US troops executing unarmed men

[butterflykiss]

It is clearly not a war crime. He was a terrorist, not fighting in a uniform, was not an innocent civilian, and therefore does not have any rights under the Geneva convention.

How do YOU know he was a"terroist"? I suppose all Iraqi citizens fighting against the US invaders are "terrorists? Come off it mate and take the neocon wool from your eyes.
If the same situation happened in Australia being invaded by Indonesia would the locals that tried to get rid of them also be "terrosits" also IYO?

 

[theGimp]

The level of whinging from the usual suspects in this thread is astounding.
Where was this completely fake concern when they found that poor tortured woman. Armless, Legless, face smashed up and her body pulled apart for those who would find her.

That in itself is 1000 times more attrocious than this. Yet all of you whingers are jumping up and down because a US soldier took someone out who was clearly not an innocent in a warzone.

Simply amazing.
Well done Dan. How do you manage to care for so many sheep.

 

[Pessimistic]

The level of whinging from the usual suspects in this thread is astounding.
Where was this completely fake concern when they found that poor tortured woman. Armless, Legless, face smashed up and her body pulled apart for those who would find her.

That in itself is 1000 times more attrocious than this. Yet all of you whingers are jumping up and down because a US soldier took someone out who was clearly not an innocent in a warzone.

Simply amazing.
Well done Dan. How do you manage to care for so many sheep.

Simple. As the most powerful state in the world and self procalmed "policeman' we are entitled to expect conduct from the US troops at least 1000 times better then the 'terrorists'.

As an example contast it with the conduct of the Aus troops in East Timor

 

[BlueMark]

What a load of bollocks Gimp. What some of the insurgents are doing is horrific and has to be condemned. Equally some of the stuff the US has done is equally horrific, just have a look a some photos of what a cluster bomblet does to a kid or look at the photos of the prisoners that were bashed to death by US soldiers (or is that different). Brutality is brutality, a war crime is a war crime, murder is murder no matter who commits it, to excuse one and condemn the other is nothing but hypocrisy of the highest order.

 

[theGimp]

What a load of bollocks Gimp. What some of the insurgents are doing is horrific and has to be condemned. Equally some of the stuff the US has done is equally horrific, just have a look a some photos of what a cluster bomblet does to a kid or look at the photos of the prisoners that were bashed to death by US soldiers (or is that different). Brutality is brutality, a war crime is a war crime, murder is murder no matter who commits it, to excuse one and condemn the other is nothing but hypocrisy of the highest order.

Correction, your response is bollocks. By your logic, every grenade, gunshot, cluster bomb dropped should be classified as murder. Its people like you who like to differentiate between the two opposing sides not me. So look at yourself before using the same old hypocrisy whinge.
Im sure we both agree that its all horrible but it is war. The idea that this soldier goes up for a murder charge is a farce.

 

[dan warna]

Extremely few countries recognised the Taleban as the legitimate govt.

The US did negotiate with the Taliban when it thought there was a few drops of oil and gas underneath...

 

[Frodo]

Simple. As the most powerful state in the world and self procalmed "policeman' we are entitled to expect conduct from the US troops at least 1000 times better then the 'terrorists'.

As an example contast it with the conduct of the Aus troops in East Timor

That's a joke. How can one human conduct himself 1000 times better than another. Humanity excludes such proportions.

The only reality is that the US soldier would fear for his life whilst the insurgent would idealise martyrdom. He would be happy to die if he could take a non believer with him.

Well he's a martyr now and has his virgins etc, in heaven.....if he's so happy why are people complaining?

 

[otaku]

Simple. As the most powerful state in the world and self procalmed "policeman' we are entitled to expect conduct from the US troops at least 1000 times better then the 'terrorists'.

As an example contast it with the conduct of the Aus troops in East Timor

are they terrorsts? or are they troops?

if they are terrorists, then they deserve all they get - the fighting is not bound by rules of engagement. To be victorious, you have to adapt your attack to meet the enemy. The australians did that in Vietnam - now the americans have to learn that in Iraq

if they are soldiers, their conduct and the conduct of the americans needs to considered on a level playing field. They both need to be viewed the same way. You can't make allowances for one side, and then complain when the other side does the same things.

But, it is war - the conduct of the americans is about what you would expect.

 

[BlueMark]

Make no mistake he will be charged.
BTW show me where I have differentiated between the two sides. AND if it is 'war' by your reasoning then what the insurgents have done is acceptable is it not. Further dropping cluster bombs on a civilian area as happened in Bagdad during the invasion is a war crime (there is also considerable arguement as to weather or not a cluster bomb is a WMD, even the Americans concede that the weapon skates very close to the line. DU ammunition is a WMD and as a result both the UK and ADF refused to use it), there are very clear rules about attacking civilian targets within the Conventions or do they only apply when it is convienant can be disregarded as desired.

You cannot have it both ways. One or the other. If shooting a unarmed seriously wounded man is acceptable, then hanging 'Security Consultants' (and they were armed) from a bridge is equally acceptable.

 

[dan warna]

Correction, your response is bollocks. By your logic, every gredade, gunshot, cluster bomb dropped should be classified as murder. Its people like you who like to differentiate between the two opposing sides not me. So look at yourself before using the same old hypocrisy whinge.
Im sure we both agree that its all horrible but it is war. The idea that this soldier goes up for a murder charge is a farce.

ah well in that case we should forgive all the germans for invading poland and killing folks, because that was just war.

and we should forgive the japanese for killilng unarmed and surrendered soldiers.

we should redress the war crimes tribunals against the japanese, germans from ww2 because all they did was EXACTLY the same as the US wandering into Iraq to take the oil and kill anyone who gets in their way.

its you who are a hypocrit. Justifying an illegal war, and accusing anyone who stands up to the tyranny of the US as a 'terrorist'.

there is clearly a division between iraqi freedom fighters, and the forces of al qaeda.

Even Moqtada Al Sadr, the most militant of the shi'tes, and almost none of the sunni's will have much if anything to do with al qaeda.

And any joint operations are strictly the fault of the US who forces these two lifelong ENEMIES to join forces.

The Iraqi freedom fighters are much like the dutch and French resistance to the illegal nazi operations, and the al qaeda operatives are merely taking advantage of large but underarmed freedom movement and a demoralised but powerful US military.

but of course you cant condemn the murder of 100,000 civilians and about 100,000 legitimate military of iraq who have been MURDERED by the illegal and immoral invasion by the US.

 

[Frodo]

ah well in that case we should forgive all the germans for invading poland and killing folks, because that was just war.

and we should forgive the japanese for killilng unarmed and surrendered soldiers.

we should redress the war crimes tribunals against the japanese, germans from ww2 because all they did was EXACTLY the same as the US wandering into Iraq to take the oil and kill anyone who gets in their way.

its you who are a hypocrit. Justifying an illegal war, and accusing anyone who stands up to the tyranny of the US as a 'terrorist'.

there is clearly a division between iraqi freedom fighters, and the forces of al qaeda.

Even Moqtada Al Sadr, the most militant of the shi'tes, and almost none of the sunni's will have much if anything to do with al qaeda.

And any joint operations are strictly the fault of the US who forces these two lifelong ENEMIES to join forces.

The Iraqi freedom fighters are much like the dutch and French resistance to the illegal nazi operations, and the al qaeda operatives are merely taking advantage of large but underarmed freedom movement and a demoralised but powerful US military.

but of course you cant condemn the murder of 100,000 civilians and about 100,000 legitimate military of iraq who have been MURDERED by the illegal and immoral invasion by the US.

IRAQI FREEDOM FIGHTERS

What a f***g joke. I guess you think Iraqi's were free under Saddam They a Muslim fundemental terrorists, nothing more, nothing less and many of them are not Iraqi's and couldnt give a bollicks about Iraq.

 

[- PC -]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/terrorist

ter·ror·ist (trr-st)
(Military, Law)
n.
One that engages in acts or an act of terrorism.
adj.
Of or relating to terrorism.

terrorist - a radical who employs terror as a political weapon; usually organizes with other terrorists in small cells; often uses religion as a cover for terrorist activities

terrorist - characteristic of someone who employs terrorism (especially as a political weapon); "terrorist activity"; "terrorist state"
--------------------------------------------------------
in·sur·gent (n-sûrjnt)
adj.
1. Rising in revolt against established authority, especially a government.
2. Rebelling against the leadership of a political party.
n.
One who is insurgent.

insurgent - a person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the constituted authority (especially in the hope of improving conditions)

insurgent - a member of an irregular armed force that fights a stronger force by sabotage and harassment
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/freedom fighter

freedom fighter
(Military)
n.
One engaged in armed rebellion or resistance against an oppressive government.

Noun 1. freedom fighter - a person who takes part in an armed rebellion against the constituted authority (especially in the hope of improving
conditions)
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/soldier

sol·dier (sljr)
(Invertebrate Zoology, Entomology, Law, Military)
n.
1. One who serves in an army.
2. An enlisted person or a noncommissioned officer.
3. An active, loyal, or militant follower of an organization.
-----------------------------------------------------------

All sounds the same to me


They are only words...one mans freedom fighter is another mans terrorist

To spend countless posts justifying an action because they are one or another doesnt make it right. If as reported the US soldier decided in a non-combat situation to kill someone whatever side they were on makes it murder. Just as those who hacked the body parts from that female are murderers.

We could also argue whether America is still at war with Iraq? And do these constitute war crimes ? How can you be at war with someone you are democratising?

If it is an Iraqi problem why arent the Iraqis handling it, if like Vietnam they are only ''advisors'' why are they taking a more active role?

 

[theGimp]

ah well in that case we should forgive all the germans for invading poland and killing folks, because that was just war.

and we should forgive the japanese for killilng unarmed and surrendered soldiers.

we should redress the war crimes tribunals against the japanese, germans from ww2 because all they did was EXACTLY the same as the US wandering into Iraq to take the oil and kill anyone who gets in their way.

its you who are a hypocrit. Justifying an illegal war, and accusing anyone who stands up to the tyranny of the US as a 'terrorist'.

there is clearly a division between iraqi freedom fighters, and the forces of al qaeda.

Even Moqtada Al Sadr, the most militant of the shi'tes, and almost none of the sunni's will have much if anything to do with al qaeda.

And any joint operations are strictly the fault of the US who forces these two lifelong ENEMIES to join forces.

The Iraqi freedom fighters are much like the dutch and French resistance to the illegal nazi operations, and the al qaeda operatives are merely taking advantage of large but underarmed freedom movement and a demoralised but powerful US military.

but of course you cant condemn the murder of 100,000 civilians and about 100,000 legitimate military of iraq who have been MURDERED by the illegal and immoral invasion by the US.

Dan,

Save your soapbox for someone who cares about anything you say.
You are boring me to tears with your anti US bull********.

If you were half the humanitarian that you pretend to be you would show your compassion and express your outrage for both sides of the story.
You simply hate the US and Australia and care only for your own madman agenda.

Why do you think Im a hypocrit ?
Where did I justify the war in any way?
Where did I even mention a terrorist in any way?

This is a typical example of you squalking your rubbish without caring at all about the truth behind it. You are the most dangerous kind of person to any kind of peace process. This is because you are a looney and nothing else.
I simply exposed all of the sheep like yourself for the one sided agenda's they are pushing.
Sorry if you didnt like that.

 

[jim boy]

If you were half the humanitarian that you pretend to be you would show your compassion and express your outrage for both sides of the story.
You simply hate the US and Australia and care only for your own madman agenda.

Gimp , whether we like it or not, the US is representing us, we are not represented by any of the Iraqi insurgents.

That means that the actions of the US army should be measured against our moral standards, not that of the opposition. We can express outrage at the actions of the various groups in Iraq, but ultimately we are not responsible for them. We are responsible for the coalition, any failing by them is a failing by us and that's why some of us are outraged.

As the US like to portray themselves as the bearers of the highest standard of liberty, humanitarianism and justice then we should expect that they maintain those standards, rigoourously, no matter the circumstances.

 

[Mead]

When stuff like this comes up, I always find it quite scary how much people stick to their political allegiances when making their mind up about things.

If, like dan warna, you think that a lot of the anti-american insurgents aren't backward, sadistic and downright evil psychopaths, then you're an idiot. The bunk about terrorists = freedom fighters simply doesn't account for the kind of atrocities they've committed. Regardless of whether the American invasion was right or wrong in the first place, if the insurgents win, things will be downright terrible for average iraqis. Islamic fundamentalist regimes are not nice places to live, period.

By the same token, though, people who look at a blatantly obvious war crime like shooting an unarmed, prone and wounded combatant say 'well, they had it coming, good!' are either very stupid or deluding themselves. The issue isn't whether the guy they shot was a good person or a bad person or a soldier or a terrorist, its that its morally wrong to execute a helpless wounded individuals without any trial- that's not war, its murder.
Pragmatically its also bloody stupid- the only time anti-insurgent operations are ever ultimately successful is when the people in charge win the hearts and minds of the general population, and atrocities like this and Abu Ghraib don't help that. If the US continues in this vein, they're going to lose the war exactly how they lost vietnam- 5 or 10 years from now things will be just as bad in Iraq and eventually public opinion in America will change and they'll pull out, leaving an enormous mess.

There is something seriously wrong with the human brain when issues like this turn a large proportion of the population into Jane Fonda type flakes or Heinrich Himmler...

 

[theGimp]

Well said gents... Taking notes Dan ?

 

[dan warna]

The problem is not with my perspective, it is with yours.

you support the illegal war in iraq, you support the murder of 100,000 civilians in iraq, you support the shooting of an unarmed man, you support the dropping of cluster bombs in civilian areas, and you support haliburtons rape of iraq, and you support the use by the USA of mercenery assassin death squads, you support the torture of iraqis by the USA.

terrorist do not equal freedom fighters,

the iraqi people are supporting the freedom fighters, most iraqis want the USA out of iraq, the sunnis, shi'ite are BOTH against the USA.

justify how you like it, ignore the facts that the IRAQIS don't want us there.

I don't hate the USA, you just use that phrase because I refuse to follow your moronic ideology that because i am not a cowardly slavish follower of the USA stealing iraqi oil and murdering women and children to get it, i am anti american.

you are such a sheep and a brown noser.

you can't face the facts that the people of iraq are supporting the anti american forces, just like the people supported the anti american forces in vietnam...

 

[Moo]

Dan

I do not agree with the war but I disagree with your take on this incident.

Mead articulated his points without the abuse and if you are going to insult Mead please try something along the lines of 'Chris Judd is going to Hawthorn next year' or 'Sampi is a poor mans Jeff Farmer'.

Also Mead I'll be an outlier in your theory of sticking to your political allegiances

 

[Moo]

If, like dan warna, you think that a lot of the anti-american insurgents aren't backward, sadistic and downright evil psychopaths, then you're an idiot. The bunk about terrorists = freedom fighters simply doesn't account for the kind of atrocities they've committed.

Mead, a little simplistic to put them all into one group - we are facing a mixture of Baath party loyalists, Jihadists, Al Queda (not previously in Iraq), ethnic minoritites and a number of regular Iraqis who are anti-occupation.

Not suggesting all Iraqis take up arms but many would be supporting the activities of the groups and some of the foreign fighters are just as hated as the coalition.

Some I would classify as terrorists and some I would say are resistance fighters, just because they are all taking up arms against us should not mean we all see them as one group. There is far more than 1 group and at the moment they share a common enemy, when we go with our firepower so also goes this uniting bond and there will be a power struggle between the US-Iraq Govt, Terrorists, Iraqi Power Groups - Religious and ethnic for sure.

Iraq has rocky times ahead.

 

[Mead]

Mead articulated his points without the abuse and if you are going to insult Mead please try something along the lines of 'Chris Judd is going to Hawthorn next year' or 'Sampi is a poor mans Jeff Farmer'.

... Now where can I find a bomb-vest at 11.30pm on a thursday night?

 

[theGimp]

you support the illegal war in iraq
you support the murder of 100,000 civilians in iraq,
you support the shooting of an unarmed man,
you support the dropping of cluster bombs in civilian areas,
and you support haliburtons rape of iraq,
and you support the use by the USA of mercenery assassin death squads,
you support the torture of iraqis by the USA.

Classic stuff..
Do you enjoy unloading that big gun of yours into your foot ?

What I would really like to know is why you feel you have the right to make such judgements without any justificationl apart from the fact that you are a raving lunatic.

You are quick with labels and accusations.. but can you back it up or do you completely lack conviction as I suspect ?

I challenge you to explain yourself and find even the slightest piece of evidence that any of this bull******** you constantly post is true.

I assume you will either ignore this challenge or come back with a whole new bunch of unfounded ranting and raving. Its all you are good at.

 

[Fire]

Classic stuff..
Do you enjoy unloading that big gun of yours into your foot ?

What I would really like to know is why you feel you have the right to make such judgements without any justificationl apart from the fact that you are a raving lunatic.

You are quick with labels and accusations.. but can you back it up or do you completely lack conviction as I suspect ?

I challenge you to explain yourself and find even the slightest piece of evidence that any of this bull******** you constantly post is true.

I assume you will either ignore this challenge or come back with a whole new bunch of unfounded ranting and raving. Its all you are good at.

Actually, in a way he is right.

If you support a war you have to support everything that comes with it too. None of the atrocities of this war come as a suprise, the world has seen many examples of this in the past. So if you support the co-elitions ideals enough to justify war, you are also claiming that such actions are justifiable for the bigger picture.

Personally, I believe that anyone who still supports the way in which this war has been carried out has something wrong with them.

 

[theGimp]

Actually, in a way he is right.

If you support a war you have to support everything that comes with it too. None of the atrocities of this war come as a suprise, the world has seen many examples of this in the past. So if you support the co-elitions ideals enough to justify war, you are also claiming that such actions are justifiable for the bigger picture.

Personally, I believe that anyone who still supports the way in which this war has been carried out has something wrong with them.

FFS... Back to smashing my head against the wall it seems.
Why do any of you ********ing people think that I support the war.
Because I think Dan Warna is a lunatic ? Strange logic.

Can someone please please please explain this phenomenon to me.

 

[Fire]

FFS... Back to smashing my head against the wall it seems.
Why do any of you ********ing people think that I support the war.
Because I think Dan Warna is a lunatic ? Strange logic.

Can someone please please please explain this phenomenon to me.

Where did I say you supported the war?
I was not reffering to 'you' in the hypothetical, not you specifically, so i will apologise if it appeared that way.

 

[theGimp]

Where did I say you supported the war?
I was not reffering to 'you' in the hypothetical, not you specifically, so i will apologise if it appeared that way.

Cheers... I have calmed down now. Urge to kill fading.. fading.. gone.