Actually, we were just fine until Bush started making up reasons to invade because he needed a good ad campaign for his election. It certainly does not have to be "us or them." We coexisted just fine, with minimal casualties, prior to the Iraq invasion.

Whom do you consider "us" and "them"?

__________________
"Homo Homini Lupus"
Thomas Hobbes

so I am accused of being underhanded and now you wish for me to explain why I wasn't? this aint france yet.......and I think the original “objection” was answered...by matt and others....

__________________

"The captain has turned off the `No Dubbing' sign. You are free to speak any language you choose."

you made another incorrect assumption, one would think you’d stop after a couple.

__________________

"The captain has turned off the `No Dubbing' sign. You are free to speak any language you choose."

Well, given the context of our discussion, "us" is Americans and "them" is Iraq/Afghanistan.

US probe disputes civilian deaths in Afghanistan - Yahoo! News

My favorite part...

In Azizabad and other small villages where civilians are reported killed in combat, the Afghan government and international militaries pay about $2,000 for each person killed, giving villagers incentive to file false claims. U.S. officials acknowledge that payments have been made for people who never existed.

A senior Afghan official close to the Azizabad case said Tuesday he was sure 90 civilians had not perished in the fighting, but he said the Afghan government had already paid claims to villagers. He spoke on condition he was not identified contradicting the official government report.

The official noted that President Hamid Karzai — whose government was quick to publicize the civilian casualties report — is running for president next year, and has reason to be seen standing up to international powers while taking the side of Afghan villagers.

No conclusive evidence has surfaced in the Azizabad case to confirm the death toll.

The U.N. and Afghan reports relied primarily on the word of villagers.

The situation is being politicized by the sitting President who will be running next year (sound familiar?), and the only evidence is the word of villagers who could stand to profit for claiming someone died who didn't. In that case I'd move from village to village claiming my "son" died every week. The U.S. military stands to gain something by claiming fewer civilians died, the Afgan government stands to gain something by claiming more civilians died, the Afgan civilians stand to gain something by lying about family deaths. The only people who don't stand to gain anything are those that are killed, and can anyone ever really know how many people died, and what connections they did or did not have?

__________________
There is no secret ingredient.

yanqui, go home

Neocons might consider having Al Jazeera arrested for 'committing News '

YouTube - Amy Goodman Arrested at RNC
Informed Comment

You think its wrong to assume few would complain if an armed Palestinian 15 year old were killed?

Surely if my assumptions are so wrong you can easily point the falacy and we can have a discussion about it.

I simply accused you of being underhand and detailed why I think thats so, you then denied that accusation of underhandedness, without detail. Matt and others then spoke of WS views on the murder of the student - a view from a post on another thread. Then the discussion they sought to have on this thread decended into baiting re Allah.

Thankfully we've moved on from then.

its a pity neither you nor the article can tell us anything about the raid.

I for one am glad this conflict is moving into Pakistan in any case as military logic dictates not allowing your enemy a space to rest. Your thoughts moon?

Excellent comment. Its hard to know whats what without footage.

I think that your policy invites another string of 9/11s. Not to mention more unaffordable wars, the further trampling of America's reputation, increased poverty at home, more expensive oil, a housing crisis, a recession and a Cold War. Military logic is for the extinct apes of history. And neocons.

So, we can believe one of two governments who are looking to solidify their reputations before elections, dishonest militants and the impoverished of villages looking for a check? I do love how we bicker back and forth with our opinions here but I am almost positive that there may just be enough brain power and diversity in these forums for some solutions to actually be developed.

That, I suppose, marks the end of any respect for any 'apology' that Guantanamo George might utter.

The tribesmen must perceive him as a collaborator.

Blunder on.

There's too many daft assumptions here to deal with.

Unaffordable wars? Expensive yes. Unaffordable no.

America's reputation re Afghanistan is fine. Same with all the other participants.

Poverty at home is unrelated here.

Oil is not facing a war shock, its speculative bubble in times of inceasing demand.

Housing crisis? Necessary correction.

Cold War. Unlikely when the interests are not oposed.

What you should say instead here is, you dont agree with my Military analysis because there are wider implications.

Neocons extinct? Granted. Thank God.