It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by shots
Originally posted by stumason
By removing or changing parts of the video, they can make it appear worse than it is and take the situation completley out of context.
In other words according to what you are saying, if they have in fact edited the tape, they are making portions of it to look as something other then what it was, which in essence means they are faking portions of it. Or am I missing something here?
Originally posted by stumason
It was a riot. As stated above, I would expect the same treatment off the Metropolitan Police if I did this in London. In fact, in the UK, tear gas, rubber bullets, riot police with batons, police on horses and water cannon would have been deployed.
Originally posted by shots
I agree with you there and think it would have been handled the very same here. The only point I was trying to make is that any time you change the context you are in fact faking it or perhaps a better phrase to use in this case is putting your spin on it to make it look other then what it was.
Frankly I would like to view the original so I can truly judge what took place and I would tend to think you feel the same. Other then that we agree on all points
Originally posted by pieman
devilwasp, you mean to tell me the british army never sanctioned illegal act's in northern ireland
which bloody sunday do you want me to discuss. instatutional heavy handedness is a trademark of british clonial oppression, ever hear of ghandi, what do you think was his problem?
Originally posted by LoganCale
These people are soldiers. They are the weapons of a government. That means they must be disciplined enough to separate their personal emotions from their actions and not just be rampaging on their own and issuing punishments. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the kids should have neccessarily been throwing things at them. But I can also understand their point of view.
Let me turn it around the same way you did. I am making assumptions that may or may not have been the case with these kids, but: If you were an Iraqi kid whose mother or father or brother or friend or whatever were killed by Coalition soldiers, either accidentally or intentionally, wouldn't you be furious and want revenge? So then is it okay for them to try and kill or injure some soldiers for revenge? I suspect your answer will be that it is not. So then how is okay for the soldiers to beat the kids as revenge for attacking them? That's not okay either. They have the right to stop them from attacking them. Once they have stopped the attack and detained the individuals involved, all violence should end.
I realize it's easy to say things that may change when you are personally in a situation, but revenge is usually not the best option and I prefer to always attempt to take the higher ground. Better to temporarily detain them and let someone not directly involved in the situation decide what to do.
Originally posted by Klepto
I am sure these are not the only incidents where death by mobs in Iraq had occured.. it is understandable if the soldiers may have acted the way they did
Originally posted by ArchAngel
Beating those kids did nothing to protect their lives.