Posted on 01/10/2014 12:14:05 PM PST by chessplayer
Adam Banotai was a 21-year-old sergeant and squad leader in the Marine Corps during the 2004 invasion of Falluja, a restive insurgent-held city in Iraq. His unit — which had seven of 17 men wounded by shrapnel or bullets in the first days of the invasion — seized control of the government center early in the campaign.
So when Sunni insurgents, some with allegiances to Al Qaeda, retook the city this month and raised their black insurgent flag over buildings where he and his men fought, he was transfixed, disbelieving and appalled.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
5.56mm
Of all the horrible things that have happened, since the long national nightmare began, under the reign of "O" the Red, this the worst.
It's heartbreaking. All the blood was spilled for nothing as you said.
(Recall the vicious subhuman practitioners of the "religion of pieces" burned the bodies of the four men and hung them on the bridge there.)
It's just so sad.
Prayers for all of our military and their families.
This is exactly why it matters who you vote for-that you know what they believe in, what they stand for, and find out if they even like your country, and what it stands for, much less be willing to defend it and its interests.
The left has wanted another Viet Nam. Looks like they got what they wanted.
Tragic.
Who was it that pulled the USA completely out of Iraq? It was not Bush, his foibles and outright blunders notwithstanding. Bush, for the weakness that he showed, at least did not present the simpering, submissive face that Obama wears towards that part of the world.
Funny how those that remind us of the blame that Bush bears (which I don’t deny) want to exonerate Obama, who pulled everyone out and encouraged the terrorists openly.
I had a year of college left in Sept. of 2001, and I made my mind up that Tuesday, the 11th, that I would jump in wherever we were fighting when I graduated. Besides, it would take months/a year to plan the thing anyway...
I changed my mind three days later, when, at the memorial service at the National Cathedral, I heard a mooselimb imam speaking. I was offended, because I know what islam is, what it means and what it does. And I felt angry, because this guy apologized for absolutely NOTHING. My "spider sense" was telling me something is wrong.
I knew Bush had a propensity for weakness towards his enemies, starting with the EP3 incident and extending to the democrat party, so I knew this was politically correct horsecrap from him or Karen Hughes, Karl Rove, etc.
But that Saturday, Rita Cosby, on Fox News, showed a video of Muzzamil Siddiqi (the imam invited to speak at the 9/11 service) chanting "DEATH TO AMERICA!". (I have been unable to find this video on the internet since 2003)
I would have expected that from Klinton, and from Gore, but not from a Christian republican from Texas. I was stunned. I knew the fix was in. Throw in his "Islam is peace" comment the following week, and I knew I was witnessing the beginnings of the (internal and external) systematic, planned unraveling of the American empire. Throw in the "Infinite Crusade" and "Infinite Justice" horseshit, and I knew I would never sign up.
Fast forward to 2003. Even the "shock and awe" seemed muted. The ROE (Rules of Engagement) were getting our troops killed for no reason. Building schools for people that will never learn to read. Giving out candy so they can get shot at or blown up. THEY don't give a crap about the kids there, why should we?
That war should have taken 3 months. Maximum. ANNIHILATE every major city with the largest conventional bombs we have, kill indiscriminately, KEEP THE MEDIA AWAY from the battle...Then leave. If they want help, we come back, and we get all the oil we can suck up out of the dirt. and they play by our rules, or more die.
That is what they understand. Islam MEANS submission. They will submit to us. Instead they sh-t on us. Bush could have been 60% as crazy as I sound, and the world would have been a lot safer, and Fallujah would not be in enemy hands.
Another Obama victory. He does not have our best interest in anything.
See Post #20 and I too remember well the NY Times staff squawking about there was no AQ in Iraq.
I also remember well the media supporting going after AQ wherever they were but it became convenient for them to turn on Bush and the American people by claiming AQ was no longer in Iraq or operative much of anywhere. They said this and printed it and had no knowledge if they were inaccurate or not. It was all a campaign to characterize the war efforts as without merit and unjustified.
Democrats always do this, they run away and let a victory turn to defeat and then blame the republicans for the mess.
I will give you a specific example, a real on the ground example told by a person in local contact with AQ.
His name is Azhar and is 100% westernized Pakistani living in Karachi but very successful in business. He lived in the USA for a long spell and visits often as his brother and his brother’s family live in the USA and are American citizens. All are very fond of the USA and its rule of law. They would like for nothing more than Pakistan be more like the USA.
Azhar told me that the locals where he lived couldn’t just go round up AQ and their families because AQ had been living among them for 30 years and had intermarried.
But what they could do is make AQ and its jihad cult very unpopular as long as the USA was seen as strong and invincible.
Azhar said the Paki population was steering the AQ youth away from jihad. It was no longer popular and actually was seen as an embarrassment on par with Somali pirates up against Navy destroyers and Seal Teams. What the AQ kids wanted was to grow up educated and prepared to join the first world.
And the local attitudes towards AQ jihad in Pakistan are mirrored in Iraq.
How then does Obama’s dereliction regarding Iraq help to foster anti-AQ sentiments? Answer: It doesn’t.
Another example:
An Iranian friend of mine in Amsterdam and another friend in Israel on the recent ‘let up’ on the regime in Iran. My Iranian friend hates the mullahs there and says and I have confirmed with others that many people in Iran hate the mullahs too. When the Shah was in power there was a middle class and people could buy a home and a car, their kids could attend college and life was quite good. But the Shah’s secret police went too far and the people wanted some honesty so they thought Khomeini might be what they need. They were wrong. The Mullahs took over just as Mandela in S. Africa and split the power and riches among their cronies. The Iranian middle class died and my Iranian friend sees the same happening to the USA.
The Iranian people hate the Mullahs and want to see them gone. Given the opportunity they will brave any hardship to rid the country of these “bastards” as they call them. But they will not tolerate an outside attack led by foreigners. That will make them angry.
Iranians are different from Iraqis because Iraqis are a patchwork of many different peoples who will not be necessarily angered if an outside force steps in. The 40 million Kurds to the north in Iraq love Americans and are grateful to God for the sacrifice that Americans made in Iraq. The Iraqi Sunnis do not necessarily like the American presence but they accepted it as long as it was not seen in their daily lives. Petraeus handled the population just right.
But what does Obama do in Iran? He allows the prospects of lifting sanctions to be floated. What does that mean specifically? It means billions upon tens of billions of frozen assets for example 20,000 kg of Iranian gold frozen in place in UAE can be released. Released to who? To the bastard mullahs that the people hate.
Will this help the people in Iran? Of course not. All we needed to do was to keep the siege going on Iraq and in fact as my Iranian friend and Israeli friend both said separately that tripling the sanctions would lead to starvation in Iran but this was good medicine, why? Because the Iranian people would not blame America or NATO countries for their starvation, they would blame the mullahs and they would rise up and overthrow the mullahs.
So Obama lets AQ revive itself in Iraq and lets the mullahs salivate at tens of billions of dollars in assets for themselves and their cronies while the people in both countries suffer.
In Iraq all that needed to be done was a massive drone strike against AQ leaders. In Iran all that was necessary was a tripling of the sanctions. The people in both place would have taken care of the rest.
But the pukes at the NY Times see the failure of Obama in Iraq and scramble for damage control by trying to divert attention to GW Bush. It’s Obama’s world now and AQ is taking control in Iraq and the mullahs are smiling in Iran. This is the legacy of Obama.
Let’s be clear, if the Iranian government gets the bomb, it is a 100% certainty that they will give the bomb to one of their sponsored terrorist groups who will not hesitate to use it on us or our European allies. It will happen.
And if the pukes at the NY Times still exist, they will write how the nuclear explosion was a payback to the USA for all its interference in Iran and support of the Shah.
So chessplayer, your NY Times friends have NO point. They have lunacy wrapped in a defense of their leftist leader Obama.
And you did know that far more than 50% of the NY Times editorial staff are homosexual? Well you do now. Look it up.
Thank you for risking everything for a cause greater then your own desires. Please do not buy into the belief that your sacrifices and the sacrifices of your brother and sisters in arms was for “nothing”. Regardless of how Bush or Obama or the Iraqi government wasted the efforts and sacrifices of warriors like you, you can say that you at least gave your best effort to give people a chance at freedom from evil and oppression and that is not “nothing”. That is perhaps the greatest gift/sacrifice a people can offer to others.
Repeat Offender,
You and your brothers also showed America’s enemies that we can go into any of their hell holes, kick their pathetic butts and make them pay.
All militant Muslims share responsibility for the unprovoked murders of 911. Obama caused us to give up ground, but if needed, we have warriors who can go back and again make our enemies pay.
I am almost to the point that tactical nukes might become a good option with these animals. If Russia and china finally have enough, maybe the Islamic problem will get solved in a joint effort.
I really appreciate your service and sacrifice. thank you
My son is finishing high school and I told him no way he joins the Army so I did right after high school, not under Obama, no way.
Many, many died in Iraq and Afghanistan needlessly because of the ROMAN and for nothing more than political reasons.
You sound like John Kerry.
What??? Vets themselves who fought in the Battle of Falujah are wondering what they put their lives on the line for. There is a Marine on Fox right now who fought in that battle who is wondering why. You gonna accuse them of being John Kerry??? Families had to spend this past Christmas without their sons who died in that battle. AND FOR WHAT? This is like troops taking Normandy in WWII just to have it given back to the Nazi’s.
John Kerry himself was in Vietnam.
But we know he does what he does specifically BECAUSE it hurts the United States.
What we should do is give 24 hr notice that the town will be removed from the map.....and in 16 hrs send everything that can carry a bomb to level it.
BTTT
The answer is simple: the Americans turned over domestic security to the Iraqis. The Iraqis can’t handle the load.
This shouldn’t be a surprise.
For years we have been electing fools who think that the only important forces in determining world events are free elections and a free economy. They have been utterly blind to the power of religion and culture in shaping what nations will be.
In their provincial Ivy League view of the world you just need to teach a backward people to vote, give them a working legal system and free economy and presto chango they will be just like little Americans. This conceit was around during Vietnam. It was operating in spades when the decision was made to remake Iraq.
We can influence another country as long as we keep American troops there to back a local government that we approve of. But once we tire of spending lives and money the locals will revert to form and their religion and culture will rise to the top. The crime is that American soldiers and Marines pay the price for an exercise in folly that they have no control over.
I don't care who the president is, we don't need any troops ANYWHERE, unless we're going in to kick some ass, militarily defeat an enemy, and then get the hell out.
We shouldn't have combat troops stationed anywhere on this planet unless they have a specific military mission, or be situated on a friendly ally base.
The locals need to be responsible for their own patrols and control of their territory!
Arab Muslims are incapable of running their own countries.
When we went into Iraq, I thought that we would need to occupy the country for at least 20 years, anything short of that, and it would fall apart within months of us leaving.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.