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.

 

The Enemy Within:US Female Soldiers Raped.

page: 13
34
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by liquidsmoke206
 


Most U.S. military personel demonstrate more maturity and more self control than most college students, especially when you look at the statistics.

When is the last time you heard of U.S. soldiers forcing a junior member to drink themselves to death in order to be accepted among peers?

U.S. military personal are on average more disciplined and have a stronger sense of morality and duty than those outside of the military in the same age groups.

Your continuous attacks against U.S. soldiers are way, way off base. Your continual embrace of ignorance clearly shows that you are mocking your superiors.




posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by liquidsmoke206
 



Wow. You're actually serious. I can't stop laughing.

Did some soldiers beat you up and take your lunch money when you were little or something?

Obviously those reports are BS- you actually read it and thought it was serious? You don't seem to know much about the military or it's culture, although you seem to think you do.

That's #ing funny.



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by liquidsmoke206
 


Maybe it's just my horrible math acting up again, which it does frequently, but if 71% are assaulted and/or raped but 80% aren't ever reported then something is horribly wrong with the numbers there. And as I said, sexual assault can be as innocent as a male soldier squeezing a female soldier's shoulder and she decides it was unwanted sexual attention.

I was in the National Guard a few years back. At drill I was standing with a few male soldiers talking and kidding around. One told a joke just as a CO walked by. The CO decided the joke was inappropriate simply because I was the only female standing there and told the guy he shouldn't talk like that around me because he didn't know me well enough to know if I would take it wrong. By wrong he meant sexual assault. I didn't of course, I thought it was pretty funny actually.

My point here being that there are women who have a stick up their rear and think that every look, pat on the back, and shoulder squeeze is sexual in nature when it's not. There are women who will yell sexual assault if a male soldier so much as winks at them or pats them on the back as they walk by. All it takes for some women is for them to be having a bad day and they will intentionally cry foul when even they know nothing inappropriate has happened. Once again, it does happen as does rape. But not every claimed sexual assault really is, just as not every female who has cried rape telling the truth. Most are, but there are some who lie about it for various reasons.

I broke my own rule and read through the rest of the thread after I made my initial post a few pages back and the majority of what I have seen here has been more of the same "soldiers are brain-washed, puppy-killing, murdering rapists" crud that floods every thread on this board about the military. I have never in my life came across a group of people as large as the one that inhabits threads like these that is so anti-military they will take any excuse to bash the entire group instead of the few morons that actually do things they shouldn't. Not specifically you, I would have to go back and re-read your posts to determine if I am including you in this statement as I simply can't remember specifically who said what. Never in my life have I seen this happen, except here.

Do some soldiers rape people? Yes. Do all soldiers rape people? Heck no. And the worst part is that some people on this board latch on to stories such as this one and take it to mean that all military men are like that. I know more military men and women than I can count and not a single one of them would ever rape someone. I personally have spent time alone with several military men I am friends with and not once have a single one of them done anything to make me feel uncomfortable, sexually harassed, etc. And not once have any of them even attempted to rape me.

I honestly think that a lot of the posters, not all but a lot of them, are missing the point that while rape is horrible regardless of what occupation the perpetrator happens to have, and that yes some men manage to get into the military and then go and rape someone, it is not something that happens more often in the military than in the civilian world. I provided my own research a few pages back that shows this. Yet it was over-looked and ignored by the majority of the posters since then because it does not fit in with their view of reality. And again I say, that is just asinine.

Edited almost immediately to say: Sorry for the rant! I just become really irritated by gross generalizations about our military by people, no specific person being targeted here, who have never been in the military and have no clue what does or does not happen in it except what they read in an article or whatever theories they make up off the top of their heads. Again, not denying that rape and sexual assault happen in the military but it is not something that happens to as great an extent as some members here would like to believe. Just as many other beliefs that some members here hold about the military are so far off the mark that they couldn't get any further from the truth if they tried.

[edit on 4-11-2008 by Jenna]



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by liquidsmoke206
 



Did you ever consider that even if college guys are more likely to rape it's simply because there are more potential victims, and more opportunities(parties etc..).


I see, so that makes rape on college campuses acceptable? Is there any length you will not go to in order to justify the actions of college students while attacking military personel?

Yeah, the price of going to war, for defending ones nation is very steep in its costs to the psychological strength of anyone. What messed you up so bad that you think you have a right to attack the people who put their lives on the line for our country?



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by craig732
 




I have yet to see a link to the alleged "figures and reports released by the Department of Defense and other government/military agencies".



Er,page 12 abut 7 posts in.You'll find links from the D.O.D.itself.They list the figures,i even quoted them.

And you said you've read things properly.




[edit on 4-11-2008 by jakyll]



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


Oh lets play the he's justifying rape for college students angle....no class.
Look I'm saying that opportunities for rape will increase frequency.
Don't you think if there were more women in the military and they were allowed to have keggers all time, with no supervision that the rates would skyrocket to a way higher frequency that at colleges just based on the personality types and various disorders suffered military personnel?

what messed you up so bad that attacking a military who doesn't defend you but makes life more dangerous by attacking countries for no reason and creating a huge group of citizens with mental issues that will one day integrate back into society with those issues is such a repulsive thing?



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   
reply to post by liquidsmoke206
 


Yeah.

The military all by itself just got up and went to Iraq because we wanted to.... I joined because I couldn't wait to go off to join a war on a whim.

Yeah. Real smart. You should be focusing on the leaders, not the military. We don't ever "attack other countries" on a whim.

Did you forget we answer to the .....drum roll...... US GOVERNMENT?!?!???? CIVILIANS!?!?!?

And yeah - I said I wouldn't post again, but that was too much. LOL


[edit on 4-11-2008 by mf_luder]

[edit on 4-11-2008 by mf_luder]



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by mf_luder
 


Signing up to go to a war that is wrong on every level, says a lot about someone's character. But thats really not the topic of this thread.

I could attack leaders, but there's plenty of threads already doing that, and this one is about the military so I'm tryin to stay on topic.



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Yeah, but your additions to the thread are beyond ridiculous. You should do something about that. You clearly have psychological problems stemming from some soldiers doing something bad to you or your family and you can't get past it.

You're almost exactly the racist that got beat up by a black guy once so he thinks all black people are murderous thugs. It's not even sad to me; it's just funny.



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 




REALLY? Then were are all your posts trying to explain why these rapes occur. Anyone who offers reasons for why these rapes occure you attack as morally obtuse.


How a woman dresses or women being in a male dominated area or men being desperate for sex etc are not reasons,they are pitiful BS excuses used to justify the actions of those who commit these crimes.

You've tried desperatly since joining this thread to deflect it from the issue at hand.Its not about rapes in the military as a whole,its about rapes that are happening in the military units that are deployed in Iraq.Thats an important thing to remember here.If you want to continue the line of discussion you are on,start your own thread don't try and derail mine.




Obviously then, you know absolutely nothing about reasearch, because unless you compare the group in question to similiar groups, all of your observations are meaningless dribble, unless your own goal is to ridicule them. Parasites are more honorable creatures.


Why? So you can rest easier knowing that there might be some men in another countries military who are just as bad or worse as some men in America's military?

If you wanna talk about other armed forces,how bout this;Iraq is split into 4 zones North,Central,South Central and South.The US forces control North and central,the Polish control a multinational force in South Central and the British control a multinational force in the South.

Now,just how many breaking stories of rape and other crimes has their been since 2003 involving the Polish,British,Australian forces and the 36 other countries that have had/still have troops deployed there;compared with the US that is??






[edit on 4-11-2008 by jakyll]



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 05:17 PM
link   


If you wanna talk about other armed forces,how bout this;Iraq is split into 4 zones North,Central,South Central and South.The US forces control North and central,the Polish control a multinational force in South Central and the British control a multinational force in the South.


Not even true.


Now,just how many breaking stories of rape and other crimes has their been since 2003 involving the Polish,British,Australia and the 36 other countries that have had troops deployed there;compared with the US that is??



Let's ignore your first facts are wrong and even if they were true they insinuate each area is equally as large so the ratios are American 50%, British and polish 25%. That's not true either, but let's continue: Can you read Polish? Which government and media is the most transparent?



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperViking
 


Every map i've seen of the Iraq division zones say that it is.find me one that doesn't and maybe i'll listen to you.



Let's ignore your first facts are wrong and even if they were true they insinuate each area is equally as large so the ratios are American 50%, British and polish 25%. That's not true either, but let's continue: Can you read Polish? Which government and media is the most transparent?


To which facts are you referring?

And i didn't ask about size or ratios i asked about news stories.




[edit on 4-11-2008 by jakyll]



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by jakyll
 


Show you one map?! I've been there three times!!! Your information is civilian- it's pathetic. The Brits and Poles control small cordons- they don't control a combined 50% of the place, as you suggested.



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperViking
 


So what you're saying is you don't have a map.

I guess the uncle and cousin i have out there along with several American friends must be in the wrong.I'll let them know when i next get the chance too.



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 06:09 PM
link   


I don't have any unclassified ones, no. You think the sections are divided equally? And you want people to take you seriously? Maybe on this website- you shouldn't venture anywhere else.



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperViking
 


Did i say they were equal??

No.

I said that different zones were under different commands.

Try reading what i said properly,it'd make this debate so much easier.C'mon,you're a soldier,you should pay attention to the details.




[edit on 4-11-2008 by jakyll]



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   
I'm sorry- you didn't say anything about them being equal? Than why did you try to equate them by asking why the other areas don't have the same ratio of reports? Ignoring the transparency issue- which is profound- why would you ask to compare the number of reports if you were not already comparing the amount of soldiers?

Your attempts to slant arguments are incredibly transparent (to use the word again) to anyone with even a limited amount of reason.



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperViking
 


And no reason comes as limited as yours.



I'm sorry- you didn't say anything about them being equal? Than why did you try to equate them by asking why the other areas don't have the same ratio of reports? Ignoring the transparency issue- which is profound- why would you ask to compare the number of reports if you were not already comparing the amount of soldiers?


I believe the point i was trying to make is that certain people on this thread seem to think that such behaviour is the norm in all armies.The fact that there has been no reports of rapes by soldiers on fellow soldiers in other armed forces that are in Iraq shows that such an assumption just isn't true.(that doesn't mean there hasn't been obviously,but after 5yrs or so you would expect to here something if there had)



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by jakyll
 


And your response was to ask about reports filed in less transparent armies- one of which whose native tongue is not English, drastically limiting the amount of information English speakers could access!- that constitute an infinitismally smaller ratio? Again: That COULD NOT have been a serious response to those concerns. Why do you persist in doing that?



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by SuperViking
 


Half the allied forces in Iraq don't have English as their native tongue,but you can bet they all speak it.

And to say that language is a barrier in spreading news
Most countries have English language newspapers and English language news programmes,you can even read and watch Al-Jazeera in English.

And just for you,a Polish news site,in English.
www.warsawvoice.pl...


Now,make me laugh heartily or go away,all this stalking is beginning to bore me.




[edit on 4-11-2008 by jakyll]



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join