Inside Iraqi Torture Chambers

[pritchke]

John D Harris thanks for try to answering my question but that does not explain why Rhumsfield feels he needs to lie about wide spread looting and disorder and placed looting as one instance "A vase". I am watching the news right now and Rumsfield was brushing off the wide spread looting and started ranting about chicken little. To the people of Iraq it does seem that the sky is falling, I have seem many images of buildings burning, people running out of buildings with anything they can carry, people fearing for their children. I am not sure what news you are watching. I think it is very important to restore order as soon as possible. Many of those looters are criminals released as Lil Lil mentioned.

On a happier note the clerics have done a good job on asking many original honest looters to return items and now there is a hugh wear house full of returned loot.

[ 04-12-2003, 01:26 AM: Message edited by: pritchke ]

Originally posted by pritchke: John D Harris thanks for try to answering my question but that does not explain why Rhumsfield feels he needs to lie about wide spread looting and disorder and placed looting as one instance "A vase". I am watching the news right now and Rumsfield was brushing off the wide spread looting and started ranting about chicken little. To the people of Iraq it does seem that the sky is falling, I have seem many images of buildings burning, people running out of buildings with anything they can carry, people fearing for their children. I am not sure what news you are watching. I think it is very important to restore order as soon as possible. Many of those looters are criminals released as Lil Lil mentioned. On a happier note the clerics have done a good job on asking many original honest looters to return items and now there is a hugh wear house full of returned loot.

That's good news about the clerics stepping in to get stuff back to its owners. [img]smile.gif[/img] They have also called for the Iraqi's to get the foreigner's out, meaning those who came to die for the Fedayeen from Syria and elsewhere. [img]smile.gif[/img]

I also saw some footage of locals protecting themselves from thieves, beating men and threatening them with guns for stealing. Not that it is proper for any (small) crowd to beat a man in the street but it is getting a point across to wannabe thieves, that much is positive.

Back up should arrive soon...let's hope so anyway. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[pritchke]

Originally posted by Lil Lil: Quote: Originally posted by pritchke: Now a current question is why is Rumsfield lying again? "The looting is not that bad we keep seeing one person looting a vase over and over again". What crap! Why does he have to understate the obvious and continue to lie about the situation at hand? Could one of you guys give him a pie to the face, that is what we do up here to lying officials. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am jealous of Animal [img]smile.gif[/img] , everyone is ignoring the question "On why is Rumsford lying again?" I have no problems with the US deciding to invade Iraq to take out Saddam. My main problem was integrity, I didn't believe it was about WoMD. I didn't believe it was the motives of Pearle, and the more I hear of Rumsford the more manipulative he seems. You can not get my support when I feel lied to. Anyway the past is the past. We must now look to the present and future so let us stop arguing about the reasons for starting the war right or wrong. I don't know if integrity means anything anymore but to me it is important and builds trust. I would think the current problem is restoring order, Bagdad looks like a city in revolt in the Civ 3 game. Many Iraqies are saying "I have welcomed the Americans but we need to restore order because I fear for my kids. At least under Saddam we were save as long as towed the line." I think restoring order and protecting people from stray shooters, and looters is important don't you? Else everything you worked for may go in the toilet.

I missed the question on Rumsfield earlier. Sorry, Pritchke!

My guesses would be:
1) because its his job
2) because he stands to profit too
3) because he is running a public relations spin for the people who are pressuring him to do something about it.
4) because he believes what he is saying.

The U.S. has had a plan approved to bring in security forces from other countries.

When those forces arrive is anyone's guess as far as I know. I am figuring that as long as the Fedayeen are putting up a fight in Baghdad it could be delayed but then again, I didn't get the details on the countries providing security or how soon they plan to be there.

I agree wholeheartedly that something needs to be done soon but I also remain cautious about placing our troops in a police-state in a country that for the most part, was raised not to like us all that much, and on the borders of countries waiting with baited breath for us to slip up. Liberators or not, we are still the great satan to the Arab world.

I think we have to wait for the war to be over for that pie in the face unless we want to face being arrested for terrorism. We usually save that honor for businessmen like Gates & Trump. [/QUOTE]Thanks Lil Lil, personally I would not want Rumsfield doing my public relations. I think you are more qualified in this statement alone,"Yes, the looting is currently bad but the U.S. has had a plan approved to bring in security forces from other countries." The trick to public relations is to provide comforting details without telling fibs. I did ad some to your statement but I think the Pentagon would be better off hiring you to do PR.

[pritchke]

And I saw some citizens with weapons to guard buildings taking on a police role until order is restored.

Originally posted by pritchke: Thanks Lil Lil, personally I would not want Rumsfield doing my public relations. I think you are more qualified in this statement alone,"Yes, the looting is currently bad but the U.S. has had a plan approved to bring in security forces from other countries." The trick to public relations is to provide comforting details without telling fibs. I did ad some to your statement but I think the Pentagon would be better off hiring you to do PR.

Well, I think at the time he was speaking the plan had not yet been approved and that for him to even admit that one was being worked on would have made it look bad if it had not been approved later...letting him look like an idiot with his tales of Henny Penny (which was sad btw) would have been better left alone and unsaid for a short time but I am not going to second guess his timing since I don't know anything more about it.

Thank for the job offer too btw...my room mate said the same thing LOL (about putting an Iraqi flag in place of the Saddam statue if flags had to be shown at all during that event) but I don't think I'd like living there. I'd be glad to send them my phone number if they wanted consultation though.

I am glad to hear the news about the citizens too...proving to them that they are a capable people will make the transition period that much more stable as well as the eventual governing of themselves. [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

[ 04-12-2003, 01:48 AM: Message edited by: Lil Lil ]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by pritchke: John D Harris thanks for try to answering my question but that does not explain why Rhumsfield feels he needs to lie about wide spread looting and disorder and placed looting as one instance "A vase". I am watching the news right now and Rumsfield was brushing off the wide spread looting and started ranting about chicken little. To the people of Iraq it does seem that the sky is falling, I have seem many images of buildings burning, people running out of buildings with anything they can carry, people fearing for their children. I am not sure what news you are watching. I think it is very important to restore order as soon as possible. Many of those looters are criminals released as Lil Lil mentioned. On a happier note the clerics have done a good job on asking many original honest looters to return items and now there is a hugh wear house full of returned loot.

The looting is relative, to the Iraqis the looting is more lawlessness then they have seen. But here in the USA, that's barely a NCAA championship looting, so from Rumey's point of view (being he's from the USA) it's not much of a looting spree. Like I said check out South Central LA, or the Watts riots, the looting in Chicago when the "Bulls" won their 4th or 5th NBA championship, the riots in almost every major US city when MLK was assasinated, the riots in Miami, or almost any grocery store after a hurricaine. I've seen people almost come to blows over an over priced 2" candle, everybody yelling, shoving and fighting because they didn't get the last candle in town. I just bought some string, and wax, walked by them all smiling at them, as their jaws dropped, and they rushed to find the wax. I went home and made my own candles.

[Animal]

Originally posted by John D Harris: Quote: Originally posted by Animal: Quote: Originally posted by Lil Lil: Animal, a lot of "why Iraq?" may be answered by what we've been finding in the way of Russian built underground nuclear facilities, French-made trucks, modified to load biological weapons into SA missles, etc. (granted, none of the smoking guns have been proven to be smoking guns but Russia and France in particular are facing great losses in Iraqi revenues by what is happening there, and why? Why are Russia, France and Germany refusing to cooperate in the rebuilding of Iraq without full reign being given to the UN? Even I support the idea that Bush & Co have a lot of profit to gain by being the heroes and saving the oil fields at the same time but it seems to me that there is a lot more going on, through covert actions on the part of other countries, that have yet to be revealed; action that in the long run, could have other countries in no better positions than Iraq was with Saddam. Of course, Bush could be the beast and they are trying to save the world.

And the US never sold anything to Iraq. Okay?

If the UN has full control over the new government of Iraq, that eliminates any question of US subterfuge over the invasion. The US invades Iraq then sets up there own hand picked government. No, not suspicious at all.

Yes, there is a lot more going on. Why such interest from the US?[/QUOTE]The only problem with the UN doing that is the UN is to slow and unweldy (SP?) Look at Kosivo, Hatti compared to Afghaistan much smaller countries yet they are no where near having a stable Goverment after years and years of UN help. The UN is good at passing out food and clothes but making a goverment, sorry but it's a Charlie Foxtrot. [/QUOTE]Agreed, the UN gets bogged down easily with debates, is slow, unweildy and isn't the perfect solution, but it's a lesser of two evils. The UN would, however, provide a much more impartial government that truly does have the best interest of the Iraqi's at heart. I'm not sure the same could be said for the US.

[Animal]

Originally posted by pritchke: Quote: Originally posted by pritchke: Canada tried to make a reasonable proposal with deadlines that would have lasted an extra month but may have added support at the end of the time. Both the US and the French had such big swollen heads that it was ignored, not even looked at. Neither one could get past their pride French Non, US we want war now. This is what an American friend told me. Anyway the past is the past. We must now look to the present and future so let us stop arguing about the reasons for starting the war right or wrong (but let us not forget what was said). Now a current question is why is Rumsfield lying again? "The looting is not that bad we keep seeing one person looting a vase over and over again". What crap! Why does he have to understate the obvious and continue to lie about the situation at hand? Could one of you guys give him a pie to the face, that is what we do up here to lying officials.

I am jealous of Animal [img]smile.gif[/img] , everyone is ignoring the question "On why is Rumsford lying again?"

I have no problems with the US deciding to invade Iraq to take out Saddam. My main problem was integrity, I didn't believe it was about WoMD. I didn't believe it was the motives of Pearle, and the more I hear of Rumsford the more manipulative he seems. You can not get my support when I feel lied to.

Anyway the past is the past. We must now look to the present and future so let us stop arguing about the reasons for starting the war right or wrong. I don't know if integrity means anything anymore but to me it is important and builds trust. I would think the current problem is restoring order, Bagdad looks like a city in revolt in the Civ 3 game. Many Iraqies are saying "I have welcomed the Americans but we need to restore order because I fear for my kids. At least under Saddam we were save as long as towed the line." I think restoring order and protecting people from stray shooters, and looters is important don't you? Else everything you worked for may go in the toilet.[/QUOTE]Jealous of me? Huh? [img]graemlins/confused2.gif[/img]

I agree 100% with you. The Iraqis are no better off now than a month ago, but for Rumsfeld to say that it's no problem is complete BS. For once I'd like to hear some honesty from a politician.

Originally posted by Animal: For once I'd like to hear some honesty from a politician.

LMAO, do you realize how many people would drop dead of heart attacks if that happened? There's their population control method without the use of war!
[img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Animal: So you ask me for proof that the average Iraqi citizen is not better off now than a week ago. I ask you, prove to me that they are better off now. Is mass looting and chaos your idea of freedom? Is draping a US flag over the face of a statue democratic?

Is mass looting and chaos my idea of freedom? No,it isn't. Then again, I haven't had to live hand to mouth and wonder how I would feed my children or find care for their medical needs while the leader of my country ate lavish banquets and lounged in golden bathtubs for the last 25 years.

What we are seeing right now IS the freedom that comes with having decades of oppression suddenly lifted. People who lived in constant fear of their government are suddenly freed of this everyday threat. The natural human result is to go "hog wild" (as we say in the South). As John D. Harris pointed out, we have had much worse looting in the U.S. on a regularly recurring basis. The NCAA Baskatball tournament is one example. The towns of BOTH teams in the championship game are routinely looted and vandalized whether their team won or lost. This is a phenomenon I've never understood. [img]graemlins/dontknowaboutyou.gif[/img] But it seems to occur after ANY major championship game professional and collegiate sports.

I agree that Rumsfield must have done a good impression of "Baghdad Bob" in trying to ignore the obvious (I didn't see or hear his comments myself). There is no denying the looting was rampant - at least for a few days. But when the military was unable to take control, the Iraqi citizens took measures into their own hands. Their retaliation justice was swift and brutal. I've seen more than one instance where looters were killed by the Iraqi populance. It is normal to expect a certain level of lawlessness to follow any type of major transition, but the situation DOES appear to be under control now.

Is draping the U.S. flag over Saddam's statue "democratic"? That's a difficult question to answer, because I don't know for certain who draped the flag. I admit it would be somewhat arrogant for the U.S. troops to do it. Then again, they just brought an end to a horribly brutal regime...so I guess they have a right to feel a little cocky and proud of themselves right now. And from what I've seen, the majority of Iraqi citizens in Baghdad are also happy with the results.

I'll agree with Lil Lil's suggestion that the Iraqi flag would be a more appropriate symbol....but keep in mind that that flag hasn't represented "democracy" for many years. I think it's justified to fly or display the American flag as the "liberating force", but I also agree the Iraqi flag should now be raised as a NEW symbol of freedom and (hopefully) democracy.

Originally posted by Animal: I mean no offense, even though this may come across a little on the harsh side, but all I hear is how the US is doing such a good thing, how the US is bringing freedom to the Iraqis, lets praise the US for their actions. Well, you still have North Korea, Syria, South Africa, Uganda, and dozen other "opressed" countries to go. As soon as the US brings freedom to the world, then I will praise them for their actions. Again, no disrespect intended, but look at it from something other than a US perspective.

No disrespect or offense is taken, Animal, but your suggestion brings up an obvious question. You say you will "praise the U.S. for their actions" once we've liberated ALL the oppressed countries you mentioned...however, I think it would be safe to assume that you (and many, many others) would continue to criticize our actions until the end result is achieved.

Your opposition to the current War is well documented and you still disagree with it because we "changed motives". The liberation of the Iraqi populance has not earned your praise. Can you honostly say we should expect a different reaction from all of those who opposed THIS war if the U.S. were to turn around and announce plans to invade North Korea or Syria next? Then provide a check list of other countries we plan to liberate over the next couple of decades?

The only thing that would accomplish is giving substance to those accusing the U.S. of being war-mongering empire builders.

I honostly do not mean any disrespect to your or your views, Animal. But your remark highlights the stereotypical "No Win" situation the U.S. seems to be thrust into in the international arena.

Other countries loudly and soundly criticize us when we take military action against a country, then - in the very next breath - those same countries berate us for not taking similar actions in several other countries with similar circumstances. It seems that we are supposed to serve as the Global Police Force on one hand, but shouldn't expect anything but harsh criticism while actually doing the job and can only hope for reluctant praise (if any at all) once the job is completed and the end results are favorable.

They may or may not represent your views accurately, and I apologize if you feel I'm "putting words in your mouth" or twisting your views. I'm simply pointing out how I view the entire situation from a U.S. perspective.

It does seem to be a "Damned if we do, Damned if we don't" scenario, because we will be harshly criticized by some regardless of what actions we take (or don't take).