US troops kill 13 Iraqis in Falluja. - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-01-2003, 04:34 AM   #16
War Child
 
Marko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Posts: 739
Local Time: 03:51 PM
Sting,

I don't know how you read it and where you found it in my post, but I don't support those terorists.
On other hand you are openly saying that it's o.k. to ill civilians in order to eliminate few of those terorists. It makes me sick - us government holds no one responisible for all the killed and wounded civilians as they hold it 'colateral damage'.
In my country we had one big operation which lasted 4 days and we freed the third of our country. In that operation 50 civilians were killed - those people who led our forces now have to go to the war crime tribunal! And i have to say that we also fought against terorists (see UN resolutions)... will any of your highest ranking officers anwser for all those killed civilians?
__________________

__________________
Marko is offline  
Old 05-01-2003, 07:03 AM   #17
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
Dreadsox,


Can you explain how Powell and Bush could have made a more convincing case to the rest of the world? If one was not convinced by Powell's speach to the UN in February, there is nothing that would have convinced them. But we have over 40 countries with the USA. If you don't think 40 countries is enough, whats your number?

I will again say, that I believe from reading and rereading Pollack, that I feel that this administration did not come close to meeting the conditions that Pollack outlined. You may have a different opinion. Two people can do this.

AS to Powell's speech, I do believe that some of the things he said were discredited, and in fact, proven to be innacurate by the AEIAOOOEIIIASUAS.....I forget the acronym. As a supporter of the war, I was NOT sold by his speech. I had to read outside books to convince myself because this administration has a communication problem in my opinion.

I do not have a number Sting. I stated my opinion. My opinion is that we basically have two nations running the show in Iraq. It does not matter how many have gone on record saying they support us. This phase of the operation would have much more legitimacy if there were a "true" coalition of forces in country at this point in time. As it is, we are "the" target and anytime anything goes wrong, it can be perceived as our fault.

You said the speed of the operation was great. I don't care how fast it went. While I am surprised it went so well, there was never a doubt in my mind that we would win, with or without the world. My point is about this phase. My point was not about the speed of this phase. This is the phase where "TRUE" international support is/was necessary. Now, we are percieved as the "ONE AND ONLY" occupier of Iraq.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 05-01-2003, 12:06 PM   #18
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 08:51 AM
Dreadsox,
I did not support the war, but I agree with everything you stated here. But I'll go a step further and say that I thought Powells presentation was an embarasement to our government. Many will disagree with me, but I wasn't even convinced that he was convinced.

Quote:
I don't understand how you could support people that use innocent civilians as a shield to try and kill US soldiers.
Sting you honestly need to watch your leaps of reasoning. No where did Marko present any such thing.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-01-2003, 01:28 PM   #19
War Child
 
Marko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Posts: 739
Local Time: 03:51 PM
BVSuperstar - thanx
__________________
Marko is offline  
Old 05-01-2003, 03:46 PM   #20
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:51 PM
Marko,

"I don't know how you read it and where you found it in my post, but I don't support those terorists.
On other hand you are openly saying that it's o.k. to ill civilians in order to eliminate few of those terorists. It makes me sick - us government holds no one responisible for all the killed and wounded civilians as they hold it 'colateral damage'.
In my country we had one big operation which lasted 4 days and we freed the third of our country. In that operation 50 civilians were killed - those people who led our forces now have to go to the war crime tribunal! And i have to say that we also fought against terorists (see UN resolutions)... will any of your highest ranking officers anwser for all those killed civilians?"

Colateral damage is an unavoidable fact when terrorist decide to fight against US forces from a large crowd. Your essentially saying that the US soldiers had no right to fire back in self defense. If one is critical of the legitamite self defense of the lives of US soldiers, then it would seem one is borderline supporting what would have happened if the soldiers had not fired back.

A US soldier cannot be held responsible for acting to defend himself and fellow soldiers. These soldiers are alive today because they responded to the terrorist actions. The people that are responsible for the deaths of the innocent civilians are the terrorist.

It makes me sick that anyone would want to hold any US soldier responsible for actions that saved the lives of US soldiers and were against terrorist. The US soldiers did not target any innocent civilians.

The reason that the Croation officers have to go to the wars crimes tribunal is because some feel that there is evidence that they may have committed war crimes. Colateral damage is not a war crime but and unavoidable fact of war. Targeting innocent civilians is a war crime and not colateral damage. Obviously, the Croation officers are on trial because there is evidence that civilians were executed rather than just being the random victim of colateral damage. Realize that there was almost no fighting when the Croations took the other the part of the country that was under Serb Control. Most Serb civilians and Serb military forces had withdrawn from the area prior to the Croation military operation. This makes the deaths of the civilians remaining in the area suspect.

"will any of your highest ranking officers anwser for all those killed civilians?"

NO, for the simple fact that the deaths of any civilians in the incident, do to US fire, were an unavoidable accident given the circumstances. There is not evidence that US forces executed any civilians. Every soldier on the ground in Iraq, including my friends has the right to shoot back in self defense. I sleep better at night knowing my friends are ready to defend themselves and others without hesitation.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 05-01-2003, 04:10 PM   #21
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:51 PM
Dreadsox,

"I will again say, that I believe from reading and rereading Pollack, that I feel that this administration did not come close to meeting the conditions that Pollack outlined. You may have a different opinion. Two people can do this."

Could you be more specific and outline what the Bush Administration did not do that was required from Pollacks book before going into Iraq. Its difficult for me to see how you could say the administration was not even close, please be more specific.

Pollack never said there had to be a broad coalition, but that certain countries in the region were a must.


"I do not have a number Sting. I stated my opinion. My opinion is that we basically have two nations running the show in Iraq. It does not matter how many have gone on record saying they support us. This phase of the operation would have much more legitimacy if there were a "true" coalition of forces in country at this point in time. As it is, we are "the" target and anytime anything goes wrong, it can be perceived as our fault."

Could you please define "true Coalition" forces. What is a "True Coalition"? Do you think it would be better to have Arab troops from the bordering countries that have been suspected of having territorial ambitions in Iraq by some, to be operating in the country. Is it not a coalition simply because the French and Germans do not have troops there? Would it really be desirable to have French and German troops there to begin with?


"As it is, we are "the" target and anytime anything goes wrong, it can be perceived as our fault.""

How is that any different from the "area's" where US soldiers are responsible for maintaining peace and security in Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan?


"You said the speed of the operation was great. I don't care how fast it went."

I care how fast it went because its the speed of the operation which saved lives!

"This is the phase where "TRUE" international support is/was necessary. Now, we are percieved as the "ONE AND ONLY" occupier of Iraq."

Please define, "TRUE" international support. The United Nations will be involved in the delivery of humanitarian supplies and several other activities. What important countries do not support the economic and political development of Iraq into a democracy that does not threaten its neighbors?

"Now, we are percieved as the "ONE AND ONLY" occupier of Iraq.""

We can't be responsible for everyone's mistaken perception or the fact that many have not picked up on the fact that the British military's current deployment in Iraq is the largest deployment of British troops in decades. Nearly 50,000 British troops, a 1/4 of their entire military, have been involved in the operation.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 05-01-2003, 04:13 PM   #22
War Child
 
Marko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Posts: 739
Local Time: 03:51 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
Marko,

Colateral damage is an unavoidable fact when terrorist decide to fight against US forces from a large crowd. Your essentially saying that the US soldiers had no right to fire back in self defense. If one is critical of the legitamite self defense of the lives of US soldiers, then it would seem one is borderline supporting what would have happened if the soldiers had not fired back.


It makes me sick that anyone would want to hold any US soldier responsible for actions that saved the lives of US soldiers and were against terrorist. The US soldiers did not target any innocent civilians.

The reason that the Croation officers have to go to the wars crimes tribunal is because some feel that there is evidence that they may have committed war crimes. Colateral damage is not a war crime but and unavoidable fact of war. Targeting innocent civilians is a war crime and not colateral damage. Obviously, the Croation officers are on trial because there is evidence that civilians were executed rather than just being the random victim of colateral damage. Realize that there was almost no fighting when the Croations took the other the part of the country that was under Serb Control. Most Serb civilians and Serb military forces had withdrawn from the area prior to the Croation military operation. This makes the deaths of the civilians remaining in the area suspect.

"will any of your highest ranking officers anwser for all those killed civilians?"

NO, for the simple fact that the deaths of any civilians in the incident, do to US fire, were an unavoidable accident given the circumstances. There is not evidence that US forces executed any civilians. Every soldier on the ground in Iraq, including my friends has the right to shoot back in self defense. I sleep better at night knowing my friends are ready to defend themselves and others without hesitation.
You are right on some accounts, BUT one of our top officers is accused of using too much artilery during the operation in 1995! Too much artilery? cut the crap - that's what I said. So there are roatian officers accused of for crimes - and it's based on collateral damage! The eventual crimes that maybe happened after the operation are something different and I wasn+t talkn about them - I hope that I'm clearer now...

I have to say that I strongly disagree with you, but I find you a good debater with lousy arguments

And self defence - there are different kinds of self defence. This way you are playing for them - they want you to kill inocent peple and so oyu do... ironic
__________________
Marko is offline  
Old 05-01-2003, 04:14 PM   #23
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:51 PM
BonoVoxSupastar,



"Sting you honestly need to watch your leaps of reasoning. No where did Marko present any such thing."

The specific statement may have been over the top. But I have dear friends in Iraq and I am against any statement or idea that would prevent US soldiers from defending themselves like they did in the recent incident. If my friends are faced with a similar situation, I hope they react in the same way. Their lives depend on it.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 05-01-2003, 07:26 PM   #24
Refugee
 
Klaus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: on a one of these small green spots at that blue planet at the end of the milky way
Posts: 2,432
Local Time: 03:51 PM
In Falludscha, the town were the Iraqi at least 15 civilians were shot today there was a terror act against US soldiers.
People threw grenades into a building with US soldiers and shouted something about "revenge for the mertyrs"

is this the begining of a israel/palestine-like scenario?

Klaus
__________________
Klaus is offline  
Old 05-01-2003, 08:18 PM   #25
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


I care how fast it went because its the speed of the operation which saved lives!

Sting, My heart is not in it. I am not debating this again. It will lead to interpretations of resolutions, debates on what a coalition is, ect. I do not have it in me to go around about these things. Things that we went round and round about before the war. You and I have different opinions on this administration and Pollack.


What I will respond to is this, and this is to clarify, the speed of the operation has nothing, nothing at all to dowith what I said in any of my statements. That is why I said I did not care, because it was not relevant towards the points I have made in here. I have expressed my opinions.

Peace
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 05-01-2003, 08:22 PM   #26
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:51 PM
Dreadsox,

If you don't want to explain your opinion thats fine. I was just asking some specific questions.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 05-02-2003, 12:44 AM   #27
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 08:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
BonoVoxSupastar,



"Sting you honestly need to watch your leaps of reasoning. No where did Marko present any such thing."

The specific statement may have been over the top. But I have dear friends in Iraq and I am against any statement or idea that would prevent US soldiers from defending themselves like they did in the recent incident. If my friends are faced with a similar situation, I hope they react in the same way. Their lives depend on it.
I understand that. I have friends in both Iraq and Afganistan and one dear friend that just got back. So I know what's going on. I know there are some really awful things happening on both sides of the line. I have the same respect and fears that you do for these men and women. But one thing you have not grasped in all of these discussions is that there are occasions where the US has done wrong. But I won't get into any details.

The story at hand has been reported by a few different sources. All have stated that the facts are unclear. I know how you want to see them, and it would be great to know that you are right, but you just don't know. Some say there were stones thrown, some say there weren't. Some say there were armed iraqis some say there weren't. The facts are that no where did they report any US soldier shot and if there was shooting involved it wasn't even clear that the soldiers were being shot at, it could have been shooting in the air. The point is why were children killed? Why were we occupying a school for so long, we had already found our inspections to be unfruitful. The fact is that we don't have all the facts and you can't react as if you do. I know there are situations happening that require our soldiers to defend their lives against those that are upset with the US being there. But I also know there are innocent lives that have suffered from the US soldiers ignorance, impatience, and even just out right hatred towards the people. This is coming from a first hand source...
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-02-2003, 06:05 PM   #28
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:51 PM
BonoVoxSupastar,


"But one thing you have not grasped in all of these discussions is that there are occasions where the US has done wrong. But I won't get into any details."

I know that is what you like to think. I do not know what your specifically talking about, but if your talking about the current operation please explain!

The difference between you and me, I think, and I underline think, is that I trust a member of the US military long before I would trust an independent reporter who often have not taken the time to understand, military weapons, military tactics, training, and the reality of combat in an urban setting.


"The point is why were children killed?"

From what I know of urban combat especially when large crowds are present, I would have been surprised if no one was killed. Oh and because no US soldier was shot does not mean they were not being shot at.

"Why were we occupying a school for so long, we had already found our inspections to be unfruitful."

These soldiers may not have been involved in inspections. I 'd like to inform you that there is a lot more than just inspections that US troops are currently working on! The school based on its position in the town may have been the best location for the troops to base themselves. These soldiers have been involved in military operations for the past 6 weeks and its their job to decide where they do their patrols and where they set up a base that is BEST from a tactical point of view based on multiple factors.

"But I also know there are innocent lives that have suffered from the US soldiers ignorance, impatience, and even just out right hatred towards the people. This is coming from a first hand source..."

Oh and what is your first hand source!? Please name the soldier who you claim has shown hatred to the Iraqi people. US soldiers are not ignorant like many others who do not understand their training and tactics and are not currently in their situation. Patience is a word that soldiers in the current operation understand too well unlike some civilians back in the comfortable western world. How often do civilians ever once think what it was like to sit out in the desert for 6 months away from their family and friends, while waiting to go into Iraq. There may be bad apples in every organization, but you will find ignorance and impatience least in the US military.

In any event, I would reserve judgement for someone that has volunteered to potentially give his life for freedom and justice until you can prove that person is beyond any reasonable doubt guilty of that crime.

I'd be interested if you would acknowledge the fact that the reason there were not hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians in the war is do to the skill, professionalism, honesty, integrity, and knowledge of the men and women who SERVE are country and are ready to give the ultimate sacrifice.

I respect them and disdain any comment that unfairly or foolishly critizes them or alleges they have done actions that they are not guilty of.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 05-02-2003, 06:31 PM   #29
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 08:51 AM
Quote:
I respect them and disdain any comment that unfairly or foolishly critizes them or alleges they have done actions that they are not guilty of.
I agree with you for the most part when it comes to the US soldiers. Like I said I have many of friends that are part of the US military. I have nothing but respect for these men and women.

I spent about 15 minutes writing to further explain what I was talking about earlier, but then decided it wasn't worth it. I'm not here to criticize any of these soldiers. The only thing I will say is that under heavy heat, stress, etc. there have been mistakes made. In the throws of battle, although trained not to, there have been soldiers acting on their own accord.

My problem is not with the soldiers. My problem is that with a pre-imptive strike and the restructuring of a country, Bush's administration has done a poor job dealing with the events that followed the fall of the regime. These were things that should be dealt with better. That's all.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 05-02-2003, 06:41 PM   #30
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 02:51 PM
"In the throws of battle, although trained not to, there have been soldiers acting on their own accord."

Soldiers are trained to act on their own accord without waiting for orders from leaders not on the scene of battle. This is one reason why US forces are so quick to react on the battlefield and survive and quickly defeat the enemy.

Many Iraqi military units were destroyed in place because they never recieved orders from their leaders to move to avoid being targeted and destroyed. US military destroyed the communication links between Iraqi forces. Since Iraqi forces are not trained to operate independently of their chain of command, it was easier to destroy many of their tank units.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com