Americans Killed in Iraq Mutilated and Desecrated

[R.H. Lee]

Well, Paco, I really don't know what that rambling rant was about.

Just a suggestion. Learn to communicate in paragraphs rather than one long rambling sentence following another long rambling sentence without any coherence in between.

Also, ad hominem attacks such as drawing the corollary to Hitler are not helpful. There is no moral equivalence.

I think you make my point regarding the insulation the average American has to the realities of the world. We just don't understand there are those who would kill us. I expect my government to find them and kill them first.
That is not immoral. It is self defense.

 

[Antlurz]

Pax....

A couple pages back, you responded to a post I made. It seems as though you based your response on my agreeing with the responses of that attack. I agree only in that our response (s) should be overwhelminly agressive and even brutal, but when one gets to the point of brutality, the definition of brutality comes into play. I use the term brutal only to define that our response should be extremely painful to the opponent. Punishingly painful, even....but degradation and mutilation have no place in that generally speaking.

Ron

(I'm definitely gonna have to learn that this forum moves fast. )

 

[Paco]

RileyMc,

I'm sorry that you have trouble understanding my writings, but don't assume there's something wrong in what I wrote. Crazy thought: maybe you didn't understand because you refuse to understand. Don't run behind that tired wall of self-righteousness.

As for not understanding my mortality: I've been at gunpoint twice, I've been assaulted and had to defend myself, I'm not from this country (though I'm a naturalized and happy American) and I've seen great death and suffering, and appalling poverty in my short years so I'm not sold on you're whole 'dillusioned' thing and I hardly doubt that I'm magically backing your argument. Let's not make assumptions.

As for no corollaries between WWII and now, well atrocity is atrocity. Hate is hate. One -dimensional thinking speaks for itself. We can still learn a tremendous amount by understanding the psycology of anger that was present on all sides in WWII. Look RileyMc as far as the war goes-the very fact that we THRers are so split, even with the amount of common ground we have, should give us all a moment of pause. I'm trying to remind myself that we're supposed to be on the same side.

Let's keep things civil. Peace
-paco

 

[Paco]

BTW, self-defense is always justified once a situation can be defined as such. That's the crux of this problem: I really don't think we're doing all that much anymore to defend ourselves. We got Saddam. We got, or at least made Osama run. What in the heck do we think is gonna be solved with bombs now? Rileymc, you say that this isn't a police thing? Well, then what is it. Tell us where we need to bomb? Who do we kill? When will we know when we have attained peace?

-confused paco

 

[Brasso]

Some folks just need killing.

Now....is the above just chest pounding, or is it the turth?

I know some Muslims who are good, freedom loving, religious tolerant people, but, and this may just be my impression, they seem to be the great minority of the world population of Muslims. Let's face it. If most muslims really were about peace and tolerance then these attacks would not be happening. Whether it's a matter of religion or culture, a large portion of the people of the middle east only know force. Most of their societies are based on it. In their eyes, might makes right, all moral imperatives be damned. Could I pull the trigger on a mother and her child, or an old man? No, I could not. But if I knew the town was full of only radical islamists, then it would cease to exist. I also believe that people have a moral obligation for their own government. These people let themselves be governed by a murderer. Iraq's soldiers knew who they were fighting for. I will not give them a free pass, as they have the freedom to choose what is right and good just as our forefathers did. If I were the President, my initial instinct would have been to obliterate the entire region. I hate that they turned my emotions to such hatred. Whether I could tolerate to see the blood myself or not, it is unfortunately the only viable choice these barbarians offer us. Whether we come down to their level or let them continue to murder us is the only question. It's a shame that a race of people let a mad man convince them that he went into a cave and recieved revelation telling him to kill everyone on earth who would not give up their religion and join him. Perhaps some day they will recognize who God really is.

 

[Paco]

Dear Brasso,

Not an attack, just a thought:

I know some Muslims who are good, freedom loving, religious tolerant people, but, and this may just be my impression, they seem to be the great minority of the world population of Muslims. Let's face it. If most muslims really were about peace and tolerance then these attacks would not be happening. Whether it's a matter of religion or culture, a large portion of the people of the middle east only know force. Most of their societies are based on it. In their eyes, might makes right, all moral imperatives be damned. Could I pull the trigger on a mother and her child, or an old man? No, I could not. But if I knew the town was full of only radical islamists, then it would cease to exist. I also believe that people have a moral obligation for their own government. These people let themselves be governed by a murderer. Iraq's soldiers knew who they were fighting for. I will not give them a free pass, as they have the freedom to choose what is right and good just as our forefathers did. If I were the President, my initial instinct would have been to obliterate the entire region. I hate that they turned my emotions to such hatred. Whether I could tolerate to see the blood myself or not, it is unfortunately the only viable choice these barbarians offer us. Whether we come down to their level or let them continue to murder us is the only question.

replace:
Muslims with Americans
Iraq's with America's
radical islamist with Staunch Christians
Middle East with North America

-I bet they say the same thing about us... We gotta stop the propaganda on both sides and try to figure this thing out. This is a new one and we're gonna have to go down different paths and come up with different solutions. That. or bring our people home and start some housekeeping here starting with beefing up the borders even more.

-paco

 

[Rebar]

I have to say this incident hardens my view of Islam as a cruel and barbaric religion, and most practitioners as backward, tribal, and primitive peoples.

The few exceptions to this rule regardless, it's time to stop being so friendly and openhanded, and to treat the Iraqis as a hostile population, and to really act as the occupiers that we're being accused of being.

The sooner we can hand off to the new Iraqi government the better, so they can go back to killing each other.

 

[hapafish]

I'm throwing another two cents in ...

I personally don't believe that just shooting down rioters in the streets is the way to go. The reason I don't agree with what happened at My Lai and No Gun Ri is because those knee-jerk reactions are done with no regard for the consequences and no aim. Turning Fallujah into a smoking crater is more an act of weakness than strength, however viscerally satisfying it may be. It is a complete admission of failure to secure Iraq, a complete abandonment of even a veneer of wanting to help the Iraqis, and and a complete bankruptcy of the American way.

That having been said, this is a war to the finish, and those burning bodies of American citizens on tape should be sufficient reminder of the futility of admitting this is anything else. It is nice to say that we are "above" atrocity and "targeting" civilians, but pulling punches on PC grounds is not the way to go. War is dirty. Peacekeeping is worse. I can't even begin to describe how filthy I felt doing peacekeeping duty and do it justice. Anyone who has done it probably has the

The best and only real form of mercy America can administer to Iraq, Afghanistan, and every other nation we fight from now on is to terminate hostilities from a show of absolute strength. To shy away from anything less is collective suicide. If America take the hard steps to end hostilities with Japan by incinerating Hiroshima and Nagasaki with all its civilians, I fail to see why we should shirk away from doing the modern-day equivalent provided the need is real and the promise of a conclusive end to hostilities is also real.

If I, born overseas, can see that this is a war for the very survival of America's way of life, and understand that now, like back then in 1945, these extreme times require extreme measures, I fail to see why any American would shy away from doing what is necessary. I grew up on stories about how the American fighting man was brave and implacable in battle, just and compassionate in peace. Why in these times the people of the United States bend over backwards to accomodate those who kill its citizens is something I will never accept nor understand.

I pray that President Bush will never have to face the same hard choices as President Truman on whether to drop the bomb, but this war is real. Quibbling over whether innocents would die is not a choice the average American has to face. Given the choice between the deaths of millions of American fighting men and the salvation of an entire generation, President Truman chose to destroy two Japanese cities, and all their innocents. And I absolutely believe he did the right thing.

This war has to be brought to a finish. It never ended, and all the nation-building and peacekeeping in the world is not going to change that one iota. Without a conclusive, overwhelming victory to bring everything to pure standstill, we will fight this war forever. If civilians have to die, that is what it will take. That is why America tries to elect men of conscience to sit in the Oval Office who think things through and know what needs to be done.

But there was no real final victory, no enemy who will stand and fight, and the enemy is great in number. What really ticks me off is that the rioters you saw in the streets don't have the balls to pick up arms and fight like the VC or the NVA, but let the foreign mujahid and a small number of insurgents do all the fighting, if hit-and-run can be honored by such a word. I'd know if I was one of them, I would be hitting the "occupiers" every single damn day. These people are cowards. Filthy, disgraceful cowards.

Since we're all in it for the long haul, let's stay long enough to destroy all the ones who want Americans dead. There's no other real choice available, unless you want us to all pull out like in Somalia and prove without a shadow of a doubt that America is now a nation of cowards, ripe for the killing. Send me and my buddies back and let us really fight. If a price has to be paid for peace, let us pay it - out of their hide. America is worth nothing less.

Peace out.

 

[Paco]

hapafish,

Here's the thing man: I think the fellas in the Oval Office know that it can't be so easily solved by giving a very powerful definitive blow like in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We knew Japan was tetering and getting ready to push its civies into the last desperate act of trading their lives for as many American soldiers as possible. This is a bit different. No bomb can solve this.

Honestly I don't know what will except that I disagree about the whole pulling out thing and becoming weak thus easy pickings. After we pulled outta Vietnam, no nations came to our door to pick a fight. We smacked Iraq around in the first Gulf War and in the Desert Storm broke some military records as to how fast we got to their capital. AND we caught their leader. I highly doubt if we pulled out we would be considered cowards. We're the only super power left on the earth and I don't think that a group of nations could take us down.

Pulling out is a perfectly viable option, and not a cowardly one. My uncle who, as I've said before, was in Vietnam for three tours and just because he was ordered to come back doesn't mean he's a coward. Anycase, now that we've got lots of folks going back-n-forth on this, what would you SPECIFICALLY do to end this? Seriously, if your were the man or woman in power, what would you do specifically?

-paco

 

[Brasso]

If you want a serious answer from me I'll give it. And this is not just "chest pounding", because I have believed this for many years.

I would drop a nuke on one middle eastern city for every act of terrorism committed until it stopped. I would advocate Israel driving every last palestinian out of the region so that we would not have to be involved with the matter any more. Maybe I'm just not presidential material, but that is seriously what I would do.

Until the radical islamists and the muslim population as a whole who support them by not standing against them catch up with the rest of the civilized world that is all they offer their enemies.

What makes them such cowardice little bastards is that they prey on our compassion, knowing that we are not as capable of the same level of evil as they are, and at the same time proclaim themselves the chosen people of god.

Sorry if the little "god" offends anyone, but I do not believe they worship the same God as the God of the Bible. That is my personal belief, right or wrong.

 

[Paco]

which city do you drop it on. 16 outta the 19 9/11 terrorists were Saudi Arabians and that's a fact. Do we drop in on Bush's good friends? It's also a fact that the Saudies and the Bush family have close ties. Again, it worked in WWII but how do you direct your attack. And I have a sneaking suspition that the bombing would fuel evrlasting hatred from more than just the Arabs and we would eventually would have to bomb most of the world. Ha! No thanks, but what do I know. Keep the 'solutions' coming!

-paco

 

[Paco]

Brasso,

You added some goodies! If you are a Christian then I say:

Matthew 7:1-5
Matthew 5:38-48

I gotta believe that Americans are good hearted people and that they can stay that way even if they are getting abused. I hope we can maintain our humanity through this one: too many ghost stories from both my uncles about Vietnam.

 

[R.H. Lee]

My hat's off to you, Paco. You are a master of verbal equivocation.

As to your question "when will we know if we have attained peace?".....

War cannot become peace without victory. One side must destroy the other. There is no other way.

Is it inevitable that many lives will be lost on both sides? Maybe not, but I'm not hopeful as regards radical islamofascism. They are not a rational enemy. They are eager to blow themselves and their children up to kill us.
We cannot reason with them. We cannot negotiate or even co-exist with them. They will not be satisfied with anything short of Islamic world domination.

They are not, for example, anything like the former Soviet Union. There were enough nuclear weapons between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R to destroy the entire planet many times over. Yet in 50 years, it never happened. Why? MAD-Mutually Assured Destruction prevailed. Each side was more interested in its OWN survival then in the others destruction.
Eventually, we non violently defeated the U.S.S.R and it is no longer a superpower nor a threat to our existence.

Israel has at one time or another offered the so-called 'palestinians' everything they asked for. In response, Israel suffered more terrorism and murder of its citizens, and that continues to this day. Make no mistake, THIS enemy is consumed with hatred for us.

Where do we attack? Afghanistan and Iraq are a good start. The U.S. is in a strategic location in the middleast to project power quickly and decisively to Syria/Iran/Lebanon or anyone else who may need some good medicine.

 

[EchoSixMike]

After we pulled outta Vietnam, no nations came to our door to pick a fight.

Wrong. The USSR went into Afganistan, and there was all the communist fun happening in Angola and elsewhere in Africa being fought by proxy as a direct result of American failure in VN. Same with Cambodia for that matter. That nobody mad a play for the CONUS was only due to the fact that people like Curtis Lemay put us so far ahead early in the game that a few years of stupidity didn't sink us.

You fight the war until the enemy tries to surrender, and then you keep fighting him a little more until the desperation sets in, and he realizes that he has no choice save to surrender and pray that we are merciful. IN this case, I would suggest that I MEF surround Fallujah(it's a city of about 1 million, and it's about 25 Sq km looking at the map right now) and we need to go through the whole stinking place and kill those who need killing without mercy. Some will resist and ID themselves for killing, that is my hope. More will be ID'd by our intel assets for later interogation and elimination. This will result in more than a few dead Marines, probably some guys I know, guys I was E-mailing and phoning only recently. But it is the right thing to do, balancing the need to do things the right way, and the need to win the war. Something similar would be fine as well. To let it go without any serious action to to admit defeat, as in Somalia, Beirut or Yeman.

To depopulate the region via nuclear or chemical weapons would be fine with me, personally for I'm rather cynical about any future for Iraq(or the middle east in general), but that's only me being hopelessly unrealistic. I have no doubts that America would easily survive doing so and remain America, as we are now, and have always been a nation unwilling to break others to our will militarily. We are a nation that is strangely bipolar, being both assured that our way is right, and at the same time completely unwilling to impose that way upon others. That is why I see no long term harm to the national character coming from cauterizing the ME, as it would an historial anomoly. I do see long term harm coming to America from the insane steps we would take in the name of security following a nuclear or severe bio attack on America, as the restriction of liberty in the name of security has been a long running trend in America and the rest of the world, for that matter. Thus,while I see genocide as a failure on our part, it is the lessor of two failures if the alternative is the self destruction of the US by conversion into a police state in the aftermath of a severe WMD attack that sends the sheeple into panic. The US lashing out would cause the US to restrict it's government. The US being attacked would cause the US to restrict it's citizenry. Thus the rational for my position.

MadDog posted an interesting thread back on TFL regarding the historical implementation of genocide. Sad and interesting reading. Sad choices.

To forstall the noise about me not doing my part, being an uninvolved nutcase, etc etc, I'll be in the Iraq AO in about four monthes, give or take a few weeks. Say what you will, but I'm not noncommital. S/F...Ken M

 

[w4rma]

FYI, it appears that they were mercenaries. There are probably *alot* more mercenaries being killed in Iraq, but they don't add to the American soldier death count. It is my understanding that this is the primary reason that they are being used.

4 Killed in Iraq Worked for N.C. Firm

Wed Mar 31, 6:22 PM ET
By EMERY P. DALESIO, Associated Press Writer

MOYOCK, N.C. - The four civilians who were killed and dragged through the streets of an Iraqi town Wednesday worked for a North Carolina subcontractor that is providing security in a hostile area of Iraq.

Blackwater Security Consulting provides security training and guard services to customers around the world. It is one of five subsidiaries of Blackwater USA, based in northeastern North Carolina about a half-hour's drive from the world's largest naval base in Norfolk, Va.

The company referred calls to a spokesman in suburban Washington who declined comment beyond a prepared statement that said Blackwater was a government subcontractor providing security for the delivery of food in the Fallujah area.
...
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...on_re_mi_ea/civilian_deaths&cid=540&ncid=1480

 

[capt. Nemo]

Philosophy

Someone a while back made reference to a philosophy of sorts: Kill the terrorists but not the people.

I think some are missing something very obvious to me...the people ARE the terrorists. I don't understand the view of several on this board that this is a police action and each terrorist needs a trial and justice and protection as provided by our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Damn, some posts have approached condemnation of our existance in the world and justification of the attacks on us. We've been compared to Hitler. We've been censured for referring to Muslims as anything but a great, peaceful, benevolent religion. It was said that we "owe it to foreigners" to make access to our country as easy as possible. Is the the next step to say that our country belongs to everybody except us?

If we delude ourselves into thinking that we can win the war - or even prevent another domestic attack - with a limited, politically correct, kill'em-with-kindness-justice-compassion approach, then we have already lost.

I don't see many Mullahs or Muslims condemning these atrocities. Guilt by omission may be as bad as guilt by commision.

I'm not racist, bigoted or cruel. I'm just an American.

Just my two cents worth...

Buck

 

[Paco]

capt. nemo,

woah there! No one said anything about America being another Nazi culture. I, me myself, I said that to use the argument of religion as an excuse to wipe out an ENTIRE people is awful close to the Fuhrer. If the shoe fits, fine, if not it's just an observation on a phylosophy approaching another known and corrupt phylosophy- No one here on this board strikes mean as a Nazi, just some of us have some serious anger and feel that their anger justifies statements of racial anger or religious anger.

-paco

 

[warmi]

" Blackwater was a government subcontractor providing security for the delivery of food in the Fallujah area."

Well, looks like they don't care for our food ...

 

[Paco]

Dear echosixmike,

How is Afganistan or Cambodia 'knocking on our door?' As for genocide vs police state, well, I think it's too easy to say it's just one or the other and a great way to justify a futile war. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but you would wipe out EVERY terrosist out there, meaning ALL muslims? How about home-grown terrorists like the oklahoma bombers?

How about instead only surgical strikes to the leaders- that's what I would propose. Get our specialists to do a quasi-Brasso suggestion/ thing: kill their terrorist leaders for every time they attack us-just like the idea in Afganistan. I know, I know: easier said than done- but that's what I'd propose while hurrying to set up their gov. and then split. I have no interest in making Iraq a state, or Afganistan for that matter.

What branch of the service are you going in as? Do you know what job they are giving you? What do your friends over there think of the situation?

-paco

 

[gunsmith]

were these guys and gals armed?

A guy I used to know worked for a company called dyncorp guarding places in Qatar,he quit because he wasn't allowed to carry weapons off duty.
I have not heard yet if these poor folks suffered the same dumb pc rules.

 

[Paco]

p.s. rileymc, I mean no offense but you sound like a conspiracy theorist or a hold over from the communist-red fear days. Do you really think those fighter/terrorists/peasants want to subjegate the WHOLE world? Yeah, yeah, I know what some of their fundamentalist leaders say, but guess what: I've heard similar talk from fundamentalist christians saying that christianity MUST be spread to all corners of the world... So much for freedom of belief.

BTW, I'm just as pissed at the terrorists as anyone, but that's just it: I'm pissed at the terrorists, not the mothers, fathers, brothers, and sisters they are associated with. Stay civil!

 

[warmi]

Yeah, they were.
I read that there were some weapons found inside of their burned out cars.

I don't think it mattered here much since they were ambushed by rpg wielding thugs.

 

[capt. Nemo]

Referencs

Hey Paco,

I didn't intend to start a side-discussion, but, you're the one who brought up the "H" word (gotta be PC):" 'kill the enemy off' bit: sounds way too much like Hitler".

What does one do to an enemy during wartime? I'm not being a smartass...I'd really like to know.

Mods, I know this is OT and if there's any follow up on this particular theme, we'll take it up with PM's.

Buck

 

[gunsmith]

Nuke Mecca?

eh, why not!
Probably not gonna happen, though they were (are)certainly asking for it.
If (as "paco" suggest) the Saudi's are such good friends of GW,why are they raising the price of gas during an election year?

Paco what is "spujegate"

The Islamic nut job terrorist either want to kill or convert the entire world to their brand of Islam,they believe that will bring world peace.

 

[Delmar]

I would guess there are peaceful people in Iraq-otherwise, we would be at war with the vast majority of them. That does not seem to be the case, at least not at this time.

I do not advocate killing wholesale, but those caught and known to be on the wrong side of this fight should be dealt with in the harshest possible terms.

Truman used an atomic bomb because it did the maximum about of damage and pretty much "out of the blue". Nobody would have thought a lone bomber could cause so much devastation, and it was a violent appeal to the empire to give up. Two bombs later, it worked. Not by itself-the USSR was chomping at the bit to get their booty, the rest of the allies had fought a long, bloody and no-quarter battle to get close.

Our "nuke" of the modern era are precision guided weapons. They fall out of the sky at altitudes where they cannot be seen by the naked eye. I don't think its a useful weapon at this stage of the war-not unless the bad guys dig a few buried tank divisions out of the sand.

The only thing which is going to do this is to find the bad guys and fight them toe to toe, and help the saner ones establish some kind of a sensible government, help to feed them and assist in helping them establish some kind of a working economy.

As others have mentioned, in the end-its their fight to win or lose. We won't be there forever.