soldiers in harms way’..
So it is better to use the Constitution before another war starts.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:02 pmComment by michael #26
michael,
You MAY in time come to understand that the anti-war side of this debate…
…REALLY does have the best interests of the troops, their families and ALL involved (the world) at heart…
…right now the lens of your soul is dirty with false nationalistic pride, foisted upon you by murderous, thieving cowards who have duped you into believing that THEY care about you…
…they don’t care about YOU michael…
…if they did your borders would be sealed, your ports, chemical plants, railyards, schools, malls, churches and neighborhoods all secured…
…manufacturing would be based here in the U.S., and our healthcare system accessible to all…
…THEY care about securing energy resources, strategic military advantage by taking over a weakened people’s country to establish a spearhead in the ME…
THEY care about their (Cheney/Halliburton/GE/Carlyle/Bechtel/Blackwater)’s experiment in light- mostly”privatized”- military/security, reconstruction, new weapons systems, battlefield tactics, and war on the cheap…
…and most importantly how to hyperinflate the corporate “bottom line”…
…michael, you may seriously believe this (conflict) is your grandfather’s (WWII military mission), YOUR Pearl Harbor…
…but you are sadly mistaken…
…you have been taken into confidence by political grifters, who have/are perpetrating the biggest CON in U.S. history…
…maybe even the history of the world…
…I just hope that you (and those like you) don’t “nut up” as they say…
…when reality hits you…
February 19th, 2007 at 3:08 pm-accusing them of torture?
They were only following the policies of the administration so I don’t blame them one bit. Bush, Cheney and Gonzalez are the ones that should be in prison not those law ranking soldiers.
-accusing them of flushing the Koran down the toilet
There were several allegations made by detainees of soldiers throwing the Koran in the toilet. One detainee claimed that his Koran was flushed. Newsweek reported that a guard flushed the Koran down the toilet. The Defense Department said that the allegation made by a detainee could not be corroborated. Newsweek retracted the allegation made by the detainee.
-comparing them to Nazis?
More like comparing the Bush administration to Nazis.
-revealing their intelligence gathering methods?
Whistle blowers revealed illegal activities perpetrated by the Bush administration.
-revealing their secret prisons?
We don’t need secret prisons.
-accusing them of terrorizing women & children in the middle of the night?
That’s what they doing [unintentionally].
-kicking recruiters off campuses?
I think a better place to recruit is at right wing blogs. We were doing them a favor.
You don’t think that they see all this? They despise your traitorous ways. Support the troops? Don’t make us laugh!
Comment by michael — February 19, 2007 @ 2:41 pm
And you based this on what?
February 19th, 2007 at 3:46 pm“I’ve spoken to plenty of “our troops†and the commentary is always the same. They’re sick and tired of being pimped by this administration and that’s an overwhelming sentiment.
Comment by veritas — February 19, 2007 @ 2:49 pm”
Really, care to share some of those conversations with us?
February 19th, 2007 at 4:49 pm“…REALLY does have the best interests of the troops, their families and ALL involved (the world) at heart…”
BS! Reread #26. People who do those things DON’T support our troops!
“…right now the lens of your soul is dirty with false nationalistic pride, foisted upon you by murderous, thieving cowards who have duped you into believing that THEY care about you…”
Gosh! I didn’t know this. Just who are these murderous, thieving cowards? As if I don’t know who you are about to name. But before you do please provide names and things that they personally killed and stole from?
“…if they did your borders would be sealed, your ports, chemical plants, railyards, schools, malls, churches and neighborhoods all secured…”
We suggest sending the Guard to secure the borders and we are accused of racism. We suggest building a wall and we are accused of racism. As for the rest, I didn’t know we were having problems there. Maybe you can shed some light on some facts?
“…manufacturing would be based here in the U.S., and our healthcare system accessible to all…”
As far as the manufacturing jobs fleeing offshore, you can thank the very liberal unions for that. It is accessible for all, they just have to pay for it. If they can’t afford it, get a second job!
“…THEY care about securing energy resources, strategic military advantage by taking over a weakened people’s country to establish a spearhead in the ME…”
As far a energy resources we have plenty of untapped oil in this country but idiots on the left prevent us from drilling thereby enforcing our dependence on the Middle East and South America. You’re one of the few people who understand why we are in Iraq. Yes it is to establish a military presence there to fight terror and ensure that the flow of oil to the rest of the world is not in the hands of the terrorists.
“…you have been taken into confidence by political grifters, who have/are perpetrating the biggest CON in U.S. history…
…maybe even the history of the world…”
It’s obvious that you loons on the left don’t have a clue about what is at stake for this planet if we don’t succeed there. They could control most of the worlds oil. They could align with countries like North Korea and Russia. They would then have their hands on nuclear weapons! If you think we have a mess over there now just think what it will be like if the terrorists win.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:22 pmThink what it will be like if WE win. Democracy…which means Shia control of Iraq. Democracy without a Bill of Rights is a dangerous thing, especially with a history of sectarian mistreatment. 80% of the oil in the middle east is under areas populated by Shiites…in Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. There was one huge flaw in Bush’s strategy big enough to drive a truck bomb through…SHIITE MAJORITY!!
February 19th, 2007 at 5:45 pmThey could align with countries like North Korea and Russia. They would then have their hands on nuclear weapons!
Comment by michael #36
What makes you think that hasn’t happened already?
..and if it has what do you propose to do about it?
…it’s pretty ironic (and I guess appropriate that this “debate” is all about )…
…the GULF…
…because ideologically, philosophically, and morally speaking…
…that’s exactly where we THINKING Liberal Progressives…
…and you STINKING right wing Bushite TRAITORS…
…are…
February 19th, 2007 at 5:46 pmBrace yourselves, everyone, things are going to get even worse.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:53 pmWe don’t have a veto-proof majority in the Senate.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:58 pmThe boy-king will put a signing statement to any legislation that is on his desk.
The republiscum are the problem here — it is not the Dems we have to pressure, but the Repugs. We must get more of them to join the Dems.
They should be reminded, if rationality is unsuccessful, that when the Dems gain the White House, that president will have the same unfettered powers they have given their beloved moron.
Really, care to share some of those conversations with us?
Comment by michael — February 19, 2007 @ 4:49 pm
It’s really unfortunate that you will take the word of the Fox propagandists and the White House liars before you take the word of people who are there, trying to survive in the hell of Iraq.
Last week, Bush even admitted that he doesn’t know Iraq because he lives in the pleasant surroundings of the White House.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:02 pmGosh! I didn’t know this. Just who are these murderous, thieving cowards? As if I don’t know who you are about to name. But before you do please provide names and things that they personally killed and stole from?
Comment by michael — February 19, 2007 @ 5:22 pm
This a stupid question. It would be like me asking you who Osama Bin Laden has personally killed or stolen from.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:05 pmAs far as the manufacturing jobs fleeing offshore, you can thank the very liberal unions for that. It is accessible for all, they just have to pay for it. If they can’t afford it, get a second job!
Comment by michael — February 19, 2007 @ 5:22 pm
I blame greedy corporations for that.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:09 pm#43 Since Michael has never had a job (being 13 and all) you can’t really blame him for being an ignorant ass.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:13 pmit is not the Dems we have to pressure, but the Repugs. We must get more of them to join the Dems.
Comment by Marie #40
You’re absolutely right Marie…
…but for Liberal Progressives this is an almost impossible task because…
…the Repulsivescum legislators who are obstructing the Dems in the House and Senate (and thwarting the will of the majority)…
…live in “safe” red pockets…
…Sen. Mitch McConjob can’t be pressured by people who don’t vote in his state, and the people who vote in his state are right wing Bushites…
…unless and until the right wing Repulsivescum (and DLC Democrat) conned’self-servatives have an epiphany…
…we’re stuck with these inbred pig fu*kers…
Without that 60 vote super majority the world is SCREWED…
…the ONLY other alternative that I can see as an infinitesimal possibility to coerce their cooperation…
…is to starve their states (districts) economically…
…cancel any federal funding to them…
February 19th, 2007 at 11:37 pmFDR once described the Navy department as a feather pillow.
You punch it in the side, and the other side just bulges up.
Same drill here. Crack down in one area, the feathers just shift.
This shit isn’t going to work.
February 20th, 2007 at 12:38 amThe Iraqis can work this out on their own. Let them.
Someone really has to sit GW down and explain to him the difference between playing cowboys and indians in his sandbox and the real life consequences of military conflict.
This is not a game. Our troops are not toy soldiers. This isn’t a movie where the actors can talk tough; get in staged fights; and all get up, brush off and go home at the end of the day.
We have spent four years chasing a paper tiger in Iraq while Al Qaeda is flourishing in other parts of the world. Yet, Bush continues to assure those who are playing in his sandbox that we are absolutely winning in Iraq. Winning what? Winning against whom? What ever happen to having Al Qaeda on the run, as told to us in October, 2006?
How can he continue to swagger and talk tough when he and his military leaders are unable to hold neighborhoods in Baghdad? Neighborhoods? Does anyone cringe when they realize that the leader of the free world is battling in ‘neighborhoods’, and after four years still can’t clear and hold them?
February 20th, 2007 at 6:04 amhttp://www.eff.org/
EFF: Legal Guide for Bloggers
Updated April 20, 2006
Whether you’re a newly minted blogger or a relative old-timer, you’ve been seeing more and more stories pop up every day about bloggers getting in trouble for what they post.
Like all journalists and publishers, bloggers sometimes publish information that other people don’t want published. You might, for example, publish something that someone considers defamatory, republish an AP news story that’s under copyright, or write a lengthy piece detailing the alleged crimes of a candidate for public office.
The difference between you and the reporter at your local newspaper is that in many cases, you may not have the benefit of training or resources to help you determine whether what you’re doing is legal. And on top of that, sometimes knowing the law doesn’t help – in many cases it was written for traditional journalists, and the courts haven’t yet decided how it applies to bloggers.
But here’s the important part: None of this should stop you from blogging. Freedom of speech is the foundation of a functioning democracy, and Internet bullies shouldn’t use the law to stifle legitimate free expression. That’s why EFF created this guide, compiling a number of FAQs designed to help you understand your rights and, if necessary, defend your freedom.
To be clear, this guide isn’t a substitute for, nor does it constitute, legal advice. Only an attorney who knows the details of your particular situation can provide the kind of advice you need if you’re being threatened with a lawsuit. The goal here is to give you a basic roadmap to the legal issues you may confront as a blogger, to let you know you have rights, and to encourage you to blog freely with the knowledge that your legitimate speech is protected.
Please note that this guide applies to people living in the US. We don’t have the expertise or resources to speak to other countries’ legal traditions, but we’d like to work with those who do. If you know of a similar guide for your own jurisdiction or feel inspired to research and write one, please let us know. We can link to it here.
Table of Contents
or, see an index of all the questions » http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/questions.php
Blogger Legal Liability Issues
The Overview of Legal Liability Issues FAQ briefly addresses some common legal issues that affect you as a publisher, especially situations where you may face legal claims or threats based on the information you published on your blog.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Intellectual Property addresses issues that arise when you publish material created by others on your blog.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Online Defamation Law provides an overview of defamation (libel) law, including a discussion of the constitutional and statutory privileges that may protect you.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Section 230 Protections discusses a powerful federal law that gives you, as a web host, protection against legal claims arising from hosting information written by third parties.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Privacy addresses the legal issues surrounding the privacy rights of people you blog about.
Bloggers As Journalists
The Bloggers’ FAQ on the Reporter’s Privilege is useful to bloggers who report news gathered from confidential sources.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Media Access can help bloggers who need to get access to public records and government meetings, as well as secure press passes to help with newsgathering.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on the Freedom of Information Act can help bloggers use open government laws to get information from the government.
Other Legal Issues for Bloggers
The Student Bloggers’ Legal FAQ addresses legal issues arising from student blogging. It focuses on blogging by high school (and middle school) students, but also contains information for college students.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Election Law addresses the legal issues you may face blogging about political campaigns.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Labor Law addresses legal issues with workplace blogging, including union organizing, protections for political blogging away from the workplace, and whistle blowing.
The Bloggers’ FAQ on Adult Material addresses the legal issues arising from publishing risque adult-oriented content, including obscenity law, community standards on the Internet, and the new 2257 regulations.
February 20th, 2007 at 6:31 am