#1 Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
America rules!
So you are proud of 3900 dead? None of whom would have died had the neocons involved with BushCo not lied their way into an illegal invasion and occupation.
Can you imagine if anyone had said something like “the death toll at the WTC was amazing considering they crashed two planes into the towers”.
In the final tally the death toll on 9/11 will be a very small % of the total killed in Iraq, which surprisingly enough had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. Just a fun diversion for GWB to see if he could get his grubby hands on some oil. So in that light the death toll in Iraq of U.S. soldiers is an amazing statistic of incompetence & corruption. None of those soldiers needed to be there in the first place.
That is still an amazing statistic considering we’ve had over 150,000 there for almost 5 years.
America rules!
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
The American military has expressed regret “that civilians are hurt or killed while coalition forces search to rid Iraq of terrorism,†after the 11 October killing of 15 women (one pregnant) and children in an air raid near lake Thar Thar.1 The civilian death toll by US fire was 96 in October, with 23 children among them, while in September US forces and contractors killed 108 Iraqi civilians, including 7 children. In August US troops killed 103 civilians, 16 of them children, and in July they killed 196. In fact, during the last five months US forces in Iraq have killed over 600 Iraqi civilians. Regrettably, as always.
Of course, the msm treats this as non-news, unworthy of reporting.
After all, the Bushies say things are going swimmingly in Iraq.
We are not allowed to see flag draped coffins, we are not given the news of our young people being killed in Iraq, we are like mushrooms — in the dark and fed $hit.
30,000 Americans would have to die in Iraq before you could call the deaths on 9/11 a small percent of the number of deaths in Iraq. At the current rate, we would have to stay in Iraq another 25 years, but we are already turning over territories to Iraq troops and police forces, so I doubt we will ever reach 6,000, much less 30,000.
Let us not forget, 3900, the number the DOD reports, have died on Iraqi soil… this number does not reflect the REAL number - the number of those that died en route to the hospital or after in the hospital. That number has been reported to be 4 to 5 times as many deaths.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
No, Jason, what is amazing is that we outnumber the enemy 5 to 1, our military is superior in all ways, and yet it is taking more time to defeat them than it took to win WWII.
If I didn’t know better, I’d say this was planned. Just sayin’.
Oh, and remember, Hendler, we are only counting the troops that actually die in Iraq. If a troop is injured by, say, an IED, is flown out of the country for treatment, and dies AFTER he or she leaves the borders of Iraq, well, then, their death is not counted.
Here’s some death statistics, for those who glorify Bush on the “low” body count for American men and women serving in Iraq.
Had they stayed home in 2003,
56 would have died from non moter vehical accidental injuries.
22 more would have died in motor vehical accidents.
15 would have been shot to death.
15 others would have committed suicide.
14 would have been accidentally poisoned.
9 would have been murdered.
That makes a grand total of 141 who would not have survived 2003, had they not been sent off to war. For the roughly 5 years of the Iraq war, approximately 700 would have died any way.
That means there have been 3,200 needless deaths (deaths in excess of random statistical chance) of young women and men in a war based on lies. Of course, one could argue that every death in Iraq is needless.
Numbers to Hendler, Humans to others. Here’s another number. Over 28,000 US troops have been injured. Many with much more severe injuries than in conflicts past. Largely due to the advances of medicine and the speed in which they are brought in to medivac units. These are the ones that have to go to Walter Reed and the Va. The ones that Hendler’s handlers have ignored.
No, I demonstrated the absurdity of another poster trying to claim the US will have many, many more casualties in the future, and I demonstrated how that it is an absolutely implausable statement.
I will say once more what I have been saying all along…Sadaam Hussein was not worth one American soldier’s life. He was not worth $1 of our treasure. And he definitely was not worth the total loss of credibility that our country has suffered for invading the sovereign nation of Iraq.
More statistics that prove America is great, and has the best health care system in the world.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
Good to know you’re onboard with government health care, Hendler. Since those soldiers and vets are covered with what you would probably call socialized medicine.
Lives are more than numbers, Hendler.
Comment by Merlin — December 27, 2007 @ 4:42 pm
Of course, and we here totally agree - but ask Bush, his press secretaries, and his blind minions like Hendler — THEY are the ones who equate lives and numbers.
Jason, your magic ball for predicting the future of our troops in Iraq seems clouded, murky, and at best like Mystic Myrna’s backroom.
If the Shiites get their snot up about us arming the Sunni Awakening brigades, or any number of other scenarios play out, the lull in violence may explode at any time. The surge failed to produce any reconciliation between these factions, as that was a fallacious presumption to begin with.
Given the extra time, they’ve just ethnically cleansed Baghdad, and we’ve armed the Sunni militias to buy some security.
Polish that crystal ball up before using it again, didn’t you read the damn directions?
That is still an amazing statistic considering we’ve had over 150,000 there for almost 5 years.
America rules!
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
Add Karma Recommend (0)
The total number of soldiers who would lived if the warmongering Bush administration had not initiated this invasion: 3900. Bush and Cheney should rot in hεll (if there is one) for all the death and destruction they have caused.
Let’s face it. You’d have to be a flat-out sociopath to post something like what bibleboy did above. Does this heartless sociopath think soldiers under fire appreciate that kind of talk. If he does, he’s not only a sociopath but a moron.
Amazing. Jason ManHandler been rightfully torn to pieces for his callous and pathetic war cheerleading, yet he’s still trying to defend his indefensible statements.
Seems like it’s just about time for an off-topic post on “Hill’reh”, eh, Jason?
What a tool. What a deluded, lying tool of BushCo.
That is still an amazing statistic considering we’ve had over 150,000 there for almost 5 years.
America rules!
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
You are a jackass of staggering proportions Hendler. Your empathy for your fellow Americans is, well, non existent. But don’t worry if you were on fire there’s probably not a human being who would piss on you to put you out. You are too loathesome to even deal with.
Hendler has a huge rotting hole in his psyche. The blackness and hate that ooze from his keyboard are disgusting. Jason, I think you should seriously consider whether your want to continue your existence into 2008.
Keep in mind that triage and battlefield technique has greatly improved since Viet Nam. By Pentagon estimates, it’s at least 4 times as effective. What that means is that for that 3900, there are at least 4 times that many soldiers with catastrophic wounds and injuries who would have died if this were 40 years ago to go along with it.
Again, you’d have to be an acute sociopath to celebrate something like this. Bibleboy, you’re an example of what passes for a religious person these days, it doesn’t speak very well for the state of organized religion.
30,000 Americans would have to die in Iraq before you could call the deaths on 9/11 a small percent of the number of deaths in Iraq. At the current rate, we would have to stay in Iraq another 25 years, but we are already turning over territories to Iraq troops and police forces, so I doubt we will ever reach 6,000, much less 30,000.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
Only American deaths count right you psychopath. How about innocent Iraqi women, children and men. Their deaths mean nothing to you right. You should see a psychiatrist you are an example of abnormal psychology that needs to be examined.
nanlichi says “Jason, I think you should seriously consider whether your want to continue your existence into 2008.”
I think you have a point there. I mean, Jason, look, with this kind of outlook and complete lack of empathy, life isn’t going to get any better for you. You do know that, right?
Those voices in your head telling you to think about ending the misery, they may have a point too.
As I’ve told you repeated, I only use my real name when I post, which is more than you can claim - coward.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
Sure Jason you are sick enough to cheer the deaths of 3,900 American Soldiers as not too many but we can believe you’d tell the truth about anything. Sorry that’s not the way the mind works.
I certainly hope that everyone here is flagging Jason for his onerous posts on this thread. If you are not, you are guilty of encouraging this black-hearted soul.
Reality keeps rearing its ugly head, killing any utopian dreams that some candidates would like to paint.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:31 pm
May I point out a few things?
1) This is off-topic, unless you are trying to make the point that the assassination of Bhutto has anything to do with the Iraqi civil war. If that’s the case, it’s just lunacy.
2) Most of us really don’t care what anybody named Podhoretz has to say.
3) We still don’t know who was responsible for Bhutto’s death. It could have been Al Qaeda or any other group wanting to commit an act of terror for whatever reason. It could have been Musharref and/or his minions, seeking to eliminate political competition. It could even have been a covert operation by our own CIA. Yet you and Podhoretz are making an assumption that because Bhutto was killed by a suicide bomber, this must be part of the “War on Terror” we are fighting in Iraq, and validates our entire reason for being there. Podhoretz goes so far as to mention “radical Islam” despite no real evidence that’s why Bhutto was killed.
“It could have been Al Qaeda or any other group wanting to commit an act of terror for whatever reason. It could have been Musharref and/or his minions, seeking to eliminate political competition.”
… or missmolly, as suggested by Bhutto after the last bomb went off near her and killed 200… it could have been Musharref working WITH the “terrorists” (like the ISI paying 100,000 bucks to Atta?).
I mean, after all, that was Bhutta’s idea (and that is why they are tearing up Pakistan and blaming Musharref right now).
That is still an amazing statistic considering we’ve had over 150,000 there for almost 5 years.
America rules!
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
We have lost 3,900 of our soldiers in Iraq. This only counts the ones that died on the battlefield there. It doesn’t count the ones who died from their injuries after being removed. It doesn’t count the ones who died from other coalition countries. It doesn’t count the Iraqis who have died.
Yet, even if we only focus on those 3,900, that’s still more people than died at the hands of terrorists on 9/11.
Can you imagine the absurdity of saying “2,974 deaths is an amazing statistic when you consider there are almost 300 million Americans here.”
No — we were so outraged over those 2,974 deaths that we started two wars over them. Why aren’t the 3,900 military deaths anywhere close to that important in your mind?
Better change your handle fck, Jason is dead to us. You will be flagged on sight. And whatever nom de guerre you choose next will be apparent and we will flag it too. You are one sick thing.
We will see that number go up now that Bush is sending troops in to Pakistan to protect the Nukes. Yes the Nukes were given to Pakistan so the US could have a direct hit to Iran and Syria for Israel.
Good grief. And morons like Jason call *us* haters.
They make me sick. All of them.
And nobody has mentioned all of the Iraq vets who are now homeless, suffering from PTSD and wandering the streets - having been cheated out of their disability benefits by Bush’s VA.
And what about the soldiers who have committed suicide…?
Yeah. “America rules,” all right. America rules in HELL.
I was recently asked on this blog what I thought would happen in regards to the Mahdi Army if American forces withdrew from Iraq. What would happen if the Mahdi Army went unchecked? This is a very complex question and I did not have the time or the space (in being courteous to other posters here) to answer that question fully. I have since, however, posted a full diary at Vet Voice regarding that question. If interested, this is the link: http://vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=302
Disclaimer: Please understand that almost all of the contributors/commenters at vetvoice are veterans, or are still serving in Iraq. So, please be respectful.
Why is it our business to determine the fate of Iraq? If they ask for our help after the withdraw, so be it. We can consider it. But it is not for us to decide based on what we THINK would happen with the Mahdi Army…
you DO understand that? Right? We are NOT the decider.
Let’s think of it this way, iF Bush hadn’t LIED us into war, perhaps the death toll would be ZERO. People like JMH claim to support the war and the troops, but the fact that he cheers the death of “only” 3900 American soldiers if not more, just about shows how much they know the meaning of sacrifice. Your attitude is like the soldiers who marched off to the CiVIL War and World War I THINKING that it would just be a picnic and walk in the park. There is NOTHING romantic about war and unfortunately you don’t know about how war affects soldiers and their families.
Nice job, Chris. Very informative, I’ve marked it as a favorite. I’m a votevet member as well. Just haven’t diaried…
Comment by RUCerious — December 27, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
####
Thank you!!! This was my first diary. Also, willyloman, I agree that we should not be in the business of determining Iraq’s fate, but I was trying to keep my diary within scope - short and concise.
In a recent report about who the insurgents really are, they were like 41% Saudi and Jordanian…blah blah blah…
… but no Iranians. Yet, your post claims “There are two primary factions of the Mahdi Army. One is the loyal JAM, the other is a splinter group that is reported to have trained with the Iranian Quds forces.”
So my first question to you would be who “reported” that the JAM “trained with Iranian Quds forces”?
So my first question to you would be who “reported†that the JAM “trained with Iranian Quds forces�
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
####
By far the largest group of foreign fighters is Saudi. Recently the NYTimes and Al-Jazeera reported that a splinter group from JAM (not JAM itself) had received training from the Quds in Iran. Considering that factions of the Badr Militia were exiled in Iran prior to the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, I do not know for certain if this Mahdi splinter group received training before the war as well. Both the Badr militia (strong Iranian ties) and the Mahdi Army have strong political influence in the Iraqi government.
It really seems you think Iran is playing a large roll in Iraq right now. Even bigger than Saudi Arabia?
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 5:55 pm
####
No. It simply doesn’t have the means. We know that Iraqi insurgents have received training and weaponry from Iran, as well as from many other nations. The Italian government recently uncovered a huge weapons smuggling ring that was working with the Iraqi government. But Saudis are by far the largest number of foreign fighters, and they have the most money.
“More than 40% of the foreign fighters who entered Iraq to join the insurgency in the past year were citizens of Saudi Arabia, America’s key partner in the Middle East, according to detailed information seized from a camp used by them.”
This post is inaccurate. 3900 US soldiers have died IN IRAQ. Many more (likely ~10,000, but who knows, it’s not advertised) died from their wounds after leaving the country.
So, what is your supposition here? Is it a bad thing if the Mahdi Army takes over Iraq?
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
####
Actually, my supposition is the exact opposite. If we withdrew, the Mahdi Army would wipe out Al-Qaeda in Iraq, and would be the strongest deterrent against Iranian influence. And you are right - the Saudis are the predominate problem by far. AQI is the smallest, but most advanced and most lethal - because of Saudi Arabia.
Ok. Thanks. Just checking. Because we need to get the hell out of their country, and no matter who takes over, it isn’t our place to determine their fate. We have already done enough damage.
And when we get out se should all our corporations and Oil companies with us. Either that or leave them there to see how the Mahdi Army will deal with them.
I’m just trying to clarify.
But I think Saudi Arabia will invade at least the southern parts of Iraq as soon as we leave, and it will turn into a horrible mess.
The Italian government recently uncovered a huge weapons smuggling ring that was working with the Iraqi government.
Comment by Chris L — December 27, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
It looks like the Iraqi government is exercising its sovereignty.
“The Mahdi Army commanders, who said they would be endangered if their names were revealed, said Iran’s Revolutionary Guards were funding and arming the defectors from their force…”
more unnamed sources of someone saying they are being trained…
but were is the arming part? Do you have more “unnamed” sources for that too?
Every loss is a tragedy. However, unlike Clinton’s illegal war of choice in Kosovo, we are now in a war that was not of our choosing.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
You can pack a lot of stupid into one sentence, I must say.
Clinton’s war was not illegal. That’s one. And the “war” in Iraq (that’s two) was most obviously of our choosing — if by “our” you mean Bush. That’s three, or maybe four. Either stupid or deliberate lies.
but were is the arming part? Do you have more “unnamed†sources for that too?
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 6:13 pm
####
Actually, that was just a quick link. Our intel guys on the borders have reported Iranian weapons and intelligence. But, as i said before, that is a small group. We have the same problems now with Syria. However, by far, the group that is supplying, equipping, funding the insurgency the most is Saudi Arabia.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
A lot of us objected at the time, long and loud. Your obsession with Clinton, though, is very unhealthy. I’d be ready to vote for HRC just to see your brain explode.
http://hotair.com/ archives/ 2007/ 03/ 21/ ap-mahdi-army-fractures-defectors-now-loyal-to-iran/
Comment by Chris L — December 27, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
Why should we believe anything in that article? There’s no way to discern if those sources for the AP story are credible. And there’s a lot of assumptions and conjecture in the post you linked to.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
###
So you were against the sanctions against Iraq? You really believe that more Iraqi children were killed under Clinton than under Bush? Or are you saying that because Clinton did one thng, Bush can do another? You sound like my children.
Looking down upon your rants from 30,000 feet, I remembered that the 3,900 you are bemoaning now, were the liberal slandered “rapists” and “baby killers” before they fell. You don’t fool anyone when you claim to care for the troops, alive or dead - you just hate Bush and want to tear down the Most Admired Man of 2007.
Same “intel guys†that brought us Team B and the Office of Special Plans?
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 6:19 pm
####
No, those guys are idiots. I’m talking about US Army Military Intelligence (yes, some of those guys are idiots too - I spent some time attached to the 902nd CI so I can say that - but they are better than the government types)
Where were you when Clinton killed 567,000 Iraqi children under five? http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
I was trying to get the sanctions eliminated. Where were you?
The UN FAO concluded that sanctions led to the deaths of 567,000 Iraq children under five. So, yes, far more Iraqi children died as a result of Clinton’s sanctions than have died as a result of the invasion of Iraq.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
####
Wow. I don’t even know where to start. Wow. For a change, why don’t you try talking to vets and people that are still over there. You can start by clicking on my name.
Looking down upon your rants from 30,000 feet, I remembered that the 3,900 you are bemoaning now, were the liberal slandered “rapists†and “baby killers†before they fell. You don’t fool anyone when you claim to care for the troops, alive or dead - you just hate Bush and want to tear down the Most Admired Man of 2007.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
You’re a dirty liar, Hendler. No one here has ever slandered them as such. You’re beyond disgusting.
And your Most Admired Man got 10% of the vote. Bill Clinton got 8%, within the margin of error. Every sitting president since 1981 has won that award, yet Bush barely scraped past a retired president. Ooooh, and a liberal.
You’re not only a dirty liar, you’re not at all bright.
Yes, the moonbats want to change the topic yet again. As far as my service, four years in the U.S. Marine Corps, which is four more years than the average moonbat.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:24 pm
chris says “However, by far, the group that is supplying, equipping, funding the insurgency the most is Saudi Arabia.â€
really? Your article says something different..
“AQI, although well funded by the Saudis, is the smallest of the various terrorist organizations representing less than 4% of the insurgency. “
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
####
OK, let me clarify. AQI is the smallest insurgent group in Iraq. It is also the most well funded and most advanced. The largest number of foreign fighters in Iraq (whether AQI or not) are from Saudi Arabia.
OK, let me clarify. AQI is the smallest insurgent group in Iraq. It is also the most well funded and most advanced. The largest number of foreign fighters in Iraq (whether AQI or not) are from Saudi Arabia.
Comment by Chris L — December 27, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
The Saudi royal family must be happy. “If they’re terrorizing over there, they’re not terrorizing over here.”
“OK, let me clarify. AQI is the smallest insurgent group in Iraq. It is also the most well funded and most advanced. The largest number of foreign fighters in Iraq (whether AQI or not) are from Saudi Arabia.”
Thanks for clearing that up. Did you know what the percentage of Iranian fighters in the insurgency ws, according to the files found?
0%.
No hard evidence linking supplying insurgency with weapons…
Let’s have some fun with an ignorant moonbat. Explain to us why you believe it was illegal to inade Iraq.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:29 pm
####
The Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) on which the invasion was predicated, was to fight Al-Qaeda and those who attacked us on 9/11. It was not authorization to invade a country that, at the time, had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda or 9/11. Essentially it is the same as if the AUMF had been used to attack Canada.
Looking down upon your rants from 30,000 feet, I remembered that the 3,900 you are bemoaning now, were the liberal slandered “rapists†and “baby killers†before they fell. You don’t fool anyone when you claim to care for the troops, alive or dead - you just hate Bush and want to tear down the Most Admired Man of 2007.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
Look how callously you talk about the deaths of those 3900 troops. It’s obvious you have no empathy or sympathy for them or their families.
And where do you think Bush would rank on a most despise list?
You can choose to believe what you want. However, I have long ago grown weary of sissy moonbats such as you who question my four years in the Marines when they have yet to spend a single day in uniform.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
You should have paid more attention as a child when you were warned about lies. When you lie constantly, no one will believe you even when (if) you tell the truth.
I have long since grown weary of lying turdweasels like yourself.
Speaking of diversions, muslim terrorists kill a powerful woman, and all TP wants to talk about are American fallen heroes.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
That is the subject of this thread, you do realize that don’t you a$$hat. Why don’t you go peddle your black-hearted drivel at redstate? We are royally sick and tired of you here.
You can choose to believe what you want. However, I have long ago grown weary of sissy moonbats such as you who question my four years in the Marines when they have yet to spend a single day in uniform.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
####
Actually, I’m an OIF veteran. So are a lot of democrats. There are a number of commenters here that are vets. Like the only OIF veteran in congress. Or like Andrew Horne and Rick Noriega, both veterans running for congress. Why do you use the term “moonbats”??
Unless I mimic you, “tear my blouse” and scream for Bush’s ouster, you will claim that I don’t care enough about fallen heroes. Btw, no one on TP will refer to them as heroes, because that runs counter to your “rapist” and “baby killer” slander.
You can choose to believe what you want. However, I have long ago grown weary of sissy moonbats such as you who question my four years in the Marines when they have yet to spend a single day in uniform.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:35 pm
####
Public law 107-40, the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists, one of two resolutions commonly known as “AUMF” , was a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress on September 18, 2001, authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. The authorization granted the President the authority to use all “necessary and appropriate force” against those whom he determined “planned, authorized, committed or aided” the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups. The AUMF was signed by President George W. Bush on September 18, 2001.
Unless I mimic you, “tear my blouse†and scream for Bush’s ouster, you will claim that I don’t care enough about fallen heroes. Btw, no one on TP will refer to them as heroes, because that runs counter to your “rapist†and “baby killer†slander.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:36 pm
Look how callously you talk of their deaths in the very first post. You don’t care anything about them.
And I call them victims of the Neocon war machine.
Let’s have some fun with an ignorant moonbat. Explain to us why you believe it was illegal to inade Iraq.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:29 pm
He started a war of aggression. A war of aggression is a war crime.
And yet another example of the Right-Wing spitting on troops.
Note - the sgtlejeune post at the bottom is me. That is what the L in my handle stands for. See Hendler, you’re not the only one here that posts under his own name.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
So your against sanctions but your for illegal invasions and occupations. Leslie Stahl threw that number out there and Madeline Albright didn’t argue with her at that moment, does that make it the definitive answer, no it does not. But then you’ll accept the Red Cross estimate that over 1 million Iraqis more than normal died since the war began, right?
Go talk to your buddy Nat from #156, who refuses to recognize those fallen soldiers as heroes.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:45 pm
They’re victims.
And why does someone who marginalizes their deaths care so much about my opinion?
A post in The Medium that appeared on Monday about the Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul and his purported adoption by white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups contained several errors. Stormfront, which describes itself as a “white nationalist†Internet community, did not give money to Ron Paul’s presidential campaign; according to Jesse Benton, a spokesman for Paul’s campaign, it was Don Black, the founder of Stormfront, who donated $500 to Paul. The original post also repeated a string of assertions by Bill White, the commander of the American National Socialist Workers Party, including the allegation that Paul meets regularly “with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review and others†at a restaurant in Arlington, Va. Paul never attended these dinners, according to Benton, who also says that Paul has never knowingly met Bill White. Norman Singleton, a congressional aide in Paul’s office, says that he met Bill White at a dinner gathering of conservatives several years ago, after which Singleton expressed his indignation at the views espoused by White to the organizer of the dinner. The original post should not have been published with these unverified assertions and without any response from Paul.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:48 pm
Iraq did not attack us. Period. It was a war of choice. You may think it was a good choice, but it was clearly exactly that. Iraq posed no threat.
Not to mention, the attack on Iraq was planned long before 9/11 (also well-documented, and no, I won’t do your research for you). The attack on the WTC provided Bush and Cheney with a handy opportunity, but it would have happened regardless.
If you think I’m combing through other threads for the dubious pleasure of reading your comments and pointing out the lies, forget it. I don’t have the stomach for rereading your comments.
Not a single member of the Think Progress research team has served in the military. That’s a fact.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:20 pm
Prove it. And Jon Stoltz posts here and you dis him here too. Isn’t your name the kind of name a guy uses when he’s trying to hide is over agressive feminine side? Maybe you should cut back on the estrogen cream.
I don’t marginalize their deaths - I recognize them as heroes. I further celebrate their achievements by applauding their ability to keep casualty rates lower now than in any other conflict of this size in the history of warfare.
So I thought the President had an absolute responsibility to go to the U.N. and say, “Look, guys, after 9/11, you have got to demand that Saddam Hussein lets us finish the inspection process.†You couldn’t responsibly ignore [the possibility that] a tyrant had these stocks. I never really thought he’d [use them]. What I was far more worried about was that he’d sell this stuff or give it away.†http://www.time.com/ time/ magazine/ article/ 0,9171,994507-7,00.html
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:48 pm
I had no problem with the reinstitution of the inspection process; I have a problem with the war of aggression (a war crime).
Yes, but you think it, don’t you? We know you moonbats are fans of Ted Rall and the corrupt and bloated Murtha.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:28 pm
If we thought it we would have said it. Corrupt and bloated Murtha actually served pansy all you do is lie about serving. No details of course go look up some actual service member’s info like Jake/Frank M. always does, sissy.
Speaking of diversions, muslim terrorists kill a powerful woman, and all TP wants to talk about are American fallen heroes.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
Jason the incompetent baffoon can’t do two things at once. Hell he can’t even do one competently. You are dead to us JMH, rest in that special place reserved for you in hell.
I don’t marginalize their deaths - I recognize them as heroes.
Your very first post marginalizes their deaths.
I further celebrate their achievements by applauding their ability to keep casualty rates lower now than in any other conflict of this size in the history of warfare.
Top that!
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
No American or Iraqi should have died for this administration’s lies. 3900 Americans and countless Iraqis have died because of the Bush administration.
“If we thought it we would have said it. Corrupt and bloated Murtha actually served pansy all you do is lie about serving. No details of course go look up some actual service member’s info like Jake/Frank M. always does, sissy.â€
Calm down, little fella. You’re allowing your mouth to get way ahead of you.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 7:06 pm
Really girlfriend, the guys are waiting for the details of your military service. I did not serve and I don’t lie about it. Wish would at least admit your a bloviating coward.
No one said Iraq attacked us. Saddam was removed from power for the very reason Clinton noted. Do you believe Bill Clinton lied when he said Iraq was a threat to the U.S.?
Well, you assume Iraq is a threat until it can be verified that it is not a threat. An inspection process took place prior to the war of aggression (a war crime) and we found out Iraq was not a threat.
Given that the Clinton administration launched a preemptive atttack on Iraq in 1998, why wouldn’t one expect the U.S. to have plans drawn up to attack Iraq again?
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 7:04 pm
We have invasion plans for every country on Earth just in case something arises. Nothing arose in Iraq.
I know, I know, you are far more comfortable when brown people die at the hands of other brown people.
I’m not a republican.
THE SURGE WORKED! Iraqi’s are moving back from Syria and abroad ….
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 7:07 pm
One Iraqi dying a day or thousands of Iraqis dying a day doesn’t justify a war of aggression. Bush and Cheney should be prosecuted for all the death, destruction and misery they have caused.
OK, now one of you have finally recognized our American soldiers as heroes. Anyone else here ready to come forward and give a testimonial?
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
This black-hearted troll who has no respect for our soldiers wants us now to come forward and do testimonials. Well, the testimonial of the Democrats is that they have been working very hard to get our soldiers the equipment they need, the rest they need, the training they need and the medical care they need. That’s a pretty big testimonial I think. On the other hand, the Republiscums have gone along with Bush and have filibustered bills that would help our soldiers and have repeatedly tried to cut benefits and funding for the VA. Anyone with an IQ above 75 knows who supports and honors the troops.
Now folks, please flag this scum over and over and over again until TP finally gets the message and sends him packing (under this moniker).
You’re rewriting history. Saddam did not cooperate with the weapons inspectors.
Of course he did.
“More revealing are Blix’s difficulties with the Iraqis. Time and again he and his colleague Mohamed ElBaradei tried to explain to the Iraqis that they needed to cooperate for the inspections to confirm what they claimed
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 7:20 pm
Mr. Blix said he was conducting operations in Iraq with relative ease (and nothing was found) and was satisfied that Saddam was destroying the missiles that went fifteen miles too long.
THE SURGE WORKED! Iraqi’s are moving back from Syria and abroad ….
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
You are right a$$hat, they are moving back. It is not because Iraq is now safe, it is because they have run out of money and their host countries are telling them to leave. And what are they coming home to? Most no longer have a home because they are now occupied by a Sunni or Shiite family (depending on where you lived in the first place).
I have posting quite a bit in this thread. If I lie as often as you claim, one would think there would be no need to comb through other threads.
That’s all right, your failure to cite a single example betrays your own lack of honesty and integrity. Who would expect anything less from a moonbat.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 7:04 pm
My own honesty and integrity are doing just fine, thanks for your concern.
Your comments are filled with lies about what liberals or progressives believe. In many cases, the lies constitute the entire wordage of the comment. Find them yourself; I certainly have no intention of reposting them because they were revolting enough the first time through.
That is still an amazing statistic considering we’ve had over 150,000 there for almost 5 years.
America rules!
December 27th, 2007 at 4:20 pmKreist, Hendler, only you could celebrate the deaths of American soldiers.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:25 pm#1 Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
America rules!
So you are proud of 3900 dead? None of whom would have died had the neocons involved with BushCo not lied their way into an illegal invasion and occupation.
What a wonderful person you are.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:27 pmJMH is a bigger a$$hole than I thought.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:28 pmWho could think of celebrating “only 3900″ dead — only a warmongering pinhead.
Like this is some sort of fu(king board game, Jason?
You really need to enlist, get out there and fight for your beliefs Jason. Really. “soldiers” like you got fragged in Nam
December 27th, 2007 at 4:28 pmThat number is deceiving. The medical advances made have saved many lives. And left 10’s of thousands of our bravest handicapped, crippled and worse.
Hendler, you disgust me. The death of one soldier is tragic. The deaths of thousands for lies is unforgivable.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:28 pmCan you imagine if anyone had said something like “the death toll at the WTC was amazing considering they crashed two planes into the towers”.
In the final tally the death toll on 9/11 will be a very small % of the total killed in Iraq, which surprisingly enough had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. Just a fun diversion for GWB to see if he could get his grubby hands on some oil. So in that light the death toll in Iraq of U.S. soldiers is an amazing statistic of incompetence & corruption. None of those soldiers needed to be there in the first place.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:29 pmHendler wouldn’t pass basic training. There would most certainly be an “accident” within the barracks.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:29 pmThat is still an amazing statistic considering we’ve had over 150,000 there for almost 5 years.
America rules!
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
The American military has expressed regret “that civilians are hurt or killed while coalition forces search to rid Iraq of terrorism,†after the 11 October killing of 15 women (one pregnant) and children in an air raid near lake Thar Thar.1 The civilian death toll by US fire was 96 in October, with 23 children among them, while in September US forces and contractors killed 108 Iraqi civilians, including 7 children. In August US troops killed 103 civilians, 16 of them children, and in July they killed 196. In fact, during the last five months US forces in Iraq have killed over 600 Iraqi civilians. Regrettably, as always.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ analysis/ beyond/ the-price-of-loss/
79,796 – 86,942 Document civilian deaths, from Violence.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
Thats just from violence. How many more have died and are going to die from being displaced, having no clean water etc etc.
But hey I guess they don’t count right. There not Americans.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:29 pmOf course, the msm treats this as non-news, unworthy of reporting.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:30 pmAfter all, the Bushies say things are going swimmingly in Iraq.
We are not allowed to see flag draped coffins, we are not given the news of our young people being killed in Iraq, we are like mushrooms — in the dark and fed $hit.
Here is a link to an article that sums up the impact of Benezir Bhutto’s death on the primary races:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/ blogs/ index.php/ jpodhoretz/ 1684
Reality keeps rearing its ugly head, killing any utopian dreams that some candidates would like to paint.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:31 pmI know this is hard for you, but
STAY ON TOPIC, HENDLER!
December 27th, 2007 at 4:33 pmAgreed. Jason ManHandler is a pathetic excuse for an American.
Jason, I thought you were trying to use your cold_hard_left persona when you’re cheering the deaths of American soldiers.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:33 pm#7, Dave C,
30,000 Americans would have to die in Iraq before you could call the deaths on 9/11 a small percent of the number of deaths in Iraq. At the current rate, we would have to stay in Iraq another 25 years, but we are already turning over territories to Iraq troops and police forces, so I doubt we will ever reach 6,000, much less 30,000.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:34 pmLet us not forget, 3900, the number the DOD reports, have died on Iraqi soil… this number does not reflect the REAL number - the number of those that died en route to the hospital or after in the hospital. That number has been reported to be 4 to 5 times as many deaths.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:35 pm#12, rtwl,
As I’ve told you repeated, I only use my real name when I post, which is more than you can claim - coward.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:35 pmI see, Jason. The deaths of Iraqis don’t mean a damn thing to you, do they?
December 27th, 2007 at 4:35 pmYeah, their just brown people, so make sure you ignore them.
Jason ManHandler — you’re a flat-out liar.
And all of the regulars here know it.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:38 pmAs I’ve told you repeated, I only use my real name when I post, which is more than you can claim - coward.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
The only coward here is you, the one who gleefully applauds the death of thousands of soldiers from the safety of his own keyboard.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:39 pmAs I’ve told you repeated, I only use my real name when I post, which is more than you can claim - coward.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
Liar. Your name is Jason Hitler, and you’re another closeted homosexual conservative who gets off on the deaths of American troops.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:40 pmComment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
No, Jason, what is amazing is that we outnumber the enemy 5 to 1, our military is superior in all ways, and yet it is taking more time to defeat them than it took to win WWII.
If I didn’t know better, I’d say this was planned. Just sayin’.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:40 pmLefty, please don’t denigrate homosexuals by equating them with trash like Hendler.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:41 pmThere’s no money in victory. Just in reconstruction and rearmaments. Funny how that works, ain’t it?
December 27th, 2007 at 4:42 pmMathematical flim flam used to show your utter disdain for human life wasted because of the lust for power & greed and brought about with lies.
Lives are more than numbers, Hendler.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:42 pmJason made the erronious connection between Iraq soldiers deaths and the number of people killed on 9/11.
Once again, it’s hard for these trolls to give up on the “connection to al Qaida” lie.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:43 pmOh, and remember, Hendler, we are only counting the troops that actually die in Iraq. If a troop is injured by, say, an IED, is flown out of the country for treatment, and dies AFTER he or she leaves the borders of Iraq, well, then, their death is not counted.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:43 pmWell said, Merlin.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:43 pmAs I’ve told you repeated, I only use my real name when I post, which is more than you can claim - coward.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
Give us your address, phone number, and e-mail address, and then we’ll stop laughing at you.
Real name? Oh, you are so brave.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:45 pmHere’s some death statistics, for those who glorify Bush on the “low” body count for American men and women serving in Iraq.
Had they stayed home in 2003,
56 would have died from non moter vehical accidental injuries.
22 more would have died in motor vehical accidents.
15 would have been shot to death.
15 others would have committed suicide.
14 would have been accidentally poisoned.
9 would have been murdered.
(source: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm)
That makes a grand total of 141 who would not have survived 2003, had they not been sent off to war. For the roughly 5 years of the Iraq war, approximately 700 would have died any way.
That means there have been 3,200 needless deaths (deaths in excess of random statistical chance) of young women and men in a war based on lies. Of course, one could argue that every death in Iraq is needless.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:45 pmwilly, it’s like having a demented parrot in the house, screeching
9/11 Awk! Al Qaeda, sqwaaaak! Iraq! WMsquaaakDs!!
Not to mention flapping around the room shitting on the furniture.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:45 pmNumbers to Hendler, Humans to others. Here’s another number. Over 28,000 US troops have been injured. Many with much more severe injuries than in conflicts past. Largely due to the advances of medicine and the speed in which they are brought in to medivac units. These are the ones that have to go to Walter Reed and the Va. The ones that Hendler’s handlers have ignored.
Hendler wouldn’t stand a chance in today’s Army.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:45 pm#23, Merlin,
No, I demonstrated the absurdity of another poster trying to claim the US will have many, many more casualties in the future, and I demonstrated how that it is an absolutely implausable statement.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:45 pmI will say once more what I have been saying all along…Sadaam Hussein was not worth one American soldier’s life. He was not worth $1 of our treasure. And he definitely was not worth the total loss of credibility that our country has suffered for invading the sovereign nation of Iraq.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:47 pm#30, hellinabucket,
More statistics that prove America is great, and has the best health care system in the world.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:47 pmMore statistics that prove America is great, and has the best health care system in the world.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
Good to know you’re onboard with government health care, Hendler. Since those soldiers and vets are covered with what you would probably call socialized medicine.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:49 pmLives are more than numbers, Hendler.
Comment by Merlin — December 27, 2007 @ 4:42 pm
Of course, and we here totally agree - but ask Bush, his press secretaries, and his blind minions like Hendler — THEY are the ones who equate lives and numbers.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:51 pmJason says “More statistics that prove America is great, and has the best health care system in the world.”
then you are indeed homeschooled.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:51 pmJason, your magic ball for predicting the future of our troops in Iraq seems clouded, murky, and at best like Mystic Myrna’s backroom.
If the Shiites get their snot up about us arming the Sunni Awakening brigades, or any number of other scenarios play out, the lull in violence may explode at any time. The surge failed to produce any reconciliation between these factions, as that was a fallacious presumption to begin with.
Given the extra time, they’ve just ethnically cleansed Baghdad, and we’ve armed the Sunni militias to buy some security.
Polish that crystal ball up before using it again, didn’t you read the damn directions?
December 27th, 2007 at 4:52 pmThat is still an amazing statistic considering we’ve had over 150,000 there for almost 5 years.
America rules!
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
Add Karma Recommend (0)
The total number of soldiers who would lived if the warmongering Bush administration had not initiated this invasion: 3900. Bush and Cheney should rot in hεll (if there is one) for all the death and destruction they have caused.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:53 pmLet’s face it. You’d have to be a flat-out sociopath to post something like what bibleboy did above. Does this heartless sociopath think soldiers under fire appreciate that kind of talk. If he does, he’s not only a sociopath but a moron.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:53 pmAmazing. Jason ManHandler been rightfully torn to pieces for his callous and pathetic war cheerleading, yet he’s still trying to defend his indefensible statements.
Seems like it’s just about time for an off-topic post on “Hill’reh”, eh, Jason?
What a tool. What a deluded, lying tool of BushCo.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:54 pmRUC says “Not to mention flapping around the room shitting on the furniture.”
I know. They got nothing else to hang their chicken-hawk hats on! “9/11! Terror! Fear! 9/11! Fear!”
They’re like that old drunk guy at the end of the bar angry at the world and cursing to themselves.
Pretty soon they will be consumed by their own demons.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:54 pmThat is still an amazing statistic considering we’ve had over 150,000 there for almost 5 years.
America rules!
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
You are a jackass of staggering proportions Hendler. Your empathy for your fellow Americans is, well, non existent. But don’t worry if you were on fire there’s probably not a human being who would piss on you to put you out. You are too loathesome to even deal with.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:54 pmHendler is a pissant. He’s that pimple on the a$$hole of a troll. He has less to discuss than Bush does about his military career.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:55 pmColonel Ripper, you must have had dufi in your units like Hendler. How did they get treated by the other soldiers?
December 27th, 2007 at 4:56 pmHendler has a huge rotting hole in his psyche. The blackness and hate that ooze from his keyboard are disgusting. Jason, I think you should seriously consider whether your want to continue your existence into 2008.
No, really.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:57 pmKeep in mind that triage and battlefield technique has greatly improved since Viet Nam. By Pentagon estimates, it’s at least 4 times as effective. What that means is that for that 3900, there are at least 4 times that many soldiers with catastrophic wounds and injuries who would have died if this were 40 years ago to go along with it.
Again, you’d have to be an acute sociopath to celebrate something like this. Bibleboy, you’re an example of what passes for a religious person these days, it doesn’t speak very well for the state of organized religion.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:58 pmHendler wouldn’t have made it long enough in the service to even see a fullbird Col. He’d been shipped home by the 3rd week.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:58 pmPerhaps Hendler could make amends by donating his cadaver to science. Next week.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:59 pm30,000 Americans would have to die in Iraq before you could call the deaths on 9/11 a small percent of the number of deaths in Iraq. At the current rate, we would have to stay in Iraq another 25 years, but we are already turning over territories to Iraq troops and police forces, so I doubt we will ever reach 6,000, much less 30,000.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
Only American deaths count right you psychopath. How about innocent Iraqi women, children and men. Their deaths mean nothing to you right. You should see a psychiatrist you are an example of abnormal psychology that needs to be examined.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:59 pmnanlichi says “Jason, I think you should seriously consider whether your want to continue your existence into 2008.”
I think you have a point there. I mean, Jason, look, with this kind of outlook and complete lack of empathy, life isn’t going to get any better for you. You do know that, right?
Those voices in your head telling you to think about ending the misery, they may have a point too.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:00 pm#12, rtwl,
As I’ve told you repeated, I only use my real name when I post, which is more than you can claim - coward.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
Sure Jason you are sick enough to cheer the deaths of 3,900 American Soldiers as not too many but we can believe you’d tell the truth about anything. Sorry that’s not the way the mind works.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:01 pmI certainly hope that everyone here is flagging Jason for his onerous posts on this thread. If you are not, you are guilty of encouraging this black-hearted soul.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:01 pmJason, this is like a game for you, isn’t it?
You come on the thread, make an outrageous statement, then see how many responses you get, right?
So your intent is to piss off, well, piss off.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:02 pmReality keeps rearing its ugly head, killing any utopian dreams that some candidates would like to paint.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:31 pm
May I point out a few things?
1) This is off-topic, unless you are trying to make the point that the assassination of Bhutto has anything to do with the Iraqi civil war. If that’s the case, it’s just lunacy.
2) Most of us really don’t care what anybody named Podhoretz has to say.
3) We still don’t know who was responsible for Bhutto’s death. It could have been Al Qaeda or any other group wanting to commit an act of terror for whatever reason. It could have been Musharref and/or his minions, seeking to eliminate political competition. It could even have been a covert operation by our own CIA. Yet you and Podhoretz are making an assumption that because Bhutto was killed by a suicide bomber, this must be part of the “War on Terror” we are fighting in Iraq, and validates our entire reason for being there. Podhoretz goes so far as to mention “radical Islam” despite no real evidence that’s why Bhutto was killed.
Sorry, not buying.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:02 pmLefty, please don’t denigrate homosexuals by equating them with trash like Hendler.
Comment by RUCerious — December 27, 2007 @ 4:41 pm
Homosexual or heterosexual the disgusting specimen Hendler is non practicing. Who’d have this worthless piece of crap, nobody.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:03 pmRUC “Jason, this is like a game for you, isn’t it?
You come on the thread, make an outrageous statement, then see how many responses you get, right?”
Isn’t that the definition of “troll”? Trolling for bites? Or is it the little stinky guys under the tunnel?
December 27th, 2007 at 5:03 pmIt’s ok Jason, there’s a better life waiting. Jesus has prepared your path and awaits you.
Come on man, just do it. Show those bastards at work that you have the balls to pull the trigger.
Just. Do. It.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:04 pmMr. Hendler has faded like bad gas.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:05 pmIsn’t that the definition of “troll� Trolling for bites? Or is it the little stinky guys under the tunnel?
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 5:03 pm
Both.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:06 pm“It could have been Al Qaeda or any other group wanting to commit an act of terror for whatever reason. It could have been Musharref and/or his minions, seeking to eliminate political competition.”
… or missmolly, as suggested by Bhutto after the last bomb went off near her and killed 200… it could have been Musharref working WITH the “terrorists” (like the ISI paying 100,000 bucks to Atta?).
I mean, after all, that was Bhutta’s idea (and that is why they are tearing up Pakistan and blaming Musharref right now).
Just thought I would toss in option “c”
December 27th, 2007 at 5:07 pmMr. Hendler has faded like bad gas.
Comment by hellinabucket — December 27, 2007 @ 5:05 pm
But his stench will linger for hours.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:07 pmMaybe he is sucking on an exhaust pipe. Dare we dream?
December 27th, 2007 at 5:08 pmThat is still an amazing statistic considering we’ve had over 150,000 there for almost 5 years.
America rules!
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 4:20 pm
We have lost 3,900 of our soldiers in Iraq. This only counts the ones that died on the battlefield there. It doesn’t count the ones who died from their injuries after being removed. It doesn’t count the ones who died from other coalition countries. It doesn’t count the Iraqis who have died.
Yet, even if we only focus on those 3,900, that’s still more people than died at the hands of terrorists on 9/11.
Can you imagine the absurdity of saying “2,974 deaths is an amazing statistic when you consider there are almost 300 million Americans here.”
No — we were so outraged over those 2,974 deaths that we started two wars over them. Why aren’t the 3,900 military deaths anywhere close to that important in your mind?
December 27th, 2007 at 5:09 pmBetter change your handle fck, Jason is dead to us. You will be flagged on sight. And whatever nom de guerre you choose next will be apparent and we will flag it too. You are one sick thing.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:12 pmWe will see that number go up now that Bush is sending troops in to Pakistan to protect the Nukes. Yes the Nukes were given to Pakistan so the US could have a direct hit to Iran and Syria for Israel.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:13 pmHow proud can we also be of the immeasurable domino effect of shattered families, especially through divorce, brought on by extended tours of duty?
This. Nonsense. Must. End.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:16 pmjustasking, you know these visions are a curse, not a blessing, don’t you?
December 27th, 2007 at 5:28 pmGood grief. And morons like Jason call *us* haters.
They make me sick. All of them.
And nobody has mentioned all of the Iraq vets who are now homeless, suffering from PTSD and wandering the streets - having been cheated out of their disability benefits by Bush’s VA.
And what about the soldiers who have committed suicide…?
Yeah. “America rules,” all right. America rules in HELL.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:32 pmIt is pretty obvious that the war supporters wouldn’t care if the death toll was 10,000 or 20,000 or more.
What matters to them is thumping their chests and boasting.
-GSD
December 27th, 2007 at 5:34 pmGSD, do you get the feeling that the Hendlers of the world are just pumped up on video games?
December 27th, 2007 at 5:37 pmOh, look at the goodwill Georgie’s spreading!
December 27th, 2007 at 5:37 pmSorry - OT - sort of -
I was recently asked on this blog what I thought would happen in regards to the Mahdi Army if American forces withdrew from Iraq. What would happen if the Mahdi Army went unchecked? This is a very complex question and I did not have the time or the space (in being courteous to other posters here) to answer that question fully. I have since, however, posted a full diary at Vet Voice regarding that question. If interested, this is the link:
http://vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=302
Disclaimer: Please understand that almost all of the contributors/commenters at vetvoice are veterans, or are still serving in Iraq. So, please be respectful.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:38 pmWhy is it our business to determine the fate of Iraq? If they ask for our help after the withdraw, so be it. We can consider it. But it is not for us to decide based on what we THINK would happen with the Mahdi Army…
you DO understand that? Right? We are NOT the decider.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:41 pmNice job, Chris. Very informative, I’ve marked it as a favorite. I’m a votevet member as well. Just haven’t diaried…
December 27th, 2007 at 5:42 pmwilly, that’s not what Chris was trying to get to. Just asking for informed opinions, not determinations…
December 27th, 2007 at 5:42 pmHonoring the Fallen
December 27th, 2007 at 5:43 pmLet’s think of it this way, iF Bush hadn’t LIED us into war, perhaps the death toll would be ZERO. People like JMH claim to support the war and the troops, but the fact that he cheers the death of “only” 3900 American soldiers if not more, just about shows how much they know the meaning of sacrifice. Your attitude is like the soldiers who marched off to the CiVIL War and World War I THINKING that it would just be a picnic and walk in the park. There is NOTHING romantic about war and unfortunately you don’t know about how war affects soldiers and their families.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:45 pmwar? what war?
when was the official declaration of war made?
what YOU have is an illegal invasion and occupation.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:45 pmNice job, Chris. Very informative, I’ve marked it as a favorite. I’m a votevet member as well. Just haven’t diaried…
Comment by RUCerious — December 27, 2007 @ 5:42 pm
####
Thank you!!! This was my first diary. Also, willyloman, I agree that we should not be in the business of determining Iraq’s fate, but I was trying to keep my diary within scope - short and concise.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:45 pmVery insightful Chris L. Thanks for also reminding me about that website. The voice of the soldier needs to be heard.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:47 pmjustaskin :}
December 27th, 2007 at 5:48 pmChris;
In a recent report about who the insurgents really are, they were like 41% Saudi and Jordanian…blah blah blah…
… but no Iranians. Yet, your post claims “There are two primary factions of the Mahdi Army. One is the loyal JAM, the other is a splinter group that is reported to have trained with the Iranian Quds forces.”
So my first question to you would be who “reported” that the JAM “trained with Iranian Quds forces”?
December 27th, 2007 at 5:51 pmThen you state “Considering that the Badr militia is also Shia, and supported by Iran and the Quds military force…”
It really seems you think Iran is playing a large roll in Iraq right now. Even bigger than Saudi Arabia?
December 27th, 2007 at 5:55 pmSo my first question to you would be who “reported†that the JAM “trained with Iranian Quds forces�
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
####
By far the largest group of foreign fighters is Saudi. Recently the NYTimes and Al-Jazeera reported that a splinter group from JAM (not JAM itself) had received training from the Quds in Iran. Considering that factions of the Badr Militia were exiled in Iran prior to the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, I do not know for certain if this Mahdi splinter group received training before the war as well. Both the Badr militia (strong Iranian ties) and the Mahdi Army have strong political influence in the Iraqi government.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:56 pmIt really seems you think Iran is playing a large roll in Iraq right now. Even bigger than Saudi Arabia?
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 5:55 pm
####
No. It simply doesn’t have the means. We know that Iraqi insurgents have received training and weaponry from Iran, as well as from many other nations. The Italian government recently uncovered a huge weapons smuggling ring that was working with the Iraqi government. But Saudis are by far the largest number of foreign fighters, and they have the most money.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:59 pmEd Schultz says:
“More than 40% of the foreign fighters who entered Iraq to join the insurgency in the past year were citizens of Saudi Arabia, America’s key partner in the Middle East, according to detailed information seized from a camp used by them.”
http://edschultz.invisionzone.com/ index.php?showtopic=33511&mode=threaded
December 27th, 2007 at 5:59 pmThis post is inaccurate. 3900 US soldiers have died IN IRAQ. Many more (likely ~10,000, but who knows, it’s not advertised) died from their wounds after leaving the country.
December 27th, 2007 at 5:59 pmChris… says ” We know that Iraqi insurgents have received training and weaponry from Iran,…”
please provide me with the link to the evidence that Iran is arming the insugency. Please, I would love to see that.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:00 pmChris says “Mahdi Army have strong political influence in the Iraqi government.”
They used to before the withdrew from the Iraqi Parliment. They have a lot of supporters.
So, what is your supposition here? Is it a bad thing if the Mahdi Army takes over Iraq?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:03 pmSo, what is your supposition here? Is it a bad thing if the Mahdi Army takes over Iraq?
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
####
Actually, my supposition is the exact opposite. If we withdrew, the Mahdi Army would wipe out Al-Qaeda in Iraq, and would be the strongest deterrent against Iranian influence. And you are right - the Saudis are the predominate problem by far. AQI is the smallest, but most advanced and most lethal - because of Saudi Arabia.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:06 pmThey used to before the withdrew from the Iraqi Parliment. They have a lot of supporters.
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
####
They are still the power behind the throne.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:07 pmplease provide me with the link to the evidence that Iran is arming the insugency. Please, I would love to see that.
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
####
http://hotair.com/ archives/ 2007/ 03/ 21/ ap-mahdi-army-fractures-defectors-now-loyal-to-iran/
December 27th, 2007 at 6:09 pmOk. Thanks. Just checking. Because we need to get the hell out of their country, and no matter who takes over, it isn’t our place to determine their fate. We have already done enough damage.
And when we get out se should all our corporations and Oil companies with us. Either that or leave them there to see how the Mahdi Army will deal with them.
I’m just trying to clarify.
But I think Saudi Arabia will invade at least the southern parts of Iraq as soon as we leave, and it will turn into a horrible mess.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:10 pmnon-military types at Think Progress ???
Your service record, please, slag? Branch, rank and a few key duty stations would be fine…
December 27th, 2007 at 6:10 pmThe Italian government recently uncovered a huge weapons smuggling ring that was working with the Iraqi government.
Comment by Chris L — December 27, 2007 @ 5:59 pm
It looks like the Iraqi government is exercising its sovereignty.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:10 pmwe are now in a war that was not of our choosing.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
#####
Please tell that to these guys.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:10 pm“we are now in a war that was not of our choosing.”
Complete and utter BS.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:10 pmOh, and that whole story is based on this :
“The Mahdi Army commanders, who said they would be endangered if their names were revealed, said Iran’s Revolutionary Guards were funding and arming the defectors from their force…”
more unnamed sources of someone saying they are being trained…
but were is the arming part? Do you have more “unnamed” sources for that too?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:13 pmEvery loss is a tragedy. However, unlike Clinton’s illegal war of choice in Kosovo, we are now in a war that was not of our choosing.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
You can pack a lot of stupid into one sentence, I must say.
Clinton’s war was not illegal. That’s one. And the “war” in Iraq (that’s two) was most obviously of our choosing — if by “our” you mean Bush. That’s three, or maybe four. Either stupid or deliberate lies.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:13 pmHey, Slag? Where’s your service record? Cmon, show us your military type stuff. Coward.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:16 pm“we are now in a war that was not of our choosing.â€
He’s right! It wasn’t OUR choosing! it was the ChickenHawk Neo-Con lie machine. It was THEIR choosing.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:16 pmbut were is the arming part? Do you have more “unnamed†sources for that too?
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 6:13 pm
####
Actually, that was just a quick link. Our intel guys on the borders have reported Iranian weapons and intelligence. But, as i said before, that is a small group. We have the same problems now with Syria. However, by far, the group that is supplying, equipping, funding the insurgency the most is Saudi Arabia.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:17 pmThe military is always going to have deaths in training, and just because a certain number of people in any population are going to die.
But to think that these nearly 4,000 troops lives are not significant is true bullshit.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:18 pmWhere were you when Clinton killed 567,000 Iraqi children under five?
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
A lot of us objected at the time, long and loud. Your obsession with Clinton, though, is very unhealthy. I’d be ready to vote for HRC just to see your brain explode.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:18 pmhttp://hotair.com/ archives/ 2007/ 03/ 21/ ap-mahdi-army-fractures-defectors-now-loyal-to-iran/
Comment by Chris L — December 27, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
Why should we believe anything in that article? There’s no way to discern if those sources for the AP story are credible. And there’s a lot of assumptions and conjecture in the post you linked to.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:19 pmComment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
###
So you were against the sanctions against Iraq? You really believe that more Iraqi children were killed under Clinton than under Bush? Or are you saying that because Clinton did one thng, Bush can do another? You sound like my children.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:19 pm“Our intel guys on the borders have reported Iranian weapons and intelligence.”
Same “intel guys” that brought us Team B and the Office of Special Plans?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:19 pmYou sound like my children.
Comment by Chris L — December 27, 2007 @ 6:19 pm
I hope for your sake none are over the age of three.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:21 pmComment by Nat — December 27, 2007 @ 6:19 pm
###
Sorry. As I said before, that was a quick link because Willy wanted a link. Most of my information comes from 3 years of living in the Middle East.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:21 pmNot a single member of the Think Progress research team has served in the military. That’s a fact.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:20 pm
Not an answer, though, is it? The question was about YOUR service record.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:21 pmLooking down upon your rants from 30,000 feet, I remembered that the 3,900 you are bemoaning now, were the liberal slandered “rapists” and “baby killers” before they fell. You don’t fool anyone when you claim to care for the troops, alive or dead - you just hate Bush and want to tear down the Most Admired Man of 2007.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:23 pmSame “intel guys†that brought us Team B and the Office of Special Plans?
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 6:19 pm
####
No, those guys are idiots. I’m talking about US Army Military Intelligence (yes, some of those guys are idiots too - I spent some time attached to the 902nd CI so I can say that - but they are better than the government types)
December 27th, 2007 at 6:23 pmchris says “However, by far, the group that is supplying, equipping, funding the insurgency the most is Saudi Arabia.”
really? Your article says something different..
“AQI, although well funded by the Saudis, is the smallest of the various terrorist organizations representing less than 4% of the insurgency. “
December 27th, 2007 at 6:23 pmMmm, now we know who recommended POS Jason #1 post in this thread.
You must be proud too, Manslagt.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:24 pmWhere were you when Clinton killed 567,000 Iraqi children under five?
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
I was trying to get the sanctions eliminated. Where were you?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:24 pmThe UN FAO concluded that sanctions led to the deaths of 567,000 Iraq children under five. So, yes, far more Iraqi children died as a result of Clinton’s sanctions than have died as a result of the invasion of Iraq.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
####
Wow. I don’t even know where to start. Wow. For a change, why don’t you try talking to vets and people that are still over there. You can start by clicking on my name.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:25 pmLooking down upon your rants from 30,000 feet, I remembered that the 3,900 you are bemoaning now, were the liberal slandered “rapists†and “baby killers†before they fell. You don’t fool anyone when you claim to care for the troops, alive or dead - you just hate Bush and want to tear down the Most Admired Man of 2007.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
You’re a dirty liar, Hendler. No one here has ever slandered them as such. You’re beyond disgusting.
And your Most Admired Man got 10% of the vote. Bill Clinton got 8%, within the margin of error. Every sitting president since 1981 has won that award, yet Bush barely scraped past a retired president. Ooooh, and a liberal.
You’re not only a dirty liar, you’re not at all bright.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:26 pmSo I guess it all comes to what Clinton admin did or did not regarding Iraq.
Talk about poor arguments to defend the illegal invasion.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:27 pmYes, the moonbats want to change the topic yet again. As far as my service, four years in the U.S. Marine Corps, which is four more years than the average moonbat.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:24 pm
Wow. Really? Why is that so hard to believe?
You did your combat where?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:27 pmchris says “However, by far, the group that is supplying, equipping, funding the insurgency the most is Saudi Arabia.â€
really? Your article says something different..
“AQI, although well funded by the Saudis, is the smallest of the various terrorist organizations representing less than 4% of the insurgency. “
Comment by willyloman — December 27, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
####
OK, let me clarify. AQI is the smallest insurgent group in Iraq. It is also the most well funded and most advanced. The largest number of foreign fighters in Iraq (whether AQI or not) are from Saudi Arabia.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:27 pmOK, let me clarify. AQI is the smallest insurgent group in Iraq. It is also the most well funded and most advanced. The largest number of foreign fighters in Iraq (whether AQI or not) are from Saudi Arabia.
Comment by Chris L — December 27, 2007 @ 6:27 pm
The Saudi royal family must be happy. “If they’re terrorizing over there, they’re not terrorizing over here.”
December 27th, 2007 at 6:28 pmYes, but you think it, don’t you? We know you moonbats are fans of Ted Rall and the corrupt and bloated Murtha.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:28 pm
####
You mean the 37 year Marine veteran Murtha? Why is the right-wing always slandering the troops?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:29 pmYes, but you think it, don’t you? We know you moonbats are fans of Ted Rall and the corrupt and bloated Murtha.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:28 pm
No. I’ve never thought of the military in those terms at all. Your hatred for people who disagree with you has completely distorted your little brain.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:30 pm“OK, let me clarify. AQI is the smallest insurgent group in Iraq. It is also the most well funded and most advanced. The largest number of foreign fighters in Iraq (whether AQI or not) are from Saudi Arabia.”
Thanks for clearing that up. Did you know what the percentage of Iranian fighters in the insurgency ws, according to the files found?
0%.
No hard evidence linking supplying insurgency with weapons…
No training evidence except “unnamed sources”…
and no Iranian fighters in Iraq…
now what does that add up to for you?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:30 pmSo now our conservatives visitors are claiming psychic and mind-reading abilities?
Amazing they couldn’t use such clairvoyance to see past their blind allegiance to the Bush personality cult.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:30 pmLet’s have some fun with an ignorant moonbat. Explain to us why you believe it was illegal to inade Iraq.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:29 pm
####
The Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) on which the invasion was predicated, was to fight Al-Qaeda and those who attacked us on 9/11. It was not authorization to invade a country that, at the time, had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda or 9/11. Essentially it is the same as if the AUMF had been used to attack Canada.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:32 pmLooking down upon your rants from 30,000 feet, I remembered that the 3,900 you are bemoaning now, were the liberal slandered “rapists†and “baby killers†before they fell. You don’t fool anyone when you claim to care for the troops, alive or dead - you just hate Bush and want to tear down the Most Admired Man of 2007.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
Look how callously you talk about the deaths of those 3900 troops. It’s obvious you have no empathy or sympathy for them or their families.
And where do you think Bush would rank on a most despise list?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:33 pm“sissy moonbats such as you who question my four years in the Marines”
do Marines use the word “sissy”?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:33 pmSpeaking of diversions, muslim terrorists kill a powerful woman, and all TP wants to talk about are American fallen heroes.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:34 pmYou can choose to believe what you want. However, I have long ago grown weary of sissy moonbats such as you who question my four years in the Marines when they have yet to spend a single day in uniform.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
You should have paid more attention as a child when you were warned about lies. When you lie constantly, no one will believe you even when (if) you tell the truth.
I have long since grown weary of lying turdweasels like yourself.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:34 pmSpeaking of diversions, muslim terrorists kill a powerful woman, and all TP wants to talk about are American fallen heroes.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
You missed the Bhutto thread? You have no use for American fallen heroes? You really are scum.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:35 pmSpeaking of diversions, muslim terrorists kill a powerful woman, and all TP wants to talk about are American fallen heroes.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
That is the subject of this thread, you do realize that don’t you a$$hat. Why don’t you go peddle your black-hearted drivel at redstate? We are royally sick and tired of you here.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:35 pmYou can choose to believe what you want. However, I have long ago grown weary of sissy moonbats such as you who question my four years in the Marines when they have yet to spend a single day in uniform.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
####
Actually, I’m an OIF veteran. So are a lot of democrats. There are a number of commenters here that are vets. Like the only OIF veteran in congress. Or like Andrew Horne and Rick Noriega, both veterans running for congress. Why do you use the term “moonbats”??
December 27th, 2007 at 6:36 pm#139, Nat,
Unless I mimic you, “tear my blouse” and scream for Bush’s ouster, you will claim that I don’t care enough about fallen heroes. Btw, no one on TP will refer to them as heroes, because that runs counter to your “rapist” and “baby killer” slander.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:36 pmYou can choose to believe what you want. However, I have long ago grown weary of sissy moonbats such as you who question my four years in the Marines when they have yet to spend a single day in uniform.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
I’m a four star general.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:39 pmComment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:36 pm
####
I have seen the right wing slander troops far more than anyone on the left. By the way, they are heroes, every one of them.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:39 pmShow us where I have lied. Put up or shut up, moonbat.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:36 pm
we are now in a war that was not of our choosing.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
Other examples abound. Pretty much equal to the number of comments you have posted.
You really think anywhere here is insulted by your use of “moonbat”? It’s just one more example of your crippled little mind.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:40 pm#151, Chris,
OK, now one of you have finally recognized our American soldiers as heroes. Anyone else here ready to come forward and give a testimonial?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:42 pmGo read the entire AUMF.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:35 pm
####
Public law 107-40, the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists, one of two resolutions commonly known as “AUMF” , was a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress on September 18, 2001, authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. The authorization granted the President the authority to use all “necessary and appropriate force” against those whom he determined “planned, authorized, committed or aided” the September 11th attacks, or who harbored said persons or groups. The AUMF was signed by President George W. Bush on September 18, 2001.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:42 pmUnless I mimic you, “tear my blouse†and scream for Bush’s ouster, you will claim that I don’t care enough about fallen heroes. Btw, no one on TP will refer to them as heroes, because that runs counter to your “rapist†and “baby killer†slander.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:36 pm
Look how callously you talk of their deaths in the very first post. You don’t care anything about them.
And I call them victims of the Neocon war machine.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:42 pmOK, now one of you have finally recognized our American soldiers as heroes. Anyone else here ready to come forward and give a testimonial?
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:42 pm
Happily. Are you willing to apologize for your disgusting comments celebrating their deaths?
Many of us, many times, have heralded our troops and their courage. You’re one of the few to celebrate their deaths.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:43 pmComment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:41 pm
####
Yet another example of the right wing’s disdain for the troops.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:45 pm#157, gummy,
Go talk to your buddy Nat from #156, who refuses to recognize those fallen soldiers as heroes.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:45 pm–Turkey is thankful for the intelligence by what it is cluster-bombing Kurds. They called it superb. I think Bush is doing a hillarious job in Iraq–
December 27th, 2007 at 6:45 pmhttp://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf , where you are directed when you search on casualty list at the DOD site.
There is no definition of casualty anywhere on the page.
Does not differentiate those who died inside or outside Iraq.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:46 pmLet’s have some fun with an ignorant moonbat. Explain to us why you believe it was illegal to inade Iraq.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:29 pm
He started a war of aggression. A war of aggression is a war crime.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:47 pmNot a single member of the Think Progress research team has served in the military. That’s a fact.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:20 pm
And you have?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:48 pmAnd yet another example of the Right-Wing spitting on troops.
Note - the sgtlejeune post at the bottom is me. That is what the L in my handle stands for. See Hendler, you’re not the only one here that posts under his own name.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:48 pmGo talk to your buddy Nat from #156, who refuses to recognize those fallen soldiers as heroes.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:45 pm
I don’t even know the guy.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:50 pmNot a single member of the Think Progress research team has served in the military. That’s a fact.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:20 pm
###
True, but Faiz did serve on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:51 pmWhere were you when Clinton killed 567,000 Iraqi children under five?
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
So your against sanctions but your for illegal invasions and occupations. Leslie Stahl threw that number out there and Madeline Albright didn’t argue with her at that moment, does that make it the definitive answer, no it does not. But then you’ll accept the Red Cross estimate that over 1 million Iraqis more than normal died since the war began, right?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:51 pmGo talk to your buddy Nat from #156, who refuses to recognize those fallen soldiers as heroes.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:45 pm
They’re victims.
And why does someone who marginalizes their deaths care so much about my opinion?
December 27th, 2007 at 6:52 pmHow about a duty station, slag? Just one or two would be fine.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:52 pmHEY TP… ARE YOU GOING TO POST THIS RETRACTION?
http://themedium.blogs.nytimes.com/ 2007/ 12/ 26/ editors-note-the-ron-paul-vid-lash/
Editors’ Note: The Ron Paul Vid-Lash
By The New York Times
A post in The Medium that appeared on Monday about the Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul and his purported adoption by white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups contained several errors. Stormfront, which describes itself as a “white nationalist†Internet community, did not give money to Ron Paul’s presidential campaign; according to Jesse Benton, a spokesman for Paul’s campaign, it was Don Black, the founder of Stormfront, who donated $500 to Paul. The original post also repeated a string of assertions by Bill White, the commander of the American National Socialist Workers Party, including the allegation that Paul meets regularly “with members of the Stormfront set, American Renaissance, the Institute for Historic Review and others†at a restaurant in Arlington, Va. Paul never attended these dinners, according to Benton, who also says that Paul has never knowingly met Bill White. Norman Singleton, a congressional aide in Paul’s office, says that he met Bill White at a dinner gathering of conservatives several years ago, after which Singleton expressed his indignation at the views espoused by White to the organizer of the dinner. The original post should not have been published with these unverified assertions and without any response from Paul.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:52 pmComment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:48 pm
Iraq did not attack us. Period. It was a war of choice. You may think it was a good choice, but it was clearly exactly that. Iraq posed no threat.
Not to mention, the attack on Iraq was planned long before 9/11 (also well-documented, and no, I won’t do your research for you). The attack on the WTC provided Bush and Cheney with a handy opportunity, but it would have happened regardless.
If you think I’m combing through other threads for the dubious pleasure of reading your comments and pointing out the lies, forget it. I don’t have the stomach for rereading your comments.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:54 pmHey, I’ll go first!
December 27th, 2007 at 6:54 pmGermany, 3rd Armored Division 1968.
DaNang, RVN, Feb 69 - Oct 69
Phu Bai Oct 69 - Feb 70
US Army RA.
Not a single member of the Think Progress research team has served in the military. That’s a fact.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:20 pm
Prove it. And Jon Stoltz posts here and you dis him here too. Isn’t your name the kind of name a guy uses when he’s trying to hide is over agressive feminine side? Maybe you should cut back on the estrogen cream.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:54 pm#170, Nat,
I don’t marginalize their deaths - I recognize them as heroes. I further celebrate their achievements by applauding their ability to keep casualty rates lower now than in any other conflict of this size in the history of warfare.
Top that!
December 27th, 2007 at 6:55 pmSo I thought the President had an absolute responsibility to go to the U.N. and say, “Look, guys, after 9/11, you have got to demand that Saddam Hussein lets us finish the inspection process.†You couldn’t responsibly ignore [the possibility that] a tyrant had these stocks. I never really thought he’d [use them]. What I was far more worried about was that he’d sell this stuff or give it away.â€
http://www.time.com/ time/ magazine/ article/ 0,9171,994507-7,00.html
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:48 pm
I had no problem with the reinstitution of the inspection process; I have a problem with the war of aggression (a war crime).
December 27th, 2007 at 6:57 pmHey, I’ll go first!
Germany, 3rd Armored Division 1968.
DaNang, RVN, Feb 69 - Oct 69
Phu Bai Oct 69 - Feb 70
US Army RA.
Comment by RUCerious — December 27, 2007 @ 6:54 pm
####
You mentioned earlier that you are also a member of Vote Vets. What state are you in?
I’ll go second -
Fort Hood, Texas - 1st Cavalry Division 1998-2000
December 27th, 2007 at 6:58 pmKuwait, Operation Desert Spring - 2000
Fort Hood, Texas -6th MP Group (CID) 2000-2002
Operation Noble Eagle 2002
1457th Combat Engineer BN, (Corps Wheeled) - Baghdad, Iraq 2003-2004.
Yes, but you think it, don’t you? We know you moonbats are fans of Ted Rall and the corrupt and bloated Murtha.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:28 pm
If we thought it we would have said it. Corrupt and bloated Murtha actually served pansy all you do is lie about serving. No details of course go look up some actual service member’s info like Jake/Frank M. always does, sissy.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:59 pmHow can anyone respect such a person?
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:58 pm
####
And yet again, ANOTHER example of the right-wing spitting on troops. I bet you feel the same way about Brian McGough as well?
December 27th, 2007 at 7:01 pmSpeaking of diversions, muslim terrorists kill a powerful woman, and all TP wants to talk about are American fallen heroes.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
Jason the incompetent baffoon can’t do two things at once. Hell he can’t even do one competently. You are dead to us JMH, rest in that special place reserved for you in hell.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:02 pmI don’t marginalize their deaths - I recognize them as heroes.
Your very first post marginalizes their deaths.
I further celebrate their achievements by applauding their ability to keep casualty rates lower now than in any other conflict of this size in the history of warfare.
Top that!
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 6:55 pm
No American or Iraqi should have died for this administration’s lies. 3900 Americans and countless Iraqis have died because of the Bush administration.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:03 pm#185, gnat,
I know, I know, you are far more comfortable when brown people die at the hands of other brown people.
THE SURGE WORKED! Iraqi’s are moving back from Syria and abroad ….
December 27th, 2007 at 7:07 pmI guess you don’t believe it since you didn’t even bother to provide a source.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:56 pm
Havn’t seen you post many sources today.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:07 pmWell, it’s been fun, but I’m out for the day. Have a good time everybody!
December 27th, 2007 at 7:07 pmJon Stoltz is the guy who wimped out when questioned by a fellow soldier during the Yearly Kos convention. How can anyone respect such a person?
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 6:58 pm
Misinterpretation is your only strong suit. I see you’re not offering any info on your fake military service you lying sack of crap.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:10 pm“If we thought it we would have said it. Corrupt and bloated Murtha actually served pansy all you do is lie about serving. No details of course go look up some actual service member’s info like Jake/Frank M. always does, sissy.â€
Calm down, little fella. You’re allowing your mouth to get way ahead of you.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 7:06 pm
Really girlfriend, the guys are waiting for the details of your military service. I did not serve and I don’t lie about it. Wish would at least admit your a bloviating coward.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:12 pmNo one said Iraq attacked us. Saddam was removed from power for the very reason Clinton noted. Do you believe Bill Clinton lied when he said Iraq was a threat to the U.S.?
Well, you assume Iraq is a threat until it can be verified that it is not a threat. An inspection process took place prior to the war of aggression (a war crime) and we found out Iraq was not a threat.
Given that the Clinton administration launched a preemptive atttack on Iraq in 1998, why wouldn’t one expect the U.S. to have plans drawn up to attack Iraq again?
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 7:04 pm
We have invasion plans for every country on Earth just in case something arises. Nothing arose in Iraq.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:16 pmI know, I know, you are far more comfortable when brown people die at the hands of other brown people.
I’m not a republican.
THE SURGE WORKED! Iraqi’s are moving back from Syria and abroad ….
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — December 27, 2007 @ 7:07 pm
One Iraqi dying a day or thousands of Iraqis dying a day doesn’t justify a war of aggression. Bush and Cheney should be prosecuted for all the death, destruction and misery they have caused.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:23 pmOK, now one of you have finally recognized our American soldiers as heroes. Anyone else here ready to come forward and give a testimonial?
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
This black-hearted troll who has no respect for our soldiers wants us now to come forward and do testimonials. Well, the testimonial of the Democrats is that they have been working very hard to get our soldiers the equipment they need, the rest they need, the training they need and the medical care they need. That’s a pretty big testimonial I think. On the other hand, the Republiscums have gone along with Bush and have filibustered bills that would help our soldiers and have repeatedly tried to cut benefits and funding for the VA. Anyone with an IQ above 75 knows who supports and honors the troops.
Now folks, please flag this scum over and over and over again until TP finally gets the message and sends him packing (under this moniker).
December 27th, 2007 at 7:31 pmYou’re rewriting history. Saddam did not cooperate with the weapons inspectors.
Of course he did.
“More revealing are Blix’s difficulties with the Iraqis. Time and again he and his colleague Mohamed ElBaradei tried to explain to the Iraqis that they needed to cooperate for the inspections to confirm what they claimed
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 7:20 pm
Mr. Blix said he was conducting operations in Iraq with relative ease (and nothing was found) and was satisfied that Saddam was destroying the missiles that went fifteen miles too long.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:32 pmTHE SURGE WORKED! Iraqi’s are moving back from Syria and abroad ….
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
You are right a$$hat, they are moving back. It is not because Iraq is now safe, it is because they have run out of money and their host countries are telling them to leave. And what are they coming home to? Most no longer have a home because they are now occupied by a Sunni or Shiite family (depending on where you lived in the first place).
December 27th, 2007 at 7:35 pmI have posting quite a bit in this thread. If I lie as often as you claim, one would think there would be no need to comb through other threads.
That’s all right, your failure to cite a single example betrays your own lack of honesty and integrity. Who would expect anything less from a moonbat.
Comment by Manslagt — December 27, 2007 @ 7:04 pm
My own honesty and integrity are doing just fine, thanks for your concern.
Your comments are filled with lies about what liberals or progressives believe. In many cases, the lies constitute the entire wordage of the comment. Find them yourself; I certainly have no intention of reposting them because they were revolting enough the first time through.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:38 pmI don’t marginalize their deaths - I recognize them as heroes. I further celebrate their achievements by applaudin