Gay Patriot Header Image

Murder & Media Manipulation: Al-Qaeda’s Strategy in Iraq

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 8:38 pm - June 20, 2006.
Filed under: Media Bias,War On Terror

Since I first learned of the murder of the two U.S. soldiers whose booby-trapped bodies were recovered earlier today, I’ve been trying to find words to express my outrage at this atrocity. Simply put, it shows the barbarity of our adversary, thugs who use the cloak of a religious ideology to mask their sadism.

Terrorists affiliated with Al Qaeda kidnapped the men at a checkpoint south of Iraq. When recovered, “ the bodies showed signs of having been tortured.” More evidence of what we have long known about Al Qaeda: it is not a typical foe. Its followers show no regard for the Geneva Convention, indeed, have no regard for human life, even that of the people for whom it is ostensibly fighting — Iraqis and other Muslims.

As horrible as these murders are, it is important to note that it is one of the few times Al Qaeda has succeeded in directly attacking coalition soldiers in Iraq. Normally, they do not directly attack our troops, but instead use Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) to target them. It is a sign of their weakness that they have largely been targeting civilians, murdering innocent Muslims.

They’re killing their own people to make it appear that we are losing. And the Western media is helping them make their case. In the very AP article on the murder of the U.S. soldiers, the reporter writes that “Violence was unabated Tuesday, with at least 18 people killed in attacks nationwide, including a suicide bombing of a home for the elderly in the southern city of Basra.

As one military officer wrote in to Best of the Web:

The media manipulation by the insurgents is brilliant and extremely effective. The press has become a puppet for the insurgents; the insurgents know exactly what they are doing with these “massacres” (quoted here because the investigation has not been completed, nor have any charges been filed) and the political nightmare they will cause the current administration. Bodies are produced for film, and there is zero fact-checking by the media–the media eat up this “news” like there is no tomorrow.

To the terrorists’ fighting our troops and the Iraq people, indiscriminate murder is merely a means of manipulating the media.

I wonder if perhaps, the latest uptick in violence is Al Qaeda’s means of showing that it is still exists after the American success in taking out is leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. It needs to do something as it suffers repeated defeats. In the immediate aftermath of his death, “American and Iraqi forces . . . carried out 452 raids,” killing 104 insurgents and capturing “759 ‘anti-Iraqi elements.” Earlier today, an American airstrike killed another leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, Mansour Suleiman Mansour Khalifi al-Mashhadani, the group’s “religious emir.

Al Qaeda’s remaining leaders in Iraq know that by murdering innocent civilians and relying on a compliant Western press, they will make it appear that despite numerous successes, U.S. and Iraqi forces are unable to control the situation in Iraq. Thus, Al Qaeda attacks the targets they can most easily attack, not the ones with any strategic value in a traditional military sense. That’s because their strategy is getting headlines and winning this one not on the battlefield, but in the U.S. media. And to that end, it doesn’t matter how many Iraqis they murder.

The barbarity of the murder of Pfcs. Kristian Menchaca and Thomas Lowell Tucker shows the evil nature of the opponents we face. These terrorists show no respect for conventions of warfare or for human life. And no respect for the dead, booby-trapping bodies in order to use them to kill even more people. It’s just too bad that some bloggers are using the murders of these servicemen as just another excuse to attack the Administration.

Once again, we see the evil of our enemies in Iraq for what it is. As our hearts go out to the families of these two brave young men, let’s not mince words and call their murderers what they are. And do what we can do defeat them.

-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com

Share

70 Comments

  1. The MSM, of course, are willing puppets. Perhaps because “if it bleeds, it leads”; or perhaps because of their “blame America first” mentality, and their well-studied preference for presenting the Democrats’ narrative on things.

    Our foes truly are barbaric. Captain Ed further noted today, here, how the Taliban have taken to forcing women and children directly into the line of fire, as human shields for themselves.

    Fortunately, and thanks to our brave servicepeople, the unravelling of the Zarqawi network continues apace. You had a news link; Captain Ed has comment and updates.

    By the way – slightly off topic, but anyone who still doesn’t want to acknowledge that Zarqawi had a relationship with Saddam before the war, such as Mary Ann Weaver of the Atlantic Monthly, can basically shove it as far as I am concerned: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/334dhoqq.asp

    Comment by Calarato — June 20, 2006 @ 9:32 pm - June 20, 2006

  2. (I am seeing a giant whitespace block in the middle of my last sentence, just before my last link – and I have no idea why)

    Comment by Calarato — June 20, 2006 @ 9:37 pm - June 20, 2006

  3. Are you equally outraged by U.S. atrocities committed against Iraqis?

    Comment by faux news boy — June 20, 2006 @ 9:54 pm - June 20, 2006

  4. If any existed, I’m sure we would be, but none do, and there you are. Sucks to be you, doesn’ it, troll boy?

    Comment by Randy Rager — June 20, 2006 @ 9:59 pm - June 20, 2006

  5. Are you equally outraged by U.S. atrocities committed against Iraqis?

    Yeah, when the US Services start using women and children as human shields, kidnap and videotape beheading, and setting IEDs near restaurants, we’ll get back to you on that outrage. Okay, sparky?

    Dumb shit.

    Comment by cheshirecat — June 20, 2006 @ 10:16 pm - June 20, 2006

  6. “Are you equally outraged by U.S. atrocities committed against Iraqis?” – by a courageous anonymous poster

    Here’s the difference between them and us, 3 GIs charged in Iraq slayings

    We PROSECUTE our soldiers for committing atrocities. That’s why they are so RARE.

    Our enemies USE atrocities as their means of conducting warfare. It’s Standard Operating Procedure for them.

    Your moral-equivalence argument is weak and disgusting.

    Comment by Kevin Baker — June 20, 2006 @ 10:20 pm - June 20, 2006

  7. faux news boy–

    OK, find me one report, from anyone who isn’t actually ON the other side, where US troops walked students off a school bus and shot them, or tortured opposition captives to death.

    As for the Generva Convention, al Qaeda has proved one more time they aren’t covered. OF the 4 mandatory points they must meet all of (wear uniforms, carry arms openly, have a defined table of organization and respect the Convention themselves), they meet none.

    I’m pretty sure that people caught planting IEDs, or attacking US troops can behauled before a tribunal of officers and then shot, without violating the Convention one whit.

    And I wrote in 2004 that we should do exactly that, before “this thing gets out of hand.” Sadly, we didn’t.

    Comment by Kevin Murphy — June 20, 2006 @ 10:26 pm - June 20, 2006

  8. Dan,

    You are so right and this has been bothering me for a while. Look at the extraordinary efforts our military went through to find and save these fine young men while what does our enemy do? They send their young and even retarded on suicide missions to kill anyone or everyone by filling their brains with illusions of paradise for commiting mass murder. Imagine if the world press were properly alligned with reality and every atrocity committed by our sick enemies received the headlines that the U.S. military receives even after fake charges like peeing on Kurans or whatever. This is a sad world we live in where the true barbaric evil is labeled insurgents while those falable heroes that defend freedom, not just for the U.S. but for Iraq, are purposely called the mass murderers. If the MSM and therefore the majority of our people do not get this simple point and just listen to the headlines, this will be Vietnam times 10 and the left will jump for joy while destroying this country and the world for decades to come. Please keep up the great work.

    Cheers,

    Jody Green

    Comment by Jody Green — June 20, 2006 @ 10:37 pm - June 20, 2006

  9. […] Oh and Gay Patriot hits the nail absolutely on the head. Treating their deaths with a certain degree of solemnity, even if just at first, is appropriate; using them to score points against the neo-cons, as Sully does, is revolting. […]

    Pingback by The Conjecturer » Ironic, I Guess — June 20, 2006 @ 10:38 pm - June 20, 2006

  10. “Are you equally outraged by U.S. atrocities committed against Iraqis?”

    No.

    Comment by Tom W. — June 20, 2006 @ 11:13 pm - June 20, 2006

  11. The two soldiers didn’t “show signs of being tortured” they were mutilated to the extent that identification required DNA tests.

    If US troops committed atrocities I’d be outraged. Until they do, I reserve my outrage for the sadistic animals we’re fighting.

    I predict a surge in recruiting… OUR recruiting. It really is worth it to destroy these monsters.

    Comment by Synova — June 20, 2006 @ 11:27 pm - June 20, 2006

  12. Are there U.S. atrocities that are equal to what was done to these two soldiers that would be worth “equal outrage”?

    Comment by Eric Anondson — June 20, 2006 @ 11:30 pm - June 20, 2006

  13. Jody,

    This is where you show how much the American people truly misunderstand the situation. Despite what you hear in soundbites, there are a number of different factions killing in Iraq. Almost every release of information from our military shows that less than 10% of the fighters that they have captured are Al Queda or foreign fighters, the barbarians who committed this atrocity. The rest of the killings are done by a combination of actual Iraq insurgents who are Shia and death squads from the Sunni’s. So must of the violence is being committed by actual Iraqi citizens against one another.

    Comment by Derrick — June 20, 2006 @ 11:40 pm - June 20, 2006

  14. […] GayPatriotWest said it better than I. Title of his rant: Murder and Media Manipulation: Al-Qaeda’s Strategy in Iraq. It is a must-read. Al Qaeda’s remaining leaders in Iraq know that by murdering innocent civilians and relying on a compliant Western press, they will make it appear that despite numerous successes, U.S. and Iraqi forces are unable to control the situation in Iraq. Thus, Al Qaeda attacks the targets they can most easily attack, not the ones with any strategic value in a traditional military sense. That’s because their strategy is getting headlines and winning this one not on the battlefield, but in the U.S. media. And to that end, it doesn’t matter how many Iraqis they murder. […]

    Pingback by Hang Right Politics - Archives » I Tried to Find the Words, but Someone Already Did — June 20, 2006 @ 11:48 pm - June 20, 2006

  15. Excellent post. The point is this; the monsters in Iraq, who cannot win anything on the battlefield, are clearly putting their entire effort to feeding and nuturing the one great accomplice, the MSM. Nothing is done recently for any other purpose, except to provide their function propaganda arm.

    So when will the MSM actually quit aiding the terrorists by not doing exactly what they want done?

    Comment by Mike O — June 21, 2006 @ 12:21 am - June 21, 2006

  16. ya know….it’s kinda disgusting watching the MSM reporters get hard-ons reporting that these two soldiers were tortured before they were killed. Even Andrew Sullivan’s nipples got nice and erect just at the possibility that they’d be tortured. If this country had the backbone that my grandfather’s generation had, they’d line up all these reporters against a wall and let fly with a couple of Uzis

    Comment by Christopher — June 21, 2006 @ 12:30 am - June 21, 2006

  17. LOL@the idea that the MSM are “puppets” of the Iraq insurgency.

    What do you expect them to do? Not report the daily slaughter? And where did you learn of the numerous successes in Iraq? Personal phone calls to Iraqis? Blogs? Reminds me of Ann Coulter claiming on The Today Show, promoting her book, that conservatives are deprived a voice by the MSM.

    The barbarity of the insurgency is very good evidence of the futility of our invasion of Iraq and it’s success is evidence of our total lack of preparation. Far more people have been killed and tortured since our occupation than were in the last 10 years of Saddam’s reign.

    This is Vietnam all over again. The hubris of America’s elected leaders and their inability to admit their failure will continue to kill thousands on both sides until enough people are affected. And then you’ll blame he MSM for showing the faces of dead Americans.

    Comment by donny — June 21, 2006 @ 1:22 am - June 21, 2006

  18. line up all these reporters against a wall and let fly with a couple of Uzis

    Ah yes, the Rethug way of “spreading freedom and democracy.”

    BTW, I’m really quite amazed that Dan had the unmitifgated gall to bring up the Geneva Conventions! As Sully so aptly puts it http://tinyurl.com/k3nv4 :

    What was once a difference in kind between us and our enemy is now a difference in degree. That fact profoundly weakens our moral standing in the world, the power of our cause, and impedes the long-run success in the war of ideas that the war on terror involves.

    Comment by Ian S — June 21, 2006 @ 1:27 am - June 21, 2006

  19. I’m curious, but who is responsible for the estimated 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths?

    Comment by Just a Question — June 21, 2006 @ 1:32 am - June 21, 2006

  20. And where did you learn of the numerous successes in Iraq?

    Well we sure as hell won’t hear it from the liberal left and their accomplices in the MSM, will we? So much for their claims of supporting the troops.

    This is Vietnam all over again.

    No matter how much you desperately want it to be, it ain’t.

    The hubris of America’s elected leaders and their inability to admit their failure will continue to kill thousands on both sides until enough people are affected.

    What you mean is the hubris of America’s elected leaders for daring to do what lord BJ couldn’t be bothered to do. It’s a damn shame they won’t allow you and your liberal fuckbuddies to undermine the war and the country so they can regain their power, ain’t it?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 21, 2006 @ 2:10 am - June 21, 2006

  21. #19

    I’m curious, but who is responsible for the estimated 100,000 Iraqi civilian deaths?

    I’m curious as to whether you’re ignorant of the fact that that study has been debunked or if you’re hoping like hell that the rest of us are.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 21, 2006 @ 2:17 am - June 21, 2006

  22. And… of the more accurately estimated 30,000 Iraqi civilian deaths… those who are responsible are, i.e., those who did nearly all of the killing, are THE TERRORISTS.

    OK? got it?

    Comment by Calarato — June 21, 2006 @ 2:24 am - June 21, 2006

  23. Faux news boy, do you mean the “panties on the head” and the “barking dogs”? Oh, how horrendous. The beheaded and booby-trapped bodies pale in comparison . . .

    Comment by American Jewess — June 21, 2006 @ 2:53 am - June 21, 2006

  24. #19

    I’m also curious if you’re aware that you’re safer as a soldier in Iraq than a baby in a womb at Planned Parenthood.

    Just a Question

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 21, 2006 @ 5:42 am - June 21, 2006

  25. Furthermore,

    Let’s pretend that the left actually does give a damn about America and the Iraqi civilians. Why in the hell would they demand our disgraceful surrender and the ensuing bloodbath?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 21, 2006 @ 6:34 am - June 21, 2006

  26. I’m with #16. And spare yourselves the effort of typing “…then we’re no better than they are”. Fret-fret-fret-fret. that’s all you people do. Meanwhile others have to get all dirty cleaning up the shit that you;re too holy to. Say, Christospher, can you lend me an Uzi?

    Comment by Cranky Con — June 21, 2006 @ 8:29 am - June 21, 2006

  27. […] I think Dan at Gay Patriot has this exactly right. The media are willingly participating in the media manipulation the terrorists are using strategically. As horrible as these murders are, it is important to note that it is one of the few times Al Qaeda has succeeded in directly attacking coalition soldiers in Iraq. Normally, they do not directly attack our troops, but instead use Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) to target them. It is a sign of their weakness that they have largely been targeting civilians, murdering innocent Muslims. […]

    Pingback by Blue Crab Boulevard » Blog Archive » Media Manipulation — June 21, 2006 @ 8:32 am - June 21, 2006

  28. Democrat Message to Fledgling Democracy ? ?We won?t be there for as long as you need us?…

    Democrats in Congress are all too willing to join sides and help the media present a distorted view of the war on terror, the military and progress in Iraq. The Jane Fonda party is exactly what the terrorists need to deflate the troops, turn public opi…

    Trackback by Webloggin — June 21, 2006 @ 8:49 am - June 21, 2006

  29. How Al-Qaeda Manipulates the Media…

    Gay Patriot lays out the facts.

    What’s most appalling is the fact that those who are in the media know this is what’s bei……

    Trackback by Dean's World — June 21, 2006 @ 9:04 am - June 21, 2006

  30. Your column helps illustrate why violence usually escalates. Let me change and rewrite the beginning of your sentence below.

    You wrote:

    Since I first learned of the murder of the two U.S. soldiers whose booby-trapped bodies were recovered earlier today, I’ve ben trying to find words to express my outrage at this atrocity.

    I rewrote:
    “Since I first learned of the USA bombing that killed 13 civilians inclusing children, I’ve been trying to find words to express my outrage at this atrocity.”

    People remember their outrage but rarely try to understand their enemies outrage.

    Don’t misunderstand me … of course the murder of the 2 US soldiers is a horrible, and tragic occurrence. And unfortunately there are many more happening every day in Iraq. (there were in fact 13 civilians killed yesterday by a coalition bomb).

    Comment by Steve — June 21, 2006 @ 9:55 am - June 21, 2006

  31. “…If this country had the backbone that my grandfather’s generation had, they’d line up all these reporters against a wall and let fly with a couple of Uzis…”
    of course if that happened then this country wouldn’t be this country…it would have become the fascist nation that the bush administration and it’s supporters want it to be. i’m just thankful we had real leaders with real vision to found this nation. if it was up to the idiots that pass for leaders today (of both parties) and their kool-aid drinking cult-members (like the person who posted the above quote) we would be totally f’ed.

    Comment by j. — June 21, 2006 @ 9:56 am - June 21, 2006

  32. Web Reconnaissance for 06/21/2006…

    A short recon of what?s out there that might draw your attention….

    Trackback by The Thunder Run — June 21, 2006 @ 10:03 am - June 21, 2006

  33. #3 faux news boy — June 20, 2006 @ 9:54 pm – June 20, 2006

    Are you equally outraged by U.S. atrocities committed against Iraqis?

    No, of course they aren’t. You really do need to understand the mind-set of the modern American conservative. It is largely a tribal mind-set: you do bad to members of my “tribe” (even if they are US mercenaries/contractors, whether or not they are actual Americans) and I’ll vent my rage against members of your tribe. They studiously ignore the fact that, if their Bush malAdministration hadn’t invaded Iraq in the first place, the murdered soldiers would not have been in Iraq to be murdered. At least not by the Iraqis.

    Comment by raj — June 21, 2006 @ 10:04 am - June 21, 2006

  34. #5 cheshirecat — June 20, 2006 @ 10:16 pm – June 20, 2006

    Yeah, when the US Services start using women and children as human shields, kidnap and videotape beheading, and setting IEDs near restaurants, we’ll get back to you on that outrage. Okay, sparky?

    This is a joke, right? Even assuming that the Iraqi rebels are using women and children as human shields, where do you believe the US Services in Iraq would get women and children from to be used as human shields? The US? Eastern European women verschleppt for the purpose?

    Videotaping? Of course the US military isn’t going to videotape their activities. They might be caught in a “transgression.”

    Setting off IEDs near restaurants? One might presume that you have never heard the term “civil war.” A civil war that was unleashed in large measure by the Bush malAdministration’s incompetence. In a civil war, one fights with what one has. These aren’t set-piece battles like the American War of Northern Aggression.

    Comment by raj — June 21, 2006 @ 10:05 am - June 21, 2006

  35. #6 Kevin Baker — June 20, 2006 @ 10:20 pm – June 20, 2006

    Here’s the difference between them and us, 3 GIs charged in Iraq slayings

    We PROSECUTE our soldiers for committing atrocities.

    No. The US prosecutes its soldiers for violating the so-called “rules of engagement.” And, pray tell, who determines what the “rules of engagement” are? Why, the US Defense Department, of course! Not the Iraqis. Not the tribes or other peoples living in the area. Certainly not the newly-installed Iraqi government. The US Defense Department makes the decision as to what the “rules of engagement” are. And so the US Defense Department determines who can and cannot be prosecuted.

    Or scapegoated–as with William Calley.

    Comment by raj — June 21, 2006 @ 10:05 am - June 21, 2006

  36. “The barbarity of the insurgency is very good evidence of the futility of our invasion of Iraq and it’s success is evidence of our total lack of preparation. Far more people have been killed and tortured since our occupation than were in the last 10 years of Saddam’s reign. This is Vietnam all over again. ”

    This doesn’t even make sense on its own terms, in addition to incorporating a monstrous lie. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqs died by violence at the hands of Saddam’s regime. The UN estimated last year that there had been something like 27,000 civilian deaths — the 100,000 number was something that the MSM pulled out of their hats. (The actual Lancet study said “between 8,000 and 200,000” — a range so wide it’s meaningless — and the MSM settled on 100,000 as a nice round number that was in between.) It seems there are still a great many people who don’t understand that this is a media war, first and foremost. The above commenter is right in one way about it being Vietnam all over again — ask General Giap, Commander in Chief of the Army of North Vietnam. He wrote that he knew he could never defeat the US militarily, but that the anti-war sentiment of the left, a result of the Communists’ considerably propaganda victories in the MSM, would do the job for him. (It’s in his memoirs actually.) We of course know the result — millions of boat people, hundreds of thousands murdered by the new Communist regime in Vietnam, millions dead in Khmer Rouge death camps. So when you say that the “barbarity of the insurgency is very good evidence of the futility of our invasion of Iraq,” I guess you are looking forward eagerly the same result for the Iraqis that your fellow travelers successfully achieved for the Vietnamese and the Cambodians?

    Comment by Lisa — June 21, 2006 @ 10:12 am - June 21, 2006

  37. raj baby writes: “They studiously ignore the fact that, if their Bush malAdministration hadn’t invaded Iraq in the first place, the murdered soldiers would not have been in Iraq to be murdered.”

    This is a joke, right? Circulating around the study groups of 1-Ls?

    Hmmm, I guess that since this observation comes from a pro-German source who is still smarting over the fact that he can’t become a full fledged German citizen, we shouldn’t take it seriously.

    Honestly raj, you gotta get a new act… and find a way to effect that change in citizenship.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 21, 2006 @ 10:14 am - June 21, 2006

  38. Someone asked “And where did you learn of the numerous successes in Iraq?”

    Answer: From milblogs. (You’ve heard of that blogging thingy, right?) Try a few.

    #30 You rewrote it as your personal leftist fantasy… ummmm…. why,
    Steve? (I mean, other than the twisted self-gratification.)

    Comment by Calarato — June 21, 2006 @ 10:24 am - June 21, 2006

  39. Someone asked “And where did you learn of the numerous successes in Iraq?”

    From Fox News: although it seems that Fox is showing a lot of repeats.

    For example: for three years I have seen exColonels and exMajors saying:

    “we can win this thing … we are making progress” at least a couple of hundred times as if saying it will somehow make it happen.

    Comment by Steve — June 21, 2006 @ 10:29 am - June 21, 2006

  40. An example of Spanish MSM bias…

    Trackback by The Anti-Jihad Pundit — June 21, 2006 @ 10:32 am - June 21, 2006

  41. #36 – It’s worse than that, Lisa. Saddam killed at least 500,000 Iraqis in 1988-2003.

    That’s not counting the war deaths he created AND it’s not counting the 80,000 kids per year dead from starvation and disease while he siphoned off the Oil-For-Food money that was supposed to go to humanitarian relief (and went instead to 19 Presidential palaces and all kinds of French, Russian and German weapons he wasn’t supposed to have).

    It may seem unbelievable that some people are so sick and twisted as to prefer Saddam and al Qaeda and direct all their comments (or votes or donations or what have you) to undermining the U.S…. but it’s true.

    Comment by Calarato — June 21, 2006 @ 10:33 am - June 21, 2006

  42. #30 You rewrote it as your personal leftist fantasy… ummmm…. why,
    Steve? (I mean, other than the twisted self-gratification.)

    I don’t even know what u mean. I was just showing a similar view of another story that occurred yesterday.

    Separately, I am right-wing (economically) … praying for a government that will stop spending like drunking sailors.

    Comment by Steve — June 21, 2006 @ 10:34 am - June 21, 2006

  43. Steve,

    We can win this thing… in fact, we already are winning it. And that’s making progress. Deal with it.

    And good for you, for watching Fox News. (I do not.)

    Comment by Calarato — June 21, 2006 @ 10:34 am - June 21, 2006

  44. “I don’t even know what u mean…”

    Indeed.

    Comment by Calarato — June 21, 2006 @ 10:36 am - June 21, 2006

  45. “I don’t even know what u mean…”

    Indeed.

    Let me rephrase … Your post made no sense in relation to my post. .

    We can win this thing… in fact, we already are winning it

    The US has already lost the war… it’s now just a question of how badly (in terms of lost prestige, wasted money, dead soldiers, etc) . Now don’t get upset, I never said Al- Qaeda has won. Often (usually?) no one wins in war.

    Your sentiment … that “we can win” ….. shared by those in power … is scary. Why?

    With all the armed factions and growing hatred in Iraq,
    there will be no peace in the near term. Beyond the Kurd / Sunni / Shia / Al-Qaeda divisions, each ofthese has many (armed-to-the-teeth-and-mad) factions.

    And let’s not forget the Kurds. They now probably can’t survive without US protection. There is simply and sadly NO CHANCE of violence subsidizing in the near future with or without the USA there.

    Thus the USA will refuse to pull out and continue to bankrupt the treasury .. leaving 50,000 – 150,000 soldiers there indefinitely … even though no one (except the Kurds) wants them there.

    Sure … pulling out sooner would lead to civil war ….. yep nice mess … thanks.

    ——-
    PS- I’m assuming the author … after rereading his article …. is a bit embarrassed that he brought up the lack of respect for the Geneva Convention.

    Comment by Steve — June 21, 2006 @ 10:58 am - June 21, 2006

  46. Thus the USA will refuse to pull out and continue to bankrupt the treasury .. leaving 50,000 – 150,000 soldiers there indefinitely … even though no one (except the Kurds) wants them there.
    How many US troops stayed in Germany? In Japan? In Korea? How long?

    Oh, tens of thousands are still there today? Fancy that. No wonder we’re bankrupt… All that money we could have spent on education! Let me bounce a favorite cliche of the reality-based community back at you… “where’s your outrage?”

    “Support our troops! Bring them home… from Japan, Korea, and Europe!” Right?

    Comment by Eric Anondson — June 21, 2006 @ 11:18 am - June 21, 2006

  47. Sorry, LIsa, you still lose with you own math. Saddam, by the estimation of the same sources, executed less than 10,000 of his compatriots in the 10 years since the Gulf War. That is still far less than the number of people who have died in the last few years.

    I love how people on this site argue from a pragmatic position in one instance and then revert to an ideological one in the next moment.

    And I’m laughing very hard at the idea that blogs are more reliable sources of the “great successes” in Iraq than the MSM.

    Comment by dante — June 21, 2006 @ 11:56 am - June 21, 2006

  48. dante, you can neither accept nor admit that there are even good stories to be told about the work of our soldiers, the Coalition, the Iraqi govt or the vast legion of private sector, non-military Americans and other non-Iraqi experts helping to rebuild the country.

    You can’t. To do so would be to agree with a long-held, often-stated truism of the Right –in America, the MSM is biased against conservatives.

    But its ok, dante. You laugh –even laugh very hard. That’s about all your opinion and political capabilities are worth these days… generating laughs. At least you aren’t crying and depressed –and for someone on the GayLeft, that’s an incredible accomplishment in these days of the GayLeft’s marginalization and impotency.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 21, 2006 @ 12:27 pm - June 21, 2006

  49. Most of the insurgents are native born Iraqis that are killing other Iraqis or foreighners. Then we have the militias (that no one seems to want to talk about) who have a ‘relationship’ with the most powerful political party in Iraq; SCIRI.

    If the ‘relationship’ that Saddam had with Zarqawi is enough to justify this bumbling of a war-regime change, then frankly we should be invading Saudi Arabia.

    Comment by Edward TJ Brown — June 21, 2006 @ 12:27 pm - June 21, 2006

  50. Indeed.

    Steve, Raj, and Dante demonstrate how the modern Democratic Party works: insisting that Saddam only killed 10,000 people in the ten years following the first Gulf War, then weaving all sorts of fictions about US brutality to support it.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 21, 2006 @ 12:28 pm - June 21, 2006

  51. Brutal murder of Soldiers makes War Personal…

    I was watching FOX last night, after getting home from work, and was appalled by the news of the slaughter of those 2 brave soldiers. Will our Military finally get to finish these bastards off for good so the Iraqi…

    Trackback by Sneakeasy's Joint — June 21, 2006 @ 1:29 pm - June 21, 2006

  52. #45 – Steve – What part of the President’s strategy for stabilizing Iraqi democracy, and that as the definition of victory, do you not understand? (or have you not read it?)

    Let’s review the ongoing progress – only the most important points:

    – 2003, removal of an evil tyrant who had completely destroyed Iraqi civil society and reduced it to nothing. Mass graves exposed.

    – 2004, sovereignty restored to a native Iraqi government

    – 2005, three major elections create a democratic constitution and let the people elect parties. Well-trained native Iraqi forces start participating in operations and taking over bases and provinces from Coalition forces.

    – 2006, more native Iraqi forces come online, as the parties form a government committed to fighting the terrorists. The U.S. begins its troop drawdown – already, just in June 2006, we have 30,000 fewer troops in Iraq than six months ago.

    – 2007: More troop drawdowns to come.

    #49 – Ed – Sorry, but no.

    It may be true TODAY that most of the insurgents are native Iraqis. Because the Coalition, including native Iraqi forces, have successfully killed or captured the majority of the foreign al Qaeda terrorists that were in Iraq. Ummm, that’s good news, Ed.

    As for invading Saudi Arabia: Why would we do that? They have been cracking down on their al Qaeda.

    Terrorism was and is highly international. As of 9-11-01, six Middle Eastern states were most heavily involved in it: Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia. After 9-11, three of them undertook to shift in a good direction: Libya, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia. The other three did not. See if you can name them and whether than has had anything to do with the pattern of Bush Middle Eastern policy.

    Comment by Calarato — June 21, 2006 @ 1:30 pm - June 21, 2006

  53. #36 Lisa — June 21, 2006 @ 10:12 am – June 21, 2006

    The actual Lancet study said “between 8,000 and 200,000″ — a range so wide it’s meaningless — and the MSM settled on 100,000 as a nice round number that was in between.

    Actually, it was the Lancet study that settled on the 100,000 number, not the “MSM.” If you understand statistics, you might want to root around Tim Lambert’s site (he actually understands statitstics) which has postings on the Lancet study that are available through http://timlambert.org/category/lancetiraq/ and http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/lancetiraq/

    In any event, the Lancet study estimates the number of excess Iraqi deaths following the American invasion over the number prior to the American invasion. Of course, the latter would include the number of Iraqi deaths during Saddam’s regime, including those that may be attributed to US sanctions. So regardless of whether the excess is 8000, 100,000 or a million, that would still mean the number above those under Saddam. Which is something that people often forget.

    Comment by raj — June 21, 2006 @ 3:23 pm - June 21, 2006

  54. #37 Michigan-Matt — June 21, 2006 @ 10:14 am – June 21, 2006

    raj baby writes: “They studiously ignore the fact that, if their Bush malAdministration hadn’t invaded Iraq in the first place, the murdered soldiers would not have been in Iraq to be murdered.”

    This is a joke, right?

    Actually, it should be self-evident. Even to a 2-L. Even to a 2-L who gained admittance under AA (affirmative action).

    On the other hand, it might not be self-evident to a legacy. You weren’t a “legacy” admission, were you?

    Comment by raj — June 21, 2006 @ 3:25 pm - June 21, 2006

  55. #38 Calarato — June 21, 2006 @ 10:24 am – June 21, 2006

    Someone asked “And where did you learn of the numerous successes in Iraq?”

    Answer: From milblogs.

    Oh, that’s nice–milblogs. So, tell me once again. Why doesn’t the US military take the US news media out to show them their successes? It seems to me that, if things were going as swimmingly in Iraq as you seem to believe, the US military would be all excited about showing it to the US media. The fact that they apparently don’t do that suggests to me that things aren’t going as swimmingly as your milblogs might want you to believe.

    Heck, even during Vietnam, the US military tried to seduce the US media into reporting that things were going swimmingly. Now, the US gov’t appears to be trying to browbeat the US media into reporting that things are going swimmingly, even though they have provided no evidence that they are. Of course, the US media being the sheep that they are, will go along with the Bush malAdministration’s line.

    Comment by raj — June 21, 2006 @ 3:25 pm - June 21, 2006

  56. #45 Steve — June 21, 2006 @ 10:58 am – June 21, 2006

    And let’s not forget the Kurds. They now probably can’t survive without US protection.

    That may be true, but, if it is, it is primarily because Turkey and Iran believe that the Kurds in Iraq will try to join with the Kurds in southeastern Turkey and western Iraq to form a new Kurdistan. Thereby inviting retaliation from Turkey and Iran, and thereby destabilizing the entire region. Which was one reason for my objection to Bush’s war on Iraq.

    Question for the Bush malAdministration apologists here: if the Kurds from Iraq start attacking Turkey–an American Nato ally–will the American military come to the defense of Turkey? I have no reason to believe that it will.

    Comment by raj — June 21, 2006 @ 3:27 pm - June 21, 2006

  57. Wednesday Guest Blogging…

    Wow, Ann Coulter guest blogging at Agitprop! Thanks for stopping by Ann. Always a pleasure, thanks for having me blogenfreude, you godless liberal scumbag. [adjusts flamethrower]: Privates First Class Kristian Menchaca and Thomas Tucker were members of…

    Trackback by AGITPROP: Version 3.0, Featuring Blogenfreude — June 21, 2006 @ 3:31 pm - June 21, 2006

  58. It’s important to remember that the current level of violence in Iraq could be maintained by a small insurgent group. The overall level of violence on a per capita basis in Iraq is not that much higher than it is in a typical major US city, but the results get magnified by the mainstream media, which insists on listing every single event every day. It may be difficult to get the violence any lower than it already is considering we can’t even get the violent death rate lower than that in Washington, DC.

    Comment by Rod — June 21, 2006 @ 4:58 pm - June 21, 2006

  59. How frustrating. Liberals are so anti American and anti Bush that they cant recognize victory when it stares them in the face. How bout 48 million free Arabs exterminating terrorists from land and space which was a haven to terrorists just 3 yrs ago. How about the fact that it’s been almost 5 years since an attack on our soil. You can’t really think that would be true if we had not taken the fight to the terrorists. The work goes on, the battle continues, the dream lives on. If leftists won’t protect the country…step aside, let the grownups do it.

    Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — June 21, 2006 @ 6:26 pm - June 21, 2006

  60. Without addressing the main point of your post, which I generally agree with, I do want to point out that the below is factually incorrect:

    As horrible as these murders are, it is important to note that it is one of the few times Al Quaeda has succeeded in directly attacking coalition soldiers in Iraq.

    While IED’s attacks are providing a large number of the casualties, very many are also due to “direct” attacks in the form of small arms fire, mortar rounds, etc. There have been a number of significant incidents, including the unfortunate annihilation of some Marine sniper squads in this manner. Also IED attacks are usually followed up with small arms and rocket propelled grenade attacks. Casualties and deaths from secondary fire in these attacks tend to get lumped in with those from the actual blast.

    What this is however, is a rare example of the capture of American troops, although there have been a lot of civilian kidnappings.

    I will also point out that so far it appears that Al Quaeda has apparently failed in this incident to do one of their televised orgies in media depravity. It is a small thing, but it is something to be grateful for and I pray this continues to be the case.

    Comment by Patrick (Gryph) — June 21, 2006 @ 7:16 pm - June 21, 2006

  61. I want to know where the so-called human rights groups on the murders of these soldiers? Where are those who demand adherence to the Geneva Convention? They’re to busy bashing Bush to give a sweet Jesus about how our soldiers are treated.

    While the libs are pissing themselves over the treatment of Club Gitmo patrons, why don’t they give a fuck about how al-Qaeda treats their prisoners?

    How are we supposed to believe that liberals give a single solitary DAMN about Iraqi civilians, be it 8,000 or 100,000? They never cared before the war and they obviously don’t care now since they demand our surrender and an Iraqi bloodbath.

    The simple fact is that the American left could give a fuck about Americans or Iraqis. They care about themselves and, for some reason, their plantation owners of the DNC. These sick bastards will use the deaths of either for their own advantage, but the reality is that they just don’t give a damn. Just look at their words and deeds.

    It’s sick, sad, classless, tasteless, pathetic, disturbing not to mention uncompassionate.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 22, 2006 @ 2:23 am - June 22, 2006

  62. #61 ThatGayConservative — June 22, 2006 @ 2:23 am – June 22, 2006

    I want to know where the so-called human rights groups on the murders of these soldiers?

    Why don’t you email them and ask them?

    It is my understanding that the “so-called human rights groups” primarily direct their attention to violations of what they consider to be human rights conducted by governments, not by perpetrators who are not related to the governments.

    Unless, of course, the governments give their tacit imprimatur and encouragement to the perpetrators by not bothering to try to track them down and prosecute them. As with death squads in, for example, Guatemala.

    Where are those who demand adherence to the Geneva Convention?

    Sorry to have to disabuse you of your implicit notion, but the fact is that the Geneva Convention only adheres to the contracting states. The text of the Convention is here. As has been made clear many times before by the Bush II administration, persons such as the likely abductors, would be most likely considered “enemy combatants” (as with those who the American government verschleppt from Afghanistan to Guantanimo) and would not be entitled to Prisoner of War protections in the Convention. Even in the unlikely event that the abductors would adhere to the Geneva Convention, it would be a bit much to expect that they would after the Bush II administration made it clear that it would not apply the Convention to them.

    In other words, tit-for-tat.

    Comment by raj — June 22, 2006 @ 7:45 am - June 22, 2006

  63. “It may be true TODAY that most of the insurgents are native Iraqis.”

    It has always been the case. The insurgents are not ‘freedom fighters’ but they are also not the work of al Qaeda. Al Qaeda has always been a minor play in the insurgency which has been mostly native Iraqis who (1) pro-Baathist or (2) Shiite or Sunni Islamic fundamentalists that want a theocracy. This does not include the Badr militia that few people want to talk about.

    The fact that some one is a thug or a dictator is not really a valid reason to invade, if it were then we would have invaded Saudi Arabia a long time ago. Also, Saudi Arabia ‘crackdown’ is largely window dressing.

    Keep spinning the lies. It is funny to read comments from my fellow Americans talk about the Middle East as if they really had a clue how things work.

    Comment by Edward TJ Brown — June 22, 2006 @ 1:57 pm - June 22, 2006

  64. To say the media is liberal is more misinformation. The media is predatory. It cares not for politics, simply for blood and sensational stories to boost viewership. It is corporate America at it’s best.

    Comment by Mike — June 22, 2006 @ 2:07 pm - June 22, 2006

  65. “What you mean is the hubris of America’s elected leaders for daring to do what lord BJ couldn’t be bothered to do. It’s a damn shame they won’t allow you and your liberal fuckbuddies to undermine the war and the country so they can regain their power, ain’t it? ”

    When BC launched strikes at OBL, the right screamed and frothed at the lips that he was trying to distract them from Monicagate and was trying to wag the dog.
    I love the way you guys are saying he didn’t do enough.

    I am still waiting for the headline that liberals are undermining the war from here. The war was prosecuted very poorly. The commanders and the Pentagon should be held responisble for the war going badly. I am against pre-emptive war and I still want us to win, I’m just wondering why our leaders don’t want to…. They have the tools, the might and supposedly the military training to plan a successfull operation why didn’t they?

    Comment by Mike — June 22, 2006 @ 2:15 pm - June 22, 2006

  66. When BC launched strikes at OBL, the right screamed and frothed at the lips that he was trying to distract them from Monicagate and was trying to wag the dog.

    That was because it was already known that the only thing those strikes were hitting were camps that had been evacuated weeks earlier.

    What we couldn’t figure out was why Clinton waited, especially when a) we knew where the camps were, b) we knew when and how many people were moving out of them, and c) we had a pretty darned good case that bin Laden was involved within hours of the bombing.

    Now, you can try to explain why, given that we knew all that, that we didn’t hit bin Laden’s camps BEFORE he was able to evacuate and empty them — like when the explosions might have actually done something.

    Meanwhile, we notice the fact that missiles came raining down on those empty camps right after Clinton had to admit on TV that he lied to the American public and that he was having sex during work hours in the Oval Office with an intern.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 22, 2006 @ 3:02 pm - June 22, 2006

  67. […] Hoepfully, GayPatriotWest has something to say about this, too. […]

    Pingback by Hang Right Politics - Archives » Now, It’s - Very - Personal — June 22, 2006 @ 3:45 pm - June 22, 2006

  68. NDXXX, I think one night my partner mixed things up a bit… Clinton was doing his mea culpa on TV and sort of claiming the only one he really needed to say Sorry to was wife and daughter… and then, of all things, asking Americans to pray for him and his family!

    We were watching Wag the Dog –a brilliant film that perfectly captured the cynical, manipulative and devious ways of a President gone “fishing”– when SlickWilly’s Show started. We got back to the film later that night… a few days later –wow. Life imitating Art.

    Oh yeah, SlickWilly and HyperGore were incredible leaders when they had the opportunity… DADT, DOMA, OBL sets up Taliban, border security eviscerated, military preparedness imperiled, etc etc.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 22, 2006 @ 7:48 pm - June 22, 2006

  69. raj dissing milblogs and then saying that if the news was so good why doesn’t the military tell people about it…

    I don’t know how many times I’ve heard someone say that *anything* that comes from the military’s PR department has to be assumed to be a *lie* and that milbloggers *lie* and that the president *lies*… so how, exactly, are any of these supposed to publicize the good news?

    Well they *do* but if you aren’t listening or don’t believe they tell the truth just because of your prejudices, it’s not reasonable to say that the fact that you refused to listen to the good news (whoever you are) is proof that there isn’t any.

    Not all milbloggers are singing the praises of the Iraqis and the Iraqi bloggers aren’t all singing the praises of the Americans, the picture painted isn’t all roses. It’s messy and real. Sort of like life but moreso. The military regularly releases reports about what their civil affairs people are up to. They point out the encouraging stuff but they don’t make it up. If you (whoever you are) refuse to be encouraged, that’s a choice you made of your own free will.

    The best bits, IMO, are the little pictures of Iraqi (or Afghan) life. The description of a single Iraqi military leader, be he impressive or a hopeless crook doesn’t prove that Iraq will prevail but it does remind you (whoever you are) that we’re dealing with real, honest to goodness, sinful messed up people, just like other people, and it’s wrong to expect them to be perfect or assume that they can’t prevail because they aren’t perfect.

    We’ve already lost?

    In what reality? The make believe one without real people in it?

    Start looking at some of that information you’ve (whoever the heck you are) discounted because it came from the wrong sources… namely military sources, official and unofficial. Start thinking, realistically, about the chaos involved in reordering a society and how long that’s likely to take, and think about what needs to be done now to succeed. A free an prosperous Iraq is an incredibly valuable thing, for us, and for them.

    I honestly don’t care what Bush said that isn’t true because what matters is the future of a country smack dab in the center of the middle east and I see people who would gladly watch it rot in hell with all its citizens if they can only score points here at home… or on a blog.

    Comment by Synova — June 23, 2006 @ 8:58 pm - June 23, 2006

  70. Americans Need to be Outraged…

    Two American Soldiers were brutally tortured, and murdered. Where’s the Outrage? Here, and here, for starters. ( Bless you BOTH!! ) Oh, and here, too! ;-D ( Morning- 6/22- PLEASE see the end of this essay for an IMPORTANT update…

    Trackback by Sneakeasy's Joint — June 26, 2006 @ 1:12 am - June 26, 2006

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.