Battle for Baqubah

[Michael Tee]

<<Gotta love the rationalization efforts>>  [my attempt to point out that as repulsive as the al Qaeda torture manual may be, there is nothing in there that wasn't first used by U.S. -sponsored death squads in El Salvador and Guatemala.  Or for that matter by U.S.-backed dictators in Argentina and Chile.]


What I "gotta love" is sirs' asinine attempts to claim moral superiority over al Qaeda when both his cause and theirs belong together in the same moral cesspool.

[Michael Tee]

<<The Associated Press' dispatches focused on U.S. casualties: "U.S. military says 15 American troops killed in last 48 hours." CNN ran with: "12 U.S. troops killed in Iraq in 48 hours." The New York Times headline read: "14 U.S. Troops Killed in Iraq in 2 Days."

<<Surprisingly, only Reuters seemed to get what was going on. Its headline said: "U.S. troops set trap for militants near Baghdad.">>

I think maybe AP and CNN realize that the dead U.S. soldiers are gone for good, but the "trapped militants" are easily replaced.  They will go on fighting as long as they are occupied by fascists who have come to steal their oil and enslave them under puppet governments like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan.

<<Never mind that the aforementioned headlines don't seem to agree on the number of deaths. What needs to be said is this is one of the war's largest operations to date, and perhaps the most significant. If successful, it could push al-Qaida out of Iraq. It also might lay the groundwork for an eventual war-ending peace.>>

Oh yeah.  That'll happen.

[BT]

Oh yeah.  That'll happen.

Why not?

[sirs]

<<Gotta love the rationalization efforts>>

What I "gotta love" is sirs' asinine attempts to claim moral superiority over al Qaeda when both his cause and theirs belong together in the same moral cesspool.

The cesspool of course being the asanine notion that AlQeada and the U.S. are equivalent in both their intentions & actions

[Michael Tee]

<<The cesspool of course being the asanine notion that AlQeada and the U.S. are equivalent in both their intentions & actions>>

I'd say the U.S. is actually worse because they know better.

[sirs]

<<The cesspool of course being the asanine notion that AlQeada and the U.S. are equivalent in both their intentions & actions>>

I'd say the U.S. (those trying to bring democracy to a dictator run nation, who go out of their way to limit civilian casualties, and who will prosecute those they've determined abused thier positions, while in the military) is actually worse (than AlQeada, who openly target innocent women & children, will burn prisoners alive, and behead them for all to see, while giving high 5's to themselves) because they know better.

I rest my case.  Thanks Tee

[Michael Tee]

I realize that you quoted me accurately in the red-ink portions, sirs, but I disagree with the textual "clarifications" that you gratuitously inserted in between the red parts.  So thanks very much, but I'll do my own clarification of my own remarks, and here it is:

I'd say the U.S. (those trying to invade a Third World country and steal its oil, who have caused so far 600,000 fatal civilian casualties, and who will prosecute a few low-ranking scapegoats for the torture and murder of prisoners, allowing all the others and all the superior officers who knew or ought to have known about the torture and murder, and who still continue to torture prisoners held illegaly in torture chambers around the world, to get off scot-free) is actually worse (than AlQeada, who openly target innocent women & children, although killing them in far less numbers than their U.S. adversaries, will burn prisoners alive, although without the benefit of napalm or white phosphorus or similar material favoured by U.S. forces for burning people alive, and behead them for all to see, rather than beating them slowly to death, suffocating them in sleeping bags or raping them first, U.S.-style, while giving high 5's to themselves, which they also learned from Americans) because they know better.

Now, THAT'S more like it.

[BT]

because they know better.

Ah yes, the straw man about Americans being non violent genteel folk raises it's ugly head.

We kill each other for tennis shoes for crissakes.

We shoot each other for failure to use a turn signal.

Sometimes we kill each other because we don't like their looks.

so how come Americans are morally superior?

[Michael Tee]

<<Ah yes, the straw man about Americans being non violent genteel folk raises it's ugly head.

<<We kill each other for tennis shoes for crissakes.

<<We shoot each other for failure to use a turn signal.

<<Sometimes we kill each other because we don't like their looks. >>

Judge America by its lowest common denominator if you wish.  All countries have their violent criminals and in that sense are indistinguishable one from another.

Most normal, sane people in the world tended to judge America by its best - - from the preamble to the Declaration of Independence, to the Bill of Rights, to the Gettysburg Address, to FDR and the founding of the United Nations and the hopes for a new world without war and the rule of international law.  They respected a country which led the fight against fascism without stooping to the level of the fascists themselves.  Which respected human rights, even the rights of the prisoners they took in battle.  Which never stood accused of torture and murder of prisoners.

And America does know better.  Witness the Americans who have denounced torture, from Lanya right here in this column to Al Gore, who has issued one of the most eloquent denunciations of the criminal Bush regime that I have seen to date. 

<<so how come Americans are morally superior?>>

I never said they were morally superior.  I said their heritage was morally superior to their enemies' heritage.  They had better examples to follow.  That they have failed those examples is the tragedy.  It's also the measure of their moral inferiority.

[BT]

Judge America by its lowest common denominator if you wish.

Isn't that what you meant when you claimed the military was made up of low hanging fruit? And those who commit these atrocities are in the military are they not? So why should they know better?

[Michael Tee]

<<So why should they know better?>>

Leadership, BT.  It's called leadership.  Something that's pathetically inadequate in the present administration.  You can't expect people who function at the moral level of a snake or  lower to set any kind of example for the lower ranks, now, can you?

[sirs]

I realize that you quoted me accurately in the red-ink portions, sirs, but I disagree with the textual "clarifications" that you gratuitously inserted in between the red parts.  So thanks very much, but I'll do my own clarification of my own remarks, and here it is:

I'd say the U.S. (those trying to invade a Third World country and steal its oil, who have caused so far 600,000 fatal civilian casualties, and who will prosecute a few low-ranking scapegoats for the torture and murder of prisoners, allowing all the others and all the superior officers who knew or ought to have known about the torture and murder, and who still continue to torture prisoners held illegaly in torture chambers around the world, to get off scot-free) is actually worse (than AlQeada, who openly target innocent women & children, although killing them in far less numbers than their U.S. adversaries, will burn prisoners alive, although without the benefit of napalm or white phosphorus or similar material favoured by U.S. forces for burning people alive, and behead them for all to see, rather than beating them slowly to death, suffocating them in sleeping bags or raping them first, U.S.-style, while giving high 5's to themselves, which they also learned from Americans) because they know better.

Now, THAT'S (Tee's tee leaf delusional opinion on how evil the American military and the U.S. are, and the associated invalid & unsubstantiated rationalizations) more like it.

Yea, that is more like it.  You'll let us know when we start high fiving and giving medals to those who behead and burn people alive, k?       

[BT]

Leadership, BT.  It's called leadership.  Something that's pathetically inadequate in the present administration.  You can't expect people who function at the moral level of a snake or  lower to set any kind of example for the lower ranks, now, can you?

The leadership is of the people also. Duly elected twice. And all throughout the chain of miltary command, staffed by sons and daughters of america.

Again why should they know better. Why are they morally superior to their AQ counterparts. Seems almost patronizing to assume Muslim counterparts are not up to the high moral plain  that you insist Americans should hold to.

[Amianthus]

The leadership is of the people also. Duly elected twice. And all throughout the chain of miltary command, staffed by sons and daughters of america.

69% of the American public has confidence in the military. Compared to 14% that have confidence in Congress.

http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/16252

[Michael Tee]

<<You'll let us know when we start high fiving and giving medals to those who behead and burn people alive, k? >>

Yeah sure I'll let you know.  It's already happened. 

Ask that schmuck John McCain who all that napalm he dropped landed on.  Find out how many decorations were given out for bathing Falluja in willie peter.  And ask anyone what bomb or shell your Army uses that kills people without beheading them.