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.

 

US army in Iraq institutionally racist, claims British officer

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 06:21 AM
link   

"A senior British officer has criticised the US army for its conduct in Iraq, accusing it of institutional racism, moral righteousness, misplaced optimism, and of being ill-suited to engage in counter-insurgency operations.
The blistering critique, by Brigadier Nigel Aylwin-Foster, who was the second most senior officer responsible for training Iraqi security forces, reflects criticism and frustration voiced by British commanders of American military tactics."

www.guardian.co.uk...


The bottom line is that this so called "officer" in the british army says killing the enemy is "racest". The US army is "too" preoccupied with killing terrorist. No wonder Iraq is still having trouble with terrorist.

The purpose of any ARMY is to KILL the enemy.....PERIOD............

Mod Edit: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.




[edit on 12/1/2006 by Mirthful Me]




posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 06:42 AM
link   
err... I would suggest you have a look at the British military history of policing areas of sectarian violence and civil war and think about the wealth of experience 'this officer' probably has over US counterparts...

the whole point of policing a civil war is not just to kill 'terrorists' as you so eloquantly put it... but to foster an envirnment of stability and win the conifedence of all sides as much as possible, then engaging insurgents who threaten these objectives...

Try thinking about the things you read beofre just flying off half cocked, and questioning the oath of this commissioned officer, particuarly one as senior as a Brigadier...

Q


[edit on 12-1-2006 by Qoelet]



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 06:55 AM
link   
I am not now nor have I ever been impressed with British "Officers" of any rank. I would suggest YOU look at history of british oppression and the civil unrest associated..........ahhh, INDIA, America, and every other part of the british empire lost to civil war.

If this were an SAS officer I would cut him some slack.

Basically this guy was a "clerk" nothing more.........



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 07:05 AM
link   
Clearly didn't understand the point...

comparing the American revolution to any of this indicates that...

as does the comment about 'cutting SAS officer some slack'...

Q



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Qoelet
Clearly didn't understand the point...

comparing the American revolution to any of this indicates that...

as does the comment about 'cutting SAS officer some slack'...

Q


I find it rather Ironic that a british officer would speak of "winning the minds and hearts" based on British history of oppressive rule. The American revolution fulling illustrates the point.

The occupation of Ireland is another great example of winning the minds and heart too.

The SAS is a top notch group of professionals whom I highly respect having worked with them. The Royal Marines are bad either............but this guy is just a 'clerk" and belongs in "logistics" passing out bullets to real warriors.....



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by thermopolis
"A senior British officer has criticised the US army for its conduct in Iraq, accusing it of institutional racism, moral righteousness, misplaced optimism, and of being ill-suited to engage in counter-insurgency operations.
The blistering critique, by Brigadier Nigel Aylwin-Foster, who was the second most senior officer responsible for training Iraqi security forces, reflects criticism and frustration voiced by British commanders of American military tactics."

www.guardian.co.uk...

The bottom line is that this so called "officer" in the british army says killing the enemy is "racest". The US army is "too" preoccupied with killing terrorist. No wonder Iraq is still having trouble with terrorist.

The purpose of any ARMY is to KILL the enemy.....PERIOD............



Are you atualy on this planet, the US army could learn alot from this man. What he is saying is that the US is spending more time on fighting (which btw they aint doing too well at) then they are in actualy rebuilding the country. If you look at the facts there has been less problems in the British controlled area's then in the US controled parts.

I think you should be more greatfull to this man, as he speakes the truth, and without him and his so called 'army' as you basicly put it, you would have ended up with another 'Vietnam' on your hands.



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 07:59 AM
link   
This officer makes a very good point. We are there for much more than killing terrorists. We need to let these people know we are there to protect them, and allow them a better life. Isnt this the whole point of our continued occupation? Are we not supposed to be helping rebuild the country we wrecked? Arent we showing them that we didnt blow up their buildings, we blew up Saddams buildings, and now we are going to fix it all for THEM?
One of my jobs is at a nicer hotel in MI and I had like 10 army reserves in the lobby the other day hurling racist insults at Sanjay Gupta on CNN, because he is Indian. The guy is a friggin doctor, and the head medical correspondant on CNN, and if I remember correctly, he actually visited Iraq and performed some surgeries on our troops! These hillbillies are all done up in their fatigues, representing our country, and they stood here in front of me and a couple complete strangers calling this guy a dune-coon, and some other stuff I wont repeat. This stuff cannot happen if we are to be the guiding light of the modern world.
I actually almost started a fight with one of them, because I was embarassed that these sentiments exist in soldiers. In OUR soldiers. I can only hope that most of our troops feel the way that I do.



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Plain English

I'm sure Brigadier Aylwin-Foster's criticisms are sincere and well-informed, but I think he would have been better served to deliver them in a more circumspect manner.

This is something that I as an American expect from flag officers in our armed forces, and I like to think that my British friends would also hold their own leaders to similar standards.

As much as I prize candor, I also recommend combining it with tact.



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by picklewalsh
Are you atualy on this planet, the US army could learn alot from this man. What he is saying is that the US is spending more time on fighting (which btw they aint doing too well at) then they are in actualy rebuilding the country.


Until GW Bush anounced the war on terror the IRA was handing the Britsh Army it head on a weekly basis for decades. The only way to deal with terrorist is to kill them.........all of them..........and anyone that is standing next to or near them.



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 08:59 AM
link   
I laughed out loud when i read the "racist" part.
I was a Soldier in the late 80's early 90's in the British Army and in my time with my regiment there was 1, yes 1 black Soldier in all my time there. And i dont believe i ever came across a Black officer that i can remember.
The US isnt the only Army that is Racist trust me.
The situation may well have changed but in my time there were very few Black Soldiers and no Asian ones exept the Gurkas, who as everyone knows are among the finest Mountain warfare troops around.
As for the US spending all their time fighting, i believe they have the most difficult areas to police the Sunni triangle for instance, bit difficult to win hearts and minds when you are getting blown up and shot at all the time.
None of us know the true situation on the ground, but i trust this Officers view but also suggest we look at all angles and not just one point of view.

[edit on 12-1-2006 by Janus]



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 09:41 AM
link   
And what exactly is laughable about racism?! Especially in our militaries. This is sad. These are the ones over there winnning the "hearts and minds," (HAHA).
I dont think the absense of minorities in the forces are exactly on par with the arguement here either, while this is a disturbing fact also. I am not sure how the UKs population is distributed racially, but this is kinda weird.
The absense of a race in the military doesnt necessarily mean the corps are racist, maybe just that the minorities dont feel inclined to die for their country. Is this the case?
I know ALL of my black friends here in the states are very against the continued conquest of brown people by the gov't. I am as well. My friends are also a bit more politically inclined, so they understand the issues on a level not shared by a majority of our servicemen. Not to call our soldiers ignorant, but IMO they would not support so much of this mess if they really, really understood what was going on. Most are blinded by free college, a fat signing bonus, or an instilled patriotism that never questions leadership. All of which are evil as hell.

[edit on 12-1-2006 by DaFunk13]



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by thermopolis
Until GW Bush anounced the war on terror the IRA was handing the Britsh Army it head on a weekly basis for decades. The only way to deal with terrorist is to kill them.........all of them..........and anyone that is standing next to or near them.


Wow...
You really have no idea do you?



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 09:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by thermopolis
Until GW Bush anounced the war on terror the IRA was handing the Britsh Army it head on a weekly basis for decades. The only way to deal with terrorist is to kill them.........all of them..........and anyone that is standing next to or near them.


So you would have preferred if the British has just dropped 500 lb bombs on the houses of the Irish terrorists, killing them and anyone standing next to them or near them? Should they have done a Fallujah style operation in Ireland?

I think that would have made the problem much worse and really produced a lot of anti-British sentiment aropund the world.

I may not like muslims very much, especially muslims living in Western nations, but unless you plan to use overwhelming force and run the place like Saddam ruled it you are probably going to have to look a bit at how to deal with the population in a manner that wont make all of them hate you.

BTW, did the IRA really hand the British their head every week or were the British just holding back?
I think the British could have destroyed Ireland if that was their intention.
They have the military power to do it.

[edit on 12-1-2006 by AceOfBase]



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 09:59 AM
link   
Someone isn't smart or brave or anything just because he is in the military.
The reason this guy's opinion is news-worthy is that it is provocative and is in line with how the media would prefer to portray the U.S.

Seems it would be more beneficial if we look at the remarkable progress in that country, keep in mind thatthe blood loss is due to the insurgents who do NOT want the Iraqi people to have control of their own country and destiny, and that, while the insurgent-created violence is an horrible thing, it is better than the continuous oppression with government-sanctioned terror that was cruelly inflicted upon the Iraqi population for such a long time.



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 10:10 AM
link   
And just what remarkable progress have we made? I am being honest. I have heard about the schools we have opened, or the hospitals we have established, but these are simply things to "win the hearts and minds." They seem more of a PR campaign that actual nation rebuilding.
How many of these people still dont have homes, or a grocery store, or even power and clean water? How many PERMANENT US bases have been built while we neglect the things these people need to survive. They need utilities, and jobs, and we send our corporations (you know the ones) to rebuild their country? Seems a little weird...
I also would like to know why everyone assumes these insurgents must be Iranian, or Syrian, or anything but Iraqis keeping an occupying force out. I understand that there are a lot of foreign insurgents in Iraq, but they arent all foreign. Matter of fact, I bet 90% of them are Iraqis fighting for their own control.
IF another country invaded Harlem, or Detroit do you think those "insurgents" are fighting for Bush, or white americas dream? They would fight to keep the occupation out.

I find myself posting the following point a lot lately:
You cannot force a way of life on people, whether its a better way or not. They have to want it.



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   
What have we done? What have the Iraqis themselves done? Yes, that is right, the news prefers to tell you about the latest car bomb or improvised bomb. It is necessary to go somewhere besides the mainstream news.

Why is it assumed that the majority come from outside? Uh, I don't know, you will even have to ask the Iraqi government why it is thought to be that way. Why is it that you think not? Why is it that you would think that the Iraqi people aren't smart enough to realize that self-determination is the smart way to go, rather than destroying their own capability and then look for another demon with sick sons and a few torture chambers, plastic shredders and mass graves?

Why is it that when the insurgents attack the recruits as they join their own military, the survivors get back into the line? Might be because they believe in their country and their struggle for freedom.



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 10:41 AM
link   
Looks like the British army think they are better in counter insurgency If it's so, they should agree to exange their region in Basra with Sunni triangle US forces.



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 10:50 AM
link   
I dont have much of a reply, Crowne. You obviously have your opinion and I have mine. My only wish is that we could find an unbiased news service that would cover both the good and the bad, rather than what they want us to hear. I stand by my point of insurgents being the Iraqis themselves. The Iraqis joining the military is no different that you and I having conflicting views. We are on the same side of the fight, with different views. I want to see freedom in Iraq. I want an allied Iraq. I just dont want to force it.
And I have no idea how you equate a forced invasion with "self determination."

[edit on 12-1-2006 by DaFunk13]



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Take A Muslim To Lunch


Originally posted by AceOfBase
I may not like muslims very much, especially muslims living in Western nations, but unless you plan to use overwhelming force and run the place like Saddam ruled it you are probably going to have to look a bit at how to deal with the population in a manner that wont make all of them hate you.

I think if you knew more Muslims, you might like them more.

Everybody's got issues, and Muslims are no exception. But like everyone else, they mostly just want to get through life as best they can and be happy.

Muslim terrorists don't represent Muslims anymore than Christian terrorists in places like Ireland and the U.S. represent Christians.

I say it a lot, but I swear it's true: we're all more alike than different.

Just sayin'.



Edit: Sorry, just a quick digression back to the topic for a moment.

The English Way

Comments like these published in the press are inevitably calculated to stir up friction between the U.S. and Britain and play on preexisting prejudices.

My preexisting prejudice is that as an American, I consider Britain, the U.K. and all the Commonwealth nations our solid allies, and I don't give a damn what anyone says, it won't change my mind about that.

I ask my fellow Americans and British friends alike not to allow the comments of a single individual – even one as reputable and honorable as Brigadier Aylwin-Foster – to come between friends.

Sure, we can squabble and disagree on all sorts of things, but the friendship we have sealed with the blood of our ancestors and the noble deeds of our common kin is unassailable.

And I, for one, will not have it any other way.

[edit on 1/12/2006 by Majic]



posted on Jan, 12 2006 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Ditto. How many of us know a muslim personally? I know a few and it isnt the religeon of hate that we are lead to believe. The fanatics dont represent Islam any more than the christian conservative terrorists in Washington represent me as a follower of Christ.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join