O'Reilly to call for the leveling of Fallujah?

Foxnews ^ | March 31, 2004. | Bill O' Reilly

[ConservativeMan55]

Foxnews host Bill O'Reilly just previewed his show. "Problems continue for the U.S. Military in Fallujah. Why doesn't the U.S. Military just go ahead and level it?"

I have to say that I agree with Bill. Level the place.

[Alberta's Child]

Someone put an excellent question to Donald Rumsfeld a couple of weeks ago along those lines:

"How can you tell me that you're going to turn the keys over to the Iraqis when you can't even tell me who is going to be getting them?"

[NittanyLion]

Lookit, nobody really wants innocents to die, and you know it. You belabor and beleager your point endlessly and boringly which forces me to conclude that you are an agitator.

I reply to others' replies, as is the purpose of this forum.

As far as no one wanting innocents to die, those who advocate leveling the town sure have an odd way of expressing those reservations.

Smug on, friend. You have no buyers here.

Stuff it.

[Robe]

" I fart in your general direction" ,
yup it works for the French !!!!

[isthisnickcool]

Wrong, wrong again, thousands got away with looting *and* murder, and were never caught. The 10,000 that were arrested wound up getting amnesty and a slap on the wrist, and this include thousands of illegal aliens.

Well, due to slavery in America we owed them one big riot so they could poop where they eat. /sarcasm off

My point is that it makes no sense to kill a bunch of people that had nothing to do with these murders today. My LA riot analogy was used to show that you cannot kill the innocent just because you are really really pissed off. If we do then we are no better than the morons that did what they did on 9/11.

But I can see how some want to just flatten then damn place because it's full of Islamic robots. Nutcase idiots following a nutcase "religion/cult". Would I cry if we did flatten the place? Nope.

[jackbill]

I too think that it should be leveled.

By the way, what military experience does O'Reilly have, other than playing with lead soldiers in his pre-teens?

[Constantine XIII]

Eh, I think the Romans had something there. :D

[SauronOfMordor]

In a town of 500,000 there are probably 5,000 insurgents. You have to figure out some way to kill the 5,000 and leveling the town would be unjust.

The town is full of Sadaam's tribesmen. Their standard of living as Sadaam's henchmen was pretty good. Now it's not so good, and under a Shiite-controlled government it will probably be pretty bad. They are pissed, and they are taking it out on us. Plus probably the radical Wahabbists are tossing money around to broke people in exchange for making trouble.

The place needs to be dispursed, and repopulated by Kurds

[sheik yerbouty]

It sort of clings and moves with them. A sort of malodorous cloud..

[isthisnickcool]

Gads! Look at Gore. Who makes Botox? They must be making a mint off the Dems.

[Joe Hadenuf]

They hated Saddam's guts. But they didn't dare cross him.

That doesn't seem to fly anymore.

You say they were scared to death of Saddam, but don't think twice about killing and mutilating people from the world's greatest military superpower?

Something don't ring true here.

[Schatze]

Thanks for the tip. This is uttterly disgusting. I hope no one is eating dinner.

[txhurl]

Like I said, friend, you will no doubt be horrified and villainized by what retribution will happen.

Save your angst for then. You'll be far more interesting.

[muawiyah]

There is this slum called Sadr City in Baghdad with more than a million dirt-poor residents.

The housing in Fallujah is much better than anyone in Sadr City has ever had.

Simply have the incoming Iraqi government give that housing to the poor. Then the Iraqis can work it out themselves however it is they do such things.

Why waste a perfectly good town when the only problem is in the people who live there.

[LisaMalia]

Presumably you're speaking of World War II. Truman had no other means at his hands with which to accomplish an end to the war. I suspect that, if he had the technological and surveillance capabilities of the current-day military, his decisions would've ultimately been different. He could have effectively directed force at his target as opposed to the populace in general.

Huh? Your comment makes absolutely no sense. Sure Truman had other means, but he chose not to use them, and thankfully so. Otherwise, like I said, we would probably not be posting to each other on this message board.

Don't be a typical liberal hypocrite. You can't have it both ways.

Innocent people were killed in Hiroshima, and innocent people may be killed in Fallujah. You can't condone one, and condemn the other.

[don-o]

Lookit, nobody really wants innocents to die, and you know it.

Opps. Then about 95% of the posters on this thread need to ask to have their posts deleted.

Oh, I get it now. Y'all were just joking around anout Daisy Cutters and nukes and whatnot.

Just funning, eh?

[NittanyLion]

Like I said, friend, you will no doubt be horrified and villainized by what retribution will happen. Save your angst for then. You'll be far more interesting.

I doubt it. Fortunately the administration understands what principles America is protecting a bit better than those like yourself, who have little more to offer than raw emotion at the expense of all logic.

[Tennessee_Bob]

Innocent people were killed in Hiroshima, and innocent people may be killed in Fallujah.

Works for me. We need to nuke Fallujah. One, maybe two weapons. Eliminates the need for troops on the ground, pilots would be at low risk. Send in the Spirits!

[NittanyLion]

Don't be a typical liberal hypocrite. You can't have it both ways.

This from someone who advocates killing civilians as retribution for...the killing of civilians.

Pardon me if I don't take your comments seriously.