The Iraq Thread

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IsthatyouJohnWayne @ April 12 2003,14:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">All of these things are irrelevant. What matter are reports of US troops screwing up, killing journalists and commiting acts of friendly fire. Shady oil deals and how doggon crazy and out of control those Americans are. Those are the important (non US propaganda) things.<span id='postcolor'>

It was fought on Iraqi soil. Iraqi civilians died, not US or UK civilians. Or am I wrong? Was your house bombed and your family killed because Iraq suspected that Tony Blair might be spending the night there?

All of that put aside, the relation Iraq-coalition is not symmetrical. The Anglo-American forces attacked Iraq. Iraq defended itself. When Hitler invaded Poland, you were not hearing discussions about "Well, the Polish government was corrupt anyway". When Iraq invaded Kuwait, there were few people that said "Who cares, Kuwait was a bloody dictatorship anyhow. One dictator or another, it's all the same."

Why should we be saying so in the Iraq case?

Edit:Grammar fix

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 12 2003,01:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LOL, if he's surrounded by five armed friends then its his ass. All's fair in love and war remember. It'd be pretty damn dumb to go cavorting around the Iraqi countryside carrying a weapon or with an armed entourage if you looked like a member of the Iraqi regime. If one were stupid enough to do something like this, then tough shit, he wasn't fit to reproduce anyway.<span id='postcolor'>

Right, because all mighty God Bush deicedes to invade and determine who has rights to life. I have few normal words left to those defending Anglo-American forces, especially after the incidents with reporters, so I won't be saying so much since it's demeaning to you.

[brgnorway 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 12 2003,07:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Uh, excuse me, but you are wrong, I saw footage of women and children being forced across a bridge near An Nasiriyah. They were screaming in terror about being caught in the crossfire. The Coalition troops had to stop firing to save them. You must have missed that bit of "biased" reporting though.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, I'll excuse you! How on earth do you manage to make this incident into "iraqi soldiers hiding behind women and children" ?

[brgnorway 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IsthatyouJohnWayne @ April 12 2003,14:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think Schoeler covered most of it but i will make it clear once again. <span id='postcolor'>

No he didn't - see my former post!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">1940s Norway is not Iraq and 1940s Germany is not America. I do not accept it as a reasonable comparison. The point i was trying to get across about 'collaborators' is that reactions have been different because numbers, circumstances and motivations of 'collaborators' are different.

<span id='postcolor'>

Once again you are trying to twist the facts I presented! Rules of engagment are abolished when you are attacked and your life is at risk. No, hiding behind women and children is not ok but then again we don't know if that has happend. Nor do we know if prisoners of war has been killed. I'm surprised that a person whom obviously know nothing about the occupation of Norway can claim this or that. By the way, I'm sure many iraqis will feel almost the same about the americans as norwegians felt about the germans. If you can't understand that you'r obviously naive or blinded by your anglosaxian ideology!

[LandShark-AL 0]

I was in the US army SF for 10 years and did my time in war

in Iraq and other places and we never killed POWs and we took

a lot of them.But I know we are the only bad people in the world and all that crap.After you go to war tell me how you did not shoot back when people where shooting ak and rpgs at you

[Longinius 1]

"I was in the US army SF for 10 years and did my time in war

in Iraq and other places and we never killed POWs and we took

a lot of them.But I know we are the only bad people in the world and all that crap.After you go to war tell me how you did not shoot back when people where shooting ak and rpgs at you "

So you brought prisoners with you on covert operations? If you for example were tasked with blowing a bridge behind enemy lines and came across a group of Iraqi soldiers that saw you, and surrendered, you would bring them with you?

[PFC Mongoose 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 12 2003,15:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IsthatyouJohnWayne @ April 12 2003,14:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Iraqi atrocities? Hey its a different culture, we shouldnt judge. Im sure those torturers had the Iraqi peoples best interests at heart.<span id='postcolor'>

I'll try typing more slowly, perhaps then you'll understand.  Perhaps my English is so bad that it's impossible to understand what I am saying.

The atrocities that the Iraqi government committed before this war are not valid as war crimes. USA does not have jurisdiction over it. Not even the ICC has jurisdiction over it since they were committed prior to 1991 (Hague tribunal foundation).

I'll type it once again, just to be safe that you get it:

The atrocities that the Iraqi government committed before this war are not valid as war crimes. USA does not have jurisdiction over it. Not even the ICC has jurisdiction over it since they were committed prior to 1991 (Hague tribunal foundation).<span id='postcolor'>

The ICC doesn't have any jurisdiction over America, either.

That doesn't mean that those in Iraq and America responsible for War Crimes shouldn't be punished, or at least brought to trial.

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ April 12 2003,15:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 12 2003,01:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LOL, if he's surrounded by five armed friends then its his ass.  All's fair in love and war remember.  It'd be pretty damn dumb to go cavorting around the Iraqi countryside carrying a weapon or with an armed entourage if you looked like a member of the Iraqi regime.  If one were stupid enough to do something like this, then tough shit, he wasn't fit to reproduce anyway.<span id='postcolor'>

Right, because all mighty God Bush deicedes to invade and determine who has rights to life.  I have few normal words left to those defending Anglo-American forces, especially after the incidents with reporters, so I won't be saying so much since it's demeaning to you.<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah sure buddy, Bush is my almighty God. I've already said plenty of times in this thread that I pretty much think he's a jackass. I think I just have a MUCH more realistic perspective than you do about the realities of war. People die in war in case you didn't know. What you might have heard, or have been unwilling to pay attention to, is that much fewer people have died in this war than in any other. Say what you like, but this is true. Sometimes you sound like a broken record. You keep trotting out these concepts and outrageous claims of atrocities or upcoming disasters only to have them disproved immediately or within a week. I'm wondering still how that wholesale slaughter in Basra is coming along? How about the standing order to shoot women and children? Oh, and the massive Iraqi resistance in Baghdad that will result in untold numbers of innocent civilian casualties? Whats next, Oh, let me guess, the new order for the Coalition is to make all Iraqis our slaves, and to turn Iraq into an American club med. After that we will invade Sweden and kill as many civilians as possible because we all know how much the Swedes piss us off. You know, if your claims weren't so fantastic, I might take you more seriously. Take Denoir for example. He makes valid, sober points many of which I have conceded to and many of which I feel I have parried effectively. All you do is paint yourself to be an extremely leftwing radical, who can't back down from his stance one iota. Sorry, but this is as nice as I can be under the circumstances.

[Longinius 1]

Now I am genuinly pissed of. The national museum in Bahgdad has been looted. It contained historic treasures dating 5 000 years back in history. It was a part of humanities heritage.

It was guarded by TWO American soldiers, and it has now been sacked.

The coalition sucks cowballs.

[FallenPaladin 0]

Well, the TBA set the rules. It`s guarding the oil ministry, the other problems will solve themselves.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ April 12 2003,17:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Now I am genuinly pissed of. The national museum in Bahgdad has been looted. It contained historic treasures dating 5 000 years back in history. It was a part of humanities heritage.

It was guarded by TWO American soldiers, and it has now been sacked.

The coalition sucks cowballs.

<span id='postcolor'>

Yepp. I posted this yesterday The looters did not just steal artifacts but they destroyed a lot of it. I don't know if the stupid fucks that were supposed to guard that place are aware what they let happen. There was a huge amount of priceless artifacts in that museum that are now gone. This is IMO a greater disaster than the people killed. People can reproduce, this is lost for ever.

NYT article:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

Looters Plunder Iraqi Museum; 50,000 Artifacts Are Taken

By JOHN F. BURNS

BAGHDAD, Iraq, April 12 — The National Museum of Iraq recorded a history of civilizations that began to flourish in the fertile plains of Mesopotamia more than 7,000 years ago, but once American troops entered Baghdad in sufficient force to topple Saddam Hussein's government this week, it took only 48 hours for the museum to be destroyed, with at least 50,000 artifacts carried away by looters.

The full extent of the disaster that befell the museum only came to light today, as the frenzied looting that swept much of the capital over the previous three days began to ebb. As fires in a dozen government ministries and agencies began to smoke out, and looters tired of pillaging in the 90-degree heat of the Iraqi spring, museum officials reached the hotels where foreign journalists are staying along the eastern bank of the Tigris River, with word of what is likely to be reckoned as one of the greatest cultural disasters in recent Middle Eastern history.

A full accounting of what has been lost may take weeks or months. The museum had been closed during much of the 1990's, and like many Iraqi institutions, its operations were cloaked in secrecy under Mr. Hussein. So what officials told journalists today may have to be adjusted as a fuller picture comes to light, and as the world learns whether some of the museum's priceless gold, silver and copper antiquities, some of its ancient stone and ceramics, and perhaps some of its fabled bronzes and gold-overlaid ivory, had been locked away for safekeeping elsewhere before the looting, or seized for private display in one of Mr. Hussein's ubiquitous palaces.

What was beyond contest today was that the 28 galleries of the museum and vaults with huge steels guarding storage chambers that descend floor after floor into darkness had been completely ransacked.

Officials with crumpled spirits fought back tears and anger at American troops, as they ran down an inventory of the most storied items that they said had been carried away by the thousands of looters who poured into the museum after daybreak on Thursday and remained until dusk on Friday, with only one intervention by American troops, lasting about half an hour, at lunchtime on Thursday.

Nothing remained, museum officials said, at least nothing of real value, from a museum that had been regarded by archaeologists and other specialists as perhaps the richest of all such institutions in the Middle East.

As examples of what was gone, the official cited a harp in solid gold from the Sumerian era, which began about 3360 B.C. and started to crumble about 2000 B.C. Another item on their list of looted antiquities was a sculptured head of a woman from Uruk, one of the great Sumerian cities, dating to about the same era, and a collection of gold necklaces, bracelets and earrings, also from the Sumerian dynasties and also at least 4,000 years old.

"The Americans were supposed to protect the museum," its deputy director, Nabhal Amin, told Reuters. "If they had just one tank and two soldiers nothing like this would have happened. I hold the American troops responsible for what happened to this museum."

<span id='postcolor'>

[ralphwiggum 6]

well, just to lighten up th thread:

A fan page for Information Minister al-Shhaf

[bn880 5]

4--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 12 2003,124)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ April 12 2003,15:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 12 2003,01:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LOL, if he's surrounded by five armed friends then its his ass. All's fair in love and war remember. It'd be pretty damn dumb to go cavorting around the Iraqi countryside carrying a weapon or with an armed entourage if you looked like a member of the Iraqi regime. If one were stupid enough to do something like this, then tough shit, he wasn't fit to reproduce anyway.<span id='postcolor'>

Right, because all mighty God Bush deicedes to invade and determine who has rights to life. I have few normal words left to those defending Anglo-American forces, especially after the incidents with reporters, so I won't be saying so much since it's demeaning to you.<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah sure buddy, Bush is my almighty God. I've already said plenty of times in this thread that I pretty much think he's a jackass. I think I just have a MUCH more realistic perspective than you do about the realities of war. People die in war in case you didn't know. What you might have heard, or have been unwilling to pay attention to, is that much fewer people have died in this war than in any other. Say what you like, but this is true. Sometimes you sound like a broken record. You keep trotting out these concepts and outrageous claims of atrocities or upcoming disasters only to have them disproved immediately or within a week. I'm wondering still how that wholesale slaughter in Basra is coming along? How about the standing order to shoot women and children? Oh, and the massive Iraqi resistance in Baghdad that will result in untold numbers of innocent civilian casualties? Whats next, Oh, let me guess, the new order for the Coalition is to make all Iraqis our slaves, and to turn Iraq into an American club med. After that we will invade Sweden and kill as many civilians as possible because we all know how much the Swedes piss us off. You know, if your claims weren't so fantastic, I might take you more seriously. Take Denoir for example. He makes valid, sober points many of which I have conceded to and many of which I feel I have parried effectively. All you do is paint yourself to be an extremely leftwing radical, who can't back down from his stance one iota. Sorry, but this is as nice as I can be under the circumstances.<span id='postcolor'>

The basic point is: I do have an understanding of War, that is why I wsa against it, what you say above is not true about me. I do not debate with people who accept targetting of reproters, blowing up restaurants etc.

Stop saying bullshit about me, nothing I have claimed personally has been wrong, I was sure they were targeting reporters and htey did. I didn't forcast upcoming disasters, I thought Iraqis would put up a bigger fight, like everyone else.

I do not know which of "my" claims is fantastic. This is great, I have to defend my self again.

My prediction has been that Iraq is not a threat, and so far it was true. What else are you going to make up about me, rather than hang your head in shame for this un-necessary moronic war? Go on, support bullshit causes, go on attack my unwillingness to be civil with people who can't understand anything but their cozy lives, go on, it's your right and freedom so it must be good.

EDIT: As for Denoir, #1 I'm not Denoir, #2 you don't meet those standards either, #3 you people are lucky to have someone sensible to be patient and pampering with you in these discussions about life/death, he's like your grandfather for gods sake

[Badgerboy 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (RalphWiggum @ April 12 2003,18:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">well, just to lighten up th thread:

A fan page for Information Minister al-Shhaf<span id='postcolor'>

I've already ordered a T Shirt from another site.

Hooray!

[LandShark-AL 0]

No we did not just stand around so people could see us.

if they came so close as to see us we killed them if in fire fight

we would break contact and keep moving spec ops dont have

the ammo load for long fire fights.But yes some times we where there to take someone.As for blowing thing up we can do that from a good ways off with a LGB not a lot of planting the old c4 in spec ops these days and there are even better now then when I got out in 94.

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ April 12 2003,19:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 12 2003,12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ April 12 2003,15:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 12 2003,01:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LOL, if he's surrounded by five armed friends then its his ass.  All's fair in love and war remember.  It'd be pretty damn dumb to go cavorting around the Iraqi countryside carrying a weapon or with an armed entourage if you looked like a member of the Iraqi regime.  If one were stupid enough to do something like this, then tough shit, he wasn't fit to reproduce anyway.<span id='postcolor'>

Right, because all mighty God Bush deicedes to invade and determine who has rights to life.  I have few normal words left to those defending Anglo-American forces, especially after the incidents with reporters, so I won't be saying so much since it's demeaning to you.<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah sure buddy, Bush is my almighty God.  I've already said plenty of times in this thread that I pretty much think he's a jackass.  I think I just have a MUCH more realistic perspective than you do about the realities of war.  People die in war in case you didn't know.  What you might have heard, or have been unwilling to pay attention to, is that much fewer people have died in this war than in any other.  Say what you like, but this is true.  Sometimes you sound like a broken record.  You keep trotting out these concepts and outrageous claims of atrocities or upcoming disasters only to have them disproved immediately or within a week.  I'm wondering still how that wholesale slaughter in Basra is coming along?  How about the standing order to shoot women and children?  Oh, and the massive Iraqi resistance in Baghdad that will result in untold numbers of innocent civilian casualties?  Whats next, Oh, let me guess, the new order for the Coalition is to make all Iraqis our slaves, and to turn Iraq into an American club med.  After that we will invade Sweden and kill as many civilians as possible because we all know how much the Swedes piss us off.  You know, if your claims weren't so fantastic, I might take you more seriously.  Take Denoir for example.  He makes valid, sober points many of which I have conceded to and many of which I feel I have parried effectively.  All you do is paint yourself to be an extremely leftwing radical, who can't back down from his stance one iota.  Sorry, but this is as nice as I can be under the circumstances.<span id='postcolor'>

The basic point is: I do have an understanding of War, that is why I wsa against it, what you say above is not true about me.  I do not debate with people who accept targetting of reproters, blowing up restaurants etc.  

Stop saying bullshit about me, nothing I have claimed personally has been wrong, I was sure they were targeting reporters and htey did.  I didn't forcast upcoming disasters, I thought Iraqis would put up a bigger fight, like everyone else.  

I do not know which of "my" claims is fantastic.  This is great, I have to defend my self again.

My prediction has been that Iraq is not a threat, and so far it was true.  What else are you going to make up about me, rather than hang your head in shame for this un-necessary moronic war?  Go on, support bullshit causes, go on attack my unwillingness to be civil with people who can't understand anything but their cozy lives, go on, it's your right and freedom so it must be good.  <!--emo&

EDIT: As for Denoir, #1 I'm not Denoir, #2 you don't meet those standards either, #3 you people are lucky to have someone sensible to be patient and pampering with you in these discussions about life/death, he's like your grandfather for gods sake<span id='postcolor'>

See here you go again.  You insult me by saying Bush is my almighty God, then you insinuate I'm a monster and that I "support the targetting of reporters, and the blowing up of restaraunts." (another fantastic claim incidently, since no one has proven the reporters were the ones targetted, and again I'll reiterate in case you missed it in my first post, the wrong people getting targetted is an unfortunate part of combat, its bound to happen in every war, not just this one), then you make it out as if I lobbed the first insult.  Well, I didn't, and if you feel the need to defend yourself, you probably do.  And, at least when I speculate I use qualifying words like "might", "perhaps", "maybe", "its possible".  See, these words modify the sentence so that it doesn't appear to be a claim based upon fact, but speculation.  I'm assuming you know how to use such words since your English is excellent, yet you don't always seem to do that.  If I have to go back through the history of this thread and quote all the times that I think you've made unsubstantiated claims, I will.  Oh, and its not just me who has mentioned this to you.  I don't mean to insult you, but its hard to argue with your claims since they aren't always based upon careful observation of whats going on over there.  You seem deeply committed to your point of view, and completely unwilling to accept anyone else's.  Your point of view, to me seems to be based on the decision to believe any and all negative things you hear about the coalition, whether they be rumor, fact, innuendo or outright slander.  Its obvious you've made up your mind that we are all a bunch of warmongering killers bent on world domination, so from this point on I will no longer respond to your posts, as it will do no good whatsoever.

Edited for spelling errors.

[PFC Mongoose 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 12 2003,18:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ April 12 2003,17:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Now I am genuinly pissed of. The national museum in Bahgdad has been looted. It contained historic treasures dating 5 000 years back in history. It was a part of humanities heritage.

It was guarded by TWO American soldiers, and it has now been sacked.

The coalition sucks cowballs.

<span id='postcolor'>

Yepp. I posted this yesterday The looters did not just steal artifacts but they destroyed a lot of it. I don't know if the stupid fucks that were supposed to guard that place are aware what they let happen. There was a huge amount of priceless artifacts in that museum that are now gone. This is IMO a greater disaster than the people killed. People can reproduce, this is lost for ever.

NYT article:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

Looters Plunder Iraqi Museum; 50,000 Artifacts Are Taken

By JOHN F. BURNS

BAGHDAD, Iraq, April 12 — The National Museum of Iraq recorded a history of civilizations that began to flourish in the fertile plains of Mesopotamia more than 7,000 years ago, but once American troops entered Baghdad in sufficient force to topple Saddam Hussein's government this week, it took only 48 hours for the museum to be destroyed, with at least 50,000 artifacts carried away by looters.

The full extent of the disaster that befell the museum only came to light today, as the frenzied looting that swept much of the capital over the previous three days began to ebb. As fires in a dozen government ministries and agencies began to smoke out, and looters tired of pillaging in the 90-degree heat of the Iraqi spring, museum officials reached the hotels where foreign journalists are staying along the eastern bank of the Tigris River, with word of what is likely to be reckoned as one of the greatest cultural disasters in recent Middle Eastern history.

A full accounting of what has been lost may take weeks or months. The museum had been closed during much of the 1990's, and like many Iraqi institutions, its operations were cloaked in secrecy under Mr. Hussein. So what officials told journalists today may have to be adjusted as a fuller picture comes to light, and as the world learns whether some of the museum's priceless gold, silver and copper antiquities, some of its ancient stone and ceramics, and perhaps some of its fabled bronzes and gold-overlaid ivory, had been locked away for safekeeping elsewhere before the looting, or seized for private display in one of Mr. Hussein's ubiquitous palaces.

What was beyond contest today was that the 28 galleries of the museum and vaults with huge steels guarding storage chambers that descend floor after floor into darkness had been completely ransacked.

Officials with crumpled spirits fought back tears and anger at American troops, as they ran down an inventory of the most storied items that they said had been carried away by the thousands of looters who poured into the museum after daybreak on Thursday and remained until dusk on Friday, with only one intervention by American troops, lasting about half an hour, at lunchtime on Thursday.

Nothing remained, museum officials said, at least nothing of real value, from a museum that had been regarded by archaeologists and other specialists as perhaps the richest of all such institutions in the Middle East.

As examples of what was gone, the official cited a harp in solid gold from the Sumerian era, which began about 3360 B.C. and started to crumble about 2000 B.C. Another item on their list of looted antiquities was a sculptured head of a woman from Uruk, one of the great Sumerian cities, dating to about the same era, and a collection of gold necklaces, bracelets and earrings, also from the Sumerian dynasties and also at least 4,000 years old.

"The Americans were supposed to protect the museum," its deputy director, Nabhal Amin, told Reuters. "If they had just one tank and two soldiers nothing like this would have happened. I hold the American troops responsible for what happened to this museum."

<span id='postcolor'><span id='postcolor'>

It was pretty stupid of them to guard the museum so poorly. I wonder how thinly stretched their forces are, or if it was just a command screw up.

The backlash will be forceful.

Still, even if they are ancient artifacts, and even if they hold a lot of history, to me, people are almost always more important than stuff. People can reproduce, but if your friend dies, that person is gone. Their decendents may resemble them, you may meet other people like them, but someone close to you has been erased off the face of the earth.

Losing ancient relics and artifacts is a tragedy, but to me, losing people is almost always far worse.

[Col. Kurtz 0]

Edit: Basically what Denoir said on the issue of the museum been looted and the faliure of coalition soldiers to stop it.

As for the people dying vs. artifacts, I would rather see 10 soldiers killed and the artifacts saved than no one killed and the artifacts taken and destroyed. Its harsh, but sometimes human lifes have to be sacrificed to save things. The Mesopatamian was the first really advanced civilisation. They were the first to use writing as a way of recording information. They got into science and mathematics. Artifacts to atest to these remarkable achievements have probably been lost. I think that will have a greater affect on a world wide scale than a couple of soldiers been killed.

[ruff 102]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ April 12 2003,19:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 12 2003,12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ April 12 2003,15:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 12 2003,01:26)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">LOL, if he's surrounded by five armed friends then its his ass.  All's fair in love and war remember.  It'd be pretty damn dumb to go cavorting around the Iraqi countryside carrying a weapon or with an armed entourage if you looked like a member of the Iraqi regime.  If one were stupid enough to do something like this, then tough shit, he wasn't fit to reproduce anyway.<span id='postcolor'>

Right, because all mighty God Bush deicedes to invade and determine who has rights to life.  I have few normal words left to those defending Anglo-American forces, especially after the incidents with reporters, so I won't be saying so much since it's demeaning to you.<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah sure buddy, Bush is my almighty God.  I've already said plenty of times in this thread that I pretty much think he's a jackass.  I think I just have a MUCH more realistic perspective than you do about the realities of war.  People die in war in case you didn't know.  What you might have heard, or have been unwilling to pay attention to, is that much fewer people have died in this war than in any other.  Say what you like, but this is true.  Sometimes you sound like a broken record.  You keep trotting out these concepts and outrageous claims of atrocities or upcoming disasters only to have them disproved immediately or within a week.  I'm wondering still how that wholesale slaughter in Basra is coming along?  How about the standing order to shoot women and children?  Oh, and the massive Iraqi resistance in Baghdad that will result in untold numbers of innocent civilian casualties?  Whats next, Oh, let me guess, the new order for the Coalition is to make all Iraqis our slaves, and to turn Iraq into an American club med.  After that we will invade Sweden and kill as many civilians as possible because we all know how much the Swedes piss us off.  You know, if your claims weren't so fantastic, I might take you more seriously.  Take Denoir for example.  He makes valid, sober points many of which I have conceded to and many of which I feel I have parried effectively.  All you do is paint yourself to be an extremely leftwing radical, who can't back down from his stance one iota.  Sorry, but this is as nice as I can be under the circumstances.<span id='postcolor'>

The basic point is: I do have an understanding of War, that is why I wsa against it, what you say above is not true about me.  I do not debate with people who accept targetting of reproters, blowing up restaurants etc.  

Stop saying bullshit about me, nothing I have claimed personally has been wrong, I was sure they were targeting reporters and htey did.  I didn't forcast upcoming disasters, I thought Iraqis would put up a bigger fight, like everyone else.  

I do not know which of "my" claims is fantastic.  This is great, I have to defend my self again.

My prediction has been that Iraq is not a threat, and so far it was true.  What else are you going to make up about me, rather than hang your head in shame for this un-necessary moronic war?  Go on, support bullshit causes, go on attack my unwillingness to be civil with people who can't understand anything but their cozy lives, go on, it's your right and freedom so it must be good.  <!--emo&

EDIT: As for Denoir, #1 I'm not Denoir, #2 you don't meet those standards either, #3 you people are lucky to have someone sensible to be patient and pampering with you in these discussions about life/death, he's like your grandfather for gods sake<span id='postcolor'>

i just wanna say that now we have peace rallies and all that around the world against the war

but where were they when saddam killed thousands of his own ppl

or the iraq iran war

[Longinius 1]

"No we did not just stand around so people could see us.

if they came so close as to see us we killed them if in fire fight

we would break contact and keep moving spec ops dont have

the ammo load for long fire fights.But yes some times we where there to take someone.As for blowing thing up we can do that from a good ways off with a LGB not a lot of planting the old c4 in spec ops these days and there are even better now then when I got out in 94."

Yes, yes, I know this. I was giving you a hypothetical example of a situation.

I will give you another one:

You are on a recon, moving by night and hiding by day. You are far behind enemy lines. During the day, a small enemy patrol finds you. You let them come in close and shoot them. In the shoot out, two survives. What do you do with them?

[PFC Mongoose 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Col. Kurtz @ April 13 2003,10:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Edit: Basically what Denoir said on the issue of the museum been looted and the faliure of coalition soldiers to stop it.

As for the people dying vs. artifacts, I would rather see 10 soldiers killed and the artifacts saved than no one killed and the artifacts taken and destroyed. Its harsh, but sometimes human lifes have to be sacrificed to save things. The Mesopatamian was the first really advanced civilisation. They were the first to use writing as a way of recording information. They got into science and mathematics. Artifacts to atest to these remarkable achievements have probably been lost. I think that will have a greater affect on a world wide scale than a couple of soldiers been killed.<span id='postcolor'>

I can understand that point of view.

I didn't really mean 'better the articats were destroyed than soldiers died defending them', but that swhile these artifacts are representative of ancientcivilizations, and are valuable beyond belief, they are just stuff, and stuff just generally isn't as important as lives, to me.

The knowledge of these civilizations lives on. To me, the knowledge of these civilizations are far more important than the relics.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PFC Mongoose @ April 13 2003,05<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It was pretty stupid of them  to guard the museum so poorly.  I wonder how thinly stretched their forces are, or if it was just a command screw up.

The backlash will be forceful.

Still, even if they are ancient artifacts, and even if they hold a lot of history, to me, people are almost always more important than stuff.  People can reproduce, but if your friend dies, that person is gone.  Their decendents may resemble them, you may meet other people like them, but someone close to you has been erased off the face of the earth.

Losing ancient relics and artifacts is a tragedy, but to me, losing people is almost always far worse.<span id='postcolor'>

I don't think you realize the scale of this disaster. Torching the Louvre would have been less disasterous. You could destroy every museum in America and you would not come near the damage that was done here.

If you want a war crime, this is it. According to the Geneva conventions the occupational forces must enforce law and order and prevent looting and the destruction of property. If I had a say, I would execute the complete chain of command responisble for this,   starting with Bush. I'm against the death penalty, but in this case I'm willing to pull the trigger myself.

[Col. Kurtz 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PFC Mongoose @ April 13 2003,20:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The knowledge of these civilizations lives on.  To me, the knowledge of these civilizations are far more important than the relics.<span id='postcolor'>

But without the artifacts, how can the knowledge be backed up? It would be like if Tutankhamens tomb was blown up and all his artifacts were either destroyed or stolen. A history book can still talk about his life and show pictures of what the artifacts looked like, but you can't go into a museum and see the artifacts any more. And if someone says its all fake, you don't have proof to show them that they are wrong. Just words and pictures that could be faked.

About how severe the looting of the Museum of Iraq is, imagine this: Every single painting done by famous artists are brought together and put into one museum. The country that museum is in becomes a dictatorship and then 25 years later it is liberated. There is lots of looting and the museum is looted and all the famous paintings of the world are either destroyed or taken off to hang on the wall of the looters homes. It would just be such a huge loss.

[Blaegis 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PFC Mongoose @ April 13 2003,12:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I didn't really mean 'better the articats were destroyed than soldiers died defending them',  but that swhile these artifacts are representative of ancientcivilizations, and are valuable beyond belief, they are just stuff, and stuff just generally isn't as important as lives, to me.

The knowledge of these civilizations lives on.  To me, the knowledge of these civilizations are far more important than the relics.<span id='postcolor'>

I cannot believe you actually said that. "Just stuff"?!?!? Irreplaceable artifacts of Mesopotamia, the cradle of our civilization, are now gone forever because of indifference or negligence. Those soldiers should have fought to the death to protect the museum (not that it would even be necessary, a couple iof shots in the air would've dispersed the looters). Your ignorance, and ignorance of those in the chain of command that allowed this to happen truly knows no bounds.

[ran 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ April 13 2003,12:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Torching the Louvre<span id='postcolor'>

heh , cool down boy .... don't make anything you would regret afterward