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.

 

Young children fight American soldiers in Iraq.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 01:39 AM
link   
I just spent about 2 hours sitting at the bar with a marine who shot a kid who had a gun aiming behind a pile of rubble over in Iraq. .. Believe me, he feels bad, but if you were going to die, would you shoot a kid. or anyone? In this situation yes - I would.


By the way, I am really glad he was there to have that conversation.

[edit on 21-9-2006 by tha stillz]




posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by LAES YVAN
Their pathetic fathers, and maybe mothers are brainwashing their kids to hate, and be violent.


This is what a psychologist would call projection. The US is the violent one. It's gone into that country, waged an unprovoked war for oil, wrecked the economy, and occupied it with some violence. There have been plenty of people interned and tortured by the US, pregnant women have been shot on the way to hospital, and the US backs death squads that roam the cities.

There isn't a family in Iraq that hasn't lost members since the US decided to "liberate" it.

I rather think that the lessons the US is teaching are more powerful than any imaginary brainwashing you think the parents are conducting.


If these people had any brain at all, they would be peaceful, or at least pretend to be peaceful, so we can get the hell out of there already. The only reason we are still there is because there is still violence, people are still attacking the Americans, and their government and law enforcement (that we are helping to build) isn't quite strong enough yet.


Right. That's why the US is building an embassy so vast and heavily fortified that it can be seen from space, and why it's constructing a number of deep desert bases - it's just desperate to get out of a country that has massive oil reserves that can feed its SUV habit!

The US has invaded and occupied the country primarily for economic reasons. US corporations like Monsanto now control the country to the extent that Iraqi farmers aren't allowed to keep their own seeds, they have to use Monsanto seeds which they have to buy every year. Now that's what I call liberation!

There are many other examples. The US, early in the occupation, closed down the first firm (which I think was from Qatar) to restore mobile phone services in Baghdad, because they wanted a US company to get the action. Liberation is NOT the agenda for the Iraqi people, and neither is the US leaving. They want to train an army for the puppet government to bear the brunt of the insurgency, but that's as far as it goes.


If we leave Iraq now, and they are attacking us as we leave, they will think they won, and more attacks on USA would be a probability.


I really really hope you're not connecting Iraq with 9/11 here. No, you're probably worried about loss of face, here, and you'd be right. How many more Iraqis have to die before the US can admit its mistake? And the civil war is a product of US black ops. The Sunnis and Shias were uniting against the occupation, but a few well-placed "suicide" bombs and cultivating some death squads put paid to that problem and got the natives fighting amongst themselves. It's a well-worn colonial tactic.


If we get the place to be peaceful, and an American troop can walk down the streets without fear of getting blown up or shot, then we might leave.


I'm sorry, but for the reasons posted above, I think this is delusional.



posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by tha stillz
I just spent about 2 hours sitting at the bar with a marine who shot a kid who had a gun aiming behind a pile of rubble over in Iraq. .. Believe me, he feels bad, but if you were going to die, would you shoot a kid. or anyone? In this situation yes - I would.


By the way, I am really glad he was there to have that conversation.

[edit on 21-9-2006 by tha stillz]


Thats the sad thing Tha stillz,
neither one should have been put in that predicament. The marine undoubtedly will have to deal with that for the rest of his life, and that kid who probably would have just been out playing with other kids or at school or home eating dinner with family if we had not been there. Just like all these kids that are now going to go to trial for murdering those Iraqis, the americans already convicted of wrongdoing in Abu Gharib and a few other incidents as well...all of that could have been avoided. Its we the Pe(ons)ople who suffer in the end.

Meanwhile...100's of Millions of dollars in cold cash is missing & nowhere to be found, billions being spent on the war that should have never been, cutbacks on veterans benefits, discontinuation of funding for Public Broadcasting Station, Social security a mess, Americans with no health insurance....But HEY...we did build a neato 9billion dollar embassy/Palace and Babylon was sacked! COOL!

(This isn't directed to you tha stillz just anyone in general)
Strange how the country that fed us all the incorrect intel never shed a drop of blood , yet they are reaping the benefits and collecting the cash. I was under the impression that anyone not aiding the "Coalition of the Willing" would recieve no benefits.

Kurdish Fighters in Northern Iraq being trained by Israeli Former Special Forces: BBC2 Newsnight
www.abovetopsecret.com...'



posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 06:00 AM
link   
Mr Pie, perhaps i seemed a little defensive last night. Im sorry if some of you cant add it up. I was never any good at getting my point across. I have to believe that I did some good over there. I am going back and I truly believe we that go are making the best of a crappy situation. I dont believe that democracy is right for Iraq at this point. Or that it will ever work. I never thought we were there for the right reasons. I dont neccessarily believe in the motives of this administration and Rumsfeld is a different story alltogether. I have first hand knowledge of his denial of the Iraq situation in an after action review. However, I am feeding my children and plan to retire in 3 years. I have fought in Panama, Somalia, Afghanistan, and a couple places people could care less about and in the end, I believe that the only thing worth fighting for is my friends and family. I lose sleep every night over my best friend getting extended an extra 4 months for what I believe is a futile effort. The Iraqi people are peacefull. The insurgency uses leverage and terror to accomplish thier goals. I am sure of what I would do in the position of the farmer who will have his wife and children killed if he doesnt kill his enemy. But i am on this side. You just cant simply refuse to fight. As a man that is loyal to my family and country and brothers, that goes against everything i believe in. As for killing women and children, who would want to live with such a horrific thing. Its easy to talk the talk. Of course you will defend the lives of others around you and yourself. I never witnessed any incident over there that wasnt justified. We actually went through several firefights that we didnt fire anything but smoke as not to endanger civilians. I am embarrased by the actions of a few and believe that there are bad people in every profession. The tools we use make it a little easier to do more damage. I respect the opinion of others and wish that I was fighting for a just cause. As a soldier, you cannot go on a combat patrol every day for a year and wonder if you are doing the right thing. You will hesistate and that will cost you dearly. I have seen it. I think about my Iraqi interpreter friends who were executed because they helped us is Sadr City. Highly intelligent men who gave up everything to support what they believed was the best thing for thier families and country. And the FOB shopkeeper whos family was killed because he sold us DVDs. The murderous ways of the previous regime was no different. I know. You wouldnt believe some of the stories these people would tell you. The Iraqi people on the average wouldnt hesitate to support democracy if they thought we would stick it out. History has shown that we wont. And i personally dont blame them for thier reluctance. The conviction of the insurgency is over a thousand years old. Its an uphill battle. I know for a fact there are currently ties between Al Queda and Iraq. I believe they werent there until after 911 but thats my opinion. Maybe we went there for the wrong reasons. If we left Iraq now, I think that americans would regret it later. Im not sure it would save as many lives as people think. We need to think more on a global scale in the future. Not as the "Ugly American" who thinks that their way is the only way. The war on terror is an endless war. How do you fight an ideal? You cant with conventional warfare. And apparently you cant with unconventional warfare either. If anyone had a logical and real solution, I would love to hear it.



posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 06:07 AM
link   
Rich23, you crack me up. Your comment about a few well placed suicide bombs is a killer. I guess you have some really good sources. I hope this is about gas so it wont cost me so much to drive back home to my family. I could really feel good about that. Did you make up that last comment on your own?

[edit on 21-9-2006 by shwnster]



posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 07:14 AM
link   
No. I'm glad you feel able to laugh it off.

Do you remember the British soldiers who were arrested and a company of UK soldiers had to go and break them out of an Iraqi prison? They were dressed as locals and had explosives in their car. Further, there are reports of Iraqis being trained as policemen who are told to drive a car to a specific spot and call in when they're in place... and their car blows up.


One young Iraqi man told us that he was trained by the Americans as a policeman in Baghdad and he spent 70 per cent of his time learning to drive and 30 per cent in weapons training. They said to him: 'Come back in a week.' When he went back, they gave him a mobile phone and told him to drive into a crowded area near a mosque and phone them. He waited in the car but couldn't get the right mobile signal. So he got out of the car to where he received a better signal. Then his car blew up."

Impossible, I think to myself. But then I remember how many times Iraqis in Baghdad have told me similar stories.


You can find out more about it on this thread.

And for details about how the US is provoking a civil war through the use of death squads, you can look on this thread..

And I wish you luck on your next tour, I really do. I hope you don't get killed, and I hope you don't have to kill too many people. I can tell you're not sure about the reasons you're there, and that must be hard.



posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 07:18 AM
link   
there is only one possible thing to do

SHOOT TO KILL



posted on Sep, 21 2006 @ 10:56 AM
link   
^ Funny, that's kinda how I feel whenever I talk to you guys


shwnster,

Thank you for your contribution to the thread, I don't doubt you are speaking from firsthand experience.

I'm not one of those that think the US military is a buch of thugs, I have no doubt the vast majority of our troops are decent people just trying to do a difficult job.

I think it's hard to get across that a lot of us don't think this war serves any legitimate purpose, and that conflicts with a soldier's need to believe in the mission he's been assigned.

As you point out there are no easy answers in Iraq: the only one that works it's too late for anyway - we shouldn't be invading countries that haven't attacked us, we should stay out of wars that don't legitimately involve us.

That we don't do this isn't the fault of the soldiers we send out to fight, it's the fault of our leaders, and of us as a people when we fail to stop them from doing wrong.



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
I think it's hard to get across that a lot of us don't think this war serves any legitimate purpose, and that conflicts with a soldier's need to believe in the mission he's been assigned.

I agree but I'm not so sure the average soldier should even care about the overall mission... he/she is there to do a specific task and to do it according to their training. Practically, they should let the top brass and politicians worry about whether or not the mission is worth believing in. That's the problem that many have with this war... those who serve are TRUSTING us to make the right decisions and to ONLY commit them into harm's way when absolutely necessary. We, or rather Bush, has broken that trust and it's absolutely disgusting.



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 09:37 AM
link   
I'm just responding to what seems to be some soldiers' tendency to take any criticism of the war personally.

You say "this war in pointless" and they feel like they're being attacked personally and need to defend it. Just trying to point out that opposing the war is not the same as opposing the soldiers sent to fight it.



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 10:01 AM
link   
And I agree with you. Soldiers aren't paid to think and make the decisions... they're paid to carry out the actions that result from the decisions that the civilian leadership (us) have come to. So like you said, when a soldier (or anyone else) tries to confuse criticism of the war with criticism of the actual soldiers, they're absolutely wrong....



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN

Originally posted by tha stillz
I just spent about 2 hours sitting at the bar with a marine who shot a kid who had a gun aiming behind a pile of rubble over in Iraq. .. Believe me, he feels bad, but if you were going to die, would you shoot a kid. or anyone? In this situation yes - I would.


By the way, I am really glad he was there to have that conversation.

[edit on 21-9-2006 by tha stillz]


Thats the sad thing Tha stillz,
neither one should have been put in that predicament. The marine undoubtedly will have to deal with that for the rest of his life, and that kid who probably would have just been out playing with other kids or at school or home eating dinner with family if we had not been there. Just like all these kids that are now going to go to trial for murdering those Iraqis, the americans already convicted of wrongdoing in Abu Gharib and a few other incidents as well...all of that could have been avoided. Its we the Pe(ons)ople who suffer in the end...



I agree, it just sucks that this guy was forced to do that. He is an awesome guy with a big heart, and he thinks about it every night before he goes to sleep. And for what, to secure the energy reserves to maintain geo-political dominance? What a waste.

Wish we could get free energy to market. But instead patents are declined and scientists are jailed. Yes it is truly a shame.



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by rich23
This is what a psychologist would call projection. The US is the violent one. It's gone into that country, waged an unprovoked war for oil, wrecked the economy, and occupied it with some violence. There have been plenty of people interned and tortured by the US, pregnant women have been shot on the way to hospital, and the US backs death squads that roam the cities.


Mmmhm. The U.S. is violent... yes, of-course, but are you telling me the enemy isn't? What you are doing is justifying murder. Anyone who would send their six year-old child out to fight in a war is a lunatic. Anyone who would encourage their 18 year-old son or daughter to strap explosives to their chest and blow up a coffee shop is a lunatic. Anyone in the civilized world (the West) who would justify and make excuses for this sort of behavior is also a lunatic.

You are either a jihadists sympathizer, or perhaps a real patriot acting like one of those nut-jobs to discredit them. I'm really not sure. You can be sure around here.

We're talking about a culture that makes childrens cartoons that encourage suicide bombings. We're talking about a culture that abducts reporters and civilians and then cuts their heads of while chanting "God is great", as their victim screams in utter agony. We're talking about a culture that burns down Churches and riots in the streets over criticism of their faith.

All this latest report does, in addition to the one revealing that abductees are again being used as forced suicide bombers, does is confirm the justification for our side in this conflict. We aren't the barbarians, they are. Look at the whole thing with an ounce of compassion and a dose of common sense and you might see that.


I'm sorry, but for the reasons posted above, I think this is delusional.


QFT.



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Langolier
Mmmhm. The U.S. is violent... yes, of-course, but are you telling me the enemy isn't? What you are doing is justifying murder.



What enemy?? There were no WMD's, there were NO AL-Queda ties, No training camps, NOTHING! So who is trying to justify what? Rich or You? Who is being the appologist here? It is you..making up stories to accomodate your hatred for Muslims. Either you have been in a state of solitary confinement for the past several years or you are making excuses. Show us proof that these people were our enemies before we stepped foot into that country. Something that was proven to be true as a basis for war. Not this secondary freedom garbage that was used AFTER the fact.

I will agree that they are enemies now, but they were not before...we made some new ones along the way.



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
I will agree that they are enemies now, but they were not before

Hussein was clearly against the United States, he laboured under sanctions imposed by the US, had been defeated on the battlefield by the US, and ordered his troops to shoot at US planes that were enforcing UN air restrictions. He gave money to international terrorist organizations, invaded neighbhoring countries, and was a despot that made any idea of democratic reform in the middle east immpossible.
Lets not pretend that he was a good freind of the evil US that decided to pull a trick on him and attack him.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 08:00 AM
link   
I really believe Rich23 has no clue what he is talking about. He is basing his claims on some disinformation, and hate.

The USA can NOT take the oil for themselves, nor can they take the money that the oil makes. If you think they can, you are denying your lack of knowledge. A.K.A. denying ignorance. The oil, and the money from the oil, is being watched by the UN and many other countries. It is illegal for the USA to take it all. But it is not illegal to stop the money from reaching terrorists, and that's what is happening. All the oil, is doing exactly what it has been doing all these years. The USA isn't taking more of it, so we can drive our SUV's. We have been getting the same amount as we always had.

The only difference is, the money that is being made by the oil isn't going straight to Saddam. Saddam was a selfish little bastard, and kept all the oil money to himself. The Iraqi people, and the country, did not see a cent of it. Now the money is going to a bank, and is going to help rebuild Iraq. BUT, its far to early to start giving that money out, since there are still terrorists living in Iraq. We don't want to start giving the terrorists money. So as soon as the country gets its own police and military force started, and the country starts to become peaceful, they will have a huge amount of oil money to use, to start getting things back in place.

Until then USA has to sleep in their backyard, to keep them in the right direction. Its not a 1 year or 5 year thing, this is a LIFETIME thing. We wont have a full military in the backyard for life, but we will have a USA presence for a lifetime. In years to come, Iraq will be an allie to USA.... now who would have ever though of that happening?

We went to Iraq, because it has always been well known that Saddam funds the people that want to kill us, with his oil money. AND, it is well known Saddam had WMD's, and we didn't want them to reach the hands of the people that want to kill us. The common mistake by the people is thinking that WMD meant nuclear bombs only, because they think weapons of 'mass' destruction, truly meant 'mass' as in 'matter'. But it means weapons of 'massive' destruction, which could be a numerous amount of different weapons. It is WELL KNOWN Saddam has/had chemical weapons, and other types. Just because we haven't found them YET, doesn't mean we never will. It's still possible they are hidden. It's still possible they were shipped out of the country before we got to Iraq. They had plenty of time to, it's only a matter of time we find them now...


[edit on 24-9-2006 by LAES YVAN]



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 12:07 PM
link   
The issue is not "taking the oil" - the idea is simply to ensure the oil is in friendly hands.
The hands of people that won't cut off the supply because we do something like encourage Israel to bomb a few hundred civilians to paste in Lebanon, etc...

And there were no WMD "stockpiles" or production programs in Iraq in 2003, even the Bush Administration admits that now. Why won't it's blind supporters?



All this latest report does, in addition to the one revealing that abductees are again being used as forced suicide bombers, does is confirm the justification for our side in this conflict. We aren't the barbarians, they are. Look at the whole thing with an ounce of compassion and a dose of common sense and you might see that.


Funny that none of this would be happening in Iraq now if we hadn't invaded a country that hadn't attacked us.

As for the cultural chauvanism - yes, bombing civilians from 25,000 feet and machine gunning families in their cars at checkpoints is so much more civilized


Slaughter is OK apparently, as long as you don't have to see the faces of the people you're murdering.

If we're going to go comparing cultures, I'd say a culture where people safe in the comfort of their armchairs demand wars and mass murder halfway across the planet and pretend it's "self-defense" has major issues of it's own.

Let's take a little survey - who's started more wars in the last 50 years, the Arabs or the US? Who has the highest bodycount of victims worldwide over the same period?

I think you'll find the Arabs you hate so much don't even come close.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN


What enemy?? There were no WMD's, there were NO AL-Queda ties, No training camps, NOTHING! So who is trying to justify what? Rich or You? Who is being the appologist here? It is you..making up stories to accomodate your hatred for Muslims. Either you have been in a state of solitary confinement for the past several years or you are making excuses. Show us proof that these people were our enemies before we stepped foot into that country. Something that was proven to be true as a basis for war. Not this secondary freedom garbage that was used AFTER the fact.

I will agree that they are enemies now, but they were not before...we made some new ones along the way.


If you agree with me that the insurgents (terrorists) are enemies then what are you arguing with me about? I'm not an apologist, but you are. You are justifying suicide attacks and the purposeful targeting of civilians. The Iraq war was most definetly a serious tactical error (mistake).

It did several things...

Destroyed US credibility...

Showed the Bush administration to be EITHER horribly incompetent, OR horribly corrrupt.

And it isn't just Iraqi insurgents; it's terrorism all over the world.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
The issue is not "taking the oil" - the idea is simply to ensure the oil is in friendly hands.
The hands of people that won't cut off the supply because we do something like encourage Israel to bomb a few hundred civilians to paste in Lebanon, etc...



You mean like Cheney and Rumsfeld energy task force made just to influence Iraq into giving away their rights to the oil in Iraq? right? those friendly hands?

Yes it most be.

Right now Iraq has to buy oil from other people because they can not produce any until they agree to be more oil friendly to the US and the oil barons.

You know you are very confuse about Iraq, Saddam and what in the heck we are doing in that country.

Deny ignorance, the propaganda is blinding your senses.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 04:26 PM
link   


right? those friendly hands?


Yep, those very ones.

Stealing the oil outright would be too obvious and not worth the trouble - as long as the politicians there are nice and compliant when it comes time to bid on the development contracts, seizing the fields themselves is unnnecessary.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join