.... Hmmm! Me thinks, this is a valation of Geneva War Code! Me think, the American are slipping into further Arabian Quicksand! Me heard, the end is near! What do you thinks?
Nasty Little American GI, Shot Dead An Unarmed Iraqis! Crimes Against Humanity!
Marine shown on US networks shooting wounded man in Fallujah mosque
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Several US televison networks aired footage of members of a US marine unit entering a mosque in Fallujah before one marine shot an unarmed, wounded man in the head as he lay prone aganst a wall.
Televisions networks said the marine who killed the wounded man had been detained and could face prosecution.
The reports said the unnamed marine had been wounded in the face the day before the killing but had returned to duty almost immediately.
CBS News showed a still photo from the film depicting the marine standing above the slumped figure aiming his rifle at the man's body.
It aired excerpts of a discussion between the marines.
"He's dead now," one marine in the squad shouts after the shooting.
NBC said the film of the man being shot in the head was "too gruesome" to be seen on screens.
NBC said the dead man, one of about five pictured inside the mosque, was an unarmed insurgent who had been discovered the previous day and been left to await medical attention.
The sequence was captured on film by an embedded camera operator who entered the mosque with the marine squad.
Other networks including CNN, ABC and Fox News also showed the sequence.
Lieutentant Colonel Bob Miller, a military judge leading an investigation into the shooting, told NBC in an interview that the rules of engagement in Iraq (news - web sites) "authorize the marines to use force when presented with a hostile act or hostile intent."
Miller added: "Any wounded -- even in this case wounded -- insurgent, who does not pose a threat would not be considered hostile."
The Defence Department in Washington said it had no information about the incident.
America undressed
The Empire Has No Clothes: US Foreign Policy Exposed by Ivan Eland
Reviewed by David Isenberg
Now that George W Bush has been re-elected president of the United States, neo-conservatives and war hawks, both pundits and policymakers, will likely feel vindicated and even emboldened to
continue on their course of enlarging the American empire, all under the rubric of fighting the global "war on terror". As one of the new political slogans puts it, "four more years, four more wars".
But, as it turns out, wanting a US empire and benefiting from one are markedly different things. This is something not well appreciated in many of the recent books analyzing the American empire. Most of them assume, regardless of the overall morality of the undertaking, that the US has only to snap its militarized fingers and the deed is done, rather like the slogan "resistance is futile" of the Borg in the Star Trek television series, leaving the rest for historians to debate.
Of course, in reality that never happens. All empires, from the Roman to the British, come to an end sooner or later. But the costs are considerable, both to the lands and people absorbed, as well as economically, socially and politically to the imperial country itself.
But in a sound-bite age, few people have the time or inclination to ponder the sweep of history. What is needed then is a primer on the subject, a sort of "Empire for Dummies", laying out in detail the follies of America's current course of action, which is taking it steadily further away from its historical roots as a republic.
Fortunately, we have just such a work in The Empire Has No Clothes. It is a worthy tome written by Ivan Eland, who is senior fellow and director of the Center on Peace and Liberty at the Independent Institute in Oakland, California.
Eland deserves more than a little credit for writing this book. Not just any author can detail the similarities between ancient Sparta and the US-dominated North Atlantic Treaty Organization, for example, but he manages to pull it off quite nicely.
Eland was previously director of defense policy studies at the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, DC, and as such, has observed imperialistic interventions by both right- and left-wing administrations - from George H W Bush, through Bill Clinton to George W Bush himself. His jaundice about their rhetoric and actions is both well documented and well deserved.
He is obviously familiar with all the current proponents of American empire - from imports such as British historian Niall Ferguson, to home-grown pith-helmet and jodhpur-wearing wannabes Robert Kagan and Wall Street Journal essayist Max Boot - and their arguments and smoothly picks them apart. One of his favorite targets by the way is Boot; he can't resist pointing out his contradictions, as in this passage:
Even Max Boot of the Council on Foreign Relations, a staunch proponent of military intervention for spreading democracy and free markets, admits that imposing liberal democracies by force in the developing world has been less than successful (yet he still advocates attempting to do so).
Observations like these are fairly frequent and quite entertaining, and it's worth buying the book for these alone. The layout of the book is straightforward. The first chapter is a relatively brief survey of the American empire. It plows familiar ground, but sets the stage for analyzing the current stage of American military interventionism.
The second chapter is devoted to answering the question - as if there is really any debate here - of whether the US truly has an empire. After conclusively demonstrating that yes, Virginia, there really is an empire, he moves on to a discussion of the more useful question as to why it has one; ie, security, domestic causes, democratic peace theory, that is, democracies don't fight each other, a proposition that was proved false in World War I.
He then explains how the current American empire is, in fact, worse than its predecessors in that it has none of the benefits and all the disadvantages of traditional empires, such as nationalism, as the US is now facing in Iraq.
But the next two chapters are the heart of the book. They are why conservatives and liberals, respectively, should be against empire. Those who appreciate irony will find lots to amuse them here. For example, how is it that a Republican Party that once sincerely believed in not just limited, but minimal, government, has become an unabashed supporter of continued, massive military mobilization, the greatest enlarger of government bureaucracies known to humanity? As Eland writes, "American societal mobilization to fight World War II surpassed even the massive effort during World War I. The US government's tentacles slithered ever deeper into civil society."
Increased government growth and spending, the corresponding damage caused to economic growth and the economic costs of paying for successive wars are neatly summarized here as well.
Another target for Eland is the concept of using military force to spread "free markets"; what can be called the neo-mercantilist argument. Evidently there are those who really believe that capitalism and democracy can be spread at the point of a bayonet. If it sounds ridiculous, it is only because it is, and Eland has a fun time demolishing the argument.
The chapter on why liberals should oppose empire is equally, if not more, informative and entertaining. After reading this section nobody will ever be able to utter the words Woodrow Wilson and liberal with a straight face. In Eland's view this is the old left, but one that resonates to this day, just under new names, such as the "engagement and enlargement" of the Clinton years, or what the former president's secretary of state Madeleine Albright euphemistically called "assertive multilateralism".
Interestingly, in light of the reported contributions that Christian evangelicals made to Bush's re-election, Eland notes that Wilsonianism preceded Wilson and was rooted in the desire of Christian missionaries to save savage and inferior peoples and vanquish evildoers. Fast-forward 90 years and find the "axis of evil". Coincidence? I don't think so.
The final chapter dwells on what is an appropriate policy for the current age. Like the first chapter, much of this is familiar and represents the usual solutions offered up by the anti-empire crowd, such as conducting an offshore balancing strategy, abandoning outdated alliances, focusing on key regions, letting rich allies defend themselves, using a narrower definition of "protection of trade" and "vital interests", and stopping worries about maintaining access to cheap oil.
Left unsaid, however, is that very few, if any, of these options are likely to be adopted during the next four years of the Bush administration. Perhaps the costs of maintaining the American empire will have to become even more evident before American can return to a more traditional foreign policy.
The Empire Has No Clothes: US Foreign Policy Exposed by Ivan Eland. The Independent Institute, Oakland, California, 2004. ISBN: 0-945999-98-4. Price US$24.95, 304 pages.
David Isenberg, a senior analyst with the Washington-based British American Security Information Council (BASIC), has a wide background in arms control and national security issues. The views expressed are his own.
(Copyright 2004 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com for information on our sales and syndication policies.)
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 7:22 AM
This is what I found on yahoo.com:
U.S. to Probe Shooting of Wounded Iraqi:
By STEVEN R. HURST, Associated Press Writer:
NEW YORK - The U.S. military is investigating the videotaped fatal shooting of a wounded and apparently unarmed Iraqi prisoner by a U.S. Marine in a mosque in the former insurgent stronghold of Fallujah, a Marine spokesman said.
The incident played out as the Marines 3rd Battalion, 1st Regiment, returned to the unidentified Fallujah mosque Saturday. Sites was embedded with the unit.
Sites reported that a different Marine unit had come under fire from the mosque on Friday. Those Marines stormed the building, killing ten men and wounding five, Sites said. The Marines said the fighters in the mosque had been armed with rocket-propelled grenades and AK-47 rifles.
The Marines had treated the wounded, he reported, left them behind and continued on Friday with their drive to retake the city from insurgents who have been battling U.S.-led occupation forces in Iraq (news - web sites) with increasing ferocity and violence in recent months.
The same five men were still in the mosque on Saturday, Sites reported.
On the video, as the camera moved into the mosque during the Saturday incident, a Marine can be heard shouting obscenities in the background, yelling that one of the men was only pretending to be dead.
"He's (expletive) faking he's dead!"
"Yeah, he's breathing," another Marine is heard saying.
"He's faking he's (expletive) dead!" the first Marine says.
The video then showed a Marine raising his rifle toward a prisoner lying on the floor of the mosque. The video shown by NBC and provided to the network pool was blacked out at that point and did not show the bullet hitting the man. But a rifle shot could be heard.
"He's dead now," a Marine is heard saying.
The blacked out portion of the video tape, provided later to Associated Press Television News and other members of the network pool, showed the bullet striking the man in the upper body, possibly the head. His blood splatters on the wall behind him and his body goes limp.
Sites reported a Marine in the same unit had been killed just a day earlier when he tended to the booby-trapped dead body of an insurgent.
NBC reported that the Marine seen shooting the wounded Iraqi had himself been shot in the face the day before, but quickly returned to duty.
A spokesman at Marine Corps headquarters in the Pentagon (news - web sites), Maj. Doug Powell, said the incident was "being investigated." He had no further details, other than to confirm the incident happened on Saturday and that the Marines involved were part of the 1st Marine Division.
On Tuesday, the U.S. military said in a statement that the 1st Marine Division is investigating an allegation of the unlawful use of force in the death of an enemy combatant in Fallujah during combat operations on Saturday.
The Marine has been withdrawn from the battlefield pending the results of the investigation, the U.S. military said.
"We follow the law of armed conflict and hold ourselves to a high standard of accountability," said Lt. Gen. John F. Sattler, commanding general of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force. "The facts of this case will be thoroughly pursued to make an informed decision and to protect the rights of all persons involved."
Lt. Col. Bob Miller, who NBC said is heading the investigation, told the network that the rules of engagement allow the use of force in self-defense.
"Any wounded — in this case insurgents — who don't pose a threat would not be considered hostile," said Miller.
The events on the videotape began as some of the Marines from the unit accompanied by Sites approached the mosque on Saturday, a day after it was stormed by other Marines.
Gunfire can be heard from inside the mosque, and at its entrance, Marines who were already in the building emerge. They are asked by an approaching Marine lieutenant if there were insurgents inside and if the Marines had shot any of them. A Marine can be heard responding affirmatively. The lieutenant then asks if they were armed and fellow Marine shrugs.
Sites' account said the wounded men, who he said were prisoners and who were hurt in the previous day's attack, had been shot again by the Marines on the Saturday visit.
The videotape showed two of the wounded men propped against the wall and Sites said they were bleeding to death. According to his report, a third wounded man appeared already dead, while a fourth was severely wounded but breathing. The fifth was covered by a blanket but did not appear to have been shot again after the Marines returned. It was the fourth man who was shown being shot.
The CNN broadcast of the pictures used pixilation to cover parts of the video that could lead to public identification of the Marines involved.
NBC's Robert Padavick told members of the U.S. television pool that the Pentagon had ordered NBC and other pool members to make sure the Marine's identity was hidden because "they (the military authorities) are anticipating a criminal investigation as a result of this incident and do not want to implicate anybody ahead of that."
In New York, NBC spokeswoman Allison Gollust said the network did not broadcast the prisoner being shot because of the "graphic nature" of the video.
In this image taken from pool video provided to the Associated Press by NBC News, a U.S. marine is seen, left, raising his rifle in the direction of Iraqi prisoners lying on the floor of a mosque in Fallujah, Iraq (news - web sites) Saturday Nov. 13, 2004. The pool video was recorded Saturday as the Marines returned to an unidentified Fallujah mosque. The video, in a version aired by CNN showed the Marine raising his rifle toward the prisoners but neither NBC nor CNN showed the shooting itself. The video was blacked out but the report of the rifle could be heard. The bodies in the foreground are other Iraqi prisoners. (AP Photo/NBC News, Pool)
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 7:33 AM
""We follow the law of armed conflict and hold ourselves to a high standard of accountability," said Lt. Gen. John F. Sattler, commanding general of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force. "The facts of this case will be thoroughly pursued to make an informed decision and to protect the rights of all persons involved.""
- This is full of BS; USA never follows Geneva War Code, in all her wars! This is why USA tried to get out of UN war crimes and never allows any of her Imperial Killer to stand trial outside of USA!
- Just look up Tiger Force; you will see how much war crimes commited by the American in Vietnam.
- Great, the more war crimes commited by the American; which means their moral is further deepen into the sink hole! Only time, and continue to meat grinding the American inside Iraq. For each and every one of these freedom fighters the American kills; there sprint another 100 more, lets see how long can the American stay inside Iraq!
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 7:41 AM
Well, these are the realities of war, there is no point in trying to say these savage acts don’t take place often in wars, or some how the American solders have a much higher moral convictions, and these things shouldn’t be expected from them, they are trained to kill after all. But what is odd is they way the Iraqis have stayed quiet, the way the Iraqis are acting, you’d think they like being occupied.
It has taken the Americans almost the same time to subdue a few hundred resistance fighters in Falluja as it took them to invade Iraq. If the Iraqis had really don't liked being occupied, more than a few hundred of them would have stayed behind and fought the Americans.
If you are weak, lazy and pathetic, and are sitting on top of allot of oil, like the Iraqis are, then you are asking to be invaded. Well, if they like being occupied, they should like the consequences that come with being occupied, and here you see some of the consequences!
THE WORLD IS A BRIDGE, CROSS IT, BUT BUILD NO HOUSE UPON IT!
“IS THERE LIFE AFTER DEATH? ... TRESSPASS HERE AND FIND OUT”
CIA agent Geoffrey Kemp talking about Saddam Hussein:
“WE KNEW HE WAS A SON OF A BITCH, BUT HE WAS OUR SON OF A BITCH”
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 7:45 AM
"But what is odd is they way the Iraqis have stayed quiet, the way the Iraqis are acting, you’d think they like being occupied."- they probably like to see americans getting killed.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 7:55 AM
Comrade Hadi
"It has taken the Americans almost the same time to subdue a few hundred resistance fighters in Falluja as it took them to invade Iraq. If the Iraqis had really don't liked being occupied, more than a few hundred of them would have stayed behind and fought the Americans."
- This is where I have to disagree; for the Iraqis Freedom fighters, it is far more important for them not to fight a big macho front to front war with American. For this will fully destroy their strength and hard core of fighters.
- It is far more important to spread out, continue to bleed and kills the American slowly; this way, you maximized your strength(to preserve) and to fight more effective against the American might.
- It is far more important for the Iraqis to target the weak point of the American military(truck convoy, pipe line, oil storage...etc); makes this economic hell for the American occupation of Iraq. This is the way to win over the American; is to bleed them over years, rather then to fight them hard on one or two fights! In an all out front-to-front war; the Iraqis will lost, continue to degrade the American moral is the key to winning this battle.
- So far, the Iraqis are winning this war; just liken in Vietnam! In fact, Iraqis done far better then the North Vietnamese because it told them(VC) far longer time to fully strained the American military during the Vietnam War. Now you needed to feed and supply the American with good Arabian Hash Oil; let the moral of the American troops to further degrade in animals liken in Vietnam, they don't knows when the next KABBOOOOM is going to kill them!<br /> Sooner or later, the American public will get tired of this foreign war; that is the day when America will quit and pull out! Let them claim their hollow victory; for the end game, the Iraqis will be laughing at the American in this war!
- You hide in the dark, while the American GI stand in the light; you takes your sneaky crack shot at them and to kill them! They can not fully defense against these type of attacks. Trading space(Fallajah) for Time, is the most prudent way to fight the American.
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 8:25 AM
Dragon my main man, I’m not at all suggesting that the resistance should stand toe to toe against a much more superior force that are the American, on the contrary, I’m suggesting that a guerrilla war will be the winning formula, the problem for the Iraqis is that it seems only a very small fraction of the population is actually actively hostile and prepared to take up arms against the invaders.
In Afghanistan for example, there was an estimated 1 million Afghanis fighting the Soviets, and that’s how they manage to throw out the soviet invaders. If the Iraqis go on fighting a pathetic war like this, when only 1100 odd American soldiers have died from the beginning of the invasion one and a hlf years ago, then it will take them for eternity to convince the Americans that this war is not winnable. In fact, the Americans should take allot of solace as to how easy the war has been so far, hence the re-election of Bush!
THE WORLD IS A BRIDGE, CROSS IT, BUT BUILD NO HOUSE UPON IT!
“IS THERE LIFE AFTER DEATH? ... TRESSPASS HERE AND FIND OUT”
CIA agent Geoffrey Kemp talking about Saddam Hussein:
“WE KNEW HE WAS A SON OF A BITCH, BUT HE WAS OUR SON OF A BITCH”
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 8:38 AM
"Dragon my main man, I?m not at all suggesting that the resistance should stand toe to toe against a much more superior force that are the American, on the contrary, I?m suggesting that a guerrilla war will be the winning formula, the problem for the Iraqis is that it seems only a very small fraction of the population is actually actively hostile and prepared to take up arms against the invaders."
- Given the fact of the Shiite, Sunni and Kurds makes up of Iraqis; it is hard pressed for them to stand unified against the American. The American are using the well tested theory of "Divided and Conquest" employed by them Stinky British! Until an overwhelme majority Shiite stand up and to fight; you will continue to see small fractional fighting liken now!
- When comes the election in January; should the majority Shiite win the vote, but denial of real power inside Iraq...... there is going to be a strong chances that Shiite Muslims will raise up and to fight the American hard! Right now, me thinking the Shiite leaders ship is keeping her power dry; see if they can win the election and control of Iraq without a firefights. But, the American days inside Iraq is numbered; what ever the outcome of January Iraqis election, this will only polarized the population and makes it even more difficult for the American to rule over Iraq. Give it few more months, the American are deeply into quicksand; just wait and see!
"In Afghanistan for example, there was an estimated 1 million Afghanis fighting the Soviets, and that?s how they manage to throw out the soviet invaders. If the Iraqis go on fighting a pathetic war like this, when only 1100 odd American soldiers have died from the beginning of the invasion one and a hlf years ago, then it will take them for eternity to convince the Americans that this war is not winnable. In fact, the Americans should take allot of solace as to how easy the war has been so far, hence the re-election of Bush!"
- The game is only started; remember, it told America few years to slowly gear up and to fully engaged with the Vietnamese. Now, with in less then 2 years; the USA military already showing cracks and strain. You thinks they can continue to sent over volunteer soldiers who may have a better job waiting for them at home! Unless the American are ready for the national drafts(which I doubt the public support); there is no way in hell the current American forces is able to subjugated the Iraqis.
- Also, in this coming 2005-2008; there is a very strong chance for a China-Taiwan war....... now, how is America going to find man and money to fight this even larger war! I thinks, American public opinions already at 50%; just continue to bleed the American, they will crack just liken in Vietnam.
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 9:00 AM
I think Hadi is saying that the Iraqis were lazy and incompetant in the first place, and should have gotten the wake up call after 1991 to become self-sufficient. Of course it doesn't help that Saddam Hussein has always been a moron and burned his bridges with the Arab world. Nevertheless, he could have found ways to educate the people to a much higher standard and develop the core industries at home.
But enough of the hindsight, this resistance is inefficient. If this resistance had been led by Chairman Mao, Ho Chi Minh or Deng Xiaoping, US casualties would be far higher. In fact, if any of the aforementioned leaders were in charge of Iraq prior to the invasion then the US would still be trying to conquer Iraq today.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 9:05 AM
Also, in this coming 2005-2008; there is a very strong chance for a China-Taiwan war....... now, how is America going to find man and money to fight this even larger war! I thinks, American public opinions already at 50%; just continue to bleed the American, they will crack just liken in Vietnam.
If the Iraqi resistance can drag it on then this can actually help China by degrading US public support for another major war. If American support for Chen Shuibian could be limited to arms shipments then that is not too bad, but then again any active American aid would be considered an act of war.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 1:18 PM
@Comrade
"If the Iraqi resistance can drag it on then this can actually help China by degrading US public support for another major war. If American support for Chen Shuibian could be limited to arms shipments then that is not too bad, but then again any active American aid would be considered an act of war."
- I have a sneaky feeling that USA wanting to stage the China-Taiwan war before our 2008 Olympic; this is one reason why IQ Bush and his neo-hawks are head rush into Iraq, to subjugate them Iraqis and to control the oil tap in middle east before China getting too strong. The American fully aware that once China regained our full strength, the USA will not be able to fight us in the future; so it is better to kill the dragon baby(China) in the womb then to allows for the baby grow into a full 30,000 lbs Dragon! IMHO
- If you look at all the American attack movements(first Venezuela, Iraq, Suddan, Iran, North Korea...etc); it all pointed to a graduals containment and to restricts China Oil imports route.
"I think Hadi is saying that the Iraqis were lazy and incompetant in the first place, and should have gotten the wake up call after 1991 to become self-sufficient. Of course it doesn't help that Saddam Hussein has always been a moron and burned his bridges with the Arab world. Nevertheless, he could have found ways to educate the people to a much higher standard and develop the core industries at home.
But enough of the hindsight, this resistance is inefficient. If this resistance had been led by Chairman Mao, Ho Chi Minh or Deng Xiaoping, US casualties would be far higher. In fact, if any of the aforementioned leaders were in charge of Iraq prior to the invasion then the US would still be trying to conquer Iraq today."
- In this hold sorry asss affair of Iraqis war; what is most despicable is the ways Iraqis Generals being brought and paid for not to fight the American in full strength. Agreed that it was Saddam own failure to hired and listen to impotent Generals; who only ideas it to mojo their own citizens. If Saddam had been a smart leader; he would have promoted Generals through warfare skills and smart IQ, instead of groupies who liken to lick his shoe! In the end, it is not so much of the Iraqis army who let down the Iraqis population; it is the Saddam leadership style and his General who let down the population.
- Until the next Iraqis strong man comes along; the Iraqis at best is to fight in today fashion, by trial and errors..... a more capable Iraqis leader will learn and emerge in time of conflict. Who knows, the hatred American forces currently deployed inside Iraq; are ferment ground to feed and nurture the next generation of Iraqis who will be stronger leader for the futures. Let just wait and see how this Iraqis War penned out! In the long run; America is not going to win over Iraq, because there are too much interest world wide to allows Iraqis to be turn into American states.
- In a funny ways, it was a good fortune for us; because now the American are fully quicksand inside Iraq, they wanting to turn the table on China....... but in turns, get trap by their own greed. I said, let them rott inside Iraq! Now that nutcase OBL is getting more stronger and more popular within the Muslims communities; who knows, nutcase OBL may be the ticket and leader to fight the West-Muslims holy war! My friend "Time The Equalizer" will tell the truth! Let see who get the last laughs!
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 1:27 PM
It's ironic you bring up Osama bin Laden. Not only are US forces getting bogged down in Iraq (I believe a retired US general said Iraq has tied down 8 of 10 US army divisions and 2 of 3 Marine Corps divisions) but they are allowing bin Laden to not only regroup his "armies" but also regain credability throughout the Moslem world. Ultimately, the USA is making a self-fulfilling prophecy of transforming Iraq into the next Afghanistan, if they haven't done so already. What's worse (for US interests,) they are also sowing the seeds for the emergence of a new Caliphate, i.e. supreme Moslem governor. Can you imagine if this Caliphate were able to get the whole Arab world to act in a coordinated manner?
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 1:38 PM
"It's ironic you bring up Osama bin Laden. Not only are US forces getting bogged down in Iraq (I believe a retired US general said Iraq has tied down 8 of 10 US army divisions and 2 of 3 Marine Corps divisions) but they are allowing bin Laden to not only regroup his "armies" but also regain credability throughout the Moslem world. Ultimately, the USA is making a self-fulfilling prophecy of transforming Iraq into the next Afghanistan, if they haven't done so already. What's worse (for US interests,) they are also sowing the seeds for the emergence of a new Caliphate, i.e. supreme Moslem governor. Can you imagine if this Caliphate were able to get the whole Arab world to act in a coordinated manner?"
- Comrade, at this rate of American JDAMing the Muslims; I would not be surprise that a second coming of Muhammad is in the work and to unified to create a Pax_Muslims movement. It is out of chaos, suffering, and turmoil which forges a strong leader! Just look at Lion of Afghanistan(forgot his name); who raise through the ranks by fighting the Soviet Russian, he have the stuff where legions are make from! In this funny sense; OBL is gaining popularity, the longer he stay alive and more he carry out attack into USA. If OBL successively carry out another daring attack into USA liken 9/11; you bet your ass, his follower groups will get tremendous support.
- Me thinks, a Pax_Arabian force is long time overdue; the Arabs brotherhood needed to unified behind a strong man, and to resist the Western aggression! Me say, someone liken our Great Mao should like the fire in Arabian Sand!
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 5:50 PM
They were showing this on Russian TV the US soldier was screaming he’s faking it he’s faking it then he Iraqi put his hands up and got shot. Dragon sorry to say its not against the Geneva convention because they have no uniforms, they are not soldiers they are insurgents so they are as bad as spies so they can be shot on the spot.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Exactly...what are the Justifications given for him to shoot him. of coarse they are not mentioned they just want attention to support people who do not want the war to continue.
I guarntee this has already happened but no one has known about it till now
"An Invasion through Canada into the US would become a disaster, they are the only country that does not follow their doctrine, unpredictability and innovation is what scares the russian bear" - Russian Infantry Officer shortly after the cold war
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 7:03 PM
LOL!Good work!This soldier can work in my platoon.Dont play in service.The enemy is cruel and have,like the evil,thousands faces,you need,like occupation force soldier dont give space to any surprize of the mads home warriers/terrorists.These soldier,if under my command will get a medal for this right action.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 11:42 PM
@skinheadbhudda
"what are you bitching about chinaboy? Afraid we will out do japan when we lite your asses on fire?"
- Oh yeah, are you a Smelly Troll who wanting to chat with Ol' boy? Are you one of my known Smelly Troll; for you needed not to hide and sneaky around! You wanting to chat, sure bring them on!
- What possible can you Fatso American do to us Chinese; when we already sent your forefather running liken a yellow dog in Korea! What is the matter with you lots; don't you read your longest Marine defeat/retreat in your short human history? You ain't scare of them Yellow LaundryMan up North; Demanded From Yellow General DM! Haa! Haa!
- So, me gather you most proud of your GI Joe shooting unarmed freedom fighters? What with you, are you one of them blood crazy red neck; who have little value on human being life?
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 11:46 PM
what war are you refferring to? I don't recall running from a bunch of screaming chinese who were mowed down easily. I laugh about the chinese fighting ability they can't fight nations who are 1/10th the size.
losers=china
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Re: US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
No score for this post
November 16 2004, 11:52 PM
"what war are you refferring to? I don't recall running from a bunch of screaming chinese who were mowed down easily. I laugh about the chinese fighting ability they can't fight nations who are 1/10th the size.
losers=china"
- My god, are you a real Hick village idots from your deep south; me heard about hill billies liken yourself. Don't you maggot every read your trashy history; don't you Lump-Nut learn your yellow forefather in Korea! You wanting a picture for me to show how yellow is your forefather?
THE ROVING EYE Counterinsurgency run amok By Pepe Escobar
"The people who are doing the beheadings are extremists ... the people slaughtering Iraqis - torturing in prisons and shooting wounded prisoners - are 'American heroes'. Congratulations, you must be so proud of yourselves today." - Iraqi girl blogger Riverbend
Whom are you going to trust: Fallujah civilians who risked their lives to escape, witnesses such as Associated Press photographer Bilal Hussein, hospital doctors, Amnesty International, top United Nations human-rights official Louise Arbour, the International Committee of the Red Cross; or the Pentagon and US-installed Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi?
On the humanitarian front, Fallujah is a tragedy. The city has virtually been reduced to rubble. Remaining residents, the Red Cross confirms, are eating roots and burying the dead in their gardens. There's no medicine in the hospitals to help anybody. The wounded are left to die in the streets - their remains to be consumed by packs of stray dogs. As Iraqresistance.net, a Europe-wide collective, puts it, "World governments, international organizations, nobody raises a finger to stop the killing." The global reaction is apathy.
Civilians? What civilians? Asia Times Online sources in Baghdad confirm the anger across the Sunni heartland - even among moderates - against the occupation and Allawi has reached incendiary proportions. His credibility - already low before the Fallujah massacre - is now completely gone.
Allawi insists on the record that not a single civilian has died in Fallujah. Obviously nobody in his cabinet told him what Baghdad is talking about - the hundreds of rotting corpses in the streets, the thousands of civilians still trapped inside their homes, starving, many of them wounded, with no water and no medical aid. And nobody has told him of dozens of children now in Baghdad's Naaman hospital who lost their limbs, victims of US air strikes and artillery shells.
A top Red Cross official in Baghdad now estimates that at least 800 civilians have been killed so far - and this is a "low" figure, based on accounts by Red Crescent aid workers barred by the Americans from entering the city, residents still inside Fallujah, and refugees now huddling in camps in the desert near Fallujah. The refugees tell horror stories - including confirmation, already reported by Asia Times Online, of the Americans using cluster bombs and spraying white phosphorus, a banned chemical weapon.
The talk in the streets of Baghdad, always referring to accounts by families and friends in and around Fallujah, confirms that there have been hundreds of civilian deaths. Moreover, according to the Red Cross official, since September Allawi's Ministry of Health has not provided any medical supplies to hospitals and clinics in Fallujah: "The hospitals do not even have aspirin," he said, confirming many accounts in these past few days from despairing Fallujah doctors. The official spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of US military reprisal.
Even submitted to media blackout - an al-Arabiya reporter, for instance, was arrested by the Americans because he was trying to enter Fallujah - the Arab press is slowly waking up to the full extent of the tragedy, not only on networks such as al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya, but also in newspapers like the pro-American Saudi daily Asharq a-Awsat. Our sources say that most of Baghdad and the whole Sunni triangle is already convinced that the Americans "captured" Fallujah general hospital, bombed at least two clinics and are preventing the Red Crescent from delivering urgent help because as many bodies as possible must be removed before any independent observers have a chance to evaluate the real extent of the carnage.
Al-Jazeera continues to apologize for not offering more in-depth coverage, always reminding its viewers that its Baghdad bureau was shut down indefinitely by Allawi in August. But many in the Arab world saw its interview with Dr Asma Khamis al-Muhannadi of Fallujah's general hospital, invaded and "captured" by the marines. She confirmed that "we were tied up and beaten despite being unarmed and having only our medical instruments"; and that the hospital was targeted by bombs and rockets during the initial siege of Fallujah. When the marines came she "was with a woman in labor. The umbilical cord had not yet been cut. At that time, a US soldier shouted at one of the [Iraqi] National Guards to arrest me and tie my hands while I was helping the mother to deliver. I will never forget this incident in my life."
Crucially, Dr al-Muhannadi also confirmed that American snipers killed more than 17 Iraqi doctors who had mobilized to answer an appeal from Fallujah's doctors broadcast on al-Jazeera: information on the massacre has been circulating in Baghdad for days. Amnesty International, based on the account of a doctor at the scene, says that 20 Fallujah medical staff and dozens of civilians were killed when an American missile destroyed a clinic on November 9.
The failure of 'Iraqification' On the military front, roughly 3,000 urban guerrillas with mortars, Kalashnikovs and rocket-propelled grenades have resisted more than 12,000 marines supported by F-16s, AC-130 gunships, Cobra and Apache helicopters, an array of missiles, 500-pound and 2,000-pound bombs, tanks and Bradleys. Sources in Baghdad close to the resistance tell Asia Times Online that at least 200 marines are dead, and more than 800 wounded. The Pentagon - exercising total media blackout - will only admit to about 50 dead and 350 wounded. Allawi and his cabinet are spinning more than 1,600 "insurgents" dead; the resistance so far only admits to a little more than 100.
The resistance says that dozens of marine snipers have taken six or seven positions along Tharthar Street, the main street leading to Ramadi, and a few buildings overlooking the Euphrates in western Fallujah. But residents seem to be free to move in the narrow alleyways: the Americans only control the main roads. According to resistance reports, the mujahideen are constantly changing their positions, moving apparently undetected inside the areas they still control and reinforcing different neighborhoods with more cells of five to 20 fighters each.
"Iraqification" - the Mesopotamian counterpart of Vietnamization - is floundering. After 19 months of occupation, the Pentagon still has not been able to put an Iraqi army in place. Baghdad sources confirm the backup plan has been to give US troops a counterinsurgency field manual. (The exhaustive 182-page document will be discussed in a separate article.)
During the Vietnam War, counterinsurgency was conducted by Special Forces. In Vietnam, the US simply did not understand that the force of the resistance was its complex clandestine infrastructure. By killing indiscriminately in covert operations like Operation Phoenix, the Americans totally alienated the average Vietnamese.
In Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire (Penguin Press, New York, 2004), Tony Negri and Michael Hardt, discussing counterinsurgencies, point out how "guerrilla forces cannot survive without the support of the population and a superior knowledge of the social and physical terrain". They could be describing the guerrillas in the Sunni triangle. "Guerrillas force the dominant military power to live in a state of perpetual paranoia." In asymmetrical wars like Vietnam and Iraq, US counterinsurgency tactics must not only lead to a military victory but to control of the enemy with "social, political, ideological and psychological weapons". There's ample evidence these tactics are failing in Iraq.
Like a fish out of water Negri and Hardt argue that in counterinsurgency "success does not require attacking the enemy directly but destroying the environment, physical and social, that supports it. Take away the water and the fish will die. This strategy of destroying the support environment led, for example, to indiscriminate bombings in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, to widespread killing, torture and harassment of peasants in Central and South America." This - "take away the water and the fish will die" - is exactly what's happening in Fallujah. And it won't work, because "the many noncombatants who suffer cannot be called collateral damage because they are in fact the direct targets, even if their destruction is really a means to attack the primary enemy". Fallujah's population has been the direct target this time - the "water" that was essential to the resistance "fish".
But the "fish" are always able to turn the tables "as the rebellious groups develop more complex, distributed network structures. As the enemy becomes increasingly dispersed, unlocalizable, and unknowable, the support environment becomes increasingly large and indiscriminate." This is exactly the post-Fallujah scenario - see The real fury of Fallujah, November 10.
The political infrastructure in Iraq controlled by the Ba'ath Party for many decades has integrated most of the Islamic resistance groups under its command with great efficiency. It has also managed to infiltrate and smash the Iraqi counterinsurgency force that the Americans were trying to assemble. The new counterinsurgency field manual means that unlike Vietnam, counterinsurgency is now being conducted by marines and GIs. Intuitively, the totally alienated population of the Sunni triangle (the "water") has already identified the threat.
Iraqification mimics Vietnamization in at least one aspect: the logic of collective punishment (once again "take away the water and the fish will die"). The Fallujah assault proved that for the Pentagon every Sunni Iraqi is the enemy.
The Pentagon maintains there are no civilians in Fallujah. The horror faced by these "invisible" civilians has not even begun to emerge, even though precision-strike democracy is being denounced by those who risked their lives to escape. The "water" is represented by the "invisible" civilian population in Fallujah.
In yet another echo of Vietnam, for the Pentagon any dead Iraqi in Fallujah is a dead guerrilla fighter - and just like in Vietnam this figure includes "noncombatants", women and children. In Fallujah, the Pentagon declared, after fully encircling the city, that women, children and the elderly might leave, but not men and boys from ages 15 to 55. This implies that most of the 50,000 to 100,000 civilians trapped in the city may be these men and boys - many with no taste for war - along with the unlucky elderly, women and children who were too poor to leave. But under Pentagon logic the problem is solved: everyone inside the city is a fighter. Thus no need for relief from the Iraqi Red Crescent or anyone else.
Counterinsurgency meets 'invisible' civilians In a press conference in Baghdad, Allawi's Interior Minister Faleh Hassan al-Naqib finally was forced to admit what Asia Times Online and an array of independent media have been reporting since the spring of 2003: that the resistance spans the whole Sunni heartland, not only Fallujah and the Sunni triangle (a lot of "water" for a few thousand "fish"); that the resistance is unified under some form of central command and control, and is not a bunch of uncoordinated groups; that the majority, at least 95%, are Iraqis, and not "foreign fighters" (thus ridiculing the Pentagon's designation of the resistance as "anti-Iraqi forces"); that former Ba'ath Party officials and former Iraqi army officers are essential protagonists; and that they have prepared for urban guerrilla warfare long before the US invasion.
With Fallujah, the guerrilla strategy has changed. No more occupying a territory that could be organized as a safe haven (the city of Fallujah, for instance). The guerrillas are now network-centered. Negri and Hardt: "The network tends to transform every boundary into a threshold. Networks are in this sense essentially elusive, ephemeral, perpetually in flight ... And, even more frighteningly, the network can appear anywhere at any time." Think of the new Iraqi resistance as small, mobile armies striking in Baqubah, Samarra and Mosul, running away and melting into the local population, which fully supports them. This is pure Vietminh tactics - Saddam Hussein's officers were all keen students of the Vietnam War.
The Americans in Iraq are now confronting a network enemy. Negri and Hardt say that "confronting a network enemy can certainly throw an old form of power into a state of universal paranoia". Thus the fiction of "invisible" civilians in Fallujah. Thus the "capture" of Fallujah general hospital. Thus destroying Fallujah in order to "save it". Thus the marine executing a wounded man, on camera, inside a mosque. Thus the Vietnam nightmare all over again.
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
"An Invasion through Canada into the US would become a disaster, they are the only country that does not follow their doctrine, unpredictability and innovation is what scares the russian bear" - Russian Infantry Officer shortly after the cold war
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.
Current Topic - US Soldiers Shooting Unarmed Wounded POW.......
E Tan, E Epi Tas! on loan! 
