I think Lixy has left the forum. 
It was interesting to get a young Muslims views on things.
Lixy, are you really gone?
“Rules of Engagement” are primarily used only by Western Armies and First World forces.
Throughout Africa, the Middle East, South America and Asia the military is expected to be used against civilians and does so routinely. These nations have no anxiety over the killing of civilians.
Most “soldiers” outside of Nato, France and India and Japan wouldn’t give the shooting of a civilian a second thought.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I think Lixy has left the forum.
It was interesting to get a young Muslims views on things.
Lixy, are you really gone? [/quote]
HH,
I think he’s been pulled. His handlers realize that no one (except orion) was buying his drivel.
Him defending terrorists using children as human shields was a sure sign of desperation.
I’ll be watching for his replacement.
JeffR
[quote]karva wrote:
Tokoya wrote:
Lixy,
Why does Islam use Mickey Mouse for jihad purposes? This is sick shit.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/016322.php
LOL. Don’t you disgrace Mickey, you muslim bastards![/quote]
Listen people,
I can stand them burning our leaders in effigy. I can stand them yelling things in their sweaty parades.
HOWEVER, I CANNOT COUNTENANCE THE tERRORISTS USING MICKEY AS A SYMBOL.
THAT IS TOO FAR!!!
I think even hamas realized they were treading on sacred ground when they apologized.
Note to bad guys, even our democrats are going to get angry if you traduce Mickey Mouse.
JeffR
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I think Lixy has left the forum.
It was interesting to get a young Muslims Extremest views on things.
Lixy, are you really gone? [/quote]
Fixed it for you.
[quote]
Aren’t the British troops mostly stationed in Shia areas while the US troops are stationed in Sunni areas as well as areas that the Sunnis and Shia are intermixed?
I think the violence seen by the US troops is more of a function of the ethnic/sectarian makeup of the population rather than experience some British troops may have had in Northern Ireland.[/quote]
There’s no doubt that the US took on the toughest missions. I can’t give you an objective way of distinguishing the effects.
However it’s worth noting that Basra has a mixed population of Sunni and Shia. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Iraq_demography.jpg . Basra also appears to be one of the most peaceful regions, and frontline operations were handed over to the Iraqis in February; withdrawal of UK troops from the province is expected soon.
I am also going by various reports in the media in which ex-servicemen, and occasionally serving officers, have criticized American policy and rules of engagement in Iraq. It’s known from leaked memos and such that Blair and British military chiefs have attempted to persuade their opposite numbers to change policies on this, but without effect.
This isn’t really to blame the US military. Without specific training and experience in winning the battle of hearts and minds this kind of thing is inevitable, and the British army has made all the same mistakes in the past.
I do believe that there needs to be a rethink at the highest levels before it’s too late.
I see I stirred up some heavy sentiments by this thread. First, let me say that I wasn’t trying to put the blame on the soldiers, but on the commanders that put the soldiers in that position unnecessarily in the first place. From the perspective of many of you around here, shit is bound to happen in wars.
I totally agree, but in the case of Iraq, it’s almost impossible to distinguish between civilians and combattants.
PGJ, I respect the fact that you try to defend your military and, for the nth time, I’m sure most of the disfortunate kids in the army are doing their best to live up to the reputation of your armed forces. However, you are disregarding the many crimes commited by some of them.
Yes, they get court-martialed, but the hundred of thousand private contractors are effectively beyond the law. Be it the Blackwater guys or one of the other dozen private companies that operate in Iraq.
Zap, your post barely had any coherence so I won’t adress it.
Thunderbolt23, I called PGJ a jerk because of the attitude he exhibited in the “Targeting girls school” thread. That is, a jerk as in “a foolish, rude or contemptible person”.
I think he deserves the label with his “bloodless” war, parallels to the Nazis and WTFs in every post. I started this thread to show that whatever you what you accused “the other side” of allegedly planning to do was actually done by your soldiers.
It sucks to have to use the deaths of little kids to illustrate a point, but I (along with millions of protesters) did my share to oppose the war. Therefore, I consider rubbing your nose in the mess not only a privilege, but a duty to make sure next time you don’t go blowing up countries based on meager suspicions.
JeffR, I condemn not only anyone who takes a weapon near a school or a civilian area, but also any use of violence when not ABSOLUTELY necessary. Forgive me for not buying the line the official story that the troops are there to protect the Iraqis and fight Al-Qaeda.
Vroom, the very definition of a guerilla entails the combatants will get the support of the civilians and hide among them. This is nothing new. And what exactly did you find questionable about my title? It’s accurate. Now, read on a bit about guerillas…
HH continues his usual rant about Muslims…
GKhan, thanks for the link but I’m afraid it’s got nothing to do with Iraq. On an related note, Assadulla means “lion of God”. Don’t know why you need to deride other people’s names.
Tokoya, what does Palestine have to do with the topic at hand. Please focus. If you’re mad at them for violating Disney’s copyright, blame Sonny Bono. The character should have been public domain for a long time now.
Islam’s got nothing to do with the plight of the Palestinians. Heck, that society used to be extremely secular for the region, until Arafat’s calls for ceasefire lost credibility among the locals. And FYI, the Mossad has been directly involved in the rise of Islamist groups.
But that’s another story altogether. Also, stop referencing to Spencer’s crap or I’ll start using deathtoamerica.org as source.
For all of you the death of those kids was inevitable. For me, and for all peace-lovers, it’s a direct consequence of waging unnecessary wars. Remember? Cause and effect.
[quote]lixy wrote:
I see I stirred up some heavy sentiments by this thread. First, let me say that I wasn’t trying to put the blame on the soldiers, but on the commanders that put the soldiers in that position unnecessarily in the first place. From the perspective of many of you around here, shit is bound to happen in wars.
I totally agree, but in the case of Iraq, it’s almost impossible to distinguish between civilians and combattants.
PGJ, I respect the fact that you try to defend your military and, for the nth time, I’m sure most of the disfortunate kids in the army are doing their best to live up to the reputation of your armed forces. However, you are disregarding the many crimes commited by some of them.
Yes, they get court-martialed, but the hundred of thousand private contractors are effectively beyond the law. Be it the Blackwater guys or one of the other dozen private companies that operate in Iraq.
Zap, your post barely had any coherence so I won’t adress it.
Thunderbolt23, I called PGJ a jerk because of the attitude he exhibited in the “Targeting girls school” thread. That is, a jerk as in “a foolish, rude or contemptible person”.
I think he deserves the label with his “bloodless” war, parallels to the Nazis and WTFs in every post. I started this thread to show that whatever you what you accused “the other side” of allegedly planning to do was actually done by your soldiers.
It sucks to have to use the deaths of little kids to illustrate a point, but I (along with millions of protesters) did my share to oppose the war. Therefore, I consider rubbing your nose in the mess not only a privilege, but a duty to make sure next time you don’t go blowing up countries based on meager suspicions.
JeffR, I condemn not only anyone who takes a weapon near a school or a civilian area, but also any use of violence when not ABSOLUTELY necessary. Forgive me for not buying the line the official story that the troops are there to protect the Iraqis and fight Al-Qaeda.
Vroom, the very definition of a guerilla entails the combatants will get the support of the civilians and hide among them. This is nothing new. And what exactly did you find questionable about my title? It’s accurate. Now, read on a bit about guerillas…
HH continues his usual rant about Muslims…
GKhan, thanks for the link but I’m afraid it’s got nothing to do with Iraq. On an related note, Assadulla means “lion of God”. Don’t know why you need to deride other people’s names.
Tokoya, what does Palestine have to do with the topic at hand. Please focus. If you’re mad at them for violating Disney’s copyright, blame Sonny Bono. The character should have been public domain for a long time now.
Islam’s got nothing to do with the plight of the Palestinians. Heck, that society used to be extremely secular for the region, until Arafat’s calls for ceasefire lost credibility among the locals. And FYI, the Mossad has been directly involved in the rise of Islamist groups.
But that’s another story altogether. Also, stop referencing to Spencer’s crap or I’ll start using deathtoamerica.org as source.
For all of you the death of those kids was inevitable. For me, and for all peace-lovers, it’s a direct consequence of waging unnecessary wars. Remember? Cause and effect.[/quote]
Since just about every post made pointed out either the, fallacy of your logic ,or the utter bias which you exhibit, why do you think we would care what you think at this point?
It’s not working. Perhaps another forum would go for it but this one isn’t.
[quote]lixy wrote:
PGJ wrote:
Do you ever try to see things from a different perspective.
If that was a question then believe me, I do my best. However, I doubt you do the same.
But my question was pretty straight forward. Do you expect the mom, dad and brothers of the dead kids to ever forgive the USA for the act? I mean, such thing would have never happened if you didn’t invade Iraq. Isn’t it logical that they would hold you responsible for the chaotic state their country is in? And by extention, of every victim of said chaos?[/quote]
I pretty sure most Muslims have no idea what forgiveness means. Kindness and good will towards fellow men, that are not muslims is not taught in Islam. Hate, vengeance, murder, suicide, venom, torture and vindication are.
So to answer your question, I don’t expect the greater Muslim community to forgive any non-muslim for existing, much less for a tragic accident. If you say it was intentional, you better back it up with fact not crap from the conspiracy theory sites what you try to present garbage information as news.
Given your source I question the validity of the story. They probably attacked a terrorist school where they were indoctrination young kids to go out and fight and bathe the infidel in blood.
[quote]lixy wrote:
I see I stirred up some heavy sentiments by this thread. First, let me say that I wasn’t trying to put the blame on the soldiers, but on the commanders that put the soldiers in that position unnecessarily in the first place. From the perspective of many of you around here, shit is bound to happen in wars.
I totally agree, but in the case of Iraq, it’s almost impossible to distinguish between civilians and combattants.
PGJ, I respect the fact that you try to defend your military and, for the nth time, I’m sure most of the disfortunate kids in the army are doing their best to live up to the reputation of your armed forces. However, you are disregarding the many crimes commited by some of them.
Yes, they get court-martialed, but the hundred of thousand private contractors are effectively beyond the law. Be it the Blackwater guys or one of the other dozen private companies that operate in Iraq.
Zap, your post barely had any coherence so I won’t adress it.
Thunderbolt23, I called PGJ a jerk because of the attitude he exhibited in the “Targeting girls school” thread. That is, a jerk as in “a foolish, rude or contemptible person”.
I think he deserves the label with his “bloodless” war, parallels to the Nazis and WTFs in every post. I started this thread to show that whatever you what you accused “the other side” of allegedly planning to do was actually done by your soldiers.
It sucks to have to use the deaths of little kids to illustrate a point, but I (along with millions of protesters) did my share to oppose the war. Therefore, I consider rubbing your nose in the mess not only a privilege, but a duty to make sure next time you don’t go blowing up countries based on meager suspicions.
JeffR, I condemn not only anyone who takes a weapon near a school or a civilian area, but also any use of violence when not ABSOLUTELY necessary. Forgive me for not buying the line the official story that the troops are there to protect the Iraqis and fight Al-Qaeda.
Vroom, the very definition of a guerilla entails the combatants will get the support of the civilians and hide among them. This is nothing new. And what exactly did you find questionable about my title? It’s accurate. Now, read on a bit about guerillas…
HH continues his usual rant about Muslims…
GKhan, thanks for the link but I’m afraid it’s got nothing to do with Iraq. On an related note, Assadulla means “lion of God”. Don’t know why you need to deride other people’s names.
Tokoya, what does Palestine have to do with the topic at hand. Please focus. If you’re mad at them for violating Disney’s copyright, blame Sonny Bono. The character should have been public domain for a long time now.
Islam’s got nothing to do with the plight of the Palestinians. Heck, that society used to be extremely secular for the region, until Arafat’s calls for ceasefire lost credibility among the locals. And FYI, the Mossad has been directly involved in the rise of Islamist groups.
But that’s another story altogether. Also, stop referencing to Spencer’s crap or I’ll start using deathtoamerica.org as source.
For all of you the death of those kids was inevitable. For me, and for all peace-lovers, it’s a direct consequence of waging unnecessary wars. Remember? Cause and effect.[/quote]
That is weak as hell. Failed attempt at reconciliation for all of your stupidity. You still can’t lay the blame on the terrorists for hiding inside a school, can you?
Instead of all you supposed “peace lovers” ganging up on America, why don’t you spend your energies on the people who believe and support brutal dictatorship, enslavement, torture (sawing off heads), suicide bombings, and using children as human shields.
Why do you people ALWAYS focus on the single force physically opposing this evil? No matter what America does, you people find a way to criticize and end up supporting the wrong side.
I would think that true peace-loving people would be concerned with ending terrorism, not fighting those who are actually trying to do something about it.
You are part of the “Blame America First no matter what” crowd.
[quote]PGJ wrote:
I would think that true peace-loving people would be concerned with ending terrorism, not fighting those who are actually trying to do something about it.
[/quote]
The issue is that the current approach to fighting terrorism appears to be flawed.
[quote]jumper wrote:
Lixy is saying there is a bloodthirsty, racist supremist portion of our military just out to kill innocents. Im sure your friends don’t fit into that category niether did I or anyone else I knew. Out of respect for your friends why don’t you call lixy out on his bullshit![/quote]
Can you completely refute that? There are racists in combat situations…its just a matter of statistics. Do not confuse this general assertion with a criticism of the entire military.
Neither you, nor I, nor my friends fit that category so don’t take it so personally. You know for a fact that there are douchebags somewhere in uniform in Iraq.
Instead of ignoring it and getting angry at someone for pointing it out keep doing your job and setting the people straight who need straightening–that is your MORAL obligation as a part of the UCMJ.
[quote]Jamougha wrote:
PGJ wrote:
I would think that true peace-loving people would be concerned with ending terrorism, not fighting those who are actually trying to do something about it.
The issue is that the current approach to fighting terrorism appears to be flawed.
[/quote]
Exactly.
[quote]Jamougha wrote:
PGJ wrote:
I would think that true peace-loving people would be concerned with ending terrorism, not fighting those who are actually trying to do something about it.
The issue is that the current approach to fighting terrorism appears to be flawed.
[/quote]
I wish we could make this a point of discussion instead we are loaded with people that would rather justify the evil actions of our enemies and blame the US and Israel for all the ills in the world.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
I wish we could make this a point of discussion instead we are loaded with people that would rather justify the evil actions of our enemies and blame the US and Israel for all the ills in the world.
[/quote]
Who is justifying it? Trying to explain it in less ambiguous terms than “evil terrorism” is not justification…it is rationalization. Thats what some humans do.
There seems to be a precedent with people criticizing that of which they have little understanding while at the same time complaining that they are receiving too much criticism.
I’ve got an idea: Why don’t non-Muslims stop criticizing Islam and non-Americans stop criticizing the US and the US armed forces? Then maybe we can have civilized discussions…this doesn’t mean we have to accept others opinions as truth.
Those with moral authority don’t usually go around telling everyone how morally superior they are to everyone…I’m trying to think if I’ve ever heard His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama tell anyone how righteous he is…nope, I’m fairly certain he hasn’t.
[quote]Jamougha wrote:
PGJ wrote:
I would think that true peace-loving people would be concerned with ending terrorism, not fighting those who are actually trying to do something about it.
The issue is that the current approach to fighting terrorism appears to be flawed.
[/quote]
No shit! Brilliant. NOTHING goes according to the plan in warfare. Never, ever. The problem is some people expect perfection. Fighting a war isn’t like coming up with a fool-proof business plan to increase productivity.
Please describe a perfect approach. How would the “peace-lovers” end terrorism?
[quote]PGJ wrote:
Jamougha wrote:
Please describe a perfect approach. How would the “peace-lovers” end terrorism?
[/quote]
Give up and convert to islam?
[quote]John S. wrote:
PGJ wrote:
Jamougha wrote:
Please describe a perfect approach. How would the “peace-lovers” end terrorism?
Give up and convert to islam?[/quote]
And that WILL be the end-state if nobody puts up a fight.
[quote]PGJ wrote:
Jamougha wrote:
PGJ wrote:
I would think that true peace-loving people would be concerned with ending terrorism, not fighting those who are actually trying to do something about it.
The issue is that the current approach to fighting terrorism appears to be flawed.
No shit! Brilliant. NOTHING goes according to the plan in warfare. Never, ever. The problem is some people expect perfection. Fighting a war isn’t like coming up with a fool-proof business plan to increase productivity.
Please describe a perfect approach. How would the “peace-lovers” end terrorism?
[/quote]
That’s a complete cop-out. Noting that war is chaotic, then invoking Tarawa or Dieppe or some other WWII disaster, does nothing to excuse how fucked up the prosecution of this war has been. Ever read the Assassin’s Gate, Fiasco, or Cobra II? Or did you just dismiss them all as liberal propaganda?
[quote]PGJ wrote:
No shit! Brilliant. NOTHING goes according to the plan in warfare. Never, ever. The problem is some people expect perfection. Fighting a war isn’t like coming up with a fool-proof business plan to increase productivity.
[/quote]
This is not a regular war. This is most definitely not a war you can win by throwing more military power at it. The flaw isn’t tactical; it’s much deeper than that.
You can’t win in Iraq ever and the terrorist’s biggest victory was the day that jackass of a president of yours decided to invade Iraq. That was the ultimate boost for Al-Qaeda. Seriously, I couldn’t think of anything more emboldening to the Islamists than invading Arab countries for no good reasons.