[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
*
It's only an accident when it's Iraqis who are killed. Or it's collateral damage.
[/QUOTE]
Nadia, please list which terrorist acts you want us to classify as accidents.
ChannMahi, My statement was in response to Imdad Ali's following comment:
[quote]
I'm, sorry to say but you do not understand the difference between an accident and intentional act to kill innocent people.
[/quote]
The almost weekly killings of innocent Iraqi women and children, including pregnant women, seems to be swept aside as collateral damage. No one utters a peep whenever that occurs. If we have an American or British soldier, a member of an occupation force (because let's not be stupid about this, that is what they constitute in reality), then we have blaring headlines. i really hate to say this, i honestly do, but it seems to myself as though that only the killing of a Western soldier constitutes an act of terrorism. It should be equally reprehensible to kill a civilian as it is to kill a soldier. Infact moreso because a civilian is not given the luxury of signing a piece of paper agreeing to participate in an armed conflict.
There was a time when an African court convicted a man for resorting to violence in order to attain his political objectives. We jailed him for 27 years, and when he was finally released we presented the 'terrorist' with a Nobel Peace Prize. The US govt. should understand they have no respectable position in that country; they will continue to dig their own grave deeper unless they realize that few people in recorded history have submitted willingly to an occupation of their land. From their pov, they are not committing acts of terrorism; they are defending their homeland. i don't expect you to understand this and i know you will refer to me as being soft on terrorism. Well, so be it. Only time will tell which one of us is right.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
I'm always amazed at the apologists' justifcation for the 'intentional' murder of innocents based on retribution to those who have committed 'accidental' killings. What makes it all the more amazing is when these justifications are made by people who claim piety.
Does God not view our own personal actions based on whether they were intentional or accidental? If I were to drive my car and intentionally run someone over, would God judge me the same as if the brakes went out on my car and hit that person accidently? These people are sealing their own fate while preventing their people from flourishing because of their ignorant machismo.
[/QUOTE]
yeah blah blah more mistakes, more killings of innocents and americans are angels in disguise who cannot do anything wrong but make mistakes which are forgiveable bcoz God doesnot look at their mistakes as mistakes. :~)
How could the US let this happen? Very sad.
As the occupying force all responsibility rests solely on their shoulders, they’re as bad as the people who planted the bomb!
Al Qaeda translates to American incompetence.
Nadia, actually he’s very right about this.. not about you, but the Iraqis. How can an Iraqi child possibly know the difference when his mother is shot however innocently with an occompanyment of fearful yelling in a foreign tongue?? How can an Iraqi know the difference when he himself told the US intel that there was in fact nothing in that building, twice, yet they raid it wind up killing his brother in law thinking he was a terrorist?? Etc, ad nauseaum…
“Blow away anything that looks the least bit out of place. Wish I could be there with you. Perhaps my chance will come soon!”
– [Master Sgt. Bill Farrar](http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=125&article=17067#August 16)
How can they understand that fine difference when they hear words like this?? Even if the institutional difference sides on that which is just, the individual comprising that institution is not aware of how to properly express the difference, some don’t care to, some are too afraid to know the difference.
The problem is: We’re undermanned. If we’re gonna stay, gotta do it right or not at all. We don’t seem to realize that even honest mistakes are damaging. Because in our minds it will rosy some day, we have a tendency to dismiss the chaos of the present. It’s no less delusional than the wife that get’s beaten by an alcoholic boyfriend and then makes excuses for him. I know you love Iraq, but we gotta do things right and we’re not doing that now.
The UN doesn't even count as an authority any more, at least in Iraq. The US/UK over-rode the UN in order to invade and occupy the country. Even so, it's a poor choice of a target IMO. If people don't like having their country run for them then by all means target the armed forces responsible, but killing diplomats is counter-productive and plain wrong.
^ The same diplomats who ensured an economic stranglehold on these very same people for over 10 years resulting in the deaths of 100 000’s. At the moment in the eyes of the general Iraqi populace all targets are game whether people like it or not IMHO.
I feel there’s more purging to be done before anyone seriously thinks about re-building.
However, the US had much more to gain than the Iraqi resistance through this action.
How many American reporters copped it?
What none!?
How many were there?
What none?!
"However, the US had much more to gain than the Iraqi resistance through this action."
How utterly predictable...
^ It was wasn’t it and rather timely too, all in the name of drawing fresh international forces in…don’t think it’ll work though. Throwing oneself into a quagmire is the forte of the US troops alone. ‘Dem boys do it so well don’t you think?
What did you think the first casualty of war was...cable?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
If we have an American or British soldier, a member of an occupation force (because let's not be stupid about this, that is what they constitute in reality), then we have blaring headlines. i really hate to say this, i honestly do, but it seems to myself as though that only the killing of a Western soldier constitutes an act of terrorism. It should be equally reprehensible to kill a civilian as it is to kill a soldier. Infact moreso because a civilian is not given the luxury of signing a piece of paper agreeing to participate in an armed conflict.
[/QUOTE]
How many western soldiers were targeted and killed in the attack on the UN? Do you consider Vieira de Mello a western soldier?
Presumably, you will agree that no Western soldiers were killed in this attack and yet it is being referred to as terrorism. Does this not refute your statement that "it seems to myself as though that only the killing of a Western soldier constitutes an act of terrorism?"
In your own words, you ought to view the perpetrators of the UN bombing as more reprehensible because these victims were not soldiers who were targeted for murder. These were people who did not particpate in any way in the invasion of Iraq and were only there to provide humanitarian relief and aid. Their only mission was to help Iraqis and to do whatever they could to help get Iraq working for the Iraqi people.
Yet, you use this cowardly terrorist attack to vent further about what you view as the evils the US is perpetrating upon the Iraqi people. And between the lines you seem to place more blame and responsibility for the act on the US than on the ignorant thugs who did it.
MyVoice,
Please tell me, after everything that has gone on in Iraq since the invasion, no less than 60 American soldiers have been killed since the official conclusion of the war, almost-weekly protests by Shi'ites (not Sunnis) against continued occupation, and Iraqi attacks and assaults against American soldiers - do you honestly believe you don't see a connection between why this UN compound was targeted and its perceived affiliation with the US? You don't comprehend that the US's continued presence in the country makes things extremely, extremely challenging for other parties? The British and American presence in the country makes the situation that much more difficult for everyone to work in and ultimately, makes their work of helping the Iraqis that much more difficult - well nigh impossible. The two forces are not seen of anymore as liberation forces, even by Shiites who were the most brutally treated next to Kurds under Hussein's regime; they are viewed as occupation forces. In such a situation, there can only be one rational solution and that is the departure of American and British troops.
Spoon summed it up best.
**
[quote]
If we're gonna stay, gotta do it right or not at all. We don't seem to realize that even honest mistakes are damaging.
[/quote]
**
Y'know.. one especially sad part of this is that, from the gossip I've heard over the past months, de Mello was likely to become the next Secretary General.. probably would've made a damn good one too...
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by spoon: *
**probably would've made a damn good one too...
[/QUOTE]
*
i think he would have.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by spoon: *
de Mello was likely to become the next Secretary General.. probably would've made a damn good one too
[/QUOTE]
Maybe. But after the anti US and UK statements he had made about their occupation of IRAQ, the US would have made sure that he does not become the Secretary General. Infact it maybe in their interest that he has been killed.
As the sun rises daily, the circle of guilt assignation completes yet again.
Boo hoo, he would have made a great Sec. General (mourning a guy about whom I'd wager you all know only slightly more than I do-which is nothing-and don't you go googling him now to prove me wrong)
He would have....if the damn U.S. hadn't killed him. Another Saint dies at the hands of the U.S.
Group hug everyone?
Sickening tragedy, that a good man dies. Tragic also that his and the deaths of others are siezed by opportunists who would rather find American guilt above all evidence to the contrary.
The groupthink here is worse than in an Oprah studio audience.
C'mon storch, ya gotta admit.. that crap you just said made no sense at all...
Personally I believe the US demonstrated immense incompetence and nothing more; they're after all fighting a highly organised and literate resistance and have little chance of turning the tide at present.
I think of greatest dismay to the UN wasn't just the loss of one man or a few, it was the fact that a million tonnes of ordnance and 150,000 soldiers can't get their act together and provide the basics of security.
In my own twisted world it makes perfect sense.
It's like this.
Innocent man get blown up by Iraqis.
Guilt is not assigned to Iraqis-but to Americans.
Man who is killed is beatified (sainted)-making it that much more criminal that he was killed. Thus making Americans and American occupation more culpable and distasteful.
All this is internalized as fact.
This in turn creates the continued assesment of U.S. occupation as disasterous.
Negating all possible positives that could come from it in the future. Feeding and
enabling the minds of those who can see or have no interest in the upside. This
thinking is prevelent in the Worldwide media (including the U.S.), the "Arab" or
Muslim "Street", and Gup.If your unchangeable opinion is that nothing good can come from the ouster of Hussein-especially since Americans are the ones who did it, then you assist in undermining any positive movement toward stability, prosperity and peace in Iraq. Imagine if all the energy spent on undermining the effort in Iraq were brought against those who are disrupting it. International pressure against the remnants of the regime, Al quaeda, etc. Opinion in the country might change. You know PMA, man. Positive Mental Attitude. It's possible. But we'll never find out, as it is seemingly too unpalatable to assist an "American" project in any way.
More crap later, spoon (fed).
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Thap: *
Personally I believe the US demonstrated immense incompetence and nothing more; they're after all fighting a highly organised and literate resistance and have little chance of turning the tide at present.
I think of greatest dismay to the UN wasn't just the loss of one man or a few, it was the fact that a million tonnes of ordnance and 150,000 soldiers can't get their act together and provide the basics of security.
[/QUOTE]
What is your previous experience with the process of occupation? Your statement is really just an opinion-albeit an opinion accepted as fact by many.
Yes my opinion, most things I write usually are, that’s why I started the two sentences with
“Personally I believe”
And
“I think”
But well spotted nonetheless.