lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: And we wonder why the Iraqis don't like us...
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 02-02-2007, 08:36 PM   #1
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
And we wonder why the Iraqis don't like us...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Yco1deXOzN8

Check out that video. Pretty ****ing insane. And this is actually how soldiers are *SUPPOSED* to drive in Iraq... to minimize the risk of being ambushed when stuck in traffic.

It seems that the soldiers have little to no respect for Iraqi lives and property, if they think that ramming cars and causing wrecks is okay.
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-02-2007, 08:49 PM   #2
Alkonium
To Mend and Defend
 
Alkonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Divinity's Reach
Posts: 3,883
Current Game: Guild Wars 2
Roleplayer Forum Veteran 
Wow. And people somehow are able to question my cynicism about the US. I am shocked. Well, not really.

Alkonium is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-02-2007, 09:04 PM   #3
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
I don't really have a problem with it. American soldiers are basically the police force in Iraq; you get the hell out of the way when you see a police cruiser or ambulance coming, why should a U.S. Army Humvee be treated differently?

In that video when the Humvee hits the car in front of it, it doesn't look like it does a hell of a lot of damage anyway, and with the greater amount of danger facing U.S. soldiers in Iraq, I think they are perfectly justified in getting the people who ignore their horn out of their way by hitting the car in front of them like that.

If it goes further, however, and they do cause wrecks like you said (which I didn't see in the video you posted), then yeah, I think they'd be in the wrong.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-03-2007, 03:42 PM   #4
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
American soldiers are basically the police force in Iraq;
Except they're not. They're an occupying military that has become nothing but a pain in the ass for the average Iraqi. Someone getting a fresh new dent in their car is just another reminder for them that they're occupied.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
you get the hell out of the way when you see a police cruiser or ambulance coming, why should a U.S. Army Humvee be treated differently?
Maybe some people don't know that you're SUPPOSED to pull over for a Humvee? It's not like it has lights and sirens on it. Besides, cops, firetrucks, and ambulances STILL don't have the right to bump cars, with or without a siren.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
In that video when the Humvee hits the car in front of it, it doesn't look like it does a hell of a lot of damage anyway, and with the greater amount of danger facing U.S. soldiers in Iraq, I think they are perfectly justified in getting the people who ignore their horn out of their way by hitting the car in front of them like that.
A lot of the people they hit look like they had no where to get out of the way. They're stuck in traffic FFS. It looks like they're ramming cars because they have no care for the property of the Iraqis, and think that since they're trying to save their own lives, that it's okay to piss off other people in the process.

Just think... every person in these bumped cars now might look the other way if they see an IED being planted... how the HELL are we EVER going to win hearts and minds like this??
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-03-2007, 09:25 PM   #5
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,787
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Except they're not. They're an occupying military that has become nothing but a pain in the ass for the average Iraqi. Someone getting a fresh new dent in their car is just another reminder for them that they're occupied. Maybe some people don't know that you're SUPPOSED to pull over for a Humvee? It's not like it has lights and sirens on it. Besides, cops, firetrucks, and ambulances STILL don't have the right to bump cars, with or without a siren. A lot of the people they hit look like they had no where to get out of the way. They're stuck in traffic FFS. It looks like they're ramming cars because they have no care for the property of the Iraqis, and think that since they're trying to save their own lives, that it's okay to piss off other people in the process. Just think... every person in these bumped cars now might look the other way if they see an IED being planted... how the HELL are we EVER going to win hearts and minds like this??
Hmm.....a potential rpg up the tailpipe or a slightly pissed off Iraqi (who you claim doesn't like you anyway)? Nothing to lose. Also, they are effectively the equivalent of the police under the current circumstances, "occupiers" or not. Besides, after almost 4 years, no one in Iraq doesn't essentially know that you get out of the way of a military vehicle in what is still pretty much a wartime situation. It takes a lot more than a few bumped cars to solidify such attitudes. On top of which, the people who are planting IEDs and blowing up people with car bombs are killing many more civilians than soldiers. If those people turn the other way upon seeing an IED planted somewhere, they are probably already the enemy or are potentially signing their own death warrants. Explosives don't discriminate.
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-03-2007, 09:55 PM   #6
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Hmm.....a potential rpg up the tailpipe or a slightly pissed off Iraqi (who you claim doesn't like you anyway)? Nothing to lose. Also, they are effectively the equivalent of the police under the current circumstances, "occupiers" or not. Besides, after almost 4 years, no one in Iraq doesn't essentially know that you get out of the way of a military vehicle in what is still pretty much a wartime situation. It takes a lot more than a few bumped cars to solidify such attitudes. On top of which, the people who are planting IEDs and blowing up people with car bombs are killing many more civilians than soldiers. If those people turn the other way upon seeing an IED planted somewhere, they are probably already the enemy or are potentially signing their own death warrants. Explosives don't discriminate.
So even if all of these things were true (which they're not) - how does all of this still justify damaging someone's personal property (fixing a car isn't cheap, you know - and these people probably don't have the money to fix them)? Even an ambulance on the way to a life-threatening accident doesn't have the right to bump your car. And they KNOW that someone may die if they don't get there in a hurry. The difference is that a paramedic, or a fireman, or a cop will usually have respect for people's property, and will usually have respect for the law. The soldiers in Iraq, at least THESE soldiers, seem to think that the law does not apply to them... that there is no such thing as "hit-and-run" to them.
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-03-2007, 12:56 AM   #7
Rogue15
Reconnaissance Specialist
 
Rogue15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Kaas City
Posts: 18,652
Current Game: The Old Republic
Roleplayer 10 year veteran! 
what if they were evacuating a casualty?


Battle is a pure form of expression. It is heart and discipline, reduced to movement and motion. In battle, the words are swept away, giving way to actions-- mercy, sacrifice, anger, fear. These are pure moments of expression.
Rogue15 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-03-2007, 01:03 AM   #8
Grey Master
Firecracker
 
Grey Master's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: are u stalking me?
Posts: 1,075
Joyriding is good, but not like this.
I think the soldiers have to drive more carefuly, if only to make the people feel a little more safe.
Grey Master is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-03-2007, 03:18 AM   #9
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grey Master
Joyriding is good, but not like this.
Yeah I know I'd love to cruise down the streets of Baghdad in a convertible with the top down so I can holla at all the one-legged bitchez. Like in that LL Cool J song. But in a war zone.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-03-2007, 02:08 AM   #10
Windu Chi
Banned
 
Windu Chi's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Getting revenge on that traitor, Anakin.
Posts: 882
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
It seems that the soldiers have little to no respect for Iraqi lives and property, if they think that ramming cars and causing wrecks is okay.
Ah come on, TK those soldiers can't trust no civilians there most of the country is a huge killzone.
Everyone is suspected of being a enemy by the soldiers I bet; children and women.
If I was patrolling that place I wouldn't trust nothing that walks upright and only have two legs.
So, they should drive slowly in traffic and respect the traffic laws and what?
End up dead by a ambush or a IED on the road.
The best thing for everyone is to get them the hell out of there.
The war is lost there I believe, the place is just a butcher's nest; death squads, disguise genocide cause by sectarian violence, etc, etc and etc.
But of course that is the easy thing to say, leave.
The war look's like a revenge war, the soldiers kill insurgents, the family members of the insurgents become insurgents over and over again until no one is left.
Plenty of civilians are leaving(who can leave) and a lot have already left.
The government officials are corrupt and out for their own personal needs, I don't see no solution there.
Just will have to wait and see how much gallons of blood Bush, his administration and people who still support that war is willing to waste, before they give up.
I think the death toll is going to reach 10,000 millitary fatalities over the coming years, before they get that in their thick heads.

Last edited by windu6; 02-03-2007 at 02:30 AM.
Windu Chi is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-03-2007, 10:21 AM   #11
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
I don't really have a problem with it. American soldiers are basically the police force in Iraq; you get the hell out of the way when you see a police cruiser or ambulance coming, why should a U.S. Army Humvee be treated differently?
Because they're not "the police force", they're an illegally occupying force. A malevolent force, as far as the Iraqis are concerned.

We get out of the way of the police on the roads in our own countries because they have a social remit to act in the interests of the society they are sanctioned by. But perhaps you're forgetting that a policeman that smashes into someone... at least in my OWN nation... is often deemed to be just as responsible for causing an accident as a member of the public would be. We usually get out of the way of the police, but the police are supposed to drive safely, just in case we don't get out of the way.

Add to this the fact that your average US humvee driving fast in Iraq isn't driving fast so that it can get to the scene of a crime more quickly, it isn't driving fast because it's pursuing evil criminals... it's driving fast because the US personnel within want to protect their own backsides.

The Iraqis don't want the US nor the UK in Iraq, the US/UK have certainly done the people no good in Iraq, and therefore any damage they cause is merely another count on the massive list of crimes contained within the larger war-crime that they are guilty of.

Anyway, this clip is fairly mild. I presume you've all seen the footage of US mercenaries shooting at random bystanders on the road to Baghdad? If not, it can be produced, no doubt.


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-03-2007, 11:11 AM   #12
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
I knew about this already, from Riverbend's blog. She reports they also fire machine guns in the air to get people to move out of their way.

Quote:
what if they were evacuating a casualty?
Isn't that what this contraption called an ambulance is for?

I was going to suggest the Humvees use sirens and those fancy spinning blue light thingies, but then I remembered that seeing as to how the Coalition uses plywood for armour, I doubt they can afford them.

Quote:
But perhaps you're forgetting that a policeman that smashes into someone... at least in my OWN nation... is often deemed to be just as responsible for causing an accident as a member of the public would be. We usually get out of the way of the police, but the police are supposed to drive safely, just in case we don't get out of the way.
Right. Even in a really bad emergency with lives at stake, you don't see fire apparatuses ram other vehicles out of the way, even though they're certainly capable of doing so.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-03-2007, 10:01 PM   #13
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,787
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
What specifically are you talking about being untrue?
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-03-2007, 10:11 PM   #14
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
What specifically are you talking about being untrue?
Well, to start with, you're saying that there is nothing to lose by doing this. Wrong. The Iraqis have something to lose... the quality of their car. And, America has something to lose... the hearts and minds of the Iraqis, which is something that we were SUPPOSED to win over in this whole thing, remember?

And you say the soldiers are like a police force. Usually, a police force has some kind of legal establishment for their duties. There is no international authorization for American troops to be in Iraq, especially against the will of the Iraqi people. I really don't think that Americans would appreciate it if Chinese soldiers came over to American cities and started bumping our shiny new Escalades and F-150's while we're sitting in traffic until we pay off our debt to them.

Lastly, you say that the people were bumped because they wouldn't get out of the way. Now, I don't know if you've ever driven in traffic before, but sometimes there is no way to get out of the way.
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 12:37 AM   #15
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,787
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
First off, the guys in the HMV have "nothing to lose" under the scenario as I described it. The guys in the HMV are not the Iraqis. I was referring to them specifically.

Second, this is not like Okinawa. The US military forces in Iraq are combatants, not a tripwire force in a peacetime setting. Second, the will of the Iraqi people is not some monolithic anti-US/Coalition block. Some want us there and others do not. However, maybe we can find the time to send UN troops in to replace the US/GB et al and try to stabilize Iraq, that is if we can pull them away from the brothels they're running, when they're not cannabalizing the local population or cowering in their bunkers and looking the other way.

Third, your Chinese scenario is almost too absurd to respond to, but I will anyway. It is totally irrelevant how much "debt" we owe the PRC. They run a huge trade surplus with the US and don't yet have the alternative markets to dump their goods in yet. As a result, trying to come over here to "occupy" us till we pay said debt would be financially counterproductive for them.

However, your description of the incident in the video is a bit overblown. They tapped the cars in front of them, none crashed nor looked damaged (to the extent you appear to be suggesting). Furthermore, most of the vehicles they tapped found a way to get out of the way. Also, there was no high speed traffic. It also seems obvious from the video that the soldiers figured out they had to shift tactics due to the nature of the traffic situation.

As to the whole UN thing, so what. All that matters currently is the essentially bilateral (and somewhat symbiotic) relationship between the Coalition forces and the current government. The UN can go hang itself. It is incapable of acting due to the fact that it only takes 1 veto from any 1 of 5 countries to hamstring it from doing anything remotely productive anywhere. Words without actions are meaningless in the end. It was only the absence of one of the veto members that even allowed the UN to sanction the defense of SK. Otherwise you'd no doubt be bitching today that the inevitable US involvement in Korea would have been an imperialist aggression against the good people of NK.
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 01:21 AM   #16
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
First off, the guys in the HMV have "nothing to lose" under the scenario as I described it. The guys in the HMV are not the Iraqis. I was referring to them specifically.
Maybe not this trip. Maybe they won't be so lucky next time. Maybe next time, one of these drivers will be armed, and won't be so pleased with the fresh new dent in their car.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Second, this is not like Okinawa. The US military forces in Iraq are combatants, not a tripwire force in a peacetime setting.
Usually in a war zone, people aren't sitting in rush hour traffic in the middle of it. If this was truely a combat situation, the streets would be deserted. There is no combat going on in this video. Only a wreckless soldier driving like he owns Iraq.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Second, the will of the Iraqi people is not some monolithic anti-US/Coalition block.
What is this "Coalition" of which you speak? You mean us and Britain? Hardly a coalition. Besides, the British are on their way out. We'll be the only ones left.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Some want us there and others do not.
Eh... no one in Iraq wants us there. Except maybe the people in the Iraqi government who stand to gain from America bleeding for their government, which would be overthrown in a day if it weren't for our occupation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
However, your description of the incident in the video is a bit overblown. They tapped the cars in front of them, none crashed nor looked damaged (to the extent you appear to be suggesting). Furthermore, most of the vehicles they tapped found a way to get out of the way. Also, there was no high speed traffic. It also seems obvious from the video that the soldiers figured out they had to shift tactics due to the nature of the traffic situation.
Yes, damage is done. It doesn't matter how hard they were hit - trust me, I was just in a fender-bender a few weeks ago. I rear-ended a Honda Civic going about only 10-15 mph... yet our bumpers are both sagging.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
It is incapable of acting due to the fact that it only takes 1 veto from any 1 of 5 countries to hamstring it from doing anything remotely productive anywhere.
Yeah, and usually that one veto is from the U.S.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Otherwise you'd no doubt be bitching today that the inevitable US involvement in Korea would have been an imperialist aggression against the good people of NK.
Heh... inevitable. Like somehow it's crucial to the continuation of the United States of America that South Korea is defended from North Korea.
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 02:35 PM   #17
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,787
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Heh... inevitable. Like somehow it's crucial to the continuation of the United States of America that South Korea is defended from North Korea.
Using your logic, we should have just left Europe at the end of WW2, not confronted the USSR over West Berlin, and walked away from Japan after the signing of the surrender. I mean, none of it was necessary to defend the territorial integrity of the US itself.

The UN did nothing in Iraq b/c it wasn't seen as necessary by ANY of the real powers for geopolitical and economic reasons. How Saddam controlled his population was a nonissue. Suggesting that the UN "allowed" SH to stay in power b/c he kept a lid on the local population is just silly.
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 02:01 AM   #18
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Maybe not this trip. Maybe they won't be so lucky next time. Maybe next time, one of these drivers will be armed, and won't be so pleased with the fresh new dent in their car.
Yeah it sucks that the soldiers don't have assault rifles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Usually in a war zone, people aren't sitting in rush hour traffic in the middle of it. If this was truely a combat situation, the streets would be deserted. There is no combat going on in this video. Only a wreckless soldier driving like he owns Iraq.
What. First off, for most of the video there's no traffic, just a lot of people double parked. Secondly, how would you know that if it was "truely" a combat situation, there would be no cars on the road? Lastly, it could have turned into a combat situation at any time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Eh... no one in Iraq wants us there. Except maybe the people in the Iraqi government who stand to gain from America bleeding for their government, which would be overthrown in a day if it weren't for our occupation.
Actually, a very small number of Iraqis is in favor of the U.S. occupation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Yes, damage is done. It doesn't matter how hard they were hit - trust me, I was just in a fender-bender a few weeks ago. I rear-ended a Honda Civic going about only 10-15 mph... yet our bumpers are both sagging.
The Humvee probably hit it at a slower speed. The cars being hit were moving, which detracts from the force of the impact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Lastly, you say that the people were bumped because they wouldn't get out of the way. Now, I don't know if you've ever driven in traffic before, but sometimes there is no way to get out of the way.
I hit rush hour traffic here in Boston every morning and every afternoon - you find a way to pull to one side. And no matter what kind of anecdotes either of us come up with, the people in that video had plenty of opportunity to slow down and get to the side.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
And, America has something to lose... the hearts and minds of the Iraqis, which is something that we were SUPPOSED to win over in this whole thing, remember?
I hope you're being sarcastic, because that ain't gonna happen.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 10:12 AM   #19
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Second, this is not like Okinawa. The US military forces in Iraq are combatants, not a tripwire force in a peacetime setting. Second, the will of the Iraqi people is not some monolithic anti-US/Coalition block. Some want us there and others do not. However, maybe we can find the time to send UN troops in to replace the US/GB et al and try to stabilize Iraq, that is if we can pull them away from the brothels they're running, when they're not cannabalizing the local population or cowering in their bunkers and looking the other way.
Bahaha... This is simply rabid neoconservatism at its most ridiculous.

First, as you well know (because I have made you aware of it on more than one occasion) the vast majority of the Iraqi people don't want the US/UK occupying Iraq. I have in the past produced (and can produce again) polls taken by our own governments that clearly show this. End of story. And if you don't want the will of the Iraqi people to be obeyed... then you are opposed to democracy in Iraq. Equally end of story.

Secondly, the US and UK created the mess in Iraq over the course of decades. It is not up to the rest of the world to fix our mess. So your laughable tirade simultaneously insulting the UN nations and suggesting that they need to pop over to Iraq and help you out... it's not only vulgar, it's nonsensical.

-

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
What. First off, for most of the video there's no traffic, just a lot of people double parked. Secondly, how would you know that if it was "truely" a combat situation, there would be no cars on the road? Lastly, it could have turned into a combat situation at any time.
You don't seem to be getting the idea: Bumping people's cars (and what looked like a bus) off the road is not safe. All the pedestrians they avoided with a narrow margin... (and subsequently insulted,) they were not safe. If the US forces were really there for the benefit of the Iraqi people, they wouldn't run around endangering them wantonly.

And of course, as has been stated before: this driving "technique" is merely for the US soldiers' benefit. But here's the chaser, here it is: An illegally occupying military force does not have the right to safeguard its soldiers at the expense of the safety of the civilian population.

The fact that you can even CONSIDER excusing this behaviour absolutely boggles the mind.

Suppose an occupying force took up residence in the US, a force that most of the US populace wanted GONE. Would you then excuse them if they rushed around running American cars off the road, damaging property and endangering the people? Of course you wouldn't.

Have some objective morality, why don't you.


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 02:29 PM   #20
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,787
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
Bahaha... This is simply rabid neoconservatism at its most ridiculous.
Secondly, the US and UK created the mess in Iraq over the course of decades. It is not up to the rest of the world to fix our mess. So your laughable tirade simultaneously insulting the UN nations and suggesting that they need to pop over to Iraq and help you out... it's not only vulgar, it's nonsensical.
Get off your stump for a minute. I was clearly being sarcastic about the effectiveness of the UN. If you were half as perceptive as you'd have people believe, you'd have picked that up. Frankly, the UN has less business being there than anyone else. They didn't lift a finger to alleviate the Iraqi's of SH (afterall, you only need one veto from US/GB/France/Russia/PRC to get in the way). Furthermore, if it's ONLY/primarily the US/GB (as you assert)that are responsible for the mess that became Iraq, then it was their moral responsibility to fix it. That you even think the UN should have any say in anything at this point gives me cause to question your fabled sense of morality and logic. You're not only being nonsensical, but foolish as well.
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 02:33 PM   #21
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
They didn't lift a finger to alleviate the Iraqi's of SH
Uh... and why would they want to do such a thing? Saddam Hussein kept the Iraqis in line, and he was not an Islamic fundamentalist like the ones we have in power now.
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 05:03 PM   #22
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
You don't seem to be getting the idea: Bumping people's cars (and what looked like a bus) off the road is not safe. All the pedestrians they avoided with a narrow margin... (and subsequently insulted,) they were not safe.
Not getting these people out of the way is not safe for the soldiers (who probably don't want to be there any more than the average Iraqi wants them there) inside of the Humvees. Either way, someone's in danger.

And god forbid the civilians are insulted. They probably can't speak English, never mind understand the insults lobbed at them by the soldiers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
If the US forces were really there for the benefit of the Iraqi people, they wouldn't run around endangering them wantonly.
They aren't there for the benefit of the Iraqi people.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 12:02 PM   #23
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
Suppose an occupying force took up residence in the US, a force that most of the US populace wanted GONE. Would you then excuse them if they rushed around running American cars off the road, damaging property and endangering the people? Of course you wouldn't.
Or how about this: What about those ambulances, fire apparatuses and police cars most of us do want in our countries. Would it be OK if those rear-ended you?

No? Then think about how you'd feel if it was some illegal occupying force you did not like in the first place.

And if you think that movie was bad, wait 'til you see how these guys teach people not to sit peacefully next to the road without understanding English.

What is upsetting about the movie is not what they do, it's the comments that condone the behavior. But then again, seeing as to how the Army-worshippers are so in awe of their land and Army that they allow torture at Guantanamo...


Last edited by Dagobahn Eagle; 02-04-2007 at 01:15 PM.
Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 01:09 PM   #24
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Hey Eagle, that link seems to go straight back to the original humvee clip...

Anyway, here's another interesting news clip, where US soldiers comment on what they've been told to do to the Iraqis, and an ex SAS gent criticises US policy in Iraq... which is laughable really, considering the amoral uses the SAS have been put to by the UK in the past.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=UNfrCklURkA

Here's one of UK soldiers beating up defenceless children who dared to throw rocks at the impenetrable base!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=U8EYRoxKjpI


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 01:15 PM   #25
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
Hey Eagle, that link seems to go straight back to the original humvee clip...
Fixed.

Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 03:42 PM   #26
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Get off your stump for a minute. I was clearly being sarcastic about the effectiveness of the UN. If you were half as perceptive as you'd have people believe, you'd have picked that up.
Sarcasm is classically ironic in nature. So if you're trying to claim that your anti-UN insults were ironic, I have to say "rubbish". Because you've made it quite clear both in this thread and in past threads that you have nothing but contempt for the institution of the United Nations, Tot. Your vulgar insults directed at the UN are just that, direct insults completely in line with your previously and currently demonstrated attitude towards the UN and its effectiveness as an institution. No irony there.

However, there is another, more contemporary definition of "sarcasm", that is "harsh or bitter derision". Insulting mockery, in other words. And if that's the sense you're trying to use when you claim "sarcasm" on your part, I agree totally. It was bitter, derisive, neo-con nonsense. And yes, I did pick up on that, quite obviously so from my response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Frankly, the UN has less business being there than anyone else. They didn't lift a finger to alleviate the Iraqi's of SH (afterall, you only need one veto from US/GB/France/Russia/PRC to get in the way).
You say that the UN "has no business in Iraq" because they didn't "stop Saddam Hussein". What a warped perspective.

The truth is that the non US/UK countries have no obligation to go into Iraq, because they didn't cause the problem. The US and UK did cause the problem, by supporting and funding Saddam, then excusing Saddam's war crimes, then decimating the country with over a decade of war, bombing and sanctions which starved and killed the Iraqi people and effectively prevented Saddam from being overthrown by them...

As for your implication that the US and UK have some business being in Iraq... lol. The only business we have in Iraq is the oil business. Nothing excusable or altruistic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Furthermore, if it's ONLY/primarily the US/GB (as you assert)that are responsible for the mess that became Iraq, then it was their moral responsibility to fix it.
Exactly! But instead of fixing it, we made it even worse!

The problem was: Iraq was a decimated country (decimated by us) with a self-serving dictatorial regime in power (supported for years by us).

So how could we have fixed it? Well we could have lifted sanctions and re-invigorated the Iraqi people, so that they would no longer have to depend on Saddam's regime. They would no doubt have eventually overthrown him, as other popular movements have overthrown US/UK backed dictators in other nations. We could have sent many more diplomatic missions and observers into the country, and funded peaceful democratic organisations within Iraq!

Instead... We illegally invaded the country for spurious reasons, destroyed the infrastructure, killed hundreds of thousands of civilians and commited sundry war-crimes in the process! Torture, beatings, illegal imprisonment, show-trials, election-rigging... you name it.

So yeah, we have a moral obligation to fix our own mess. Did we try to fix it? Nope. Are we fixing it now? Nope. Will we try to fix it in the future? Not if people like yourself are listened to by the masses, mate.

As previously established, your statements indicate that you oppose democracy in Iraq, you oppose the exercising of international law merely because the US and other powerful nations are capable of circumventing it, and you excuse any and all minor war-crimes committed by our troops in Iraq, just as you excuse the most grevious crime of all: Going to war in the first place. For shame, sir.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
That you even think the UN should have any say in anything at this point gives me cause to question your fabled sense of morality and logic. You're not only being nonsensical, but foolish as well.
Irrelevant nonsense. As stated ad infinitum, international bodies are the only bodies that even APPROACH the state of having moral authority on the international stage. Your idea that the UN should NOT be involved in anything, is the only UN-related nonsense around here.


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 06:18 PM   #27
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
Not getting these people out of the way is not safe for the soldiers (who probably don't want to be there any more than the average Iraqi wants them there) inside of the Humvees. Either way, someone's in danger.
You seem to think that US soldiers in humvees have the right to be safer than the Iraqi civilians they run off the road and almost run over. They have no such right. Once again: this driving "technique" is merely for the US soldiers' benefit. But here's the chaser, here it is: An illegally occupying military force does not have the right to safeguard its soldiers at the expense of the safety of the civilian population.

Illegal occupying forces HAVE NO RIGHTS. Only responsibilities. It's basic, basic morality. Hard to get more basic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
And god forbid the civilians are insulted. They probably can't speak English, never mind understand the insults lobbed at them by the soldiers.
Well you missed the point again, didn't you. The fact that the US soldiers were insulting the Iraqi civilians they almost ran over is indicative of the contempt for Iraqi people that US/UK soldiers routinely have. You don't get to insult people whom you've almost clipped with your car.

So whether or not the Iraqi people KNOW they're being insulted isn't relevant, and I'm not sure how you can think it is... It's the same with that old clip of US soldiers teaching Iraqi children to chant "f**k Iraq! f**k Iraq!" over and over again. The kids couldn't understand it, but that's not the point. It's immoral, immature and disrespectful, and from all reports, it characterises our attitude over there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
They aren't there for the benefit of the Iraqi people.
Yah, that's the point. The US and UK claim to be there for the benefit of the Iraqi people. But these tapes are all further evidence that this is a lie. Not that any further evidence was necessary, but hey.


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 06:47 PM   #28
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
You seem to think that US soldiers in humvees have the right to be safer than the Iraqi civilians they run off the road and almost run over. They have no such right. Once again: this driving "technique" is merely for the US soldiers' benefit. But here's the chaser, here it is: An illegally occupying military force does not have the right to safeguard its soldiers at the expense of the safety of the civilian population.
I'd rather have a few civilians be almost hit or have their cars dented a bit than a few soldiers be ambushed and wounded or killed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
Illegal occupying forces HAVE NO RIGHTS. Only responsibilities. It's basic, basic morality. Hard to get more basic.
You seem to assume I agree with your version of morality. In this case, I do not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
So whether or not the Iraqi people KNOW they're being insulted isn't relevant, and I'm not sure how you can think it is... It's the same with that old clip of US soldiers teaching Iraqi children to chant "f**k Iraq! f**k Iraq!" over and over again. The kids couldn't understand it, but that's not the point. It's immoral, immature and disrespectful, and from all reports, it characterises our attitude over there.
The soldiers there aren't obligated to respect the Iraqi people. They're obligated to protect them. So long as they try to do this, I don't give a damn what they say.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 07:05 PM   #29
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
I'd rather have a few civilians be almost hit or have their cars dented a bit than a few soldiers be ambushed and wounded or killed.
Uh... they're SOLDIERS. It's part of their JOB to be ambushed, wounded, and killed. As much as I don't want to see any of the above happen... it WILL happen as long as they're occupying a hostile land.

Just because I don't want to see those things happen doesn't mean, however, the soldiers should get special priviledges... like the ability to commit hit-and-runs and numerous other crimes to save themselves at the expense of the average Iraqi.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
The soldiers there aren't obligated to respect the Iraqi people. They're obligated to protect them. So long as they try to do this, I don't give a damn what they say.
I'm sure glad the police in America don't "protect" me the same way these soldiers do! God damn! I hardly call running me off the road and nearly running me over in the street "protecting" me!
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 07:12 PM   #30
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
As much as I don't want to see any of the above happen... it WILL happen as long as they're occupying a hostile land.
By your logic it doesn't matter if the Iraqi people die either, hell they're in a war zone, so they'll most likely die too.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
I'm sure glad the police in America don't "protect" me the same way these soldiers do! God damn! I hardly call running me off the road and nearly running me over in the street "protecting" me!
You're exaggerating what happened in the video, none of the cars in it were run off the road. As for the "nearly running me over in the street" part, keyword there is "nearly". I also don't see police here being ambushed with IEDs and shot at with fully automatic assault rifles and RPGs.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
Ha! If we're going with "what-ifs"... With this style of driving Iraqi civilians, maybe Iraqi children, could easily be injured or killed in the process. Would you rather THAT than some US soldiers getting shot at? I wouldn't.
This entire issue is a what-if. Maybe civilians will be wounded, and maybe soldiers will be wounded. In any case, if you'd like to dig up some statistic that says "reckless driving is to blame for the emotionally-jarring death of some school children who just wanted to learn", feel free to. I'll have my tears on the ready.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spider AL
Hmph, then you're deluding yourself. This is basic stuff. A military force that invades another country illegally, causes the deaths of many civilians, ruins the country's infrastructure and sticks around when the majority of the native peoples want them gone DO NOT have any right to safety within the country they've invaded. What warped version of morality are YOU using to say that they do have any such rights? Of course they don't.
So by not agreeing with you on the issue, I'm deluding myself? That statement is equivalent to you deluding yourself - contrary to what you seem to believe (based on your other posts, in addition to this statement), you are not some sort of moral authority who can pronounce judgment on the world (via the internet).

You're also saying that the soldiers driving like this played a key role in destroying Iraq - they didn't. The people who did aren't in places where it's necessary to drive like that. I have no doubt that the soldiers in that video don't want to be there, they're most likely there against their will, in addition to being there illegally. In my mind, this gives them the right to protect themselves, perhaps not by any means necessary, but I will give them some leeway and say that's it's okay to protect themselves at the risk of someone's car being dented.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite

Last edited by Det. Bart Lasiter; 02-04-2007 at 07:32 PM.
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 07:21 PM   #31
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
By your logic it doesn't matter if the Iraqi people die either, hell they're in a war zone, so they'll most likely die too.
When did an Iraqi civilian ever sign up to be in a war zone, like a soldier did. When?


Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
You're exaggerating what happened in the video, none of the cars in it were run off the road.
*Shrug* Looked like it to me. They were forced off of their current path on the road. Is that more politically correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
As for the "nearly running me over in the street" part, keyword there is "nearly".
Maybe next time, though, it won't be "nearly."

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
I also don't see police here being ambushed with IEDs and shot at with fully automatic assault rifles and RPGs.
Too bad, it's part of a soldier's job. If a soldier didn't want to have to face AK's and RPG's then they shouldn't have signed up. Either that or the Bush Administration should have put more than scrap metal on a Humvee and call it armor. Do you know that there is actually technology available to be mounted on military vehicles that shoots down incoming RPG's? They're using it in Israel right now. For some reason though, the retarded U.S. government refuses to adapt it for our own vehicles.
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 06:24 PM   #32
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,787
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
Sorry al, but the only irrelevant nonsense spewed is your inexplicable rallying to the defense of an utterly bankrupt and amoral/immoral institution. As is your statement about my position on democracy in Iraq. I'm glad you picked up on my "harsh" critique of the UN (it shows that occasionally you do grasp what's being said). Neo-con, your obsession with the term notwithstanding, has nothing to do with it. However, once again in one of your indoctrinal moments, you willfully confuse my statement to make one of your own. I don't seriously contend the UN should be involved in any manner. You obviously know this much as you appear to indicate in your attempt to "slam" me in the opening of your post. Or perhaps I'm mistaken here. Maybe you're once again having problems with your ability to comprehend. If not, I can only fairly conclude that you're attempting, disingenuously, to misrepresent what I'm saying (you do have a history of that, btw). I'd say shame on you, but you're so obviously and utterly shameless as to make it pointless. Either way, that's your problem not mine.
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 06:41 PM   #33
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Sorry al, but the only irrelevant nonsense spewed is your inexplicable rallying to the defense of an utterly bankrupt and amoral/immoral institution.
In this dubious paragraph, are you attempting to refer to the UN? In the past you've stated that your problem with the UN was that it wasn't powerful enough to stand up to nations like the USA. Are you now suggesting that the UN is "immoral" as an institution? Why? Are you going to wheel out more of your unsubstantiated oil-for-food related neo-con allegations again? Please spare us.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
As is your statement about my position on democracy in Iraq.
You are opposed to democracy in Iraq. You support and always have supported the US/UK's immoral and illegal invasion and occupation of the nation, and since the majority of Iraqis oppose our presence there, your support of the occupation is DIRECTLY in opposition to the will of the Iraqi people.

Therefore you don't believe the will of the Iraqi people should be observed.

Therefore you're against democracy in Iraq.

End of story.

As for the rest, it's really a mishmash of babbling about how I fail to comprehend you... What can one say to such unsubstantiated drivel? Show me where I've misunderstood you or misrepresented your position. Ever.

Until you do... your allegations are spurious and are to be dismissed.


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 07:08 PM   #34
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
I'd rather have a few civilians be almost hit or have their cars dented a bit than a few soldiers be ambushed and wounded or killed.
Ha! If we're going with "what-ifs"... With this style of driving Iraqi civilians, maybe Iraqi children, could easily be injured or killed in the process. Would you rather THAT than some US soldiers getting shot at? I wouldn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
You seem to assume I agree with your version of morality. In this case, I do not.
Hmph, then you're deluding yourself. This is basic stuff. A military force that invades another country illegally, causes the deaths of many civilians, ruins the country's infrastructure and sticks around when the majority of the native peoples want them gone DO NOT have any right to safety within the country they've invaded. What warped version of morality are YOU using to say that they do have any such rights? Of course they don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
The soldiers there aren't obligated to respect the Iraqi people. They're obligated to protect them. So long as they try to do this, I don't give a damn what they say.
And as stated before, these clips show that the US soldiers are protecting themselves and endangering the Iraqi people. So not only are they not protecting the Iraqi people, they ALSO have no respect for them.

That's a wash.


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-04-2007, 07:22 PM   #35
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
By your logic it doesn't matter if the Iraqi people die either, hell they're in a war zone, so they'll most likely die too.
You clearly didn't grasp his logic. He never said that US soldiers getting shot "doesn't matter". You've totally misrepresented him!

As for the Iraqi people, they are civilians in their own country. They didn't bring the war to Iraq, the US did. So it matters if they die. They're innocent civilians in their own country! Their lives matter MORE than the lives of our soldiers, morally speaking. Civilian lives ALWAYS matter more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
You're exaggerating what happened in the video, none of the cars in it were run off the road. As for the "nearly running me over in the street" part, keyword there is "nearly". I also don't see police here being ambushed with IEDs and shot at with fully automatic assault rifles and RPGs.
The cars were shunted from the rear and forced out of the way by a bigger, heavier vehicle! You may not WANT to call that "running them off the road" just because they happened to maintain some control... but that's you being over-charitable to western soldiers.

As for your idea that just because they only NEARLY ran people and kids over that makes it okay... nonsense. You can go out driving on the wrong side of the road right now. If you don't happen to hit anyone or anything... that's lucky. That doesn't mean that you weren't doing something morally wrong as well as irresponsible and dangerous.

As for the police being attacked with rifles etc... It wouldn't matter WHAT the police were at risk of being attacked with, they would STILL not have the right to drive through crowded public streets so recklessly as to endanger people's lives and damage property. End of story.

(edit - Additions)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
This entire issue is a what-if.
No it isn't, you're the one who brought the what-ifs into the "issue". The clip itself is very clear-cut, no "what-ifs" there. The drivers are driving in a manner which endangers Iraqi civilians and damages their property. And the fact is that US soldiers have no right to endanger Iraqi civilians in order to safeguard their own backsides. End of story.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
So by not agreeing with you on the issue, I'm deluding myself?
By not applying basic logic, you're deluding yourself. Has nothing to do with agreeing with me or not agreeing with me. The logic is this: An illegally invading force is morally in the wrong. They have no moral right to make themselves safer at the cost of the native civilians' safety.

This is basic stuff. You haven't even TRIED to argue with it in a coherent way, and frankly it cannot be argued with. Instead, you seem to want to make it personal. It's up to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
You're also saying that the soldiers driving like this played a key role in destroying Iraq
Ugh, what utter drivel. I've never said anything of the sort. You're just making stuff up, now.

The soldiers in this clip have been proven to have done two things: 1: driven in a manner that endangers Iraqi civilians in order to protect their own backsides (in line with general policy), and 2: shown disrespect for Iraqi civilians whom they almost ran over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
I have no doubt that the soldiers in that video don't want to be there, they're most likely there against their will, in addition to being there illegally. In my mind, this gives them the right to protect themselves,
Oh right. I'm sorry, I didn't realise they'd been drafted into a traditionally amoral army entirely against their will.

Please. They're big boys and girls, they've seen TV, they know the score. And if they don't, too damn bad. They signed on the dotted line. That one signature was a minor moral crime in itself. Everything that follows is just gravy.

(/edit)


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.

Last edited by Spider AL; 02-04-2007 at 08:01 PM. Reason: Additions
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-05-2007, 12:41 PM   #36
Spider AL
A well-spoken villain...
 
Spider AL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Help, help, I'm stapled to my workstation.
Posts: 2,162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Your contention about democracy has implicit in it that somehow you support the concept in Iraq. That isn't even remotely believable given the fact that you would have been quite content to see them suffer under Saddam's regime (or any that followed) b/c the UN wouldn't have lifted a finger to do otherwise.
Ludicrous nonsense. I am and always have been in favour of abiding by the will of the Iraqi people, and therefore democracy in Iraq.

The Iraqi people didn't want to be decimated by our violence and starved into submission by our economic sanctions, therefore I was AGAINST those violences, and against those sanctions.

The Iraqi people didn't want us to kill hundreds of thousands of civilians and destroy their national infrastructure in the process of illegally invading their country, so I was against that invasion.

The Iraqi people don't want us illegally occupying their country, they don't want us continuing to be a focus for violence and occasionally going off on one and beating Iraqi kids up if not blowing their heads off. So I'm against the occupation.

So I'm in favour of the will of the Iraqi people being enacted, therefore I'm in favour of Iraqi democracy by default.

Your statements in the past, and in this very thread, show that you approve of all of the things mentioned above, therefore you're opposed to the will of the Iraqi people being enacted, therefore you're against democracy in Iraq by default. It's very simple.

As for your ridiculous implication that I was in some way in favour of Saddam's rule... Ugh, it's beneath contempt. Every civilised, intelligent person was against Saddam's regime, but every civilised, intelligent person also recognised that bombing the heck out of Iraq (as we did over the course of decades) would do NOTHING but strengthen Saddam. Every civilised, intelligent person also recognised that invading Iraq, destroying what little infrastructure they had left and decimating the civilian population would be WORSE than leaving Saddam in power, as evil and damaging as he was.

So was I (or any other individual with more than one brain-cell) in any way in favour of Saddam's reign? Of course not, only a sillyperson would suggest so. I was in favour of ousting Saddam through means that would not adversely affect the Iraqi people and international attitudes to the US and UK, means which I have mentioned above.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
And we all know what paragons of virtue you seem to think run that place
Oh do we indeed? Go and find a post in which I've described those that run the UN as being more virtuous than any other men. You won't find one. Once again you make the basic error you've consistently made throughout these threads... the fact that I recognise that international law can only be morally applied by international institutions like the UN, doesn't mean that I'm stating that "the UN will always be moral".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
I haven't stated anywhere where I stand on the idea of a democracy (really nothing more than mob rule in its "pure" form anyway) in Iraq, let alone anywhere else. You, unfortunatley, like to infer a great deal from other peoples' positions, often going off half-cocked.
Bahahah! Ohhh Tot. You really are priceless. "Pure democracy is mob rule!!!111" as if that's something negative...

I don't think I've ever heard anything so unenlightened since involuntarily listening to Alanis Morissette's single "Ironic".

So, even if your previous posts hadn't made your stance on Iraqi democracy crystal, crystal clear, (which they did) this post has made your stance on democracy in general even clearer. It's not a huge, superhuman inference, after all. It's a gargantuan, unmissable implication running through every damn post on this topic you've ever made.

The Iraqi people are the "mob" you're so dismissively referring to, and they have the right to run their own country. By the people, for the people, anyone?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
The "accusation" was neither spurious nor poorly formed. Unfortunately, you consistently twist people's words to fit your rants and then deny that you are guilty of anything. In doing so, your responses become irrelevant. Also, you've demonstrated repeatedly throughout that you have neither a modicum of maturity or apparently an ounce of introspection. You also make leaps of logic that are both non sequitur in nature and astounding in their arrogance. I'd be able to take you seriously if you weren't so selectively hypocritical in your attempts at admonishment. ... You, unfortunatley, like to infer a great deal from other peoples' positions, often going off half-cocked. This is just one example of how you devolve into irrelevancy. You simply make too many assumptions. So, perhaps you should take your own advice and stop spewing your own particular brand of nonsense in these threads. Untill then, you just have no credibility.
There you go again with a veritable smorgasbord of unsubstantiated accusatory assertions.

One example, please, of where I've made unjustified assumptions. One example of where I've been hypocritical. One example of my twisting people's words, one example of my alleged non-sequiturs... Oh just go and find some examples to support your childish and ludicrous accusations why don't you. Until then... they're dismissed.


[FW] Spider AL
--
Hewwo, meesa Jar-Jar Binks. Yeah. Excusing me, but me needs to go bust meesa head in with dissa claw-hammer, because yousa have stripped away meesa will to living.
Spider AL is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-05-2007, 01:28 PM   #37
Dagobahn Eagle
First Strike Tester
 
Dagobahn Eagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Bergen, Norway
Posts: 3,513
Current Game: First Strike
Quote:
You're exaggerating what happened in the video, none of the cars in it were run off the road. As for the "nearly running me over in the street" part, keyword there is "nearly".
In this clip. The same way, I can probably have a drunk driver tear through a city and video-tape it. But the point is: If he makes it through without hurting anyone and there's a tape to prove it... does that make drunk driving safe ("he only nearly hit that old lady crossing the street")? Or does it mean that next time, he might not be as lucky?

Quote:
I also don't see police here being ambushed with IEDs and shot at with fully automatic assault rifles and RPGs.
No, but you do see emergency vehicles in a hurry to get wounded to hospitals, SWAT teams to hostage crises, or fire apparatuses with their equipment and personell to fires. All of which is as important, or even more so, than a Hummer load of soldiers avoiding ambush.

Ambulance personnel, as you well know, can perfectly well find themselves in situations where they needs to deliver patients quickly to hospitals. They often need to drive fast just as often as Hummer crews feel they need to drive fast. Yet it'd never be acceptable for them to bump into cars ahead of them.

Quote:
This entire issue is a what-if. Maybe civilians will be wounded, and maybe soldiers will be wounded. In any case, if you'd like to dig up some statistic that says "reckless driving is to blame for the emotionally-jarring death of some school children who just wanted to learn", feel free to.
Reckless driving and rear-ending of cars is the cause of countless accidents every year everywhere else in the world.

Causes of car accidents are often attributed to driver negligence. This is especially true for young and inexperienced drivers, though any driver can act negligently or recklessly on the road. One quarter of all car accidents involve a teenaged driver. Motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death for persons aged five to twenty-seven. Lack of experience, risk-taking behavior, distractions, and alcohol or drug use are common causes of car accidents that involve teen drivers. Reckless and aggressive driving are major causes of car accidents for any age group.


Taken from here.
I fail to see how it'd be any different when it's Humvees being driven. "Any age group" would include American Humvee drivers.

The bottom line is: There's nothing "what if?" about reckless driving causing accidents. Driving in the manner depicted in the movie, as well as wantonly rear-ending cars, does cause accidents. This is a proven fact.


Last edited by Dagobahn Eagle; 02-05-2007 at 01:48 PM.
Dagobahn Eagle is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-06-2007, 12:19 AM   #38
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
Rebel marksman: "Crazy driver!"

Apart from ramming other vehicles the driver of the vehicle acted much like some belligirent New Yorker, or an Israeli behind the wheel. Ramming other cars off the road however is too much. On a completely unrelated note there's a lot of nice cars in Iraq, I saw a BMW and I think a Mercedes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Check out that video. Pretty ****ing insane. And this is actually how soldiers are *SUPPOSED* to drive in Iraq... to minimize the risk of being ambushed when stuck in traffic.
You have a source for this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
So, they should drive slowly in traffic and respect the traffic laws and what?
End up dead by a ambush or a IED on the road.
Yes. With all apologies to Jae and those who have loved ones in the military, America isn't in Iraq to flip pogs. They get hazard pay for a reason. By the same token however every reasonable precaution should be taken to ensure the safety of the troops there. But not only do I see ramming Iraqis off the road as unnessecary I don't see how it helps. Wouldn't a car loaded with explosives plus a military jeep hitting it's back end equal BOOM?

Quote:
Originally Posted by windu6
The war look's like a revenge war, the soldiers kill insurgents, the family members of the insurgents become insurgents over and over again until no one is left.
True. This is one of the reasons behind, and one of the things that legitimises, terrorism. We should never have gone in, but now that we are we're stuck. Even the Democrats realise that now that they have the power to take action on Iraq.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TK-8252
Just think... every person in these bumped cars now might look the other way if they see an IED being planted... how the HELL are we EVER going to win hearts and minds like this??
QFT, we're not. All the work that's done by soldiers to try and connect with the Iraqi people is flushed down the crapper by some of the stunts these idiots pull here.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-06-2007, 04:07 PM   #39
TK-8252
Get Cloned.
 
TK-8252's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 5,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy Allen``
You have a source for this?
Not one that I can link to, but it was said by Keith Olbermann on his MSNBC show, Countdown. He said that this is a method soldiers are now using in order to avoid being stopped and ambushed (basically, never stop the vehicle - always be on the move). However, he also said that the average Iraqis probably doesn't know why the soldiers are doing this.

Here's the transcript from his show:

"OLBERMANN: Another kind of evidence about Iraq and more visceral, to use that word again, those homemade videos from soldiers there increasingly posted on the Internet. One such posting we‘ll show you presently, with a military Humvee driving through a congested, though unidentified, city in Iraq, the vehicle seems to be making every effort to prevent itself from slowing town.

One of MSNBC‘s military experts, Colonel Jack Jacobs, watched the video, tells us that soldiers are taught to drive this way now to reduce the risk from IEDs, improvised explosive devices, and that this is the best way to defeat a possible ambush. So assumptions about why the Humvee is driving this way are perfectly reasonable. How average Iraqi citizens might react to these maneuvers, that‘s another matter. We‘ve condensed the 2.5-minute video. Here it is."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16991456/
TK-8252 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 02-06-2007, 04:18 PM   #40
Nancy Allen``
Banned
 
Nancy Allen``'s Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,948
I'd wager that such a tactic makes them no less vulnerable. It's not as if you cannot aim an RPG at a moving target, or detonate a car bomb as Americans drove past.
Nancy Allen`` is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > JediKnight Series > Community > Senate Chambers > And we wonder why the Iraqis don't like us...

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:25 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.