Yes, yes, yes. The "Lions" are the only ones who kill civillians and it's all about sectarian gangs. American troops, coalition forces and Maliki are all the good guys and have never killed civillians, raped women, etc.

Three months ago I asked Maliki to offer "round-the-table amnesty" to all the fighters. Why? Because every one of them had the blood of innocents on their hands. Maliki, for some strange reason, believed Amnesty should be offered only to those who didn't need it. That was a joke and of course the plan failed!

As for the sectarian BS - Al Sadr extended his hand to the Sunni "lions" and announced that he wanted to join forces with them to fight the invasion, or as he put it... "cut off the head of the snake"... so he didn't view the Sunni "lions" as enemies.

Now I don't know who's playing what games here, but to even suggest that the bloodshed is all the fault of the Sunni "lions" is pure BS, at best. They're all ticking me off with the killing of the civilians, the twisting of words and the bending of images, and believe me when I tell you, my light is going to shine all over this... but to stop it will take... ROUND THE TABLE AMNESTY! End of story.

To any Sunni or Shiite fighters here, I know you think America is upset by the increase in sectarian violence, but let me ask you this. If America said it would be upset if you jumped off a cliff... would you do that too? You're doing their dirty work... for them!

Ninth Scribe

Wonderfully put out...It's good to see some people with sense in this forum

Well thank you for that. I've always rebelled against the 'parrot' routine... don't like people telling me the only thing I'm allowed to say is "Polly wanna cracker?"

Ninth Scribe

loolll!! hehe....

It's good to think outside the box

You asked him?

So your blaming all of the violence on the Sunni's, because the Shia are obviously so peace loving.

That must be it. America is only in Iraq so they can set off road side bombs and killing innocent Iraqi's. All those elections, freedoms, ect all just a cover up! There in it to set off those road side bombs, they do not want peace and stability in Iraq! They want violence, and they want to be stuck there for the next ten to fifteen years!

Brilliant conclusion.

America (the government) doesn't want to leave Iraq until there is a 'user-friendly' government in place that will do what America wants! As I mentioned on the "Low Blow" thread (page 5), Maliki is just starting to figure that out now!

Of course, these are just the opinions of a woman ~ and what do we women know?

Ninth Scribe

I really doubt that. Do you realize all the think tanks and people trying to figure out how they can get USA troops out of that sitation while at the same time not leave it a complete anarchy?

You should really do some research before reading into these conspiracy theories.

What relevance does that have to anything? The opinion of anyone is not anymore valid because of there gender. Someones opinion is more valid because of there knowledge.

The US gov’t has a policy not to kill civilians

The US gov’t has a policy not to rape women

If a US soldier murders or rapes he will be tried in a court.


The insurgents policy is to kill civilains

The insurgents policy is to rape women

If an insurgent kills civilians and rapes women he gets rewarded by other insurgents because the deaths will be blamed on the "occupation".

Of course Americans have killed Iraqis. I think your claim is what is called a 'straw man' ;).

That 'strange reason' was of course pressure from his own base not to be too soft on those who had targeted them. I happen to agree with you, but then again, I'm not the one being targeted by suicide bombings and car bombs! I thought you were the one who was always full of understanding why people in Iraq react like they do? Do you have no sympathy for the Shi'ite postion? Decades of oppression by Sunnis, now they finally get a say in government and those same Sunni's do their utmost to destroy it and attack Shiite targets wherever they can.

Depends. Al Sadr was overjoyed when he heard of the death of the "lion" for which you wept, Al Zarqawi. Sadr has no problem aligning with those who fight just the occupation, he has no interest in joining those who commit these suicide bombings against government and shiite targets.

Virtually every week in Iraq there are several massacres on the scale of Qana, yet nobody cares, that is what suprises me. As the conflict in Iraq has increasingly 'iraqified' the interest on this forum and from Muslims in general has simply declined. It's as if they are too embarrased to discuss this primarily Muslim on Muslim violence.

Of course not 'all' of it is the fault of these Sunni "lions". But that doesn't change the fact that the majority of the major bombings on markets, funerals, the Iraqi government institutions and Shiite religious processions is the work of these people. They are not the work of 'sectarian gangs', they are the work of highly organized Sunni 'resistance' groups, the ones you claim to understand so well. Initially the Shiites restrained themselves and refrained from revenge. But those times are over, they have no intention letting this happen anymore. Exactly the reason why they resisted a broader amnesty, they are pissed off.

I agree, that would be best.

Iraqis have to act smart be like hezbollaah unity is number 1 and allah will help them to victory inshallaah. All the people that commit sectarian voilence are criminals.

Wait if you commit sectarian violence your a criminal, but if you commit unitarian violence your a hero? Violence is Violence, there is no difference!

The same Shia that basically began the violence under Al-Sadr? The Shia are no less guilty than the Sunni.


Oh people will care when it is the Americans who commit such a massacre. But they have nothing to say on the matter when it is a Shia or Sunni group.

The "policy" you speak of isn't worth the paper it's written on to Iraqis... and we all know why!

I hate the word "insurgents" but you think they don't have policies? Really? Gee, have you read Jill Carroll's publication about her experience as a hostage of the Mujahideen? Don't push my buttons today over trivialities. You just have no idea how ticked off I am at the moment (different issue and I can't discuss it).

It was EVERYONES policy to kill civillians.... I have documentation on that from ALL parties involved, so spare me the lecture about how U.S. reasoning was 'better' than Al Qeada's. None of it will wash with me. Ever. And I'm clearly not in any frame of mind to be civil right now, so I'm going to leave this forum till I can cool my jets and figure out what to do about this... situation.

Ninth Scribe

Let's ask Nick Berg what the policies of insurgents are. Oh wait you can't because he has no head. Maybe Jessica Lynch can enlighten you.

Jessica Lynch was in the U.S. armed forces... fighting against the Iraqis. Nick Berg was not, but was an American male who was helping the Americans. I hate to repeat this old news because, at least to me, it was made crystal clear from the beginning:

Rules of Engagement:

1) All American soldiers are targets.
2) Anyone who helps them (Iraqis, Americans, anyone) are targets.

Civilian women, of any background, are excluded from this list for obvious reasons. Zarqawi himself demanded that Maragaret Hassan's kidnappers publish proof that she was a "spy, conspiring against Muslims" or release her immediately.

Not all groups out there, however, are Mujahideen, but when you make a post with the name "Lions of Iraq" you've made it clear to me who you are accusing and I will address those complaints because I have no reason to believe they deserve anywhere near the ridecule they've received.

And before you decide to use cheap shots like Nick Berg... why not ask his own father who he feels is truly responsible for the death of his son?

Ninth Scribe