Does this mean we have to invade them, too?

[Undertoad]

Disproving a strawman is conspiracy theory tactics 101. Nobody said it was a huge massively attended event. They said it was an important event. Nobody would have expected a big crowd because at that stage of events it would have been dangerous to be on the streets taking a position. Nobody "promoted" it. Nobody ever said there was a massive crowd and crowd size was never the important aspect of the event. People took long shots like this showing the scope but nobody thought it interesting because that wasn't the point of it.

It was an unusual event because nobody expected military operations to lead to Baghdad in a week.

The piece circles tanks in yellow because it is supposed to be significant... why? They are calling that "sealed off". It looks like a nice defensive position to me. Two days earlier that nearby Palestine Hotel was hit by tank rounds. Would you head out to the street to help knock the statue down?

[Torrere]

Except that in this case the straw man is widely cited by supporters of the war such as UG as evidence of that the invasion of Iraq was welcomed by the Iraqi people.

[yesman065]

There aren't any people in the picture because, as the description points out, the area was "Sealed off by Marines."

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by yesman065

There aren't any people in the picture because, as the description points out, the area was "Sealed off by Marines."

Therefore, this is BS:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Not welcomed? You have a memory that is shorter than your dick. The pulldown of Saddam's statue outside the Paradise Hotel in B'dad was just one example of many welcoming crowds.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Disproving a strawman is conspiracy theory tactics 101. Nobody said it was a huge massively attended event. They said it was an important event. Nobody would have expected a big crowd because at that stage of events it would have been dangerous to be on the streets taking a position.

Funny. It was also dangerous to be in Tiananmen Square. Why did so many arrive? It was dangerous to demonstrate for the Orange Revolution. Why did so many arrive? It was dangerous to demonstrate for the Prague Spring in 1958(?). Why did so many so up? It was dangerous to demonstrate for the Velvet revolution. Why did so many so up?

In each case, the people overwhelmingly wanted that liberation. In Iraq - no. That was a fact. So many did not like Saddam. But they also did not want the Americans. So reporters had to carefully find those who so welcome Americans.

As noted in anther post, Iraqi kid would display the thumbs up sign to Americans. Americans then knew the Iraqis were welcoming them. Thumbs up in Iraq is equivalent to the middle finger salute in America. Did you know that? Some reporters were reporting (accurately) that Iraqis were not who heartedly welcoming Americans - as demonstrated by so few people in the street.

UT says there were few people on the street - even though Americans clearly had secured the street. Too many want to believe George Jr lies. Americans were not warmly welcome in Baghdad. After all, if Americans were so welcome, then why did Americans suffer first 'terrorist' casualties in the Shi'ite areas (ie Sadr City) - where Americans should have been most warmly welcome.

Reality - many were lied to by administration spin. Reality - the welcome and hate even between two adjacent neighborhoods was quite sharp. And that was when it was safe for an American to venture on Iraq streets without protection.

At what point do we concede that George Jr is a despicable liar? He was then. He is now. "Mission Accomplished".

[tw]

Originally Posted by yesman065

There aren't any people in the picture because, as the description points out, the area was "Sealed off by Marines."

It amazes me how one still buys into another lie - that Iraqis did not have freedom. Some Iraqis were on the wanted list. They knew who they were and had the freedoms of wanted criminals. Most others had complete freedom in a country where government corruption was rampant and widespread. Iraq was a prosperous nation. That cannot happen without a significant degree of freedom. But George Jr lies proclaim the entire nation was under Nazi like occupation. That is only a Rush Limbaugh lie.

What are they today? Whereas some once knew they were wanted men; today everyone in Iraq knows they can die at anytime. Everyone only has freedoms of wanted criminals. Today, all - not just a minority - are now daily targets. As Iraqis repeatedly and overwhelmingly said in that BBC program last year.

12 Dec 2005
The BBC last night announced from Baghdad a result of the latest poll conducted by ABC News, Time Magazine, BBC, Der Spiegel, and NHK. By numbers of two to one, Iraqis declared everything as worse than it was under Saddam. Security has never been worse - although neighborhood security and security in the more rural areas has improved. But other things such as jobs, basic human services, etc all were lists as worse. After US spending $2billion just on the electrical grid, Iraq still has less electricity than under Saddam.

They are now liberated to perform all the ethnic cleansing, kidnapping, and murders they want. Clearly Iraqis have more freedom? Is that what freedom is? To fear like you have never feared before? Get a grip. We did not liberate them. We condemned Iraqis - to years of bloody civil war. We liberated people who did not want to be liberated - once we remove the Rush Limbaugh propaganda.

What do we know today? Literally every general who was commanding in Iraq in 2003/4, and Gen Garner and Jerry Bremer - they all told George Jr back then that America was losing in Iraq. It was known back then when George Jr was also lying about how Americans were so welcome. At what point do you concede your mistake - you believed what the lying president was saying. They did not flood the streets to welcome liberators. Instead they gave US soldiers the thumbs up sign.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Tonchi

I was speaking totally tongue in cheek, which even UG realized, and harkened back to that previous (unrelated) thread where UG was fulminating about his medals and rank. When somebody else asked him what that rank actually WAS, it turned out that he was not exactly as "high up" as his rhetoric would make you believe, whereupon I made my remark originally.

Actually, to set the record even straighter, I've never "fulminated about [my] medals and rank" or more properly my rate. Rank is officer, rate is enlisted, and anybody who thought I was a rear admiral was regrettably deceiving himself. I've merely remarked that I left the US Navy as an E-6 and that I have a couple of decorations of which I am proud, but which aren't the stuff of mighty heroism either. I know what I did, and I know the worth of it, in spite of attempts by certain fools and an antipatriot or two to denigrate it. These persons are of course despicable.

[Ibby]

Yes, UG, you're right, saying you arent a mighty righteous super-warrior of our fatherland is SO despicable.

Would you prefer me to call you a Sturmmann, brown-shirt??

[Urbane Guerrilla]

I'm certainly behaving better than you are, Ibbie.

[Ibby]

Nah, taking the occasional (well, okay, constant) pot-shot at the resident right-wing freakshow is perfectly acceptable in MY book, and that's the only one I play by.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Could we drift back to subject of this thread? What the hell was it, anyway?

Oh yeah, Iran.

[Torrere]

No, that's the Iran thread. This one is about Somalia.

No one cares about Somalia. UG's radical neoconservatism, on the other hand, gets people riled up.

That's why we're blowing hot air with UG instead of discussing the topic.

[yesman065]

Originally Posted by tw

We liberated people who did not want to be liberated - once we remove the Rush Limbaugh propaganda.
Instead they gave US soldiers the thumbs up sign.

Sorry to have to correct you again tw, but my statement was merely an observation of my own. If the streets are blocked off how can there be crowds of supporters there? Thats all - just something blatantly obvious - no conspiracy, lies, Rush Limbaugh or any other deep rooted innuendo or BS. Just a simple fact.

[piercehawkeye45]

Since it is about Somalia, I belive that we back the Ethopian government and we planned out their attacks but didn't do the dirty work ourselves.

[tw]

Originally Posted by yesman065

If the streets are blocked off how can there be crowds of supporters there?

Quite simply - there were not enough troops to block off the streets. That is why you see and saw rabble-rousers and looters running about. If the people so wanted liberation, they would have stormed through the security as they did to mass in Tiananmen Square.

The only place where the massive Iraqi population welcomes liberation was in the Green Zone and White House analysis. If Iraqis so welcomed Americans, then why was the parking lot in the Green Zone always so full of those black government issued Suburbans every day. Why did so many people fear to leave the Green zone even months after Iraqis were liberated and so welcomed American? Again, I believe that is even noted in the Frontline documentary The Lost Year

And then Iraq become even more danagerous to Americans. So many thumbs up signs - that meant they welcomed the liberation?