• Home
  • World
  • Iraq After Saddam
BAGHDAD, Aug. 22, 2007

Helicopter Crash Kills 14 GIs In Iraq

Suicide Truck Bombing Separately Kills 19 People; Iraqi PM Lashes Out At U.S.

By Lindsay Goldwert
  • Video Iraq Choppers A Crucial Risk

    Helicopter crashes in Iraq get a lot of attention, but moving troops quickly by air may be safer than by land, where mines pose a greater danger. David Martin reports.

  • Video 14 Dead In Black Hawk Crash

    A U.S. military Black Hawk helicopter crashed in northern Iraq during nighttime operations, killing 14 soldiers on board. Officials still do not know the cause of the crash. Martin Seemungal reports.

    • Wrecked cars damaged after a suicide truck bomber targeted a police agency in Beiji, 155 miles north of Baghdad, Iraq, Wednesday, Aug. 22, 2007. Photo

      Wrecked cars damaged after a suicide truck bomber targeted a police agency in Beiji, 155 miles north of Baghdad, Iraq, Wednesday, Aug. 22, 2007.  (AP Photo/Bassem Daham)

    • Saddam's cousin and the former defense minister Ali Hassan al-Majid, gained the nickname Photo

      Saddam's cousin and the former defense minister Ali Hassan al-Majid, gained the nickname "Chemical Ali" after chemical attacks on Kurdish towns during the so-called Anfal campaign.  (AP Photo)

    • In this still from an undated video released by the Iraqi government, Iraq's Sunni vice president Tariq al-Hashemi visits inmates as he promises them better treatment at the crowded prison in eastern Baghdad. Many of the prisoners, who were jammed into open wire cages covered with tarps, shouted out complaints of mistreatment and prolonged detentions. Photo

      In this still from an undated video released by the Iraqi government, Iraq's Sunni vice president Tariq al-Hashemi visits inmates as he promises them better treatment at the crowded prison in eastern Baghdad. Many of the prisoners, who were jammed into open wire cages covered with tarps, shouted out complaints of mistreatment and prolonged detentions.  (AP Photo/Iraqi Government)

    • The military said initial indications showed the helicopter that went down in northern Iraq, killing all 14 U.S. soldiers on board, Wednesday, Aug. 22, 2007, experienced a mechanical problem and was not brought down by hostile fire. The cause of the crash is still under investigation. Photo

      The military said initial indications showed the helicopter that went down in northern Iraq, killing all 14 U.S. soldiers on board, Wednesday, Aug. 22, 2007, experienced a mechanical problem and was not brought down by hostile fire. The cause of the crash is still under investigation.  (AP / CBS)

    Previous slide Next slide
  • Timeline Iraq Copter Crashes

    Some of the deadliest helicopter crashes in Iraq and Kuwait since the start of the war.

  • Interactive Battle For Iraq

    The government, the insurgency, key players, background and photos.

  • Interactive American Heroes

    Profiles of U.S. soldiers who've died in Iraq, a look at the war's toll and pictures of mourning.

(CBS/AP)  A helicopter went down in northern Iraq on Wednesday, killing all 14 U.S. soldiers aboard, the military said, the deadliest crash since January 2005.

CBS News has learned that almost 800 yards into the flight, a tail rotor malfunctioned. The pilot called it in but before he could react, the helicopter went into an uncontrollable spin and crashed in rough terrain, killing all 14 on board, reports CBS News chief foreign correspondent Lara Logan.

The military said initial indications showed the aircraft experienced a mechanical problem and was not brought down by hostile fire, but the cause of the crash was still under investigation.

The UH-60 Black Hawk was part of a pair of helicopters on a nighttime operation when the crash occurred. The four crew members and 10 passengers who perished were assigned to Task Force Lightning, the military said. It did not release identities pending notification of relatives.

The U.S. military relies heavily on helicopters to avoid the threat of ambushes and roadside bombs — the deadliest weapon in the militants' arsenal — and dozens have crashed in accidents or been shot down.

The Army's deputy director for aviation says that he has more than 400 helicopters of all kinds operating in Iraq – more than any time during the war. Their main mission, says one Brigade commander is to carry troops in and out of battle, reports CBS News national security correspondent David Martin.

Helicopters remain the safest way to travel in Iraq, with roadside bombs and ambushes forcing U.S. troops into the skies.

"The ability to move combat force at 100 knots versus 20 miles an hour on the ground is an element of speed which is critical in combat," says Col. Robert Quackenbush of the Army Aviation Directorate, reports Martin.

The deadliest crash occurred on Jan. 26, 2005, when a CH-53 Sea Stallion transport helicopter went down in a sandstorm in western Iraq, killing 31 U.S. troops.

Wednesday's deaths rose to at least 3,721 members of the U.S. military who have died since the Iraq war started in March 2003, according to an Associated Press count.

In other recent developments:

  • A suicide truck bomber struck a police station in the northern oil hub of Beiji, killing at least 45 people and wounding 80, officials said. Police and hospital officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to release the information, said 25 policemen and 20 civilians were killed.

  • "We simply cannot continue on the present course," Rep. Neil Abercrombie, who heads up a House subcommittee with jurisdiction over the Army and Air Force budgets, said Tuesday. The Hawaii Democrat says Iraq and Afghanistan are costing the U.S. "billions of dollars beyond the regular defense budget, with emergency supplementary bills for hundreds of billions of dollars... Unless you have an endless supply of cash coming in you're not going to be able to do it." Abercrombie is the author of a bill calling for the Bush administration to report to Congress on its plans for troop redeployment.

  • The daily number of improvised explosive device (IED) IED attacks has increased six-fold since 2003101 of the 139 anti-U.S. attacks involved IEDs.

  • The Iraqi High Tribunal Tuesday began hearing the case of former defense minister Ali Hassan al-Majid, a cousin of Saddam Hussein who is better known as "Chemical Ali" because of his alleged involvement in chemical attacks on Kurdish towns in 1991. Ali and 14 other defendants are charged with crimes against humanity, which carries the maximum penalty of death by hanging.

  • Muqtada al-Sadr's office on Tuesday condemned the assassinations of two southern provincial governors as the radical Shiite cleric distanced himself from the killings, seen as part of a brutal contest among rival Shiite militias for control of some of Iraq's main oil regions. Authorities say a roadside bomb Monday killed the governor of Iraq's southern Muthanna province. The blast struck the convoy carrying Mohammed Ali al-Hassani at about 9 a.m., killing him and three other people.

    With violence unrelenting, political pressure mounted for Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to show progress in bringing Iraq's battling factions together.

    President Bush acknowledged his frustration with Iraqi leaders' inability to bridge political divisions on Tuesday, but said only the Iraqi people can decide whether to sideline the troubled prime minister.

    "Clearly, the Iraqi government's got to do more," Mr. Bush said at the close of a two-day North American summit with the leaders of Mexico and Canada.

    The Sept. 15 deadline for Mr. Bush's next progress report to Congress is fast approaching, leaving the president little time to show that his U.S. troop buildup is succeeding in providing the enhanced security the Iraqi leaders need to forge a unified way forward.

    Al-Maliki, who has faced accusations of having a Shiite bias that has alienated minority Sunnis, lashed out at the U.S. criticism on Wednesday, saying no one has a right to put timetables on his elected government.

    He blamed the U.S. presidential campaign for the recent tough words from the Bush administration and from other American politicians.

    "No one has the right to place timetables on the Iraq government. It was elected by its people," he said at a news conference in Damascus at the end of a three-day visit to Syria. "Those who make such statements are bothered by our visit to Syria. We will pay no attention. We care for our people and our constitution and can find friends elsewhere."

    Without naming any American official, al-Maliki said some of the criticism of him and his government was "discourteous."

    U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker, co-author of the highly anticipated report to Congress, also said Tuesday that Washington's blueprint for reconciliation was insufficient to win back control of Iraq. Congressional benchmarks such as laws to share oil revenue and reform security services don't tell the whole story, he said Tuesday.

    Crocker, who will present the report with military commander Gen. David Petraeus, called Iraq's problems difficult but fixable, arguing for more time for his diplomacy and operations by the bolstered American military force.

    "Failure to meet any of them (congressionally mandated benchmarks) does not mean the definitive failure of the state or the society," Crocker said. "Conversely, to make them all would not by any means mean that they've turned the corner and it's a sun-dappled upland from here on in with peace and harmony and background music. It's just a lot more complex than that."

    He echoed Bush's frustration with the lack of action by al-Maliki government's on key legislative measures.

    "Progress on national level issues has been extremely disappointing and frustrating to all concerned – to us, to Iraqis, to the Iraqi leadership itself," Crocker said. But he added that the Shiite prime minister was working "in the shadow of a huge national trauma."

    While saying U.S. support was not a "blank check," Crocker said Washington would continue backing al-Maliki's government "as it makes serious efforts to achieve national reconciliation and deliver effective governance to the people of Iraq." He stressed that it's not just al-Maliki, but "the whole government that has to perform here."



    © MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
    Share:
    Digg
    Yahoo! Buzz
    Mixx

    Video and Galleries from Iraq After Saddam

    Latest in Iraq After Saddam
    Bombs Claim 50 in Iraq
    Biden Meets with Key U.S. Leaders in Iraq
    Senate Investigates Blackwater Subsidiary
    Add a Comment See all 231 Comments
    by tbweb August 22, 2007 6:35 AM PDT
    The Iraq invasion was proven to be a mistake so the U.S. should correct its mistake and exit Iraq as soon as possible and stop changing the mission on the fly and making excuses to remain in Iraq. It''s the price of being wrong. The Iraqi PM said the U.S. can leave anytime it wants, so leave and let the chips fall where they may. The U.S. has Bridges, DAMS and Infrastructure to fix and those Chinese loans can be better spent on those projects.
    Reply to this comment
    by jowand August 22, 2007 6:39 AM PDT
    tbweb
    Wasn''t a mistake, wasn''t wrong. What''s wrong is the Dems trying to make political points out of this.
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 6:48 AM PDT
    jowand,

    NOBODY still in their right mind would question now that this invasion of Iraq WAS A MISTAKE. ONE BIG MISTAKE. Go to Youtube and search CHENEY IRAQ INVASION C-SPAN. Even Cheney thought it was a mistake in 1994!!

    The moral of the story is...DON''T INVADE OTHER PEOPLE''S COUNTRIES FOR NO REASON.

    Now stuck in Iraq. Don''t want to look silly leaving. So stuck now probably forever. Still looking silly whether we stay or leave. Just trying to keep some face by staying. Should have thought about it more BEFORE invading. Should have listened to UN, France, German, George Bush II, Cheney circa 1994.

    Reply to this comment
    by tbweb August 22, 2007 6:48 AM PDT
    tbweb
    Wasn''''t a mistake, wasn''''t wrong. What''''s wrong is the Dems trying to make political points out of this.

    Posted by jowand at 06:39 AM : Aug 22, 2007,,,

    It was a mistake to constantly change the mission in Iraq. The mission was to remove Saddam and make sure Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. The mission was accomplished, the U.S. should have left or at a minimum redeployed. Only U.S. greed for Iraqi rebuilding contracts kept us there and to make matters worst most of those contracts were no bid and failed and even worst still the U.S. got greedy and kept other nations out and those nations paid us back by not helping us on the ground with troops like France for example! The truth hurts?
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 6:51 AM PDT
    Sorry, George Bush I.
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 6:54 AM PDT
    tbweb,

    Why exactly did we have the mission to remove Saddam? Because he was a dictator? So, what about the tens of other dictators in the world? Pakistan has a dictator. Is our goal to remove this dictator, too?

    And, there was never any mission to make sure Iraq had no WMD. Before the invasion, there were scare tactics telling us that THERE WAS NO QUESTION that Iraq had WMDs. Yet, all the actions of the leaders leading up to the invasion would have suggested that they knew Iraq had no WMDs. You don''t spend month after month threatening someone if you think they are a madman with lethal weapons.

    Actions speak louder than words.
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 6:58 AM PDT
    Also, any idiot who wants to say that Saddam sent the WMDs to Syria when he knew that we were going to invade is just that...an idiot.

    How much of a threat is someone if they don''t plan to use (but send away) the things that you are trying to scare us into believe that they plan to use.

    If he wasn''t going to use the WMDs when he knew we were going to invade, exactly when was he planning to use them?
    Reply to this comment
    by kevboom August 22, 2007 7:00 AM PDT
    "What''s wrong is the Dems trying to make political points out of this."

    So by your logic, if Republicans make horrible judgments in foreign and domestic policy (I know that''s a stretch, but bear with me), leading to very bad problems for our own and other people, and then Democrats want to discuss and change the flawed policies, the problems created are really the Democrats fault? I believe that''s what the logic folks call a fallacy in reasoning. If you don''t want people to talk about messes you created, then don''t create any more messes. From Every Child Left Behind, to presidents standing in the way of medical research and advancement, to failures in environmental protection, to massive corporate give aways, to never-ending war, I can''t honestly think of one policy the current administration has supported that actually benefited anyone in the U.S. but their very rich friends. I just can''t believe anyone is still on this Web site supporting Bush. It''s mind boggling.
    Reply to this comment
    by rogeevan August 22, 2007 7:02 AM PDT
    No there''s a hugh difference Mr. Bush. The Japanese attacked us with a plan to colonize China and the whole of Southeast Asia. We attacked Afganistan because that''s where the Al-Quiada is hiding. We did not know where they are, and the Taliban couldn''t deliver them, so we attacked the Taliban. The Taliban were not a treat to anybody, much less to us.We just didn''t like them. Of course everyone knows the misinformations and lies that justified the Iraq invasion.
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 7:06 AM PDT
    Please go to Youtube and search

    Cheney
    Iraq
    Invasion
    Cspan

    Cheney said himself that getting Saddam was not worth the life of one dead American!!

    What changed between then and now? Nothing.

    Don''t be a fool.

    IRAQ HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH SEPTEMBER 11TH.

    NOTHING!
    Reply to this comment
    by rogeevan August 22, 2007 7:06 AM PDT
    No there''s a hugh difference Mr. Bush. The Japanese attacked us with a plan to colonize China and the whole of Southeast Asia. We attacked Afganistan because that''s where the Al-Quiada is hiding. We did not know where they are, and the Taliban couldn''t deliver them, so we attacked the Taliban. The Taliban were not a treat to anybody, much less to us.We just didn''t like them. Of course everyone knows the misinformations and lies that justified the Iraq invasion.
    Reply to this comment
    by tbweb August 22, 2007 7:09 AM PDT
    Posted by whatithink at 06:54 AM : Aug 22, 2007,,,

    I''m not defending removing Saddam or checking for WMD, I thought that was the mission, the goal. It''s so confusing I don''t know what to believe to be honest, but one thing is for sure, none of it can be defended! Maybe when this ends the History books will clear it up, explain it all, right now its still going on with more confusion and U.S. Deaths to come!
    Reply to this comment
    by rogeevan August 22, 2007 7:10 AM PDT
    No there''s a hugh difference Mr. Bush. The Japanese attacked us with a plan to colonize China and the whole of Southeast Asia. We attacked Afganistan because that''s where the Al-Quiada is hiding. We did not know where they are, and the Taliban couldn''t deliver them, so we attacked the Taliban. The Taliban were not a treat to anybody, much less to us.We just didn''t like them. Of course everyone knows the misinformations and lies that justified the Iraq invasion. The Iraqi people is now in the worst state that they''ve ever been. Their history, culture and traditions goes back to biblical times. Let''s leave them in peace?
    Reply to this comment
    by rogeevan August 22, 2007 7:13 AM PDT
    No there''s a hugh difference Mr. Bush. The Japanese attacked us with a plan to colonize China and the whole of Southeast Asia. We attacked Afganistan because that''s where the Al-Qaeda is hiding. We did not know where they are, and the Taliban couldn''t deliver them, so we attacked the Taliban. The Taliban were not a treat to anybody, much less to us.We just didn''t like them. Of course everyone knows the misinformations and lies that justified the Iraq invasion. The Iraqi people is now in the worst state that they''ve ever been. Their history, culture and traditions goes back to biblical times. Let''s leave them in peace?
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 7:16 AM PDT
    tbweb,

    The only goal was getting the oil reserves. That''s why once we invaded we secured the oil reserves instead of the borders.

    What''s funny is that the people defending invading Iraq consider themselves Christians. Our invasion of Iraq has been worse for the Christians who live in Iraq more than most. Regardless of what one feels about Saddam as an individual, he was secular. If our battle is against fundamentalist islam, why pick one of the most secular countries in the Middle East to invade AND give it to a group of people who want to turn it into an islamic republic like Iran?

    Just stupid.
    Reply to this comment
    by meboard August 22, 2007 7:17 AM PDT
    Well, I for one have had enough of the "cut-n-run" attitude that seems to have come over the President ever since Karl announced his resignation. After 4 years of turning the tide in Iraq, I think we need to wait 2 more weeks when the "report" comes due. Those 2 weeks could mean all the difference to the big "surge"...
    No more defeatist attitude Mr. President. We American expect you to stand in front of your mirror each morning and repeat, "I think I can, I think I can, I think I can!"
    XOXO, Maliki''08 campaign
    Reply to this comment
    by August 22, 2007 7:18 AM PDT
    jowand wrote:

    "tbweb
    Wasn''''t a mistake, wasn''''t wrong. What''''s wrong is the Dems trying to make political points out of this."

    What is wrong is the fact that you right wing fascist Republicanazis attribute the blame to Democrats for GW Bush''s war based on lies.

    Does the truth really hurt you Republicanazis so much?

    You Republicanazis are the very reason our troops are dying in Iraq.

    IF you were honorable, you''d admit to the truth, and you''d be screaming for GW Bush''s blood.

    But the simple truth is that you''re all a bunch of stinking cowards.
    Reply to this comment
    by itchyb-2009 August 22, 2007 7:22 AM PDT
    "tbweb
    Wasn''''t a mistake, wasn''''t wrong. What''''s wrong is the Dems trying to make political points out of this."

    Really, wake up and read something besides Faux News. It''s not just the Dems, sparky, it''s a crosscut of all political stripes that agree this WAS a mistake and it WAS wrong. If you want to blame this on making political points, then a vast majority of you fellow Americans are doing the same thing. The moving target of "Winning" and "Success" will keep moving, till Bush & Co. are out of office.
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 7:25 AM PDT
    itchyb,

    Someone needs to let people know that Faux News is not really news but an editorial forum for rightwing nazis to feel good about themselves.
    Reply to this comment
    by tbweb August 22, 2007 7:28 AM PDT
    Posted by itchyb at 07:22 AM : Aug 22, 2007,,,

    I didn''t write that, you''re answering the wrong person! You wake up and get your Postings right and address the correct Poster! Sheese!
    Reply to this comment
    by rogeevan August 22, 2007 7:28 AM PDT
    No there''s a hugh difference Mr. Bush. The Japanese attacked us with a plan to colonize China and the whole of Southeast Asia. We attacked Afganistan because that''s where the Al-Qaeda is hiding. We did not know where they are, and the Taliban couldn''t deliver them, so we attacked the Taliban. The Taliban were not a treat to anybody, much less to us.We just didn''t like them. Of course everyone knows the misinformations and lies that justified the Iraq invasion. The Iraqi people is now in the worst state that they''ve ever been. Their history, culture and traditions goes back to biblical times. Let''s leave them in peace?
    Reply to this comment
    by rogeevan August 22, 2007 7:31 AM PDT
    No there''s a hugh difference Mr. Bush. The Japanese attacked us with a plan to colonize China and the whole of Southeast Asia. We attacked Afganistan because that''s where the Al-Qaeda is hiding. We did not know where they are, and the Taliban couldn''t deliver them, so we attacked the Taliban. The Taliban were not a treat to anybody, much less to us.We just didn''t like them. Of course everyone knows the misinformations and lies that justified the Iraq invasion. The Iraqi people is now in the worst state that they''ve ever been. Their history, culture and traditions goes back to biblical times. Let''s leave them in peace?
    Reply to this comment
    by tbweb August 22, 2007 7:33 AM PDT
    tbweb
    Wasn''''t a mistake, wasn''''t wrong. What''''s wrong is the Dems trying to make political points out of this.

    Posted by jowand at 06:39 AM : Aug 22, 2007,,,

    Posted by itchyb at 07:22 AM : Aug 22, 2007,,,

    What are you two talking about? I never said it wasn''t a mistake! What''s going on here? You two are answering ghost Post!

    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 7:35 AM PDT
    Tbweb,

    I think they were responding to jowand.
    Reply to this comment
    by jowand August 22, 2007 7:38 AM PDT
    rogeevan
    If you don''t know what the Taliban was up to, ask Bin Laden; Hillary or Kerry can tell you wjere he is. They allowed Bin Laden to train about 30,000 terrorists in Aghanistan during Clinton year. Bet you think Bush bombed the twin towers too, HOO HOO conspiracy.
    Reply to this comment
    by jowand August 22, 2007 7:41 AM PDT
    mcdazz
    Hey mcdazz, top o the mornin'' see you are still bottom feeding.
    Reply to this comment
    by tbweb August 22, 2007 7:42 AM PDT
    14 more Americans are dead and 14 more U.S. families are in mourning. This hurts like hell, I wonder if Bush feels our pain or is this just another business transaction for him? I don''t think he feels anything, never saw him show any emotion, its not weak to show your emotions.
    Reply to this comment
    by citizenusa-2009 August 22, 2007 7:42 AM PDT
    Hey Chickenhawk! Yea, you in the Whitehouse..14 more dead today! Keep smilin. Life is good for YOU!
    Reply to this comment
    by jowand August 22, 2007 7:44 AM PDT
    Hey Chickenhawk! Yea, you in the Whitehouse..14 more dead today! Keep smilin. Life is good for YOU!
    Posted by CitizenUSA at 07:42 AM : Aug 22, 2007

    BUZZARD
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 7:46 AM PDT
    jowand,

    What does the Taliban have to do with the War in Iraq?

    That''s like bringing up the Inca empire when discussing Japan''s bombing of Pearl Harbor.

    It''s the idiots like you that have gotten us into this mess. I blame you more than GW.

    You enable stupidity.
    Reply to this comment
    by citizenusa-2009 August 22, 2007 7:46 AM PDT
    The only "emotions" Bush and Cheney have are that of GREED. Love of money. Makes them hot! Watching them walk through VA Hospitals would be a lesson in apathy. They don''t CARE. IT''S NOT THEIR FAMILIES DYING FOR NOTHING! What a wonderful example we are to the world!
    Reply to this comment
    by jowand August 22, 2007 7:47 AM PDT
    tbweb
    Did it hurt Clinton with "Blackhawk Down"?
    Reply to this comment
    by itchyb-2009 August 22, 2007 7:48 AM PDT
    tweb, sorry was directed to jowand.
    Reply to this comment
    by jowand August 22, 2007 7:51 AM PDT
    whatithink
    You mentioned Afghanistan, what do you have sometimers decease?
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 7:51 AM PDT
    jowand,

    You people are so predictable. Anytime Bush is discussed, you try to turn it into Clinton.

    So predictable.




    Reply to this comment
    by johnpatrick9 August 22, 2007 7:52 AM PDT
    Smells more and more like Vietnam ...anger, blame, denial, scapegoating and no acceptance of blame, responsibility or of shame. The arrogance of power is ever the same and weilded by the same sort of arrogant individuals. May they all roast in hell for the horrors they have visited upon their fellow humans. DISGRACEFUL..and to those who voted for war and bush...next time try thinking and do not be swayed by the drums of war by those who never tasted of its horror.
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 7:52 AM PDT
    jowand,

    I said nothing about Afghanistan. And, if Bush had learned the difference between Afghanistan and Iraq, we''d not be in this mess.
    Reply to this comment
    by citizenusa-2009 August 22, 2007 7:52 AM PDT
    jowand: As a matter of fact, because this man has a CONSCIENCE, he let the father of one of the soldiers call him "every name in the book" to his face. Clinton took it like a MAN, and with tears in his eyes APOLOGIZED, and said he f''d up! Clinton explained in a TV interview last year that he (all too late) realized he put those boys in extreme danger and will live with that mistake for the rest of his life. How interesting that after THOUSANDS OF DEATHS, your Bushit dictator does not feel the same? What''s wrong with this picture? By the way jowand, you seem to be a war monger. Why don''t you suit up and put your money where your mouth is?
    Reply to this comment
    by jowand August 22, 2007 7:54 AM PDT
    said nothing about Afghanistan. And, if Bush had learned the difference between Afghanistan and Iraq, we''''d not be in this mess.
    Posted by whatithink at 07:52 AM : Aug 22, 2007

    Go read your own post you bloviated politico. You think history is a form of female surgery
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 7:56 AM PDT
    jowand,

    You go read your own post. I commented on Afghanistan BECAUSE you brought up the Taliban!! Or do you think the Taliban is in Iraq? I wouldn''t be surprised. You are a nitwit.
    Reply to this comment
    by iceman_1960 August 22, 2007 7:57 AM PDT
    "Some people in this country think if we can pull out of Iraq, our problems will be over," Thompson told the Veterans of Foreign Wars. "You and I know better than that."

    Thompson is using an argument near and dear to alcoholics.

    "Our wives tell us that if we can just stop drinking, our problems will be over. You and I know better than that. Drink up, boys. The next round''s on me."
    Reply to this comment
    by jowand August 22, 2007 7:58 AM PDT
    Posted by CitizenUSA
    Clinton explained in a TV interview last year that he (all too late) realized he put those boys in extreme danger and will live with that mistake for the rest of his life.

    Clinton is only sorry he screwed up 10 years later, he couldn''t care less about the military. Stop being a KOOL AID carrier for the most corrupt White House in the nations history.
    Reply to this comment
    by August 22, 2007 7:58 AM PDT
    jowand wrote:

    "mcdazz
    Hey mcdazz, top o the mornin'''' see you are still bottom feeding."

    Nahh, you''re the expert on that.

    Have you extracted your head from your own *** yet?
    Reply to this comment
    by bobnjersey August 22, 2007 7:59 AM PDT
    [We care for our people and our constitution and can find friends elsewhere]

    i say we take him up on it ... since he''s so confident in his own future and security.
    Reply to this comment
    by pastdue1 August 22, 2007 7:59 AM PDT
    "Those who make such statements are bothered by our visit to Syria. We will pay no attention. We care for our people and our constitution and can find friends elsewhere."
    According to Bush ~ this is the man for Iraq.
    Maliki has served his purpose for the Bush/Cheney corporation, so it''s time to find another man for Iraq.

    "We simply cannot continue on the present course," Rep. Neil Abercrombie, . . .costing the U.S. "billions of dollars beyond the regular defense budget, with emergency supplementary bills for hundreds of billions of dollars... Unless you have an endless supply of cash coming in you''re not going to be able to do it."

    It isn''t just the cost of human lives that the nation needs to be concerned about ~ it''s being financially sound ~ for our nation to continue. However, Bush continues to make his feeble little attempts to spin another tale of success to the public.

    .S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker, co-author of the highly anticipated report to Congress, also said Tuesday that Washington''s blueprint for reconciliation was insufficient to win back control of Iraq."

    They are getting us ready for September. And, of course, the administration could not trust the Generals to write the report to Congress.
    Reply to this comment
    by whatithink-2009 August 22, 2007 8:01 AM PDT
    Please do not get caught up in a Clinton discussion. Let''s stick with current affairs. The right wingers want you to get stuck on Clinton, so Bush and his cronies get off scott free.

    Don''t fall for this ploy!!
    Reply to this comment
    by jowand August 22, 2007 8:02 AM PDT
    Iceman_1960
    Better listen to your wife or sleep on your stomach.
    Reply to this comment
    by antoniof123 August 22, 2007 8:02 AM PDT
    jowand you like the rest of the neocon party keep talking but you have yet to sign up and go over there. Just like the administration kids where are they playing while our brothers and sisters die. I do blame you and the rest of your ilk so when 2008 rolls around don''t except your mudslinging swiftboaters to make a difference this time around. God I hope we survive the next 15 months.
    Reply to this comment
    by citizenusa-2009 August 22, 2007 8:02 AM PDT
    When Baby Bush invaded Iraq, I screamed another Vietnam! The similarities are OBVIOUS. People shook their heads and laughed...no one''s laughing now.
    Reply to this comment
    by bobnjersey August 22, 2007 8:02 AM PDT
    [Stop being a KOOL AID carrier for the most corrupt White House in the nations history. ]
    [Posted by jowand at 07:58 AM : Aug 22, 2007]

    so when were you born ... 1992?
    Reply to this comment
    See all 231 Comments
    • MOST POPULAR
    • Viewed
    • Commented
    Latest News
    Featured Blogs