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.

 

Behind the Steel Curtain: The Real Face of the Occupation

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2005 @ 05:39 PM
link   
With respect to the HRW , where is the rest of the report?
It focus's 100% on the bad points, there is little to none reports of UK or UK troops performance in other areas, hell the conclusion and recomendations mention nothing of any of the above and frankly critisise the whole thing.

Might I also add , the reason evidence to the contuary is so not easy to come by is because of 1 factor. There has been no report of UK or US troops upholding the HR laws.

Does this mean that the entire coalition force does not obey these laws?

Or Is it more likely that it is not being reported?


Ofcourse anything I do say is immaterial and will be pushed to the side and discounted.




posted on Dec, 21 2005 @ 05:48 PM
link   
The HRW is just as flawed an biased as any group looking to push an agenda.


At Durban one role of Human Rights Watch was to exclude the representative of Jewish lawyers and jurists from over 40 countries. Here's what happened:

As a representative of the IAJLJ, I was a member of the caucus of international human rights nongovernmental organizations. Human Rights Watch, along with others such as Amnesty International and the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights (renamed Human Rights First), was also a member of this caucus. Together we had a right to vote on the final NGO document, and hours before the last session gathered together to discuss our position.

The draft included egregious statements equating Zionism with racism, and alleging that Israel is an "apartheid" state guilty of "genocide and ethnic cleansing designed to ensure a Jewish state.


www.ngo-monitor.org...

I'm not pushing a view that the American occupation is a hundred percent in the wrong I'm just simply stating that it doesn't practice as a policy the targetting of civilians. Views on whether or not the occupation could do a better job of prevent civilian death will vary depending on who you ask.

The role of this site is to deny ignorance, analyze facts and come up with your own opinions. I read through your rather lengthy and well constructed HRW work and I agree the coalition does practice some questionable actions.

That still doesn't allow people to overlook the other side of the coin, the insurgents ruthlessly killing men, women, and children in an effort to prevent the reconstruciton of an Iraq based on democracy not a Sunni minority ruling the country.

Good counter point aape.

Quick side note


Originally posted by juube
this guy aape gives you everything u asked, isnt it your turn to prove him wrong? but you cant do it, can you? cos hes giving you all the facts right there. read it and learn something about your all-mighty-superstate...


Sorry Juube that I wasn't on call and immediately paged the minute aape came up with evidence suggesting the Coalition forces practice suspect policy in regards to civilian loss. I guess I'm to busy here in my all mighty superstate.

Simply get a grip. Things aren't black and white, maybe you should go read up on the use of IEDs by the insurgents and you might learn something about your great "freedom fighters". I'm quite capable of making my own informed deciscion, I don't need you instructing me to read something.

[edit on 12/21/2005 by Agent47]

[edit on 12/21/2005 by Agent47]



posted on Dec, 21 2005 @ 06:06 PM
link   
no need to get angry man, did i say anything about those freedom fighter you mentioned? now what makes you think, i have something to do with freedom fighters? sorry to disappoint you, i have nothing to do with you, or with your freedom fighters. i only said, that he has better point than you do. he gave you the proof you wanted. and now youre focusing on me? and trying to blame me for something i have nothing to do with? veeery interesting way to prove you cant say anything to aapes post.



posted on Dec, 21 2005 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by juube veeery interesting way to prove you cant say anything to aapes post.


He had a better point? From page one the thread was about such things as "the use of guided weapons against civillians in fallujha".

I gave a response to aape's post just becaue I didn't do the reactionary thing and try to disprove it, doesn't mean I somehow did something wrong. He made a good point but all the same he has made some horrible points at the same time. Things like the first website he linked to earlier on or how he alledged the use of IEDs was nothing more than a hoax. I said something to his post and now your just trying to bait me into wasting my time with your trollish one liner behavior.



posted on Dec, 21 2005 @ 06:21 PM
link   
Erm i didn´t say that IED´s are a hoax. "Have you somekind of link about explosive pepsi cans in iraq?-D"
If that was what you meant. I just said that you must not blindly believe that every bombing is made by same men. To me it just seems so weird that freedom fighters would blow up their own country men on purpose. Because they must understand that such actions will only bring more hate towards "insurgency", and i believe people in iraq would want other countries to come and help to stop the occupation in iraq. I admit i started on this thread on wrong foot, but it´s very hard to be neutral on this kind of subject.
-aape

[edit on 21-12-2005 by aape]



posted on Dec, 21 2005 @ 09:07 PM
link   
We are helping the Iraqi's!!

We are putting young Americans lives on the line to make Iraq a better place!!

Why do you dislike the idea of a free Iraq?!?



-- Boat



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47
I've really had it up to here with your trolling but for a momment I'm going to assume your just acting up some sort of carictature.

And I've had it with you hijacking my thread.



Half of what you posted is opinion and the other is historical sayings like "through history etc".

Still - those are Facts.



I'm being honest can you really provide some sort of clear proof of a policy to target Iraqi civilians or are you going to just continue to post silly graphics and spout anti American hate mongering and ridicule my service to my country.

Well, the first article in this Post can pretty much Describe What the Coalition troops are doing in Iraq and calling it DEMOCRACY.

If you wish to see More Proof, check out more of my Posts - but, yet again you will find them to be a part of the "Liberal-Islamo-Fascist-Propaganda" so don't Bother.

No matter how you want to turn it, in order to make it look "Good" - bottom line is, that News that come out Lately show that Bush's full range of imperial powers include: wiretapping the innocent, detaining citizens without charges, and the use of torture. And you have absoulutely NO problem with that. And a goverment that CAN do those things and call it "Pursue of Freedom" is capable of doing MUCH worse and calling that "Liberation".

To me it looks alot like the "Liberation" of Chile - the "Good" United States just HAD to Liberate the People of Chile from the "Evil" Communistic Leaders that wanted to spread their Wicked and Twisted Ideas across the South America.



Oh and its Agent 47 Obi Wan....

Oh, I Applologzie myselef mister Agent 47.



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

Originally posted by Agent47
I've really had it up to here with your trolling but for a momment I'm going to assume your just acting up some sort of carictature.

And I've had it with you hijacking my thread.


So by not agreeing with you I am some how hijacking your thread?


I thought I had been talking to a wall before but man.

Souljah you say that your first "article" explained what I needed to know but do you realize your first article was in fact a weblog. Not an accredited public news outlet or even an sketchy internet outlet. It was a persons private weblog where I remind you that in a weblog anyone can say whatever they want regardless of its validity. I could cite weblogs where people say North Korea is planning to nuke Japan or Hitler is still alive.

What I'm saying is that you did a very bad job of proving your point by using rhetoric, opinion based sources (using them like facts), and a couple diagrams. So I'm just going to repeat myself and say that yes the coalition makes mistakes but it is the unfortunate side to an effort to rebuild a country. Now you don't want me to get all sappy and produce pictures of soldiers vaccinating kids or building schools because we've all seen that side of the news. So what I'm saying is I'd rather see the coalition try and do something good rather than see them leave and have the insurgents continue to slaughter innocents on purposep\

[edit on 12/22/2005 by Agent47]



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47

How much do you pay at the pump? That oil invasion sure has knocked the price of pure crude right down to record lows right? Oops I guess not. The Iraq War is the result of a neocon agenda no doubt but it clearly isn't a get rick quick scheme.


Agent47 I suggest you read my original post again, as you have missed the point.
At no time did I claim that the invasion of Iraq was intended to provide cheaper oil. In fact I stated at the end that the US wants access to the Iraqi Crude reserves at any costs.
The alternative is a energy hungry economy nosediving, and a reduction in the military capability of the country.

To think that this war is about money is ridiculous, there is much more than personal fortune at stake here.



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47
Souljah you say that your first "article" explained what I needed to know but do you realize your first article was in fact a weblog. Not an accredited public news outlet or even an sketchy internet outlet. It was a persons private weblog where I remind you that in a weblog anyone can say whatever they want regardless of its validity. I could cite weblogs where people say North Korea is planning to nuke Japan or Hitler is still alive.

I am waiting for you to use a weblog in support of your posts.

Have you maybe asked yourself why those photos and that article was not in some Corproate Media News?

I think you did not.

But you quickly turn everything in your own favour.

Typical for an US Army Person.



So I'm just going to repeat myself and say that yes the coalition makes mistakes but it is the unfortunate side to an effort to rebuild a country.

Yes ofcourse - the Coalition makes Mistakes and ACCIDENTS happen, when Iraqi Civilans Die. How Convenient.

The Coalition has no Idea what is in store for them in Iraq - this is a REAL war soldier, not a Virtual one. It is not a Gulf War 1 Part Deux - it is VIETNAM REVISTED. You think that with this so-called "Democracy" installed your work is finished? Dear Agent47, how mistaken you are. That is only the End of the Beginning.



Now you don't want me to get all sappy and produce pictures of soldiers vaccinating kids or building schools because we've all seen that side of the news.

Oh Goodie!

Will that be from the .gov and .mil sites?

Yes Please!

Will you call your Propaganda Officer to supply you with those Photos?



So what I'm saying is I'd rather see the coalition try and do something good rather than see them leave and have the insurgents continue to slaughter innocents on purposep\

Ah yes - love your Rhetoric.

But what "Good" is the Coalition doing exactly - apart from bombing the crap out of Iraqi Civilans, and ofcourse calling that a "MISTAKE"?

The Problem with the American Empire in Iraq is, that you are not Armed well for this Urban Guerrilla Combat. The Army has Heavy Weapons, designed to destroy great ammounts of war technology - and they use them in Urban Combat. That's why airplanes bomb a house with a "SUSPECTED" Sniper inside. But you have no Weapons against "Terrorism". None. Problem is, that all of them become obsolete, because you can not kill the Terrorists - they are Killing Themselves!

Now that is a New Experience for you, huh?

Not used to that.

So by all means - do attack Iran and Syria and extend your Problems in the Middle East to more countries.




posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Expositor

Agent47 I suggest you read my original post again, as you have missed the point.
At no time did I claim that the invasion of Iraq was intended to provide cheaper oil. In fact I stated at the end that the US wants access to the Iraqi Crude reserves at any costs.
The alternative is a energy hungry economy nosediving, and a reduction in the military capability of the country.

To think that this war is about money is ridiculous, there is much more than personal fortune at stake here.




Regardless if you say "Oil" or "Iraqi crude" my point about if petrochemicals are on such a brink of collapse that we needed Iraqi crude immediately then we would have already been investing in Russian petrochemicals as a much cheaper alternative to invading Iraq.



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47
I'm not pushing a view that the American occupation is a hundred percent in the wrong I'm just simply stating that it doesn't practice as a policy the targetting of civilians.


Agent 47, can you please explain to me how a conventional military force can fight a local populace insurgancy and not have to target civilians?

No ducking the question either, by repeating the current political spin on how we are all working together to build a better Iraq either.

I want to understand the Strategic and Tactical methods involved in fighting an enemy that dresses like, looks like , acts like , lives with and is for all intents and purpose, part of the local population.



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Expositor
Agent 47, can you please explain to me how a conventional military force can fight a local populace insurgancy and not have to target civilians?

No ducking the question either, by repeating the current political spin on how we are all working together to build a better Iraq either.

I want to understand the Strategic and Tactical methods involved in fighting an enemy that dresses like, looks like , acts like , lives with and is for all intents and purpose, part of the local population.


Read what you quoted me. If you did read it you would have noticed it said the coalition doesn't target civilians as a matter of policy. By that I mean a patrol or squad leader isn't going to sit down and say "ok guys were going to go out there and shoot anything that moves, got it? ok break!".

In Iraq the coalition fights an enemy that dresses like , looks like etc in a couple of ways.

One way is to receive or gather intelligence as to where insurgents live and then apprehending them at night in raids.

Another way is to go on patrol and look for suspected insurgents during the day. This is the part where roadside IEDs go off and maim whoever was unlucky enough to trip them.

The third way is to conduct operations in Iraq, either rebuilding or strategic and wait until someone opens fire on the Coalition troops and once its clear that its an enemy soldier they usually try to put him down.



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 03:54 PM
link   
Expositor, query.

Why is it that you place the onus on Coalition troops to identify insurgents? Insurgents clearly violate the rules of warfare, hiding in churches, mosques, hospitals, crowds of innocents. Their acts clearly use civilians as shields. It is fairly easy to identify an insurgent in the open- man with RPG or AK firing at you. It's harder when it's an IED, or a suicide bomber. While IEDs are valid weapons in the field (I say this grudgingly, of course), caching weapons deliberately amongst civilian targets is not. Tactics designed deliberately to cause civilian casualties, or involve civilians in firefights make this not an easy proposition. What's the difference between an insurgent fighter and a citizen trying to defend his home and family? COuld you tell, on the ground?

It's never quite that cut and dried.

DE



posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 11:47 PM
link   

by Expositor
I want to understand the Strategic and Tactical methods involved in fighting an enemy that dresses like, looks like , acts like , lives with and is for all intents and purpose, part of the local population.


This link may answer some of your questions about being able to tell the difference between the insurgents, and civilians.

U.S. Department of Defense




when they (insurgents)came in, they removed all the imams from the mosques, and they replaced them with Islamic extremist laymen. They removed all the teachers from the schools and replaced them with people who had a fifth-grade education and who preached hatred and intolerance. To keep the population afraid, they kidnapped and murdered large numbers of the people here, and it was across the spectrum.

The enemy conducted indiscriminate mortar attacks against populated areas and wounded scores of children and killed many others. The enemy here did just the most horrible things you can imagine, in one case murdering a child, placing a booby trap within the child's body and waiting for the parent to come recover the body of their child and exploding it to kill the parents. Beheadings and so forth.

So the enemy's grip over this population to maintain the safe haven was based on fear, coercion, and these sort of heinous acts.

We were able to gain access to intelligence here by a very good relationship with the people, who recognized this enemy for who they are and were very forthcoming with human intelligence.

We have an air/ground team here, so our aerial scouts were able to maintain contact with the enemy as they tried to move into the interior of the city. So we pursued them very effectively.


And yes, it is a .mil website



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by makeitso
when they (insurgents)came in, they removed all the imams from the mosques, and they replaced them with Islamic extremist laymen. They removed all the teachers from the schools and replaced them with people who had a fifth-grade education and who preached hatred and intolerance. To keep the population afraid, they kidnapped and murdered large numbers of the people here, and it was across the spectrum.

So, which Side is doing that in Iraq?

The Insurgents ONLY, right?

Remember the Shia Cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and his Militia?

It is just too obvious that the Tactics of the Empire in this Scenario is to "Divide and Rule" - and yes, the Iraqi people have become divided to 3 sides. The Empire supports two of them and blames one for everything - yet the other two also have their own Militias and also perform their own Terrorism, for they also kidnap and murder.



The enemy conducted indiscriminate mortar attacks against populated areas and wounded scores of children and killed many others.

OK, and when the Empire drops a 1000 pound bomb on a House with 17 Civilans inside - including WOMEN and CHILDREN - what is that?

Oh yes - according to the Top Gun experts, that is an ACCIDENT.



The enemy here did just the most horrible things you can imagine, in one case murdering a child, placing a booby trap within the child's body and waiting for the parent to come recover the body of their child and exploding it to kill the parents. Beheadings and so forth.

Yes ofcourse they do.

And I have seen them Eat the Hearts of their Victims.

And they also Eat their Brains.

And then they turn to Lizarads and Fly away.



So the enemy's grip over this population to maintain the safe haven was based on fear, coercion, and these sort of heinous acts.

Let me think who also uses FEAR to maintain Security....

Hmmmm...

Ah YES!





We were able to gain access to intelligence here by a very good relationship with the people, who recognized this enemy for who they are and were very forthcoming with human intelligence.

In translation - form the Article in the original post:

The American troops played a classical, colonial, very dirty trick of divide and conquer in Al-Qa’im. They allied with one big tribe, Al bu Mahal, against another very big one, Al-Salman. They used one as informants against the other. These people may make mistakes, or they may give wrong information for different reasons, but innocents get killed in the process. In the last “Steal Curtain” operation, thousands were arrested, and informants from the other tribe were used to pick those who were thought to be insurgents. This story was repeated in many places: Rumanna, Karabla, and Al-Ebeidy. Of course anyone who is branded as a collaborator (traitor) is killed. Qa’im is one example of what is happening in different parts of Iraq.



We have an air/ground team here, so our aerial scouts were able to maintain contact with the enemy as they tried to move into the interior of the city. So we pursued them very effectively.

...and them we bombed the Wrong house.

Sorry!



And yes, it is a .mil website

NO - REALLY?

I would never have guessed!



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

But you quickly turn everything in your own favour.

Typical for an US Army Person.



Whats that supposed to mean exactly? There are plenty of people on this board who aren't apart of the military who support the points I've presented. Your just trolling/dragging my name through the mud now.



Yes ofcourse - the Coalition makes Mistakes and ACCIDENTS happen, when Iraqi Civilans Die. How Convenient.



Yes it is pretty convenient since its true and applies to any war. See thats because in war it doesn't always turn out like people intend and accidents happen. These accidents don't always kill iraqis but british/american soldiers and journalists. Its a war man its not simple.



Oh Goodie!

Will that be from the .gov and .mil sites?

Yes Please!

Will you call your Propaganda Officer to supply you with those Photos?


Acutally they are from a private blog just like most of the "factual" information you've presented so far. Oh and theres that slander again, where in the hell did you get "propaganda officer"?


bareknucklepolitics.com...
bareknucklepolitics.com...






Ah yes - love your Rhetoric.

But what "Good" is the Coalition doing exactly - apart from bombing the crap out of Iraqi Civilans, and ofcourse calling that a "MISTAKE"?

The Problem with the American Empire in Iraq is, that you are not Armed well for this Urban Guerrilla Combat. The Army has Heavy Weapons, designed to destroy great ammounts of war technology - and they use them in Urban Combat. That's why airplanes bomb a house with a "SUSPECTED" Sniper inside. But you have no Weapons against "Terrorism". None. Problem is, that all of them become obsolete, because you can not kill the Terrorists - they are Killing Themselves!


What good is the coalition doing? Tell me your joking. But if your not how about you read this.


In support of the U.S. government's reconstruction effort in Iraq, Bechtel is under contract with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), for the emergency repair, rehabilitation, and reconstruction of critical elements of Iraq’s infrastructure. This initial effort includes assessing and repairing selected power, municipal water, and sewage systems; dredging, repairing, and upgrading the Port of Umm Qasr; rehabilitating selected schools, clinics, and fire stations; reconstructing three key bridges; constructing a key rail line; restoring telephone service to more than 200,000 Baghdad subscribers; and restoring Iraq's main 2,000-kilometer, north-south fiber optic communications backbone.


I would post the fact sheets regarding the schools/bridges/water mains built by this company but they are in PDF files. So if you'd like to deny ignorance by all means check out this site
Iraq Reconstruction


And let me ask you one last thing. Do you have any education or technical training in the U.S military strategic doctrine or tactics? If the answer is anything other than yes, then how do you know that the American military is equipped in Iraq do destroy "modern war equipment".

I'm sorry but you really just seem to be trolling/grasping at straws.




[edit on 12/23/2005 by Agent47]



posted on Dec, 23 2005 @ 09:55 PM
link   
Agent 47 if you look at souljah's posts in general you will find the basis of such is rhetoric. The problem is I do not believe souljah understands the definition of rhetoric. I'm sure he will google such after reading this post. Even the posting of US global bases lacks many countries (we're more places than you think souljah - even on this forum). Souljah you may enjoy trolling for anti-US stories to propagate US hatred, but really all you're doing is painting yourself as a target. The crosshairs burn brighter with your incessant anti-US policy. Freedom of speech is a democratic value, one you seem to enjoy, and which many countries lack.

One thing I can promise the US and the UK will continue to fight to survive and protect our citizens from individuals who choose to wage war against our freedoms. The US has a proud history and the UK a longer proud history and although you beleive we are seeking to crush the world under American might, we are only seeking to live in peace, especially with those who will use economic means (oil) to destroy our way of life. I see that you're caught up in the drama of Che Guevara and yet your altruistic beliefs in Islam are based off lies and campaigns for power.

It's really ridiculous to watch a donkey complain that it is being used and abused all the day long, while it eats well and is used only for carrying baggage, while the others toil in the quarry's all the day and are whipped to their death.

If one can only assume what truth is then every argument is based on lies.



posted on Dec, 24 2005 @ 02:28 AM
link   
For some reason my edit posts function won't work so I'm going to post these two photos from my last post because the links keep breaking.






I know these are from my ATS account but if you search for "evil americans" at this blog you will find the entry that contains these photos

bareknucklepolitics.com...



posted on Dec, 24 2005 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

1) ultra_phoenix main job: Spitting on Souljah.

2) Souljah REAL main job - Spitting on Bush Administration.


1)

2) It's a lie.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join