Baghdad Residents Kill Three Militants

[GhostFox]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&e=1&u=/ap/20050322/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Shopkeepers and residents on one of Baghdad's main streets pulled out their own guns Tuesday and killed three insurgents when hooded men began shooting at passers-by

I guess they take the "power of the people" more literally over there. :E

 

[gh0st]

That seems like a very "American" thing to do. Kind of neat, actually. I'd shoot them too.

 

[ray_MAN]

Finally, they get the picture. Maybe Iraq is coming along. I have faith.
(Hey, gh0st, where did those warnings come from? Why aren't you a staff member anymore? )

 

[Lemonking]

that kinda makes me happy

 

[CptStern]

nice to see a few iraqis take matters into their own hands (hint hint) but that just adds to the lawlessness and chaos. I'm sure if it hasnt happened already, incidents of petty disputes, tribal feuds, settling of scores etc ending in death will become commonplace It's just inevitable in an armed lawless society. Chances are, that some of the armed populace might actually work against the occupying force and take up arms to fight the oppressors.

 

[bliink]

Ok, lets stay on topic, I dont want to have to delete any more posts.

(Hey, gh0st, where did those warnings come from? Why aren't you a staff member anymore? )

Off topic posts, personal attacks. Send a PM next time.

Now, on topic.

 

[KoreBolteR]

nice to see that they are taking matters into htier own hands!

good find ghostfox

 

[Kebean PFC]

Chances are, that some of the armed populace might actually work against the occupying force and take up arms to fight the oppressors.

Lemme guess, the oppressors are the U.S. right? When have we oppressed them? They are less oppresed now then when Sadam was in there, we just didn't hear about it or care.

If i misenterpreted(sp) your statement, sorry, but with all the anti-US stuff you post, it seems to me that you mean the US when you say "oppressors," which is IMHO Bullshit.

 

[KoreBolteR]

i dont see any civilians shooting US forces?

its obvious that the civilins are scared of the militants, and are only now starting to protect themselves from them.

they would rather US forces stay, rather leave them with a control freak terrorist force.

 

[Absinthe]

i dont see any civilians shooting US forces?

Kind of a dumb question, isn't it? The moment a a civilian starts shooting at US forces is the moment he's classified as a combatant.

So... you're never going to get "civilians" shooting at US forces.

 

[KoreBolteR]

Terrorists shoot US forces, not civilians.

but Terrorists dress and try look like Civilians.

So are you gonna say civilians shooting terrorists are muslim traitors? cos thats what Al-Qaeda of Iraq is going to believe.

 

[Absinthe]

Kore, it's really simple. When a civilian starts shooting US forces, he's classified as a combatant. So of course you're not going to hear about civilians shooting at US forces. Why? Because the US no longer considers them as such when they're sending bullets their way! It's a semantical trick.

And for the record, I haven't accused anybody of being a traitor.

 

[CptStern]

Lemme guess, the oppressors are the U.S. right? When have we oppressed them? They are less oppresed now then when Sadam was in there, we just didn't hear about it or care.

If i misenterpreted(sp) your statement, sorry, but with all the anti-US stuff you post, it seems to me that you mean the US when you say "oppressors," which is IMHO Bullshit.

yes in a sense

get aquainted with that document, it'll come up a lot in these forums

 

[KoreBolteR]

Kore, it's really simple. When a civilian starts shooting US forces, he's classified as a combatant. So of course you're not going to hear about civilians shooting at US forces. Why? Because the US no longer considers them as such when they're sending bullets their way! It's a semantical trick.

And for the record, I haven't accused anybody of being a traitor.

no. the terrorists accuse these people of being muslim traitors, then trying to go after them possibily killing them, which makes the civilians of Iraq fear them.. Fear accusing and killing a member of a high run terrorist group, which dress as civilians.

i get your point tho, i suppose there is 1 or 2 civilians who agree with Al-Qaeda's Terms, therefore can be considered one...





...and stern you always bring the "IRAQ WATER TREATMMENT VULNERABILITIES" into things.. :upstare:

 

[gh0st]

nice to see a few iraqis take matters into their own hands (hint hint) but that just adds to the lawlessness and chaos. I'm sure if it hasnt happened already, incidents of petty disputes, tribal feuds, settling of scores etc ending in death will become commonplace It's just inevitable in an armed lawless society. Chances are, that some of the armed populace might actually work against the occupying force and take up arms to fight the oppressors.

I dont know about you, but if I see somebody in the street blasting away at someone I'll blow their brains out. But by your standard that would be... lawlessness? What you want to arrest enemy soldiers? Maybe we can give them chocolate and shove roses up their asses while we're at it.

This, in no way classifies as a 'petty dispute', 'tribal feud', 'settling of a score'. This is civilians taking responsibility for the safety of their fellow citzens. Oh when you speak of "opressors" do you mean this guy?? Surely you do. Oh by the way, that "chances are" bullshit - just cut that out right now because you have no idea what you're even saying. Armed populace siding with the insurgents? Well this would certainly dispell that little theory of yours.

(Hey, gh0st, where did those warnings come from? Why aren't you a staff member anymore? )

Those warnings came because no one on this forum is able to hear big boy words without lashing out. I'm not a staff member because I dont have the time to do it, its a bit of a commitment and I didnt expect it.

 

[seinfeldrules]

To stern the US is the oppressor because they established free elections. He feels that countries like NK and Iraq are much better off under people like Kim Jong Il and Saddam. They are obviously just misunderstood individuals, the US is just evil.

 

[Cole]

I just hope that Iraq will do great and other nations in the middle east will follow there lead. That is all I can hope for.

 

[CptStern]

funny how seinfeldrules skips over all the shit the US has thrown iraq's way over the last 30 years. "Lets ignore all the death and destruction and think of all the good things" Sorry but one incident doesnt win the war. Iraq will be in a state of chaos for generations to come

 

[seinfeldrules]

funny how seinfeldrules skips over all the shit the US has thrown iraq's way over the last 30 years. "Lets ignore all the death and destruction and think of all the good things" Sorry but one incident doesnt win the war. Iraq will be in a state of chaos for generations to come

Funny how stern skips over all the positive shit the US has given Iraq over the past 3 years. I mean we've given them billions of dollars in aid, set up (and allowed) free elections, protected them, and most importantly removed Saddam. I'm sorry that you need to be such a pessimist, but the future has never looked brighter for Iraq. After Saddam, they really dont have anywhere to go but up. Nobody is saying the transformation will occur overnight, but the signs are clearly there. This incident personifies that dream. Iraqis are sick of being attacked by terrorism and Saddam, they want a fresh start.

 

[Bodacious]

Funny how stern skips over all the positive shit the US has given Iraq over the past 3 years. I mean we've given them billions of dollars in aid, set up (and allowed) free elections, protected them, and most importantly removed Saddam. I'm sorry that you need to be such a pessimist, but the future has never looked brighter for Iraq. After Saddam, they really dont have anywhere to go but up. Nobody is saying the transformation will occur overnight, but the signs are clearly there. This incident personifies that dream. Iraqis are sick of being attacked by terrorism and Saddam, they want a fresh start.

Hey, liberating oppressed Iraqis is costing too much and Saddam never killed anyone but his own people. We should have left him be and worried about how fat our own population is.

Seriously though, all the signs of success are there and the left is ignoring them. I saw a news report that overall terrorist attacks have decreased since the elections. Other signs exist like the revolution in Lebanon and other regimes changing track.

 

[CptStern]

i guess it doesnt phase either of you that hundreds of thousands of civilians had to die so that you could achieve your goal ...huzzah! for turning a blind eye :dozey:

 

[seinfeldrules]

i guess it doesnt phase either of you that hundreds of thousands of civilians had to die so that you could achieve your goal ...huzzah! for turning a blind eye

And I guess it doesnt phase you that freedom is finally on the horizon... huzzah! for turning a blind eye

 

[CptStern]

sure pally, you continue living in a fairy land full of sparkling little elves who dole out democracy like it's going out of style, I'll let history speak for itself

 

[gh0st]

sure pally, you continue living in a fairy land full of sparkling little elves who dole out democracy like it's going out of style, I'll let history speak for itself

You keep living in your america-hating fantasy land, let the men go out and make the world a better place while you sit on your ass criticising them. I dont see any mass graves in Iraq unless they are being discovered by american forces. You'd bitch about anything.

 

[CptStern]

they report what they want to report ..and there's really no need to attack me, why not channel your energy on something positive instead ...like disputing the evidence?

 

[gh0st]

they report what they want to report ..and there's really no need to attack me, why not channel your energy on something positive instead ...like disputing the evidence?

I'm not attacking you. Disputing what evidence exactly? The "water card" you always play? Its getting old when all you use to argue against an entire war is that and the albright quote.

 

[SIGbastard]

Good for the Iraqis. Guns are only a tool. I consider my guns as tools for protecting my family. They are tools for death. I have no problem with that. In the right circumstances a tool of death is justified and needed. I carry my Sig Sauer P-239 9mm Two Tone everywhere except for work. I work with people with developmental disabilities for now, but I start Dental School this June. I consider it a responsibility to be able to protect my wife which is why I originally got a concealed carry permit. I just advise a good gunsafe suited to your needs especially if you have children.

 

[KoreBolteR]

theres no such thing as evidence really..

i can never trust any news source.. as it could be the news channels political view of it, or the editors personal opinions.

and mostly there is all anti-war editors and media sources. especially over the net = easy for anti-war protesters to 'prove' thier arguments on forums like these.

 

[Absinthe]

i get your point tho, i suppose there is 1 or 2 civilians who agree with Al-Qaeda's Terms, therefore can be considered one...

The US's definition of a civilian is pretty much somebody that doesn't shoot. That's why you never get civilians shooting at US soldiers. You do, however, get many civilians that turn into combatants.

 

[KoreBolteR]

The US's definition of a civilian is pretty much somebody that doesn't shoot. That's why you never get civilians shooting at US soldiers. You do, however, get many civilians that turn into combatants.

well they are.. why shoot US forces, have they shot at them? blown up thier cars and streets with suicide bombers?

the US are there to protect civilians of iraq from people who want to cause the country harm in spite of bush policies.

 

[CptStern]

I'm not attacking you. Disputing what evidence exactly? The "water card" you always play? Its getting old when all you use to argue against an entire war is that and the albright quote.

please, I've personally trounced every last official justification behind the war

wmd: self-evident but they knew there wasnt any to begin with

democracy: Allawi is a good example of "democracy", so is Chalabi

humanitarian reasons: Iraqi water treatment plants: engineered death, cia endorsed torture, indiscriminate bombing, heavy casualties, selective targeting etc

Purposeful Misinformation: wmd, uranium from niger, 45 minutes to launch etc


btw the water treatment assessment document is proof of the "oppression" of the iraqi people

theres no such thing as evidence really..

i can never trust any news source.. as it could be the news channels political view of it, or the editors personal opinions.

and mostly there is all anti-war editors and media sources. especially over the net = easy for anti-war protesters to 'prove' thier arguments on forums like these.

:upstare: kore ...I'm using official CIA, DIA and in some cases presidential documents and sources ..what more do you want? gun-point confession?

 

[Absinthe]

well they are.. why shoot US forces, have they shot at them? blown up thier cars and streets with suicide bombers?

the US are there to protect civilians of iraq from people who want to cause the country harm in spite of bush policies.

Kore, you're missing my point entirely. It's a semantical trick. You don't get civilians shooting at US soldiers because, by their definition, civilians don't do that. The moment they deviate from that definition, they are no longer considered civilians. So when you get a headline saying "Civilians aren't attacking US troops"... well, duh. It's a stupid statement. It's not an effective gauge of how the Iraqis feel about the US occupation.

A more valid gauge would be statistics showing how many civilians are eventully classified as combatants.

 

[KoreBolteR]

Kore, you're missing my point entirely. It's a semantical trick. You don't get civilians shooting at US soldiers because, by their definition, civilians don't do that. The moment they deviate from that definition, they are no longer considered civilians. So when you get a headline saying "Civilians aren't attacking US troops"... well, duh. It's a stupid statement. It's not an effective gauge of how the Iraqis feel about the US occupation.

A more valid gauge would be statistics showing how many civilians are eventully classified as combatants.

but as soon as the 'civilian' shoots at us troops possibly killing innocent iraqis.. blowing up cars, themselves to kill other innocents, they do automatically turn into a terrorist.

they have no respect for thier contry nor people.. as demonstrated by those 3 shopkeeper/pedestrians earlier this week.

but the iraqis want to get these terrorists, get rid of an evil force in thier country. even the iraqi army has done another succesful mission. wp to them.

Iraqi forces successful again

:upstare: kore ...I'm using official CIA, DIA and in some cases presidential documents and sources ..what more do you want? gun-point confession?

okay, sorry :E

 

[Sprafa]

they protected themselves. Doesn't means they don't want kill Americans.

 

[Razor]

sure pally, you continue living in a fairy land full of sparkling little elves who dole out democracy like it's going out of style, I'll let history speak for itself

History is something that should never be forgotten and left unjudged, but sometimes, you need to ignore what happened in the past and look to the future, Iraq's future hasn't looked more brighter, from my point of view, then it ever has.

 

[Sprafa]

Iraq's future hasn't looked more brighter (...) then it ever has.

Good point. Iraq was a shithole so comparing to how it was before is pretty much a sea of roses.

 

[CptStern]

sorry but I dont agree ...Iraq is much worse off now than during saddam's time ...100% of iraqis are on food rations ..during the worst days of the sanctions only 67% were using rations. Not too mention that far more civilians die today than they did during saddam's time ...before I hear the outrage of the insane right, I'd like to remind you that the majority of people saddam killed were men. The US intervention has done far more damage to iraq than saddam ever did ..this is indisputable

 

[SIGbastard]

Man only 67% were on food rations before the war! ONLY 67%! Cpt Stern I'm sorry but you my friend are what I like to call an ass clown. Sorry for the insult but I'm just trying to let you know so you can pull your head out just a little bit and peek around at the real world. Sure they are on rations. There is going to hard times that come with war. Sometimes it is worth the cost. There isn't much else to say. I'm not a die hard republican or anything, but sometimes I get sick of people who only see the problems and not what has been going well. I guess the media is to blame in a large way. It will take awhile but Iraq has potential to be a prosperous country. The war itself will surely have a negative impact on Iraq in the short term, but the long term impact will most likely be positive.

 

[CptStern]

Man only 67% were on food rations before the war! ONLY 67%! Cpt Stern I'm sorry but you my friend are what I like to call an ass clown. Sorry for the insult but I'm just trying to let you know so you can pull your head out just a little bit and peek around at the real world. Sure they are on rations. There is going to hard times that come with war. Sometimes it is worth the cost. There isn't much else to say. I'm not a die hard republican or anything, but sometimes I get sick of people who only see the problems and not what has been going well. I guess the media is to blame in a large way. It will take awhile but Iraq has potential to be a prosperous country. The war itself will surely have a negative impact on Iraq in the short term, but the long term impact will most likely be positive.

look until you can brings FACTS to the table stfu. Tired of you people and your knee-jerk reactions. If you guys actually took the time to research the issues you'd come to the same conclusions I have ...there's no denying the truth. Less patriotic lip-service and more dealing with the issues ..as they truely are

 

[Solaris]

Yes stern you are right on this one, the Iraqis are better off.


"but the long term impact will most likely be positive."
Why, like in vietnam?