linky



Now, keeping in mind the source, and the obviously biased nature of the descriptions of the motivations of the soldiers behind this factual event (ie the death of an Iraqi governor's son at the hands of US troops), just let me say this:


OH FUCK

I sense moar suicide bombings coming up...

It'll be "we said, he said" 'til the end of time.

the headlines great, because obviously the entire country had a hand in it.


on a side note, has there ever been a war without civilian deaths or a war where U.S. civilian were killed? oh wait I forgot our govt always knows attacks are coming and does nothing. :rolleyes

Way to avoid the point. You get a cookie.

so what is the point?

no answer? you can have your cookie back then.

The point is: there has been a culture of permissiveness when it comes to what US troops do to Iraqi citizens. This culture of permissiveness has usualy met a stonewall of military denial, vague evocations of TEH WAR ON TERRAH, and just generally ignoring things. Look at Abu Grahib: "oh it's just the work of a few overstressed bad apples". Then it came out that it was official government policy. Repercussions for various actions have been minimal at best, usually somebody being scapegoated for the media. . Nobody cares. But the problem is that now they fucked up. They killed an Iraqi governor's son. THIS IS FUCKING HUGE. They can't hide behind the usual AL QAEDA RUN! rhetoric.

Is that to say that the highest levels of the US government knew about this? No. But troops from their army representing them while they occupy a foreign country did it nontheless. Iraqi citizens make little distinction between US TROOPS and the US. Is this to say that everybody in the US army kidnaps and murders people? Of course not. However "incidents" such as this are far from rare. This is the extension of an official culture of permissiveness of hostile actions towards Iraqi civillians by US troops.

This is not a case of collateral damage. They went into someone's home, killed two people and kidnapped another. The only problem this time is that one of them mattered politically, and they won't be able to sweep it under the carpet. There will be repercussions.

Keep your cookie

OK, so our boys may have killed the kid. It isn't a stretch to think the kid was involved in anti-US circles with the intent to do harm. If the kid was involved and armed when the troops stormed the home, then by all intents he was a threat, and the troops acted accordingly. Just look at how many times the children of people in power think they can get away with just about anything and the law doesn't apply to them... Now, that being said, it is also a possibility that it was a genuine mistake and the kid was an innocent victim. We just don't know.

first of all, if that is your point then what i said applies perfectly. if you cant make that connection, then i dont know what to tell you. second, what is far from rare? that our troops "murder and kidnap" people unconnected with those we are fighting? is that to imply that this is common proctice? if so i would ask for proof and not some bullshot report from a left wing blog or arab newspaper. third, its pretty evident from your post here that despite the news source and the obvious bias your original post points to, that you share that point of view by the way the last bold statement is written. ask me if i believe some left wing anti-american post or the boys and girls who put their lives on the line for my family everyday and i've got a swift answer for ya. you dont know if that guy was involved with terrorists or not, who gives a crap who he was, if they got proof he was linked up, good on'em for takin' him out. and as far as calling it kidnapping. get over it, if they take a military prisoner for questioning and it saves one US life...i really dont give a fuck.

"There will be repercussions" oooohhhh, well i guess out of fear we should just cower away and never piss anyone off again or try to stop terrorists before they kill people huh?


no thanks, i only eat cookies made stateside. heres a good homemade cookie now,


This letter was originally published by the Clayton News Daily (Jonesboro, GA) on July 4th, 2007.

To the editors:

Today is July 4th, our country's Independence Day, and 231 years ago, our forefathers won this for all to enjoy. Today, our country has more freedoms and wealth than any other in the world. We have all of our freedoms granted to us by the U.S. Constitution. This document sets the standards for all Americans to be guaranteed their freedoms and rights.

Of all the freedoms and rights granted to each American, it is not the news reporter or politician, who ensures that each American enjoys these rights, but it is the American Service Member (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard.) This is the person who every American should be thanking every day, for what they do.

Even though less than 1 percent of the American population serves in the military, it is that sacrifice made by an individual to help protect and guarantee these freedoms. While enjoying the day's festivals celebrating our country's birth, take the time and effort to thank a veteran, or a current service member for their sacrifice in helping to protect your freedom.

If you are unable to thank a vet, say thanks to either the parents or the spouse of a vet, because they are the ones, who worry the most, while the service member is away, protecting your freedoms.


Master Sergeant Mitch Young
B Company, 1st Battalion, 7th Special Forces Group (Airborne)
Killed in action in Afghanistan on July 13th, 2008

I don't see why we should thank the military, since they're just an instrument of the federal government.

You're right, I can think of absolutely no examples of US troops treating Iraqi citizens unfairly. I'm sorry. Everything they do is 100% pure and backed by Jesus. No evidence of de-humanisation of people that are treated largely as being guilty until proven innocent. They can do no wrong.


*These are just the ones I can remember. And I'm sure the Iraqis have a better memory than me.*

I'm not implying that every single soldier there is a bloodthirsty homicidal maniac. They are not. However, it is equally foolish to assume that every Iraqi that gets killed by the US is a de-facto terrorist.

I'm not assuming anything. and I don't believe in Jesus. and I know not all iraquis killed are terrorists. I already said it, sometimes in War civilians die, as LMH said "i can't help it reality exists".

but you are assuming that the soldiers "murdered" and "kidnapped" an innocent. I didn't say he was a terrorist I said "if they can prove he was, good"

oh, and while the military may be a branch of govt, it is a voluntary service that if noone signed up for wouldn't last very long. all those people willingly put their lives upfront to protect you and your family Madhammer. and they are the same ones that use their lives to protect your right to demonize or denegrate them. would you do the same for them?

That's not the issue I was referring to. I'm certainly respectful of anyone who signs up for military service. But the fact is that once you do sign up, what you do is up to the government to decide. I'm not thankful that US soldiers are fighting in Iraq because I don't think they should ever have been sent there. It's nothing against them or their bravery at all; it's just that "supporting the troops" and "supporting the mission the troops get sent on" are two very different things. Not that you'd know from the rhetoric.

the letter I posted specified thanking a service member not the people who send them on missions so that's where the mixup happened. all apologies, I misunderstood your meaning. given the context at the time I hope you can understand.

WHY NOT?

Do the Iraqi civilians and gunmen not even count as stats?

Because we got caught up in this little thing called "body count" during the Vietnam war as a way to measure progress. Since there were no actual military objectives to take, no bases to destroy, no towns to capture, no bridges to hold, the US Army needed a measurable indicator to show that we were "winning" the war, so they started counting bodies. As it turns out, "body count" wasn't so good an indicator.

I suppose it would have been tricky to count all the people who got killed during Shock And Awe.

Not to mention a bit of a buzzkill for everyone who had a raging hard-on for invading Iraq.