Why US Army kill civilians in IRAQ?

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by farooqaaa, Apr 30, 2008.

  1. TechEvangelist

    TechEvangelist Guest

    Messages:
    919
    Likes Received:
    140
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    #41
    They are also terrorizing each other on the basis of differences in their religious beliefs (Shia v. Sunni), regardless of who sides with the US. It is part of a power strugle within Islam.
     
    TechEvangelist, May 2, 2008 IP
  2. korr

    korr Peon

    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    38
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #42
    There is a lack of training - in counter-insurgency. Why? There is not really any historical record of a counter-insurgency working. There is no model to copy, no successful experience to draw on!

    The U.S. military expected Saddam to line up his troops & tanks and go head on, but no one in Iraq was dumb enough to show up for that battle. The army dissolves into the civilian population, and insurgents don't wear uniforms. Many of the tactics of insurgency is to make militants indistinguishable from the civilian population. U.S. soldiers stick out like a sore thumb, but the people trying to kill them don't look or dress any differently than the people who would just like to go to work and rebuild their country.

    Its psychological torment for our U.S. soldiers - they're in a position they can't really win.
     
    korr, May 2, 2008 IP
  3. guerilla

    guerilla Notable Member

    Messages:
    9,066
    Likes Received:
    262
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #43
    Who are the internal terrorists? Are they Shia? Sunni? Both? are they the Mahdi army? The Da'Wa Party? Al Queda?

    I don't understand how anyone can condone a war where they don't know who they are fighting.

    Reagan came to the same conclusion when he pulled the troops out of Lebanon. It's costly and messy interfering in the (irrational, dangerous, and evil) internal affairs of other nations.
     
    guerilla, May 2, 2008 IP
  4. SEOBusiness

    SEOBusiness Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,046
    Likes Received:
    36
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    185
    #44
    They are in the war field,they may be killed anytime.So they shoot civilians who may shoot them.Civilian + AK = terrorist.
     
    SEOBusiness, May 2, 2008 IP
  5. farooqaaa

    farooqaaa Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Likes Received:
    149
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #45
    Yeah, an armed person is not a civilian. I am talking about unarmed. They kill unarmed civilians.
     
    farooqaaa, May 3, 2008 IP
  6. WebdevHowto

    WebdevHowto Peon

    Messages:
    991
    Likes Received:
    23
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #46
    A civilian with an AK does not = a terrosit. A civilian with an AK is a threat and often an enemy, but not necessarily a terrorist.
     
    WebdevHowto, May 3, 2008 IP
  7. GRIM

    GRIM Prominent Member

    Messages:
    12,638
    Likes Received:
    733
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #47
    If that was the case a good chunk of the US population is not a 'civilian'
     
    GRIM, May 3, 2008 IP
  8. ziya

    ziya Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,971
    Likes Received:
    28
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    140
    #48
    USA army bombed a hospital, 20 ppls wounded :(
     
    ziya, May 3, 2008 IP
  9. bogart

    bogart Notable Member

    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    509
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    235
    #49
    Definition of Insurgent: a member of an irregular armed force who takes part in an armed rebellion against an established authority or administration

    The Iranian terrorist organization, al Quds, is supplying weapons, training, and financial support to the Iraqi insurgents. The support includes sending Hezbollah fighters to Iraq as well as suppying roadside bombe to kill American troops.
     
    bogart, May 3, 2008 IP
  10. farooqaaa

    farooqaaa Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Likes Received:
    149
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #50
    I mean only in IRAQ. A civilian with AK is insurgent.
     
    farooqaaa, May 3, 2008 IP
  11. GRIM

    GRIM Prominent Member

    Messages:
    12,638
    Likes Received:
    733
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #51
    Ahh sounds much like our minutemen ;)
     
    GRIM, May 3, 2008 IP
  12. guerilla

    guerilla Notable Member

    Messages:
    9,066
    Likes Received:
    262
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #52
    The government is unable to provide any proof of this. Of course, if you know the different groups in Iraq, then you would be hard pressed to find the one tied to Iran.

    The one faction in Iraq with very tight Iranian ties, is the government of Nouri Al-Maliki as he is the leader of the Da'wa party that bombed our Kuwaiti embassy. Maliki is Iran's pal, not Sadr or the Sunnis.

    So before you endlessly repeat unsubstantiated propaganda, find out who al Quds is supplying. Sadr is anti-Iran.

    This is precisely the sort of conflation that the idiot McCain reinforces when he keeps saying that Iran is supporting Al Queda in Iraq. Al Queda is an enemy of Iran. It's totally illogical, and the experts are more than willing to admit it. But to the layman, to the 70% of Fox viewers who think Saddam planned 9/11, this sort of conflation creates enemies and fear where none should exist.

    How quickly we forget all of the aid that Iran provided to us against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Without Iran's help, Afghanistan would have been a much bigger failure than it is today.

    Precisely! Full marks.
     
    guerilla, May 3, 2008 IP
  13. bogart

    bogart Notable Member

    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    509
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    235
    #53
    The Iranians support both al-Sadr and Maliki. al-Sadr is probably hiding in Iran right now.
     
    bogart, May 3, 2008 IP
  14. guerilla

    guerilla Notable Member

    Messages:
    9,066
    Likes Received:
    262
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #54
    Sadr is anti-Iran. He's an Iraqi nationalist.

    So that leaves Maliki as I said.

    So Iran is working with the Iraqi government to undermine the US occupation.

    Sounds like the problem for Patraeus is in the Iraqi parliament, specifically the thugs who bombed our embassy in Kuwait.

    We're going to see a war with Iran. They are carefully laying the propaganda for such. It's going to have untold costs in morality, blood and treasure.

    We as free thinking patriots, have an obligation to see through propaganda to the truth, and to oppose the actions in foreign affairs that make us more vulnerable at home.
     
    guerilla, May 3, 2008 IP
  15. farooqaaa

    farooqaaa Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Likes Received:
    149
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #55
    Lets talk about the latest news. US Bombed a hospital in IRAQ. Because there were Fighters, and civilians wounded because the fighters used them as shields. They say 14 Fighters are killed... Where are they? NO proof.......

    WHAT THE HELL? The news never say the truth.

    ......... Visit this link just to get some information. I read it, and its all lies:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/2008050...80503112533;_ylt=Au401g9vXWx3WiJpdQfbhLtX6GMA
     
    farooqaaa, May 3, 2008 IP
  16. imad

    imad Peon

    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    41
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #56
    why you seem so surprised? this been happening since day 1 in war.
     
    imad, May 3, 2008 IP
  17. bubaipal

    bubaipal Peon

    Messages:
    939
    Likes Received:
    17
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #57
    But the real fact is US attacked Iraq for the oil mines. They really had no point attacking Iraq. Iraqis are bound to fight back.
     
    bubaipal, May 4, 2008 IP
  18. farooqaaa

    farooqaaa Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,330
    Likes Received:
    149
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    180
    #58
    So who are terrorists now? The invaders or the Iraqis?
     
    farooqaaa, May 5, 2008 IP
  19. godisgood

    godisgood Banned

    Messages:
    79
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #59
    You do realize that out of all civilian deaths in Iraq American forces are only accountable for maybe 25% of the deaths and most of that is from the initial bombing. Do not trust youtube videos for your source of information.
     
    godisgood, May 5, 2008 IP
  20. GRIM

    GRIM Prominent Member

    Messages:
    12,638
    Likes Received:
    733
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    360
    #60
    To be absolutely honest and truthful, what the US did by invading in the first place set the field for the devastation that is going on now. Even if not at the gun of a US soldier, at the pen of the US administration.
     
    GRIM, May 5, 2008 IP