|
29 Apr 03 - 07:24 AM (#942626) Subject: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: GUEST,Botticelli 13 dead, and who fired the first shot?
|
|
29 Apr 03 - 07:58 AM (#942642) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: catspaw49 This of course was to be expected and is the flip side of Dumbya'a "cheering crowds." Soldiers justifiably paranoid in a strange land of suicide bombers and a native people feeling the pressures of a new control, this time by American troops. Who fired first? Does it matter? The blame falls at the top. It comes down on Iraqi leadrs unable to calm their people and on an American president who has put both groups in an untenable situation. Rest assured, it will happen again. Spaw |
|
29 Apr 03 - 09:20 AM (#942679) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow Iraqis killed in anti-US protest"
There were angry scenes at the funerals of those killed in Falluja Thirteen Iraqis were reportedly killed when US forces opened fire on demonstrators on Monday night in the Iraqi town of Falluja. There are conflicting reports as to what happened in the town, which lies 50 kilometres (35 miles) west of Baghdad. US paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division started shooting after coming under fire from approximately 25 armed civilians mixed within a crowd of some 200 protesters outside a compound they were occupying in the town, a statement from US Central Command (CentCom) said. But Iraqi witnesses said the protesters were unarmed and that the soldiers opened fire without warning on a peaceful crowd, which was protesting against the US forces' use of a school as their barracks. How could anyone compare this to Bloody Sunday? After all, it happened on a Monday... And while I waas lookihg for the link to that, here's another one I found on the BBC site: Iraq's cancer children overlooked in war "With Iraq's hospitals in disarray, the long-term sick are being passed over in a frantic effort to treat emergency cases. For the thousands of young leukaemia victims, the outlook is bleaker than ever." |
|
29 Apr 03 - 09:56 AM (#942705) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: ard mhacha I know who to believe and it isn`t the trigger happy scum that fired into an unarmed crowd, three 11 year olds included, in this mass murder. Ard Mhacha. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 10:12 AM (#942720) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Amos As Spaw said, it was to be expected that some slice of awful violence would pop up somewhere. Lessons fron 'Nam: politicians can turn war on and off with the flick of a compromise. Those who have to wage it cannot flick a switch at a moment's notice and turn from adrenalin soaked warriors to diplomats. This is one of the grimy facts aboiut war that people like GWB overlook. A |
|
29 Apr 03 - 10:35 AM (#942727) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Amos CNN's Karl Penhaul said he talked to a pair of U.S. soldiers who said protesters opened fire first, shooting at American forces with AK-47s. The soldiers said the troops fired back. In Washington, Pentagon officials also reported that soldiers took aim after shots were fired at them. The incident is under investigation, Pentagon officials said. U.S. Central Command said soldiers came under fire from Iraqis armed with AK-47 assault rifles. "The unit exercised its inherent right to self defense and returned fire," the Central Command statement said. Central Command denied the accuracy of reports from the Qatar-based, Arabic-language news network Al-Jazeera that U.S. soldiers fired unprovoked into a crowd. (from CNN's web page) A |
|
29 Apr 03 - 10:38 AM (#942731) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Greg F. Dumbya and the BuShites don't 'overlook' it, Amos. They simply don't give a shit- not the same thing at all. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 10:40 AM (#942737) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow Pedantic point - three children aged less than eleven. And 75 people injured. No news of any injuries to the soldiers. These guys in crowds who set these things off by firing at the army seem to be terrible shots. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 10:53 AM (#942751) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: catspaw49 Just awhile back there was a movie with Tommy Lee Jones and Samuel L. Jackson that dealt with a very similar scenario. There is plenty of blame to go round here. American troops at a high level of intensity, angry Iraqis wanting the Americans out....but the real blame here is for the ones who put both in the position they were in. And much as I'd like to blame Bush and his cronies, the Iraqi leaders are not without fault. They too need to keep their folks under a bit of control. Loud and angry rock throwing protests in the face of a nervous bunch of people with rifles is not a wise move either. Spaw |
|
29 Apr 03 - 12:00 PM (#942807) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: GUEST,pdc Spaw -- what Iraqi leaders? There is no leadership in Iraq right now. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 12:03 PM (#942810) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Mark Clark Which Iraqi leaders would those be? The ace of clubs? The jack of diamonds? The mayor of Baghdad? Troops can't be used as policemen, they're trained only to kill not to make value judgements. Value judgements in battle are often fatal. The troops must be replaced with well-trained civilian police very quickly if more such tragedy is to be avoided. - Mark |
|
29 Apr 03 - 12:05 PM (#942815) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: mexican Why do people bring their children to these protests? |
|
29 Apr 03 - 12:12 PM (#942820) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow "Why do people bring their children to these protests? " Perhaps because it didn't occur to them that a "liberating army" was going to fire on an unarmed crowd. I hope that there were television crews there filming, to help sort out what actually happened. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 12:20 PM (#942833) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: DougR Right. Believe the bad guys instead of our troops. So typical of so many of you. Oh well. DougR |
|
29 Apr 03 - 12:29 PM (#942842) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Lepus Rex "The bad guys," Doug? So Iraqi civilians are "bad guys," now? ---Lepus Rex |
|
29 Apr 03 - 12:48 PM (#942848) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Amos Iraqis with AK47s, interested in applying them to others, are the bad guys du jour. The claims that the crowd was unarmed is kind of incompatible with the claim that a firefight went on for some time. You think these troops were duckshooting, or fighting with themselves? Not. But the whole story is not known, for certain. A |
|
29 Apr 03 - 12:53 PM (#942850) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow "The bad guys" - according to this report the dead included Isix children aged seven or eight - U.S. Command Confirms Firefight in the Iraqi Town of Falluja The thirteen dead is provisional - the Red Cross puts it higher, and with all those wounded it seems unlikely there won't be more deaths. It seems more likely to be a panicky cock-up, rather than a deliberate massacre to give the protestors a lesson - that's one difference from Bloody Sunday. The other difference being the killing of little children this time. There should an investigation into what happened, not just carried out by the army. But there won't be, any more than there will be for the shootings at checkpoints and road blocks. Maybe it'll be included in the movies they make about all this. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 01:03 PM (#942858) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Ringer Why spend £200M on a Saville enquiry when McGrath of Harlow knows that what really happened was "a deliberate massacre to give the protestors a lesson"? |
|
29 Apr 03 - 01:06 PM (#942863) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: An Pluiméir Ceolmhar Just hope those damned anti-second-amendment liberals won't use this incident to argue that Iraqi civilians should be denied free access to firearms. Or am I confused? |
|
29 Apr 03 - 01:12 PM (#942870) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Amos "The BBC also reported a witness saying a man on a motorbike had opened fire on the U.S. soldiers. A total of 13 people were killed and at least 75 wounded, Reuters reported, citing Falluja hospital director Ahmed Ghanim. Some local people gave higher estimates, Reuters said. International Committee of the Red Cross spokeswoman Tamara Alrifai in Geneva said 15 had died. The Red Cross has sent relief supplies to hospitals for the wounded, whose exact number isn't known, Alrifai said. " Given all the confusion, the man-on-the-motorbike report seems to make a lot of sense. The fog of war is not like an academic analysis. If there was a jerk on a moped using an AK47 on troops and they fired back, not knowing immediately where he was, it could have started the whole ruckus. A |
|
29 Apr 03 - 01:22 PM (#942880) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: GUEST, heric >>"Why do people bring their children to these protests? " Perhaps because it didn't occur to them that a "liberating army" was going to fire on an unarmed crowd. << I hope I am not viewed as impolite for saying that I admire this as impressive doublespeak. (Bringing their children to protest a liberating army.) |
|
29 Apr 03 - 01:30 PM (#942889) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow "If" There were plenty of reports along those lines on Bloody Sunday. Naturally. Other reports say that the shooting started when someone chucked a stone at the school the soldiers were using as a barracks. And the reason why thgere'd have been children in the crowd or so, as mexican asked, would have been because the protest was calling for the soldiers to give back the school building. Whether or not Bloody Sunday was a deliberate massacre or not, that was a reasonable suspicion, Ringer. I doubt if that particulalr explanation of what hapened on Monday would be very plausible, that's what IO meant. Reports put the crowd involved at about 200. Nearly eighty wounded, 13-17 dead. And not one of the dead or wounded from among teh soliers it seems. That is a rather comprehensive shoot-out. It doesn't sound like professionals carefully shoopting at a handful of armed opponents. It sound like people with automatic weapons just blazing away. But maybe there are facts we don't know yet.That's why a proper investigation by independent investigators is needed, and needed fast. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 01:53 PM (#942905) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: beadie This sounds vaguely reminiscent of the Boston Massacre (paranoid occupying troops in a hostile environment surrounded by angry locals and no one knows for sure who fired first). Of course, in the original, the British submitted to having their troops tried for crimes arising from the incident in an American Colonial court. Defended by a Boston brewer and sometimes lawyer (and cousin of the second President) named John Adams, the troops were acquitted of the most serious of the charges brought and none were imprisoned. I wonder if that would happen in this case? |
|
29 Apr 03 - 02:49 PM (#942945) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: catspaw49 Just got back and to answer the Iraqi leader question......Even now there are individuals and religious leaders coming to the fore. Although they are not the classic leadership, they are filling that role to a lot of Iraqi citizens who would prefer their own people to the Americans. I am not saying they are responsible for this or that they are or will be a part of whatever Iraq is to become, but simply that they are at the present looked upon as some sort of leader by the Iraqis. It's only natural. for those in that position it would be wise not to twist the dragon's tail and work toward a peaceful settlement and establishment of a real leadership to get the Americans out asap. Spaw |
|
29 Apr 03 - 03:06 PM (#942954) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: ard mhacha I find it amazing that the words of an invading army can be held as truth. I seen enough of the lying scum here in the sick six, the truth eventually comes out, but with the time elapsed, no one gives a damm. The US troops in Vietnam murdered civilans, but who the hell cares now. Get your brain-washed trigger happy scum out of this mess of their making and leave the Iraq people to settle their own affairs, oh, how bloody stupid of me, the oil, I forgot about the oil. Ard Mhacha. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 03:46 PM (#942988) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: GUEST,Steve "leave the Iraq people to settle their own affairs" unless, of course they decide to elect another dictator who insists on one-party rule, or an ultra-religious government intent on 'Islamifying' the country and blowing up Ziggurats etc that is...whither democracy then? This is from Reuters: "Lieutenant Colonel Eric Nantz, speaking at the school, said his men had been on the lookout for trouble from diehard Saddam supporters as Monday was the vanished dictator's 66th birthday. What Nantz described as "celebratory firing" accompanied a crowd which was first dispersed from outside a U.S. base in the centre of town by an American show of force. When the crowd reformed at the school, however, shots were aimed at the troops. "There were a lot of people who were armed and who were throwing rocks. How is a U.S. soldier to tell the difference between a rock and a grenade?" Nantz said. - doesn't one go bang? - arguing about whoever shot the first round is really irrelevant - a return to playground politics "well he started it" - it would seem that the American troops were disproportionate in their response in an already volotile region. The sooner they're withdrawn, and some semblance of order is established the better for all involved. Failing that I can only foresee more incidents like this. Steve |
|
29 Apr 03 - 04:05 PM (#943000) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow blowing up Ziggurats I don't think the Iranians ever got round to blowing up pre-Islamic monuments and all that. The Taliban were a pretty different mob, with a very different ideology. If Iraq did go for an ultra-religious government, it seems generally agreed that it would pretty definitely be more like their neighbours and fellow Shi'ites in Iran, which is a lot closer to being a democracy than most places around the region. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 04:21 PM (#943017) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: gnu "The bad guys" are the guys with the AK's, Lepur Rex. The good guys are the ones who risked their lives to liberate the Iraqi civilians. You remember the "good men" ? |
|
29 Apr 03 - 04:29 PM (#943027) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow So why did "the good guys" mow down half the crowd? There was an army guy on the news saying "It was like the Alamo". Sounded more like Wounded Knee to me. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 04:36 PM (#943036) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: gnu I think you should be in charge of the next platoon to come under fire in such a situation so that you could run into the crowd and wrestle down the trigger without firing a shot. Are the coalition suppose to retreat and leave the looters and criminals to return ? Well... are they ? |
|
29 Apr 03 - 04:57 PM (#943057) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow Two hundred in a crowd. Seventeen dead. Seventy-five wounded. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 06:11 PM (#943109) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: GUEST,Botticelli It makes me wonder though, that we may not know the truth of this (and other) 'excesses' until 30 years and much more than £200m later.
|
|
29 Apr 03 - 06:34 PM (#943122) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Wolfgang A couple of threads ago many here have demanded that the US army should have prevented looting of museums and other buildings. Are you really sure you would have liked to see an army tank or some foot patrol men in front of each museum, embassy, governmental building confronting an angry crowd they do not understand who tried for good or bad reasons to enter a building? Wolfgang |
|
29 Apr 03 - 06:38 PM (#943124) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow Here's a more detailed account from a reporter on the spot in the London broadsheet The Independent At least 10 dead as US soldiers fire on school protest Strikes me as a scrupilously fair report, giving both sides, but also pointing out inconsistencies. For exmple: According to Lt-Col Eric Nantz, the troops were being shot at and stones had been thrown. They tried to disperse the crowd with loudspeaker warnings but in vain, he said. Under threat, they fired back. Yet there are no bullet holes visible at the front of the school building or tell-tale marks of a firefight. The place is unmarked. By contrast, the houses opposite – numbers 5, 7, 9, and 13 – are punctured with machine-gun fire, which tore away lumps of concrete the size of a hand and punched holes as deep as the length of a ballpoint pen. Asked to explain the absence of bullet holes, Lt-Col Nantz said that the Iraqi fire had gone over the soldiers' heads. We were taken to see two bullet holes in an upper window and some marks on a wall, but they were on another side of the school building. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 06:58 PM (#943139) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Wolfgang Another inconsistency in the report: Some Iraqis, both sides agree, were firing in the air is followed by interviews with Iraqis who insist that nobody in the crowd had guns. Wolfgang |
|
29 Apr 03 - 07:12 PM (#943147) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow As I said, it's a report that tries to lay out the various versions of what happened. Though the quote there isn't necessarily inconsystent. "In the crowd" are the key words. Thee are an awful lot of guns around in Iraq I understand. Some kind of misunderstanding, combined with panicky over-reaction seems the most likely explanation of this massacre. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 07:24 PM (#943156) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: greg stephens We are getting the usual predictable knee-jerk reactions here. Surely a fairly obvious point is that there are plenty of crowds of 200 Iraqis around in Iraq at the moment, and the wicked soldiers havent shot machine guns into all of them. Something happened here out of the ordinary. And we will never know what it was. People will believe what reinforces their pre-existing opinions, as is pretty universal, alas. Aybody changed their minds about Bloody sunday one way or the other, after £20m worth of enquiry? Precious few, I would guess. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 07:35 PM (#943164) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: mexican It amazes me how you lot sitting in your safe european (western world) homes, seem to know exactly what happened! I would not like to be a politically correct private confronted by a bunch of mad mustachioed islamic fundamentalists who, I know don't care about life in this world and will sure as hell blow me to bits along with their own children - for the promise of sanctity in the hearafter |
|
29 Apr 03 - 07:43 PM (#943171) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: mexican Don't get me wrong, but the soldiers are not to blame - it's the mad politicians who put these people in these situations. But we can't believe anybody, the truth takes years to come out. |
|
29 Apr 03 - 08:24 PM (#943192) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Lepus Rex The "bad guys" that Doug was referring to, gnu, were the (surviving) protesters, who were quoted by the press. Presumably, any "bad guys" with Kalshnikovs weren't hanging around to be interviewed, so... were the non-armed survirors "bad" for protesting? Or do you just have a problem with uppity sand-niggers? ---Lepus Rex |
|
29 Apr 03 - 09:34 PM (#943222) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: catspaw49 Mexican....If you'll take a good look, you'll see that was my point at the very outset of this thread. The blame is not with the soldiers or the crowd but with those who have put them in the position. These soldiers were on a razor's edge and used to the idea that some of their numbers had been killed by grenades and suicide bombers. The Iraqis were equally keyed up and wanting to be sure that the US got the message. Put yourself in either set of shoes, boots, sandals, or bare feet. In one of our threads on VietNam I explained that I went to jail because I did not want to be put in such a position as I am not a pacifist. Then I wrote: I'd also like to change the thought process a bit as some of us looked at the situation then and other situations too, not as something worth dying for, but was and is it something worth killing for? That was at the heart of my thinking then and still remains so today. I am not necessarily a pacifist, though I admire many. However, if you have a gun and I have a gun and we're trying to kill each other, rest assured I am going to do my damndest to kill you first. This is what young people are asked to do in any war. I came to the belief that there was nothing worth killing for about VietNam. Others came to a similar realization after they were there and hence the abundant cases of post traumatic stress. Others wars are different and each one must be decided by the people involved.....Is it worth killing for? If you are going to put me in the situation of killing someone else before they kill me, you better have a damn good reason so I can live with myself afterwards. I think that still applies for Iraq as well. Spaw |
|
29 Apr 03 - 10:20 PM (#943244) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow "the truth takes years to come out" The only reason the truth takes years to come out is because the people whose duty it is to find out the truth collude in suppressing it. This happened on Bloody Sunday - and whatever uncertainty there might be because of the delays and the destroyed evidence, there is no doubt whatsoever that the cover-up took place. And the cost of that cover-up in terms of human suffering was terrible It need not happen this time. I imagine that it will however - and the cost in terms of human suffering will be terrible. It's not a question of fixing all the blame on the people who actually pulled the triggers. The people who put them in the situation, and the people who trained them and briefed them, and drew up their "rules of engagement" are in there as well. Maybe there actually were some people shooting at them, or maybe they just thought there were and had some vision in their head such as mexican painted just now. All kinds of maybes. The authorities have a duty to find out the truth, and quickly, and to resist any attempt at a whitewash. They owe it to the families if the dead, and also to the soldiers involved and to the other soldiers who could well die as a result of this. No doubt in the wake of this, young Iraqis are lining up to night to join the Iraqi equivalent of the IRA. |
|
30 Apr 03 - 03:24 AM (#943337) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: GUEST,Boab It happened because the so-called "coalition" forces haven't got the remotest legitimate excuse for being where they now are. Not even CNN can cover up the farcical nature of the claims that "freedom" [belatedly] was the over-riding motive for the attack on Iraq. And now Bush and Bushie-tail Blair want the U.N. to remove sanctions forthwith! What those two cretins have done is to split the world into two camps. Blair is going frantic now seeing the rising inclination of European countries to form their own military alliance. What the hell did they expect? If they effectively nullify/ignore the mandate of the United Nations and antagonise several of their NATO partners in doing so , then a look in a mirror will advise them as to who the wreckers are in this world. The dead of the Two Towers have been basely dishonoured through the use of their deaths as an excuse for the expansion of US-British power. And the "British' part is a chimera; poor silly Tony----- |
|
30 Apr 03 - 04:18 AM (#943348) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Hrothgar Beadie, I thought that the John Adams who defended the British troops involved in the Boston Massacre was the second president of the US, not a cousin. Whichever Adams it was defended them well, but the important thing is that the verdict was generally accepted. In this situation, however, it is going to be very difficult to reach a clear cut answer. Differences in legal systems, languages, and all the other factors are going to confuse the issue to the extent that I believe that it will never be satisfactorily settled. I will keep an open mind on the issue - while remembering that "military intelligence" is an oxymoron. |
|
30 Apr 03 - 05:16 AM (#943357) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: gnu I see that again, Lepur Rex, you rise to the occasion with complete and utter nonsense. And your attempt to put words, especially the racial slurs, in my mouth demonstrates your intentions : you, sir, and I use that term loosely, are a troll of the vilest nature. Don't bother to address me in any fashion in the future and I, pleasantly, will reciprocate. (In case you don't understand the foregoing, I shall put it in a form that I am sure you can comprehend : fuck off asshole.) Spaw... well said. Even though I still support the war when your litmus test is applied. I beieve(d) Blair. |
|
30 Apr 03 - 06:43 AM (#943380) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: ard mhacha I seen and heard that US soldier refer to the peaceful demonstration as " just like the Alamo", now the Alamo had causalities on both sides, I didn`t hear of any dead or wounded on the US side. Also this was very strange as there is always the possibilty of our old chestnut,"friendly fire".Very lucky for the British that they were not present. Ard Mhacha. 2 |
|
30 Apr 03 - 07:46 AM (#943404) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: InOBU Dear Friends: As you know, Americans are often said to be lacking in historical grounding, or not being able to see shades of grey. Well, as to DougR refering to the protesters as the bad guys, well, that disproves the above. You see, Americans know, from a good sence of history, much of it from cowboy films, for the older guys, and rambo films for the ioounger fellows, you can tell the bad guys by their hats. Saddam wore a black berrett, while our guys wear light colored head gear. Now, as to the shades of grey, our guys hats are beige, and shaped like nazi head gear, this adds a sort of ... watch out for us, we are unpredicable to the scene so that if we are accused of shooting at protesters we can say, "So?..." or "Don't F*** with us!" and not look silly. Think of the Lone Ranger saying that, after one of his silver bullets killed some kid. Now, if he was wearing a grey hat, and had a believable snear, well... there you are! Cheers Larry |
|
30 Apr 03 - 07:47 AM (#943406) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: InOBU that should read, younger fellows, hit the wrong keys... Larry |
|
30 Apr 03 - 10:22 AM (#943520) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Amos Boab: Getting spun up like that on topics about which you have no actual control is kinda coutnerproductive, if you ask me! :>) More important, this morning another similar incident has occurred. We gotta settle these guys out. American soldiers are not supposed to inflict bodily harm on people because they are protesting. That's what the National Guard and the Republican party are for. A |
|
30 Apr 03 - 11:12 AM (#943567) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Teribus From the television reporting (mostly BBC World) and newspaper articles, the situation appears to be fairly unique in that no other instances have been reported of Iraqi's out "celebrating" Saddam Hussein's birthday. The protest appeared to be about the use of the school by US forces as their base in the town. Factors to be taken into account include: 1. Fallujah is a town where the Ba'athist Regime enjoyed strong support. 2. The town was not affected to any great extent by military action during the recent war. 3. The town is the location of sites suspected of involvement with Saddam's weapons programmes. 4. When American forces arrived in the town, the mayor suggested they use the school building as a headquarters. 5. No Iraqi civilian police presence. 6. No interpreters present. 7. Troops involved are Airbourne (82nd) 8. The amount of "unauthorised" weaponry available 9. The method by which ex-Iraqi servicemen (Army, Republican Guard, Special Republican Guard and Saddam Feddayeen) returned to "civilian life". As to what happened and why, no doubt the perception of damn near everyone who was there will differ to varying degrees. The one thing that will be consistant will be that each fully believed in their reasons for reacting as they did. The important thing for the future is to put in place the means by which repetition is rendered less likely. "Hearts and Minds" programmes are tricky things to initiate and require a great deal of effort to make work. The American brass are not very good at it - they never have been. Airbourne troops do not make good "temporary policemen" in a civil environment, it is not their fault it is the fault of their training. The demands of the residents for the Americans to quit the school, is, I believe, fairly reasonable and rational - they want life to return to normality - that includes children going to school. The coalition forces should have in place sufficient engineering units to throw up a secure base area that does not interfere with civilian life in Fallujah - that should be done as quickly as possible. The unit - in fact NO unit - should be operating without accompanying civilian Iraqi Police officers or Interpreters. Three very important things that seemed to be totally lacking in this situation - Dialogue, understanding and restraint. From GUEST Steve above: <<"There were a lot of people who were armed and who were throwing rocks. How is a U.S. soldier to tell the difference between a rock and a grenade?" Nantz said. - doesn't one go bang? - >> One of them certainly does go bang Steve - But by the time it does it is generally too bloody late for the squaddie that the Lt-Col is talking about. MGOH says: "No doubt in the wake of this, young Iraqis are lining up to night to join the Iraqi equivalent of the IRA." In doing so they would be making the worst possible mistake of their lives. Not only for themselves but for their communities and their country in general. |
|
30 Apr 03 - 11:14 AM (#943568) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Lepus Rex I didn't put anything in your mouth, gnu. Note the lack of quotation marks. I simply gave two reasons you might think that Iraqi civilains are "bad guys." Judging by your indifference to the deaths of Iraqi civilains, I might belive it was the latter reason, but who am I to know? And if you're going to call me "Leper" instead of "Lepus," at least spell it correctly, genius. ---Lepus Rex |
|
30 Apr 03 - 11:57 AM (#943604) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow "In doing so they would be making the worst possible mistake of their lives. Not only for themselves but for their communities and their country in general." No doubt true, Teribus, but so what? That's what will happen. It always does. It happened in America when the British soldiers did the same thing didn't it? There is a crying need for neutral observers who are able to tell it as it is, however it is. That's what the press is supposed to be able to do. Perhaps, with another three more Iraqis shot dead today by the soldiers occupying the school, some reporters or TV crews will stick around this time. Though maybe they are worried they might get shot too, and you couldn't blame them either, in the light of what has happened before now. (Trading personal insults in a thread about something like this doesn't make too much sense. Better to do that in PMs, if it's got to be done at all.) |
|
30 Apr 03 - 03:29 PM (#943764) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: gnu McGrath, you are correct regarding my use of "Lepur" which was uncalled for... funny, I thought, but uncalled for. Anything for a joke, in my book. I see, however, by Lupus Rex's last post that he still insists on false insinuation. Bad guys = guys with AK's. I saw an interview with one of the troops who said he fired at "guys with rifles" and estimated there were about 25 of them. Doesn't sound like civilians throwing rocks to me. Sounds like a bunch of cowards amongst a crowd of civilians with much less disregard for the safety of those civilians than the troops. Anyway, until "all the facts are known", I tend to side with the troops because I cannot believe that such a well trained and disciplined force would fire on innocent, unarmed civilians. I agree they should not have accepted the offer of use of the school. That was an error in judgement, both "politically" and strategically. |
|
30 Apr 03 - 05:03 PM (#943833) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow "I cannot believe that such a well trained and disciplined force would fire on innocent, unarmed civilians." Maybe that depends what the training has included, and how the discipline is directed. When it comes to being "a well trained and disciplined force" the British paras score pretty high... I can't see how using heavy machine guns against a civilian crowd could ever be an appropriate response, even if there had been some guys with rifles. Some of the people killed weren't even in the crowd, they were in their homes across the street. Someone "offered" them the use of the school? I can't quite see that happening. |
|
30 Apr 03 - 06:14 PM (#943890) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: catspaw49 Finally remembered the name of the movie.....Mirrors the hell out of this. Check it out if you get a chance......Rules of Engagement starring Tommy Lee Jones and Smuel L. Jackson. Spaw |
|
30 Apr 03 - 07:08 PM (#943944) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Gareth Mmmm ! Kevin - At a cost of £200 Million, and 4 years and counting the enquiry has still not reported on "Bloody Sunday". Arn't you being a little premature in anticipating thier findings ? Gareth |
|
30 Apr 03 - 09:42 PM (#944062) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow The paras killed 14 unarmed people, and it should never have happened, and there was a vigorous cover-up effort, that much is clear. Does anyone even try to deny that now? The arguments are about how far it was planned and authorised in advance, and how far it was spontaneous. But fair enough - they didn't shoot any small children, and they didn't fire heavy machine-guns into the crowd and into neighbouring houses. I note that this story doesn't seem ri be seen as that significant in the media - see Google news -"Search and browse 4,500 news sources updated continuously, " and it doesn't even mention it on its front page at this time. (That link will of course lead to whatever page is current at the time when it's clicked). ) |
|
01 May 03 - 09:05 AM (#944335) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Greg F. They're just dead sand niggers, Kevin- why would the news media - particularly the American media-be interested? |
|
01 May 03 - 09:41 AM (#944354) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: catspaw49 Yeah..........I haven't seen the paper yet but the TV news this AM carried a story. Now that we've had it happen at least three times I guess they figure it's time to up the "billing." Even so, it was about 7 or so stories deep. The leading story of course is Dumbya's upcoming speedh today aboard the carrier Abraham Lincoln. And since the carrier is too far out for Marine One, he's flying in for a deck landing aboard a Viking (in the front seat next to the pilot no less) which is the first time a President has made a jet landing on a carrier's deck. Does anyone have some statistics regarding the incidence of trap-wire failure on carriers? Spaw |
|
01 May 03 - 04:13 PM (#944424) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: DougR Lepus: when I wish you to explain to Mudcatters something I said, I will ask you to, okay? I think most Catters understood that I meant the folks in that crowd that had guns were the "bad guys." DougR |
|
01 May 03 - 04:27 PM (#944434) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: beadie McGrath: Does this mean that the British Army brass have learned their lesson from the Amritsar affair (colonial India)? If memory serves, the commanding officer of the detachment that dispatched a huge number of unarmed men, women and children was reported to have told the hearing officer that the reason he didn't use his machine gun (which was mounted on a truck) was that he couldn't fit it through the passsageway into the courtyard of the temple. Military forces are trained to respond instantly to immediate, deadly threats against the unit. It is much more of a questionable situation when there is time for reflection and reasoned decisionmaking before firing back. I wonder . . . |
|
01 May 03 - 04:44 PM (#944442) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow They probably have. I hope they have learned something since Bloody Sunday. Quite possibly the soldiers who machine-gunned the protesters in Falluja on mOnday, and then again on Tuesday, were doing what they had been trained to do. In that case the people responsible for they training don't seem to have learned much from disasters such as Bloody Sunday or Amritsar. Or Wounded Knee for that matter. And the soldiers involved have been denied the proper training to which they were entitled. |
|
01 May 03 - 04:46 PM (#944446) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Lepus Rex Bite it, Doug. He asked me a question, and I responded. Anyways, you said "Right. Believe the bad guys instead of our troops. So typical of so many of you. Oh well." The "bad guys" being believed were those that were interviewed after the massacre. Again, unlikely to have been the "folks in that crowd that had guns." Quit trying to weasel out of it. The meaning of your statement was clear: Don't trust Iraqis, because they're Iraqis. ---Lepus Rex |
|
01 May 03 - 05:52 PM (#944492) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Mark Clark “Just like the Alamo.” Yeah, I remember the Alamo. That was when a bunch of illegal immigrents were fighting to “liberate” a big piece of Mexico because Mexico had outlawed slavery and they were afraid they might lose their investment and have to do their own work. In the end, the U.S. Government (J.K. Polk?) supported the idea of illegal settlements in foreign territory and, after illegally annexing the coveted territory, sent troops to Mexico City to explain it to them. But I don't think the troops who shot the Iraqi civilians are necessarily monsters. After all, they are our neighbors and sons and daughters, people we used to know. It's just that their training carefully removes any inhibition against killing and erases the possibility of assigning value to human life outside their own unit. That training is to make them more effective in battle and to help protect them. The fault, in my opinion, lies with the government and military chain of command who allowed those energized killing units to be used as police. - Mark |
|
01 May 03 - 06:04 PM (#944503) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow I keep on thinking about that photo that was in the press of a US soldier with "Kill 'em all" written in large letters on his helmet. Or rather, about what kind of army it is, where something like that is condoned. |
|
01 May 03 - 06:23 PM (#944517) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: GUEST, heric We need a kinder, gentler machine gun hand. Which reminds me for those who care you can get presale Neil at the Greek Theatre tickets by entering "LA" at ticketmaster right this very minute. |
|
01 May 03 - 06:35 PM (#944525) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Mark Clark Well the U.S. now has an all volunteer military so I suppose a few people might enlist just to get the chance to kill somebody. I don't think that's common though. Mostly they are carefully trained to do exactly what they are told and don't stay long if the training doesn't take hold. I don't forgive the U.S. government for these attrocities but I'm inclined to give the foot soldier the benefit of the doubt. Maybe I'm not seeing the reality. - Mark |
|
02 May 03 - 01:06 AM (#944662) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: DougR Lepus: horse pucky! DougR |
|
02 May 03 - 08:51 AM (#944818) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow "Mostly they are carefully trained to do exactly what they are told" That is another reason to be alarmed at this kind of episode - the idea that they might in fact have been doing what they were told to do. In the same way my worry about that helmet "Kill 'em all" wasn't that there might be the occasional soldier who is screwed up or stupid, any large organisation is likely to have some like that, but that it looked as the label was ok by the army authorities, rather than being recognised as a serious breach of discipline, with very dangerous possible consequences. |
|
02 May 03 - 11:52 AM (#944929) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: catspaw49 Kevin are you nuts? Let me play devil's advocate for a minute here. I have stated many times on this forum that I refused induction and did not go to VietNam, not because I'm a pacifist, but because I am positive that if you are trying to kill me, I will do my damndest to kill you first. My question was how I would cope later and indeed many Viet vets had plenty of problems some of which were never overcome. But let's assume that we are both soldiers and we are in a war. Do you suggest that perhaps we have a spot of tea with someone to see what kind of guy they are before we decide whether we kill them or not? BTW, I obviously did not support this war either, but if I had (just for the sake of discussion) and I were in the position of invading that country, I'd damn well be out to "kill 'em all." So the fighting part ends and I'm doing this peacekeeping duty. A loud and noisy crowd begins to form and soon we are looking at a throng of people obviously hostile to ME....not the USA, which they really are....but to ME!!! I mean they ain't in the US and neither am I. They are right in front of me...men, women, and children. I know that we have suffered losses because of suicide attacks by men, women, and children and I am now pretty wired! Rules say don't fire unless fired upon. Okay. The crowd starts throwing rocks and I wonder which rock is really a grenade. Then someone says he sees someone shooting. Given the order to fire, I am now gonna' "kill 'em all." I also expect that the rest of the platoon is going to do the same. I don't want anybody beside me with a wait and see mentality! I am not trying to justify the actions taken here. Both groups were put in untenable positions that they should never have been in. As I said at the beginning of this thread, the fault lies up the ladder!!! But I gotta' tell you that any army I join better damn well have that "kill 'em all" philosophy. If I'm in a situation where my life is (I believe) in danger, than I want everyone around me to protect me and I will do the same for them. This is not a new attitude in the US as it was true in WWI and WWII as well. Spaw |
|
02 May 03 - 12:36 PM (#944957) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: InOBU Hi Spaw... the above is why I am a pasifist. Having seen war up close, ya, the kill em all, IS the problem. War is just nations mugging each other and if it is wrong for the little guy who has justified anger and need it is wrong for the big collection of blokes as well. You look at WWII, everyone says, well, look at the death camps, we had to go to war. Well, not a single rail line was hit to slow down the murder of Gyspies and Jews, and no camps were the target of liberation, it just happened when we got to that place ... on the other hand, if we had put Rockafeller and the other bankers in jail who were working with Hittler right through the war, well, nazism could have been nipped in the bud. Llyods bank, Chase bank, Morgan Trust funded the building of nazi state and the nazi state corporation was kept intact ( I.G. Farbin) after the war. The war was not to save anyone. SO, lets not get into the kill em all situations any more, eh? And for those of you who are going to bring up Sept. 11, don't bother, this war or Afganistan ain't about that any more than WWII was a war to save us poor Gypsies. Cheers Larry |
|
02 May 03 - 12:38 PM (#944960) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: InOBU BUT Pat AND Kev.... on the Kill em All topic, check out the story on Otway's new band post... someone finally got me peeved enough to tell as much of the history of band members as I can remember, and though I don't want to kill them all, damn but if it is not a good reason to fight a war! Cheers the both of yous. Larry |
|
02 May 03 - 01:19 PM (#944989) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow WEll, we've neither of use been in a war, spaw, so, like you, I'm guessing. My understanding of how I'd want the soldiers on my left and right to be responding to a crisis wouldn't be like that, and if I can imagine myself into a commanding officer role, it's not how I'd want them responding either. I'd want people who could keep their head, and overcome the natural tendency to panic and blast off in all directions. Training is about learning how to do that. "Kill 'em all" is natural, but it's stupid, and in a lot of circumstances it's likely to make it more likely you and your comrades get killed. It's an attitude that leads to Monday's massacre - an episode which is probably going to cost the lives of Americans. |
|
02 May 03 - 01:55 PM (#945011) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: ard mhacha McGrath how right you are, the Army did learn a lesson after bloody Sunday, they set up the Catholics and left the Protestant Paramilitaries do some of their killing. Ard Mhacha. |
|
02 May 03 - 02:11 PM (#945021) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: catspaw49 Kevin, the fact that you or I were never and t this point likely will never be soldiers makes us "inexpert" but also able to discuss the stuff as friends without either of us coming away with harsh feelings....which is why I did it! I would hope that the level and style of training for a soldier is such that he can be in control while also being under extreme duress. And once again, the problem with this whole damn thing is way up the ladder....and I think the Iraqis have some culpability too.....not because they should not want the US out, but because the organizers/leaders of these things should realize where they are likely to go. If you mess with a coiled rattler, you're likely to get bit. LARRY.....Got a question.....Pacifist means what exactly? I view things through a lens of "is it worth killing for." The fact that I can think of a few things that would lead me to do so keeps me from any serious pacifistic view. I can't commit past a certain point. Do the Quakers have "sects" shall we say that take a differing view or is the pacifist belief in non-violence an integral part of the life? Is it violence or violence against my fellow man? I wonder this because Norman Morrison was I think widely revered for his actions and yet I can think of very few things less violent. It's bothered me for a long time actually and I thought, what the hell, I'll ask someone who knows. Spaw |
|
02 May 03 - 02:35 PM (#945042) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow Agreed, spaw, the problem is "way up the ladder". Essentially, what happened on Monday shouldn't have happened. Serious mistakes were made, and that's why there needs to be a proper independent investigation to identify what they were and to sort out exactly what happened. Either the soldiers were behaving the way they are supposed to behave when turned heavy machine-gun fire on that crowd, and were acting in accordance with their "rules of engagement" - in which case the people who drew up and approved those "rules of engagement" need to be sorted out. Or the soldiers were not behaving in accordance with the "rules of engagement", and what happened was a breakdown of discipline and training - and in that case, the people responsible for training procedures and so forth carry a heavy responsibility. Cover-ups take place to save the necks of the people "way up the ladder", not to protect the people who actually do the shooting. |
|
02 May 03 - 02:53 PM (#945058) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: catspaw49 Kevin, you really need to see that movie I mentioned....Brings in a who;e ;ot of this and is very troubling....especially since we have now seen the actual events. It's a good watch and you'll see what I mean about it. Coverup-a-plenty!!! Spaw |
|
02 May 03 - 04:59 PM (#945119) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: ard mhacha An item on Channell 4 news UK, referring to friendly fire, it has now been established that the US pilots were on drugs to keep them awake. This was confirmed by a US spokseman. Could be the Alamo man and his trigger happy pals were on drugs, though this time for kicks. Ard Mhacha. |
|
02 May 03 - 05:29 PM (#945131) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: GUEST, heric You know, there's a thread around here about reports that the miltary liked to pump their boys with speed-like derivatives, and some vets Norton 1, eg, were adamant that this was false. |
|
02 May 03 - 06:08 PM (#945155) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: McGrath of Harlow And so it comes on, inexorably - US troops attacked in Falluja - "Seven US soldiers have been wounded in a grenade attack on their headquarters in the tense Iraqi town of Falluja. Six received moderate injuries and a seventh light injuries when two grenades were lobbed over a wall of the compound by two unidentified men at about 0100 on Thursday. |
|
02 May 03 - 06:51 PM (#945178) Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday (American Style) From: Greg F. Can't be. Relax. The Bush Baby sez the war's over. |