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.

 

Juba 2 Video: How 668 U.S soldiers were killed with Juba's Sniper Rifle

page: 6
2
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2006 @ 10:51 PM
link   
Is it possible to have a moral debate without people reducing themselves to elementary school tactics? That goes for all sides, by the way.

The morality of death, is that there is none. Death is horrible.

These are the circumstances we're in, we need to find a way to fix the problem that doesn't involve taking any more lives, or that at least doesn't play an active role in the killing.

I'm glad we're pulling out. This whole thing has become so complicated and full of propoganda, from both sides, that you can't help but get a bad taste in your mouth if you look at it for what it is.




posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 12:03 AM
link   

The morality of death, is that there is none. Death is horrible.


You are right. And i think war is a terrible thing.

But it's not a war that iraq started and a difference has to be recongised between iraqi partisans killing US soldiers, and US soldiers killing partisans.

The iraqies are fighting for their survival and their countries survival, the US government is talking about cutting up iraq into three countries such that iraq no longer exists. Think about it what if someone wanted to murder your mother and cut her up into 3 pieces? What wouldn't you do.

The US soldiers are fighting for a big corporation in a place they don't belong.



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 12:50 AM
link   


Well one side is fighting on their own city streets where they grew up, and the other side are tresspassers, in a country they do not belong in, trying to impose their will on others.


You are incorrect in assuming that the insurgents are all from Iraq, many are from other countries. Just because the actions of one side are unjustified, doesn’t mean that the actions of the other side are. The many insurgent groups each have different reasons, some have ultra conservative religious reasons and wish to set up a theocracy in Iraq.



And no, the people who have been defending their country and homeland from the illegal and violent occupation, against all, fighting a super power with 30 year old rifles and never for a second giving up or thinking they will lose. People as honourable as that cannot be evil. So that is why i will belive my Partisans over you any day of the week.


How naïve. They may believe what they are doing right, but that doesn’t mean that their actions are justified. I believe the saying “the road to hell is paved with good intentions” comes to mind. Then comes Ba'athists insurgent group, who wished to reinstate Saddam. Yep, real honorable.


And then there are their means. The be.ing of civilians could hardly be seen as honorable. Human Rights Watch even published this report detailing the abuses of insurgent groups.



...and by nature i am a truth seeker...


I don’t question that you seek the truth, but I do wonder just how much your bias is clouding your view. It seems with you, as with many other people who post on this board, that you learn to deny one side, only to blindly accept another.



The resistance of iraq, certainly doesn't use suicide as much as it is claimed by the media, they are not that desperate.The media reported this attack below as a "suicide truck" when it's obvious from the holes in the roof, that it was a mortar attack.


It’s not just the roof that’s been damaged in that picture. Plenty of wall had been damaged as well. Though it is difficult to see the full extent of the damage since that picture is small and the angle and lighting isn’t that great.



And i think war is a terrible thing.


That I agree with, war is truly are horrible thing.

[edit on 26-10-2006 by Lethys]

[edit on 26-10-2006 by Lethys]



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 01:22 AM
link   

You are incorrect in assuming that the insurgents are all from Iraq, many are from other countries. Just because the actions of one side are unjustified, doesn’t mean that the actions of the other side are.


No it is you who is making the assumptions here, it is you who is beliving the US government even after it's lies upon lies, it's who is assuming that they are fighting "foreigners" in iraq.

Yes, at the begining of the war many people from around the world who couldn't stand the injustice, went to iraq to fight the invasion. But most if not all of those have already left, they where driven out by the Iraqi collaborators who where very secterian, many of those people that came in the defence of their iraqi brothers where tortured and killed by the disgusting traitors. In syria a few years ago, i met one of the people who returned, he was a taxi cab and wore a read berray, He said that from now on he would only fight for Syria. Ask anyone on the streets, and the resistance says it themselves, they are on their own.

If there are foreign fighters as you say, then where are they? Out of the thousands and thousandsof people in abugharib only a couple of hundred are non iraqi arabs, and many of those lived in iraq for most of their lives.

The fact is, even the american military have to quietly admit that the foreign fighters they keep talking about are very small in number.



www.guardian.co.uk...
The US and the Iraqi government have overstated the number of foreign fighters in Iraq, "feeding the myth" that they are the backbone of the insurgency, an American thinktank says in a new report.


and another one for you that talks about something a lil different
wdthu.blogspot.com...

You see i'm not the one basing my ideas on assumption , it is you who isn't looking at the facts.
So even after all that has happened, how is it you are still beling the lies?
There is 150,000 foreign fighters in iraq, and they are the US and british soldiers.


The many insurgent groups each have different reasons, some have ultra conservative religious reasons and wish to set up a theocracy in Iraq.


The resistance factions may have different ideologies, but they all have one uniting idea, to right their country of occupation. Political ideology doesn't matter, that can all be decided after Iraq has self determination and is no longer under foreign controll.


They may believe what they are doing right, but that doesn’t mean that their actions are justified. I believe the saying “the road to hell is paved with good intentions” comes to mind.

I belive there exist a right and a wrong, you may not agree with me on that, but i belive what is REALLY right and wrong has little to do with intention.
George Bush claims to be occupying iraq for "good intentions" (though i don't actually belive him), though i suppose some soldiers think they are fighting with good intentions, That doesn't change the fact that they are trying to do something they percieve to be right by doing something wrong, like occupying someones country. I belive the saying is "the end doesn't justify the means".
In contrast the iraqi resistanboth belives they are doing the right thing, and are doing the right thing, in the right way and for the right reasons.
Their actions are COMPLETELY JUSTIFIED, by the geneva conventions and common sense.

As for the civilian killings and that fake berg be.ing, your psy-ops trying to make the resistance look bad, have nothing to do with the resistance.
The resistance treats prisoners very well, and if they are deamed to be harmless journalists and not spies or mercinaries , they are let go. Take for instance just one small example of this, jill caroll, who after her time with the resistance actually gained weight.



I don’t question that you seek the truth, but I do wonder just how much your bias is clouding your view. It seems with you, as with many other people who post on this board, that you learn to deny one side, only to blindly accept another.


We'll if your word about that, hound me for evidence, and i'll show you just what facts are behind my ideas. Anyway, i don't think the truth is always in the middle, sometimes it's even more extreme that the two sides that are arguing.
If your still not satisfied, think of it this way, the website needs someone with my bias, to stip the scale in the other direction and make things more equal.


It’s not just the roof that’s been damaged in that picture. Plenty of wall had been damaged as well. difficult to see...


I agree that that picture is difficult to see, but i have other high res images of it which i will upload when i get home. in those images you will see that there is absolutely NO wall dammage.

[edit on 26-10-2006 by Syrian Sister]



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 01:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Link
Link

Those are two incidents. If the situation were reversed, I'd still be more concerned about the local death squads than the invading army.



A rock turns into a grenade, and a military outpost turns into a black church? c'mon

I'm talking about the attacks between the ethnic minorities and religious sects within iraq.


So I guess you'll believe the media you choose, aand I'll choose the media I'll believe.

So you suggest that the only violence in iraq right now is between iraqi patriots who are only targeting soldiers, and americans who are just hauling off and commiting mass murder left and right???? That after baathist rule, the locals 'let bygones be bygones'????


But if an occupying force did this on more than one occasion, and it was my country being occupied, I'd prefer the method of getting those forces the F out before the trend continues.

And so in order to do that you'd.....engage in the very warefare that they are using to justify their being there? Join the insurgents and start killing your own people?
If there was no resistance, there'd be no US Army in iraq. Problem solved. THen come the next elections, you vote out the puppet president, and vote in somone you like. All he has to do is agree to have elections as a normal facet of political life, and everyone wins.
But the iraqis don't want that. They don't want peace. They want blood, and they are going out into the streets and taking it.

Everyone keeps saying that if the US was invaded, of course we'd all defend it. BUt thats not whats happening. NO one is standingup for saddam or the old system, and the vast majority of deaths in iraq are civilians dying from car bombs, and kidnappings, face first into shallow pits with bullets in their brains. If people did that in the US when there was an invasion going on, we'd recognize them as traitors and criminals.



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Everyone keeps saying that if the US was invaded, of course we'd all defend it. BUt thats not whats happening. NO one is standingup for saddam or the old system,


So what your saying is, to fight for the US if it where invaded, is the equivelent of fighting for bush?



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
If there was no resistance, there'd be no US Army in iraq. Problem solved.


The evidence runs counter to this assertion. It's most annoying, but right now I cannot find a story I saw only today that says the US are building a huge airfield in the Kurdish area. But there are many "deep desert" bases in Iraq, plus the enormous Baghdad embassy which only a conquering nation would dare build.

The US are not "pulling out". They may be retreating to their deep bases, but they will still be there.



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 06:41 AM
link   

If there was no resistance, there'd be no US Army in iraq. Problem solved.


LOL that's like saying, if there was no smoke, there would be no fire.

More logical would be, if there was no US army in Iraq, there would be no resistance.

-------------

Also, here is that image of that Mortar strike i promiced you. As you can see, the holes are through the roof.




posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Syrian Sister


Also, here is that image of that Mortar strike i promiced you. As you can see, the holes are through the roof.



Holes can also be made by a suicide bomber strapped with explosives.

www.informationclearinghouse.info...

Heres the video of their attack.



posted on Oct, 26 2006 @ 07:41 PM
link   


If there are foreign fighters as you say, then where are they? Out of the thousands and thousandsof people in abugharib only a couple of hundred are non iraqi arabs, and many of those lived in iraq for most of their lives.


You act as if there are almost no foreign insurgents, yet the link you use to debunk me still claims that the number is about 10%. While it’s certainly not anywhere near a majority, it is still a noticeable amount.



I belive there exist a right and a wrong, you may not agree with me on that, but i belive what is REALLY right and wrong has little to do with intention.


I am certainly not debating the existence of right and wrong here. As for intention, it certainly is something to worry about. These ideologies are what you will have to deal with when the US leaves Iraq. History is full of examples where a group fights and overthrows a tyrant, only to simply replace him with another. The communist revolutions in China and Cuba come to mind. While the governments the communists fought were certainly horrid, the communists proved to be no better. And in Chinas sake, ended up causing one of the worst famines in modern history.



As for the civilian killings and that fake berg be.ing, your psy-ops trying to make the resistance look bad, have nothing to do with the resistance.
The resistance treats prisoners very well, and if they are deamed to be harmless journalists and not spies or mercinaries , they are let go. Take for instance just one small example of this, jill caroll, who after her time with the resistance actually gained weight.


Nick Berg isn’t the only person who has been be.ed. Even without the be.ing, the insurgents have captured and killed a number of civilians. In your reply you seem to have skipped the 140 page report by Human Rights Watch that I linked.
As for Jil Caroll, I suppose you are referring to the video of her praising the insurgency that appeared on an Islamic website. Well her response to the video is quite different. She claims that she participated in the video because she feared for her life and that they would let her go if she complied. Later she refers to them as being "criminals, at best".



I agree that that picture is difficult to see, but i have other high res images of it which i will upload when i get home. in those images you will see that there is absolutely NO wall dammage.


I think the video deltaboy posted says a lot. In it, you can clearly see the explosion originating from the ground.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 09:31 PM
link   



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 09:45 PM
link   
mbdelta, please stay on topic.



posted on Oct, 31 2006 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
That after baathist rule, the locals 'let bygones be bygones'????


Baathist rule was designed for stability, without it, this happens. I'm sure they'd be glad to have it back.

You should look past the propaganda and see how well Sunni's, women, and jews were treated in Iraq pre 2003.

And if you want to complain about how the fundamentalist Shia's were suppressed, take a long look in the mirror.

[edit on 31/10/06 by SteveR]



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
Baathist rule was designed for stability, without it, this happens. I'm sure they'd be glad to have it back.

Ok, so lets just triple the US troop presence and install rumsfeld as Dictator, the US can probably crack down on it better than Hussein.


And if you want to complain about how the fundamentalist Shia's were suppressed, take a long look in the mirror.

Hussein used VX gas on entire towns and tribes. I am sure that the Sunnis would be happy to have the baathists in power agian, but that's not saying much.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
Baathist rule was designed for stability, without it, this happens. I'm sure they'd be glad to have it back.


utter tripe ! the Hussien regieme was anything but stable - it was pure divide and conqour tactics at every juncture .

Saddam alternatly brutalised and feted groups - soley to keep them from gaining too much power and forming any credible opposition

his strategies were to turn groups against each other - with one aim - so that they did not unite against him

how the hell was that stable ?

only the republican guard and secret police got " stable treatment " , because without them his house of cards would collapse .


You should look past the propaganda and see how well Sunni's, women, and jews were treated in Iraq pre 2003.


ok - Sunni`s ? the marsh arabs were predominantly sunni - that is why he brutally oppersed them and attempted to wipe out thier habitat

women ? yeah being raped by his sons was great
[ / sarcasm ]

jews ? what jews - they had been driven out or underground by the early 70s

if jews were well treated - can you point to a openly operating synagogue in hussain era iraq ?

or was that all " just propaganda " ????



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignorant_ape

women ? yeah being raped by his sons was great
[ / sarcasm ]


Here's an account, by an educated, Westernised Iraqi girl, of how things are now for women in Iraq. The US has brought chaos to the country and the forces of fundamentalism are benefiting:


Since the beginning of July, the men in our area have been patrolling the streets. Some of them patrol the rooftops and others sit quietly by the homemade road blocks we have on the major roads leading into the area. You cannot in any way rely on Americans or the government. You can only hope your family and friends will remain alive- not safe, not secure- just alive. That’s good enough.

For me, June marked the first month I don’t dare leave the house without a hijab, or .scarf. I don’t wear a hijab usually, but it’s no longer possible to drive around Baghdad without one. It’s just not a good idea. (Take note that when I say ‘drive’ I actually mean ‘sit in the back seat of the car’- I haven’t driven for the longest time.) Going around bare-.ed in a car or in the street also puts the family members with you in danger. You risk hearing something you don’t want to hear and then the father or the brother or cousin or uncle can’t just sit by and let it happen. I haven’t driven for the longest time. If you’re a female, you risk being attacked.

I look at my older clothes- the jeans and t-shirts and colorful skirts- and it’s like I’m studying a wardrobe from another country, another lifetime. There was a time, a couple of years ago, when you could more or less wear what you wanted if you weren’t going to a public place. If you were going to a friends or relatives house, you could wear trousers and a shirt, or jeans, something you wouldn’t ordinarily wear. We don’t do that anymore because there’s always that risk of getting stopped in the car and checked by one militia or another.

There are no laws that say we have to wear a hijab (yet), but there are the men in .-to-toe black and the turbans, the extremists and fanatics who were liberated by the occupation, and at some point, you tire of the defiance. You no longer want to be seen. I feel like the black or white scarf I fling haphazardly on my . as I walk out the door makes me invisible to a certain degree- it’s easier to blend in with the masses shrouded in black. If you’re a female, you don’t want the attention- you don’t want it from Iraqi police, you don’t want it from the black-clad militia man, you don’t want it from the American soldier. You don’t want to be noticed or seen.


It's from Baghdad Burning.

Since the "liberation" of Iraq, she has lost her job (because she's a woman), can't drive, wear her own clothing or leave the house without a hijab and a guard of male relatives.

I don't know about Saddam's sons. For all I know they might have been rapists. Or, they might have been painted as rapists for propaganda purposes. I don't know. I know the US is capable of this, because they tried to portray the Taliban as profiting from the heroin trade before they invaded. Two reports came out in the same week, one from the UN saying the heroin trade had been abolished and production in Afghanistan stopped by the Taliban... and another from the US saying the opposite.

The trouble is, after the invasion opium production returned to pre-Taliban levels and the US had no choice but to admit this - although no mention was made of the pre-invasion propaganda. This is all by way of a digression admitting my ignorance of the guilt or innocence of Saddam's sons in cases of rape. And of course there might have been accusations that were groundless. Even George W Bush has been accused of rape, for example.

But even if Saddam's sons were serial rapists, I don't think that they could have done the kind of damage to women's rights that the invasion has inflicted on them. They'd have to have worked pretty damn hard at it. And then of course there's a documented instance of US troops raping a 14-year old girl, and then killing her and her family afterwards.



posted on Nov, 1 2006 @ 06:25 PM
link   
nevermind, made a mistake. I have nothing to contribute, sorry
.

Shattered OUT...

[edit on 1-11-2006 by ShatteredSkies]



posted on Nov, 2 2006 @ 01:52 AM
link   
i am sorry , i was under the delusion that the topic was conditions before 2003 , and that is what i answered .

if you [ RICH23 ] do not posess the integrity or attention span to stick to what was addressed , why should i bother

ps - can i take your silence on the issue of sunnis , jews etc as agreement ?


Originally posted by rich23

Originally posted by ignorant_ape

women ? yeah being raped by his sons was great
[ / sarcasm ]


Here's an account, by an educated, Westernised Iraqi girl, of how things are now for women in Iraq. The US has brought chaos to the country and the forces of fundamentalism are benefiting:


PS : this is the sencond time in this thread that you have run off at a tangent after making wild claims , and ignoring the counter argument .

there really is no point continuing this " discussion " , i have better things to do



posted on Dec, 13 2008 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Captain Hook
 

??? Juba has killed only 37 US soldiers



posted on Jan, 3 2009 @ 06:45 PM
link   
This is not my real ip address!



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join