The Iraq thread 3

[denoir 0]

I did not know that this happened to Lynch when she was out.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tm....inter=1

Quote[/b] ]

According to medical records cited in her biography, Lynch also was sodomized, apparently during a three-hour gap she cannot recall.

Actually that turned out to be bullshit. She was neither shot nor stabbed nor sodomized.

[Akira 0]

To briefly go back to the execution:

I have noticed now that many groups are denouncing the execution of Nick Berg, including prominant Muslim clerics, and even Hezbollah, who called it against the tenets of Islam (but they also said it was badly timed as it takes away from the Iraq prison scandal).

Many Iraqi's interviewed were also strongly against the act, most calling it a sad event in the violence that is engulfing their nation.

Anyway....carry on.

Do you happen to have a few good links on that?

Hezbollah Denounces

[melkorjl 0]

In the spanish army there is a law that tell that if a soldier or an officer receive an order to do something that he belives is illegal, he can disovey it and an investigation will be made to determine if he is right or not. now the question. does this law exist in the US army?

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

To briefly go back to the execution:

I have noticed now that many groups are denouncing the execution of Nick Berg, including prominant Muslim clerics, and even Hezbollah, who called it against the tenets of Islam (but they also said it was badly timed as it takes away from the Iraq prison scandal).

Many Iraqi's interviewed were also strongly against the act, most calling it a sad event in the violence that is engulfing their nation.

Anyway....carry on.

Do you happen to have a few good links on that?

Hezbollah Denounces

I just can not get it to load

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]In the spanish army there is a law that tell that if a soldier or an officer receive an order to do something that he belives is illegal, he can disovey it and an investigation will be made to determine if he is right or not. now the question. does this law exist in the US army?

It was a MP that came foward with proof/evidence of abuse and that started the investigation.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]I just can not get it to load

Here:

Quote[/b] ]

Hizbollah Slams Beheading of American as Un-Islamic

BEIRUT (Reuters) - Lebanon's Hizbollah guerrilla group condemned Wednesday the beheading of an American hostage by Iraqi militants as an ugly crime that flouted the tenets of Islam.

"Hizbollah condemns this horrible act that has done very great harm to Islam and Muslims by this group that claims affiliation to the religion of mercy, compassion and humane principles," the Shi'ite Muslim group said in a statement.

An Islamist Web site Tuesday carried a video clip of the execution of the man who identified himself as Nick Berg, with a statement saying a group linked to al Qaeda did it in revenge for the abuse of Iraqis by U.S. troops.

Hizbollah said Berg's killing had diverted the world's gaze from an escalating furor over the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by occupation soldiers.

"The timing of this act that overshadowed the scandal over the abuse of Iraqi prisoners in occupation forces prisons is suspect timing that aims to serve the American administration and occupation forces in Iraq and present excuses and pretexts for their inhumane practices against Iraqi detainees."

The Syrian-backed group which the United States deems "terrorist" said the executors' behavior was closer to "the Pentagon school -- the school of killing and occupation and crimes and torture and immoral practices that were exposed by the great scandal in occupation prisons."

Washington blames Hizbollah, whose attacks forced Israeli troops to withdraw from south Lebanon in 2000 after a 22-year occupation, for 1980s suicide bombings against its embassy and Marines barracks and the abduction of Westerners in Beirut.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

Thank you

[Baphomet 0]

I'm still outraged by it. Regardless. It's extremely hard to maintain any perspective after seeing it.

It resulted in my having a rather ugly discourse with an arab friend of mine.

I have no idea why he'd see any need to defend it. Or at least make the indifferent remarks he did.

I read the transcript of the speech the executor read.

It repeatedly referenced pride and dignity as the primary impetus to the butchering. This one comment made me fume.

Quote[/b] ]Abu Banan translated the closing remarks, taken from the Repentence Sura of the Qu’ran, as follows: "So kill the mushrikeen wherever you see themâ€

The “mushikreen†are those who do not follow Islam, people who are considered apostates or polytheists.

Others translate it more literally. “Kill them (the unbelievers) where you find them.â€

I almost want someone to try and kill me for that reason. Give me a chance to see how many hits it takes to splinter my louisville slugger. That's just me being angry however.

Anyone who kills under the pretense of hurt pride is a psychopath. They're psychopaths. Anyone who can sympathize with them are most likely as well. They should watch the video and see if raw human suffering doesn't change their mind. Regardless of religion. It was a horrendous act.

This will bother me for a long time. I think my opinion on the whole issue has been irreparably altered. I still don't agree with the war in Iraq and I certainly don't subscribe to any jingotard patriotic delusions. However I am totally against slaughtering of innocent people because someone was offended.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Thank you

Fix your crappy computer....

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]This will bother me for a long time. I think my opinion on the whole issue has been irreparably altered. I still don't agree with the war in Iraq and I certainly don't subscribe to any jingotard patriotic delusions. However I am totally against slaughtering of innocent people because someone was offended.

They are using that has a excuse.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

Quote[/b] ]Thank you

Fix your crappy computer....  

Its my connection, although I can't complain about free 1.5mbit access, can I?

[Hjaldar 0]

I don't know if it was a pearl video or not, but I actually once got a video of an execution by a prisoner by knife in the throat from Kazaa(was an accident.). First time I've really seen someone die, and that took quite some time to get out of my head.

I am historian-to-be (as soon as I finish university next year) and often confronted with explicit material. Human history was never very... well, human.

Nevertheless, it is a deed of inhumanity. Nick was just as old as me. Poor guy - wrong time, wrong place.

Looks like Bush has gotten into something nobody can control - and it's not him who's suffering. It's ordinary people.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

In the spanish army there is a law that tell that if a soldier or an officer receive an order to do something that he belives is illegal, he can disovey it and an investigation will be made to determine if he is right or not. now the question. does this law exist in the US army?

Lets not go too far here. I am sure (and fully convinced) that MOST of the american soldiers have a good sense of responsibility. Many of them are engaging in Iraq for a long time. They got a good grip by now for the civillian tragedy, for the cultural clash, and especially what action may save your life and what overreaction may cause more harm than good. Lets not get unfair here.

OH and by the way: I would be the first one to blow a shrine into pieces if it is abused for military purposes. In that case a shrine has been dishonoured already by the fundamentalists, not by the US forces! Dont blame the soldiers only if they were put into that mess, look at the top of the chain of command!

[denoir 0]

OH and by the way: I would be the first one to blow a shrine into pieces if it is abused for military purposes. In that case a shrine has been dishonoured already by the fundamentalists, not by the US forces!

You are making the common faulty assumption that there lies a symmtery between the US forces and the resistance fighters. There is very little. The resistance represents (or claims that it does) the people. It's their shrines. Don't think of the shrines as some real estate with an abstract value. From their point of view they are not 'abusing' the shrines for military purposes. They are making their last stand in them.

Think barbarians at the gates, ready to strom the city. The brave resistance fighters take their last stand in what is most holy. The evil barbarians show their evilness by attacking the valiant resistance fighters with complete disrespect to what is holy.

That's how the Arabs generally see it (or at least the way Arab media presents it). And that's why from a stability point of view it is ok for the resistance to use the mosques and shrines for military purposes whilte it is not ok for the US military to attack them.

When a resistance fighter fires an RPG from a shrine, he is defending it. When US troops return fire, they are attacking it. See the difference in perception?

This has very serious practical consequences. But beyond that, there is a certain logic to it. Assuming that the resistance represents the people then it's their mosques and shrines we're talking about. The US military is the occupational force. It's not symmetrical in any way.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Okay, fair point. Now I realy dont know from which angle the arabs see it. But dont you think that there is an abuse here in the sense of a shrine ->religious symbol -> not to be dishonoured by arms and fighting.

I dont know whether the arabs allow weapons to be stored in their religious buildings but I know that they know that we have scruples to target such sensitive objects.

If the resistance fighters during combat would retreat into their church, fine with that. But if the church has been previously prepared as a combat station then I see an abuse indeed! I am sure there are strategically better buildings around than A SHRINE!

[denoir 0]

But dont you think that there is an abuse here in the sense of a shrine ->religious symbol -> not to be dishonoured by arms and fighting.

No. It could be a parking lot for all I care. I'm not the religious type. Which kind of is the point as the values of religious symbols are subjective and relative. A mosque or a church, unless it has some historical vualue,  has no value except for those that worthship that specific religion. And it's those that can assign any rules that they want to their faith. They can for instance say that only faithful muslims are allowed with weapons inside the mosque. And since the US forces have no influence on their religions interpretation while they are trying to respect them (to avoid pissing off more people), it is an impossible situation.

Quote[/b] ]I dont know whether the arabs allow weapons to be stored in their religious buildings but I know that they know that we have scruples to target such sensitive objects.

Absolutely, it's a smart strategy. With every US shot fired at a mosque public resentment against the occupation grows. The fact that it was planned to provoke them to is less important due to the assymetrical situation and the public perception of it.

Furthermore it's a smart operational move as well. If US forces hesitate to shoot at mosques then it would be plain stupid from a survivability point of view not to exploit that.

Quote[/b] ]I am sure there are strategically better buildings around than A SHRINE!

Tactically and operationally, perhaps. Strategically certainly not. For each demolished mosque I can guarantee you that they gain more supporters than the people they lose.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Quote[/b] ]Tactically and operationally

Well hmmm yes. actually that is what I meant. Strategically you are certainly right!

But lets make the loop back..

How stupid can one be to carry the war against teror to Iraq?

A) unknown teritory

B) Large amount of resources and finance required (that money put into national security..hell they could allocate a guard to each single tourist entering the US!)

c) iraq being surrounded by muslim countries, vast borders. Logical consequnce is that Al Quaida has an easy entry.

D) Iraq being a muslim country: not only Al Quaida can easily gain sympathy support here but ANY sort of religious fanatic can motivate the population to act against US forces

E) Where could it be easier to hide for a muslim extremist than in a muslim country

F) Bringing the war on teror to outside US-teritory? For what? This is like building a strong fortress and engaging the enemy on a open field.

G) Taking the risk of killing muslim civillians only increases the risk of creating new sources of teror. I bet that Iraqis now stand in line to be part of the Al Quaida "resistance".

H) Excluding most europe from this war not only reduces the legality of this action but also makes you the ONE AND ONLY focus of terorist actions. Wherever an american tourist now travels (may it be the southern part of thailand) watch out, they wont hesitate to take you as a hostage and sacrifice you for the honour of their "religion"

I)War-weary: Engaging in Iraq may cause the american nation to turn war-weary. In case REAL ACTION is required this might backfire. We will see when the next real threat turns up whether the US is willing to engage with the same amount of optimism again

J) Risk of a terorist attack is increasing. The soil of teror is not arms and strategical locations, it is human resources. Killing muslims only increases the risk of teror. Learned that from palestine: no money but still being able to build a suicide bomb

Strategically, they already screwed up big time. But what did BUSH think? That the iraqis would welcome the americans with cheering and women dancing on blown up iraqi-tanks?

[denoir 0]

But what did BUSH think?

Bush himeslf not much I would guess but the neocon platform did too much thinking and too little reality checks. They based their thinking on ideology put forward by neoconservative intellectuals like Wolfowitz.

The neoconservative core ideology is that free trade is divine and that everybody wants to be an American. As they state it "American leadership is good both for America and for the world".

In short they thought that overthrowing Saddam was enough and that the rest would fall into the natural order as they percieve it. The Iraqis would be endlessly grateful and that the new Iraq and America would get a prosperous relationship very fast. They also thought that the other ME countries would realize how great America is by seeing how happy all the Iraqis were.

Much ideology, little reality. And as history have shown, it is a fatal mistake to interface with the real world by using a model based purely on ideology. This is what got Powell jumpy in the first place. The WMD chase was ideology driven. Instead of seeing what was (wasn't) there they saw what they wanted to see. Also a typical blunder based on ideology was when they fired all of Saddam's officers at the start of the occupation.

The effect in Iraq was that they were utterly unprepared to what followed after the war. The world turned out to be less black and white than they wanted it to be. Sure, a majority of the Iraqis were happy to see Saddam gone - but some where not. Also it turned out that a large portion of those that were glad to get rid of Saddam weren't too thrilled about an American occupation. It turned out to the surprise of the neocons that the world had shade of grays which did not quite fit with the things they planned.

So what we're seeing now is an emergency patching from the US military. Wolfowitz put it as:

Quote[/b] ]

''There's been a lot of talk that there was no plan,'' he said. ''There was a plan, but as any military officer can tell you, no plan survives first contact with reality. Inevitably, some of our assumptions turned out to be wrong.''

The military is doing the best it can but this is no small thing to improvise while the situation is deteriorating. So far their fixing has been too slow. There are too few troops in Iraq. Those that are there have not got proper training in urban combat and much less peace keeping. National guard and reserve units with poor training are used. And this latest prison scandal is just another testemony of the complete dissaray of the post-war mission.

A fatal mistake was that before the war they did not listen to those countries that have both extensive peace keeping experiences as well as histories of colonialization. They all warned Bush not to do it and all for the same reasons: the post-war situation would be a mess.

The option of war might seem a priori to be the swiftest. But let us not forget that having won the war, one has to build peace. Let us not delude ourselves; this will be long and difficult because it will be necessary to preserve Iraq's unity and restore stability in a lasting way in a country and region harshly affected by the intrusion of force.

..

Such intervention could have incalculable consequences for the stability of this scarred and fragile region. It would compound the sense of injustice, increase tensions and risk paving the way to other conflicts

[billybob2002 0]

Positive News Time! GOAL!

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tm....occer_2

Quote[/b] ]

Iraq Soccer Team Qualifies for Olympics

Wed May 12, 4:28 PM ET  

AMMAN, Jordan - Iraq (news - web sites)'s soccer team qualified for the Athens Olympics on Wednesday, less than three months after the country was reinstated by the International Olympic Committee (news - web sites).

Quote[/b] ]

Iraq beat Saudi Arabia 3-1, and then clinched the third and final Asian qualifying spot when Kuwait held Oman to a scoreless draw.

Celebratory gunfire was heard in central Baghdad after the match, and tracers zoomed across the sky.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Villepin, lol yeah that man must hunt Bushs dreams by now! Good read Denoir. Tomorrow I will waste an hour reading the link on the new WORLD ORDER you gave me. I think I can extract some info from that concerning TBAs world picture!

Just a last statements without changing direction of the discussion again.

Powell was a good man but his loyalty was abused by TBA.

I think the question is interesting indeed. WHAT did Bush think (and the entire republican guard) would be the outcome of iraq?

[Akira 0]

Positive News Time! GOAL!

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tm....occer_2

Quote[/b] ]

Iraq Soccer Team Qualifies for Olympics

Wed May 12, 4:28 PM ET  

AMMAN, Jordan - Iraq (news - web sites)'s soccer team qualified for the Athens Olympics on Wednesday, less than three months after the country was reinstated by the International Olympic Committee (news - web sites).

Quote[/b] ]

Iraq beat Saudi Arabia 3-1, and then clinched the third and final Asian qualifying spot when Kuwait held Oman to a scoreless draw.

Celebratory gunfire was heard in central Baghdad after the match, and tracers zoomed across the sky.

I think that absolutely kicks ass. Wish I could be there to cheer when the Iraqi team comes in the stadium...

[ralphwiggum 6]

Positive News Time! GOAL!

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tm....occer_2

Quote[/b] ]

Iraq Soccer Team Qualifies for Olympics

Wed May 12, 4:28 PM ET  

AMMAN, Jordan - Iraq (news - web sites)'s soccer team qualified for the Athens Olympics on Wednesday, less than three months after the country was reinstated by the International Olympic Committee (news - web sites).

Iraq is a formidable team, so great job.

Quote[/b] ]Celebratory gunfire was heard in central Baghdad after the match, and tracers zoomed across the sky.

wonder how Coalition forces reacted

[Akira 0]

wonder how Coalition forces reacted

Coulda just called in the Denver or Seattle police. They're used to those "celebrations."

[Longinius 1]

Shrines in the form of mosques and churches have always been used as sanctuaries in times of danger. Look at European churches from mideval times, most of them look like mini forts. So Denoir is dead on. Its very easy for anyone to make it out the way he explained. Since its deep rooted with this people that the shrine is a place of safety for the worshippers. Not something you attack with, but something you defend.

[quicksand 0]

The whole point is about balance.30 years old AKs do little against AC-130 gunships.What did you expect,they would stay as sitting ducks in their uniforms waiting to be wiped off?

You think if the Resistance would have state of the art weaponry,air support,kevlar vests etc. their approach against US forces would be the same?

From their point of view they are fighting against an illegal occupying force in their country and they must do anything in order to prevail.They know that if they only fire from buildings the next second the buildings will be leveled with rockets.Mosques are their only partially safe zone,and you bet they are going to use them if that`s what is needed to win the confruntation.

Both sides are giving all they have.I`ve seen no remourse on the US millitary side levelling buildings with AC-130s regardless of how many civillians were inside to get their lone target(Fallujah siege),why should the resistance act any different?