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.

 

Documents Show Army Seized Wives As Tactic

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Exactly..........
As i said above, the wives would know something was going on. they are not stupid. Would you suspect something was wrong if your wife/husband went out during the day, and failed to tell you where he/she was going?

Maybe the explosives strapped to their chest would give something away, or maybe the rifles in the 4X4 would set the mind wondering, or maybe the cache of ammunition in the cellar would set the nerves jangling.but hey, i am only speculating here.......................




posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Sorry for the snip Grady but I find it very fair....


The children of criminals are taken into protective custody every day and held against their will in shelters, residential centers, the homes of complete strangers, and even held in lockdown facilities and drugged, but even that is not analogous to what you suggest or the situation in Iraq.

[edit on 2006/1/27 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Dronetek:

It's not a new tactic, you realize that? It was used in WWII, Korean War, Vietnam and practically every other war. This is war folks...


First at all - in Iraq was not any war, untill the US of A don't get there. Saddam was a annoyance, but not a threat (CIA).

Second - yes, about using army choppers to rip open the alleged wifes of alleged insurgents in Vietmam (after they are raped by the wole unit and still did not say what they probably don't even know) I read something sometimes, but refuse to believe as too barbaric...

Don' try tell me that this was happened.
And note that the war was lost, despite the high amount of bombs used and the high causalities. Is is more that likely the main reason was the last of respect for enemy, the lack of understanding that no matter how hard you press them, it always hit you back with more power that you used... Somebody should whisper that to US military, since they seems clueless. Every innocent civilian killed generate 5 new insurgents. Every family bombed generate 20 insurgets. And so on, so far.

Third - you make me understand the extreme hatred for America in countries, where living people witch experienced such treatments. Like in Iran, where operation AJAX removed democratically elevted government and instaled dictator Shah. Even so many years later they are so violently anti-ami, that you can count you chances if going there with your uniform as zero ones.
And since such tactics are used (and US army assured us many times, that there is no womans in the prisons - and where else they could be, right?) - you also legitimate similar tactics or better to say atrocites for your enemy.
I mean - who said that only Iraqi civilians have to suffer? Let's detain, torture and kill (accident's happen, you know?) some innocent wifes of US soldiers then, right?


In short - such barbaric methods to just hold the occupation for a moments longer will only generate more resistance, more anti-amerikanism and also legitimate every response by the resistance. No matter how cruel.

As for me - they win the moral high ground. You lost.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Since the wives in Muslim culture are submissive, its pretty much we have to assume that they know what their husbands are doing.


Are we talking in English here? I'm missing something here. Eddie says to this post:


Originally posted by Bikereddie
Exactly..........
As i said above, the wives would know something was going on. they are not stupid.


Does anyone here KNOW the definition of submissive? Let's check it out:

One Look: # adjective: willing to submit without resistance to authority; deferent.

That's a slave man. So NO Eddie, they wouldn't know what their husbands were doing, they aren't mates like we have here in the West.

Keep telling yourself that though, maybe that will make this type of action, just like the terrorists, paletable. It's easier when they are not people, just words on a screen.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by deltaboy
Since the wives in Muslim culture are submissive, its pretty much we have to assume that they know what their husbands are doing.


Are we talking in English here? I'm missing something here. Eddie says to this post:


Originally posted by Bikereddie
Exactly..........
As i said above, the wives would know something was going on. they are not stupid.


Does anyone here KNOW the definition of submissive? Let's check it out:

One Look: # adjective: willing to submit without resistance to authority; deferent.

That's a slave man. So NO Eddie, they wouldn't know what their husbands were doing, they aren't mates like we have here in the West.

Keep telling yourself that though, maybe that will make this type of action, just like the terrorists, paletable. It's easier when they are not people, just words on a screen.


Yes they would know what was going on. But they would be too scared to admit it openly. Come on man, you pull me down when you only have to think of human nature and instincts here. If your wife was having an affair, do really think she would telll you straight away? NO!, but that wouldnt stop you suspecting some thing was wrong now would it?
The same principle applies here too..............



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:10 PM
link   
All I have to say is, if its working then keep doing it, if it’s not then adapt and switch to other tactics. As long as we don't kill or torture the women and only use them as an incentive for cooperation then I’m all for it. Now, you may ask if its immoral, it probably is, however do I care if it saves our GI’s and if it helps us win, nope I defiantly do not


You cant win a game when the other side can do what it wants while you have to adhere to the rules


[edit on 27-1-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:11 PM
link   
Intrepid, I meant loyal to their husband with obedience without question to their authority. True loyalty, they may know their husband's activities, but will support them no matter what their views are. After all we known for a fact how Muslim wives are loyal to their husbands in the time of holy war or Jihad. Don't matter if equal or unequal. Remember the recent Jordanian bombings which a wife failed to detonate her bomb as her husband blew himself up?



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bikereddie
Yes they would know what was going on. But they would be too scared to admit it openly. Come on man, you pull me down when you only have to think of human nature and instincts here. If your wife was having an affair, do really think she would telll you straight away? NO!, but that wouldnt stop you suspecting some thing was wrong now would it?
The same principle applies here too
..............


Um, NO it doesn't, you are ascribing Western thinking on a different culture. Doesn't work, well, yeah it does if all you want to do is justify abuse of families.

:shk:



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by Bikereddie
Yes they would know what was going on. But they would be too scared to admit it openly. Come on man, you pull me down when you only have to think of human nature and instincts here. If your wife was having an affair, do really think she would telll you straight away? NO!, but that wouldnt stop you suspecting some thing was wrong now would it?
The same principle applies here too
..............


Um, NO it doesn't, you are ascribing Western thinking on a different culture. Doesn't work, well, yeah it does if all you want to do is justify abuse of families.

:shk:



It all boils down to human instincts, no matter where you come from, or what culture, or what education etc etc etc.
You know it, and i know it.
Instincts prevail here. People are not stupid, give them some credit here, not that they have a sub logical way of thinking because they are from a different culture. They have the same instincts the same as you or I. Maybe better in some instances.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:41 PM
link   
I don't see much of a problem with it as long as they're not injured. Like already said, this is war, not some everyday civil/criminal law situation.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bikereddie
It all boils down to human instincts, no matter where you come from, or what culture, or what education etc etc etc.
You know it, and i know it.
Instincts prevail here. People are not stupid, give them some credit here, not that they have a sub logical way of thinking because they are from a different culture. They have the same instincts the same as you or I. Maybe better in some instances.


OK, what are you really saying? You're ascribing atributes to them. I'm not talking about "instincts", "sub-logical"? Sounds like reasonable means to do whatever you want to do. Do we check out those individuals that are "carry-ons". Kids, wives, first cousins second removed. OR do we just BLOW THE ShIT OUT of anyone that isn't on our side.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:45 PM
link   
www.wefound.org...
Maybe we should just blame it on the Koran.



One of the most important ways in which the Muslim woman obeys her husband is by respecting his wishes with regard to the permissible pleasures of daily life, such as social visits, food, dress, speech, etc. The more she responds to his wishes in such matters, the happier and more enjoyable the couple’s life becomes, and the closer it is to the spirit and teachings of Islam.

The Muslim woman does not forget that her obedience to her husband is one of the things that may lead her to Paradise, as the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said:

“If a woman prays her five daily prayers, fasts her month (of Ramadan), obeys her husband and guards her chastity, then it will be said to her: ‘Enter Paradise by whichever of its gates you wish.’” 14

Umm Salamah (radhiallahu anha) said:

“ Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: ‘Any woman who dies, and her husband is pleased with her, will enter Paradise.’” 15


If the husband is pleased with her.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Kids, wives, first cousins second removed. OR do we just BLOW THE ShIT OUT of anyone that isn't on our side.


Are there reports that we have blown the “ShIT” out of them? Until such, they are probably just used as an incentive for cooperation.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Some Iraqis have multiple wives, something that the new constitution allows, which was a sticking point to some groups in the US. Having multiple wives, of course, adds to the already complicated scenario of kidnapping loved ones.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 09:10 PM
link   
quote:
"They dont say "War is hell" for nothing. What do you expect the military to do when they are facing such a violent enemy? We didnt start making real head way in the pacific until we bacame as brutal as the enemy.

I'm not saying I like the idea of the US kidnapping Iraqis. However, this is war and I want us to win it. If that means kidnapping insurgent's wives to bait them, than I say go for it. I'm not in the business of hamstringing our military. "

Response:

Even the mafia has more cooth than this, family is off limits, and BTW, where's the formal declaration of war??? I haven't seen congress declare it yet.. BTW, my father and grand father were in WWII, in the pacific and they never did something this sick... Only scum and losers use family members to get at someone they want. The reason they do is they are too flipping stupid to win playing fair which says a whole lot about the intelligence level of our armed forces these days and the current administration. If Patton were alive today he would try those losers for war crimes but then again, we don't have real leadership these days, only wanna be's and idiots willing to follow wanna be's.



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dronetek
It's not a new tactic, you realize that? It was used in WWII, Korean War, Vietnam and practically every other war. This is war folks; it’s not a patty cake party.

Wow! so america has been doing this since what 50, 60 years or even longer ago? how backward are you gonna go?



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by RedHare
Wow! so america has been doing this since what 50, 60 years or even longer ago? how backward are you gonna go?


We're fighting savages who have no code of honor or morality and some are upset because we detain some family members as leverage? Who cares? Think what you will. We're in this to win a war not Miss Congeniality.

[edit on 2006/1/27 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 09:44 PM
link   

and BTW, where's the formal declaration of war??? I haven't seen congress declare it yet..


Umm... Congress has not given a formal declaration of war since WWII, are you telling me no wars since then have happened? A Formal Declaration of war has fallen out of favor, what is now given is an Authorisation for use of Military Force.

Following the 9/11 attacks, Congress passed the Authorization for the use of Military Force (AUMF). Section 2(a) of the AUMF authorized the President to "use all necessary... force against those nations, organizations or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed or aided the 9/11 terrorist attacks." They also passed one for the Invasion of Afghanistan, and for Operation Iraqi Freedom.


The reason they do is they are too flipping stupid to win playing fair which says a whole lot about the intelligence level of our armed forces these days and the current administration.


Yeah right that's why Curtis LeMay did what he did, because he was “too flipping stupid to win playing fair” whatever the hell “playing fair” means. We won WWII because we used tactics that were not popular but were so vital to us wining over the Japanese, there is no such thing as a “fair” war, the sooner we learn that the easier we will make it for ourselves.

[edit on 27-1-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 10:05 PM
link   


We're fighting savages who have no code of honor or morality..


..and becoming more like them every day. Congratulations!



That justification might as well be known as the Diseased Blanket defense.



[edit on 27-1-2006 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

We're fighting savages who have no code of honor or morality and some are upset because we detain some family members as leverage? Who cares? Think what you will. We're in this to win a war not Miss Congeniality.

[edit on 2006/1/27 by GradyPhilpott]


Win this war? What is your definition of 'win'? How will we know when we have won? When there is peace in Iraq?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join