Iraq Issues

[nemafakei]

Hm. I wonder at what point along the line the claim by Blair's Dossier that 45 minutes after Hussein gave the order, certain WoMD's could be deployed arose; aparrently, there was one unreliable source only...

[Dude_Doc]

Cheeses, this thread is still open...

[Gobalopper]

Comments Revive Doubts Over Iraq Weapons

U.S. Official: Bush Used WMD Argument For Politics

Iraq Arms Hunt Will Shift to New Sites

[zamboe]

Photos Raise Allegations of Torture

"A British soldier was arrested today after he left a roll of film at a photo store that appeared to show an Iraqi prisoner being tortured, the Defense Ministry said today."

What is interesting is that some people in the pre-war stage denied this possibility, in fact I think that is just a small piece of all what the coalition forces have done against HR.

[Gobalopper]

Denied what exactly zamboe? I don't think there is anything you can predict before a war starts.

[zamboe]

Denied what exactly zamboe? I don't think there is anything you can predict before a war starts.

On the contrary, I think there are some things that can be predicted to happen, maybe not measure the quantity or time duration, but no doubt that were going to happen, such as HR violations made by coalition forces as I showed with the last link. I think that nobody can expect that an army of more than 100,000 soldiers will control a country and won't take advantage of their power for barbaric purpouses, not that I mean is the majority, but certanly are not isolated events.

Btw, when I said some people I wasn't thinking about you Gob.

[Gobalopper]

I would agree you can never know what soldiers are going to do. It will be interesting to see if it was just British soldiers who did stuff like this, it doesn't reflect well on the rest of the troops.

Iraqi Mobile Biological Warfare Agent Production Plants

The Threat to America & Bush's Response

U.S. Forces Arrest Iraqi Baath Party Members

Three U.S. Soldiers Dead, Six Injured in Road Accident

Bush: 'We Found' Banned Weapons (President Cites Trailers in Iraq as Proof)

Administration Defends Iraq War Motives

U.S. to Realign Its Military Forces (Wolfowitz Cites Terrorism Threat)

[SurlyPIG]

Zamboe I'd like to see you fight in a war and not go a little loco. The prevalence of abusive violations among coalition soldiers is no more prevalent than it is in other military forces, UN peacekeepers or even police forces.

[zamboe]

Zamboe I'd like to see you fight in a war and not go a little loco. The prevalence of abusive violations among coalition soldiers is no more prevalent than it is in other military forces, UN peacekeepers or even police forces.

Therefore accepted ?.

I don't think than any military court of law would even consider that under stress a soldier could justify any crime against HR. Certanly in the US they don't care about it, instead a hero style welcome will be provided for those who commited crimes against HR while they were in Irak. Will they go to trial?, hell no !, they are heros, liberators, What are we thinking !

[Gobalopper]

I don't think Ace is saying its ok, you would have to be very warped to think something like this is ok. But it does happen all over the place not just the military. The soldiers are under investigation and something is going to be done about it.

Blair Says Iraq Weapons Secrets Will Be Publicized

Revealed: the cluster bombs that litter Iraq

Eight-man unit to be questioned over Iraqi PoW 'torture' pictures

Pentagon challenges Vanity Fair report

New questions about U.S. intelligence regarding Iraq's weapons of mass terror

[zamboe]

Gob, The soldiers that are under investigation happen to be UK soldiers, not US soldiers, don't you see some sort of coincidence why the US has rejected the instauration of the International Court for crimes against humanity, that court that already started to function located in The Netherlands, US don't recognize that court, most UN associate countries have accepted it's legislation. As a part of their war against terror the US has guaranteed impunity to it's army and secret service, that is warped in my opinion.

[Gobalopper]

I wouldn't except it either. People should either be put to trial in their own country or the country the crime was commited it. I'm not a big fan of the international court.

[nemafakei]

"The Sun reported that he belonged to the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, which fought in southern Iraq and is part of the Seventh Armored Brigade, known as the Desert Rats"

Heheh! So that narrows it down to about half of the British soldiers, then.

An honest question: has the US actually ever formally apologised for past wars, like the use of chemicals in Vietnam and so on.

"The soldiers that are under investigation happen to be UK soldiers"

Again, I wonder how much of an investigation would be mounted if it were the US soldiers accused of this.

Will someone please explain why the american soldiers don't stop wearing helmets and put on berets and so on once the fighting has mostly died down?

[Anathema]

I wouldn't except it either. People should either be put to trial in their own country or the country the crime was commited it. I'm not a big fan of the international court.

Pardon me, but I don't think that a country like Iraq in its current status is capable of setting up a court to deal with such incidents, and with a court in the home country the judge is less likely to be objective about the whole thing.

I made a thread about the ICC a while ago, but it wasn't long until emprworm came along and ruined it ::)

[SurlyPIG]

Therefore accepted ?.

I don't think than any military court of law would even consider that under stress a soldier could justify any crime against HR. Certanly in the US they don't care about it, instead a hero style welcome will be provided for those who commited crimes against HR while they were in Irak. Will they go to trial?, hell no !, they are heros, liberators, What are we thinking !

LMAO. If this doesn't prove you're anti-American, I don't know WHAT will. Here we are discussing the actions of British soldiers and you go into a rant about evil evil Americans. ::)

[Gobalopper]

And an international judge is supposed to be any more objective?

Weapons of Mass Disappearance

Where are Iraq

[zamboe]

Therefore accepted ?.

I don't think than any military court of law would even consider that under stress a soldier could justify any crime against HR. Certanly in the US they don't care about it, instead a hero style welcome will be provided for those who commited crimes against HR while they were in Irak. Will they go to trial?, hell no !, they are heros, liberators, What are we thinking !

LMAO. If this doesn't prove you're anti-American, I don't know WHAT will. Here we are discussing the actions of British soldiers and you go into a rant about evil evil Americans. ::)

LMAO back.

If I mentioned the US it's because it's whitin the context of the last posts in this topic, your effort to take phrases out of context will not divert my point. You could read that Nema made the same question I did, just with different words. And again I am not anti american, which in your case I would say you are anti HR for your unconditional support to imputinity.

Gob, I fail to understand why you question so much an institution like the IC (international court) when it's only beginning it's work, instead of that I would be proactive and support it - at least - for some time to see how it works, I expect that it will proceed in a more objective way than let's say a US or UK court when some of it's own soldiers are (if they ever are) under trial.

Not supporting a new initiative is accepting that the current situation is good enough, which I think is your position.

[SurlyPIG]

Nice try. You directly quoted me and responded, and I was referring to the one incident. We don't even have to be talking about the US in order for you to bash it anymore.

And why should British soldiers from the UK under the British army be subjected to a UN court, the very same UN that opposed the action that sent them there in the first place? That's like saying Osama bin Laden should be tried (if found) in a Taliban court (if they even had a judicial system).

The soldiers are British and they should be charged in a British military court under British law.

[zamboe]

UK is not US.

UK will (I think and I hope) charge their soldiers if pertinent.

More than 120,000 US soldiers are in Irak. They've been almost for two months already, unless you think that all those soldiers are all saints unable to brake any law, and that 100% of those soldiers did respect HR, then how come not even one of them have been put in a court of law ?, same as other people in this forum I wait for an answer if someone could provide it...

[SurlyPIG]

Because the military is well commanded and strictly controlled. The soldiers are well-trained both physically and mentally to handle combat. Armies are not comprised of the 'unwashed public' so to speak, so the prvalence of criminal activity is bound to be less, especially in a voluntary heirarchy.

There has not been one reported case of HR abuse by any US soldier in Iraq. It amazes me how you will assume that US soldiers are just naturally HR-abusive criminals but you'll demand proof from the US government that Saddam has/had WMDs.

[Gobalopper]

Come on over the water's lovely

"How much for a fill-up?" I asked.

"Ten dollars," the man said.

"I've only got a 20," I said.

"That's good," he said. "Bush," he added, pointing to the picture of Andrew Jackson on the bill.

"Close enough," I said. Afterwards, he wanted another 20 for his seven-year-old boy. I'm a softie but not that soft, so I fished out a Canadian 20.

"What this?" he said suspiciously. "American one dollar?" He pointed to the Queen's portrait. "Who this?"

"George Washington," I said.

He'll have a hard job getting rid of the Canadian but that Yankee 20 he'll change in one of the stores back in town and he'll do himself and the local economy more good than the UN's bloated boondoggle ever will.

A good article and funny too. :)

[zamboe]

Because the military is well commanded and strictly controlled. The soldiers are well-trained both physically and mentally to handle combat. Armies are not comprised of the 'unwashed public' so to speak, so the prvalence of criminal activity is bound to be less, especially in a voluntary heirarchy.

There has not been one reported case of HR abuse by any US soldier in Iraq. It amazes me how you will assume that US soldiers are just naturally HR-abusive criminals but you'll demand proof from the US government that Saddam has/had WMDs.

Amazing, it's not that you don't believe it, is that you don't want to believe it.

UK 40,000 soldiers --> 1 case already reported and under trial.

US 120,000 soldiers -> 0 (all saints and unable to do anything wrong)

Under your view UK soldiers then are not well trained then.

I am willing to bet that in the 5 years that the US plans to stay in Irak, not one, not a single soldier will go to trial.

What's interesting to me and really impossible to compute is what you write :

"The soldiers are well-trained both physically and mentally to handle combat"

"I'd like to see you fight in a war and not go a little loco. The prevalence of abusive violations among coalition soldiers is no more prevalent than it is in other military forces, UN peacekeepers or even police forces. "

What a paradox.

[SurlyPIG]

When did I say they were saints? Don't put words in my mouth, it makes you look dishonest.

Of course US soldiers are trained better. The American army isn't the most powerful in the world JUST because of its technology.

According to your numbers there are 3 US soldiers to every British soldiers. Assuming that HR abuses are uniform, there should be a one in four chance that the soldier committing it would be British (like what we've seen). But then you have to factor in the differences between the two different military forces.

And it's not a paradox, it's logic. I said that HR abuse is no more prevalent among COALITION soldiers than it is among any force, anywhere in the world. Quoting your numbers, 1 in 160,000 is pretty damn good. Certainly better than any other military force in recent history.

And FYI, there aren't going to be 120,000 US soldiers in Iraq FOREVER you know. Some have already left. But it's good to know that you put faith in the judgement of US soldiers! A testament to their training...

[zamboe]

I still have my question unanswered.

Perhaps is because the answer would prove me right.

[zamboe]

Iraq weapons: US spy agencies under fire

Quote from the article.

"All I can tell you is there is a general feeling among CIA analysts that intelligence was politicised and that the CIA and (Defence Intelligence Agency) was not given full consideration because the Pentagon, the policymakers, including the vice-president's office, did not want to hear that message. They wanted to hear a hardline message supporting a policy they already adopted," Counterterrorism chief for the Central Intelligence Agency.