The Iraqi's just don't get it.

Joined
8 February 2003
Messages
3,189
Location
45 min N. of Road America in Appleton WI
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040615/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq&cid=540&ncid=716

The entire planet is over there to help them, and they think they are "all" Americans. Well when I feed a dog and it bites me, that is the last f'n piece of food that dog will see. I say let Saddam out, put him back in charge, and build a 50 ft tall wall around the f'n country. The thing that I don't get is all religions have bad apples, but why does the Muslim religion have bad apples among them 10 fold per capita in comparison? Why so much hate?

Sorry I just had to vent........I feel for all of the countries and companies who have hard working people over there.
 
This shit is getting old, I think if they bomb those people we round the people up who are chanting down with USA and drop them out of a building. I think America is starting to become a bunch of pussies and when we see that shit on TV we become more scared. I say we take it down to there level and bomb there asses back, it's the only thing they understand.



T Bell said:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040615/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq&cid=540&ncid=716

The entire planet is over there to help them, and they think they are "all" Americans. Well when I feed a dog and it bites me, that is the last f'n piece of food that dog will see. I say let Saddam out, put him back in charge, and build a 50 ft tall wall around the f'n country. The thing that I don't get is all religions have bad apples, but why does the Muslim religion have bad apples among them 10 fold per capita in comparison? Why so much hate?

Sorry I just had to vent........I feel for all of the countries and companies who have hard working people over there.
 
I can't say I totally agreed

but, can't be better said ...
Well when I feed a dog and it bites me, that is the last f'n piece of food that dog will see.

The thing is, why feed the dog?? While you are in hunger yourself!!
 
I say we take it down to there level and bomb there asses back, it's the only thing they understand.

......and when another september 11 pops along, don't come crying to the rest of the world with sympathy! :rolleyes:
 
The thing that really gets me about the majority of the Iraqi population is that they just sit back and watch what happens instead of taking an active role in the formation of their country. It seems like they are content to blame the Americans for everything bad that happens (ie car bombs, pipeline sabatoge, looting, etc), but when there is progress being made and paid by us (schools, infrastucture, training of security forces) they act like it was to be expected. Like some kind of welfare entitlement program. Shame on them for not taking the initative to better their own futures by rooting out the bad seeds themselves. If there was some a-hole fundamentalist cleric holding my city hostage while the Americans were fighting them, I guarantee most of my neighbors would "remove" him and his boys so that our town would stop being shot up. Iraqis remind me of (most) Americans on welfare. They just sit back, hope something good happens, collect the check from the government, and then bitch about what the government isn't doing for them. What they need to do is to take care of business themselves.
 
ajnsx said:
......and when another september 11 pops along, don't come crying to the rest of the world with sympathy! :rolleyes:

It could have happened in Australia/ Japan too.

We should have come up with better alternative energy solutions in the past 25-30 years since the 1970's and I believe we could have by now. The oil producing countries of the middle east need their money supply cut off.
To paraphrase "Kane of the TV show Kung FU" when someone threatens you with stick you can run, fight or, take the stick away.
We need to remove the stick, oil.
We gave them too much money too fast and upset their culture.

Stop being a customer and come up with a better product and the world will stop buying from them. Dry up the money supply and need to be there at all. Long term it's a better solution.
 
pbassjo said:
Stop being a customer and come up with a better product and the world will stop buying from them. Dry up the money supply and need to be there at all. Long term it's a better solution.


they already did that to Iran,

did that work?
 
While reported news does get me steamed at times too. I would suggest things reported are not always as they seem or appear. Speak w/some that have been over in Iraq, the peoples appreciation is more than reported and the scum don't hold the majority. I'm aware that in some areas our troops have been asked not to return fire which sucks and that appears the case in the Yahoo story, that much is truth, however don't always believe what you read and hear. Grain of salt guys, agenda and negative press has great effects....remember that!





www.francesucks.com
 
As usual, Tom has hit the nail on the head. Well said. ;) Recently I was on a trip to Las Vegas with a group of freinds. While enjoying some adult beverages, we noticed some soldiers in fatigues. We ended up talking with them for about two hours. Long story short - they confirmed what Tom just said, and that the VAST majority of the Iraqi people are extreemly greatful that we are there. They all had pictures of themselves alongside Iraqi's, where the pictures showed no doubt as to their affection.

BTW, we were very impressed with the soldiers we met. If they are an example of what we have represetning us, we are in good hands. The word "professional" is how I would describe them.
 
Tom Larkins said:
While reported news does get me steamed at times too. I would suggest things reported are not always as they seem or appear. Speak w/some that have been over in Iraq, the peoples appreciation is more than reported and the scum don't hold the majority. I'm aware that in some areas our troops have been asked not to return fire which sucks and that appears the case in the Yahoo story, that much is truth, however don't always believe what you read and hear. Grain of salt guys, agenda and negative press has great effects....remember that!





www.francesucks.com

Yep, and to expand on Tom's point, just remember when you see (AP) at the beginning of an article, either don't read it or understand that it will be slanted. All newspapers, radio stations, TV stations and magazines do not have the resources to dispatch employees all over the earth for the latest updates. This is why news "agencies" like the Associated Press are relied upon so much. And these organizations DO have agendas.
 
cmhs75 said:
they already did that to Iran,

did that work?

I didn't make myself clear. I wasn't suggesting embargo or isolation. I think a better solution is to win in the open market place. We need to be energy self sufficient and to come up with technology that is marketable on a global level. A solution that makes oil unattractive and uncompetitive as a energy method.
We need a better way to run cars even if it means we lose the neat sound that the internal combustion engine makes.
 
The thing that really gets me about the majority of the Iraqi population is that they just sit back and watch what happens instead of taking an active role in the formation of their country

Voters in Australia keep falling dramatically, so they could be accused of doing the same. I think i saw a news report that polls for Americans voting have dropped also. As for the irag population i think decades of consequences from 'speaking' out have maybe made them a little cautious especially in the climate of transition.



It could have happened in Australia/ Japan too.

Very true pbassjo, but ask any Japanese if they should pop down and bomb the rest of the Iraq population into submission and there would be a resounding 'no' response'. They have Hiroshima peace park to remind them of that. As for the Ausssies if someone suggested that type of solution, then i'd have the same kind of response to my homeland. Thank your chosen diety it's the opinions of a few!:)
 
Last edited:
Just remember, the controversial stories are the ones that sell....so that's why you see so many of those. The stories of things going well and seeming "normal" don't make the news. Not exciting enough. For instance....no one seems to care that electricity production is twice of that during Saddam's regime. Lot's of little good stories out there.....but what makes a eye catching headline?
 
Just remember, the controversial stories are the ones that sell....so that's why you see so many of those. The the stories of things going well and seeming "normal" don't make the news. Not exciting enough. For instance....no one seems to care that electricity production is twice of that during Saddam's regime. Lot's of little good stories out there.....but what makes a eye catching headline?
 
ajnsx said:
Thank your chosen diety is the opinions of a few!:)

Huh? Did you miss a edit of that line?

Anyway.
Don't be too sure of how you'll feel if you get hit at home.
I knew people who were killed in the World Trade Center and have help console their families and listened to their children cry over missing parents in the pews around me in my local church.

By the way when I was in Hiroshima on tour with a folk group, the American guest of honor over dinner said to a group of Japanese people who were promoting the tour "How do I say I'm sorry about Hirsohima?" After a brief conference the response to my shocked boss was as follows: "It was war, if we had the bomb first we might of hit SanFrancisco."

Please note in my post that I was not proposing armed warfare but the positive development of a alterenative energy source.
 
Yah, i made a mistake supposed to be a 't' in there! Fixed!


Huh? Did you miss a edit of that line?




Don't be too sure of how you'll feel if you get hit at home

My point was, if i expressed the attitude as in the earlier comment posted i quoted, i wouldn't expect sympathy from others. I tried to say "thank god(chosen diety)" all Americans don't share that view!


It was war, if we had the bomb first we might of hit SanFrancisco

Back then yes, i was refering to now, i don't hear Japanese make random comments such as just blow them all out of the water (refering to the aforementioned quote) when we discuss it at school/on the weekends.

Please note in my post that I was not proposing armed warfare but the positive development of a alterenative energy source

Yep, i understood and agree with you, i was focusing on the other posters remark and trying to highlight how silly it was.
 
This is cool

I'm from the Middle Eastern province and I have the following to comment

The Iraqi's are not as the media might perceive them to be (i.e. brainless hooligan barbarians). There are a lot of other sides to the story never told. I'd rather not talk about because its politics and politics are never clean.

But I have to say, reading through this thread, I'm impressed. I thought that the general conception of the west is based solely on a biased media. And this is the general conception here at the eastern province where everyone thinks that Americans are being manipulated by the media to think whatever their government what's them to think.

But, from what I've read, I can see that there is a lot of logical thinking going on around people in the US and this is a sure sign that progress in the west and Middle East understanding one another is bound to happen

There is hope for this world after all.
 
Tom Larkins said:
Speak w/some that have been over in Iraq, the peoples appreciation is more than reported and the scum don't hold the majority.
Here is a news story that may provide a greater perspective of the current mix of views in the overall Iraqi population than anecdotal evidence of one opinion or the other.

From http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=4&u=/ap/20040615/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_us_poll_1

Poll of Iraqis Reveals Anger Toward U.S.

Tue Jun 15, 5:00 PM ET
By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON - A poll of Iraqis commissioned by the U.S.-backed government has provided the Bush administration a stark picture of anti-American sentiment — more than half of Iraqis believe they would be safer if U.S. troops simply left.

The poll, commissioned by the Coalition Provisional Government last month but not released to the American public, also found radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr is surging in popularity, 92 percent of Iraqis consider the United States an occupying force and more than half believe all Americans behave like those portrayed in the Abu Ghraib prison abuse photos.

The Associated Press obtained a copy of a multimedia presentation about the poll that was shown to U.S. officials involved in developing Iraq (news - web sites) policy. Several officials said in interviews the results reinforced feelings that the transfer of power and security responsibilities to the Iraqis can't come too soon.

"If you are sitting here as part of the coalition, it (the poll) is pretty grim," said Donald Hamilton, a career foreign service officer who is working for Ambassador Paul Bremer's interim government and helps oversee the CPA's polling of Iraqis.

"While you have to be saddened that our intentions have been misunderstood by a lot of Iraqis, the truth of the matter is they have a strong inclination toward the things that have the potential to bring democracy here," he said in a telephone interview Tuesday from Baghdad.

Hamilton noted the poll found 63 percent of Iraqis believed conditions will improve when an Iraqi interim government takes over June 30, and 62 percent believed it was "very likely" the Iraqi police and Army will maintain security without U.S. forces.

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said, "Let's face it. That's the goal, to build those up to the point where they can take charge in Iraq and they can maintain security in Iraq."

The poll results conflict with the generally upbeat assessments the administration continues to give Americans. Just last week, President Bush predicted future generations of Iraqis "will come to America and say, thank goodness America stood the line and was strong and did not falter in the face of the violence of a few."

The current generation seems eager for Americans to leave, the poll found.

The coalition's confidence rating in May stood at 11 percent, down from 47 percent in November, while coalition forces had just 10 percent support. Nearly half of Iraqis said they felt unsafe in their neighborhoods.

And 55 percent of Iraqis reported to the pollsters they would feel safer if U.S. troops immediately left, nearly double the 28 percent who felt that way in January.

"To a certain degree it is self-evident that Iraqis have lost some confidence in us, particularly in our ability to protect them," Hamilton said.

Frustration over security was made worse this spring by revelations of sexual and physical abuse of Iraqis by U.S. guards at the Abu Ghraib prison.

The poll, taken in mid-May shortly after the controversy began, found 71 percent of Iraqis said they were surprised by the humiliating photos and tales of abuse at the hands of Americans, but 54 percent said they believed all Americans behave like the guards.

The prison scandal has also become fodder in the United States, as Democratic challenger John Kerry accuses Bush of failing to set a proper moral tone. "I think the president is underestimating the full affect of what has happened in the world to our reputation because of that prison scandal," Kerry said Tuesday.

Anger at Americans was evident in other aspects of the poll, including a rapid rise in popularity for al-Sadr, the Muslim cleric who has been leading insurgents fighting U.S.-led coalition forces.

The poll reported that 81 percent of Iraqis said they had an improved opinion of al-Sadr in May from three months earlier, and 64 percent said the acts of his insurgents had made Iraq more unified.

However, only 2 percent said they would support al-Sadr for president, even less than the 3 percent who expressed support for the deposed Saddam Hussein (news - web sites).

The coalition's Iraq polling of 1,093 adults selected randomly in six different cities — Baghdad, Basra, Mosul, Diwaniyah, Hillah and Baquba was taken May 14-23 and had a margin of potential sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points. Crucial details on the methodology of the coalition's polling were not provided, including how samples were drawn.

The most recent independent polling by Gallup found more than half of Iraqis want U.S. and British troops to leave the country within the next few months.

An Oxford International poll taken in February for ABC News and several networks from other countries found a higher level of optimism than more recent polling taken after months of bombings and other violence. Still, only a quarter of those polled by Oxford said they had confidence in coalition forces to meet their needs, far behind Iraqi religious leaders, police, and soldiers.

___

On The Net:

The poll results are available in slide form at: http://wid.ap.org/documents/iraq/cpapoll.htm
 
That story makes an excellent illustration:

92% consider the US and occupying force.....it does not tell us they want us out or not. Why would that be reported as such b/c when they asked the question if they wanted the US out only 41% say yes. 45% say only after a stable government is installed. That is the meat of the story but you wouldn't know it from the way the story is put together.

Could one re-state the headling from the AP this way.

Majority of Iraqies want US to stay; but don't want perminant occupancy

or

Majority of Iraqies confident after June 30 date. Poll numbers decline after recent prison pics & cleric fueled violence

Read this story w/objectivity, read it twice and you can see the same thing. It can be done w/any media, the unfortunate thing about this is its importance in the way it shapes opinion.

Note the poll date of May 14-23, which was right in the middle of the media hipe about the prison and violence. Also, whats the big surprise about us being occupying force. We are, until stability is brought. None of us wants to be over there any longer than we have too!
 
Last edited:
Ryanmcd2 said:
I think if they bomb those people we round the people up who are chanting down with USA and drop them out of a building. I think America is starting to become a bunch of pussies and when we see that shit on TV we become more scared. I say we take it down to there level and bomb there asses back, it's the only thing they understand.

All your solution would do is recruit more people to join the resistance movement. Just as the 9/11 attacks caused Americans to join the military at record rates, attacking Iraqis would just cause the Iraqi people to hate us even more. People do not respond well to agression whether it be Americans, Iraqis or anyone else.


foxy-abby said:
If there was some a-hole fundamentalist cleric holding my city hostage while the Americans were fighting them, I guarantee most of my neighbors would "remove" him and his boys so that our town would stop being shot up.

From the above article:

"The poll reported that 81 percent of Iraqis said they had an improved opinion of al-Sadr in May from three months earlier, and 64 percent said the acts of his insurgents had made Iraq more unified."

Apparently they like him. :rolleyes:

"55 percent of Iraqis reported to the pollsters they would feel safer if U.S. troops immediately left, nearly double the 28 percent who felt that way in January."

Why do you suppose they feel that way?


wildbill846 said:
For instance....no one seems to care that electricity production is twice of that during Saddam's regime.

From today's news:

Power struggle

"the supply of electricity of vastly more concern to millions of sweltering Iraqis, is still below the pre-war level and at that only for a limited time each day.

President Bush, on this subject as on many others, got it completely wrong in claiming on May 1 that electricity is "now more widely available than before the war". His own US Agency for International Development says that pre-conflict generating levels were "around 4,400 megawatts." The CPA's latest average, for the week ending June 4, is 4,144 MWs, and a distribution map shows that two-thirds of Iraq only received a power supply for five to eight hours a day: except for two small areas nowhere else got more than 10 hours."
 
Eric5273 said:

From today's news:

Power struggle

"the supply of electricity of vastly more concern to millions of sweltering Iraqis, is still below the pre-war level and at that only for a limited time each day.

President Bush, on this subject as on many others, got it completely wrong in claiming on May 1 that electricity is "now more widely available than before the war". His own US Agency for International Development says that pre-conflict generating levels were "around 4,400 megawatts." The CPA's latest average, for the week ending June 4, is 4,144 MWs, and a distribution map shows that two-thirds of Iraq only received a power supply for five to eight hours a day: except for two small areas nowhere else got more than 10 hours."


Straight from the horse's mouth....

http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/accomplishments/electricity.html

Since the conflict, available electrical capacity has more than tripled, exceeding the pre-conflict generating level of 4,400 MW
 
I thought you said output was twice that of the pre-war level? Your link does not say that.

but you did miss the next 2 sentences (from your link):

"Generated 4,518 MW on October 6, 2003-surpassing the pre-war level of 4,400 MW. Average production over the last seven days was 4,064 MW"

They exceeded the pre-war level for one day!

But the average per day level they are producing is less than the pre-war level, exactly what the above article I posted says.

Even better, I like how the sentence after that one says:

"Generated 98,917 MW hours on February 14, 2004-the highest since reconstruction began."

Now they use "MW hours" to make the number sound large. For those that don't know, you can divide that number by 24 to get the average output for that day.
 
Last edited:
Eric5273 said:
I thought you said output was twice that of the pre-war level? Your link does not say that.

but you did miss the next 2 sentences (from your link):

"Generated 4,518 MW on October 6, 2003-surpassing the pre-war level of 4,400 MW. Average production over the last seven days was 4,064 MW"

They exceeded the pre-war level for one day!

But the average per day level they are producing is less than the pre-war level, exactly what the above article I posted says.

Even better, I like how the sentence after that one says:

"Generated 98,917 MW hours on February 14, 2004-the highest since reconstruction began."

Now they use "MW hours" to make the number sound large. For those that don't know, you can divide that number by 24 to get the average output for that day.


I'm sorry....my mistake....my link says triple....

And yes the average over the last seven days is lower than the peak capacity that Saddam had accomlished over the last 30 years. Unfortunately ths site does not list a couple weekly averages for pre-war levels for comparison.

While you don't like the MW hours number because it sound over optimistic...it shows the ability to maintain that output over time. If we were having those 10 hour blackouts, it would not be able to put out that number.
 
wildbill846 said:
I'm sorry....my mistake....my link says triple....

No, your link says:

"Since the conflict, available electrical capacity has more than tripled", meaning since the conflict ended. At the end of the conflict, most of the electrical power plants had been destroyed by bombing, and power output was practically nothing. The entire city of Baghdad had no power for about 2-3 months after the conflict ended (they say this as if the conflict has actually ever ended, which it obviously has not or we would not still be fighting over there -- I guess they mean the day when Bush gave his speach with the sign "Mission Accomplished")

In fact, even before the conflict, most of Iraq's power plants had been destroyed from our bombing throughout the late 1990s and during the Gulf War. In the 1980s, all Iraqis had full electricity 24 hours per day, except for some remote, unpopulated areas.


wildbill846 said:
And yes the average over the last seven days is lower than the peak capacity that Saddam had accomlished over the last 30 years.

Wrong, Iraq's peak power capacity over the last 30 years was most definately sometime during the 1980s, before the damage done in the first Gulf War. Due to sanctions after the Gulf War, Iraq was never able to purchase parts to repair all the damaged power plants. The pre-conflict level, 4400 MW, was much lower than their 1980s output.


wildbill846 said:
Unfortunately ths site does not list a couple weekly averages for pre-war levels for comparison.

The number that they list, 4400 MW, is an average over a long period of time prior to the conflict. It is not the peak they reached on one day.


wildbill846 said:
While you don't like the MW hours number because it sound over optimistic...it shows the ability to maintain that output over time. If we were having those 10 hour blackouts, it would not be able to put out that number.

Very true. It shows they were able to maintain power output at slightly less than the pre-war level for an entire day.
 
Back
Top