An Intreasting Email @ Iraq

[MissAva]

Did you know that 47 countries have re-established their embassies in Iraq?

Did you know that the Iraqi government employs 1.2 million Iraqi people?

Did you know that 3100 schools have been renovated, 364 schools are under rehabilitation, 263 schools are now under construction and 38 new schools have been built in Iraq?

Did you know that Iraq?s higher educational structure consists of 20 Universities, 46 Institutes or colleges and 4 research centers?

Did you know that 25 Iraq students departed for the United States in January 2004 for the re-established Fulbright program?

Did you know that the Iraqi Navy is operational? They have 5- 100-foot patrol craft, 34 smaller vessels and a navel infantry regiment.

Did you know that Iraq?s Air Force consists of three operation squadrons, 9 reconnaissance and 3 US C-130 transport aircraft which operate day and night, and will soon add 16 UH-1 helicopters and 4 bell jet rangers?

Did you know that Iraq has a counter-terrorist unit and a Commando Battalion?

Did you know that the Iraqi Police Service has over 55,000 fully trained and equipped police officers?

Did you know that there are 5 Police Academies in Iraq that produce over 3500 new officers each 8 weeks?

Did you know there are more than 1100 building projects going on in Iraq? They include 364 schools, 67 public clinics, 15 hospitals, 83 railroad stations, 22 oil facilities, 93 water facilities and 69 electrical facilities.

Did you know that 96% of Iraqi children under the age of 5 have received the first 2 series of polio vaccinations?

Did you know that 4.3 million Iraqi children were enrolled in primary school by mid October?

Did you know that there are 1,192,000 cell phone subscribers in Iraq and phone use has gone up 158%?

Did you know that Iraq has an independent media that consist of 75 radio stations, 180 newspapers and 10 television stations?

Did you know that the Baghdad Stock Exchange opened in June of 2004?

Did you know that 2 candidates in the Iraqi presidential election had a recent televised debate recently?

OF COURSE WE DIDN?T KNOW!

WHY DID NOT WE KNOW??OUR MEDIA WOULD N0T TELL US!

Instead of shouting these accomplishments from every rooftop, they would rather show photo?s of what a few perverted malcontent soldiers have done in prisons in many cases never disclosing the circumstances surrounding the events.

Instead of showing our love for our country, we get photos of flag burning incidents at Abu Ghraib and people throwing snowballs at presidential motorcades.

The lack of accentuating the positive in Iraq serves only one purpose. It undermines the world?s perception of the United States and our soldiers.

This is verifiable on the Department of Defense website.

Pass it on!

 

[blueroses]

This is all true, and it''s all wonderful. However, look at our OWN media coverage at home! We rarely report positive news about anything, anywhere!

In my opinion, it has nothing to do with any partisan bias (which is a myth I simply do not buy) and everything to do with a cynical, corporate greed/profit/ratings-driven mass media. If we didn''t have the same pattern of domestic coverage, I''d say, "HUH, what''s the agenda there", but the CW in the news here at home is ALSO "if it bleeds it leads." Why report on schools and accomplishments when celebrity molestation trials, insurgents'' sucide bombings and runaway brides bring in the viewership and the all important ad dollars!

It''s pathetic and cynical, but I don''t think it''s partisan.

 

[Blue824]

Some of those I had seen before, but a lot of them I had not. Its nice to hear that things aren''t just grim like I see on tv and the magazines. There''s obviously still a lot of progress to be made though.

Blueroses is right, people don''t want to read the good, they want to read about scandals, blood, and the negatives....we only want to see the good when its cute cuddly animals, children or elderly on tv

 

[AGBF]

Did *YOU* know that todays "The New York Times" says that 12,000 people have now died in Iraq since we invaded it?

Deborah

 

[MissAva]

Yes I did, I also knwo that those numbers are sckewed, at least according to the DOD.

 

[MINE!!]

Date: 6/5/2005 10:50:51 PM
Author: Feydakin

Date: 6/5/2005 11:24:18 AM

Author: AGBF


Did *YOU* know that todays ''The New York Times'' says that 12,000 people have now died in Iraq since we invaded it?


Deborah

And how many were in the mass graves that were discovered after we invaded and deposed Saddam Huessein?? Filled by his policies and leadership??


As much violence as there in the streets of Iraq right now, it pales in comparison to the numbers that were killed before we even went there.. The idea that anyone, anywhere, can wage a zero loss war baffles me.. The fact that SO FEW have died over the last several years should be seen as amazing, instead it''s treated like an appalling number..


.. may hold at least 1,500 victims


.. Human Rights Watch concluded that ''as many as 290,000 Iraqis have been ''disappeared'' by the Iraqi government over the past two decades.


Is viloence the answer to all of our problems?? I don''t think so.. Os the appropriate application of viloence the solution to many of our problems, I believe it is..

Well said..

 

[movie zombie]

news from around the world indicates that the US is entrenched in another vietnam. our media mainly reports what is sanctioned by the government. it is an illusion that we have a free much less liberal press.

isn''t democracy grand?! i can have my opinion and you can have yours. perhaps we can agree on that.

peace, movie zombie

 

[strmrdr]

I was talking to a friend of mine that just got back for over there.
He was one of them that was building a hospital and a school.
He put word out that they needed supplies for the hospital and in under 2 weeks over a 2 tons of supplies was donated at no charge by people in the US not the government.
One night a few boxes of supples disappeared.
They put the word out to the locals about it.
3 hours later they got a message to go pick up the supplies.
They armored up and went to a garage and found the supplies intact and safe.
2 of the people they were training to work in the hospital one of whom owned the garage were never heard from again.
The people there were fed up with thugs and troublemakers.

99.9% of the people he met want our help and want us there.
Its the less than .1% that is causing problems for the rest.
The are causing more trouble for their own people than they are us. Its sad.....

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 9:48:23 AM
Author: strmrdr

99.9% of the people he met want our help and want us there.

Its the less than .1% that is causing problems for the rest.

The are causing more trouble for their own people than they are us. Its sad.....

How dare those .1% make trouble for us? Whose country is it anyway? Great scientific poll, too. Did the 12,000 dead people get a vote?

Deborah

 

[movie zombie]

i agree its time to bring the troops home. instead we''re building 4 more bases....

and let''s not forget the years of sanctions and that we were already bombing innocent iraqi civilians prior to the start of this ''war''. we don''t have much to be proud of......

peace, movie zombie

 

[MissAva]

I think our pres is extremely biased and says whatever will cause the most uproar. But that is how I veiw things. I also belive we did the right thing going into Iraq, but we ought to have had an exit strategy, if you want to call into question someone else info why not this nonsense about how many deaths? Our would the DOD be bias too?

 

[Rank Amateur]

Date: 6/6/2005 10:32:54 AM
Author: AGBF



Did the 12,000 dead people get a vote?

Deborah

Vote? The irony.

Millions upon millions of Iraqis didn''t get to vote. Until we "forced" it on them.

Damn Americans.

 

[movie zombie]

did something change? last i heard and i admit it was back when powell was still around the statement was made that DOD was NOT tracking iraqi dead....civilain or otherwise. the statement made went along the lines of ''its not our job''......

peace, movie zombie

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 5:11:33 PM
Author: Rank Amateur
Millions upon millions of Iraqis didn''t get to vote. Until we ''forced'' it on them.
Damn Americans.

You''re right, R/A. Invading Iraq was out finest hour. As long as poeple have a right (not an ability, mind you) to vote (for candiadates the US allows) it doesn''t matter to them if their family members all die.

Deborah

 

[Rank Amateur]

Some 650,000 people died during the US Civil War. Your great-grandmother was probably standing by in her safe and comfy home in Connecticut tisk tisking about what a waste of human life it was and how President Lincoln was entirely too laden with testosterone.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 6/6/2005 5:29:33 PM
Author: Rank Amateur
Some 650,000 people died during the US Civil War. Your great-grandmother was probably standing by in her safe and comfy home in Connecticut tisk tisking about what a waste of human life it was and how President Lincoln was entirely too laden with testosterone.

ROFL!
My kinfolk was fighting on both sides.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 6/6/2005 10:32:54 AM
Author: AGBF

Date: 6/6/2005 9:48:23 AM

Author: strmrdr


99.9% of the people he met want our help and want us there.


Its the less than .1% that is causing problems for the rest.


The are causing more trouble for their own people than they are us. Its sad.....

How dare those .1% make trouble for us? Whose country is it anyway? Great scientific poll, too. Did the 12,000 dead people get a vote?


Deborah

First off he was there and those are his numbers from his experence.
So if 1000 people are drowning and 999 want to be saved but 1 doesnt we should let them all drown then?

If your so worried about the Iraqi people why not put off the next diamond upgrade and go help them yourself?????

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 5:29:33 PM
Author: Rank Amateur
Some 650,000 people died during the US Civil War. Your great-grandmother was probably standing by in her safe and comfy home in Connecticut tisk tisking about what a waste of human life it was and how President Lincoln was entirely too laden with testosterone.

And your point is...? That 12,000 lives don't count? I didn't know we were vying for which wars had the most casualties. Well if that's your game, 650,000 is a drop in the bucket compared to the millions lost in just *one* World War I battle like the battle of the Somme. More than 650,000 lives were lost the first day of the battle. Does that mean that now 650,000 don't count?


Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 6:00:32 PM
Author: Feydakin
You are missing the point Deb.. MORE people died during ''peace time'' under Saddam Hussein than are dieing during ''war time'' with the US involved..

But I suppose that''s ok since it was HIS country.. We shouldn''t get involved in internal politics.. Let them solve it themselves.. Oh wait, 290,000+ died over 20 years under Saddam (that''s 14,500 per year) compared to the 6000 per year under the US.. And steadily FALLING numbers as well.. Hell, we cut the death rate in HALF by going to war with them.. How cool is that??

No, Steve, YOU don''t get it. The ones Saddam Hussein killed stay dead. They don''t get brought back to life as we kill *MORE* Iraqis.

Deborah

 

[MINE!!]

Date: 6/6/2005 5:50:51 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 6/6/2005 5:29:33 PM
Author: Rank Amateur
Some 650,000 people died during the US Civil War. Your great-grandmother was probably standing by in her safe and comfy home in Connecticut tisk tisking about what a waste of human life it was and how President Lincoln was entirely too laden with testosterone.

And your point is...? That 12,000 lives don''t count? I didn''t know we were vying for which wars had the most casualties. Well if that''s your game, 650,000 is a drop in the bucket compared to the millions lost in just *one* World War I battle like the battle of the Somme. More than 650,000 lives were lost the first day of the battle. Does that mean that now 650,000 don''t count?


Deborah

PS-You''re luck my grandmother is dead. You''re a wimp compared to her. She was one hell of a strong lady.

I think the thing that I don''t understand is why do you have a difficult time seeing things from other points of view? I have read all of the posts that you have here and I don''t think anyone was saying that people who have died don''t count. Wether it be 12,000 or 650,000. YOu seem as if you want to change the world, people''s opinions and have intentions of spreading your belief system. IN all of your ''education'' and knowledge is this the ONLY way that you see to do this? I see.. you preach.. ''tolerance.. acceptance... and...love?" yeh... rethink the way you portray it then.

I have a suprise for you.. It hasn''t worked yet.. not in the 1960''s and 1970''s with of the hippie lovin, pot-smokin cowards nor in the 1990''s or 2000''s with the celebrity ''shields'' that were coward enough to run right before the bombing of Bagdhad.

 

[MINE!!]

Date: 6/6/2005 6:02:34 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 6/6/2005 6:00:32 PM
Author: Feydakin
You are missing the point Deb.. MORE people died during ''peace time'' under Saddam Hussein than are dieing during ''war time'' with the US involved..

But I suppose that''s ok since it was HIS country.. We shouldn''t get involved in internal politics.. Let them solve it themselves.. Oh wait, 290,000+ died over 20 years under Saddam (that''s 14,500 per year) compared to the 6000 per year under the US.. And steadily FALLING numbers as well.. Hell, we cut the death rate in HALF by going to war with them.. How cool is that??

No, Steve, YOU don''t get it. The ones Saddam Hussein killed stay dead. They don''t get brought back to life as we kill *MORE* Iraqis.

Deborah

Isn''t that just like saying that those 290,000+ people do not matter to you? Maybe YOU do not get it?

 

[widget]

I was appalled that George Bush didn''t lose by a landslide in the last election...let alone that he actually won.

In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, there seemed to be almost global good will towards the United States, and an international willingness to join together in a "worldwide war on terror".

The invasion of Iraq was an ill-conceived and ill-executed disaster...begun on a premise that proved to be false (WMD)

I suspect that right now America and Americans are among the most hated or at least disrespected people in the world. I wonder how many new terrorists have been recruited since we invaded Iraq?


widget

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 6:11:09 PM
Author: MINE!!
Isn''t that just like saying that those 290,000+ people do not matter to you? Maybe YOU do not get it?

Hardly!!!!

My position is that if there is a tyrant, the people living under him have the right to decide whether they want to rebel, inevitably with great loss of life (as we Americans did against the British). It shouldn''t be up to a FOREIGN power to decide when the blood of the people should be shed if the aim is to liberate them from an oppressor! When the Iraqis were ready to face Saddam Hussein and put their lives on the line, we could have been ready to help.

HOWEVER: that was NOT our position. We did NOT invade Iraq to liberate the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein. We invaded Iraq (at least according to the President) to get rid of Weapons of Mass Destruction that threatened the United States!!! (Uh...but then there were none.)


Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 6:12:01 PM
Author: Feydakin
You seem so fixed on the fact that the US was involved in killing people during the war that you are completley disregarding the fact that their dictator for life was killing more of them than we ever have..

Please see my reply to Mine. I answer everything you said in your posting there. But here it is again in a nutshell: my position is that we did NOT go in to liberate the Iraqi people from saddam Hussein; we went in looking for Weapons of Mass Destruction that were not there. It is also my position that it was not up to us when the Iraqi people were ready to overthrow Saddam Hussein. When they were ready to die by the thousands opposing him, they would have rebelled...and *then* we could have helped.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 6:06:05 PM
Author: MINE!!
I think the thing that I don't understand is why do you have a difficult time seeing things from other points of view? I have read all of the posts that you have here and I don't think anyone was saying that people who have died don't count. Wether it be 12,000 or 650,000. YOu seem as if you want to change the world, people's opinions and have intentions of spreading your belief system. IN all of your 'education' and knowledge is this the ONLY way that you see to do this? I see.. you preach.. 'tolerance.. acceptance... and...love?' yeh... rethink the way you portray it then.


I have a suprise for you.. It hasn't worked yet.. not in the 1960's and 1970's with of the hippie lovin, pot-smokin cowards nor in the 1990's or 2000's with the celebrity 'shields' that were coward enough to run right before the bombing of Bagdhad.

Perhaps you might give a citation so that I might refute it articulately? I am unsure how to refute a barrage of accusations, none of which has been illustrated by an example from my writing.

How have I manifested an inability to see the points of view of others? (With which WORDS I used, since all we are using are words.)

Oh...and where did I preach tolerance, acceptance and love? (If I did this, I am proud...but did I? WHERE did you ever see me preach this? Citation, please.)

There is a thunderstorm here, so I will have to continue later.

Deborah

 

[widget]

Date: 6/6/2005 8:21:14 PM
Author: Feydakin
I never cared if we found WMDs or not.. They were one of many reasons we invaded, not the only reason..

The only "reasons" I ever heard prior to the invasion were WMDs, to rout out terrorists, and to "keep America safe"...

We only started hearing about "freeing the Iraqi people" AFTER the original stated reasons didn''t pan out so well...

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 8:21:14 PM
Author: Feydakin
Your argument seems hollow in it's desire to help.. Gee, I sure wish so many of you weren;t being killed by your tyrant, but hey, if you want a better life, take this rock and attack that tank.. I'm sure not going to run the risk of having people not like me for helping you..

Gee, so sorry not to be as bloodthirsty as you are. But then again, see my testosterone argument. You've got more than I do. You wanted a war and if the Iraqi people didn't, screw 'em. We bombed them to bits calling it (in a cute testosterone-soaked kind of way, "shock and awe"). How sick was that?

Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 9:25:00 PM
Author: Feydakin
Not bloodthirsty at all.. If the sanctions had worked (oil for food - but our french and russian friends had other ideas), UN inspection programs (I am sorry, but you can not inspect that factory for 48 hours while we clean things up a bit), And the ever present threat of war from Iraq going on the offensive and behaving in anything but a contrite manner after they INVADED THEIR NEIGHBOR and murder people by the thousands and got beat back for it.. I would have been more than thrilled to see not a single drop of american blood spilled in the sand.. But those things didn't work.. And weren't ever going to work..

That isn't why we invaded Iraq. Not according to your president, at least.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 9:25:00 PM
Author: Feydakin
You say I''m blood thirsty.. I say you are unwilling to make the hard decisions to make the world a safer place for everyone while hundreds of thousands are murdered and you say we have no right to intervene on their behalf.. I can only assume that you found our response to the Rwanan Masscres acceptable since we stayed out of there and let them kill each other by the hundreds of thousands (over 800,000 leaveing nearly 100,000 children orphaned).. With the appropriate hand wringing, of course..

Well...you can call them hard decisions. I think they were a snap for the cowboy in the White House. He isn''t exactly a deep thinker. Not very reflective. And did I mention he''s a cowboy?

Why accuse me of supporting genocide? Run out of sane arguments again or do you just enjoy hitting below the belt? Don''t get me wrong. You don''t scare me and neither does that great gentleman, R/A. My great-grandmothers and I are made out of sterner stuff.

Deborah

 

[tawn]

A little off the subject...and long, I apologize!

Although I have many questions/concerns about how the war initially started etc...and I can''t say that I either full-heartedly support or oppose it. What I can say, is that I offer complete support my husband who is currently in Iraq serving his country. The soldiers serving are not the ones that make the policies or decisions in regards to the war, yet they are they ones that seem to suffer the brunt of people''s negative opinions. That really annoys me...because I am more fully aware than most of the general population what the people in the military and their loved ones go through! They deserve our respect and support!

My husband told me not to watch the news because the reports that are sensationalized on tv...are not even close to the reality of what''s actually happening over there! One small example, most of the suicide bombers are not even Iraqi''s...but foreigners that set their families up for life by giving up their own. They aren''t doing it for love of their country. He has been amazed at the warm reception that he''s received by all the Iraqi people he''s met so far, which is completely contrary to what he was expecting. Public opinion here in the US is that all of Iraq hate Americans and are trying to kill them and vice versa, and he has not been having that experience at all.

I believe that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I honestly believe that few people will ever have the opportunity to actually have a clue about what''s really actually happening there. The media doesn''t begin to give an accurate portrayal...and the government isn''t going to tell all. In my humble opinion, the US really can''t win....either they didn''t do enough, they did too much!

The only experience I''ve has was when I spoke with a man who was originally from Iraq. It was several days after their election, and he told me proudly about how such a huge percentage of the people turned out to vote, I forget exactly, but wasn''t it something like 76%? Anyway, he told me how they risked their lives, and some waited all day because they ran out of ballots etc...and how important this was to them and how the Americans helped make it happen. But, he wondered why, when it''s so easy for Americans to vote...that significantly less than 40% of us bother!! Is it really that low?

Who believes that you don''t have the right to complain if you don''t vote?