PDA

View Full Version : Good News From Iraq



Jo Vale Tudo
12th September 04, 05:24 PM
I was watching the news and saw several soldiers telling the media that its hard for them to watch the news now because their work is being downsized by alot of negativity. They said you see only 10% of whats really happening in Iraq on TV here. So in their honor, here is a list of good news in Iraq courtesy of http://coverups.com/goodnews.htm



Since President Bush declared an end to major combat on May 1:

* The first battalion of the new Iraqi Army has graduated and is on active duty.

* Over 60 000 Iraqis now provide security to their fellow citizens.

* Nearly all of Iraq's 400 courts are functioning.

* The Iraqi judiciary is fully independent.

* On Monday, October 6, power generation hit 4,518 megawatts-exceeding the pre-war average.

* All 22 universities and 43 technical institutes and colleges are open, as are nearly all primary and secondary schools.

* By October 1, Coalition forces had rehabbed over 1,500 schools - 500 more than their target.

* Teachers earn from 12 to 25 times their former salaries.

* All 240 hospitals and more than 1200 clinics are open.

* Doctors' salaries are at least eight times what they were under Saddam.

* Pharmaceutical distribution has gone from essentially nothing to 700 tons in May to a current total of 12,000 tons.

* The Coalition has helped administer over 22 million vaccination doses to Iraq's children.

* A Coalition program has cleared over 14,000 kilometers of Iraq's 27,000 kilometers of weed-choked canals. They now irrigate tens of thousands of farms. This project has created jobs for more than 100,000 Iraqi men and women.

* We have restored over three-quarters of pre-war telephone services and over two-thirds of the potable water production.

* There are 4,900 full-service connections. We expect 50,000 by January first.

* The wheels of commerce are turning. >From bicycles to satellite dishes to cars and trucks, businesses are coming to life in all major cities and towns.

* 95 percent of all pre-war bank customers have service and first-time customers are opening accounts daily.

* Since President Bush declared an end to major combat on May 1... Iraqi banks are making loans to finance businesses.

* The central bank is fully independent.

* Iraq has one of the world's most growth-oriented investment and banking laws.

* Iraq has a single, unified currency for the first time in 15 years.

* Satellite dishes are legal.

* Foreign journalists aren't on 10-day visas paying mandatory and extortionate fees to the Ministry of Information for "minders" and other government spies.

* There is NO Ministry of Information.

* There are more than 170 newspapers.

* You can buy satellite dishes on what seems like every street corner.

* Foreign journalists and everyone else are free to come and go.

* A nation that had not one single element--legislative, judicial or executive--of a representative government, does.

* In Baghdad alone residents have selected 88 advisory councils. Baghdad's first democratic transfer of power in 35 years happened when the city

* Today in Iraq, chambers of commerce, businesses, schools and professional organizations are electing their leaders all over the country.

* 25 ministers, selected by the most representative governing body in Iraq's history, run the day-to-day business of government.

* The Iraqi government regularly participates in international events. Since July the Iraqi government has been represented in over two dozen international meetings, including those of the UN General Assembly, the Arab League, the World Bank and IMF and, today, the Islamic Conference Summit. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs today announced that it is reopening over 30 Iraqi embassies around the world.

* Shia religious festivals that were all but banned, aren't.

For the first time in 35 years, in Karbala, thousands of Shiites celebrate the pilgrimage of the 12th Imam.

* The Coalition has completed over 13,000 reconstruction projects, large and small, as part of a strategic plan for the reconstruction of Iraq.

* Uday and Queasy are dead - and no longer feeding innocent Iraqis to his zoo lions, raping the young daughters of local leaders to force cooperation, torturing Iraq's soccer players for losing games...murdering critics.

* Children aren't imprisoned or murdered when their parents disagree with the government.

* Political opponents aren't imprisoned, tortured, executed, maimed, or forced to watch their families die for disagreeing with Saddam.

* Millions of long suffering Iraqis no longer live in perpetual terror.

* Saudis will hold municipal elections.

* Qatar is reforming education to give more choices to parents.

* Jordan is accelerating market economic reforms.

* The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded for the first time to an Iranian -- a Muslim woman who speaks out with courage for human rights, for democracy and for peace.

Comment: I would also like to add that in addition to his other duties, George Bush also happens to be Commander in Chief of the US Military that has made the above possible, either by direct participation or influence. People tend to forget this at times... some conveniently. These brave young men and women of our Armed Forces, doing a great job, are making it possible to accomplish these happenings in the name of freedom and human decency.

From: Don Harribine, USN (Ret)


Support our troops, they're doing great! Just because Iraqians aren't blond haired, blue-eyed Americans, that doesn't mean we should deprived them of help and hope for freedom.

wakinonioi
12th September 04, 07:12 PM
Very nice

patfromlogan
12th September 04, 07:31 PM
Yeah, I can hope for the best, but 60 Iraqis were killed today.

Smeagol
12th September 04, 07:36 PM
* The Iraqi judiciary is fully independent.
sure

* By October 1, Coalition forces had rehabbed over 1,500 schools - 500 more than their target.
didn't they bomb some, too?

* The central bank is fully independent.
haha, right. do the iraqi ppl also decide "independently" which oil-pipeline they wan't all of the sudden?

* Millions of long suffering Iraqis no longer live in perpetual terror.
just with daily bombing 'n stuff

* The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded for the first time to an Iranian -- a Muslim woman who speaks out with courage for human rights, for democracy and for peace.
sorry, but i thought this was about iraq and not iran?


no iam not going to back anything up iam just trying to make you guys mad.

Jo Vale Tudo
12th September 04, 08:02 PM
Originally posted by Smeagol
* The Iraqi judiciary is fully independent.
sure

* By October 1, Coalition forces had rehabbed over 1,500 schools - 500 more than their target.
didn't they bomb some, too?

* The central bank is fully independent.
haha, right. do the iraqi ppl also decide "independently" which oil-pipeline they wan't all of the sudden?

* Millions of long suffering Iraqis no longer live in perpetual terror.
just with daily bombing 'n stuff

* The Nobel Peace Prize was awarded for the first time to an Iranian -- a Muslim woman who speaks out with courage for human rights, for democracy and for peace.
sorry, but i thought this was about iraq and not iran?


no iam not going to back anything up iam just trying to make you guys mad.

I've never heard of them bombing any schools.

If you're trying to imply that Iraq isn't perfect then you're absolutely right. Iraq is far from perfect just as any other country but its getting much better now that Saddam is no longer in control.

Balloonknot
13th September 04, 08:49 AM
I guess all this makes the war in Iraq right? We were lied to by Bush himself. There were NO WMD. Never was.

First Bush states, MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
Then Bush states, MISSION MISCALCULATED
Now the facts state, MISSION IMPOSSIBLE!!

Leodom
13th September 04, 01:21 PM
Every couple of weeks opinionjournal.com has an article of the latest good news out of Iraq.

Here is today's column.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005610

The Iraqi people are looking forward to elections and a majority of them are optimistic about the future.

More are getting married: Abdullah is one of the many Iraqis who have got married in what officials say is a post-war wedding boom brought on by rising salaries and the end of restrictions on marriage imposed by the former regime. Before the war, Abdullah could not get married because--like thousands of other young men--he was dodging military service.

The Iraqi people are now free to speak out: After decades of enforced silence, the Iraqis are relishing a chance to speak out. Radio Dijla (Tigris), which went on air in April, continues to go from strength to strength. One of 15 new private radio stations, Dijla is the only one so far to pursue the talk-radio format. It broadcasts for 19 hours a day and receives 185 calls an hour--more than the station staff can handle--mostly about everyday life's big and small problems:

Education is getting much-needed attention: After years of neglect, the education sector continues to revive. Foreign assistance is often vital; Italy, for example, is donating 100,000 computers, photocopiers and lab equipment for Iraqi universities. The grant is worth 300 million euros ($365 million). There is also some good news for these gifted Iraqi students: "Nine Iraqis have arrived in Doha to study at Qatar's private 'Education City,' which includes top tier US colleges, under scholarships granted by the Qatar Foundation, a statement said. The group, which studied together for the past six years at Baghdad's School for the Gifted, will begin with a one-year course at the Academic Bridge Programme, said the foundation. The eight hope to study medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College, while the ninth is seeking to join the petroleum engineering program at Texas A and M University."

Their economy is improving as is the Baghdad Stock Exchange: Economy. Good news for the Baghdad stock exchange, which will shortly undergo much-needed modernization: The Army's project and contracting office in Iraq is planning to award the $750,000 to $1.5 million hardware and software deal to automate the ISX.

These are just a very few. It is a long article.

If you listen to the US media, you will get a much more pessimistic view. It is good that someone is publishing the good news.

Dochter
13th September 04, 01:27 PM
Who says Iraq is worse off now than before? I thought that at least was obvious.

I only hope that things continue to improve and that insurgency doesn't erode what progress has been made. A nice and coherent exit strategy would have been nice.

Dochter
13th September 04, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by Leodom
If you listen to the US media, you will get a much more pessimistic view. It is good that someone is publishing the good news. It is indeed unfortunate that "posititve" information isn't more widely distributed. Whether or not it fits the working definition of "news" is a different discussion.

Xango
13th September 04, 01:33 PM
I believe the exit strategy is "We ain't goin noplace, so everyone just settle down".

While it may not be the exit strategy we want, there's nothing incoherent about it. Until Iran, Syria and Pakistan stop being the wildcards that they are, American troops are going to be in countries that border those places.

Electing John Kerry isn't going to change that, IMHO, which is one of the reasons I'd be at peace with a Kerry administration.

Leodom
13th September 04, 01:35 PM
Doc, I agree. As far as exit strategy goes, I think one complicating factor is that the ground offensive went much better and faster than expected. Bush alluded to this in an interview once. I forget what he called it, maybe 'catastrophic success'. By taking so little time to progress through Iraq and take Baghdad, there would be many of Saddam's soldiers who may or may not remain loyal and live to fight an insurgency type action. In addition, the "clean-up" then appears to take much longer when compared to the major battle actions. It may have been a strategy in which all the ramifications weren't fully considered. Then again, it's been said that everyone has a plan until the first punch is thrown.

I'm sure we'll be "Monday morning quarterbacking" this war for decades.

Dochter
13th September 04, 01:45 PM
I've heard too much about cutting state out of the process to really think that there was a solid plan in place.

I'm also aware that we had military governors in W.Germany for a decade+ after WW2 (not just because of the USSR). I never thought it would, or should, be quick or easy.

Freddy
13th September 04, 01:53 PM
One should look back at France's experience in Algeria.

LOVED2BLOVED
13th September 04, 04:25 PM
look at some of the blogs made by iraqs...

wakinonioi
13th September 04, 07:15 PM
Originally posted by Jo Vale Tudo
I've never heard of them bombing any schools.




In fact, they've built a lot of new schools.

Shug
13th September 04, 07:24 PM
y'know, I'm no fan of Bush' myself, and his shady ass reasons for going to war or half the other shit he's into aren't my cup of tea, but this really is good news to be hearing guys.

This is why we don't hear this shit (or why people don't pay attention to it) they're too busy trying to carry on some kind of political war. I hate the idea of good news being no news, this is the kinda shit we should see more often.

wakinonioi
13th September 04, 07:28 PM
Originally posted by Balloonknot
I guess all this makes the war in Iraq right? We were lied to by Bush himself. There were NO WMD. Never was.

!!


So I guess everybody lied then. 'Cause everyone believed they were there (and now we may never know). Even that gay nightclub called the UN believed it. France, Germany, Russia, Kerry, Mr. Friday, everyone.

Xango
13th September 04, 08:56 PM
Not to mention the sarin shell that was exploded as an attack against a US convoy, several months ago.

That would make the official case now to be: "Bush lied, there were apparently not nearly as many chemical weapons in Iraq as he thought!"

Jo Vale Tudo
13th September 04, 11:05 PM
If Bush lied, what about the rest of these people?

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is real and a grave threat to our security." -Democrat and Presidential Candidate John F. Kerry, Oct. 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real." -Democrat Presidential Candidate Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA Jan. 2, 2003)

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know that after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation" -Democrat Presidential Candidate John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."-Democrat and Vice Presidential Candidate John Edwards, Oct. 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -Democrat and Vice Presidential Candidate John Edwards, Oct. 10, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of thread Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow" -Democrat Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile deliver capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists including Al Queda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we all know too well affects American security." -Democrat Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability. -Democrat Robert Byrd, October 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons. I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -Democrat Tom Daschle

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration's policy towards Iraq, I don't think there can be any question about Saddam's conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past eleven years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats, he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors, and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -Democrat Henry Waxman, Oct. 10, 2002

"Saddam's goal is to achieve the lifting of the UN sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -Democrat Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -Democrat Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat. Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001. He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -Democrat and Presidential Candidate Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -Democrat and Presidential Candidate Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.-Democrat Al Gore, 2002

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.-Democrat Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."-Democrat Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."-Democrat Senator Carl Levin, Sept. 19, 2002

(continued)

Jo Vale Tudo
13th September 04, 11:10 PM
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."-Democrat Senator Ted Kennedy, Sept. 27, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."-Democrat Senator Jay Rockefeller, Oct. 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production of weapons of mass destruction."-Democrat Senator Bob Graham, Dec. 8, 2002

"Saddam will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983." -Democrat National Security Advisor Sandy Berger

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -Democrat Ted Kennedy, Sept. 27, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991-1994, despite Iraq's denials, UN inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons. UN inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction."-Democrat Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"Everyday Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -Democrat Presidential Candidate Joe Lieberman, August 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -Democrat Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -Democrat John Rockefeller, Oct. 10, 2002

Bush DIDN'T lie. The Democrats above didn't either!

Dochter
14th September 04, 09:41 AM
Originally posted by Xango
Not to mention the sarin shell that was exploded as an attack against a US convoy, several months ago.
You mean the IED that the insurgents didn't even know was sarin filled?

Yeah that's an immenent threat.

PeedeeShaolin
14th September 04, 09:50 AM
If Bush lied, what about the rest of these people?

None of those people made the decision to send those troops into Iraq to die for something that never existed in the first place.

CaptShady
14th September 04, 09:54 AM
Originally posted by PeedeeShaolin
None of those people made the decision to send those troops into Iraq to die for something that never existed in the first place.

That's not addressing the question. Saying "Bush lied" means all of the above lied too. Bush taking us to war as a result doesn't change this. So if you call Bush a liar, you have to call the others liars too.

PeedeeShaolin
14th September 04, 09:59 AM
But Bush DIDN'T lie, remember? He "acted on false information". Same goes with all the others.

They at least had the common sense NOT to go into Iraq unless we had PROOF and a sensible plan.

Bush had none of that. Now Iraq is WORSE than before and at the cost of our servicemen.

What kind of a fanboy do you have to be to turn a useless war thats killed a thousand of your own forces into a "democrat vs. republican" debate?

No matter what anyone saud, those troops wouldnt be there dying with G.W. Bush, our commander in chief.

PeedeeShaolin
14th September 04, 10:03 AM
Correction: the others SPOKE based on false information, Bush bankrupted his country and sent alot of troops to die based on it.

I wonder who fucked up more?

CaptShady
14th September 04, 10:16 AM
Okay, war good/bad aside ... you yourself have called Bush a liar on this specific issue. His actions based on good/bad/mystical/magical information isn't the issue here. Calling Bush a liar, is. You and BK (I'm so very sorry to compare you to him it's way off base 99% of the time) keep dodging the quotes (if they're even real). Now .. Bush and the WMD issue .. either ALL had false information, or ALL lied .. which is it. Address that, and THEN move on to how Bush acted.

Dochter
14th September 04, 11:40 AM
Those in congress were speaking based on information presented to them by this administration.
Quotes of Clinton etc. are based on old information or what this administration said.

At the very least Bush is culpable due to negligence (he made a case for war based on info that turns out to be incorrect, the rationale which was incorrect got americans killed). At worst he knowingly misrepresented the strength of the evidence to foment support for the war.

Balloonknot
14th September 04, 12:41 PM
I repeat....

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED > MISSION MISCALCULATED > MISSION IMPOSSIBLE

Jo Vale Tudo
14th September 04, 04:01 PM
Uhm... Bush's sources was various intelligence. He had a choice between believing those reliable (yet imperfect) sources of intelligence, or SADDAM FRICKING HUSSEIN! No one lied. It was slightly flawed intelligence. And for you people who's saying that there werent no WMDS at all, Tell that to the ten thousand Kurds in a mass grave, their bodies twisted and pale from biological gas. How about the soldiers over there that DAILY find empty warheads filled with traces of saline, a chemical found in a dozen different biological weapons. How about the terrorist groups who managed to swipe weapons grade uranium from Saddam's private stash?

PeedeeShaolin
14th September 04, 04:05 PM
Do you read history?

When has Saddam Frickin Hussein ever attacked the U.S.?

Who put Saddam into power?

Who was Time Magazine's "Man of the Year".

And who sold him those weapons you talked about? I'll give you a hint: When asked about WMD Colin Powell replied" We kept the reciepts".

Jo Vale Tudo
14th September 04, 04:12 PM
He was supplied weapons when he was the U.S.'s allies to fight Iran.

I'm glad we've established that he had those weapons. He not only had them, he USED them against the people in the country he is suppose to govern.

Do YOU read history? Remember that Japan never attacked the United States, yet when they were given the power and the initiative, the attack on Pear Harbor occured? Given the power (nuclear weapons, etc.) you're telling me that we should risk giving Saddam Fricking Hussein more power? Just as the Democrats above said, we shouldn't let him go too far.

PeedeeShaolin
14th September 04, 04:17 PM
he USED them against the people in the country he is suppose to govern.

And the U.S. knew about it and didn't give a rats ass. The only time we cared was when we could USE IT as an EXCUSE to invade Iraq and send our corporate employees to infest that poor country like cockroaches.


Just as the Democrats above said, we shouldn't let him go too far.

I agree with this, but the guy was no immediate damger, as we were told, and we just MIGHT have had a liiiiittle bit more time to come up with a REALISTIC strategy and involve some OTHER countries instead of footing the bill ourselves.

Idiotic war for make-believe reasons at the wrong time.

I dont think theres anything we DIDN'T fuck up in this whole sad situation.

garbanzo
14th September 04, 04:22 PM
The "good news" site also features a number of interesting features including such notable topics as the Loch Ness Moster, Big Foot and Roswell. The originial source for the data is a "Coalition" website.

Propaganda as news.

Jo Vale Tudo
14th September 04, 04:22 PM
After 9/11, we had to change our way of thinking. After all reading all those good news I posted and all the good testimonies I heard from soldiers who served there, it was FAR from invasion. The Democrats were saying he was well on his way to becoming an immediate threat.

A little more time? Just as Bill Clinton took a little more time when he had the chance to catch Osama? And how long are we talking here? How is the President's strategy unrealistic, pray tell? Its well known that every strategy is perfect until you meet the enemy. How would you have done it?

garbanzo
14th September 04, 04:25 PM
Osama? Did someone mention Osama?

Wasn't he the guy who actually organized 911?

The guy who is still at large?

Jo Vale Tudo
14th September 04, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by garbanzo
The "good news" site also features a number of interesting features including such notable topics as the Loch Ness Moster, Big Foot and Roswell. The originial source for the data is a "Coalition" website.

Propaganda as news.

The diffference is, these accomplishments are real, Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster arent. Propaganda's are usually conspiracy theories or twist of words.

Jo Vale Tudo
14th September 04, 04:27 PM
Yeah still at large! More like hiding on a cave or even dead. The last Al Qaeda tape wasn't even him preaching, it was his right hand man. Still at large? More like on the run! So at least show some appreciation for the soldiers who made it possible.

garbanzo
14th September 04, 04:27 PM
And you know they're reall because the government says so.

Like those WMD's were real?

Jo Vale Tudo
14th September 04, 04:33 PM
Yeah and of course you know the truth about the WMDs cause you're closer to Iraq than they are. Of course you know way more about the situation in the Middle East in general than the government and various intelligence sources cause you're out there doing the inspecting and investigating.

You wanna know what's propaganda? Keeping these accomplishments from the media, at the same time personally hurting the soldiers when they return here only to see all the things that go wrong in CNN and not the good things they did for the country.

Just because you don't agree with the President, that doesn't mean you have to downsize the military's good works. THAT'S propaganda.

garbanzo
14th September 04, 04:38 PM
So you tell me: what is the truth about the WMD?

What I know is that there are none. You imply that that is incorrect.

What are your sources in the armed forces telling you?

Jo Vale Tudo
14th September 04, 04:59 PM
Uhm those Democrats above are legitimate sources. I guess you can ask those soldiers and Kurds who ARE THERE. Did we find any active Weapons of Mass Destruction when we got there and fought Saddam? No. Do we know if they were destroyed, move, or sold? No. So what do we know? We know he's used them against his own people. We know he's had them before. We know he also detests the United States of America. By the way, Libya themselves SENT US their weapons and abandoned their projects after what they saw happened to Saddam. Does that say anything?

You can't use conspiracy theories, heresay and innuendo's when making criticism against your President and specially against your own country.

Jo Vale Tudo
14th September 04, 05:01 PM
By the way, my sources of the armed forces telling me were in the media, live on the news, in their own words saying that you only see 10% of what happens in Iraq in the news.

Dochter
14th September 04, 05:32 PM
No one is arguing that he had them. That would be dumb. The issue is that Bush made the centerpiece of the case for war the immediate risk saddam and his WMD's . It was also pretty clearly implied that Sasddam had operational ties to al queda.

Subsequent to the removal of Saddam there has been zero substantiation for those claims.

LOVED2BLOVED
14th September 04, 05:58 PM
Originally posted by Dochter
No one is arguing that he had them. That would be dumb. The issue is that Bush made the centerpiece of the case for war the immediate risk saddam and his WMD's . It was also pretty clearly implied that Sasddam had operational ties to al queda.

Subsequent to the removal of Saddam there has been zero substantiation for those claims.

futher backed up by powells latest confession..
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2004-09/14/content_1978753.htm

SRK85
14th September 04, 07:18 PM
Tou have to remeber the news only shows the bad things. Good things never ever get mentioned.

Dochter
14th September 04, 07:34 PM
Originally posted by Dochter
It is indeed unfortunate that "posititve" information isn't more widely distributed. Whether or not it fits the working definition of "news" is a different discussion. Start another thread if that's really what you want to talk about.

DANINJA
17th September 04, 07:46 AM
this doesnt sound like good news:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3661588.stm

wakinonioi
18th September 04, 08:29 AM
Originally posted by PeedeeShaolin
Now Iraq is WORSE than before and at the cost of our servicemen..

bullshit.

Freddy
20th September 04, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by wakinonioi
bullshit.

Oh Wow! Another intelligent post of yours.

How about something with substance for a change.

Leodom
27th September 04, 10:40 AM
Update -- Additional good news from Iraq. Apparently it's not just US journalists who report only the bad news from Iraq, Arab news does the same. After reading this article I can only conclude that life is better for the average Iraqi now than it was prior to the war. Teachers are paid more, schools are being refurbished, Iraqis have access to international communications

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110005676

Fawzia, a 36-year old teacher, says: "On the positive side, we saw an increase in our incomes. Teachers, too, have enjoyed a rise in their salaries, with the result that the practice of private tutoring is on the decline. Teachers now do want to teach and look after their pupils. Among other positive developments have been the refurbishment of school buildings, the printing of new school textbooks and the provision of free stationary to pupils. The cost of food is lower now too and we are now free to say what we want to criticize without fear."

It is a long article with many links to supporting articles. If you really want to find out what good is happening in Iraq, this is an excellent place to start. If you don't give a sh1t about whatever "good" is happening in Iraq, don't bother.

garbanzo
27th September 04, 03:56 PM
Not only that, but we're teaching the Kurds to play baseball.

http://news.bostonherald.com/international/view.bg?articleid=45009

Makes me proud.

Leodom
30th September 04, 04:42 PM
Here is another article on some good news from Iraq and some information on the influence of a relatively small number of protestors. What really pissed me off is this paragraph:

''The Najaf shrine HUNDREDS of dead women and children were brought out after Sadr left,'' Rose wrote. ''They (Sadr's supporters) rounded them up during the battle and brought them in to be executed. Why? Because they anticipated the Americans would eventually enter the shrine and walk into a media ambush. We never went in. The people of Najaf love us right now because of that. They hate Sadr and want him dead.

''Have you heard that one yet (in the media)?''

No we haven't. We just get one side. That's bad journalism


Here is the article:
http://tennessean.com/opinion/columnists/chavez/archives/04/09/58605956.shtml?Element_ID=58605956

SRK85
30th September 04, 05:56 PM
Heres some more good news 30 children dead. Wow what a great thing we have done. We totally fucked Iraq in the ass.

Leodom
30th September 04, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by SRK85
Heres some more good news 30 children dead. Wow what a great thing we have done. We totally fucked Iraq in the ass.

That subject has it's own thread already. If you had read the article or even the previous post, you would see what kind of maniacs we're dealing with in Iraq. In case you didn't understand, they brought in and killed hundreds of women and children so that when the Americans went in after Al Sadr, the media would be able to show the "100s of women and children killed by US troops" Their plan backfired because US Troops didn't go in.

and to remind you, it's the insurgents, the terrorists who killed 30 children, NOT US troops. The ENEMY killed them.

SRK85
30th September 04, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by Leodom
That subject has it's own thread already. If you had read the article or even the previous post, you would see what kind of maniacs we're dealing with in Iraq. In case you didn't understand, they brought in and killed hundreds of women and children so that when the Americans went in after Al Sadr, the media would be able to show the "100s of women and children killed by US troops" Their plan backfired because US Troops didn't go in.

and to remind you, it's the insurgents, the terrorists who killed 30 children, NOT US troops. The ENEMY killed them.

I know I shouldnt have gone and posted that in this thread my bad.