No Wonder People From the Middle East Hate Americans

Oh for Petes () sake. Thus you are saying we should crush ever single fncken car in the world because it may someday be used to carry amonium nitrate for terrorism activities. Come on ... get real.

If we have proof that this guy did that then we would not have let him go and simply crushed the car, we would have arrested him ... as we should have in that situation as a suspected terrorist, etc.

We should not act like the villains.

Yes shoot, kill, get rid of the extremist, but not every single person in Iraq (or anywhere else) is an extremist that is a threat to America or Australia, etc.

For heavens sake the guy was looting a few pieces of wood ...

Pete

 

Plans were originally to help get Iraq back in the day-to-day business of simply being Iraq again, with government buildings which had not been shelled as intact as possible. You may recall that the vast majority of Government buildings of any description were looted. Looting consisted of stripping buildings of not just their contents (you name it, innocuous or not - gone)- but the building's structural components as well. Wiring, insulation, wood, etc..

It is reported Ba'athist loyalists took anything that was considered incriminating evidence (in so many words), burned what "needed" to be burned. This destabilized the possibility of US being able to use the buildings to begin the already difficult task of laying a foundation for a new government, maintaining order and as a result, Anarchy reigned. This is what many non-loyalist, looting Iraqis thought Freedom or Democracy meant - Anarchy.
Recall that this looting, pillaging and burning took place over a period of weeks.

Call it the straw that broke the camel's back or crossed line in the sand if you wish, but one thing which may have set the soldiers off was the kid being in the group. It's difficult to determine, as the camera only rolled after the vehicle had been seized, but my mind's eye speculates it's also quite possible the driver put Iraqis or the soldiers in danger when he was driving. That mental picture I'm seeing is all part of the big picture in the microcosm of the macrocosm that war was thousands of years ago and is now. Then again, maybe someone they knew got hurt in a bad way while in a vehicle, and they felt like it was payback time.
_

From the transcript:

NARRATOR: There was still some looting going on when we arrived. And when we came across soldiers, they didn't seem sure of their role.

U.S. SOLDIER: That child don't need to be here.

NARRATOR: We filmed these GIs after they caught a group of Iraqis stealing wood.

U.S. SOLDIER: We try to stop them from looting, and they don't understand, so we take their car and we crush it, the United States Army tankers. That's what you get when you loot.

NARRATOR: Later, the car's owner told us, "I am a taxi driver. The car was my livelihood."

 

Acts like this slowly erode and chip away at any moral high ground the coalition had.
And this has NOTHING to do with 9/11, terrorism, war, invasion, Israel etc.. It has to do with enforcing the correct rule of law.
Those of you who think the GIs behaved properly should have your cars crushed next time you steal..... see how you like that. No - in fact next time we're caught speeding in our Ferraris - we should have our watches destroyed right - that's fair - afterall an American/British guy will be enforcing the law and that makes it OK -right??? WRONG.
Absolutely disgraceful.
I actually DON'T think there was any malice in those soldiers. Age and inexperience by the looks of it.

Is it just me or is this website increasingly crawling with totally gormless, INCREDIBLY stupid teenagers who make THE most insensitive remarks based on a juinor school level of understanding of world politics and geography?? I want EXPENSIVE paid membership to this site.......

 

Just saw the vid, i have seen that s**t before when young solders get caught up in the moment, i saw this during my time serving in Northern Ireland in the 80s Its later in life that a man has to sit down and face the reconing of what hes done. Personaly with my self, haveing children and seeing them grow changed my views. Some things that your child does reminds you of a situation that you were wittnes to, and when this happens you find yourself holding the child with tears in you eyes, just as you saw a mother do as you kicked in the front door of her home and a section of men raided and ransacked the rooms on the whim of some W***ky tip of.

 

Ask, and thou shalt receive.
http://ferrarichat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12886

 

They have another opinion on things than you, that doesn't mean it's wrong.

 

Beliefs? What beliefs? That infidels are all evil and must be exterminated because they are not muslims? That they should be allowed to take sadistic pleasure in torture, multilation, murder, violence and rape, brought about from the feelings of "domination" and "power" over other human beings?
Because that's about the major distinction between them and the western world. Like others have said, they live like savages from many centuries ago.

Did you look at the photo someone posted of the charred, multilated American civilian contracter, hanging upside down over the river Euphrates?

Did you notice that most of the people with sickening grins standing next to the body are children?

They are savage amoral warped pukes who have been brainwashed from a very young age by their equally savage elders. I agree that only a devestating leveling of their entire country, region, CULTURE, can alleviate the on-going chaos there (i.e. like Germany and Japan).

Sometimes I am so fed up with the atrocities, and the way many people treat each other in the world, that I feel an exterminating nuclear winter caused by some huge asteriod or a nuclear exchange would be a good thing for this planet (yes I know, this is highly 'irrational' thinking. Or is it?)

 

Exactly. I can't beleive some of the other posts refusing to totally condem this...that is seriously concerning. We've got some totally narrow minded, racist, gung ho, 'go git 'em boys whhhoooooo' people over here, but compared to some of these...they remain 'minor league'.
We've got a hard enough time convincing the UK that it was right to go in the first place.....that sort of action makes it pretty much impossible.

 

You can't just look at this videoand claim authenticity. If it were real it seems that I would have seen it on Fox News or CNN. I believe none of what I hear and half of what I see and I usually end up right when I call bull**** on something.

Now, if it is real you still don't know the cirumstances of the situation. You had some guys dubbed in voice narrating but he wasn't there. It was done in a studio.

Gotta call BS but good for them anyways. I hope the guy was a cab driver.

Jason

 

Actually you did. You said specifically that. Here is your specific quote for a reminder:

"I have little respect for the US's ability to really win a war. They never have yet. Yes they win the fight (the easy part) but have yet to win the objective, which SHOULD BE to restore peace. Instead they leave the country as a hated nation."

There is peace in Japan, as there was from the end of the war. Same in Germany. There was not an ongoing terror campaign against the American occupiers because it was plainly obvious to those being occupied that it was pointless. They were beaten. Peace was the result.


PSK SAID:
"Thank you America for providing the money, and the convoys. I still stick to my guns that the disciplined approach to fighting wars of the British is how an army should operate."


I do hope your realise this is nonsense. Read up on the actions of British long range desert patrols in north Africa in WWII. How about British treatment of Indians? How about British treatment of Arabs in palistine during the time THEY occupied it? You are being naive if you think the British have not waged war in the same dirty way everyone else has. War is dirty. No matter who is doing it.



PSK SAID:
"We are not fighting a world war at the moment ..."

Yes, we are. The war on terrorism IS a world war. Islamic Fundamentalism, as it is interpreted through various Muslim sects, is a worldwide phenomenon. It has moral, financial and militant support across the globe. Until this "belief" is gone.... this war will continue. To deny the scope of the enemy and the effort that will be required to win this war is DANGEROUS.



PSK SAID:
"I'm sorry but what right has American to exterminate other peoples beliefs which is exactly what you have said above. That is not the way to win a war permanately, ie. destroy anothers belief as you cannot do that, it is impossible. BTW I am very much pro this war , but not pro this sort of ****."


We have every right. If another groups "belief" is that we should be killed, then we have EVERY RIGHT to do whatever we can to totally eradicate that belief. It is NOT impossible. It is how wars are won, the very root of how real victory is defined. The Japanese before WWII believed that their Emporer WAS a diety. They believed he was GOD living here on earth. They believed it enough that they would gratefully give their lives in his name. They were a fanatical culture, ruled with an iron fist and galvanized into action based on this core belief. We totally ended this belief. They did not pursue a terror campaign. They did not refuse to give up this belief. They were shown in no uncertain terms, through the massive destruction of everything around them, that their belief was FALSE. When this is made crystal clear.... there is no issue in getting the enemy to abandon their belief. Another case: the American Civil War. Southerners believed they had the right to self Govt. and to form their own nation. They fought a war. They lost. They gave up on that belief. Do you want me to cite more examples?



PSK SAID:
"Never said we should not exterminate the terrorists ... but driving over a civilians car in a tank does not acheive this."

One car, big deal. Heck 1,000 cars... big deal. We cant let the little picture stuff like this deter us from the big picture. When we fire bombed Japan, there were millions made homeless. Did we cry over these little tragedies.... or did we focus on the big picture and get on with winning the war?


PSK SAID:
"If America was not such a huge market for their goods it MIGHT be a different story ... funny how money rules everything."

Baloney. They love America because: 1. We proved to them through total defeat that "their way" was dead and false. 2. We lent the helping hand to help totally rebuild their nation and thus demonstrated the American goodwill that is core to what America really is. THIS is why even as early as 1950 General MacArthur (Military Govornor of Japan post war) was viewed to the Japanese as an incredible hero whom they loved and respected even though he was their prime enemy during the war.


PSK SAID:
"Agree, but the money is running out and unrest is starting ... do your research. Thus if you read ALL my posts, I stated that we must keep the money flowing and FINISH the job."


Agree on finishing the job.... but this will require crushing alot more than some cars. In the areas like Fallujah where the enemy has broad support from the populace, we need to crush them. This means go in and flatten the place. Demonstrate without question what those who oppose the US effort can expect. Make it crystal clear what their choice is: get with the program or die. At the same time in other areas of Iraq where the peace and rebuilding process is going great, make sure the people ARE reaping the rewards. This way the reality is made even more apparent. There is a clear choice: 1. Resist and face death, suffering and the destruction of your entire world. 2. Abandon your prior belief and reap great economic reward and a better/happier life.



PSK SAID:
"Never said they hate us ... again try and read . I said they WILL hate us if we keep doing these undisciplined actions to civilians."

They will if you screw around with it. You either must project total war in the areas that are resisting, or forget about it. Just crushing some cars or killing a few folks every now and again WILL just make people mad. Unless you demonstrat to them the reality of either surrender or total destruction.... violence against them will have the result you say.


PSK SAID:
"This civilian was NOT the enemy ... he was a looter. Do you get my point yet?"

You dont know that. Neither do I. He may have been an enemy, he may not. If he was living in Fallujah and NOT actively helping coalition forces then he WAS the enemy. As I said, worrying about individual cars getting crushed is missing the point.

Now if this happened in an area where the US is getting general support, I would agree the soldiers were in error.


PSK SAID:
"Okay my say:

What I was trying to say is that this action on a looting civilian does NOT help the war cause just causes the average person on the ground to get pissed off with Americans (and the rest of the colition forces). We need to treat all civilians with respect no matter what their beliefs are because they are NOT fighting us ... the extremists are!!!, and yes shoot, run them over with a tank whatever, but not the civilians (where we can).

An American solider should not be seen driving a tank over somebodies car (which may have taken him ALL his life savings to purchase ... who knows) because of anything ... that is NOT what they are there for ... very BAD PR.

Pete


Do the "civilians" in the areas generally resisting the US forces (Fallujah and others in the sunni triangle) work and earn income? Do they provide food and shelter to the militants? Do they provide financial support? Do they provide moral support?

We do not see large protests against the terrorists in these areas. WE do not see the civilians actively seeking American help and/or helping the Americans destroy the terrorists. In fact, they do nothing to help. Sitting back and doing nothing to help fight the terrorists is in fact aiding the terrorists and thus makes you an enemy.

Japanese civilians working in rice paddies in the rural countryside were not fighting the Americans? Well.... they provided food that went to soldiers who were. So, they did contribute.

Fighting a war is not about earning respect. Its about killing the enemy until they are either dead or totally subjugated to your will. Make an example of Fallujah. Demonstrat what being an enemy of the new Iraq means. Make the choice clear: get with the program or die.

Bad PR? Victory is not about good PR. The best PR you will get will be in 4-5 years when the killing is over and Iraq is a blooming democracy. But you wont get there by being nice and worrying about PR and the feelings of our enemies.


Terry

 

If the police, here, had the powere to do that to crack dealers, they would also have the power to do that to speeders cars.......think about it.

 

There are also special areas where we can do more extreem things. The theory being if you screw up near a hospital or a school and get just plain pounded on, you will not do it again... and also tell you buddies not to either.

DrS

 

Regarding "earning respect versus the alternative" for a moment review how British past history which "Psk" seems to hold in high regard recorded the crushing of the Malayan terrorist revolution of 1953......or their successes against the IRA when they "went overboard" as some here would say they did.

There was no "tut tut cheerio" there.....that's for sure....but it worked.

Review Soviet control of the Warsaw pact countries......

Review German WWII control of occupied lands......

Review Attila the Hun for god's sake.....

The only reason people on the left wing paints those who oppose their "latte based viewpoints" as "narrow minded, racist and gung ho" is because they don't have a rebuttal that wins the argument, so they resport to denial or reality and name calling.....two of the 5 pillars of leftist liberal politics.

Consider this timeline I am about to present..........Art355 and others will recognize Richard Clarke's name prominently mentioned.....and you can make the links any way you want.......

-----------------------

PRESIDENT CARTER, DEMOCRAT

In 1979, President Jimmy Carter allowed the Shah of Iran to be deposed by a mob of Islamic fanatics. A few months later, Muslims stormed the U.S. Embassy in Iran and took American Embassy staff hostage.

Carter retaliated by canceling Iranian visas. He eventually ordered a disastrous and humiliating rescue attempt, crashing helicopters in the desert.

PRESIDENT REAGAN, REPUBLICAN

The day of Reagan's inauguration, the hostages were released.

In 1982, the U.S. Embassy in Beirut was bombed by Muslim extremists.

President Reagan sent U.S. Marines to Beirut.

In 1983, the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut were blown up by Muslim extremists.

Reagan said the U.S. would not surrender, but Democrats threw a hissy fit, introducing a resolution demanding that our troops be withdrawn. Reagan caved in to Democrat caterwauling in an election year and withdrew our troops – bombing Syrian-controlled areas on the way out. Democrats complained about that, too.

In 1985, an Italian cruise ship, the Achille Lauro, was seized and a 69-year-old American was shot and thrown overboard by Muslim extremists.

Reagan ordered a heart-stopping mission to capture the hijackers after "the allies" promised them safe passage. In a daring operation, American fighter pilots captured the hijackers and turned them over to the Italians – who then released them to safe harbor in Iraq.

On April 5, 1986, a West Berlin discotheque frequented by U.S. servicemen was bombed by Muslim extremists from the Libyan Embassy in East Berlin, killing an American.

Ten days later, Reagan bombed Libya, despite our dear ally France refusing the use of their airspace. Americans bombed Gadhafi's residence, killing his daughter, and dropped a bomb on the French Embassy "by mistake."

Reagan also stoked a long, bloody war between heinous regimes in Iran and Iraq. All this was while winning a final victory over Soviet totalitarianism.

PRESIDENT BUSH I, MODERATE REPUBLICAN

In December 1988, a passenger jet, Pan Am Flight 103, was bombed over Lockerbie, Scotland, by Muslim extremists.

President-elect George Bush claimed he would continue Reagan's policy of retaliating against terrorism, but did not. Without Reagan to gin her up, even Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher went wobbly, saying there would be no revenge for the bombing.

In 1990, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait.

In early 1991, Bush went to war with Iraq. A majority of Democrats opposed the war, and later complained that Bush didn't "finish off the job" with Saddam.

PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON, DEMOCRAT

In February 1993, the World Trade Center was bombed by Muslim fanatics, killing five people and injuring hundreds.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

In October 1993, 18 American troops were killed in a savage firefight in Somalia. The body of one American was dragged through the streets of Mogadishu as the Somalian hordes cheered.

Clinton responded by calling off the hunt for Mohammed Farrah Aidid and ordering our troops home. Osama bin Laden later told ABC News: "The youth ... realized more than before that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows ran in defeat."

In November 1995, five Americans were killed and 30 wounded by a car bomb in Saudi Arabia set by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

In June 1996, a U.S. Air Force housing complex in Saudi Arabia was bombed by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

Months later, Saddam attacked the Kurdish-controlled city of Erbil.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, lobbed some bombs into Iraq hundreds of miles from Saddam's forces.

In November 1997, Iraq refused to allow U.N. weapons inspections to do their jobs and threatened to shoot down a U.S. U-2 spy plane.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

In February 1998, Clinton threatened to bomb Iraq, but called it off when the United Nations said no.

On Aug. 7, 1998, U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

On Aug. 20, Monica Lewinsky appeared for the second time to testify before the grand jury.

Clinton responded by bombing Afghanistan and Sudan, severely damaging a camel and an aspirin factory.

On Dec. 16, the House of Representatives prepared to impeach Clinton the next day.

Clinton retaliated by ordering major air strikes against Iraq, described by the New York Times as "by far the largest military action in Iraq since the end of the Gulf War in 1991."

The only time Clinton decided to go to war with anyone in the vicinity of Muslim fanatics was in 1999 – when Clinton attacked Serbians who were fighting Islamic fanatics.

In October 2000, our warship, the USS Cole, was attacked by Muslim extremists.

Clinton, advised by Dick Clarke, did nothing.

PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH, REPUBLICAN

Bush came into office telling his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, he was "tired of swatting flies" – he wanted to eliminate al-Qaida.

On Sept. 11, 2001, when Bush had been in office for barely seven months, 3,000 Americans were murdered (50,000 attempted murder-my comments) in a savage terrorist attack on U.S. soil by Muslim extremists.

Since then, Bush has won two wars against countries that harbored Muslim fanatics, captured Saddam Hussein, immobilized Osama bin Laden, destroyed al-Qaida's base, and begun to create the only functioning democracy in the Middle East other than Israel.

Democrats opposed it all – except their phony support for war with Afghanistan, which they immediately complained about and said would be a Vietnam quagmire. And now they claim to be outraged that in the months before 9-11, Bush did not do everything Democrats opposed doing after 9-11.

What a surprise.

----------------

My comment.....the US hasn't been attacked since......and while I am not saying they won't be later on, trying to do nothing or as little as possible "because you don't want to make them mad" has it's obvious outcome. They are already mad and out of control.

The left wing has their heads stuck so far into the sand like ostrich's neck that they can't see this. And when you are like the ostrich you are mortally exposed.

Anyways....to me this is a "roundy round" argument and there's no point to it IMHO.

 

So, i guess you also feel that WWII was an immoral war and what the US did in that war to obtain victory was evil and should not have been done?

Fallujah is focus point for those opposed to the US. It is a support base for the enemy. It should be totally destroyed. Surround it to prevent any escape and then clear the entire city block by block, killing all who resist and put those who surrender into a refugee camp to be interrogated before release.

Does that mean every Iraqi in Fallujah is guilty and a terrorist? No. Was every Japanese citizen in Tokyo in March of 1945 an anti-american combatant? No. Is the blood of these "innocents" on the hands of the Americans? NO.

If the terrorists and islamofascists were not basing their war efforts from Fallujah, the people there would not be suffering. It is NOT the fault of the US that bad things are and will continue happening to "civilians" there. It is the fault of the militants. Make that clear.

These terrorists do not operate from most areas inside Iraq, areas dominated by non-Sunni muslims who were not Saddam supporters and do not adhere to fundamentalists teachings. They dont operate from these areas because they cannot. The populace there would turn them in. They do not have the popular support base required for operations. In places like Fallujah.... they do.

You can go about this by trying to win the "hearts and minds" and trying to show them all your really nice guys and just want to talk. Like we did in Vietnam for the most part. Or, you can make them face a simple reality: get with the program or die. We used the former as the basis for our strategy in Vietnam and lost. WWII was based on the latter and we know how that came out.


Terry

 

and the surprising part of this video is???????

no one here knows exactly the circumstances under which this happened. maybe there was a valid reason, maybe not, but don't pass judgment unless you were there.

 

Gabriel....

The long part of the post between ------- these marks are not my words, but that of a well known, controversial and best selling columnist/author.

The rest is mine...and thanks for the comments.

Terry.....

"Get with the program or die".....very well put.

"Trample the weak and hurdle the dead"

 

Geneva Convention...are you for real? Does Al Quaeda follow the Geneva Convention? Did Saddam follow the Geneva Convention? Were the victims of the World Trade Center afforded the protections of the GEneva Convention?BLAH BLAH BLAH liberal drivel!! And don't give me the two wrongs don't make a right BS!! This attitude really makes me sick! Why are you so willing to take any and every position that is contrary to your own country? Must be because there is a republican in the White House. BTW, much to your dismay he will be there until 2008!

 

MMMMM...... yea right, thats what i thought when i saw the Rodney King vid...........NOT!

 

KDS, awesome post as always. And furthermore, we need to vaporize this rinky-dink town of ***guzzah or whatever it's called. It is about time, after 8 years of "skirt chasing" that an occupant of the White House has the fortitude to collectively "pick up our skirt, grab our balls" and DO what needs to be done. And Art, before you say it again for the 1000th time, we all know you were in the military, were in Vietnam, and for that, speaking for myself, I am eternally grateful that YOU PROTECTED MY FREEDOMS!! But you know what, different times, different circumstances today, and we need to NOT be a "paper tiger" like the previous administration. That attitude is precisely what got us to the brink of 9/11/01 in the first place. I see Spain electing that socialist/pacifist really helped! LOL

 

BTW Art, where is you OUTRAGE over American citizens being hanged in the public square and burned alive? Kill em all, let Allah sort em out!

 

And the problem with that is.....?

 

KDS, yet again, BRILLIANT !! BRAVO!!

 

Amen WAX, I was thinking the EXACT SAME THING but you beat me to the punch! Clinton committed "war crimes" by bombing innocents to distract from the fact that the only person he could get to blow him was a disgusting fat PIG that I wouldn't touch with a democrats member!!