http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...age/index.html
Just makes me sick!!! I wish the best for Kim Sun-il's family.
Third time and it seems it won't stop.
Printable View
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...age/index.html
Just makes me sick!!! I wish the best for Kim Sun-il's family.
Third time and it seems it won't stop.
Doesn't this whole situation just suck. Everyone thinks they are doing the right thing, nothing gets accomplished and things just dig deeper. Hands for human nature.
woopee
edit now I feel like changing my avatar back. wtf.
Is there a solution????? Will there ever be one????? Seems a life is so cheap,
no matter what the demands of these hostage takers, your government dont
care a flying toss about you. We say that to negotiate with these terroists, we
are giving in to them. Forget the value of a humans life, too right it sucks.
I wonder if things would be different if it was a diplomat or an important VIP, how
fast would the government act if it was a more precious life?????
How quickly we forget Daniel Pearl.......Quote:
Third time and it seems it won't stop
In the case of the beheading in Saudi the solution is quite clear. They wanted their buddies released from Saudi prisons. They beheaded a foreigner from a friendly nation when their demands were not acceeded to. The Saudi's should take 5 of the prisoners and bury then to the neck and publicly stone them to death. (This is Saudi Arabia, remember they stoned one of their own princesses to death 20 odd years ago). The point of the burial to the neck? IIRC, men get stoned to death by being buried to the waist. If they can escape before they die they are set free. Women on the other hand are buried to the neck purportedly because their breasts mustn't me exposed. Try escaping when you are buried to the neck! All together now.... "That seems fair....." :rolleyes:
In a society where "macho" is very big and insult comes so quickly to the men Al Quaida will not only force the deaths of their "friends" but also the public humiliation of being stoned to death as a woman would be.......
Now that has a very simple answer -- just remember the embassy in Iran. Then of course they negotiated. Stalled, and then negotiated again. Then really blew it with their combined military force/operation, then negotiated again.Quote:
Originally posted here by TidaLphasE23
I wonder if things would be different if it was a diplomat or an important VIP, how
fast would the government act if it was a more precious life?????
The only reason it worked out without more deaths, is they got tired of all the stalling and were afraid our new incoming president would nuke their asses.
The beheadings will continue as long as they have serious shock value. All they want is an emotional outcry. The only interest that the prisoner has for his kinappers is his use as a political tool. It shouldn't be forgotten beheading is still acccepted as an legitamite and honorable form of execution in many middle east countries. They know that by screening it, it will shock the west but look offical to their own culture.
While it looks good from a political standpoint to send in the army. An army in never very effective against terrorist as you cant fight terrorists in the same way you would another country. Small highly specialized units are much more effective. Al quida and the other organisations are operating way out in the open. They need to be forced back to being an underground movement.
Tiger shark I may be wrong but I think they would find that hanging is a much more insulting way to be executed as it would put them down with the lowest form of criminal.
You might be right.... My point is that they should be killed in the most humiliating way they can be due to the Arab man's view of honor. Killed as a woman or killed as a criminal... whichever suits me fine as long as Al Quaida know they will dishonor 5 of the people they are trying to "help" each time they behead anyone.Quote:
hanging is a much more insulting way to be executed as it would put them down with the lowest form of criminal.
I know :idea: , Kill em all let God sort it out, or should i say Alah, as he will be taking over soon enough. Violence wont solve violence, as should be too obvious by now in this conflict
Now we are talking how best to humiliate these people. Dead is dead, simple. The more we
degrade their faith, the stronger their cause will become, not only in occupied countries, but
all over the world where there are muslims.
Dead makes them a Martyr, dishonored makes them dead!
Use thier own beliefs against them.... On that note isn't there something in Islam that says if the eyes are removed directly before or directly after death, (I forget which), that the person will wander forever in limbo, unable to find heaven and the 72 virgins that await them? Let's have the Saudi's do that too while we are at it. Then Al-Quaida are condemning their "friends" to an eternity in limbo too...... Their "friends" won't be so keen on being "rescued" then....
I'm just glad they are keeping to the geneva convention. Lucky these men, who hide in shadows until a victim is found are keeping a vigilant eye on the rules set forth by the convention. Hacking people off the street to death, guilty of working in a foreign land. Beheading is such a nice word, perhaps hacking and knawing is a better term. Why because their breatheren or in prinson held by the ultimate evil on planet earth, the USA. They probably got caught setting an explosive on a mosque full of ordinary people. Who knows, but it seemed only a few weeks ago that the Geneva Convention was singley the most important thing on earth, so I am glad they are keeping their end of humanity and upholding those principles. We must obey the tenents of Islam and give into their wishes.
Actually that is why I would go for hanging. It has nothing to do with their faith as it is a civil punishment. Terrorists especially religious fanatics see themselves as having a higher moral justification for their acts. It is important to get the message across that they are no different than anyone else that commites a crime. I am sure if you bring them before a court using their own laws the sentence would be death.Quote:
Now we are talking how best to humiliate these people. Dead is dead, simple. The more we degrade their faith, the stronger their cause will become, not only in occupied countries, but all over the world where there are muslims.
Why should they? Didint Bush declare the war in Iraq over? If there is no war then the convention doesnt apply. Roadclosed You know my opinion on Bush putting the US on a war footing so I wont go into it here. All I will say is you should expect terrorist to complain about their rights and the fact that they are protected by different international conventions but you should not expect them to respect your rights or the international conventions they use to protect themselves.Quote:
I'm just glad they are keeping to the geneva convention.
The war in Iraq is over. This is Al Quida rearing it head out of the holes it has left or can get away with. They and their copiers attack Iraqis, Koreans, Europeans, without mercy or any spitting image of Geneva and those long ago conventions. My entire post was full of sarcasm. So Al quida prisoners should not be given geneva convention autonomy? If their Islamic brothers do not do so as courtesy? And because there is not longer a war? Interesting.
The revered mastermind in Iraq Al-Zarqawi once again quouted just today that he and his followers will fight Americans and the Iraqi government until Islamic rule is once again back on earth. I mean that's hard to fix isn't it, without resorting to their own style of violence. Whoever said you can't fight violence with violence, hasn't examined world history very well. EVIL can only be stopped by violence. Hitler didn't stop gassing the Jews becuase we were nice to him and let him conquer Europe (minus the that big island over by the North Sea) and others beyond the millenia. Of course that is my own sense of evil, but I'll stand by it.
~10 000 dead iraqi civillians http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ , 3 beheadings and everyone goes apeshit what a joke. <bitter sarcasm> I guess death is only important if your not a sand nigger </bitter sarcasm>
SourceQuote:
Tom Grey answers David Crow's request the empirical basis for his statement on the number of dead under Saddam Hussein. "See http://www.gbn.org/ArticleDisplaySer...=2400&msp=1242 Here is an excerpt:":Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power"
I think that put's your 10,000 deaths back into proper perspective lumpy. Saddam was managing 25,000 a year..... We are 15,000 in profit!!!!
The Joke is that you take the figure you are given and don't look to see what the alternative is, you just blindly jump on something that sounds so terrible. A very liberal trait indeed.
Should I assume that a critical thought process is only important if you aren't a Canadian? ;)
Many more would die if Al Queda would ever gain power there. Iraq isn't exactly a model state based on the Al Queda view of Islam. I am considering educating or discussing more about Al Queda in the future. For instance I was surpised at their audacity to behead a Korean. They calculated that move very carefully and chose the director for their world staging. Their Star was found hours later near Falujah. I wonder how many of those 10,000 lived in that town? I wonder how many "brothers" are dying at the hands of Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi. I wonder why the media continues to play his message all around the world... containing activation codes to pre arranged, and pre planned terrorist cell watching for the "green light".
how did they establish "civilian" dead. those that weren't wearing uniforms?
"I wonder why the media continues to play his message all around the world... containing activation codes to pre arranged, and pre planned terrorist cell watching for the "green light""
if you consider those that fight the war effort on every front, list the number killed by terrorist bombs as numbers only and and those killed by american assaults as 'civilians including woman and children' anything but 'the enemy' i dont know what else to say. its very clear whose side they are fighting for.
The ends justify the means do they? , The deaths cited are averaged out over his whole reign which was VERY bloody when fully supported by the us in the 80s with wmd and technology, ironic isn't it ? , in recent times he was killing far less people.Quote:
Originally posted here by Tiger Shark
Source
I think that put's your 10,000 deaths back into proper perspective lumpy. Saddam was managing 25,000 a year..... We are 15,000 in profit!!!!
The Joke is that you take the figure you are given and don't look to see what the alternative is, you just blindly jump on something that sounds so terrible. A very liberal trait indeed.
Should I assume that a critical thought process is only important if you aren't a Canadian? ;)
The us goverment fails to count the dead (or even allow you to see the coffins of the american dead wonder why?) so i have no reference too even it out with.
I think that it is very sick that a couple killings , can obscure the deaths of thousands, makes sence to me.
Critical thought is not a bastion in america , note _fox news_ and half of americans still beliving saddam and osama are buddys and wmd existed, even Cheney still believes that hahahahhahaha pot calling the kettle black their;)
Are those deaths in Iraq in general since the "US occupation" cause by US soldiers? Does that include the 80 people that were killed during car bombings...and the 230+ wounded, some of which will die from their wounds. Does it also include the hundreds of innocent civilians that are killed during other roadside bombings, and car bombings caused by the militia? What about the deaths caused by getting caught in the crossfire during firefights between the Coalition forces and the insurgents? Is that number a count of deaths caused by US soldiers alone or does it also include deaths caused by other coalition soldiers, such as the British for that matter.
Don't get me wrong, 100 killed civilians is 100 killed civilians too many. I'm trying to understand, or hopefully have others understand that during a war such as this one, you cannot just point your finger at the US and blame them for all the deaths that are happening. You could argue that if the US had never went in there, then those civilians would have been killed. One could also argue that if the US had not gone in there, then other civilians would have died by the Hussein Regime. I see you saying that those numbers have averaged since the 80s....are you saying that since lately he's been doing less killing of civilians, Saddam wasn't so bad?
If you want to see that number slow down (it wont decrease, its impossible), but if you really want to see that number slow down dramatically, it has to start with the militants opposing the US, which are the one's causing the most deaths amongst the civilians. Every day you read in the paper, car bombing here, car bombing there...20 killed here by a bomb, 80 killed there by another bomb...They're killing their own people, and for what, to earn animosity towards the US? Quite frankly is working since so many people are sick and tired of "US SOLDIERS KILLING INNOCENT CIVILIANS".
Are you talking about American casualties or Iraqi that they're not counting?Quote:
The us goverment fails to count the dead (or even allow you to see the coffins of the american dead wonder why?) so i have no reference too even it out with.
One reason why they are not showing the coffins of the soldiers is sim ply because of all the propaganda that is going on in the states. Remember, its an election year, and you have the majority of the press being liberal. If no1 has access to take pictures of something that can be used as political propaganda, then no1 has anything to bitch and whine about. That priviledge can be abused very easily. Take into account Michael Moore for example, with his new movie "Fahrenheit 9/11". He dares to use the grief and pain of a mother who lost her son in Iraq, and make her read the last letter her son sent her, while pointing a camera at her face. Can you say irresponsible media?
Journalism here in the US has gonne to shits....and there is no more such thing as responsible journalism, except a few.
My 2 cent.
Lumpy - There is a big distinction between civilian casualties that are incurred collaterally during the process of fighting the enemy, which admittedly the U.S. is guilty of, and targeting civilians as Al-Queda does. The civilians that were killed by the U.S. were due to errant missles, stray bullets, in the wrong place at the wrong time, or they were voluntarily/involuntarily used as human shields around military targets. During this whole conflict with Iraq the U.S. has never targeted and killed civilians on purpose. Al-Queda and Saddam on the other hand has targeted, kidnapped, and killed civilians in cold blood. Saddam called this just in the name of maintaining his power base, and Al-Queda called this just according to Allah.
If this is the kind of Society that you desire to live in, then I am glad you reside in Canada instead of the United States.
There were two fairly important points made here. Firstly while there are 10,000 dead Iraqis it should be remembered that the US army were not the only ones shooting. Secondly the vast majority of people killed under Sadams regiem were killed while he had open support from the west. It is important to seperate the propaganda from the facts on both sides.
"Are you talking about American casualties or Iraqi that they're not counting"
no all the civillian deaths,
"A year after the war began Iraqi civilians are still being killed every day. Over 10,000 Iraqi civilians are estimated to have been killed since 18 March 2003 as a direct result of the military intervention in Iraq, either during the war or during the subsequent occupation. The figure is an estimate as the authorities are unwilling or unable to catalogue killings. "We don't have the capacity to track all civilian casualties," US Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt told Reuters in February.
Scores of civilians have been killed apparently as a result of excessive use of force by US troops, or have been shot dead in disputed circumstances. For example, US soldiers have shot and killed scores of Iraqi demonstrators in several incidents, including seven in Mosul on 15 April 2003, at least 15 in Falluja on 29 April and two outside the Republican Palace in Baghdad on 18 June.
In November 2003 the US military said it had paid out US $1.5 million to Iraqi civilians to settle claims by victims or relatives of victims for personal injury, death or damage to property. Some of the 10,402 claims reportedly filed concerned incidents in which US soldiers had shot dead or seriously wounded Iraqi civilians with no apparent cause. Beyond such payments, however, there has been little recourse for the families of the dead and injured. No US soldier has been prosecuted for illegally killing an Iraqi civilian. Iraqi courts, because of an order issued by the US-led authority in Baghdad in June 2003, are forbidden from hearing cases against US soldiers or any other foreign troops or foreign officials in Iraq. In effect, US soldiers are operating with total impunity."
from here --- Amnesty international
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index...pen&of=ENG-IRQ
I'm with snoop D_0_double G on this one, the only person able to fight a terrorist is a "Gorrila Gangsta"
Quote: George Bush is "Gorilla Gangsta". He has lots of power, and isn't afraid to throw it around. Like in the election, when he took control of the Florida recount, that was totally gangsta. And now, even though nobody else wants war, he's got so much conviction that he's going to ignore everyone and go to war anyway. That's a real gorilla gangsta. --- Snoop Dogg Late night show Conan O'Brien.
*sigh* You can bet your last stock that our & others black OPS are doing the same thing around the world and worse, the only difference is they don't show it to the soccer moms.
I always hear "well now most of europe will and does hate us now" who gives sh!t, I'm only alive for 1-110 years, do I really give a sh!t about was some knuckle head across the globe thinks of my country? We the US swings the biggest D*** in the land they need to rember that.
I'm going to say that 88% of americans could care less what they think. Alot of america is rural *hence* they don't give a ****. It's not going to change the way they live.
"An then the UN could have been envolved" who gives a sh!t again, remeber how slow they were in the blackhawk down movie.
I know what the whole world is thinking, back off leave the area and everything and everyone will go away. This all started with the russians stepping foot on "islamic soil" thats what chapped Bin-laden's ass. The west can never go back it's too late, too many feet have touched islamic soil and too much islamic blood has been spilled.
I'm not going to lose any sleep on what someone else thinks about the greatest land that has the best women,food,bandwidth, ect.......... I've vacationed all through alot of major tourist destinations and most were nice but still did not come to par with the US and I'm going to say most were behind in the times a good 10 to 15 some way more...
I'm curious to see this next election and how it will turn out If they will keep the gorilla gangsta or place kerry.
I would say kerry will to turn into a gorilla gangsta aswell as soon as he gets those daily terrorist reports everyday thrown on his desk.
2 short comments:
1. When it comes to the presidential election - I prefer to stick with the evil we know instead of the evil we don't. (hey man, sometimes cliche's work...)
2. I agree with lumpyporridge...or whoever it was that said that it's sad that a few highly publicized, but nonetheless unnecessary deaths can make everyone completely forget about the tens of *thousands* all over the world. I say - the press sux. They figure somebody (with a name) being beheaded is more dramatic and better for their ratings than thousands of nameless people being needlessly slaughtered...whatever.
The magic words in this paragraph are "during the war or during the subsequent occupation." Only sustaining 10,000 civilian casualities during a war is fantastic when you consider the alternative before "smart" technology being employed in the U.S. weaponry. I'm sure that carpet bombing would have pushed the number of civilian casualties into the hundreds of thousands easily.Quote:
"A year after the war began Iraqi civilians are still being killed every day. Over 10,000 Iraqi civilians are estimated to have been killed since 18 March 2003 as a direct result of the military intervention in Iraq, either during the war or during the subsequent occupation. The figure is an estimate as the authorities are unwilling or unable to catalogue killings. "We don't have the capacity to track all civilian casualties," US Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt told Reuters in February.
Now I went and read the sensless drivel contained in the Amnesty International article, and there is some additional information that needs to be brought to light in this discussion. The first thing to look at is that the casuality count is "all inclusive." of every death that can be linked to the war.
These Categories are:
Killings by Coalition Forces: Sad, but it does occur. Note that contrary to the statements made in the article there is a means for holding military individuals accountable, if the killing was unjust. It's called the Universal Code of Military Justice. Yes, a soldier may get away with potential war crimes, but how is this any different for any war fought throughout history. If caught the individual will be prosecuted under the UCMJ. Try to keep in prospective that unjust people are located throughout the world, and unfortunantly the U.S. military is no exception.
Killings by armed individuals: This category consisted of suicide bombs, planted explosives possible mortar fire, targeted assisinations, stray bullets from targeted assasinations, and acts of revenge carried out by individuals. Many appear to have been organized, reportedly by armed Islamist groups. So here we go again with a left wing propaganda organization trying to blame terrorism on the U.S. It still amazes me that anyone can find a terrorists actions to be "innocent." The U.S. soilder that kills an innocent on purpose deserves to be shot himself, but remember that this is not an overall mindset inclusive in the U.S. military. Now terrorism is a mindset where all ends justify the means. To most terrorists it's ok to target a bus full of kids and their teachers in order to get their message out.
Whose side do you guys want to be on anyways. A bunch of fanatics that want to rule with an iron fist or a Democratic legislature where freedom is admired and respected?