Added: 3 years ago
From: IVAWLosAngeles
Views: 14,457
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (175)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • for all you people who don't know, we went to Iraq for WMDs and take out saddam, no WMDs but took out saddam.. After we should have been gone, we stayed to protect the oil flow in Iraq.... I don't think going to Iraq was a horrible call... but staying in Iraq for Oil?? Sickening.

  • I agree that war sucks - period!!!!!! But I will continue to support our country and our soldiers regardless of what you all think! And how many times do I have to hear everyone's opinions on why we are in Iraq and Afghanistan, gezuz, enough already! And for all of you that oppose us being there, I sure hope you are all riding bicycles or drive electric cars, otherwise you are all hypocritical. Instead be the genius that invents the future car that is not dependent on oil!!

  • Thank god I live in Canada.

  • Doesn't "war" mean two armies are fighting???

  • good thing most of the dead troops were republican... OBAMA 2012!!!!

  • Any use of the phrase 'support the troops' that doesn't involve bringing them home is just hypocritical.

  • yes that right  stop the war

  • nice video thanks

  • Wow. These traitors to America make me want to vomit.

  • @TerrorWarrior5000 why did america even attack iraq? for oil? oh iraqi veterans are traitors cuz they didn't bring imperialist america more oil and money.

  • @TerrorWarrior5000 I was about to get mad at you but then I realized that you were a troll.

  • We should be playing this video on television all the time -- or at least prime-time.

  • Bullsh!t to the Iraqi Vets, why NOT appose the war from the start?. Now that you know you murdered innocent people and suffered so bad, you realized the war was wrong?. Too late, you are still guilty of murder and brain washed by your profit interested corporate wars.

  • @Axmedkoole I think your being small-minded and harsh. They probably didnt realise what they were doing could be wrong until they actually saw the results for themselves. B4 that they probably intended to protect innocent ppl and didnt realise they would be doing the complete opposite. I dont think they have much to gain by opposing it now, they are veterans afterall and will not have to fight again neway.

  • v

    In the October 1st 2002 NIE report, 16 intelligence agencies told Bush Cheney ect that "Iraq did NOT have WMDs, were NOT a threat to America or Anyone else" & were Not harboring terrorists ..so How do Bush, Cheney and their fellow leaders in the Military Industrial Complex get away with pleading that they had "faulty intelligence of WMDs"??

    They should all be / have been hung by the neck until dead-dead-dead for war crime ..NOT given corporate profit + 218 BIllion barrels of Iraq oil.

    ^

  • The whole fucking war in Iraq is a joke & im American BTW. There is absolutely no ties between 911--note: evry1 should read some books about 911 (The New Pearl Harbor= a good place to start) and read all the things that dont add up in 911 Commission Report so they can decifer the facts through all the lies--& Iraq. "the war on terror" is like China coming in2 the US and building bases to bomb & shoot the fuck out of the US bcuz of all the terrorist gangs like LPP, Crips, MS13, etc.. that exist

  • where does it end? why does Iraq and Afghanistan really hate us so much? Could it be because we keep killing innocent civilians along with the "terrorists" that pose such a threat to us?

  • There aren't enough people speaking up about this. People can't pay their bills and are losing their jobs yet no one speaks up about this. What is wrong with everybody.

  • god bless IVAW They are the true Heroes of the USA

    For Breaking through the guilt induced DENIAL that GWOT handlers are inflicting upon our soldiers In order to use them for Corporate colonization of these innocent civilizations under the guise of America .!

    the guilt of stealing tax payers money in order to help savage corporate economic colonization, genocide of millions and their innocent civilizations

    -

  • (ctn) There were several int. agencies around the world some from Russia and Britain and the US, that said Saddam had WMD, which aren't necessarily nukes. And we had reason to believe that true, after all he wasn't cooperating with UN weapons inspections. Yes Iraq has a new gov now, but they can't support themselves yet, their law enforcement members can't deal with the problem w/o our help, so until they can control themselves, we can't leave and risk our work being undone, like in Vietnam.

  • Hahahaha. What work in Vietnam? You carpet bombed the capital for years and got nowhere, and you were there for no reason. What a dumbfuck.

  • I don't appreciate your attitude asshole. For your information the NVA were ready to surrender because of those carpet bombings. And to say we did nothing in Vietnam, to say ny Uncle took shrapnel and lost some of his good friends for nothing... You asshole are the dumbfuck! Up yours.

  • Just because your Uncle and company are idiots, doesn't mean I am. The Vietcong controlled half of South Vietnam, and were nearing Saigon when the US withdrew. The NVA simply agreed to a peace so that America would get out. You did do damage, but not as much as some people say. They were not ready to surrender due to some silly carpet bombs. Your Uncle was probably stoned his entire stay in Vietnam. Oh wait... that's a good thing.

  • Look you stupid ungrateful fuck, you insult any American soldier, especially my uncle who received a purple heart, I will find you, and when I do... let's just say you don't want me to find you. So do the world a favor, go fuck yourself and die you worthless sack of shit!

  • Who said you will find me? A dumbass like you couldn't find a ball stuck up his ass. Oh, and I know you're the only one here who can anatomically fuck him/ herself, so that insult doesn't work. The IVAW are real heroes. They know the pain of wars and don't advocate other useless, painful ones (unlike your uncle and you). You think it's all about freedom and democracy? Freedom is not free at all. I saw a bumper sticker once: Be good to America, or we'll bring democracy to YOUR country! Yeah. Heh

  • Look you fucking tool, you can insult me all you want, but to insult the United States of America and the brave young men and women who served in the military, that crosses the fucking line. And if I am the only one who realizes this, then the whole world can burn in hell and will, and you, you twisted fuck, can be Satin's bitch, but I guess you'd like that, huh?

  • Who the hell is Satin? Hmmm... anyways, as I said, I don't insult the soldiers. Look at my comment made nine hours ago. The IVAW are the real heroes, who acknowledged their faults and were brave enough to rush into battle in the first place, and then to admit they were wrong and stop others from dying. And its not the US that gives me the shits, it's those that run the show. You think congress, the courts, and the president make the laws? Wrong. You think the Fed is for the economy? Wrong. Tool.

  • Your comment about hell also identifies you as a crazy. It's not god I have problems with, it's his fan club that drive me nuts. Your name, too. Always snoozing, asleep; blind to the truth. What a dumbfuck little cunt.

  • I'm done with these insults back and forth, see, some people actually have a life with better things to do. And for the record, my nick-name has no reflection on me, I maybe slept a total of 12 hours last week. Study up on religions, and maybe you won't have a problem with them anymore, and Satin is the devil, we'll start your study there. Bye Jackass.

  • Learn how to spell, you theocratic dipshit. It's Satan or Shaitan, not "Satin". Satin is a type of smooth fabric used in clothing, asswipe. And I have read the Bible, Torah, Qu'ran, a few druidic and pagan texts, and Anton LaVey's "Satanic Bible", and I assure you that I still have a problem with them. The best reason to study up on religion is for good stories and to learn how to recognize Bullshit. Seriously, the Bible remains the #1 bestselling storybook of all time.

  • And only the Satanic Bible makes any sense, mainly because it's completely original and not based off of any Abrahamic religion, unlike most Satanic shit. It's ironic how some call themselves Satanists, yet simply rip satan and their worships out of the Bible. The Satanic Bible, however, is how, because people created god, we should worship humanity (the creator of our creator), and especially ourselves (the center of our universe), and accept all the natural vices and pleasures denied by freaks

  • like you, Snooze-fuck666.

  • So did the other oil companies bribe the other countries to send troops to help the American soldiers, oh mighty enlightened one?

  • Comment removed

  • it's not called "bribing" its called "Lobbying" and "soft money campaign donations" and i'd advise you to watch the name calling, especially if you really don't understand that money has sent men to war more times in human history than any other thing.

    if my explanation makes no sense to you, why don't you offer an alternative? There were no WMDs, they had no nukes, Saddam has now been deposed and hanged by his own people and there is a functioning govt. So why is it that we are still in Iraq?

  • Actually religion is guaranteed to start more fights than any other cause.

    I didn't direclty call you a dumb ass, I used the word "if"

    Giving someone money to get them to do what you want is bribing no matter what you call it.

    I already stated why we were there, but I will again sense you need it. But I'll need more room...

  • im not a fan of the Iraq war ,but i find ex-vetrans of it protesting against comrades who are still fighting out there abit distasteful,dont think i could do it ,id be getting behind the lads who were injured instead

  • we're not protesting against our comrades - we're trying to get them home to their families. furthermore, our second mission statement is demanding better care for returning veterans, including fully funding the VA.

  • don't have a say? are you kidding? if you honestly believe that there is any separation of "corporation and state" then you're sadly misinformed. these companies have broken all profit records ever, every single quarter, and you don't think they have influence over our foreign policy? wow.

    and yes, that's exactly what i mean, that western oil companies have not had access to iraqs oil SINCE Saddam cut them off 30+ years ago.

  • And I will say this one more time.... WE DIDN'T GO INTO IRAQ FOR OIL BECAUSE THE AMOUNT OF OIL BEING IMPORTED TO THE USA FROM IRAQ HAS BEEN DECREASING! Stats are clearly shown on the EIA website.

  • Bush went in for oil, but didn't tell you that that was the reason. He lied. He said Saddam had WMD.

    Bush lied, children died. Millions took to the streets in protest before you attacked Iraq, because they KNEW it was based on a lie. MORE THAN ONE MILLION INNOCENT IRAQIS HAVE BEEN MURDERED IN BUSH'S "WAR". Please, understand this.

    I trust you have a link for the EIA website...? I would suggest googling "iraq body count", which includes US soldiers killed in combat as well as Iraqi civilians.

  • The big four oil companies (shell, bp, arco and a brittish company i can't recall the name of) have been foaming at the mouth for control of Iraq's oil reserves ever since Saddam cut them off 30+ years ago.

    Ever since the invasion they've been pushing harder for that control.

    Remember, it's not about the US importing Iraqi oil - why would we care what country we get it from? It's about which oil companies get to control the drilling, refining and distribution of the oil - it's about the money

  • Keep in mind the oil companies don't have any say in military actions, they couldn't tell the US government to invade a country so that they could get more oil... WE DID NOT ENTER IRAQ IN PURSUIT OF OIL! By the way Saddam had control over the Iraqi oil until he was removed from his position of power, which wasn't 30+ years ago.

  • "My friends, I will have an energy policy which will eliminate our dependence on oil from Middle East that will then prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East." Sen. John McCain

  • I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil. Alan Greenspan

  • It's like a dysfunctional family skirting around Dad's alcoholism. Oil is the Elephant in the Living Room.

  • How is it that so many people still dont see the god dam elephant in our living room???

  • Comment removed

  • Initially, the country was in shock from 911, that's how they succeeded. The invasion of Iraq, which had been planned by Cheney-Rumsfeld, (schooled by Nixon) was accomplished by associating Iraq-911 and the WMD scare and having Powell as a believable spokeswarmonger. By the time we were in, it didn't matter. Wolfowitz was arrogant enough to say essentially, "WMD, meh, it was what we picked...who cares?"

  • Step Two, keep the war invisible, steal the National Guard. Vietnam ended because everyday citizens were being drafted to fight and nightly dead Americans were shown on the news. Cheney-Rumsfeld learned their lessons. No US bodies on the news, the firing of a photographer who published pictures of coffins. The bulk of Americans don't see the daily consequences of the war.

  • Another Reason: Americans are no longer very civic, they're by and large corporate. The quest for personal peace and affluence has far outranked their sense of civic involvement. Look at the Obama hysteria, he was a media manipulator who tapped into the anti-war sentiment without offering a real end to the war. (he wants to leave 35-50,000 troops there after the war is "over". People's underlying guilt was assuaged by voting for the rockstar President........We MUST take our country back.

  • Nice job BeauJames59; You have a pretty good view of the god dam elphant!!!

  • Pretty f'd up day when the truth is relegated to a "slip."

  • As lieutenant Columbo would have said: You know its all those small little details which bother me

  • the primarily difference between North Korea and Iraq is that we had virtually no economic options with Iraq because the country floats on a sea of oil." Paul Wolfowitz, Secretary of Defense

  • Jesus Christ people how many god damned times do I have to tell you, we are getting less oil from Iraq now than before. EIA stats show it loud and clear we are getting less oil from Iraq now than before. America does not engage in fighting for a purpose such as oil. I think we can afford to lose Iraq as an oil source anyway, there is plenty more elsewhere. Cite the sources of your quotes also, I'm curious to know where you found those.

  • Wolfowitz: At Asian security conference in 03; Greenspan: memoirs published in 07McCain: During campaign, May 08. The EIA also stats that Iraq has the world's second largest proven oil reserves and USA currently imports 60% of its oil needs. But its not just a question of oil and big service contracts with certain companies linked with the Bush administration; its about controlling Iraqi oil which was supplying central Europe. Thats why France and Germany wouldn´t support this war.

  • If we were trying to take over, don't you think the occupation would be a little more forceful? And for a second assuming we did go for oil, why now? Why not when we had to beat Saddam's ass out of Kuwait when he tried to annex it, why didn't we keep going and take the oil then if that's what we wanted?

  • You can ask Wolfowitz, Greenspan or McCain.

    If you ask me: the occupation was forceful over a weak Iraqi army with no WMD. At the first Iraqi war, according to the official record, Saddam wasnt overthrown because a military coup was expected, but Saddam took control of it. But when McCain tried desperately to explain his verbal slip, he tumbled with another verbal slip, he said he was talking about the First Gulf War in which we didnt want Saddam to take control of the region´s oil.

  • I mean forceful over the average Iraqi people, of course we were forceful with Saddam's army, we were at a state of war with them, you don't passively win an arms battle. You attack.

    No, actually I can't ask any of these men, so I'm asking you since you think we are stealing their oil reserves, you have to think about these things and when you do, you will realize how ridiculous it is to say that our occupation is one in pursuit of oil.

  • There is no need to ask them in person, they have spoken loud and clear. Now if you dont want to believe in Greenspans or Mc Cains words or in what Wolfowitz stated in his Project for the New American Century, etc., well its your choice, Its a free country, but every one of us knows, deep inside, if we are being honest with ourselves or not.

  • Sure, I have my opinion you got yours, let's leave it at that.

  • you think that we've been delicate with the iraqi people?

    regardless, no one is claiming we went to iraq to "steal their oil". we can't do that, everyone knows that, no ones suggesting we are. we went to iraq so that western oil companies would be in a position to control the welling, refining and distribution of the second largest proven reserve of oil on the planet. these companies are pulling in $115 billion in revenue every quarter, that's "go to war" kind of money.

  • $115 billion huh? Go to war type money? One Tomahawk missile cost 1/2 mil. Abrams tank- 4.5- 10 million, just to purchase one, not to mention how much it costs to maintain. And more stuff like this adds up. The US spent 711 Billion on military funding in 2008. On top of that, none of the oil money is going to the government, and if they aren't stealing the oil, they are going to have to pay for it, right? So again, going for oil makes no sense. Oil is expensive but war costs even more.

  • listen, im not claiming that oil companies are paying for the war or for military equipment. here's how it works; war is extremely expensive, but the people voting to fund it aren't spending their own money, are they? they are spending tax payer dollars. they are being convinced to do so by lobbyists of the defense industry and the oil industry. the defense industry has made a ton of money since we've gone to war (they're the ones that charge $10 mil for a tank, right?)

  • (cont) The oil industry makes more money than any industry ever has in human history. They stand to gain absurd amounts more if they can get contracts to refine and sell Iraqs oil, especially since the reserves are proven and they don't need to spend much on researching drilling sites (the wells have already been drilled).

    They spend very little, in relation to their profits, on lobbying. That amount, however, is a very generous amount to individual congressional representatives, who

  • (cont) have control of something which is of VERY great importance to the oil industry; opening up Iraq's oil fields for their exploitation (via first removing Saddam, the guy who kicked out western oil 30 years ago, and further by continuing the occupation until those who control Iraq's oil fields will allow the western oil companies to bid on contracts and by pressuring Iraq's fledgeling government to make sure that it happens).

    It really is very logical if you actually think it out.

  • Yeah, it made sense when I first read it, then you said it was logical if I thought about it, so I did, and now it makes absolutely no sense. Why would we establish a new Iraqi government to convince them to let the US have their oil. If we could keep something under, like pressuring a government establishment into selling their oil rights to the US alone, we would be able and better off to just take the oil w/o making a government to get past, or just annexing the country, which I wouldn't back

  • And that's exactly my point, NO ONE would back us straight out annexing a country, it's not even an option.  As it stands, YOU back the occupation, because to you it's about freeing an oppressed people, but if we straight up annexed their resources, they'd then lose your support as well as mine. Is this making sense? They need to walk the fine line of appearances.

  • So what does the US military as a whole gain from having American companies having rights to this oil, what's their incentive? And how exactly do they convince the new Iraqi leadership to only sell these rights to American companies? Do you think the Iraqi leadership would speak up about it?

  • The US military has NOTHING to gain from it, in fact the occupations have been a very severe STRAIN on the US military. But the military doesn't have a choice in where they fight. You're really quite missing the point so I feel like I must be being unclear, I will try one more time. It's called "follow the money."

  • 1) Iraq has a LOT of oil. Oil = money because it is a resource that every country on the planet needs. our need is only increasing and the supply is going down. this means LOTS of guaranteed future profits for whoever controls the most oil.

    2) the big four western oil companies want control of Iraqs oil.

    3) they spend (a small amount of their own) money lobbying congress and the senate in DC to vote to continue the occupation, thus extending our mission in the country

  • 4) congress then votes to extend the war by funding "emergency war funding bills" (like the $81BILLION that is being voted for on Thursday). congress, of course, isn't spending their own money, they are voting to spend tax payers (or in fact money borrowed from the Fed, much of which isn't even actually budgeted for, putting us into deficit)

    5) a great deal of this money, of course, goes to the weapons industry, so they of course support the occupations as well.

    does this make sense yet?

  • If you really think that the oil companies are bribing the senate to keep our young men in harms way for a couple billion dollars, you are a dumb ass.

    I understood what you were trying to say to me the whole time, but it makes no sense. The government officials in America are human too, sure they would like more money, who wouldn't, but if getting that extra money meant brave young men and women had to die to get it, they would know that crosses the line.

  • Continued...

    So you tell him that someone says he does, and you ask him to give it up or you'll take it by force. He'll deny still he has one, so you search him anyway because you have reason to believe he has a weapon that could kill a lot of defenseless people. Similarly, if we receive intel from several sources that someone has WMD, we get rid of them before they have the chance to use them. We told Saddam to disarm before we went in and we know from previous experience, talk doesn't work.

  • Ok... good example. Thing is, would you then kill all the other students in the school in the process of trying to find the gun? Would you assume that just because one student MAY have a gun (you don't know for sure), that all the other students MAY be potential killers too, regardless of their record, sex or age...?

    "We told Saddam to disarm before we went in "

    Saddam never had any weapons to 'disarm'. UN inspectors said so. Therefore, it was an illegal invasion. It is an illegal occupation.

  • You are wrong on so many levels. Just continue to watch mainstream media and stay in the manufactured reality.

  • Where the hell did you come from? At least the other person had some arguments and specifically stated what they thought I was incorrect about. And by the way I don't watch the news, what 16 year old does? I use the internet to find reliable several reliable sources. By the way you come across as an extreme hippie.

  • Saddam was tricked into invading Kuwait by the U.S. to start Desert Storm. The CIA helped put him in power. His WMD that did not exist could never have harmed the U.S. North Korea (part of the axis of evil) had WMD, everyone knew that for sure and we did nothing. They don't have a giant oil supply do they? Scott Ritter a American/U.N. weapons inspector said Iraq did not have WMD. btw I'm not a hippie. Not that there is anything wrong with hippies

  • I am not even going to argue with one of those frickin' die hard conspiracy theorists like you because logic and reason make no sense to you type of people. sorry for coming down so hard but... [sighs]

    If you want me to share some facts with you ask sweetsingeruk to send you the E-Mail with my final statements on this issue.

    And for the record, hippies by definition piss me off I can find a lot of things wrong with them, don't see how you can't. One more reason not to argue with you! K Bye.

  • You can't win an occupation.

    E

  • Service in Iraq is NO badge of honoUr.

  • Fuck bush and the neocon zionists!

  • Powerful. Thank you!

  • Exactly what the vid says.

    A father of a child in Iraq goes shopping at the market one morning..

    The son later discovers his father lay dead in the streets after a misfire from American Soldiers.

    The son is filled with anger and joins the terrorist forces..

    hundreds are possibly added everyday to enemy forces..

    knock one down.. two take there pace..

  • rockoownz....you nailed it! by us doing what we are doing and killing innocent people over there did nothing but aggravate the situation.....and i believe the next attack here is going to make 9-11 look like a picnic.........

  • "and i believe the next attack here is going to make 9-11 look like a picnic..."

    The first attack (9/11) was down to Bushco. I don't think there is really a threat from anyone else, even now. Unfortunately, the Bush legacy still exists and is implemented through Obama, who is riding the lion's back, so to speak. One wrong move and the lion will eat him alive! So he does what he's told. Mass paranoia prevails as a result.

  • "terrorist forces.."

    "enemy forces.."

    Perhaps "resistance" would be a more accurate term to describe this, terrible thing though it is. If it happened to you, and you wanted revenge, would that make you a terrorist? Or would you think it was justified, as the son in the example probably would?

    "knock one down.. two take there pace.. "

    Unfortunately, this is a grim reality. You guys really need to pressure your govt to end this madness and send you home. Seriously.

  • By the way, what America is doing for Iraq is a good thing. We removed an evil dictator who killed thousands of innocent people just because he could. We established a democratic government so all people in Iraq have a say in government. Most of our soldiers over there realize this and don't want to leave until they are stable and can enforce their own laws. And Bush can't alone decide to enter a country with military force, there is a balance of power that prevents one person from doing this.

  • I can understand where you're coming from Snooze601, bu t with all due respect, nobody asked you to do anything "for" Iraq. Bush needed a reason to invade for the oil. And the reason he gave you was Saddam and his non-existent wmd's.

    Despite a huge "NO" from the UN and MILLIONS of people around the world, Bush still gave the order to invade. This invasion of a sovereign country is ILLEGAL by international law, and contravenes the Geneva Conventions.

    Unfortunate, but a fact nonetheless.

  • The evil dictator killed thousands of innocent people.

    The occupation has killed hundreds of thousands, some say more than 1 million.

    Good thing?

  • Is it ever good when innocence is killed? No jackass, and I wasn't saying it was. And most of the civilian deaths were caused by militia or mercenary fighters, not the coalition, the body count fails to produce that info. What you fail to see is that life under Saddam was hard, unjust and extremely difficult if you could stay alive. The Iraqi people have a better life now than before. And the rest of the world can also thank coalition forces for removing a potential threat to mankind: Saddam.

  • you're sadly misinformed kid. 1) you are incorrect that more civilians were killed by other forces than the "coalition"  2) life in an occupation is "better now than before?" justify that. Have you ever been to iraq? Have you ever spoken to an Iraqi about this subject?

  • 2) Okay, you got I have not been to Iraq. However, three of my cousins whom are Marines have been. One of my other cousins lives in Kuwait now and is trying to move to Iraq to accept a job offer, he wouldn't have done that a few years ago. Please trust that I am telling the truth, I wouldn't lie about that.

    1) Prove that more innocent people were killed by coalition forces. Yes, Coalition, a combination of American some European and I think some Australian, no need for quotation marks.

  • It sucks that someone getting kicked in the junk will get more views then this ad

  • It sucks that Americans don't realize the military they all say they stand for is pretty much all against osama....oops i mean obama

  • listen your add will be cencored thier is no anti war news protests in washington are blackedout from the news while britney spears runs

    do you really think thell let you advertise commercials to stop it unless they run them at 2 am while showing some crappy reruns of low rated shows

  • Thank you for the ad. One of the things we might keep in mind is that it isn't whose more righteous that counts - it's ending the war that's what's important. IVAW is getting much of the flack VVAW received in the '70's when we tried to bring our sisters and brothers home and end the stupidity of Vietnam. Keep up the struggle

  • its too late now...can u imagine how many iraqi men who had their families slaughtered by us over there are plotting to get us back......it might take some time but uts going to be huge.......

  • "its too late now..."

    The general sentiment out there (I've been there in a civilian capacity) is that all foreign troops should leave. That's it. No plotting, no revenge attacks, etc. They just want to be able to get on with their lives in their country their way.

    9/11 wasn't Iraq's fault, it was Bush's fault. Bush and his cronies are still running the show through their little puppet slaveboy Obama. That's the biggest threat to America. That's where you're now needed most.

  • You are right about one thing... 9/11 wasn't Iraq's fault. Unfortunately for you, America didn't go into Iraq because of 9/11. That wouldn't make sense anyway because al-Qaeda, a terrorist organization headed by bin-Laden, used suicide bombers in the 9/11 attacks. Where is al-Qaeda's main concentration? Afghanistan, where we went in response to 9/11. We entered Iraq initially because there was reason to believe President Hussein had WMD. Do some research.

  • Snooze601, AQ never admitted to the attacks of that fateful day. Please understand, your ex-president comes from a long line of murderous thugs who will go to any extent to get what they want. The don't care who they hurt in the process. Not even Katrina victims at home.

    I don't recognise Saddam as "president". He imposed himself on Iraq. He was a "friend" of the USA until he disobeyed his master, who then declared him a tyrant.

    I strongly suggest, most politely, that YOU do some research.

  • I appreciate your being polite, so I will do my best to do the same. Not only did CIA officials say Hussein had WMD, but the Senate Intelligence committee, Lord Butler's investigation in Britain, and some other intelligence agencies in Britain, some Russian intelligence agencies and more told the US that Hussein had WMD. Bush and his committee didn't just make this up. I personally don't think that we went for oil at all, most of our oil comes from elsewhere. And I agree Saddam isn't a president

  • Thanks for that comment, Snooze601. That so-called 'intelligence' was the whole cover-up. The CIA is notorious for such scams throughout their sordid history. The whole intelligence story on the news was a smokescreen. Russia did actually say that they provided no such information, because there was no basis for it.

    The US does, in fact, use mostly Arabian oil, despite having its own oil reserves, simply because of a long-standing control feud over resources. It's about imperialist control.

  • contd...

    When weapons inspectors went into Iraq to investigate the allegations of wmd, at the request of the UN, who were desperately trying to prevent a preemptive attack by Bush, they found nothing. They were told to stay and look some more. They reported back, saying "nothing". Then they were told to check a third time, but this time, were called back before they could report anything, because Bush already knew the answer, but needed a reason to invade. The "Shock & Awe" happened. Illegally.

  • Yeah the US does get a large sum of our oil from the that area, but we get way more oil from Mexico, Canada, and Saudi Arabia than Iraq. (And others) And in fact the amount of oil imported from Iraq has recently been decreasing. So don't tell me we went for oil.

    By the way Putin did say his intelligence committee did inform the US that Hussein had WMD. And what about the British intelligence? Do you agree it's legit?

  • Snooze601, the reasons given to the public and the reasons for actually invading Iraq are very different. There is sufficient evidence of this if you take the time to do a little unbiased research. Like I said, it's about CONTROLLING the oil reserves, the way the World Bank, the Media, the education and health systems are controlled, ALL by the same "elite" people.

    Brit intel was also NOT legit. I will not support injustice on the basis of citizenship. Wrong is wrong. No need to get agitated.

  • Let's look at this as a metaphor, if a student at a school says another student possibly has a gun, someone stops that kid whether they know for a fact he has a gun or not, they don't take the time to ask whether the student is telling the truth or not, they stop the kid who might have a gun before he has the chance to start firing. When you ask the kid if he has a gun, of course he is going to say he doesn't...

  • IVAW makes for strange bedfellows. So many personal understandings of the best way to approach our COMMON GOAL of ending the war, caring for our brothers in arms, and making amends for the mess we made by invading. This was our best effort at an opening shot in what we hope will be a campaign of ads addressing all of the problems we have with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    -One of the authors of the ad.

  • Our whole purpose in creating the ad was to bolster our current base of support, attract the uncommitted, and garner media attention for additional discussion of many of the points raised here.

  • Wow. Lots of issues to address. As for the Afghanistan issue, the vote had not been completed when the ad went into production. We also had to deal with what to put in and leave out because we only had 30 seconds worth of "bullet points" to work with. I personally wanted to address "The Myth of The Surge"...but there just wasn't enough time. The hope was that a good response for this ad would fuel a drive for additional ads to address additional issues.

  • oh FYi, IVAW is now officially against the Occupation of Afghanistan . We call for an immediate withdrawal of all occupying forces and reparations for the Afghani people.

  • so unless an ad has a superbowl sized audience it doesn't reach anyone?

    what a ridiculously defeatist attitude. it's more effective to.... go through the phone book name by name telling people about IVAW? Cheaper, I guess, maybe.

    So negative.

  • This is a well conceived and executed 30 second spot. As a Desert Storm vet, I approve this ad!

  • I hope that many citizens who were unaware that IVAW even exists know now; and that they will send financial support!

  • Please, tell me about the "millions of dollars". I do believe you are full of crap. Tell me about all of the positive actions you have taken over the last 6 years to end this criminal occupation?

  • I think that guy who said "millions of dollars" is obviously over exaggerating or atleast has no clue what he's talking about. But he is correct about "pissing" away money (which they have). And the comment about "nothing positive" is way off. The organization has attempted to do something positive, trying to end this occupation. Unfortunatly their tactics are soooo old school, is just a copy-cat of VVAW or VFP. IVAW needs to think out of the box. Marching doesn't work anymore.

  • Well, you've told us what you believe does not work. How about some suggestions of what you think will work. What is "out of the box" to you?

  • hopefully this didn't cost the organization too much money. I've heard that IVAW is in the red. Should they be making commercials and buying airtime?

  • all of the production services were donated by various organizations. the only thing that IVAW paid for was airtime, and it was paid for by the individual chapters in the cities it was aired - IVAW's individual chapters are not in any debt, but the organization on the whole could definitely benefit from additional donations, hence the reasoning behind trying to get this piece out to the masses.

    make sense?

  • Thats correct I just got word of the vote passing.

  • nice.

  • Fabulous! It should be played on every network every hour!

  • I am off to Iraq in Feb, again. I support this effort 100%.

  • TajiTJ - Be safe man! My prayers are with you.

  • IVAW currently only takes political stance on the War in Iraq it is important to remember although we have members who participate in other actions, operations and are members of other organizations, Iraq Veterans Against the War takes political stance on the war in Iraq ONLY

  • Actually they just passed a referendum in support of recalling all troops from Afghanistan as well as Iraq. So they are not only about Iraq and their organization is made up of members from the occupation in afghanistan. My only qualm with this production is that they still refer to what is happening in Iraq as a war in reality it is an occupation. End the occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan now!

  • Rock & efing Roll baby!!!! Dissent is patriotic...don't ever drink the koolaide!!!

  • Great ad IVAW!

    How do you guys feel about Obama? Are you goes sold on the Afghanistan war?

    How do you feel about his intentions to "reduce" forces in Iraq and move them to Afghanistan?

    I understand if IVAW is hopeful, but do you guys smell the same type of Bullshit coming out of the New administration already? or is it just me?

    Great Video, Thank you all for your service and patriotism!

  • IVAW just voted to include Afghanistan in two of it's points of unity (mission statements), ie:

    Immediate withdrawal of all occupying forces in Iraq and

    Afghanistan

    Reparations for the human and structural damages Iraq and

    Afghanistan have suffered, and stopping the corporate pillaging of

    Iraq and Afghanistan so that their people can control their own lives

    and future

    I hope that answers your question.

  • It does, thank you very much for your timely response.

    I'll do my best to help spread this video on forums, and to people i know.

  • IVAW fighting the good fight. I assume, then that your view on the imminent(pre) war in pakistan should be avoided at all costs.

    Had this proposal been drafted and served to the american people, then no doubt confidence would be restored to the republic.

  • We are opposed to both occupations on the grounds that they were both illegal Constitutionally as well as they are ineffective, a burden on the tax payer at home, and countless innocent lives are being lost everyday. We must bring our troops home from both occupations and end the injustice to the people of those countries on our behalf as well as take care of those that are victims of the violence, especially our own!

  • End the War Now.

  • Quality ad. Bush's occupation of Iraq needs to end.

  • I support I.V.A.W. The war/occupation of Iraq is not over. We must keeping pushing until all of the troops are home, and out of Iraq.

  • We need you to post the link or embed it to everyone you know, tell everyone, we need a lot of views in a short time to make this get out there!!!!!

  • excellent, thanks IVAW!

  • Amazing ad - keep up the great work!

  • did this air, and if so, when?

  • yes, on NBC, but very late - 4 1/2 hours after the slot we were given, so we are working with NBC to get some additional slots throughout the week to get the number of viewers we expected when it was supposed to air right before the Oath of Office.

    But if you're in LA, it will be on dateline tonight, last commercial break of the show, check it out!

  • how can we help to get it on the air across the nation (i already donated @ ivaw*org, but have no problem doing so again!)?

  • IVAW, this is an AMAZING ad! Truly great work!

  • i wonder if any obama zombies realize an iraq vet was crushed at their little democratic national convention

  • small correction, the event you're referring to was the final presidential debate at Hoffstra University in upstate New York.

  • Beautiful.

  • this video has nothing to do with democrats or republicans...its about ending the war!!! REPOST THIS VIDEO!!!

  • please don't repost it anywhere, but definitely spread the word, embed it, link it, etc!

  • we made it in 6 weeks on completely donated services, thank you for asking.

    i'd be very interested in seeing the ad that you produced since you are so passionate about the subject.

  • Sounds like your confused. You want more of the truth and then attack those telling part of it. Get help.

  • make your own video. seeing George Galloway on your profile doesn't help your stance

  • Save America End the War; End the Fed!

  • Very well put ad.

  • Great Ad! Thank you for standing up and speaking out, on national t.v., and during the inauguration ~ Brilliant!

  • STAND UP COLORADO

  • Dynamite ad! Love the graphics and the shooting gallery metaphor. Keep pushing the truth. End The Wars.

    John Grant

  • thanks you guys! great job

  • I am putting this on my profiles.

  • bring them home!!! He won't though