Printable View
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...d=540&ncid=716
So, America is still going to pull out in June? Events like this frankly scare me. How can any person involved in this feel good about dishonoring the dead, who weren't even soldiers?
Take care all.
I was going to make a thread about it too. The people who did that are animals. The people who got killed weren't even soldiers, they were civilians. And why would anyone desecrate their dead bodies? The people who did that are scum. Sometimes it's hard to think that the people in Iraq even deserve to be saved from their former dicator. Sometimes it's hard to believe the depths of human ignorance.
Do you think America should still turn government over to the Iraqi citizens in a few months?
Take care all.
I don't know what it's really like over there, just what I've seen on TV, and that's likely not very much. It's probably never going to be safe for anyone to live anywhere in the Middle East. All they do is murder each other and murder anyone who tries to stop the murdering. The Iraqis and the US and the UN will decide when to let Iraq go on its way, and in a year they'll likely have another dictator anyways. It's getting difficult to care. At least we tried.
I'd say don't give up hope, but I too am beginning to wonder if Iraq will ever be able to stand on its own. The people there have lived in such oppression for so long that perhaps there is little anyone anywhere can do to heal the situation at this point. I still believe with a proper education, they too would desire a form of government that would allow for civil liberties, and not be directly tied to Islam.
Take care all.
God damn. That's awful.
I wish I could make those animals pay, but that would just be adding fuel to the fire.
God damn.
I saw a picture on another forum of what was done to the victims. There's some guy standing below the mangled and charred corpse of what I'm guessing is one of the contractors having a good time watching him suspended from a bridge. I wouldn't even call most of those folks over there animals because even the nastiest of beasts are above that.
People like that make it impossible to bring freedom and security to the innocents over there. Most of these liberation efforts are futile. Look at that track record of some of those dirty bastards as far as not only leading a violent life, but propagating their violence all over their country and smothering any effort get people out of the way of it. It's past time to cut our losses and quit playing with the idealist notion that the people over there who deserve to be saved are actually able to be rescued.
I wouldn't say animals myself, but certainly misguided human beings. The day we begin to judge others as not even human is the day we ourselves are judged.
Take care all.
That's fine by me. I'm willing to take judgment because I spare no pity to anyone who can treat another human like that. I think those attackers are better described as something extremely bad.
Edit but Unne: I can't allow language like that, however much I might agree with the sentiment.
Darn right I judge them. There is no excuse for something like that. Ignorance is not even an excuse.
What they don't understand is that Americans do not give in to acts of barbarism and gruesome violence - all they're doing is strengthening our resolve.
Fair enough, fair enough.
Still, I stand by my stance that we are all indeed humans, though deeds can be done by us that are terrible and can not be forgiven. It only shows how weak humans can be. Yet, to put them below us is dangerous because then one might begin to border on self-righteousness. I am in no way defending the actions. I made this thread to express my outrage, but humans did this, and that, is the very core of all the problems of the world. We can blame problems on weapons, or lies, science, religion, but people created all of this. We must take a serious look at ourselves and try to figure out how anyone could become so filled with hate and without remorse, or else the tragedies will only continue to repeat themselves.
How will the world respond? Will we hunt them down, or continue to stand pat?
Take care all.
If my military knows what they're doing (and I know they do), they'll stand their ground, not retaliating or retreating. The American occupation is, and should be the epitomy of "loving thy enemy." We will be like a steel wall, unwaivering against this storm of brutality.
I certainly hope so. Or else, all hell will again break lose and we might have Somalia again.
Take care all.
Quote:
Originally posted by The Captain
How can any person involved in this feel good about dishonoring the dead, who weren't even soldiers?
It wouldn't be equally as horrific if the dead were soldiers? Soldiers or civilians, it should never be acceptable to act in such a way.Quote:
Originally posted by Dr Unne
The people who got killed weren't even soldiers, they were civilians.
Tough question, but aren't soldiers better prepared to face these hostile conditions than a civilian? Not saying that a soldier's death is any less than another, but it just seems more tragic when it involves someone outside of having any experience defending themselves.
Still, I take your point. Though If any soldier's corpse were carried through the street, I warrant the reaction would still be the same. I believe we were reacting to the terrible act of dragging the bodies moreso than who was killed. Sorry if it offended you in any way.
Take care all.
"I think they will embrace us as liberators" -Dick Cheney
this whole thing reminds me of things like when you have two friends who are at odds and you try to step in and reconcile them. often you just end up getting stuck in the mess yourself and everyone is worse off.
Yes, soldiers are trained to defend themselves against such an attack, while civillians are typically not. It does not make it any more or less gruesome whether it is a soldier or a civillian, but it is certainly more shocking when civillians are the target of this brutality.
I think that these news stations and websites should remove these pictures. These people obviously want attention from this atrocity, so I don't think they should be given any. As long as they continue to show these awful images, they are only giving passive support to the animals that did this.
It goes both ways, because without the photos, people will probably continue to be ignorant to the issue. Pictures speak a thousand words, or so it says, and hopefully these thousand words equals stability and peace soon. I think pictures are a double-edged sword, yes they give exposure to those who did this, but also, they help to really drive home the point of how terrible it was. We are very much a visual society.
Take care all.
In World War I, after the Battle of the Somme, the bloodiest battle of the war (and possibly of the 20th Century), a British photographer decided to take pictures of the aftermath in an attempt to boil Britain's blood and strengthen her resolve to keep fighting against Germany. He took pictures of everything - trenches that had been turned into mass graves, corpses that were being devoured by rats, bodies that had been mutilated beyond any recognition. The result was opposite what he intended. Many British, upon seeing their sons, fathers, and husbands slain and face-down in the mud, began to riot, and popular support for the war began to dwindle.
It wouldn't be equally as horrific if the dead were soldiers? Soldiers or civilians, it should never be acceptable to act in such a way. --Talus
The killings themselves are what I was referring to. Mutilating dead bodies is horrific no matter who the people were, yes. If you kill a soldier, you could at least make some weak argument of self-defense. At least soldiers know they might die, and volunteer to join the military knowing and accepting the possibility. Civilians should expect to feel safe. They shouldn't be murdered in the streets for no reason.
But yeah, even if in this case it was soldiers killed, the soldiers in Iraq are HELPING the Iraqis. Sometimes it seems like people over there don't know anything but to mindlessly kill everyone who isn't in their immediate social group.
this whole thing reminds me of things like when you have two friends who are at odds and you try to step in and reconcile them. --eestlinc
Reminds me more of a dog biting a vet when the vet is trying to save its life.
I believe, the reason that failed was because the photographer was using the pictures for the wrong reasons. In my opinion, photographs should be used to inform, not rally support.
Would 9/11 support have been as high without photos? Tough to call, but more or less, I think those photos were taken, not to stir emotions, but to capture events so that they could be grasped by anyone who wasn't there.
Take care all.
I see, I was connecting everything with the draggings. I agree, we prepare for the worst and can atleast defend ourselves whereas the contractors couldn't.Quote:
Originally posted by Dr Unne
The killings themselves are what I was referring to. Mutilating dead bodies is horrific no matter who the people were, yes. If you kill a soldier, you could at least make some weak argument of self-defense. At least soldiers know they might die, and volunteer to join the military knowing and accepting the possibility. Civilians should expect to feel safe. They shouldn't be murdered in the streets for no reason.
Does anyone know what they were doing in Iraq? Were they helping to rebuild something?
Take care all.
"In Iraq, the company was hired by the Pentagon to provide security for convoys that delivered food in the Fallujah area, the company statement said."
I say send Saddam back to these animals. Let him run them feet-first through a plastic shredder, just like old times.
it should be noted that the jobs these contractors were doing are jobs formerly done by military personnel. The privatization of the US military is going to result in civilian casualities.
Don't know about that, in my humble opinion. There are many people in Iraq that want our help, need it, and completely disagree with what has transpired since Saddam was captured. Would we just strand them as well? If not, how do we pick out who to leave and take? It gets very complicated..
Take care all.
EDIT:
"In Iraq, the company was hired by the Pentagon to provide security for convoys that delivered food in the Fallujah area, the company statement said."
Heh, probably should have read the article more than once before posting. I completely missed that part.
[q=Dr Unne]it's hard to think that the people in Iraq even deserve to be saved from their former dicator. Sometimes it's hard to believe the depths of human ignorance.[/q]Clearly, the entire population's not to blame for the actions of extremists. It's pretty close to racism to say that the whole country's full of bloodthirsty murderers just because people like that are active there.
What west should do is to hunt down the guilty, but contine doing everything possible to help the innocent. A horrific crime like that can't go unpunished, but it won't help anyone to treat every Iraqi like a terrorist.
Yes, but they are civillian contractors who agreed to take the job despite the inherent risk involved. We pay these people well for a reason. Of course, it doesn't make it any better when some ignorant animals butcher their bodies.Quote:
Originally posted by eestlinc
it should be noted that the jobs these contractors were doing are jobs formerly done by military personnel. The privatization of the US military is going to result in civilian casualities.
yea, it's horrific regardless, but they are technically working for the US military and we are at war with these people in Iraq.
Well he didn't get peace, and he didn't get weapons of mass destruction, so I sure hope Bush got some of that oil he wanted.
It doesn't seem as if any of the military forces in Iraq are actually achieving anything by being over there and if that is the case I hope they are pulled out before it results in more horrible stuff like this.
"It doesn't seem as if any of the military forces in Iraq are actually achieving anything by being over there and if that is the case I hope they are pulled out before it results in more horrible stuff like this."
That is true enough, but now we're in a catch-22. If we just up and leave, then all the innocent people there will be stranded. However, we cannot just sit there and hope people come to their senses either. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't. Quite a nice pickle Mr. President.
Take care all.
You'd think we'd have learned about these situations from our past, but I guess not.
Jimmy Carter was probably our best president in terms of morality because he actually addressed problems with frank honesty. Of course, he was burned for it, and blamed for all that went wrong, but if one looks at what he tried to accomplish, I think your admiration for what he did and stood for will rise.
Take care all.
Clearly, the entire population's not to blame for the actions of extremists. It's pretty close to racism to say that the whole country's full of bloodthirsty murderers just because people like that are active there.
What west should do is to hunt down the guilty, but contine doing everything possible to help the innocent. A horrific crime like that can't go unpunished, but it won't help anyone to treat every Iraqi like a terrorist. --Faris_the_guy?
Like I said, I don't know how it really is over there. All I know is what I see on TV, and what I see on TV is all bad. I see that there are at the very least huge mobs if not entire towns of people who are actively fighting us. I see prominent Iraqis saying things like this: that 9/11 was "a miracle from God". I see people holding riots in the streets demanding that Americans leave, even though we're all that's keeping them from being plunged into anarchy. I see an entire nation of Iraqis who allowed themselves to be abused by a dictator rather than fighting against him, who allowed their leader to pillage other nations and murder his own citizens and did nothing to stop him.
If the majority of Iraqis are shocked and appalled when innocent Americans are killed and mutilated in the streets by Iraqis, then sure, that's a great thing. But if Iraqis don't give a crap about incidents such as this thread discusses, then what? What exactly is the difference between doing evil acts and tolerating evil acts? I really hope that most Iraqis have some brains and some morals. I will agree that it's certain that some do, if not most. But it is hard to believe sometimes, even if it's true. Maybe just because we only see the bad stuff on TV and not the good. I don't know.
It's the media that ultimately dictates the news, not the news itself.
Take care all.
"And in an exciting new development, seven million Iraqis got out of bed, ate their breakfast and went off to work this morning!"
Gee-whiz, that'll boost the ratings. News broadcasters don't give a damn about anything but getting money off advertisers.So if your leader started making people disappear, you'd grab a shovel and make a charge for retribution? The thing about oppressive totalitarian dictators is that they kill any who oppose them. Unless they all wanted to die, there was nothing they could've done.. actually, tens of thousands of Kurds tried to fight back, but they were all murdered with WMDs. Dictators like that control the news, they can make people believe whatever they want about anyone.Quote:
I see an entire nation of Iraqis who allowed themselves to be abused by a dictator rather than fighting against him, who allowed their leader to pillage other nations and murder his own citizens and did nothing to stop him.
""And in an exciting new development, seven million Iraqis got out of bed, ate their breakfast and went off to work this morning!"
Gee-whiz, that'll boost the ratings. News broadcasters don't give a damn about anything but getting money off advertisers." - Repo Man
Indeed, but at least it would be the truth for once. I've begun to forget what that is.
Take care all.
Heh, if I went just by what I saw on t.v. I'd think Americans had no brains or morals either.Quote:
Originally posted by Dr Unne
If the majority of Iraqis are shocked and appalled when innocent Americans are killed and mutilated in the streets by Iraqis, then sure, that's a great thing. But if Iraqis don't give a crap about incidents such as this thread discusses, then what? What exactly is the difference between doing evil acts and tolerating evil acts? I really hope that most Iraqis have some brains and some morals. I will agree that it's certain that some do, if not most. But it is hard to believe sometimes, even if it's true. Maybe just because we only see the bad stuff on TV and not the good. I don't know.
Well, we certainly ARE getting fatter.
Take care all.
So if your leader started making people disappear, you'd grab a shovel and make a charge for retribution? --repo man?
Retribution? No. Self-defense. It's how this nation was founded, for example. If my mother was dragged into the street and raped and murdered before my eyes by the personal guard of the President, yes, I would likely go down in flames and take as many of them with me as I could manage. Maybe not in a mindless rush that accomplishes nothing, but in the form of organized rebellion; who knows. I wouldn't sit around and wait to be saved, pretty sure. And if I did sit around and wait to be saved, would I really deserve to be saved? I don't know.
Unless they all wanted to die, there was nothing they could've done.. actually, tens of thousands of Kurds tried to fight back, but they were all murdered with WMDs.
Still a few million Iraqis left though, weren't there? If they'd tried too, they could've won. I'm sure the general population outnumbered the Iraqi army. Dictators rule because the people allow it. Maybe they couldn't have won, but is life worth living in a world where you have to watch your loved ones tortured to death before your eyes?
Dictators like that control the news, they can make people believe whatever they want about anyone.
You can't make someone believe something. You can say something all you want; it takes another person to choose to believe it.
Heh, if I went just by what I saw on t.v. I'd think Americans had no brains or morals either. --HOOTERS
So would I.
In extreme situations, people will be more than willing to trade in their freedom for the ability to keep themselves and their children safe. It could happen anywhere, given the right situation - Iraq, Russia, France, America - anywhere. It's a sad fact of human nature that most of us would prefer safety over freedom. That has been the case in Iraq for too long now, and it will be a difficult process bringing the people out of the darkness of opression.
So, imagine you're in a world where EVERYTHING you see, hear and know has been carefully scripted to make you believe lies. You're told that the world wants to conquer you, that evil outside forces are bent on pillaging your country's resources, and they'll kill anyone who gets in their way but use lies to try to justify their actions. Then, your country gets invaded by a foreign force, thousands of innocents die, and foreign troops control the streets. What would you believe?Quote:
You can't make someone believe something. You can say something all you want; it takes another person to choose to believe it.
"Ah, I see! Everything the state told me was a lie, these people are actually my friends. Yay for liberation!"
Of course not. If information's not available, people can't know it. People "choose" to believe this because there's nothing else available. 'Truman Show' principles, you might say. You can't blame an entire country for having ignorance forced upon them.Yeah, every normal population has the courage and resolve to charge to certain death, when the alternative - simply obeying - will keep them alive and in a stable, if unpleasant, state of existence. Virtually every country has had disagreeable leaders at some time or another, you can't reasonably blame a nation for choosing death in the vague hope of possibly destroying their rulers in the process. Rebellions are found out and the instigators brutally murdered; soldiers beat anyone who fails to have the dictator's protrait in their homes. That's how Iraq was. Or should they have killed Hussein just when he rose to power, because they suspected he might turn evil?Quote:
Still a few million Iraqis left though, weren't there? If they'd tried too, they could've won. I'm sure the general population outnumbered the Iraqi army. Dictators rule because the people allow it. Maybe they couldn't have won, but is life worth living in a world where you have to watch your loved ones tortured to death before your eyes?
It's a known, errr... practice, among Arabs, to desecrate the bodies of fallen enemies. When they execute people (at least here with the Palestinians), they cut the body in various parts, and hang it for all to see, and for various prey-birds to take random bites. Syrian soldiers, I hear, used to carry small hand-axes to mutilate the bodies of defeated troops (if I recall correctly, last sightings of this phenomenon were in the Yom Kippur war in 1973). So, it's not something new, really.
And - these things will keep on happening. The Iraqies won't tolerate anyone foreign controlling them, even if ultimately, it's the best thing for them. So... I just hope America pulls out of that hell-hole as soon as possible, and the hell with helping the Iraqi people, if this is their display of appreciation.
Well, to be quite frank, that news didn't surprise me that much, we asre talking about a war anyway, brings up the worst out of people.
It's not something new anyway. In Homer's Odyssey (I believe it was there) you could read how Achilles' corpse (Well, I think it was him, not 100% sure) was dragged arround tied to the back of a chariot. Or, to speak of a book I have read more recently, Robert Louis Stevenson clearly described how, in war, the people in the most barbarian islands of the south (Not in Tahiti or Samoa, yet in the Marquesse...I hope it's written Marquesse, I read the book in Spanish) broke their enemies apart to pieces and ate them. And that was more than a century ago, but one year ago I read in the newspaper how a guerrilla in Congo raped and killed children to eat them afterwards. Or to make something closer to our world (The Only One That Exists, The South Cone Are Just Extras In The Movie, Third Class Corpses :rolleyes2 ) we can see all the horrible things done in the holocaust to jews, in the Spanish Civil War to communists, in Russia to anyone oposing Stalin, or how soldiers in Vietnam used napalm against children.
And you know, this is in the news now, but I bet it has happened before in the war, in this war, in the other and in the war to come.
Like when Creon decided Polinices (Whatever the name in English is) did not deserve to be buried, he was following the same schemes this people do: They see the "infidels" have conquered their land, so they attack those people. Then one of them decides to degenerate more and starts kicking the corpses, or whatever they were doing in those images. Then people follow. Horrible, yes, completly disgusting and gross, but I'm not surprised it happened, nor will I be surprised if it happened again. Don't think I am doing an apology to such horrible actions, I'm just saying it's nothing new. I think it would not be a bad idea to ask ourselves what lead those people to degenerate to this. Do you believe none of the people posting in this forum would ever do this? I prefer to believe I wouldn't, but it's certainly frightening.
So, imagine you're in a world where EVERYTHING you see, hear and know has been carefully scripted to make you believe lies. --Big D
I was raised in a world where everyone (family, all my friends, the media, my church, etc. etc.) told me that there was a God, but I ended up atheist. I have relatives who say black people are inferior to white people, but I never believed it. I use my own brain rather than swallow whatever is fed me. If someone says "Americans are evil", people should ask why. And when they don't get an answer, they should decide it's a lie. Words can lie, but reality is always there to fall back on.
You can't blame an entire country for having ignorance forced upon them.
But I do.
Yeah, every normal population has the courage and resolve to charge to certain death, when the alternative - simply obeying - will keep them alive and in a stable, if unpleasant, state of existence.
Interesting definition of stability, then, when you can expect to be murdered at any moment by your own government.
Virtually every country has had disagreeable leaders at some time or another
Very interesting use of the word disagreeable. Every country has not, for example, had a ruler who's murdered his own citizens by the thousands. People in America hardly tolerated Clinton, who just lied and had an affair with someone; imagine if our President murdered someone. He wouldn't last a minute.
Rebellions are found out and the instigators brutally murdered; soldiers beat anyone who fails to have the dictator's protrait in their homes.
Same thing happens to people who obey. Better to go out fighting, rather than give the thugs what they want.
Or should they have killed Hussein just when he rose to power, because they suspected he might turn evil?
You have a habit of attacking straw men. No sane person would argue that you should kill a leader because you "suspect he might turn evil".
War Angel, Shadow Nexus, you're right that it's nothing new. I'm not really surprised either, just disgusted that that kind of ignorance can still exist in what should be a modern world.
Why do you call this 'ignorance'? It's just cruelty. What was common in ancient times (like Shadown Nexus pointed out) is no longer tolerated in modern, civilised nations. But Iraq and the Arab world aren't that, in this aspect. They're third-world, and their grasp of warfare and 'justice' is still stuck somewhere in ancient times. That's really all that has to be said... socially, they still haven't evolved enough.Quote:
I'm not really surprised either, just disgusted that that kind of ignorance can still exist in what should be a modern world.
I consider cruelty a form of ignorance. Or at least a symptom of ignorance.
So, what's the answer? That's really what we should be attempting to figure out. Our society in general has an unholy devotion to the past when thinking about how to progress might save us from future atrocities. Yes, one must study the past to understand the present, but you must also remember to create the future, not allow yourself to be trapped in an endless loop.
Take care all.
Perhaps the US should take a page from the Israeli playblook, get some bulldozers, and level this god-forsaken town.
I think we should kill every human being in the world. That would bring world peace. For sure.Quote:
Originally posted by Doomgaze
Perhaps the US should take a page from the Israeli playblook, get some bulldozers, and level this god-forsaken town.
This is the official press release from the DoD website:
Quote:
Coalition Vows 'Deliberate' Response to Attacks
By John D. Banusiewicz
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, April 1, 2004 – A "deliberate, precise, overwhelming" response awaits the insurgents who killed four American contractors and five U.S. soldiers March 31, the coalition's military spokesman said at a Baghdad news conference today.
Army Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, deputy operations director for Combined Joint Task Force 7, promised an appropriate, if not immediate, military reaction. The civilians were in a vehicle escorting a food convoy in Fallujah, Iraq, when it came under attack by grenades and small-arms fire. The troops were patrolling near that city when their vehicle hit a roadside bomb.
"We are not going to do a pell-mell rush into the city (of Fallujah)," Kimmitt said. "It's going to be deliberate, it will be precise, and it will be overwhelming. We will not rush in to make things worse. We will plan our way through this, and we will re-establish control of that city, and we will pacify that city."
Kimmitt said the restraint shown by military leaders in the aftermath of the Fallujah attack – in which the bodies of the victims were abused and desecrated – may have prevented more carnage. "I think that there was a well-thought-out decision on the part of the Marines" not to rush headlong into the city, Kimmitt said, given the possibility that the insurgents could have had ambushes set up or might have used civilians as human shields.
"While (the desecration of the victims' bodies) was dreadful, while it was unacceptable, while it was bestial," the general said, "a pre-emptive attack into the city could have taken a bad situation and made it even worse."
But the lack of an immediate military response doesn't mean there won't be one, Kimmitt said. "We will be back in Fallujah," he vowed. "It will be at the time and the place of our choosing. We will hunt down the criminals. We will kill them or we will capture them, and we will pacify Fallujah."
At a Baghdad Police Academy graduation ceremony today for 479 new Iraq police, the coalition's civilian administrator also condemned the attacks, according to chief spokesman Dan Senor, also at the news conference. Senor read reporters a portion of Ambassador L. Paul Bremer III's comments.
"The acts we have seen were despicable and inexcusable," Senor quoted Bremer as saying. "They violate the tenets of all religions – Islam included – as well as the foundations of civilized society." Senor said Bremer promised the soldiers' and contractors' deaths "will not go unpunished."
Senor relayed Bremer's expression of sympathy to the families of all civilian and military Iraqi and coalition families whose loved ones "have given their lives in the war to liberate Iraq and free it from terrorism."
Bremer termed the attacks as "a crime under law and a crime against the future of Iraq," Senor said, and labeled the attackers as "cowards and ghouls" who represent the worst of society. Bremer also expressed his determination that Iraq's progress toward democracy would be undeterred by the attacks.
"These murders are a painful outrage for us in the coalition, but they will not derail the march to stability and democracy in Iraq," Senor quoted from Bremer's statement.
What, only four?
Is it just me, or were those people messing with the bodies civilians? They looked like angered civilians rather than terrorists, they didn't seem to have weapons of any sort. Of course, the ones who threw the grenades must have been the terrorists, but the ones that did all that horrible things to the bodies...can they be catalogued as terrorists or just as people with doubtable moral values?
They're attacking innocent civillians in an effort to promote fear and panic in others. Hence, they are terrorists. The people who were mutilating the bodies are only animals with no respect for human life. They could also be the killers, you know.
I find it funny how people use the word "animal" in this thread. Human is as human genocides.
I use the word "animal" because no sane human would violate another human being like that.
Oh, and that makes them animal?
Funny, though, how so many mentally unstable persons have happened to gather in this one particular place.
Hi.
an·i·mal, n.
1. A multicellular organism of the kingdom Animalia, differing from plants in certain typical characteristics such as capacity for locomotion, nonphotosynthetic metabolism, pronounced response to stimuli, restricted growth, and fixed bodily structure.
2. An animal organism other than a human, especially a mammal.
3. A person who behaves in a bestial or brutish manner.
4. A human considered with respect to his or her physical, as opposed to spiritual, nature.
5. A person having a specified aptitude or set of interests: “that rarest of musical animals, an instrumentalist who is as comfortable on a podium with a stick as he is playing his instrument” (Lon Tuck).
Haha, had fun while it lasted, and then Unne whips out the Oxford. :D
Anyhow, I don't think hanging anyone is particularly bestial, you need opposable thumbs for that.
Are you seriously trying to argue, or are you just being petulant?
Still, I think branding the people who did this "animals" is only denying that human beings have problems, that seriously need to be assessed. Otherwise, only more of these sort of acts will occur.
I more than understand your point of view DocFrance, yet I also think that the only way we'll fix this is to try to understand why this happened.
Take care all.
I fully understand what happened. A bunch of ignorant people who have been living in a primitive, violent society, decided they didn't like that we're occupying their country, and decided to act horribly irrationally.
Does this mean that we're going to pull out so that more of our people don't get killed?
Hell no.
I'd argue that our society isn't much more advanced, but yes, we are not as violent. Still, the best way to end ignorance is through an education, opening of ones mind, expanding horizons.
Take care all.
If you leave a primitive, barbaric country to its own devices, then you'll inevitably end up with primitive, violent people armed with the most sophisticated black-market weapons available. Not a good way to be. Bringing other countries into the First World would be better for everyone.
All too true. Unfortunately, they will continue to resist for a long time, much like a dog that bites at the vet.Quote:
Originally posted by The Captain
I'd argue that our society isn't much more advanced, but yes, we are not as violent. Still, the best way to end ignorance is through an education, opening of ones mind, expanding horizons.
To play Devil's Advocate for a moment, imagine if America had a "forced" regime change. I think we'd probably resist even longer than Iraq has or will. Just food for thought, I suppose. Not making any comparison to the events in Iraq, but I think every people will resist change, so it's to be expected, I suppose.
Take care all.
Anybody will resist change. It's called social inertia.
...until the excesses practiced on the first world extend globally and it becomes a self-destructive story. You know, most resources are unlimited because they keep regenerating (Wood, water, food, etc) but we just know how to keep them from continuing the cycle screwing mother nature and...ourselves too.Quote:
Bringing other countries into the First World would be better for everyone.
See? I can find problems everywhere! Hah! I rule! Ha-ha! haHAHA!
To play Devil's Advocate for a moment, imagine if America had a "forced" regime change. I think we'd probably resist even longer than Iraq has or will. --The Captain
So long as we vote for our own leaders, to change our leaders is to enslave the American people. There is no parallel between such a case and the case where a people have not voted for their leaders.
Well, Iraq did vote, but under penalty of death of course. Still, I see your point. I suppose my point would be, what if the UN forced Bush out of power because they thought he was becoming too powerful? Do you think we'd fight that? People resist change, tis human nature, even IF it's best for them to change.
I made sort of the same point in the religion thread. I think partially, religion itself is to blame because religion is so very tough to change, and many people over there are very steely in their religious beliefs. They view America and the West as blasphemists (is that a word?) and that might explain most of their hatred towards us.
Take care all.
US army blow today a mosque on Flojah and 40 Iraqies were killed besides the injuries. Many Women and children also killed on strike on the same citey, although I know no body care as long they are not American.
Can't blame you for trying right? First of all, it wasn't the US Army, it was the Marines. Second and more importantly, everyone is the Mosque was an insurgent.Quote:
Originally Posted by WAKED
Whatever. Still, the fact that the things getting more complecated, and to make it worse, they are start fighting Al-Sadir followers to raise the violance there.
As I understnad Alsaid Al-Sistani is trying to clame the Irqies down as he have the most Iraqi followers, but if the situation raises more, and US didn't leave its stuborn, Iraqies will try to push him to declare the war officely.
[q=Talus]Second and more importantly, everyone is the Mosque was an insurgent.[/q]Yep, it's a pretty dirty tactic - insurgents using a sacred site to house weapons and explosives, not to mention the murderers who use those weapons. The Marines' air attack was a pinpoint strike, aimed at the one militant stronghold alone, in order to protect the lives of all the civilians living in the area. They could have gone in with tanks and RPGs, but the protracted fighting would've inevitably cost many innocent lives. Instead, they opted for a single effective blow.
Regardless, the American military is going to get a lot of crap for that. And I guess we deserve it. The cost of those innocent lives is going to be even more criticism and opposition to our presence in Iraq, sadly. But it still had to be done.
The report I read said that there weren't any civilian casualties from the mosque strike. The most innocent lives were lost during the large-scale airstrikes; now that the fighting is almost all on the ground, it's possible to be more selective and precise about where one aims. The terrorists are killing far more innocents these days - their own people, and outsiders who're there with the intent to help.