posted May 25, 2004 12:13 AM              

Wasn't our purpose over there to bring a better way of life to the Iraqi people, not display the same kind of horrors we were supposed to be ousting? Excuse me, but I fail to see anything at all funny or worthy of "levity" in this abysmal failure.

I wonder what he would have to say about "bringing democracy to the Iraqi people" if he would view these photos of what we have done to their babies

My God, what have we done?

posted May 25, 2004 10:53 AM            

Well, admittedly, we've only freed about 26 million in Iraq and it's terrible some of Saddam's terrorist buds were made to wear women's panties on their heads instead of being shot or processed through one of Saddam's shredders, but I can live with that. Apparently, they did too--live, that is.

My God, what have we done?

Freed about 50 million Muslims so far, that's all. But give us time Raine, there's still the Syrians and Iranians looming on the horizon if they don't stop sending their terrorists into Iraq to destabilize the country and prevent free elections there.

Of course, I realize Saddam's friends and supporters don't see that as a good thing. Yep, putting women's panties on captured fighters heads, roughing them up, scaring the hell out of them and embarrassing them is far, far, far worse than anything Saddam was doing to his own people. Yep, those poor, poor, poor fighters will carry those scars on their psyches to their graves. Saddam's way was better, just feed the opposition through a shredder, why scar their poor little psyches? I guess some of us just didn't understand how sensitive cold blooded murdering terrorists really are.

I suggest we avoid all that in the future. If coalition forces find anyone in Iraq who is not a member of the coalition or Iraqi security force and they have a weapon in their hands, just kill them. Far more humane, don't you agree?

posted May 25, 2004 04:10 PM              

I normally skip over your comments any more, but inasmuch as your response is the only one, I must express my incredulity at how you "can live with" these horribly deformed babies.

May God have mercy upon your soul, if you have one, for your role]/i] in all of this, inasmuch as it is [i]people (and I use the term loosely) like you who are supporting such sickening sights as these heart-wrenching babies so wretchedly brought into existence. And yes, my heart [i]is]/i] bleeding for their tragic and pathetic little lives.

How you can "live with" the fact that midwives any more do not know "what will come out" when they deliver babies, because of these horrible, horrible deformities that [i]our]/i] depleted uranium weapons have created?

I am in shock at how your normal neanderthal brutishness extends even to these poor little creatures. In absolute recantation of my former belief in everyone's redemption, you are evil and beyond hope.

You have managed to challenge my belief that there is no devil, and I shall NEVER read anything you post again! Your response makes me more sick than those photos do!

posted May 25, 2004 04:27 PM            

Tuesday, May 25, 2004 12:20 p.m. EDT
Bush Meets With Saddam's Torture Victims

In a dramatic gesture designed to counter the media's focus on U.S. abuses at Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison, President Bush met in the Oval Office on Tuesday with a group of Saddam Hussein's torture victims.

The six men, whose hands were surgically amputated at Saddam's direction in operations that were filmed for his viewing pleasure, picked up on Bush's promise last night that Abu Ghraib would be demolished, saying that they wanted to be among the first to "swing the hammer" against the prison's walls.

Their plight, chronicled by video producer Don North in the documentary "Remembering Saddam," has received scant attention in the U.S., with North telling the Wall Street Journal two weeks ago that American media outlets he contacted have shown no interest in broadcasting the film.

The film tells the story of how Saddam meted out the amputation punishments to the six Baghdad merchants, whom the Iraqi dictator blamed for his country's collapsing economy. "Besides having our hands amputated, we were scarred on our foreheads, between our eyebrows," one of the men, Ala'a Abdul Hassein, told the Houston Chronicle in April.

"The regime wanted us to be psychologically scarred forever." "I was amazed and shocked by the tape," North told the paper. "It clearly showed doctors working with surgical instruments cutting through and severing these healthy hands. The victims were under anesthetic, and while they were still under, they had these black crosses tattooed to their foreheads to show they were miscreants," he said.

"Remembering Saddam" also documents how Houston surgeon Dr. Joseph Agris volunteered to perform the necessary surgery to fit the six torture victims with prosthetic devices last year with the help of Houston oil executive Roger Brown, who helped bring the them to the U.S.In a bid to circumvent the mainstream media's embargo of the film, the Heritage Foundation has scheduled a screening of "Remembering Saddam" in Washington, D.C., Wednesday morning.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/5/25/122104.shtml

posted May 25, 2004 04:40 PM              

WHEREAS the USA claims to be SOOOOOO MUCH better and morally upright than any other country on earth...we are LIBERATING these Iraqis!!! We have GOD and RUSH on our side!!! This makes us nothing but hypocrites, jwhop. Keep on beating the drum of US supremacy, my friend.

posted May 25, 2004 05:12 PM            

The difference is that those pregnancies would be terminated in the West before they came to term and are terminated. There are many causes of deformities Raine and depleted uranium munitions are the smallest part of those causes. But it does give you a soapbox to stand on while you spout your I hate America rhetoric.

People who think like you are beyond foolish Raine. You go all the way to dangerous. We listened to people like you prior to WWII when Hitler could have been stopped, before he was strong enough to wage war with the rest of Europe. Our foolishness in listening to people like you cost 50,000,000 lives and devastated Europe.

posted May 25, 2004 05:24 PM            

Show me the Iraqis who had their hands or limbs surgically amputated by American military surgeons, show me the remains of Iraqis American military personnel put through Saddam's shredders, and show me the remains of Iraqis beheaded by American military personnel and I'll accept your moral equivalency argument.

posted May 25, 2004 05:39 PM              

Apparently, you see NO problem with the atrocities commited in the name of the USA both before and during this war. You seem not to care about the thousands of tons of delpleted uranium we have dumped on this country, resulting in a 120% increase in catastrophic birth defects. You care not that people- im sorry, maybe i should say collateral damages- died from dirty water because the US wouldnt allow chlorine to be sent to Iraq...and of course, lets not mention the thousands killed with inaccurate bomb attacks. Anything is justifiable, as long as the US still reigns supreme as the worlds big bully, eh?

As long as we can still all hail the big chief, as long as we can still drive SUVs, as long as the status quo isnt threatened, thats oK?

Pathetic.

posted May 25, 2004 05:48 PM              

Saddam ruled Iraq for 23 years. In that time it's been reported that somewhere between 300,000 and 500,000 Iraqis perished under his brutal regime. Breaking that down annually, that means somewhere between 13,000 and 22,000 Iraqis lost their lives every year during Saddam's ugly rule. Horrible, I'm sure by anyone's standards.

So just how much better off are the Iraqi people since we bombed and rolled into their homeland 14 months ago? Recent reports state that over 5,500 Iraqis have died just in Bagdad and it's surrounding area alone in that time. Other humanitarian organization reports and independent estimates have pitted the number at 10,000 to 15,000 Iraqi dead nationwide since March 2003.

Hmmmmm . . . . 13,000 to 22,000 Iraqi deaths per year under Saddam compared to 10,000 to 15,000 Iraqi dead from our little war and occupation in just over a year. Plus we have the added benefit of a torture and abuse scandal at the very same prison facility where Saddam conducted some of his worst attrocities. And let's not forget the centuries of depleted uranium exposure we have left for future generations of that beleagured nation.

Help me out here, but I'm having trouble seeing just how much better off the Iraqis are since we started our little escapade. Maybe some of those Iraqi "insurgents" we hear so much about are having the same problem. Maybe the rest of the World Community is having that problem, too, causing them to be hesitant about helping us out of the little quagmire we've created . . .

Sometimes numbers speak louder than words.

--------------------------------------------

Reader contribution to Buzzflash, just to give credit where credit is due. Wouldn't want anyone thinking I was plagarizing.

posted May 25, 2004 06:17 PM              

And now that the initial offensive action of Coalition forces is tapering off, and Saddam is gone, Iraqies shouldn't be seeing death tolls like that year after year anymore.

posted May 25, 2004 06:17 PM            

This should not have happened under any circumstances, if it did happen at all.

"How about the prisoners who were forced to drink alcohol, eat pork, renounce Allah and pray to God?"

I question your numbers though MK. Last I heard, more than a month ago, they had found apporximately 500,000 Iraqis in mass graves in Iraq.

posted May 25, 2004 06:52 PM            

These are also the same people who melted away into the population when confronted by coalition military forces.

My opinion, they are some of the worst cowards on earth. Using women and children to shield themselves from taking fire, occupying and firing from mosques they think won't be fired on and all the other things they do to avoid taking a bullet doesn't give me the sense they welcome death.

posted May 25, 2004 10:23 PM              

Those poor little babies, not to mention the ones whose little bodies were shattered and broken from our weapons of mass destruction...I cannot understand anyone condoning this, but then who would think Rush would inject a bit of levity into the murder and torture going on in Abu Ghraib, either.

At least I can agree with Bush on one thing. It is good to plow over the whole horrible place!

But plowing under the reality of the atrocities we keep committing to their environment, and our own, does nothing to alter the reality of what we are doing to innocent people--in our "Amerika-over-all" brand of racism.

posted May 25, 2004 10:45 PM              

quote:

---

I have to wonder how anyone who claims to have an ounce of compassion could or would lift their smallest finger or voice any opposition to removing a brutal thug like Saddam.

---

Please tell me exactly what you did to lift your conservative finger years ago when the liberal humanitarians of the world had their arms raised, crying out to the rest of the world to stop him?

And are you ever going to get it that we are the ones who were supporting him and arming him in his wretched war against Iran with the same horrible weapons of mass destruction that are now turned against us--and the babies we have created?

How do you sleep at night? Oh, I think I asked that once, and you said "very well"...

Ignorance is bliss, but my words will come back to haunt your sleep the day you realize what you have been a party to

posted May 25, 2004 11:06 PM              

sigh...I'll be waiting for your response, as somehow I just know Jwhop will pass right on by with some inane comments about what Clinton did or something.

And also explain to me why you weren't joining us back then--I really would like to know how people have gotten it so twisted, getting this riled up in our present state of aggression yet remaining so indifferent and lacking in simple compassion earlier--for the SAME thing! The only explanation seems to be racism--plus whatever they have put in the water--that made you not give a damn back then any more than you really care now. Doubt that? What would your response have been if those babies had been American babies? Do you see the difference? Please examine your attitudes, Randall!

And, Randall, you bear a striking resemblance to my brother! You must be astral twins, because you say the same things, and his heart is cold, too. Yet, deep down in there somewhere, in both of you, I know there is a spark of divinity that is capable of loving even the Iraqi people. Your pretense is pretty well washed up, wouldn't you say? So what is it that has motivated you to put on this sham about wanting to free the Iraqi people from Saddam? Where is that coming from?--the ubiquitous chorus from the "male=right" remnant of the old patriarchal system!

I think you, and maybe even Jwhop, would really embrace the works of Margaret Starbird, to see how astrology, covert and overt religion, the broken left pillar of Solomon's temple and pearls, cucumbers, snow white and rose red, tarot cards, and foxes all weave the most fascinating tale of intrigue and suspense you could ever begin to imagine! That is barely the tip of the proverbial iceberg, but truly, I would like to see you read The Woman with the Alabaster Jar: Mary Magdalen and the Holy Grail

Then maybe we can talk and bear fruit, instead of bitter grapes all the time. Fair enough?

posted May 25, 2004 11:49 PM            

These are the facts about who armed Iraq. No one has ever found a rifle, cannon, fighter, tank, missile, bomber, helicopter or any other armanants of US manufacture in Iraq.

Your friends the French, Germans, Russians and Chinese were the suppliers of Saddam's weapons of war. You know Raine, the same countries you on the left have been screaming for the US to listen to about going after Saddam. Saddam owed them billions for those weapons not to mention, he was bribing them with money from the oil for food program to protect him against being overthrown by the US. Your facts stink, in fact, they aren't facts at all.

Who Armed Iraq?
Charles R. Smith
Monday, March 17, 2003
Myth vs. Fact

Name one weapon in the Iraqi arsenal that was made in the United States.

I have offered that challenge to dozens of so-called anti-war activists who claim that the U.S. armed Iraq. According to these protesters for "peace," George Bush Sr. and Ronald Reagan supplied Iraq with tons of weapons.

None have been able to name the specific weapon – missile, bomb, fighter, tank or shell – that is U.S.-made or has U.S. equipment installed in it. None have been able to name any specific weapon system.

All of them have failed the challenge, providing no more than allegations that U.S. parts are in Iraqi missiles or U.S. electronics are being used by the Iraqi military. One protester even claimed that Iraq was armed with U.S.-made trucks.

Since when is a truck a weapon? Are the Iraqis going to drive backwards, fuel tank first, into the U.S. Army?

Time to separate the myth from the reality. The propaganda spun by the far left is false. The facts show that Iraq is armed with a wide range of weapons – none of which came from the U.S.

Iraqi Air Force

The Iraqi air force does not fly Falcons or Eagles. The majority of the Iraqi air force is made in Russia. The Russian MiG and Sukhoi design bureaus supplied Iraq with hundreds of advanced strike-fighters and the Mach 3 Foxbat interceptor.

Saddam could field a force of advanced MiG-29 Fulcrum fighters if they had not chickened out of combat during the Gulf War, flying to Iran for asylum. The Iranians, who love Saddam even less than we do, never returned the MiGs.

The remainder of the Iraqi air force comes from France and China. The Chinese supplied Saddam with the Chengdu F-7, a copy of the Russian MiG-21. The F-7 can fly from unimproved runways and is known to be a vicious in-close dog fighter.

However, the French Mirage F-1 is reportedly the best jet fighter in Iraqi hands. You can view an Iraqi F-1 in action on the State Department Web site, testing a chemical spraying system.

If you still believe that the Iraqis have no chemical weapons, think again. Iraq did not modify its best multimillion-dollar fighter jet to spray for fruit flies.

Anyone with half of a brain knows that you cannot keep a modern jet fighter in the air without spare parts. Thus the Russian, Chinese and French jets should be museum pieces after 12 years of a so-called U.N. ban on weapons sales to Iraq. Yet somehow Saddam has his air force flying over 1,000 sorties a month.

Thanks to excellent reporting by Bill Gertz we now know that France has been supplying spare parts for Saddam's Mirage fighters. The French spare parts arrived in Baghdad not 20 years ago during the Cold War but last year, just in time to face our forces today.

Merci! With friends like, that who needs enemies?

Iraqi Missiles

Perhaps the Iraqi missile force has some U.S.-made weapons? Not. The primary Iraqi missile is the Russian-made Scud. Other missiles include the FROG-7 from Russia, the Exocet from France and the Silkworm from China.

The Iraqi air defense has plenty of missiles ... from Russia, China and France. The SA-2 Guideline, SA-3 Goa and SA-6 Gainful SAM missiles are all of Russian or Chinese manufacture. The French also supplied Baghdad with a number of Roland air defense missile systems.

Even the missile parts are from Chinese, German and French sources. Israeli authorities know full well what is inside Iraqi-made Scud missiles since many of them fell on Tel Aviv during the Gulf War. The Israelis found that the Scud warhead electronics were made in Germany – not the U.S.A.

In addition, William Safire recently wrote a column noting that a Chinese chemical company had supplied rocket fuel to Iraq through a French front company. Safire identified the fuel, the companies and the Iraqi missile facility where it was mixed into new Iraqi rockets. Again, the missile fuel sale was made within the last year, just in time to make new Iraqi missiles pointed at Kuwait, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Saddam sends his love to Paris and Beijing. Without your help he certainly could not threaten his neighbors with nerve gas and anthrax.

Iraqi Army

Okay, if not jet fighters and missiles, then how about tanks? Certainly the biggest weapons seller in the world, the U.S.A., sold tanks to Iraq.

The Iraqi armor force is made up of Chinese and Russian models familiar to any "cold" warrior. The Iraqi T-72 and T-55 tanks are all of Russian manufacture. The Iraqis also have a large number of Type-59 Chinese tanks and Russian-made BMP armored troop carriers. No M-1 Abrams here.

How about attack helicopters? The Iraqis have a number of choppers they used against the Kurds and Shiites.

So sorry, the Iraqi attack chopper force is Russian and French. The Russians supplied Iraq with a large number of the Mil-24 Hind attack helicopters, armed to the teeth with cannon, missiles and even chemical weapon sprayers.

The French supplied Saddam with a large number of Gazelle attack helicopters. The same French also managed to keep Saddam's attack helicopter force flying today with spare parts.

Guns, then? Surely the U.S. supplied Saddam with guns?

Nope. The main Iraqi artillery is the French 155mm howitzer. The remainder of Iraq's artillery is 122mm Russian-made cannons and Russian-made short-range rocket launchers. Even the Iraqi foot soldier is armed with the venerable AK-47 of Russian and Chinese make.

Iran-Iraq War

The facts are that during the Iran-Iraq war the U.S. supplied Iraq with something much more valuable than guns: satellite information on when and where the Iranians were going to attack.

Of course, current anti-war activists seize this piece of information without putting it into historical context. The information was supplied during the height of the Cold War. The main threat to America was the Soviet Union and the biggest fear in the Gulf was the Ayatollah Khomeini.

You remember the chant "death to America"? It almost seems that the ayatollah invented it. Ironically, the Ayatollah made his way to Tehran from his home in exile – Paris.

The Reagan administration, aware that the Iranian ayatollah had threatened to turn the Gulf into a sea of fire, assisted Saddam so that he would not lose the war. The assistance stopped short of helping Saddam win the war.

In fact, when it appeared the Iraqis were on the verge of victory, the Reagan administration transferred real weapons to the Iranians. The infamous Iran-Contra scandal involved a large number of badly needed U.S. TOW anti-tank missiles that were sold to Iran.

The U.S. missiles proved to be critical to the Iranian defense against Iraq's superior Russian tank force. The result was a stalemate and the war ended.

France/Russia/China

The fact is that Saddam owes billions to France, Russia and China for weapons purchases. Clearly, Iraq is buying more weapons from Paris and Beijing despite a U.N. arms embargo. Perhaps one reason why Paris, Moscow and Beijing oppose a war in Iraq is because they would lose their best customer.

The propaganda spun by the far left that the U.S. armed Iraq is false and backed by no facts. The so-called anti-war types are more interested in slamming Bush than stopping a war. None have been able to name one American-made weapon in the Iraqi arsenal.

More importantly, none of them can give one good reason why Saddam should stay in power.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/3/17/123424.shtml

So Raine, here's a challenge for you, since you allege America armed Saddam.