It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Terrorists Use Children as Shields; Child Dies in Firefight

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 12:27 PM
link   
devilwasp:

Human nature changes every day.


So I say, "Human nature stays constant" and you say "Human nature changes every day."

Um, no. Human NATURE (our hardwired instincts) DON'T change every day. They don't EVER change. We ALL want basically the same things. ALL of us.


What makes them better?
They are trained , they are filtered to stop this sort of thing happening.


Trained? Maybe the Marines, but the National Guard? Really? Trained how?

To learn Arabic? To learn cultural differences? To study and follow the Geneva Convention to the letter? Are they trained in Diplomacy?

No. Soldiers are trained to:

a) Follow orders.

They are NOT trained to think for themselves. That's what basic training is supposed to get rid of. Your free thought. You must be trained to ACT (not think).

US soldiers are no different from any other soldiers. Maybe better weapons, and more arrogant. That's it.


Hmm seems WW2 proves your theory wrong.


How does WWII prove that the miltary DOES learn? Please tell me. We'll just go with the Allies if you want.


You still didn't answer my question: Name 5 good things that have happened in Iraq since the US/UK invasion.




posted on Oct, 3 2005 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
devilwasp:

Human nature changes every day.


So I say, "Human nature stays constant" and you say "Human nature changes every day."

Um, no. Human NATURE (our hardwired instincts) DON'T change every day. They don't EVER change. We ALL want basically the same things. ALL of us.


What makes them better?
They are trained , they are filtered to stop this sort of thing happening.


Trained? Maybe the Marines, but the National Guard? Really? Trained how?

To learn Arabic? To learn cultural differences? To study and follow the Geneva Convention to the letter? Are they trained in Diplomacy?

No. Soldiers are trained to:

a) Follow orders.

They are NOT trained to think for themselves. That's what basic training is supposed to get rid of. Your free thought. You must be trained to ACT (not think).

US soldiers are no different from any other soldiers. Maybe better weapons, and more arrogant. That's it.


Hmm seems WW2 proves your theory wrong.


How does WWII prove that the miltary DOES learn? Please tell me. We'll just go with the Allies if you want.


You still didn't answer my question: Name 5 good things that have happened in Iraq since the US/UK invasion.



The national guard is not out there on the front line. We are. we are not trained to obey orders, we are trained to think for ourselves, you know why? because the seargent isnt gonna be there all the time telling you what to do. the seargent isnt going to be there when an insurgent dressed in civilian clothes pulls out a machine gun. basic training teaches you how to deal with a situation instinctively. "better weapons and arrogance" didnt make america a world power.



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
So I say, "Human nature stays constant" and you say "Human nature changes every day."

Um, no. Human NATURE (our hardwired instincts) DON'T change every day. They don't EVER change. We ALL want basically the same things. ALL of us.

Oh really?
So the reason I'm not smacking the living hell out of my enemies is because?
We dont all want the same things, to think that is ignorance and not being able to accept that we change.
We evolve, or did you forget darwins theory?



Trained? Maybe the Marines, but the National Guard? Really? Trained how?

National guard or in my country , the TA and reserves are trained just as well as the regulars.


To learn Arabic? To learn cultural differences? To study and follow the Geneva Convention to the letter? Are they trained in Diplomacy?

Soldiers are actually trained in the geneva convention, I've seen part of a video aid.
They are not taught arabic, thats what thier interpreters are for.
They know cultures are diffrent and they taught this.


No. Soldiers are trained to:

a) Follow orders.

They are NOT trained to think for themselves. That's what basic training is supposed to get rid of. Your free thought. You must be trained to ACT (not think).

Thats ignorance, a soldier who can't think on his feet is a dead soldeir.
They are taught in basic training that your mind is the biggest weapon of all....next to rest.
They are trained to act, react and think.


US soldiers are no different from any other soldiers. Maybe better weapons, and more arrogant. That's it.

I am not just talking about US soldiers who are well trained and well armed men and women.
The USMC or any other service in the US military is no different.



How does WWII prove that the miltary DOES learn? Please tell me. We'll just go with the Allies if you want.

Germany learned that the original WW1 plan (Cant remember name but begins with S) was a failed idea so they improved on it.



You still didn't answer my question: Name 5 good things that have happened in Iraq since the US/UK invasion.

5 good things?
1) Water has been returned to most cities.
2) There is actual first aid availible.
3) Schools are not teaching propaganda.
4) A mass murderer has been removed
5) Another mass murderer has been killed.



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 07:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
devilwasp:

Human nature changes every day.


So I say, "Human nature stays constant" and you say "Human nature changes every day."

Um, no. Human NATURE (our hardwired instincts) DON'T change every day. They don't EVER change. We ALL want basically the same things. ALL of us.


What makes them better?
They are trained , they are filtered to stop this sort of thing happening.


Trained? Maybe the Marines, but the National Guard? Really? Trained how?

To learn Arabic? To learn cultural differences? To study and follow the Geneva Convention to the letter? Are they trained in Diplomacy?

No. Soldiers are trained to:

a) Follow orders.

They are NOT trained to think for themselves. That's what basic training is supposed to get rid of. Your free thought. You must be trained to ACT (not think).

US soldiers are no different from any other soldiers. Maybe better weapons, and more arrogant. That's it.


Hmm seems WW2 proves your theory wrong.


How does WWII prove that the miltary DOES learn? Please tell me. We'll just go with the Allies if you want.


You still didn't answer my question: Name 5 good things that have happened in Iraq since the US/UK invasion.



Have you ever been in the US military? I have and I was taught that the US military wants free thinking individuals. Hence the whole "army of one" bs.



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 08:49 AM
link   
devilwasp:

We dont all want the same things, to think that is ignorance and not being able to accept that we change.
We evolve, or did you forget darwins theory?


First off, we evolve over GENERATIONS, not in days. And as a SPECIES, not as individuals.

Second, we DO want all the same things, it ain't ignorance. We want our family to be taken care of, we want food in our bellies, clothes on our backs, a roof over our head. EVERYBODY wants the same things, they go about different ways of getting it.


Thats ignorance, a soldier who can't think on his feet is a dead soldeir.
They are taught in basic training that your mind is the biggest weapon of all....next to rest.
They are trained to act, react and think.


Army combat training and basic training in particular are designed to do one thing. Break down your will and make sure that you DON'T think about what you need to do, you just DO IT.

Why else are you forced to go with little to no sleep? Why else are you constantly bombarded with sounds, abuse, surprise wake-ups, etc. It is all designed to break your will down so that your mind INSTINCTUALLY does what you were trained for.

Your order of words is right. They are trained to act, react and think.

Think is last on the list. The last thing a commander in the field is a soldier who is "thinking" and not acting.

I'm not saying soldiers are unthinking idiots. I'm saying training is designed to make you ACT rather than THINK.


Germany learned that the original WW1 plan (Cant remember name but begins with S) was a failed idea so they improved on it.


And look how well they did with it. They still divided their forces and fought on two fronts when they shouldn't have.


5 good things?
1) Water has been returned to most cities.


Water was plentiful under Saddam, no waterborne diseases and no water shortages. The water shortages came about because [U.S. planes bombed the water facilities. So if you broke it, it's up to you to fix it anyway.


2) There is actual first aid availible.


? Under Saddam there were no working hospitals in Iraq? Hmm? There were actually MORE working hospitals under Saddam,


Three of the surveyed hospitals suffered major bombing damage by Coalition Forces, and five hospitals were looted extensively and vandalized in March and April 2003. Most hospitals closed for weeks to months at that time, but have now reopened. Two facilities are operating at a markedly-reduced census level; the remaining hospitals are at, or above, capacity.


www.medpeace.org...


3) Schools are not teaching propaganda.


You know this how? Have you watched the classes? Do you know what is being taught in every school in Iraq?

Before the invasion people went to school, children learned and there was an education system. Iraq used to be one of the most Westernized of all the Middle Eastern Arab States.


4) A mass murderer has been removed


At the cost of only, what, 20,000 Iraqis and 2,000 U.S. soldiers? Is that a deal?


5) Another mass murderer has been killed.


Saddam was the first, who is the second?

And what about the biggest mass murderer of them all, Osama bin Laden? What happened to him?

Dronetek :

Have you ever been in the US military? I have and I was taught that the US military wants free thinking individuals. Hence the whole "army of one" bs.


NO army wants free-thinking individuals. They may say they do but they most certainly do not.


jako




[edit on 4-10-2005 by Jakomo]



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
devilwasp:

We dont all want the same things, to think that is ignorance and not being able to accept that we change.
We evolve, or did you forget darwins theory?


First off, we evolve over GENERATIONS, not in days. And as a SPECIES, not as individuals.

Second, we DO want all the same things, it ain't ignorance. We want our family to be taken care of, we want food in our bellies, clothes on our backs, a roof over our head. EVERYBODY wants the same things, they go about different ways of getting it.


Thats ignorance, a soldier who can't think on his feet is a dead soldeir.
They are taught in basic training that your mind is the biggest weapon of all....next to rest.
They are trained to act, react and think.


Army combat training and basic training in particular are designed to do one thing. Break down your will and make sure that you DON'T think about what you need to do, you just DO IT.

Why else are you forced to go with little to no sleep? Why else are you constantly bombarded with sounds, abuse, surprise wake-ups, etc. It is all designed to break your will down so that your mind INSTINCTUALLY does what you were trained for.

Your order of words is right. They are trained to act, react and think.

Think is last on the list. The last thing a commander in the field is a soldier who is "thinking" and not acting.

I'm not saying soldiers are unthinking idiots. I'm saying training is designed to make you ACT rather than THINK.


Germany learned that the original WW1 plan (Cant remember name but begins with S) was a failed idea so they improved on it.


And look how well they did with it. They still divided their forces and fought on two fronts when they shouldn't have.


5 good things?
1) Water has been returned to most cities.


Water was plentiful under Saddam, no waterborne diseases and no water shortages. The water shortages came about because [U.S. planes bombed the water facilities. So if you broke it, it's up to you to fix it anyway.


2) There is actual first aid availible.


? Under Saddam there were no working hospitals in Iraq? Hmm? There were actually MORE working hospitals under Saddam,


Three of the surveyed hospitals suffered major bombing damage by Coalition Forces, and five hospitals were looted extensively and vandalized in March and April 2003. Most hospitals closed for weeks to months at that time, but have now reopened. Two facilities are operating at a markedly-reduced census level; the remaining hospitals are at, or above, capacity.


www.medpeace.org...


3) Schools are not teaching propaganda.


You know this how? Have you watched the classes? Do you know what is being taught in every school in Iraq?

Before the invasion people went to school, children learned and there was an education system. Iraq used to be one of the most Westernized of all the Middle Eastern Arab States.


4) A mass murderer has been removed


At the cost of only, what, 20,000 Iraqis and 2,000 U.S. soldiers? Is that a deal?


5) Another mass murderer has been killed.


Saddam was the first, who is the second?

And what about the biggest mass murderer of them all, Osama bin Laden? What happened to him?

Dronetek :

Have you ever been in the US military? I have and I was taught that the US military wants free thinking individuals. Hence the whole "army of one" bs.


NO army wants free-thinking individuals. They may say they do but they most certainly do not.


jako




[edit on 4-10-2005 by Jakomo]


uhhuh, and who are you to tell us this? the reason they make you go through loud noises, sudden awakenings, etc. is so you can think in the midst of a battle. when you say that we are trained to react, how are we going to react everysingle time to different situations.



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bikereddie
He never saw this girl again until 3 weeks later. She was hanging from a tree. She had been hung because she had taken "gifts" from a westerner.

Disgusting.

The girls family were distraught

They weren't the ones who did it?

Maybe if he hadn't given her things ,then she might still be alive?

Absurd.

to protect your own life by putting a child in front of you to stop the bullet, then that is just pure down right cowardice. PERIOD. Now tell me that is the same as carpet bombing innocents?

I agree, they're different acts, and using a child as a sheild is far worse. Indeed, putting military structures into a civilian city is very similar to it. In this example, the s


St udio
how could the bullet penetrate the insurgent first? if the child was his shield?

Doesn't seem so unbeleivable. They're in a safe house, engaged in a firefight, they bolt, grab a kid, who knows why, the troopers fire, it rips thru him as he's running away, and ends up in the kid.


The Resistance field commander said "we could hear the cries of the children and the women's calls for help from atop a column of tanks that was driving along ath-Tharthar street last Tuesday. Some of our fighters closed their eyes in pain and wept at the sight."

We would've taken pictures to prove it, but we were so busy giving medicine to poor disabled kids and consoling widows that there just wasn't enough time.


Fact is, we have people here who've reported, first hand, seeing insurgents use women and children as sheilds, you have a website, and the joooos, the evil joooos *shrug*

The Resistance field commander said "we could hear the cries of the children and the women's calls for help from atop a column of tanks that was driving along ath-Tharthar street last Tuesday. Some of our fighters closed their eyes in pain and wept at the sight."

Win them over? The nazis had just been defeated, the generalissimos and imperial dictators had been defeated, those are little tricks? Nice to see who you think that good guys were in that war.



SS
AND A PHOTOGRAPH

You have absolutely no contect for the photograph. If this was a hummer sitting on guard, and those people were prostrate upon it all day, or brought out when the GIs get alarmed, then you'd have a pretty good case, but you don't. Inspite of the massive, relentless use of decent iraqis as human sheilds by all forces within the coalition throughout Iraq, there's a single, completely contextless picture?
The photo is meaningless. It supports nothing, other than that two guys were up against a hummer.

SS
and i know for a fact that it's not in my heart to kill an innocent person

But if that person was a native contracted carpenter for the current iraqi government, or worse, an anglo, then its alright to kill them right, because they are 'collaborators' right?


Lets all stick to the topic of the thread, which is a discussion of the article that was originally cited, and not meander into discussion about who's a big old meanie and who's brainwashed.



Rikimaru
same kind of cowardice with the arabs.

What are you talking about? "The Arabs" haven't done this, and in case you didn't notice "The Arabs" are the US allies in this war. This report was focusing on a particular group of people, the insurgents. Partisans/saboteurs/guerillas have allways resorted to 'non-regular tactics' in war, these arabic and islamic guerillas are savages, agreed, but practically any guerilla campaign is fought with savagery. Regardless, how about not being racist in the thread eh?



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
First off, we evolve over GENERATIONS, not in days. And as a SPECIES, not as individuals.

Yes thats true in the physical sense, but physcologically thats another matter.


Second, we DO want all the same things, it ain't ignorance. We want our family to be taken care of, we want food in our bellies, clothes on our backs, a roof over our head. EVERYBODY wants the same things, they go about different ways of getting it.

Really?
What about murderers?
Loners?
Insane people?
Or are they the "exceptions".



Army combat training and basic training in particular are designed to do one thing. Break down your will and make sure that you DON'T think about what you need to do, you just DO IT.

Break down your will?
No its there to make you operate as a unit and build you up as a soldier, not remove any will.
They do think about what thier doing BTW, otherwise soldiers would not pick thier targets instead of being 100% efficient in takeing down the enemy, BTW if you want to see a 100% effective military unit look up the SS, say theres 30 civilains and 3 bad guys in the room they'd shoot all 33 just to be sure.
Thats being effective and not haveing morals.


Why else are you forced to go with little to no sleep?

To push you to your limits and to prepare you for life in the front lines.


Why else are you constantly bombarded with sounds, abuse, surprise wake-ups, etc.

To make you think on your feet.


It is all designed to break your will down so that your mind INSTINCTUALLY does what you were trained for.

Its not to break down any will its to train to think in split seconds, as one person put it; a split second decsion can decide if you live or die.


Your order of words is right. They are trained to act, react and think.

No all of those happen at the same time.
Otherwise our troops would spray and pray.


Think is last on the list. The last thing a commander in the field is a soldier who is "thinking" and not acting.
[/quoe]
Think was last on the list because I didnt put it as first , I could have put it as first, second or third but no ofcourse take it literally..


I'm not saying soldiers are unthinking idiots. I'm saying training is designed to make you ACT rather than THINK.

Yes and how you act depends on what you THINK is the best course of action.
Its no good pepper potting to the enemy if the enemy has machine guns and a minefield, that involves flanking.



And look how well they did with it. They still divided their forces and fought on two fronts when they shouldn't have.

Eh?
That was after they took over france and because they had a nut as a leader who didnt trust his own army.



Water was plentiful under Saddam, no waterborne diseases and no water shortages. The water shortages came about because [U.S. planes bombed the water facilities. So if you broke it, it's up to you to fix it anyway.

Every where?
I think not, sadamm blocked up the rivers and caused an entire people to remake thier lvies since thier original source of income and life was removed by sadamm.


2)
? Under Saddam there were no working hospitals in Iraq? Hmm? There were actually MORE working hospitals under Saddam,

Your point? You asked since the invasion, not since sadamm came into power.





You know this how? Have you watched the classes? Do you know what is being taught in every school in Iraq?

No I've done research.
They where taught sadamm was the greatest man in the world, is that an "ok" system?
BTW, when all the education is run by just one politcal party then that usually means they are taught what they party wants them too.


Before the invasion people went to school, children learned and there was an education system. Iraq used to be one of the most Westernized of all the Middle Eastern Arab States.

Its not about if there was one or not, it was what they were taught.



At the cost of only, what, 20,000 Iraqis and 2,000 U.S. soldiers? Is that a deal?

So yet again the "oh but we lost hundreds so we shouldnt have done anything" arguement, we used that one in WW1 guess what happened there, over 1 million dead. There would have been thousands more killed than just 22, 150 servicemen.



Saddam was the first, who is the second?

His sons.


And what about the biggest mass murderer of them all, Osama bin Laden? What happened to him?

Biggest mass murderer?
No, mabye the most famous but thats it.



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   
devilwasp:

Yes thats true in the physical sense, but physcologically thats another matter.


Psychological evolution? Do you mean "simple learning"?


Really?
What about murderers?
Loners?
Insane people?
Or are they the "exceptions


Considering all these categories are PEOPLE. then yes, they do want all the same things. Safety, shelter, love, compassion. Sometimes their brains are too busted to realize this, but it's common human needs.

Insane people are still people.


No its there to make you operate as a unit and build you up as a soldier, not remove any will.


It's not. It's to increase your susceptibility to suggestion. Keep a person underfed, under-rested, and in a constant state of alarm, and you can effectively program that person to react in a manner of your choosing.

Taking a bead on someone and blowing their head off is NOT a natural thing. Someone needs to be TRAINED to be a killer. TRAINED to kill and feel no remorse at the time. It's conditioning to get people to ACT rather than think.


To push you to your limits and to prepare you for life in the front lines....

To make you think on your feet...


Maybe that's what they tell you, but (gasp!) the military is actually doing something to you that you're not aware of, conditioning you to react a certain way in certain circumstances... Imagine.


Your order of words is right. They are trained to act, react and think.

You wrote: No all of those happen at the same time.


Not in human beingsthey don't, and DEFINITELY not under duress.


Its no good pepper potting to the enemy if the enemy has machine guns and a minefield, that involves flanking.


Really, and yet if you're told to pepperpot and you know it will be ineffective, does the Army say you should think of a better solution? Haha, hardly. Should you explain to your C.O. that he is wrong?

Follow orders or be charged.


I think not, sadamm blocked up the rivers and caused an entire people to remake thier lvies since thier original source of income and life was removed by sadamm.


Links? This sounds like propaganda. Why would he block up rivers? Just because he was an evil man plotting nefarious deeds?


Your point? You asked since the invasion, not since sadamm came into power.


Um, you are saying that the fact that there are hospitals now, that it is is due to the invasion and is a good thing. I'm saying that there were MORE hospitals under Saddam, so actually you have reduced the effectiveness of the health care in Iraq.

So I'm actually proving the OPPOSITE of what you're proposing.... Get it?


They where taught sadamm was the greatest man in the world, is that an "ok" system?


That's one aspect. Did they not learn science, physics, literature? You're taught in America that America is the greatest country in the world, and that is an obvious lie, so what's the difference?


So yet again the "oh but we lost hundreds so we shouldnt have done anything" arguement, we used that one in WW1 guess what happened there, over 1 million dead.


So, um, you're saying that 20,000 Iraqi dead, and 2000 US soldiers deaths is the right price to pay to have Saddam Hussein removed from power?

Would you sacrifice YOUR life for it, or is it better to have other people fighting and dying for it?


And you never answered my question. What happened to Osama?

If Saddam is an evil despot and to get him you are willing to sacrifice 25,000 lives, how come none have been sacrificed in the search for bin Laden? Isn't Bin Laden worse than Saddam?

jako



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
Psychological evolution? Do you mean "simple learning"?

We each evolve and learn differently.
One person will be more evolved or know more or be better in say maths than say someone who is better at english.



Considering all these categories are PEOPLE. then yes, they do want all the same things. Safety, shelter, love, compassion. Sometimes their brains are too busted to realize this, but it's common human needs.

Really?
So they all think the same, they all want the basic things you listed?


Insane people are still people.

Yes they are but they think diffrently from em and you.



It's not. It's to increase your susceptibility to suggestion. Keep a person underfed, under-rested, and in a constant state of alarm, and you can effectively program that person to react in a manner of your choosing.

Really? So the press ups, bench presses and that are not to train you up.
This is all about psyhcological warfare?
No its not, if it was we would use a better system, why?
Because the current "system" doesnt maek soldiers 100% robot like.
As one man once said , "The marine corp doesnt want robots, it wants killers."


Taking a bead on someone and blowing their head off is NOT a natural thing.

Really?
If so then how can we already know how to kill without being trained in how to do so?
its inbuilt.
Just the techniques change.


Someone needs to be TRAINED to be a killer. TRAINED to kill and feel no remorse at the time. It's conditioning to get people to ACT rather than think.

Really?
You realise that they do feel remorse and its more of a "spur of the moment" thing, right?
They think everytime they act.




Maybe that's what they tell you, but (gasp!) the military is actually doing something to you that you're not aware of, conditioning you to react a certain way in certain circumstances... Imagine.

Its not what they tell you, its what I know.
You honuestly think that they dont think but simply act?



Not in human beingsthey don't, and DEFINITELY not under duress.

No?
So If I point a gun in your face you will ethier act on instict, which is technically thinking, react same as before or think which is technically what the other 2 wherE?
Human beings do all of the above, just the level and actions they do or dont know differes.



Really, and yet if you're told to pepperpot and you know it will be ineffective, does the Army say you should think of a better solution? Haha, hardly. Should you explain to your C.O. that he is wrong?

The CO would not do so unless he believed it was the correct course of actions and the CO listens to his troops sugestions and doesnt always make the plan.


Follow orders or be charged.

Not true, orders can be broken if they are unjust.



Links? This sounds like propaganda. Why would he block up rivers? Just because he was an evil man plotting nefarious deeds?

www.informationclearinghouse.info...
He done so as "anti guirilla warfare..
Its not , it actually happened..



Um, you are saying that the fact that there are hospitals now, that it is is due to the invasion and is a good thing. I'm saying that there were MORE hospitals under Saddam, so actually you have reduced the effectiveness of the health care in Iraq.

So I'm actually proving the OPPOSITE of what you're proposing.... Get it?

No you asked me for 5 things SINCE the invasion, I have said these things sicne during the invasion quite a number of hospitals where destroyed and not only are there hospitals there are british army medical units and teams ready to help.



That's one aspect. Did they not learn science, physics, literature? You're taught in America that America is the greatest country in the world, and that is an obvious lie, so what's the difference?

Its more than one aspect and you know it, they are not encouraged free thought instead they are encouraged to join the one politcal party.
I am not taught that in america, since I am not in america nor am ameican.
And its not the best in the world.



So, um, you're saying that 20,000 Iraqi dead, and 2000 US soldiers deaths is the right price to pay to have Saddam Hussein removed from power?

Yes.
I think it was, we didnt just remove him. We removed his entire currupt and murdering regime.


Would you sacrifice YOUR life for it, or is it better to have other people fighting and dying for it?

If I could I would be there but I cant.
Also are you going to use the "oh but why dont you do it" argument thats placed to every leader in the world?
Well guess what, you need to have someone in charge who isnt in the muck and dirt leading the way.



And you never answered my question. What happened to Osama?

What happened to him?
He is being hunted by every intel force in the world, you ever tried hunting down a world terrorist?


If Saddam is an evil despot and to get him you are willing to sacrifice 25,000 lives, how come none have been sacrificed in the search for bin Laden? Isn't Bin Laden worse than Saddam?

Oh so now your saying we are not hunting him nor have lives been lost hunting him?
Now thats ignorance and an insult to every dead soldier in afghanistan.



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   
devilwasp:

We each evolve and learn differently.
One person will be more evolved or know more or be better in say maths than say someone who is better at english.


Yes, but you're talking about education and learning, not actually "evolving". I agree with you that different people learn and develop at different speeds, but there is such a huge chasm of reasons (nature vs nurture, etc) that we'd need a new thread.

Traditionally, people who go into the Armed Forces are NOT la creme de la creme of the intelligentsia, would you agree?


So they all think the same, they all want the basic things you listed?


Absolutely and completely. You may not want to hear it, but you have MORE in common with Abdullah the shoemaker in Baghdad than you think you do. More things in common than you have differences, that is for sure. We're all made of the same stuff and we all want to be loved and respected and safe, etc.


Really? So the press ups, bench presses and that are not to train you up.


No, the physical conditioning is different. But the sleep deprivation, starving, and use of bright lights and loud noises at night to keep you up are all designed to keep you susceptible to suggestion.


If so then how can we already know how to kill without being trained in how to do so?


In society, you are taught that killing someone is WRONG, and you will be PUNISHED. It's human nature, for the most part.

A killer in society goes to jail. A killer in the military is a good soldier.

Do you wonder why so many people get out of the Army and 5 years down the line or sooner they get Traumatic Stress Disorder? They have been TRAINED to not respond or feel guilt when something happens in combat and they have to do something terrible.

Give a person a few months or years to mull it over, and that usually changes. I've met veterans who regretted every single person they killed in the war. "They were no different from me, they were fighting for their country."


The CO would not do so unless he believed it was the correct course of actions and the CO listens to his troops sugestions and doesnt always make the plan.


Haha, were you really in the Army? CO listens to his troops suggestions after he has received his specific orders? LOL.


Not true, orders can be broken if they are unjust.


But at great cost. You can be shot in the field for disobeying direct orders.

from your link about the damming:


Saddam's destruction of the Marsh Arabs was widely condemned outside Iraq, although you have to come here to appreciate his ruthlessness of purpose. After the Americans and British encouraged the Shia Muslims of Iraq to rise up against Saddam in 1991 ­ then betrayed them by doing nothing when he wiped out his opponents ­ deserting Iraqi soldiers and rebels who wanted to keep on fighting retreated into the swamps of Howeiza and Amarah and Hamar where the Marsh Arabs, deified in Wilfrid Thesiger's great work so many decades ago, gave them sanctuary. Iraqi helicopters and tanks could not winkle them out.

So Saddam embarked on a strategy of anti-guerrilla warfare that puts Israel's political assassinations and property destruction ­ and America's Vietnam Agent Orange ­ into the shade. He constructed a set of dams, hundreds of them, to block the waters flowing into the marshes from the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. He diverted the water through new artificial waterways ­ one of them was called the Mother of All Battles river ­ which irrigated the towns and cities that remained loyal to him. The only water allowed into the marshes were the runoffs of fertilised fields, so the Marsh Arabs' cattle walked into the centre of the streams to find fresh water. In the end, there was no water left.


He was doing it to get rid of political opponents, not to mass murder innocent civilians. He didn't kill thousands with it, he displaced people. He used the water as political currency. Not very Stalinesque if you ask me.


I think it was, we didnt just remove him. We removed his entire currupt and murdering regime.


So, let me get this straight. 25,000 deaths in Iraq are a fair trade when it means that America might be safer.

Because it is wildly apparent that Iraqis are now more at risk than they EVER were under Saddam, even at his worst. So they're not safer at all. The removal of his regime did nothing to protect Iraqis, it actually has ended up making the whole country a huge security risk.

More terrorists are created in Iraq every day than there are people who sign up for the US Army, you can be 100% sure of that fact.


Oh so now your saying we are not hunting him nor have lives been lost hunting him?
Now thats ignorance and an insult to every dead soldier in afghanistan.


If you are hunting him, you're doing a terrible job. It's been 4 years. They found all the details of the UK bombings within DAYS, and had people jailed within HOURS.

Can you explain to me how me saying that the Bush Adminstration is doing a terrible job of finding Osama is somehow an insult to every dead soldier in Afghanistan. What, was that about freeing the Afghan people and not shutting down terrorist camps? More revisionist history?


jako



posted on Oct, 4 2005 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo

No, the physical conditioning is different. But the sleep deprivation, starving, and use of bright lights and loud noises at night to keep you up are all designed to keep you susceptible to suggestion.

In society, you are taught that killing someone is WRONG, and you will be PUNISHED. It's human nature, for the most part.

A killer in society goes to jail. A killer in the military is a good soldier.

Do you wonder why so many people get out of the Army and 5 years down the line or sooner they get Traumatic Stress Disorder? They have been TRAINED to not respond or feel guilt when something happens in combat and they have to do something terrible.

Give a person a few months or years to mull it over, and that usually changes. I've met veterans who regretted every single person they killed in the war. "They were no different from me, they were fighting for their country."


The CO would not do so unless he believed it was the correct course of actions and the CO listens to his troops sugestions and doesnt always make the plan.


Haha, were you really in the Army? CO listens to his troops suggestions after he has received his specific orders? LOL.


More terrorists are created in Iraq every day than there are people who sign up for the US Army, you can be 100% sure of that fact.



Yea but every marine is worth more than 10 insurgents, ya know why,cuz we got snipers helicopters and aircraft. which is why the insurgents sink down to using civilians as shields (which i have witnessed as we track down insurgents to civilian homes) and dressing in civilian clothes and opening fire on marines patroling the street, the sad part is that most times they miss and we take them out in a couple shots. the reason why killiers in the military are "good soldiers", cuz we believe in what were fighting for and we know that if we dont take out that insurgent when hes running down the street, hes gonna strap himself into a bomb and kill your buddies or civilians in a market.



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
Yes, but you're talking about education and learning, not actually "evolving".

No I am talking about nature, some people are just "better" at doing things.
More specifcally women at mental or precise tasks.
I mean some people are better racers or are better at kayacking skills than someone else.


I agree with you that different people learn and develop at different speeds, but there is such a huge chasm of reasons (nature vs nurture, etc) that we'd need a new thread.

Yes we need a new thread to debate that..


Traditionally, people who go into the Armed Forces are NOT la creme de la creme of the intelligentsia, would you agree?

Definatly not, some of the greatest minds are in the military.
Some of my faveroute writers are ex-military.



Absolutely and completely. You may not want to hear it, but you have MORE in common with Abdullah the shoemaker in Baghdad than you think you do. More things in common than you have differences, that is for sure. We're all made of the same stuff and we all want to be loved and respected and safe, etc.

With respect we are not all the same, to think we all want the same is an ideoligy.(sp)
We do have more in common than differences , but its not the numbers. Its the size.



No, the physical conditioning is different. But the sleep deprivation, starving, and use of bright lights and loud noises at night to keep you up are all designed to keep you susceptible to suggestion.

No If we wanted that we could drug them during thier injections or drug thier food.



In society, you are taught that killing someone is WRONG, and you will be PUNISHED.

Thats speaking for your culture , not for everyones.


It's human nature, for the most part.

Thats the debate though, is it inbuilt or is it learnt?


A killer in society goes to jail.

Do you call self defence killing?


A killer in the military is a good soldier.

Not always.


Do you wonder why so many people get out of the Army and 5 years down the line or sooner they get Traumatic Stress Disorder?

No its because they've seen things that no one should but they have to.



They have been TRAINED to not respond or feel guilt when something happens in combat and they have to do something terrible.

What do you define as something horrible though?
Is defending your friends horrible or is fighting horrible?
If so then nature is horrible.
BTW, they are not trained not to respond to guilt.
They are taught how to deal with it and have people to help with it, why else are there military councilers?
This isnt WW1.



Give a person a few months or years to mull it over, and that usually changes. I've met veterans who regretted every single person they killed in the war. "They were no different from me, they were fighting for their country."

Usually? Is that a percentage?
Its equally likely they where ok with the kill.
BTW, I am sure almost every soldier thinks that, the men and women dont want to be there but they have to be.



Haha, were you really in the Army?

No been trained by the RN.


CO listens to his troops suggestions after he has received his specific orders? LOL.

"Specific" orders?
wtf?
Orders are rarely specific since most operations are left to the men on the ground.
BTW, you ever done any leadership training?



But at great cost. You can be shot in the field for disobeying direct orders.

No you cant, thats breaking military and civil law.
Only at sea can you be shot for mutiny not for disobeying orders.


from your link about the damming:


Saddam's destruction of the Marsh Arabs was widely condemned outside Iraq, although you have to come here to appreciate his ruthlessness of purpose. After the Americans and British encouraged the Shia Muslims of Iraq to rise up against Saddam in 1991 ­ then betrayed them by doing nothing when he wiped out his opponents ­ deserting Iraqi soldiers and rebels who wanted to keep on fighting retreated into the swamps of Howeiza and Amarah and Hamar where the Marsh Arabs, deified in Wilfrid Thesiger's great work so many decades ago, gave them sanctuary. Iraqi helicopters and tanks could not winkle them out.

So Saddam embarked on a strategy of anti-guerrilla warfare that puts Israel's political assassinations and property destruction ­ and America's Vietnam Agent Orange ­ into the shade. He constructed a set of dams, hundreds of them, to block the waters flowing into the marshes from the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. He diverted the water through new artificial waterways ­ one of them was called the Mother of All Battles river ­ which irrigated the towns and cities that remained loyal to him. The only water allowed into the marshes were the runoffs of fertilised fields, so the Marsh Arabs' cattle walked into the centre of the streams to find fresh water. In the end, there was no water left.


He was doing it to get rid of political opponents, not to mass murder innocent civilians. He didn't kill thousands with it, he displaced people. He used the water as political currency. Not very Stalinesque if you ask me.

What about the local population? Are they not inocent?
And how many died on the "displacement".

This is not mass murder?



So, let me get this straight. 25,000 deaths in Iraq are a fair trade when it means that America might be safer.

Woah wait, your trying to say that we would be "Safer" and our allies would be "safer" if we didnt act?
Ever heard of chamberlin? He was the UK PM before WW2 , his actions of good will and trust and non interverance to make the UK "Safer" cost the lives of over 1 million people.


Because it is wildly apparent that Iraqis are now more at risk than they EVER were under Saddam, even at his worst. So they're not safer at all. The removal of his regime did nothing to protect Iraqis, it actually has ended up making the whole country a huge security risk.

That is the temp position not the long term one.
But hey we can say "oh its not safe" but one thing is clear.
You ask iraqis if they still want sadamm in power and I bet they will say no.


More terrorists are created in Iraq every day than there are people who sign up for the US Army, you can be 100% sure of that fact.

Yeah your point is?
Any action or non action by the UK or the US will result in more people joining the terrorists , what action do you suggest?
Hide our heads in the sand and let them "duke it out between themselves" , guess what, the US and UK tried that pre WW2 , you count the casualties and dammage after that.



If you are hunting him, you're doing a terrible job. It's been 4 years. They found all the details of the UK bombings within DAYS, and had people jailed within HOURS.

Uh yeah ok, the UK bombers was a simple all UK thing, the bombers where brittish and all the action was planned and done here.
Not across the entire world, as I said have you ever tried catching them with your hands bound by politics and morals where on the other hand they can do what they want and when?
Read up abotu NI and you'll see how difficult it is to hunt down terrorists.


Can you explain to me how me saying that the Bush Adminstration is doing a terrible job of finding Osama is somehow an insult to every dead soldier in Afghanistan. What, was that about freeing the Afghan people and not shutting down terrorist camps? More revisionist history?

It was also about catching USB not just freeing them.
He and his currurpt regime commited those acts and the country defended him, by saying we're doing a "Terrible" job at finding him is laughable and insulting.
Are you you trying to imply that the co-alition forces that died in that war did where not trying to hunt down binladden?
Do you also claim that there has been no lives lost in the hunt for him world wide?

DW.



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by sardion2000
WARNING DISTURBING IMAGERY

www.aztlan.net...


Just a few problems with these pictures.

1. The soldiers in the pictures are wearing green forrest camoflage instead of desert camoflage uniforms.

2. There are no unit patches, name tapes, rank insignias or any other identifying marks.

3. The uniforms shown have signs of heavy wear and are faded.

4. The uniforms shown are of a style not worn by the current US military.

Just something to consider.



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 03:04 PM
link   
Those photos are staged, pure and simple. And frankly I am outraged that you would post such a thing UNVERIFIED on these forums. Posting pornographic material is against the TOS. You should be ashamed of yourself.




[edit on 5-10-2005 by skippytjc]



posted on Oct, 5 2005 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Those photos are staged, pure and simple. And frankly I am outraged that you would post such a thing UNVERIFIED on these forums. Posting pornographic material is against the TOS. You should be ashamed of yourself.
[edit on 5-10-2005 by skippytjc]


Read the post skippy. I am quoting a prevoius post on this thread so take it out on the original poster. They are not pornographic because they have been edited. If you think that I am going to let someone get away with the accusations made citing those pictures as evidence then you are dead wrong. Look before you leap skippy.



posted on Oct, 8 2005 @ 12:47 AM
link   
devilwasp

Loook at the how hillariosly you try to argue, First you say i'm wrong, then you prove me right.

I said the following :


but unlike the Us soldiers (by your own admition) the resistance doesn't have the mentality that their lives are worth more than that off civilians,


THEN YOU SAID:


The resistance does have that mentality but the US do not, they may look after their own first but they look after the Iraqis just as well.



WHICH WAS MY POINT EXACTLY, YOUR SOLDIERS, BY YOUR OWN ADMITION, CARE FOR THEIR OWN LIVES BEFORE THEY CARE ABOUT THE LIVES OF CIVILIANS.

You just said "your wrong" then proceeded to prove me right.

Taking of hostages;

The resistance doesn't take "hostages" they take Prisoners of War, and if they discover that the person they have is harmless, they release them within a day, and they don't treat them badly.


news.bbc.co.uk...

Google 'saved' Australian hostage

John Martinkus was working for Australia's SBS Television
An Australian journalist kidnapped in Iraq was freed after his captors checked the popular internet search engine Google to confirm his identity.

John Martinkus was seized in Baghdad on Saturday, the first Australian held hostage in Iraq since the US-led invasion.

But his captors agreed to release him after they were convinced he was not working for the CIA or a US contractor.


All the beheading videos are staged, look at bigly, a US soldier even appeared in his video.

Ofcource under the geneva convention, Spies, Mercinaries (A.k.A security contractors) and collaboraters you are allowed to execute.



Are you saying I have the right to kill illegal immigrants?


You are allowed to kill anyone who has military or government person who has declared war on you. And america has declared war on Iraq.



The soldiers try and place the iraqi civilians above their own safety and above there friend


That obviously isn't true, look at how they shot right through two children in this article.



Also, the few in Abu Ghraib who committed those acts where charged, you and I both know this, or are you denying it?
The soldiers there where a disgrace and do not represent what the total army thinks.


The two where scape goats. your ways haven't changed, your still torturing people across all the prisons.


Maybe you didn't notice the first case.


Uhuh, and we are expected to belive that just because a child and man where in the same room, that he used it as human shield, this coming from the people who shot through both children? And who they themselves use human shields?
Why would we belive anything the US military says about the iraqi resistance, you have ZERO credibility.
Why would we belive you when you lied about the man and his baby.



Whoop tee do, they ask them to stay at home, yeah thats real good. hey maybe next time you put an add in the paper huh?


Actually they do something similar, but i'm not prepaired to divulge that to you.



Also “wild and in discriminant” you might notice that the SA-80A2 is the most accurate assault rifle in the world and that British troops are expert shots, believe me I've seen my sergeant shoot and he wasn't even a full time infantry man.


Even worse, i guess then you where aiming for those civilians. Figures.



I hear Al jazeera is recruiting.


Al jazeera is a US controlled peace of crap.

[edit on 8-10-2005 by Syrian Sister]



posted on Oct, 8 2005 @ 12:54 AM
link   
12m8keall2c


Yeah devilwasp from what I've seen Syria is always looking for a few good men, women, children as well



This from the man that claimed he was "unbias".


look at what Danie wrote



we are trained to think for ourselves



LLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


THEY HAVE TO BE TRAINED, INORDER TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES!!!!


LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL !!!!!!!!

i'm telling that one to the resistance.



posted on Oct, 8 2005 @ 04:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Syrian Sister
devilwasp

Loook at the how hillariosly you try to argue, First you say i'm wrong, then you prove me right.

No actually your not clicking on to what I said.


I said the following :


but unlike the Us soldiers (by your own admition) the resistance doesn't have the mentality that their lives are worth more than that off civilians,


THEN YOU SAID:


The resistance does have that mentality but the US do not, they may look after their own first but they look after the Iraqis just as well.


Actuallly I did make a mistkae, sorry about that.
Thinking about it, if US and UK soldiers valued themselves more than civilians then why would we lock up our abusers?




WHICH WAS MY POINT EXACTLY, YOUR SOLDIERS, BY YOUR OWN ADMITION, CARE FOR THEIR OWN LIVES BEFORE THEY CARE ABOUT THE LIVES OF CIVILIANS.

They take care of themselves before helping others thats what I said.
They only attack when ready and can only defend when they are ready.
By my own adimition I did say; US and UK soldiers IMO get thier S*** together first and dont do a rambo THEN go and take down the enemy. All the while trying to move away from civilians, whereas the resistance does not and uses by its own admition ;"Let our cities be our swamps and our towns be our jungles." but guess what , who lives in those 2 areas? Civilians.




You just said "your wrong" then proceeded to prove me right.

No you misqouted me.


Taking of hostages;

The resistance doesn't take "hostages" they take Prisoners of War, and if they discover that the person they have is harmless, they release them within a day, and they don't treat them badly.

Prisnors of war?
Civilians not breaking the law are not prisnors of war.
That is detailed in the convention.
Also the resisitance does not have the authority to make judgements about who is inocent or not without a legal court.
Also in the convention.


news.bbc.co.uk...

Google 'saved' Australian hostage

John Martinkus was working for Australia's SBS Television
An Australian journalist kidnapped in Iraq was freed after his captors checked the popular internet search engine Google to confirm his identity.

John Martinkus was seized in Baghdad on Saturday, the first Australian held hostage in Iraq since the US-led invasion.

Yeah they released him, the fact they took him , a civilian, is proof enough that they do take hostages.



All the beheading videos are staged, look at bigly, a US soldier even appeared in his video.

Ofcource under the geneva convention, Spies, Mercinaries (A.k.A security contractors) and collaboraters you are allowed to execute.

You are not allowed to execute anyone.
Also contractors :


Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria[/quoe]
They are not takeing active part in the hostilities.
Also they break the convetion..

) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war





You are allowed to kill anyone who has military or government person who has declared war on you. And america has declared war on Iraq.

No thats not true, mabye in open combat yeah, but after there prisnors no.
Also If I am a civilian and then killed in iraq it means that I was killed rightly in your opnion?




That obviously isn't true, look at how they shot right through two children in this article.

Oh no? I take it the little story a few pages back doesnt emphasise they dont fire back when they have a choice.
They fired but the man used a human shield, you ever tried to stop a bullet flying at 940 metres a second before it hits the wrong target?




The two where scape goats.

Says you not the judge.
[qoute]
your ways haven't changed, your still torturing people across all the prisons.

Wrong, now adays anyone working with iraqis is under the carful eye of the RMP or whatever the american equivilant is.



Uhuh, and we are expected to belive that just because a child and man where in the same room, that he used it as human shield, this coming from the people who shot through both children?

Yeah we are, The people who shot through 2 children done so by accident IMO, but are we to trust the two people who USED them as shields.



And who they themselves use human shields?

No they dont that was an isreali pic


Why would we belive anything the US military says about the iraqi resistance, you have ZERO credibility.

Why would we believe them? Mabye because its better to listen to both sides and see the truth.
Tell me, do you ignore everything in the western media, if so then why?
The eastern media lies to....is it not better to look between the two and see what things are the same.


Why would we belive you when you lied about the man and his baby.

I have not lied, there has been no report that differs or says diffrent about what happened to my knowledge.




Actually they do something similar, but i'm not prepaired to divulge that to you.

Ofcourse, since its now "widespread" news that means the iraqis that go to the area where the soldiers will be are willing to lay thier lives and thier childrens lives down for these people yes no?




Even worse, i guess then you where aiming for those civilians. Figures.

British troops dont hit civilians.
Period.
If they do they are punished acordingly but hey even if you dont hit them you still get punished thanks to people who hate the military and remove people who DO help like Tim Collins.




Al jazeera is a US controlled peace of crap.
[edit on 8-10-2005 by Syrian Sister]

Why do you qoute from it then?

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 8/10/2005 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Oct, 8 2005 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Syrian Sister
12m8keall2c


Yeah devilwasp from what I've seen Syria is always looking for a few good men, women, children as well



This from the man that claimed he was "unbias".


look at what Danie wrote



we are trained to think for ourselves



LLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


THEY HAVE TO BE TRAINED, INORDER TO THINK FOR THEMSELVES!!!!


LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL !!!!!!!!

i'm telling that one to the resistance.


you go ahead cuz its necessary to be "trained to think for yourself". If they just went and stuck us in the shooting as civilians, we would panic thus causing stupid mistakes. thats just common sense.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join