British Soldiers 'Kicked Iraqi Prisoner to Death'

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Czar
dari,
this report is written by Robert Fisk for the independant, commondreams which I openly admit is very liberal but that does not invalidate Robert Fisk's reporting

then please if you are so concerned about not everything being reported here, please report yourself those articles you come across which makes other countries look bad and be openly ciritical of all sides like you want me to do

I don't start thread after thread bashing a certain group or country. You do. It is you that needs to look more impartial, not me.

 

[heartsurgeon]

"British Soldiers 'Kicked Iraqi Prisoner to Death'
by Robert Fisk in Baghdad"

Fisk makes a career out of claiming everyone is committing "atrocities"
He was beaten up in Afganistan
linky by a mob. Must have hit his head a few to many times.

he is Osama Bin Laden's personal James Carville

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Czar
dari,
this report is written by Robert Fisk for the independant, commondreams which I openly admit is very liberal but that does not invalidate Robert Fisk's reporting

then please if you are so concerned about not everything being reported here, please report yourself those articles you come across which makes other countries look bad and be openly ciritical of all sides like you want me to do

I don't start thread after thread bashing a certain group or country. You do. It is you that needs to look more impartial, not me.

so cnn, bbc, fox and all those are just there to bash countries?

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Whitling
This article is an illustration of one of the reasons why I'm quite anti-war (but I'm not a pacifist). In wars individuals do criminal acts, innocent people are always shot and killed or maimed, wrong targets are chosen, and friendly fire always kills some of the troops. And in saying this, I don't consider things like Grenada a war. All these shortcomings may be tolerable if the cause is great, but, in my book, the invasion of Iraq doesn't arise to those standards.

How is that search for WMD going?

Are you also anti-EARTH since on earth individuals do criminal acts, innocent people are always shot and killed or maimed, wrong targets are chosen.

 

[DZip]

Two words: blame Bush

 

[Gaard]

"She said they did it to teach the prisoner a lesson on how to treat women because he was charged with rape," she said

Think he learned his lesson?

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: Gaard
"She said they did it to teach the prisoner a lesson on how to treat women because he was charged with rape," she said

Think he learned his lesson?

Yup. And so did every other would-be rapist.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Gaard
"She said they did it to teach the prisoner a lesson on how to treat women because he was charged with rape," she said

Think he learned his lesson?

Yup. And so did every other would-be rapist.

Charged = Guilty?

I have no sympathy with rapists, but a soldier has obligations, personal feeling notwithstanding.

I get mightily pissed at some people, but killing them would be frowned upon, or at least it used to be.

This was not a combat situation. IF the article represents the facts, there IS NO justification for this.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Gaard
"She said they did it to teach the prisoner a lesson on how to treat women because he was charged with rape," she said

Think he learned his lesson?

Yup. And so did every other would-be rapist.

Charged = Guilty?

I have no sympathy with rapists, but a soldier has obligations, personal feeling notwithstanding.

I get mightily pissed at some people, but killing them would be frowned upon, or at least it used to be.

This was not a combat situation. IF the article represents the facts, there IS NO justification for this.

We don't know all the facts yet. And I'm still fuzzy on how criminal law is handled over there...this guy may have been going free for all I know. In any case, if I must jump to a conclusion I've giving the coalition soldiers the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: burnedout
Nevermind that good old Kim or Fidel or <insert name of favorite despot here> commits similar acts on a daily basis. In the eyes of the liberal sophists, those bastards are automatically forgiven! Therefore, WE are the damned.

With all due respect, they are NOT forgiven. However, atrocities are expected from despots. They are not expected from "civilized" people.

In fact, I would turn that around 180 degrees. Forget liberal sophists, how about immoral politicans? How many tyrants has the U.S. supported, e.g., evil thugs like Saddam Hussein? How many do we still support? More often than not, our politicians are the ones "forgiving" the despots, continuing to support them and coddle them and conduct commerce with them because it is politically expedient or personally advantageous.


I do agree that like all human beings, soldiers (and cops) sometimes succumb to their emotions, make mistakes, whatever. It is not an indictment of all soldiers. It is also not an excuse; the incident must be investigated. If there was wrongdoing, the soldiers involved should be disciplined just like any other manslaughter/murder/whatever is appropriate.

I think this story highlights one of the many reasons war must be a last resort. Bad stuff happens in wars. Innocent people die in wars. Wars sometimes provoke appalling behavior.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor

Originally posted by: Gaard
"She said they did it to teach the prisoner a lesson on how to treat women because he was charged with rape," she said

Think he learned his lesson?

Yup. And so did every other would-be rapist.

Charged = Guilty?

I have no sympathy with rapists, but a soldier has obligations, personal feeling notwithstanding.

I get mightily pissed at some people, but killing them would be frowned upon, or at least it used to be.

This was not a combat situation. IF the article represents the facts, there IS NO justification for this.

We don't know all the facts yet. And I'm still fuzzy on how criminal law is handled over there...this guy may have been going free for all I know. In any case, if I must jump to a conclusion I've giving the coalition soldiers the benefit of the doubt.

No we don't know all the facts and that is why I did not say hang the soldiers, and emphasized the "IF". We DO need to know what happened. If this is a fabrication, then it needs to be handled appropriately. If this is true, it is a court martial offense, and US troops could be executed for murder, like anyone else. I don't think Brit law allows for that, however I am not sure. Let's see how this unfolds.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: burnedout
Nevermind that good old Kim or Fidel or <insert name of favorite despot here> commits similar acts on a daily basis. In the eyes of the liberal sophists, those bastards are automatically forgiven! Therefore, WE are the damned.

With all due respect, they are NOT forgiven. However, atrocities are expected from despots. They are not expected from "civilized" people.

In fact, I would turn that around 180 degrees. Forget liberal sophists, how about immoral politicans? How many tyrants has the U.S. supported, e.g., evil thugs like Saddam Hussein? How many do we still support? More often than not, our politicians are the ones "forgiving" the despots, continuing to support them and coddle them and conduct commerce with them because it is politically expedient or personally advantageous.


I do agree that like all human beings, soldiers (and cops) sometimes succumb to their emotions, make mistakes, whatever. It is not an indictment of all soldiers. It is also not an excuse; the incident must be investigated. If there was wrongdoing, the soldiers involved should be disciplined just like any other manslaughter/murder/whatever is appropriate.

I think this story highlights one of the many reasons war must be a last resort. Bad stuff happens in wars. Innocent people die in wars. Wars sometimes provoke appalling behavior.

You know, I would have more respect for you if you had some answers to some of the world's pressing problems, rather than complaining about what the current gov't is doing. Instead of bitching and delving into our past relationships, it would be fruitful if you could offer some creative solutions to the North Korean, Saudi, Iraqi, or any other problem. I will start with one:

What would you have recommended that President Clinton do about Iraq when he was in office to end the intransigence once and for all?
How about North Korea and other hotspots?

I'm being serious. Please answer.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: burnedout
Nevermind that good old Kim or Fidel or <insert name of favorite despot here> commits similar acts on a daily basis. In the eyes of the liberal sophists, those bastards are automatically forgiven! Therefore, WE are the damned.

With all due respect, they are NOT forgiven. However, atrocities are expected from despots. They are not expected from "civilized" people.

In fact, I would turn that around 180 degrees. Forget liberal sophists, how about immoral politicans? How many tyrants has the U.S. supported, e.g., evil thugs like Saddam Hussein? How many do we still support? More often than not, our politicians are the ones "forgiving" the despots, continuing to support them and coddle them and conduct commerce with them because it is politically expedient or personally advantageous.


I do agree that like all human beings, soldiers (and cops) sometimes succumb to their emotions, make mistakes, whatever. It is not an indictment of all soldiers. It is also not an excuse; the incident must be investigated. If there was wrongdoing, the soldiers involved should be disciplined just like any other manslaughter/murder/whatever is appropriate.

I think this story highlights one of the many reasons war must be a last resort. Bad stuff happens in wars. Innocent people die in wars. Wars sometimes provoke appalling behavior.

You know, I would have more respect for you if you had some answers to some of the world's pressing problems, rather than complaining about what the current gov't is doing. Instead of bitching and delving into our past relationships, it would be fruitful if you could offer some creative solutions to the North Korean, Saudi, Iraqi, or any other problem. I will start with one:

What would you have recommended that President Clinton do about Iraq when he was in office to end the intransigence once and for all?
How about North Korea and other hotspots?

I'm being serious. Please answer.

This is all well and good, however how does this change the facts of this particular incident? (whatever they may be)

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: burnedout
Nevermind that good old Kim or Fidel or <insert name of favorite despot here> commits similar acts on a daily basis. In the eyes of the liberal sophists, those bastards are automatically forgiven! Therefore, WE are the damned.

With all due respect, they are NOT forgiven. However, atrocities are expected from despots. They are not expected from "civilized" people.

In fact, I would turn that around 180 degrees. Forget liberal sophists, how about immoral politicans? How many tyrants has the U.S. supported, e.g., evil thugs like Saddam Hussein? How many do we still support? More often than not, our politicians are the ones "forgiving" the despots, continuing to support them and coddle them and conduct commerce with them because it is politically expedient or personally advantageous.


I do agree that like all human beings, soldiers (and cops) sometimes succumb to their emotions, make mistakes, whatever. It is not an indictment of all soldiers. It is also not an excuse; the incident must be investigated. If there was wrongdoing, the soldiers involved should be disciplined just like any other manslaughter/murder/whatever is appropriate.

I think this story highlights one of the many reasons war must be a last resort. Bad stuff happens in wars. Innocent people die in wars. Wars sometimes provoke appalling behavior.

You know, I would have more respect for you if you had some answers to some of the world's pressing problems, rather than complaining about what the current gov't is doing. Instead of bitching and delving into our past relationships, it would be fruitful if you could offer some creative solutions to the North Korean, Saudi, Iraqi, or any other problem. I will start with one:

What would you have recommended that President Clinton do about Iraq when he was in office to end the intransigence once and for all?
How about North Korea and other hotspots?

I'm being serious. Please answer.

And I would have more respect for you if I saw honest criticism of the Bush administration instead of fan-boy rationalizations and pompous, grandiose plans to solve everything from your couch.

(By the way, did you even read my post? I wasn't "bitching and delving into our past relationships," I was offering a counterexample to burnedout's suggestion that "liberal sophists" are the ones who forgive tyrants. I also expressed support for the troops in Iraq.)

Re. Iraq & Clinton, I think containment and inspections were working well. Iraq posed no significant threat to the United States or our allies. If I decided action was necessary, I might have encouraged covert actions either directly against Hussein, and/or in committed support to internal dissidents. I would have worked to persuade the U.N. to do more by providing honest, accurate intelligence information and treating other countries as peers instead of hired help. If the U.N. refused to act, I would accept it; that is their prerogative.

Re. North Korea, put as much pressure as we can on China to solve the problem.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: burnedout
Nevermind that good old Kim or Fidel or <insert name of favorite despot here> commits similar acts on a daily basis. In the eyes of the liberal sophists, those bastards are automatically forgiven! Therefore, WE are the damned.

With all due respect, they are NOT forgiven. However, atrocities are expected from despots. They are not expected from "civilized" people.

In fact, I would turn that around 180 degrees. Forget liberal sophists, how about immoral politicans? How many tyrants has the U.S. supported, e.g., evil thugs like Saddam Hussein? How many do we still support? More often than not, our politicians are the ones "forgiving" the despots, continuing to support them and coddle them and conduct commerce with them because it is politically expedient or personally advantageous.


I do agree that like all human beings, soldiers (and cops) sometimes succumb to their emotions, make mistakes, whatever. It is not an indictment of all soldiers. It is also not an excuse; the incident must be investigated. If there was wrongdoing, the soldiers involved should be disciplined just like any other manslaughter/murder/whatever is appropriate.

I think this story highlights one of the many reasons war must be a last resort. Bad stuff happens in wars. Innocent people die in wars. Wars sometimes provoke appalling behavior.

You know, I would have more respect for you if you had some answers to some of the world's pressing problems, rather than complaining about what the current gov't is doing. Instead of bitching and delving into our past relationships, it would be fruitful if you could offer some creative solutions to the North Korean, Saudi, Iraqi, or any other problem. I will start with one:

What would you have recommended that President Clinton do about Iraq when he was in office to end the intransigence once and for all?
How about North Korea and other hotspots?

I'm being serious. Please answer.

And I would have more respect for you if I saw honest criticism of the Bush administration instead of fan-boy rationalizations and pompous, grandiose plans to solve everything from your couch.

(By the way, did you even read my post? I wasn't "bitching and delving into our past relationships," I was offering a counterexample to burnedout's suggestion that "liberal sophists" are the ones who forgive tyrants. I also expressed support for the troops in Iraq.)

Re. Iraq & Clinton, I think containment and inspections were working well. Iraq posed no significant threat to the United States or our allies. If I decided action was necessary, I might have encouraged covert actions either directly against Hussein, and/or in committed support to internal dissidents. I would have worked to persuade the U.N. to do more by providing honest, accurate intelligence information and treating other countries as peers instead of hired help. If the U.N. refused to act, I would accept it; that is their prerogative.

Containment was not working well. The innocents were dying while Hussein continued to build policies. Furthermore, we started "smart sanctions" that went nowhere.

As for doing nothing should the UN declined to help, that is the same route the League of Nations went. Do you really want that?


Re. North Korea, put as much pressure as we can on China to solve the problem.

You are right about the Chinese. But the problem is more than that. Plus, it was the Chinese (and Pakistanis) that give NK its know-how. While an important partner in dealing with NK, left to their own devices, they could use NK as some sort of dog on a leash to terrorize their neighbors. The chinese can't be trusted to deal with it alone.