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.

 

4 Americans Shot in the Back of Head After Copter Crashes

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
From the original article...


"These untimely deaths are a reminder of the extraordinary circumstances under which our professionals voluntarily serve to bring freedom and democracy to the Iraqi people," the Blackwater statement said.


What a load of crap.

The vast majority of those mercenaries are there for the money - they get paid up to a thousand bucks a day. I haven't seen any evidence that there are Blackwater mercenaries who donate their earnings to Iraqi charities. They go to Iraq, or any number of other countries, and kill people to buy boats and homes and nice jewelry for their wives - it's got absolutely NOTHING to do with freedom and democracy.

Voluntarily serve? They get paid exhorbitant amounts of money, it's not a freakin' charity organization.

The spin on that one is making me dizzy. I'm sure there are a number of otherwise good people in the organization, but I find it VERY hard to believe that there is such a thing as a highly-principled mercenary, it's the quintessential oxymoron.

Shooting some helpless schmuck in the back of the head is barbarism? Sure it is, but so is living the life of a hired gun, so I'd say what goes around comes around.


The only thing I find interesting at all in this article is the fact that a security contractor was flying with American soldiers on a mission in one of "their" helicopters?...

I am not sure, I am reading the Geneva Convention right now, but I do believe that mercanaries are baned under international standards - some call it a "law" but in the sense a guide line we agreed to follow.

I am confused on this, we are apparently using mercanaries quite a bit in this war.. more then I have read on in any other war? .. Why is that? Who are these people, what is there job, where do they come from, what are the companies names? And who owns these companies? ... I am sure who ever owns them sure is making alot of money off this war.




posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Well Gizmo asked so here goes

US Soldier jailed for Iraqi Deaths

US investigations into Iraqi deaths

Iraq rape soldier to plead guilty

And as for



This is a terrible act of barbarism...where is the outcry from Amnesty international or the United Nations condeming THIS! violations of the Geneva convention.....they are so quick to wave a finger at the US or Isreal or UK.


The US sidesteps the Geneva convention continually by using Guantanamo Bay, applying torture, violating human rights (Al-Ghrahib mean anything?) and moving people from their country of origion to face military tribunals.

I'm not sure which planet CaptGizmo has been on the past few years, but I wish I was there too.

Edit - I must add that the 9/11 Commission totally and utter rejected any claims that Saddam Husseins regime had anything to do at all with the events of 9/11, and that the supposed "ties" to Al Queada were unproven.

[edit on 24/0107/07 by neformore]


If any sidestepping of the Geneva Convention is occurring, it's because it applies to uniformed soldiers serving in a national military force, and not terrorists, insurgents, street thugs, etc.. The US hasn't as a matter of practice used torture, not that individual(s) haven't taken it upon themselves to mistreat their captives. When discovered, they've been punished. Discomfort isn't tantamount to torture, and there's a wide variety of techniques that aren't pleasant, but are not torture.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja

So every civilian contractor is in Iraq so they can kill people? As for their salary, what do you think a fair salary would be to entice someone to risk death daily in the performance of their jobs? $7.25/hr?
As for the term mercenary, as I have noticed it's used rather liberally around here-


If they are getting paid that means their owners are being paid a hell of a lot more then that! If thats the case why then do they not only pay the people fighting over there as Americans in the armed forces a crappy salary but they cut off their benefits as well and then they come back home to a crapload of debt since the majority of them are reservists who have to leave their high paying jobs, mortages, credit card bills, etc etc.
Pay them the 1000 bucks a day instead of these people



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by zerotime
Maybe it is just me, but I believe that all human beings need to survive to be more honorable and virtuous and killing people is not the way. I don’t care who is doing the killing or why the killing is being done. There is no justification - it is not the way. If you kill for revenge then you are a slave. You have let the actions of others control your actions. You are a slave and you have let evil win another battle.



No its not just you zerotime. I believe the same thing. But its never going to get better because here is the problem:

In the early 60's the U.S. Government commissioned a report on the feasibility of a peacetime economy. The result: it wasn't feasible. So all conflicts and wars are fabricated to stimulate the economy.

They found it difficult sellings wars on countries like Grenada so they had to invent an enemy that would last a long time. So they picked on Islam. All the bs you hear about Islam on Rush and Sean and Michael is all oriented towards war with Islam just to stimulate the economy. We even had to fabricate the 911 scenario ourselves, just to show how dangerous those Moslems where. Sure, some of its true but most of it is just propaganda.

War is part of life and always will be. Or at least until we find a way to stimulate the economy without using warfare as a pretext.


OMG............

I think I just agreed with John Lear on something.
JK man.

But it is exactly why I believe the government organized and carried out 9/11

Not to become a police state but because we would literally fall apart in a few years had we not done it (there was a major stock crash at the end of Clintons term .... Dot Com burst anyone?) .. Of course you can't tell the people that "Sorry folks, we must remain at a state of war and actively use materials" (literally fighting to go through supplies to buy more to stimulate the economy) .. Mmmm Just can't see that going over well with our sensitive population.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
I am confused on this, we are apparently using mercanaries quite a bit in this war.. more then I have read on in any other war? .. Why is that? Who are these people, what is there job, where do they come from, what are the companies names? And who owns these companies? ... I am sure who ever owns them sure is making alot of money off this war.


Well I would hazard a guess that some of these people belong to an organisation that begins with "M" and ends in "ossad"

"Mercenary" is a wonderful term and can be used to cover up so many things. Spec Ops, Intel experts, "observers" etc. Anyone who really shouldn't be in a particular place in a warzone is easy to class as a "mercenary"



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:19 PM
link   
There is plenty of barbarism to go around in Iraq.

While these killings are thuggish (if they were in fact anything more than shooting a corpse and then taking credit), by the standards of the conflict in Iraq they are hardly exceptional or unusual.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN

Originally posted by spacedoubt
like Americans would do a captured insurgent, under similar circumstances.


They are finding dead insurgents bound and gagged with holes drilled into their heads by the bucketfulls.

Also when bombs hit buildings, not only are people decapitated, they are sliced in half, mutilated, maimed, crushed, and burnt beyond recognition. What makes you think we hold high moral ground here? Bcause they youtube it and we dont?



Those insurgents were Sunnis, and they were killed by Shia death squads in retaliation for the Sunni violence.

www.muhajabah.com...

Hundreds of Iraqis are being tortured to death or summarily executed every month in Baghdad alone by death squads working from the Ministry of the Interior, the United Nations' outgoing human rights chief in Iraq has revealed.

John Pace, who left Baghdad two weeks ago, told The Independent on Sunday that up to three-quarters of the corpses stacked in the city's mortuary show evidence of gunshot wounds to the head or injuries caused by drill-bits or burning cigarettes. Much of the killing, he said, was carried out by Shia Muslim groups under the control of the Ministry of the Interior.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:21 PM
link   
well thank you for the links and i will read them however no need to insult me by asking what planet ive been living on.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
If any sidestepping of the Geneva Convention is occurring, it's because it applies to uniformed soldiers serving in a national military force, and not terrorists, insurgents, street thugs, etc.. The US hasn't as a matter of practice used torture, not that individual(s) haven't taken it upon themselves to mistreat their captives. When discovered, they've been punished. Discomfort isn't tantamount to torture, and there's a wide variety of techniques that aren't pleasant, but are not torture.


Oh well that makes it alright then huh? They don't wear uniforms so treat them like animals
Well, you just set up civilian contractors and undercover spec ops people for the same treatment you reserve for those in GITMO. Still, as they don;t wear uniforms that will be ok with you, won;t it?

BTW, the US disagrees with a large chunk of the world with regard to "torture". Certain interrogation techniques adopted by the US are classed as torture under the international courts (which the US disagrees with) and would not be allowed within European Union states.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptGizmo
well thank you for the links and i will read them however no need to insult me by asking what planet ive been living on.


It wasn't an insult at all! I'd love to know how you manged to avoid the news because, to be frank, I'd quite like to miss large chunks of this unpleasantness myself.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN

Originally posted by BlueRaja

So every civilian contractor is in Iraq so they can kill people? As for their salary, what do you think a fair salary would be to entice someone to risk death daily in the performance of their jobs? $7.25/hr?
As for the term mercenary, as I have noticed it's used rather liberally around here-


If they are getting paid that means their owners are being paid a hell of a lot more then that! If thats the case why then do they not only pay the people fighting over there as Americans in the armed forces a crappy salary but they cut off their benefits as well and then they come back home to a crapload of debt since the majority of them are reservists who have to leave their high paying jobs, mortages, credit card bills, etc etc.
Pay them the 1000 bucks a day instead of these people







Because a lot of these people have skill sets that are in demand- i.e. engineers, computers, truck drivers, electricians, plumbers, construction, security(former spec ops who A- know how to defend themselves B- know how to defend others/convoys C-know what's involved in security of a fixed site). They are force multipliers. They allow the military to do it's business without having to escort every convoy, and have personnel at every facility needing protection.


137

posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
Those insurgents were Sunnis, and they were killed by Shia death squads in retaliation for the Sunni violence.
This is not proven. The Iraqi's are not at war with each other as the media is trying to convice you, they are at war with their occupiers.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
Those insurgents were Sunnis, and they were killed by Shia death squads in retaliation for the Sunni violence.



They are also being killed by the supposed Iraqi troops that we are supposedly training...the same ones that keep turning on US Soldiers.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:33 PM
link   
raja


So every civilian contractor is in Iraq so they can kill people?


Where did you get that idea? Certainly not from my post, or any other post on this thread...



As for their salary, what do you think a fair salary would be to entice someone to risk death daily in the performance of their jobs? $7.25/hr?


Well, we expext a Marine PFC to do the same job and more, for about a thousand bucks a month, and these guys get a thousand bucks a day in some cases - I think they average about 600 though (600 a day).




..national governments reserve the right to strictly regulate the number, nature and armaments of such private forces and argue that provided they are not employed in frontline pro-active military activities that they are not mercenaries.


Well, they're entitled to that argument, but it's weak. Rather than debate semantics, it might make sense to look at the big picture. Men with automatic weapons, helicopters, armored vehicles, access to both private and 'military-owned' intelligence, who operate outside the rules of engagement, and are paid exhorbitant sums of money to take part in one or more facets of an armed conflict - they are what they are, regardless of any softening their image might undergo as a result of a name change.

Call them private military companies, I don't care. We could call them Fluffy Bunny Love Helpers if anyone thinks that will help, but in plain fact the term mercenary is applicable in accord with the commonly accepted defintions, of which there are only a few, and I think the negative connotation is duly deserved.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore

Originally posted by BlueRaja
If any sidestepping of the Geneva Convention is occurring, it's because it applies to uniformed soldiers serving in a national military force, and not terrorists, insurgents, street thugs, etc.. The US hasn't as a matter of practice used torture, not that individual(s) haven't taken it upon themselves to mistreat their captives. When discovered, they've been punished. Discomfort isn't tantamount to torture, and there's a wide variety of techniques that aren't pleasant, but are not torture.


Oh well that makes it alright then huh? They don't wear uniforms so treat them like animals
Well, you just set up civilian contractors and undercover spec ops people for the same treatment you reserve for those in GITMO. Still, as they don;t wear uniforms that will be ok with you, won;t it?

BTW, the US disagrees with a large chunk of the world with regard to "torture". Certain interrogation techniques adopted by the US are classed as torture under the international courts (which the US disagrees with) and would not be allowed within European Union states.


I'm not saying they should be treated like animals- just that they don't qualify for all of the protections that a uniformed soldier would expect. Stress positions, sleep deprivation, disorientation, shivering, annoying sounds, while unpleasant aren't akin to beating, electrocution of parts of the anatomy, cutting off extremities, drowning, etc... and when the term torture is used, those are the connotations that arise, and is disengenuous.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by 137

Originally posted by BlueRaja
Those insurgents were Sunnis, and they were killed by Shia death squads in retaliation for the Sunni violence.
This is not proven. The Iraqi's are not at war with each other as the media is trying to convice you, they are at war with their occupiers.



So you're going on record saying that Sunnis don't kill Shia or vice versa?
Can you please explain at how you arrived at this conclusion?



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:55 PM
link   
This is the funniest thing I keep hearing .. Is that AMerica is goign to NUKE this person or Nuke this place ... FUNNY STUFF ... Nuclear Weapons will never be used again .. and if they are ... God help the WHOLE WORLD because it will be catastrophic ... We have other means and other bombs that pack quite the punch ... What they need to do is Evacuate the whole area ... Put NUMBERS on them you know start with # 1 .... and go on from there ... mark them keep up with them .. If they don't have a number .. Then gie them one if they won't keep thier number ... Then ... Give them a second chance .. Third Chance ... and Well they should be Handled ... Other than that we will just have a bunhc of people running around a nation ... that is killing each other ...



Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by VoXiSo
More barbaric acts, when will it stop..



Yes, if true, barbaric. But certainly not any more barbaric than anything we have done in Iraq over the past several years.

I would respectfully advise caution in believing any story that comes out of the middle east in the next few months because most of these stories will be psychologically oriented propaganda designed to inflame the American psyche towards the full acceptance of nuking Iran.

Nobody needs to be nuked for anything at this point. Besides killing a lot of people, the effects of nuclear contamination and closing the Straits of Hormuz, gas will go to $10 a gallon at the pump. Will that be worth whatever perceived ill Iran has caused or is likely to cause in the next few years? (Don't include a deliverable atomic bomb. That allegation is not supported by the facts.)



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
raja


So every civilian contractor is in Iraq so they can kill people?


Where did you get that idea? Certainly not from my post, or any other post on this thread...




quote: Originally posted by WyrdeOne

I haven't seen any evidence that there are Blackwater mercenaries who donate their earnings to Iraqi charities. They go to Iraq, or any number of other countries, and kill people to buy boats and homes and nice jewelry for their wives - it's got absolutely NOTHING to do with freedom and democracy.


As for a Marine PFC, or any other service member(including myself), we know what sort of salaries we can expect to be paid, and what sorts of tasks we might have to perform when we sign our contracts. These "mercenaries" are former SF, SEAL, SAS, Ranger, etc... and have a great deal more training and experience than a PFC. Being that they are civilians, they aren't compelled by duty to do the unsavory tasks that a soldier or marine might have to do. So what might it take to get them to leave their home and families to go into a hell hole, and risk death and dismemberment? A level of compensation that is high enough for it to outweigh the risks. They don't get any other benefits though. If they get hurt, or sick, etc.. they have to take care of it out of pocket.


137

posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
So you're going on record saying that Sunnis don't kill Shia or vice versa?
Can you please explain at how you arrived at this conclusion?

A refugee from Iraq (who fled from Saddam's regime) and went back for a family visit told me this. Ofcourse it could be that some killings are done by gangs fighting each other, but none of the groups have claimed a single bombing, kidnapping or kill on their fellow Iraqi citizens.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Correct me if i'm wrong but the US recently Ok a pre-emptive nuclear strike. That would mean we are willing to use nukes as an offensive weapon. As such why would we need that if we did not intend to use it?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join