Brittish troops held in Iraq - Oooops!

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Well it's good to see that the media won't totally ignore an obvious black-op when the suspects are caught red handed, thou this will surely need a violent reactionary measure like a new Nick Burg situation to show that the insurgents are actually the real bad guys who do the bad things while the media and the apologists try to spin a situation in which validates these SAS.

Reminds me of a lot of previous scenarios in which mystereous insurgents are blamed for actions which only fuel more civil war, ie. Al-Zarqawi's MO.

I bet they had an Al-Zarqawi tape all done up ready to be posted from London onto an Islamic message board, gonna have to shelve that now.

When Black-Ops Go Bad


How to Pretend to be an Insurgent
Pictured below are the wigs and clothing that the soldiers were wearing.





[edit on 21-9-2005 by TheShroudOfMemphis]




posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Tssssss no no no shroud of memphis don't you see?

They where just out for a sunday drive, to buy some cheese and crackers for a picnic they where going to have that day. They just wanted to get out of that stiffling uniform to just Relax.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jim30
Has it not occurred to anyone who thinks we're doing the bombs ourselves that the sooner peace breaks out and the bombings stop, then we can leave? Why would we want to prolong our stay?


Maybe you, and I would not want to prolong it, but there are others that have no intention of leaving, and they are the leaders!



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel

Originally posted by Jim30
Has it not occurred to anyone who thinks we're doing the bombs ourselves that the sooner peace breaks out and the bombings stop, then we can leave? Why would we want to prolong our stay?


Maybe you, and I would not want to prolong it, but there are others that have no intention of leaving, and they are the leaders!



Why, when the most senior Britsh Army officers are against the war and want a quick exit strategy, would they authorise False Flag Ops which would prolong the stay.



The idea is idiotic at best...Stupid and offensive at worst.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Why, when the most senior Britsh Army officers are against the war and want a quick exit strategy, would they authorise False Flag Ops which would prolong the stay.


Soldiers do as they are told which includes saying what they are told, and the higher up you go the more it applies.

The operation was SAS which follows a chain of command that ends in suits, not brass.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Soldiers also have the option of refusing illegal or imoral orders. They're not mindless robots that go out and kill someone because their superiors told them to.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel

Why, when the most senior Britsh Army officers are against the war and want a quick exit strategy, would they authorise False Flag Ops which would prolong the stay.


Soldiers do as they are told which includes saying what they are told, and the higher up you go the more it applies.

The operation was SAS which follows a chain of command that ends in suits, not brass.



Hmmm.... Not sure you know British Military very well.

They are usually quite vocal in their opinions, although they will follow orders.

However, if the order was idiotic, or worse, criminal, they wouldn't do it and would make one hell of a noise.

Remember, the UK forces swear allegiance to the Queen...not the slimy little weasel that happens to be PM.

If they believe an order to be illegal, they have a duty to disobey it and also, they are human you know. Just because over the world there are soldiers that blindly obey and kill indiscriminately, the British squaddie is a fully professional, honourable (mostly
) person. We pride ourselves on being a cut above the rest.

[edit on 21/9/05 by stumason]



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 09:48 PM
link   
It's amazing that people will make excuses for this. Give them an Islamic name or drop a Quran on the backseat of the car and BAM! we'd have 'terrorists', thou if they are SAS, dressed up to look like Insurgents and killing people obviously they were on a secret mission to do good.


Al-Zarqawi must be happy, means he was able to have a day off.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 09:52 PM
link   
Make excuses for what? There is no proof of any "explosives" except for the initial report and what was said by a few people. There weren't any mines, or explosives in that picture of their kits that anybody could see. There were no pictures of a car loaded with explosives. In fact reading the articles it sounds more like a police officer saw the bag, and warned that it might POSSIBLY have explosives in it, and that got blown into "The car is bobbytrapped!" There is NO evidence that they were out doing anything but an intel operation. If there is, then I'd still like to see it. If someone can show me proof of explosives then I'll freely admit to being wrong, and apologize for arguing about it. Until then, what is there to apologize for? A couple of troops on an intel mission, dressed in Arab robes?



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheShroudOfMemphis

It's amazing that people will make excuses for this. Give them an Islamic name or drop a Quran on the backseat of the car and BAM! we'd have 'terrorists', thou if they are SAS, dressed up to look like Insurgents and killing people obviously they were on a secret mission to do good.


Al-Zarqawi must be happy, means he was able to have a day off.



What people were killed? the only people killed were two rioters..None were killed during the arrest of these men.

Where were the explosives you claim to have been found?

they weren't dressed to look like bloody insurgents, they were dressed to mingle with the crowd so they could investigate the corrupt Iraqi forces..

then the corrupt Iraqi forces arrest them and hand them over to the Mahdi Army.

What is so friggin difficult to understand about that.. I disapprove of this war as much as the next man and believe me, I cannot stand Bush or Blair...

But, when people quite clearly make up utter BS out of nothing, it really pisses me off, Especially seeing as I have friends and family in the UK armed forces and I know what they are like.

Not everything has to be a goddam conspiracy, sometimes, as i have seen quoted on this board before, a cigar is just a cigar. Examine the facts instead of believing the crap that has been posted on this board from shoddy sources, or in somecases, just regugitated BS that someone else said to them without checking the facts..

Honestly, some people will look for a consipracy in everything.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Make excuses for what? There is no proof of any "explosives" except for the initial report and what was said by a few people. There weren't any mines, or explosives in that picture of their kits that anybody could see. There were no pictures of a car loaded with explosives. In fact reading the articles it sounds more like a police officer saw the bag, and warned that it might POSSIBLY have explosives in it, and that got blown into "The car is bobbytrapped!" There is NO evidence that they were out doing anything but an intel operation. If there is, then I'd still like to see it. If someone can show me proof of explosives then I'll freely admit to being wrong, and apologize for arguing about it. Until then, what is there to apologize for? A couple of troops on an intel mission, dressed in Arab robes?



You did not read all of my thread on the issue if you believe that.

I posted several more references to them having Bombs, or Explosives....



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Make excuses for what? There is no proof of any "explosives" except for the initial report and what was said by a few people. There weren't any mines, or explosives in that picture of their kits that anybody could see. There were no pictures of a car loaded with explosives. In fact reading the articles it sounds more like a police officer saw the bag, and warned that it might POSSIBLY have explosives in it, and that got blown into "The car is bobbytrapped!" There is NO evidence that they were out doing anything but an intel operation. If there is, then I'd still like to see it. If someone can show me proof of explosives then I'll freely admit to being wrong, and apologize for arguing about it. Until then, what is there to apologize for? A couple of troops on an intel mission, dressed in Arab robes?



You did not read all of my thread on the issue if you believe that.

I posted several more references to them having Bombs, or Explosives....


I have read your thread. i have also seen the pictures of the stuff siezed by the Iraqi "Police". Nothing in that picture is out of the ordinary for a recon unit of the SRS to have on them. Care to point out where the huge amount of explosives are? Coz they're not in the picture.

EDIT: And "references" are nothing compared to proof. Quoting some Iraqi "Police" (who are in colusion with insurgents) saying they found explosives is not evidence.

EDIT 2: And do you honestly think that British squaddies would willingly plant explosives meant to kill british squaddies. Dont be so effing stupid.

[edit on 21/9/05 by stumason]

[edit on 21/9/05 by stumason]



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 10:13 PM
link   
I even enlarged the picture to get a better look at it. No mines, no explosives, no detonators. Like has been previously stated, you need large amounts of explosives to make a car bomb. Where are they? Where are the pics of the explosives?



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I even enlarged the picture to get a better look at it. No mines, no explosives, no detonators. Like has been previously stated, you need large amounts of explosives to make a car bomb. Where are they? Where are the pics of the explosives?


It is in the car that the Brits took.

After the police caught the two SAS they took them to the police station along with some of their stuff.

Then at least two British armored vehicles came in and they took it away.

There is an image of it at the video link I posted.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I even enlarged the picture to get a better look at it. No mines, no explosives, no detonators. Like has been previously stated, you need large amounts of explosives to make a car bomb. Where are they? Where are the pics of the explosives?


did you also use your all-seeing eye?

LOL.

bloody apologists chomping at the bit to make everything seem 'okay'.

they were 'bad' iraqi police, who had infiltrated the police station, and the police KNEW that the bullets were coming from the guns of....well, they were iraqi moles in the british army who were settling an old grudge between shiite and sunni. the british army had to rush in and protect these individuals because, ...ummmm? ......i know!, ....uh, ....they were actually TRIPLE AGENTS! who had infiltrated both the evil iraqi police, the shiite and sunni resistance, and the british army. BRILLIANT in it's impossibility!!!


"they were 'just following orders'."

"they should have had a better exit strategy." (love that one, HAHA!)

the queen is a reptile.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 10:47 PM
link   
I didn't have to use my "all seeing eye". It's pretty obvious what landmines, and other explosives look like.
Not to mention that there's no way there is a couple of hundred pounds of explosive in that pile of equipment.


I already said that if someone can show me actual pics of the explosives I would say I was wrong. I'm not an apologist, I just fail to see why I should jump to the conclusion that the Coalition is the one bombing everyone pretending to be insurgents, when there is NO EVIDENCE OF EXPLOSIVES, with the exception of one or two eyewitness accounts. You would think that if they had actual evidence that the Coalition was setting bombs, they would have pictures of the explosives everywhere they could put them. Or at least ONE Arab news network at least would have picked up pictures of them.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArchAngel

Originally posted by Zaphod58
I even enlarged the picture to get a better look at it. No mines, no explosives, no detonators. Like has been previously stated, you need large amounts of explosives to make a car bomb. Where are they? Where are the pics of the explosives?


It is in the car that the Brits took.

After the police caught the two SAS they took them to the police station along with some of their stuff.

Then at least two British armored vehicles came in and they took it away.

There is an image of it at the video link I posted.



HAHAHAHA

That is nothing like what happened. You obviously do not know the chain of events, but, I have posted them in this thread and yours, so I suggest you go back and read your own thread (like you have told us too) to find out what happened because I am not writing it for the fourth bloody time (everyone ignores me, because they want some big conspiracy to believe in).

I have even provided you with the chain of events in this thread.....

For starters, have you seen the pictures of the first Warrior's to turn up at the police station? The ones that were firebombed and the crews ran away? How the fluff did they take away the car?

The reason the Brits wanted their men back was because they were being held by the Mahdi Army. Ignoring that bit too aren't we?

The equipment was all photographed and displayed by the Iraqi police before the Brits even turned up to claim their men. Nothing in ANY of those photo's would be out of the ordinary in a SRS recon op. There are no explosives worth mentioning.

Makes you wonder where people get these crazy ideas. have you actually followed the real life events, or are you just making up the news as you go along?

I would believe you if you could show me ANYTHING that would back your claims up. But you cannot, as you are lying.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 10:56 PM
link   

I would believe you if you could show me ANYTHING that would back your claims up. But you cannot, as you are lying.


OBVIOUSLY you did not see the video.



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 10:59 PM
link   

EDIT 2: And do you honestly think that British squaddies would willingly plant explosives meant to kill british squaddies. Dont be so effing stupid.


No, to kill the Pilgrims that are coming to Basra this week.....



posted on Sep, 21 2005 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

What people were killed? the only people killed were two rioters..None were killed during the arrest of these men.


An Iraqi Policeman was killed by these men directly and Five Iraqi civilians died when they were freed.



Where were the explosives you claim to have been found?


I've never claimed or even mentioned explosives in this case.



they weren't dressed to look like bloody insurgents, they were dressed to mingle with the crowd so they could investigate the corrupt Iraqi forces..


Semantics, look it up.



then the corrupt Iraqi forces arrest them and hand them over to the Mahdi Army.


That's why they were in a prison?



What is so friggin difficult to understand about that.. I disapprove of this war as much as the next man and believe me, I cannot stand Bush or Blair...

But, when people quite clearly make up utter BS out of nothing, it really pisses me off, Especially seeing as I have friends and family in the UK armed forces and I know what they are like.


So your defending the army, fine, i can understand that but sorry if i don't agree because i have no loyalty to any armed force on this planet so i'm not shocked or suprised that elements of the military can and are involved in operations which normally would be linked to an insurgency without a scrape of evidence. It doesn't mean ALL military are bad at all, of course not. I'm sure the majority of the Military are not privy to the goings on in the Black-op department anyway, why would they be? The idea of being secret and performing secret operations is to have little information spread out as possible. If you were caught by insurgents and knew all the Black-Ops that were going to take place, wouldn't be very good for military security would it?



Not everything has to be a goddam conspiracy, sometimes, as i have seen quoted on this board before, a cigar is just a cigar. Examine the facts instead of believing the crap that has been posted on this board from shoddy sources, or in somecases, just regugitated BS that someone else said to them without checking the facts..

Honestly, some people will look for a consipracy in everything.


Some people will do all they can to avoid seeing a conspiracy when it taints their comic book heros VS villans ideals of what war is.

This is not an innocent scenario, deal with it.
Why people are focusing on the 'rescue' and not the reason they were dressed up and shooting at police to begin with is an interesting twist to covering some butts until they can arrange a decoy for the news headlines.

Expect the 'insurgents' or even 'al-Zarqawi' to do something grand in a couple days time.




[edit on 21-9-2005 by TheShroudOfMemphis]





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join