Lalo Alcaraz for December 16, 2008

Are those skulls from Saddam’s mass graves?

From the graves George H. W. Bush and Ronnie Headrest helped Soddamn fill? Or from the graves of the Sadr city civilians killed by US bombing last spring, which al-Zaidi saw firsthand? Guess he lost his perspective and journalist’s objectivity. ‘Sokay, he may have had’em kicked back into him.

‘crats just remember that Saddam Was W’s daddy’s ally. The Kurd “incident” didn’t bother him at all.

poppy All the civilians killed? you actually believe al-Zaidi???? NUTS!

mtt, denyal doesn’t change truth.

re: NoFearPup

not saddam’s skulls -those skulls are premium prices… the US invasion has flooded the market with a glut of new skulls to chose from

re:oldlegodad71

can i exercise my freedoms to throw a shoe at Bush when he get’s back here ?

McClatchey is a bit more credible than al-Zaidi; interesting that the Sadr city civilians did not find the offer of a “safe haven” credible and declined to leave their homes, so the logical inference has to be that many died.   Iraqi leaders asked that military operations cease on civilian areas of Sadr city and pledged to remove insurgents: http://tinyurl.com/5ow9h8 but that did not suit al Maliki & Porgy, apparently: http://tinyurl.com/5v2hop

Hump You can not listen to THE ENEMY to get intelligence. That is plain dumb. True or not. As well from the start the media has been running this war in to the dirt insulting every single move we have made. This is TREASON in the “legal” definition. So they to, are not credible.

MTT, you can’t listen to W and get intelligence either.

Ummm, I’m skeptical - one million bodies? Where are they hiding them?

I don’t know, I am a republitard and I’ve run out of knuckles to count on…but that is an interesting way to count dead people: poll about 2000 people ask them how many relatives died (from their house) then project that number onto the general populace I’m not convinced yet. Couldn’t access Lancet page; I’ll try again.

ReFlex-76

I believe that you are the one in their own little bubble. The media did not get us in to this war. That is nuts to even suggest. This war started a long time ago. Like in 1990. Bush Sr. should have finished it.

SADAM WAS STILL IN CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In other words, it DID NOT END!!!!!

I am obviously not the delusional one. Bush Sr. ended early from political pressure and the chance of a re-elect

But it does not matter, cause once again it will not end. Obama will not finish and this war will turn in to another defeat under our belts. But this time, we have the enemy on the ropes and we’ll back off and let them go.

I was in a lead element poised for a thrust towards Bagdad in ‘91. Now I know the rest of the story.

bush finally got his legacy–shoes. He can always be known as the pres who was pelted with shoes

I hate to say it, but in this case mtt is right: Sr. quit before the job was done. Thus leaving the door open for Jr. & his daddy issues to create the mess we’re in now. Look at it this way: if someone steals your car, do you call it done when the police recover it? Heck no, you want the scumbag that stole it behind bars. Sr. gave Kuwait their car back (on blocks with the dash stripped) and told them, ok we’re all even now.

claudermilk: Bush 1 didn’t go in to Iraq because 1. His coalition wouldn’t support him. 2. No secured logistical support route. 3. He was warned by Gen Powell and ,get this, Defense Sec Chaney, that there would be no way for a free election to be won in Iraq by the people who would want us as allies an to otherwise occupy the country would be a costly and devastating experience. Just think all this in 1991.

I still “like” the skulls - nice touch, Sir!

Burned into my mind is the picture, before 1991, of Rumsfeld practically bowing to Sadam during his efforts to tie down the Iraqui oil, in trade for side winder missiles, etc. This, when our pilots were flying in Iraq skies covering the “no fly” zones..Hail to the chief.

I believe the “no fly” zones came after ‘91.