Baghdad Blast Wave: 'US to blame for Iraq mayhem'

ThePostal67 Says:

Dec 25, 2011 - @mchstatelover Oh, God, here we go with the "we were here first" Indians or rather the people that became Indians came from Asia, North American Mexico, Central America, South America! They came and got into wars with each other, killing and raping the women! While Europe made great cities and came into the world to face challenges! You were just the earlist immigrants, which is nice, someone had to be first! But if you want to claim America, the Mammoth and Grizzle were here first!

ThePostal67 Says:

Dec 25, 2011 - Were you asleep when Germany was suppliing arms to Iraq? NO, I did not forget BOTH American Presidents, the first war as I said was because Saddam invaded Iraq,~~~ FOR OIL! ................ JAPANESE (that is the correct spelling) invaded China and the rest of the area in the western Pacific! There were just getting what they gave. ... Since you don't even know how to spell Hiroshima, I can only guess your either a liberal or twelve years old and don't have a clue!

ThePostal67 Says:

Dec 25, 2011 - Did you know that they have the same God? Read about Islam before you post...IF you don't join Islam, they want ot to pay money to stay alive..............Join Of Die! Jesus never would have said that!

sj314 Says:

Dec 25, 2011 - FOR OIL does not make it LEGAL. Its only making it ROBBERYIn fact USA supply Saddam chemical weapons which was used against Kurds. And US hanged Saddam after using this weapon. For OIL!!! Gr8! aha there OIL! US flying there! Its ours lets hang dictators! "There were just getting what they gave." - This is what CALLED - WAR CRIMINALS - Killing civilians in avenge. USA biggest WAR CRIMINAL, And stop teaching grammar it shows u have no points to discuss except my spelling mistakes

PurpleStorm8 Says:

Dec 25, 2011 - Thats "Americans" that helped other people, not "America".Who cares what Germany, Japan and England did? it's hardly relevant today is it?The thing is America bully's and intimidates other country's to get it's way and only cares about money and power, whenever a country builds up a army, they are labeled a threat to global security but when the US does it AND builds several military bases world-wide, no one takes notice.America only cares about America.

sanforce Says:

Dec 26, 2011 - Here's an idea - stop killing your own people?!

rleary1 Says:

Dec 26, 2011 - Looks like that 1 trillion we blew on operation iraqi freedom is really working! What a joke and Epic failure. Both policital parties are to blame for this. Complete chicken-shit Hawks waving their little American flags that were made in China. We need to get the Hell out of the middle East & quit supporting Israel. I see no difference in any of these countries or people.

genefire Says:

Dec 26, 2011 - Is calling someone LIBERAL,suppose to be a slur or a meaning of being unintelligent? Truly ignorant people are the ones who label people in order to discredit what it is they disagree with them on. That trick is old but works on the ignorant.. Everyone seems rather confident in regurgitating what they have been spoon fed themselves. Another thing NO GOD would be ignorant enough to claim of religions of the world. I judge by the fruits they produce & not what they say.Case in point.

mikecorbeil Says:

Dec 26, 2011 - "those responsible for the recent atrocities in Baghdad are trying to say that the Iraqi government is unable to maintain control" :Those responsible could be Washington and people working for it in Iraq. Who stands to gain from these extremely violent attacks more than Washington does? Some Iraqi resistance groups might want to do this for revenge, say, but their leaders know that it'ld be very likely that this violence would be used as an excuse for the US to return to Iraq.

mikecorbeil Says:

Dec 26, 2011 - "those responsible for the recent atrocities in Baghdad are trying to say that the Iraqi government is unable to maintain control" :Those responsible could be Washington and people working for it in Iraq. Who stands to gain from these extremely violent attacks more than Washington does? Some Iraqi resistance groups might want to do this for revenge, say, but their leaders know that it'ld be very likely that this violence would be used as an excuse for the US to return to Iraq.

mikecorbeil Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - Since that's something Iraqis wouldn't want to happen, seeing the US forces return to Iraq in large numbers, if any Iraqi Resistance members are responsible for these violent attacks in civilian areas, then I'ld assume that they're not doing this under orders from their leaderships. If they are, then they strategically need to replace their leaders, asap.  They would have nothing to gain or benefit from by causing the US to return.

mikecorbeil Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - You don't know who's committing this violence. Neither do the rest of us. And the only party that stands to gain is who or which? Washington. Iraqis certainly don't stand to benefit from this. Some of them might be responsible for this violence, but if any are, then they should realise that committing such violence, killing many innocent Iraqis, is NOT going to benefit Iraqis at all. It'll have the opposite result. But Washington can strategically gain from orchestrating this.

mikecorbeil Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - Several US mil. bases worldwide? The last that I read, the official number rose from over 700 preceding the start of the war on Iraq, to the new high of over 800. And when the official number was in the 700s, independent analysts of repute said that the real number was probably around 1,000; a wee bit more than several.And you're right that we mustn't use histories of Germany, etc., as if relevant for today's wars; relevant in the sense of justifying or condemning them, that is

mikecorbeil Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - You seem to possibly be someone who still believes the myth that says that Saddam Hussein's forces genocided around 180,000 Kurds in 1988. If that's true of what you think, then it's been proven to be bs. At the time, Iran had invaded Iraq, so the fighting was in Iraq. Iran used lethal nerve gas, while Iraq used much less lethal mustard gas. But, either way, Kurds weren't genocided and there's never been proof that they were. It was always unproven hearsay.

mikecorbeil Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - The CIA station chief in Iraq in 1988 reacted to the claim from Washington that Saddam's forces genocided the Kurds, saying that it didn't happen. But there were searches conducted to try to find the mass graves, for there would've been such grave if 180,000 Kurds had been killed. A few graves were found and there were either 5,000 or 8,000 humans' remains; but they were mostly Peshmerga. They weren't civilian. They were militia fighting with Iran against Iraq.

mikecorbeil Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - Bozo, Saddam never invaded Iraq. He was the President of the country!And he didn't invade Iran for oil, either.Also, so what if Germany supplied arms to Iraq, for the US did so even more; and did much more than that that was criminal there.And you complain about somone else's spelling errors, while making them yourself. "your either a liberal or ...". Your is a word expressing possession. "you're either ..." means "you are either ..."; the correctly spelling!

mikecorbeil Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - You're atrociously undereducated about real-world history. The US has never come to the aid of anyone! And the US has always been genocidal. You call that helping others though; sort of like Bush in January and Feb. 2003, when he said that with war, the US was going to bring democracy, peace, justice, ... for Iraqis. Quite some philosopher and historian you are.

PurpleStorm8 Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - Meh...-_-

crashlight1 Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - Glad I'm watching this on youtube and not out the window. All the spin doctors and their patients won't matter when the bombs at your/my house. Our last chance for a change of course at home is Ron Paul. If he doesn't win, or wins and nothing changes, we will slip off that thin ledge of peace and freedom, and we're the only ones left standing on it.

2baldmen Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - Obama pulled out too soon. The results are disaster. President screw up strikes again.

sj314 Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - I agree with you. I said that Saddam was executed for killing civilians.No blaming Saddam. Iraq was backed by US in this war also. Yes Saddam was cruel as should be cruel powerful politician.

sj314 Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - WW2 won by Soviet Union. USA came to game when most German troops were killed on East Front. Check wiki: 85% Germans soldiers killed on Easter Front - guess why? There were no any great battle between Germans and Americas - any close to Kursk battle (6000 tanks) or Stalingrad or battle for Moscow.

uzimodem Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - well, they wanted us out, now they have it. they will do what arabs do, kill each other. they have been doing it to themselves for centuries.

JPSwissCheese Says:

Dec 27, 2011 - Typical BS, The terrorists blow up their own people and russia blames it on the US

civilisationskerl Says:

Dec 29, 2011 - This bombs were made by people who did get profit from the US in iraq and they did it because they are desperate... who believes that terrorist stories there are no al qaida in iraq and nobody bombs himself to just kill civilians it makes no sense in the oppposite it just harmas... nobody believes that Islamists who reda the Quaran everyday miss the several Verses were it's cleary forbidden to kill a innocent + to kill her/himself , it makes no sense it is a holywood product to invade countries