Iraq - A Bloody Mess - Part 2

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Proximo, Jun 28, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Read Part 1 first...

    Who is being blamed for what here? It seems to me that the compiler of this 'incisive' piece of reportage has failed to include the unquantifiable - the fact that a whole generation of Iraqis will be able to grow up with a far more pleasant and hopeful future in store. Note how the list manages to firmly place the onus on thecoalition, even when there has been a significant improvement...

    There is no doubt that we still have a long way to go in Iraq, but it is hardly as bleak as this would have you believe.

    Numbers of phones? Is that really the measure of progress in the 21st century? :evil:
     
  2. saw this as well, and it should be expected. We must remember that if anything the "Independent", well it isn't! Deluded lefties, who would rather see a return of a dictator simply because he opposes US interest, is for them, par for the course. Let us remember that the Indie and the Guiarnd use to wax lyrically about the decadence of western capitalism as opposed to the "socialist workers paradise" that was Communist Europe. For the first few years after the wall came down, these same "pillars of truth" would critise efforts by the central european nations to move towards democracy.

    Interesting points in the article (if in general, its a load of hairy bullocks!)

    Combat indicators:

    Average of attacks by insurgents: Their analysis "figures should be viewed with caution beacuase of the US..." Really! how about, figures were 0 Pre-war, because Saddam use to wipe out any village with chemical weapons if any insurgency was even suspected"

    Total Nubmer of Coalition troops killed:

    pre war - Nil - D'uh, do ya think!

    (My favourite) Iraqi civilians killed:

    Pre war - N/A REALLY! now why would that be. Does N/A stand for not applicable, not available or no account taken?

    Indie comment: "Est of Iraqi civilian deaths have varied widely becuase the US military does not count them". Two points, first, blatantly wrong statement, as the US military does count them (but that might make the US look as if it actually cares, couldn't have that now) and secondly, the most obvious Analysis would be "Numbers of Iraqi civilians deaths are not available due to the fact that President Saddam reckons its none of your business, and any more smart questions from you, Mr western journalist and you can come and see our interrogation rooms first hand!"

    I could go on, but it would just make my blood pressure rise.

    On would hope that this sort of pathetic article would have been rejected by a university, let alone a "respected" newspaper, but unfortunately in the world of leftie yank bashing, anything goes!
     
  3. well, once anyway, and that was because it was a Kurdish village rather than a hotbed of insurgency.