NationStates Jolt Archive

http://empirenotes.org/fallujah.html

Gee what brave soldiers!

An ambulance with two neat, precise bullet-holes in the windshield on the driver's side, pointing down at an angle that indicated they would have hit the driver's chest (the snipers were on rooftops, and are trained to aim for the chest). Another ambulance again with a single, neat bullet-hole in the windshield. There's no way this was due to panicked spraying of fire. These were deliberate shots designed to kill the drivers.


http://www.empirenotes.org/amb.jpg

not that I'm suprised , coming from barbaric criminals like the US military.

Ther are more photos of the injustices to Iraqi prisoners out too

http://www.empirenotes.org/chained.jpg

http://empirenotes.org/prisoners.html


I am so angry at our illigitimate president and his illigitimate war! He deserves to be treated just like the iraqis, if not worse.

Wait just a second here. Who's to say those were coalition snipers? To be fair, we weren't the only ones firing.

The prison abuses I find disgusting. But as for the ambulances, since the entire, broader war began, their was intelligence that Islamic fundementalists and other millitants allied to them would use ambulances. It doesn't surprise me one bit that an ambulance was fired upon. In fact, I've been wondering why something like this didn't happen earlier.

I doubt they would shoot up their own ambulances even if accidental and if they were accidental I doubt the shots would be so precision, and there should be other bullet holes on the ambulance as well. Those were sniper shots. Also, there was more than one ambulance driver killed in this way. So i'm pretty sure it was deliberate.

And if they wanted to stop the ambulance, they could have done it without taking out the driver, because they obviously had enough time to target teh drivers heart. They could have targeted the engine. They had many shots to take.

Why would we shoot at ambulances?

Maybe the army had classified intelligence that the drivers were associated with an american enemy?

Well, i found the pictures of Iraqi soldiers to be incredibly disturbing and wonder if anybody knows who took them and why they were released to the public

why would we humiliate and torture iraqi prisoners?

I wasn't there so I don't know. I want to know that answer too though.

I assume it's to stop them from healing their sick and injured as they are the enemy. Israel has been known to do the same exact thing to the palestinians.

There are also reports of US military shooting unarmed iraqi civilians in the back (I can't find my source on that though). Why would they do that? Because they are barbarians that are trained to kill and enjoy seeing people die I guess. That one soldier they caught on video that shot a man writhing on the ground said it was a rush and that he felt good about it.

We should never have gone into Iraq. What possible REAL reason do we have for going in there besides following the plan for a New American Century and Oil of course?

why would we humiliate and torture iraqi prisoners?

I wasn't there so I don't know. I want to know that answer too though.

I assume it's to stop them from healing their sick and injured as they are the enemy. Israel has been known to do the same exact thing to the palestinians.

There are also reports of US military shooting unarmed iraqi civilians in the back (I can't find my source on that though). Why would they do that? Because they are barbarians that are trained to kill and enjoy seeing people die I guess. That one soldier they caught on video that shot a man writhing on the ground said it was a rush and that he felt good about it.

We should never have gone into Iraq. What possible REAL reason do we have for going in there besides following the plan for a New American Century and Oil of course?
So what you're saying is that everyone in the military is just like this? And since those in the military are from every ethnic, social and monetary group of America, are you saying that all Americans are criminals?

Bush should be taken out of office. This should end completely end now. If anyone wants a good dissing bush book look at dude wheres my country

I doubt they would shoot up their own ambulances even if accidental and if they were accidental I doubt the shots would be so precision, and there should be other bullet holes on the ambulance as well. Those were sniper shots. Also, there was more than one ambulance driver killed in this way. So i'm pretty sure it was deliberate.

Okay, but that's still circumstantial evidence. There's no way to know we did it or they did it and then to attribute it to the US just because is mistaken. I'm not saying we didn't do it, but be reasonable. This wouldn't even be enough evidence to convict us in a court of law.

Why would they do that? Because they are barbarians that are trained to kill and enjoy seeing people die I guess. That one soldier they caught on video that shot a man writhing on the ground said it was a rush and that he felt good about it.Well I'm in the Navy. Guess what-- I don't enjoy seeing people die, and I'm not a barbarian. Re-evaluate your views.

Why would they do that? Because they are barbarians that are trained to kill and enjoy seeing people die I guess. That one soldier they caught on video that shot a man writhing on the ground said it was a rush and that he felt good about it.Well I'm in the Navy. Guess what-- I don't enjoy seeing people die, and I'm not a barbarian. Re-evaluate your views.

hmmm... I have very strong views on these topics. I am not a big fan of America but here's what i think

1.) Going into Afghanistan was a SUPERB thing to do. That country is seeing much more improvement then the past.

2.) Going into Iraq was a horrible thing to do, but since they are already in Iraq now, if the Iraqi people want a better nation, they should definetely fight the American forces, when i say fight i mean "diplomatically". They need to get American forces out of Iraq and the U.N. inside. The U.N. is the only possibility of an improvement.

Now... one thing i don't get is that WHY THE HELL ARE THEY HELPING A NATION LIKE PAKISTAN. Any aid to Pakistan should be stopped until Musharaf, another dictator type figure who came to power without any elections resigns. If they want to end the South Asian cold war between Pakistan and China vs. India, they have definetly got to stop helping both sides grow stronger. I say Pakistan should be helped but not on military aid. America should go into nation like Pakistan and help build the economy so they can get independent and so Pakistan does not have to rely on cheap Chinese Weapons which are inferior copies of Russian equipment. Also, China has to be rid of Communism NOW!!! And the situation in Sri Lanka has also got to be looked after. Japan-South Korea and Taiwan also have to grow more independent and stop relying on American Military assistance. All these issues have to be a top priority. Oh yes, and who the hell can forget the dead economy of Africa. These are the REAL issues of the world today...

Why would they do that? Because they are barbarians that are trained to kill and enjoy seeing people die I guess. That one soldier they caught on video that shot a man writhing on the ground said it was a rush and that he felt good about it.Well I'm in the Navy. Guess what-- I don't enjoy seeing people die, and I'm not a barbarian. Re-evaluate your views.

I apologize

I said that while pissed off at the way we are treaing human beings who are merely resisting a foreign invading army that is occupying their land. They have every right to kill the occupiers I feel and I would think there was something wrong with them if they didn't. If I was in their place I would resist too.

But I don't really feel that all servicemen are like that. Besides... Navy peeps don't even use guns right? You dont even see the people you kill.

They have every right to kill the occupiers I feel and I would think there was something wrong with them if they didn't. If I was in their place I would resist too.

*sigh*

If the Iraqis have every right to attack Americans for occupying their nation, does that mean americans have the right to defend themselves from these attacks?

The "right to kill" is very disturbing...

An eye-for-an-eye and a-tooth-for-a-tooth line of thought...

Yes of course the US has a right to defend themselves from the people resisting their occupation.

I wouldn't suggest they walk around unarmed thats for sure.

But I don't think that the US has a right to be in Iraq, which is why I feel it is okay for Iraqis to target the US military occupying their country.

It's not an eye for an eye, its "defending your country from an invading army who has no right to be in the country in teh first place"

No right to be there? That's your opinion. That's the opinion of some Iraqis.

What you define as "the right to be there" is different in someone else's opinion. I'm sure plenty of Germans didn't want the allies to be bombing their home towns. But I'm sure you're completely fine with the 'liberation of Germany from the Nazis' by the allies.

Wait just a second here. Who's to say those were coalition snipers? To be fair, we weren't the only ones firing.

To be fair we were the ones torturing the innocent. After the war was even said to be 'won'. :roll:

Wait just a second here. Who's to say those were coalition snipers? To be fair, we weren't the only ones firing.

To be fair we were the ones torturing the innocent. After the war was even said to be 'won'. :roll:

Who said we weren't in the wrong on that? Certainly not me. What I objected to was an unfounded accusation that we were shooting ambulance drivers.

No right to be there? That's your opinion. That's the opinion of some Iraqis.

What you define as "the right to be there" is different in someone else's opinion. I'm sure plenty of Germans didn't want the allies to be bombing their home towns. But I'm sure you're completely fine with the 'liberation of Germany from the Nazis' by the allies.

Even after germany fell to allies, there was a lot of guerilla fighting in the nation. A lot of Germans were unwilling to accept the defeat of another great war because they were promised revenge for the loss of the first world war. And i mean common, now think of this, if America was all of a sudden invaded by the Russians, like a secret invasion and America had no army left, wouldn't you pick up guns and go try to kick Russian butt. The same thing is happenin in Iraq. Or if you live in Canada, and America decided to invade *yes i know that won't happen, cuz America practically ownz Canada, lol* don't you think you would march down south to the border and try to kick the invaders butt?? Same thing in Iraq.

I suppose its the Iraqi's who have been sniper targeting ambulances, just to get the US into trouble. :roll:

It might be circumstantial evidence, but can you say motive?

No right to be there? That's your opinion. That's the opinion of some Iraqis.

What you define as "the right to be there" is different in someone else's opinion. I'm sure plenty of Germans didn't want the allies to be bombing their home towns. But I'm sure you're completely fine with the 'liberation of Germany from the Nazis' by the allies.

Even after germany fell to allies, there was a lot of guerilla fighting in the nation. A lot of Germans were unwilling to accept the defeat of another great war because they were promised revenge for the loss of the first world war. And i mean common, now think of this, if America was all of a sudden invaded by the Russians, like a secret invasion and America had no army left, wouldn't you pick up guns and go try to kick Russian butt. The same thing is happenin in Iraq. Or if you live in Canada, and America decided to invade *yes i know that won't happen, cuz America practically ownz Canada, lol* don't you think you would march down south to the border and try to kick the invaders butt?? Same thing in Iraq.

violence + violence = more violence

I suppose its the Iraqi's who have been sniper targeting ambulances, just to get the US into trouble. :roll:

It might be circumstantial evidence, but can you say motive?

Can you say jumping to conclusions? Who knows who shot who over there and what reasons they might have had? Just because you want it to be true doesn't mean it is. It's funny how quickly people are willing to abandon due process if it suits their cause.

No right to be there? That's your opinion. That's the opinion of some Iraqis.

What you define as "the right to be there" is different in someone else's opinion. I'm sure plenty of Germans didn't want the allies to be bombing their home towns. But I'm sure you're completely fine with the 'liberation of Germany from the Nazis' by the allies.

Even after germany fell to allies, there was a lot of guerilla fighting in the nation. A lot of Germans were unwilling to accept the defeat of another great war because they were promised revenge for the loss of the first world war. And i mean common, now think of this, if America was all of a sudden invaded by the Russians, like a secret invasion and America had no army left, wouldn't you pick up guns and go try to kick Russian butt. The same thing is happenin in Iraq. Or if you live in Canada, and America decided to invade *yes i know that won't happen, cuz America practically ownz Canada, lol* don't you think you would march down south to the border and try to kick the invaders butt?? Same thing in Iraq.

Do you know how many Western Allied deaths there were from Post-War gurillas in W. Germany? I think you'll be suprised if you find out.

And your analogy is false. Even if Saddam was totally blind from about half a year of threats that we would use force if he didn't comply, we even gave him a fourty-eight (I believe thats the right number) hour window in which we said we would attack if he didn't leave. Its not like we went in there totally out of the blue and launched a sneak attack on Iraq.

Dont be too quick to deal out guilty and wrongly accused, if your say I have little evidence, you have the same to work with.

This ambulance may have been fired on for something like these articles mention:

Three explosive-packed ambulances seized in Iraq (http://jang.com.pk/thenews/nov2003-daily/14-11-2003/main/main21.htm)

BAGHDAD: Three ambulances packed with explosives, one with as much as 1,000 kilograms, were discovered by US and Iraqi forces here in the past few days, a senior US military spokesman said on Thursday.

2 Soldiers Dead; Enemy Employing New Tactic in Iraq[url]

U.S. Marines working with Iraqi forces in the area reported finding armor- piercing rounds, aiming sights for rockets, and rifles hidden in bags of rice, grain and tea. "The man detained for transporting the weapons was wearing a poorly made Red Crescent uniform in an attempt to make the convoy look legitimate," a spokesman said in a statement.

Also in Fallujah, Marines engaged an enemy sniper, who then fled in an Iraqi ambulance. "By using the ambulances, (the enemy forces) put wounded and dying Iraqis in harm's way, preventing them the services they need to reach medical care," the spokesman said.

[url]http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36089 (http://www.dod.gov/news/Apr2004/n04152004_200404156.html[/url)

Dont be too quick to deal out guilty and wrongly accused, if your say I have little evidence, you have the same to work with.

THAT WAS MY ORIGINAL POINT!!

There is just as much reason to believe the Iraqis did it as the Coalition did it at this point. There's even more reason to believe it was a horribly accident and who ever did it didn't mean to. Time may well prove differently, but until it does, there's no sense in pointing fingers.

dp

Gosh : Why is it so suprising to you that it could be Iraqi's shooting ambulences? The terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere have shown themselves many times to have absolutely no respect for human life, whether it be Muslim, Jewish, Christian, Iraqi, American, whatever. Innocent Iraqis are regularly the targets of attacks of terrorists.

How the hell did I end up on the same side of an issue as Kwangistar?

Um... :roll: ....is this guy saying that we're killing ambulance drivers?


My god...if I weren't close to getting DEATed...who knows what I'd say?

Your looking at a future Air Force Lt.!

I doubt they would shoot up their own ambulances even if accidental and if they were accidental I doubt the shots would be so precision, and there should be other bullet holes on the ambulance as well. Those were sniper shots. Also, there was more than one ambulance driver killed in this way. So i'm pretty sure it was deliberate.

And if they wanted to stop the ambulance, they could have done it without taking out the driver, because they obviously had enough time to target teh drivers heart. They could have targeted the engine. They had many shots to take.

Why do you doubt that? Look at the great propaganda value!

Are you suggesting that only coalition forces have snipers?

Soldiers are not policemen. Their training is to take out the enemy, not arrest him.

:shock:

How the hell did I end up on the same side of an issue as Kwangistar?

http://www.deutsches-filminstitut.de/hdf/pic/darth_vader_gr.jpg

Come to the dark side, Berk!

How the hell did I end up on the same side of an issue as Kwangistar?

http://www.deutsches-filminstitut.de/hdf/pic/darth_vader_gr.jpg

Come to the dark side, Berk!

LOL! Nice portrait!

:shock:

How the hell did I end up on the same side of an issue as Kwangistar?

http://www.deutsches-filminstitut.de/hdf/pic/darth_vader_gr.jpg

Come to the dark side, Berk!

Can I join? :shock:

Dont be too quick to deal out guilty and wrongly accused, if your say I have little evidence, you have the same to work with.

THAT WAS MY ORIGINAL POINT!!

There is just as much reason to believe the Iraqis did it as the Coalition did it at this point. There's even more reason to believe it was a horribly accident and who ever did it didn't mean to. Time may well prove differently, but until it does, there's no sense in pointing fingers.

Is this the point where you suggest trial by torture?

Dont be too quick to deal out guilty and wrongly accused, if your say I have little evidence, you have the same to work with.

THAT WAS MY ORIGINAL POINT!!

There is just as much reason to believe the Iraqis did it as the Coalition did it at this point. There's even more reason to believe it was a horribly accident and who ever did it didn't mean to. Time may well prove differently, but until it does, there's no sense in pointing fingers.

Is this the point where you suggest trial by torture?

WTH? Where did I ever suggest that? :shock:

Oh...

wait....

Cartese, is that you?

Why would we shoot at ambulances?


The only thing I can figure that it's a common tactic to move weapons and fighters around in ambulences....

Can I join?

Ok, but you have to be an official member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy(tm) first. http://www.languish.org/forums/html/emoticons/vertag.gif

http://www.languish.org/forums/html/emoticons/vertag.gif

Best.

Smiley.

Evah!

:lol:

Can I join?

Ok, but you have to be an official member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy(tm) first. http://www.languish.org/forums/html/emoticons/vertag.gif

Nice agenda ya got there!

:shock:

No right to be there? That's your opinion. That's the opinion of some Iraqis.

What you define as "the right to be there" is different in someone else's opinion. I'm sure plenty of Germans didn't want the allies to be bombing their home towns. But I'm sure you're completely fine with the 'liberation of Germany from the Nazis' by the allies.

Even after germany fell to allies, there was a lot of guerilla fighting in the nation. A lot of Germans were unwilling to accept the defeat of another great war because they were promised revenge for the loss of the first world war. And i mean common, now think of this, if America was all of a sudden invaded by the Russians, like a secret invasion and America had no army left, wouldn't you pick up guns and go try to kick Russian butt. The same thing is happenin in Iraq. Or if you live in Canada, and America decided to invade *yes i know that won't happen, cuz America practically ownz Canada, lol* don't you think you would march down south to the border and try to kick the invaders butt?? Same thing in Iraq.

Do you know how many Western Allied deaths there were from Post-War gurillas in W. Germany? I think you'll be suprised if you find out.

And your analogy is false. Even if Saddam was totally blind from about half a year of threats that we would use force if he didn't comply, we even gave him a fourty-eight (I believe thats the right number) hour window in which we said we would attack if he didn't leave. Its not like we went in there totally out of the blue and launched a sneak attack on Iraq.

ok... listen up... First of all if America really wants to fix up the world , then these are all the countries which they should attack next and fix them up.

1.) North Korea
2.) China (a fucked up commune government, also dun know how succesful America can be in an American invasion of China.)
3.) Pakistan (STOP FUCKING HELPING DICTATOR GOVERNMENTS AND THEN ATTACKING THEM 10 YEARS LATER WHEN U DUN NEED EM. SERIOUSLY WHATS UP WITH THE AID TO PAKISTAN?? HELP BUILD PROPER SCHOOLS AND CRAP IN PAKISTAN NOT MILITARY!!!
4.) Sri Lanka (a fucked up Guerilla war goin on for decades)
5.) A lot of African Countries, Rwanda, Uganada (a lot of tribal wars have got to end, i mean hello?? Ancient Times have long gone, whats up with the tribes??)
If America can do that much, that will really make it easier for the next world power to keep the peace.

It would. It would also make the world an uninhabitable radioactive wasteland. And Sri Lanka seems to be on the right path.

I do agree with you, though, that we should liberate more countries. And we have been, in the past ten years. The problem is, the media seems to jump on anyone, whether it be Clinton, Bush Sr., or Bush Jr., about casualties to the point of making it seem like a New Vietnam. In reality we could have made Somalia a better place to live, but I guess we're going to have to stick with other places. :wink:

Well, i found the pictures of Iraqi soldiers to be incredibly disturbing and wonder if anybody knows who took them and why they were released to the public

the gaurds took them, and when they showed them to their friends in the army the other soldiers turned them in

ok... listen up... First of all if America really wants to fix up the world , then these are all the countries which they should attack next and fix them up.

1.) North Korea
2.) China (a f--- up commune government, also dun know how succesful America can be in an American invasion of China.)
3.) Pakistan (STOP f--- HELPING DICTATOR GOVERNMENTS AND THEN ATTACKING THEM 10 YEARS LATER WHEN U DUN NEED EM. SERIOUSLY WHATS UP WITH THE AID TO PAKISTAN?? HELP BUILD PROPER SCHOOLS AND CRAP IN PAKISTAN NOT MILITARY!!!
4.) Sri Lanka (a f--- up Guerilla war goin on for decades)
5.) A lot of African Countries, Rwanda, Uganada (a lot of tribal wars have got to end, i mean hello?? Ancient Times have long gone, whats up with the tribes??)
If America can do that much, that will really make it easier for the next world power to keep the peace.

1.) we're not attacking north korea because they have nuclear wepons, attacking them would cost the lives of hundread of millions of people
2.) same goes for china, only billion would die
3.) pakistan too has the nuke, and unlie most of the other countries on your list they respond to international pressure, mostly because of the aid we give them
4.) a f---ed up guerilla war that nordic diplomats are bringing to a peacefull resolution
5.) we'll get there eventually but every other time we tried the west just called up racist imperialist overlords and made us leave

we already keep the world at peace with our unGodly massive nuclear deterent

Can I join?

Ok, but you have to be an official member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy(tm) first. http://www.languish.org/forums/html/emoticons/vertag.gif

hey, I asked ya know

No right to be there? That's your opinion. That's the opinion of some Iraqis.

What you define as "the right to be there" is different in someone else's opinion. I'm sure plenty of Germans didn't want the allies to be bombing their home towns. But I'm sure you're completely fine with the 'liberation of Germany from the Nazis' by the allies.

Even after germany fell to allies, there was a lot of guerilla fighting in the nation. A lot of Germans were unwilling to accept the defeat of another great war because they were promised revenge for the loss of the first world war. And i mean common, now think of this, if America was all of a sudden invaded by the Russians, like a secret invasion and America had no army left, wouldn't you pick up guns and go try to kick Russian butt. The same thing is happenin in Iraq. Or if you live in Canada, and America decided to invade *yes i know that won't happen, cuz America practically ownz Canada, lol* don't you think you would march down south to the border and try to kick the invaders butt?? Same thing in Iraq.

Do you know how many Western Allied deaths there were from Post-War gurillas in W. Germany? I think you'll be suprised if you find out.

And your analogy is false. Even if Saddam was totally blind from about half a year of threats that we would use force if he didn't comply, we even gave him a fourty-eight (I believe thats the right number) hour window in which we said we would attack if he didn't leave. Its not like we went in there totally out of the blue and launched a sneak attack on Iraq.

ok... listen up... First of all if America really wants to fix up the world , then these are all the countries which they should attack next and fix them up.

1.) North Korea
2.) China (a f--- up commune government, also dun know how succesful America can be in an American invasion of China.)
3.) Pakistan (STOP f--- HELPING DICTATOR GOVERNMENTS AND THEN ATTACKING THEM 10 YEARS LATER WHEN U DUN NEED EM. SERIOUSLY WHATS UP WITH THE AID TO PAKISTAN?? HELP BUILD PROPER SCHOOLS AND CRAP IN PAKISTAN NOT MILITARY!!!
4.) Sri Lanka (a f--- up Guerilla war goin on for decades)
5.) A lot of African Countries, Rwanda, Uganada (a lot of tribal wars have got to end, i mean hello?? Ancient Times have long gone, whats up with the tribes??)
If America can do that much, that will really make it easier for the next world power to keep the peace.

You really want to glow in the dark, don't you?