The Iraq Thread 2

[Warin 0]

I think the civil unrest will die down once we get Iraq running back to normal.  Right now there are still problems with the power.  I think water and food are doing fine, but the power is out in some places.  Once those issues are taken care of the civilians should be happy, then we just have to deal with the remaining Saddam loyalists and we'll be done.

what kind of fairy tale have you been reading lately ?

what kind of fairy tale have you been reading lately?

I think he is implying that you are buying into Bush propoganda that the uprisings in Iraq are the work of malcontents and former Ba'ath party apparatus.

And what he is right in saying that for all we know, the 'bad guys' in Iraq are every day people who are unhappy with the US invasion.

The only evidence that we have is from CENTCOM and the White House. And we all know how they stand in the truth department.

[FallenPaladin 0]

Schoeler, I prefer being a fish struggling in a net thrown out by anti-American-propagandists to being a fish struggling in the net based on lies thrown out by the current US presidency.

Regarding your 6 years in military service for the USA it`s fine if you have made no bad experiences there. Considered the fact that you are in a better unit? Or in a worse one depending on the point of view? Being in an army makes you no specialist on that subject already, an army is way too complex and each unit is different.

Check out the book I mentioned above written by one of your finest. The author was a sniper, those guys are normally excellent trained and in average psychological condition. Now read what he wrote. Maybe think about that sniper killer who terrorized the USA last year after that. He was a former US sniper, decorated. He just flipped one moment from being a true american hero to a mass murderer. That`s normal if something like that happens? I doubt it.

Then think about the incidents which involved US aircraft (A10 incident; the incident where a fighter plane cut a skilift killing civilians doing some stupid stunts; the almost termination of Harmid Karsai (sp?) , the current Afghani president, in Afghanistan at the end of the Taliban where he almost was killed by an US bomb and where a few US servicemen died) .

It`s quiet obvious that there`s something more wrong in the US armed forces than in other armies. You can come to this conclusion only by adding the news on such incidents together. The continuous deaths of US service men in Iraq right now are just another proof that your armed forces high command is nonelastic and not planning large-scaled. With the current military policy in Iraq the GIs will be killed steadily and it will become worse and worse.

Nevertheless the reason for that has to be searched for in the inside or on the root.

Now back to the A10 incident which started this nice debate. I`m still of the opinion that a pilot who destroys a tank full of British servicemen with a British flag ontop of it driving in a British convoy is totally nuts and/or incompetent. That`s my opinion and nothing more. You don`t have to like it and you don`t even have to comment on it. Guys who defend pilots like this one are just pitiful in my eyes.

[ran 0]

I think the civil unrest will die down once we get Iraq running back to normal.  Right now there are still problems with the power.  I think water and food are doing fine, but the power is out in some places.  Once those issues are taken care of the civilians should be happy, then we just have to deal with the remaining Saddam loyalists and we'll be done.

what kind of fairy tale have you been reading lately ?

what kind of fairy tale have you been reading lately?

warin got it quite right and i also implied that , the underlined part , said by you sounded like a journey to the beach

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Quote[/b] ]Check out the book I mentioned above written by one of your finest. The author was a sniper, those guys are normally excellent trained and in average psychological condition. Now read what he wrote. Maybe think about that sniper killer who terrorized the USA last year after that. He was a former US sniper, decorated. He just flipped one moment from being a true american hero to a mass murderer. That`s normal if something like that happens? I doubt it.

I read the book, and it isn't half as bad as you've cracked it up to be. He briefly contemplated shooting an Iraqi that was trying to surrender, and that's that. And if you hadn't noticed, Anthony Swofford was kind of a fucked up individual to begin with. Also note that he doesn't report a single incident of actual friendly fire or shooting of prisoners.

Now what, pray tell, was your point?

[DracoPaladore 0]

It`s quiet obvious that there`s something more wrong in the US armed forces than in other armies. You can come to this conclusion only by adding the news on such incidents together. The continuous deaths of US service men in Iraq right now are just another proof that your armed forces high command is nonelastic and not planning large-scaled. With the current military policy in Iraq the GIs will be killed steadily and it will become worse and worse.

I just think its the American military tactics. When the American military fights, it is often to use high-powered air support and tank assaults as well as artillery barrages. All of which are completley useless in the alley-to-alley search for enemy units. This is a point where their tactics are failing and this is were troops are dying. They are not able to use the advanced technology they were able to use before when they first attacked.

[FallenPaladin 0]

It would be nice if it was that easy, just giving the Iraqis back the water and electricity which the US cut before, and the Iraqis lived happily ever after, but it isn`t that way. The Iraqis are happy that Saddam is gone, most of them, but many on the other hand see him now replaced with another dictatorship led by a guy in a white house many thousand miles away. They were told before the end of the war that everything would become better, but almost nothing really happened that way. Now those people think they have been lied at and that they are only last on the list and in the US thoughts regarding Iraq. Which can`t be repelled easily if you look at the US actions in Iraq. The normal people in Iraq are getting more and more upset and the extremists among them which surely are quite a few just add new fuel to the fire.

[hellfish6 7]

That, or if we suffer a major and well organized attack by Iraqi resistance where lots of casualties are generated and it become apparent that they are well organized and getting stronger every day.  If it looks like its becoming another Vietnam, then Bush is sunk.

I agree. A serious attack that catches the attention of the American people will be the only thing to make the American people realize what we've gotten ourselves into. Right now, all you hear is a quick sentence on the news saying "One more American soldier was killed in Iraq today. In other news, the guy from the Beverly Hillbillies died today, marking a great cultural tragedy for our mourning nation..."

[hellfish6 7]

I thought Anthony Swofford's Jarhead was an excellent book. He captures the boredom and frustration of being in the American military perfectly. As well as the relative indifference to human life. I remember many an hour sitting out in Kuwait with a SAW and 600 rounds of ammunition wanting nothing more than to shoot the yahoos playing chicken with the security forces outside of the perimeter. Why did I want to do it? Because 1) I was bored, 2) We all believed those people to be Iraqi or Iranian spies, and 3) because I was hot and irritable. Swofford captured those feelings perfectly. And it was well written too.

[raedor 8]

The continuous deaths of US service men in Iraq right now are just another proof that your armed forces high command is nonelastic and not planning large-scaled.

this is not right (in this way). cos u can do what u want: have the best equipped army, well trained soldiers... u cant do anything against some dead soldiers. if it has been better planned, it would not be that much, but that some soldiers die is the normal "way of war"...

[FallenPaladin 0]

@ July 07 2003,23:34)]

Quote[/b] ]Check out the book I mentioned above written by one of your finest. The author was a sniper, those guys are normally excellent trained and in average psychological condition. Now read what he wrote. Maybe think about that sniper killer who terrorized the USA last year after that. He was a former US sniper, decorated. He just flipped one moment from being a true american hero to a mass murderer. That`s normal if something like that happens? I doubt it.

I read the book, and it isn't half as bad as you've cracked it up to be. He briefly contemplated shooting an Iraqi that was trying to surrender, and that's that. And if you hadn't noticed, Anthony Swofford was kind of a fucked up individual to begin with. Also note that he doesn't report a single incident of actual friendly fire or shooting of prisoners.

Now what, pray tell, was your point?  

That`s what I wanted to point out. How can "a fucked up individual" become a sniper in the first case? Why shouldn`t such fucked up individuals become pilots of fighter planes?

It seems like the US armed forces take anyone, no matter if he`s not fitting into such a job by his mental state of mind. Maybe the US high command should just intensify the tests and requirements you have to fulfill to become a soldier. According to units and tasks of course. Then maybe there should be improvements made by training communication and identification of targets. That would lead to no whackos in the army and people who know at what they are shooting at.

[hellfish6 7]

IIRC, John Lee Malvo, the "psycho sniper" from the Washington DC area was not a trained sniper. I think he was a combat engineer. And he did serve in Gulf War I. The press made a big deal about him being given an "expert" marksmanship badge from the Army, but just about everyone I knew had one of those. In fact, I had an expert badge for everything I tried for EXCEPT the M-16.

[FallenPaladin 0]

Ok, that`s good to know. Delete him from my line of suspects then. He was described as sharpshooter here and that he was a sniper in the army. Wrong news. His name was John Allen Muhammad if I`m not mistaken, Malvo was the kid. Muhammad obviously was an demolition specialist in GW1 according to CNN.com.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Quote[/b] ]That`s what I wanted to point out. How can "a fucked up individual" become a sniper in the first case? Why shouldn`t such fucked up individuals become pilots of fighter planes?

He was field-recruited into the STA Platoon of a fleet battalion. That means he didn't go through the normal psychological screening process that a scout-sniper candidate would normally go through.

And besides, I would like you to find a perfectly normal, well-adjusted person who actually would volunteer to watch the effects of a .30 caliber rifle round on a human skull. Repeatedly. Just a guess, but I'd say your ranks would be pretty thin.

[FSPilot 0]

Warin

Quote[/b] ]I think he is implying that you are buying into Bush propoganda that the uprisings in Iraq are the work of malcontents and former Ba'ath party apparatus.

And what he is right in saying that for all we know, the 'bad guys' in Iraq are every day people who are unhappy with the US invasion.

The only evidence that we have is from CENTCOM and the White House. And we all know how they stand in the truth department.

Maybe next time he'll grace us with an explanation.

Anyway until we know who's behind this there's no point in arguing about it. I just think that the long persecuted Iraqi people wouldn't be so quick to take up arms against coalition forces who just got rid of Saddam, all for a lapse in power.

[ran 0]

who just got rid of Saddam

are you so sure of that ? are you sure that Saddam is completely out ?

Quote[/b] ]Maybe next time he'll grace us with an explanation.

maybe the next time you post you'll grace us with a bit more of common sense , intelligence and reflexion

[Schoeler 0]

That's the thing. I think the resistance is an organized group of Saddam loyalists, not of a general nature. Its probably members of the Fedayeen and the Baath Party with no hope for a future outside of prison in the developing Iraq. Why not try and sway the general populace into supporting a rebellion? At least then, they have a chance to return Saddam or institute a friendlier government.

[ran 0]

That's the thing.  I think the resistance is an organized group of Saddam loyalists, not of a general nature.  Its probably members of the Fedayeen and the Baath Party with no hope for a future outside of prison in the developing Iraq.  Why not try and sway the general populace into supporting a rebellion?  At least then, they have a chance to return Saddam or institute a friendlier government.

yeah , and since most of the "Fedayeens" and Republican guard's special force operatives have vanished ....

[Warin 0]

That's the thing.  I think the resistance is an organized group of Saddam loyalists, not of a general nature.  Its probably members of the Fedayeen and the Baath Party with no hope for a future outside of prison in the developing Iraq.  Why not try and sway the general populace into supporting a rebellion?  At least then, they have a chance to return Saddam or institute a friendlier government.

I think that is certainly a possibility...

But again, we just dont know.

Only time will tell. And I think the biggest problem is that a lot of people that want to know arent the most patient people in the world ;)

I'd like to believe that this is just a bunch of malcontents. But in my opinion, it is a possibility that it goes beyond that. I am not slagging americans here, but American foreign policy has been a little on the arrogant and heavy handed side for the last 50 odd years. Add to that the way the Arab mind seems to work sometimes, and it is a recipe for problems beyond just the fanatics.

[Major Fubar 0]

No American in his right mind wants to kill an ally and if he did, he would most certainly go to prison for it.

sure? why did the US NOT join ICC? is den haag in a country which is on the list of undemocratic countrys or is den haag know for beeing biased? or do u know other reasons?

Would you want foreign governments judging your actions?  Consider the fact that we feel justified as a sovereign nation in fighting this war with Iraq.  Now consider that some other countries consider this wa war crime.  Do you really think the U.S. as the world's only superpower is going to surrender any of that power or subvert its own sovereignty by allowing those smaller foreign nations to judge us based upon a different system of morals or ideas of proper international relations?  Those other countries have their own interests and agendas just as we have ours.  I don't agree with surrendering our sovereignty and subverting our national interests in the interest of meeting theirs.

Everybody has to be answerable to someone - even the almighty United States.

You cannot "self regulate" in the case of war crimes - that would be like catching Osama and letting him be tried by the Afghan government. Would you stand for that? Of course not.

USAs opposition to the ICC shows one of two things: 1. a rampant sense of paranoia that all the "foreigners" are out to get you, or 2. that you indeed have a lot of dirty laundry you don't want to get busted for.

[Jinef 2]

Yes, America does advocate democracy, for us it is how we live. I don't propose to say that our way of life is right for the entire world, but I do think people should have some degree of civil liberty and be able to pursue their "destinies" as they see fit. Perhaps it is abstract idealism, but it is a cohesive element of American society that most Americans agree on, liberal or conservative. While you see us as democratic imperialists, we see an increasingly socialist Europe where civil liberities that are RIGHTS (privacy, arms, free speech) to us, are being taken away from you.

FSpilot, from looking at this post does it annoy you? Obviously USSoldier11B (a bit of a silly name and hard to type btw.) knows absolutely nothing about Europe and how it operates. Under the European Convention for Human rights you are given these rights:

http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/19980042.htm

Two plonkers with one stone!

[FSPilot 0]

Why would it annoy me? Because in your opinion he's wrong? Just because you think he's wrong doesn't mean he doesn't know what he's talking about.

ran

Quote[/b] ]are you so sure of that ? are you sure that Saddam is completely out ?

He's not in control of Iraq anymore, so yes.

Quote[/b] ]maybe the next time you post you'll grace us with a bit more of common sense , intelligence and reflexion

And maybe you'll do the same instead of posting some pointless one-liner.

[ran 0]

i used to post one liners becausei thought you would understand them , you know , i wanted to make it short just for you , but since it doesn't work , i'll leave the tedious , pointless debating with you to other people FSpilot

[Major Fubar 0]

i used to post one liners becausei thought you would understand them , you know , i wanted to make it short just for you , but since it doesn't work , i'll leave the tedious , pointless debating with you to other people FSpilot

Easier said than done, Ran...debating with FS is habit forming...I know!

[Jinef 2]

READ THE LINK!

It's not my opinion! It's in the European Convention! He said that Europeans were having their rights taken away from them, there is no ban on firearms in the European convention, it is up to individual countries to decide that policy for themselves, in Switzerland every male has a military rifle, all are trained and it is all their duty to defend Switzerland if attacked. Every male has a military assault rifle, strange then that they have got one of the lowest crime rates in the world?

USSoldier also mentioned that the right to free speech is being taken away, well that would violate this convention. Considering one of the most independent news organisations in the world comes from a European country i doubt you can agree with him here.

Privacy is respected by all law enforcement agencies unless the word terrorism is involved, that is the one derogation the UK has, to hold people without trial. We have had this for about 30 years when the rest of the world actually woke up to the threat of the terrorism while the Americans were busy producing it. You cannot stand on any morale high ground here.

USSoldier11B- "we see an increasingly socialist Europe where civil liberities that are RIGHTS (privacy, arms, free speech) to us, are being taken away from you."

It is a false dichotomy to state that socialism instantaneously equals a lack of or reduced rights, you can have a socialist state with limited rights of course, pick any example; you can also have a non socialist state with limited rights such as Hitler Germany. Look at the very liberal socialist countries like Sweden and Norway, their citizens are as free as you are to hunt, to speak out and to have their privacy maintained, if you ever got a passport and went out into the big wide world you would see this.

Currently i have been too

America - 11 times (family lives in New York, i have also been to about 14 other states while there_

Canada - once, very nice place

France - Once

Germany - once (Frankfurt)

Sweden and Finland - once

Belgium - 4 times! I like the beer and chocolate.

Italy - Once

Spain - 2 times

Greece - once (once again in 2 weeks!)

Iceland - buisness, didn't see much

Holland - Who hasn't? 3 times

Chech Republic - once, nice buildings and food

Australia - some of the scariest looking people i have ever seen reside here

OK, this is how i have formulated my opinions on these countries. By going there. And as i strongly agree with FSPilot's sentiment that we should only talk what we know about (limits my conversation topics down a lot) I am for the fourth time resigning from the offtopic forum.

[FSPilot 0]

Jinef

Quote[/b] ]It's not my opinion! It's in the European Convention! He said that Europeans were having their rights taken away from them, there is no ban on firearms in the European convention[/b]

Is England excluded from Europe?

Quote[/b] ]in Switzerland every male has a military rifle, all are trained and it is all their duty to defend Switzerland if attacked. Every male has a military assault rifle, strange then that they have got one of the lowest crime rates in the world?

I believe Switzerland forces it's men to join the military at 21, but I could be wrong.

And what does crime rate have to do with anything?

Quote[/b] ]USSoldier also mentioned that the right to free speech is being taken away, well that would violate this convention. Considering one of the most independent news organisations in the world comes from a European country i doubt you can agree with him here.

Seeing how I consider England to be part of Europe, and obviously not part of this European convention (as they have a ban on guns), it makes me wonder what other countrys are not part of the European convention. It also makes me think that the European convention doesn't represent all of europe, and all of the europeans.

Quote[/b] ]Privacy is respected by all law enforcement agencies unless the word terrorism is involved, that is the one derogation the UK has, to hold people without trial. We have had this for about 30 years when the rest of the world actually woke up to the threat of the terrorism while the Americans were busy producing it. You cannot stand on any morale high ground here.

What moral high ground!? You're talking crazy.

And aren't you one of the ones who's talked out against the patriot act which violates privacy once the word terrorism is involved?

Quote[/b] ]OK, this is how i have formulated my opinions on these countries. By going there. And as i strongly agree with FSPilot's sentiment that we should only talk what we know about (limits my conversation topics down a lot) I am for the fourth time resigning from the offtopic forum.

Let us know when you get back from planet tangent.