Barbaric desecration of combatants' bodies

Frank Grimes

Some more "misinterpretation" for you vorbis.

Think the relatives of those people (if any are left) will shrug it off as "sure they didn't mean to kill them, so it's ok" or could this result in maybe another "outrage" against those nice folk who have moved into the country recently?


http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2004/0407/breaking7.htm

Fighting in Falluja kills 36 Iraqi civilians
Last updated: 07-04-04, 09:29


Fighting in the Iraqi town of Falluja has killed at least 36 civilians over the past day, doctors said today, including 25 killed in a house destroyed in an attack that locals blamed on US forces.


Witnesses said the house in the Sunni Muslim town, 50 km west of Baghdad, was hit by rockets fired by a US helicopter last night. A US military spokeswoman in Baghdad said she had no information on the incident.

The house was reduced to rubble in the attack. Locals said four families had been sheltering there and that some victims were still buried in the debris.

Witnesses said fighting raged in several parts of the town today.

US Marines who took charge of the tense Sunni cities of Falluja and Ramadi last month have begun an operation aimed at hunting down guerrillas in the area.

"Operation Vigiliant Resolve" follows the killing of four US private security guards in Falluja a week ago. After they were killed, a crowd of Iraqis set the bodies ablaze, mutilated them and hanged two of them from a bridge.

US troops were stationed mostly along the perimeter of Falluja, which has been paralysed by the fighting, witnesses said.

dathi1

Aljazeera are the only network to have reporters on the ground inside Fallujah. Strike jest are being used against residential areas and 26 people in one family have been massacred by the US liberators.
live up to date reports:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/A73529F1-1554-4C68-8774-BA478D565B02.htm

Frank Grimes

Originally posted by dathi1
Strike jest are being used against residential areas and 26 people in one family have been massacred by the US liberators.

Looks like that was 16 children and 8 women who were killed according to the report here.
They've also killed up to 40 after a rocket attack on a mosque too according to the report.

Ok, so four Americans are killed, and the US decides to launch airstrikes against the town? Thats a bit extreme, even for my feelings abt the US.

(From Franks Link) But militants, who have wide support among the population, dug in and fiercely resisted the U.S. raids into the city center and attacked American troops encircling the city of 200,000. The intensity of the resistance apparently prompted U.S. forces to bring in heavy weapons such as helicopters, tanks and AC130 gunships that have pounded suspected militant sites in the densely populated neighborhoods.

It kinda puts you in mind of what Russia did in Chechyna..

vorbis

i don't call that deliberate targetting since thats what the intial point was about. Falujah is currently akin to a warzone. Some would argue local residents are playing a large part in maintaining that situation. tbh they've helped create the mess for themselves as well. I'd hope the Americans are trying to keep stray attacks down. Jowever their priority is to restore order as more people will eventually die if that is not achieved.

Sand

Absolutely...during the Nazi occupation insurgents regularly attacked food supplies and other logistics. They have full on responsibility to attack foreign occupiers with machine guns in SUVs...after all its their country.

Oh I agree, insurgents are going to attack food convoys - they wouldnt want the situation stable after all. And of course theyre going to attack those they view as their enemies - I mean, when they blew up the UN representitive in his compound I was surprised that people were so shocked about it. The UN killed millions of Iraqis with their sanctions - The Iraqis were getting some long overdue payback for that.

Id disagree on the point of it being their country.... The insurgents do not represent Iraqis anymore than the IRA represents Irish people ( Or was Omagh in your name? ). 4 out of 5 Iraqis apparently find attacks on coalition soldiers to be unacceptable according to that BBC poll. I dunno what that tells you - but Id imagine 0 out of 5 terrorists in Iraq find attacks on coalition soldiers unnacceptable.

imagine what it must be like to have your kids killed "collaterally" by a foreign western army because they were near "targets" or whatever bolloks the US army comes up with. The thirst for revenge must be overwhelming to such an extent that all normal rules of conduct in warfare go out the window.

Im sure if a war crime is committed that the appropriate parties will be brought to justice.

Some would argue local residents are playing a large part in maintaining that situation.

I dont think so - the vast majority are keeping their heads down and trying to live their lives as best they can. In a town where a band of heroic freedom fighters murder anyone who doesnt sing from their hymn sheet then youre going to find relatively few people willing to speak out against that particular hymnsheet. And who can blame them, it would take a brave man to disagree publicly with guys like those orchestrating terrorist attacks in Iraq. Its up to the coalition and the Iraqi seucrity forces to establish security and law and order so that people need not fear being dissapeared by terrorists.

I'd hope the Americans are trying to keep stray attacks down.

I dont think they deliberately target civillians but theyre a bit....blinkered when it comes to the application of force. The bombing of a resteraunt in a busy neighbourhood towards the end of the invasion just because they *thought* Saddam was in it is a case in point. That was utterly stupid and a mentality that results in those decisions means stray attacks wont be kept down to the minimum.

It kinda puts you in mind of what Russia did in Chechyna..

Not even close tbh - Grozny was near biblical in its destruction, not a stone left upon a stone and all that. And the Russian troops massacre, torture, loot and rape Chechyens. Theres little enough interest in what the Russians and the Jihad rebels are doing in Chechnya without making it seem more acceptable by comparing it to a military operation.

bug

Originally posted by Sand
Id disagree on the point of it being their country.... The insurgents do not represent Iraqis anymore than the IRA represents Irish people ( Or was Omagh in your name? ).

no but just because some f***w*t evil idiots blew up Omagh doesnt stop one being a republican.......

4 out of 5 Iraqis apparently find attacks on coalition soldiers to be unacceptable according to that BBC poll. I dunno what that tells you - but Id imagine 0 out of 5 terrorists in Iraq find attacks on coalition soldiers unnacceptable.

.....much like, I suppose,- those 4/5 iraqis who dont want to see soldiers getting killed or attacked and find it unacceptable, that doesnt mean they dont want them out of their country. The poll doesnt tell you that.

I hope none of those killed in Fallaujah were those "4/5" that you mention, because the two groups of people- those that find the killing unacceptable, and those labelled "terrorists" are inextricably linked IMO. For the simple reason that if you kill a member of my family, I may just fight back. i.e. my revenge labels me a "terrorist", your armies' vow of revenge for the loss of four lives is somehow acceptable.

whats the most recent definition of a terrorist these days anyways?

Memnoch

Originally posted by Sand
Im sure if a war crime is committed that the appropriate parties will be brought to justice.

Yes, this is why G. W. Bush withdrew the USA from the International criminal court. And declared that no US citizen could be prosecuted by the international criminal court.


Tell me.. was the US prosecuted for using Agent Orange, a biological agent in Vietnam?

What about US soldiers shooting innocent children, was the US prosecuted for that for warcrimes?

What about the massacre in Tinamen square in China of peaceful protesters?

Everyone with a sliver of commen sense knows, that the powerful don't get prosecuted for their war crimes. By the statement you made you are implying that because no one has been "brought to justice" no crime has been committed, however the fact remains that the US has and probably never will be prosecuted for its warcrimes.
Another example of this is the detention of the prisoners at Guantanemo bay which is illegal under the Geneva Convention and also a warcrime.

Memnoch

Originally posted by vorbis
i don't call that deliberate targetting since thats what the intial point was about. Falujah is currently akin to a warzone. Some would argue local residents are playing a large part in maintaining that situation. tbh they've helped create the mess for themselves as well. I'd hope the Americans are trying to keep stray attacks down. Jowever their priority is to restore order as more people will eventually die if that is not achieved.

Yes America is "liberating" Iraq by "pacifying" it. How much longer will people continue to believe the propaganda?

Memnoch

Originally posted by vorbis
not the same thing victor. at most the situations you describe were cases where the soldiers misinterpeted a situation. Thats not the same as deliberate murder.

"minsinterpreted" how do you know that? because they say so? They shot and killed innocents without any justification... thats murder.. by any stretch of the law... why do you try to defend the indefensible?

Memnoch

Originally posted by vorbis
daith1, that is sufficient justification for the above actions? Have the relatives of the four men killed now the right to butcher some residents of Fallujah?

ah but you CONVIENTLY IGNORE the most fundamentel FACT of the situation..

the four american mercs has NO RIGHT to be in Iraq, or to have weapons. They are hostile invaders and as such died to people defending their land.. they had it coming...

the american's are using their deaths as an excuse to exert more violent control over the country through force of arms and killings of civillians

Frank Grimes

Originally posted by vorbis
i don't call that deliberate targetting since thats what the intial point was about. Falujah is currently akin to a warzone. Some would argue local residents are playing a large part in maintaining that situation. tbh they've helped create the mess for themselves as well. I'd hope the Americans are trying to keep stray attacks down. Jowever their priority is to restore order as more people will eventually die if that is not achieved.

Ok vorbis, let's see what your buddies have been up to overnight.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/A73529F1-1554-4C68-8774-BA478D565B02.htm

Among the casualties were a family sitting in a car parked behind the Abd al-Aziz al-Samarai mosque when it was bombed by a US airplane.

Well, at least the Americans didn't target them, so that's ok then?

Here's the excuse/reason the came out with:

American forces initially said those killed in Wednesday's attack on the mosque were fighters taking refuge.
But a marine officer was later forced to admit that US forces had failed to find any bodies.

So, they were working under the assumption that there were fighters there? They had false intelligence? The misread a situation? i.e. people were shooting at them, they figured they were in the mosque, so they blew the hell out of it.

Maybe I'm naive, but if an army is in a residential area and they're going to respond to someone attacking them should they not be 100% sure before they start opening fire with heavy artillery? They could have withdrawn from their positions, but no they launched rockets.

"When we hit that building I thought we had killed all the bad guys, but when we went in they didn't find any bad guys in the building," Lieutenant Colonel Brennan Byrne told reporters.

Bad guys? Does he think it's some sort of game they're playing?
They should probably do less thinking and stop the constant brute force reactions to every situation they're put in. If the death tolls continue rising the insurgents/terrorists (whatever you want to call them) will get increased support. Remember what happened in the North after the British Army got trigger happy during a peaceful protest not so long ago?
Being perfectly honest, I can see why the people who carried out the killing of those 4 "contractors" could have such contempt towards westerners.

Just a word of warning. There's a picture of a baby on that page that appears to have been killed, sorry - collaterally damaged, in the attacks. Just in case anyone finds that upsetting.

bonkey

Originally posted by Sand
Im sure if a war crime is committed that the appropriate parties will be brought to justice.

As a matter of interest Sand...is there any precedence that you're aware of to show that the Americans will seriously investigate any allegations of war-crimes against their own, and will come to a balanced and fair decision?

While its a slightly weighted question, I'll admit, the thing is that I'm not aware of any such internal investigation on American military exercises, let alone any convictions, so I'm wondering where your surity comes from.

As someone (you?) has pointed out before, only the losers ever commit war crimes.

jc

Hobbes

What amazes me is the "OMG See what is happening!".

It is business as usual.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/wounded/

For those who don't like that site...

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/

As for civilians being killed.

I've seen some of the footage of what has been done to civilians and it is no better then what has happened to the Americans.

The only difference is the media feeds it as space invaders where you get to kill the "bad guy" from high up in the air.

vorbis

the area needs to be brought back under control. Frankly, I would blame the terrorists for any civilian deaths caused by firefights THEY started. Memnoch, the double standards you impose on the Americans are ludricous. The militia in Falujah is imo responsible for most of the deaths in this latest round of fighting.

Frank Grimes

Originally posted by vorbis
Frankly, I would blame the terrorists for any civilian deaths caused by firefights THEY started.

Yeah that makes sense. The Americans seal off the city and bomb it, but it's the terrorists' fault?
Are you actually reading any of the aritcles that have been posted here and elsewhere? Have you watched the news? Listened to the radio?

Take a look (if you're bothered) here - Also, small warning, there's pictures of dead children along with the article. For those who'd rather not see them.

US helicopters and snipers are firing on ambulances and civilian vehicles trying to take the wounded to clinics or the hospital, the correspondent said.
Many children have been killed in the US attacks on Falluja
"One civilian car trying to reach a clinic hoisted a white flag but still came under fire," he said."

That's the terrorists' fault is it?

Frankly, I would blame the terrorists for any civilian deaths caused by firefights THEY started

Actually since they're fighting within their own country's borders, they'd be "resistence fighters", or even "freedom fighters" rather than terrorists. The word terrorist is being applied to too many incidents these days.

vorbis

sorry Frank, I don't trust Al Jazeera any more than I would Fox News. Also the city wouldn't have been sealed off were it not for the previous atrocities. The terrorists who did that were deliberately trying to escalate the situation with no concern at all for the Falujah inhabitants.

Frank Grimes

Originally posted by vorbis
sorry Frank, I don't trust Al Jazeera any more than I would Fox News.

Your posts seem to follow a Fox/CNN line, but if you don't want to believe AJ that's your prerogative.

Also the city wouldn't have been sealed off were it not for the previous atrocities

The killing of 4 people does not justify what the Americans are doing there at the moment.

vorbis

The killing of 4 people does not justify what the Americans are doing there at the moment.

I guess we differ over this. Fair enough.

Frank Grimes

Originally posted by vorbis
I guess we differ over this. Fair enough.

Do you mean to say you think that the killing of scores of civilians is ok?

Memnoch

Originally posted by vorbis
I guess we differ over this. Fair enough.

if you are saying that the killing of 4 american's justify america's actions, then please tell me, what does the killing of over 10000 Iraqi civillians justify????

vorbis

Leaving aside the fact that that figure is wrong, there is no justification for those deaths. I believe still though that they were the lesser of two evils. Leaving Sadamn in power would ultimately have resulted in far more innocents dying. Regards the dearhs of those four, I do believe that they have justified America's attempts to regain control in Falujah.

dathi1

Leaving Sadamn in power would ultimately have resulted in far more innocents dying.

not true....far more innocent people have died since the invasion and occupation than Sadam could manage with dissidents and Islamic fundamentalists in one year.

Memnoch

Originally posted by vorbis
Leaving aside the fact that that figure is wrong,.

really?
how so? Sky news (which is a sister channel of fox news and would be on the conservative side of reporting) reported 6-10k innocents dead in iraq

here is another link http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

according to this site the minimum civ casualties is over 8000.

Also you cannot use the excuse that "saddam's" regime was worse and that the US is doing this to save the Iraqi people. Because the FACT remains, the US supported Saddam and didn't do anything about his rule for a Long long time, they even helped him by supplying him with biological weapons.. so really.. no leg to stand upon as far as the humanitarian issue is concerned..

as for the 4 american's who died... they were COMBATANTS invading another country, they deserved it. The US NEVER had any justification to invade iraq, this has not changed with the death of 4 more invaders.

vorbis

not true....far more innocent people have died since the invasion and occupation than Sadam could manage with dissidents and Islamic fundamentalists in one year.

sanctions Daithi. Unlike other people, I hold the leader of a country responsible for his actions. Sadamn's foreign policy after 1990 smacked of wounded pride. He could quite easily have got sanctions lifted in the last 10 years. He chose not to and through his actions, far more people have died from a lack of medical care. And thats as you say leaving aside the issue of dissidents and Islamic fundamentalists.

over 10000 Iraqi civillians justify

how is anything you have shown proven that allegation? 6 -10k does NOT mean over 10000. Over 8000 does NOT mean over 10000.

Also you cannot use the excuse that "saddam's" regime was worse and that the US is doing this to save the Iraqi people. Because the FACT remains, the US supported Saddam and didn't do anything about his rule for a Long long time, they even helped him by supplying him with biological weapons.. so really.. no leg to stand upon as far as the humanitarian issue is concerned..

Thats pretty warped. I haven't denied that they helped Sadamn at times. Why though does that mean that they can't correct a mistake left over from previous foreign policy? Also if you look at my first point re sanctions, you would realise that long term, intervention will lead to less people dying. I also don't agree that those people deserved to be burnt alive.