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 supply line Hit in iraq!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 11:22 PM
link   
It's time we packed up and left Iraq to the Iraqi's...and everyone knows what happens after that...Implosion...and who the hell cares anymore...they deserve it...everyone of them. No I'm not some type of fanatic, and yes, I have served...Navy 81-86...I hated the ME then and I hate it now...nothing will EVER work there!...
We should just leave'em to it...and when they are done killing each other and they WILL...then we'll sort it out.




posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 11:29 PM
link   
We broke it, we Fix it.
It was working just fine and dandy before we went in, under false evidence mind you.

Had that whole WMD and alqaeda link not of been there... what other reason could we of possibly needed to go in ?

Being both of those 2 factors have been proven lies.. im afriad cutting and running just wont work.

For us to cut and run, we would have to reinstate Saddam, pay them billions and billions in aid and repair money, release all those angry people we've wrongfully locked up and simply say ' sorry, we made a mistake '

Bush wont cut and run for 2 reasons.

1. He knows Iran will take over, which means the next major issue will become 10x harder

and

2. Being he's still trying to cover up the truth over there, and still painting a rosey picture.. i dont think he wants to be humiliated.

AND

Israel wont allow the USA to cut and run, because that entire region will turn there sites from the america convoys, straight towards Israel.

Cutting and running means the west doesnt have the stomach to do it, and do it right.... and if America doesnt, it means Israel doesnt..
and If neither Israel or America dont have the stomach for it, that means the arabs can finally remove the occupiers from there soverign land.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 11:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by deadbang
We should just leave'em to it...and when they are done killing each other and they WILL...then we'll sort it out.



Why are they going to kill each other once we leave?
Theyre killing each other because parties are HELPING the USA.
once we are gone, there's no one there to help, sure killings will happen but not on the scale of todays killings.

The most you'd get are gangs killing people who helped them SIGNIFICANTLY.
like the dutch did to the nazi bonkers.



posted on Sep, 28 2006 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Agit8dCop, not only those reasons, but also the oil needs to be secured in Iraq. I think that is one of the large reasons for going there.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Agit8dChop, I said nothing about "cutting and running"...thats coward talk...and I fully support seeing a mission through...but there comes a time man...that you need to realize that this ain't working...and if a people are hell bent for destruction...them let them destruct...just my opinion.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by deadbang
Agit8dChop, I said nothing about "cutting and running"...thats coward talk...and I fully support seeing a mission through...but there comes a time man...that you need to realize that this ain't working...and if a people are hell bent for destruction...them let them destruct...just my opinion.



so your saying we should cut our loses and run?

or, accept our mission isnt working and let them finish the job off?

either way you look at it mate,

the coalition went in there, destroyed it, cant repair it... and have ended up in a position where they either go, leaving them to destory each other.. or stay.. and contionue to let them destroy each other.. with our assistance.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:11 AM
link   
The Terrorists prove they are cowardly again with attacks on unarmed civilians perhaps we should start making examples out of anywhere this happens I am all for bring back napalm for situations like this. Its time these terrorists realised the best way to stay alive is to keep away from our Oil and other supplys.

Theres no reasoning with these people we liberated them rebuilt their country brought them Democracy and are now helping them police it the population is clearly insane.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 04:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shamanator
The Terrorists prove they are cowardly again with attacks on unarmed civilians perhaps we should start making examples out of anywhere this happens I am all for bring back napalm for situations like this. Its time these terrorists realised the best way to stay alive is to keep away from our Oil and other supplys.

Theres no reasoning with these people we liberated them rebuilt their country brought them Democracy and are now helping them police it the population is clearly insane.


well if liberate you mean bomb the CRAP outta them
rebuilt you mean OUR EMBASSY
Democracy you mean IRANIAN influence
and policing the population you mean locking up people, murdering and raping.. well you'd be right

and its not OUR oil.. its THEIR OIL!

They have every right to attack and murder us.

WE SHOULDNT be there.

why is that so hard for people to get through there f'n heads.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 05:33 AM
link   
I am always fascinated - though saddened - by people's reactions to incidents like the one depicted in this thread, and the ensuing discussions which stem from them. I lament the war in Iraq, and indeed, all war. My personal belief is that warfare is justifiable only within the context of the invisible lines drawn by skewed perception and pride, existing nowhere other than in our minds. That isn't a very popular view, however, so I'll try to keep this short.

To those who would call me unpatriotic or a coward, I would like to say this:

I weep for the people who died in that convoy. I weep for those who die in similar attacks with increasing frequency. I lament the reasons people feel constitute justification for this war. I weep for every soldier, of any nationality, that has paid the price with their life or their livelihood for that belief. I honor the spirit of sacrifice which called them to action, while loathing and lamenting the forms in which that spirit has manifested itself.

To those reading the above who would as a result call me a pro-western war supporter, I would like to say this:

I weep for the insurgents. I weep for the Iraqi (and other) children whose lives or limbs or families are snuffed out in a matter of moments with increasing regularity. I weep for those we are told to see as enemies when they suffer or die, because I recognize that the line between "them" and "us" exists nowhere but in our hearts and minds. I understand the reasons for the ongoing violence, however I do not believe it is justified. I oppose the war.

To Syrian Sister and those who rejoice in, or at least support, incidents such as this, I would like to ask the following question:

How do you perceive people like me, having read what I typed above? You stated in your opening post, "How many children throwing rocks will it take for the occupiers and their countries to understand that they are not wanted? How many more people have to die, before you tell your governments you will no longer believe there lies??" (Emphasis was added by myself and is not congruent with the original post.) If I were to tell you that every time I see the blood-soaked corpse of an insurgent on television I want to cry, how would you perceive me? If I were to tell you that I feel the same way when I see an American body laying dead in someone's arms on television, would any sympathy I gained when I said that be lost? I don't view you as anything other than a person, and while it might seem illogical or contradictory, I care about every life lost in this conflict regardless of nationality or cultural background. In my mind and in my heart, this is truly a civil war between humanity and itself.

If I had the power to stop this conflict, I would do so in an instant. If someone told me that somehow, miraculously, my death would magically ensure that this conflict would end, then I would go outside and step in front of a bus. Unfortunately, I have no power, am ill, and can only watch. So I want to ask a question I've always wondered about in my heart, and that is this: I do not see you as part of an ethnic group, part of one "side" or another, or my enemy. I see you as a human being, regardless of how you style yourself or others perceive you. I would rather die than kill or harm anyone, and I choose to perceive no one on the face of this Earth as my enemy. So I ask you, in that spirit, are you and others who share your views capable of viewing me as anything other than an American or the enemy? I have never seen this question asked, and I feel it goes straight to the heart of this conflict, and indeed, all human conflicts.

Thank-you.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 05:37 AM
link   
Beautifully worded, AceWombat04



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 05:53 AM
link   
peace is the most simple concept that was ever created yet it appears to be the hardest one to acheive.., it's all in the state of mind.

when you try to solve the problem of violence with violence it will only result in more violence...


let there be peace for everyone, eventualy it will come.

[edit on 29-9-2006 by selfless]



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 06:31 AM
link   
US imperialist war crimes:

www.youtube.com...



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by AceWombat04
I am always fascinated - though saddened - by people's reactions to incidents like the one depicted in this thread, and the ensuing discussions which stem from them. I lament the war in Iraq, and indeed, all war. My personal belief is that warfare is justifiable only within the context of the invisible lines drawn by skewed perception and pride, existing nowhere other than in our minds. That isn't a very popular view, however, so I'll try to keep this short.

To those who would call me unpatriotic or a coward, I would like to say this:

I weep for the people who died in that convoy. I weep for those who die in similar attacks with increasing frequency. I lament the reasons people feel constitute justification for this war. I weep for every soldier, of any nationality, that has paid the price with their life or their livelihood for that belief. I honor the spirit of sacrifice which called them to action, while loathing and lamenting the forms in which that spirit has manifested itself.

To those reading the above who would as a result call me a pro-western war supporter, I would like to say this:

I weep for the insurgents. I weep for the Iraqi (and other) children whose lives or limbs or families are snuffed out in a matter of moments with increasing regularity. I weep for those we are told to see as enemies when they suffer or die, because I recognize that the line between "them" and "us" exists nowhere but in our hearts and minds. I understand the reasons for the ongoing violence, however I do not believe it is justified. I oppose the war.

To Syrian Sister and those who rejoice in, or at least support, incidents such as this, I would like to ask the following question:

How do you perceive people like me, having read what I typed above? You stated in your opening post, "How many children throwing rocks will it take for the occupiers and their countries to understand that they are not wanted? How many more people have to die, before you tell your governments you will no longer believe there lies??" (Emphasis was added by myself and is not congruent with the original post.) If I were to tell you that every time I see the blood-soaked corpse of an insurgent on television I want to cry, how would you perceive me? If I were to tell you that I feel the same way when I see an American body laying dead in someone's arms on television, would any sympathy I gained when I said that be lost? I don't view you as anything other than a person, and while it might seem illogical or contradictory, I care about every life lost in this conflict regardless of nationality or cultural background. In my mind and in my heart, this is truly a civil war between humanity and itself.

If I had the power to stop this conflict, I would do so in an instant. If someone told me that somehow, miraculously, my death would magically ensure that this conflict would end, then I would go outside and step in front of a bus. Unfortunately, I have no power, am ill, and can only watch. So I want to ask a question I've always wondered about in my heart, and that is this: I do not see you as part of an ethnic group, part of one "side" or another, or my enemy. I see you as a human being, regardless of how you style yourself or others perceive you. I would rather die than kill or harm anyone, and I choose to perceive no one on the face of this Earth as my enemy. So I ask you, in that spirit, are you and others who share your views capable of viewing me as anything other than an American or the enemy? I have never seen this question asked, and I feel it goes straight to the heart of this conflict, and indeed, all human conflicts.

Thank-you.





i agree with you acewombat, i would rather kill my self then kill someone else, that right there is a way for peace to be achieved...


and yes we are all the same even though there is a false perception of concepts that classifies indivisuals as groups.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 07:08 AM
link   
Would it be deemed acceptable if new threads actually glorifying coalition forces in Iraq were posted here on ATS? It appears to me posts openly attacking Coalition forces from the likes of Syrian Sister and others only serve enough purpose to provoke others. In the same respect i'd like to post one of my own personal success stories:


A BRITISH sniper told yesterday how he killed an Iraqi gunman from more than half a mile. Corporal Matt Hughes, 28, a Royal Marines marksman, was ordered to “take out” an Iraqi holding back a vital advance during a fierce gale. He pulled off an incredible feat of marksmanship by gauging perfectly the wind speed to bend the bullet to its target. The 7.62 calibre round from his L96 sniper rifle curved 56ft in the air before striking its target in the chest, killing him instantly.

Next to him, another Royal Marines sniper killed a second Iraqi at exactly the same moment.

Corporal Hughes, of the Marines’ spearhead brigade patrol troop, said yesterday: “It was a bit like David Beckham taking a free kick. I knew I only had one shot and had to get the angle exactly right. It was hot and the wind was blowing strongly from left to right as we crept up to a vantage point about 860 metres from the target.

“I saw I had a clear shot at my man — he was in what he thought was a secure position, but his head and chest were exposed. He was still wearing his green Iraqi uniform and was holding the rifle he’d been using to shoot at Marines.

www.freerepublic.com...


Keep up the good work guys



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 07:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Syrian Sister

Don't look at me, it's the geneva conventions that is saying it's alright. You are to be treated just as any other soldier, you are part of the military machine after all.


But I'm not, the merchant navy has nothing to do with the military. It is a purely CIVILIAN orginisation. They are not armed, they are not trained in military matters for all purposes they are CIVILIANS.

Ie:
[qoute]
1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (b) taking of hostages; (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
I do not for one moment see how a tanker carrying food can be seen to be "taking an active part in hostilities.".



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 07:56 AM
link   
First, a quick reality check for all American citizens who believe in the illegal occupation of Iraq, from this article:

There should be no mystery about the nature of the resistance in Iraq. The situation is very simple, as it would be in most countries of the world — when you have an occupation by a foreign power, you have resistance. And that’s exactly what’s happened in Iraq.

It’s absurd to think that there are tiny groups either of foreign fighters or remnants of the former regime who are holding the rest of the population to ransom.

You can see this in Fallujah, in Mosul. You could see this from the very beginning — from the summer of 2003. Whenever I went to a place where there had been an attack on a US patrol, and US soldiers had been killed, always, the local kids were jumping up and down for joy. This was always an unpopular occupation with most of the population, and that majority has gone up.


There's also this recent poll of Iraqis that suggests that the US occupation is more unpopular than ever.

A new WPO poll of the Iraqi public finds that seven in ten Iraqis want US-led forces to commit to withdraw within a year. An overwhelming majority believes that the US military presence in Iraq is provoking more conflict than it is preventing and there is growing confidence in the Iraqi army. If the US made a commitment to withdraw, a majority believes that this would strengthen the Iraqi government. Support for attacks on US-led forces has grown to a majority position—now six in ten. Support appears to be related to a widespread perception, held by all ethnic groups, that the US government plans to have permanent military bases in Iraq.


As for this question... perhaps a brief resume of US involvement with resistance to Saddam will help:


Originally posted by magicmushroom
Syrian Sister, I dont agree with the invasion of Iraq but may I ask where were the freedom fighters during Saddams reign of terror. He was in power a long time yet there seems to have been no effective action to take him out, why not.


We could start with this (far from comprehensive, from my limited knowledge) BBC timeline on the history of Iraqi kurds. Note the early, coy reference to "the British mandate": access to oil has been a permanent factor in relations between Iraq and the West. Britain repressed local nationalist movements, in its day, every bit as violently (and ineffectually) as the US. A rather selective attitude to the information displayed in this link reveals a reluctance to acknowledge British imperialism of the past and the full extent of current Israeli involvement - they're currently training Kurdish troops in the hopes of dividing Iraq, probably along the lines of the neo-con plan for tripartite division of the country, which will necessitate some ethnic cleansing.

One relevant extract:

1991 March - After the expulsion of Iraqi troops from Kuwait in March 1991, members of the pro-government Kurdish militia, the Jash, defect to the KDP and PUK, but the uprising grinds to a halt and US-led forces refuse to intervene to support the rebels. Around 1.5 millions Kurds flee before the Iraqi onslaught, but Turkey closes the border forcing hundreds of thousands to seek refuge in the mountains.


Just after the expulsion of Saddam from Kuwait, the Kurds (who had been up till then getting substantial US support) revolted; however, the immediate concern of the US was, as always, "stability": bad news for any independence movement. They sat on their hands and watched the Kurds get slaughtered. The realpolitik decision was to support Saddam, who, as can be seen from later on in the timeline, took advantage of Kurdish divisions:

1996 August - Masoud Barzani appeals to Saddam Hussein for help to defeat the PUK.

1996 September - With the help of Iraqi government troops, KDP forces seize the northern city of Irbil and take the PUK stronghold of Sulaymaniyah. A new KDP-led government is announced at the parliament building in Irbil.


Possibly some were dealing with Saddam because the West had failed them in 1991: this TIME article shows some of the reaction to the US betrayal:

As he helped extract the car of a Western journalist mired in a bog, [an Iraqi Kurd] spat out a complaint: "Why? Why do you Americans allow this to happen? Saddam will kill us all -- men, women and children. Why doesn't Bush do something? Why should all my children die? Why?"

The Kurds had no patience for geopolitical explanations. They were bitter at what they considered the betrayal of the U.S. Two weeks earlier, Washington seemed to promise that it would protect them from Saddam's unbridled use of air power, but now they were under constant fire from the sky. "We complained 10 times to the Americans that the Iraqis were using fixed-wing aircraft against us. We never received a reply," said an aide to Massoud Barzani, the commander in chief of the rebels. "One might think the U.S. and Mr. Bush want to see all the Kurds massacred."


This TIME article offers no explanation for the betrayal, merely some sympathetic words. An article by Noam Chomsky suggests that the main reason was to placate one of the major US allies in the region, Turkey:

The alliance with Turkey also required some fancy footwork because of the question of the Kurds in northern Iraq. It is difficult not to notice that Iraqi forces facing U.S. troops would be severely weakened if the U.S. were to support a Kurdish rebellion. Washington rejected this option, presumably out of concern that a Kurdish rebellion in Iraq might spread to Eastern Turkey, where the huge Kurdish population (subjected to torture and other severe punishments for the crime of speaking or writing Kurdish or otherwise identifying themselves as Kurds) suffer brutal oppression. In a rare notice of the issue in the press, the Wall Street Journal observed that "the West fears that pressing the `Kurdish question' with Turkey, Syria and Iran...could weaken the anti-Iraq alliance." The report adds that "the U.S. administration pointedly refused to meet with an Iraqi Kurdish leader who visited Washington in August" to ask for support, and that "Kurds say Ankara is using the Gulf crisis and Turkey's resulting popularity in the West as cover for a crackdown" -- while Western commentary now laments Iraq's vicious treatment of the Kurds, whose grim fate has been cynically exploited by the West for many years. Other reports confirm new population transfers in the regions near the Iraqi border, with several hundred villages either partially or totally evacuated, though increased press censorship -- the most severe since 1925, according to an informed Turkish source -- leaves the matter obscure.


The TIME article above also gives details of Saddam's brutal repression of a Shia revolt around the same time.

So, to answer magicmushroom's question: there were indeed freedom fighters in Saddam's Iraq, but the west either looked the other way when they were brutally repressed or actually helped by selling Saddam the biochemical weapons he used on them and then covering it up afterwards: a CIA analyst actually wrote an article that claimed Saddam was not responsible for the massacre at Halabja, attempting to put the blame on Iran. This surfaced again in the run-up to the 2003 invasion, and was used by some to counter arguments that Saddam was a brutal dictator: no-one looked at when the document was produced and why.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 08:55 AM
link   
you all realize if the bible future predictions are correct..that all these nations (incuding iraq, usa, syria) will all be united in a world goverment (sadly lead by the Antichrist)



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 09:26 AM
link   
You have voted AceWombat04 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

It saddens me that people do not share the view that you and I do.....

People are people....no matter where they are from, what they look like, what God they follow, or how they choose to live their lives....

It is sad that people continue to bicker about this even after you posted......One even glorifying someone that was bragging about killing someone.....

What if it was you that were killed by a sniper because you were seen as a threat?....Who are you to judge someone else and assess their viability as a threat?..

It disgusts me that people like this call themselves Americans.....no wonder everyone hates us....



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by JSquared
You have voted AceWombat04 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

It saddens me that people do not share the view that you and I do.....

People are people....no matter where they are from, what they look like, what God they follow, or how they choose to live their lives....

It is sad that people continue to bicker about this even after you posted......One even glorifying someone that was bragging about killing someone.....

What if it was you that were killed by a sniper because you were seen as a threat?....Who are you to judge someone else and assess their viability as a threat?..

It disgusts me that people like this call themselves Americans.....no wonder everyone hates us....




at least take comfort in knowing that some of us don't want to participate in this delusion and we won't contribute to a war in any way no matter what cost, peace prevails.



posted on Sep, 29 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   
You have voted AceWombat04 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

I do know of one group that is happy we are there and that is the kurds. And even if we succed in Iraq it won't stop the violence but it will decrease it. Sunni and Shia have been killing each other for hundreds of years and I doubt it would stop them now.




top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join