Fallujah predicted to be the biggest urban battle since Hue, TET OFFENSIVE

[Dems Will Win]

We did not really have the urban streetfighting when we invaded Iraq. It's going to be the biggest urban warfare since Hue and the TET Offensive of 1968! (on CNN)

We are going to kill everything and utterly destroy Fallujah from this report. We are really going to let them have it for mutilating those 4 Americans:

US officer threatens to turn Fallujah into “a killing field”

By James Conachy
23 April 2004

An unnamed senior American officer told yesterday’s New York Times that the US forces besieging the predominantly Sunni Muslim Iraqi city of Fallujah could turn it into “a killing field in a couple of days”. The statement, filled with murderous intent, is only one of the more chilling indications that the Bush administration has ordered the military to drown the city of 300,000 in blood and make it an example of what will happen in other areas of Iraq if the three-week uprising against the US occupation continues.

-snip-

The ceasefire itself has been an utter travesty. Its main purpose from the standpoint of the US military was not to negotiate a “peaceful solution,” but to kill as many defenders as possible while at the same time boosting the US forces around the city.

-snip-

The Wall Street Journal editorial of April 20 is a case in point. Declaring Fallujah had to be “cleared out as a terrorist sanctuary” and condemning the ceasefire, it warned the White House: “The fastest way for Mr. Bush to lose support at home would be if Americans see soldiers restrained from doing what it takes to win by UN statements or political control. That’s when his own base begins to walk.”

A murderous logic is at work in Iraq. Having staked so much on the conquest of the oil-rich and geo-politically strategic country, as part of a broader agenda of global domination, US imperialism is signalling it cannot and will not retreat. The entire discussion within the political establishment, from both Republican and Democratic quarters, revolves around sending more troops, allocating more finances to the war and crushing the Iraqi uprising.


-snip-

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/apr2004/iraq-a23.shtml

This will shore up Bush's base but horrify the swing. It's a real gamble for Bush, but the only one his diminutive brain can come up with. There will be a real body-count of Americans from such close fighting.

Bush blew it by never focusing aid and security on Fallujah and Ramadi. This was very predictable. He only knows how to spell one word. O-I-L.

[Edgewater_Joe]

1. No No -- Dear God, No

I know where my prayers are going to be tomorrow ...

[Skittles]

2. this won't create thousands of new terrorists

absolutely not. :o

[porkrind]

3. OMG! The whole world will hate us if we do this!

It will be a massacre, and the whole world will know it for what it is.

This is so wrong. Pictures and news stories need to get out about this. The average American and people in other countries need to find out about this ASAP.

---

Read about the Right-Wing "Master Plan": http://www.zmag.org/chomsky/sam/sam-contents.html

[maggrwaggr]

46. too late! they hate us now!

They already feel we're a bigger threat to the world than terrorism.

Ooops!

[alittlelark]

4. Are they really that evil.............

.....I sincerely hope not. I keep on hoping that they will find that tiny soul they have left. I keep on getting disappointed. I am an Atheist, but will 'pray' for all involved.

If this happens we will CERTAINLY be guilty of war crimes (if we are not already).
:spank: :cry:

[bpilgrim]

5. America's Nanking?

Nanjing Massacre: 300,000 Chinese People Killed, 20,000 Women Raped ...
http://journalism.missouri.edu/~jschool/nanking/

peace

[rockymountaindem]

7. That is a horrible comparison!

No, no, no...

The rape of Nanking involved approx. 300,000 deaths, 600,000 rapes, and mass murder by beheading, firing squad and live burial. That will not happen in Fallujah. I don't see our guys going on any "beheading contests" or using live Iraqis for bayonet practice. I also doubt we will use mustard gas.

I don't usually put people down like this, but that was one dumb thing to say.

[bpilgrim]

9. same thing the imperial japanese said

and looks like there was a lot of war time propaganda involved looking back but i stand by my comparison and as a matter of fact would say our behavior as a whole in the me bears a remarkable resemblance to imperial japans in asia... remember when they were bring their version of democracy and prosperity to asia... fighting the 'TERRORIST' even had 'illegal combatants' and all.

they had a hell of a time picking the terrorist out of the crowd but once you were picked it was often execution after a military tribunal if not on the spot.

think of what our snipers are doing right now.

it's a fair comparison, imo, but i would be willing to debate/discuss it further with anyone who is interested.

peace

[rockymountaindem]

14. Say one thing you expect our troops to do in Fallujah

that will reflect the Japanese atrocities in Nanking. "Killing civilians" doesn't count. If the US kills 10,000 civilians then we'll talk, but seriously, our troops aren't in there to kill everyone, just armed insurgents. There's a big difference. If we just wanted to kill all the Iraqis I'm sure we could have buried half the country by now, even without WMD.

[bpilgrim]

17. MURDER INOCENT CIVILIANS INDISCRIMATELY. hows that?

and YES civilians COUNT!

when we are killing MORE CIVILIANS than 'bad guys' we got a PROBLEM.

now, lets just see how this plays out but considering we were willing to kill 3 million vietnamese back then and now we got the neCONs at the helm it doesn't look good for the iraqis.

peace

[rockymountaindem]

20. I do not think that our troops will go out there thinking

"how many women and children can I kill today?" the way the Japanese did in Nanking. That's the difference. It's easy to kill civilians by accident, but it's way easier to kill them on purpose. You're really stretching it. No way our troops are going to just wipe out thousands and thousands of people on purpose.

[Redleg]

23. I agree but what do I know, having only served in combat arms for

5 years and leading the same kinds of soldiers. Yes, warfare can bring out both the best and the worst in people but I have confidence in the soldiers that they will not intentionally target non-combatants. The problem is that war is messy and innocents will be killed by both sides.

[bpilgrim]

28. oh, so it depends on what your thinking before you kill'em

that matters?

sure, watever...

and if you believe thats what the japanese grunts were thinking then there is probablt no point discussing this further with you if you want to stick with the cartoon world view.

psst... we've already killed THOUSANDS of iraqis... HUNDREDS of thousands depending on what year you start keeping score from.

and so it goes...


peace

[Redleg]

32. Sure it matter what your intentions are.

We don't simply judge right and wrong by the consequences of our action. That would be a cartoon world-view.

[bpilgrim]

34. stealing their natural oil resources doesn't seem to help our case

:shrug:

peace

[Redleg]

37. I agree but I am talking about the intentions of the soldiers, not of Bush

and the top brass.

I agree that there is a high potential for many civilian casualties in Fallujah should we attempt to neutralize it. I just can't envision our troops raping and pillaging. Yes, a few troops may have a screw come loose and do something bad but I believe that most of the troops are decent folks. I served with many decent folks during my 5 years in the Army.

[Arianrhod]

48. "We don't simply judge right and wrong by the consequences of our action."

What do you judge it by, then?

I'm not sure this statement is what you meant it to be. Would you mind clarifying your position, please?

[Redleg]

68. The consequences are only part of how we judge ethicality.

Intentions are also important, as is a concern for distributive and procedural justice and the recognition of human rights.

In almost every action we can take harm can follow, no matter how carefully we weigh the rights of people and justice. For example, a physician may work to his/her utmost to diagnose a disorder in a patient and then, with the intention of treating the disorder, give the patient a medication that causes the patient to get sicker or to die. If we judge the physician only on the consequences of his/her action then we would say the physician acted incorrectly. Would that be fair to the physician?

Now I am not trying to suggest the Bush admin's screwed-up war in Iraq is the same as the physician example. I am just trying to illustrate the problems of relying simply on consequences to judge the rightness of an act. We could argue that Bush is bad for this country (and the world) but would it follow that removing him from office using any means available would also be correct? We can apply the same logic to the removal of Saddam. The Republicans try to tell us the war in Iraq is correct because it got Saddam out of power. The problem with that reasoning is that we could have reduced Saddam's power through less destructive means.

[rockymountaindem]

36. That's totally rediculous.

Yes, it matters what they're thinking. If I went into a room of 20 people looking to kill one guy, I'd probably just go for him. If I wanted to kill everyone, then I'd just throw a whole bunch of grenades in there and be done with it. You're making totally idiotic statements. You honestly don't see how wanting to kill civilians could lead to higher civilian casualities than wanting to avoid killing them? Don't insult my intelligence.

Furthermore, I'm not sticking to a "cartoon worldview" when I say that the Japanese soldiers in Nanking were hell-bent on killing as many Chinese civilians as the could. Why don't you do a little research on that tragedy before you go trying to defend the Japanese against the indefensible. They wanted death and destruction as much as the German Einsatzgruppen in Russia did. Explain how 600,000 people died in 6 weeks without the average Japanese soldier doing a whole shitload of killing every day.

[bpilgrim]

41. we are STEALING THEIR RESOURCES... hello

just like IMPERIAL JAPAN during wwII in china.

i am not defending imperial japan just pointing out the lessons of history.

btw: most sources i have read put the population of nanking at the time of the imperial armies capture of the citiy at around 200-250k so i doubt the army could kill more souls than even existed at the time but you know how unreliable and exagerated wartime propaganda can be... but please lets stick to the point - our actions and possible future actions in iraq.

peace

[rockymountaindem]

42. Could you point me at those sources?

I think the population of Nanking was 600K at the time. The Chinese estimate of deaths is 300k and the Japanese estimate (for those who are willing to admit that it even happened) is 200K.

[bpilgrim]

60. here you go...

http://www.japanesestudies.org.uk/articles/Askew.html

peace

[Athame]

67. and so it goes...

Just finished rereading Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse Five before I give it to my 19yo son. I had forgotten where that phrase came from.

The book reminded me that in the fire-bombing of Dresden in 1945, we roasted something like 135,000 people, using conventional weapons, and the American people did not even know about it for YEARS. (So, tell me again that an operation that killed 3,000 people could not be kept secret because it would involve too many...) The bombing of Dresden is still not remembered by most Americans when thinking of WWII.

By contrast, the (immediate) death toll in Hiroshima was 71,379, using the atomic bomb, and President Truman immediately went on the air to announce the USA's ability to "{harness} the basic power of the universe. the force from which the sun draws its power has been loosed against those who brought war to the Far East."

This is all a horrific power play, my friends. We are about to show the world once again that America is to be feared and we have no qualms about committing mass slaughter. We never have.

NOT IN OUR NAME!!!

[knight_of_the_star]

74. Here's the problem

For each innocent bystander caught in the crossfire is probably a dozen more new insurgents. And when you are fighting in built-up areas, I am willing to bet that a LOT of bystanders will get caught in the fighting.

[Malva Zebrina]

86. bbut didn't shock and awe do exactly that?

Did not our troops fire on and kill schoolchildren in Iraq today, killing four of them because they were in the vicinity of a humvee that was exploded and were expressing glee?

[doni_georgia]

29. But we've already been killing unarmed women and children

Check out the news stories from some of the foreign sources (namely in the UK). We are basically shooting anyone who walks out of their house.

[ConcernedCanuk]

40. "If the US kills 10,000 civilians then we'll talk" - *ahem* - they did

.
.
.

They've killed Over 10,000 civilians, and spread thousands of tons of Depleted Uranium and unexploded ordnance around the country that will continue to kill Iraqis for generations to come.

I don't know what is seen down in the USA, but up here on stations like CBC, CTV and BBC, I've seen more than one interview with USA military that give out comments like

"we just want to kill them" -

"I just want to kick down doors and shoot people" -

Some of them aren't even old enough to shave yet fur chrissakes!

And Murikka has turned them into killing machines.

And in my opinion, alot of those armed "insurgents" are just Iraqis fighting INVADERS and Occupiers.

Right or wrong, it's THEIR country, not the US's.

It's been the USA and their "coalition" killing Iraqis,

not Iraqis killing Iraqis.

That's how I see it.

Kimmet is a killer, plain and simple.

arrrrg,

I just can't express my anger and disgust enough!

[knight_of_the_star]

72. Here's a problem though

If the insurgents dress up as and hide in the general civilian population, then how are we to know? This is WHY urban combat is so dangerous, especially to our forces because of doctrine that prohibits the killing of innocent civilians. We will have a hard time knowing who is an enemy and who is not, and I'm willing to bet that it won't take long to turn the entire city against us when we turn it into a warzone.

[Joanne98]

83. The Vietcong problem

If the insurgents are 10% of the population, but the population lets them "swim" among them, we can't tell them apart so we start killing both of them. This grows the insurgents population and makes the civilians more sympathetic to the cause. Giving the insurgents more water to "swim" in. I can't believe they're doing something so stupid.

[knight_of_the_star]

90. The revolutionary swims in the sea of the people

And we're pouring more water into that sea for them to swim in.

[Saeba]

55. Very pertinent comparison, sadly…

First as it’s a very sensible subject I must say that I condemn firmly the behavior of the Imperialist Japan of this period and I apologize to our victims. Because we have committed such crimes, Japanese army should not be allowed anymore to act outside Japan.

About the comparison between Nanjing and Fallujah, I’ve to say that it’s not true, not yet. But if the US army invades Fallujah, yes it could be the same thing.

First here a link for an historical (and neutral) approach of the massacre of Nanjing, you should read this article. The Nanjing Incident
It’s a very serious and well documented one, that try to be objective, even if the use of "incident" could surprise some.

Then when one try to dismiss the comparison based on his view of the Nanjing massacre, it should use the Arab point of view for Fallujah, not the American’s one.
But it could be unpleasant for the American …

One interesting point is that the outraged defenders of the US occupation use the same arguments than the defender of the ex-imperial army.
Here it’s a link: What I would like to emphasize is that illegal behavior and violence by some soldiers had nothing to do with the intention or policy of the Japanese Government or the Army.
I must precise some points: I don’t support the speech of this link and it can be offending. BTW it’s not a very good link but sorry I’m not a specialist on this matter. It’s only to illustrate that it’s a common thing to have a great opinion of the army of one’s country.

My point is that war is a horrible and criminal thing. During such time normal human can act with the much unimaginable and monstrous behavior. Sometime it can happen that war is the last and only solution. Stopping the Axis powers was on of these periods. The invasion of China by Japan was not, nor the invasion of Iraq by US.
And as our imperialist war is a source of shame for us, your one should be too.

[bpilgrim]

59. thank you for sharing

amd welcome to DU :toast:

I am very concerned about our naked agression and hope that using historical comparisons of our actions to those of our one time enemy will help some americans see what a dangerous road we are now traveling.

As a US VET I know our guys are only following orders and that they are for the most part good patriotic americans but that was no excuse for our enemies why should we expect history to judge us any differently?

kiyutsukete :hi:

(on edit: also, thanks for the links, i've bookmarked them)

peace

[Algorem]

81. Pentagon has strictly ruled out beheading contests.

[MoonRiver]

87. You may be right, but that is small comfort

in light of the horror that is about to befall the people of Fallujah.

[SharonAnn]

8. OMG, I just finished watching Dr. Strangelove an hour ago.

It was hysterical! So dark, so twisted, so funny, so true somehow. The same people are now in charge of our foreign policy, the Iraq war, the plans for invading Syria and Iran.

Frightening to see your picture with Gen'l Jack Ripper and his "precious bodily fluids".

[bpilgrim]

11. at least in the movie they had a sane president

i know what you mean :scared:

:hi:

peace

[Redleg]

10. That's a bit of an overstatement, isn't it?

Let's give our troops a bit more credit than that.

[bpilgrim]

12. don't know

hasn't happened yet, so i added a question mark.

:hi:

peace

[KerryThatWeight]

15. The rape scenario won't happen on behalf of American troops

Even hinting that our troops would rape the women is out of line.

Other than that ignorant comparison...peace.

[bpilgrim]

19. shoot, our own women are getting raped

you must've missed the stories but thank GORE he 'invented' the internet :bounce:

check out google...

welcome to DU :hi:

peace

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slinkerwink]

22. there are incidents of rape WITHIN the US Army...

[Redleg]

27. Just as there are in the civilian population.

I believe our soldiers and marines are no more likely to rape the people in Iraq than any other of us would be here in the USA. Now that doesn't mean it won't happen but if it does will be on a very small scale.

[troublemaker]

24. Is this a joke?

re: "Even hinting that our troops would rape the women is out of line."

You do realize that the large numbers of female US soldiers being raped in Iraq are being raped by Americans, right?

[TahitiNut]

30. Okinawa. Peacetime.

:shrug:

[doni_georgia]

35. War has the real capacity to turn normal people into animals

it's a fact. Read this http://www.peace.ca/warandrape.htm

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[KerryThatWeight]

49. It depends on your altitude

The refractive index changes as you go up or down. If you believe our troops are going to rape 20,000 women as eluded to by the poster to whom I responded then I am driven to ask from which planet you hail.

[bobbieinok]

65. there's documentation some US soldiers raped in VN - see Tiger Force

[tabasco]

43. Spare us the hyperbole.

Do you even know anybody in our military? I was a commander in the army and we prosecuted a soldier in my unit for stealing money from a civilian. Your analogy is stupid.

[bpilgrim]

61. facts on the ground

i know folks in our military because i've served in our military.

and i know what men are capable of in combat hence the post above.

do not ask for whom the bell tolls for it tolls for thee.

peace

[dbt]

6. I live in a Rogue Nation

Damn everyone who foisted bu$h on us!

:argh:
dbt

[KerryThatWeight]

13. Pray they let the innocents out first

I just hope the insurgents let the non-combatants leave if they desire. I trust our forces will give 48 hours notice before going in.

[Mike Niendorff]

26. slight problem:

You are now dealing with a guerilla warfare scenario.

Let's say 10000 people walk up to an occupation checkpoint claiming to be "noncombatants". How do you tell which people are telling the truth?


MDN

[MoonRiver]

88. They won't.

Tragically, those innocents are the cover the insurgents need. Plus, I'm not getting a sense that the insurgents care any more about innocent Iraqis than *. If having them die makes an international spectacle of the * fascists I think they'll be all for it. I can't believe what's happening at the hands of our mad leader.

[name not needed]

16. God Help Us All...

I never thought I'd see the day we destroy a city of 300,000 people over the death of four soldiers.

[caledesi]

44. As Jim Morrison sang in the song Five to One

"They got the guns (USA), but we've got the numbers."


Five to one

Yeah, c'mon, Love my girl
She lookin' good, C'mon, One more
Five to one, baby
One in five
No one here gets out alive, now
You get yours, baby
I'll get mine
Gonna make it, baby
If we try
The old get old
And the young get stronger
May take a week
And it may take longer
They got the guns
But we got the numbers
Gonna win, yeah
We're takin' over
Come on!
Yeah!
Your ballroom days are over, baby
Night is drawing near
Shadows of the evening crawl across the years
Ya walk across the floor with a flower in your hand
Trying to tell me no one understands
Trade in your hours for a handful dimes
Gonna' make it, baby, in our prime
Come together one more time
Get together one more time
Get together one more time
Get together, aha
Get together one more time!
Get together one more time!
Get together one more time
Get together one more time
Get together, gotta, get together
Ohhhhhhhh!
Hey, c'mon, honey
You won't have along wait for me, baby
I'll be there in just a little while
You see, I gotta go out in this car with these people and...
Get together one more time
Get together one more time
Get together, got to
Get together, got to
Get together, got to
Take you up in my room and...
Hah-hah-hah-hah-hah
Love my girl
She lookin' good, lookin' real good
Love ya, c'mon

[knight_of_the_star]

77. They weren't even soldiers

The four that were killed were corporate MERCENARIES. We're willing to level a city for the sake of four hired killers.

[doni_georgia]

18. If they do this it will be a holy war for real

Every Islamic group will declare war on us. These are people who are willing to commit suicide to defeat the enemy. Bush knows NOTHING about these people. If he did, he'd know that this will do nothing but light a fire of hatred that we will not be able to extinguish. The sad thing is there will be many, many innocent Americans, other westerners, and Muslims who will die in the cross fire. All of the blood will be on the hands of George W. Bush. But he doesn't care. He's protected. Bastard! What's he think? That if he does this maybe he'll get lucky and we'll get attacked again here in the US and the flag waving will start again and his numbers will go up? I pray that the American people aren't that fucking stupid.

[Dems Will Win]

25. After we wipe out Fallujah, Najef will become an armed camp

Then we will really have a fight on our hands. Hundreds of thousands of armed crazed Shia. We would need way more than the 3500 Marines and others about to attack.

Also we will lose what in Fallujah? 200, 300 men dead retaking Fallujah?

But retaking Najef would be thousands of Americans dead and then we would have to pull out as we could not destroy the place as we are about to do with Fallujah. They would quickly wear us down.

This is ridiculous. Methinks we need Kerry by January or this is going to get way out of hand.

All this--thanks to our new Office of "Special" Plans...

[doni_georgia]

31. Yep Najef is a Shia holy city - I don't even want to think about this.

[paulk]

52. Even Bush isn't stupid enough to attack Najaf

And don't kid yourself, the Shi'ites are cheering us on in Fallujah. We're doing Sistani a favor...

And really, if you're looking for informed opinion on what's going on in Iraq, the World Socialist Web Site isn't exactly at the top of the list.

[doni_georgia]

64. How do explain this news story from today???

General: "US Troops Ready to Enter Najef"

Yahoo News:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&e=1&u=/ap/20040425/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

[knight_of_the_star]

78. Oh shit

So we are going to fight TWO urban battles against populations that are out for blood while there are reports coming in about how the US Armed Forces thanks to this deployment are completely stretched thin and worn out. This is a recipe for disaster, no doubt about it.

[paulk]

80. It looks like an incursion into the suburbs

to see how the Shi'ites react. I wonder, is this some subtle strategy to force the hand of the more moderate Shi'ite factions? Or is the Coalition just completely oblivious to the possible consequences here?
Or does BushCo WANT to bring total chaos to the Middle East?

It seems more and more that Bush is hell bent on making the situation worse.

[mountainvue]

38. Or he thinks if he loses he's going out with guns a

blazing. Idiot.

[Dems Will Win]

39. What Bush said in NYT

"The stakes are too high for us to leave," he said on Friday evening at a campaign event in Florida. "This is an historic moment. You see, a free society will be a peaceful society. A free society in the heart of the Middle East will begin to change the world for the better. No, they're trying to shake our will, but America will never be run out of Iraq by a bunch of thugs and killers."

-snip-

All across Iraq, American and allied forces were repositioning and preparing for bombings, mortar attacks, ambushes and even popular uprisings in case an attack on Falluja prompted violence elsewhere, according to Pentagon and military officials.

Senior American commanders in the Middle East, in a parallel to officials in Washington, seemed to be exceedingly concerned about possible casualties in Falluja — and how the operation to quell the insurgency would be played throughout the Arab world, as well.

Thus, military and civilian officials in Iraq began an "information operation," according to senior officials in Washington, to prepare the battlefield of public opinion

-snip-

[uhhuh]

56. You see, a free society will be a peaceful society.

Is the chimp admitting in a roundabout way that the United States is not a free society? I guess we must not be free since we are not at all peaceful.

[SammyWinstonJack]

62. Bush* is a thug and a killer

It takes one to recognize one.

[mountainvue]

33. Sickening.

Unbelievable.

[Mike Niendorff]

47. A question I can't seem to shake:

Is it possible that Bush and his gang are deliberately trying to provoke and escalate the situation, not only in Iraq but also, by effect, across the entire "Arab world"? To put it another way: given that this is the one consistent result Bush's policies are clearly generating, I keep wondering whether this is also, in fact, an intended result, with a much broader regional war being the Bushies' final goal. I'm not fully convinced of this yet, but I'm about 80% of the way there.


MDN

[thebigidea]

50. what's especially interesting...

... is that both Bush, Inc. and OBL are pursuing this goal of a wider war.

Hmmmmmm.

[paulk]

53. It seems like every decision Bremer and BushCo have made

is designed to make the situation worse. You do have to ask yourself - is it really complete incompetance? Or is there a design here?

[Arianrhod]

54. I agree in principle with your assessment

but would not limit it to the Middle East. The ME is just the springboard.

Their agenda is much, much broader than that.

[Forkboy]

70. I think we have a winner

your prize is to be drafted :)

[bigbillhaywood]

51. Ah yes, the unmistakable fiery rhetoric of a Trotskyist website

Don't get me wrong, I love it. And they're probably not far off the mark, but I wouldn't consider the ICFI to be a entirely reputable news source either.

[Character Assassin]

57. What a steaming pile

The ceasefire itself has been an utter travesty. Its main purpose from the standpoint of the US military was not to negotiate a “peaceful solution,” but to kill as many defenders as possible while at the same time boosting the US forces around the city.

So, let's get this straight: we negotiated a cease fire with them, and then somehow made them contintually break it and open fire on our troops, putting them in harm's way.

Sure. Uh-huh.

I take you have no military experience and consider the wsws as a dispassionate, accurate source.

[thebigidea]

69. I take it you believe the "Coalition Provisional Authority" 100%, eh?

Its kind of hard to be Mr. Sarcasto Cynical if you take the Pentagon's PR statements at face value.

And who is the "they" you're talking about? Do you actually think a city of 300,000 people - many of them extremely pissed off & armed - somehow appointed a representative to negotiate on their behalf?

And that this rep. somehow can control every crazy, every guy with a grudge, every one of those 300,000 or so?

Of COURSE they put the Marines in harm's way to draw fire - otherwise, they'd have no idea who the fuck to kill.

[Character Assassin]

71. Bankrupt of logic

I take it you believe the "Coalition Provisional Authority" 100%, eh?"

I take it you have a propensity to guess when you don't know.

I'm not necessarily taking the Pentagon's statements into account here.

As far as the 'they', you are making several assumptions. 'Many' of them? How many? And since coalition forces had never gained control of the city, you are assuming that a wildly popular cleric with an armed militia of an estimated 30K, in all the time since the war started, has not bothered to assert his authority over one mid-sized city.

Of COURSE they put the Marines in harm's way to draw fire - otherwise, they'd have no idea who the fuck to kill.

My contention about your knowledge of military tactics stands.

[DrWeird]

75. When listening to propaganda...

look for the "made in america" label.

[bigbillhaywood]

84. It's all propaganda, I like it better when it's not dressed up as

"objective" news.

[Arbustosux]

58. FOR THE LAST TIME. Iraq is NOT Viet Nam!!!

where do you libruls get that anywho?

[Dems Will Win]

63. It is not Vietnam

It's considerably worse, being seen as an extension of The Crusades by the people in the area. All to take the oil.

[ulTRAX]

82. you're correct

Vietnam is a different country. There we intervened to first help the French colonialists return.... then when they got their asses kicked we foolishly sabotaged elections then were forced to support our puppet government. One can argue that Vietnam started as a bad policy and snowballed into a 20 year war. Iraq is an idiotic policy which snowballed into a mess in less than one year. It's idiotic because it's counterproductive... guaranteeing an INCREASE in the number of terrorists determined to strike at America.

So Iraq might not be Vietnam... but a quagmire is a quagmire. BTW... that's not MY word... it's what in 1991 Cheney predicted invading Iraq to depose Saddam would be.

[Joanne98]

85. The lies are the same

We're hearing the same phrases, "cut and run", "hearts and minds" and we NEED ALOT OF MONEY AND TROOPS. More more. The only thing left missing is the draft.

[Arbustosux]

89. and thats coming

bank on it

[donsu]

66. Guernica - the UN will have to paint another wall

nt

[knight_of_the_star]

73. The name Al-Fallujah

Will be written in the history books with the point of a bayonet for a pen and dipped in an inkwell filled with blood. Even if we win this battle, and we might, the world WILL be horrified at this. Even Blair will leave Iraq at that point, not to mention all our other allies. Bush's base will cheer this to the sky, and I'm willing to bet that the swing voters will be absolutely sickened by this. This hasn't even started yet and I already am.

[WVhill]

76. I doubt it.

I can't get a fix on the number of troops. The numbers seem to vary from 2,000 to 20,000 marines. I think the city holds maybe 300,000. The number of insurgents has been reported at less than 1,000.

I'm reading there will be a strict curfew and absolutely no acceptance of any resident carrying a gun. I think you'll see a slow squeeze to pacify the city, take command of the streets and flush out the troublemakers. The situation would have been over except for the need to allow the provisional government and various elders, clerics, etc. to save face.

On the other hand the officer who was quoted as saying Fallujah could be turned into ?a killing field in a couple of days? just ended his career.

[bpilgrim]

79. sounds like the conventional wisom

of talk radio and the rest of lamestream media

peace

[knight_of_the_star]

91. Here's something to think about

Correct me if I'm wrong, but MORE German troops were sent into the Warsaw Ghetto during the uprising there than we are sending in. The Ghetto had a population at that time of about 50k or so people and only 750 people were under arms and capable of resisting the Germans, the rest didn't even have weapons to speak of.

Result:

German army and Waffen SS suffers THOUSANDS of casualties to put down the rebellion.

Al-Fallujah is 6 times the population of the Ghetto and is probably a bit bigger, has more reported insurgents, far larger chunks of the population are under arms compared to the Ghetto, and the people in al-Fallujah haven't been systematically starved for about 4 years or so. Consider all of that.

[WVhill]

92. Here's something else.

the Jews knew by that time they were earmarked for death. THAT IS A MOTIVATOR. If you're going to die anyway.... Most Fallujah residents probably just want to go back to and expect a normal life after this gets sorted out. "The people in al-Fallujah haven't been systematically starved for about 4 years or so" and have no reason to think they will be. Women and children weren't allowed to leave the ghetto unless it was in vehicle headed for a concentration camp. Not so in Fallujah.

The Germans didn't have night vision scopes, nor helicopter gunships, nor laser targeted missiles, nor body armour, nor snipers with .50 cal rifles that can reach out and part someone's hair well beyond the range of the insurgents' weaponry. Nor did they have the non-lethal devices capable of stopping insurgents that are now being deployed to Iraq. There is no valid comparison between Fallujah and the Warsaw Ghetto. To even compare the genocide of WW II to the pacification of Iraq and the rebuilding of its infrastructure belittles the Hollocaust.

FWIW, during the Tet offensive, 20,000 South Vietnamese troops died compared to the 50,000 Viet Cong that were killed. The insurgents are nowhere near 50,000. No comparison there either.