[Gank]

Originally posted by ionia23
What I love is all the bleeding hearts out there crying about the "poor innocent Iraqis" being stomped by our vicious troops.  You don't hear any of them crying about the tens of thousands mercilessly crushed under Hussein, nooo.  The only bad guy on the planet is America and America is solely repsonsible for anyone's woes anywhere.

You do realise that while Saddam was commiting those atrocities he was the US's biggest ally bar Israel in the region? I love the way you guys shout about how great you are because you removed him and ignore the fact that you put him in there and propped him up for most of his rule.    

Btw the correct response you give is exactly the sort of thing that causes people to do this sort of stuff. Go out and get a copy of the book black hawk down and you'll see the reasons **** like this happens.

[Kazan]

Gank: not all of us ignore it

[Flipside]

Yes, as has been mentioned, they themselves are beyond caring, but what of their families and loved ones. There IS a War going on, people will die. But to be mutilated and abused and displayed in such a way simply makes those who did it nothing more than howling blooded animals.
Regardless of who invaded who, and who is shooting who, I feel precisely the same way about the people who did that as I would felt about the British Papers when they displayed Saddams dead Sons, and they weren't even mutilated.

As much as I feel for the people of Iraq, I do not blame the Americans for wanting to hunt down these individual animals and put them down.

I know it will just continue the circle of violence, but the hatred in that town seems to be no longer based on any rational basis, how many must they kill to 'make up for' their own 15 citizens?

[Gank]

I know that Kazan, it was aimed at those who do. Who do seem to be in the majority.

[beatspete]

Originally posted by Rictor

Lived his whole live under Saddam's tyranny.
Fights for the safety and freedom of his family and his nation.

Wouldn't 'resitance fighter x' be a supporter of Sadam? Thats why he's so opposed to the american take over, and fights in the resistance in the first place.  If he was fighting for the safety and freedom of his family, why is he attacking the americans?  I agree that america may not be doing the best job, but they are doing better than nothing.
The resistance are brain washed extremists, if they knew what was good for them they would help the americans rebuild their country after years of sadam's rule.

I didn't belive in the war based on WMDs, but only things like this occupation can change the world for the better.  Iraq wasn't going to sort itself out, even after sadam died of old age, one of his sons would continue.  The resitance continues to preserve what keeps iraq's people in poverty, and de-stabilises the middle east. I don't have a problem with the elimation of these people, they are a plauge on the progress of humanity.

[ionia23]

Originally posted by Gank

Btw the correct response you give is exactly the sort of thing that causes people to do this sort of stuff. Go out and get a copy of the book black hawk down and you'll see the reasons **** like this happens.

Yup.  300,000 starving Somalis asked for our help.  Funny how that sort of thing happens.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Gank


Lets give both of us a bit of credit here and presume we know the difference between a soldier who follows orders and a mercenary who chooses his line of work.

Let's presume we know the difference between mercenaries and armed guards riding herd on a convoy.

[Gank]

Originally posted by ionia23

Yup.  300,000 starving Somalis asked for our help.  Funny how that sort of thing happens.

Nobody asked you for help, the US decided to go in and bring peace by shooting up the place. Delta force and the rangers raided the UNDP hq, the charitys World Concern and Medicin sans frontier and captured  the head of the UN police force, blew up a meeting of tribal leaders discussing a peace treaty and finally killed up to 1000 civilians in the raid seen in Black hawk down before running home with your tail between your legs. Sheer ****ing brilliance. But they were starving

Beatspete, saying why dont they help the americans rebuild the place is ridiculous. If somebody bombed your country repeatedly over 13 years then invaded and gave all its own companys nice big juicy contracts to rebuild the mess they made would you help them? A lot of the Iraqi resistance isnt pro-saddam, its anti-american. Probably because these guys have first hand experience with the kind of rulers the US likes in that part of the world.

Originally posted by mikhael


Let's presume we know the difference between mercenaries and armed guards riding herd on a convoy.

Imo, there aint any difference between these guys and say the East India trading companys mercenary armys, there still hired guns.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by beatspete


Wouldn't 'resitance fighter x' be a supporter of Sadam? Thats why he's so opposed to the american take over, and fights in the resistance in the first place.  If he was fighting for the safety and freedom of his family, why is he attacking the americans?  I agree that america may not be doing the best job, but they are doing better than nothing.
The resistance are brain washed extremists, if they knew what was good for them they would help the americans rebuild their country after years of sadam's rule.

I didn't belive in the war based on WMDs, but only things like this occupation can change the world for the better.  Iraq wasn't going to sort itself out, even after sadam died of old age, one of his sons would continue.  The resitance continues to preserve what keeps iraq's people in poverty, and de-stabilises the middle east. I don't have a problem with the elimation of these people, they are a plauge on the progress of humanity.

Ah, good stuff. Comedy gold man, you should try stand-up sometime.

[Unknown Target]

Originally posted by Gank


Nobody asked you for help, the US decided to go in and bring peace by shooting up the place. Delta force and the rangers raided the UNDP hq, the charitys World Concern and Medicin sans frontier and captured  the head of the UN police force, blew up a meeting of tribal leaders discussing a peace treaty and finally killed up to 1000 civilians in the raid seen in Black hawk down before running home with your tail between your legs. Sheer ****ing brilliance. But they were starving

Actually, the UN and US CITIZENS said that something had to be done to fix the situation, so the US responded. Maybe they could have done it better, but they were still responding to the rest of the world.

Beatspete, saying why dont they help the americans rebuild the place is ridiculous. If somebody bombed your country repeatedly over 13 years then invaded and gave all its own companys nice big juicy contracts to rebuild the mess they made would you help them? A lot of the Iraqi resistance isnt pro-saddam, its anti-american. Probably because these guys have first hand experience with the kind of rulers the US likes in that part of the world.

We didnt' bomb them repeatedly over 13 years. We bombed them three times. Once during Desert Storm, once during Desert Fox, and this last time. That's three times, and the first two times, we had the support of the UN.

Imo, there aint any difference between these guys and say the East India trading companys mercenary armys, there still hired guns.

So they deserve to die, and be paraded about in a show of utter brutality?

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Unknown Target


Actually, the UN and US CITIZENS said that something had to be done to fix the situation, so the US responded. Maybe they could have done it better, but they were still responding to the rest of the world.

Wonderful logic. So I, as a Yugoslavian citizen, think that Paraguay should be bombed, which gives Yugoslavia's Army the right to do it. You are lucky that the world does not function on this principal, otherwise America have been a smoking crater long ago.

Originally posted by Unknown Target

We didnt' bomb them repeatedly over 13 years. We bombed them three times. Once during Desert Storm, once during Desert Fox, and this last time. That's three times, and the first two times, we had the support of the UN.


So they deserve to die, and be paraded about in a show of utter brutality?

Clinton bombed Iraq on and off for the entire time he was in office. And isn't three enough? You say it like its "only three". Yeah, real humanitarians, only three times. Them Iraqis are just a bunch of wussies.

[ionia23]

Originally posted by Gank

Nobody asked you for help, the US decided to go in and bring peace by shooting up the place. Delta force and the rangers raided the UNDP hq, the charitys World Concern and Medicin sans frontier and captured  the head of the UN police force, blew up a meeting of tribal leaders discussing a peace treaty and finally killed up to 1000 civilians in the raid seen in Black hawk down before running home with your tail between your legs. Sheer ****ing brilliance. But they were starving
 

Okay, facts.

1,000 civilians?  Crikey.  The word you're looking for is "guerilla".  The Rangers weren't killed by mere rocks and sticks, you know.

"Peace treaty" amoung tribal leaders, including that sick f*cker who was robbing food shipments for sale on the black market.  How easily we forget, no?

It was the right thing to do, and the wrong way to do it.  A classic example of underestimating your enemy.

By the by, those soldiers didn't run home with their "tail between their legs".  They were ordered to leave.  Perhaps Bill Clinton decided that carpetbombing the entire country wasn't a proper response.

[Gank]

Originally posted by Unknown Target
Actually, the UN and US CITIZENS said that something had to be done to fix the situation, so the US responded. Maybe they could have done it better, but they were still responding to the rest of the world.

Wtf is that last statement supposed to mean, it makes no sense. And its not maybe they could have done it better, they definetly could have done it better, US/UN intervention in somalia was a complete and utter failure.

We didnt' bomb them repeatedly over 13 years. We bombed them three times. Once during Desert Storm, once during Desert Fox, and this last time. That's three times, and the first two times, we had the support of the UN.

Ummm bombing them 3 times is repeatedly. And there were more bombings than just the 3 major campaigns. And I dont think UN support is going to mean **** all to the Iraqis being bombed, do you?

So they deserve to die, and be paraded about in a show of utter brutality?

Learn to read.

[ionia23]

Originally posted by Rictor

Wonderful logic. So I, as a Yugoslavian citizen, think that Paraguay should be bombed, which gives Yugoslavia's Army the right to do it. You are lucky that the world does not function on this principal, otherwise America have been a smoking crater long ago.

Bombing Paraguay...now, there's a thought.  Any reasoning behind it?

There's only two countries on this planet with the capability of rendering North America a "smoking crater", and you don't come from either of them.

[Gank]

Originally posted by ionia23
Okay, facts.

Where?
No facts here, just some bull**** opinions based on a film which isnt even accurate to the flagwaving book it was based on.

Originally posted by ionia23
1,000 civilians? Crikey. The word you're looking for is "guerilla". The Rangers weren't killed by mere rocks and sticks, you know.

1000 civilians is a UN estimate. It even comes up at the very end of the film. Thats what happens when you conduct military operations in broad daylight in a packed city. Why do you think those guys were pulled out of the helicopter and dragged around the street? Because the same guys had just been flying around the place shooting everything up with miniguns. Innocent people died.

Originally posted by ionia23
]"Peace treaty" amoung tribal leaders, including that sick f*cker who was robbing food shipments for sale on the black market. How easily we forget, no?

As opposed to the sick ****ers who blew up the best chance of peace in the region  How easily we ignore, no?

Originally posted by ionia23
It was the right thing to do, and the wrong way to do it. A classic example of underestimating your enemy.

Goes a bit beyond underestimating.

Originally posted by ionia23
By the by, those soldiers didn't run home with their "tail between their legs". They were ordered to leave. Perhaps Bill Clinton decided that carpetbombing the entire country wasn't a proper response.

Right, because that was the only alternative left.

[Rictor]

Well, actually, there are six nations capable of rendering America a smoking crater, but I still don't from any of them. Does that matter? No.

You said that America went into Somalia because "the UN and US CITIZENS said that something had to be done to fix the situation, so the US responded." You have no right, as a US citizezen, to condone the invasion of another country. You can agree or disagree, but your agreement does not validate the act. In short, you can think what you want, but no one gives a ****. You can't invade because "Us citizens thought it was right", it simply doesn't work that way.

I meant that if the world worked on the "do what the people think, even if its none of their business" principal, America would be quickly destroyed. You may or may not know this, but America has very few friends in the world.

Before the war, in Britain and Australia, your two greatest allies, public support was less than 50% for the war. And Spain, the third greatest ally, was 91% against. The rest of the world was uninimously against.

[ionia23]

Yup, you're all right.  World be damned.  The sooner my country can go isolationist again, the better.

[mikhael]

Originally posted by Gank
Imo, there aint any difference between these guys and say the East India trading companys mercenary armys, there still hired guns.

By that logic, my sister and brother in law are mercenaries. They're both security sorts hired to carry guns. The warehouse they work in might find that a bit of a stretch though. Same for the guy that rides herd in a bank's armored car.

There's a difference between a mercenary (an unaffiliated soldier who sells his combat services to the highest bidder) and a security guard.

[Rictor]

Yes, but this did not happen in America, this happened in Iraq. There are two major differences. Firstly, Iraq is a warzone. Secondly, these guys were not in their own country, defending against thieves. They were in a foregin nation, protecting the thieves. Even if you choose to disregard that last part, they were still in a foreign nation, which is currently a warzone. They were guarding the interests of US companies, war profiteers to be exact.

And I don't remember Rent-A-Cop security guards carrying automatics or wearing kevlar.

[Flipside]

I don't think the question of 'valid target' is really what is causing the problem here though.