"Unlike the American troops, we look the Iraqis in the eye"

The Daily Telegraph U.K. ^ | 4-05-03 | Not attributed

[Pukka Puck]

What part don't you understand?

[Happygal]

I might wrestle you...but be fore warned. I may bite! ;-)

[WaterDragon]

"Fortunately for all of us, the adults are back in charge in Washington."

Amen, Chemist_Geek!

[Fred Mertz]

GRRRRRRRRRRowl!

[Happy2BMe]

"Fortunately for all of us, the adults are back in charge in Washington."

[Happygal]

Pukka...using Chemist_geeks username as a basis for (a)making a point and (b) comedy...failed on both premises.

Need some sleep, sweetie? ;-)

[Happygal]

What part don't you understand?

It's not the question, just the offer.

I have to sleep tonight Pukka...seeing a picture of you may not help peaceful (sans nightmare) sleep! *L*

[Chemist_Geek]

Sorry, I am not on drugs of any sort.

The obvious thing to write, would be, "Perhaps you ought to be." However, I'm not qualified to say.

What I am qualified to say is that there is no person, no military organization, which is perfect. The United States military is the most powerful on the planet, of that there is no doubt. However, its procedures are not perfect (just ask any supply clerk) and can be improved. If the Coalition is in Iraq merely to smash Saddam and grab the WMD, then it's irrelevant how we treat the Iraqi people. Of course, if we treat them poorly then we'll just have to keep going back, over and over, in the future, and fill up Arlington quicker. We need to create a nation of Iraq which is hostile to terrorists, and friendly to America.

Our forces can learn something - and be more effective in the long term - from the way the UK forces are behaving. There are posts above in this thread from Criminal Number 18F, which say parallel things.

Go ahead and label me a defeatist and America-basher. It'll prove my point.

[Pukka Puck]

Come now dear, it was at least as original and witty as Chemist_geeks' telling me to up my dosage of some sort of drug and you though that was a wonderful post.

So yea or nay on the picture?

[Happygal]

Ouch! From that response YOU could bite! *LOL*

[Happygal]

Excellent post, Chemist Geek! Just Excellent!

[Pukka Puck]

I agree with Waterdragon this article written in Telegraph is a crap.

This is not an article written to be informative or helpful. It was written to disparage American troops and caters to anti-American feelings in Britain.

If you can't see the glaring spin in this article, you are blind.

[Chemist_Geek]

Need some sleep, sweetie? ;-)

Yes, actually, I do. I've a busy day scheduled for tomorrow, and it's half-past midnight here. :-)

I'll catch up on the thread later Monday.

[WaterDragon]

I don't think anyone has said our troops are perfect, or that they aren't learning constantly, which they are.

The tone of the article is snide, and this isn't the first time the so-called conservative Telegraph has printed such. That is what is objectionable.

Do you think intelligent men are capapble, if they want, to write seriously about issues without snide sneering at the troops of an ally? I think they can, again -- if they want to.

[Happygal]

Why would you think I would want to look at your gay ass? ;-)

[Fred Mertz]

If you send your picture with your name across the Internet then you are likely to have your identity compromised.

You don't want do become Ahmedd Pukka, do you?

[Pukka Puck]

"I have to sleep tonight Pukka"

Yes, it might be kind of hard for you to sleep after you caught a look at me, but it would a good type of excitement.

You could always wait until the morning to open it up, but you being a girl, I doubt you will be able to resist the urge to check your mailbox.

[Pukka Puck]

"Do you think intelligent men are capapble, if they want, to write seriously about issues without snide sneering at the troops of an ally?"

You make a very good and obvious point. Why is this so hard for others on this thread to see?

[Pukka Puck]

Just asking.

I wouldn't want to force you to do anything.

[Pukka Puck]

I'll take my chances.