Actually it isn't ridiculous at all. It was the men they were searching. They weren't seizing anyone. But they can wait until the women are properly covered before going in. The problem is that when the troops went in to search and the women weren't covered the men shouted and stepped in the troops way to delay them, the troops then knocked them down or were rough with them and thought they were being stopped because the family was hiding something when they werent' hiding anything. More than one person has claimed that this is ridiculous, but the fact is that being sensitive to citizens of that country's culture works and protects the troops. I pointed out the difference in the British controlled areas(where they do wait for the women to be covered) and the American controlled area. There is much less resentment of the British in their areas because of steps like these. We must remember it is their country, and to violate their customs will only fuel resentment and make our job harder. I've offered a comparison showing that what I say actually works. You may just want to stomp them and grind them under your heel. I want to make our troops safer, and do a better job of handling the occupation. DaDakota, nowhere did I advocate not using force to enforce order over there.
Hypocrisy- You ask where are the muslim clerics who advocate"peace and cooperation" and then advocate doing "whatever it takes" to "neutralize" our opponents. Brutality- See above. Warped world view- See above.
I'm on the team that values our soldiers so much that we are enraged at the knowldedge that their lives have been put at risk based on lies and incompetence. Which team are you on?
I see the logic in this, and it is very noble. I suppose the thinking on the ground goes something like this, however: if we take the mosque person by person, we will suffer casualties, potentially heavy casualties. If we drop a 500-lb bomb, short-term problem is solved with no American casualties. It is, perhaps, as short-sighted as you say. What a freaking mess.
I guess it really is the beginning of the end. When the pro-war guys start revealing their true colors. None of the "we're doing it because we love the Iraqis so much". Hey, NJRocket, your tactics haven't been very successful in moderting the people in Israel either. Why do you wish this type of thing on the USA? Will you only be happy when we have more suicide bombers in the USA? I note Bush hasn't said : "They're getting desperate. Bring 'em on". He hasn't even said anything to the effect that it is good that we bombed the mosque so that the terrorists will get mad come out and fight us over in Fallujah and Sadr City and not in NYC. Bush may be starting to lose his swagger, though his belief that God has annointed him, to battle the "evil ones" may keep his faith in his misguided policies going longer than is strictly rational.
Perhaps a pro western Saddam-like regime is needed to keep these animals in order. The Saudis are pretty good at this stuff.
40 Reported Killed in Fallujah Mosque Wednesday April 7, 2004 3:01 PM FALLUJAH, Iraq (AP) - A U.S. helicopter fired three missiles at a mosque compound in the city of Fallujah on Wednesday, killing about 40 people as American forces battled Sunni insurgents, witnesses said. Cars ferried bodies from the scene, though there was no immediate confirmation of causalities. Part of the wall surrounding the Abdul-Aziz al-Samarrai mosque was demolished, said AP reporter Abdul-Qader Saadi, though the mosque building was not damaged. The strike came as worshippers gathered for afternoon prayers, witnesses said. They said the dead were taken to private homes in the area where temporary hospitals have been set up. Angry residents gathered around the mosque after the strike. The offices of an organization of Sunni clerics next door was also lightly damaged. U.S. Marines have besieged Fallujah, west of Baghdad, for the past three days in a major operation aimed at uprooting insurgents link
Again, DD, I will point out that the "women covering up" thing is more cultural than directly religious. Compare the variety of Muslims in the USA (and consider asking them where they are from) and you'll see a *definite* pattern. And, of course, you realize that the mindset you're displaying is the exact same one that Iraqis will have against the USA: "Man, those Christians are messed up. Bombing a mosque." (Before you bash me, though, I'm all for getting this Sadr guy.)
What you would call "animals" others would call fighting for their country. glynch was right! The pro-war crowd is showing their true colors... "Kill em' all and let OUR GOD sort em' out..."
I heard that they just hit the Mosque's walled compound, but not the Mosque. True? Still, very very sad about any innocent worshippers her were harmed. Certainly won't help the US cause there, but the priority is preparing the country for June 30. One would expect reasonable, non-power hungry individuals to adopt a wait-and-see attitude when there is to be a handover in less than 90 days. What we see could and may have been anticipated; folks jockeying for power through weapons and violence. I ask, why does a cleric need a personal militia? The US has no choice but to respond to give the new Iragi government any chance of surviving.
Main Entry: hyp·o·crite Pronunciation: 'hi-p&-"krit Function: noun Etymology: Middle English ypocrite, from Old French, from Late Latin hypocrita, from Greek hypokritEs actor, hypocrite, from hypokrinesthai : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion Dude I'm an atheist, I have no false appearance of virtue. My point was that the radical clerics are using Islam as a sham to consolidate their power, control their populace and incite them to violence while they shield themselves from violence by claiming sacred sanctuary. Religious leaders should be preaching brotherhood and acceptance, not violence and vengence. When they do they lose their right to sanctuary. I on the otherhand believe mankind is just a bunch of monkeys with guns. There is very little expectation that reason will ever prevail.
They exist, but have little control or ability to help lead because Islam is so fragmented. Each of these clerics has his own little fiefdom. Imagine a Methodist minister brought in to lead a Presbyterian church. That would probably not work. That's what you're asking for. Islam in that region of the world is made up of a bunch of little churches all competing for power and with little in common with each other (except the blaming of America for their problems, ugh).
B-Bob, your idea that the decent Iraqis will support the killing of the people at the mosque is based on the supposition that these people want us to be there and don't see those people as fighting for the liberation of Iraq from foreign occupiers. Are you sure this is correct? I believe polls showed that most of the people in Fallujah supported the killing of the armed mecenaries, but did not support the mutilation of the bodies.
I couldn't see all the pollsters behind the people jumping up and down for joy in the streets...you could be right.
I don't know. All I know is that we are in a vicious cycle of our own making. Is it worth the trouble to stay in or should we just get off? A choice between two ugly options.
Lets see: 1. We don't attack mosques and they become hideouts for anti-coalition guerillas endagering our troops. 2. We attack mosques and they become rallying points for anti-coalitions forces, the Iraqi equivalent of "Remember the Alamo!", also endagering our troops. Ladies and gentleman we are on the horns of a classic dilemma. I got no good answers.
Sam, it is indeed a tough choice between two bad options. That is why I don't think we'll choose till the all voluntary army begins to vote with its feet. You can't keep extending them for ever. This is of course a given with Bush. I don't think Kerry will have the balls to pull the plug on it either. Perhaps, though, given his experience in Vietnam, maybe he'll have enough empathy with the troops to do so. Kerry's rapport with leaders other than Blair will assist in making the best of a bad situation as we turn over the mess to the UN after the fig lead of the "handover" to the Chalab group on 6/30 unravels. On a related note, Nightline ran a story about possible retention problems with the Special Forces guys as they see those recently discharged working along side them but making $1,000 per day or more in Iraq as private military.
Historically the only way to unite two disparate societies is to give them a common enemy. So at least we have a purpose in Iraq. I begining to think the Viet Nam solution may be the best we can do. Declare victory and go home. Not right away though. We do need to try to support the formation of a democratic struture. June 30 is as good as any because it's like anything, if you don't set a deadline no progress will be made. Perhaps the rational element in Iraq will panic enough to build a consensus. We will have to continue the bloody campaign against the radicals for the time being, eleminating them as much as possible and infiltrating them where we can for future intelligence. The end result will probably look like Iran more than Turkey but we may have to accept that. (good luck Kurds!)
