British troops attack children

[TheAmazingRando]

I certainly don't want the Iranians or Syrians capitalizing on our hard work, I want the US to capitalize on the US's hard work.

 

[JNightshade]

I'd have to agree with Rando on this. While I think that the results of our hard work ought to go back to Iraq (improving infrastructure, setting up a real police force/better schools, stabilizing power and water) we definitely can't pull out now. It's far too late. If you think it's anarchic now, imagine it with almost no one there to keep the peace.

 

[Nat Turner]

I'd have to agree with Rando on this. While I think that the results of our hard work ought to go back to Iraq (improving infrastructure, setting up a real police force/better schools, stabilizing power and water) we definitely can't pull out now. It's far too late. If you think it's anarchic now, imagine it with almost no one there to keep the peace.

That's interesting because the conditions in Iraq are still much worse than they were pre-invasion. We should simply accept that the entire thing was a mistake and pull out. If you're losing all your money at a casino, do you keep playing because you might eventually make it back?

 

[TheAmazingRando]

So cut our loses and reinvest in Artic resources like Russia?

 

[>>FrEnZy<<]

I think the iraqi people would be much happier with arab occupiers than american ones . I dont think the syrians and iranians would be able to maintain the magnitude of the insurgency...they arent as rich as america. Hence, It would be better for iraq to be occupied by weaker forces, as it will be easier for them to overcome the occupying forces.

 

[TheAmazingRando]

I think you underestimate the power Iran posses, they would jump for a chance to get back at Iraq for that nasty little war they had with them. I doubt the Iraqi people would do well with the Iranians in power. The best outcome is Iraqis ruling Iraqis but that is not what will happen.

 

[>>FrEnZy<<]

yep, you have me there rando

 

[Raziaar]

That's interesting because the conditions in Iraq are still much worse than they were pre-invasion. We should simply accept that the entire thing was a mistake and pull out. If you're losing all your money at a casino, do you keep playing because you might eventually make it back?

Thats because all the ****ing whackos either liked Saddam, or were quelled by saddam, and everybody did their mass murdering of innocents out of the public media's eye.

But thats obviously better, right?

 

[XANA]

my god that was disturbing! besides, im not sure that thing those kids tossed was a grenade. but other than that, this is the reason i don't go to britain anymore. but notice, that camera man sounded constipated! but imo, the british are like the french, i blame them for the weirdest things. but really, i don't think the iraqis (sp? i've had SO many blonde moments you'd never beleive me) deserved to get beaten THAT badly. hell, you can just go dick cheyney on them and "accidently" shoot one of them and claim you saw a bird! im not saying i wouldn't have fought back, im just saying i wouldn't have gotten involved as much as these clowns, that's all. and, also, someone mentioned there being only ONE "grenade". so of there was ONE "grenade", why did those soldiers have to attack more than one of the children if only one of them threw it? a soldier's job is to protect our country and eliminate enemies, not attack civilians and beat them like piñatas!!! what they did was uncalled for.

 

[Nat Turner]

Thats because all the ****ing whackos either liked Saddam, or were quelled by saddam, and everybody did their mass murdering of innocents out of the public media's eye.

But thats obviously better, right?

That's mostly propaganda, and democracy isn't worth hundreds of billions of our dollars and the costs of thousands of innocents.

 

[Raziaar]

That's mostly propaganda, and democracy isn't worth hundreds of billions of our dollars and the costs of thousands of innocents.

That's not propoganda. You're calling the people in Iraq who said their families were murdered, and the videotapes that SHOW these things, liars?

The kurds who were killed, The Shiite muslims who were killed, the Sunni's... the mass graves.

Yeah, propoganda.....

 

[Pajari]

That's mostly propaganda, and democracy isn't worth hundreds of billions of our dollars and the costs of thousands of innocents.

No, democracy is worth a lot more than that. We're getting a bargain compared to the high price some other countries had to pay for it.

 

[Nat Turner]

That's not propoganda. You're calling the people in Iraq who said their families were murdered, and the videotapes that SHOW these things, liars?

The kurds who were killed, The Shiite muslims who were killed, the Sunni's... the mass graves.

Yeah, propoganda.....

Even if you're right I don't think it justifies invasion. But I think at least some of that is propaganda.

 

[Nat Turner]

No, democracy is worth a lot more than that. We're getting a bargain compared to the high price some other countries had to pay for it.

Yeah sure, let's throw out tons of money and innocent lives because you want to trade one crappy system of government for another bad one.

 

[Pajari]

Yeah sure, let's throw out tons of money and innocent lives because you want to trade one crappy system of government for another bad one.

Yeah dood, democracy totally blows and I'm the only one that wants a democratic Iraq, so I'm going to force the most liberal constitution ever written in an Arab state on the poor Iraqi people and grind them into the dust with my boot-heel of democratic elections and plurality!

You're the one rolling the eyes here? Give me a break.

 

[Nat Turner]

Yeah dood, democracy totally blows and I'm the only one that wants a democratic Iraq, so I'm going to force the most liberal constitution ever written in an Arab state on the poor Iraqi people and grind them into the dust with my boot-heel of democratic elections and plurality!

You're the one rolling the eyes here? Give me a break.

Democracy sucks when the people don't even want it. And no I don't think it's right to kill people over a system of government, anyways. It's like killing people over religion.

 

[Pajari]

Democracy sucks when the people don't even want it.

70% participation in the latest election speaks to the contrary. And why would anyone not want democracy?

 

[Nat Turner]

70% participation in the latest election speaks to the contrary. And why would anyone not want democracy?

Iranians don't want democracy. The Chinese don't want democracy. It's just another system of government, not necessarily better. (Democratic republic is actually a more accurate term)

Also just because people vote in the election, it doesn't mean they support the government. You can hate the government but still want your say in the meantime.

 

[Pajari]

Iranians don't want democracy. The Chinese don't want democracy. It's just another system of government, not necessarily better. (Democratic republic is actually a more accurate term)

Also just because people vote in the election, it doesn't mean they support the government. You can hate the government but still want your say in the meantime.

The Iranian and Chinese governments don't want democracy, there is a difference. Everybody, regardless of ethnicity or nation, wants the freedom to do what they want. That's been pretty obvious since Athen's Golden Age. You've got some catching up to do.

And if the people vote in the election, it doesn't mean that they support the government, but it does mean that they support democracy. If they really didn't want democracy, then this civil war that's brewing would already be a full-blown mess.

 

[Sulkdodds]

As part of the HL2.net staff, I would hold, that everything the HL2.net staff
do is partly your responisbility. If there is a controvertial banning by one of the HL2.net mods, then you, in your position of power, have the responisbility of preventing this kind of thing from happening again amoungst your staff. You're not a 'nice guy' when you let 'evil sick ****s' do what they want.
Hence, bringing this back to the orginial case, a 'nice guy' solider is responsible for what his fellow 'evil sick ****' soliders do.responsible for what his fellow 'evil sick ****' soliders do.

Er, not quite. I'm not in a position of power. I can't do anything. I'm only a content writer. You think Munro or anyone else listens to me? I disagree a hell of a load with decisions made by the staff. My position is alike to that of a lowly soldier. And short of shooting his own people, there is nothing he can do. My point was not avoiding collective responsibility, but that you can't just say 'it's okay to attack soldiers' because not all soldiers are going to be directly responsible for what was done to you, and may not have even been able to stop it if they'd wanted to. Unless the insurgents can find exactly which soldiers did what and 'punish' them accordingly, they're not actually revenging themselves are they? It's like attacking a black man you see on the street because a similar-looking black man killed your father, or bitching at me because Pi Mu Rho banned yo' ass.

You seriously can't be expecting the people of a newly wartorn country to throw off a ghandi...thats a ridiciulous notion. Also, through out history, revolt against an occupying force has, in almost all cases, come out of a minorty of insurgents. If it is the entire populace is to be mobilised to make the coalition leave, then they are certainly heading in the right direction.

I wasn't expecting them to 'pull a Ghandi' and I didn't say they were. In case you hadn't noticed, that whole post dealed in miraculous absolutes that would never happen. That was the point. 'If the US pulled out today...if all the violence suddenly stoped...if the insurgents won.' They're just not feasible. Non-violence isn't feasible either. But let's take two scenarios:

1. All the Iraqis want the US out. All the Iraqis use violent methods.
Result: A load of bloodshed and Iraq turns into a warzone anyway.

2. All the Iraqis want the US out. All of them protest peacefully in the streets in huge crowds.
Result: The US is forced to do something. They can't start killing them anymore because then they'll be totally ****ed PR-wise. They can't take the moral high ground. Consider this: if Iraqis are fighting a load of people are going to die. But when they die, people will say 'oh well they deserved it because they were fighting'. If they are peaceful, people are going to say 'this is atrocious'. You know the power of PR and of public opinion as well as I do. I'm not saying non-violence is the total best solution ever but it's a damn sight better than armed insurgency is going to be at this point in time.

]]As you stated before, the only way the coalition would be leaving, is if the entire populace began to revolt against the coalition. Considering this did happen, the 'insurgents' will no longer be insurgents, as they will have nothing to insurge against. Yes, there may be disputes amoung the people, however, these disputes will eventually be pacified as the looming threat of occupation is no longer hanging over their heads.

No. I believe that If the US were to leave right now, Iraq would implode. They wouldn't just all think 'ah, we're free' and settle down happily. I could be wrong, but it's happened in quite a lot of countries before. It's even possible a dictatorship far worse than the US or Saddam might emerge. Fundamentalists always take power in times of crisis and the local fundies in Iraq are complete and profound bastards.

Obviously if the insurgents surrenedered and stopped fighting, the americans will no longer have to fight them. How ever, that would be at the cost of surrenedering and letting the US do what ever they wish with their country (which would most likely be to exploit their nations resources). Your hypothesis is incorrect here, because the only way the US can stop its atrocities in iraq is by leaving the country. Hence, the hypothetical question you should be asking is the following: what if the US and the institutions of governance suddenly leave Iraq? well considering the insurgents will have nothing to insurge against, they will obviously stop.

You see, I don't think they will. As I've now explained, I'm not talking about stopping fighting. I'm talking about fighting through different methods. And yes I think it's dangerous to let the US have its way with Iraq. But it's better than shooting them and either A. pushing them out and you're ****ed anyway or B. failing to push them out and you're really ****ed. Besides, I'm not suggesting they just sit around with their thumbs up their arses am I?

You are hilarious. I think you are forgetting that this is happening in iraq. The insurgents are defending their soil by attacking the US. If I come into your house and tell you that from now on, things are run the way I want them to, and you come and hit me, you arent attacking me, your defending your home.
It's silly to expect you to think, after Ive come into your home, "Oh, well hitting this person who has come into my home is not justified because he isnt hitting me"

A good point. Although as has been mentioned, many countries have come off the better for occupation. The US and British killed thousands of innocent people in WW2 but Germany and Japan became a hell of a lot better after invasion and occuptation. Now, if I was an Iraqi I would have been extremely happy to hear that the US was invading at first. Woohoo, goodbye Saddam! But when they turned out to be pretty nasty themselves, then I would be pissed off. But if they weren't doing all that shit, nobody would want them out so fast and, conversely, they'd get out quicker.

I would respond to your 'you are hilarious' with some misguided and self-important insult, but that would make me a bit of a **** now wouldn't it?

 

[>>FrEnZy<<]

Sorry for insulting you sulkdodds

its just >>FrEnZy<< by the way.

 

[Nat Turner]

The Iranian and Chinese governments don't want democracy, there is a difference. Everybody, regardless of ethnicity or nation, wants the freedom to do what they want. That's been pretty obvious since Athen's Golden Age. You've got some catching up to do.

And if the people vote in the election, it doesn't mean that they support the government, but it does mean that they support democracy. If they really didn't want democracy, then this civil war that's brewing would already be a full-blown mess.

No, that's simply not true. It's a fact that most Iranians want to keep their theocracy, and most Chinese want to keep their Communism. It's a wild claim to say that the majority of people support the Western system of government.

 

[Eg.]

Um, you Nat, you never went to China, or Iran, have you? Just saying, people say a lto when the governement cant hear. Tianamen square was just for nothing, right?

 

[Nat Turner]

Um, you Nat, you never went to China, or Iran, have you? Just saying, people say a lto when the governement cant hear. Tianamen square was just for nothing, right?

My dad's been to China at least a dozen times, and most people there either don't care about politics, or they support their government. It's mostly Western propaganda that hypes up the Tianenmen square massacre. A similar incident happened in England that nobody talks about.

In Iran, most of the people there support their crazy president. It's true.

Sure there's always dissenters but I'm talking about the majority.

 

[Razor]

My dad's been to China at least a dozen times, and most people there either don't care about politics, or they support their government. It's mostly Western propaganda that hypes up the Tianenmen square massacre. A similar incident happened in England that nobody talks about.

In Iran, most of the people there support their crazy president. It's true.

Sure there's always dissenters but I'm talking about the majority.

Most of the ordinary Iranian's living in and around the major cities want closer ties with the west, especially because they enjoy western culture and fashion and entertainment.

 

[Nat Turner]

Most of the ordinary Iranian's living in and around the major cities want closer ties with the west, especially because they enjoy western culture and fashion and entertainment.

Who told you this? Was an actual poll conducted?

 

[Solaris]

Theres more important things than electing your leaders. Like feeding your familly. Democracy as it is doesn't work anyway, too many idiots.

 

[Sulkdodds]

its just >>FrEnZy<< by the way.

Ah right. Sorry, I do get carried away with the "*$£&/ sometimes. It's like forum tourette's.

£"&))>>@"''#. Damnit! D:

Democracy as it is doesn't work anyway, too many idiots.

I thought you advocated factory workers choosing their own managers?

 

[Solaris]

I thought you advocated factory workers choosing their own managers?

Yes, of course however they would have to have a certain level of qualifications.

 

[Nat Turner]

Theres more important things than electing your leaders. Like feeding your familly. Democracy as it is doesn't work anyway, too many idiots.

Yup. Unfortunately, as history has shown, the vote is a very weak check on government.

 

[Some_God]

Democracy as it is doesn't work anyway, too many idiots.

That explains why you posted here and why this forum is not working out. :thumbs:

 

[Nat Turner]

That explains why you posted here and why this forum is not working out. :thumbs:

No, he's actually right. We have a democratic republic yet such a tyrannical administration and legal code.

It obviously isn't working out.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Well, thats a relative feeling. Besides, if this countries such a failing, why stay here anyway? Surely it succeeds in one way by keeping you here ...

My Own Personal Aside:

I hope to move out of North Carolina at somepoint in my life just to avoid all the damn Nuclear Plants they're building around me. Its my own form of protest I'd like to call, being more effective then everyday protesters, [at least in one way]. Without my number in the county, they can't justify those plants being constructed. Plus, I just don't like Nuclear energy.

Why can't anyone realize that the most effective forms of protest are the ones that don't appear to be protests at all but actions instead? People make protests, take that action, [which I here Protests gross in currency compared to the american dollar 200-to-1] but they do it all the wrong way. Get an education. Get some smarts out of it. Research political sciences or whatever is the prerequiste for the Presidency, and get in there yourself! Heck, congress! The best way to stop another "Bush" from happening is to steal his seat on the Bus next to his friend Cheney, or in less metaphorical terms, the Presidency and the Vice Presidency chairs in the white house.

I guess people don't know how to take their messages to the next level then.
I support my country, and I believe its doing well, but for those drooling live journal angst balls I can't be sure.

 

[gick]

EDIT: Actually, never mind...

 

[>>FrEnZy<<]

Well, thats a relative feeling. Besides, if this countries such a failing, why stay here anyway? Surely it succeeds in one way by keeping you here ...

My Own Personal Aside:

I hope to move out of North Carolina at somepoint in my life just to avoid all the damn Nuclear Plants they're building around me. Its my own form of protest I'd like to call, being more effective then everyday protesters, [at least in one way]. Without my number in the county, they can't justify those plants being constructed. Plus, I just don't like Nuclear energy.

Why can't anyone realize that the most effective forms of protest are the ones that don't appear to be protests at all but actions instead? People make protests, take that action, [which I here Protests gross in currency compared to the american dollar 200-to-1] but they do it all the wrong way. Get an education. Get some smarts out of it. Research political sciences or whatever is the prerequiste for the Presidency, and get in there yourself! Heck, congress! The best way to stop another "Bush" from happening is to steal his seat on the Bus next to his friend Cheney, or in less metaphorical terms, the Presidency and the Vice Presidency chairs in the white house.

I guess people don't know how to take their messages to the next level then.
I support my country, and I believe its doing well, but for those drooling live journal angst balls I can't be sure.

ahhahhaha, your funny. You make it sound like a walk around the block. getting into congress isnt about having a educational background in political science, its about having money and ensuring that the ecconomic policies you will advocate will be in line with those of the policies the corporations want.


and I also think, that although nuclear power is potentially very dangerious and produces nuclear waste, its one of the best power alternatives that we currently posses. Relative to other forms of energy production, it makes little pollution, and as for wind and solar power...they are exteremly expensive and just dont provide enough energy production. Regardless to say, having a wind turbine in your backyard will probably be more disturbing for you than having a nuclear powerplant in your backyard.

 

[Pajari]

It's mostly Western propaganda that hypes up the Tianenmen square massacre. A similar incident happened in England that nobody talks about.

Haha, what? Tiananmen wasn't child's play, moron. Thousands of people were mowed down by tanks and machine guns over the course of several hours of fighting in the city streets and in the square itself. Soldiers deserted their units and joined the citizens in fighting the loyal CCP battallions, and in order to re-establish order the Chinese government had to bring in tanks and basically plow their way through the city, shooting on sight. Read a few chapters of "The New Emperors" if you want an account of what happened from someone that was actually there and was not completely talking out of his ass.

In Iran, most of the people there support their crazy president. It's true.

You have absoloutely no way of proving that. Its not true. Maybe if they had fair elections we'd be able to figure that out.

 

[gick]

You have absoloutely no way of proving that. Its not true. Maybe if they had fair elections we'd be able to figure that out.

He might well be right. Look at Iraq and Palestine (similar region and culture), in both countries the people have given overwhelming support to parties that openly wish to install an Islamic Republic.

Having said that, things may look different from within a theocracy, so maybe the Iranians arent so happy with the situation.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

I think the iraqi people would be much happier with arab occupiers than american ones . I dont think the syrians and iranians would be able to maintain the magnitude of the insurgency...they arent as rich as america.

Frenzy, a fool who thinks the Insurgency maintains itself off of money is probably a fool who thinks the Insurgency will be defeated with money. The Insurgency runs off the pure adrenaline of combat and also their blind faith to Theocratic Facism's in which its pure poetry to die a meaningless death in the honor of a Islams War Prophets.

they arent as rich as america. Hence, It would be better for iraq to be occupied by weaker forces, as it will be easier for them to overcome the occupying forces.

No, I just think your trying to put an extremist Arab Control back in power over Iraq. Its what the Insurgents want, also ... somethings scaring them ... and I can't figure out what. Maybe its the fact the Snipers Mujahedeen is being hunted down, one by one.

Whatever it is, somethings screwing with them. And I think thats because Abu Masab Al-Zarqwai showed his true colours in the Mosk bombings.

I think you underestimate the power Iran posses, they would jump for a chance to get back at Iraq for that nasty little war they had with them. I doubt the Iraqi people would do well with the Iranians in power. The best outcome is Iraqis ruling Iraqis but that is not what will happen.

No, thats what will happen. The longer the Insurgents resist, the longer will stay. We're not Russia.

 

[Pajari]

He might well be right. Look at Iraq and Palestine (similar region and culture), in both countries the people have given overwhelming support to parties that openly wish to install an Islamic Republic.

Well, I think he's dead wrong, but that wasn't my point. He's making absoloutely baseless statements.

Having said that, things may look different from within a theocracy, so maybe the Iranians arent so happy with the situation.

Yeah, I'd like to think that a regime as oppressive as Iran's is hated by their citizens, but there really is no way of knowing. History tells us that people don't enjoy life under a theocracy or facist dictatoriship.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

You make it sound like a walk around the block.

While you make it sound like a mad dash through an armed Checkpoint in Lebanon, I at least try to put a positive spin on things. You want to change things, get into power and make that change. Gain some influence, do something besides rant about it from afar inside an Internet Forum for some video game.

What I do outside of this thread, this forum, goes well beyond just words. I participate in my community, I visit debates, and actively try and participate with the Political Buildings that are occuring in my state.

At least I'm doing something. Why can't other people? Or I should say, why won't other people? Its simple. They don't want to get off their lazy butts and do it. The most they can come up with to defend themselves is this, "Well, its not my responsibility anyway." or "Why should I?"

But I say, why should you not? It is your responsibility! It was an Americans duty to know the Political structure of the Old America during the late 1700's! Get involved, or don't bitch about those that are!

that although nuclear power is potentially very dangerious and produces nuclear waste

Sorry, I'm a peacy green. Nuclear Waste is not something I'm an avid fan of.