American Credibility

[scubamike]

To quote your own quote:

The U.S.-led occupation authority in Iraq has said that at least 300,000 people are buried in mass graves in Iraq. Human rights officials put the number closer to 500,000, and some Iraqi political parties estimate more than 1 million were executed.

Nowhere near 1,000,000 confirmed.
1,000,000 would work out about 33,333 p.a. over 30 years.
Human rights ESTIMATE: 500,000 = 16,666 p.a.
US ESTIMATE: 300,000 = 10,000 p.a.

Last year UN and USA estimates:
11,000.

Lies, damn lies and statistics....

 

[insein]

Originally posted by scubamike
To quote your own quote:



Nowhere near 1,000,000 confirmed.
1,000,000 would work out about 33,333 p.a. over 30 years.
Human rights ESTIMATE: 500,000 = 16,666 p.a.
US ESTIMATE: 300,000 = 10,000 p.a.

Last year UN and USA estimates:
11,000.

Lies, damn lies and statistics....

11,000 War casualties. we did not round people up for systematic death. Theres a HUGE difference. Trying to compare the US Coalition to Saddams torture chambers is ridiculous.

 

[pegwinn]

Originally posted by scubamike
Why does the killing of one person create such passion for vengence?

Since the start of the war:
Americans killed in Iraq: about 700
Iraqis killed in Iraq: about 11,000

So much loss creates much desire for revenge, by both sides. But Americans seem to consider the loss of one of theirs to be 100x worse than the loss of one Iraqi life.

All the dead are tragic. The Berg killing wasn't an act of war. It was a singled out person who was a noncombatant. We didn't ever do that. The Iraqi dead are as a result of combat operations.

 

[scubamike]

Originally posted by pegwinn
All the dead are tragic. The Berg killing wasn't an act of war. It was a singled out person who was a noncombatant. We didn't ever do that. The Iraqi dead are as a result of combat operations.

Most of the Iraqi dead are non-combatants too. They are still dead. There have been instances where US troops have simply been too quick on the trigger (understandable considering the circumstances they are trying to operate under), but they don't capture the imagination like a beheading does.

Saying people are dead due to "combat operations" doesn't really mean anything to the families does it? Just like the use of Nick Berg to send a message to the US Govt doesn't mean his family aren't suffering.

Having seen the footage of the beheading I was surprised at the (relatively speaking) humanity of it. Death would've been quite quick as it started with the severing of the arteries which supply blood to the brain. From memory that means loss of consciousness within 10 seconds. Many more people have died much worse deaths than Nick Berg did. Considering the fact they could easily have tortured him to death over days/weeks it wasn't so bad.

Note: I am not justifying the murder of a non-combatant. But things could've been much worse for him. Before I get branded a "terrorist sympathiser" (a favourite label applied by Republicans) I abhor murder in all of its diverse forms.

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by scubamike

Having seen the footage of the beheading I was surprised at the (relatively speaking) humanity of it. Death would've been quite quick as it started with the severing of the arteries which supply blood to the brain. From memory that means loss of consciousness within 10 seconds. Many more people have died much worse deaths than Nick Berg did. Considering the fact they could easily have tortured him to death over days/weeks it wasn't so bad.

It wasn't so bad? Your kidding right?

 

[Bart]

America has no credibility. We are just America.

 

[scubamike]

Originally posted by MtnBiker
It wasn't so bad? Your kidding right?

It is to be expected that some people will take one's posts out of context without reading the entire thing.

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by scubamike
It is to be expected that some people will take one's posts out of context without reading the entire thing.

I read your whole post and then asked a question about it's content. It is to be expected that some people will avoid backing up their statements. Sycophant.

 

[walwor]

Having seen the footage of the beheading I was surprised at the (relatively speaking) humanity of it. Death would've been quite quick as it started with the severing of the arteries which supply blood to the brain. From memory that means loss of consciousness within 10 seconds. Many more people have died much worse deaths than Nick Berg did. Considering the fact they could easily have tortured him to death over days/weeks it wasn't so bad.

Note: I am not justifying the murder of a non-combatant. But things could've been much worse for him. Before I get branded a "terrorist sympathiser" (a favourite label applied by Republicans) I abhor murder in all of its diverse forms.

I just wanted to post this again so we can all read it again. Are you at all aware of how this sounds? What point are you making? That you watched men deliberately saw off an innocent man's head, but it didn't fill you with revulsion? Shall we remove you from the group known as "human beings?" Or will you take one more chance to clarify what on earth or in hell you were trying to tell us when you wrote this?

 

[brneyedgrl80]

Originally posted by insein
First of all, how do you figure that is? Tell me where anyone said any death wasnt a waste except for the terrorists and terorists appeasers lives.

Innocent iraqis being killed is horrible. But to say that America has caused great hardship on these people is a disgrace to what these people have gone through for over 30 years. Millions of iraqis dead or disappeared just for disagreeing with their government's ideals. 11,000 or whatever number it may be died in the liberation of their country. Those same 11,000 along with who knows how many others would have been dead within another year had Saddam been allowed to remain in power.

I would have to say that overall, America would be the cause for at least the past 20 years of Iraq's hardship considering it was the Reagan Administration that put Saddam in power even though we knew full well what kind of man he was. Correct me if I am wrong though.

Scubamike, you will not find a strong backing for liberal thoughts. You have be really strong in your beliefs and not take everything everyone writes seriously, or you will not do well. That's what I have learned so far.

And on a side note, I have to say that the Berg killing was horrible. But looking at it from this perspective, he was a casulty of war. Yes, he was a non-combatant, but so were the majority of the Iraqi people being held in the prison that were being tortured and even killed, check out thememoryhole.org I do not condone what happened to Berg or to the Iraqi prisoners, but the Iraqi people wanted revenge for what was done to their civilians, so they took one of our civilians and murdered him because they knew that would hit us more than just murdering an innocent soldier, ya know? I think the whole thing is horrible myself though... The real question for me is why wouldn't America trade some of the Iraqi prisoners for Berg? I know there are a lot theories going around about the whole Nick Berg situation, but that is one question I have not found an answer for. What do you guys think?

 

[NewGuy]

Folks, scubamike is only 25.

He would have us believe he is so well educated and speaks a couple of languages having travelled to Germany, Australia, Austria, Malaysia, Thailand, Singapore, USA, Canada, Mexico, Switzerland, Slovenia, Croatia, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, and France.

All of a sudden, this nearly professional student knows everything there is to know about politics and the world around us.

Since he likes to dabble in Psychology, Philosophy and Sociology, he seems to think he knows all about how to play the game.

Consider the source. He has experience in socialist nations and just wants to bring it all home to America.

 

[pegwinn]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by scubamike
Why does the killing of one person create such passion for vengence?

Since the start of the war:
Americans killed in Iraq: about 700
Iraqis killed in Iraq: about 11,000

So much loss creates much desire for revenge, by both sides. But Americans seem to consider the loss of one of theirs to be 100x worse than the loss of one Iraqi life.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by pegwinn
All the dead are tragic. The Berg killing wasn't an act of war. It was a singled out person who was a noncombatant. We didn't ever do that. The Iraqi dead are as a result of combat operations.

Originally posted by scubamike
Most of the Iraqi dead are non-combatants too. They are still dead. There have been instances where US troops have simply been too quick on the trigger (understandable considering the circumstances they are trying to operate under), but they don't capture the imagination like a beheading does.

Saying people are dead due to "combat operations" doesn't really mean anything to the families does it? Just like the use of Nick Berg to send a message to the US Govt doesn't mean his family aren't suffering.

Having seen the footage of the beheading I was surprised at the (relatively speaking) humanity of it. Death would've been quite quick as it started with the severing of the arteries which supply blood to the brain. From memory that means loss of consciousness within 10 seconds. Many more people have died much worse deaths than Nick Berg did. Considering the fact they could easily have tortured him to death over days/weeks it wasn't so bad.

Note: I am not justifying the murder of a non-combatant. But things could've been much worse for him. Before I get branded a "terrorist sympathiser" (a favourite label applied by Republicans) I abhor murder in all of its diverse forms.

Scuba, so how did you like the fifteen or so seconds of screaming? Humane yes? I addressed your original question of "Why?". You took my answer and made it into your springboard to decry the civilian casualties and minimize the Berg murder. OK. Now I will ask you some questions.

Why didn't the innocents revolt?
Why are the innocents not pointing out the criminal element we call insurgents and terrorists.
Why didn't the innocents flee when it was obvious that war was on the horizon?
Why don't the innocents take an active hand in the rebuilding and purging of thier own country?
If the Iraqi people don't want us there, why has their newest government asked coalition troops to remain?

Notice that you are getting angry. How dare I question the Iraqi people like that huh? Yet all I did was move on (dot org) from your own post. Ticks you off huh?

 

[insein]

Originally posted by brneyedgrl80
I would have to say that overall, America would be the cause for at least the past 20 years of Iraq's hardship considering it was the Reagan Administration that put Saddam in power even though we knew full well what kind of man he was. Correct me if I am wrong though.

I can go one step further. Iran was an ally in the Middle East. the Shah, while not a humanitarian due to most Arbas living that way, was a way better choice than Saddam. What happened to the Shah you ask? He was left to the Revolutionaries led by the Aayatollah Kummene(sp?). The Aayatollah could be traced back to the begining of the modern Anti-US terrorists movment we see today. How was this allowed to happen? Why did America not defend its ally? Jimmyy Carter was President. He believed that Peace was achieved through sitting back and hoping for the best. This allowe dour ally to fall creating an Anti-American hotbed in Iran let led to a Hostage crisis and many of the embassy bombings you've seen over the last 25 years. Saddam at the time was a wrose humanitarian than the Shah but he was the only person over there we could use to get to the Aayatollah. That is why we used Saddam to get to Iran. We supplied him with some weapons to combat Iran. So blame Carter for putting us in that situation and possibly the situation we sit in today.

And on a side note, I have to say that the Berg killing was horrible. But looking at it from this perspective, he was a casulty of war. Yes, he was a non-combatant, but so were the majority of the Iraqi people being held in the prison that were being tortured and even killed, check out thememoryhole.org I do not condone what happened to Berg or to the Iraqi prisoners, but the Iraqi people wanted revenge for what was done to their civilians, so they took one of our civilians and murdered him because they knew that would hit us more than just murdering an innocent soldier, ya know? I think the whole thing is horrible myself though... The real question for me is why wouldn't America trade some of the Iraqi prisoners for Berg? I know there are a lot theories going around about the whole Nick Berg situation, but that is one question I have not found an answer for. What do you guys think?

I feel that the Nick Berg incident is NOT equivalent to a casualty of war. Had he been a bystander shot by enemy fire while the enemy was firing at our soldiers, that would be a casualty of war. He was sytematically murdered. That is all it is. Just like 3000 innocent civilians were murdered on 9/11, 1000+ were murdered at the African embassy bombings, a dozen or so were murdered in the first WTC in 93. The attack on the USS Cole was an actual military target and coupled with all the aformentioned should have made a clear cut declaration of war that should have been acknowledged back in 93. Even the Oklahoma City bombings have "fishy" circumstances surrounding them that would lead to Arab terrorists having a hand in the attack. The point is, when civilians die in war do to targeting the enemy its a tragic casualty of war. When civilians are targeted by either side in a war, its murder.

 

[scubamike]

Originally posted by NewGuy
Folks, scubamike is only 25.

He would have us believe he is so well educated and speaks a couple of languages having travelled to Germany, Australia, Austria, Malaysia, Thailand, Singapore, USA, Canada, Mexico, Switzerland, Slovenia, Croatia, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, and France.

All of a sudden, this nearly professional student knows everything there is to know about politics and the world around us.

Since he likes to dabble in Psychology, Philosophy and Sociology, he seems to think he knows all about how to play the game.

Consider the source. He has experience in socialist nations and just wants to bring it all home to America.

You really are a child aren't you. Yes, I am 26 (learn to count). I am well educated, well-travelled and speak German and bits of a few other languages from my travels (and currently studying Japanese). You have next to nothing on your profile and then attack me on mine. Grow up you utter wanker.

You can't attack the issues in any reasoned way so seek to attack me instead. Germany socialist? Umm, the dude in charge is a former banker. Hard to get more capitalist than a banker.

=========

As for the beheading discussion. Yes it is revolting. Especially since it was done for publicity purposes. But at the end of the day they could've spent a few weeks torturing the poor bastard to death. Surely a quick and clean death is better than that. As for the 15 seconds screaming. Who was doing the screaming? It is bloody hard for someone to scream when the first cut was to the front of the throat.

=========
As for these questions:

Why didn't the innocents revolt?
Why are the innocents not pointing out the criminal element we call insurgents and terrorists.
Why didn't the innocents flee when it was obvious that war was on the horizon?
Why don't the innocents take an active hand in the rebuilding and purging of thier own country?
If the Iraqi people don't want us there, why has their newest government asked coalition troops to remain?

Where exactly were people to flee to?
Why should they have to flee their homes?
The majority of Iraqis understand that they still need outside help to stabilise things, but lets face it America is not a good choice due to long-held resentment.

And most people by nature tend to want to keep their heads down. To report on militants would be likely to get you killed. To be seen to be helping the Americans would likewise make one a target (as has been happening alot lately).

 

[scubamike]

Originally posted by Sir Evil
Let me tell you something Scubamike, if you came here expecting to find as many foreign sympathizers as yourself you are in the wrong place! How about scuba diving your ass all the way to Iraq with all your major concerns for the people there you sorry excuse for human life!

I am so terribly sorry that my opinion is not in perfect alignment with yours. Fortunately there is this thing called "freedom of speech". I know it is under threat in the USA but it is alive and well in other democracies.

 

[scubamike]

Originally posted by Sir Evil
Smart asses will quickly loose their freedom of speech on this board, you may want to keep that in mind!

I'm sure we'll be sad to see you go.
:

 

[scubamike]

Originally posted by Sir Evil
Hmmm, I dont see the we in this equation. Imagine me leaving my own board for like's of a newcomer? I dont think so!

So one is only allowed free speech if one runs the board.
I'm sure telling you to "scuba diving your ass all the way to Iraq" would get me banned.

Anyway, I'll repeat:

I am so terribly sorry that my opinion is not in perfect alignment with yours. Fortunately there is this thing called "freedom of speech". I know it is under threat in the USA but it is alive and well in other democracies.

No doubt you'll ban me for my differing opinion but I see that posts persist regardless.
It seems the ones who hand out the most abuse on these boards are the moderators. Sad.

 

[scubamike]

Originally posted by Sir Evil
NEGATIVE What's sad is when someone comes to a board titled the USMB from a foreign land spewing out crap about the poor Iraqi's! Where is it that you made mention to those Americans killed on 9-11? that's not a problem for you?

I have mentioned it. It sucked and Kiwis were killed in it too. Along with dozens of other nationalities. It was a shitty day for a large portion of the western world.

So sorry to rock the boat by offering an alternative viewpoint. Not!!
You know examining other peoples points of view can be enlightening. Try it.
Try thinking about the suffering of those affected directly by US foreign policy.

I would like to offer more balanced posts but everything here seems so one sided so my posts are an attempted counter to that.

Speaking of balanced was just watching a very interesting interview with a Kiwi journalist who has operated alot in the Middle East.
Worth a look, even though it is fairly long.
Interview with Robert Fisk

Anyway, no need for the excessive swearing and biligerent posturing. If your behaviour is an example of fair conduct....
I have seen other people threatened in posts and otherwise made fun of by some of those who are moderators. Just calling it as I see it.

 

[MtnBiker]

scuba, are you saying you don't like the way the board is run?

 

[MtnBiker]

Here is a quote from a member that takes quite the contrary position to most of the moderators and the admin:

Originally posted by Psychoblues
And "balanced" is what makes USMB so special for me, don't you know it, SE? Very few of us agree on many things but we are allowed to post our thoughts and opinions without fear of the dreaded "banishment" unless we might prove disrespectful, disruptive or entirely off base. Even then we seem to have some latitude and that's what makes USMB so good. At least for me.