It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Saddam's Lion Cubs...

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 06:23 AM
This is so sad.

The 'Ashbal Saddam' or 'Saddam's Lion Cubs' are said to be one of the last lines of defence for Saddam's regime. The unit is wholly made up of boys between the ages of 10 to 17 who, like the majority of the conscripts we are turning to dust have been forced into the unit, and brainwashed to fanatically support Saddam.
They have said they will fight to the death.

Who will kill these unfortunate children?

we will.

I know you are going to say well it was Saddam who done all this etc..
But had this 'disarmament' been done in any other way these kids could have been rehabilitated (by the Iraqis themselves mostly) and still have had a chance of a life along with with their fathers and brothers who we have already killed and who were as much a victim of this regime as any of the civilians.
I'm sure there are lots of Iraqis who would not take freedom over their families dead bodies.

I hope it does not come down to a fight against these kids. The troops will have their minds stained forever if they have to shoot 12 year old boys.

[Edited on 4-4-2003 by kegs]

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 06:46 AM
Disturbing! Makes the Hitler youth look like cub scouts.

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 08:04 AM
"But had this 'disarmament' been done in any other way these kids could have been rehabilitated (by the Iraqis themselves mostly) and still have had a chance of a life"

Do you seriously believe this???

Ok, lets (for arguement's sake) say that the inspectors found nothing, Saddam had disarmed, etc. Ok, now what? Guess what? Saddam is still in power, the kids are still "lion cubs", and still brainwashed. You think the Iraqis would be able to "deprogram" them with Saddam still in power? I wish I had the luxury of living in your dreamworld....

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 08:21 AM
I'm not going to get into a hypothetical argument with you Garzok, These points have been discussed at length over the last few months.
The fact remains that the bringer of death for these brainwashed children will be the ones who have set out to liberate them. Where is the line between the Victims of Saddams regime that we propose to save, and those we need to kill to save them?


posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 08:36 AM
Yep, I've been thinking along these lines aswell. At the moment everyone's thinking that we'll be saving people's lives, and even if we kill 2-3K civilians we'll still have saved more than that within a few years.

But all of the Iraqi soldiers we kill will also have to go down on our list I think. If the casualty figures really are as high as people have been saying then we're going to have to wait for quite a long time for the moral argument to hold.

Can war ever be moral? Particularly when it's a violent war instead of a war of liberation. Maybe Afghanistan/Kosovo made us take our guards down... but I think this war is becoming more unjustified with each person who dies in this conflict, from any side.

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 08:49 AM
At any time, these soldiers have the ability to lay down their arms and surrender. If they instead choose to shoot at you...they must be taken out. Even at 10, I think I'd be able to realize when enough is enough... If a 10 year old is lobbing grenades in your direction, he's gotta go... Is it tragic? Yes. But if everyone in the world were to roll over peacefully, for every ruler who uses children as soldiers, we'd all be under such dictators...cowering behind our morality...

We'll do what we can to minimize this, as we have...but you can only shoot yourself in the foot so many times and expect victory....

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 08:52 AM

Originally posted by Bob88
Disturbing! Makes the Hitler youth look like cub scouts.

Sorry BoB88. Hitler has his own youth division, the HitlerJugend Panzer Division. In comparison, those Iraki are nothing. Even the others SS division were not so fanatic than them.

But we can see a constancy.Hitler had " his " youth, Saddam has " his " youth. Khadafi has " his " youth too, and even a women division dedicated only to " Colonel ".

Tyrants are all the same.


posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 09:03 AM
Ahh yes Gazrok. If you're in a war and they shoot at you, you have to shoot back.

But if we're going to kill all of these people, then we have to take responsibility for our actions. WE started this war. Therefore each person who dies is OUR responsibility. If we underestimated how many people would fight, then the extra people who die are still our responsibility.

Even if Saddam had openly stated that he had WMD's and been totally unhelpful in destroying them, we'd still have to take responsibility for the deaths involved in the conflict, because we are the ones launching the attack.

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 09:19 AM
But not alone...I think all would agree that Saddam shares in this responsibility as well. It is HIS actions that have led to this, and especially, it is HIS decision to put the lives of these children, and civilians, in danger.


posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 09:26 AM
I won't agree with you. Saddam is a sh*t. But we started the war.

[Edited on 4-4-2003 by dom]

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 09:44 AM
But am I understanding you right? You are then saying that Saddam should accept NO responsibility for civilians and children who die in this war?

So when he:

Fires at our soldiers while holing up in a hospital or
Puts anti-aircraft batteries in a schoolyard or
Sends 10-17yr olds into battle or
Hangs someone for waving at coalition troops or
Herds women and children into military targets or
Shells his own civilians as they flee the city....

He bears absolutely NO responsibility?

Hey, to each his own....


posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 09:52 AM

The only things we can offset are actions which the regime would have carried out anyway (such as torturing political prisoners, etc.)

Everything else is the action of a country fighting an invading force... although personally I'd prefer if they didn't use civilians as human shields, but if we weren't attacking them they wouldnt have to.

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 10:15 AM

Originally posted by dom

but if we weren't attacking them they wouldnt have to.

For you, all the arguments are good, isn't it ?

Peoples like Saddam ( Hitler, Stalin...) have to be defeated. And with peoples like them, you've no choice. You fight or you surrend. But you know it. It's just that you don't like the USA, so, you'll use ALL the possible arguments.

If we were during WW2, I would send you in nazi Germany as humanshield !

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 10:32 AM
Saddam is to held responsible for his actions.Some of you seem to forget that Saddam has been killing his people long before the war started.If the US got up and left right now,there would still be killing Iraq.
Everyone protest the war now,should have been protesting Saddam long ago.


posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 10:32 AM
And I'd shove a V2 up your backside and click launch.

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 12:47 PM
Let me make what I was trying to say a little clearer.

I've made a thread on this before, but it got no replies.

The majority of the Iraqi army is made up of conscripts. You know what a conscript is I take it? They are forced into joining the army. Understood?

We are on a quest to liberate Iraq. Agreed?

The conscripts that are forced to fight for Saddam are the Fathers and brothers of the people we are sworn to free. Can you understand that?

They are as much a victim of Saddam's regime as any civilian. The majority of them hate Saddam as much as any of you. Can you comprehend that?

And so are these kids.

So, what we are doing to free the Iraqi people is killing their husbands, sons, brothers, uncles and fathers.

So can you see why they are not so enamored with this liberation?

I hear all this 'can't make an omelet without breaking eggs' rubbish and I wonder...

Is your mother an egg? Is your Father one too? What about your brothers and your friends and their families? Would you consider them worth 'breaking' for anything?

The pro-war people seem to like keeping the arguments one-dimensional, and within the comfort zone of their mindset.
Well I am sorry, but I'm afraid these are people too, just like any you know and love.

So they can surrender at any time...?

Have you wondered why they arent? Do you remember the vast numbers that surrendered on the first day of the first gulf war?

I'll tell you why they aren't. Saddam is not stupid. He learns his lessons. He has infused every outfit of his army with elements of the Fedayeen and his republican guard solely for the purpose of preventing the troops from doing so. Ever wondered why we still havent taken Basra? The city with the most anti-Saddam people in the country?
Some Iraqi divisions have had to shoot their officers just to get the chance to surrender. These men have a gun pointed at the back of their heads and the front.

Want sources on that? Tough.
Search for the thread "something to remember" and you'll get them. I can't be arsed illuminating anyones ignorance right now.

So the majority of the people we have killed are exactly the people we are there to liberate.

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad

I'm sorry if any of any of you consider my position as 'living in a dream world' but what do you consider more of a dream world? Living in a world of 'collateral damage' how good the latest missile, planes and bombs are? People who live in a world of enemy combatants and easily identifiable good guys/bad guys?
These are all terms made to dehumanize the truth of what actually happens. The same as this war coverage does, as we sit in comfort and watch it on our TVs then change over for a comedy or the ten oclock film.

And. Oh forget it..

Im pretty angry right now, and Ive had a drink or two so I apologies if this post sound condescending or whatever.

Im going to sign off and go to the pub.

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 02:43 PM
The "dreamworld" comment was really directed more towards one point...

Is there another way to remove Saddam from power, other than what we are doing right now?

The answer to that, is no. We tried the decapitation route, for the sole goal of saving Iraqi lives, as well as our own soldiers', but either Saddam survived, or his ranking members of the regime are doing everything they can to exhibit he's still alive.

Nobody wants innocents to die for Saddam...but there doesn't seem to be an alternative.... It's not like staying out would save more Iraqi lives...we're talking about someone who killed 5000 of his own with WOMD already, and kills thousands more each year of his regime...

I realize that the Iraqi soldiers seem to have no choice...but they do. Like you said...they need to shoot their commander if he doesn't allow surrender. I don't need you to give a link, I know you are correct (just think about those Iraqis who surrendered the other day with bullets in their arses from their own units as they surrendered.

May this be over soon, and may they see their families safe and sound...

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 03:44 PM

Originally posted by dom
And I'd shove a V2 up your backside and click launch.

A V2 or a Scud ? Yeah, what a pacifist man you are....

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 03:58 PM
It blows my mind when people read about Saddam having an army of children,and get mad at the U.S.
We are talking about a man/monster that uses children,has multiple torture chambers,murder,rapes,lies,uses WMD's on his own people,yet the coalition are the bad guy's in some peoples minds.
Don't you get it,all of these horrors will come to stop,when Saddam and his thugs are removed.
Some call Bush/Blair war criminals,wrong,the war criminal is Saddam.
God willing the day's of appeasment are over.........

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 08:03 PM
as a former iraqi all i can say is this, you may feel sorry for these children, but believe me when i say, these children will kill US troops with out hesitation, you forget what most of the 'lion cubs' turn into, these are the youngest members of the rebublicaan guard, but unlike adults they are more afraid of saddam then there own parents, they will kill or be killed, you may not like it, and you dont have to, but these are the next generation of terrorests and republican guard, and they will kill for there 'leader'.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in