war on iraq

[JAWS]

Have I missed a few days news?
I don't seem to heard anything from the usual suspects about this "Atrocity". I'm sure the ones who were only too eager to jump on the band-wagon over some very badly faked photos of supposed "Atrocities" by British Troops would find that one too much to resist.

I notice that the fact that the places where the Hostages, including where Bigley was be-headed didn't rate much comment from certain quarters. And I'm still waiting for signs of the huge Humanitarian Crisis to emerge. And for signs of all the poor starving children which was supposed to result from the war. And the mounds of the thousands of bodies which must have been piled up in Baghdad as a result of the bombing.
Somebody must have been very quick at clearing that lot up so nobody would notice them.

Funny how all these "facts" which were trumpeted so loudly didn't seem to leave any trace.

Not to mention that Al-Jazeera Television was started by Ex-BBC employees. (Oops! Sorry! I shouldn't repeat that, the BBC just happened to let that slip out in a panic to prove that Al-Jazeera was totally impartial on the subject.)

[jjc]

Unarmed? And who decided that? Have you never heard of Suicide Bombers?

Oh, okay. So now we're going to shoot dead all wounded insurgents in case they are suicide bombers. But wait, what about surrendering insurgents? Isn't it possible that they are also suicide bombers? I guess we'd best shoot them too. And then there're those who have never raised arms against our forces before but are willing to strap explosives to themselves now. I suppose we should shoot them too?

And just when did the Terrorists, Insurgents, Freedom Fighters or whatever name you wish to give them sign up to International Law?

What does that matter? We HAVE signed up to International Law. What's more, the very basis of our reasoning for being in Iraq is to uphold International Law. With that in mind, shouldn't we be following it ourselves?

Regular troops, operating as part of a regular army are entitled to be treated as such. These people by their own methods do not fall into that category.

UN Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field:

Article 12 Members of the armed forces and other persons mentioned in the following Article, who are wounded or sick, shall be respected and protected in all circumstances.

They shall be treated humanely and cared for by the Party to the conflict in whose power they may be, without any adverse distinction founded on sex, race, nationality, religion, political opinions, or any other similar criteria. Any attempts upon their lives, or violence to their persons, shall be strictly prohibited; in particular, they shall not be murdered or exterminated

Article 13 The present Convention shall apply to the wounded and sick belonging to the following categories:

1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organised resistance movements

If the Mosque had been cleared the previous day then what were live people doing in their anyway? Either they had not been there the previous day or somebody at that time had not finished the job of clearing the Mosque as they should have done. Wounded people lying on un-pinned grenades is an old trick as is laying on a weapon until some idiot turns their back on you and then shooting them, preferably in the back.

That's right, the squad of marines that cleared the building the day before had already disarmed the man in question (according to the cameraman who filmed the execution). Rather than treat the five wounded insurgents, as they were required to, the squad informed field commanders that there were ten dead and five wounded insurgents in the Mosque and moved on, leaving a following squad to deal with the wounded (and disarmed) men. On their arrival, the following squad did indeed deal with the wounded man.

Funny how some people want International Law to work one way only.

Who wants it to only work one way? Personally, I'd like to see it upheld by ALL parties, but that doesn't mean that we abandon it if opposition forces don't adhere to it.

If you want to point fingers then do try and be even handed about it. Or is that against International Law as well?

It's not about being even handed. If you had tried to defend the terrorists beheading prisoners or sending suicide bombers to attack our troops then I would criticise you equally vehemently. But you haven't. What you've done is to excuse the war crimes committed by some of our forces. Whether it's a cliché or not, two wrongs do not make a right.

[jjc]

can't believe you're not even supporting your own troops. our countrymen are being slaughtered and all you can do is support the innocents of terrorists.

I wondered how long it would be before somebody used the puerile "you should be supporting our troops" argument. Explain to me where in my postings here I have indicated that I don't support our troops?

Suggesting that the only way to support our troops is to unquestioningly accept the decisions of our government and turn a blind eye to the crimes of some of their comrades is, quite frankly, crass stupidity.

[jjc]

Not to mention that Al-Jazeera Television was started by Ex-BBC employees

Eh? What's that got to do with anything? You mention it, even going so far as to give it its own paragraph, as if it's some deciding fact that will wake us all up to something. Wake us all up to what?

I don't seem to heard anything from the usual suspects about this "Atrocity".

Really? It was pretty widely reported and commented on.

And I'm still waiting for signs of the huge Humanitarian Crisis to emerge. And for signs of all the poor starving children which was supposed to result from the war. And the mounds of the thousands of bodies which must have been piled up in Baghdad as a result of the bombing.
Somebody must have been very quick at clearing that lot up so nobody would notice them.

So all is well in Iraq since we invaded then? Is that what you're saying?

[RandomHero]

isn't it funny how unless we personally know the victims we don't care if the perpatraitors are killed. i'll just relate this to the 'thieft' discussion. bill's house was broken into. now if we had no idea who bill was, if bill lets say was shot in iraq we wouldn't think much of it. (nae offence bill!) perhaps that the perpatraitors shud b arrested, woteva. but we know bill and people think the perpatraitors shud b caught and paraded around naked and egged, ect. wot if the bill we know is kidnapped and be-headed by terrorists THEN we would want the perpatraitors to have the same fate. or to be photographed naked, paraded infront of everyone as torture for wot they've done.

i think it's incredibly selfish that unless you personally know the victim then the perpatraitor shud suffer the same fate.

yes i have brought the support ur troops subject up. be a bit more patriotic and if you think you can avoid the subject by insulting my intelligence then you can go
Frolick Under Cars Kicking yourself.

[jjc]

yes i have brought the support ur troops subject up. be a bit more patriotic and if you think you can avoid the subject by insulting my intelligence then you can go
Frolick Under Cars Kicking yourself.

I'm not avoiding the subject, I asked you a straight forward question:

Explain to me where in my postings here I have indicated that I don't support our troops?

Now, as well as actually answering the question (perhaps without resorting to any more pathetic attempts at getting ignorant obscenities past the auto-censor?), maybe you can tell me what is unpatriotic about questioning the government?

Also, can you tell me whether this US marine executing an injured insurgent in the glare of international media has made our troops more, or less, likely to face more insurgents? Why?

[Rheghead]

Sea bird wrote

History will show who is right about the war.
But remember the winner writes the history.
Only in films does the good guy win and the bad guy get his just deserts.
Some terrorist become heads of government.(Washington U.S.A,Sadam Iraq,

When the Red army and the Allies took Berlin in 1945 there were a lot of crimes and acts of terrorism committed against the German population. Similiar to what happened in Fallujah.

Eisenhower the chief terrorism protaganist then became President of the U.S.

Do those crimes mean that taking Berlin was wrong?

[The Godfather]

isn't it funny how unless we personally know the victims we don't care if the perpatraitors are killed.

Speak for your self.

So if you love your country and are patriotic, Tony Blair said lets go to Ireland and sloughter all the Catholics, we would whole hardedly agree and cheer as the troups carryed out their orders and rejoice as they came home covered in blood.
Of course not.

Sounds to me like we are just hearing the American media through Random Hero.
You are American arnt you?

[The Godfather]

Now if the 21st centuary Hittler started terrorising Europe and trying to invade us I would support the troups, hell I would even sign up myself if I wasnt forced to. All because I am patriotic and love my country and want to keep my country as it is, Great British.

What has Iraq got to do with being patriotic to ones country?

[RandomHero]

no i'm not american.

alot of you people have seemed to be brainwashed by michael moore and such like. you enjoy america bashing for all the wrong reasons.i hope that iraq terrorists target you and then you can tell me all about how you are against the war. if you want the link to see some of these disturbing torture/be-heading videos, let me know. these terrorists are sick and are so lucky that all our troops do to them if they are wounded is put them out of their misery. if an iraqi terrorist found me when i was wounded, i'd pray that they put me out of my misery as quickly and painlessly as that american troop did.

[RandomHero]

So if you love your country and are patriotic, Tony Blair said lets go to Ireland and sloughter all the Catholics, we would whole hardedly agree and cheer as the troups carryed out their orders and rejoice as they came home covered in blood

if the catholics started shooting weapons of mass destruction at us and began to take over places then yes, they would have to be stopped. but there's a difference between catholics and those who follow alah. for the iraqis this is a holy war.

the soldier who shot the 'unarmed' and wounded iraqi. the iraqi could have been a suicide bomber or he could have been unarmed but are you willing to take the risk? who would you rather see die. A platoon of our soldiers. or some terrorist scum who would kill you and your family if given half the chance?

[jjc]

i hope that iraq terrorists target you

And on that truly despicable note I bring any debate (and I use the term loosely) between us to a close.

[The Godfather]

God your thick, have you ever read a newspaper in your whole life?

The 'Iraqi' terrorists are not even Iraqi.

Have Iraq ever 'shot' weapons of mass destruction at us?

For the Iraqi's it is not a holy war. It is a war against troops that have invaded and are still in their country.

Talk about brainwashing. What do you thing Bush has been doing through the prepossessed American media.

those who follow alah

I pray to god that you will never leave you house. Your type of igroramous having the internet is bad enough. I think you need to go and visit that Mosque in Glasgow that is having an open week or did you not hear about that on the news?

I also draw any debate with you to a close.

P.S Would you trust that Iraqi doctor in the hospital to treat you. I dont think you would.

[JAWS]

"According to the cameraman who filmed the execution." Precisely, so it must be right!
No journalist would ever get it wrong or mis-represent anything for the benefit of their own agenda! When something controversial happens i have a nasty habit of checking several news outlets to see who is putting their own "Spin" on it.

Most of what purports to be "NEWS" is more often than not just inpired guess work and fertile imagination. Sometimes you have to wait months or even years before you realise that what is reported is often just "wishful thinking".

Remember how happy they were to hang on to every word of "Comical Ali"? That was until even they could no longer deny what their own eyes told them as the non-existent tanks rolled into view.

And I still must have missed all the "shock, horror" stories on the news. If a handful of poorly faked photos could create the hysteria it did then this one should rub for weeks or even months. Hell, there's still one MP squawking about which way a ship was pointing nearly 25 years ago!

Well said random_hero. The main problem is that the nasty Americans keep voting for the wrong man and don't have the sense to do what certain sections of the British Media want them to!

[Sunday]

Let the Americans deal with it - tis their problem..

[JAWS]

I think if you check how the various borders were created in that area that we had more than a little to do with it. In effect America is now having to sort out problems originally created by European Countries and I included Britain in that.

Similarly with Africa, most of the problems there were caused by Britain, France, Germany, Belgium and Portugal drawing Borders which were convenient to them regardless of the existing Tribal Units. Often one tribe was set up as "Upper Class" and used to dominate other tribes.

How would Scots feel if say China or India suddenly decided that the Borders belonged to England, the Central Belt belonged to Belgium and the Highlands belonged to Greenland?
After all, England and Scotland are only Tribal Units so what does it matter. In future you need a passport to go outside the Highlands even if you only want to see your relatives!
Of course one of the smaller Clans in each region would be deemed "Upper Class" and would have to be trained to help run each of the three areas and would be put in power over the rest.

Of course it's all the Americans fault and it's theirs to solve.
How nice it is when you can make an absolute wreck of something and turn your back and let somebody else take the blame. We have got very good at that in recent times.

[JAWS]

Godfather, can you please clarify.

"The 'Iraqi' terrorists are not even Iraqi."
"For the Iraqi's it is not a holy war. It is a war against troops that have invaded and are still in their country. "

Is it "foreign terrorists" or Iraqi's fighting for their Country or both?

"What do you thing Bush has been doing through the prepossessed American media."
So the American Media just blindly follow what the President tells them? I can think of several Presidents who have reason to show that such a suggestion is absolutely ridiculous. Have you never heard of Walter Kronkyte? (Somebody correct my spelling if it's wrong please)

I seem to remember Saddam Hussein declaring that it was a "Holy War" and very little being said by Clerics to contradict that. Perhaps they thought his pompous posturing was so absurd that nobody would take notice.
However, the call for Jihad has been substituted so many times as a call for "Terrorism" by so many "Extremists" that if people believe that then who is to blame.

Much was made of it being a war against "The Great Satan" and little of that went un-contradicted either in the media here or by either Christian or Muslim Clerics.

The Prophet Mohammed himself taught, "Oh you who Believe, fight the unbelievers who are near you!"
I have no doubt that many of you can quote similar statements from the Christian Bible which could be used to "Justify" the most Un-Holy acts imaginable and which, at one time or another, have been used.
I do not believe for one moment that the vast majority of Muslims would wish to take that particular text in that particular context any more than the majority of Christians would agree with those who twist the words of the Bible to similar ends.

Whilst such teachings are mis-used by people of violence and are not condemned by the Leaders of whatever Religion then if people come to believe that such things are what their Religion is about then they have only themselves to blame.

Whilst Religious Leaders appear to condone violence by their silence then they must accept some of the responsibility. I would have thought that 30 years of that not too far from here would have taught us that!

[The Godfather]

"What do you thing Bush has been doing through the prepossessed American media."
So the American Media just blindly follow what the President tells them? I can think of several Presidents who have reason to show that such a suggestion is absolutely ridiculous. Have you never heard of Walter Kronkyte? (Somebody correct my spelling if it's wrong please)

Remember the news that all the American networks share price rose along with nearly every other big corporate when Bush's victory was official.

[jjc]

"According to the cameraman who filmed the execution."

I have to confess that I was wrong. When I said that the executed insurgent was the only survivor in the Mosque when the marines re-entered I ‘misspoke’; there were, in fact, four survivors. Only one of the injured men left the previous day had died of his wounds.

As for your dismissal of Kevin Sites, I can only quote you his words and say that his description of events seems to match the video of the event accurately.

Since the shooting in the Mosque, I've been haunted that I have not been able to tell you directly what I saw or explain the process by which the world came to see it as well. As you know, I'm not some war zone tourist with a camera who doesn't understand that ugly things happen in combat. I've spent most of the last five years covering global conflict. But I have never in my career been a 'gotcha' reporter -- hoping for people to commit wrongdoings so I can catch them at it.

This week I've even been shocked to see myself painted as some kind of anti-war activist. Anyone who has seen my reporting on television or has read the dispatches on this website is fully aware of the lengths I've gone to play it straight down the middle -- not to become a tool of propaganda for the left or the right.

But I find myself a lightning rod for controversy in reporting what I saw occur in front of me, camera rolling.

It's time you to have the facts from me, in my own words, about what I saw -- without imposing on that Marine -- guilt or innocence or anything in between. I want you to read my account and make up your own minds about whether you think what I did was right or wrong. All the other armchair analysts don't mean a damn to me.

Journalist or not, he is also an eye-witness to the event and was holding a camera that recorded the entire thing.

I’m stunned that you would try to equate his reporting of this to “inspired guess work and fertile imagination”.

And I still must have missed all the "shock, horror" stories on the news. If a handful of poorly faked photos could create the hysteria it did then this one should rub for weeks or even months.

You’ve heard no stories of coalition actions that have shocked or horrified you? Truly?

Oh, and whether you listen or not, the execution of this insurgent is still being talked about… or am I dreaming this entire thread?

[Rheghead]

jjc, What is your position on the war in Iraq?