US troops facing deadlier bombs in Iraq

Originally posted by Souljah
and you say i APPLAUD when people are murdered?
where the hell did you see me do that?

Oh, let me see...maybe it was words such as these:

take the power back, one way or antother: with violence

that is the final part of this "revolution" that you are talking about. when people stop talking and start DOING IT, then true changes really start to happen.
and taking back the power with violence, has only one result in usa:
another civil war!

Are these the words of a man that loves peace?

Hello Clint,

If not mistaken....y'r Idal there Clint~y....in the movies was also a Terroriest....hee...hee

but I garentee if you w'r standing in front of me....no way you would call me that to my face. Becuase a Terrorist I am not, but to fight for someones freedom, that I woukld gladly die for.

So far from what I have read and what you "assume" explains everything....look at your self before stating claims to others.

Your friend Sven.

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by Souljah
and you say i APPLAUD when people are murdered?
where the hell did you see me do that?

Oh, let me see...maybe it was words such as these:

take the power back, one way or antother: with violence

that is the final part of this "revolution" that you are talking about. when people stop talking and start DOING IT, then true changes really start to happen.
and taking back the power with violence, has only one result in usa:
another civil war!

Are these the words of a man that loves peace

i see you have successfully compiled words of mine to make me look more like a revolutionary, not a peace lover.
answer yourself to a few questions, and maybe you will understand me:

was gandhi a peace lover or a revolutionary?
is nelson mandela a peace lover or a revolutionary?
was che guevara a pace lover or a revolutionary?
or are they both?

but sorry, no revolution is peacefull, they tend to get very violent and bloody all the time. but after that comes peace. in one form on another.
after all, we will all find peace someday.

It is the US's fault for throwing these soldiers lives away. It is the US military command's fault for sending these patrols out to run over IED's.

My cousin is being sent to Iraq as I speak for the second time. If anything bad happens to him, then the Iraq people will have an American terrorist to worry about, alot more smarter then UBL is or ever will be.

I will kill every single person in that forsaken country. I know no ROE like the US Army does.

But I cant really blame the Iraqis. I can blame the US though for having their heads stuck up their behinds, I mean blown up their behinds.

Idiots. They need to learn what geurilla and urban warfare is all about. Dont let let the IRaqi population drive around, dont put our troops in city center, dont put them within mortar/artillery range of a population center, dont send them out in vehicles to find badguys *rolls eyes*. There is no vehicle in the world that can withstand explosives.

And obviously the intelligence gathering is not good enough. So they need to suck it up and go home, or start pulling the trigger on everything that moves until the bad guys surrender and comply. Else friendlies die.

Enough said on this.



[edit on 8-1-2005 by Ritual]

Souljah

You are wrong. I reserve the word revolutionary for those that fight to overthrow oppression. Those that murder their own innocent countrymen need not apply.

The US is not there to oppress the Iraqis. We are there to help the Iraqis.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Souljah

You are wrong. I reserve the word revolutionary for those that fight to overthrow oppression. Those that murder their own innocent countrymen need not apply.

The US is not there to oppress the Iraqis. We are there to help the Iraqis.

Jsobecky, seeing as the resistance is widespread and not under a single command such as a military, it would seem rather foolish to assume that the terrible acts committed by the few are in direct connection with the whole.

As for you calling the main stream Iraqi resistance 'terrorists', that�s you're personal opinion. But seeing as technically under the Geneva Convention this war falls under the category aggressive and illegal 'occupation', this grants the civilian population of the oppressed country the right to fight back legally.

Also seeing as these people are exercising their right given to them under the international protocols of war, would this not entitle these people to be called 'resistance'?

Hmm, although I suppose you're 'terrorist' comment was not unexpected seeing as the French resistance in WWII were thought of by the Nazi's as 'terrorists', I guess it just depends if you are on the aggressors side or not.

Oh and before you automatically label me as 'One of them', I am just someone who agrees with International Law, if you choose otherwise that�s up to you.

Originally posted by Johnny Redburn
Jsobecky, seeing as the resistance is widespread and not under a single command such as a military, it would seem rather foolish to assume that the terrible acts committed by the few are in direct connection with the whole.

Lots of evidence point to the Mukhabarat as the primary co-ordinating force behind the "insurgency". And then there are always the occasional al-Qaeda in the mix.

As for you calling the main stream Iraqi resistance 'terrorists', that?s you're personal opinion. But seeing as technically under the Geneva Convention this war falls under the category aggressive and illegal 'occupation', this grants the civilian population of the oppressed country the right to fight back legally.

Also seeing as these people are exercising their right given to them under the international protocols of war, would this not entitle these people to be called 'resistance'?

Hmm, although I suppose you're 'terrorist' comment was not unexpected seeing as the French resistance in WWII were thought of by the Nazi's as 'terrorists', I guess it just depends if you are on the aggressors side or not.

It's more than my opinion as to whether they are terrorists or resistance. The single factor that makes them terrorists is that they DELIBERATELY AND ROUTINELY murder their own, innocent citizenry. Now you may want to put further labels, like resistance, on them, but as the saying goes, no matter how much lipstick you apply, it's still a pig.

Maybe you can point out where the GC gives them the right to murder their own citizens? Or to behead innocents while videotaping them? I'll wait while you look it up.

And while you're at it, maybe you can explain what interest al Qaeda has in Iraq? Humanitarian?

Oh and before you automatically label me as 'One of them', I am just someone who agrees with International Law, if you choose otherwise that?s up to you.

I think your application of International Law is very one-sided. It doesn't matter, I don't care what you think, or what label you prefer. I don't apply labels unless someone asks for one, anyway.



[edit on 10-1-2005 by jsobecky]

Originally posted by jsobecky
You are wrong. I reserve the word revolutionary for those that fight to overthrow oppression. Those that murder their own innocent countrymen need not apply.

you just dont want to undestand that people in iraq are opressed, by "fake puppet governor" and by the american armed fores. if you want to help iraqi people, move the u.s. forces out of there!

murder their own innocent countryman? if somebody was "murdered" or assainated, he wasnt innocent, but a collaborator, a traitor.
what would you do with traitors? tell me.

Originally posted by jsobecky
The US is not there to oppress the Iraqis. We are there to help the Iraqis.

if you want to help iraqi people, move the u.s. forces out of there!
they are not helping the peace process, if you havent noticed yet.

Originally posted by svenglezz
Hello Clint,

If not mistaken....y'r Idal there Clint~y....in the movies was also a Terroriest....hee...hee

but I garentee if you w'r standing in front of me....no way you would call me that to my face. Becuase a Terrorist I am not, but to fight for someones freedom, that I woukld gladly die for.

Clint was never a terrorist. I think it's a language/culture thing, your misunderstanding.

Anyway, you described yourself as a terrorist. Remember? We were taliking about

Maybe you can explain why "those who fight for the change of iraqi people" are busy murdering innocent Iraqi citizens and destroying their future by blowing up the oil pipelines. I think that the Iraqi people are fed up with those terrorists.

and you said

me join'em....already have.....

Hello again,

Join'em I would.....and I'd be the one sprinting in front....that's for sure, but for you to sit there and start to say to others what they beleive that is a true "terroriest"

So if you want to back down from that statement now, I can understand. I can see you're probably pretty embarassed.

Remember, the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist is that a terrorist is one who kills his own innocent countrymen. And that's who you're associating yourself with, sven. Your words, not mine.

You lay with dogs, you're gonna get fleas.

Originally posted by Souljah
you just dont want to undestand that people in iraq are opressed, by "fake puppet governor" and by the american armed fores. if you want to help iraqi people, move the u.s. forces out of there!

murder their own innocent countryman? if somebody was "murdered" or assainated, he wasnt innocent, but a collaborator, a traitor.
what would you do with traitors? tell me.

Tell me this, Souljah. You have a neighbor. An honest man, a hard worker. He wants to be able to vote in an election and take part in Iraq's future, and maybe one day see his children be part of the political process.

Does that give you the right to murder him? A simple yes or no will suffice.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Tell me this, Souljah. You have a neighbor. An honest man, a hard worker. He wants to be able to vote in an election and take part in Iraq's future, and maybe one day see his children be part of the political process.

Does that give you the right to murder him? A simple yes or no will suffice.

no.
ofcourse not.
but then again, that is ME talking, not a pissed guy from baghdad city.
i dont think the "situation" is that easy to understand. if it were that easy, people wouldnt die every day and u.s. soldiers would be home now.

let me ask you something:
you have a "honest" neighbour, that sells the u.s. forces information about the "rebel forces" hideouts. he gets food, water, medicine and clothing from the american soldiers. the next day the u.s. forces kill your brother and two cousins fighting for the rebel forces. and you know that your neighbour SOLD HIM OUT!
what are you going to do?

and i think that is the "easy" case of scenarios that are happening down there.
a real human tragedy if you ask me.

Originally posted by Souljah
let me ask you something:
you have a "honest" neighbour, that sells the u.s. forces information about the "rebel forces" hideouts. he gets food, water, medicine and clothing from the american soldiers. the next day the u.s. forces kill your brother and two cousins fighting for the rebel forces. and you know that your neighbour SOLD HIM OUT!
what are you going to do?

Ask my neighbor how I could get the same deal he did. The brother and cousins, after all, were killing innocent people with their IEDs and beheadings.

You really believe that the insurgents are responsible for that beheading crap?

THAT IS SOOOOOOOOOOO A US propaganda meme. They started it with Perle, and.. it didn't catch on SO.. they killed the American kid (Nick...) who was at Abu doing the telecom work because.. well how much do you want to bet he had something to do with the leak? AND FINALLY some dumb ass Iraqis caught on and pulled off a couple of their own, when all of a sudden they realised it wasn't the way to go and that they had fallen in to a trap.

The IDEs? War is hell. Should have left the country along and the two brothers wouldn't have been killing US soldiers for killing their friends and famillies.

Did IRAQ go to the USA and hurt some people there? No.

Did the USA go to IRAQ and hurt some people there? Yes.

Who is at fault here (since we are asking these hypothetical question)?

Who instigated? Who's paying the price right now?

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by svenglezz
Hello,

Got'a give it to em' there getting better at making the bombs, thanx to the American'z.

So you sympathize with and support the terrorists. Good. Maybe you should go over there and get in the front lines with them, eh?

Actually its the people like you who support war who should be sent over there, but of course your too much of a coward, and would rather send your young to die....

As for the resistance being called cowards, this is an old trick by crusaders, the brave resistance fight agaisnt 10x there number with 100x better equiptment and win.... The US bombs cities flat and still cannot win....

I do hope soon these guys find some new and exciting ways to blow the hell out of there illegal invaders.

Hello Clint,

Come on into the "light".....it's ok...we will forgive you for your view(s) on the war.....many others have made the switch....so you would not be alone..(maybe have some "support group" for these people) making the switch...hee...hee


But calling me a "dog" wow...that's just to much for me to take, come on man you seem to be so fast to "lable" people just because their view is not of yours....in many ways this show's "denial", if you cant back up your broad claims, "go take another bath" and make sure you "cleans" your soul, for the loss of 1000's of lifes.

And yes "Clint" was a crazy man in the films, I know me being Canadian and you being American (that's a big language/culture thing....well maybe if I was French (oh....no....now I started something)...heee...hee.

Anyways lets talk more about how we can get our fellow soldiars out of Iraq (esp. since they want out)....I'm sure you can agree on that...let's get out and save the people from both sides. That's the thing...why stay, from what I saw on CNN etc. with the embeded journalist it only took a few weeks to take over Iraq, so why not just go quickly take over and leave...if need be come back (if need be).

Your always Canadian friend,
Sven

PS I would fight for USA 2, if it w'r being invaded "illigally" by a "bigger" army....and again I'd be the one sprinting in front...esp. for America (and I'd bring some beer 2)



but I garentee if you w'r standing in front of me....no way you would call me that to my face. Becuase a Terrorist I am not, but to fight for someones freedom, that I woukld gladly die for.

Clint was never a terrorist. I think it's a language/culture thing, your misunderstanding.

Anyway, you described yourself as a terrorist. Remember? We were taliking about
quote: Maybe you can explain why "those who fight for the change of iraqi people" are busy murdering innocent Iraqi citizens and destroying their future by blowing up the oil pipelines. I think that the Iraqi people are fed up with those terrorists.
and you said
quote: me join'em....already have.....

Hello again,

Join'em I would.....and I'd be the one sprinting in front....that's for sure, but for you to sit there and start to say to others what they beleive that is a true "terroriest"
So if you want to back down from that statement now, I can understand. I can see you're probably pretty embarassed.

Remember, the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist is that a terrorist is one who kills his own innocent countrymen. And that's who you're associating yourself with, sven. Your words, not mine.

You lay with dogs, you're gonna get fleas.

A terrorist is someone who kills there own countrymen?? Every nation sometimes kills there own people, your statement is dumb and has no point nor sense in it. Terrorists are people who kill for personal gain, they are not the religous people fighting oppression, or the resistance fighter occupation forces. they are the US and isreal and all there puppet followers

Originally posted by svenglezz
Hello Clint,

Come on into the "light".....it's ok...we will forgive you for your view(s) on the war.....many others have made the switch....so you would not be alone..(maybe have some "support group" for these people) making the switch...hee...hee


But calling me a "dog" wow...that's just to much for me to take, come on man you seem to be so fast to "lable" people just because their view is not of yours....in many ways this show's "denial", if you cant back up your broad claims, "go take another bath" and make sure you "cleans" your soul, for the loss of 1000's of lifes.

Hey sven

I don't think you really know my views on war. I have been talking about the definitions of a terrorist, not whether or not we should be at war.

I didn't mean to imply that you were a dog, sven! That was just an old saying I was referring to, same as if I said something like "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink". Sorry if you took offense.

But there are some people here who are HALF-horse, and I think you know which half I'm referring to.

I recently heard Bush say something that could be interpreted as a desire to get out of Iraq after the elections. Can't remember the exact quote, and politicians are always vague, but I was heartened to hear him say it, anyway.

Originally posted by P Amaru
A terrorist is someone who kills there own countrymen?? Every nation sometimes kills there own people, your statement is dumb and has no point nor sense in it. Terrorists are people who kill for personal gain, they are not the religous people fighting oppression, or the resistance fighter occupation forces. they are the US and isreal and all there puppet followers

No, you are wrong. When does the US kill it's own people? Does your gov't kill your citizens? Maybe they do, maybe that's why your view is so biased.

A resistance fighter and a terrorist are not the same person, no matter how many times you say it, it is not going to be true.

A terrorist does not care if he kills his own people. In fact, he sets out to do just that. He is not a resistance fighter.

Originally posted by jsobecky

No, you are wrong. When does the US kill it's own people? Does your gov't kill your citizens? Maybe they do, maybe that's why your view is so biased.

A resistance fighter and a terrorist are not the same person, no matter how many times you say it, it is not going to be true.

A terrorist does not care if he kills his own people. In fact, he sets out to do just that. He is not a resistance fighter.

Many govts we would consider "good" have killed there own citizens sometimes for the greater good of the nation... And you seem to have some basic grasp on the meaning of terrorist, yes your right its not a poor freedom fighter fighting his opressers, its murdering cowards like the US who bomb from affar, american bullets and bombs dont discrimante, america is the true evil, and one day soon i garuntee you there will be a attack so big on the US you will be hiding in caves for the next 100 years from antrhax or whatever else the worlds freedom fighters decide to drop on you.

Hey everybody,
Many of you have very interesting insights, and others of you are way off. First of all, there are no "front lines" anymore in Iraq except for maybe Fallujah. My platoon patrols 12 hrs/day and haven't done a lick of "fighting" since "HOLY WEEK" in April. Basically we're just moving targets. Tons of IED's and occational carbombs. We have caught many b4 they go off, but most have gone off as we were driving by. Second, how many of you have talked with citizens of Iraq? I'm here as I type and I have talked to (w/ an interpretor) hundreds of local nationals from MANY different areas. Some areas love Saddam and others hate him. The only thing that I will say is that there is no way order will be restored here for many many decades. Many people are brainwashed by their religious leaders and will do anything. Did you know that urban Iraqi's are prejudice toward the rural dwellers?
I have seen/expierenced just about every type of IED that I know of first hand and a few carbombs too We do not "drive over them" unless they're buried in a dirt road or they're packed in culverts that cross beneath the road. 99% of them are disguised and along the sides of the road. Also, they're not engineered and manufactured. Most of them consist of mortars with blasting caps hooked on the tips. Then they're either hard wired to a detonator-like a gas grill sparker or something; or they're remote detonated by using stuff from garage door openers, walkie talkies, cell phones, and even remote-controlled car parts, ETC.
I will say that the "insurgents are definately getting more innovative and bombs are definately getting more accurate. Did you know that some carbombs have back seats completely made/molded out of explosives (plastic explosives and powder from mortars)and then are covered up by the original seat cove...looking completely legit to the naked eye. Any responses/questions are definately welcome. Thanks.

[edit on 15-1-2005 by pedigreechum]