US soldiers kill 10-year-old Iraqi girl

Hopefully people check back in this thread for an update. There are new 2008 Winter Soldier investigations happening now. this is where Iraq/Afghanistan vets are speaking out against war crimes that they were a part of. check out the thread here if you are interested.

2008 winter Soldier

reply to post by ANTHONY33


Not the Iraq people but the terrorists in Iraq. You could say that US did the Iraqis a favor by bringing down a dictator.

reply to post by bonthan


You have a point. We did bring down the dictator....only to become the dictator ourselves. many Iraqis appreciate the fact that we got Saddam out, but now, things are a mess over there. They are thankful, but seem to want to run the country themselves. As if we have overextended our welcome. Which a lot of folks believe is the case.

Originally posted by ANTHONY33
I welcome the day when the world bring war on those invading, oil hungry, war loving, fascist, ignorant Americans streets and see how they like it having teenagers with tools of Evil run around killing your children for looking funny at you.

Sorry I typed out loud

So will we also see all the different Christian denominations blowing themselves up to kill other Christian denominations 50 to 100 at a time while injuring 100s too?

If you want to paint the right picture at least get the big one straight.

Originally posted by palehorse23

You have a point. We did bring down the dictator....only to become the dictator ourselves. many Iraqis appreciate the fact that we got Saddam out, but now, things are a mess over there. They are thankful, but seem to want to run the country themselves. As if we have overextended our welcome. Which a lot of folks believe is the case.

We want them to run their own damn country. Their inability to work together without trying to kill each other is what is preventing them from doing it. With whoever is the next president it will be political suicide if we stay as we are now over there for it has cost the republicans dearly so far. The sad part is we will need to pull out and we will see many die as soon as we stop being the safety valve for the pot of boiling secularists.

reply to post by Xtrozero


So then what is the right thing to do? Do we stay or do we leave. Don't you think we are at a point to where we can't just leave the area? The way things appear to be going with the campaigns (Dems handing it to McCain) we are not going to be out of there anytime soon. And why do you think that the sectarian violence wasn't heard of as much as it is now? Because Saddam quashed it. Sure it happened when he ruled, but hasn't it increased since our occupation/invasion?
Why is it that we think we can just insert our Democracy anywhere we please? The question again is raised, what the hell was our whole point of going in the first place? If we do suddenly leave, we will be blamed for leaving the country in chaos. It is a NO WIN situation. Whether we stay or leave, people are always going to be dying, both innocent people and those creating the violence. It is a sad situation no matter how you look at it.
I just wish our leaders would focus a bit more on protecting and helping the people of this country instead of running out to achieve their own personal agendas. I am sure this will never change though. No matter who ends up in office next, it will not be a pretty scenario.

[edit on 3/16/2008 by palehorse23]

We need the oil , If we dont get it we will be the losers ,The oil is flowing and we aren't leaving till its all gone trust me , We rule the world or the world rules us , God bless the soldier that had sense to save his own life and not end up coming back in a coffin, They will chop your head off in a heartbeat dont be dumbed down, Its us or them in a war dont matter who started it

[edit on 17-3-2008 by yenko13]

I would hardly compare a gang war with a military operation. If our military operated like a gang, we would be totally screwed. I would not want a gang protecting my country that's for sure.

If you read the third Geneva convention and the 1977 protocol 1, you will find that Gangs could very well be considered an armed force.

um.. Saddam = 500k-1M citizens killed....

America = 100k People killed.... including soldiers I assume..

And Iraq was better off under Saddam?

The UN estimated the excess deaths during the 35 years of Baath party rule(covering Saddam Hussein as well as several other presidents), to be approximately 200,000.

The US estimated the excess deaths during the same period to be approximately 300,000.

Iraqi death tolls stands between 60-80K right now.. "surveys" are not exact sciences by anymeans, essentially quessimating.

Actually the IBC count is 82,000 - 89,000 civilian deaths, and those are just the ones who were reported in the media.

Only more Sunnis have died under American control, which honestly I have a hard time feeling bad for them.

So you approve of the honour killing system. If someone from your extended family kills someone from my extended family, it's ok for me to kill you, because even if you are an fine upstanding person, you should pay for what your idiot cousin did.

If insurgents use women and children-

A- that is a war crime
B- it is unfortunate, but these women and children lose their protected status if in their actions are part of hostilities(i.e. forward observing, signalling ambushes, carrying explosives or weapons, etc...).

So insurgents in Iraq are capable of committing warcrimes(indicating that they are a militia under the geneva convention), but if they are cáught, they are considered 'enemy combattants' and hauled off to Guantanamo. Seems a wee bit contradictory to me.

[edit on 17-3-2008 by aaa2500]

[edit on 17-3-2008 by aaa2500]

We have seem to have migrate away from the post topic (presumptuous of me, I suppose since it's not my post). Or maybe not, depending on the overall debate raging at the moment.

Just to add some fuel to the fire I thought I might mention:

1) It seems incorrect to contend to contend that this is a 'war' between 'the US and coalition forces and 'terrorist' or even 'insurgents.' I am uncertain as to how much weight to give to government figures but if it is true that 90% of the enemy combatants in the area are from Syria, doesn't that change the rules of engagement somewhat?

2) The US citizens supporting and promoting this conflict are corporate. In other words the military industrial complex and energy industries represent the motive force behind this conflict. The other pablum is just political and diplomatic crap used to keep the issue muddled and unresolvable. (After all if our objectives were met - we would leave, no?) It seems criminal to ignore that this was a rushed war on the cheap to strengthen economic and commercial ventures in the area. There was NO strategy for withdrawal.

3) The "Project for the New American Century" imprinted its dogma on the administration long before the 'events' triggering this war took place. Unfortunately, that 'agenda' lacked vision in regards to anything other than the eventual 'global' action it encouraged. The longer it lasts the more money is made by corporate America, since they drive the political machine, the actual population of the US is disenfranchised and therefore unable to put an end to it.

4) This move seems to have been 'foreshadowed' by Papa Bush who established, by means of the Kuwait trap, the international legal precedent to allow for a nation to 'represent' the global community in taking military action against another. The abuse, of course, came from Bush Jr., who may or may not be a tool of greater forces behind the throne.

5) Al Qaida is a creation of the disastrous covert intelligence operations of the US; and their existence - whether ties to 9-11 or not, is our testimony to the 'Blow back' theory. I believe that this will be the fuel used to stoke the 'privately funded army' trend, ala Black Water. You see, if the people's voices are heard, and military support for the 'war in Iraq' disappears, you will see a strong political effort to legitimize the institutionalization of these mercenary organizations (again, to the benefit of corporate America).

6) The reporting of human carnage and tragedies we are subject to are suspect in content and may very likely be riddled with propaganda under and overtones. The fact that our soldiers are there make us responsible even though we don't want them to be there - a difficult position at best.

7) Long ago the determination was made that the concept was to inflict such pain on the enemy's support mechanisms (i.e. the civilian population) as to remove the 'will' to engage in war from our enemies. Of course the morons in charge are using this philosophy despite the fact that this is no 'war' in the conventional sense. Targeting or 'accepting' losses in the civilian world is part of the strategies of war. Iraq, however, is more of a 'use soldiers and weapons of war' to 'police' and 'control' populations - hence, more civilian losses and outright cruelties inflicted on them.

Personally, I really think that if we withdrew from the area - most of the violence against the Iraq civilian population would vanish. (Although we and our allies have been known to mimic the violence in order to justify other activities.) *sigh*


[edit on 17-3-2008 by Maxmars]

[edit on 17-3-2008 by Maxmars]

Originally posted by Wig

Originally posted by -0mega-
I think some are still stuck at the original posted story from the Iranian news-source, which makes it sound like they were shooting a 10 year old just for the sake of it. (Instead of the YAHOO & MSNBC (sp?) sources that claim she was shot by accident because she was behind a berm

Since when has the Pentagon been honest about what really happened?

So it's automatically untrue, or the opposite of what is said if it corroborates the Pentagon's version of the facts? I guess that simplifies the thought process if they don't actually have to put any effort into forming an opinion in individual circumstances.

Originally posted by ANTHONY33
[

Protect you from whom?
The world needs protecting from you and your Fascist Government.

And where is it that you live that you're in such peril from our "fascist" government? There isn't another country on the planet that does more(positive things- aid, humanitarian assistance, etc...) for other countries than the USA.

reply to post by ANTHONY33


Well you'd get an F on your understanding and definition of the word Fascism and its proper use in a sentence. Fascism is not a government that is run by corporations. In a fascist system, all corporations would be controlled by the government(i.e. state controlled economy, anti-capitalistic, etc..)

Originally posted by palehorse23
reply to post by bonthan

 

You have a point. We did bring down the dictator....only to become the dictator ourselves. many Iraqis appreciate the fact that we got Saddam out, but now, things are a mess over there. They are thankful, but seem to want to run the country themselves. As if we have overextended our welcome. Which a lot of folks believe is the case.

How are we the dictator in Iraq? Iraq has had a sovereign government since Jan '05. What are we dictating? We are rebuilding Iraq, training the Iraqi military/police, and trying to stabilize the security situation to set up conditions for success for the Iraqi government.

America needs to send more prostitutes to keep our soldiers from being bored. Many children have been shot out of boredom. These guys are not the brightest.

Originally posted by earthman4
America needs to send more prostitutes to keep our soldiers from being bored. Many children have been shot out of boredom. These guys are not the brightest.

Could you provide some numbers on how many children have been shot out of boredom by these "dullards" so that we can form an objective and empirical understanding?

reply to post by BlueRaja


No, I cannot. I can only speculate. Any numbers provided to me would most likely be misrepresented.

If you weren't there, anything you have to say is merely conjecture and/or supposition. And, if you were there, you're probably glad to still be alive. Whether right or wrong, we'll never know and the soldiers involved must live with what they believe. Your/our comments make little or no difference to them.

first of all I will probably not post alot on this forum due to the fact they practice censorship of free speech which is totally unAmericain. second the great empire
known as America will soon cease to exist due to it's greedy and arrogant goverment and people who think they can just rule the whole planet. will soon be at a world war III with half the planet. by the end of 2009 America will be in a fight for it's very existance with military forces from Russia/Iran/and Syria.
as well as those within the country that hate and despise America for what it has become.

reply to post by rogues gallery


This is a private forum with terms and conditions that you agree to abide by. There is no absolute right to post whatever you feel like posting in the name of free speech. Even free speech has limits- you're not allowed to yell fire in a crowded theater, you're not allowed to threaten people, you're not allowed to incite riots, etc... You're forgetting the responsibilities that come with rights, which seems to be a common mistake.

Originally posted by earthman4
reply to post by BlueRaja

 

No, I cannot. I can only speculate. Any numbers provided to me would most likely be misrepresented.

So your basing your entire opinion on.....nothing? You're perfectly willing to slander an entire group of people, working in a location/conditions that you've never been in, just because you think something is the case?