US Troops use children as shields

[justsoyouknow 0]

Yeah, that's a real fucking knee slapper there, Skippy!

The only reason he took it back is because Banky called him on being a moron.

I'm sorry, maybe if I'd added "hippy" or "commie" to the end of what I said, you guys would all be cracking up.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

Yeah, that's a real fucking knee slapper there, Skippy!

The only reason he took it back is because Banky called him on being a moron.

I'm sorry, maybe if I'd added "hippy" or "commie" to the end of what I said, you guys would all be cracking up.

Yeap, just call me Mr.SlapBusKKK.

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

I like JSYK.

[Guest INXS]

I believe that this incident took place

Then you're a fucking idiot. The Pentagon would fucking CRUCIFY anyone they caught doing shit like this.

 

Of course the troops have cnady, why is in inconceivable for them not to?

 

Where the hell would they get it? In the middle of the goddamn desert? It's not like you can just go down to the QuickieMart on your particular street corner and buy a few bags of M&Ms. The soldiers only have whatever food their superiors issue to them, unless they want to risk intestinal infection and buy some from the locals.

 

This reminds me of British Army patrols in Northern Ireland who keep candy on them to dish out to local kids as they are patrolling - it stopped republicans throwing bricks and stones at the troops.

 

So how is handing out candy to kids a bad thing? Especially if they're throwing rocks at you and you want them to stop? Would you rather they had shot the kids instead?

They get candy from food parcels sent from home such as from relatives and friends. They are stationed in camps, camps which receive mail.

 

I never said that handing out candy to kids is a bad thing, I don't even think that if the yanks used kids as human shields it was a bad thing, given the situation. They did what they had to do to get the job done.

[Guest INXS]

I believe that this incident took place

Of course you do, because you want to believe everything that's negative about America, our President, our troops, and the war effort. No thread condemning America for some imagined sin would be complete without the board's resident leftist pincushion contributing the expected response.

I can believe that it happened if I want to - it's certainly a believable tactic. I'm not actually condemming the troops for using this method, I think it's a good idea!

[Guest INXS]

This is exactly why this should have been in Current Events. That response of his is comedy gold.

 

And yes, terrorist wouldn't want to harm children. Why, before every suicide bombing the terrorists make sure no children are in the malls, planes or buildings they decide they want to destroy because killing children is wrong and unacceptable to the sweet hearted soul of a terrorist. They are like Santa Claus in a way with their love for children.

 

The goal of terrorist is no child will be harmed by their hands.

 

I'm quicker to believe we developed a giant turd monster that flings crap or that the bat boy from Weekly World News has joined the war effort than I am to believe this story.

Uh...you can't stereotype all terrorists like that. That's an extremely ignorant view to take on the situation in Iraq. The majority of resistance fighters in Iraq aren't of the same breed as those behind 9/11 - they are regular Iraqi guys wanting the occupying forces out of their country. I don't agree that they should use violence to acheive their aims but that's a fact.

 

This tactic of using children from the town as human shields obviously worked (if it happened) and stopped the troops from being attacked as they were carrying out their searches. If insurgency or terrorists or whatever you want to call them had no respect for human life or a childs life then they would have attacked the troops regardless, surely.

[Ripper 0]

When I think someone has hit the peak of stupidity.

[Guest INXS]

When I think someone has hit the peak of stupidity.

Yes, i'm stupid for answering responses to my posts in this thread, in a mature manner.

 

Some people...

[nl5xsk1 0]

And why does everyone just assume this isn't true? Like fuck.  Having rules in war is like banning punching from boxing.  Its morally disgraceful.  And really, are young American boys above such behavior?

When I first read that, I got the impression you were saying that Americans would do it but Canadians would not ... I'm incorrect, right?

Well Canadian soldiers are not the ones in question, are they?

You really didn't answer my question, Banky. You've left it almost as ambiguous as it was before.

[Ripper 0]

When I think someone has hit the peak of stupidity.

Yes, i'm stupid for answering responses to my posts in this thread, in a mature manner.

 

Some people...

being mature doesn't mean you aren't stupid. I can explain the benefits of fucking a light socket in a mature manner. Doesn't make it any less stupid.

[Jingus 0]

They get candy from food parcels sent from home such as from relatives and friends. They are stationed in camps, camps which receive mail.

Imagine this: you're a soldier living in the middle of the desert, and you've been eating nothing but MREs for the past several months. A kindly relative sends you some candy. (This scenerio assumes that said candy hasn't gone bad in the month or so that it takes care packages to reach the troops, especially since all such packages are exposed to air when they're opened and searched by MPs before they get to the grunts.)

 

Do you: 1. Instantly scarf down the slightly moldy candy, since anything is better than a solid diet of military rations;

 

or

 

2. Hang onto the candy because, at some unknown point far down the road, you want to use it to lure in children just like a creepy pedophile trying to get them into your windowless van.

 

I never said that handing out candy to kids is a bad thing, I don't even think that if the yanks used kids as human shields it was a bad thing, given the situation. They did what they had to do to get the job done.

 

So you strongly disagree with removing Saddam and the war in general... but you agree with using children as human shields?! Is there a name for whatever psychological infirmity you suffer from?

 

I can believe that it happened if I want to - it's certainly a believable tactic. I'm not actually condemming the troops for using this method, I think it's a good idea!

 

No. It's not a believable tactic. I can't quote you the exact rule, but I'm pretty goddamn sure that somewhere in the US Military's "How Not To Fight A War" guidebook there's a rule against kidnapping dozens of children and strapping them onto your tank, most likely with a punishment of many many years in jail.

 

Uh...you can't stereotype all terrorists like that.

 

This is me stricken completely fucking speechless.

 

That's an extremely ignorant view to take on the situation in Iraq. The majority of resistance fighters in Iraq aren't of the same breed as those behind 9/11 - they are regular Iraqi guys wanting the occupying forces out of their country. I don't agree that they should use violence to acheive their aims but that's a fact.

 

"Occupying forces" is a hell of a way to describe the troops who removed a brutal tyrant who has used and abused the people under his control for decades. And how does a "regular Iraqi guy" know how to manufacture, conceal, and effectively detonate a high-explosive bomb like the kind killing innocent people EVERY DAY in that country?

 

This tactic of using children from the town as human shields obviously worked (if it happened) and stopped the troops from being attacked as they were carrying out their searches. If insurgency or terrorists or whatever you want to call them had no respect for human life or a childs life then they would have attacked the troops regardless, surely.

 

That's just my point: it never happened. Nobody except you, the guy who wrote the article, and Banky believes that it happened.

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

The article is probably exaggeration to the max, but Jingus makes the worst arguments in defense of anything.

[Ripper 0]

Yeah...i perfer just letting a persons own stupidty drown them. Then somehow reference sexual intercourse with a inanimate object and I am pretty much done.

[Guest Frank_Nabbit]

Iraqi Victim Says US Torture

Worse Than Saddam

By Adam Tanner

1-11-5

 

FORT HOOD, Texas (Reuters) - A former inmate at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison forced by U.S. guards to masturbate in public and piled onto a pyramid of naked men said on Tuesday even Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein did not do such things.

 

The inmate testified at the court martial of reservist soldier Charles Graner, accused ringleader of guards who engaged in the abuse, which prompted outrage when pictures of the sexual humiliation were published around the world.

 

"I couldn't believe in the beginning that this could happen, but I wished I could kill myself because no one was there to stop it," Hussein Mutar, who was sent to Abu Ghraib accused of car theft, said in videotaped testimony.

 

"They were torturing us as though it was theater for them," he said, as the prosecution wound up its case against Graner on assault, dereliction of duty and other charges that could bring him up to 17 1/2 years in prison.

 

An obviously ill-at ease Mutar added: "I was extremely emotional because (even) Saddam didn't do this to us."

 

Graner and Pvt. Lynndie England, with whom he fathered a child and who is also facing a court-martial, became the faces of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal after they appeared smiling in photographs that showed degraded, naked prisoners.

 

Since the scandal erupted last year, the Bush administration has blamed it on a small group of soldiers.

 

But investigations have shown many prisoners in Iraq, Afghanistan and at the U.S. Navy base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba also suffered abusive treatment after the government looked at ways to obtain more information in its war against terrorism.

 

SEXUAL HUMILIATION

 

At the trial military prosecutors have presented evidence not seen before in public from Abu Ghraib, including a video of forced group masturbation and a picture of a woman prisoner ordered to show her breasts.

 

Graner's lawyer Guy Womack argues his client was only following orders to soften up prisoners for military intelligence agents. He said activities such as making human pyramids with naked hooded prisoners were not illegal.

 

In earlier video testimony on Tuesday, Ameen Al-Sheikh, a Syrian who said he went to Iraq to oppose the U.S. occupation, declared," Graner was the primary torturer."

 

Al-Sheikh, well known in Abu Ghraib for having once obtained a gun from an Iraqi guard and exchanged fire with American soldiers, appeared wary in his testimony.

 

"That Graner guy is a man who hurt his country, hurt his people and I think he will receive his punishment," he said. He said Graner forced him to eat pork and drink alcohol, practices against his Islamic religion.

 

Graner said outside court of the man, "The last time I saw him he was threatening to kill me."

 

Three soldiers in Graner's former unit had testified on Monday about his key role in stacking naked prisoners into a pyramid, putting a leash on a prisoner and other abuses in the highest security area of the prison just outside Baghdad.

 

Two investigators testified that they had identified prisoners shown in the abuse pictures as common criminals arrested on charges including robbery, assault and prostitution.

 

On Wednesday, the defense will open its case that will include testimony from Graner.

[Jingus 0]

Yeah, that's shitty, and Graner should certainly be prosecuted and jailed. But I don't see what it's got to do with the rest of this thread.

 

Jingus makes the worst arguments in defense of anything.

 

Uh.... I know you are, but what am I?!.... fuck.

[2GOLD 0]

The leash thing I never had a problem with cause it was a tether which we put on little kids and she looked like she was just holding it as he crawled from his cell. The rest was just too sick and Graner should be going to jail for an extremely long time.

 

I get the feeling they were all going for a insanity way out of the military since they actually took photos like morons but forgot the obvious fact of it being against the law.

 

Then again, looking at the ones who did it...none of them looked too bright to begin with.

[Guest The Winter Of My Discontent]

Canada doesn't have an army, silly

Precisely, so what was that douche attempting to prove? My point, for the idiots who feel I am simply an American hating Canadian, is that any young boy of 18-21 without any true value systems or real maturation COULD find themselves in a position where they would do something of this nature. Of course adults also brutally violated many Iraqi prisoners, so maybe it isn't an age thing, its just the horrors of war cripple peoples common sense. But whatever it takes to make America the land of the free!!!

nl5....

 

read the rest of my post.

[... 0]

THIS THREAD IS SO FUCKING GOOD SOMEONE MAKE A JOKE ABOUT CANADIANS AGAIN

[Special K 0]

Canadians = I scan a nad

 

ho ho ho.

 

EDIT: Americans = Nas? I cream!

 

oh ho ho

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

I just put my iPod on shuffle. With 2112 songs to choose from, I will use this space to document what tracks it chooses, keeping it up until I grow sick of it:

 

01. N*E*R*D - Bobby James

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

02. Galaxie 500 - Snowstorm

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

03. Sigur Rós - Untitled 6

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

That Sigur Rós track is a long one, so it'll be a bit before the next update!

[Giuseppe Zangara 0]

In the meantime, look at this: http://216.127.90.178/se1003a.jpg

[Nighthawk 0]

Hey, that's pretty cool.

[Ted the Poster 0]

They photoshopped that guy's head.

[... 0]

2112 songs

If there's one song by Rush on there, I swear...

[Red Baron 0]

2112 songs

If there's one song by Rush on there, I swear...

He should have the whole album on there.

 

 

It's a remarkable album.

[Guest Failed Mascot]

I think Inca would like Twilight Zone by RUSH

[Nighthawk 0]

He's already acknowledged these things.