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.

 

U.S. Army problems in Iraq?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 4 2004 @ 12:05 AM
link   
A U.S. Marine Corps officer said they would "try to do things differently" than the army in Iraq. Army officers took it as implied criticism.

What did this Marine Corps officer mean? What is the army doing wrong?




posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 08:47 PM
link   
The US casualties to Iraqi casualties are somewhere around 1 dead american for every 15 dead Iraqi's... I don't think thats too bad compared to Veitnam or the Civil War.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
What did this Marine Corps officer mean? What is the army doing wrong?
I think that it means they wish to operate more stealthily and in smaller groups, while they distinguish between civilians and 'Iraq aggresives'. This way, they don't blatantly destroy civilians, mistaking them for the armed Iraqi aggressives.

I think the army is just shooting anything that walks and moves, by the reports I have been reading, so I can see where the problem lies when the Army indiscriminately shoots all Iraqi's.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 09:26 PM
link   

I think the army is just shooting anything that walks and moves..............indiscriminately shoots


Ahhh yes, and if this was the case there IMMORTAL, wouldn't the Iraqi casualty numbers be far higher than they are now?
I also see no mention of those Iraqi's or whomever that are "indiscriminately" killing their own people and Arab brothers and sister?

Keep reading those reports you read, k?



seekerof

[Edited on 5-4-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Originally posted by Seekerof

Ahhh yes, and if this was the case there IMMORTAL, wouldn't the Iraqi casualty numbers be far higher than they are now?
Yes, there would be far greater numbers in civilian casualties at the moment, but my point is in reference also to the bombing and the subsequent destruction of the land area of Iraq.


I also see no mention of those Iraqi's or whomever that are "indiscriminately" killing their own people and Arab brothers and sister?
Why should G. W. Bush care if they kill themselves? Did you see the time he joked about not finding the WMD? Joking at the expense of ill-informed people about the real reasons for the unjust wars. Also, if the U.S.A respects religions, then why won't it follow it's own laws with the Iraq treasures and museums, as the museums were looted and not stopped by U.S soldiers. I think that most of the treasures ended up in Rich peoples hands in the US somewhere.


Keep reading those reports you read, k?

Yeah, I will keep reading those reports.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 10:24 PM
link   

the Iraq treasures and museums, as the museums were looted and not stopped by U.S soldiers. I think that most of the treasures ended up in Rich peoples hands in the US somewhere.


Most?
Small fraction maybe........
Museum looting: it didn't happen
Iraq's museums: what really happened




Did you see the time he joked about not finding the WMD?


Has no bearing on the "indiscriminate shootings of anything that moves or walks".



seekerof



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 10:41 PM
link   


I think the army is just shooting anything that walks and moves, by the reports I have been reading, so I can see where the problem lies when the Army indiscriminately shoots all Iraqi's.


Dude, your "reports" suck. If anything the army has been too SOFT in how they deal with people.




Yes, there would be far greater numbers in civilian casualties at the moment, but my point is in reference also to the bombing and the subsequent destruction of the land area of Iraq.

Sorry buddy, we aren't blowing up houses or buildings anymore. During the first days of the war - yeah - we took out critical targets. But you know what, we struck with unprecedented accuracy and little colateral damage. The only people "bombing" anything these days are those who set improvised explosives on the side of the road to try and kill our troops who are there only to keep the peace.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
I also see no mention of those Iraqi's or whomever that are "indiscriminately" killing their own people and Arab brothers and sister?

Keep reading those reports you read, k?


Dude, he never said Iraqis were killing their own people.

Tell me honestly, do you believe everything the government tells you? For a self-proclaimed "seeker of logic," you really don't live up to the billing very well.


If he is reading the wrong reports, fine. He's wrong. But what if you're reading the wrong reports? You seem to be the kind of person that believes everything you're told.

I don't believe everything I read or am told, but don't throw it away. There is always more to the story, especially in war. They don't tell you everything, in case you didn't realize.

[Edited on 5-4-2004 by sweatmonicaIdo]



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Sorry buddy, we aren't blowing up houses or buildings anymore. During the first days of the war - yeah - we took out critical targets. But you know what, we struck with unprecedented accuracy and little colateral damage. The only people "bombing" anything these days are those who set improvised explosives on the side of the road to try and kill our troops who are there only to keep the peace.


Uh oh. Another un-American calling himself an American!



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

Originally posted by Seekerof
I also see no mention of those Iraqi's or whomever that are "indiscriminately" killing their own people and Arab brothers and sister?

Keep reading those reports you read, k?


Dude, he never said Iraqis were killing their own people.

Tell me honestly, do you believe everything the government tells you? For a self-proclaimed "seeker of logic," you really don't live up to the billing very well.


If he is reading the wrong reports, fine. He's wrong. But what if you're reading the wrong reports? You seem to be the kind of person that believes everything you're told.

I don't believe everything I read or am told, but don't throw it away. There is always more to the story, especially in war. They don't tell you everything, in case you didn't realize.

[Edited on 5-4-2004 by sweatmonicaIdo]


If you read what he said, Seekerof never claimed that IMMORTAL said this - he was making the point himself, which is quite valid.




Uh oh. Another un-American calling himself an American!



What exactly makes me unamerican? Because I say that we aren't blowing up peoples houses and buildings in Iraq anymore (we aren't - we are actually building things for them)? Because I rightfully point out that the ones bombing people are in fact Iraqi's? Give me a break. Nothing I said was unamerican.



posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Seekerof: "Ahhh yes, and if this was the case there IMMORTAL, wouldn't the Iraqi casualty numbers be far higher than they are now? "

Well, unfortunately the Pentagon doesn't deem it important enough to even keep a running tally of how many Iraqi civilians have died. Hell, they don't even REPORT 90% of the attacks that go on in Iraq because of U.S. public opinion.

We're pushing 10,000. iraqbodycount.com...

Change your nic. You're no Seeker of Logic, you're a Consumer of Propaganda.

I'm sure you still believe there are WMDs hiding under a rock somewhere...


jako



posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
Change your nic. You're no Seeker of Logic, you're a Consumer of Propaganda.





posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
We're pushing 10,000. iraqbodycount.com...


We?
Who is the we?

And I hate to say it, but 10,000 is nothing. Those figures take into account all Iraqi civilians who died in the invasion - not just those killed by US fire.

It's strange to see you caring so much about the Iraqis. In other threads you have stated that US forces should pull out and that it doesn't matter how many die in a civil war - let the Iraqis kill each other is your motto.

It seems you change stances just to support a weak argument.



posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Leveller: "We?
Who is the we? "


Umm, the human race. Didn't you get an application?

And I hate to say it, but 10,000 is nothing. Those figures take into account all Iraqi civilians who died in the invasion - not just those killed by US fire. "

Awww, how touching. So 10,000 ain't so bad. Er, I guess you mean 10,000 Iraqis, though, because 3,000 dead Americans forced huge changes in US policy and apparently appalled the whole world... Now I understand where you're coming from.

"It's strange to see you caring so much about the Iraqis. In other threads you have stated that US forces should pull out and that it doesn't matter how many die in a civil war - let the Iraqis kill each other is your motto.

Yes, I do say that. With Americans around for them to slaughter, it only adds to the violence, gives them an easy focus. Take away the invaders, and let people get on with their daily lives and deal with their OWN internal politics (that's called democracy, fyi).

Yes, maybe some Sunnis will kill some Shia's and vice versa. Once they install "democracy" everything will be all well and good, right? But hey, wait a second, doesn't your own fabulous country, a shining light of freedom and democracy to the whole world, have BY FAR the highest murder rate in the world?. Funny, huh? Go McDemocracy!

It seems you change stances just to support a weak argument."

My argument is strong and my stance is consistent. See above. Give it another shot, old boy.


jakomo



[Edited on 6-4-2004 by Jakomo]



posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

I think the army is just shooting anything that walks and moves..............indiscriminately shoots


Ahhh yes, and if this was the case there IMMORTAL, wouldn't the Iraqi casualty numbers be far higher than they are now?
I also see no mention of those Iraqi's or whomever that are "indiscriminately" killing their own people and Arab brothers and sister?

Keep reading those reports you read, k?



seekerof

[Edited on 5-4-2004 by Seekerof]



hey seekerof, why dont you keep reading those figures k?

who says the figures are accurate, the hospitals???

Cyrus



posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller

Originally posted by Jakomo
We're pushing 10,000. iraqbodycount.com...


We?
Who is the we?

And I hate to say it, but 10,000 is nothing. Those figures take into account all Iraqi civilians who died in the invasion - not just those killed by US fire.
what are you stupid???
It's strange to see you caring so much about the Iraqis. In other threads you have stated that US forces should pull out and that it doesn't matter how many die in a civil war - let the Iraqis kill each other is your motto.
who's talking about other threads? you're hopeless...argue some sense boy!
It seems you change stances just to support a weak argument.


better than blindly consuming propaganda and being "oh so patriotic" despite your having a helpless rube for a president, (..it's just, i disagree?)
Cyrus


[Edited on 6-4-2004 by Cyrus]



posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
What exactly makes me unamerican? Because I say that we aren't blowing up peoples houses and buildings in Iraq anymore (we aren't - we are actually building things for them)? Because I rightfully point out that the ones bombing people are in fact Iraqi's? Give me a break. Nothing I said was unamerican.


Actually, I was referring to your "unprecedented accuracy and little collateral damage statement." Can you prove that our weapons are not subject to human errors? You seem to imply that American weapons are these super weapons of good that only hit the bad guys. Past experience has shown that is not the case. Prove to me that they are just that damn perfect.

"Troops there to keep the peace?" Keep the peace for whom? Iraq? The world? Or the U.S. and it's interests?



posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Hey you Ukrainian hotshot with the flashy lips, how about post to the contrary with some real articles instead of the USUAL Russian bravado...which amounts to misfired sub launched missiles and pilots that get 20-40 hours of flight training a year, but still have the worlds best airforce...



seekerof



posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Hey you Ukrainian hotshot with the flashy lips, how about post to the contrary with some real articles instead of the USUAL Russian bravado...which amounts to misfired sub launched missiles and pilots that get 20-40 hours of flight training a year, but still have the worlds best airforce...



seekerof


Dude, you've been dropping the USUAL U.S.A. government #1 bravado since day one.



posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 11:44 PM
link   
kill em all!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join