The media are minimising US and British war crimes in Iraq

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx

If we executed or sold into slavery any of our prisoners, you would call it a war crime. Much less use the women as concubines.

The only lesson you have taught us is that you do not do your homework.

[edit on 12-11-2005 by xman_in_blackx]

[edit on 12-11-2005 by xman_in_blackx]


Actually as you know there is striking evidence that we have executed and raped prisoners. One prisoner was dead within 45 minutes o reaching Abu Graib. Was he a 'bad guy? Probably. Does that justify murder? If we abandon the rule of law we abandon any hope of a just world. Freedom ends with the death of justice.

What about the evidence of the rape of children (on other threads)? W'eve all seen the wires and hoods, naked piles of bodies and the body in ice with the thumbs up girl. Nice.

I would also suggest that there is significant evidence that we have a policy of executing Iraqi journalists. So much for freedom to speak and press freedom. I have seen two separate video's of Iraqi journalists getting mowed down in broad daylight. One was reporting at the scene of a burning Humvee and the other was a cameraman inside his hotel room.

As of Sepember 2005, 68 journalists had been killed in Iraq. A total of 63 journalists were killed in the Vietnam war, which lasted from 1955 to 1975.

www.rsf.org...

There is little question that we have a policy whereby our guys are licensed to kill with impunity. The targeting of journalists is most reprehensible IMO.




posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by seattlelaw

There is little question that we have a policy whereby our guys are licensed to kill with impunity. The targeting of journalists is most reprehensible IMO.


This is happening in a place where insurgents showed up to fight in ambulances with the lights and siren on. Things are not always what they seem. Your enemy follows no rules of engagement. Is it a camera crew or is it an RPG? When all hell breaks loose, the fog of war can make things appear as something else. In the end, you take no chance and shoot in the direction of the perceived fire. Also, snipers and those who are detonating roadside bombs have been video taping their actions. Once again...when the gunfire starts or bombs go off, it is a journalist or an insurgent? A grunt may not take the chance and kill him. It is right? No. It is a tragedy that the insurgents look a lot like journalists. Is it a crime? It is war. Did the soldier mean to kill a journalist? I doubt that it was done on purpose.

I remember when Kosovo was raging and a European journalist was running with his video camera and he was killed when struck by a mortar round. The video enraged and saddened me. Was he targeted? You bet. Did they perceive him as a possible soldier or threat? I would imagine so.

Have there been insurgents attacking wearing press credentials or civilian clothes? It is hard to tell who is who. You have to act fast. If you are wrong, you and\or your friends die.

It is a dangerous place.



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Souljah your posts have really gone done hill since last i was here and SS posts arent even woth messing with.

Corporate programing? oh yes....must buy newest product from china!

please! Corporate programming that sounds so much like a communist you prove my point lol. 'Must destroy capitalism!' BOL...your living in another era, lol!


I think it's the corruption, murder, and constant lies, Souljah has a problem with, not Capitalism itself (although there is not much difference at times), and I agree with him.
Back on topic, are the media minimising US and British war crimes in Iraq? I would say yes, more than we will ever know probably.



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx

Originally posted by seattlelaw

There is little question that we have a policy whereby our guys are licensed to kill with impunity. The targeting of journalists is most reprehensible IMO.


This is happening in a place where insurgents showed up to fight in ambulances with the lights and siren on. Things are not always what they seem. Your enemy follows no rules of engagement. Is it a camera crew or is it an RPG? When all hell breaks loose, the fog of war can make things appear as something else. In the end, you take no chance and shoot in the direction of the perceived fire.


It Works both ways though, did you already forget about the Two S.A.S operatives who were caught in a car full of explosives recently, dressed up as Muslims, Joke Shop novelty Muslim beards included? A dangerous place indeed.



posted on Nov, 15 2005 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
Arpanet was created by Capitalism and the Military Industrial complex. Two of the things you despise. Funny how that works.

...and do You Think that the Military Comples would SHARE this Technology with all of us, Civilans? If you ask me they would still use this web technology just for themselves. It is true that the Military has, Again, made Basis for something the Civilan Sector then used.

The guy who can take Cred for the Creation of the Internet is mister Tim Berners Lee.

Yet again, we have gone far far away from the Original Topic, about which you have not spoken very much - the talk here is around me...



posted on Nov, 16 2005 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Because you d'a man Souljah


Y'r a fan of mine......and always an enemy of the "ignorant" people on this site.

That's why you get picked' on....but thank _od you can defend y'rself well (usually with a good link)....not like the others around here.

Y'r Canadian friend,
Sven



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 01:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

The guy who can take Cred for the Creation of the Internet is mister Tim Berners Lee.


Tim Berners Lee came up with the concept of the web, not the Internet.

That is what gets geeks like me so upset about your so called "facts." You get close to the mark, but you really have no clue as to what you are talking about. You do a google search and get some data but you have no idea of how the Internet works or how the world wide web sits on top of the Internet's foundation. You have no idea of its true origin. You are one of those people who thinks that the web and the Internet are the same animal. Sorry to burst your big ego bubble, but it is not the same animal. Never was and never will be. I can go on ad nauseum about how it differs, but that would take time that I do not have.

This is how you work. Half truths close enough to the mark to get you brownie points with people who are naive and gullible and fall for your so-called expertise. You post links but you don't understand what they mean. You follow the traditions of Lenin who knew that if you tell a lie loud enough and often enough that it becomes truth. You may even be flattered by this, which brings my point closer to the mark.

It is so hard to debate a subject rationally with someone who thinks that 'close enough' will work. Then you wonder why people get upset with you. It is not because you are 'on to something' but because the lack of understanding regarding some of the most basic of concepts shows through your facade.

We try and play by the rules, but to you they are just part of the 'evil capitalist system', so eventually, we either have a stroke, a breakdown, or just give up on you as someone to debate with.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 02:34 AM
link   
ok, still yet to see any real proof of the so called US and UK war crimes in Iraq that are being downplayed. It has just been hear-say up to this point and I will not believe any of the accusations until then. Based on the Ideals I was raised with as well as many others were raised with I will refuse to believe any of these war crimes took place, if anyone comes with indisputable proof(which I doubt will happen, since none of us are in a real place to come up with such evidence). Keep it comin, this is interesting.



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 08:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
We try and play by the rules, but to you they are just part of the 'evil capitalist system', so eventually, we either have a stroke, a breakdown, or just give up on you as someone to debate with.

So - let me Ask you Again:

What does Have to do with the TOPIC of this Thread?




posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 05:51 PM
link   
This is exactly what I am talking about.

You try to justify your animosity toward the West by taking a very complex subject and make generalized statements that are completely wrong.

This is just one of them.


Originally posted by Souljah
Everyone that they kill is an Insurgent or Terrorist, so that makes them enemy combatants immediatly. If there were any Civilans among them is not relevant. They just blow-up the House, and then when everybody inside is Dead, they leave them there.

When they are killed by Coalition fire, they immediatly become Terrorists.


The link is commentary and not a news article. Yet you treat it as if it was "news." It even states right above the headline "comment."

It doesn't matter to you, but it should matter to those who are counting on you to provide them with facts and good arguments to make their cases in their own cities. You should be a shining beacon to all of those who believe in what you preach, but upon closer inspection, there is only vapor.

This is how Marx let his people down. This is how Lenin let his people down. This is how Guevara let his people down. Get the facts right and you may actually become the revolutionary that you try to emulate. You must uplift those you serve.



[edit on 17-11-2005 by xman_in_blackx]

[edit on 17-11-2005 by xman_in_blackx]



posted on Nov, 17 2005 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
Arpanet was created by Capitalism and the Military Industrial complex. Two of the things you despise. Funny how that works.

...and do You Think that the Military Comples would SHARE this Technology with all of us, Civilans? If you ask me they would still use this web technology just for themselves. It is true that the Military has, Again, made Basis for something the Civilan Sector then used.

The guy who can take Cred for the Creation of the Internet is mister Tim Berners Lee.

Yet again, we have gone far far away from the Original Topic, about which you have not spoken very much - the talk here is around me...


uhm....actually tim berners lee was resposible for the HTTP protocol the internet uses, this is a techinicallity really, but arpanet was the first networked computer system over a geographic area, now if you say tim berners lee is responsible fdor the way we know the internet today that is correct. He however was not reponsible for the internet itself, anyone remember the BBS?



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
You try to justify your animosity toward the West by taking a very complex subject and make generalized statements that are completely wrong.

Wrong by WHAT Standards? The Western ones? The Military ones? The Corporate Media ones? Who defines what is Right and whats is Left?



It doesn't matter to you, but it should matter to those who are counting on you to provide them with facts and good arguments to make their cases in their own cities. You should be a shining beacon to all of those who believe in what you preach, but upon closer inspection, there is only vapor.

We have seen this kind of Events all the times in Iraq. Remember THIS?


U.S. says kills 70 militants in west Iraq clashes

U.S. fighter jets and attack helicopters killed around 70 suspected militants in a series of air strikes in and near the western Iraqi city of Ramadi on Sunday, a military statement said on Monday.

About 50 other [size=+1]suspected insurgents were killed in a series of other clashes around the city that involved U.S. helicopter gunships, F-18 fighters and ground troops.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

So - around 70 SUSPECTED Insurgents are hiding in a House - what do you do? Simple - level the House with 2000 pound bombs and the problem is solved. No more SUSPECTS now, huh? Just DEAD INSURGENTS.



BAGHDAD, Iraq - U.S. helicopters and warplanes bombed two villages near the city of Ramadi, a hotbed of Sunni-Arab insurgents west of Baghdad, killing around 70 Iraqis, the military said Monday. The military said all the dead were militants, though witnesses said at least 39 were civilians.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

Militants. Insurgents. Rebels. Terrorists.

40 of them Civilans.

But according to the Military Logic - when they are DEAD they become Miltants.

GO Figure.



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
But according to the Military Logic - when they are DEAD they become Miltants.

GO Figure.


True enough. Anyone seen together with the militants and insurgents will be seen as enemy combatant and will be killed. Even if the insurgent is just your friend and you're tagging along with him, unarmed, you'll get kill too. I guess it's just the U.S Military way of shutting the insurgents up. Furthermore, how about the air strike and carpet bombing by the U.S Military? Insurgents along with civilians are killed. Too bad the U.S Military can't develop missiles with pin point accuracy.

Simple. The terrorist/insurgents/militants played that game and so will the "good" guys.



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 09:14 AM
link   
I think they minimise the war in general. I mean perhaps I'm speaking out of turn here since the BBC IS a British thing after all...but I was very surprised after the 7/7 bombs in London that the Arab programme on the World Service had to take a two minute silence. I don't remember any two minute silences for all the people in the Middle East who've been killed. Seems some lives are more equal than others!



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Militants. Insurgents. Rebels. Terrorists.

40 of them Civilans.

But according to the Military Logic - when they are DEAD they become Miltants.

GO Figure.


You do it and you are not even aware of your flawed thinking. This is not happening in a vacuum. This is happening in WAR where people are shooting at each other. Do you really htink that hwen someone is shooting at you, you will stand up and say "Hey! We need at the civillains to get out of the way now! We will be blowing up this building."

I think it is safe to say that this is pretty well known that if they engage the US, no matter where they are, they will be taken out. If the pure of heart extremists care about their innocent Iraqi brethren, why do they engage the US with innocents in close proximity?

1. Insurgents/extremists don't care about the civilians
2. The civilians are only perceived cvilians because they wear no uniforms
3. Insurgents/extremists desire civillian casualties to gain support by portraying the US as monsters who kill innocents.

I wouldn't do that. Would you? If I had friends, who I wanted to be safe, I would not have them "tagging along" with me. If you "tag along" in a bank robbery, you get shot at or go to jail too. If a woman is shooting at US troops, she is no longer a civilian. If a child is shooting at US troops, he is no longer a civilian. It doesn't make it any less of a tragedy, but it is still war, not a war crime.

You don't let the facts get in the way of your arguments.

Here are some of your "facts":

1. The US is evil.
2. Anything the US does is evil.
3. Capitalism puts the world under its heel.
4. Anyone who opposes the US is a hero.

All of these are nothing more than your opinion and very far from fact.



posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 06:45 AM
link   
The first Victim on the War is the TRUTH.

The second Victim of the War is the Civilan Population.

Can you show me a War, that was played by the "Rules" lately?

Nobody sticks to the Rules anymore. Not the Americans, not the British, not the French, not the Chinese, not the Russians, not the Iraqis, not anybody.

And Civilans DIE in wars such as this one in Iraq. And not just by the Hand of the Insurgents. The US forces kill civilans also - but that Fact is always distorted to that point, that the US looks "Good" and the opposite side looks "Bad" again. Remember how many Civilans were Killed during the Vietnam War? Did it help? Did it DECREASE the resistance of the VC? 2-4 MILLION civilans were killed in that conflict - ONLY by US Forces! Carpet Bombing rings a bell? Did the Slaughter of 4 million people do any good?

Anyway, the same things happening all over again. History repeating itself right before our very eyes, and nobody notices that. THAT is #ing Crazy to me! Why do we have to go yet AGAIN on the same path, that we all know where it ends? Why is that GOOD for the future of the Mankind? Do you think that this war will bring PEACE to our World? Do you think this war will bring JUSTICE to our World? Do you think this war will bring LIBERTY to our World? All I see is the Gap betwen two Civilzations INCREASING. All I see is that all Arab/Muslim population looking at all Western/Christian population with Hatred and vice versa. Why? Becuase current US President wants to "Liberate" the Middle East? Just like the US wanted to "Liberate" Vietnam?

History repeats itself, everytime that a Man makes his SAME Mistakes again. War in Iraq is a FAILURE when looking Globally. It increased the international Terrorism, it increased the instability of the Middle East and it created a Legion of Islamic Radicals.

Smart Thing to do?

You be the Judge!



posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 08:17 AM
link   


The first Victim on the War is the TRUTH.

Souljah that is the most truthful thing that you have said of late. Remember it! It seems that you have forgotten it.
Civilians die, military die, that has been a fact throughout the ages. It is a fact that all military forces know by heart and take into account when planning their operations and battles. But not in the way that you would have the world beleive. The military does it's best ti minimize the damages death and injuries of not only the civilians and friendly forces, The military also tries to minimize the deaths and damage to the opposing forces. If the military did not at least try to do this, then you would definately would have seen a much higher death count and devastation. Heck the war would have been over a long time ago!

Yes history repeats itself! it always will! We can learn from history, try to avoid the mistakes of the past, but all mistakes are not unavoidable.



posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
1. Insurgents/extremists don't care about the civilians
2. The civilians are only perceived cvilians because they wear no uniforms
3. Insurgents/extremists desire civillian casualties to gain support by portraying the US as monsters who kill innocents.


I'll put this around and tell me what's your comment.

1. U.S Military Generals/Soldiers don't care about the civilians.
2. The ordinary American are only perceived innocent because they bear no mark that distinguishes him/her as a threat to the terrorist.
3. U.S soldiers and coalition forces did black/false flag operations to lean the faults on the insurgents and portraying them as the real threat.


Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
I wouldn't do that. Would you? If I had friends, who I wanted to be safe, I would not have them "tagging along" with me. If you "tag along" in a bank robbery, you get shot at or go to jail too. If a woman is shooting at US troops, she is no longer a civilian. If a child is shooting at US troops, he is no longer a civilian. It doesn't make it any less of a tragedy, but it is still war, not a war crime.


Tagging along with a robber and tagging along with an insurgent is two whole different things. A robber and an insurgent too is two other different subjects in a whole. You tag along with a robber and you know it's for your own greed but if you tag along with an insurgent, you know you're defending your country from invaders. Why do you think the insurgents are there in the first place? Just to kill off the U.S led forces for fun? No, they just want back their homeland and kick the invaders out.

However, I have to agree with you about the woman and child putting up arms fight with the U.S forces and will be killed. But I ask you this, how about the ones who did it to avenge their loved ones who were killed? If you were invaded by some foreign forces and they start shooting your loved ones and the only thing that is within your proximity is an AK, would you pick it up and start unleashing hell?

I know I would.


Originally posted by xman_in_blackx
1. The US is evil.
2. Anything the US does is evil.
3. Capitalism puts the world under its heel.
4. Anyone who opposes the US is a hero.

All of these are nothing more than your opinion and very far from fact.


Wrong. The U.S isn't evil. Everybody is evil, it's whether you can contain it or not. Capitalism bring out the idea that money is god and god is money and for money, people will do anything. Though, on the other hand, it brings out the competitive edge in everyone which is a good way of developing ourselves as humans. I believe every ideology has it's pros and cons. For example, Communism--a noble and divine idea but it can never work in this world. And no to your comments that people sees anyone who opposes U.S is a hero. People who are defending their rights and freedom against U.S is a hero.



posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Heartagram

I'll put this around and tell me what's your comment.


1. U.S Military Generals/Soldiers don't care about the civilians.
Not true, they try to minimize civilian casualties. Otherwise, there would have been no warnings to evacuate Falluja. We would have just flattened the entire town no matter who was in it.

2. The ordinary American are only perceived innocent because they bear no mark that distinguishes him/her as a threat to the terrorist.
I don't understand what you are asking. If you are talking about terrorism in America, how are American civilians a threat to terrorists? Are they going to throw a cup of Starbucks coffee at them?

3. U.S soldiers and coalition forces did black/false flag operations to lean the faults on the insurgents and portraying them as the real threat.
Then why do terrorist organizations take credit for them?


Originally posted by Heartagram
Tagging along with a robber and tagging along with an insurgent is two whole different things...but if you tag along with an insurgent, you know you're defending your country from invaders.


..and as soon as you pick up a weapon and fire, you become a valid target for US troops. Or are you suggesting that he is not carrying a weapon yet fighting to free his country from oppression through non violence?

Why did he choose to "tag along" with insurgents rather than the good old fashioned method of protest? What is wrong with protests? The Vietnam war was stopped with protests. Civil Rights in the US gained full momentum with protests. I am not buying the "tagging along" theory.


Originally posted by Heartagram
But I ask you this, how about the ones who did it to avenge their loved ones who were killed? If you were invaded by some foreign forces and they start shooting your loved ones and the only thing that is within your proximity is an AK, would you pick it up and start unleashing hell?

I know I would.


You could do more damage with a protest sign than you ever could with a rifle. You may actually get people out of your country with the sign, while the rifle will only get you more troops. Then, if troops shoot at a peaceful protest, you have a real war crime and someone will indeed pay.


Originally posted by Heartagram
Capitalism bring out the idea that money is god and god is money and for money, people will do anything. Though, on the other hand, it brings out the competitive edge in everyone which is a good way of developing ourselves as humans. I believe every ideology has it's pros and cons.

Capitalism has done more elevate the masses of humans than any other method or model. We have a middle class because of Capitalism. Capitalism can grow like a leviathan, but it has its own checks and balances built in. If a company forgets about the consumers, it will lose those consumers. Even the Robber Barons had their day in civil court and were humbled before those consumers they forgot about.

So many people forget about that.



posted on Nov, 20 2005 @ 03:38 AM
link   

Not true, they try to minimize civilian casualties. Otherwise, there would have been no warnings to evacuate Falluja. We would have just flattened the entire town no matter who was in it.


That was just a media stunt, they want to make it look like they aren't slaughtered a hole City, just because it apposses US occupation, in the eyes of the world.

But looking not at what they said but what they did on the ground, they turned some of the evacuaties back, because they where men Or boys over the age of 15. And sometimes teh evacuaties where shot at the checkpoints.

The whole city was co-ordinaned off, and the US didn't provide any facilities for which the hundreds of thousands of civilians would have evacuated too.

The made make shift refugee camps outside the city, where desease was comment.

CARE FOR CIVILIANS???? is that why the first thing they attacked and took controll over was the Fallujah hospital?
Just so the doctors don't spread "propoganda" about civilian deaths?
Is that why they Banned any of the media, Independent or inbedded, To go into fallujah and witness their war crimes???

Spare me your "care for civilians" speach ok? the words from your soldiers, "it's either us or them, and it has to be them" come to mind.



  exclusive video


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

log in

join