Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Scare_Crow

$2,500 is what an Iraqi civilian is worth

89 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

aquatus1
I love this "old school" way of looking at things. I love to hear how we're being extra special nice, compared to the bloodletting of the past. Imperialism is different from self-defense. Once we stepped into the light, it was plain to see all the holes in this plan. We're just trying to buy our own protection. There is no plan, only arrogance, on a scale not seen since the Third Reich.

If America is being empirialistic, it sucks at it. We didn't force them to accept our government, we didn't force them to accept our customs and integrate our culture, we didn't try to 'breed them out', or 'educate' them out of existance, we didn't take slaves, rape, pillage, torture...heck, we didn't do anything any of the empires have traditionally done to secure their empires.

Heck, the war could have been over in two weeks without a single loss of allied life. All we had to do was carpet bomb the place. But we didn't. Instead, we lost 3000 of our boys. Why? Because we are extra special nice. That's the only reason. 3000 dead. Just because we are nice.

Empirialism. Pssh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Avinash_Tyagi
If America is being empirialistic, it sucks at it. We didn't force them to accept our government, we didn't force them to accept our customs and integrate our culture, we didn't try to 'breed them out', or 'educate' them out of existance, we didn't take slaves, rape, pillage, torture...heck, we didn't do anything any of the empires have traditionally done to secure their empires.

Heck, the war could have been over in two weeks without a single loss of allied life. All we had to do was carpet bomb the place. But we didn't. Instead, we lost 3000 of our boys. Why? Because we are extra special nice. That's the only reason. 3000 dead. Just because we are nice.

Empirialism. Pssh.

Ummm Aquatus...we did do some of that stuff, or didn't you read about those soldiers on trial?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rahl

I so wish Aquatus1 was an innocent civilian in iraq and and lost a family member or two to this illegal war and then come up with stupid snot nosed better than you arguments all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aquatus1
Ummm Aquatus...we did do some of that stuff, or didn't you read about those soldiers on trial?

The key words are "on trial". What does that mean? That means that it is a crime. As an institution, such things are forbidden and punished when discovered. Was this always true? Not at all. In fact, it used to be the exact opposite. Rape and pillage was not only authorized, it was encouraged.

I so wish Aquatus1 was an innocent civilian in iraq and and lost a family member or two to this illegal war and then come up with stupid snot nosed better than you arguments all the time.

I don't understand this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Avinash_Tyagi
The key words are "on trial". What does that mean? That means that it is a crime. As an institution, such things are forbidden and punished when discovered. Was this always true? Not at all. In fact, it used to be the exact opposite. Rape and pillage was not only authorized, it was encouraged.

Or more likely they're going after it only because its reached the media and makes them look bad, and its unlikely any of those will see any real tough punishments for their crimes, a few years in jail tops

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rahl

I doubt you would. You are the person that would just go ahead and carpet bomb, i dont want to care to quote you but its there to scroll up . You are a disturbed person , iraqi never caused 9/11 , they have enough of their own problems without idiots like you calling for indisciminate carpet bombing. You are a disgrace . I don't think you care how many innocent iraqi's died, not by your tone , this is just war , isn't it ? Just so long as usa gets oil .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
UconnHusky
I know he has killed men,women and children So has the States FACT. Did Saddam kill over a hundred thousand of his own people and no you can't count the Iran/Iraq war. If you count desert storm then probably yes.

So we can't count the Iraq/Iran war for deaths attributed to Saddam and his regime but you can use the current Iraq war to blame America for killing thousands of civilians? You are sure that one of America's objectives in Iraq is to kill civilians? Interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rahl

You are a moderator i see, well do what you will , a disgrace I call you , and disgrace It stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
supercar
How much time on any given night do you see and hear about Iraqies being slaughterd every day? Next to zero.

Where do you live? Where I live,the media reports constantly about Iraqi deaths. Where I live,the news media never reports the good news from Iraq such as schools being built,health clinics being built,fire and police departments being set up and run by Iraqis,etc. There is alot of good going on Iraq that NEVER gets reported. That's why people like you criticize the war.

If its not on TV the averge Americans think it isnt happening

If the good things happening in Iraq aren't on TV,people like you think there are no good things happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scare_Crow

Aquatus didn't like my use of the term "extra special nice," which is a slap, but I don't mind. I don't think we should use the past to compare what good liars we've become today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Michelle

aquatus' only mistake was to try to reason with close-minded individuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
supercar
I know Saddam was a very bad guy there's no doubt about it. So if the war is to help Iraq and it's people why did it take so long to go in and take care of this mad man. Why wasn't he taken care of back in 91 ? He hadn't killed enough people

The war is not about making Iraq a safer place,it's about making America a safer place. One of the reasons there have been no terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11 is because every scumbag terrorist who ever thought about attacking the US has gone to Iraq instead.

Man what will be the total of civilian deaths once this civil war is over, also created by the U.S.

The insurgents and militias have killed thousands more innocent civilians than the United States has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rahl

Is there any statistics for the sudden exodus to iraq , these evil terrorists... or maybe because nobody is doing evil terrorist stuff, they are all there in iraq fighting bad americans ?, is that a circular agument? i really wonder sometimes if you people are actually serious , but i guess its worth it if some people believe it . isn't it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Avinash_Tyagi
aquatus' only mistake was to try to reason with close-minded individuals.

Oh i'm very open minded, i'm just realistic and realize we haven't done the iraqis any favors, sure we got rid of Saddam, but we replaced it with a devastated infreastructure and sectarian violence, one bad was traded for another and a dictator was traded for a harsh occupier, that can't even maintain stability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rahl

edit

Edited by Rahl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EmpressStarXVII

Whether it is 60,000 deaths or 600,000 deaths it is still an atrocity, and I feel like their blood is on my hands. As far to the original topic, is $2,500 the conversion into US dollars, or is that 2,500 in the Iraqi currency? 2,500 Iraqi currency could feel like having millions to them. Regardless, the loss of a loved one can never be replaced with money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
el midgetron
If America is being empirialistic, it sucks at it. We didn't force them to accept our government, we didn't force them to accept our customs and integrate our culture, we didn't try to 'breed them out', or 'educate' them out of existance, we didn't take slaves, rape, pillage, torture...heck, we didn't do anything any of the empires have traditionally done to secure their empires.

Heck, the war could have been over in two weeks without a single loss of allied life. All we had to do was carpet bomb the place. But we didn't. Instead, we lost 3000 of our boys. Why? Because we are extra special nice. That's the only reason. 3000 dead. Just because we are nice.

Empirialism. Pssh.

wrong. "We didn't force them" ?? We are occupying Iraq, what were they supposed to do? We are pillaging their oil, we are torturing them. "Breed them out" lol, how medieval would we have to be on them before you thought it was bad?

"Extra special nice"? lol, we did bomb them. We bombed the crap out of them and what was left is shot to heck now anyway.

Where do you live? Where I live,the media reports constantly about Iraqi deaths. Where I live,the news media never reports the good news from Iraq such as schools being built,health clinics being built,fire and police departments being set up and run by Iraqis,etc. There is alot of good going on Iraq that NEVER gets reported. That's why people like you criticize the war.

If the good things happening in Iraq aren't on TV,people like you think there are no good things happening.

Huh, you must live in Iraq. No, that couldnt be right, becuase you would know how distorted this war is. I guess you must live in Bizzaro-land.

The war is not about making Iraq a safer place,it's about making America a safer place. One of the reasons there have been no terrorist attacks on US soil since 9/11 is because every scumbag terrorist who ever thought about attacking the US has gone to Iraq instead.

The insurgents and militias have killed thousands more innocent civilians than the United States has.

Is that a standard issue government response? I hear it all the time and its completely mindless dribble. Are you reading that out of a psy-op manual or something? "America hasn't been attacked since 911", so? When was the last time that happend before 911? 1993, 8 years before 911? So, by your logic, since we have made it +5 years, its somehow proof the war in Iraq has had an effect on the war on terror? Very logical gman.

All the terrorist are in Iraq now? Who are we fighting in Somalia then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rahl

The people that advocate its for terrorism reasons they are in iraq, know full well, as much as we do, that its not the true reason, The question is, why do they adhere to it it, i know one reason , the reason that can not be said for fear of being called all kind of nazi thug etc, which i am not, but i do know some of the dots that join the line here . Again, you cannot say , it is a big thing in america this thing , this reason you cannot breathe it.

Edited by Rahl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aquatus1
Or more likely they're going after it only because its reached the media and makes them look bad, and its unlikely any of those will see any real tough punishments for their crimes, a few years in jail tops

Total propaganda. An argument so weak even you have to throw in the disclaimer "Or more likely". You can't even concede that such things are not institutionalized, but rather the work of a few individuals violating rules.

I doubt you would. You are the person that would just go ahead and carpet bomb, i dont want to care to quote you but its there to scroll up . You are a disturbed person , iraqi never caused 9/11 , they have enough of their own problems without idiots like you calling for indisciminate carpet bombing. You are a disgrace . I don't think you care how many innocent iraqi's died, not by your tone , this is just war , isn't it ? Just so long as usa gets oil .

You have no idea what you are talking about.

I never called for carpet bombing. I stated, quite accurately, that the only reason that we have lost people on our side is because we fight nice. As a comparison, I showed how, if we fought with the same ideals as past wars, we wouldn't have lost a single life.

I never claimed Iraq caused 9/11. I haven't even mentioned 9/11. You call me disturbed, but you are so wrapped up in the subject, you are unable to distinguish who said what. Heck, you can't even interpret what someone actually did say. No, the moment anyone says anything that isn't immediately supporting you, all you can do is start accussing them of being "a disgrace". All you can do is accuse others of only caring about oil.

You think you are any different than the people you are accusing?

You are a moderator i see, well do what you will , a disgrace I call you , and disgrace It stands.

Yes, I am a moderator, and I have no idea why you would bring that up. Do you believe a moderator is incapable of expressing their opinion. That a moderator is incapable of taking abuse, or being insulted?

Why bring that up? The only reason I can think of is as a sad attempt to try and pretend that moderators shouldn't think in ways that you don't agree with.

Aquatus didn't like my use of the term "extra special nice," which is a slap, but I don't mind. I don't think we should use the past to compare what good liars we've become today.

It's a slap? I am flattered you think so highly of my opinion. In all cases, I is rather unfair to say that the past should be used to compare to today. How else is one going to measure improvement? One always measures what one was to how one is. If all you do is measure someone to some idealized and nonexistant standard, you are setting yourself up for failure.

wrong. "We didn't force them" ?? We are occupying Iraq, what were they supposed to do? We are pillaging their oil, we are torturing them. "Breed them out" lol, how medieval would we have to be on them before you thought it was bad?

Not that medieval at all. After all, that was over 500 years ago. Humanity has been pretty vicious between then and now. You call what we are doing now "forcing them". To me, forcing someone means threatening their lives to change. We didn't force them to change their government; they did so quite willingly. We are indeed occupying them, and what that has traditionally meant is that we are the overlords and they are the slaves, but, since we are not the savages of old, we are acting more like landlords who are unwilling to kick out people who don't pay rent. Heck, we even accept that our boys will get killed, just for the sake of not being to harsh on them. You think we have to go back to medieval times to find occupying forces that would raze an entire village just for hurting one of their own?

"Extra special nice"? lol, we did bomb them. We bombed the crap out of them and what was left is shot to heck now anyway.
In reality, no, we didn't bomb the crap out of them. Germany bombed the crap out of England. I'm sure you've seen the pictures of the total devestation, of the acres upon acres of rubble that once used to be cities? No, our bombing was what is referred to as surgical. Heck, you could walk a few blocks away from a bombed building and not even tell an attack had happened.

What was left is shot to heck? You are saying that nothing has been rebuilt?

Huh, you must live in Iraq. No, that couldnt be right, becuase you would know how distorted this war is. I guess you must live in Bizzaro-land.

Yes, because it is utterly inconceivable that anyone could actually have a different opinion than you do. Anyone who doesn't believe as you do couldn't possible be an intelligent being in their own right. They must be a foreigner. They must be some sort of inhuman being that one can freely personally insult without any guilt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Slayer
You are a moderator i see, well do what you will , a disgrace I call you , and disgrace It stands.

Cool down, Rahl.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
el midgetron
Not that medieval at all. After all, that was over 500 years ago. Humanity has been pretty vicious between then and now. You call what we are doing now "forcing them". To me, forcing someone means threatening their lives to change. We didn't force them to change their government; they did so quite willingly. We are indeed occupying them, and what that has traditionally meant is that we are the overlords and they are the slaves, but, since we are not the savages of old, we are acting more like landlords who are unwilling to kick out people who don't pay rent. Heck, we even accept that our boys will get killed, just for the sake of not being to harsh on them. You think we have to go back to medieval times to find occupying forces that would raze an entire village just for hurting one of their own?

Your right, the fact that we havent been complete and total monsters justifies the war. Heck, isnt it time the Iraqies all signed a giant "thank you" card and sent it to us?

So, even though we took Saddam out of power, we didnt force the Iraqies to change governments? If they had asked for Saddam back would we have given him back? I don't think so. So, was there really a choice? No. But to you "force" only means threatening someones life to change. I guess the Iraqies could have chose not to install a new government and just be happy with the occupying US force and the constant war in there home. No "threat" to thier lives there.

Say what you want but there is something very wrong with the way you justify the sistuation in Iraq, if you have to compare it to genocide or the most "vicious" examples of humanity to defend it. America use to be a nation of principals and honor. Now we have enlightend voices like yours who claim anything below mass rape and murder in the open, is fair game. America, we're not Hitler! America, we're not medieval savages!

Your whole thing about being so nice as to "accept" our boys getting killed is such a crock. You really think we could have carried out the war without ever setting foot in Iraq? You should forward that plan to your fearless leader. How do you suggest we could have caught Saddam without troops on the ground? How do you suggest we secured the oil fields without troops on the ground? How do you suggest we were to look for non-existant WMDs without troops on the groud? No, it was all for the sake of "not being to harsh on them", what a fairy tale.

You really think the wellfare of the Iraqie people dictate the policy in Iraq? We do things strickly to "not be so harsh"? Try typing "DU baby" into google image search, bring up a photo of an Iraqie child, look it in what it has of a face and say "your welcome".

We're not medieval savages!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aquatus1
Your right, the fact that we havent been complete and total monsters justifies the war. Heck, isnt it time the Iraqies all signed a giant "thank you" card and sent it to us?

Who's justifying? Who's asking for a thank you? All I am asking for is an acknowledgement that, as wars go, we are pretty damn nice about it.

So, even though we took Saddam out of power, we didnt force the Iraqies to change governments?
That's correct. They could have gone right back to a dictatorship if they wanted (in fact, if we had left, it is pretty much guaranteed that is what would have happened).

If they had asked for Saddam back would we have given him back? I don't think so.

Hell no. Leaders of the opposition country die in wars. At least, they used to. The way things are going nowadays, who knows...

So, was there really a choice? No.
Sure was. They could have gone to a dictatorship, they could have become an American commonwealth, they could have become a monarchy, heck, thry could have just all joined the hari krishnas and become a nation of love and peace. They decided to go with the option that put a lot of money and resources at their disposition.

But to you "force" only means threatening someones life to change. I guess the Iraqies could have chose not to install a new government and just be happy with the occupying US force and the constant war in there home. No "threat" to thier lives there.

That is correct. The only threat they would encounter is the threat of being caught in a cross-fire when insurgents try and re-establish their old government.

Say what you want but there is something very wrong with the way you justify the sistuation in Iraq, if you have to compare it to genocide or the most "vicious" examples of humanity to defend it. America use to be a nation of principals and honor. Now we have enlightend voices like yours who claim anything below mass rape and murder in the open, is fair game. America, we're not Hitler! America, we're not medieval savages!
You keep harping on about justifying the war. No one has to justify any war. The defeated don't have any rights that they are given by the victors. Thems the rules.

So, what makes the allied forces so nice? What makes us nice is that we have the most lenient and merciful rules in existance, now and throughout all of history. Because of our principals, we don't carpet-bomb the entire country, because our principles dictate that money and soldier's lives are not worth the death of countless civilians. Because of our honor, we don't just raze the country and leave, because we accept as our responsibility the re-construction and stabilization of the country that we rode into. It is because that we are Americans (and I don't mean to exclude our allies, but El Midgetron is on a roll with the whole "America!" thing), it is because we are Americans, not Hitler, that we do not round up the different tribes into concentration camps. It is because we are Americans, not medieval savages, that we rebuild the country, instead of razing it to the ground.

You seem to think that all these nice things that we do should be accepted during a war. Nonsense. Who said war was nice? Just because we play nice doesn't mean that anyone, including us, is under an obligation to. The only reason we do is because of our principles and our honor.

Your whole thing about being so nice as to "accept" our boys getting killed is such a crock. You really think we could have carried out the war without ever setting foot in Iraq?

Yes, I do. In fact, that is in large part what happened. Or do you think the marines were able to push into Baghdad so fast because everyone ran away?

You should forward that plan to your fearless leader. How do you suggest we could have caught Saddam without troops on the ground?
We wouldn't have. We would have dropped a warhead on his forehead. Which is what we tried to do at the very beginning, but, unfortunately, missed.

How do you suggest we secured the oil fields without troops on the ground? How do you suggest we were to look for non-existant WMDs without troops on the groud? No, it was all for the sake of "not being to harsh on them", what a fairy tale.

I suggest we do the war exactly as we did it. You are trying to make it seem like I advocate Scorched Earth. Get over yourself.

You really think the wellfare of the Iraqie people dictate the policy in Iraq? We do things strickly to "not be so harsh"? Try typing "DU baby" into google image search, bring up a photo of an Iraqie child, look it in what it has of a face and say "your welcome".
Go skim through the library of the Simon Wiesanthal center. Take a look at the babies who had to go through a not very nice war. Tell me we haven't improved the state of warfare ten-fold since then.

We're not medieval savages!

Exactly my point. If we were, this war would have been over a lot sooner and we wouldn't have thought twice about leaving anyone behind. But we aren't savages, we are very nice people, and so we re-build the people we conquered, and then walk away when it's done. And yet, we still have people screaming that we aren't doing enough.

No defeated country has the right to demand to be treated nicely by the conquering enemy. The fact that we do is to our credit, and yet no one wishes to acknowledge that. That's what happens when you forget the past. You get spoiled and start to expect as rights what are nothing more than privilidges. You start to mistake kindness for weakness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OlDrippy34

Aquatus has much more patience for persistent and shameless ignorance than I do.

Bravo sir, well played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
el midgetron
The defeated don't have any rights that they are given by the victors. Thems the rules.

No defeated country has the right to demand to be treated nicely by the conquering enemy.

I guess the Geneva Convention is just another "god-damn-piece of paper". I really don't know what to say to you. If this is what you need to believe to sleep at night, be my guest. Someday you might wake up to a world you don't recognize and have to rethink your spin.

Honestly, its a fasle war, we have turned the Iraqies lives upside down, killed tens of thousands, tens of thousand more will probably die before its over and you think we are being "nice"? Can you think of a situation where America could be over-thrown & occupied, no utilities, mass chaos, large numbers of dead, and you still think of the "victors" who rule over you as "nice"? Its ridiculus, your views and attitude is so pompous and arrogant it sickens me.

Go skim through the library of the Simon Wiesanthal center. Take a look at the babies who had to go through a not very nice war. Tell me we haven't improved the state of warfare ten-fold since then.

Ok, your right the Iraqie babys that have been maimed and killed are the lucky ones. They could have been maimed and killed in a "bad" war. Yes, that proves warfare has improved ten-fold.

The very fact that you would hold up one dead baby next to another and say, "look how much warfare has improved" shows exactly how well you understand the pain a suffering of those effected by war. Absoultly pathetic.

Obviously, your are not talking about the Polish Jews, their country got conquerd, hence they "had no rights" remember?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.