Ansar Al-Sunnah executes Marine Prisoners

[K e r b e r o s]

Oh ... your right ...

storm the capital and demand his impeachment

I don't think I could -- I'll wait for the term to end in earnest; besides, Rumsfeld is getting smarter. It was no more then awhile ago he thought about changing our military from the ground up ... :rolling:

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

Rakurai you make it sound as if there's no american soldiers accused of horrible dispicable crimes ...which isnt the case. Does it mean that all US soldiers are murdering scum? of course not ...this is a fringe element ...just like Timothy McVeigh is ...which I'm sure you'd agree doesnt represent all militia groups

No there've been a few acts, and they've gotten courtmartialed. That's the difference, the quantity and the punishment.

Zarqawi, rebel leader, has himself personally beheaded many. It's tough to watch but it shows the true nature of our enemy. I propose we do this to them. Yet still, even with a tactic as barbaric (yet, I tell you, it'd yield results) we're still above these people. Those it's done to are already dead. And they are enemy fighters. Not civillian truck drivers or humanitarians.

It's unpopular, and gruesome, but it should seriously be considered.

At the very -least- cast aside all barbarity to confront barbarity, review our geneva and ROE standards for the conflicts. Geneva conventions are seriously outdated. Some of the things are good, POW treatment for uniformed soldiers and the like. The problem is, can you name me one war we've been in since they were created where the enemy has followed the rules on a general/wide scale? There are absolutely rediculous items in 'the rules', too, such as the paratrooper one I mentioned. And the mission parameters example I gave (that's not exactly the rules problems but more of the way the military is going about it) Brigade commanders by the time they've reached the position want to retire looking 'clean' and thus there's no real initiative that might make someone look bad but actually accomplish things. We need a radical shift in our own policy making, culture, and leadership. Things would change if we had someone like a new McArthur show up and such.

 

[CptStern]

No there've been a few acts, and they've gotten courtmartialed. That's the difference, the quantity and the punishment.

come on courtmartial for murder is a slap on the wrist ...and no they didnt all get charged

Zarqawi, rebel leader, has himself personally beheaded many.

he's a foreigner is he not? ...I doubt he controls all insurgency in iraq

It's tough to watch but it shows the true nature of our enemy. I propose we do this to them. Yet still, even with a tactic as barbaric (yet, I tell you, it'd yield results) we're still above these people. Those it's done to are already dead. And they are enemy fighters. Not civillian truck drivers or humanitarians.

google Highway of death

It's unpopular, and gruesome, but it should seriously be considered.

I firmly believe that wouldnt make a lick of difference ..these people are happy to die for their cause

At the very -least- cast aside all barbarity to confront barbarity, review our geneva and ROE standards for the conflicts. Geneva conventions are seriously outdated.

you're there to help iraqis (supposedly)

Some of the things are good, POW treatment for uniformed soldiers and the like. The problem is, can you name me one war we've been in since they were created where the enemy has followed the rules on a general/wide scale?

doesnt mean they shouldnt

There are absolutely rediculous items in 'the rules', too, such as the paratrooper one I mentioned. And the mission parameters example I gave (that's not exactly the rules problems but more of the way the military is going about it) Brigade commanders by the time they've reached the position want to retire looking 'clean' and thus there's no real initiative that might make someone look bad but actually accomplish things. We need a radical shift in our own policy making, culture, and leadership. Things would change if we had someone like a new McArthur show up and such.

McArthur wanted to use nukes in vietnam ...civilian safety isnt high on his list

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

come on courtmartial for murder is a slap on the wrist ...and no they didnt all get charged

What else is there to do besides courtmartial them though? Take them out back and shoot them? What do you propose be done to offenders (for real, honest question) And no, Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld aren't the ones who did those things. You may feel animosity at them for the war in general, but it's not the same.

he's a foreigner is he not? ...I doubt he controls all insurgency in iraq

He leads the largest insurgent force, Al Qaeda in Iraq, also known as Tawhid and Jihad, and a few other names. Yes, they are the largest force, and comprised of a lot of foreigners.

Here is the conglomerate combination of most groups, combined recently into one joint force
http://www. tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=4416

Here are many of the groups who were combined into that force.
http://www. tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=4338
http://www. tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=3921
http://www. tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=4477
http://www. tkb.org/Group.jsp?groupID=4375

google Highway of death

Conventional warfare, this took place between actual armies. Were they supposed to let them regroup and either fortify their Northern positions further or counter assault?

I firmly believe that wouldnt make a lick of difference ..these people are happy to die for their cause

Well we'll have to agree to disagree, read things about quelling Muslim extremists in the Phillippines by burying the terrorist's bodies with pigs. It's a big insult, and it helped to stop them.

you're there to help iraqis (supposedly)

Exactly the point, we can't do this if we can't actively stop terrorists from blowing up cars in their markets. It's more than just the ROE and Geneva, those are big issues. It's just the way we function on a wide scale that has me angered, my brother too. For example, a simple, VERY OBVIOUS common sense deterrent to stopping many car bombs is just coordination with police on car thefts! That's how most of the car bombs are deliverd. Some are the bombers own, but few. Coming from a veteran, they were glad when on patrol they found a shady character stealing cars. Because it's a very high likelyhood they just sent a likely car bomber to jail.

doesnt mean they shouldnt

Aye, there SHOULD be things that professional soldiers don't do. The problem is a lot of the stuff in our rules is simply to put it bluntly silly and stupid. When I talk about the rules most people think about the things that should stay, those things are good, but for Christ's sake there are some simply stupid ass rules in there, at least give them a review. With as extreme as the things I'm saying are (and yes I recognize they are) at least some of these issues should be looked into, I think everyone agrees on that.

McArthur wanted to use nukes in vietnam ...civilian safety isnt high on his list

North Korea, he wasn't in service (or alive? not sure) in Vietnam. He proposed creating a radiation belt in the unpopulated area but troop movement hotspot between NK and China. Had he done that things might be a lot better today for the ROK and for what is today known as the DPRK

 

[Gargantou]

Meh, why can't the terrorists just smuggle in a nuke into Washington or whatever and detonate it, then the US can nuke them to hell.
I don't like neither the US(Government specifically tho) nor terrorists.

 

[SFLUFAN]

What I fail to understand is how the mortar/sniper unit could've found themselves in that position in the first place. Were they all facing the same direction when the insurgents approached? Normally in that sort of situation in a known hostile environment, you would be on 360 degree security at all times with a heavy weapons unit stationed nearby for just this sort of contingency.

I just don't see how a group of insurgents can "sneak up" on a position in broad daylight.

 

[seinfeldrules]

Meh, why can't the terrorists just smuggle in a nuke into Washington or whatever and detonate it, then the US can nuke them to hell.
I don't like neither the US(Government specifically tho) nor terrorists.

You dont like the US Gov't so you propose nuking DC.... I'm sure the 4000 kids I'm going to school with in that area would appreciate your sentiment!


I agree with most of what Rakurai said, right on the money.

 

[Zeus]

Meh, why can't the terrorists just smuggle in a nuke into Washington or whatever and detonate it, then the US can nuke them to hell.
I don't like neither the US(Government specifically tho) nor terrorists.

You're unbelievable. And not in a good way either.

 

[Recoil]

Meh, why can't the terrorists just smuggle in a nuke into Washington or whatever and detonate it, then the US can nuke them to hell.
I don't like neither the US(Government specifically tho) nor terrorists.

Hahaha, what an idiot.

(Yeah, I repeat myself, but I think it's appropriate.)

 

[baxter]

There are things professional soldiers don't do.
There are things professional soldiers just don't do in a war

Zarqawi, rebel leader, has himself personally beheaded many
It's unpopular, and gruesome, but it should seriously be considered

There are things professional soldiers don't do.
There are things professional soldiers just don't do in a war

I am hateful to the enemy

There are things professional soldiers don't do.
There are things professional soldiers just don't do in a war

Brining their level of fighting to them will make them realize they are in vain, and it will bring a new tactic into the fight that's not there to the extent it needs to be, FEAR.

There are things professional soldiers don't do.
There are things professional soldiers just don't do in a war

No, if I saw a gang of Americans arrested in say Lebanon, as they had been pillaging, beheading civillians, and reaking chaos, and they were stacked in a naked pyramid, I'd probably have said they deserved worse. These scum deserve to pay the price for their crimes

There are things professional soldiers don't do.
There are things professional soldiers just don't do in a war

Maybe I spotted a contradiction here but what the heck.
I have always believed that professional soldiers adhered to the Geneva Convention and act in a courageous, disciplined way and above all a professional manner.
Professional soldiers don’t demonise their enemies, nor do they resort to acts of terror to achieve their objectives.

You cannot achieve the goal of "liberating" a country by, changing the rules of combat, acting like barbarians and simply resorting to the law of anarchy.

To resort to these methods drags any country and their objectives down to the level of the very people you demonise so readily.

FEAR will not stop the anarchy nor will it halt the wave of anti- American,/Western feeling being unleashed from the Middle East...

 

[seinfeldrules]

You cannot achieve the goal of "liberating" a country by, changing the rules of combat, acting like barbarians and simply resorting to the law of anarchy.

To resort to these methods drags any country and their objectives down to the level of the very people you demonise so readily.

I agree that there is no need for Americans to go around needlessly killing people. I am not saying that is what Rakurai is suggesting, but I think he is pushing a little too far. However, I do believe that we need to take a much different approach to new conflict rather than adhering to outdated rules and laws. This isnt the enemy of WWII or the Cold War.

 

[baxter]

I agree that there is no need for Americans to go around needlessly killing people. I am not saying that is what Rakurai is suggesting, but I think he is pushing a little too far. However, I do believe that we need to take a much different approach to new conflict rather than adhering to outdated rules and laws. This isnt the enemy of WWII or the Cold War.

This is true and without getting into our differing views on the war in Iraq, I do agree a different approach needs to be taken here.
I personally don’t feel that altering the Geneva Convention nor the rules of combat will in anyway go anywhere near addressing the issues out in Iraq nor lessen the casualties.
Like you said “We need to take a much different approach “

 

[CptStern]

What else is there to do besides courtmartial them though? Take them out back and shoot them? What do you propose be done to offenders (for real, honest question)

oh I dont know ...25 to life?

And no, Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld aren't the ones who did those things. You may feel animosity at them for the war in general, but it's not the same.

they lied to get their foot into iraq ..they puposely lied to the people of the US ...let's make a comparison here shall we ....where's Charles Manson? did he actually kill anybody? why is he still locked up ...seeing the pattern here?

He leads the largest insurgent force, Al Qaeda in Iraq, also known as Tawhid and Jihad, and a few other names. Yes, they are the largest force, and comprised of a lot of foreigners.

you mean the leader of the terrorist groups in iraq right ...or are there no legitimate insurgeants who just want the occupiers out of THEIR country

Well we'll have to agree to disagree, read things about quelling Muslim extremists in the Phillippines by burying the terrorist's bodies with pigs. It's a big insult, and it helped to stop them.

urban legend, may or may not have happened ...although the person it was atributed to more than likely didnt actualy do it

Exactly the point, we can't do this if we can't actively stop terrorists from blowing up cars in their markets. It's more than just the ROE and Geneva, those are big issues. It's just the way we function on a wide scale that has me angered, my brother too. For example, a simple, VERY OBVIOUS common sense deterrent to stopping many car bombs is just coordination with police on car thefts! That's how most of the car bombs are deliverd. Some are the bombers own, but few. Coming from a veteran, they were glad when on patrol they found a shady character stealing cars. Because it's a very high likelyhood they just sent a likely car bomber to jail.


Aye, there SHOULD be things that professional soldiers don't do. The problem is a lot of the stuff in our rules is simply to put it bluntly silly and stupid. When I talk about the rules most people think about the things that should stay, those things are good, but for Christ's sake there are some simply stupid ass rules in there, at least give them a review. With as extreme as the things I'm saying are (and yes I recognize they are) at least some of these issues should be looked into, I think everyone agrees on that.


North Korea, he wasn't in service (or alive? not sure) in Vietnam. He proposed creating a radiation belt in the unpopulated area but troop movement hotspot between NK and China. Had he done that things might be a lot better today for the ROK and for what is today known as the DPRK

I have a better idea ...stop invading nations on false pretenses ...this wouldnt have happened if the bush admin hadnt lied

 

[SFLUFAN]

What occupiers?

The last time I checked Iraq had an elected, soverign government - it's no longer under occupation. It's a situation similar to when Syria had troops stationed in Lebanon. That was not an occupaton - they were there at the invitation of the Lebanese government and when the government asked them to leave (after massive street protests), they did. The same way Coalition forces will leave if the Iraqi government asked them to. Doesn't sound like an occupation to me - it's not the same as the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

oh I dont know ...25 to life?

Which is done through courtmartials.
???

they lied to get their foot into iraq ..they puposely lied to the people of the US ...let's make a comparison here shall we ....where's Charles Manson? did he actually kill anybody? why is he still locked up ...seeing the pattern here?

It's not the same at all, they did not endorse these specific incidents.

you mean the leader of the terrorist groups in iraq right ...or are there no legitimate insurgeants who just want the occupiers out of THEIR country

Not many, most insurgents are members of the conglomerate. As far as my bro relayed it to me, they all work under the same banner and objective. It's run by certain families, of which spreads down into a lower chain of command (at least it was this way in Mosul, which also got a lot of the spilloff from Fallujah following our clampdown)

urban legend, may or may not have happened ...although the person it was atributed to more than likely didnt actualy do it

Either way, they should be treated like the pigs they are and used to set an example to other terrorists. I think perhaps we should hand over to Iraqi citizens the corpses of the terrorists, I bet you'd see a lot more images reminiscent of what you saw of the Fallujah bridge, only with the enemy remains lynched, instead.

I have a better idea ...stop invading nations on false pretenses ...this wouldnt have happened if the bush admin hadnt lied

Sigh, that debate will go no where because we have it in many threads and it just comes down to what you believe and personal reasons for and against. But we're there now and those tactics I listed need to be looked at. We need major reform on our side, we need to take wider steps to prevention rather than reaction, as we currently run things.

A nice article on this subject of military reform, by the way
http://www.worldfascistnews.org/page2.html

 

[baxter]

A nice article on this subject of military reform, by the way
http://www.worldfascistnews.org/page2.html

Nice link.....World Fascist news service.

Definition of fascism.

Fascism
"A political system based on a very powerful leader, state control and extreme pride in country and race, and in which political opposition is not allowed"

 

[CptStern]

Which is done through courtmartials.
???

discharged out of the army ...for murder ya that seems fair


6 months for throwing 2 bound iraqi civilians into a river, drowning one?

1 year in the stockade for murder?

3 years for killing a wounded soldier

3 years for murdering a civilian ..even though he admitted it!!

"During the final day of his court-martial, Richmond admitted that he wanted to kill the Iraqi, Army officials said"


yet when the victems are americans the sentence is death

It's not the same at all, they did not endorse these specific incidents.

yes it is ..because of their lives 20,000 iraqi civilians and 1800 americans have lost their lives ..they literally sent them to their deaths

Not many, most insurgents are members of the conglomerate. As far as my bro relayed it to me, they all work under the same banner and objective. It's run by certain families, of which spreads down into a lower chain of command (at least it was this way in Mosul, which also got a lot of the spilloff from Fallujah following our clampdown)

so in other words the majority are foreigners ..right? ...hmmmm during the era of saddam terrorist attacks were all but unheard of ...in other words YOU created this situation

Either way, they should be treated like the pigs they are and used to set an example to other terrorists. I think perhaps we should hand over to Iraqi citizens the corpses of the terrorists, I bet you'd see a lot more images reminiscent of what you saw of the Fallujah bridge, only with the enemy remains lynched, instead.

kind of undermines your supposed "humanitarian" mission to "free" the people of iraq

Sigh, that debate will go no where because we have it in many threads and it just comes down to what you believe and personal reasons for and against. But we're there now and those tactics I listed need to be looked at. We need major reform on our side, we need to take wider steps to prevention rather than reaction, as we currently run things.

A nice article on this subject of military reform, by the way
http://www.worldfascistnews.org/page2.html

there is no question that they intentionally misled the american public into going to war ..therefore they should bear the brunt of the reponsibility ..I will not be satisfied till they are arrested for treason (not holding my breath)

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

discharged out of the army ...for murder ya that seems fair


6 months for throwing 2 bound iraqi civilians into a river, drowning one?

1 year in the stockade for murder?

3 years for killing a wounded soldier

3 years for murdering a civilian ..even though he admitted it!!

"During the final day of his court-martial, Richmond admitted that he wanted to kill the Iraqi, Army officials said"


yet when the victems are americans the sentence is death

That lies in the sentencing then, just need judges to be heavier handed.

Although the killing wounded soldier was just crap. I read the story, the person's guts were hanging out and they were still alive in serious pain. There was no way to save their life, but they were still there alive. Soldiers aren't allowed to, but god, in that case, just put him out his misery. I don't believe the soldier should have been charged at all in that. And what's bad is he got a worse penalty than the ones who did premeditated murder.

yes it is ..because of their lives 20,000 iraqi civilians and 1800 americans have lost their lives ..they literally sent them to their deaths

Better prosecute FDR, Kennedy, and LBJ for crimes commited during wars they commenced.

so in other words the majority are foreigners ..right? ...hmmmm during the era of saddam terrorist attacks were all but unheard of ...in other words YOU created this situation

Of course, they are coming from all over to attack the Americans. For instance, if it were a predominately Muslim/Arab nation occupying another, you wouldn't see the same reaction from the fundamentalist religious crazies. See Kuwait in 1990.

kind of undermines your supposed "humanitarian" mission to "free" the people of iraq

Those terrorists are enemies of the people of Iraq. I doubt they'd have flowers and grief for the villains who park cars at their cafes and markets and blow them up. The people of Iraq should be treated well, the enemy should not.

there is no question that they intentionally misled the american public into going to war ..therefore they should bear the brunt of the reponsibility ..I will not be satisfied till they are arrested for treason (not holding my breath)

They didn't commit treason. I'd rather they just have said the reason for going was to remove Hussein for his crimes against his own people as one of the only reasons. They did give this reason, in many speeches and the state of the union, but if this has been sole reason it probably would have had a lot more support, as odd as that sounds it's just the way people work. There isn't really a UN law against 'being a sadistic son of a bitch' though. So weapons violation was the case, and then when it failed with the UN to even enforce their own rules, kind of stuck with that, and even if you don't think WMD was present, he STILL was in violations of his weapons agreements, and even launched many of the banned munitions against our forces in Kuwait.

 

[CptStern]

That lies in the sentencing then, just need judges to be heavier handed.

but they were heavy handed in that case where the american soldier killed his fellow soldiers ..he got the death penalty

Although the killing wounded soldier was just crap.

I have it on video ..that's just not true ..the man was lying writhing in pain and the marine in question shot him and then joked that it felt good while his comrades cheered. There's another video where soldiers wound an insurgeant when a marine walks up to him and shoots him point blank ..."take no prisoners" I guess

I read the story, the person's guts were hanging out and they were still alive in serious pain. There was no way to save their life, but they were still there alive. Soldiers aren't allowed to, but god, in that case, just put him out his misery.

I think you're referring to the incident where a teenager was put out of his misery ..but that's not quite what happened:

"American troops had been clashing regularly with the Mahdi Army -- Muqtada al-Sadr's militia -- in the restive Baghdad slum. So when Staff Sgt. Cardenas Alban of Carson, Los Angeles County, saw an object fall from a garbage truck in the distance, his company took positions around the vehicle and unleashed a barrage of fire from rifles and a 25-millimeter cannon atop a Bradley fighting vehicle. The truck exploded in flames.

As soldiers from the 1st Battalion, 41st Infantry Regiment approached the burning vehicle, they did not find insurgents. The victims were mainly teenagers, hired to work the late shift picking up trash for about $5 a night, witnesses said.

Medics scrambled to treat the half a dozen people strewn around the scene. A dispute broke out among a handful of soldiers standing over one severely wounded young man who was moaning in pain. An unwounded Iraqi claiming to be a relative of the victim pleaded in broken English for soldiers to help him.

But to the horror of bystanders, Alban, 29, a boyish-faced sergeant who joined the Army in 1997, retrieved an M-231 assault rifle and fired into the wounded man's body. Seconds later, another soldier, Staff Sgt. Johnny Horne Jr. , 30, of Winston-Salem, N.C., grabbed an M-16 rifle and also shot the victim


We are not sheep," said Emad Raheem, 40, who said he was the driver of the dump truck. "We are human beings."

Seven Iraqis were killed in the attack, including the one who was shot, military officials said. Eight others were wounded. "

I don't believe the soldier should have been charged at all in that. And what's bad is he got a worse penalty than the ones who did premeditated murder.

if the roles were reversed you'd be digging holes and smearing them with pig's blood

Better prosecute FDR, Kennedy, and LBJ for crimes commited during wars they commenced.

I have no problem with that ..but let's stick with the present ..your president authorised the deaths of over 25,000 people

Of course, they are coming from all over to attack the Americans. For instance, if it were a predominately Muslim/Arab nation occupying another, you wouldn't see the same reaction from the fundamentalist religious crazies. See Kuwait in 1990.

and how many of these groups were in iraq before the invasion? say what you will but you created this situation, and you've also set into motion decades of instability in the entire region ...in fact you're prepetuating it indefinately

Those terrorists are enemies of the people of Iraq.

they wouldnt be there if not for the US ...conditions are worse now then they were during the reign of saddam

I doubt they'd have flowers and grief for the villains who park cars at their cafes and markets and blow them up. The people of Iraq should be treated well, the enemy should not.

so an Iraqi who takes up arms against the occupiers should be treated with respect? ..there's only one flavour of combatant according to the US hype machine: terrorist

They didn't commit treason. I'd rather they just have said the reason for going was to remove Hussein for his crimes against his own people as one of the only reasons.

you cant honestly believe that ...how do you kill 7000 civilians during the initial invasion while flying the banner of humanitarian ..it just makes no sense

They did give this reason, in many speeches and the state of the union,

let's not rewrite history here, we've been through this before the ONLY justification was WMD ..all else was merely window dressing

but if this has been sole reason it probably would have had a lot more support, as odd as that sounds it's just the way people work.

I doubt it ..not after somalia ...besides, it just makes no sense for the US to charge to the rescue after inflicting 12 years of horror upon the people of iraq

There isn't really a UN law against 'being a sadistic son of a bitch' though.

you're right that isnt a cause for war ..why do you think you had to do it illegally?

So weapons violation was the case, and then when it failed with the UN to even enforce their own rules, kind of stuck with that, and even if you don't think WMD was present, he STILL was in violations of his weapons agreements, and even launched many of the banned munitions against our forces in Kuwait.

please ..a weak attempt at best ...as you're own Secretary of State Colin Powell said before the war:

"Saddam Hussein had not been able to "build his military back up or to develop weapons of mass destruction" for "the last 10 years". America, he said, had been successful in keeping him "in a box".

 

[dream431ca]

Ok..Nukes are out of the question. We don't need nukes anymore. We have extremely precise weapons, so we can hit our target with out damaging too much around it..and even if the US was nuked..they should be smart enough not to nuke the country that nuked them...what they should do is get every other country along with them, (and because they were nuked, I see no reason why many strong countries would not join them,) and invade the country that launched the nuke, and also go into adjacent countries and find the group who did this. Nukes don't solve anything...sure the nukes are fun to watch explode on documentrays and such, but if one really went off in a populated city, it would literally stop the world.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Highway of death

The bombardment and ambush of these forces was no different than the battles that occured nearly sixty-years ago. Entire forces of hundreds-of-thousands would become encircled and enbatteled for nearly weeks on end before being completely annihilated.

With comparison, no amount of destruction on this scale has ever been reproduced because military thinkers have adapted ways to move armies based off of conventionalism in much smaller yet more effective ways.

I doubt he controls all insurgency in iraq

He's in contact with Ansar Al-Sunnah, and he's trying to become a 1st or 2nd in command for the force.

doesnt mean they shouldnt

Here's one thing I have to say CptStern, is that this Insurgency is in the process of either regrouping or re-recruiting. The allies in Iraq must be dealing some severe blows to this Insurgency, because at the same rate they're becoming deadlier, we are becoming more precise in finding they're members. Just last week a letter was discovered off of a dead Insurgents body meant to be written to Al-Zarqwai; in it the man detailed a lack of leadership around Mosul and a lack of force capable of resuming the operations carried out in places like Baghdad.

We're getting closer and closer, for reasons.

Putting that aside, another critical thing to note besides the possibility of breaking its leadership capabilities, is that this force of military operation (insurgency) respects nothing of Geneva, because it's western law.

We need to grow some balls and re-organize and plan our forces; we should be the ones adapting, not them. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, already argued that it's been too long that we assumed the solution to a war, was a uniformed group of soldiers.

Something has to change somewhere, and one thing is our willingness to get dirty and adapt to these terrorists; and we should'nt be hiring mercenaries. They're changing sides because the pay is allegedly better from Al-Qaeda.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

so an Iraqi who takes up arms against the occupiers should be treated with respect? ..there's only one flavour of combatant according to the US hype machine: terrorist

Unfortunately, these Iraqi's who take up arms against the American forces are going to treat Prisoner's of War no better then Al-Zarqwai himself.

The Baathist regime has already programmed that into Militant youth, wether they realize it or not.

 

[CptStern]

The bombardment and ambush of these forces was no different than the battles that occured nearly sixty-years ago. Entire forces of hundreds-of-thousands would become encircled and enbatteled for nearly weeks on end before being completely annihilated.

ah but the difference this time around was that the iraqi forces were RETREATING after saddam had ordered their withdrawal

Here's one thing I have to say CptStern, is that this Insurgency is in the process of either regrouping or re-recruiting. The allies in Iraq must be dealing some severe blows to this Insurgency, because at the same rate they're becoming deadlier, we are becoming more precise in finding they're members. Just last week a letter was discovered off of a dead Insurgents body meant to be written to Al-Zarqwai; in it the man detailed a lack of leadership around Mosul and a lack of force capable of resuming the operations carried out in places like Baghdad.

We're getting closer and closer, for reasons.

closer to what? attacks are escalating

anyways this is where I re-iterate my point:

"..there's only one flavour of combatant according to the US hype machine: terrorist"


you see to call them "freedom fighters", or "partiots" or whatever is counter-productive to the propaganda the US must constantly pump out so that no one thinks to themselves ..."hmmm maybe some of these freedom fighters have a point, maybe we should leave their country"

an occupying army always refers to anyone fighting against them as guerillas or terrorists ..if they want to play the PR game, they have no choice ...remember half the job of the bush admin was to sell you the war in iraq ...iand it worked fanatsitically, much to the chagrin of typical iraqis

Putting that aside, another critical thing to note besides the possibility of breaking its leadership capabilities, is that this force of military operation (insurgency) respects nothing of Geneva, because it's western law.

so what? does that allow you to do the same ...sorry but as the "liberator" as the "saviour" you're supposed to play by the rules ...the whole world is watching ...you want us to believe you only have good intentions prove it to us ...one picture of a hooded prisoner in humiliating positions undoes everything humanitarian justification you've said ....hard to call yourselves "liberators or humanitarians" when torture is sanctioned by those in power

We need to grow some balls and re-organize and plan our forces; we should be the ones adapting, not them. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, already argued that it's been too long that we assumed the solution to a war, was a uniformed group of soldiers.

pfft, Rumsfeld should be arrested for fabricating the whole thing

Something has to change somewhere, and one thing is our willingness to get dirty and adapt to these terrorists; and we should'nt be hiring mercenaries. They're changing sides because the pay is allegedly better from Al-Qaeda.

I have an idea ....STOP MEDDLING IN OTHER PEOPLE'S AFFAIRS


you created this situation ..if down the road there are more 9/11's you have only yourself to blame

 

[CptStern]

Unfortunately, these Iraqi's who take up arms against the American forces are going to treat Prisoner's of War no better then Al-Zarqwai himself.

absolutely not true, there are dozens of cases were prisoners were released unharmed

 

[baxter]

Putting that aside, another critical thing to note besides the possibility of breaking its leadership capabilities, is that this force of military operation (insurgency) respects nothing of Geneva, because it's western law.

We need to grow some balls and re-organize and plan our forces; we should be the ones adapting, not them. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, already argued that it's been too long that we assumed the solution to a war, was a uniformed group of soldiers.

Something has to change somewhere, and one thing is our willingness to get dirty and adapt to these terrorists; and we should'nt be hiring mercenaries. They're changing sides because the pay is allegedly better from Al-Qaeda

The Geneva Convention is not a western law it is International Law, with 190 countries, virtually every country on the planet, signed up to it. It is the convention to which any Government controlled forces conduct themselves in war. It is backed up by International Humanitarian laws and Human rights laws.
The US is a signed up member to this convention, hence the reason all US controlled forces fall under it.
Breaking International law and breaching the Geneva Convention is not “growing balls” it is generally called war crimes. It is the law whereby the US has an obligation to prosecute service personel under their control that commit acts of terror during wars or occupations.
The tactics of the terrorist fall outside all laws including international law. They believe they are not answerable to a Government that is accountable to the International Laws.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

closer to what? attacks are escalating

The attacks are escalating, but in which form? Small-Arms related injuries are decreasing, while those killed by Implemented Explosive Devices are increasing.

Ultimately, this one style of attack is only doing 50-70% of their work -- to lack the capability to field a force either skilled or large enough to deal the United States casualties in Firefights, means that this Insurgency is either smaller then before, or preparing for a stage of attack we've not yet seen.

In summary, I see only one form of resistance escalating. Not the other way around. This could be bad, but this could be good.

ah but the difference this time around was that the iraqi forces were RETREATING after saddam had ordered their withdrawal

A retreat is'int a surrender Stern.

you see to call them "freedom fighters", or "partiots" or whatever is counter-productive to the propaganda the US must constantly pump out so that no one thinks to themselves ..."hmmm maybe some of these freedom fighters have a point, maybe we should leave their country"

Agreed somewhat, but the Rhetoric has changed and I believe the new replacement for the word "terrorist" to be more appropriate and yet, just as effective. (see Extremist)

On the same level, terminology like "The Great Satan", and "Infidel" have been very popular Rhetoric amungst many countries under the threat of Islamic Revolution or Muslim Counter-Revolution. We know primarly what the first word describes, and we know the second word can be just about anyone they target for criticism.

But words like terrorist, infidel, and terms like "Great Satan" are far from being appropriate and are in noway of becoming fair for a very long-time. Here is the problem; they won't change their Rhetoric. They wont play fair.

I believe if they want us Americans to actually want to barter out our fear mongering, it's time they too barter out theirs aswell.

..."hmmm maybe some of these freedom fighters have a point, maybe we should leave their country"

I don't know when it will be for the extremist, "hmmm, maybe our Rhetoric of Great Satan and Infidel is hardly fair to those involved or who are tolerant of our life-style. Maybe we should be nicer.", but I do when it won't and thats now and probably forever.

I've heard people argue its fair for these middle-eastern countries to play this game of tid-for-tad, yet I also know its going to cost them respect.

so what? does that allow you to do the same ...sorry but as the "liberator" as the "saviour" you're supposed to play by the rules

... and if were facing someone who won't respect our rules, should we respect theirs? No. I don't think so.

one picture of a hooded prisoner in humiliating positions undoes everything humanitarian justification you've said ....hard to call yourselves "liberators or humanitarians" when torture is sanctioned by those in power

Those in power -- would that be those being beheaded by Islamic militants? No.
One picture of a beheaded prisoner put into humilating positions undoes everything their trying to win in my mind.

Also, most Iraqi's agree on two things about the Insurgency and the Coalition:

1. The Insurgents don't have plan for Iraq.
2. The Coalition might have a plan, but they're moving to fast to please their "OMFG GET HOME NOW KTHXBAI" people to effectively and efficiently poll and create an effective Iraqi Consitution.

Either option is now causing numberable confusion in Iraq amungst Iraqi's, and I must say we should stay as long as it takes to perfect a constitution that will protect Iraq's people, and that is for Iraqs people. Not one created by the politically elite hidden in the US Green Zone Fortress.

Rumsfeld should be arrested for fabricating the whole thing

Possibly, and maybe if things were'nt as random and Partisan as they are now, he might've been.

STOP MEDDLING IN OTHER PEOPLE'S AFFAIRS

BUT WAIT WAHT ABOUT TEH AFRICANSS?!?!!11

if down the road there are more 9/11's you have only yourself to blame

Only yourselfs to blame if they happen in your countries -- are you still failing to discover that even if we made everything right, they'd still hate us and try to kill us and collaspe our societies?

The tactics of the terrorist fall outside all laws including international law. They believe they are not answerable to a Government that is accountable to the International Laws.

... and people think these beheading extremists are heroes ... I find disgust in all attrocities and I think any form of it is unexcusable, and I'll not have one become overuled or forgotten because; "BUT TEH KERBEROSOS TEH INSURGENTS DONT HAVE TAKNS!!1 THEY CAN"T PLAY TEH FAIR!!1"

 

[SAJ]

Also, most Iraqi's agree on two things about the Insurgency and the Coalition:

1. The Insurgents don't have plan for Iraq.
2. The Coalition might have a plan, but they're moving to fast to please their "OMFG GET HOME NOW KTHXBAI" people to effectively and efficiently poll and create an effective Iraqi Consitution.

Kerberos, do you have an opinion poll,or some kind of source to back up this assertion?
Just wondering.

 

[baxter]

... and people think these beheading extremists are heroes ... I find disgust in all attrocities and I think any form of it is unexcusable, and I'll not have one become overuled or forgotten because; "BUT TEH KERBEROSOS TEH INSURGENTS DONT HAVE TAKNS!!1 THEY CAN"T PLAY TEH FAIR!!1"

I’m sorry pal I would like to reply but to be honest I really can’t understand your comment.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

I’m sorry pal I would like to reply but to be honest I really can’t understand your comment.

Sometimes idiots try to justify the actions the terrorists take (beheadings, suicide bombs, etc) by saying "it's not a fair fight because they can't match the US conventionally" Kerberos is doing a parody "OH BUT KERBEROS ITS NOT FAIR THEY DONT HAVE TANKS" etc. I know you really knew what he was saying and were trying to belittle it, but stepping in as a 3rd party I can prevent that.

 

[SAJ]

And at the same time,useful idiots attempt to justify the illegal invasion, occupation and virtual destruction of a country ,on "humanitarian" grounds.

 

[CptStern]

The attacks are escalating, but in which form? Small-Arms related injuries are decreasing, while those killed by Implemented Explosive Devices are increasing.

ya because the only people getting killed in iraq are americans :upstare: ...civilians kerberos civilians ..next you'll be saying the majority died by "Implemented Explosive Devices" ........ duh

A retreat is'int a surrender Stern.

"The Iraqi troops were not being driven out of Kuwait by U.S. troops, as the Bush administration maintains. They were not retreating in order to regroup and fight again. In fact, they were withdrawing, they were going home, responding to orders issued by Baghdad, announcing that it was complying with Resolution 660 and leaving Kuwait. At 5:35 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time) Baghdad radio announced that Iraq's Foreign Minister had accepted the Soviet cease-fire proposal and had issued the order for all Iraqi troops to withdraw to positions held before August 2, 1990 in compliance with UN Resolution 660. President Bush responded immediately from the White House saying {through spokesman Marlin Fitzwater) that "there was no evidence to suggest the Iraqi army is withdrawing. In fact, Iraqi units are continuing to fight. . . We continue to prosecute the war." On the next day, February 26, 1991, Saddam Hussein announced on Baghdad radio that Iraqi troops had, indeed, begun to withdraw from Kuwait and that the withdrawal would be complete that day. Again, Bush reacted, calling Hussein's announcement "an outrage" and "a cruel hoax."

Agreed somewhat, but the Rhetoric has changed and I believe the new replacement for the word "terrorist" to be more appropriate and yet, just as effective. (see Extremist)

On the same level, terminology like "The Great Satan", and "Infidel" have been very popular Rhetoric amungst many countries under the threat of Islamic Revolution or Muslim Counter-Revolution. We know primarly what the first word describes, and we know the second word can be just about anyone they target for criticism.

But words like terrorist, infidel, and terms like "Great Satan" are far from being appropriate and are in noway of becoming fair for a very long-time. Here is the problem; they won't change their Rhetoric. They wont play fair.

I believe if they want us Americans to actually want to barter out our fear mongering, it's time they too barter out theirs aswell.

I don't know when it will be for the extremist, "hmmm, maybe our Rhetoric of Great Satan and Infidel is hardly fair to those involved or who are tolerant of our life-style. Maybe we should be nicer.", but I do when it won't and thats now and probably forever.

I've heard people argue its fair for these middle-eastern countries to play this game of tid-for-tad, yet I also know its going to cost them respect.

that might as well have been in chinese ...everytime I think you're leading to a point you take some side angle that just completely throws everything off kilter

... and if were facing someone who won't respect our rules, should we respect theirs? No. I don't think so.

please how that makes any sense ....a handful of armed thugs with no respect for human life or law is the same thing as the most powerful army in the world .....apples to oranges

Also, most Iraqi's agree on two things about the Insurgency and the Coalition:

1. The Insurgents don't have plan for Iraq.
2. The Coalition might have a plan, but they're moving to fast to please their "OMFG GET HOME NOW KTHXBAI" people to effectively and efficiently poll and create an effective Iraqi Consitution.

where's your source ...you said "most iraqis" ...if it is most iraqis then you shouldnt have a problem finding a source ...the majority of iraqis want the US out of iraq

Either option is now causing numberable confusion in Iraq amungst Iraqi's, and I must say we should stay as long as it takes to perfect a constitution that will protect Iraq's people, and that is for Iraqs people. Not one created by the politically elite hidden in the US Green Zone Fortress.

so after the billions of dollars you've invested in iraq you're just going to hand over everything to the iraqi people and walk away ...you're more naive than I thought

Possibly, and maybe if things were'nt as random and Partisan as they are now, he might've been.

partisan or not, there's a certain element in america that will turn a blind eye to any crimes their nation commits

BUT WAIT WAHT ABOUT TEH AFRICANSS?!?!!11

ya what about them? what about Patrice Lumumba? are you going to pay reparations for destroying his country and playing a part in his assisnation? will you ever answer for the crimes of propping hated dictator Mobutu Sese Seko? Or what about Jonas Savimbi? ...will your government ever make amends for propping up and supporting that murderer?

Only yourselfs to blame if they happen in your countries -- are you still failing to discover that even if we made everything right, they'd still hate us and try to kill us and collaspe our societies?

of course they would still hate you ...you cant resurrect their dead friends/family ...you could have minimalised your actions in other countries that may have prevented this sort of reaction ...it's the chicken and the egg scenario ...stop commiting bloody coups, occupations and supporting of murderers and maybe some of them wont come back to bite you in the ass

... and people think these beheading extremists are heroes ... I find disgust in all attrocities and I think any form of it is unexcusable, and I'll not have one become overuled or forgotten because; "BUT TEH KERBEROSOS TEH INSURGENTS DONT HAVE TAKNS!!1 THEY CAN"T PLAY TEH FAIR!!1"

who thinks the people who are beheading people are heros? I want a list of names

 

[baxter]

Sometimes idiots try to justify the actions the terrorists take (beheadings, suicide bombs, etc) by saying "it's not a fair fight because they can't match the US conventionally" Kerberos is doing a parody "OH BUT KERBEROS ITS NOT FAIR THEY DONT HAVE TANKS" etc. I know you really knew what he was saying and were trying to belittle it, but stepping in as a 3rd party I can prevent that.

I actually wasn't trying to belittle anybody, I genuinely didn't understand Kerberos comment and the only reason I replied was because it was in response to one of my comments.
Since you took the time to clear it up for me would you also clear up which idiots try to justify these actions?

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

I actually wasn't trying to belittle anybody, I genuinely didn't understand Kerberos comment and the only reason I replied was because it was in response to one of my comments.
Since you took the time to clear it up for me would you also clear up which idiots try to justify these actions?

People I've debated with not so much here but on PW, other political forums/chats, and real life.

 

[CptStern]

I've been to PW ..it inspires hate ...the thread titles alone make most sane people want to retch

 

[seinfeldrules]

I'm sure these sites wouldnt be much different then sites like democraticunderground.com

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

I've been to PW ..it inspires hate ...the thread titles alone make most sane people want to retch

PW doesn't censor anything, except for blatant trolling like someone posting tub girl/goatse or spamming referal sites. There s no 'political trolling' etc there. If you disagree, you're welcome to post whatever you feel there, nothing is censored or shut down.

 

[CptStern]

be that as it may ..the majority of it is flamebait

 

[Absinthe]

I've seen communities (both right and left) that are far worse than anything I've seen on PW. Despite the aggressive content, PW seems to have more reasonable and discussion-worthy members than inept, rhetoric-stuffed 'tards.

Disagree with almost everything they say, mind you. But I keep myself from disrespecting them.

 

[seinfeldrules]

be that as it may ..the majority of it is flamebait

This sounds familiar from somewhere....

 

[Top Secret]

ah Red Dawn ..the american psyche in celluloid form

One of my favorite movies of all time.

Wolverines!!!