Iraqi protestor and the Girl who is with stupid

[Skunk]

What about Iran today? I'm very confused about the label 'Axis of Evil'.
Sure, there are some civil rights problems (no less than in the UK/US at the moment), but the government was democratically elected and the country is now both peaceful and law abiding...

[Djinn Raffo]

Originally posted by Thoran: All I would add to Magik's post is that US actions during that point in time were to insure a Balance of Power in the region. The idea of Fundamentalist Iran in control of such a large portion of the Middle East was not something that Western powers wanted to deal with (not just US would have lost in that scenario). Iraq was the only country large enough to resist Iran east of the Red Sea... and they were supported to make sure they didn't lose. To judge those actions as negative without understanding the dynamics of the period is... shortsighted.

Thoran it was Iraq that started the Iran/Iraq war. It was Iran that was resisting Iraqi aggression.. not the other way around. It just so happened that the Iranians were much more resilient than Saddam had anticipated.

EDIT>> If i'm not misunderstanding..

[ 01-25-2003, 03:46 AM: Message edited by: Djinn Raffo ]

[khazadman]

Skunk, Iran was named a part of the axis of evil because they are the biggest sponser of terrorism.

Now as for those civilians who died in the bunker....well that kind of stuff happens when civilians are forced into a military instalation to be used as human shields. So the blame for that goes once again to the evil b***rds running the country.

[Skunk]

Skunk, Iran was named a part of the axis of evil because they are the biggest sponser of terrorism.

That's news to me - care to quantify that statement?

Now as for those civilians who died in the bunker....well that kind of stuff happens when civilians are forced into a military instalation to be used as human shields. So the blame for that goes once again to the evil b***rds running the country.

Is that in reference to the bombing of the air-raid shelter? I think that the kindest thing that we can say about that is that our 'intelligence' guys got it wrong - mistaking a civilian air-raid shelter for a military one.

[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Jorath Calar: Well this isn't as funny... but it's still true, and proves the "stupid" guy has a point... sorry to spoil your "fun".

Yep, Scores of dead children is not funny. Every American should look into the face of war so they can weigh horror on their own conscience. Of course it is a free country so we don't hafta!

I'm curious how many clusterbombs get scattered all over Iraq this time around like we did in S.E.Asia, The Balkans, Iraq I, and Afganistan.
These weapons also kill children and innocents long after they have been used.

Warning: This sight shows graphic imagies of the mutilation of human bodies by weapons of war. That is the reality of the situation. http://www.itvs.org/bombies/bombs.html Between 1964 and 1973, the United States conducted a "secret" war, dropping over two million tons of bombs on the mountains and jungles of Laos. Many of these bombs - especially a newly developed weapon called a "cluster bomb" - failed to explode when they hit the ground, leaving the landscape littered with millions of unexploded bombs, as dangerous today as when they fell from the sky three decades ago. Dubbed "bombies" by Laotian villagers, these eye-catching but deadly orbs, as brightly colored as exotic fruit, are still found by children playing in shallow dirt, in the clefts of bamboo branches, or in the furrows of fields where farmers still till the soil by striking the earth with a hoe. In 1964, as the Vietnam War was intensifying, the United States attempted to staunch the flow of North Vietnamese people and supplies moving along the Ho Chi Minh Trail, which detoured through Laos before heading into South Vietnam. Laotian Communists, backed by North Vietnam, were fighting in a civil war against the U.S.-supported Royal Lao government. Because the United States signed the 1962 Geneva Accords prohibiting American military involvement in Laos, the bombing, organized by President Kennedy, the CIA and the Air Force, was kept secret, both from Congress and from the American people, to pursue a covert strategy for ridding the countryside of Communists. Initial targets were Communists troops, supply depots and lines of communication. Later, to prevent the soldiers from having access to men and materials, the U.S. began to bomb farms, villages and towns. The consequences for Lao civilians were devastating. American planes delivered the equivalent of a B-52 planeload of bombs every eight minutes, 24 hours a day, for nine years. More bombs were dropped on Laos at that time than on Germany and Japan combined during World War II. In the last three decades more than 12,000 people, many of them children, have been killed or injured by bombies or other unexploded ordnance (weapons). With an estimated 90 million cluster bombs dropped on Laos, many experts consider Laos to be the most heavily ordnance-contaminated country in the world. The Consequences Wherever they been used - Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Sudan, Lebanon, Iraq, Kuwait, Yugoslavia, Kosovo, Ethiopia, Chechnya, and Afghanistan, unexploded cluster bombs have created problems for civilians: During the Gulf War over 30 million cluster bomblets were dropped on Kuwait and Iraq and, in the following months, unexploded bombs killed 1,600 civilians and injured another 2,500. According to a recent study by the Red Cross, children in Kosovo are five times more likely to be killed or injured by a NATO-dropped unexploded cluster bomb than by a Serbian landmine. Today, in Afghanistan, reports indicate that the U.S. use of cluster bombs is causing the same kinds of tragic consequences for civilians there as they did in other countries. Because cluster bombs are area weapons with a wide dispersal pattern, they kill living things indiscriminately, including civilians. And their high-failure rate means that the killing of innocent people will continue long after the bombs stop dropping.

I question the moral and the ethics of such weapons. This information about the death my nation has helped cause made me sick when I read it and even sicker when I saw the documentry.

Clearly certain weapons used by the supposed good guys are really weapons of mass destruction. They should be banned. Which is why this is good news:

Cluster Bombs Today Their current use in Afghanistan is helping to focus the world's attention on cluster bombs. Many feel that their impact on civilians is unacceptable and a breach of international humanitarian law. More than 50 international organizations, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Mennonite Central Committee, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the International Committee to Ban Landmines have called for a moratorium on cluster bomb use. And, in spite of the fact that cluster bombs are one of the favorite and most deadly weapons in the U.S. and NATO arsenals, on December 13, 2001 the European Parliament passed a resolution calling for an immediate global moratorium on their use to be followed by an outright ban.

[Memnoch]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: quote: Originally posted by Jorath Calar: Well this isn't as funny... but it's still true, and proves the "stupid" guy has a point... sorry to spoil your "fun".

So, deaths due to war equates to war is terror? Thanks for the pics, a*hole, I really wanted to see that. I'll file this along with the scatology pictures another member posted that got severe warnings.

I'm not flaming you, I'm expressing sincere anger and disgust. I have to go somewhere so this is likely my last post til Monday. If it's too offensive, I guess a mod will just have to take it down. But, you are over the line. Full stop.[/QUOTE]Timber mate, you ARE flaming Jorath here, by calling him an asshole. Star or no star, the intent is what makes a flame, not the word itself. Jorath posted those pics in order to draw an emotional response from you, which he did. Whether or not you see that as a low blow and a bit of emotional blackmail, try and show some self-control and not turn this into a slanging match. I'm guessing he probably felt as pissed off about your pic as you did with his - so you're even.

Jorath, in future perhaps you could think of a more tactful way to express disapproval of Timber's post - waving a red flag in front of a bull in a china shop is in nobody's best interest, irrespective of who did the wrong thing first. Perhaps if you had posted something saying "Timber, I don't think that's funny at all etc etc" this wouldn't have degenerated the way it did. Remember, we all had a good chuckle about the "Frodo has failed" thread with a pic of George Bush wearing the Ring of Power. We expect you all to be reasonable and act with self-control in dealing with each other. Don't let me down. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 01-25-2003, 08:47 AM: Message edited by: Memnoch ]

[Horatio]

Originally posted by Thoran: quote: Originally posted by Horatio:

I'd just like to step in here and mention that many of them don't have a choice [img]smile.gif[/img] [/QUOTE]Yes of course, but I don't think there's a way to get Saddam and his supporters without risking innocent (on both sides). It's a very crappy situation, but just because there's no painless solution doesn't mean we should just throw up our arms and say "oh well". Something needs to be done, I hope it can be done peacefully, but it needs doing one way or another.[/QB][/QUOTE]

Don't get me wrong, I agree with pretty much everything else you said. I was just pointing something out that I had noticed had gone unmentioned [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Thoran]

Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: quote: Originally posted by Thoran: All I would add to Magik's post is that US actions during that point in time were to insure a Balance of Power in the region. The idea of Fundamentalist Iran in control of such a large portion of the Middle East was not something that Western powers wanted to deal with (not just US would have lost in that scenario). Iraq was the only country large enough to resist Iran east of the Red Sea... and they were supported to make sure they didn't lose. To judge those actions as negative without understanding the dynamics of the period is... shortsighted.

Thoran it was Iraq that started the Iran/Iraq war. It was Iran that was resisting Iraqi aggression.. not the other way around. It just so happened that the Iranians were much more resilient than Saddam had anticipated.

EDIT>> If i'm not misunderstanding..[/QUOTE]Sorry about the delay responding (weekends are very busy)... but yes you're right, Iraq attacked Iran after Iranian extremists tried to assasinate Tariq Aziz (spelled wrong I'm sure). I guess I was trying to establish that at that time we were much more afraid of Iran than we were of Iraq, and the logic was sound. It just goes to show that when you support a dictator, no matter how much it makes sense at the time, it CAN come back to bite you later. I'm not a big fan of after the fact criticism though, unless you can put yourself in the shoes of the guys making those decisions how can you judge them? We can go back through time and pick apart decisions that MANY great men and countries have made, but what's the point? To condemn actions taken today? This doesn't make sense to me, the US of today is completely different in many ways from the US of the Cold War.

[Felix The Assassin]

Originally posted by Jorath Calar: Well this isn't as funny... but it's still true, and proves the "stupid" guy has a point... sorry to spoil your "fun".

You are so correct. This is not funny. Either is the actual effects of being on the other side, ya know, the side that sent that down range.

I must ask though, since you did post it.

Oil fields on fire. Ya know what? I have a picture very similar to that one. Have you any idea what it was like to try and breath in that environment. The Iraqi army set them ablaze just as they realized US Marines where closing the gap on their retreat. You are Denied satisfaction.

How can a Cruise Missle be responsible for a DU warhead. Du don't go bang, it goes through armor. A cruise missle goes bang. You are denied satisfaction for this one.

Smart munitions are just that. Once the grid has been coded into the tracking system, that is where it goes. No adjustment.

Dud US bombs. Yes the sand of the desert has an effect on bombs. I too have witnessed a dud bomb exploding, especially when someone suddenly messes with it. Therefore, no munition that is laying around should be treated as a dud. Sorry for the child, but he should not have been messing with it. You are denied satisfaction.

I have a personal and professional acquaintance with a crew-man who has 15 small pieces of DU shrapnel in his leg. He is suffering no effects, and lives a normal, healthy (checked annually), life. Denied satisfaction.

Why are they out of medicene? Because it was stockpiled for the army. They were routed so fast they could not retrive it. If they were to abide by the rules imposed upon them, then they could have medical euipment and pharmaceuticals, however, when we openly find pristine chemical warhead canister's, one must wonder where there issues really lie.

FYI
3rd Bn, 35th Armor, 3rd Bulldog Brigade, 1st Armored Division, Bamberg, Germany.

Felix

[Thoran]

And oh yea... there's no doubt that the origonal image was photoshopped. [img]smile.gif[/img] ... of course I like the new image better... and I think I know the guy on the right.