In Iraq, a perilous alliance with former enemies »
Posted by: jimstaro 1 year ago116 Comments Report this Story
"Who do you trust? Who do you not trust?" said Balcavage, commander of the 1st Battalion, 505th Parachute Infantry Regiment of the 82nd Airborne Division, his voice dipping out of earshot.
Read Full Story at msnbc.msn.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 116
-
-
-
0%
AnteUp1 year ago
Mornin' Miles Away ~
Pretty much. I didn't see mention of the tactics we allow
them to use, that would be "sweeps" of the populace, then
torture and roadside killings.
It was revealed months ago that we are paying Sunni militias
in LEBANON who are supporters of? You guessed it...al-Qaeda!
That was in a New Yorker article by Seymour Hersh but you
didn't hear anything about it past one appearance on CNN
the week it was to hit the stands. Then? NO press coverage.
One more time: 1,2,3,4.......WHAT ARE WE FIGHTIN' FOR???
Reply-
0%
MilesAway1 year ago
Good evening to you too "AnteUp" (21:16 Chinese Standard Time).
Sorry, I didn't heard anything here in China, because Chinese government imposed press censure too (just like our own)...
Can you be so kindly and post any link so I can read it?
Thank you and keep your "crusade" by making so exceptionally realistic comments in many posts.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
Goppy1 year ago
Im surprised at you ANC!
Ill have no more talk bout bringin the troops home!!
Thars still a lot of money for them private corporations to make!!
Good ole boy GW is primin the pump of our economy by spendin $10 Billion a month in Iraq!!
I bet at least 1 cent on ever $10 dollors comes back into our economic recirculation!!
Donchu believe in bein entrapernureal?
Reply
-
-
0%
Goppy1 year ago
You know, you liberals got this all rong.
The insipred policy of Goerge W. Bush and Dick Cheney is purporsely confusin.
I believes Goerge W. Bush is exhibitin total ineptitued and grooss lack of gud judgement for one gud reason -
To fullfill his ultimate goal of privatizin the military!
Personally, I thinks my buddy Goerge wuz really embarrased at how easily our military done its job topplin Bagdad. They wuz amazin!!
So Goerge, Dick, and Donny had to switch over to nation buildin! Cause its near to impossible to nation build a country as divided as Iraq. I mean, lets face facts, a Sunni is more liekly to join forces with a Sheite than a Christian Conservative is to join the ACLU!
So thar you have it!!
Thats why GW is givin all them no bid contracts to private companys.
Its called free market poeple! Our GW believes in free markets!
Military aint no exception!!
Why a soldier can make 10 times as much doin goverment work as they can workin for Dark Water!!
Reply -
0%
groingo1 year ago
It has never worked in the past, always we have would up fighting the very ones we trained in situations like this, A guy named Bin Laden comes to mind as does Sadam Husein who was provided material and knowhow to fight Iran and the list is endless.
American Government/Military, "stupid is as stupid does".
Reply -
0%
jimstaro1 year ago
groingo, you said similar to what I posted here: http://imagineaworldof.blogspot.com/2007/08/per... on just this reoccurring failed policies!
And you might want to view this:
How we create the Saddam's and bin Laden's:
"Thanks for the Memories"
http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html
Reply-
0%
Mr-opinion1 year ago
This country , since WWII have made a habbit of spending money emporing divtators, monarchs or other single entities to run countries 'as our friends' just so that 20 years later we can spend money to remove them and start the cycle all over, how else do you justify 1/3 of a nations GNP goint to military budget............ Don't expect it to change on its own
Reply
-
-
0%
wallyone1 year ago
american foreign policy has never failed to fail.. practically every country which has a problem, yeh i know not every one, has had american intervention before the problems began.
iran, iraq, panama, vietnam, guatemala, cuba and the list goes on.. add your favorite country to the list..
Reply-
0%
libsRfunny1 year ago
"american foreign policy has never failed to fail.. practically every country which has a problem, yeh i know not every one, has had American intervention before the problems began."
Yeah, Western Europe sure turned out .. oh ,wait, did way better than Eastern Europe under the USSR.
And, Japan ... Oh, wait, Japan is an economic power.
But, South Korea!!! .... Oh, wait, South Korea is doing pretty damn well, too. Way better than those pesky North Koreans.
Ooooh .. wait! Kuwait!!! Yeah Kuwait... Oh, sorry, I guess Kuwait wound up pretty good thanks to U.S. intervention.
Well, I guess you just don't know what you are talking about.
Reply-
0%
wallyone1 year ago
you mean kuwait where the americans said they wouldn't intervene if hussein went after kuwait for angle drilling and then were in on the lies surrounding bayonetting babies and other evil deeds.. all the while the kuwaities did nothing for themselves.. but the good ol USA went in and killed thousands on the highway of death.. i think you don't know what you are talking about .. sounds like you are cherry picking to me.. if it were not for the korean war perhaps they would now be functioning like vietnam.. they are doing way better off now that the USA were driven out and the country was united.
Reply -
0%
blowback1 year ago
> South Korea is doing pretty damn well, too. Way better than those pesky North Koreans.
.
Firstly, you take far too much credit for Europe.
Secondly, Japan is in almost every sense except title
a US colony.
Kuwait. Well there you go. You found a tropy to hang
on the wall. A cherry to pick. But the picture is not
the perfect one you paint. (refer wallyone's comment).
And you neglect the consequences of that, and other
interventions that continue today and will continue for
generations to come.
The fact that you mention both North and South Korea
but fail to recognize that the use of North and South
is that of a Korean nation divided by us and has yet
to be resolved is evidence of not only the failure of US
foreign policy, but that you just don't know what you
are talking about.
Reply -
0%
Mr-opinion1 year ago
Korea is doing it dispite the US, Kuwait was fine on it's own and sue isn't any better than before (we left the same misserable monarc in charge), but lets check on that list:
Panama (Noriega was our man), Vietnam (heck we did wonders), Iran * we back the hell out of the Shah), Iraq (we gave sadam billions), Philipines (now recovering), Cuba (Yes we put him there - indirectly), on the fringe Sudan ...... and the list goes on and on
Western Europe (actually only aplies to germany, doesn't it) and Japan, had their own plans and concepts, and the US gave them money... Our failures is every place we chose to support, or empower / install a dictator
Now lets discuss who doen't have a clue - do you actually think, or just revel in pro USA propaganda
Reply
-
-
0%
blowback1 year ago
> american foreign policy has never failed to fail.
.
Since 1945 - China, Italy, Greece, The Philippines, Korea,
Albania, Germany, Indonesia, , British Guyana, Vietnam,
Cambodia, The Congo, Zaire, Brazil, Dominican Republic,
Cuba, Chile, East Timor, Nicaragua, Grenada, Libya, Panama,
Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, El Salvador, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, and many
times more than once.
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/US_Inter...
Also not to be forgotten, Diego Garcia, an island in the middle
of the Indian Ocean.
The British uprooted the indigenous people of Diego Garcia
and transplanted them to the Maldives and elsewhere.
The island is now rented by Britain to the US and is used
as a strategic military base for further control of Africa, SE Asia,
the Subcontinent and the Middle East.
It's resort-style living.
The indigenous people of Diego are now suing Britain for the theft
of their homeland and the abduction of their people.
Reply
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.10 Replies
-
0%
HistoricallyCorrect1 year ago
You know, it's funny. I remember when we gave weapons to another Middle Eastern group we thought to be the lesser of two evils. Anybody else remember when we supplied Osama bin Laden? My memory's a little fuzzy, but can anyone tell me how that worked out for us?
Reply-
0%
schmirt1 year ago
Nearly all support for Bin Laden was from Saudi Arabians. I guess it would have been more noble on our part to let the Soviets continue to slaughter the Afghans. The tragedy of Afghanistan was due to neglect and denial through the 90's...thank you Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton.
Jimmy Carter loses Iran. I wonder how that turned out? Reagan withdrew from Lebanon after terrorist hit. Did the terrorist threat go away?
You probably deny Iran became a big threat; we choose to counter it with Saddam (though less than 1% of his armaments were from U.S.).Saddam goes nuts anyway. In your world of pure choices, should we have instead invaded Iraq to depose Saddam before the horror that unfolded?
If one does not act, one may allow evil to flourish. If one does act, then naturally, there is risk of new problems.
I do more than agree with you on one thing: Your memory IS fuzzy...and selective.
Reply-
0%
HistoricallyCorrect1 year ago
America gave billions of dollars of weapons to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan. Although I admit that my wording makes it appear that they give it directly to Osama, it would be wrong to assume he didn't benefit from it. Also, our intervention in Afghanistan had absolutely nothing to do with the interests of the Afghans. As much as I would love to believe we were helping the little guy, our politicians didn't care what happened to these people as long as the Soviets didn't have them. If we had really cared, the Taliban wouldn't have ever gotten into power.
I don't deny or confirm that Iran became a big threat, mostly because I'm not sure what point in time you're talking about. I assume you mean in the late 70's/80's in which case I'm not sure I agree. If our government saw them as such a big threat during this time, I would ask you, why did they give them so much aid during the Iran-Iraq War?
Reply -
0%
blowback1 year ago
> Jimmy Carter loses Iran.
.
Jimmy Carter did not 'lose' Iran.
Iran was not for him or the US to 'lose.'
Iran is a sovereign state, not a US colony.
Iran DID overthrow the US puppet, the Shah.
Iran DID have a revolution.
But no, Jimmy Carter did NOT 'lose' Iran.
It was never ours, and like other nations,
it shouldn't be.
Reply
-
0%
blowback1 year ago
> You know, it's funny. I remember when we gave weapons to another Middle Eastern group we thought to be the lesser of two evils. Anybody else remember when we supplied Osama bin Laden? My memory's a little fuzzy, but can anyone tell me how that worked out for us?
.
The same can be said of Saddam Hussein.
He was our man in our war with Iran.
It was called the Iran-Iraq War.
We provided arms. WMDs were used.
Many died.
Reply
-
-
0%
schmirt1 year ago
Critics lambast Bush for failing to seek a diplomatic solution with Iran/ Syria to atleast coorporate in the name of security in the middle east.
Military is charged to innovate, to split the opposition, gain alliances and even to coopt those we had conflict with. Now the critics think it is awful to employ tactics beyond violence and bombs to gain advantage?
Critics claim the leadership has disregarded political solutions and diplomacy and yet lambast it for seeking cooporation from Saudi Arabia ( a country that is internally embroiled with many who are avowed enemies us the U.S.).
Critics cry foul about an administration that interferes with the soveriegnty rights of other countries and still shriek because US does not invade Pakistan to get Bin Laden.
We supported Stalin of the USSR against the Nazi and we still had a 50 year conflict with them after WWII.
Many in the world hate us as much for not doing things as much as they hate us if we do.
So much for nuance.
Reply-
0%
Goppy1 year ago
You are so right smirty!!
Why is everbody dumpin on us!!??
Dont everbody know we is simply tryin to make this a safer world for Haliburton?!
Its called synknronisity. goverment fights battles the world over for unfettered corporate freedom.
I guess the only difference is that we used ta just collect business taxes on corporations after we made markets safe for em. You know, collected on the back end.
In Iraq, we dont collect taxes. In fact, we pay corporations for the honor of havin our soldiers die with honor. And we pay, and we pay!!
Thats whut I lieks about us Christian Conservatives so much! We are so generous to corporations with our tax money!!
Mountains may crumble, and bridges may fall, but Im still gonna fight for corporations to reduce their tax burden.
Cause corporations are like a corporation.
See, God is the CEO, Jesus is the presdient, and the Holy Spirit is in charge of HR.
Reply -
-
0%
Mr-opinion1 year ago
Never blind consent for what "OUR' government does, but maybe quit trying to tell all others in the world how to run their lives, and whats good for them if we can't get our own act in proper motion at home.
Encurrage, support - selectivly of course - but I love how we are willing to kill millions, to stop someone from killing thousands in their own autonomous country.
Reply
-
0%
MRCOFFEECAKE1 year ago
If things are worse NOW than ever..and they are,
then why are we repaeating the stupid
practices that caused it, like a bunch of dumb monkeys.
We fight against our own weapons in Afganistan and
Iraq, and you still favor giving OUR weapons to the very
people who can hand them over to AlQuaida once we leave because we have armed them?
Why don't we just cut out the middle man and give them directly to AlQuaida..
Haven't we learned ANYTHING??
Reply
-
