Success in Iraq is dependent on Iraqis

  • Thread starter Thread starter MTAFFI
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 67
  • Views Views 8K
wilber - i truly have no idea either what we should do with this mess we have created. no matter what we do, more people will die, more orphans, more people emotionally scarred and physically crippled for life.
 
Perhaps if a true international coaltion could be formed, there would be enough manpower and enough trained "cops" to keep the peace. The U.S. military isn't trained to be nation builders, they are trained to destroy nations...let's be blunt. The bombing of the U.N. HQ in Baghdad spelled the end of any true international involvement, but that issue should seriously be looked at again.
 
Greetings and peace be with you all,

Any solution for the Iraqi people must be based on justice and fairness.

In Britain and America there is a justice system that works fairly well in theory, if your car gets bumped by someone else you can get compensation through the legal system. You would expect this as a right because someone has ruined what was yours.

Working on the justice system that Americans and the British citizens expect as a right, how can this be applied in Iraq. After all what is fair and right for an American must be fair and right for an Iraqi also.

So if an Iraqi man has had his home destroyed, his son killed, he has lost his job due to unfair economic sanctions and he has been made redundant because his employers have gone bust.

Which court will he get justice through, were will he get compensation from, will the criminals be brought to justice?

Sadly it seems our Iraqi brother in humanity is going to get nothing in return for all the injustice done against him.

What should he do, buy a gun and a bomb or should he learn to forgive?

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric
 
Again total agreement. But if we stay more will die. If we leave more will die. I have a hard time trying to figure out which is the least bad.

agree on this one. Iraq without Saddam is still too 'fresh' to take control by itself.
 
I agree with you in some parts and disagree in others

Greetings and peace be with you MTAFFI;

I can’t imagine what Bush and Blair were thinking, they apply economic sanctions against Iraq for years
The sanctions were applied for good reason, humanitarian aid, etc was not barred from the country (oil for food turned out to be a fluke because of Saddams side deals), it was SH who wouldnt allow it to reach the people, he did that to his own people that was not the fault of the US, IMO

they bomb the country into submission looking for fictitious WMD.
In retrospect it is easy to see this was a mistake, but at the time you have to remember it didnt seem illogical, SH threatened repeatedly that he had the means to "destroy the US". What if we didnt invade and Saddam did have these weapons? What if an attack was carried out under the umbrella of a terrorist organization, supplied by Saddam with such a weapon? I believe the president thought that the risk was too high and something had to be done. Now knowing the evidence he was given he was probably in a 50/50 situation on whether or not the WMD were actually there, unfortunately they were not and the situation is what it is now

In the meantime thousands of Iraqi have lost a mum, dad, brother, sister, son or daughter, huge amounts of infrastructure have been destroyed, and there are around two million Iraqi refugees living in fear and squalor.
It is an absolute shame and I feel terrible for these families and people, nothing in the world could compensate them for what they have lost, hopefully in the end God will reward them for their troubles as long as they continued to live righteous despite their problems.
Iraq did not ask to be invaded, they did not ask the American and British to depose Saddam. why should we expect the Iraqi people to accept an invading army with an apparent unjust cause to invade their country
They were happy at the first, try and remember when we first invaded, there was practically no resistance, these people no doubt wanted SH and his people out, it was only after he was caught that Al-Qaeda and other groups came in to cause the majority of the damage you are speaking of

At some time both Bush and Blair will have to stand before God and try and justify their actions.
They will no doubt


Peace be with you
 
I will also add that those who blow up women and children with suicide bombs will also answer to God, standing in line with Blair and Bush.
 
Greetings and peace be with you MTAFFI;

I believe that success in Iraq is dependent on Iraqis finding justice. America is spending billions on an American agenda in Iraq. If there was a commitment to spend this money bringing about some kind of justice then I feel this would be the solution. You did not answer the last part of my previous post which I feel is the real problem.

So if an Iraqi man has had his home destroyed, his son killed, he has lost his job due to unfair economic sanctions and he has been made redundant because his employers have gone bust.

Which court will he get justice through, were will he get compensation from, will the criminals be brought to justice?

Sadly it seems our Iraqi brother in humanity is going to get nothing in return for all the injustice done against him.

What should he do, buy a gun and a bomb or should he learn to forgive?

In the spirit of praying for peace on earth

Eric
 
Greetings and peace be with you MTAFFI;

I believe that success in Iraq is dependent on Iraqis finding justice. America is spending billions on an American agenda in Iraq. If there was a commitment to spend this money bringing about some kind of justice then I feel this would be the solution. You did not answer the last part of my previous post which I feel is the real problem.

I have a question for you, how do you think justice should be served to these people? Should we pay reparations? Should we pay to rebuild infrastructure? Do we owe people for the suicide attacks, etc? If so do they then owe the 3500 families and countless injured that have been wounded on the US's side?

So if an Iraqi man has had his home destroyed, his son killed, he has lost his job due to unfair economic sanctions and he has been made redundant because his employers have gone bust.
Who is directly responsible for his home and son? In most cases I am sure that it would be an insurgent, not the US. As far as economic sanctions, I believe that it would be because of SH that he lost his job, not the sanctions.

I think the main problem is how do you know who is civilian and who is not? We could be giving money or assistance to someone who on the surface looks and acts like a nice guy, but may be planning a car bomb in the market the next day. Compensation cannot be given to those whose identities are unknown.

Which court will he get justice through, were will he get compensation from, will the criminals be brought to justice?
Sadly this must come from the government, but from the shape they are in, it may seem as though justice will never get served. Who are the criminals? I think you can find that many times if a US soldiers is accused of a criminal act they are very often brought to light and justice.

Sadly it seems our Iraqi brother in humanity is going to get nothing in return for all the injustice done against him.

What should he do, buy a gun and a bomb or should he learn to forgive?
That is up to the Iraqi, if he feels the US has done him wrong or taken from him, then he should pick up a gun and fight the occupation forces, but the second he blows up a market or commits suicide in traffic is when he will become a terrorist. Also he probably shouldnt expect to recieve compensation after all is said and done.
 
'A dead Iraqi is just another dead Iraqi... You know, so what?'

Interviews with US veterans show for the first time the pattern of brutality in Iraq


By Leonard Doyle in Washington
Published: 12 July 2007

It is an axiom of American political life that the actions of the US military are beyond criticism. Democrats and Republicans praise the men and women in uniform at every turn. Apart from the odd bad apple at Abu Ghraib, the US military in Iraq is deemed to be doing a heroic job under trying circumstances.

That perception will take a severe knock today with the publication in The Nation magazine of a series of in-depth interviews with 50 combat veterans of the Iraq war from across the US. In the interviews, veterans have described acts of violence in which US forces have abused or killed Iraqi men, women and children with impunity.

The report steers clear of widely reported atrocities, such as the massacre in Haditha in 2005, but instead unearths a pattern of human rights abuses. "It's not individual atrocity," Specialist Garett Reppenhagen, a sniper from the 263rd Armour Battalion, said. "It's the fact that the entire war is an atrocity."

A number of the troops have returned home bearing mental and physical scars from fighting a war in an environment in which the insurgents are supported by the population. Many of those interviewed have come to oppose the US military presence in Iraq, joining the groundswell of public opinion across the US that views the war as futile.

This view is echoed in Washington, where increasing numbers of Democrats and Republicans are openly calling for an early withdrawal from Iraq. And the Iraq quagmire has pushed President George Bush's poll ratings to an all-time low.

Journalists and human rights groups have published numerous reports drawing attention to the killing of Iraqi civilians by US forces. The Nation's investigation presents for the first time named military witnesses who back those assertions. Some participated themselves.

Through a combination of gung-ho recklessness and criminal behaviour born of panic, a narrative emerges of an army that frequently commits acts of cold-blooded violence. A number of interviewees revealed that the military will attempt to frame innocent bystanders as insurgents, often after panicked American troops have fired into groups of unarmed Iraqis. The veterans said the troops involved would round up any survivors and accuse them of being in the resistance while planting Kalashnikov AK47 rifles beside corpses to make it appear that they had died in combat.

"It would always be an AK because they have so many of these lying around," said Joe Hatcher, 26, a scout with the 4th Calvary Regiment. He revealed the army also planted 9mm handguns and shovels to make it look like the civilians were shot while digging a hole for a roadside bomb.

"Every good cop carries a throwaway," Hatcher said of weapons planted on innocent victims in incidents that occurred while he was stationed between Tikrit and Samarra, from February 2004 to March 2005. Any survivors were sent to jail for interrogation.

There were also deaths caused by the reckless behaviour of military convoys. Sgt Kelly Dougherty of the Colorado National Guard described a hit-and-run in which a military convoy ran over a 10-year-old boy and his three donkeys, killing them all. "Judging by the skid marks, they hardly even slowed down. But, I mean... your order is that you never stop."

The worst abuses seem to have been during raids on private homes when soldiers were hunting insurgents. Thousands of such raids have taken place, usually at dead of night. The veterans point out that most are futile and serve only to terrify the civilians, while generating sympathy for the resistance.

Sgt John Bruhns, 29, of the 3rd Brigade, 1st Armoured Division, described a typical raid. "You want to catch them off guard," he explained. "You want to catch them in their sleep ... You grab the man of the house. You rip him out of bed in front of his wife. You put him up against the wall... Then you go into a room and you tear the room to shreds. You'll ask 'Do you have any weapons? Do you have any anti-US propaganda?'

"Normally they'll say no, because that's normally the truth," Sgt Bruhns said. "So you'll take his sofa cushions and dump them. You'll open up his closet and you'll throw all the clothes on the floor and basically leave his house looking like a hurricane just hit it." And at the end, if the soldiers don't find anything, they depart with a "Sorry to disturb you. Have a nice evening".


Sgt Dougherty described her squad leader shooting an Iraqi civilian in the back in 2003.

"The mentality of my squad leader was like, 'Oh, we have to kill them over here so I don't have to kill them back in Colorado'," she said. "He just seemed to view every Iraqi as a potential terrorist."

'It would always happen. We always got the wrong house...'
"People would make jokes about it, even before we'd go into a raid, like, 'Oh ****, we're gonna get the wrong house'. Cause it would always happen. We always got the wrong house."


Sergeant Jesus Bocanegra, 25, of Weslaco, Texas 4th Infantry Division. In Tikrit on year-long tour that began in March 2003

"I had to go tell this woman that her husband was actually dead. We gave her money, we gave her, like, 10 crates of water, we gave the kids, I remember, maybe it was soccer balls and toys. We just didn't really know what else to do."

Lieutenant Jonathan Morgenstein, 35, of Arlington, Virginia, Marine Corps civil affairs unit. In Ramadi from August 2004 to March 2005


"We were approaching this one house... and we're approaching, and they had a family dog. And it was barking ferociously, cause it's doing its job. And my squad leader, just out of nowhere, just shoots it... So I see this dog - I'm a huge animal lover... this dog has, like, these eyes on it and he's running around spraying blood all over the place. And like, you know, what the hell is going on? The family is sitting right there, with three little children and a mom and a dad, horrified. And I'm at a loss for words."


Specialist Philip Chrystal, 23, of Reno, 3rd Battalion, 116th Cavalry Brigade. In Kirkuk and Hawija on 11-month tour beginning November 2004

"I'll tell you the point where I really turned... [there was] this little, you know, pudgy little two-year-old child with the cute little pudgy legs and she has a bullet through her leg... An IED [improvised explosive device] went off, the gun-happy soldiers just started shooting anywhere and the baby got hit. And this baby looked at me... like asking me why. You know, 'Why do I have a bullet in my leg?'... I was just like, 'This is, this is it. This is ridiculous'."
Specialist Michael Harmon, 24, of Brooklyn, 167th Armour Regiment, 4th Infantry Division. In Al-Rashidiya on 13-month tour beginning in April 2003

"I open a bag and I'm trying to get bandages out and the guys in the guard tower are yelling at me, 'Get that **** haji out of here,'... our doctor rolls up in an ambulance and from 30 to 40 meters away looks out and says, shakes his head and says, 'You know, he looks fine, he's gonna be all right,' and walks back... kind of like, 'Get your ass over here and drive me back up to the clinic'. So I'm standing there, and the whole time both this doctor and the guards are yelling at me, you know, to get rid of this guy."

Specialist Patrick Resta, 29, from Philadelphia, 252nd Armour, 1st Infantry Division. In Jalula for nine months beginning March 2004

"Every person opened fire on this kid, using the biggest weapons we could find..."

"Here's some guy, some 14-year-old kid with an AK47, decides he's going to start shooting at this convoy. It was the most obscene thing you've ever seen. Every person got out and opened fire on this kid. Using the biggest weapons we could find, we ripped him to shreds..."


Sergeant Patrick Campbell, 29, of Camarillo, California, 256th Infantry Brigade. In Abu Gharth for 11 months beginning November 2004

"Cover your own butt was the first rule of engagement. Someone could look at me the wrong way and I could claim my safety was in threat."

Lieutenant Brady Van Engelen, 26, of Washington DC, 1st Armoured Division. Eight-month tour of Baghdad beginning Sept 2003

"I guess while I was there, the general attitude was, 'A dead Iraqi is just another dead Iraqi... You know, so what?'... [Only when we got home] in... meeting other veterans, it seems like the guilt really takes place, takes root, then."

Specialist Jeff Englehart, 26, of Grand Junction, Colorado, 3rd Brigade, 1st Infantry. In Baquba for a year beginning February 2004

"[The photo] was very graphic... They open the body bags of these prisoners that were shot in the head and [one soldier has] got a spoon. He's reaching in to scoop out some of his brain, looking at the camera and smiling."

Specialist Aidan Delgado, 25, of Sarasota, Florida, 320th Military Police Company. Deployed to Talil air base for one year beginning April 2003

"The car was approaching what was in my opinion a very poorly marked checkpoint... and probably didn't even see the soldiers... The guys got spooked and decided it was a possible threat, so they shot up the car. And they [the bodies] literally sat in the car for the next three days while we drove by them."

Sergeant Dustin Flatt, 33, of Denver, 18th Infantry Brigade, 1st Infantry Division. One-year from February 2004

"The frustration that resulted from our inability to get back at those who were attacking us led to tactics that seemed designed simply to punish the local population..."

Sergeant Camilo Mejía, 31, from Miami, National Guardsman, 1-124 Infantry Battalion, 53rd Infantry Brigade. Six-month tour beginning April 2003

"I just remember thinking, 'I just brought terror to someone under the American flag'."

Sergeant Timothy John Westphal, 31, of Denver, 18th Infantry Brigade, 1st Infantry Division. In Tikrit on year-long tour beginning February 2004

"A lot of guys really supported that whole concept that if they don't speak English and they have darker skin, they're not as human as us, so we can do what we want."

Specialist Josh Middleton, 23, of New York City, 2nd Battalion, 82nd Airborne Division. Four-month tour in Baghdad and Mosul beginning December 2004

"I felt like there was this enormous reduction in my compassion for people. The only thing that wound up mattering is myself and the guys that I was with, and everybody else be ****ed."


Sergeant Ben Flanders, 28, National Guardsman from Concord, New Hampshire, 172nd Mountain Infantry. In Balad for 11 months beginning March 2004

The Other War: Iraq Vets Bear Witness, by Chris Hedges and Laila al-Arian, appears in the 30 July issue of The Nation

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...cle2758829.ece
 
islamirama.
War is burtal? I would never have guessed.

Thinks for bringing that to our attention.

I guess I just never thought of driling holes in peoples kneecaps before shooting them in tha back of the head and dumping them on the street as brutal.
 
Greetings and peace be with you MTAFFI

I received this email today from the ‘Fellowship of Reconciliation’ a peace organisation that operates in many parts of the world.
The full story is here, http://zmagsite.zmag.org/June2007/nygaard0607.html

The full story is worth reading but I have posted their conclusion,

A relentless attack from the air against Iraq and Afghanistan has been going on for years, with the United States conducting an average of 75 to 100 airstrikes in the 2 countries every day. The death toll from these attacks is unknown, but a reasonable estimate is in the range of 100,000 to 150,000 in Iraq, with the number in Afghanistan as yet unexplored. Yet the story of these air wars is almost unknown in the United States.

British medical journal the Lancet, remains the best estimate of the number of people who have died in Iraq—violently and otherwise—as a result of the U.S. invasion and occupation.
As Nick Turse tells us in “Bombs Over Baghdad,” the Lancet report “estimated 655,000 ‘excess Iraqi deaths as a consequence of the war.’ The study...found that from March 2003 to June 2006, 13 percent of violent deaths in Iraq were caused by coalition air strikes. If the 655,000 figure, including over 601,000 violent deaths, is anywhere close to accurate—and the study offered a possible range of civilian deaths that ran from 392,979 to 942,636—this would equal approximately 78,133 Iraqis killed by bombs, missiles, rockets, or cannon rounds from coalition aircraft between March 2003, when the invasion of Iraq began, and last June when the study concluded.” Turse adds that, “According to statistics provided to TomDispatch by the Lancet study’s authors, 50 percent of all violent deaths of Iraqi children under 15 years of age, between March 2003 and June 2006, were due to coalition air strikes.”
Here, then, are the final rough numbers: Every day, between 50 and 100 Iraqis die as a result of “coalition” airstrikes. Every airstrike kills, on average, one Iraqi, and wounds three more. Updating the numbers from the Lancet study, we discover that overall, since the U.S. invaded Iraq, somewhere between 102,180 and 147,051 Iraqis have been killed by U.S. airstrikes alone. Between 306,540 and 441,153 have been wounded.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric
 
Greetings and peace be with you MTAFFI

I received this email today from the ‘Fellowship of Reconciliation’ a peace organisation that operates in many parts of the world.
The full story is here, http://zmagsite.zmag.org/June2007/nygaard0607.html

The full story is worth reading but I have posted their conclusion,



In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

I dont find zmag or the lancet study to be credible
 
because they contradict the lies of your gov't?

Because they don't operate under the rules of professional journalism, at least in the case of the vast majority of articles copied and pasted in these threads.

As for the Lancet study, it cannot be taken seriously because of the political motivations behind it, the destruction of the necessary data evidence, and the illogical methods used to reach its findings. In the end though, it doesn't matter whether the insanely high number of 650,000 is true, or the more widely accepted number of around 150,000 is true. Many people have died, that isn't in dispute.
 
They voted in a democratic fashion.
Voting in a democratic fashion, under occupation, is completely contradictory.
Their elected representatives could pass laws making Shaira the law of the land but that doesn't solve the problem that the Al Quaeda boys regard the Shia with derision.
The "elected" representatives didn't vote for sharia, but instead voted for the oil laws that were written by US oil giants, and were passed by the "democratically elected" representatives of American oil giants/occupation, not the Iraqi people...
 
Last edited:
because they contradict the lies of your gov't?

because I find most of them to be baseless or unfounded, the majority of articles that come from there come from bias surveys, quotes that are taken out of context and the articles that are written are not written from an objective standpoint. They would be the equivalent to "Fox News" to you, I do read it and take it for what it is worth, just like fox news.

As far as lancet, well I think that issue has been thoroughly covered and the last time I posted facts about it they went unanswered so I will leave them like that.
 
Voting in a democratic fashion, under occupation, is completely contradictory.

Not to mention that this gov't is illegtimate and can't be recognized under international law. No gov't can be formed while a nation is under occupation by international law.

The "elected" representatives didn't vote for sharia, but instead voted for the oil laws that were written by US oil giants, and were passed by the "elected" representatives of American oil giants/occupation, not the Iraqi people...

Only thing these "elelcted" offical did was give oil jaints 100yr contracts with 65% profit rights. Like i said, illegtimate gov't serving occupiers interests...
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top