A rocket-propelled grenade slammed into a U.S. military ambulance Thursday, killing one American soldier and wounding two others, the latest in a series of attacks on U.S. personnel or their offices. The ambulance was transporting a wounded American soldier to a medical facility when it came under fire on a highway about 20 miles south of Baghdad. The wounded soldier being transported was not the one killed, said Capt. John Morgan, a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad.
Since the war is over there have been more and more attacks on US troops. This week alone has seen about ten people die (US of course, about 40 Iraqi), a little over 1 person a day. I wonder at this rate how long will it take until there are more deaths during forced occupation than the war? When you call an end to a war so fast and quick it looks great for the history books. But history is still being made.
I'm glad the war is over.
-
mccutcheon
- New York Scribbler
- Posts: 4996
- Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2000 8:01 am
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
I'm glad the war is over.
Militia groups are paying starving citizens to kill American soldiers.
Just like Saddam gave $25,000 to the families of suicide bombers.
Enjoy your cheap oil America. Paid for by the cheap blood of the American soldier.
Just like Saddam gave $25,000 to the families of suicide bombers.
Enjoy your cheap oil America. Paid for by the cheap blood of the American soldier.
-
mccutcheon
- New York Scribbler
- Posts: 4996
- Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2000 8:01 am
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
I'm glad the war is over.
Why Americans don't care about WMD. In the article below it says college students believe Iraq used them in the war or they were already discovered. No one feels lied to.
http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2003/06/19/deluded/index_np.html
http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2003/06/19/deluded/index_np.html
I'm glad the war is over.
hitchens is a sad alcoholic idiot who happens to be an entertaining and occasionally brilliant writer. why take seriously a former trotzkyist who is now a reactionary radical?
daniel cohn-bendit recently put it right when he accused perle and his consorts of being revolutionaries, people who believe in using violent force to change the world according to their ideology.
daniel cohn-bendit recently put it right when he accused perle and his consorts of being revolutionaries, people who believe in using violent force to change the world according to their ideology.
I'm glad the war is over.
Apathy is the new religion.
-
mccutcheon
- New York Scribbler
- Posts: 4996
- Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2000 8:01 am
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
I'm glad the war is over.
When Sloth and I are old sipping Pernod on some beach in the south of France (we will be able to live there after the US invasion of 2009 called Operation Smashing the Smellies, a great thing for all Americans except that they made the cheese illegal, ‘d the Champs Elyeese and I wish they would have kept the Eiffel Tower) Sloth and I will reflect on our lives. And he will tell me, "You know, I slept through the 2000's." And I'll answer, "Don't worry you didn't miss anything."
-I owe some funnily named blokes Tennessee Williams and Gore Vidal for this, I think.
-I owe some funnily named blokes Tennessee Williams and Gore Vidal for this, I think.
-
Tommy Martyn
- Mile High Club
- Posts: 887
- Joined: Mon May 19, 2003 8:01 am
- Location: a desk
I'm glad the war is over.
Could this,by any chance, be the same Gore Vidal who nominated one Christopher Hitchens as his successor?
I think we should take Hitchens seriously when he is right. I think he explained quite clearly that the policies and attitudes to S.H. of the respective Bushes were not the same. There is no evidence to suggest otherwise.
Hitchens himself has replied to accusations about his drinking on a number of occassions. The general thrust being: if he is such a lush how come he writes hundreds of articles and travels to so many countries while publishing so many books and holding down a teaching position? (To say nothng of his marriage and small children.) He also asks his critics to show him where he has been late or incoherent on his many public appearances. If you could supply direct examples of where his drinking has impacted his work then I will take a big step towards taking you seriously.
Now, what's with the ex-trot label? Our political views change over time. Hitchens is not the first or the last. Perhaps we should look to the writing and the actions. His targets during the period he described himself as a socialist were, amongst others, the Vietnam war, the British Monarchy, the occupation by the Soviet Union. (He has also written at length about the Elgin Marbles but I am not sure the audience here is familiar with this.) I would heartily agree with most of the things he wrote and said then and, I suspect, so would he.
During the period where, by his own admission, he could no longer label himself a socialist, he published critical books on Mother Teresa, (I can't think of a figure more enamoured by the religious right) Henry Kissinger, (Who famously went on to call him a holocaust denier and had to retract) and Bill Clinton. (Whom he held accountable for pursuing a right wing agenda under a left umbrella)
During the Bush administration he has aimed arrows at the Enron affair, the erosion of civil liberties under Ashcroft and Bush himself, "A man who will never read a book for pleasure." He did not support sitting round and continuing to do nothing about, "people who believe in using violent force to change the world according to their ideolgy." Which seems to me is just about as close as you can get to a Baath party mission statement.
I think we should take Hitchens seriously when he is right. I think he explained quite clearly that the policies and attitudes to S.H. of the respective Bushes were not the same. There is no evidence to suggest otherwise.
Hitchens himself has replied to accusations about his drinking on a number of occassions. The general thrust being: if he is such a lush how come he writes hundreds of articles and travels to so many countries while publishing so many books and holding down a teaching position? (To say nothng of his marriage and small children.) He also asks his critics to show him where he has been late or incoherent on his many public appearances. If you could supply direct examples of where his drinking has impacted his work then I will take a big step towards taking you seriously.
Now, what's with the ex-trot label? Our political views change over time. Hitchens is not the first or the last. Perhaps we should look to the writing and the actions. His targets during the period he described himself as a socialist were, amongst others, the Vietnam war, the British Monarchy, the occupation by the Soviet Union. (He has also written at length about the Elgin Marbles but I am not sure the audience here is familiar with this.) I would heartily agree with most of the things he wrote and said then and, I suspect, so would he.
During the period where, by his own admission, he could no longer label himself a socialist, he published critical books on Mother Teresa, (I can't think of a figure more enamoured by the religious right) Henry Kissinger, (Who famously went on to call him a holocaust denier and had to retract) and Bill Clinton. (Whom he held accountable for pursuing a right wing agenda under a left umbrella)
During the Bush administration he has aimed arrows at the Enron affair, the erosion of civil liberties under Ashcroft and Bush himself, "A man who will never read a book for pleasure." He did not support sitting round and continuing to do nothing about, "people who believe in using violent force to change the world according to their ideolgy." Which seems to me is just about as close as you can get to a Baath party mission statement.