The War Thread

moneyp · March-21st-2003, 01:04 AM

It is a bitch, isn't it? War, I mean.

Resume griping here!

Tom Storer · March-21st-2003, 03:54 AM

This morning they're saying Saddam H may have been hurt in the "decapitation" strike, and that even if he wasn't, others may have been hit and the regime could be in disarray. Hence the delay on the "shock and awe" massive bombing. Apparently if the Iraqi leadership is not in effective control of armed response, the massive bombing may not be necessary. Fingers crossed.

Ron Thorne · March-21st-2003, 04:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tom Storer
This morning they're saying Saddam H may have been hurt in the "decapitation" strike, and that even if he wasn't, others may have been hit and the regime could be in disarray. Hence the delay on the "shock and awe" massive bombing. Apparently if the Iraqi leadership is not in effective control of armed response, the massive bombing may not be necessary. Fingers crossed.

Yeah, Tom, I heard something similar. In fact, I also heard that long-term discussions between American military/intelligence sources and high-ranking Iraqi military leaders have escalated within the past few hours, with some news sources suggesting that there could be a breakthrough "surrender" of major proportions. In these intense, media-driven times, only time will tell, of course. One can always hope for a relatively speedy conclusion (so-to-speak) to this nightmare, however.

Uli · March-21st-2003, 10:06 AM

In related matter, I've read this morning that the EU is discussing to get their own military forces.

The world is steadily degressing under the leadership of Youknowhat.

RainyDay · March-21st-2003, 03:36 PM

I heard the first soldier, a marine was killed. More soldiers were killed in our crappy military aircraft last night. You know, "60 Minutes" has done many stories about the helicopters that keep crashing. Supporting the troops should at least include giving them hardware that won't kill them.

I have a friend who has two sons in the marines in Iraq. She's opposed to the war and when I called her this morning, she was just beside herself.

Monte Smith · March-21st-2003, 04:40 PM

Here's to hoping this is over quick and with minimum damage, collateral or otherwise. My peeps in Saudi Arabia say there is a lot of jet traffic, but otherwise all calm. They are civilians working in the oil biz, and I worry about them as much as I worry about my active duty peeps in Kuwait (probably not there anymore, but on the move) and on the high seas.

By the way--Lois, love the new features. Thanks very much for your hard work!

patricia · March-21st-2003, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RainyDay
I heard the first soldier, a marine was killed. More soldiers were killed in our crappy military aircraft last night. You know, "60 Minutes" has done many stories about the helicopters that keep crashing. Supporting the troops should at least include giving them hardware that won't kill them.

I have a friend who has two sons in the marines in Iraq. She's opposed to the war and when I called her this morning, she was just beside herself.

That occurred to me as well, considering that the Patriot is once again protecting our troops from scud missels, that the Patriot had between 0% and 4% success rate. This was contrary to the 100% success rate that Schwartzkopf was crowing about. The manufacturer of the Patriot is once again supplying this missel, slightly modified and the success rate is approximately 10%.
This company, "Raytheon" is the front-runner in developing the missel interception devices etc. for the revived "Star Wars" defence system, being touted by this administration.
The interesting thing is that even with evidence from an independant rocket scientist, from MIT, the government still believed that the Patriot is a magic bullet.
Our troops should sure feel safer, knowing that the intercepting missel is just slightly more useful than a slice of cheese.

RainyDay · March-21st-2003, 07:48 PM

Today is the second day of demonstrations in SF and there is a raging debate about it. Our offices are adjacent to Civic Center and yesterday we watched a police drama unfold outside our windows for most of the afternoon. They arrested busload after busload of demonstrators. Today there are fewer demonstrators and they're mostly down in the Financial District.

I don't understand how you can be opposed to the war yet become so angry when others demonstrate against the war. People should be free to engage in civil disobedience or not. As long as the actions remain nonviolent, I'm fine with it. I just don't understand why people are so angry. Is it fear? Is it just people who oppose the war? People who claim to be anti war are just livid about the inconvenience. Maybe it's denial. The US is bombing the crap out of another country, and some would prefer not to have their lives impacted in any way by what's happening. I just don't get it.

catesta · March-21st-2003, 07:52 PM

Say what??

Monte Smith · March-21st-2003, 08:07 PM

Can we all AT LEAST agree that the SF protesters who forced themselves to vomit as a statement against the war are "anti-American pukes?"

Yuk yuk yuk.

I respect everybody's right to express their opinion, but that's just gross, man.

Marine Maj. David "Bull" Gurfein tears down a poster of Saddam Hussein in Safwan, Iraq:

Brian Olewnick · March-21st-2003, 08:32 PM

I was listening on the radio in the office to some of the news coverage this afternoon. The sense of excitement and, indeed, "coolness" in many of the reporters was pretty sickening. While I understand that, as near as we can tell, the strikes were done with a good deal of precision and I'm somewhat heartened by that, I'm reasonably certain that some untold number of innocent Iraqis were slaughtered today. It would be difficult for me to imagine reporting on the day's events and not stating that with some constancy. But of course, they're only Iraqis and don't count.

patricia · March-22nd-2003, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Brian Olewnick
I was listening on the radio in the office to some of the news coverage this afternoon. The sense of excitement and, indeed, "coolness" in many of the reporters was pretty sickening. While I understand that, as near as we can tell, the strikes were done with a good deal of precision and I'm somewhat heartened by that, I'm reasonably certain that some untold number of innocent Iraqis were slaughtered today. It would be difficult for me to imagine reporting on the day's events and not stating that with some constancy. But of course, they're only Iraqis and don't count.

Reports that no fewer than 1500 bombs were dropped on Bagdad, it is inconceivable that no civilians were killed. Of course, as you say, "...they're only Iraquis and don't count."
So terribly sad. And, after almost certain victory, considering the U.S.'s vastly superior to anyone's firepower, what then??
After bombing the dickens out of Iraq, who's going to put the country back together?? And what of the Turks, defying everone's orders, who are advancing into Northern Iraq?
The rest of the Middle East is not quite as jubilant as the newscasters are. Calls for revenge from the people of the Arab states, encouraging suicide bombers to avenge the American/British attack on Iraq, denouncing it as Western Imperialism. This is only page one.

Tom Storer · March-22nd-2003, 05:24 AM

The contrast between the images of peaceful Western demonstrations and what is going on in the Middle East is instructive. In Egypt, Yemen, Turkey, etc., anti-American protest is directed at the national governments for not opposing the war, and police and demonstrators mix it up with considerable violence. Four demonstrators died in Yemen. This is supposed to help America's influence in the world? By undermining repressive, authoritarian allies to the benefit of anti-American, pro-Islamic-fundamentalist parties? Oh, I forgot - once Iraq shines as a prosperous, unified democracy, it will serve as a model to all those other countries, who will choose America because of their consumer goods. Or something.

Ron Thorne · March-22nd-2003, 05:53 AM

I can identify with the images of our servicemen defacing the likeness of Saddam Hussein as they roll through Iraq. I can identify with the images of the petrified, overlooked, impoverished, repressed Iraqis, some of whom are singing and dancing in the streets of villages as American and UK troops pass through.

Sadly, I can also identify with the following image. Monte may not like this one, though I'm sure he's seen it.

On the other hand ...

frankpop1 · March-22nd-2003, 06:25 AM

go bush!

Jimmy Cantiello · March-22nd-2003, 09:13 AM

People who use phrases like "our crappy military aircraft" don't know what they're talking about............

catesta · March-22nd-2003, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jimmy Cantiello
People who use phrases like "our crappy military aircraft" don't know what they're talking about............

Makes you wonder what they said and did while the previous administration attempted to dismantle the military.

tippy · March-22nd-2003, 12:59 PM

I can understand why the phrase "crappy military aircraft" offends, but the point remains for me that we have collectively put enough money into defense for our guys not to be riding around in 35-year old aircraft that have previously been known to be less than sound. (Or that's how I heard it, even on the conservative stations.)

There's no worries of further military dismantling since nations will now be building their arms up worldwide probably at an alarming rate.

Monte Smith · March-22nd-2003, 01:00 PM

Honestly, Ron. What is it you think you know about me that would lead you to suspect that I wouldn't appreciate the *brilliant* graphic that you put up? [Which was passed around weeks ago in my office]. My favorite parts are the picture of Cheney and Saddam's belly.

Interesting snippet from a UPI report:

"A group of American anti-war demonstrators who came to Iraq with Japanese human shield volunteers made it across the border today with 14 hours of uncensored video, all shot without Iraqi government minders present. Kenneth Joseph, a young American pastor with the Assyrian Church of the East, told UPI the trip "had shocked me back to reality." Some of the Iraqis he interviewed on camera "told me they would commit suicide if American bombing didn't start. They were willing to see their homes demolished to gain their freedom from Saddam's bloody tyranny.""

Source: By Arnaud de Borchgrave
UPI Editor at Large
From the International Desk
Published 3/21/2003 2:46 PM

tippy · March-22nd-2003, 01:13 PM

Just a thought. Aren't all the richest Arab nations going to be generating nuclear arms now? All international agreements are off now, right?

catesta · March-22nd-2003, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tippy
I can understand why the phrase "crappy military aircraft" offends, but the point remains for me that we have collectively put enough money into defense for our guys not to be riding around in 35-year old aircraft that have previously been known to be less than sound.

That sounds good, but it's not reality.

Clinton put us way behind the eight ball.

http://www.freecongress.org/commenta...2/021205PW.asp

Uli · March-22nd-2003, 01:36 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by catesta
[B]

Clinton put us way behind the eight ball.

Sounds like the usual Repub Clinton whining to me.
Do you really think those bombs are that much more precise now than in 91 because your leader has been in the office for 2 years and despite 8 years of the hated Clinton? Or, is the precision thing just another lie?

Catesta, do you really think we are underarmed?

tippy · March-22nd-2003, 02:06 PM

Catesta, I think the funds were probably stretched disproportionately by defense contractors. Even granting that research is important, I think making certain our troops have safe transportation probably could have been provided for in the defense budget which has taken up by far the largest chunk of our taxes for decades now.

Also, Bush Deserted his military service. This article from October 2002 brings up Clinton's service evasion without addressing Bush's law-breaking in this regard. It's terrific spin. But it's not balanced.

catesta · March-22nd-2003, 02:20 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Uli
[B]

Quote:

Originally posted by catesta

Sounds like the usual Repub Clinton whining to me.

Timeless, isn't it? ( ;

Underarmed? I'm not sure.

Did Clinton cause problems for the military? Yes.
Part of the trouble we still experience today is a shortage of simple spare parts for existing equipment.
That is a serious issue, and one that Clinton ignored.

I did not say Clinton collasped the entire military in 8 years.
What I am saying is that he did not do enough.
Let us not forget what we are using now is in most cases technology that was developing prior to Clinton. It often takes years to materialize into a reality.

Sure technical progress was made during the 8 years before Bush, but what did Clinton ever show support for?

Obviously two years is not enough time for anyone to turn around this problem, so no, I am not giving Bush immdetiate credit.

Salvador Dali Lama · March-22nd-2003, 02:21 PM

We have the best military helicopters in the world.......... thats why soldiers call them "Shithooks" right?

moneyp · March-22nd-2003, 02:24 PM

So then who HAS the best military helicopters in the world? Maybe the whole "rotor blade" method of military travel just doesn't work as well as it should.

tippy · March-22nd-2003, 02:37 PM

I just found it odd that we are using 30+ year old air transport. That's really the only point I wished to make.

I also wish to express my sympathy to the people who are no longer waiting for friends, family to come home.

catesta · March-22nd-2003, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Salvador Dali Lama
We have the best military helicopters in the world..........

I doubt anyone making that statement today would be referring to a helicopter that old.

Yes, the helicopter named the "Chinook" was known in slang terms as the "shithook" or just "hook." That goes back to Vietnam.

Correct me of I'm wrong, but that term had nothing to do with it's lack of capabilities.

Monte Smith · March-22nd-2003, 02:58 PM

I love to visit my wife at work and check out the Chinooks on Fort Lewis. They are *shocking and awesome* machines indeed.

Hey! Whirly-birds might be the only piece of military equipment that you can't compare to a penis! No matter how impressed you are by sophisticated Freudian headshrinking of the military mind, I challenge any self-impressed peacenik to suggest that effective combat helicopters are phallic symbols like every other piece of equipment seems to be to their fraudulent way of thinking.

"This is my penis
this is my gunship.
One is for shooting
the other's for funship."

March-22nd-2003, 03:48 PM

The tremendous turnout at today's anti-war protest makes me proud to be a New Yorker. This time, Bloomberg did not succeed in disrupting things.