34 killed by bomber in northern Iraq; 6 dead in Baghdad blast
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
U.N. observers warn of Syria civil war after massacre
( 7 )
-
Obama on the defensive over spending, debt
( 18 )
-
Egypt's top candidates try to broaden support
( 1 )
-
Queen marks diamond jubilee riding wave of popularity
( 0 )
-
Thousands take part in 'Slut Walks' in Brazil
( 10 )
-
- Business Teaching Positions - Part-time - Kanto Region
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥3,000 ~ ¥5,000 / Hour
-
- National Relief/Substitute Teacher - summer start
- Interac, Tokyo
- Salary: ¥275,000 ~ ¥300,000 / Month
-
- 営業パーソン
- 加治金属工業株式会社, Tochigi
- Salary: ¥240,000 ~ ¥350,000 / Month Negotiable
Order by Time Order by Popularity
26 Comments
Login to comment
0
DickMorris
The new Obama led administrations policies are proving to be a failure. Witha surge in deaths and the real possibility of imminent civil war Obama is already being known as a lame duck presixdent.
0
SushiSake3
DickMorris - this U.S. withdrawal was concocted by bush, not President Obama.
bush owns the disaster in Iraq and you voted for him, so there's blood on your hands, too.
0
smithinjapan
DickMorris: "The new Obama led administrations policies are proving to be a failure. Witha surge in deaths and the real possibility of imminent civil war Obama is already being known as a lame duck presixdent."
PLEASE! When bush... that's right, bush, not Obama... started this war and rammed it through Congress despite it being against the UN charter the US signed (and therefore illegal) critics were saying this sort of thing would happen, and warned it would probably end the way pretty much all US 'regime changes' ended -- with civil war and/or a worse dictator than the one they ousted (numerous examples available). Your ilk argued against it for ages -- hell, some of you STILL think there are WMDs -- but as SOON as Obama became president you breathed a sigh of relief so you could finally claim it's the misadventure it is, but blame it on someone else. The civil war, my friend, is exactly what most rational people have claimed would happen when a bunch of fools were saying things like, "A purple thumb in your eye!", or, "The war in Iraq is just!", etc.
What's happening has little or nothing at all to do with Obama's policies; the war in Iraq never should have happened in the first place, as we have said all along.
0
yabits
Gosh, in earlier times, this would sound very much like a message from Tokyo Rose or Hanoi Hannah.
Al Qaeda Annie?
0
Sarge
"the disaster in Iraq"
is this the disaster that has seen the former dictator of Iraq brought to justice, his winsome sons assume room temperature and free elections resulting in a government that doesn't seek WMD or threaten its neighbors?
Checking...
Yeah, it is!
0
Madverts
"resulting in a government that doesn't seek WMD or threaten its neighbors?"
You have no idea what could happen in the future, so methinks alluding to the fledgling govenrnment in Iraq being a success at this point in time considerably myopic....
...especially as the insurgents are turning up the violence as the 130,000 strong occupation army withdraws from the cities.
This isn't some computer game to be taken lightly, young man.
0
adaydream
Sarge if Saddam had never been disposed by george bush with his lies and fabrications, there are about a half-million Iraqis would still be alive.
Iraq didn't have any suicide bombing in Iraq before george bush took the opportunity to attack a country that did not attack the US.
Your support of george bush is like a murderer having a cheerleading section. Barack Obama didn't have anything to do with this. < :-)
0
Madverts
"Barack Obama didn't have anything to do with this"
He does now....
0
adaydream
Madverts yes he does now. But he didn't start this mess. Sarge's hero george bush started it and Barack Obama has to clean up bush's mess.
But Obama will end this fiasco for the US. The GOP would have us shoving more troops and equipment into Iraq for decades of decades to come. < :-)
0
SushiSake3
Hey - Iran is stronger than ever, the Middle East is still unstable, there's now more America-hating terrorists than ever and your economy is in the tank, no thanks to the bungled invasion of Iraq.
Happy?
You have an extremely low bar for success.
The entire global situation has actually worsened in the eyes of people who live in the real world.
0
TheQuestion
I've never understood how people manage to link the war to the economy. Investors and consumers run the economy while the president and soldiers run the war. There aren't enough soldiers in either Iraq or Afghanistan to create a noticible depression in the consumer market, aside from the world trade center being destroyed commerce itself hasn't been affected, no private companies have been refitted to produce military equipment, and no U.S citizens have been targeted since the invasion began.
The War costs the government money not the investors (taxes money that they are required to pay anyway aside). The recession was predictable to the smarter ones on wallstreet, it's part of how the economy works. What has got investors scared are the proposed tax hikes, the bailouts, and stricter regulation which will drive up cost. The war doesn't even register on the top 100 worries of the folks in the stock market.
The economy can, and is currently in the process of, straighten itself out on its own, government interferance will only slow the process.
0
ca1ic0cat
The link to the economy is pretty straightforward. The government has to buy supplies and pay people to fight. That requires either higher taxes or increased debt. Increased borrowing pulls investment out of the more efficient private sector. We all know about higher taxes.
There is also the issue of the cost of materials. For example, the price of lumber has gone up quite a bit as a lot of the stuff was bought by the government to rebuild Iraq. Same for concrete. That drives core inflation. Speaking of inflation a barrel of oil doens't cost what it used to either.
So the government fighting a war like this (along with tax cuts plus big government giveaways) combines to stagnate the economy while driving inflation up at the same time. Same thing happened with LBJ and Viet Nam.
Of course the property bubble burst and economic problems that resulted have kept inflation down. But yeah, a war will affect the economy.
The middle east will stay unstable until all the countries are reasonable democracies. I'm sure every monarchy and dictatorship in the region is propping up their favorites to try to keep their own rotten regimes in power. Not something the US can fix on it's own. It was a mistake to think we could.
On the other hand all the terrorist wannabes are blowing up things in Iraq rather than in NYC. The army is doing it's job. Perhaps this is the lesser of the evil outcomes.
0
Madverts
"The government has to buy supplies and pay people to fight."
And pay for the dead.....and the wounded. Claiming the war in Iraq and continued occupation isn't a drain on the US economy doesn't seem coherent.
0
adaydream
ca1ic0cat nice linking there. I don't always agree with your posts, but this one has some real merit. Thanks.
I would venture to say that the amounts of wood, concrete and metals used to create munitions alone sent to the MiddleEast is staggering. < :-)
0
Madverts
"On the other hand all the terrorist wannabes are blowing up things in Iraq rather than in NYC"
Comments like that seem extremely selfish IMO.
0
SuperLib
There's no link. Bush had his "link" with Al Queda and Iraq, and Sushi has his "link" with the economy and Iraq. Both use lies to get uneducated people to join their ranks and support their causes.
0
SuperLib
So the government pumped billions and billions of dollars into the pockets of the private sector?
0
Madverts
"So the government pumped billions and billions of dollars into the pockets of the private sector?"
That sounds good, but how many billions got spunked?
0
SuperLib
About $48.2 billion. But that's only if I correctly understand what "spunked" means. The last time I heard that word was on an adult video, I think. :P
0
yabits
Hey, libertarians never have to be coherent. After all, nobody has ever trusted them enough to give them real responsibilities. And anyone who puts blind belief in an invisible hand or an invisible man in the clouds is rightfully not to be trusted.
0
TheQuestion
If they need supplies than they buy from the private sector which should lead to an increase in revenue not a subtraction (which it has in the defense market). And the increased borrowing comes from outside the U.S as nobody withing the U.S is stupid enough to invest in government bonds.
Which is why so many contractors have gone into Iraq and Afghanistan and are turning a tidy profit off of it too. Another example of how the wars seem to hurt the government but have little, or even a positive, effect on the private economy. The cost of oil has more to do with supply and demand than anything else, like the recent drop its experienced due to people traveling less or finding ways to cut fuel costs.
I said the war didn't effect the economy, the bailouts, on the otherhand, are an abomination.
Another problem of the private sector that the it would have taken care of on its own. Unfortunatly Uncle Sam saw fit to bail out the Fannie and Freddie, the ones primarily responcible for the mortgage crisis, and allow them continue on their merry way instead of letting them crumble as they should have.
How many bussinesses have closed because of the war? None, they close for a variety of reasons, where I live it's because of the massive small business tax, but none of them are harmed directly by the war. The war didn't cause the banks or the auto companies to collapse nor did it cause the housing crisis. That was poor management and maybe a little bit of government intervention.
That's a whole nother issue entierly. Maybe the war was just or maybe it wasn't, we'll find out in due time.
Thank you for your meaningful contribution.
0
Madverts
You correctly understood.... :) Brit slang for Americans vs.2.1
0
Sarge
Madverts ( 10:11 PM ): "This isn't some computer game to be taken lightly, young man"
Did I say it was? Or even imply that is was?
And would you please refrain from calling me "young man"? Thanks a whole lot in advance.
adaydream ( 10:15 PM ): "your support of george bush ( George W. Bush ) is like a murderer having a cheerleading section"
Un, no, my support of George W. Bush is like supporting the man who led the way for the U.S. to suffer zero terrorist attacks since 9/11 and liberate two countries.
Back to top