I found this while surfing around the net:
Iraq has not surrendered
I know Bush held a photo op on a carrier declaring the war was over. It was then or never for the photo op as it was the lowest point in the hostilities which have been increasing ever since. The fact remains Iraq has not surrendered.
The POWs have not been released. It is required they be released immediately after the end of a war. So despite what Bush said on the carrier he did not not believe the war was over when he said it. When they are all released the war is over and not before.
US troops are continuing to take prisoners so they do not believe the war is over.
Until Iraq surrenders the people of Iraq have every right to fight and kill the invaders in any manner they choose. If this were a legal war then Iraqis would be bound by the conventions of war. In terms of international law this is an illegal war so Iraqis are bound by none of the laws. Nor are Americans of course and their behavior demonstrates they are waging an illegal war.
Iraqis have the right kill off foreign troops
Americans might not like to hear that but in international law governing war, as long as the war continues they have a right to fight and kill the foreigners even if they are Americans. Americans can declare themselves anything they want including the humorous title of liberators but the fact is they are conquerors.
They have conquered. They do rule. They will not leave. What else describes conquerers?
Of course good judgment should rule on the part of the Iraqis but it is not required. And from their point of view they read interviews with US troops who openly talk of killing wounded Iraqis after the fighting. They read of US troop firing into crowds of protesters which the US has confirmed. Are they supposed to be happy about it? Would you be in their position?
Are you happy to know American troops murdered wounded troops whose crime is defending their country? Are you happy to know American troops are stopping protests, people just trying to get water and electricity, by opening fire on them?
If Iraqis had conquered the US and were running things and had murdered wounded, helpless defenders and were murdering anyone who protests, I know I would be working on ways to kill them. Why should Iraqis be any different? What would you do?
The US has no intention of allowing Iraq to be free
This has been said several times. It is usually said indirectly but some times explicitely. The most explicite is to say US will not leave until there is a pro-western democracy in place in Iraq.
I have a dumb question. What if they do not want to be pro-western? Does that mean we never leave? How can they be both free and forced to be pro-western? How is it possible to be free and forced to be pro-western?
Pro-western is not an honest term. It really means pro-american. Look at it from the point of view of Iraqis.
The US is making a big issue of finding mass graves. Iraqis see the largest mass graves as the result of the revolution the US encouraged in 1990-91 and then abandoned and pulled out support. The revolutionaries died because the US stopped helping. On top of that it was President Bush the father of this President Bush who encouraged them and then abandoned them. Are they to trust the son when the father lead them to destruction? Would you?
It is impossible to force anyone to be free. There is only the opportunity to be free. But placing any requirements upon the freedom such as pro-western means there is no freedom only force. As if to emphasize this, Iraq now has a free press which is not free to criticize or oppose the occupation of Iraq in any manner.
How will Iraqis be forced to be pro-american?
The only way I know is the way they were forced to be pro-Saddam Hussein, torture and if necessary kill those who are not. Already the US is killing people demanding the minimum necessities of modern life for having the courage to do so. Is formal torture and murder far behind?
Why would they not want to be pro-american?
The invasion itself is quite sufficient. Who like invaders? The French may have lined the streets but the Germans didn't. And the people did nothing. They cannot even be pressed to say they permitted their country to attack the US as was fed to Germany.
Iraq did not attack the US, period, end of discussion. Iraqis know they were attacked without cause. Everyone in the world knows they were attacked without cause. The best anyone can do is come up with a lame excuse to justify it.
Who really likes having their country reduced to chaos and ruin by foreigners. Who likes having thousands of trigger happy teenagers telling them what to do, when to do it and how. Remember they only deal with the lowest ranks. Americans may be proud of their troops but that does not mean the troops patroling the country are mature enough to drink. The US says they are not by law.
Before the war women could walk the streets of Baghdad alone at night. Today they are afraid to go out in groups in daylight. Before the war women in Iraq were as free as American women in the 1960s or 70s. Today they are being threatened for not wearing headscarves. Before the war Christians could sell alcohol and anyone could buy it. Today alcohol dealers are being murdered wholesale.
Looting, rape, murder and drug dealing are rampant where it did not exist before. Two hours of electricity is a good day. The city water is disease ridden. Stop me when I mention something that would make Iraqis pro-american.
Right. Almost forgot. Hussein is out of power. Iraqis agree the US has achieved its objective. Should Iraqis love Americans because Americans will not leave?
To paraphrase
If Americans come as guests they may stay for a hundred years. If they come as occupiers we will kill them.
Everything is worse including the rate of innocent civilians deaths at the hands of the Americans who are the new Husseins. The promised freedom keeps being pushed further into the future.
How bad can it get? They are only ragheads.
Considering the average American is no better educated than the troops in Iraq that attitude understandably common. An Iraqi may be called a raghead but a raghead with a gun is called sir. Iraqis are adult human being just like the rest of us. Intelligence is not measured by knowledge of enjoying life in America.
Unlike America, Hussein did not fear an armed citizenry. Private ownership of guns is more common in Iraq than in the US. There are at least 14 million people capable of using guns and who likely own guns. There is no pro-american faction in Iraq. As things get worse the only disagreements are between patience and violence. And that mean US troops are outnumbered about 100 to 1. On the bright side, if the women do not fight it is only about 50 to 1.
Iraq has not surrendered
I know Bush held a photo op on a carrier declaring the war was over. It was then or never for the photo op as it was the lowest point in the hostilities which have been increasing ever since. The fact remains Iraq has not surrendered.
The POWs have not been released. It is required they be released immediately after the end of a war. So despite what Bush said on the carrier he did not not believe the war was over when he said it. When they are all released the war is over and not before.
US troops are continuing to take prisoners so they do not believe the war is over.
Until Iraq surrenders the people of Iraq have every right to fight and kill the invaders in any manner they choose. If this were a legal war then Iraqis would be bound by the conventions of war. In terms of international law this is an illegal war so Iraqis are bound by none of the laws. Nor are Americans of course and their behavior demonstrates they are waging an illegal war.
Iraqis have the right kill off foreign troops
Americans might not like to hear that but in international law governing war, as long as the war continues they have a right to fight and kill the foreigners even if they are Americans. Americans can declare themselves anything they want including the humorous title of liberators but the fact is they are conquerors.
They have conquered. They do rule. They will not leave. What else describes conquerers?
Of course good judgment should rule on the part of the Iraqis but it is not required. And from their point of view they read interviews with US troops who openly talk of killing wounded Iraqis after the fighting. They read of US troop firing into crowds of protesters which the US has confirmed. Are they supposed to be happy about it? Would you be in their position?
Are you happy to know American troops murdered wounded troops whose crime is defending their country? Are you happy to know American troops are stopping protests, people just trying to get water and electricity, by opening fire on them?
If Iraqis had conquered the US and were running things and had murdered wounded, helpless defenders and were murdering anyone who protests, I know I would be working on ways to kill them. Why should Iraqis be any different? What would you do?
The US has no intention of allowing Iraq to be free
This has been said several times. It is usually said indirectly but some times explicitely. The most explicite is to say US will not leave until there is a pro-western democracy in place in Iraq.
I have a dumb question. What if they do not want to be pro-western? Does that mean we never leave? How can they be both free and forced to be pro-western? How is it possible to be free and forced to be pro-western?
Pro-western is not an honest term. It really means pro-american. Look at it from the point of view of Iraqis.
The US is making a big issue of finding mass graves. Iraqis see the largest mass graves as the result of the revolution the US encouraged in 1990-91 and then abandoned and pulled out support. The revolutionaries died because the US stopped helping. On top of that it was President Bush the father of this President Bush who encouraged them and then abandoned them. Are they to trust the son when the father lead them to destruction? Would you?
It is impossible to force anyone to be free. There is only the opportunity to be free. But placing any requirements upon the freedom such as pro-western means there is no freedom only force. As if to emphasize this, Iraq now has a free press which is not free to criticize or oppose the occupation of Iraq in any manner.
How will Iraqis be forced to be pro-american?
The only way I know is the way they were forced to be pro-Saddam Hussein, torture and if necessary kill those who are not. Already the US is killing people demanding the minimum necessities of modern life for having the courage to do so. Is formal torture and murder far behind?
Why would they not want to be pro-american?
The invasion itself is quite sufficient. Who like invaders? The French may have lined the streets but the Germans didn't. And the people did nothing. They cannot even be pressed to say they permitted their country to attack the US as was fed to Germany.
Iraq did not attack the US, period, end of discussion. Iraqis know they were attacked without cause. Everyone in the world knows they were attacked without cause. The best anyone can do is come up with a lame excuse to justify it.
Who really likes having their country reduced to chaos and ruin by foreigners. Who likes having thousands of trigger happy teenagers telling them what to do, when to do it and how. Remember they only deal with the lowest ranks. Americans may be proud of their troops but that does not mean the troops patroling the country are mature enough to drink. The US says they are not by law.
Before the war women could walk the streets of Baghdad alone at night. Today they are afraid to go out in groups in daylight. Before the war women in Iraq were as free as American women in the 1960s or 70s. Today they are being threatened for not wearing headscarves. Before the war Christians could sell alcohol and anyone could buy it. Today alcohol dealers are being murdered wholesale.
Looting, rape, murder and drug dealing are rampant where it did not exist before. Two hours of electricity is a good day. The city water is disease ridden. Stop me when I mention something that would make Iraqis pro-american.
Right. Almost forgot. Hussein is out of power. Iraqis agree the US has achieved its objective. Should Iraqis love Americans because Americans will not leave?
To paraphrase
If Americans come as guests they may stay for a hundred years. If they come as occupiers we will kill them.
Everything is worse including the rate of innocent civilians deaths at the hands of the Americans who are the new Husseins. The promised freedom keeps being pushed further into the future.
How bad can it get? They are only ragheads.
Considering the average American is no better educated than the troops in Iraq that attitude understandably common. An Iraqi may be called a raghead but a raghead with a gun is called sir. Iraqis are adult human being just like the rest of us. Intelligence is not measured by knowledge of enjoying life in America.
Unlike America, Hussein did not fear an armed citizenry. Private ownership of guns is more common in Iraq than in the US. There are at least 14 million people capable of using guns and who likely own guns. There is no pro-american faction in Iraq. As things get worse the only disagreements are between patience and violence. And that mean US troops are outnumbered about 100 to 1. On the bright side, if the women do not fight it is only about 50 to 1.
