Warning: disturbing photo ahead
This photo, of an American soldier cradling a bloody child after a suicide bomb attack in Iraq is probably the single most disturbing photograph I have seen coming out of Iraq.
The people who blow up civilians are not "insurgents", they are terrorists, plain and simple--although Michael Moore thinks they are patriotic minutemen, resisters of American imperialism. They deserve everything that was done in Abu Ghraib, and then some.
May the U.S. Army grind their bones into dust.
10 comments:
I couldn't agree more!!
When you blow up your neighbors and countryman because you don't like American's... you are a terrorist.
My dad retired from the Army after 30 years as an O6 and would go over there today if he could. People who listen to the likes of Michael Moore don't understand what being an American is all about.
My prayers go out the the soldiers and to the innocent Iraqi people who are also dying for the sake of freedom.
Go Team America: World Police!
So the same applies to the IRA's activities in Northern Ireland (and those of the Protestant Loyalists)? Just checking because many in the US (including several leading newspapers) think that the IRA are "freedom fighters"....
I'm not usually one to pick up the political flag but one man's insurgent is another man's freedom fighter.
Although here (and probably in most cases) what freedom are they fighting for? The lofty goal of removing a foreign power may be the rallying cry but I doubt that's it.
I'm not going to condone anything they've done and I'm also not going to speak on our own military except to say that our hands aren't clean either.
As for Moore, I'm sure he's not cheering in the streets over this. Frankly any loss of life in this conflict is saddening. Besides Moore has another film to make, and it's about health care, not terrorists. If he wanted to make a point out of it he could.
The IRA, the ETA, the PLO, anyone who shoots civilians is a terrorist.
As they say in Ireland, "Fook the IRA".
I personally don't think that the term "freedom fighter" can be applied to anyone who blows up their own countrymen in hopes of igniting a civil war that will end in the establishment of a facist dictatorship. Nope, doesn't fit the definition at all.
I do hope there's a particularly nasty corner of Hell reserved for those who target civilians.
Then the revolutionaries that began America were terrorists. They regularly used snipers against British troops, and rarely followed the rules of war. Oh, and they also tortured British soldiers, as well as other Americans who didn't join the cause. A government always labels its enemy the worst thing imaginable. I'm sure newspapers in the 1700s were outraged at the antics of the rebels.
Do you really mean to say you can't see the difference between geurilla warfare (against a military) and terrorism (against civilians)? Are you that stupid?
So then the Iraqi insurgents are good? Are you really that stupid?
I really dislike when people use incorrect historical analogies. The British were not in America with the intent of goodness toward the colonies. We are in Iraq in order to dislodge a wild card leader with dangerous materials, as well as to liberate their people from all the death that he, his followers and bad-intentioned neighbors wrought.
Oh, and our military is the Best. No country in all history, with this much power, has wielded it with such compassion.
Dave in NY
Post a Comment