Czas na "przerwę": alianci bez prowiantu

[Gość: Lechu]

Ciekawe co byłoby, gdyby się nie podzielili ?

[Gość: Tadeusz]

Szkoda chłopaków!

[Gość: zigzag]

[Gość: Tadeusz]

Wiem o tym,ale uwierz mi - myślenie naprawdę nie boli.

[Gość: grinch]

Gość portalu: Tadeusz napisał(a):

> Szkoda chłopaków!
==============================================================
Napisz to do Bush'a Mniejszego, ktory liczyl na to, iz
Irakijczycy powitaja najezdzcow kwiatami, a takze mlekiem
i miodem...

Zdjęcia z linii frontu !!!!!

[Gość: Homepage z Niemiec]

www.strike-free.net/ge/ds/chronicle/news25.htm

[Gość: samanta]

Mimo, ze buszowi ich dowodcy bardzo zle zycze to jednak zal mi zolnierzy ,
ktorzy poszli do nieba a inni stracili rece i nogi .

Former CIA analyst: US & & #35 8216;conned into war& & #35 8217;

[Gość: Po angielsku!]

Robert Baer charges that the American-led invasion is a ‘dire
mistake’

BEIRUT: Middle East expert and former Central Intelligence
Agency officer Robert Baer has charged that the American-led
war in Iraq is a dire mistake based on false assumptions and
faulty information, but that President George W. Bush cannot
stop now and leave Saddam Hussein in power after the long
emotional and political buildup to the war.
“The American people, Congress, government and president were
conned into this war, in the full sense of the word, by neo-
conservatives and hawks in Washington who sold a false bill of
goods. The president was lied to and given erroneous
information that was filtered through Iraqi exiles who had not
lived in Iraq for 20 or 30 years and had no clear idea of
realities inside Iraq. The exiles had no intention of fighting
themselves, but wanted the US to fight for them,” he told The
Daily Star Thursday in an interview.
The 21-year CIA veteran quit the agency in good standing about
five years ago, and was given the Career Intelligence Medal for
his service.
He called this “almost an accidental war,” against the backdrop
of an American population that did not bother with foreign
affairs but suddenly suffered the wrenching emotional
experience of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
“There was already in place among some circles in Washington an
old plan to attack Iraq. After Sept. 11, 2001 it was sold to
the president, who was told that this would be a quick,
decisive, easy, almost bloodless operation, at little expense
and with no resistance by Iraqis, with Saddam Hussein gone at a
flash of the muzzle. But it has not worked out that way.
Determined Iraqis who stalled mechanized divisions in southern
Iraq are not just pockets of resistance. In its first week the
war did not go as planned.”
Baer, who has published a book on his years in the CIA and is
now publishing a second book about Saudi Arabia, said the worst
scenario for the US is to surround and lay siege to Baghdad and
its 5 million people.
He fears that this will increase the bitterness felt against
the US by Arabs and Muslims, who increasingly see Americans as
hostile to them. He is also concerned “that young Americans now
are fighting and dying in Iraq based on faulty analyses from
questionable sources,” but he cannot see Bush stopping the war
now.
“President Bush spent nine months working the American
population into a frenzy of fear and anger about Saddam
Hussein, and he cannot now tell them that it was not so serious
after all, that he has to stop the war and leave Saddam in
power.”
The best way to minimize long-term damage to the US’ standing
in this region is for Washington “to make a brisk, clean
transition to Iraqi or Iraqi-UN rule after the war ends, offer
substantial assistance for reconstruction, leave the Iraqis
alone , and turn America’s attention quickly to achieving a
fair resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict.” ­ R.K.

Czas na male co nieco!

[Gość: arahat]

Czyzby drugi wietnam???

Wietnam ?

[Gość: kong]

niemozliwe, Wiet-kong mial poparcie narodu, no i armie i odwage by walczyc o
swoje panstwo
Irak to zlepek plemienny, jedni z drugimi sie beda tez niedlugo bic
nie ma wody i ani dzungli - trudno o partyzantke oprocz miast
ich latwo podbic trudno utrzymac

[Gość: \-8]

latwo podbic?

A ile miast zajela przez 10 dni i kontroluje ta wataha 150 tysiecy tumanow z
nizin spolecznych Ameryki? Zero lub jedno. JEDNO! (Umm Qasr, z pomoca(?)
polskich najemnikow; ale Umm Qasr to raczej miasteczko, nie miasto?)

proponuje wiecej nie zmyslac.
tam jest dokladnie tak jak w Wietnamie,
walcza w swoim zrozumieniu z inwazja, nacjonalizm najbardziej elementarnego
typu. oprocz tego strach przed partia baath, ale i bez tego beda strzelac z
fuzji i czego popadnie.
Odbywaja sie dokladnie takie szarze na czolgi jak ulanskie w 1939 r.
w czasie inwazji na Polske.

Tydzien bez seksu dla yankesow to jest duze poswieceni

[Gość: Obserwator]

polecam francuska milosc

[Gość: doradca]

z wielbladem lub koza

[Gość: Hejo]

co walcza za US$1000 na miesiac (plus 'combat zone' US$150!!! na miesiac).
Chyba tylko sprzataczka dostaje mniej od nich w USA...
Bardzo smutne - chlopaki z najwiekszej biedoty w USA sa wykorzystywani przez
pojebasow typu Perle i Wolfowitz...

[Gość: sas]

Gość portalu: Hejo napisał(a):

> co walcza za US$1000 na miesiac (plus 'combat zone' US$150!!!
na miesiac).
> Chyba tylko sprzataczka dostaje mniej od nich w USA...
> Bardzo smutne - chlopaki z najwiekszej biedoty w USA sa
wykorzystywani przez
> pojebasow typu Perle i Wolfowitz...

Mi tez jest ich zal,
zal mi jest ich dlatego , ze potracili juz zdrowy rozsadek,
ze opanowala ich mania wyzszosci,
ze wpojono im nienawisc do innych spoleczenstw,
ze poddali sie samowolnie praniu muzgow,
ze wyzbyli sie pokory na rzecz szyderstwa,
Mialem okazje leciec z 85 osobowa grupa, z polnocnej Kaliforni
do Atlanta w stanie Georgia.
Bylo to tuz przed Swietami Bozego Narodzenia 2002, nastroje
mieli jak po napojach wyskokowych, ale wygladem i zachowaniem
przypominali niedorosniete dzieci.
Przykry to byl obrazek, a w wyobrazni pozostawil niesmak o US
Army.
Dalo mi to jednak odpowiedz, na pytanie dnia dzisiejszego, -
jaka grupa spoleczenstwa USA, popiera samobojczy wyczyn Busha.

Kawalek dobrego reportazu -Robert Fisk

[Gość: Dla angielskojezycznych]

The Coming Siege of Saddamagrad?
The Coup That Didn't Happen
By ROBERT FISK

Baghdad.

L et us now praise famous men. Saddam Hussein was keen on doing
just that yesterday. And he proceeded to list the Iraqi army
and navy officers who are leading the resistance against the
Anglo-American army in Umm Qasr, Basra and Nasariyah.

Major-General Mustapha Mahmoud Umran, commanding officer of the
11th Division, Brigadier Bashir Ahmed Othman, commander of the
Iraqi 45th Brigade, Brigadier-Colonel Ali Kalil Ibrahim,
commander of the 11th Battalion of the 45th Brigade, Colonel
Mohamed Khallaf al-Jabawi, commander of the 45th Brigade's 2nd
Battalion, Lieutenant-Colonel Fathi Rani Majid of the Iraqi
army's III Corps ... And so it went on.

"Be patient," President Saddam kept saying. Be patient.
Fourteen times in all, he told the army and the people of Iraq
to be patient. "We will win ... we will be victorious against
Evil." Patient but confident in victory. Fighting evil.

Wasn't that how President Bush was encouraging his people a few
hours earlier? At other times, President Saddam sounded like
his hero, Joseph Stalin. "They have come to destroy our country
and we must stand and destroy them and defend our people and
our country ... Cut their throats ... They are coming to take
our land. But when they try to enter our cities, they try to
avoid a battle with our forces and to stay outside the range of
our weapons."

Was this, one wondered, modelled on the Great Patriotic War,
the defence of Mother Russia under Uncle Joe? And if not, how
to account for--let us speak frankly--the courage of those
hundreds of Iraqi soldiers still holding out under American air
and tank attacks?
People, party, patriotism. The three P's ran like a theme
through the Saddam speech along with a bitter warning: as the
American and British forces made less headway on the ground,
President Saddam said, they would use their air power against
Iraq ever more brutally.

So what does it feel like to live these days in President
Saddam's future Stalingrad? Early yesterday, the cruise
missiles and the planes came back. The great explosions clapped
across Baghdad in the darkness. One of the Tomahawks smashed
into the grounds of the Al-Mustansiriya University--25 students
wounded and one dead, so they claimed.
There were other sounds in the early hours. A blaze of
automatic gunfire on the Tigris Corniche--attempts to capture
two escaping US airmen, the authorities insisted--and then a
full-scale gun battle not far from the city centre at 2.30am.
There were rumours. Armed men had come from Saddam City--the
great Shia slums on the edge of Baghdad--and had been
intercepted by state security men. No "independent
confirmation". A story that the railway line north of Baghdad
has been cut. Denied.

But the sheer amount of military and statistical detail coming
from the Iraqi authorities is beginning to make the US Centcom
information boys look like chumps. On Sunday, the Iraqi
Minister of Defence, General Sultan Hashim, gave a remarkable
briefing on the war, naming the units involved in front-line
fighting--the 3rd Battalion of the Iraqi army's 27th Brigade
was still holding out at Suq ash-Shuyukh south of Nasariyah,
the 3rd Battalion of the Third Iraqi Army was holding Basra.
And I remembered how these generals gave identical briefings
during the terrible 1980-88 war against Iran. When we set off
to check their stories then, they almost always turned out to
be true.

Does the same apply now? General Hashem repeatedly insisted
that his men were destroying US tanks and armour and
helicopters.

This was easy to dismiss--until videotape of two burning US
armoured personnel carriers popped up on the television screen.
Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan has been obliging enough to
explain the Iraqi army's tactics. It was Iraqi policy to let
the Anglo-American armies "roam around" in the desert as long
as they want, and attack them when they tried to enter the
cities. Which seems to be pretty much what they are doing.

From Baghdad, with its canopy of sinister black oil smoke and
air raid sirens, the American plan appears to be rather
similar: to barnstorm up the desert parallel to the Tigris and
Euphrates valley and try to turn right at every available city
on the way. If there's trouble at Umm Qasr, try Basra. If Basra
is blocked, have a go through Nasariyah. If that's dangerous,
try to turn right through Najaf.

But the open road--the long highway to Baghdad lined with
adoring Iraqis throwing roses at GIs and Tommys--is proving to
be an illusion.

By this morning, the Americans could be outside Baghdad. But in
military terms they might as well be in Kuwait.

Perhaps, in American and British terms, this is too pessimistic
an assessment. In Baghdad, it's easy to see not just how badly
the Americans and British have miscalculated, but it's also
possible to imagine just how long President Saddam and his army
and Baath party militias can endure, a sobering thought for
those of us sitting in the Iraqi capital and only too well
aware that the Stalingrad symbolism might turn out to be real.
Saddam's tactics are clearly those of Stalin. Every day that
passes is a day of further pain for Washington and London.

You could observe this cockiness when Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf,
the Information Minister, spoke. Of Tony Blair, he said
jovially yesterday: "I think the British nation has never been
faced with a tragedy like this fellow." Mr Sahaf then presented
a casualty list, which, however imaginative it might turn out
to be, was credible to the average Iraqi, and perhaps to
anyone. Civilian wounded and dead respectively: in Baghdad, 194
wounded (13 less than estimated); in Ninevah, eight wounded; in
Karbala 32 wounded and 10 killed; in Salahuddin, 22 wounded and
2 killed. In Najaf, the figures were 36 and 2; in Qadissiyah,
13 and 4; in Basra, 122 and 14. In Babylon, the Iraqi
government claims 63 wounded and 30 killed.

Sixty-two dead civilians--if the statistics are correct--is not
a massacre. But there's nothing surprising about such a figure.
It looks as if the Americans and British are bleeding
to "liberate" a people who are not all that keen to be
liberated by the Americans and British. A moral problem, of
course. But not so big a moral problem as it would be if all
this Iraqi suffering at the hands of the Americans and British
turned out to be about oil.

Alive and well?

Saddam Hussein's appearance on television yesterday failed to
convince British and American intelligence that the Iraqi
leader was either alive or well. But those who have met him
most recently believe the TV footage shows him to be in robust
health.

"One hundred per cent it is Saddam Hussein," a Lebanese
political activist, who met the President last month,
said. "This is his accent, these are his words, this is his
speech and his style. This is his way. This is him, without
hesitation."

Toby Dodge, an expert on Iraq at Warwick University, said
Allied scepticism was part of psychological warfare. He
said: "The whole American strategic plan is based on triggering
a coup so they don't have to fight in Baghdad. He's alive and
as well as you and me." The makeshift surroundings in
yesterday's broadcast lent it credibility, Mr Dodge said.

Troche prawdy: A Battlefield from Hell

[Gość: Dla angielskojezycznych!]

www.counterpunch.com/jackson03262003.html

Podsluchy

[Gość: Gosc]

Służby bezpieczeństwa Rady UE (w jej budynku znaleziono pluskwy)
i delegacje krajów, które chciano szpiegować, nie chciały
spekulować, kto założył podsłuch. Dla "Le Figaro" sprawa jest
jasna - policja belgijska wskazuje na Amerykanów. AFP dodaje, że
USA próbowały ostatnio podsłuchiwać w ONZ w Nowym Jorku
delegacje krajów, które w Radzie Bezpieczeństwa nie poparły
stanowiska prezydenta Busha wobec wojny z Irakiem. Dziennikarze
w Brukseli żartowali zaś, że te podsłuchy to dowód na to, iż z
Unią nie jest jeszcze tak źle, skoro ktoś aż tak bardzo chciał
poznać jej zdanie.

[Gość: |-:]

gdyby sie nie podzielili to uznani zostaliby przez army lawyer za combatants
i... wiecie co dalej.

[Gość: Lusa]

Czas na rzez. Na wojnie nie stoi sie bo ten kto stoi bedzie
pocelowany. Amerykanie dostali dobrze juz på dupie. Dzisiaj
slonce wyszlo w Sztockholmie i ja siedzialem w traktorze i tu
na polnocy 30 stopmi w traktorze a na zewnatrz zimno. Tam na
pustyni jest 50-60 stopni w czolgu a nocy zimno. Piasek wchodzi
wszedzie do nozdrza i w ucho i w oko. Hitler wpakowal sie på
Staliningrad a amerykanie pod Bagdad. Ni daj borze aby stali
dluzszy czas na tym samym miejscu bo jak ich namaruja to z
tego ich pola nie zostanie nic. Rzez. I dobrze zachlannym
bandytom. Bo co oni maja w Iraku do roboty. Rabusie.

[Gość: warmi]

Amerykanie dostali w dupe ?

Zajeli polowe kraju , praktycznie okrazajac resztki irackiej
armii, ktora teraz nieustannie atakuja sily powietrzne.
W calej tej operacji stracili 30 zolnierzy i ty to nazywasz
dostaniem w dupe ?
Zdajesz sobie sprawe ze np Niemcy w czasie kampani wrzesniowej w
Polsce ktora byla uwazana ze jedna z najbardziej udanych ,
stracili 20 tysiecy zolnierzy w ciagu 4 tygodni ?

CZAS NA W TYL ZWROT!!!!

[Gość: Emi]

Marzysz

[Gość: warmi]

DLACZEGO NIEWINNI MUSZA UMIERAC?

[Gość: Emily]

Poczytajcie o prawdziwych celach tej wojny z imperialnej gazetki.

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A44496-2003Mar28.html

A czemu nie ?

[Gość: warmi]

ZDJECIA Z LINII FRONTU!!!!

[Gość: Popatrzcie!]

www.strike-free.net/ge/ds/chronicle/news25.htm