 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
"Hmm, could that be bacause there isn't one?"
I already told you in detail that there is no forum to bring a legal case in the decentralised structure of international law. Could you please stop being a propaganda tool here and keep it for Iraq?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
shawnmmcc
|
|
Oerdin, are you deliberately misreading my posts, or are you so emotionally caught up in them that you truly are incapable of reading them. Even worse, maybe you are hoping that by misrepresenting what I said to get away with ignoring my point, a la Rush Limbaugh. Most Apolytonites don't stoop that far, I hope you aren't.
quote:
Oerdin said: You then agreed that was how things should be run but then, perversely, you again contended you shouldn't shoot at people who attempt to run check points. |
I NEVER said that. My point concerns you comment, to quote you in full:quote:
If some macho Arab teenager wants to try to run a check point at 90 mph in daddy's car then the soldiers have every right to send that worthless sack of **** to see Satan. |
Please note you've not responded to my previous post: quote:
You don't even respond to my, and other posters, comments about the actual civilian casualties at the check points. Instead you stick to you straw man examples, hotheaded teenagers and macho testosterone junkies (which I tried to use, hoping you would see the point). Most of the dead are individuals who just didn't understand the rules, or how they worked, or just panicked. Often children are passengers in those cars, and just as often they are casualties. You don't address that issue at all. |
You keep harping on the roadblocks. How they have to work. And then claim that I don't agree. I did, clearly, read my previous posts. My issue is your "...sack of ****." comment. Since I gave you a chance to reply intelligently, now I will comment on your obvious lack of defense, and lack of feeling of remorse, for that kind of dehumanizing comment. I had assumed it was accidently. Obvious, it was not.
Once an individual becomes a "...sack of ****." to someone, that person descends into a moral quagmire. That attitude is the same one taken by bad police, and bad soldiers, when they beat the information out of a someone in their custody. That's the best case. When a individual in uniform takes it to the extreme, they become candidates for the sonderkommando. If you don't know the history, I suggest you look it up, including the interviews with the members, and how they justified what they did to the dirty..., or is that "...sack of ****."
I am sad you are going over there to represent our country. The man I spoke about already has to have been rotated out, though if you aren't too mentally lazy you could check on it yourself. However, as it is more likely you will have the opportunity and will not have to put yourself out - talk to the guards who have shot and killed the "...sack of ****." Some, unfortunately, will be like you. Maybe you will listen to the ones that talk about the dead children, and realize that they are always the losers in war. Then when you are not on duty at the roadblock, you won't strengthen Al Quaeda. Out of curiosity, have you been studying Arabic for you deployment. With that you might save the life of one "...sack of ****." Oh, I forgot, us Americans don't bother to learn the language of "...sack of ****."
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Oerdin
|
 |
of Internet Music.
Sep 2001
time: 21:32
|
|
shawnmmcc: Now all you are doing is playing symantics. I responded fully to post about civilian causualties and I elaberated upon it by giving you a scenerio. Sorry if you don't like it but if we are to discuse things then it helps to have a situation to illistraite it so everyone can see it clearly. That's not harping that's just setting the frame of the debate.
You keep going back to one comment where I called an person who willfully runs a military check point in a war zone a "stupid sack of ****" and you try to read a whole dictionary into three words. Well, I stand by that if someone is dumb enough to do something like that at a military check point in a war zone then they are a stupid sack of ****. You can read what ever you want into that comment but I contend that people see what they want to see and you clearly are doing just that.
BTW aren't you a quick one to judge? That wouldn't be to bad except you've spent so much time demonizing me based upon three words so I find it funny. I guess we all have our blind spots.
Last edited by Oerdin on 01-12-2003 at 15:34
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
East Street Trader
|
 |
London, United Kingdom
Jun 2000
time: 05:32
|
|
Two sets of complete strangers fight each other causing injury, death and the sort of anger exhibited in the thread title.
The sort of anger which paves the way for some more groups of strangers to do the same.
Who gains?
Well, a few armchair strategists get to indulge their taste for military analysis. And a few other folk who like to cheer their side on get to make a lot of noise.
But these are tastes capable of being indulged in a game of Civ or at a football game. At a rather lower cost. Such folk would readily give up their minor pleasures if to do so meant that the deaths and injuries were avoided.
The big winner would not so agree. He has much more at stake.
Time after time the same method is used. Focus attention on an external enemy and demonise that enemy. Result? Subjects who stop being a pest about imprisonment without trial, about assassination as a vehicle of the state, indeed about all and any of the tools necessary to the oppressor.
Show me a political leader - King, Fuerer, President or Prime Minister - who sets his people to kill and be killed by strangers, imprisons without trial and convinces those he "leads" to kill individuals at his behest and I will show you a tyrant.
I am not sure which is harder to understand, the thirst to oppress which drives the King/Fuerer/President/Prime Minister or the folly of the rest of us, time after time being duped into handing over to him the power to oppress us.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
What do Fedayeen "uniforms" look like?
The most likely thing is that the US troops were attacked, fired indiscriminately at everything, and god knows whom and how many they really killed.
As for the political side, the story is going down very well with local Iraqis for sure...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Thorgal
|
|
Tarifa, Cádiz.
Jan 2002
time: 05:32
|
|
quote:
Some eyewitnesses say that some men who were minding their own business joined the fight because the Americans rolled into the center of town and started shooting indiscriminately. This doesn't seem credible |
Why not? US soldiers are so scared... It would not be strange at all.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cruddy
|
|
Last BBC radio broadcast I heard, the local hospitals were reporting 8 civilians dead and dozens injured.
So not a TOTAL success in the hearts and minds war - although it will boost the morale of coalition troops.
Incidentally Ted Stryker, we had a thread on RPG effectiveness versus the Abrahms several months ago. Now let's see if I can dig out the URL... Nope, but here's a piccie;
So, although RPG's are USUALLY ineffective... never say never!
Last edited by Cruddy on 01-12-2003 at 19:41
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
I read that the US nr of 46 dead was not based on a body count, but on interviews with soldiers. If correct, my, we all know how well methods like these worked in another war...
Or it's moral boosting time, so they needed another Lynch story.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
techumseh
|
 |
of the frozen North.
Apr 1999
time: 22:32
|
|
Speaking of ducks.....
quote:
CARL HIAASEN
Iraq becomes Operation Sitting Duck
Sun, Nov. 30, 2003 - Miami Herald
A few days ago, two American soldiers in Iraq were shot, dragged from a truck and viciously beaten with concrete blocks. Their bodies were left on a dusty street in Mosul, a city once considered one of the safest for U.S. forces.
The murder and mutilation was carried out not by hardened operatives of al Qaeda, but by a gang of Iraqi teenagers, the very generation for whom we've been battling to ''liberate'' the country.
For any civilians to act so barbarously shows a depth of hatred that is chilling. As the months drag on, and the flag-draped coffins of fallen Americans keep arriving at Dover Air Force Base, the mission in Iraq makes less sense than ever.
What are we doing there? Who are we fighting? How do we get out? The only question that now seems hollow is why we ever invaded in the first place.
The search for the phantom weapons of mass destruction has been reduced to a nightly punchline in Jay Leno's monologue. No nukes, no anthrax and no nerve gas have been found; nothing to justify President Bush's pre-war declaration that Saddam Hussein posed an immediate threat to global security.
So far, the most dangerous weapons uncovered are decidely low-tech -- pistols, rifles, homemade bombs, land mines and RPGs fired from donkey-drawn wagons. Unfortunately, they're doing a bang-up job of maiming and killing Americans.
The atmosphere in Iraq remains so perilous that on Thanksgiving Day, Bush had to sneak into Baghdad on a darkened Air Force One.
Whether the war was launched on false pretenses or merely faulty intelligence will be argued endlessly. The grim fact is that we're there now, and we're stuck.
In Afghanistan the mission was so clear. We were responding to a brazen attack against Americans on American soil. We knew who did it, and where they were hiding. The international community was virtually united behind us.
Iraq is another story. Saddam Hussein was a despicable tyrant, but not even the White House claims that he played a direct role in the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Picked off by snipers
The hijackers themselves weren't Iraqis, nor were those who planned the crime. The man who approved it, Osama bin Laden, was known to detest Saddam.
Yet here we are mired in Iraq, our troops getting picked off by snipers, sappers and roadside rocket jockeys. Call it Operation Sitting Duck.
The hawks in the administration gripe that the media is focusing only on the bad news out of Baghdad, but where's the good news?
Last week, U.S. Col. William Darley told reporters that attacks by Iraqi insurgents against U.S. forces had declined from a high of 40 per day in mid-November to about 30 per day now.
It hardly makes you want to pop the champagne, knowing that our troops are coming under fire more than once an hour.
This holiday weekend concludes the bloodiest month for U.S. forces since the so-called end of major combat. More than 60 U.S. soldiers have been killed by hostile fire in November.
As of Thanksgiving Day, a total of 183 had died since the president triumphantly jet-landed on that aircraft carrier May 1.
Technically, though, the White House was correct. Major combat in the conventional sense ended in Iraq. These days our soldiers are dying by ambush and assassination.
GI murders in Mosul
Despite somewhat muted media coverage -- Michael Jackson's arrest received more attention than the GI murders in Mosul -- polls show that the war is increasingly a political liability for the White House. Efforts are accelerating to put a new Iraqi government in place.
Bringing the troops home, however, will be a long time in coming. As long as Saddam Hussein remains at large, Bush will keep a sizeable fighting force on the ground.
His insistence that occupying Iraq is central to the war on terrorism grows more preposterous by the day. Saddam has disappeared, but the much larger evil of al Qaeda has been lethally busy in Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan.
Meanwhile, bin Laden himself is still alive and making dire threats. He's certainly not in Iraq, and nothing that happens in Iraq will bring us closer to catching him.
The grisly scene in Mosul last week recalled that infamous horror in Mogadishu a decade ago, when a Black Hawk helicopter was shot down and the mangled remains of U.S. servicemen were dragged through the streets by a celebratory mob.
An unseen enemy
It was a demoralizing episode for this country, but at least the soldiers in Somalia went down fighting. In Iraq the enemy is often unseen, indistinguishable from friendly civilians, and the shots and grenades come out of nowhere.
Troops who were trained to wage war are now courageously trying to wage peace. In such a role they must be visible and ubiquitous in a land where they aren't universally welcome.
The results have been deadly though not unanticipated. The question for Bush is how long before the American people decide that the best exit plan is to elect a president with an exit plan. |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Tingkai
|
|
To find the Northwest Passage
Aug 2001
time: 13:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zylka
Not at all. One involved a vehicle rampaging down the street spraying bullets at civilians, the other a tank deciding it's high time those factory workers start... **** I don't know. It's just obvious that American forces looooove that Thanksgiving civilian hunt. |
American troops in humvees are shown on video firing machine guns as they drive down a street in a shopping district. Now maybe they took out some enemy combatants, but the video also shows a civilian is killed. But hey, the Yanks are taking down the Iraqi thugs and all the wannabe Americans cheer.
A reporter is on the scene and reports that an American tank fired on workers leaving a factory, but hey, its the Iraqis fault, according to the wannabe American.
And we got all these armchair cheerleaders go Hoorah, we kicked Iraqi butt today.
Yeah, the American troops fought off an ambush and killed the attackers, but civilians also died. And yeah, that's war, but it ain't a football game. There's no point in cheering another bloody day in Iraq.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
DinoDoc
|
 |
AECCP loves Democracy
Sep 1999
time: 23:32
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tingkai
A reporter is on the scene and reports that an American tank fired on workers leaving a factory, but hey, its the Iraqis fault, according to the wannabe American. |
What reporter on the scene?
Last edited by DinoDoc on 01-12-2003 at 21:13
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Skyjack666
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by DinoDoc
What reporter on the scene? |
Yeah, Dino...they can rarely back up their bashing.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32.
Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-12-2003 14:33
|