The truth of what happened in Falluja?

[shamrock_uk]

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...C060978A07.htm

Many will doubt the source of course, but there's no denying that it corresponds with the Guardian article it refers to or that it contains a lot of testimonial. Plus doctors are fairly educated people and not your average foaming-at-the-mouth insurgent. Anyway, the picture it paints is pretty harrowing with some terrifying testimonial from doctors and surviving children. As for whether they're lying, its hard to know since the US doesn't release civilian casualty figures.

Not sure whether its part of a wider strategy of clamping down on the leaking of civilian casualty figures, but the US does seem to be getting mighty fond of raiding hospitals. And forbidding doctors to talk to the press?

A brief section quoting some Western media:

Targeting media Journalist and writer Naomi Klein has also come under attack for insisting that US forces are eliminating those who dare to count casualties. No less than the US ambassador to the UK David Johnson wrote a letter to British newspaper The Guardian that published Klein's work, demanding evidence, which she then provided. The first piece of evidence Klein sent to Johnson was that the hospital in Falluja was raided to stop any reporting of casualties, a tactic that was later repeated in Mosul. "The first major operation by US marines and Iraqi soldiers was to storm Falluja general hospital, arresting doctors and placing the facility under military control. "The New York Times reported that 'the hospital was selected as an early target because the American military believed that it was the source of rumours about heavy casualties', noting that 'this time around, the American military intends to fight its own information war, countering or squelching what has been one of the insurgents' most potent weapons'. The Los Angeles Times quoted a doctor as saying that the soldiers 'stole the mobile phones' at the hospital - preventing doctors from communicating with the outside world."

And I really have to include this quote at the end:

But as Richard Perle, a senior adviser to US President George Bush said at the start of the Iraq war: "The greatest triumph of the Iraq war is the destruction of the evil of international law."

[ 04-07-2005, 03:49 PM: Message edited by: shamrock_uk ]

[pritchke]

I don't dispute the article but it does seem almost unbelievable, the house raids seem almost criminal.

Could it be possible that there is a small group of soldiers that raid houses, loot them, and shoot any witnesses while on duty or even off duty? This would not surpries me as much as if they were doing this under direct orders which I doubt. There is always a criminal element to any organization.

[ 04-07-2005, 03:56 PM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

[shamrock_uk]

Oh, I just don't know

Maybe that is the most likely explanation. I just wish I could be a fly on the wall sometimes without having to rely on second-hand accounts.

Having said that, given it is Falluja, I watched one American officer giving a speech to his troops just before they attacked - something along the lines of "Satan waits for you behind those walls, we're gonna kick his ass". Sorry, it's horribly paraphrased, but it was definitely 'Satan' and how they were going to kill him - these troops were getting fired up by all this religious nonsense so maybe it's not inconceivable.

The attitude that 'well we told civilians to leave so whoevers left is a terrorist' was a ridiculous one too. Picture how many American's would have refused to leave their homes if the Soviets have invaded: "I was born here, I grew up here, I'm not leaving my house for no-one" - its a perfectly natural reaction.

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by shamrock_uk: The attitude that 'well we told civilians to leave so whoevers left is a terrorist' was a ridiculous one too. Picture how many American's would have refused to leave their homes if the Soviets have invaded: "I was born here, I grew up here, I'm not leaving my house for no-one" - its a perfectly natural reaction.

Of course it is a perfectly natural reaction, given the illustration you used This REDNECK would not leave his house alive, and YES I would gladly wear the mantle of terrorist under those circumstances. What is ridiculous is to complain/wine/whatever when one makes a choice to stay, accept the consequences of the actions one has chosen. I have little if any sympothy for somebody that is told "Don't be in town when we get there because we are going to kill everything in town." Given that the inteity telling them this is capitable of doing Exactlly that and has shown in the past they have the will to do so. If they stay "to bad so sad". If they chose not to leave, they made their choice if they chose to leave they made their choice. either way they have to deal with the consquences of their actions weither they have what it takes to accept the consequences of their choice or not. Here's a reality of life "you rarely get what you think you deserve, but you ALWAYS deserve what you get."

[pritchke]

[quote]Originally posted by John D Harris:

Originally posted by shamrock_uk: [qb] Here's a reality of life "you rarely get what you think you deserve, but you ALWAYS deserve what you get."

So, if some criminal goes up and shoots your kid in the head and kills them both you and your kid deserved it. Sure if you say so!!! I personally don't think life is as simple as that and many people don't deserve the injustices being done onto them. So by this philosophy you support guys like Saddam, and what's his name in Africa after all those people who were butchered deserved what they got. I really doubt you believe those words.

[ 04-08-2005, 11:35 AM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

[Timber Loftis]

I simply ain't buying it. Especially from the source that reported the brave successful Iraqi defense of Baghdad Int'l Airport. I only got a few paragraphs into it before declaring BS. Sorry, not credible enough to merit a read.

[Azred]

There isn't too much credibility to this story. Seriously, our soldiers wouldn't simply shoot teenage females in the head when we could sell them as sex slaves and make some money.

If this were really happening it would be all over every major news agency.

On the other hand, of course the military must sometimes approach and perhaps even seize a hospital becuase terrorists/insurgents use those as "safe" places to hide. If I were a terrorist that's where I would hide....

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by pritchke: quote: Originally posted by John D Harris: Originally posted by shamrock_uk: [qb] Here's a reality of life "you rarely get what you think you deserve, but you ALWAYS deserve what you get." So, if some criminal goes up and shoots your kid in the head and kills them both you and your kid deserved it. Sure if you say so!!! I personally don't think life is as simple as that and many people don't deserve the injustices being done onto them. So by this philosophy you support guys like Saddam, and what's his name in Africa after all those people who were butchered deserved what they got. I really doubt you believe those words.

No where is there any support for anything in the quote of mine, It is fact, nothing more nothing less. I am walking around with 2 crushed vertibre because somebody changed lanes taged the front of the car my friend was driving and we spun out of control and rolled the car several times. Now it would not have happened if I had taken as little as 5 seconds longer in the bathroom at the bar, if I had stopped and looked in the mirror and primped my hair, but then again I not the kind of person that gives a rat's rear-end about the superfical. I made the choice to get in the car several times that night, along with many other choices that night that would have changed the outcome, if I had made the choices differant.

Now as for those people deserving what they got: Did they not have feet to leave on? Did they not make the choice to leave or stay? If they stayed and got killed they got what they deserved, if they left and were killed they got what they deserved. If they stayed and lived they got what they deserved, if they left and lived they got what they deserved. Since you what to bring up a one sided example, try this one somebody makes a choice that puts them on a skyscraper and they fall off do to their choices made, splattering on the concret sidewalk below. They made the choice to take the risk they got what they deserved. Somebody else gets on the same skyscraper makes the same choices but lives they got what they deserved. Obviously they are better at climbing sky scrapers.

The muderer analogy is flawed and intentionaly one sided, a in true comparison to what happened in Iraq. The proper analogy would be: I see a killing comitted in a back alley the killer points his gun at me and my kid tells me to leave, gives us the chance to leave, but instead I stay there. Then my kid and I get shot and killed so yes I would have gotten what I deserved.

Here's another one for you "You can let Life live you or you can live life."
I don't believe or accept this Fate crap. I control my life, I am the master of my fate and the captain of my ship.

Having wrote all of that: This is the most important part and if you miss it you miss everthing. Getting what you deserve in life is not a moral judgement, any more then any other law of nature like gravity is a moral judgement. Cause and effect have NOTHING to do with right or wrong, they have to do with cause and effect. Once you understand that then you are free to make the choices of right and wrong and will have what it takes to accept the effects of your causes.

[ 04-09-2005, 10:28 PM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

[Northraven]

Bravo John D I was going to write something similar in your defense but you took care of it and now I don't have to

As to the topic of this thread, I don't really find the story to be that credible. I'd also like to make the point, and this somewhat relates to what John D was saying, that in war some civilians are going to die. This fact is as inevitable as friendly fire casulties. By pointing this out I'm not denying that civilian deaths aren't tragic but history has shown that they are inevitable.

I have to agree with what John is saying which I would sum up as basically "shit happens" and when it does you have to accept it and move on. A lot of the problem with the world today is that everybody always has to find someone or something else to blame for everything that happens to them instead of accepting the consequences of their own choices. Sometimes there is no one to blame, it is simply a combination of everything you have done leading to the event that befalls you. So to relate this rant to the topic, if the US troops let it be known in advance that if you stay in this city you run the risk of being caught in the line of fire and you choose to stay then you have only yourself to blame if that's what comes to pass. You made your choice and now you have to accept the consequences...and here's the crucial part...the responsibility for your actions.

/rant off/

[ 04-13-2005, 03:31 PM: Message edited by: Northraven ]