It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


US losing the war in Iraq

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 04:30 AM

Originally posted by Mdv2

Originally posted by nephyx

In a time of war, it probably isnt a good idea to stand around burnt out humvees and celebrate. seems like common sense parenting to me.

So basically you say that particular American soldier did rightfully kill the kid because he was celebrating the death of his ''enemy''? Sorry to say, but I find your ideology pretty ridiculous.

Remember this picture?

Imagine a Hezbollah militant shooting the kid. Would you have also said ''Their parents should have prevented them from writing on the shells''

Children cannot be held responsible for what they are being taught by their parents, descent doesn't matter. Kids, especially in the Middle East, including Israel are being raised with hate towards others. In no way there's any justification for killing children or keeping them responsible for what they are being taught by others.

You are from Germany, in the [once occupied] country I live people have been deeply hating Germans for a very long time. Many Germans, but also non Germans including me, are of opinion that children of Nazi-Germany's soldiers and war criminals cannot be held responsible for the acts committed by their ancestors during World War II.

However, when applying your theory on this particular matter they should be held responsible, shouldn't they?

[edit on 11-9-2006 by Mdv2]

You are going a bit overboard. If children are playing next to a blown up humvee they are putting themselves in a military zone which leaves no room for excuse. The parents should be the ones that keep their children from playing in the middle of a warzone (Hence at home where its more safe).

I dont think any child should die, but if people cant control their children and they fill their mind with so much hatred I have a hard time building sympathy for them or their families. A lost cause is a lost cause, whether it be on the israeli, iraqi, lebanese, American side. Anyone who sits around a corpse and cheers should be shot. People dying is the last thing that should be celebrated.

if hezbolla came by and killed those israeli children for signing 'From Israel' on those missiles I would come to the exact same conclusion. Dont automatically assume I am for or against one side just because I understand why the americans killed those people in Iraq.

posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 10:02 AM

Originally posted by nephyx

You are going a bit overboard. If children are playing next to a blown up humvee they are putting themselves in a military zone which leaves no room for excuse. The parents should be the ones that keep their children from playing in the middle of a warzone (Hence at home where its more safe).

While I agree that it would be sensible to keep children at home when living in such dangerous areas, there's no excuse to deliberately kill children. The soldier who killed the child acted very unprofessional. Nevertheless, I can image what hell they are going through over there in Iraq.

Apparently Israeli children are being raised with hate against others, neither a very understandable way of parenting children no matter what circumstances you live in.

Originally posted by nephyx
People dying is the last thing that should be celebrated.

Fully agree.

Originally posted by nephyx
because I understand why the americans killed those people in Iraq.

Pretty contradictory, one one hand you say ''Deaths of people shouldn't be celebrated by others'' and on the other hand you say you understand why the American soldier deliberately killed those children. So basically you say killing innocent children is no problem while celebrating deaths of others is.

There's no excuse possible here, the soldier in case acted very unprofessional and should be brought to court.

posted on Sep, 15 2006 @ 05:35 AM
All im saying is that all those people put themselves in the line of fire. If a known terrorist uses his own children as a human shield how many of our own should die before we get a clear shot on the man we are targeting? If people are so stupid that they let their kids dance around next to dead soldiers what should they expect?

Dont think that I justify the killing of children, thats a gross misinterpretation. What I do justify is the fact that anyone who celebrates the death of others is putting themselves in a very dangerous position especially in the context of this scenario. Before anyone got shot, they should have thought about what could happen if they were seen by American soldiers.

I just think it was completely irresponsible for the parents of these children to find such joy in the death of an American soldier. Children may be innocent, but do you think that their warped minds will grow up to be any different? Do you think in 10 years they wouldnt be happy that an american soldier got killed? Dont you think that this hatred comes from a long tradition of anti american sentiment?

War is downright dirty, no doubt about that. I hate to see anyone die.

posted on Sep, 16 2006 @ 06:39 AM

Originally posted by nephyx
Dont you think that this hatred comes from a long tradition of anti american sentiment?

Oh good grief. "They hate us for our freedoms". It's all just "anti-American sentiment". Wrong. The US has gone over there, invaded their country, wrecked their economy, polluted their land with Depleted Uranium that causes HIDEOUS birth deformities and leukaemia and cancers in the adult population, uses the country as a free-fire zone, rapes 14-year-old girls... can you be genuinely surprised that they're rather glad when US soldiers are killed?

Anyway... back to the topic at hand:

The U.S. military may be prepared to walk away from a strategically critical area of Iraq: The Al-Anbar province.

The area, which is surrounded by the Kurdish-controlled area to the north and the Shiite-controlled area to the south, has seen the fiercest fighting and the highest death toll of the war,

Despite that, the U.S. has never controlled the area since the war began.

But one top secret report by a Marine intelligence officer said there is no chance the U.S. military can end the insurgent violence or that a viable government can be set up in the area.


But of course there has to be a denial:

WASHINGTON (AFP) - A top US commander denied the US military had written off Al-Anbar province in
Iraq and defended a shift of US forces to Baghdad despite intelligence depicting the situation in the west as dire.

Oh, so they are moving forces to Baghdad, then.

posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 04:39 AM
I just thought I'd update this thread with some more recent articles that demonstrate pretty conclusively that the process I originally outlined has continued and that the situation has deteriorated even further. Plus, there have even been signs that the people at the top (Bush, Blair) are beginning to acknowledge the situation. The latest town to fall to militia control is Amarah, which the British recently vacated:

The militia headed by the radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr yesterday took over the southern Iraqi city of Amarah, recently vacated by British forces, after a day of heavy fighting which left dozens killed, almost 100 injured and widespread damage to buildings.

In what is being seen as a symbolic flexing of muscle, heavily armed Mahdi Army fighters in black uniforms stormed and took over the three main police stations and flattened them with explosives.

That's a bit of a blow for the police force. And it's interesting that the same article reports that plans for the partition of Iraq are "bitterly opposed" by al-Sadr. Interesting.

There are signs, as I've said, that the USG is finally beginning to admit to itself that the situation is unwinnable. According to this AP article, the majority of Iraqi youth want US troops out. Problems with the polling methods aside, it's significant, I think, that copies of the survey are marked "For Official U.S. Government Use Only". The article itself is interesting. A previous version was short and bleak, and a later version contains more detail and a strange internal contradiction:

As Iraqi leaders try to diversify the ethnic and religious backgrounds of their security forces, the department's opinion analysis said that Arab Sunnis may be particularly hard to recruit.

In Arab Sunni areas, "confidence in the Iraqi army and police is low, and majorities oppose enlisting in either force," the analysis said. "Even recruitment in Arab Shia areas could present challenges as sizable numbers of local youth express support" for local militias, "thus clouding the issue of loyalty to national forces."


Yet in its assessment of the broader picture for Iraq, which includes Kurds and Arab Shiites, there were pieces of good news: A majority of young Iraqis would be willing to join the security forces or support a family member who did, the survey found.

It doesn't, to me, look as if the preceding statements justify this optimistic view of the situation: another problem with this conclusion is that the pollers apparently had difficulty with interviewing Sunnis and so I think they may be a little unrepresented, although it's not hard to guess their attitude.

There's an interesting article in The Guardian which details "frantic" efforts being made to find a solution to the problem of stabilising Iraq, including something which I doubt very much will find any favour with the current US administration:

The Foreign Office is conducting a review in tandem with Mr Baker. UK officials said the Foreign Office was "beavering away" on about half a dozen options, roughly the same as those considered by the ISG. One official said discussions were proceeding at "a high tempo".

Among the changes the ISG is expected to recommend is the opening of talks on Iraq's future with Syria and Iran, countries the White House has sought to isolate.

"The failure of the Baghdad initiative is convincing evidence that a military solution is not going to work," said Larry Diamond, a former adviser to the US-led occupation authority in Baghdad who also advised the ISG. "We should be talking to neighbouring Arab states and we think we should be talking to Iran - to broker the compromises which might save the situation," Mr Diamond told the Guardian.

Other options being considered are a redeployment of forces to "super-bases" in Iraq or bases outside the country, pressuring the Baghdad government to find a fairer way of sharing Iraq's oil wealth to give Sunnis a better deal, and even the partitioning of the country into autonomous Kurdish, Sunni and Shia regions - an idea the White House has dismissed as a "non-starter".


Oh, those would be the permanent bases that the US denied having for so long, then.

And what a cluster-#### it must be if even the ISG is recommending talks with Iran and Syria, the first of which is undoubtedly the Bush administration's next military target.

So the thing to watch for in upcoming discussions on "phased withdrawal" are any mention of these superbases, and also the fate of the enormous US embassy which squats on an area of central Baghdad the size of the Vatican, and is the most heavily fortified embassy compound in the world... just the ticket for the people who liberated a people so successfully from under the heel of the tyrant Saddam.

WHAT a mess.

posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 06:31 AM
"If you so terribly hate the west, at least that's what I conclude from all of your messages, may I ask why you live there? Why do you live in Australia rather than in your beloved Syria?"

I don't hate "the west", i just hate the US's government and anyone that supports it.
Stop trying to shift the blame to "the west".

I'm moving to my beloved Syria soon enough anyway.

As for buying US products, most good people i know boycott those. I for one don't by any nikes, don't eat at mcDonalds, and had to curb my addiction to coca cola .
i still get cravings and withdrawl symptoms.

oh coke... why did you have to break my heart.

Anyway i thought this thread was still pretty news worthy, noting how many soldiers died this month.

Losing the war indeed.

posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 07:07 AM
Thank you for bringing a healthy dose of clarity, sanity and above all truth to a forum where such qualities are much less common than they should be. I should also like to say how much I admire you for the brave and civilized way you have fought your corner, sometimes in the face of great provocation.

You have my vote:

You have voted rich23 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

...and if I could give you all three of my monthly votes, I would.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4   >>

log in