What A Freedom... What A Democracy

[Peace]

Why when president W Bush wants to say any thing he start to push freedom in between, or if he want to make some action he says that he is fighting terror some where, and when ever he is doing something he start saying: this is for freedom and for peace and democracy. I can’t convince my self that the whole world is complaining from unfairness. And the whole world was in darkness until g.w.bush became president.

Why when one of the channels starts to show something against what he or his government talking about (which could be true or another opinion) he starts to accuse them that they are Terrorists...which is very easy and very powerful those days … is this democracy?!!

Now after the old regime felled. What does us is doing in Iraq??? This week only 700 people where killed according to the military spokesman 78 of them are children below 10 years 162 of them are women and the majority of the others are from the old people… is this the democracy and the freedom that he is talking about. It’s the Iraqi people them selves who don’t want to have the Americans there.

One of my friends who is working as a reporter for one of the TVs told me that we are not suppose to say this on TV, but in the last week only more than 160 soldiers were died, 16 helicopters were shoot down, more than 55 fuel tanks for the us military we bombed, and undetermined number of tanks and armored carriers were destroyed … I am sure if such thing get out to TV the us gov. will start accusing that TV channel that its supporting the old regime.

No one can say now that the US is in Iraq to free the people from the old regime or to fight the old regime supporters (because no one will support the old regime.. no one will sacrifice him self to support something which is not exist) … the US is losing heavily there and they are hiding that …there is a question here …why US gov. still accepting this …for the Iraqi people freedom ?!!!!!! …you have to answer it.

[Busyman]

.........and the propaganda machine keeps turning.............. <_<

[fred devliegher]

but in the last week only more than 160 soldiers were died, 16 helicopters were shoot down, more than 55 fuel tanks for the us military we bombed, and undetermined number of tanks and armored carriers were destroyed …

Care to back those numbers up in any way, shape or form ? I&#39;m always a bit weary about FOAF stories.

For the record, I am and always have been against the war. A lot of people saw this coming - Hollywood doesn&#39;t really translate to real life, people aren&#39;t always happy when US soldiers show up.

But this kind of unfounded propaganda and Bush-bashing isn&#39;t really helping the cause. Instead of pointing fingers, why not focus on the problem at hand - getting Iraq back on it&#39;s feet, to stop the fighting and find a way - if it still exists - to help the people who suffer from this mess; Iraqi&#39;s and Americans alike.

Just my &#036;0.02.

[ahctlucabbuS]

I agree with the above post. I never was supportive of the war, but they can´t back out now. They need to finish what they started, or even better get USA out and the more neutral UN organ in. The presence of US soldiers only cause uproar in the Iraqi population, so a more neutral organ sounds sensible&#33;

The numbers seem to be 87 US soldiers killed so far in April (which makes the cassualties higher than the invasion), and 880 Iraqi killed during the first two weeks of april. (taken from a norwegian paper)

[Peace]

Barky Posted on 14 April 2004 - 14:03
Care to back those numbers up in any way,

all what u see is from reporters in the ground... there 2 is arabic sources that u can get ... i stayed at an arabic country for about 10 years i know how to speak and to read arabic ... the reporters told me its not allowed to broadcast this info. in TVz otherwise we will be kicked off ...if any one here can read arabic i will give him the link to see ...most of the news there were gathered by a profissional reporters.



i was going to upload some images that i have for iraqi ppl being abused so much to see what type of freedom US are bringing to iraq thats why when the ppl discovered the truth the fight them.


the ppl were expicting something good from US ... but after they found that they are the hill it self they start to fight the US army there

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Peace@14 April 2004 - 13:06

Barky Posted on 14 April 2004 - 14:03
Care to back those numbers up in any way,

all what u see is from reporters in the ground... there 2 is arabic sources that u can get ... i stayed at an arabic country for about 10 years i know how to speak and to read arabic ... the reporters told me its not allowed to broadcast this info. in TVz otherwise we will be kicked off ...if any one here can read arabic i will give him the link to see ...most of the news there were gathered by a profissional reporters.



i was going to upload some images that i have for iraqi ppl being abused so much to see what type of freedom US are bringing to iraq thats why when the ppl discovered the truth the fight them.


the ppl were expicting something good from US ... but after they found that they are the hill it self they start to fight the US army there
It seems that some soldiers are afraid of being shot in back by a masquerading friendly Iraqi.

You are saying that the friendlies are not friendlies due because of our abuse, yet the guerrilla tactics have been used since major fighting stopped.

Seems like a paradox. <_<

For instance, there was a situation in which an Iraqi boy was on rooftop with a gun.
There were troops below on the ground. The boy was shot.
The parents were obviously pissed.

Now reverse it. The boy shoots 3 soldiers and gets away.

I guess that was better.

This reminds of the hood.

One of your boys tries to rob a guy on the street or murder him.
The guy shoots your boy dead yet you vow revenge. What for?

Some logic is order. <_<

[J'Pol]

As I recall no-one is saying that the new regime has to be a democracy. Indeed in the timetable for handover of power, which Mr Bush has said he will adhere to, there is no prospect of a democratically elected government. There may never be. The people of Iraq will decide that.

With regard to whether the people want the US there, the pictures just now are of the rebels fighting against the US. However how many people actually support the rebels ahead of the US. It is hardly surprising that it looks as if the people want the US out. The people who want this are the ones with the guns and rockets. I am not convinced they talk for the majority.

Whatever the position, the coalition cannot really leave until there is some form of Iraqi Government, whether transitional or permanent. Then that Government can decide how much, if any support they require from the U.S. and it&#39;s allies.

[Biggles]

Saddam is gone. For better or worse (but mainly better I think) the Iraqis will have to sort out some new governmental structures.

I am sure that the US and certainly the vast majority of the US people would like to see their troops home now.

There is propaganda from both sides. This is inevitable and the US led coalition will try to minimise the credence given to the insurgents as these things can develop a life of their own if fanned the right way. The facts and figures of a war are never really known until after the shooting has finished. A lot of people have died and the US and the Iraqis have lost a lot of equipment and houses. Damage has been done to both the peace and the IGC.

The US military have perhaps over-stated the lack of civilian casaulties and this may come back to haunt them. The insurgants are gretting street wise and although there was a news black out on the actions taken they appeared to have taken a lot of footage themselves. I certainly have seen dead and dying women and children on TV. Given that the insurgents are inside shooting out and the US outside shooting in, this is hardly surprising and probably explains the extremely extended ceasefire under way at the moment. Likewise the scale of the insurgency is probably broader than expected. It is not credible that "a few thugs" could hold out against tanks, helicopters and gunships backed up by thousands of US soldiers. There are clearly many hundreds perhaps thousands firing back and taking up arms.

However, there is no option - this must be recovered. It would seem that few that are fighting want Saddam back. So what do they want? Do we really know (do they know?)

I may be wrong but I think the IGC has too many exiles parachuted in and not enough of those who struggled through Saddam&#39;s regime in Iraq. Sadr may be a hot head but his father stood up to Saddam and paid with his life. Sadr may, with some justification, feel he has something to say. Iraq is a complicated place and I will be surprised if any one template will ease them into peaceful co-existence. However, if we hang our hat on anyone group or voice without paying attention to the mood on the street then we will have wasted blood and money for nothing.

A slightly radical Iraq might prove a better long term friend than one we try to mould in our own image. However, I appreciate that might represent a brave political decision and politicians tend not to be too keen on those (whatever colours they favour)

I reserve the right to be completely wrong on this subject though. :unsure:

[{SHELL%SHOCKED}]

Originally posted by Peace@14 April 2004 - 12:36
One of my friends who is working as a reporter for one of the TVs told me that we are not suppose to say this on TV,
Your "friend" sounds very spineless may be you should find some friends not willing to give up there 1st amendment rights for a pay check, Traitors &#33;&#33;

[fred devliegher]

Originally posted by {SHELL%SHOCKED}+14 April 2004 - 21:54--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE ({SHELL%SHOCKED} @ 14 April 2004 - 21:54)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Peace@14 April 2004 - 12:36
One of my friends who is working as a reporter for one of the TVs told me that we are not suppose to say this on TV,
Your "friend" sounds very spineless may be you should find some friends not willing to give up there 1st amendment rights for a pay check, Traitors &#33;&#33; [/b][/quote]
:angry:

What the crap are you on about ?

You don&#39;t know the poster, his friend, the situation or anything. You just storm in here and make a bold statement without backing it up.

Damnit, ever learned to argue sensibly ?

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by {SHELL%SHOCKED}+14 April 2004 - 20:54--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE ({SHELL%SHOCKED} &#064; 14 April 2004 - 20:54)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Peace@14 April 2004 - 12:36
One of my friends who is working as a reporter for one of the TVs told me that we are not suppose to say this on TV,
Your "friend" sounds very spineless may be you should find some friends not willing to give up there 1st amendment rights for a pay check, Traitors &#33;&#33; [/b][/quote]
Just because YOU have the 1st amendment, doesnt mean everyone has.

The USA has a very small minority of the worlds population.

Last I heard, the FBI were investigating students that attended an anti-war rally...so what happened to that amendment anyway?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by {SHELL%SHOCKED}+14 April 2004 - 21:54--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE ({SHELL%SHOCKED} @ 14 April 2004 - 21:54)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Peace@14 April 2004 - 12:36
One of my friends who is working as a reporter for one of the TVs told me that we are not suppose to say this on TV,
Your "friend" sounds very spineless may be you should find some friends not willing to give up there 1st amendment rights for a pay check, Traitors &#33;&#33; [/b][/quote]
I think you will find the word is maybe, however I do not intend removing your right to talk crap.

Oh and btw - If the constitution of the USA is so feckin great, how come there have been so many amendments. Was the original just a poorly thought out first draft. Speaks volumes for your Founding Fathers old bean.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@14 April 2004 - 14:11
Last I heard, the FBI were investigating students that attended an anti-war rally...so what happened to that amendment anyway?
the problem with freedom of speech is that everyone knows what you are talking about. ;)

[Biggles]

Originally posted by vidcc+14 April 2004 - 22:28--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc @ 14 April 2004 - 22:28)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Rat Faced@14 April 2004 - 14:11
Last I heard, the FBI were investigating students that attended an anti-war rally...so what happened to that amendment anyway?
the problem with freedom of speech is that everyone knows what you are talking about. ;) [/b][/quote]
:lol:

But surely they should cherish what they hear - not look at it in a funny way. :ph34r:

[Kid1A]

Come on dude, no-one is this world is free, their aint no such thing as freedome, just the perception of it. but you&#39;ve all herd this before

[clocker]

Rat & JP,

I&#39;ve just read all of ShellShocked&#39;s posts ( all ten of &#39;em) and can&#39;t seem to find any declaration of citizenship in them.

Why the assumption that he/she is American?

[hobbes]

Originally posted by clocker@15 April 2004 - 00:35
Rat & JP,

I&#39;ve just read all of ShellShocked&#39;s posts ( all ten of &#39;em) and can&#39;t seem to find any declaration of citizenship in them.

Why the assumption that he/she is American?
I initially thought he was the return of "ShockandAwe", but his style is not quite right.

I would bet that the fellow is Canadian.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by clocker@15 April 2004 - 00:35
Rat & JP,

I&#39;ve just read all of ShellShocked&#39;s posts ( all ten of &#39;em) and can&#39;t seem to find any declaration of citizenship in them.

Why the assumption that he/she is American?
May be

There

1st amendment rights

Pay check

No brainer really, the chap is American.

[Leviathan]

The war is a complete disgrace, and it has made my country a colony of the United States....no Im not Iraqi, Im English and the Iraq conflict is definitely not in my name...

Bliar out&#33;

p.s. did we ever have a vote on letting the US take over our defence and foreign policy?

[MagicNakor]

Pay the house hobbes.

He&#39;s from the United States. ;)

:ninja:

[hobbes]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@15 April 2004 - 01:19
Pay the house hobbes.

He&#39;s from the United States. ;)

:ninja:
Yeah, I fecked up.

How many baby seal furs do I owe?

[MagicNakor]

None.

Baby seals aren&#39;t allowed to be killed.

:ninja:

[Alex H]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+14 April 2004 - 17:22--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol &#064; 14 April 2004 - 17:22)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> there is no prospect of a democratically elected government. There may never be. The people of Iraq will decide that. [/b]
Well if that&#39;s the case, they won&#39;t will they? :blink:

<!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol
Oh and btw - If the constitution of the USA is so feckin great, how come there have been so many amendments. Was the original just a poorly thought out first draft. Speaks volumes for your Founding Fathers old bean.[/quote]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Well, you know what Americans are like. They get a great idea and then rush in without any real plan...

[Peace]

Hi all
And thanks for the nice posts, I appreciate that a lot, I will not point to the bad post because you already did.

This is from “Lomenaeeh French newspaper“:

One of the marines’ officer’s assures that we have received military orders to kill and eliminate the innocent kids in school while they are training.

Officer Jimmy Massy (I am not sure about the spelling coz of translation) said after he decided to leave the army and go back home to Carolina: in one month, me and battalion have killed 30 Iraqi citizens, that was during our mission that we were ordered to isolate some villages and to have a strict control on the check points.

“Lomenaeeh French newspaper“ (I am not sure about the spelling coz of translation) has carried out from jimmy saying:

We never hesitated to start shooting on any car in the neighborhood that passes from the check point without stopping. We never allowed any report to reach such places.

And about his rezones of confusion about what the US military have done in Iraq he said:
I feel very ashamed about what we did… referring that the sights of bloods are chasing him every time he is trying to sleep, clarifying: we were in the beginning of the last April, when Baghdad was not captured yet, a red car was coming in our direction were we where standing in a check point in one of the neighborhoods…we didn’t hesitated to start shooting on it. And we hit it a direct hit. We killed three of the passengers and injured another one. Then he added: I cant forget the seen of the car will the blood were coming out from it and the voice of the injured man shouting in spite of his wounds: why you killed my brother?? We didn’t do anything for you.

Then jimmy said: the same thing happened with 2 other cars, and we killed 3 other citizens again. He added: I kept serving in this check point for one month and the orders that the Iraqi soldiers are undercover by citizens’ clothes, and the imbalances are carrying explosives.

And he felt very upset about the message that the US gov. is sending to the Iraqi people that they will provide them with food…we never did such thing but for three hours a day ..the other time we were fighting.

He added: one day we entered a city there and we start distributing supplies on the people there, but of course no one accepted it ; who will take food from them hands which killed his mother and his brothers. Jimmy assured that he collapsed down completely after that, then they offered him an office work there for the marines … but he refused that offer. He said: I had 7 years to my retiring salary but I refused this dirty money.

The “Lomenaeeh French newspaper“referred that the only solution for the American soldiers was to kill them self. And the newspaper proved that by referring to the official declaration from the marines that 23 soldiers had killed there self in 2003.

The newspaper pointed that the suicides have made the American management Very worried, that’s why they sent a medical team to Iraq to try to understand the increasing number of suicides Between soldiers .

[BigBank_Hank]

This being a French paper the only thing its good for is toilet paper. I wonder if that same newspaper wrote articles on how the French Government stole millions of dollars from the oil for food program, or how the French government sold weapons to Saddam that were in violation the resolution passed by the U.N.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@15 April 2004 - 16:13
This being a French paper the only thing its good for is toilet paper. I wonder if that same newspaper wrote articles on how the French Government stole millions of dollars from the oil for food program, or how the French government sold weapons to Saddam that were in violation the resolution passed by the U.N.
Yeh, it must be..I mean 23 suicides...

The American Source i found (Boston.com) says 24...not counting those that have commited suicide after evacuation from the country.

It also says...


Dr. William Winkenwerder, assistant secretary of defense for health affairs, told reporters in January that of the more than 10,000 troops medically evacuated from Iraq, between 300 and 400 were sent outside the country for treatment of mental health problems.



I think the French Newspaper is playing it down more than the American....

....Please do not "Generalise"....

Not all of the French are the same, just like not all Yanks are the same... and go find your own natural enemies; The French are ours already :P

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Alex H+15 April 2004 - 00:00--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Alex H &#064; 15 April 2004 - 00:00)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+14 April 2004 - 17:22--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol &#064; 14 April 2004 - 17:22)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> there is no prospect of a democratically elected government. There may never be. The people of Iraq will decide that. [/b]
Well if that&#39;s the case, they won&#39;t will they? :blink:


Originally posted by J&#39;Pol
Oh and btw - If the constitution of the USA is so feckin great, how come there have been so many amendments. Was the original just a poorly thought out first draft. Speaks volumes for your Founding Fathers old bean.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Well, you know what Americans are like. They get a great idea and then rush in without any real plan... [/b]
..........much like your posts. <_<

<!--QuoteBegin-Rat Faced@
....Please do not "Generalise"....

Not all of the French are the same, just like not all Yanks are the same... [/quote]
<!--QuoteBegin-Alex H
Well, you know what Americans are like.[/quote]

[Busyman]

btw I wonder why soldiers are shooting cars that rush through checkpoints.

I think the soldiers should just sit there and allow "possible" terrorists to blow up a real target past the checkpoint. So far the checkpoints have had their share of suicide bombers.

[Rat Faced]

My point goes to Alex H too busyman...thats why I added.

Although i appologise. I called them French and you Yanks...

I should either have said Frogs n Yanks or French and Americans... as it stood i only used the nick on one population..


Please forgive my lack of manners ;)

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@15 April 2004 - 15:07
My point goes to Alex H too busyman...thats why I added.

Although i appologise. I called them French and you Yanks...

I should either have said Frogs n Yanks or French and Americans... as it stood i only used the nick on one population..


Please forgive my lack of manners ;)
No prob Rat.

I wasn&#39;t really directing anything at you. I was merely using your words to solidify points to others. ;)

[BigBank_Hank]

Damn I feel so left out I got no apologies :P

[Busyman]

Originally posted by BigBank_Hank@15 April 2004 - 15:30
Damn I feel so left out I got no apologies :P
Sorry BigBank. :D How&#39;s The SugarHill Gang?

[BigBank_Hank]

Originally posted by Busyman@15 April 2004 - 14:58
Sorry BigBank. :D How&#39;s The SugarHill Gang?
:lol: :lol: Doing fine

[Alex H]

Rat Faced & Busyman

Yeah ok, you got me :lol: I&#39;ll play nice now.


Originally posted by BigBank_Hank
or how the French government sold weapons to Saddam that were in violation the resolution passed by the U.N.

Oh come on&#33; You can&#39;t blame the French for everything. The fact that the Americans (specific Americans, not all Americans) sold weapons, dual use technologies and chemicals to Saddam doesn&#39;t make you guys (not you per se, but the American government and the traditions of accountability it has) any better.

[3RA1N1AC]

Originally posted by Busyman@15 April 2004 - 10:59
btw I wonder why soldiers are shooting cars that rush through checkpoints.

I think the soldiers should just sit there and allow "possible" terrorists to blow up a real target past the checkpoint. So far the checkpoints have had their share of suicide bombers.
i think the next time the u.s. gov&#39;t wants a foreign head of state to vacate his office, he should just come out quietly with his hands on top of his head and his pants around his ankles. yet another "w00t" for sovereignty.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC+16 April 2004 - 00:32--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3RA1N1AC &#064; 16 April 2004 - 00:32)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@15 April 2004 - 10:59
btw I wonder why soldiers are shooting cars that rush through checkpoints.

I think the soldiers should just sit there and allow "possible" terrorists to blow up a real target past the checkpoint. So far the checkpoints have had their share of suicide bombers.
i think the next time the u.s. gov&#39;t wants a foreign head of state to vacate his office, he should just come out quietly with his hands on top of his head and his pants around his ankles. yet another "w00t" for sovereignty. [/b][/quote]
:lol: :lol: :lol:

And as the British say, "He&#39;ll get a roacket up&#39;is oss&#33;&#33;&#33;" :ph34r:

(and there will be a charred white flag in what&#39;s left of his hand)

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Mr JP Fugley+16 April 2004 - 12:16--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mr JP Fugley @ 16 April 2004 - 12:16)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by Busyman@16 April 2004 - 04:46

Originally posted by 3RA1N1AC@16 April 2004 - 00:32
<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@15 April 2004 - 10:59
btw I wonder why soldiers are shooting cars that rush through checkpoints.

I think the soldiers should just sit there and allow "possible" terrorists to blow up a real target past the checkpoint. So far the checkpoints have had their share of suicide bombers.
i think the next time the u.s. gov&#39;t wants a foreign head of state to vacate his office, he should just come out quietly with his hands on top of his head and his pants around his ankles. yet another "w00t" for sovereignty.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

And as the British say, "He&#39;ll get a roacket up&#39;is oss&#33;&#33;&#33;" :ph34r:

(and there will be a charred white flag in what&#39;s left of his hand)
who is you ? Dick Van fucking Dyke.

a dick and a dyke, thats a bit saucy matron. [/b][/quote]
who is me?? :blink:

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Peace@15 April 2004 - 07:41




Officer Jimmy Massy&nbsp; said after he decided to leave the army and go back home to Carolina: in one month, me and battalion have killed 30 Iraqi citizens, that was during our mission that we were ordered to isolate some villages and to have a strict control on the check points.

has carried out from jimmy saying:

We never hesitated to start shooting on any car in the neighborhood that passes from the check point without stopping. We never allowed any report to reach such places.

And about his rezones of confusion about what the US military have done in Iraq he said:
I feel very ashamed about what we did… referring that the sights of bloods are chasing him every time he is trying to sleep, clarifying: we were in the beginning of the last April, when Baghdad was not captured yet, a red car was coming in our direction were we where standing in a check point in one of the neighborhoods…we didn’t hesitated to start shooting on it. And we hit it a direct hit. We killed three of the passengers and injured another one. Then he added: I cant forget the seen of the car will the blood were coming out from it and the voice of the injured man shouting in spite of his wounds: why you killed my brother?? We didn’t do anything for you.

Then jimmy said: the same thing happened with 2 other cars, and we killed 3 other citizens again. He added: I kept serving in this check point for one month and the orders that the Iraqi soldiers are undercover by citizens’ clothes, and the imbalances are carrying explosives.

The “Lomenaeeh French newspaper“referred that the only solution for the American soldiers was to kill them self. And the newspaper proved that by referring to the official declaration from the marines that 23 soldiers had killed there self in 2003.The newspaper pointed that the suicides have made the American management Very worried, that’s why they sent a medical team to Iraq to try to understand the increasing number of suicides Between soldiers .&nbsp; &nbsp;

You bring up an excellent point about American soldiers, Peace.

When a car runs a checkpoint it is the soldiers imperative to destroy that vehicle, as it is assumed to be a threat (suicide bomber, smuggler, whatever) and needs to be eliminated before it accomplishes its objective.

When the people killed turn out to be civilians, this deeply affects the soldier as a person. Why did they run the checkpoint, this death was not necessary. This blood was brought by my hands, I had no idea they were innocent, but I still feel sadness and guilt.

Soldiers in Iraq are turning to suicide because they a people seeing terrible things. In this guerilla/ambush phase of the war, a moments hestitation may put you in a pine box home and thus collateral killing of innocents occurs.

So although the soldiers are performing their duty as soldiers must, they are first and foremost human beings who are emotionally distraught by what they see. If we hated these people it would not matter, but we have no hate for them. We do not view them as anything other than humans in conflict.

Some cannot handle this mentally and turn to suicide. Who will not be permanently scarred after seeing corpses all around, comrades falling over dead, and mutilated children.

So thanks for your post, it really highlights the human side of American soldiers. It juxtaposes the idea that Americans are emotionless automatons who hate Arabs and have no consideration for their lives. As in the checkpoint scenario, they may be performing as a soldier must, but the person behind the uniform has no interest in killing an innocent and the stories of depression and suicide reflect this.

[Rat Faced]

Very well said, and i wholeheartedly agree with the point that a soldier has no choice but to shoot first and ask questions afterwards, if a car is not stopping at a checkpoint.

If there are innocents killed, especially women and children, this will affect any sane Human Being... hell killing enemy soldiers is bad enough :(

[vidcc]

Originally posted by hobbes@17 April 2004 - 10:48

When a car runs a checkpoint it is the soldiers imperative to destroy that vehicle, as it is assumed to be a threat (suicide bomber, smuggler, whatever) and needs to be eliminated before it accomplishes its objective.

When the people killed turn out to be civilians, this deeply affects the soldier as a person. Why did they run the checkpoint, this death was not necessary. This blood was brought by my hands, I had no idea they were innocent, but I still feel sadness and guilt.

Soldiers in Iraq are turning to suicide because they a people seeing terrible things. In this guerilla/ambush phase of the war, a moments hestitation may put you in a pine box home and thus collateral killing of innocents occurs.

So although the soldiers are performing their duty as soldiers must, they are first and foremost human beings who are emotionally distraught by what they see. If we hated these people it would not matter, but we have no hate for them. We do not view them as anything other than humans in conflict.

Some cannot handle this mentally and turn to suicide. Who will not be permanently scarred after seeing corpses all around, comrades falling over dead, and mutilated children.

So thanks for your post, it really highlights the human side of American soldiers. It juxtaposes the idea that Americans are emotionless automatons who hate Arabs and have no consideration for their lives. As in the checkpoint scenario, they may be performing as a soldier must, but the person behind the uniform has no interest in killing an innocent and the stories of depression and suicide reflect this.
was it lee clegg that was jailed for shooting a civilian in a car that went through a checkpoint in Norther Ireland?.
At least the American troops are not subject to criminal retribution

[Busyman]

Originally posted by vidcc@17 April 2004 - 19:06

was it lee clegg that was jailed for shooting a civilian in a car that went through a checkpoint in Norther Ireland?.
At least the American troops are not subject to criminal retribution
This ain&#39;t Northern Ireland.

Suicide bombers are blowing up checkpoints vid. ;)

[vidcc]

Originally posted by Busyman+17 April 2004 - 15:12--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Busyman @ 17 April 2004 - 15:12)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-vidcc@17 April 2004 - 19:06

was it lee clegg that was jailed for shooting a civilian in a car that went through a checkpoint in Norther Ireland?.
At least the American troops are not subject to criminal retribution
This ain&#39;t Northern Ireland.

Suicide bombers are blowing up checkpoints vid. ;) [/b][/quote]
and in northern ireland soldiers weren&#39;t being shot??....army barracks weren&#39;t being attacked.?....the biggest difference here is purely scale.

[Peace]

hi all
there is a new movie i will going to watch... its name is "control room"...i think that will show how is truth is lost in the US media channels and the diff. between what channels in US are showing and the other parts of the world chaneels r showing :).

[J'Pol]

Suicide bombings were rarely used in Northern Ireland as I understand the situation.

If a car went headlong towards a checkpoint it was probably because the brakes had failed.

The terrorists there tended to commit their acts and live to terrorize another day.

[vidcc]

i don&#39;t think there was any suicide bombings in northern ireland...but checkpoints were attacked, the weapon of choice is irrelevent. The post was merely about one less accountability issue for the troops to worry about.
I don&#39;t agree with the war however I support the troops 100%. May innocent civilians stop being killed and may our troops all come home safe.

[chalice]

Lee Clegg was sentenced to life for the murder of Karen Reilly (18) and Martin Peake (17). All they did was drive through a checkpoint. It was very close to my home at the time.

Two years later he was released and his conviction was quashed. In 1999 he was promoted.

Accountability? Don&#39;t make me laugh.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by chalice@18 April 2004 - 06:27
Lee Clegg was sentenced to life for the murder of Karen Reilly (18) and Martin Peake (17). All they did was drive through a checkpoint. It was very close to my home at the time.

Two years later he was released and his conviction was quashed. In 1999 he was promoted.

Accountability? Don&#39;t make me laugh.
the point about accountability is that he was charged in the first place, something i couldn&#39;t see happening in the Iraqi situation..... the rights or wrongs of the clegg case will always be open to debate. We weren&#39;t actually there to see what happened so i won&#39;t quibble on details.

[J'Pol]

That is the point being made Chalice.

In circumstances where suicide bombing, including cars into checkpoints, are a standard procedure the military will react to that. They will fire on a car which appears to be a danger.

Where however there is no form for suicide bombing, including but not limited to attacks on checkpoints, then to fire on the car is an entirely different thing.

It appears obvious to me, tho&#39; I could be wrong, that the situations are entirely different.

I think that is the point busyman was making, not whether or not soldiers were being murdered. I am sure he will correct me if I have picked him up wrong.

[chalice]

Originally posted by vidcc+18 April 2004 - 14:39--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc &#064; 18 April 2004 - 14:39)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-chalice@18 April 2004 - 06:27
Lee Clegg was sentenced to life for the murder of Karen Reilly (18) and Martin Peake (17). All they did was drive through a checkpoint. It was very close to my home at the time.

Two years later he was released and his conviction was quashed. In 1999 he was promoted.

Accountability? Don&#39;t make me laugh.
the point about accountability is that he was charged in the first place, something i couldn&#39;t see happening in the Iraqi situation..... the rights or wrongs of the clegg case will always be open to debate. We weren&#39;t actually there to see what happened so i won&#39;t quibble on details. [/b][/quote]
What is the point of creating tribunals if they are corrupt? That&#39;s worse than having no accountablity at all.

I&#39;d agree with Busyman and JP that the situations are entirely different. The only suicide bombers we have in N Ireland are the inept ones who blow themselves up en route. And there&#39;s been plenty of them. In the past it hasn&#39;t been beyond the paramilitaries to hijack a vehicle and coerce the driver into transporting primed explosives to the target.

The Shankill Road bombing (an atrocity by any standard) claimed one of the bombers.

Checkpoints have come under heavy fire in borderlands like Crossmaglen where the infamous "sniper at work" roadsign still stands.

[J'Pol]

http://www.42.dropbear.id.au/image/snipers.jpg

Chalice

Why do they leave such a sign up. Is it seen as a reminder of earlier times.

[chalice]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@18 April 2004 - 16:43
http://www.42.dropbear.id.au/image/snipers.jpg

Chalice

Why do they leave such a sign up. Is it seen as a reminder of earlier times.
I&#39;d say some of the reason its still there is Lest We Forget.

But factions such as the Real IRA and hte Continuity IRA are known to inhabit the area. So I&#39;d guess its also there as a (tasteless) symbol of defiance.

There&#39;s also the tourist trade to consider.

[J'Pol]

You are probably spot on with all three.