The Iraq thread 4

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

But a dead iraqi child? Well it was born in poverty and iraq is used to misery.. that isnt much of a surprise. Not worth much attention.

Funny how no one on the left was paying attention to this and much worse during Saddam's decades of rule. Actually, it's not funny at all.

OT: Regarding Terry Schiavo, see The Death of Terry Schiavo: an Epilogue for an example of a contrary opinion.

NOONE came along with the words "lets stop the iraqi starvation". Except maybe the UN with their oil for food programm. (strange to mention it but true)

So I dont care about right or left. I blame both sides. They are ignorant in their own way.

Iraq was suffering from starvation (actually it was rather the lack of baby food and medical supplies), true. So was africa.

Did anyone care? Right wing left wing? Does NOW anyone realy care? No!

The term "iraqi people" is deliberately used by TBA because it sounds so abstrakt. Statistics about "the iraqi people" dont stip up emotions because statistics are statistics and not photographs of dead individuals or pictures of children with one leg.

But when the issue of Euthanasia is concerned, the US media dont say "euthanasia" but they paint a nice little picture of one poor person Terri Schiavo. Suddenly we can identify ourselves with her problems and we get emotional. Quite strange since currently there are several cases in the US simillar to that of Terri Schiavo. But no, this time we want only Terri, we want EMOTIONS.

Did we ever see something simillar in the press about one iraqi women? Husband dead, children wounded! No, that would be too subjective wouldnt it? US Media dont show iraqi individuals Å• la Terris Schiavo coverage . That could create a wrong impression about the (sarcastic tone ->) "overall" situation in iraq. There might be individuals that suffered, but isnt the "overall" situation that counts?

The overall situation of americans is good: enough food, overall enough medications, overall democracy. So seriously, who gives a f.uck about Terri Schiavo?

[Jinef 2]

Ok you've drilled in the point enough in the many thousand posts of this circus.

Yes human beings are scum. We are all dirty little fucks that need to be exterminated. How the hell you can judge people you hear about on the news where you most likely have taken drugs and enjoyed the pleasures of the flesh a bit too much for pure reproduction.

Quite honestly, Christian values? What bollocks.

The pope was old and had iron beliefs, that's why he let many people die of AIDs and let a lot many more get infected with HIV.

The cure for AIDs in most of these deprived places is to get the youngest virgin girl you can and have sex with her, not very clever from our western perspective eh? Oh how enlightened we are, praise the lord.

There is no viable way to live your life in my opinion. You either follow religion which was written 2000 years ago and is just wrong when appiled to today's situations. Or you go with science, you objectify everything, people are objects. If someone can't do anything for you they are worthless.

You can try and find an intermediate somewhere but however you live your life someone is suffering on account of it.

As you guessed I am quite quite bored again.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Ok you've drilled in the point enough in the many thousand posts of this circus.

Yes human beings are scum. We are all dirty little fucks that need to be exterminated. How the hell you can judge people you hear about on the news where you most likely have taken drugs and enjoyed the pleasures of the flesh a bit too much for pure reproduction.

Quite honestly, Christian values? What bollocks.

The pope was old and had iron beliefs, that's why he let many people die of AIDs and let a lot many more get infected with HIV.

The cure for AIDs in most of these deprived places is to get the youngest virgin girl you can and have sex with her, not very clever from our western perspective eh? Oh how enlightened we are, praise the lord.

There is no viable way to live your life in my opinion. You either follow religion which was written 2000 years ago and is just wrong when appiled to today's situations. Or you go with science, you objectify everything, people are objects. If someone can't do anything for you they are worthless.

You can try and find an intermediate somewhere but however you live your life someone is suffering on account of it.

As you guessed I am quite quite bored again.

Sir,

I find your ideas interesting and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Please find enclosed a 'Church of Bru' induction kit consisting of 1 (one) outsized hat and a case (24 bottles) of Glass Bru bottles.

Sincerely

[FerretFangs 0]

Are we once AGAIN headed towards a discussion of religion??? I should sincerely hope not.

STOP IT NOW! Return to TOPIC!!!

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Are we once AGAIN headed towards a discussion of religion??? I should sincerely hope not.

STOP IT NOW! Return to TOPIC!!!

The whole issue of Iraq is inextricably linked with religion, like it or not. I notice you only protest when one particular viewpoint is raised, however.

It IS on topic.

[chaztheducky 0]

not when its talking about the pope and aids its not. and the whole thing about shevino....im sorry but i have to finally say this....the whole ordeal is bull shit and was caused by a few people who didnt know when to let go. (bring on the flaming)Fuck Terri Schiavo. im sorry but i had to say that. now lets remember that this is about iraq and we need to stop getting side tracked.

now that thats done, one thing that i think is cool is that iraq is learning to stand on its own 2 feet and the US withdraw is closing in.

[FerretFangs 0]

Actually, I protest when we AREN'T TALKING ABOUT THE SUBJECT.

YOU have an agenda, not me.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Actually, I protest when we AREN'T TALKING ABOUT THE SUBJECT.

YOU have an agenda, not me.

Actually, you only protest when you dont agree with the beliefs of the people who arent talking about the subject.

[FerretFangs 0]

Really? I'd like to see you back that up with something I've posted.

Right now, please.

The fact is, this thread is for discussing "THE WAR in IRAQ." Perhaps you should create a new thread, for "Baron's Favorite Subject Matter, And Hangups" or something.

[ralphwiggum 6]

Baron, i had enough of your anti-religion drivel. 3 months PR.

in case you are going to send me PM to protest don't bother. this was suppose to be done after you publicly defied placebo's order, but i forgot to do it.

[Akira 0]

Man. That guy had a hardon for religion in a big way...and not in the "good" sense either...

Quote[/b] ]now that thats done, one thing that i think is cool is that iraq is learning to stand on its own 2 feet and the US withdraw is closing in.

I would have to disagree. Nothing we have seen so far says that Iraq can currently stand on its own. On the other hand though, I do think Iraq will be better once the US leaves.

And by better I mean better for Iraq...not necessarily better for the US.

[Scrub 0]

Quote[/b] ]Balschoiw

Bavarian Battlesmurf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote  

[scrub's quote]:

What's the difference between Al-Zarkawi and someone who tortures (reasonably, not mutilating or anything irreversable)?  In the end, on one route- freedom is achieved, the torture ends, the individual has personal power to affect his/her life. [/scrub's quote]

Reasonably torture ? Do you actually know about longterm effects of torture ? Ask the vietnam veteran round the corner. I guess he will burst in laughter when talking about torture.    

You speak of my dad.  And no, he did not have bamboo under his fingernails, but he DID get smacked around, threatened, starved, isolated.  Is he a wreck? thankfully, no. But he has absoultely NO intention of returning to "That God forsaken strip of muck they call their country" (his quote, no personal insult or discussion of religeon intended)

Quote[/b] ]

Freedom achieved by torture ?

Why should torture end when it turns out to be a big hit ?

Why should torture end?  Not that I'm as expert in the subject as you, but I must say the free populations revolt against such needless cruelity (see: Argentina/Brazil police actions 10 yrs ago and the civic response) and wise leaders find the limits in which it helps and where it does not.

Quote[/b] ]

And the major percentage, imprisoned in Iraq who were innocent ,teenagers, men who lost their pride and reputation only because they were abused and tortured for what reason again ?

Can't say I know any of the teenagers. Guilty or not. So -no comment-  You visit there often?

Quote[/b] ]

I´m sorry, but your statement is a really stupid one.

What´s next ?

Preemptive executions handled in a reasonably way to achieve freedom ?

And no, average arrested Iraqui Joe had no personal power to affect his/her life when he/she got taken to Abu Ghraib for some nude pictures.

Sorry, but I fail to understand your logic neither can I accept such attitude.

Umm, yeah..  Ya see,  you kinda jumped into the deep end on that one..  You added a bunch of your own hostility and lack of logic onto my words.   I said "When freedom is achieved"...  You honestly think the huddled masses currently caught in the midst of a war, much less the combatants themselves are truly free?  I'd have to say, not just yet.  still more info to extract from the captured combatants.  Find former Saddam insurgents/foreign Jihaddists.  Find Al-Zakarwi.(sp?)  Then maybe when people can stretch in the daylight, express themselves and not be put on a fanatics 'to die' list, that MIGHT be the time you can call them 'free'

In the future, please dont alter the context of my words and try to hold me accountable.. not nice.  

[FerretFangs 0]

Well Hell, I and nearly everyone I know are on some fanatics "to-kill" list. We call them, "the enemy."

Does that make me more or less free than the Iraqis are?

[Scrub 0]

Quote[/b] ]FerretFangs Posted on April 13 2005,00:35

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well Hell, I and nearly everyone I know are on some fanatics "to-kill" list. We call them, "the enemy."

Does that make me more or less free than the Iraqis are?

I truly don't know.  If you can't tell them that "you think they need sensitivity training" without getting shot, I guess that puts about the same restraints on as Iraqi's in the war zone.  Limited freedom because of the situation.  Are you free to say "I'm not going to fight today" or could you 'walk cross that fortified street to get a drink?' without getting holed?

I don't know your environment, your limits, your bravery/capability to change the situation, so I can't...  wait.

Was your question rhetorical?  

Cause I don't believe it can REALLY be answered.

Edit: Talking about freedom, if you're in the U.S. military you HAD the freedom to choose to serve, and now you are a piece of equipment with an opinion that is probably squashed by a guy that answers to 'Sarge'  

Sorry for the comic book example, I know it's rediculous, but when you talk about freedom, you HAVE to split hairs.  'Cause to maintain freedom usually means someone has to either give up some for the greater good (service), or because anothers actions hurt the greater good, THAT person has to have restricted freedom. (prisoner/enemy) And also, the innocents that are caught in the middle that are harmed or intimidated have limited freedoms due to fear or physical violence.  Because when you think of it, ANYONE can say 'I'm free' until someone with a bigger stick/more people/money whatever says 'no you're not'.  I mean, hell, we in the U.S. are only free if we follow the rules- just try not paying your taxes.  Do you think you really own anything?  We are just renters- no tax, no home, no car, no freedom (prison for tax evasion)   Freedom is a fluid concept that has a lot of smoke and mirrors involved.. Corny as it is, I think of freedom as a path, not a destination.  Cause if there's even one more person around that you have to get along with, you can't just do anything you want. So there is a limit to true 'freedom'

Don't get me wrong, I'd much rather my country stay as flexible as it is. I'm just trying to peel this onion to it's barest truths I can find (being a political teurrets-syndrome sufferer doesn't help )

[denoir 0]

Find former Saddam insurgents/foreign Jihaddists.  Find Al-Zakarwi.(sp?)  Then maybe when people can stretch in the daylight, express themselves and not be put on a fanatics 'to die' list, that MIGHT be the time you can call them 'free'

Actually, I would say that most people in the region would very much disagree with you.

They are 'free' by US definition. In historical context however, this means very little. When occupying another country, the attacking side always calls it 'liberation' and also claims it was self-defence.

In the end however, it's all the same: You kill a bunch of people, including civilians, install your preferred from of government and appoint locals willing to work with you.

Looking at it from Arab point of view, the US made up phony WMD claims, bombed the shit out of the country, killed lots of civilians and installed a US-compatible form of government. This was executed with great incompetence, leading to the chaotic situation today, but overall it's pretty much a by the book occupation.

[FerretFangs 0]

It was part rhetorical, and part sarcastic. I was waxing philosophical, and you responded in kind. Touche.

But within the meanderings of your answer, you did state a simple truth: That we are no more free than those we are attempting to "free."

It kind of makes it difficult for me to be overly sympathtic, then. That said, I'd submit the freedom they have now, is somewhat more substantial than what they had.

[Scrub 0]

Quote[/b] ]FerretFangs Posted on April 13 2005,02:35

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That said, I'd submit the freedom they have now, is somewhat more substantial than what they had.

Agreed.

[chaztheducky 0]

I second that

____

Quote[/b] ] On the other hand though, I do think Iraq will be better once the US leaves.

And by better I mean better for Iraq...not necessarily better for the US.

cant it be both?

[FerretFangs 0]

ONe less enemy nation in the world can't be a bad thing.

[billybob2002 0]

I told you (bals) not to rush to judgement....

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7491280/

Quote[/b] ]

Report clears U.S. in friendly fire incident

BAGHDAD - The friendly fire shooting at a U.S. military checkpoint last month in Baghdad wounded Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena and killed intelligence agent Nicola Calipari.

Now, NBC News has learned that a preliminary report from a joint U.S.-Italian investigation has cleared the American soldiers of any wrongdoing and provides new details into the shooting.

Intelligence agent Calipari had just negotiated Sgrena's release from Iraqi kidnappers on March 4 when the two and a driver headed for the Baghdad airport in a compact rental car.

It was dark when the Italians turned onto a ramp leading to the airport road where the U.S. military had set up a temporary checkpoint.

The investigation found the car was about 130 yards from the checkpoint when the soldiers flashed their lights as a warning to stop. But the car kept coming and, at 90 yards, warning shots were fired. At 65 yards, when the car failed to stop, the soldiers used lethal force — a machine gun burst that killed Calipari and wounded Sgrena and the driver.

Senior U.S. military officials say it took only about four seconds from the first warning to the fatal shots, but insist the soldiers acted properly under the current rules of engagement.

The investigation failed, however, to resolve one critical dispute: The Americans claim the car was racing toward the checkpoint at about 50 miles per hour, the Italians say it was traveling at a much slower speed.

In Italy, agent Calipari was given a state funeral, but the investigation found he himself may have committed a fatal error. He reportedly chose not to coordinate his movements with the U.S. military for fear it would jeopardize his efforts to free the Italian hostage.

Sgrena, meanwhile, disputes the military's account and says she has little confidence the investigation will reveal the truth.

As a result of the incident, the U.S. military will review its procedures regarding the use of lethal force at checkpoints, but senior military officials say they'll take no action that would put American soldiers at greater risk.

© 2005 MSNBC Interactive

[Akira 0]

How do you know it won't be an enemy nation? What if the people go with a decidedly anti-US government? What if the government gets cozy with Iran or heads away from the US and toward Europe or the East?

Quote[/b] ]cant it be both?

It's possible to be both, but given the region, and the history, it is far more likely that it won't be. And if it does turn out not good for the US, what then? Are we going to invade again and again and again until Iraq sets up a government that isn't "an enemy?"

[chaztheducky 0]

LOL

great paradox

[FerretFangs 0]

I smell a cynic....

[Daddl 10]

Quote[/b] ]The investigation found the car was about 130 yards from the checkpoint when the soldiers flashed their lights as a warning to stop. But the car kept coming and, at 90 yards, warning shots were fired. At 65 yards, when the car failed to stop, the soldiers used lethal force — a machine gun burst that killed Calipari and wounded Sgrena and the driver.

Senior U.S. military officials say it took only about four seconds from the first warning to the fatal shots, but insist the soldiers acted properly under the current rules of engagement.

That's a distance of 65 yards (60 meters) in 4 seconds. Assuming the car didn't slow down that's a velocity of about 54 kph (34 mph) speed. If it did slow down somewhat, then it was even slower.

Iguess the following simply does not compute:

Quote[/b] ]The investigation failed, however, to resolve one critical dispute: The Americans claim the car was racing toward the checkpoint at about 50 miles per hour, the Italians say it was traveling at a much slower speed.

At 50 mph it would have been travelling at 22 m/s, covering a distance of 100 yards in those 4 seconds. Even according to their own report the car didn't. It would also mean that the car would have only come to a halt after passing the checkpoint even if they hit the brakes immediately when the shooting started and the road conditions were optimal...

From that it is safe to assume that a) the soldiers did not give the car enough time to react and slow down, and/or b) the time and distances are rubbish.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]I told you (bals) not to rush to judgement....

I have not rushed to a judgement. Read then talk. If you think you have to go on a personal vendetta billybob you will see what you will get.

The report is worth as much as all the other reports from US investigations.

I´d like to see the octopus soldier who can go through his ROE´s within 4 seconds. That´s just a really funny claim. Nothing more.

Another interesting developement:

Poland to withdraw troops from Iraq end 2005

Quote[/b] ]Polish defence minister says move was subject of talks in Washington few months ago.

WARSAW - Poland will withdraw its troops from Iraq at the end of 2005, when the mandate of the UN multinational stabilisation force in the country expires, Defence Minister Jerzy Szmajdzinski said Tuesday.

"When the UN mandate in Iraq expires, the Polish stabilisation mission must also end," Szmajdzinski told reporters after a cabinet meeting.

"The government adopted this position after examining the political situation in Iraq and the advances made in building Iraq's own security force, as well as (after examining) our own capacity," Szmajdzinski said.

Poland, a close ally of the United States in the Iraqi conflict despite strong domestic opposition, controls an area south of Baghdad with 4,000 troops from the US-led multinational force under its command.

"Our allies know our capacity... This (withdrawal) was the subject of talks in the United States a few months ago. It is not a surprise move," said the defence minister.

Since 2003, when the UN-mandated multinational force deployed in Iraq, some 10,000 Polish soldiers have been sent to the country on tours of duty, Szmajdzinski said.

The cost to Poland of sending troops to Iraq was more than 660 million zlotys (160 million euros, 210 million dollars), while supplies and equipment for the mission have cost an additional 800 million zlotys. Part of the outlay was covered by the United States, Szmajdzinski stressed.

Following elections in Iraq on January 30, Poland cut its contingent in Iraq from 2,400 to 1,700 soldiers.

The next contingent of troops that will be sent to Iraq from Poland will number "several hundred soldiers less" than previous deployments, Szmajdzinski said.

"Like other countries, we are applying a strategy of withdrawal" from Iraq, he said.

I guess it´s time to rename the "coalition of the willing" to "coalition of a few"....