View Full Version : Iraq brutality video
landmarker
13-Feb-06, 18:49
Once more the behaviour of our troops in Iraq is called into question.
I saw the video clip on the news last night. No-one can think what happened was right but....
The Iraqi's had been part of a mob which was attacking the troops who had liberated their country from a tyrant they seemed powerless to act against.
Perhaps they might be considered lucky that , as home made 'grenades' were being thrown the soldiers did not open fire.
I'd like to see the editor of the 'News of the World' do a tour of duty in Basra, and then perhaps re-consider his attitude. These soldiers are young men, often running on adrenalin, up against wily opposition in a place they never asked to be.
Fair doo's they are soldiers. They are paid to do politicians bidding,but in this case I'd like to hear some of the polticians whose lies and bungling sent them over there in the first place be a little more supportive.
Perhaps a couple of these teenage victims went away thinking it might not be such a good idea to attack British troops in the future.
I've no doubt scapegoats will be found and paraded. The politicians, in their hypocrisy will refer to the 'great majority of heroes' and weeding out 'rotten apples' and frankly I find this attitude is as pungent as it is predictable.
Those soldiers are doing a dirty and thankless job. If one of them had fallen into the hands of the mob they may well have been torn limb from limb.
Let's keep a sense of perspective and I'm surely not alone in thinking the sooner our troops are out of that country the better.
I didn't think they got that much of a doing to be honest.
who knows if its real. it is the news of the world. read it every sunday but its a bit far fetched at times.
Alice in Blunderland
13-Feb-06, 20:45
I agree that the troops have been there long enough but two wrongs dont make a right.The guys should never have been throwing grenades at the troops in the same way the troops had captured them no need to vent their anger on them like that I can honestly say I felt uncomfortable watching it.One of the reasons Saddam was so disliked was the way his troops beat up and abused civilians.
lassieinfife
13-Feb-06, 20:47
I didn't think they got that much of a doing to be honest.
It dont matter except to the Iraqui's whether they got much of a beating or not[wonders how scotsboy would feel if he was on receiving end?] its the fact that the troops were caught on video doing something they shouldnt have been doing and so placing all the rest of the british troops in more danger,but as army born and bread I still say if they dont want to go into world trouble spots and deal with the problems they shouldnt join up
What seems rather strange to me is that it would appear that the incident occurred almost two years ago. Why should it come to light now, just when the fuss over the Danish Cartoons has started to ease off?
I wonder just when the "News of the World" got possession of the video and how long it took them to verify it's authenticity?
The timing of the publication, which was bound to add fuel to emotions which were already boiling point, is also just before more troops are sent to Afghanistan.
Does anybody know what injuries these youths who were, "Begging for Mercy" and being "Beaten to a Pulp" sustained? Surely they must have all been hospitalised as a result of the "Savage Beatings" shown on the "Horrific Video".
And 'shock, horror', only one of them was wearing shoes! I presume from that being pointed out that it wouldn't have been so bad if they had been able to have some shoes!
It should not have happened, but I suspect that rather a large feast is being portrayed from a couple of rather small sandwiches.
Still, I'm not going to demand that the Editor of the NoW be sacked and that the Government should offer a Grovelling Apology because of the "Injury to my Feelings". I do so hope that the hordes of demonstrators do not resort ot burning Arab Embassies because they are also repeating the video adding Insult to my Injured Feelings! :roll:
The Iraqi's had been part of a mob which was attacking the troops who had liberated their country from a tyrant they seemed powerless to act against.
Perhaps they might be considered lucky that , as home made 'grenades' were being thrown the soldiers did not open fire.
No we didn't liberate them, we invaded their country and now we are occupying it. Western companies have taken control of their oil and America is building permanent military bases. Before the invasion Iraq had some of the best medical services in the Middle East, now they are a shambles. Before the invasion the women of Iraq were among the most liberated in the Middle East and now they are enslaved by Muslim law. Electricity water and transport services are all worse than before the invasion. The countries GDP is down 21.8%, the cost of living is up 29.3% and over 50% of the workforce is unemployed.
In a recent poll 47% of ordinary Iraqis said they thought that attacks on the occupying forces are justified.
I'm fairly confident that if those Iraqis weren't engaged in street violence then they wouldn't have got a good kicking.
wickerinca
13-Feb-06, 22:10
I'm fairly confident that if those Iraqis weren't engaged in street violence then they wouldn't have got a good kicking.
Yep..........don't think that these soldiers would have gone and dragged innocent bystanders in for a bit of a knockabout....and I promise that this is going to be my only post on this subject because if I wrote what I want to write I would be banned for ever!:D
I'm fairly confident that if those Iraqis weren't engaged in street violence then they wouldn't have got a good kicking.
You might call it a good kicking, I call it child abuse.
You might call it a good kicking, I call it child abuse.
I didn't know we allowed people that young to join the army!
I call it child abuse.
I call it a good clip around the earhole....British army style.
When France was under the sway of the Vichy government, those Frenchmen who stood up to the puppets and the German puppetmasters were heros who were referred to as Resistance Fighters and underground soldiers and were honoured because they stood up to the invaders of their country and were prepared to die for their beliefs. When they were caught by the Germans they were executed,not beaten up.
When Iraqi nationals stand up against their puppet government they are referred to as insurgents and rebels but they are doing exactly what the French resistance fighters were doing and for the same reasons. Can you blame them for fighting back when the situation is as bad as the picture painted by Fred? And can you blame the British soldier for doing what soldiers have been doing since war was invented?
Fair enough,Iraq had a problem under Saddam but at least it was their problem!!!
Before the invasion Iraq had some of the best medical services in the Middle East, now they are a shambles.
I thought that children were dying by the thousands before the we went there. At least that's what we were being told by the same people who are now telling us it was Utopia.
I must admit to one thing. I can never remember which piece of propaganda I am supposed to believe on which day, I get so mixed up.
Is Pearl Harbour still a big conspiracy by Roosevelt so the Americans could take control of China, South-East Asia and force Hitler to declare war on them so they could take over Europe or was that yesterday I was supposed to believe that?
I do, however, still believe WW1 was a conspiracy between the Czar (funded by the CIA) and America in an attempt to prevent the Bolsheviks taking over Russia.
Terrible that such a thing could happen and to this day the truth hasn’t been told.
Fancy the Americans torpedoing the Lusitania and blaming the Germans just so they had an excuse to invade Europe.
When France was under the sway of the Vichy government, those Frenchmen who stood up to the puppets and the German puppetmasters were heros who were referred to as Resistance Fighters and underground soldiers and were honoured because they stood up to the invaders of their country and were prepared to die for their beliefs. When they were caught by the Germans they were executed,not beaten up.
When Iraqi nationals stand up against their puppet government they are referred to as insurgents and rebels but they are doing exactly what the French resistance fighters were doing and for the same reasons. Can you blame them for fighting back when the situation is as bad as the picture painted by Fred? And can you blame the British soldier for doing what soldiers have been doing since war was invented?
Fair enough, Iraq had a problem under Saddam but at least it was their problem!!!
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Martin Luther King
Perhaps all those white Americans who joined in the Freedom March should just have stayed home and said, "At least it's their problem! Why should I get involved?"
Funny how it was alright for the Americans to stick their nose into our private war with Hitler. Well, it was none of their business, it was our problem!
Only the Americans (assisted by us of course) make war on civilians.
Try telling that to the East Germans, the Hungarians, the Czechoslovakians, the Poles, the Chechnyens.
“Mao Tse Dung, Thou are't the Red Sun of our Hearts.” (Anybody still got their Little Red Book?) How many Millions did the Red Guard Kill? How many died in China after Tiananmen Square?
Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge, how many died in the Killing Fields?
Perhaps they didn't matter because they weren't about oil!
Where were the demonstrators then? Where were the howls of indignity?
Funny how some people moral repugnance can be very selective.
Volunteers for the Gulags anybody?
I can't decide whether you agree with my last post or not.
I can't decide whether you agree with my last post or not.
I can understand you saying that, or anybody else saying it for that matter.
The only time I will be absolutely certain if what we did was right or not is when there is some sort of solution.
Only the final outcome is will say if Iraqis are better or worse off than before and all the political grandstanding has little to do with that eventuality.
The one thing I am certain of is that those who are intent on making out that only one side in any conflict is playing dirty or capable of atrocities are doing no more than spout propaganda whichever side they blame.
There are many fingers which have been poked into the Iraqi Pie and ours is just the one which is most visible. There are others who have an interest there who are willing to sit quietly and watch and wait until they see where their best opportunities lay.
If anybody has knowledge of any conflict where both sides are armed or use extreme force where only one side has committed atrocities and the other has behaved impeccably then I'm sure many eminent Historians would be glad to learn of it.
Point taken. No real arguement.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Martin Luther King
The principle of justice is to have laws and due process of law, to have judges to ensure that the law is administered fairly. Deciding a barefoot child is guilty and dragging him off and beating him senseless id not justice, that is injustice.
Funny how it was alright for the Americans to stick their nose into our private war with Hitler. Well, it was none of their business, it was our problem!
America was happy enough making money out of the war till the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour.
Thank you for the above posts; I'm not good at putting these things into words as it is difficult to ascertain what is right and what is wrong. How simple if everything was black and white.
There are so many facets to war. Inhumanity to any being is wrong and we all know there is no easy way to "peace".
Is there a way?.....
There are too many power hungry nations in the world for whatever perceived reason and they all spew out their "justifications".
So many people are engaged in mopping up the after effects of conflict; good people who believe in humanity, good people who struggle to lessen the devastation left by war, natural disasters etc., and yet still it goes on....
I call it a good clip around the earhole....British army style.
Then remind me again why we invaded Iraq.
I seem to remember something about terrorist links but that turned out to be lies and then there was talk of weapons of mass destruction but that turned out to be lies.
Then they told us that we were bringing justice and freedom to the brutally oppressed people of Iraq but what was happening to those barefoot Iraqi children didn't look too much like justice and freedom, looked more like brutal oppression to me.
lorraine_2406
14-Feb-06, 11:22
My husband is out there in basra and whats going to happen is the boys out there are going to get the back lash of something that happened 2yrs ago which is a disgrace it should of been left alone and dealt with at the time all this happened why drag something up that happened 2 yrs ago and put the troops out there on high alert when this is all old news.
I understood that the original video discovered two years ago showed only the soldiers chasing the Iraqis down the street and stopped short of the beating up, the latter was only recently found. My first instinct was to wonder why the NoW chose to publicise this, knowing the damage it would do to both our troops and reputation, instead of passing it straight to the MoD. Cynically I came to the conclusion that if they had simply passed it on nothing would have been done and the whole incident would have been hushed up. The publicity ensures that action is taken.
I don’t in any way underestimate the problems of the army in that situation but I do worry about the attitude of those doing the kicking and particularly the one take the pictures and shouting his commentary. We hear over and over again about incidents of bullying, sometimes leading to death, in the army and every time they try to brush it under the carpet, telling us either it didn’t happen, or it’s an isolated incident or something will be done to ensure it never happens again. Soldiers have to be tough and sadly they have to be able to kill, but there must be a difference between that and being taught that bullying is OK.
The incident itself was appalling. The consequences for our troops, putting them in even more danger and damaging the good relations they had tried to build up, are incalculable and I feel desperately sorry for their families.
This was a war built on lies but do we ever know the truth? In a discussion on the radio yesterday about the two bombs dropped on Japan one person said the second bomb had to be dropped because they refused to surrender even after the first one; another said the Japanese had been suing for peace for 4 months with the only condition that they should keep their Emperor so the bombs were not necessary. Will we ever know?
The principle of justice is to have laws and due process of law, to have judges to ensure that the law is administered fairly. Deciding a barefoot child is guilty and dragging him off and beating him senseless id not justice, that is injustice.
America was happy enough making money out of the war till the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbour.
Has anybody decided what the injuries to the youths were? Beaten sensless is just an emotive term which mearly creates a belief, not a description.
As for Pearl Harbour, tell that to the families of the crew of the "Ruben James".
At least when America entered the war it didn't demand supplies off us in order to weaken our ability to fight. Neither did they have a non-agression pact or an agreement to carve another country up with Hitler.
They were also willing to fight on two fronts which some other powerful countries simply refused to do.
They also poured money into Europe after the War to help rebuild it rather than supress it.
Has anybody decided what the injuries to the youths were? Beaten sensless is just an emotive term which mearly creates a belief, not a description.
<snip>
I thought I heard they were beaten unconscious. That's more a description isn't it?
I call it a good clip around the earhole....British army style.
More than a clip round the ear as well, no matter what "style" you do it in.
I have to question the motives and wisdom of the N0tW in bringing this to such public attention right now when anti-western sentiment is running so high in the Muslim world.
I don't believe that if they had handed this footage to the authorities it would have been swept under the carpet. They could have kept a copy or the original as insurance just in case it was suppressed, but I really think this was a purely "sell more papers" exercise....
Were the troops right to act like this? They are under incredible pressure and stress out there carrying out the "will of this goverment" and I believe just prior to this footage they had been petrol bombed by rioters (several soldiers receiving serious burns) - so mabye they snapped. They are soldiers after all , trained for battel, and are not really meant for keeping the peace.
Just my 2p worth....
Then they told us that we were bringing justice and freedom to the brutally oppressed people of Iraq but what was happening to those barefoot Iraqi children didn't look too much like justice and freedom, looked more like brutal oppression to me.
Fred, I have some shoes I no longer need, they are in good condition, perhaps the concerned NGOs could have a collection for shoes.
Is their some suggestion the troops stole their shoes or removed them as a form of torture?
Do youths in that area wear shoes normally? Not all countries find wearing shoes as necessary as we do.
I rather suspect there are a lot of people in the world who wish that was the extent of the "brutal oppression" that they were suffering.
Nobody is suggesting that what occurred should have happened, but hysterical descriptions do nothing to help those people who suffer under genuinely brutal regimes.
If people are left with the impression that "brutal oppression" is restricted to a few kicks and blows then they are likely to shrug and decide it's hardly worth bothering about people who are genuinely brutally oppressed.
Fred
So by your reaction u fully support the so called justified acts against the british troops?????? Maybe we shouldnt be there but its to late now to change what has been done. So stop whinging about what could have been and support the country which is your flesh and blood.
Whitewater
14-Feb-06, 13:41
I have been reading through this post with interest, many good and differing points of view from all of you.
I myself think that the "News of the World" has been very irresponsible in publishing and releasing this video at this particular time. It happened two years ago, the incident was over. I have seen worse in front of the "Waterfront" on many a Saturday night. They, as a supposedly responsible newspaper, know fullwell what the reprocussions will be. It will not only be in Iraq, but all over the Arab world. I just wonder what their hidden agenda is.
I can't say I'm in favour of what happened, but I have never been in the services or involved in action of any kind. But I can well imagine what our troops are going through, an incident like this where nobody was maimed or killed I thought showed great restraint. It was just a warning to let them know not to do it again.
Many years ago when I was young we would get a smack on the ear from a policeman who would then escort us home and tell our parents what had happened and what he had done, this always resulted in a good row and maybe even a smack on the backside from our dads. What happened on the video was a bit more severe than that, but was designed to have the same effect, without any lose of life.
I think there has been over reaction here as well as it being to late.
I perhaps have a very suspicious mind, but I think there is something rather dark and sinister behind the release of this video at this particular time.
I have been reading through this post with interest, many good and differing points of view from all of you.
I myself think that the "News of the World" has been very irresponsible in publishing and releasing this video at this particular time. It happened two years ago, the incident was over. I have seen worse in front of the "Waterfront" on many a Saturday night. They, as a supposedly responsible newspaper, know fullwell what the reprocussions will be. It will not only be in Iraq, but all over the Arab world. I just wonder what their hidden agenda is.
I can't say I'm in favour of what happened, but I have never been in the services or involved in action of any kind. But I can well imagine what our troops are going through, an incident like this where nobody was maimed or killed I thought showed great restraint. It was just a warning to let them know not to do it again.
Many years ago when I was young we would get a smack on the ear from a policeman who would then escort us home and tell our parents what had happened and what he had done, this always resulted in a good row and maybe even a smack on the backside from our dads. What happened on the video was a bit more severe than that, but was designed to have the same effect, without any lose of life.
I think there has been over reaction here as well as it being to late.
I perhaps have a very suspicious mind, but I think there is something rather dark and sinister behind the release of this video at this particular time.
To make money and perpetuate war.....possibly?
I saw the video clip on the news last night. No-one can think what happened was right but.... …but here’s why you think we should turn a blind eye to it. [disgust]
I’ve also seen the clip. Unlike Rheghead, I wouldn’t describe what these children were treated to as ‘a good clip around the earhole’ – I’ve had many clips around my own ears and I certainly don’t recall any of them involving army boots or batons.
From the moment the soldiers had taken these boys into custody they had a duty of care toward them. That duty does not include taking revenge on them for being part of a rioting mob.
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
How can any country claim to fight for human rights and flaunt human rights at the same time?
Lassiein fife - I have received a couple of sound beatings at the hands of police (not in the UK I may add)....I thought both were over the top, but I knew/know the risks.
landmarker
14-Feb-06, 17:17
From the moment the soldiers had taken these boys into custody they had a duty of care toward them.
Health & safety speak from someone with his head in the clouds & who clearly lives in a world of his own. Give my regards to the cuckoos.
You think they were taken into custody? I think they were just taken in for a bit of a slap. A bit of a slap is recognized in the Middle East you know - it is part of the culture.
Health & safety speak from someone with his head in the clouds & who clearly lives in a world of his own. Give my regards to the cuckoos. So you think that it is acceptable to kick prisoners in the head and beat prisoners with batons when they are posing no threat to you whatsoever? Presumably the same is true in reverse as well? I mean, if a British soldier is captured by the insurgents I take it that you will have no problem whatsoever with his captors giving him a little 'slap' with a stick or a boot? [disgust]
You think they were taken into custody? I think they were just taken in for a bit of a slap. A bit of a slap is recognized in the Middle East you know - it is part of the culture.
The same question to you as I just asked Landmarker: I take it that you won't have any objections if a British soldier is captued by insurgents and they decide to give him a 'bit of a slap' with a boot or a stick... it being a part of the culture over there and all? [disgust]
That is exactly what has happened in the past, is happening at the moment and will happen in the future.
I have no problem with that and accept it, those soldiers who are there know that is exactly what will happen to them.
Health & safety speak from someone with his head in the clouds & who clearly lives in a world of his own. Give my regards to the cuckoos.
Even the cuckoos don't want him.:Razz
Might I venture to suggest a check of
http://www.johnnichol.com/Back%20to%20Iraq.htm
Some people have conveniently short memories. Funny how the same people only ever see one side committing atrocities and not another. Perhaps it's the blinkers that cause the problem. Perhaps we should just resort to throwing explosives amongst crowds of youths, it would stop them being given a good slap by squaddies.
Of course, we could resort to non-violent beheadings. Or maybe tying prisoners hands behind their backs, shooting them in the back of the head and leaving them dumped by the side of a road.
I'm sure the Commanders of people who do that sort of thing will be sure to carry out an enquiry and punish those concerned.
I can't wait to hear the reports of the Courts Martial.
That is exactly what has happened in the past, is happening at the moment and will happen in the future.
I have no problem with that and accept it, those soldiers who are there know that is exactly what will happen to them. So it doesn't bother you? You aren't outraged when you hear of insurgents beating prisoners? I'm surprised to hear that.
Even the cuckoos don't want him.
What does this add to the discussion? By all means, make comments about me whilst discussing what I have said, but making little digs like this is pathetic and best left on the playground. Grow up.
So it doesn't bother you? You aren't outraged when you hear of insurgents beating prisoners? I'm surprised to hear that.
It does not outrage me at all; it is exactly what I expect to happen. I may not like it, or agree with it but I would be naďve to think that anything else would happen. I would say, I would more rather a “doing” from our lads than theirs.
Health & safety speak from someone with his head in the clouds & who clearly lives in a world of his own. Give my regards to the cuckoos.
Two words: Geneva Convention.
Last time I checked the UK had signed it.
I am not all that well versed on the Geneva Conventions but I assumed that they related to combatants and that those combatants required to be in uniform. If these were civilians then would the Geneva Conventions apply?
Two wrongs don't make a right. They never have and they never will.
I don’t know what happened before the British soldiers (allegedly) beat these lads up, but let’s assume that they were involved in some form of public disorder. What do you think should have happened to them? Given some community service?
I am not all that well versed on the Geneva Conventions but I assumed that they related to combatants and that those combatants required to be in uniform. If these were civilians then would the Geneva Conventions apply?
They were in uniform in an occupied country andin a state of war. Why on earth would the geneva convention on war fare and teatment of prisoners NOT apply?
I don’t know what happened before the British soldiers (allegedly) beat these lads up, but let’s assume that they were involved in some form of public disorder. What do you think should have happened to them? Given some community service?
What would normally happen to someone involved in public disorder in a democratic country?
They certainly wouldn't be beaten.
Those being attacked were not in uniform, so either they were civilians or combatants not wearing uniform.
http://www.genevaconventions.org/
I am not saying I agree with what happened, simply that in the context it has been blown out of proportion.
If those were English football fans being hit with batons in Germany you would be cheering the police on - whether those being hit were innocent or guilty.
You consider that Iraq was a democratic country 2 years ago?
Two wrongs don't make a right. They never have and they never will.
Not everyone agrees!
Bart: Somebody ought to ruin Gabbo's career the way he ruined Krusty's.
Lisa: Two wrongs don't make a right, Bart.
Bart: Yes they do.
Lisa: No they don't.
Bart: Yes they do!
Lisa: No they don't!
Bart: Yes they do!!
Lisa: Daaaad!
Homer: Two wrongs make a right, Lisa.
Reference:
http://www.snpp.com/episodes/9F19.html
You consider that Iraq was a democratic country 2 years ago?
No, but the soldiers were from a democratic country.
Those being attacked were not in uniform, so either they were civilians or combatants not wearing uniform.
http://www.genevaconventions.org/
I am not saying I agree with what happened, simply that in the context it has been blown out of proportion.
If those were English football fans being hit with batons in Germany you would be cheering the police on - whether those being hit were innocent or guilty.
I wouldn't. I never "cheer on" violence.
Your stance is laudable Savey, but in the real world these things happen.
To say "that's just the way the world is" can't be used as justification.
These were real people, if it was me or my family how would I feel? How would you feel?
As has been mentioned, this is only a tiny, tiny part of a huge, huge problem. Injustice and violence is nothing new, its widespread and deep-rooted no matter what side you're on.
That fact doesn't mean we have to accept it.
Your stance is laudable Savey, but in the real world these things happen.
That, unfortunatly, is indisputable.
lorraine_2406
14-Feb-06, 19:22
My husband is out in iraq just now in basra and there is 9 year olds walking about with guns need i say anymore
I have told you how I feel - I would accept it.
If I was one of those lads who were captured I would have known exactly what was going to happen - in fact I would be thankful that it was so light.
If I was one of those soldiers parents I would be supporting them wholeheartedly.
I have had beatings from police on two occassions, both becuase I was in the wrong place at the wrong time - but I knew the risks.
"Pakistani security guards have shot dead two protesters in Lahore during unrest over Western newspaper cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad."
BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4711318.stm
I await the howls of indignation. But, then again, the security guards were not British or American and the protesters never became prisoners.
Two Iraqi youths have suddenly decided to sue the MOD because they were amongst the "Youths" in the video. One of the youths, who suffered what I believe has been called "Child Abuse", was 25 at the time. Some "Youth", Some Child". Neither have said if they were wearing shoes at the time but I'm sure they will be questioned closely about it. There is no truth in the rumour that if one of them admits wearing shoes he will be charged with theft.
As far as the soldiers already arrested, they have already been dealt with.
The Court Martial has ended and they have been informed, "You have been found guilty and sentenced. All we need to do now is decide on the crime."
Will "Offences Against the State" suffice? Of course, we can't tell you what those Offences are because they are State Secrets!
"Pakistani security guards have shot dead two protesters in Lahore during unrest over Western newspaper cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad."
BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4711318.stm
I await the howls of indignation. But, then again, the security guards were not British or American and the protesters never became prisoners.
<snip>
Howls of indignation do nothing to stop the avalanche of death. Neither does tit-for-tat beatings.
It happened yesterday, it happened today and it will happen tomorrow.
Once again....knowing all this doesn't mean that it can justified - that it's "understandable". The commentary on the said video is animalistic.
Maybe the day after tomorrow will be better.
What does this add to the discussion? By all means, make comments about me whilst discussing what I have said, but making little digs like this is pathetic and best left on the playground. Grow up.
I have the right to say what I like on this forum as does everyone else.If you don't like the way I agreed with Landmarker,too bad.Why don't you ignore this post as you have ignored virtually everything else I have posted for quite some time.
I was not having a little dig at you,I was agreeing with the sentiments expressed in a previous post.As it is,I think you are a lot closer to the playground than I am. One can almost see the pimples on your reality picture as it is painted by the idealistic drivel you continue to post in your usual bullying, pedantic way. I find myself wondering if you have ever lived in the real grown up world.
landmarker
14-Feb-06, 20:17
The soldiers dispensed some rough & instant justice.
A few local teenagers got roughed up because they were amongst a mob
who thought it 'sport' to throw grenades at British troops.
Let's get one thing straight, the fate of these Iraqi's and their dust bowl oil-rich country is not worth one more drop of British blood. The mistakes have been made, the lies have been told. The troops , who seem to face as much nit-picking judgemental criticism from armchair pundits as they do support from a
largely ignorant public would be better placed serving in Afghanistan, at least preventing the resurgence of the Taliban.
Globalisation eh? and technology. It teaches us all that conflict is a dirty business - surprise surprise. We should celebrate the fact that we still produce enough men of fibre & fortitude to do the bidding of our useless politicians.
The real sadness here is that their loyalty, often blind and uncompromising is mis-used in ways which sees them duffing up teenagers in Iraq. Teenagers who may have been trying to kill them just minutes earlier.
I repeat they got off lightly. Leave Iraq and leave it soon.
It's claimed to have been the birthplace of 'civilisation' well, any semblance of such 'civilisation' seems to have been thrown out with the Baath'ist water.
The vacuum left behind seems anything but 'civil' to me.
I wish the Iraqi's peace and prosperity, but my working class contemporaries in uniform have done quite enough to help them on their way.
let’s assume that they were involved in some form of public disorder. What do you think should have happened to them?
I’m starting to get the impression that you haven’t seen this video. That wouldn’t stop you from discussing the charges, but seeing it might give you a better idea of just how ‘much of a doing’ these boys were subjected to.
As for beatings with batons being meted out as punishment for being involved in ‘some form of public disorder’: are our troops not being labelled as these boys’ “liberators”? Do you think they felt ‘liberated’ as they were pinned to the ground and beaten with sticks? Do you think they felt ‘liberated’ as their cries for mercy were met with laughter and kicks? These particular soldiers are no better than those they have usurped and it sickens me.
I am not saying I agree with what happened
No, you aren’t… you are just too apathetic for what happened to bother you.
If those were English football fans being hit with batons in Germany you would be cheering the police on - whether those being hit were innocent or guilty.
Perhaps you would, but I most certainly wouldn’t.
Neither have said if they were wearing shoes at the time but I'm sure they will be questioned closely about it.
Your humour is misplaced.
Here (http://astream.com/links/notw/together_300.asx) is a link to the video we are discussing (please note – this is a video of people being beaten with sticks – if you don’t want to watch that don’t click the link).
You might want to pay close attention at around 1minute 10 seconds, where you will clearly see one of ‘our boys’ purposefully beating the bare feet of his victim with a baton. Forgive me if I am wrong, but wasn’t that one of the tactics employed by Saddam’s torture squads? Good joke, eh Jaws? [disgust]
Oh, and you might also want keep your eyes open at 1 minute 40 seconds so you don’t miss the hysterical moment when a squaddie spots that one of the boys has been pinned to the ground (by two other soldiers) in such a way as to leave his groin exposed… I nearly died laughing when he planted his boot on that boy’s testicles. [mad]
Might I venture to suggest a check of
http://www.johnnichol.com/Back%20to%20Iraq.htm
Some people have conveniently short memories. Funny how the same people only ever see one side committing atrocities and not another. Perhaps it's the blinkers that cause the problem. Perhaps we should just resort to throwing explosives amongst crowds of youths, it would stop them being given a good slap by squaddies.
Were the Iraqis in that link representing my country?
weeboyagee
14-Feb-06, 22:23
What is the world if it is a place for beatings and to exercise violence against a fellow human being?? Who ultimately is "safe" in that world? No-one!
British soldiers beating and whacking civilians with sticks is wrong - plain and simply wrong. It is as wrong for the British Soldiers to be subjected to violence when trying to police a place and make it safer.
British Soldiers are ambassadors for their country and have a tough job - but they do not make it easier when they are caught in these situations.
And from what I see in a lot of the posts here we have to hold on to a sense of proportion. Something that was not exercised by the drama and crisis reporting of yesterday in todays papers as shown in the immature if not somehow sickly clever operations to get sales - as shown by the (I can't stand that paper) NOtW.
The British Soldiers do an admirable job. Lets not see any more dropping of the guard and lowering their standards to the level of those who need to take heed of their example - and that is not by beating, abusing or otherwise assaulting civilians - unless they are defending themselves.
Something I need to be aware of when I consider my feelings about the offending video is that this is a moment in time in the process of human history and human development. We in the West pride ourselves on a sense of fair play and although British forces are not immune from commiting attrocities in conflict zones, if they are caught, then they are punished. A couple of generations ago this type of behaviour would have been applauded by a large part of the population. But hey, things they are a changin and this is part of the process. More and more people, as this thread alone has shown, are changing, and not running with the wolves. Maybe in another few generations this type of behaviour will have been bred out of our boy soldiers when they queue up to take the Kings shilling.
And yes, theres a part of me agrees with Jaws and Landmarker and some of the rest o ye, but that part is archaic and well used and I dont particularly like it. Its counter productive and does nothing to avoid conflict. This is the part that agrees with Bush and Blair and the war on terror.
The part that jjc touches is hardly used but its there and its always been there. It just needs to be acknowledged as a real and integral part of my whole being. This part also craves for peace for the world.
If conflict is going to be avoided in the future, and I have more faith in humanity than some of you on here, the behaviour shown by our troops in the video needs to be addressed by the highest authorities.
RandomHero
14-Feb-06, 22:36
Your humour is misplaced.
Here (http://astream.com/links/notw/together_300.asx) is a link to the video we are discussing (please note – this is a video of people being beaten with sticks – if you don’t want to watch that don’t click the link).
You might want to pay close attention at around 1minute 10 seconds, where you will clearly see one of ‘our boys’ purposefully beating the bare feet of his victim with a baton. Forgive me if I am wrong, but wasn’t that one of the tactics employed by Saddam’s torture squads? Good joke, eh Jaws? [disgust]
Oh, and you might also want keep your eyes open at 1 minute 40 seconds so you don’t miss the hysterical moment when a squaddie spots that one of the boys has been pinned to the ground (by two other soldiers) in such a way as to leave his groin exposed… I nearly died laughing when he planted his boot on that boy’s testicles. [mad]
First of all this is just propeganda that fools like you jump on. secondly, do you want to see some videos of what they are doing to our boys? I could send you some links, just let me know.
Support your troops.
Two Iraqi youths have suddenly decided to sue the MOD because they were amongst the "Youths" in the video. One of the youths, who suffered what I believe has been called "Child Abuse", was 25 at the time.
Yes one of those who have decided to sue the MOD is 27 hence would have been 25 at the time.
You obviously read the report hence you obviously know that the other youth is now 14 hence would have been 12 years old at the time.
Are you suggesting that a gang of grown men handcuffing a 12 year old kid and beating him senseless is anything other than child abuse?
RandomHero
14-Feb-06, 22:47
Yes one of those who have decided to sue the MOD is 27 hence would have been 25 at the time.
You obviously read the report hence you obviously know that the other youth is now 14 hence would have been 12 years old at the time.
Are you suggesting that a gang of grown men handcuffing a 12 year old kid and beating him senseless is anything other than child abuse?
I would call it self defence.
Were the Iraqis in that link representing my country?
No. the were representing theirs, and representing it very well indeed. And by all accounts by the standards they were expected to employ.
But it's only Brutal British Squaddies who ever do such things isn't it?
Mustn't point out that by comparison British Troops are generally extremely well behaved, that's biased.
The last Court Marshal that was held were British Soldiers were accused of dragging youths from a car and savagely beating them, despite much exageration in the press, was thrown out. One witness confessed that they had told lies because the MOD had payed all the expenses for a trip to England. The Defence Team also had the brilliant idea of checking the complainants medical records. The checked the Hospital where he had been admitted to for his serious injuries but, most sadly, they had no record of him or his injuries at that time. The "injuries" turned out to be from an incident totally unconnected to the alleged incident and had occurred long before our troops wre in Iraq.
But nobody from the Army, or our Investigative Media who believe the the public have a right to know, had bothered to do even simple check like that.
Why let the truth get in the way of a good story? Ask the Daily Mirror, they think the Barracks in Preston is in Iraq, in fact they are certain it is.
I'm still waiting for somebody to tell me what injuries were inflicted by the "savage beatings" but nobody seems to know.
One thing I do know, if that's how soldiers are taught to hand out a "savage beating" then somebody needs to look at the training methods.
I've seen worse handed out by a group of Happy Slappers on the news last month.
Does nobody teach them how to use rifle butts any more?
Heaven help us if we ever gat into a real war, "Wait till you see the whites of their eyes and then hit them with your handbags chaps!"
No offence ladies, you'd have probably done a far better job.
I would call it self defence.
You are joking.
I would call it self defence.
Three soldiers against one twelve-year-old... with batons... inside an army compound... whilst being covered by other soldiers with guns.
What were they defending themselves against exactly? [disgust]
RandomHero
14-Feb-06, 22:57
These soldiers are getting grenades thrown at them. They are seeing their friends being set on fire. WOuld you not fight back? The didn't kill them, they didnt even beat them that severly. I think they have every right. It's been blown out of proportion. it's just propaganda anyway, we're only seeing one side of it. it's not good PR but that's what war is about. if we show the iraqis that we are just going to sit back and take it then who knows how far they could push it.
Self-defence when someone is throwing grenades at you is one thing.
Taking your frustrations and anger out on nine (not all nine are seen on the video) individuals in the safety of the barracks is quite another.
I would have thought that the official procedure would be to arrest them and process them.
Have you heard the commentary on the video?
RandomHero
14-Feb-06, 23:12
Yes I have. Is it genuine? Who knows. I don't think anyone truley understands unless you are there. Watching your friends die. You know that you are trying to make the country better but you are constantly being shot at. Not only that, some soldiers don't want to be there. They are doing what they are told to do.
Throwing grenades? What's the official procedure on that, Savey?
First of all this is just propeganda that fools like you jump on.
Is it? The MOD has said that the Royal Military Police has identified ‘several people’ in the video so I assume that they are British soldiers. Whoever leaked the video and whatever their motives for doing so at this time, they are still British soldiers beating children with batons. I don’t apologise for finding their actions reprehensible.
secondly, do you want to see some videos of what they are doing to our boys? I could send you some links, just let me know.
If you have any proven video-evidence showing what these boys have done to ‘our boys’ then I’d be very interested… otherwise “they do bad stuff too” doesn’t really cut it.
Support your troops.
How about you support our troops?
We don’t yet know how much damage the seven soldiers in this video have done. We know that they are responsible for the provisional council of Basra suspending relations with British forces, but what about the damage to the relationship with the Iraqis on the ground?
The vast majority of those brave men and women over there are doing their jobs to the utmost of their ability and with the utmost professionalism. If you think that you are supporting them by condoning the actions of those who would add to the danger they face every day then you are sorely, sorely mistaken.
lorraine_2406
14-Feb-06, 23:16
As i said earlier my husband is in basra what the 1LI did was wrong yes but has anyone stopped to think what went on before they took these people and hit them with batons people forget that no matter what age they are over in iraq there are children as young as 9 walking about with guns their was not so long ago a child threw a granade at one of our boys yes it is upsetting to see such young people getting treated like that but the country is full of young children that want to kill.
RandomHero
14-Feb-06, 23:18
Im glad Mr Human Rights is back. People get hurt in war, get over it. Well we only get to see our boys beating the protesters, i'd have liked to have seen with the angry mob. I don't want to get into all of this with you. Gleber2 was right about you, but then again, I already knew that didn't I?
Yes I have. Is it genuine? Who knows. I don't think anyone truley understands unless you are there. Watching your friends die. You know that you are trying to make the country better but you are constantly being shot at. Not only that, some soldiers don't want to be there. They are doing what they are told to do.
Throwing grenades? What's the official procedure on that, Savey?
I've no idea RandomHero.
But surely dragging nine people back to the barracks to beat them isn't going to solve anything.
As i said earlier my husband is in basra what the 1LI did was wrong yes but has anyone stopped to think what went on before they took these people and hit them with batons
The operative word being ‘before’.
I’m sorry that your husband is stuck in such an awful situation, I truly am – but picking random kids out of a mob and beating them is not the answer.
Here we go again! One Child who alleges he was one of the victims of the Vicious attack is 27 years old now.
My poor mathematics says that two years ago he would hve been a 25 year old Child.
I wonder if his mummy still changes his nappy?
Here we go again! Yes, here we go again... another is now fourteen, which means that he was twelve at the time.
I have a (much) younger brother who is twelve. If he were set upon by a gang of three squaddies he wouldn't stand a chance. Self defence? A light slap? My eye! This was a gang of men beating on a child and there simply is no excuse for that. :mad:
Lorraine 2406, forget it. You are wasting your breath. Some people have obviously never been anywhere near situations like that.
All British Troops are Savage Baby Killers second only to the Vicious Butchers of the American Army. All they can do is attack poor little children who only wish to play nicely and offer the soldiers sweets.
Our Brutal Squaddies refuse to see this because they are so indoctrinated with hatred that they just have to attack any person, preferably innocent and unarmed, who come within range.
They have slaughtered so many Iraqis that the bodies are piled 10 high in the streets and the capitalist press is refusing to show that to assist the propaganda of the Bush-Blair attempts at conquering the World.
Oh yes, I forgot, they say "Boo" to old ladies to and frighten them!
Im glad Mr Human Rights is back. This isn’t about “human rights”, it is about the most basic standard of decency. Do you really think that it is excusable to take young boys to a military compound and beat them? Really?
It honestly makes me sick to my stomach to think that these seven soldiers were over there representing me. But what really angers me is that we have now reached the stage where we don’t even see Iraqis as people anymore. If you saw a man in the street beating a twelve-year-old with a stick you’d step in and put a stop to it, but when you see a gang of men beating a twelve-year-old Iraqi boy you couldn’t give a damn… he’s only an Iraqi boy to you.
It’s disgusting.
Here we go again! One Child who alleges he was one of the victims of the Vicious attack is 27 years old now.
My poor mathematics says that two years ago he would hve been a 25 year old Child.
I wonder if his mummy still changes his nappy?
Are you saying the 12 year old wasn't there? Because one of them was 25 none of them could have been younger?
Wasn't it you making accusations of people wearing blinkers? Seeing what they want to see and disregarding the rest?
Yes, here we go again... another is now fourteen, which means that he was twelve at the time.
I have a younger brother who is twelve. If he were set upon by a gang of three squaddies he wouldn't stand a chance. Self defence? A light slap? My eye! This was a gang of men beating on a child and there simply is no excuse for that. :mad:
The same age as my grandson and if he were ever to get involved in anything similar I would have no sympathy for him whatsoever.
And if you think I am lying or exaggerating about that then when his father visits in summer I will get him to correct that impression!
Lorraine 2406, forget it. You are wasting your breath. Some people have obviously never been anywhere near situations like that.
All British Troops are Savage Baby Killers second only to the Vicious Butchers of the American Army. All they can do is attack poor little children who only wish to play nicely and offer the soldiers sweets.
Our Brutal Squaddies refuse to see this because they are so indoctrinated with hatred that they just have to attack any person, preferably innocent and unarmed, who come within range.
They have slaughtered so many Iraqis that the bodies are piled 10 high in the streets and the capitalist press is refusing to show that to assist the propaganda of the Bush-Blair attempts at conquering the World.
Oh yes, I forgot, they say "Boo" to old ladies to and frighten them!
No one has suggested anything like that Jaws. We're speaking about this specific incident. We can't turn a blind eye just because we live in Britain.
Im glad Mr Human Rights is back. People get hurt in war, get over it. Well we only get to see our boys beating the protesters, i'd have liked to have seen with the angry mob. I don't want to get into all of this with you. Gleber2 was right about you, but then again, I already knew that didn't I?
Which war would that be then? What country did we declare war against? Who is the enamy? How will we know when the war is over?
All British Troops are Savage Baby Killers second only to the Vicious Butchers of the American Army. All they can do is attack poor little children who only wish to play nicely and offer the soldiers sweets. Jaws,
That’s a despicable slur and you know it.
Nobody here is saying that these few individuals are representative of all British troops; in fact I’ve said exactly the opposite.
Still, if you can’t win the debate by… well, debating your point… you can always make some insulting stuff up about how the people who disagree with you are being unpatriotic and should be supporting the troops (as though turning a blind eye to this would be a better option).
I know that we’ve disagreed in the past, but I honestly thought better of you than this. My mistake, it won’t happen again.
"AN Iraq war hero who collapsed and died hours after hearing he won the Military Cross for bravery was buried yesterday.
Mourners heard that Sgt Major Darren Leigh, 37, of the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment, showed “courage, iron discipline and restraint”.
Last August he led a baton charge on a crowd of 300 in Basra — through a barrage of missiles and gunfire — despite grenade injuries to his legs."
Might just explain my reaction!
No one has suggested anything like that Jaws. We're speaking about this specific incident. We can't turn a blind eye just because we live in Britain.
At no stage did I say they were right in doing what they did but the description given by some are also wild exaggerations, I just though I would join in.
Funny how people get so touchy when they are subjected to the same sort of exaggeration they hand out.
How do any of you think the relatives of our troops who are out there feel when the impression given is that the behaviour shown on an often very edited clip is described as if their relatives are behaving like that.
Has any one of you stopped to think of that?
At least we do try to discipline the odd ones who do go over the top or does that only happen to keep the media happy?
The same age as my grandson and if he were ever to get involved in anything similar I would have no sympathy for him whatsoever.
And if you think I am lying or exaggerating about that then when his father visits in summer I will get him to correct that impression!
Get involved in anything simlar to what?
Get involved in anything simlar to what?
Standing innocently outside a military compound minding his own innocent business!
How do any of you think the relatives of our troops who are out there feel when the impression given is that the behaviour shown on an often very edited clip is described as if their relatives are behaving like that.
Has any one of you stopped to think of that?
I would have thought that was exactly the reason why such behaviour should not be tollerated. If all the decent folk whether in the military or civilians express our outrage then the world will see that it is just a handfull of bad apples.
However the more people condone what happened the more it looks like we are a nation of child abusers.
I would have thought that was exactly the reason why such behaviour should not be tollerated. If all the decent folk whether in the military or civilians express our outrage then the world will see that it is just a handfull of bad apples.
However the more people condone what happened the more it looks like we are a nation of child abusers.
Did I say I condoned what happened? Nor do I accept the exaggerated versions of the video.
Yes there was violence used but who described it as "Child Abuse" and I think the term "beaten to a pulp" was also used though how anybody could see that from the TV screen I do not know.
My reaction before was slight exaggeration of previous reports of the Bombing of Baghdad, The terrible conditions of the Hospitals, The starving Children, the Soldiers in Falluja supposedly murdering an injured unarmed prisoner in a building which had been cleared. Pictures of wounded babies desperately in need of medical attention with wonderfully clean wound dressings on their abdomen.
Or are all they things that have never been said either?
Did they not show the first few minute of the video of what was happening outside the compound before the soldiers came through the gate or did they just show the bits they wanted the public to see?
Perhaps it would have been better if the troops had just opened fire on the troublemakers outside and put an end to the trouble.
The soldiers dispensed some rough & instant justice.
A few local teenagers got roughed up because they were amongst a mob
who thought it 'sport' to throw grenades at British troops.
Let's get one thing straight, the fate of these Iraqi's and their dust bowl oil-rich country is not worth one more drop of British blood. The mistakes have been made, the lies have been told. The troops , who seem to face as much nit-picking judgemental criticism from armchair pundits as they do support from a
largely ignorant public would be better placed serving in Afghanistan, at least preventing the resurgence of the Taliban.
Globalisation eh? and technology. It teaches us all that conflict is a dirty business - surprise surprise. We should celebrate the fact that we still produce enough men of fibre & fortitude to do the bidding of our useless politicians.
The real sadness here is that their loyalty, often blind and uncompromising is mis-used in ways which sees them duffing up teenagers in Iraq. Teenagers who may have been trying to kill them just minutes earlier.
I repeat they got off lightly. Leave Iraq and leave it soon.
It's claimed to have been the birthplace of 'civilisation' well, any semblance of such 'civilisation' seems to have been thrown out with the Baath'ist water.
The vacuum left behind seems anything but 'civil' to me.
I wish the Iraqi's peace and prosperity, but my working class contemporaries in uniform have done quite enough to help them on their way.
Landmaker, I again am with you 100% on this issue, Our troops are doing a job out there, that they did not sign up for, policeing the world, our troops sign up to defend the UK and its allies sic NATO.
I would like to ask all the yellow livered do gooders in here a wee question. Have you ever served in HM Forces? If not how can you even consider condeming any of them? I consider myself fortunate, I served for 27 year in the Royal Naval Reserve, and apart from the "Falklands Crisis" where I was called up for a month, I never had to go to war. My eldest son was on 24 hour stand by to go and fight the "Argies" but it was all over too soon for him, ( Thank Goodness for his Mothers sake). Our Present armed forces at the moment are so short of recruits that yes the TA RNR & RAFA are out in Iraq, they were only supposed to be called up to defend our shore, but they are still out there doing there jobs as is Lorraine's hubby. Instead of condeming them, praise them....and get this Bush & Blair axis to bring them home, they are the Enemy!!!!!!!
Golach, I could not have put it better myself. A lot louder, a lot ruder even, but not so calmly and so eloquently.
highlander
15-Feb-06, 02:45
As a mother of one of the highlanders serving in iraq, i would just like to say landmarker and golach, i could not agree more with what u both said.
but i do have one question to JJC, u said picking random kids out of a mob and beating them is not the answer, i would like to know if u were in that situation, how would u have delt with it? The only ones who are rubbing thier hands in glee are the News of the world papers, as bad news makes better sales, odd is it not, after the pictures were shown in the papers, we get the full story next day how the troops were being set upon by mobs, but no we get the editted version, how these poor lads were dragged away, making out they were so innocent, to be battered by the british troops, i dont condone what was done, tempers are flaired, things get out of hand, the troops are there to help these people, and what do they get in return, NO thanks from a lot of u lot in here, so easy to sit at your comps, giving your thoughts, how it should be delt with, how cosy!!! how about giving a thought to the troops , who dont have the choice to say, oh plz sir i dont want to go there, it might be dangerous, they dont have the choice, they go where they are told. 20 minutes a week, they get to phone home for news, could u sort all your family probs in 20mins, somehow i doubt it, but seem to spend far more time in here giving your views, gawd help if any of your kids were out there you would have a different approach to this.
I think that no-one on this forum really approves of violence and war but it has been said that we have had two and a half wars per year for the last two thousand years.Every side in every conflict has been accused of atrocities whether it has been the Crusaders or the Japs.
We have sent troops into Iraq under false pretences and we are trying to police a country that does not want our policing. You do not send an army of fairly green troops into a situation and then complain about the way they have to do their jobs.It is very difficult, I would imagine, to remain calm and gentle when your mates are being blown to bits by an enemy that hates your very existance.
We have no right, by any standards, to be in Iraq, but soldiers are paid to carry out orders and to risk their lives in the execution of these orders, and, if a few agitators get no more than I have experienced in the hands of the British police, then too bad. C'est la guerre,n'est ce pas.
This is a far from perfect world we live in and we have to live with the imperfections no matter how they stick in the craw. As long as our revered leaders say that our boys have to stay in Iraq, we have to support them but we do not have to approve of their actions or condone them.
I live in the real world where one can see the blood and smell the excretia and can't help but think that the whole video business is a storm in a teacup
which has been stirred up by a sensation seeking,unpatriotic media machine which doesn't care a whit for the garbage it stirs up and the consequence of that stirring.
Did I say I condoned what happened? Nor do I accept the exaggerated versions of the video.
Yes there was violence used but who described it as "Child Abuse" and I think the term "beaten to a pulp" was also used though how anybody could see that from the TV screen I do not know.
Better ask the person who said it.
Now if a man beat his wife like those Iraqi children were beaten it would be called abuse wouldn't it? If a man beat his dog like those Iraqi children were beaten it would be called abuse wouldn't it? But as it was only Muslims being beaten it wasn't abuse?
My reaction before was slight exaggeration of previous reports of the Bombing of Baghdad, The terrible conditions of the Hospitals, The starving Children, the Soldiers in Falluja supposedly murdering an injured unarmed prisoner in a building which had been cleared. Pictures of wounded babies desperately in need of medical attention with wonderfully clean wound dressings on their abdomen.
Or are all they things that have never been said either?
Which was made in response to a claim that we had liberated Iraq and the Iraqi people should be grateful to us.
The American Government estimates over 30,000 Iraqi civilians dead since the invasion, more realistic estimates say over 100,000 and they still haven't told us why. That is no exageration.
Did they not show the first few minute of the video of what was happening outside the compound before the soldiers came through the gate or did they just show the bits they wanted the public to see?
I don't see it as relevant, the beatings were obviously not defencive, looked to me like they were done for revenge and enjoyment. But from the reports I read a group of Iraqi protesters went along to an Iraqi Ministry to protest about there being no jobs, or what jobs there were all going to one section of the community when they were met by British soldiers and fired on with rubber bullets. So who was to blame? The protesters for wanting jobs? The Iraqi Ministers for not providing the jobs? The British Army for firing the rubber bullets? The protesters for reacting as a mob and turning on the British Army?The militants who threw the hand granades? An Iraqi sniper who shoots American soldiers? A kidnapper who kidnaps a westener and beheads them?
No, the people who did the beatings were to blame, not the British Army, not the Iraqi people, not the children who were beaten. What happened was illegal and it was immoral, there is no justification for it.
well here we go again our troops slated. i believe this aleged incodent happened almost 2 years ago mmm. our troops are not green by any means they are very well trained and have a vast knowledge of how to do thing the right way NI was a great training ground. as for the the aleged incodent well we all get stresed and the rules of engagment dont help. to be walking the streats in any hostile enviroment is very demanding both phisicaly and mentaly with very little or no down time being on 12 hours stand by 12 hours patroling then 12 hours gaurd duty for 6 months. every time you leave the base fear and aprihention. yes young men and women they may be but they are also human. having just recently returned from iraq for the 2nd time and the last i hope you have to see to believe realy you do. since the end of the second world war britain has had only 1 year when no service personell where lost in action. our forces are constantly being asked to do more with less and our politicians seem to feel the need to go where america goes regardless i believe its called sucking up. since 9/11 the USA has in their own words become the leaders in the war on terror this from the sme country that done nothing but slate us over northern irland as for casualtys yes we have lost 100 but our great friends and leaders have lost into the thousands. should we be there NO!!!!! are we there yes should we stop hounding our people yes our support is what they need.
weeboyagee
15-Feb-06, 14:36
I would call it self defence.
From what I make of it - the British Troops in the video are attackers - not defenders? What were they defending themselves from? They had combat gear on and weapons. I did not see anything other than civilian clothes, some bare flesh and the hands on the lads being beaten.
What happened pre-camera is one thing but be under no illusion, these soldiers were attacking people with sticks, feet and the rest. Support our troops???? Sure - I support our troops and will shout it from the rafters but allow thugs to be disguised in a British Soldier's uniform to perpitrate what he would not get away with on the high streets of home and you're darn right I will not support that!
And for the rest of you who think that this is an unfortunate and typical result of a war then think again! I whole heartedly support our boys trying to mitigate in an unpleasant situation that was not their choice to mediate in but they KNOW what they sign up to and that signing automatically renders them pawns in a political game that can ultimately lead to them loosing their life. Regretably this IS a fact. I agree with golach - get them out of the situation and they will not be open to the subjections of the situation - but remain where they are and there is a standard of diplomacy and downright humanity that is not just expected of them but is demanded of them!
They are doing a great job but don't let the few spoil our vision of the many in the ranks - they know fine well what fuelling their actions have on the current situation where they are. Public support of their actions leaves us open to the ridicule of our hypocrisy that is then taken to an extreme by the Islamic extremists and used to somehow justify their terrorist activites!
Compo, you are commenting on America's self chosen place in the world game. A country which engaged in civil war to free the black man and when that war was over, joined together again to destoy the Red man.:confused:
Weeboyagee,a good post and in many ways I must agree with you. However,our soldiers are only human and in an intolerable situation. In our civilised country,young people beat each other up in our streets every other night. It seems to be the nature of the human beast these days, and they are getting away with it in our towns and cities every weekend. I would imagine that a latent propensity towards violence would be a prerequisite in someone seeking a carreer in the armed forces. Perhaps I'm wrong but I am applying logic, not emotion, in trying to reach my conclusions.
Gollach,you're right!! Get us out of there!!
Don't know how I posted twice. SORRY!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotsboy
let’s assume that they were involved in some form of public disorder. What do you think should have happened to them?
I’m starting to get the impression that you haven’t seen this video. That wouldn’t stop you from discussing the charges, but seeing it might give you a better idea of just how ‘much of a doing’ these boys were subjected to.
As for beatings with batons being meted out as punishment for being involved in ‘some form of public disorder’: are our troops not being labelled as these boys’ “liberators”? Do you think they felt ‘liberated’ as they were pinned to the ground and beaten with sticks? Do you think they felt ‘liberated’ as their cries for mercy were met with laughter and kicks? These particular soldiers are no better than those they have usurped and it sickens me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotsboy
I am not saying I agree with what happened
No, you aren’t… you are just too apathetic for what happened to bother you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotsboy
If those were English football fans being hit with batons in Germany you would be cheering the police on - whether those being hit were innocent or guilty.
Perhaps you would, but I most certainly wouldn’t.
I have seen the video JJC and it does not shock me at all.
You chose the term liberator in this instance not me – I have not used the term. It is apparent that the lads were none too happy with the presence of the troops, or were after a bit of fun hence the public disorder……..or do you think they were just taken in and beaten on a whim?
You are correct I am apathetic, because in the big scheme of things the beating is nothing – I have seen worse dished out to women by the CRS in France.
landmarker
15-Feb-06, 18:53
I live in the real world where one can see the blood and smell the excretia and can't help but think that the whole video business is a storm in a teacup
which has been stirred up by a sensation seeking,unpatriotic media machine which doesn't care a whit for the garbage it stirs up and the consequence of that stirring.
Very true.
There should be more of an outcry at the behaviour of this newspaper editor.
lorraine_2406
15-Feb-06, 19:05
Landmaker, I again am with you 100% on this issue, Our troops are doing a job out there, that they did not sign up for, policeing the world, our troops sign up to defend the UK and its allies sic NATO.
I would like to ask all the yellow livered do gooders in here a wee question. Have you ever served in HM Forces? If not how can you even consider condeming any of them? I consider myself fortunate, I served for 27 year in the Royal Naval Reserve, and apart from the "Falklands Crisis" where I was called up for a month, I never had to go to war. My eldest son was on 24 hour stand by to go and fight the "Argies" but it was all over too soon for him, ( Thank Goodness for his Mothers sake). Our Present armed forces at the moment are so short of recruits that yes the TA RNR & RAFA are out in Iraq, they were only supposed to be called up to defend our shore, but they are still out there doing there jobs as is Lorraine's hubby. Instead of condeming them, praise them....and get this Bush & Blair axis to bring them home, they are the Enemy!!!!!!!
Well said your a star
thankyou
Better ask the person who said it.
Now if a man beat his wife like those Iraqi children were beaten it would be called abuse wouldn't it? If a man beat his dog like those Iraqi children were beaten it would be called abuse wouldn't it? But as it was only Muslims being beaten it wasn't abuse?
Which was made in response to a claim that we had liberated Iraq and the Iraqi people should be grateful to us.
The American Government estimates over 30,000 Iraqi civilians dead since the invasion, more realistic estimates say over 100,000 and they still haven't told us why. That is no exaggeration.
I don't see it as relevant, the beatings were obviously not defensive, looked to me like they were done for revenge and enjoyment. But from the reports I read a group of Iraqi protesters went along to an Iraqi Ministry to protest about there being no jobs, or what jobs there were all going to one section of the community when they were met by British soldiers and fired on with rubber bullets. So who was to blame? The protesters for wanting jobs? The Iraqi Ministers for not providing the jobs? The British Army for firing the rubber bullets? The protesters for reacting as a mob and turning on the British Army? The militants who threw the hand grenades? An Iraqi sniper who shoots American soldiers? A kidnapper who kidnaps a westerner and beheads them?
No, the people who did the beatings were to blame, not the British Army, not the Iraqi people, not the children who were beaten. What happened was illegal and it was immoral, there is no justification for it.
I like the analogy to different types of beatings, fred. So any children who was killed by our military in Iraq would have been murdered.
Oh, the screams if indignation when I mentioned “Child Murderers”. All I see that as is using the same sort of distortion.
You use the emotive comparison of wife beating and child abuse. All I have suggested is that you should be brave enough to take that one step further and compare those incidents where children died to the actions of Brady and Huntley.
Well, there have been children killed in Iraq and there were children killed in this country, surely you are willing to make the same comparison as you seem quite happy to make over the emotive subjects of wife beating and child abuse.
Are you sure they were Muslims? Are their no other faiths in Iraq? Are you saying the same things have never been done to Christians in any other incidents our Soldiers have been involved in?
Has it similarly never happened to whites? Don’t bother playing the Race, Religious Bigotry Card, it’s even more outlandish than the beaten dog analogy.
The beatings were not defensive? Nobody has said they were, I certainly haven’t.
The Iraqi ministry, rubber bullets? Notice you totally ignore the fact that two days ago innocent Iraqis waiting patiently in a queue for benefits were blown to pieces by terrorists. Or were they just acting defensively because the queue threatened them.
How many of the civilians have been killed by British Soldiers? !0,000? 20,000, 50,000? 200,000? Going once! Going twice! Sold to the man in the red hat!
How many have been killed by roadside bombs and other methods used by terrorists in order to control the population so they can return to power?
I know of the figures you quote and seeing both are produced by completely biased sources I trust none of them. I am well aware of the methods used, Make up a number that suits us and insist that it's true. I also know the trick of talking about casualties to give the impression that they also count towards the total dead.
I’m afraid you have lost my with the unemployment demonstration. Are you suggesting it was caused by the actions shown on the video and would not have occurred except for that?
Why have people queuing for jobs been blown up? Unless the terrorists were trying to reduce the competition for jobs.
You made an analogy previously to the French Resistance in WW2. Did they go around blowing up French men, women and children just to create terror? Was their aim to terrorize the French people to grab power? I think by comparing them to terrorists willing to kill absolutely anybody to serve their own purpose is a great insult to them. I rather suspect that they would be horrified by the very thought of committing such acts and would have been ashamed to call themselves patriots had they done so.
And I don't recall, at any stage, justifying it.
<snip>
I would like to ask all the yellow livered do gooders in here a wee question. Have you ever served in HM Forces? If not how can you even consider condeming any of them? <snip>
I'll answer this because I suspect my attitude to this video would label me a "yellow livered do gooder" in your eyes.
No I've not served in HM Forces.
I condemn brutality of any kind, from any source.
As for being a "yellow livered do gooder" I suspect you're saying that I'm a coward for believing what I do, or maybe for not serving in the Forces. Whatever the case you don't know me and I don't know you. Personal insults aren't very constructive.
lorraine_2406
15-Feb-06, 20:07
As a mother of one of the highlanders serving in iraq, i would just like to say landmarker and golach, i could not agree more with what u both said.
but i do have one question to JJC, u said picking random kids out of a mob and beating them is not the answer, i would like to know if u were in that situation, how would u have delt with it? The only ones who are rubbing thier hands in glee are the News of the world papers, as bad news makes better sales, odd is it not, after the pictures were shown in the papers, we get the full story next day how the troops were being set upon by mobs, but no we get the editted version, how these poor lads were dragged away, making out they were so innocent, to be battered by the british troops, i dont condone what was done, tempers are flaired, things get out of hand, the troops are there to help these people, and what do they get in return, NO thanks from a lot of u lot in here, so easy to sit at your comps, giving your thoughts, how it should be delt with, how cosy!!! how about giving a thought to the troops , who dont have the choice to say, oh plz sir i dont want to go there, it might be dangerous, they dont have the choice, they go where they are told. 20 minutes a week, they get to phone home for news, could u sort all your family probs in 20mins, somehow i doubt it, but seem to spend far more time in here giving your views, gawd help if any of your kids were out there you would have a different approach to this.
Yippeeee well said mummy inlaw
hugs and kisses
from your daughter inlaw and your grandbairns xxxxxxx
We should be condemning the media and the newspaper which released the story. Due to that our British Armed Forces are in danger. Whoever released the video to the media, should have reported the incident when it took place and handed it over to the military, so that they could have dealt with rogue element of that unit there and then. And bring charges against the person involved of putting the video footage to the media.
What an online war this is turning out to be.
I’m sorry for anyone with family serving in Iraq – or Afghanistan or anywhere else particularly dangerous. Unfortunately if you join the forces you presumably do so knowing that at some point your life will be in danger. There is no conscription these days – it’s a voluntary choice of career. No-one in this country believes that the behaviour of a few bad soldiers is typical of the rest but this bad behaviour puts the lives of the rest in even more danger than before. Bullying, which is what this is taken to extremes, is wrong whatever the circumstances. Violent revenge, however tempting at the time, is also wrong. We are supposed to be a civilised country with a system of justice and it’s no good going into what we think is an uncivilised country to train new security services if we lower our own standards – why should they pay any attention?
So much has gone wrong because America and Britain claim one standard and display another. Guantanamo Bay is a disgrace – no human rights there and our Government is just as culpable as the American. More video is being released about brutality in Abu Ghraib prison. Ill treatment is not limited to a few uncontrolled soldiers, it goes right to the top. That doesn’t make it right at any level.
One thing I don’t understand – why all these photos and videos? I can sort of understand soldiers losing it and taking out their feelings on prisoners (not saying it’s right but …). What I absolutely don’t understand is why they want to record it or, having done so, when they cool down why don’t they see how dangerous the material is and immediately destroy it? Is it to show friends and family when they get home – "come round and see our holiday snaps" – or what? The soldier who took the video of the beating was apparently also doing the commentary – didn’t he wonder later whether this was actually, maybe not the best idea in the world and quick, press the delete button.
I'll answer this because I suspect my attitude to this video would label me a "yellow livered do gooder" in your eyes.
No I've not served in HM Forces.
I condemn brutality of any kind, from any source.
As for being a "yellow livered do gooder" I suspect you're saying that I'm a coward for believing what I do, or maybe for not serving in the Forces. Whatever the case you don't know me and I don't know you. Personal insults aren't very constructive.
SAVEY, I find it strange that people who condemn brutality of any kind only ever seem to complain about it when it comes to it being done by certain parties.
I have yet to hear anybody bother about the brutality in Chechnya which makes Iraq look very tame by comparison.
I wonder why that is? Why are our brave media personnel not heading for the front line there? Could it be a lack of air-conditioned hotels where they can down their whiskey and sodas whilst they prepare their reports? Or perhaps it’s just because “their only Muslims” that Chechnya is ignored.
I hear little about the brutality in parts of Africa where people have a foot chopped off and/or a hand cut off, children included, so they can't join the army to fight against terrorists. The silence about such things is deafening.
Where are the howls of outrage over that kind of brutality.
Nobody organised Marches against "Necklacing" in the Townships of South Africa. Or does putting a petrol soaked tyre round someone and burning them to death not come under the heading of "brutality"?
Or does that sort of behaviour not come under the heading of "condemn brutality of any kind, from any source."?
I would have thought that several like minded people would have posted many times about such things!
lorraine_2406
15-Feb-06, 21:56
well here we go again our troops slated. i believe this aleged incodent happened almost 2 years ago mmm. our troops are not green by any means they are very well trained and have a vast knowledge of how to do thing the right way NI was a great training ground. as for the the aleged incodent well we all get stresed and the rules of engagment dont help. to be walking the streats in any hostile enviroment is very demanding both phisicaly and mentaly with very little or no down time being on 12 hours stand by 12 hours patroling then 12 hours gaurd duty for 6 months. every time you leave the base fear and aprihention. yes young men and women they may be but they are also human. having just recently returned from iraq for the 2nd time and the last i hope you have to see to believe realy you do. since the end of the second world war britain has had only 1 year when no service personell where lost in action. our forces are constantly being asked to do more with less and our politicians seem to feel the need to go where america goes regardless i believe its called sucking up. since 9/11 the USA has in their own words become the leaders in the war on terror this from the sme country that done nothing but slate us over northern irland as for casualtys yes we have lost 100 but our great friends and leaders have lost into the thousands. should we be there NO!!!!! are we there yes should we stop hounding our people yes our support is what they need.
Well done you
SAVEY, I find it strange that people who condemn brutality of any kind only ever seem to complain about it when it comes to it being done by certain parties.
I have yet to hear anybody bother about the brutality in Chechnya which makes Iraq look very tame by comparison.
I wonder why that is? Why are our brave media personnel not heading for the front line there? Could it be a lack of air-conditioned hotels where they can down their whiskey and sodas whilst they prepare their reports? Or perhaps it’s just because “their only Muslims” that Chechnya is ignored.
I hear little about the brutality in parts of Africa where people have a foot chopped off and/or a hand cut off, children included, so they can't join the army to fight against terrorists. The silence about such things is deafening.
Where are the howls of outrage over that kind of brutality.
Nobody organised Marches against "Necklacing" in the Townships of South Africa. Or does putting a petrol soaked tyre round someone and burning them to death not come under the heading of "brutality"?
Or does that sort of behaviour not come under the heading of "condemn brutality of any kind, from any source."?
I would have thought that several like minded people would have posted many times about such things!
Start threads about those situations and I'll add my tuppence worth. Some of the situations I'm aware of and some I'm not. By the sounds of it all are horrible brutality. As it was, this thread was speaking about a specific situation which I commented on.
Just because there are no threads on these other situations doesn't mean they are any more or less vile.
wickerinca
15-Feb-06, 22:09
SAVEY, I find it strange that people who condemn brutality of any kind only ever seem to complain about it when it comes to it being done by certain parties.
I have yet to hear anybody bother about the brutality in Chechnya which makes Iraq look very tame by comparison.
I wonder why that is? Why are our brave media personnel not heading for the front line there? Could it be a lack of air-conditioned hotels where they can down their whiskey and sodas whilst they prepare their reports? Or perhaps it’s just because “their only Muslims” that Chechnya is ignored.
I hear little about the brutality in parts of Africa where people have a foot chopped off and/or a hand cut off, children included, so they can't join the army to fight against terrorists. The silence about such things is deafening.
Where are the howls of outrage over that kind of brutality.
Nobody organised Marches against "Necklacing" in the Townships of South Africa. Or does putting a petrol soaked tyre round someone and burning them to death not come under the heading of "brutality"?
Or does that sort of behaviour not come under the heading of "condemn brutality of any kind, from any source."?
I would have thought that several like minded people would have posted many times about such things!
I helped to look after a baby in the Burns Unit of the Red Cross Hospital in Cape Town South Africa in 1991. Her Mother had been necklaced for some reason.and they hadn't bothered to remove the baby from her back before her punishment was meted out. The mother's sister managed to untie the baby and took her to us. After many months there was some slight improvement but that little girl was badly scarred for life and though this is an awful thing to say, it might have been best if she had perished. There was no-one to look after her and she was an outcast.
Where were your cries of indignation then? Everyone in the world was happy because Nelson Mandela was released and South Africa was saved. It is easy to sit in the comfort of your armchair and use words like "condemn brutality of any kind, from any source ".....but let me ask you this. Who were the most brutal?........The men and women who necklaced that mother or the two policemen who went to her aid and beat off the crowd with their batons, hands and feet thus allowing the aunt to get to the child? Can you imagine the screams?........the smells? It is a brutal world.
I helped to look after a baby in the Burns Unit of the Red Cross Hospital in Cape Town South Africa in 1991. Her Mother had been necklaced for some reason.and they hadn't bothered to remove the baby from her back before her punishment was meted out. The mother's sister managed to untie the baby and took her to us. After many months there was some slight improvement but that little girl was badly scarred for life and though this is an awful thing to say, it might have been best if she had perished. There was no-one to look after her and she was an outcast.
Where were your cries of indignation then? Everyone in the world was happy because Nelson Mandela was released and South Africa was saved. It is easy to sit in the comfort of your armchair and use words like "condemn brutality of any kind, from any source ".....but let me ask you this. Who were the most brutal?........The men and women who necklaced that mother or the two policemen who went to her aid and beat off the crowd with their batons, hands and feet thus allowing the aunt to get to the child? Can you imagine the screams?........the smells? It is a brutal world.
Brutality is defined as: the trait of extreme cruelty, The state or quality of being ruthless, cruel, harsh, or unrelenting.
A ruthless, cruel, harsh, or unrelenting act.
The policemen's act was not a brutal act. So my answer would be the men and women who "necklaced" that mother.
Brutality is defined as: the trait of extreme cruelty, The state or quality of being ruthless, cruel, harsh, or unrelenting.
A ruthless, cruel, harsh, or unrelenting act.
The policemen's act was not a brutal act. So my answer would be the men and women who "necklaced" that mother.
That still does not answer Wickerinca's question about the lack of indignation.
Where were the demonstrations about the behaviour of the "Football Team" and others carrying out such acts?
I certainly do not remember them, can anybody tell me when they were? Neither do I remember a certain Minister of the Crown who has previously had a great deal to say about South Africa condemning that sort of brutality.
I don't recall any cries of indignation when there was a picture of a man being shot in the head in Rwanda because the soldier there took pity on his pleas for him to do that rather than die by the usual humane method of being hacked to pieces by a mob with machetes after a lengthy period of torture.
Everybody knew what was happening because instructions were given out on the radio there as to how to slash people so that death would be certain but would last over several excruciatingly painful days just so the thugs had the enjoyment of knowing it would not be a quick death.
Where is the hold-up at the UN over what is happening in the south of Sudan? Who is stopping the UN from carrying out a proper intervention so rape and murder can be committed to force people to flee where they live?
Why are the people who are so willing to fuss and fret over a beating not in the least bit concerned about that sort of behaviour?
These acts are not a quick two minute beating, however wrong that may have been, but “ruthless, cruel, harsh and unrelenting acts” which have been going on for years and in some cases are still going on all day every day.
But that is of no interest, the Brits and Yanks are not committing those acts so who cares! It’s nothing to do with us.
Just who is blocking a concerted UN intervention in Sudan, can somebody please tell me?
SAVEY, didn't you bring into the thread "brutality from any source"?
wickerinca
16-Feb-06, 00:02
Brutality is defined as: the trait of extreme cruelty, The state or quality of being ruthless, cruel, harsh, or unrelenting.
A ruthless, cruel, harsh, or unrelenting act.
The policemen's act was not a brutal act. So my answer would be the men and women who "necklaced" that mother.
So you do not consider the harsh beatings that these policemen had to inflict on some of the crowd to gain control over the situation, to be brutality in any form. By all accounts, and that includes the statements by the policemen themselves and by the aunt (who vanished off the face of the earth a few days later. I hope that she fled and is safe somewhere but that did not appear to be the consensus of opinion)...they had to severely beat two or three of the ringleaders. I might add that the policemen would probably have been wearing the standard issue black leather boot and it would be fairly reasonable to assume that the men or women who were beaten would not have been wearing any footwear as that was quite normal for many South Sfrican residents...my sons included if they got away with it.
That still does not answer Wickerinca's question about the lack of indignation.
Where were the demonstrations about the behaviour of the "Football Team" and others carrying out such acts?
I certainly do not remember them, can anybody tell me when they were? Neither do I remember a certain Minister of the Crown who has previously had a great deal to say about South Africa condemning that sort of brutality.
I don't recall any cries of indignation when there was a picture of a man being shot in the head in Rwanda because the soldier there took pity on his pleas for him to do that rather than die by the usual humane method of being hacked to pieces by a mob with machetes after a lengthy period of torture.
Everybody knew what was happening because instructions were given out on the radio there as to how to slash people so that death would be certain but would last over several excruciatingly painful days just so the thugs had the enjoyment of knowing it would not be a quick death.
Where is the hold-up at the UN over what is happening in the south of Sudan? Who is stopping the UN from carrying out a proper intervention so rape and murder can be committed to force people to flee where they live?
Why are the people who are so willing to fuss and fret over a beating not in the least bit concerned about that sort of behaviour?
These acts are not a quick two minute beating, however wrong that may have been, but “ruthless, cruel, harsh and unrelenting acts” which have been going on for years and in some cases are still going on all day every day.
But that is of no interest, the Brits and Yanks are not committing those acts so who cares! It’s nothing to do with us.
Just who is blocking a concerted UN intervention in Sudan, can somebody please tell me?
SAVEY, didn't you bring into the thread "brutality from any source"?
Yes, and if there were threads on them then I would express my feelings on them. But I suppose it could be summed up in "I condemn brutality of any kind, from any source." My "indignation" is for all acts of brutality. However, this thread was about just one. Feel free to start a thread about some of the others if you want. Am I really being unreasonable about this or not answering the questions put to me?
So you do not consider the harsh beatings that these policemen had to inflict on some of the crowd to gain control over the situation, to be brutality in any form. By all accounts, and that includes the statements by the policemen themselves and by the aunt (who vanished off the face of the earth a few days later. I hope that she fled and is safe somewhere but that did not appear to be the consensus of opinion)...they had to severely beat two or three of the ringleaders. I might add that the policemen would probably have been wearing the standard issue black leather boot and it would be fairly reasonable to assume that the men or women who were beaten would not have been wearing any footwear as that was quite normal for many South Sfrican residents...my sons included if they got away with it.
I don't know anything about this situation apart from what you've told me. It sounds like a nightmare. Having to "severely beat two or three of the ring leaders" is awful, I wouldn't like to be caught in that type of situation. Whether the beatings they were given were "cruel" or "harsh" I don't know is the honest answer.
I'm probably not in a position to judge that. My instinct, which could be way off, is that it sounds like a "heat of the moment," rather than a premeditated act.
Yes, and if there were threads on them then I would express my feelings on them. But I suppose it could be summed up in "I condemn brutality of any kind, from any source." My "indignation" is for all acts of brutality. However, this thread was about just one. Feel free to start a thread about some of the others if you want. Am I really being unreasonable about this or not answering the questions put to me?
Not unreasonable in the leased, just rather selective in the choice of what offends you.
Suddenly, despite the widening of the thread, and not only be me, it suddenly becomes narrowed back to one incident, lasting less than two minutes, which is turned into the most horrific act perpetrated in the world in the last two years.
If you cannot cope with more than one small incident on the thread others seem perfectly capable of doing so.
Are you suggesting that the videoed incident is the worst piece of violence you have ever seen and compared with the other mentioned?
Where does the incident come on a scale of say one to a hundred on the scale of violence you seem so concerned about?
Scale it from a small tap as one and feeding somebody feet first through a meat grinder at one hundred.
Where would you place the "Child Abuse" and "Beating to a Pulp" carried out by the ruthless British Soldiers?
Just so I can judge the extent of your horror at their behaviour, just how violent were they being so I can know how guilty I should feel about supporting such monsters.
I can't cope with feeling less guilty that I should, it distresses me!
wickerinca
16-Feb-06, 00:29
I don't know anything about this situation apart from what you've told me. It sounds like a nightmare. Having to "severely beat two or three of the ring leaders" is awful, I wouldn't like to be caught in that type of situation. Whether the beatings they were given were "cruel" or "harsh" I don't know is the honest answer.
I'm probably not in a position to judge that. My instinct, which could be way off, is that it sounds like a "heat of the moment," rather than a premeditated act.
My impression from the policemen was that it was something they had to do to take control and that it was not all that unusual for them...therefore I would not say it was entirely heat of the moment............merely taking control and making their presence felt.
You wouldn't happen to be a lawyer by any chance?
I'll answer this because I suspect my attitude to this video would label me a "yellow livered do gooder" in your eyes.
No I've not served in HM Forces.
I condemn brutality of any kind, from any source.
As for being a "yellow livered do gooder" I suspect you're saying that I'm a coward for believing what I do, or maybe for not serving in the Forces. Whatever the case you don't know me and I don't know you. Personal insults aren't very constructive.
Ehhm excuse me Savey did I mention your name? No I dont think so?
But if you wish to take it as a personal insult, by all means please go ahead. How can serving in any of HM Forces be a sign of brutality? I served in the reserves for 27 years and never hit anyone. I shouted at and put a few on punishment, that was my job. I trained New Entry Ratings at HMS Scotia and whilst I was the CPO in charge, I had more good awards won by my ratings than any other chief.
My post was a show of my personal disgust in the posters in here who are condeming our troops. This Video is two years old so forget it, move on, Stop Condeming Our Troops
Not unreasonable in the leased, just rather selective in the choice of what offends you.
Suddenly, despite the widening of the thread, and not only be me, it suddenly becomes narrowed back to one incident, lasting less than two minutes, which is turned into the most horrific act perpetrated in the world in the last two years.
If you cannot cope with more than one small incident on the thread others seem perfectly capable of doing so.
Are you suggesting that the videoed incident is the worst piece of violence you have ever seen and compared with the other mentioned?
Where does the incident come on a scale of say one to a hundred on the scale of violence you seem so concerned about?
Scale it from a small tap as one and feeding somebody feet first through a meat grinder at one hundred.
Where would you place the "Child Abuse" and "Beating to a Pulp" carried out by the ruthless British Soldiers?
Just so I can judge the extent of your horror at their behaviour, just how violent were they being so I can know how guilty I should feel about supporting such monsters.
I can't cope with feeling less guilty that I should, it distresses me!
I could address each of the situations you have raised and give my personal comments on each of them, but the fact is I don't know all the details about each of them. I don't feel I'm being selective. If it were Iraqis beating British troops that I'd seen graphically on my TV it wouldn't have changed my reaction. I'm bringing it back to the one subject as that was the reason I posted my comments in the first place. I'd feel just as strongly about any of the situations you have raised if I seen them graphically on TV. A scale of disgust for violence is difficult, I can only react to a real situation as it's presented to me.
I think the video has been given the 'Michael Moore style' of editing treatment. I saw a documentary about Michael Moore and how he 'edited' snippets to make Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 911. Basically, he could make anyone seem to say anything or put anything out of context.
My impression from the policemen was that it was something they had to do to take control and that it was not all that unusual for them...therefore I would not say it was entirely heat of the moment............merely taking control and making their presence felt.
You wouldn't happen to be a lawyer by any chance?
It would be cool cold and calculated. You count the number of rounds you have with you, you assess the situation, and you start beating in the hope that when the mob come to kill you that you have enough bullets to fire in the hope that they give up before they necklace you as well.
Of course, you could always stand back, do nothing and wait until the persons dead and the crowd goes away.
Of course, if the news decides not to show the necklacing then it is sheer, unprovoked police brutality!
It depends on how the Media wish it to be interpreted and peoples views on the overall situation.
My impression from the policemen was that it was something they had to do to take control and that it was not all that unusual for them...therefore I would not say it was entirely heat of the moment............merely taking control and making their presence felt.
You wouldn't happen to be a lawyer by any chance?
LOL no I'm not.
I'm willing to listen and change my view if anyone can give me a real reason why I should suppress my revulsion at seeing the violence in said video and instead support it.
Ehhm excuse me Savey did I mention your name? No I dont think so?
But if you wish to take it as a personal insult, by all means please go ahead. How can serving in any of HM Forces be a sign of brutality? I served in the reserves for 27 years and never hit anyone. I shouted at and put a few on punishment, that was my job. I trained New Entry Ratings at HMS Scotia and whilst I was the CPO in charge, I had more good awards won by my ratings than any other chief.
My post was a show of my personal disgust in the posters in here who are condeming our troops. This Video is two years old so forget it, move on, Stop Condeming Our Troops
My two comments were unrelated...ie. "I haven't served in HM Forces."
Then in answer to your question as to how I could condemn them......"I condemn brutality of any sort" etc. etc. I wasn't saying that serving in HM Forces was in itself a sign of brutality.
SAVEY, I find it strange that people who condemn brutality of any kind only ever seem to complain about it when it comes to it being done by certain parties.
I have yet to hear anybody bother about the brutality in Chechnya which makes Iraq look very tame by comparison.
I wonder why that is? Why are our brave media personnel not heading for the front line there? Could it be a lack of air-conditioned hotels where they can down their whiskey and sodas whilst they prepare their reports? Or perhaps it’s just because “their only Muslims” that Chechnya is ignored.
I hear little about the brutality in parts of Africa where people have a foot chopped off and/or a hand cut off, children included, so they can't join the army to fight against terrorists. The silence about such things is deafening.
Where are the howls of outrage over that kind of brutality.
Nobody organised Marches against "Necklacing" in the Townships of South Africa. Or does putting a petrol soaked tyre round someone and burning them to death not come under the heading of "brutality"?
Or does that sort of behaviour not come under the heading of "condemn brutality of any kind, from any source."?
I would have thought that several like minded people would have posted many times about such things!
But I haven't seen anyone condoning or excusing any of the things you mention, start a thread and howl if you like and everyone will agree with you but I see no point in that. Why organise a march against something everyone agrees is wrong? What is the point of marching with plackards to put your point across when everyone has the same point of view as you?
It is because the soldiers in the video were British that nationalist feelings and percieved loyalties creep in and distort peoples perception to varying degrees, people don't argue against the beatings because the soldiers were British it is because the soldiers were British that people see what happened differently.
I'm willing to listen and change my view if anyone can give me a real reason why I should suppress my revulsion at seeing the violence in said video and instead support it.
Don't read on if you are easily distressed.
What will your reaction be to real violence then. I mean the type that the Media are too squeamish to show? Things which have occurred in the British Isles. Next time you see the scene after a bomb has gone off remember that before the scene you are shown on TV was cleaned up some body has been round to do that. You will not see people using buckets and shovels to remove the remains, the trying to decide which bit of arm or leg goes with which body. Nor will you see the mess which can't be collected that was swilled away with hoses.
Knee-capping? You don't use a gun. you take an electric drill with a large bit and you start at the back of the knee. (I'm sure you get the picture)
Violence, the term "skinned alive" is not just a term, there is a technique to doing it so you don't cut any blood vessels so the victim does not die before you have done what you want in order to torture him.
Not in some far flung spot, not by "thugs" in the British Army, but in the British Isles none the less.
In view of you revulsion at the video, what term would you use to describe that sort of brutality even though it is not mentioned in the original post?
How would you like to live wondering if opening your car door might just be the last thing you do, not once, not twice, but over months and months.
Not in some foreign dispute but here, in mainland Britain.
How revolting do you find that sort of thing? Next time you walk up to your car, try and imagine that it might just be the last thing you do and afterward somebody will be moving you with that bucket and shovel, and don't forget about the hosepipe!
And don't think when you drive off down the road that you are safe because the real professionals for the bomb with a timer or a trembler to make sure you really are in the car.
Now, tell me about violence, I'll be happy to hear your version.
As I have said before, the beatings should not have happened but they need to be spoken of in context and not by some of the hysterical descriptions on here.
It that video is anybodies idea of an extreme of violence than they really should open their eyes, ears and minds.
It is because the soldiers in the video were British that nationalist feelings and percieved loyalties creep in and distort peoples perception to varying degrees, people don't argue against the beatings because the soldiers were British it is because the soldiers were British that people see what happened differently.
I quite agree fred, some people cannot bear to think of The British Military in any other terms.
I have not said that they are right, they should not have done what they did, but some people are so blinkered that all they ever do is watch and wait to see when the next opportunity arises to portray them in a bad light.
Strange thing i, the same people are never there cheering when they do something decent because the could not stomach the thought!
To say people are just acting out of "Blind British Imperialist Patriotism", (I forget the latest chant, I stopped listening when Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh" and "Che Lives" started to bore me to tears) is just simplistic.
Some people are reacting for certain other ideologies if that be the case.
They simple changed, "My Country Right or Wrong" into "My Country's Always Wrong!"
Been there, seen it, heard it! And after Fifty years it's still the same weary worn out old song.
I've heard the same mantra chanted almost constantly since Cyprus. I'm a little too young to remember Korea, the Forgotten War, but I’m told by those who were that the same voices were heard.
The same sorry sounding voices have started to complain we were nasty to those nice supporters of Hitler in World War Two and that the British slaughtered innocent civilians for the fun of it. .
Just when have the British Armed Forces managed to do anything right?
Refresh my memory, I seem to have forgotten when I heard anything like that said by those decrying the troops on the video.
I like the analogy to different types of beatings, fred. So any children who was killed by our military in Iraq would have been murdered.
Oh, the screams if indignation when I mentioned “Child Murderers”. All I see that as is using the same sort of distortion.
You use the emotive comparison of wife beating and child abuse. All I have suggested is that you should be brave enough to take that one step further and compare those incidents where children died to the actions of Brady and Huntley.
Well, there have been children killed in Iraq and there were children killed in this country, surely you are willing to make the same comparison as you seem quite happy to make over the emotive subjects of wife beating and child abuse.
Sorry to quote myself, but you seemed to have missed answering the question on my previous post, so I’ve shown it again for your convenience.
I see no point in replying to any of the posts on this thread since my last post. I tend to agree and disagree with virtually every one and find it very hard to debate this situation when I can see the pros and cons in everyone's point of view.The violence is endemic and,in itself, cannot be cured. Is it inherent in our genetic make-up or something that has developed as we have evolved?
The violence in Iraq which started this thread is,in itself nothing. I once saw a man, inebriated, being carried into a police station. He managed,by some acrobatic means, to kick one of the constables in the head at which point he was dropped to the ground and had two hefty knees in the groin resulting in a ruptured testicle. Iraq,Palestine South Africa, NO, it was in Durness Street in Thurso and I was the unfortunate drunk. This sort of violence takes place every wekend up and down the country,indeed anywhere there are unruly young people acting the man and flouting authority. Why ignore this and make such a song and dance over the video in question. Very fortuitous,the release of the Americans acting like animals. This really helps to take the pressure of our little problem.
I must agree with Jaws,however, when he talks about the problems in Rwanda, Sudan, Chechnya etc. There we find real problems that are on the whole created by the colonial powers who plundered and raped Africa and the left her to bleed. and the uncensured violence of the Mafia controlled Government of Russia.Now we are trying to take control of the Middle East and when we of the West withdraw from that mess I am sure we will leave immense problems for those who will have to pick up the pieces.
The question we must ask ourselves is what in the heck we are doing in sticking our noses into the affairs of other countries who obviously don't want our help.and what we must do to get out of the situation we have created. We of the West armed Saddam and put him in power so that he could keep Iran occupied. We should have got rid of him in 1991. We didn't for some reason and the people of Iraq paid the price.
Bring home the British army from every where and let us concentrate on the problems we have at home.We haven't got the resources in money and manpower to maintain the roll we have chosen globally and it is high time the British patriotic EGO was put to rest and we realise how small and innefective we now are on a world stage without our buddys in the U.S.A.The problem with being a bully beater is that you eventually get beaten. I don't think the people of the West are really prepared for what is coming. Imsh'Allah!!!!!
I call it a good clip around the earhole....British army style.
When I was young that is what we would have got from the local bobby for scrumping.But times have changed and not always for the better.I think it's about time our troops were withdrawn and let the Iraqis get on with life post Sadaam.They'll either revert to there former lives or carve out a better one.It's up to them.
wickerinca
16-Feb-06, 03:10
I could address each of the situations you have raised and give my personal comments on each of them, but the fact is I don't know all the details about each of them. I don't feel I'm being selective. If it were Iraqis beating British troops that I'd seen graphically on my TV it wouldn't have changed my reaction. I'm bringing it back to the one subject as that was the reason I posted my comments in the first place. I'd feel just as strongly about any of the situations you have raised if I seen them graphically on TV. A scale of disgust for violence is difficult, I can only react to a real situation as it's presented to me.
So you only react to violence that you see on your TV?...and to a real situation? ....but we do not know what happened before or after this two minutes so how can you judge these soldiers? Have you been in a situation where you have feared for your life because of the actions of people around you? Have you lived in constant fear for weeks on end? I cannot condone what these men did but I do not condemn them either. I have never been in a position anything like what they face on a day to day basis so I do not think that I have the right to judge them.
I do think that I have the right to judge the media, I believe that it was the News of the World that stirred it up this time, and I find them falling well short on commonsense and working for the common good!
I could address each of the situations you have raised and give my personal comments on each of them, but the fact is I don't know all the details about each of them. I don't feel I'm being selective. If it were Iraqis beating British troops that I'd seen graphically on my TV it wouldn't have changed my reaction. I'm bringing it back to the one subject as that was the reason I posted my comments in the first place. I'd feel just as strongly about any of the situations you have raised if I seen them graphically on TV. A scale of disgust for violence is difficult, I can only react to a real situation as it's presented to me.
Savey, one two minute clip arouses your indignation yet you seem to have missed media coverage of the whole of Apartheid (over about three decades), the coverage of the Genocide in Rwanda (the aftermath is still going on), and the current well documented civil war in Sudan.
I am surprised,
Next you will be telling me you have never heard of Tiananmen Square. To refresh your memory that is the one with the lone Chinese Student standing in front of a long line of Tanks.
They were there to ask a crowd of unarmed students, "Would you kindly like to go home, please." That was just before the non-violent shooting started.
Nobody knows the death toll because the Chinese tend not to video such things. The person who videoed the student was risking his life by doing so.
Would you like to express your disgust on the thread I started about the wounded Policewoman in Nottingham only there doesn't seem to be a video of that so you might be unable to decide.
Don't read on if you are easily distressed.
What will your reaction be to real violence then. I mean the type that the Media are too squeamish to show? Things which have occurred in the British Isles. Next time you see the scene after a bomb has gone off remember that before the scene you are shown on TV was cleaned up some body has been round to do that. You will not see people using buckets and shovels to remove the remains, the trying to decide which bit of arm or leg goes with which body. Nor will you see the mess which can't be collected that was swilled away with hoses.
Knee-capping? You don't use a gun. you take an electric drill with a large bit and you start at the back of the knee. (I'm sure you get the picture)
Violence, the term "skinned alive" is not just a term, there is a technique to doing it so you don't cut any blood vessels so the victim does not die before you have done what you want in order to torture him.
Not in some far flung spot, not by "thugs" in the British Army, but in the British Isles none the less.
In view of you revulsion at the video, what term would you use to describe that sort of brutality even though it is not mentioned in the original post?
Disgusting. Inhuman.
How would you like to live wondering if opening your car door might just be the last thing you do, not once, not twice, but over months and months.
Not in some foreign dispute but here, in mainland Britain.
How revolting do you find that sort of thing? Next time you walk up to your car, try and imagine that it might just be the last thing you do and afterward somebody will be moving you with that bucket and shovel, and don't forget about the hosepipe!
And don't think when you drive off down the road that you are safe because the real professionals for the bomb with a timer or a trembler to make sure you really are in the car.
Now, tell me about violence, I'll be happy to hear your version.
As I have said before, the beatings should not have happened but they need to be spoken of in context and not by some of the hysterical descriptions on here.
It that video is anybodies idea of an extreme of violence than they really should open their eyes, ears and minds.
Who decides the degrees of violence but us individually? Our personal reaction to a given situation.
When I see someone being kicked in the groin I cringe, I don't say "hold on a minute, lets not get carried away here! That kick looked painful, but it's not like he's been knee capped with a drill!"
To suggest that we should compare evey piece of violence on Earth with the most extreme violence on Earth is unreasonable.
A teacher repeatly slapping the face of a young pupil would provoke as much of a reaction from me as any of the situations you have mentioned. It's not necessarily the extremity of the violence but all the nuances of a given situation that we perceive.
So you only react to violence that you see on your TV?...and to a real situation? ....but we do not know what happened before or after this two minutes so how can you judge these soldiers? Have you been in a situation where you have feared for your life because of the actions of people around you? Have you lived in constant fear for weeks on end? I cannot condone what these men did but I do not condemn them either. I have never been in a position anything like what they face on a day to day basis so I do not think that I have the right to judge them.
I do think that I have the right to judge the media, I believe that it was the News of the World that stirred it up this time, and I find them falling well short on commonsense and working for the common good!
Has a judge or jury ever been in the same position as a murderer? In most cases no. You don't have to stick your hand in the fire to know that you'll get burned. If you do not condone or condemn their actions how did you react to the video?
Savey, one two minute clip arouses your indignation yet you seem to have missed media coverage of the whole of Apartheid (over about three decades), the coverage of the Genocide in Rwanda (the aftermath is still going on), and the current well documented civil war in Sudan.
I am surprised, I'm aware of these situations. Apartheid is a whole other issue altogether. The genocide in Rwanda, doesn't bear thinking about. It's just incredibly horrible. I've heard it said that blood is the fertilizer of the African soil. Unfortunatly violent death in Sudan is nothing new.
Next you will be telling me you have never heard of Tiananmen Square. To refresh your memory that is the one with the lone Chinese Student standing in front of a long line of Tanks.
They were there to ask a crowd of unarmed students, "Would you kindly like to go home, please." That was just before the non-violent shooting started.
Nobody knows the death toll because the Chinese tend not to video such things. The person who videoed the student was risking his life by doing so.
Another terrible situation that is staggering in its potential scale.
Would you like to express your disgust on the thread I started about the wounded Policewoman in Nottingham only there doesn't seem to be a video of that so you might be unable to decide.
Gladly.
I'm totally in agreement with Savey on this question.
I think you're missing the point, Jaws. The Americans and British went into Iraq with the message that we are civilised countries which obey the rule of law and, once the WMD myth was exposed, the justification given by our rulers was that we had at least managed to get rid of a cruel tyrant and we would introduce democracy to this benighted country. All the security forces in Iraq were disbanded as either suspect or not up to our high standards.
Every time our forces show that a few of them (and it is only a few) are not capable of giving the example they are supposed to be giving and are showing themselves to be no better than Saddam's thugs, we lose the whole argument and justification for being there. I would be more hopeful if those at the top of the command chain were being held to account but that doesn't seem to be happening.
We can hold up our hands in shock and horror at the terrible things that happen all round the world until the cows come home. This is a specific situation and is not comparable with Sudan, S.Africa, Chechnya or anywhere else where violence, torture etc. are common. America and Britain state over and over again that they are civilised countries which do not use torture. Actions speak louder than words.
Oh dear where to start???
In my working life I have been spat at, threatened, had pieces of furniture thrown at me and never batted an eyelid – I like to think I don’t scare easily. On Monday I had the most appalling phone call which threatened me in a crude and vicious way by a man who knew both my name and where I lived but whose voice I didn’t recognise. This succeeded in sending me running home in tears terrified for the safety of my children. What does this tell me? It tells me that if a phone call sends me home so distressed I couldn’t do the job that the soldiers in Iraq do; I wouldn’t want to do the job and I would be terrified faced with a violent mob. I don’t believe I have the right to make a judgment about the violence the video showed if I have no understanding of the context in which the actions took place. I don’t believe the media are interested in showing that context – they are simply interested in selected salacious highlights. They have no responsibility and care nothing for the rights and wrongs of the situation.
Whislt the video makes me flinch Jaws is right that there are far worse things going on in the world and in our own country at that. Savey is also right in that we can only judge by our own experiences and opinions but then Jaws has probably seen many of the things he mentions at first hand and Savey probably hasn’t. Gleber2 says we should wind our necks in and refuse to “interfere” in world affairs. I don’t believe he is right about this. We have to stand up and be counted and the best way to do this would be through making the United Nations take a proper and forceful role as the worlds policemen. However in the absence of this we must not stop taking a stand – we might not always get it right but we have to stand up and be counted. The alternative is to turn a blind eye and that is not acceptable either. If no one else is prepared to do it then we should - just as in the other thread about thugs in Wick people are saying we have to take a stand – it’s a similar thing but on a global scale.
The video is just that a two minute video of a situation about which we have no idea and we have no context to allow us to judge. The soldiers are doing a good job in a difficult situation - a job none of us want to do ourselves – thank goodness there are people still prepared to do this work in spite of our belittling their achievements and actions at every available opportunity
weeboyagee
16-Feb-06, 14:36
Hey you guys - that means my cronnie partners in crime as well......(cronnie as in caithness.org cronnies, squidge, golach, jaws, jjc, etc..... not as in golach's age cronnies - sorry golach :D) are you loosing your sense of proprotion about this??
The posts are steadily getting more intense as this debate wrangles on but reading most, if not all of the posts, there is a lot that can be understood as reasonable about most of them.
The video is a clip. We do not know what happened in it's entirity, either before, after or even during the clip (like what was still going on over the wall or with the crowd elsewhere). We cannot judge (I agree with squidge on that one) but we can sure as heck have an opinion on the actions at that time. To allow it to boil over into all the diversity that has spun from it - the brutality of troops, the right to be in iraq, the iraqi people as a whole, whether we served in the armed forces or not - is allowing ourselves to be drawn into a debate much greater than it deserves to be given the original subject matter (crikey - I feel a bit of saxovtr coming on here!!!)
Seriously though,....... I still believe that from what we saw, the actions of the troops were a poor spectacle for the world to see of Britains representatives in a role of policing - but OF COURSE our opinions will alter depending on the level of facts that come available - and until they are made available we are expanding the debate depending on the level of personal attack that we are taking from the posts!!
Chill you guys! It's a big bad world - but there are some wonderful people in it - our troops are part of those guys and so are a lot of the iraqi people.
As golach says - it was years ago - have your say and move on. Yawn......zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz - finish your lunch WBG :cool:
I'm totally in agreement with Savey on this question.
I think you're missing the point, Jaws. The Americans and British went into Iraq with the message that we are civilised countries which obey the rule of law and, once the WMD myth was exposed, the justification given by our rulers was that we had at least managed to get rid of a cruel tyrant and we would introduce democracy to this benighted country. All the security forces in Iraq were disbanded as either suspect or not up to our high standards.
Every time our forces show that a few of them (and it is only a few) are not capable of giving the example they are supposed to be giving and are showing themselves to be no better than Saddam's thugs, we lose the whole argument and justification for being there. I would be more hopeful if those at the top of the command chain were being held to account but that doesn't seem to be happening.
We can hold up our hands in shock and horror at the terrible things that happen all round the world until the cows come home. This is a specific situation and is not comparable with Sudan, S.Africa, Chechnya or anywhere else where violence, torture etc. are common. America and Britain state over and over again that they are civilised countries which do not use torture. Actions speak louder than words.
Are you saying that it only matters because it is British Troops and that the other places mentioned are not worth bothering about? It's alright for other countries to do the most atrocious things as a matter of policy but a few British squaddies behaving badly is beyond tolerance?
When they start digging up mass graves containing hundreds of bodies that we have hidden then you can compare our actions to Saddam's Thugs.
Are you seriously saying that all those Thugs did is hand out the odd 90 seconds long bearings averaging about ten blows for each of the Iraqis concerned?
When Tony Blair's son walks up to somebody in a room full of people, puts a gun to somebody's head and blows his brains out then carries on as if nothing had happened then I will accept your comparisons with Iraq.
The media here are far more interested in Saddam's rantings in Court than reporting the evidence of the witnesses to atrocities carried out by his Thugs. The victims don't matter, what Saddam is wearing is more important.
That just shows how interested we are in atrocities when a fashion show becomes the most important report on the news.
The trouble is that we do not hold our hands up in shock and horror at the terrible things in the rest of the world because, if we do not see them on TV, then who cares, they don't exist.
We can happily carry on in our comfortable lives thinking that a few dozen blows are the most disgraceful thing we have ever heard of.
What a smug, self-satisfied, tub-thumping set of moralising hypocrites we are!
When Iraq's do this to there own, are you saying our troops are worse?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4719252.stm
You have not lost your touch,O Master of the Diatribe.
wickerinca
16-Feb-06, 16:21
Has a judge or jury ever been in the same position as a murderer? In most cases no. You don't have to stick your hand in the fire to know that you'll get burned. If you do not condone or condemn their actions how did you react to the video?
It left me unmoved.......there I've said it. I'm a horrible, hard-hearted witch!
It did not affect me to a point that I felt I needed to make an issue of it. It is a war zone..........whether we like it or not!.........and in war 'poop' happens. It was two years ago.
Just wonder who is pulling the strings here?
Are you saying that it only matters because it is British Troops and that the other places mentioned are not worth bothering about? It's alright for other countries to do the most atrocious things as a matter of policy but a few British squaddies behaving badly is beyond tolerance?
When they start digging up mass graves containing hundreds of bodies that we have hidden then you can compare our actions to Saddam's Thugs.
Are you seriously saying that all those Thugs did is hand out the odd 90 seconds long bearings averaging about ten blows for each of the Iraqis concerned?
When Tony Blair's son walks up to somebody in a room full of people, puts a gun to somebody's head and blows his brains out then carries on as if nothing had happened then I will accept your comparisons with Iraq.
The media here are far more interested in Saddam's rantings in Court than reporting the evidence of the witnesses to atrocities carried out by his Thugs. The victims don't matter, what Saddam is wearing is more important.
That just shows how interested we are in atrocities when a fashion show becomes the most important report on the news.
The trouble is that we do not hold our hands up in shock and horror at the terrible things in the rest of the world because, if we do not see them on TV, then who cares, they don't exist.
We can happily carry on in our comfortable lives thinking that a few dozen blows are the most disgraceful thing we have ever heard of.
What a smug, self-satisfied, tub-thumping set of moralising hypocrites we are!
A shark will bite into flesh of its victims with a vice-like grip. It will wriggle and wriggle until eventually it tears a lump of flesh off.
As I was reading this post I could almost hear the "JAWS" music in the background. Well done Jaws, your opinions on this subject reached a stunning climax there. Composed like a work of art.
That aside what would we be doing in a practical sense to not be classed as, "smug, self-satisfied, tub-thumping set of moralising hypocrites?"
It left me unmoved.......there I've said it. I'm a horrible, hard-hearted witch!
Wow there! Easy now! Everyone's entitled to their opinion.
It did not affect me to a point that I felt I needed to make an issue of it. It is a war zone..........whether we like it or not!.........and in war 'poop' happens. It was two years ago.
Just wonder who is pulling the strings here?
The time difference makes little or no difference to me. I seen it on Friday.
I respect your point of view however and agree that in war bad things happen.
wickerinca
16-Feb-06, 17:59
I was quite composed when I called myself a witch...........it is unfortunate that here isn't a 'smiley' for a shrug:grin:
I respect that you have your own opinions and I think that we will just have to agree to disagree on some issues as I do not suppose that any amount of debating can change some deeply held beliefs....and I am not in the torture business:grin:
Are you saying that it only matters because it is British Troops and that the other places mentioned are not worth bothering about? It's alright for other countries to do the most atrocious things as a matter of policy but a few British squaddies behaving badly is beyond tolerance?
When they start digging up mass graves containing hundreds of bodies that we have hidden then you can compare our actions to Saddam's Thugs.
Are you seriously saying that all those Thugs did is hand out the odd 90 seconds long bearings averaging about ten blows for each of the Iraqis concerned?
When Tony Blair's son walks up to somebody in a room full of people, puts a gun to somebody's head and blows his brains out then carries on as if nothing had happened then I will accept your comparisons with Iraq.
The media here are far more interested in Saddam's rantings in Court than reporting the evidence of the witnesses to atrocities carried out by his Thugs. The victims don't matter, what Saddam is wearing is more important.
That just shows how interested we are in atrocities when a fashion show becomes the most important report on the news.
The trouble is that we do not hold our hands up in shock and horror at the terrible things in the rest of the world because, if we do not see them on TV, then who cares, they don't exist.
We can happily carry on in our comfortable lives thinking that a few dozen blows are the most disgraceful thing we have ever heard of.
What a smug, self-satisfied, tub-thumping set of moralising hypocrites we are!
Oh come on Jaws, if you read what I was saying you would know that wasn't it. I'm sure all of us would like to stop torture, violence, cruelty wherever and whenever it occurs. If I started to list the things that make me feel sick when I hear/see them we'd be here all night. The difference with this particular case is that we went into Iraq with the message "Look at us, we're civilised people, we don't use torture, we've come here to show you how to run your country as a democracy, set up a fair system of justice, do away with all the dreadful things that Saddam authorised etc. etc." We were supposed to be winning hearts and minds, showing the Muslim and other extremists a more tolerant way to live. So, every time some troops (apparently with the knowledge of their superiors) do something that belongs more to the Saddam culture it knocks the whole project off course. Yes there are unspeakable things going on all over the world but the perpetrators on the whole are not pretending moral superiority over their victims.
We don't know how many Iraqui civilians have been killed by the mass bombings, what's worse the authorities don't even seem to care. Strangely that does not seem to cause the same outcry as the beatings and torture in Abhu Ghraib but it's always easier to identify with a few than with many. The whole enterprise was ill-conceived and lacked planning - typical in fact of both governments.
Badger, I was being a little naughty there and I admit it. I know you weren't saying such things don't matter. Your reply to what I said is perfectly reasonable, the ones I have problems with are those who try to make people believe that what happened was the worst possible violence they had ever heard of.
What offends me is the methods some of the media use of taking an incident and then dribble bits of it out over a period of months and years as if they have discovered a separate and completely new incident on each occasion.
The recent pictures of Abhu Ghraib relate to the same period as the original ones and the people involved have been Court Marshalled and, with the worst offenders, have received jail sentences.
The media have not said there is anything new or that the incidents have been continuing since then, but by their omission of clearly stating that have deliberately allowed people to believe that to be so.
Those who wish to inflame the situation are clearly stating that this is happening now! And our media have deliberately spoon fed them that opportunity.
From the account of the BBC Reporter in Baghdad there would appear to have been more made of the video on this thread than the majority of Iraqis are making. They seem to be of the opinion that "Saddam's lot did much worse than that!" and that they are far more concerned about the photographs of the prisoners being humiliated.
I have no doubt that some would have you believe that the BBC Reporter is just another British Patriot with a completely biased view which can see no wrong in the British Army. In saying that, I am sure both the Army and the BBC would fall about laughing at the suggestion.
I can't wait for that pathetic accusation to be tossed around again.
Yes, we should behave better, but how many of us have never ever done anything wrong in our entire lives. Most of us will admit to being imperfect humans and do not expect absolute perfection in others.
Yes, what happened was wrong but to describe it as "Child Abuse" and being "Beaten to a Pulp" as some have done is ridiculous.
And for the benefit of the "Child Abuse" lobby a child is anyone under the age of fourteen years, that is under not the "age of". Anyone aged fourteen years or over is a "Young Person" and not a "Child", until they are 18 at which time they become an Adult.
With respect to the thousands who died in the Baghdad bombings I am sure that Saddam would have made great propaganda out of countless coffins being carried on the shoulders of huge crowds for burial. The one thing he did have was a fine tuned sense of the dramatic to feed the media with.
Strange how the media who were taken to various places to take pictures of damage were never taken to see the mass graves of the victims.
I still can't work out why the Iraqis would wish to hide such an horrific thing from us before the Americans arrived in Baghdad. How did they overlook such an opportunity with the whole world watching. Think of the sympathy they could have generated!
Has anybody ever found them since?
And I am still waiting an answer from fred as to why it is fine to compare those assaults to "Wife Beating" and "Child Abuse" in this country when my comment about "Baby Killers" would not apply equally to the alleged deaths of children and babies earlier in the war.
I am willing to wait and wait and wait. If one accusation is true then it follows the other must be also.
And I am still waiting an answer from fred as to why it is fine to compare those assaults to "Wife Beating" and "Child Abuse" in this country when my comment about "Baby Killers" would not apply equally to the alleged deaths of children and babies earlier in the war.
I am willing to wait and wait and wait. If one accusation is true then it follows the other must be also.
You didn't say which baby you were refering to so it's difficult to say.
If there was a case of British soldiers going out and grabbing a baby taking it back and slitting its throat for fun while one of them filmed it so they could enjoy the moment over and over again I'd call them baby killers. Wouldn't you?
You didn't say which baby you were refering to so it's difficult to say.
If there was a case of British soldiers going out and grabbing a baby taking it back and slitting its throat for fun while one of them filmed it so they could enjoy the moment over and over again I'd call them baby killers. Wouldn't you?
But I’m not talking imaginary examples fred.
You likened the incident in the compound to the criminal offences of “Wife Beating” and “Child Abuse” in this Country. If killing Babies in this Country then all I am doing is likening it to babies killed by Bombers and Artillery in Iraq. Unless all the babies who suffered and were killed that we were constantly told about in Baghdad and Fallujah never existed.
If they never existed then we were being fed outright lies and if they did then the troops who killed them must be “Baby Killer”.
If they are not, then killing babies in this country must not be a crime!
Were there babies killed in the bombing raids on Baghdad or not?
Were there babies killed in Fallujah?
If troops who kill babies are not “Baby Killers” then what would you call them if you call troops who hit alleged children “Child Abusers”?
If you say one is true then the other must be true.
Members of the current Government have previously been happy to go along with such accusations in the past, why do you find it so difficult to do the same now?
Only the names and the dates have changed, exactly the same tribal chants have been trotted out ad nauseum! Has anybody got a Little Red Book to wave always remembering to use the left hand!
What really does bother me is nobody has gone to Red Lion Square this time, things have got rather lax! And nobody writes decent Protest Songs any more!
But I’m not talking imaginary examples fred.
You likened the incident in the compound to the criminal offences of “Wife Beating” and “Child Abuse” in this Country. If killing Babies in this Country then all I am doing is likening it to babies killed by Bombers and Artillery in Iraq.
Then obviously you are not comparing like with like unless you are suggesting that the soldiers on the video were acting under orders.
I was opposed to the war against Iraq, however now that we are there we need to finish what we started. The fact that some are so shocked with video of these Iraqi youths getting a beating that they are calling into question our standards and comparing them to the previous Iraqi regime says more about their intransigence to acts perpetrated against the Iraqi people by that regime – or is it simply that they need video evidence to comprehend it?
Anyone recognise the following acts from ordinary life in the evil west?
Taken from http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/19675.htm
For over 20 years, the greatest threat to Iraqis has been Saddam Hussein's regime -- he has killed, tortured, raped, and terrorized the Iraqi people and his neighbors for over two decades.
When Iraq is free, past crimes against humanity and war crimes committed against Iraqis, will be accounted for, in a post-conflict Iraqi-led process. The United States, members of the coalition, and the international community will work with the Iraqi people to build a strong and credible judicial process to address these abuses.
Under Saddam's regime many hundreds of thousands of people have died as a result of his actions, the vast majority of them Muslims. According to a 2001 Amnesty International report, "victims of torture in Iraq are subjected to a wide range of forms of torture, including the gouging out of eyes, severe beatings, and electric shocks ... some victims have died as a result and many have been left with permanent physical and psychological damage."
Saddam has had approximately 40 of his own relatives murdered. Allegations of prostitution are used to intimidate opponents of the regime and have been used by the regime to justify the barbaric beheading of women. There have been documented chemical attacks by the regime, from 1983 to 1988, resulting in some 30,000 Iraqi and Iranian deaths.
Human Rights Watch estimates that Saddam's 1987-1988 campaign of terror against the Kurds killed at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 Kurds. The Iraqi regime used chemical agents to include mustard gas and nerve agents in attacks against at least 40 Kurdish villages between 1987-1988. The largest was the attack on Halabja which resulted in approximately 5,000 deaths. o 2,000 Kurdish villages were destroyed during the campaign of terror.
Iraq's 13 million Shi'a Muslims, the majority of Iraq's population of approximately 22 million, face severe restrictions on their religious practice, including a ban on communal Friday prayer, and restriction on funeral processions.
According to Human Rights Watch, "senior Arab diplomats told the London-based Arabic daily newspaper al-Hayat in October [1991] that Iraqi leaders were privately acknowledging that 250,000 people were killed during the uprisings, with most of the casualties in the south." Refugees International reports that
"Oppressive government policies have led to the internal displacement of 900,000 Iraqis, primarily Kurds who have fled to the north to escape Saddam Hussein's Arabization campaigns (which involve forcing Kurds to renounce their Kurdish identity or lose their property) and Marsh Arabs, who fled the government's campaign to dry up the southern marshes for agricultural use. More than 200,000 Iraqis continue to live as refugees in Iran."
In 2002, the U.S. Committee for Refugees estimated that nearly 100,000 Kurds, Assyrians, and Turkomans had previously been expelled, by the regime, from the "central-government-controlled Kirkuk and surrounding districts in the oil-rich region bordering the Kurdish controlled north."
"Over the past five years, 400,000 Iraqi children under the age of five died of malnutrition and disease, preventively, but died because of the nature of the regime under which they are living." (Prime Minister Tony Blair, March 27, 2003) Under the oil-for-food program, the international community sought to make available to the Iraqi people adequate supplies of food and medicine, but the regime blocked sufficient access for international workers to ensure proper distribution of these supplies. Since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom, coalition forces have discovered military warehouses filled with food supplies meant for the Iraqi people that had been diverted by Iraqi military forces.
The Iraqi regime has repeatedly refused visits by human rights monitors. From 1992 until 2002, Saddam prevented the UN Special Rapporteur from visiting Iraq. The UN Special Rapporteur's September 2001, report criticized the regime for "the sheer number of executions," the number of "extrajudicial executions on political grounds," and "the absence of a due process of the law."
Saddam Hussein's regime has carried out frequent summary executions, including:
* 4,000 prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in 1984;
* 3,000 prisoners at the Mahjar prison from 1993-1998;
* 2,500 prisoners were executed between 1997-1999 in a "prison cleansing campaign;"
* 122 political prisoners were executed at Abu Ghraib prison in February/March 2000;
* 23 political prisoners were executed at Abu Ghraib prison in October 2001; and
* At least 130 Iraqi women were beheaded between June 2000 and April 2001.
The fact that Fred et al can wax lyrical about the tyrannical west is testament to freedoms we enjoy that others are denied.
I was opposed to the war against Iraq, however now that we are there we need to finish what we started. The fact that some are so shocked with video of these Iraqi youths getting a beating that they are calling into question our standards and comparing them to the previous Iraqi regime says more about their intransigence to acts perpetrated against the Iraqi people by that regime – or is it simply that they need video evidence to comprehend it?
The fact that Fred et al can wax lyrical about the tyrannical west is testament to freedoms we enjoy that others are denied.
This was discussed on Question Time last night and I was glad to hear the panel agreeing with what I keep saying here. It's not a question of comparing Saddam's horrific regime with ours, it's the fact that we went in there claiming to be so much better than them etc. (see my earlier post). The west can't go on claiming the moral high ground when at the same time it is committing human rights abuses and torture. Even now the US apparently won't back down on Guantanamo and it was interesting that Peter Hain last night obviously wanted to come out more strongly against it than he felt he should, maybe because he's been in trouble for speaking out in the past. The US and UK governments are hypocrites - end of.
it's the fact that we went in there claiming to be so much better than them etc.
Really I thought we wient in to take control of WMD. I would be interested to find any quote that we went in their claiming to be so much better. However I will even give you that we did say this (although I have not seen it anywhere) and I will tell you WE ARE so much better.
wickerinca
17-Feb-06, 19:18
Really I thought we wient in to take control of WMD. I would be interested to find any quote that we went in their claiming to be so much better. However I will even give you that we did say this (although I have not seen it anywhere) and I will tell you WE ARE so much better.
Have to agree with you there scotsboy! We seem to have both been residents of Muslim countries so perhaps we have a different view of their culture.
If Tony Blair starts wiping out the Scots , Welsh or Irish and George Bush has a pop at Mexico or Canada then perhaps we will have sunk to Saddam Hussein's depths.
If Tony Blair starts wiping out the Scots ... then perhaps we will have sunk to Saddam Hussein's depths.
Hardly gonna happen, he is a Scot who has emancipated Scottish politics from Westminster.
Then obviously you are not comparing like with like unless you are suggesting that the soldiers on the video were acting under orders.
That has yet to be decided. But I am comparing like with like, asnd you are just looking for a way to avoid the issue.
You were quite happy to compare the soldiers actions with "Wife Beating" and "Child Abuse" in this Country.
If a member of the Police assaults some yob in a Police Station this weekend will you accuse him of "Wife Beating"?
Under orders or not, (and an unlawful order is not an order which has to be obeyed), does tha make any difference to the countless "Babies" supposedly killed in the bombings of Baghdad ot the shelling of "Fallujah"? The ones that were alleged to have been killed, that is, but have never been found by out extremely concerned Media. We were assured they were there and that Allied troops were responsible. A great deal of noise was made about it at the time telling us there were huge humanitarian crises, which never seemed to materialise for more than a couple of news items.
I ask again, because we were told enough about them at the time and warned on every news item before the conflict started the "Babies" would be killed, were those babies killed or not?
Because if they were, as we were told time and time again, then we must have done so knowing full well that would happen and afterwards were told categorically that it had indeed happened, then surely they were killed intentionally.
You wish to equate what happened in the video with torture, "Wife Beating" and "Child Abuse", I am asking you to continue down that path and accuse the Military of being "Baby Killers", it's been done before by certain groups who have used similar arguments to yours, all I am asking is that you take that ever so small step further.
It’s not a very big step, is it, all you have to do is tell us that the Allied Military deliberately bomber Baghdad, and shelled Fallujah, in the full knowledge that they had been warned and were fully aware that by doing so they would kill babies.
Or were such warnings never given by certain Groups, because I seem to recall them as I am sure many others do.
Did the Military bomb and shell under those conditions or not? Be brave, after all, we are only talking about brutal British and American Troops who take pleasure in "Abusing Children" and "Beating them Senseless", who knows what other atrocities and War Crimes they are capable of?
Stand up for your convictions and tell people how horrific the behaviour of our troops in Iraq and elsewhere really are!
It's been said before, why not say it again! Others have previously been brave enough!
I'm not asking you to sit on an Iraqi anti-aircraft gun for them to use as propaganda, am I?
That has yet to be decided. But I am comparing like with like, asnd you are just looking for a way to avoid the issue.
You were quite happy to compare the soldiers actions with "Wife Beating" and "Child Abuse" in this Country.
I didn't compare anything with "Child Abuse" or with "Wife Beating".
I called what was happening on the video child abuse because that is what it was. No comparisons. What was being done was abuse, that is official, that is the recognised term for what was happening, look it up in a dictionary if you don't believe me. It was happening to a 12 year old child, therefore it is child abuse.
Now what did you want to know about Falluja? I don't know too much because journalists were excluded, for their own safety they said. From what I can gather in reprisal for the lynching of four American contractors by insurgents America surrounded the city, allowed the women, children and old men to leave then flattened it, only the Americans called it "liberating" it. I recall there were reports of Americans using white phosphorus as a weapon which the Americans categorically denied until it was proved.
There is an eye witness account from an Iraqi journalist who managed to get into Falluja soon afterwards here http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1387460,00.html and it makes very interesting reading, especially the very last paragraph
Once, when a foreign journalist, an Irish guy, asked me whether I was Shia or Sunni - the way the Irish do because they have that thing about the IRA - I said I was Sushi. My father is Sunni and my mother is Shia. I never cared about these things. Now, after Falluja, it matters.
but it makes no mention of any of the claims regarding babies which you made.
Oh I see now very clearly what is fred's position.
When Hitler conned his youth into defending Berlin till the last boy standing then the allies who were fighting them were guilty of 'child abuse'.
Yes, fred's contribution to this thread is very valid........not
In view of the fact that I have been accused of issuing sanctimonious blasts of wind and daring to judge other’s motives and compassion in my fantasy life on Caithness.org.
And that my posts are full of the same innuendo at people whose visions of the future of the human race are outside my range of perceptions.
Further, that I do not try to listen and understand what opponents say and that my methods are to shame those who think differently and that my motives are dubious about others feelings for the bravery of those in our police and armed forces.
I will stop and ponder those comments, more especially in view of the fact I have, on previous occasions, been accused of arguing for arguing’s sake and never stating and sticking to my opinion.
I must now go and decide which of these two opinions is accurate as they both seem mutually exclusive.
However, I will reiterate on one of my earlier posts on this thread with the following which occurred last summer:-.
“AN Iraq war hero who collapsed and died hours after hearing he won the Military Cross for bravery was buried yesterday.
Sgt Major Darren Leigh, 37, of the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment, showed “courage, iron discipline and restraint.”
Last August he led a baton charge on a crowd of 300 in Basra — through a barrage of missiles and gunfire — despite grenade injuries to his legs.
More than 500 mourners joined wife Marie and daughter Limara at the service in Swinton, Greater Manchester.”
That is the picture of British Soldiers I carry, but there is no constant reminders of incidents like that in the Media months or years after they happen, they are buried with the bodies of the Soldiers who carried them out.
Why should I be concerned about the death of one Soldier?
It is no secret that I originated in Preston or that I have lived in Manchester.
The place I lived in Manchester for 35 years was Swinton.
I will make no reference to what had been happening outside the compound in the video earlier because some have expressed it’s irrelevance.
With that I will take my parsimonious, sanctimonious, shaming, innuendo, accompanied by my lack of perception, away from this thread and leave those who find my views lacking in understanding to carry on the decrying the actions of the incident videoed two years ago unopposed by me. I wish them luck in their endeavours and I will keep my thoughts and views on the subject to myself!.
Posters, I am sorry that I have not seen fit to change my opinions to agree with those of others, and I am sorry if I have maligned anybody’s intentions in having a different viewpoint to mine.
I may disrespect a person’s views, but that does not mean I disrespect them as a person. There is a difference between the two and I am able to see and respect that difference.
I will leave it to other’s to make the judgement as to my actions and intentions, that is not for me to judge.
Ach, you're just being too harsh on yersel'
I know I said I was not posting any more about this matter, but I just noticed fred had answered my previous post.
I have to clarify that despite my pressing points very strongly with fred, none of the things I refer to in my last post have been said by fred.
Fred, we may disagree, but you have never once complained about my tactics and you have always been straight, open and forthright in our discussions and I am happy to make sure that is understood by all.
In my short time as a poster,I have read many of your posts.I have disagreed with some of them,agreed with others; laughed at some,got very angry at others and, on the whole, find your viewpoints quite thought provoking. I have never been offended to the point of nasty PM's or felt that you were trying to foment friction. I would say that you and I could debate life,the universe,the Muslim question and the war in Iraq over a pint or two and not fall out or come to blows. Which is more than I could say for some of your protagonists. Keep on calling a spade a spade and I will continue to read your posts and enjoy your diatribes.[evil] [evil]
Oh I see now very clearly what is fred's position.
When Hitler conned his youth into defending Berlin till the last boy standing then the allies who were fighting them were guilty of 'child abuse'.
Yes, fred's contribution to this thread is very valid........not
The allies landed at Normandy in June 1944 and by May 1945, less than a year, they liberated an entire continent. We invaded Iraq in March 2003, nearly three years ago and still the bloodshed continues with no end in sight.
If when taking Berlin British soldiers had taken a 12 year old child prisoner, handcuffed him then beat and kicked him while he was being held to the ground then yes they would have been guilty of child abuse, that's obvious isn't it?
So fred, shooting into the crowd would be alright then? Those kids need to be shown a lesson not to mess with the occupation forces, it is not as if they can take them to court or take them back to mummy and daddy is it?
So fred, shooting into the crowd would be alright then? Those kids need to be shown a lesson not to mess with the occupation forces, it is not as if they can take them to court or take them back to mummy and daddy is it?
Yes they need to be taught not to behave like that but the reaction of the soldiers just made things worse, not better. We are putting more and more people in prison in this country but it doesn't reduce crime, most of them come out worse than they went in because the system as it is just doesn't work. Violence breeds violence, always has, always will. I'm not sure what the best response would have been but the effect of what did happen is that not just those kids and their companions but most people in Iraq must be hating the occupying forces even more and making their life more difficult.
What made the video particularly bad for me was the commentary - that was pure hate and gloating over someone else's suffering. Was this someone who was a bully before he went to Iraq or did the circumstances there change him? If the latter, this war is not just destroying bodies but seriously damaging minds. Whenever I hear about torture I worry about the mentality of the torturers, whether they enjoy it or whether they're forced into it and have to live with the memory. What kind of civilians will those soldiers be in later life?
In view of the fact that I have been accused of issuing sanctimonious blasts of wind and daring to judge other’s motives and compassion in my fantasy life on Caithness.org.
And that my posts are full of the same innuendo at people whose visions of the future of the human race are outside my range of perceptions.
Further, that I do not try to listen and understand what opponents say and that my methods are to shame those who think differently and that my motives are dubious about others feelings for the bravery of those in our police and armed forces.
I will stop and ponder those comments, more especially in view of the fact I have, on previous occasions, been accused of arguing for arguing’s sake and never stating and sticking to my opinion.
I must now go and decide which of these two opinions is accurate as they both seem mutually exclusive.
However, I will reiterate on one of my earlier posts on this thread with the following which occurred last summer:-.
“AN Iraq war hero who collapsed and died hours after hearing he won the Military Cross for bravery was buried yesterday.
Sgt Major Darren Leigh, 37, of the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment, showed “courage, iron discipline and restraint.”
Last August he led a baton charge on a crowd of 300 in Basra — through a barrage of missiles and gunfire — despite grenade injuries to his legs.
More than 500 mourners joined wife Marie and daughter Limara at the service in Swinton, Greater Manchester.”
That is the picture of British Soldiers I carry, but there is no constant reminders of incidents like that in the Media months or years after they happen, they are buried with the bodies of the Soldiers who carried them out.
Why should I be concerned about the death of one Soldier?
It is no secret that I originated in Preston or that I have lived in Manchester.
The place I lived in Manchester for 35 years was Swinton.
I will make no reference to what had been happening outside the compound in the video earlier because some have expressed it’s irrelevance.
With that I will take my parsimonious, sanctimonious, shaming, innuendo, accompanied by my lack of perception, away from this thread and leave those who find my views lacking in understanding to carry on the decrying the actions of the incident videoed two years ago unopposed by me. I wish them luck in their endeavours and I will keep my thoughts and views on the subject to myself!.
Posters, I am sorry that I have not seen fit to change my opinions to agree with those of others, and I am sorry if I have maligned anybody’s intentions in having a different viewpoint to mine.
I may disrespect a person’s views, but that does not mean I disrespect them as a person. There is a difference between the two and I am able to see and respect that difference.
I will leave it to other’s to make the judgement as to my actions and intentions, that is not for me to judge.
May I judge your actions and intentions?
Never worry Jaws. Your posts are always interesting to read, because whether I agree with them or understand them or not, they're well composed.
My previous post was serious though I now see it reads like sarcasm.....my mistake.
That's what this forum is here for. Different viewpoints and opinions to be expressed and discussed. And I think it's great!
Discussions like this one help us all to see a different side to the subject in question. It may not change our viewpoint it may even serve to reinforce our viewpoint, but at the very least it widens our knowledge and experience on the given subject. You have far more experience on this forum than I but may I just state one piece of advice?
Don't take personally things said in the heat of a discussion. For the simple reason that they're not personal.
Keep composing and keep posting.......where would this forum be without posters like yourself? A very boring place indeed! :D
NB. I just discovered the post that you are refering to on another thread.......it did come across as a bit personal....
So fred, shooting into the crowd would be alright then? Those kids need to be shown a lesson not to mess with the occupation forces, it is not as if they can take them to court or take them back to mummy and daddy is it?
Those kids need to be shown a lesson not to mess with the occupying forces?
That's what it's all about for you is it, proving that we are the masters and they are the slaves. That is why you can watch a child being beaten without an ounce of pity or compassion?
I asked a while back how we would know when we had won this war and no one seemed to be able to answer, I know one thing though, I know how to tell when we have lost.
That's what it's all about for you is it, proving that we are the masters and they are the slaves.
Well!, aren't we?[lol]Aren't they?
We used to rule a quarter of the world until Hitler dragged us into a war and the apologists amongst us :eek: started giving us a pathetic guilty concience...
Well!, aren't we?[lol]Aren't they?
We used to rule a quarter of the world until Hitler dragged us into a war and the apologists amongst us :eek: started giving us a pathetic guilty concience...
The only reason the sun didn't set on the British Empire was because God didn't trust the British in the dark.
The disolution of the Empire was a condition of a loan from America at the end of the war which we had no option but to agree to, nothing to do with apologists.
So lets see, you think we are the master race and you think abuses committed by our soldiers are justified, sound familiar?
NB. I just discovered the post that you are refering to on another thread.......it did come across as a bit personal....
SAVEY, I mentioned no names and made no personal accusations other than the fact that I was not including you.
My only comment was that people on this thread were very concerned about the acts of violence mentioned on this thread whilst the I posted about the Policewoman had drawn virtually no attention.
A check of the page with that thread on it will show it has drawn far less attention then the thread about a dog needing a new home.
If anybody wishes to take that as a personal attack then that is for them to decide. I certainly made no such personal attack on anybody.
The post is still there for all to see including my Freudian Slip by typing "knew" instead of "know" her.
The incidents mentioned in that post are all factual and well documented and my very personal feelings on them remain as stated.
Sanctimonious and parsimonious hot air or not, I make no apology or excuse for holding them.
Those reasons are not based on the versions presented on TV or in the Press or on the versions depicted of them by others.
I have my own reasons for holding them and they will only change as circumstances in future provide good reason for that to be.
If people do not like my views or opinions that is their prerogative. They have every right to see things differently from me, or anybody else, and I have no wish to see them prevented from holding their beliefs or prevent them from stating their own beliefs and feelings.
If I take offence because of their views then that is my problem. I may voice my disagreement, but that does not mean I believe they are not entitled to speak out.
lorraine_2406
18-Feb-06, 23:45
I didn't compare anything with "Child Abuse" or with "Wife Beating".
I called what was happening on the video child abuse because that is what it was. No comparisons. What was being done was abuse, that is official, that is the recognised term for what was happening, look it up in a dictionary if you don't believe me. It was happening to a 12 year old child, therefore it is child abuse.
Now what did you want to know about Falluja? I don't know too much because journalists were excluded, for their own safety they said. From what I can gather in reprisal for the lynching of four American contractors by insurgents America surrounded the city, allowed the women, children and old men to leave then flattened it, only the Americans called it "liberating" it. I recall there were reports of Americans using white phosphorus as a weapon which the Americans categorically denied until it was proved.
There is an eye witness account from an Iraqi journalist who managed to get into Falluja soon afterwards here http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1387460,00.html and it makes very interesting reading, especially the very last paragraph
but it makes no mention of any of the claims regarding babies which you made.
These so called children you are going on about were throwing bricks and cranades in a riot and also shooting at the soldiers you try stepping in a soldiers shoes and see how you would of coped with the sitiuation you cant critisise british soldiers as they are doing a bloody good job out in iraq.
These so called children you are going on about were throwing bricks and cranades in a riot and also shooting at the soldiers Their behaviour doesn't change their age, lorraine_2406. The fact is they were children, not "so called children".
you try stepping in a soldiers shoes and see how you would of coped with the sitiuation you cant critisise british soldiers as they are doing a bloody good job out in iraq. What these soldiers, and others like them, did affects how the British Army is perceived in Iraq. What these soldiers did puts all other soldiers at greater risk of reprisals. I cannot understand why you cannot see that.
Yes, we should bloody well criticise these soldiers, and to do so is to support the vast majority of soldiers who are doing what they are trained to do.
Please let's stop justifying the behaviour of a minority of thugs who believe that their uniform justifies their violent expression of their prejudices and outright hatred of the Iraqi people.
lorraine_2406
19-Feb-06, 00:08
Their behaviour doesn't change their age, lorraine_2406. The fact is they were children, not "so called children".
What these soldiers, and others like them, did affects how the British Army is perceived in Iraq. What these soldiers did puts all other soldiers at greater risk of reprisals. I cannot understand why you cannot see that.
Yes, we should bloody well criticise these soldiers, and to do so is to support the vast majority of soldiers who are doing what they are trained to do.
Please let's stop justifying the behaviour of a minority of thugs who believe that their uniform justifies their violent expression of their prejudices and outright hatred of the Iraqi people.
well that is your opinion and every one is entitled to one my husband is out there just now and i am sorry i dont agree as these children where shooting at the soldiers what do you suggest they should of done if you where out there under threat for your life how would you of coped we are not talking about nice family children we are talking about children that are out to kill.
well that is your opinion and every one is entitled to one my husband is out there just now and i am sorry i dont agree as these children where shooting at the soldiers what do you suggest they should of done if you where out there under threat for your life how would you of coped we are not talking about nice family children we are talking about children that are out to kill.
I have a funny feeling that the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights doesn't distinguish between "nice family children" and children whose homeland has been invaded and whose family members have disappeared/been imprisoned/been brutalised. Children are children.
I do think that most people are capable of distinguishing children from trained soldiers though.
Look, Lorraine, if the News of the World reported that a minority of doctors were routinely euthanising sick pensioners because they were inconvenient and an expense to the NHS, would we condemn the newspaper for publicising it? Would we say that these doctors couldn't be criticised because every doctor worked under pressure, so we should cut them some slack?
The hell we would. We'd want them struck off and prosecuted and we'd do everything in our power to protect professional, well-meaning doctors from the impact of the actions of the few.
Why do you find it so distateful that a minority of British Army thugs are being criticised? It's surely not that your husband features in the video, is it?
lorraine_2406
19-Feb-06, 00:28
I have a funny feeling that the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights doesn't distinguish between "nice family children" and children whose homeland has been invaded and whose family members have disappeared/been imprisoned/been brutalised. Children are children.
I do think that most people are capable of distinguishing children from trained soldiers though.
Look, Lorraine, if the News of the World reported that a minority of doctors were routinely euthanising sick pensioners because they were inconvenient and an expense to the NHS, would we condemn the newspaper for publicising it? Would we say that these doctors couldn't be criticised because every doctor worked under pressure, so we should cut them some slack?
The hell we would. We'd want them struck off and prosecuted and we'd do everything in our power to protect professional, well-meaning doctors from the impact of the actions of the few.
Why do you find it so distateful that a minority of British Army thugs are being criticised? It's surely not that your husband features in the video, is it?
No its not my husband featured in that video if you had a family member over there you would no exactly what goes on and how these people work
These so called children you are going on about were throwing bricks and cranades in a riot and also shooting at the soldiers you try stepping in a soldiers shoes and see how you would of coped with the sitiuation you cant critisise british soldiers as they are doing a bloody good job out in iraq.
I didn't criticise British Soldiers, I criticised the British Soldiers in the video.
I think you will find that the British Army also criticise the British Soldiers in the video, they obviously don't think their actions were justified as arrests have been made. The Ministry of Defence criticised the soldiers calling the video "extremely disturbing" and Tony Blair promised a full investigation so he must be of the opinion that a crime has probably been committed.
I called what was happening on the video child abuse because that is what it was.
Yes but my image of a child abuse victim does not throw molotov cocktails at the law enforcement agencies. So by making comparisons with rioters to child abuse victims then you are basically saying (by association) that all child abuse victims were 'asking for it'.[evil]
well that is your opinion and every one is entitled to one Really? I ask because it seems that anybody who has spoken out here against the actions of these few soldiers has been tarred with a pretty nasty – and wholly unwarranted – brush: that they are somehow not supporting the brave men and women who are, even as we speak, risking their lives in a far-off country; that they are unpatriotic; that they are “yellow livered do gooders”. If that brush isn’t designed solely to stop people from voicing their opinion then I honestly don’t know what it is for.
I’ve stayed clear of this thread for the past few days because I honestly don’t understand what’s going on here. I may not have agreed with everything that everybody has said on this board in the past, but I’ve always thought that the members here are basically decent people… yet here we are on page 10 of a thread started to justify the beating of children in custody. I’m so appalled that, for the first time ever, I find myself ashamed to have a login here.
It has been suggested that the moments prior to and (bizarrely) after the segment of video we have seen might explain these soldiers’ actions – but the video clearly shows the prisoners being led into a military compound and the compound gates being closed. Whatever happened before that gate closed was dealt with and these soldiers were either acting out of spite or vengeance and I don’t see how either of those can be considered justifiable reasons for beating prisoners?
It has been insinuated that people are only appalled by these beatings because they were at the hands of British soldiers – the argument being that if you don’t comment on every single case of violence across the globe then you are being hypocritical to comment on any of them. Of course, that ignores the fact that this entire thread was started to justify these beatings. That is a very different thing to a thread started in sympathy for a victim (such as the one Jaws started following the shooting of the policewoman in Nottingham) and will inevitably attract very different responses.
It has been said that people criticising the soldiers who dished out this beating are actually criticising all British soldiers, but that simply is not the case. I’ve read and reread this thread and I simply cannot see a single instance where anybody has suggested that all British soldiers are responsible for this beating… quite the opposite – everybody who has criticised these soldiers has been quite specific in only criticising these soldiers.
It has been suggested that those of us who have criticised these soldiers are not supporting the vast majority of British soldiers who weren’t immortalised in this video – but I believe the opposite to be true. Here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4712360.stm) are some quotes from Muslim papers around the world. The provincial council in Basra has suspended relations with UK forces. The men and women serving in Iraq today have enough to contend with without Iraqis thinking that they are all like the individuals in this video and our silence – and especially our excuses – here can only serve to inflame the situation.
It has been said that this beating was excusable because Saddam did worse, but if we only concern ourselves with the very worst and ignore the rest then what kind of world are we going to end up with?
Finally, it has been stated that this beating was nothing more than the soldiers teaching these boys ‘a lesson’. Frankly, this is the justification that causes me the most concern. The video shows the boys being beaten with sticks and kicked in the head and groin. I know that some people scoff at the notion of ‘common sense’, but I’m not one of those people and common sense tells me that the only ‘lesson’ learned at the end of a stick or the point of a boot is hatred and I’m not sure that’s a lesson we should be teaching these children. But more than that, where does this ‘lesson’ stop? So it’s okay to beat these children to make them follow the rules… but what about those children? And what about your children? If this lesson is good enough for Iraqi children, what about teachers dolling out a kick to the testicles for talking in class?
I’ve read all of the reasons given in this thread as to why we should turn a blind eye to this incident, even why we should support it; but I’ve read nothing – not one thing – that makes me think this incident was anything other than a group of frustrated and angry soldiers beating on a group of children in their custody and I simply cannot see how that can be (or should be) ignored.
Considering that from the Prime Minister down there is general agreement that the contents of the video be investigated I have arrived at some conclusions as to the way different organisations treat such matters.
A soldier in Civilian Controlled Democracy who behaves in an excessive manner is arrested, charged and tried.
A soldier in a Totalitarian State doing the same thing is doing his duty to the State and honoured.
A Terrorist is Glorified and held up as a shining example for others to follow.
A person in a Democracy who objects to such actions is entitled to an opinion.
A person in a Totalitarian State who objects to such actions is entitled to an extended term in a Psychiatric Hospital as an Enemy of the State until Re-educated.
A person in a Terrorist Controlled Area who objects to such actions is entitled to a Bullet in the Head.
Such is the way of the World we live in. Nowhere is perfect, but I know which system I prefer to live under.
The soldiers in the video did wrong, I have never disputed that, but does that entitle a baying mob to take pleasure in tearing them apart?
The Media love having somebody to victimise!
People may find a look at this site may provide some background to the video.
It too proves most enlightening and is usually unbiassed, other than that I will not comment
http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/men/news/s/204/204378_iraq_video_shows_troops_under_attack.html
It's from the same source who published the Guardian before it got Londonised and was still the Manchester Guardian.
Just so everybody knows exactly what is being discussed here and to clarify the position would somebody please detail the following in order that everybody is commenting on the same details.
It just might save a lot of misunderstandings. .
1. Under the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights what is the wording of the offences that they have committed under that Declaration?
2. Will somebody please give the legal definition of the crime of Child Abuse so that everybody is talking about the same thing.
3. What are the exact ages of the Children so everybody knows the correct age of all involved and is it known who all four victims are as ages seem to range from 12 to 27? The source of the ages would be useful, again so everybody is talking about the same details.
“Images from the film showing British soldiers kicking, punching and striking young Iraqi civilians with batons, have been published by the News of the World.” Is the description given be Aljazeera. The full details are at http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=10561
4. Have they all been identified and their injuries confirmed because the News of the World has stated that the video shows a “dead Iraqi” being kicked in the head.. If that refers to one of the Iraqis who were shown being beaten then that would surely amount to murder which is a serious matter by any standards.
A further insight as to the way the whole of the British Army is being portrayed by certain sections of the British Media can be found at
http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/review/article_full_story.asp?service_ID=10660
I would hardly think that Aljazeera can be portrayed as the Capitalist Media or that it is controlled by Bush or Blair.
They certainly do not owe the British Army any favours, yet their report of the video seems to be far more accurate and balanced than some of the versions given by the media in this country.
A fact which in some ways hardly surprises me.
Yes but my image of a child abuse victim does not throw molotov cocktails at the law enforcement agencies. So by making comparisons with rioters to child abuse victims then you are basically saying (by association) that all child abuse victims were 'asking for it'.[evil]
An extremely tenuous accusation, as you well know, Rheghead. Fred is saying no such thing.
The abuse of children is child abuse, regardless of context. It is your image of child abuse which is narrow, not the definition of child abuse itself.
1. Under the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights what is the wording of the offences that they have committed under that Declaration? I'm not going to guess which offences they'll be charged with. It'll be for the MoD and the lawyers to decide on the offences which have been committed here, and on which legislation they'll use. At that point, quoting the wording will be easy.
2. Will somebody please give the legal definition of the crime of Child Abuse so that everybody is talking about the same thing. Do you honestly need this? There will be different definitions depending on the legislation (domestic/international) you're considering. I know child abuse when I see it. In terms of how I apply my personal definition, if I'd classify it as abuse when applied in this country to a British kid, then I'd classify it as abuse when applied elsewhere to a kid of another nationality.
3. What are the exact ages of the Children so everybody knows the correct age of all involved and is it known who all four victims are as ages seem to range from 12 to 27? The source of the ages would be useful, again so everybody is talking about the same details.
“Images from the film showing British soldiers kicking, punching and striking young Iraqi civilians with batons, have been published by the News of the World.” Is the description given be Aljazeera. I am curious as to your motivation for this pedantry and what it is that you're trying to say. Is it that the abuse would be okay if they're over 16? Over 18? I'm genuinely at a loss as to why you're asking this.
4. Have they all been identified and their injuries confirmed because the News of the World has stated that the video shows a “dead Iraqi” being kicked in the head.. If that refers to one of the Iraqis who were shown being beaten then that would surely amount to murder which is a serious matter by any standards. It'll be for the MoD to investigate and put all the evidence together to deal with these men. Thankfully, evidence as presented by the News of the World doesn't count.
Yes but my image of a child abuse victim does not throw molotov cocktails at the law enforcement agencies. So by making comparisons with rioters to child abuse victims then you are basically saying (by association) that all child abuse victims were 'asking for it'.[evil]
Have you any evidence that the 12 year old child in the video threw molotov coctails at the law enforcement agencies?
Or do you blame the actions of a people on one child? Do you blame every Iraqi protesting for jobs for the actions of the worst of them? If a man commits a crime do you punish his neighbours children?
Are you being what I was accused of being when it was said that I blamed the entire British Army for the actions of a few soldiers? Do you have a racist mentality?
Do you have a racist mentality?
Now I really think you have lost e plot![disgust]
The abuse of children is child abuse, regardless of context. It is your image of child abuse which is narrow, not the definition of child abuse itself.
Oh I see now, the soldiers should have given these boys a jolly good talking-to and told them the error of their ways. Just enough to get their chins wobbly then took them to their mummies and daddies who will again tell them off for being naughty boys and then ground them for a week.
I can see that happening....not or am I being too narrow again? Of course making a kiddie cry would be child abuse in someone's book.:roll:
Lets face it, a couple of kids got a duffing up for street violence, so what? It happens all the time(I even applaud it, regardless of age), but in this case there are strong political reasons to show this video that have little relevence to 'child abuse' which are, in truth, to undermine coalition presence in Iraq. To use such tactics is pathetic in my view and only serves to show up the media circus that seems to infiltrate our lives, Piers Morgan can vouch for that.
I long for the return of the days when war correspondence was just a small column in the Times newspaper.[smirk]
lorraine_2406
19-Feb-06, 14:10
Now I really think you have lost e plot![disgust]
Well said well done mate
landmarker
19-Feb-06, 19:04
I think the odd kick in the crotch might have a positive effect on yob behaviour in our own backyard, let alone Basra.
The people who protest most about what went on are the most detached from reality.
Drutt, emotively calls these people 'children' yet protests when Jaws tries to define exactly what a 'child' is. Calling him a 'pedant' I recall.
These Iraqi's were treated largely they would be treated by fellow Iraqi's, except they weren't shot in the back of the head. They now have the freedom to 'protest' which they were not granted, or did not have the moral fibre to exercise under Saddam.
It's all a lot of fuss about very little. As I said at the very beginning of the thread what happened 'was not right' but it wasn't very wrong either in my humblest opinion. My opinion is rooted in the real world, unlike some of the dreamers who have contributed thus far.
I'm not going to guess which offences they'll be charged with. It'll be for the MoD and the lawyers to decide on the offences which have been committed here, and on which legislation they'll use. At that point, quoting the wording will be easy.
Do you honestly need this? There will be different definitions depending on the legislation (domestic/international) you're considering. I know child abuse when I see it. In terms of how I apply my personal definition, if I'd classify it as abuse when applied in this country to a British kid, then I'd classify it as abuse when applied elsewhere to a kid of another nationality.
I am curious as to your motivation for this pedantry and what it is that you're trying to say. Is it that the abuse would be okay if they're over 16? Over 18? I'm genuinely at a loss as to why you're asking this.
It'll be for the MoD to investigate and put all the evidence together to deal with these men. Thankfully, evidence as presented by the News of the World doesn't count.
I take it that the answer to each question is that nobody is willing to give an answer.
"They have commited dreadful crimes, but we don't know exactly what, but they have to be guilty of something."
I do not condone what they did, it was something they should not have done and I have always stated that.
All I am asking is that those who are making specific allegations about certain types of Offence against either National or International Law state clearly exactly what Offences they mean.
If that is being pedantic then so be it.
If my mother struck me with a metal bar to my severe injury when I was thirteen that could be described by some as "Child Abuse". If my mother now took that same bar and struck me in a similar manner I hardly think anybody would describe that as "Child Abuse". That is not to say that it would be accepteble for her to do that. I would have thought anybody would be able to see that there was a difference between the two.
Of course, I am still her child, so under certain conditions her action could well be termed "Child Abuse".
I think the odd kick in the crotch might have a positive effect on yob behaviour in our own backyard, let alone Basra.
The people who protest most about what went on are the most detached from reality.
Drutt, emotively calls these people 'children' yet protests when Jaws tries to define exactly what a 'child' is. Calling him a 'pedant' I recall.
These Iraqi's were treated largely they would be treated by fellow Iraqi's, except they weren't shot in the back of the head. They now have the freedom to 'protest' which they were not granted, or did not have the moral fibre to exercise under Saddam.
It's all a lot of fuss about very little. As I said at the very beginning of the thread what happened 'was not right' but it wasn't very wrong either in my humblest opinion. My opinion is rooted in the real world, unlike some of the dreamers who have contributed thus far.
I wonder how how much "moral fibre" you would have shown if you had been living under Saddam's regime? May I remind you that anyone showing the smallest opposition was likely to be dragged off, tortured, and either killed or imprisoned for life.
The effect of all this publicity on the vast majority of forces in Iraq must be wholly bad and I too question the motives of those who chose to publicise both this video and the Abhu Ghraib photos at this time but nothing, absolutely nothing, can justify ill treatment of prisoners wherever they are. The men and boys beaten up by these soldiers were prisoners from the time they were taken into the compound and should have been treated according to whatever laws are in place.
Lorraine, I simply don't understand your posts. As I've said before, I don't believe anyone in this country judges all the soldiers by the behaviour of a few but this behaviour is being used as propaganda and has simply made the lives of soldiers like your husband much more difficult and dangerous. If I were in your shoes I would be furious with them. Joining the forces inevitably means exposure to danger at some point but this comes under the heading of friendly fire in my book. Every time I see our soldiers in action, or befriending the Iraquis as they used to be able to do, on tv I am lost in admiration of their courage and good humour in the most appalling circumstances. They have enough problems and danger without a few of their own side adding to it.
Lorraine, I simply don't understand your posts. As I've said before, I don't believe anyone in this country judges all the soldiers by the behaviour of a few but this behaviour is being used as propaganda and has simply made the lives of soldiers like your husband much more difficult and dangerous. If I were in your shoes I would be furious with them. Joining the forces inevitably means exposure to danger at some point but this comes under the heading of friendly fire in my book. Every time I see our soldiers in action, or befriending the Iraquis as they used to be able to do, on tv I am lost in admiration of their courage and good humour in the most appalling circumstances. They have enough problems and danger without a few of their own side adding to it.
badger, it would appear certain parts of the press are only too willing to assert that such behaviour is quite normal behaviour in the British Army.
http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/review/article_full_story.asp?service_id=10660
The report carries extracts from sections of the British Press and their views on British Soldiers which is being reported in the Middle East.
It paints a picture which others here are denying exists amongst certain sections of our society.
It makes very interesting reading, very interesting indeed.
landmarker
19-Feb-06, 20:43
I wonder how how much "moral fibre" you would have shown if you had been living under Saddam's regime? May I remind you that anyone showing the smallest opposition was likely to be dragged off, tortured, and either killed or imprisoned for life.
.
The answer to your question is not much.
We should conclude from ther second part of your supposition that they are much better off now then eh?
If it's taken the odd kicking or a bit of roughing up I think Iraqi history will judge it more than worthwhile, dont you?
As for 'understanding' Lorraine's posts she is emotionally involved to a high degree. Just expounding hot air & theorising about this subject is one thing, having loved ones out there doing Blair's dirty work is something else entirely.
Now I really think you have lost e plot![disgust]
I'm trying to find the plot, hence the questionmark.
You seem to believe that those being beaten by the British soldiers had thrown handgrenades at the British troops, I'm trying to determin the basis for this belief.
I'm trying to find the plot, hence the questionmark.
You seem to believe that those being beaten by the British soldiers had thrown handgrenades at the British troops, I'm trying to determin the basis for this belief.
Don't let the media block your objectivity.
Don't let the media block your objectivity.
Oh I never let anything block my objectivity.
Oh I never let anything block my objectivity.
So then you accept that the intentional killing of a child is the ultimate form of child abuse?
So then you accept that the intentional killing of a child is the ultimate form of child abuse?
Use your imagination Rheghead - there are much worse things that can be done to a child than ending its life.
Use your imagination Rheghead - there are much worse things that can be done to a child than ending its life.
Do you think that every adult 'child abuse victim' wished that they'd been killed in childhood?
Do you think that every adult 'child abuse victim' wished that they'd been killed in childhood?
Ooop... you nearly caught me out there with that clever insinuation. :roll:
Has anybody stopped to consider that people who read this board might just be personally very well aware of the results of Child Abuse and have very personal knowledge of it's consequences or the effect it might just have on them and their mental state.
To my shame it had not crossed my mind until the point was made about "wishing they had been killed in childhood" was made.
We may glibly talk about it, but the victims live with it forever, especially when it involves sexual abuse.
So then you accept that the intentional killing of a child is the ultimate form of child abuse?
How does this relate to the matter we were discussing?
I'm just trying to follow your train of thought which seems to be "some Iraqis threw hand grenades at British troops, the child being beaten was an Iraqi therefore the child being beaten threw handgrenades at British troops".
I have just seen this headline so where are the children who were beaten up?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16723863%26method=full%26siteid=94762% 26headline=exclusive%2d%2dattempted%2dmurder-name_page.html
I have just seen this headline so where are the children who were beaten up?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16723863%26method=full%26siteid=94762% 26headline=exclusive%2d%2dattempted%2dmurder-name_page.html
It's a conspiracy, hatched by Bush and Blair, with the co-operation of the Puppet Regime in Iraq and published by the Capitalist Pro-Western Press, with the intention of taking attention away from the endemic brutality of the British Army.
Golach, I can't believe that you fell prey to this nasty piece of blatant propaganda!
You nasty evil Running-dog of Capitalist Imperialist Warmongers, how dare you spread such malicious lies about those poor children?
Don't you realise that most 12 and 14 year olds are Married with Children? How dare you make excuses to protect Child Abusers?
It makes me ashamed to be associated with some members of this Board. I dread to think how others view us!
lorraine_2406
20-Feb-06, 11:51
I have just seen this headline so where are the children who were beaten up?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16723863%26method=full%26siteid=94762% 26headline=exclusive%2d%2dattempted%2dmurder-name_page.html
well the papers have said everything and that was the point i was trying to put across so wheres the child abuse involved in this as i said in many of my post the british soldiers came under threat
To add a personal viewpoint on this, the first riot I saw in Basra was when a crowd of protesters faced some of our soldiers who had rifles, and pelted them with rocks. The next day, another protest, and the same soldiers came out, but this time armed with sticks. The rioters melted away in seconds. Why? Because the rioters knew the British Army rules of engagement and knew we would not open fire just for them throwing rocks, but we could give them a whack. A local Iraqi interpreter told us the phsycology behind it and it worked.
I have driven out of a compound, through a crowd of these 'kids' who smashed every window in my vehicle (and were paid to do it by ex-Baath Party hoodlums). At that moment I would have liked nothing more than to get out and give a couple a damm good hiding, but we were in serious danger. They are not innocent little darlings, they are 'rent-a-mob' and given clear instructions on what to do and how to do it by cowards who know exactly how to get the media exposure we are now seeing, without putting themselves at risk.
The posters on here like Fred who call our soldiers terrorists and child abusers should wake up. It's a cruel world out there and sometimes you just have to take the gloves off!
(It did seem ironic reading another subject on here praising the 'have-a-go hero' for tackling a local Wick yob in Henrietta Street. Parallel there?)
To add a personal viewpoint on this, the first riot I saw in Basra was when a crowd of protesters faced some of our soldiers who had rifles, and pelted them with rocks. The next day, another protest, and the same soldiers came out, but this time armed with sticks. The rioters melted away in seconds. Why? Because the rioters knew the British Army rules of engagement and knew we would not open fire just for them throwing rocks, but we could give them a whack. A local Iraqi interpreter told us the phsycology behind it and it worked.
I have driven out of a compound, through a crowd of these 'kids' who smashed every window in my vehicle (and were paid to do it by ex-Baath Party hoodlums). At that moment I would have liked nothing more than to get out and give a couple a damm good hiding, but we were in serious danger. They are not innocent little darlings, they are 'rent-a-mob' and given clear instructions on what to do and how to do it by cowards who know exactly how to get the media exposure we are now seeing, without putting themselves at risk.
The posters on here like Fred who call our soldiers terrorists and child abusers should wake up. It's a cruel world out there and sometimes you just have to take the gloves off!
(It did seem ironic reading another subject on here praising the 'have-a-go hero' for tackling a local Wick yob in Henrietta Street. Parallel there?)
How dare you introduce facts into the thread?
You have only experienced what happens, what would you know about it?
You are not supposed to know about the Organisers who stand at the back and do all the pushing and encouraging.
You are not supposed to know that the Terrorists arrange for the Mods in order to use them as a shield when they throw their grenades and open fire from within the crowd.
You must never mention the fact that the Terrorists do this in the hope that the Army will open fire so they can be accused of massacring innocent civilians. It's even better if you push children to the front, then you really can go for the "Sympathy Reaction" against the "Brutal Forces of Oppression".
Of course, such things are just part of my "Fantasy Life" on this board. Having never come across similar tactics in this country, minus the fire arms and grenades, I too would hardly know about them., here they only throw petrol bombs!
Knowing how to manipulate a crowd is one of the main essentials to be learned by those who use such tactics. Without the crowd they would not be able to operate in safety or escape.
I would still like to know the source from which the "Alleged Children" who suffered the "Child Abuse" was derived.
Has anybody ever found where the various ages originated, because I certainly haven't in my constant Trawling of the Web in order to find subjects to attack people with.
Neither have I found anywhere stating what injuries they received as a result of being "Beaten to a Pulp". I would have thought by now that some of the more knowledgeable about the incident would have known by now.
I seem to have missed some Golden Opportunities, how careless of me! I must learn to Trawl more thoroughly in future!
The answer to your question is not much.
We should conclude from ther second part of your supposition that they are much better off now then eh?
If it's taken the odd kicking or a bit of roughing up I think Iraqi history will judge it more than worthwhile, dont you?
As for 'understanding' Lorraine's posts she is emotionally involved to a high degree. Just expounding hot air & theorising about this subject is one thing, having loved ones out there doing Blair's dirty work is something else entirely.
There are many people there who apparently do believe they are better off - at least they were able to vote. However I'd be the first to agree that things are nowhere near as good as they should be and that's entirely due to the complete lack of forward planning by the invaders. They just went in with all guns blazing and expected what? That somehow it would all work out and everyone live happily ever after? If they really felt they had to invade, all soldiers should have had lessons in the local culture, been told to respect the people, and backed up by a huge workforce to restore the essential services. The opportunity was there and it was missed and things get worse by the day.
Yes of course Lorraine is emotionally involved - it must be a nightmare for anyone with family members in that awful situation. All I'm saying is that I would be seriously upset if my husband/son or whatever was being tarred with the same brush as those very few individuals and having their lives increasingly endangered.
I don't read national newspapers any more and think it would be a very good thing if everyone who objected to their content and stance on various issues just stopped buying them. Then maybe they would have to act more responsibly. Unfortunately scandal, shock, horror sells. I do watch tv news regularly and even that frequently makes me cross but it's the only way of keeping in touch. Any media can be used as a weapon and, in the absence of opposition or competition, it will brainwash.
JJC wrote
I’m so appalled that, for the first time ever, I find myself ashamed to have a login here.
Freedom of speech makes you ashamed?
Your quotes from muslim papers, are sections selected by the BBC - from my perspective living in a muslim country very little is being made of this event.
How dare you introduce facts into the thread?
You have only experienced what happens, what would you know about it?
You are not supposed to know about the Organisers who stand at the back and do all the pushing and encouraging.
You are not supposed to know that the Terrorists arrange for the Mods in order to use them as a shield when they throw their grenades and open fire from within the crowd.
You must never mention the fact that the Terrorists do this in the hope that the Army will open fire so they can be accused of massacring innocent civilians. It's even better if you push children to the front, then you really can go for the "Sympathy Reaction" against the "Brutal Forces of Oppression".
Of course, such things are just part of my "Fantasy Life" on this board. Having never come across similar tactics in this country, minus the fire arms and grenades, I too would hardly know about them., here they only throw petrol bombs!
Knowing how to manipulate a crowd is one of the main essentials to be learned by those who use such tactics. Without the crowd they would not be able to operate in safety or escape.
I would still like to know the source from which the "Alleged Children" who suffered the "Child Abuse" was derived.
Has anybody ever found where the various ages originated, because I certainly haven't in my constant Trawling of the Web in order to find subjects to attack people with.
Neither have I found anywhere stating what injuries they received as a result of being "Beaten to a Pulp". I would have thought by now that some of the more knowledgeable about the incident would have known by now.
I seem to have missed some Golden Opportunities, how careless of me! I must learn to Trawl more thoroughly in future!
Keep it up!!! Your more amusing than Basil Fawlty these days.
Keep it up!!! Your more amusing than Basil Fawlty these days.
It helps when you have good "straight men" (Oops, sorry, "persons") to work with.
Occasionally something makes me lose my sense of perspective but I usually overcome the problem.
How does this relate to the matter we were discussing?.
It has everything to do with what we were discussing, you claimed that British soldiers were involved in 'child abuse', I think you are wrong and being overly simplistic on the basis that to 'abuse a child' means that you are abusing a child on the basis that they are a child, in this case that reasoning is highly fallacious as they were receiving a 'roughing up' on the basis that they were involved in street violence, age is not a factor in the reasons as to why they received a beating. There are many instances around the world where there are 'child fighters' and 'Hitler youth style radicals' who would 'shoot and ask questions later' on any innocent peacekeeper or humanitarian worker. So to shoot one of these kids would (by your reasoning) be 'child abuse' therefore exposing the fallacious grounds for your reasoning. You mentioned that the allies liberated Europe in a matter of a year, well they had the luxury of being free from media coverage, who knows what happened to the youths of Germany who defended the Fatherland? To call the liberating forces 'child abusers' would be highly insulting and it would be very naive of us to believe that a bit of roughing up did not happen to those most vulnerable in German society.
The thing is this, when armies are involved then crap like this happens, it is a natural condition of conflict. The politicians that send our troops to areas like Iraq are accepting of the fact that the end justifies the means or they wouldn't send them in the first place.
If it was up to me, British troops would not have been deployed in Iraq but since they are deployed I can only feel it my duty to support them and cricise them in a constructive manner. Dissention in the form of calling our troops 'child abusers' is firstly unpatriotic and secondly, is highly damaging to Coalition/Iraq relations and serves only to give a mandate for further terrorist attacks on UK servicemen and civillians.
If those British soldiers are deemed to have roughed up a group of kids that is unwarranted and cruel then it is up to the Army authorities to be 'judge and juror and executioner', not the British Public opinion which is an extremely blunt and heavy-handed weapon of justice .
Well said Rheghead, I could not agree more.
lorraine_2406
20-Feb-06, 18:34
Well said Rheghead, I could not agree more.
i will second that
The following two news items are very relevant to the thread.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4730966.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4732910.stm
With regard to Rheghead’s post, I am reminded of the famous saying by Lord Macaulay
"We Know no Spectacle so Ridiculous as the British Public in one of its periodical fits of morality."
And how accurate he was!
wickerinca
20-Feb-06, 19:40
i will second that
Great post Rheghead
Third vote here!
I have just seen this headline so where are the children who were beaten up?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16723863%26method=full%26siteid=94762% 26headline=exclusive%2d%2dattempted%2dmurder-name_page.html
I was of course refering to the 14 year old who says he was one of those being beaten 2 years ago.
Fish yet again
20-Feb-06, 21:19
What the British troops did was wrong. Tony Blair was right to condem their actions. There have been mixed feelings about what it was that the troops in question were responding to by beating the "demonstrators". The troops reaction was a response to a situation when people are faced with the atrocities of war on a daily basis.
Demonstrators in this country bear witness to the baton-wielding Police just doing their job. There are never any hastened investigations or calls for the Police to justify their actions. Our Police argue that they are maintaining order...which is exactly what our troops are trying to do in Iraq.
To date British troop deaths total 101, soldiers who have forfeited their lives in this foreign land. Where is the justice for those soldiers?, victims of the people they were trying to help. How many of their killers have been caught and brought to justice?
At the last count, none. If any have then the authorities have / are keeping quiet about it, perhaps for fear of retaliation. But at least those killers would get a fair trial. Dead soldiers don't.
My Comrade, Uncle Joe, used to put on some wonderful Show Trials.
You are about to receive a fair trial for the entertainment of the public after which you will be found Guilty and Executed.
Of course, if you do not sign this confession the trial will not be necessary!
You will go to the Lubyanka with Comrade Beria who has the furnace ready for you.
Head first or feet first is your choice.
Nice to see the good old days back. :evil
If it was up to me, British troops would not have been deployed in Iraq but since they are deployed I can only feel it my duty to support them and cricise them in a constructive manner. Dissention in the form of calling our troops 'child abusers' is firstly unpatriotic and secondly, is highly damaging to Coalition/Iraq relations and serves only to give a mandate for further terrorist attacks on UK servicemen and civillians.
There are many forms of child abuse even if you only see the one.
It is dismissing the incident as "a good clip around the earhole....British army style" which is highly damaging to Coalition/Iraq relations and likely to lead to further terrorist attacks on UK servicemen.
As what spin the tabloids put on it you still have a video of prisoners handcuffed, held to the ground being beaten with sticks and kicked in the body head and groin. Watch the video yourself, see as they come through the gate one prisoner's head is inches below the shoulder of the soldier next to him and watch that prisoner beaten to the ground dragged up, beaten down again, thrown agaist a wall, dragged up and beaten down again.
It is images like that which are damaging to the reputation of the British Army and the British people. That things like that happen I know, they always have but as long as it is deemed unaceptable behaviour we can call ourselves a civilised nation, when it is not only deemed aceptable but applauded then we have not exported democracy to Iraq we have imported barbarism to the UK.
Has anyone on this thread applauded the violence? I don't think so but I could well be wrong. It has been seen as being acceptable as one of the facts of warfare but not acceptable on humanitarian grounds We have been one of the most barbaric nations in history and we haven't changed that much.
I'm fairly sure that if you took a poll of the British Troops out there - 99.9% would offer to come home.
But as always the British Troops have been let down by the British Press.
The NoW editor who decided to publish after so long should be in that yard with the troops
I have said on many occasions that their actions were wrong but it is also wrong to use extremely emotional terms in order to exaggerate a situation for propaganda purposes, and that is obviously what using unnecessarily emotive terminology is. .
I will ask again, and will keep asking, has anybody seen any correct information about the ages of the "Alleged Children" who suffered the "Child Abuse", because it seems to vary with the amount of antagonism and emotion people wish to create.
It is now over a week since the NoW started this and still nobody has given any proof the children were involved.
I have even checked Aljazeera, and I would have thought that if it was known Children were involved, then they would hardly hide the fact.
Even they give a more rational and balance description than “Child Abuse” and “Beaten to a Pulp” which have, along with other such descriptions, been used here.
What a disgraceful situation when a Media Source, which is trusted and used by Terrorist whose avowed intent is to destroy us, gives a more rational description the actions of the British Army than I can find from some here.
I m trying to picture the reaction of my parents if they discovered, during WW2 that they had to tune in to Lord Haw Haw and Joseph Goebbels in order to get a rational and less hysterical description of what the British Troops were doing than they could receive from our own sources in Britain.
I would suggest that until somebody can show definitely that children were those who were assaulted that the term Child Abuse cease to be used.
As far as I am concerned, without that information I think I will start calling it "Geriatric Abuse", it's no more or no less as good a description.
I will ask again, and will keep asking, has anybody seen any correct information about the ages of the "Alleged Children" who suffered the "Child Abuse", because it seems to vary with the amount of antagonism and emotion people wish to create.
Why don't you just look at the video?
It is available here http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2696891?htv=12 you can stop it, start it, watch it frame by frame.
Why don't you just look at the video?
It is available here http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2696891?htv=12 you can stop it, start it, watch it frame by frame.
I just only see reasonable force being used, nothing more sinister than the Police are allowed to implement in Wick or Thurso on a Saturday night. The headbutt and kicking is reasonable in my view if the detainee refuses to do what they are told, even the use of the sticks didn't look as if full force was used behind it. Once they are on the ground they are being told and searched in relation to the street violence, only when they tried to get up and escape did an army boot go in, reasonable in my view.
The lad on the ground was quite correct to be afraid and was obediently lying on the ground like a good little hoodlum, not like the one who was pathetically shouting out please and struggling with the soldiers.
It would be interesting to get the views of THURSO BOY on this matter - I am sure a few on here are aware of the case in question, I rather it was something of a legal precedent.
You have bamboozled me. What case are you refering to?
I just only see reasonable force being used
Then I still see child abuse.
just watched the video, what i see is british soldiers doing their jobs. looks like only a tiny portion of the video is shown. what went on before do we know. the army does a good job could you do there job day in. dunno if i could.
lorraine_2406
21-Feb-06, 20:48
just watched the video, what i see is british soldiers doing their jobs. looks like only a tiny portion of the video is shown. what went on before do we know. the army does a good job could you do there job day in. dunno if i could.
well said nice to see that not everyone out there is out to condem what happened in that video our troops do a fantastic job in iraq
Why don't you just look at the video?
It is available here http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2696891?htv=12 you can stop it, start it, watch it frame by frame.
i have watched and studied the video. Yes I agree what happened was wrong and not acceptable behaviour. I have never said otherwise, nor have I ever attempted to excuse it.
I still see nothing on that video to indicate any particular age of the persons being assaulted.
I have heard the accusations of "Child Abuse" and again ask what age were the "Children" because my previous description of "Geriatric Abuse" would seem be equally valid from the scene shown of the video. Should anybody try to use my term in the same manner as "Child Abuse" is being claimed I would ask the same question.
Even Aljazeera, the best known Independent Media Source in the area, which was started by ex-BBC World Service personnel who left to start the Company because they thought the BBC were not giving the local population a fair hearing, have not resorted to that sort of derogatory description.
Indeed, they seem to have a far more balanced and objective view than much of our own Media, a fact I find to be a terrible indictment of the methods and veracity of what I read and see every day.
It would appear that, where our media are fixated with sales and viewing figures at all cost, Aljazeera are more concerned with being accurate, factual and truthful.
I am willing to accept the term "Abuse" as a reasonable way of describing the incident but nowhere have I seen or heard anything which indicates any "Child" being involved.
I have heard claims as low as the age of 12 being mentioned here but nobody can or will tell me or any other person where, after a nine day period of the incident being reported very widely Worldwide, where there has been any confirmation of the ages of the people concerned to confirm tham as "Children".
I ask yet again, where are the definitive reports of the ages of the "Children" being abused.
Once the assaulted people can be shown to be of the age where they would be considered to still be a "Child" I will accept use of the term "Child Abuse".
Until tha time I will not accept it is a fair and reasonable description because there seems to be nothing to warrant that particular term other than an assumption and the fact that it attempts the portray a far more extreme form of "Abuse" than simply using the term "Abuse" on it's own.
I can see why some would wish to portray the incident as "Child Abuse", all I am questioning is it's source and authenticity.
All I seek, after nine full days of detailed reporting, where is the source of the use of the name "Child" because surely there must, by now, be one which is easily available!
well said nice to see that not everyone out there is out to condem what happened in that video our troops do a fantastic job in iraq
Lorraine 2406, the video, I remember correctly, shows far more than the incident concerned including what happened immediately prior the "main" part.
The soldier who took it did so as a personal record of the situation in Iraq where he was serving.
He has been interviewed by some section of the media, I would have to check again to see exactly were and when, and he started it during his first tour there when they had just taken control of Basra.
On his return for a second tour he was astonished at the change in attitude he found in the local population towards the troops and continued the video to show that.
Personally, once I became aware of the background to the tape, I consider that in their haste to grab people's attention with a sound-bite, they missed out on a Golden Opportunity to make a much bigger meal of it.
Their haste to be "First with the Worst" overtook even their wish to prove themselves right.
If memory serves me well, was there not a similar case of this ilk in Thurso in the 50's, when two policemen, dished out a well deserved skelping till a young chap for cheeking them, and some do gooder got the Dailly Express involved, and as a result the two policemen lost their jobs. And the young chap turned into a fine sober upstanding member of the community. [lol] AYE RIGHT!!!!!!
Aye Right!!! I ken him weel.
I am willing to accept the term "Abuse" as a reasonable way of describing the incident but nowhere have I seen or heard anything which indicates any "Child" being involved.
Article 1 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child defines a child “as being below the age of eighteen years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.”
Scottish law is similar, you are a child till you are 18 or until you marry whichever comes first.
You've seen the video, how many of the abused would you put at over 14 let alone 18?
Article 1 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child defines a child “as being below the age of eighteen years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.”
Scottish law is similar, you are a child till you are 18 or until you marry whichever comes first.
You've seen the video, how many of the abused would you put at over 14 let alone 18?
Defining Child Abuse Who is a Child?
Section 93(2) (a) and (b) of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 define a child in relation to the powers and duties of the local authority. Within this area, child protection procedures apply to children and young people who have not yet reached their 16th birthday and to young people with special needs which might place them at increased risk up to the age of 18 years.
http://www.clacksweb.org.uk/children/childprotection/
I think the above indicates the upper ages for with regard to Child Abuse in Scotland. I assume that law would apply should the Soldiers be tried under Scottish Law as those are the appropriate ages of majority concerning Child Abuse.
I have not checked the law in Iraq but if you wish to do so I would have no objection.
Iraq however, is not a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which, incidentally pre-dates the First Iraq War.
I cannot imagine why Saddam Hussein would not wish to sign it and thereby protect Iraqi Children.
I have seen the video on TV and looked at the video on the site you posted. I see a number of soldiers and four civilians involved in the incident.
Without stop frame or enhancement I am unable to see sufficient detail of the four civilians to determine any sort of age with any certainty.
I would have thought that, had they been known to be as young as 14 or even 16 they would have been described as Young Teenagers by Aljazeera even if not in our media. They, at least, I would have thought, would have far more reliable sources in Iraq than the News of the World, who also appear not to have given any ages.
Even face to face at close quarters in this country you will find notices stating ID may be asked for concerning the sale of, cigarettes – 16 and alcohol – 18 and that is not involving a blurred and indistinct video take from a rooftop above a yard but from a distance of two the three feet. .
I ask again, other than by guess work or impression, where do the ages of anyone involved appear with any sort of certainty.
I have, so far neither heard of, or seen, any ages mentioned except herein.
I would have thought that, had they been known to be as young as 14 or even 16 they would have been described as Young Teenagers by Aljazeera even if not in our media.
http://www.itn.co.uk/news/1999791.html
Tony Blair has pledged to probe fresh allegations of abuse of Iraqis by British troops after a video allegedly showed soldiers brutally beating a group of young teenagers.
I perhaps have a very suspicious mind, but I think there is something rather dark and sinister behind the release of this video at this particular time.
I must admit to being puzzled myself, the cartoons, the video, the Abhu Ghraib photos, they must be up to something.
After seeing on the news last night that George Bush is insisting on a unified Iraq and threatening to cut off American aid if Iraq splits I suspect that the Neocons are trying to destabalise Iraq so it will split.
Certainly would take them one step closer to opening up the Kirkuk-Haifa pipeline, an independent Kurd state in the north would be a lot easier to deal with.
As I said fred, I never previously thought I would get a more ballanced and less emotive view from a Media Source trusted by Terrorists than I would from our own Media.
Whatever Spin the Media here put on it in order to get people's attention, Aljazeera, broadcasting for the benefit the Arabs of the area would be more likely to benefit from an inflammatory version of the incident and this they have not done.
I'm sure the Activist Arabs in the area would have preferred Aljazeera to use the terms "Child Abuse" or even "Young Teenagers" the better to further their aims.
Fred, I'm feeling generous and helpful tonight, I'll give you a site you may trust which mentions a boy of 14 being involved.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1709524,00.html
It gives the names of a man of 27 and a boy of 14 who were produced by the radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, who orcanises the demonstrators in the area.
They didn't come forward previously because they thought they would not be believed. After the video they came forward and not want to know how to sue the MOD.
The link has been there for all to see since the 14th February, two days after the NoW first ran the story a week and a half ago. It's easy to find, all you do is Google "Iraq Video" 14 and up it comes on page one but nobody found it to gave the age of a boy of 14. I wonder why? It's interesting reading, including the killing of six Iraqis.
I believe them when they say they have come forward to sue the MOD!
Now I'm really confused. Neocons? The bad guys? Trying to split up Iraq to stop Bush?
But I thought Bush was the Bad Guy trying to take over the World to control oil and save the dollar!
A separate and independent Kurdistan so the Kirkuk-Haifa pipeline can be put into operation.
Sounds good, A nice independent and free Kurdistan in the North if Iraq. Eternally grateful to the "Neocons" (that's a good name, am I supposed to make a connection with Neo-Fascists?) and thereby protecting the Oil Pipeline to Haifa.
And everybody is going to stand back and let all this happen without lifting a finger.
A Kurdish North Iraq, a Sunni Central Iraq, and a Shiah South Iraq. And not a squeak from anybody.
Wow, I can't wait to see that happen. And what happens then? It’s got to be good.
Now I'm really confused. Neocons? The bad guys? Trying to split up Iraq to stop Bush?
But I thought Bush was the Bad Guy trying to take over the World to control oil and save the dollar!
Yes the Neocons, they control the media, they control the oil companies and they control the American government. They are the ones who decide who our government will be, they can turn a coward into a cowboy and a war hero into a coward and even if their man gets fewer votes than his opponent they can still make him a winner.
They can even turn an invasion into a liberation.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2842.htm
The neocons:
http://www.antiwar.com/paul/paul70.html
Yes the Neocons, they control the media, they control the oil companies and they control the American government. They are the ones who decide who our government will be, they can turn a coward into a cowboy and a war hero into a coward and even if their man gets fewer votes than his opponent they can still make him a winner.
They can even turn an invasion into a liberation.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2842.htm
The neocons:
http://www.antiwar.com/paul/paul70.html
These websites aren't coming up.......they've probably blocked them on purpose to stop me from finding out the truth! [para]
Yes the Neocons, they control the media, they control the oil companies and they control the American government. They are the ones who decide who our government will be, they can turn a coward into a cowboy and a war hero into a coward and even if their man gets fewer votes than his opponent they can still make him a winner.
They can even turn an invasion into a liberation.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2842.htm
The neocons:
http://www.antiwar.com/paul/paul70.html
I really do love the idea that the Neocons running the Republican Party are really Trotskyite Revolutionaries.
Of course, that would explain why they are trying to destroy Bush's hopes for a United Iraq.
Is this a typical CIA cock-up or were they Sleepers placed there by Putin's KGB pals?
Wow, "The Red Revolutionaries of the White House" now there's a title worthy of a Hollywood Blockbuster.
I can't wait to see the Premier of the one!
I really do love the idea that the Neocons running the Republican Party are really Trotskyite Revolutionaries.
Of course, that would explain why they are trying to destroy Bush's hopes for a United Iraq.
Is this a typical CIA cock-up or were they Sleepers placed there by Putin's KGB pals?
You think that political belief is a straight line with Fascists at one end and Commiunists at the other? It isn't, it's a circle, the extremists of one are not too far away from the extremists of the other.
The article said that the Neocons believe in Trotskie's theory of "Permanent Revolution". Have you seen the long range plans for the American and British military? We have at least another 30 years of what is happening in Iraq happening somewhere in the world. Did you see that Bush has renamed his "War on Terror" "The Long War"? The Neocons will not be satisfied with much much more power than anyone else in the world, they will not stop until their power is absolute and that just isn't going to happen.
Just think what Hitler or Stalin could have done if their propaganda machines controlled the worlds television, radio and newspapers. If they had machines capable of reading through every letter and listening to every phonecall. If they controlled an army not just bigger and more powerful than any other but bigger and more powerful than every other army in the world put together. Hitler or Stalin, would the result have been that much different?
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.