Have people forgotten about 9/11?

[kai]

What do you think a war is? Your question is ridiculous. Prove it? You're at war! You want me to prove you're at war? Jeez. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians have died in your war. On top of that, the depleted uranium left by the bombing will cause hundreds of thousands of hideous, deadly birth defects in Iraqi civilians who have yet to be born. British soldiers are responsible for these past and future deaths. The UK government knew hundreds of thousands of civilians would die before going in, calculated this was a good way to achieve their political goals, and went in anyway. What more do you want?
I simply want you to back up your statement that UK armed forces in action or motive wish to kill as many civilians as it takes to achieve political goals?

To you, what is the moral difference between the British soldiers who die over there while killing Iraqis to achieve Blair's political goals and the Saudi Arabians who died in New York to achieve Osama bin Laden's political goals?
The British Army operations in Iraq are to train Iraqi Security forces under UN authorization its actions and aims are clearly laid out in depth here:
http://www.mod.uk/defenceinternet/home

the Criminals that hijacked those airplanes and flew themselves and everyone on board into civilian buildings in new york were terrorists if you don't see the difference then your politics are questionable at the very least
I don't see any difference. You haven't made a convincing case there is a difference. As far as I can see, your position is mostly based on naivety, propaganda, anti-Islamic sentiment and wishful thinking.

no i don't think you do see the difference , and spare me the anti Islamic bull ****e. and i shouldn't need to make a case against the 9/11 bombers unless of course you are of a similar ideology then you are beyond the pale.

 

[Alceste]

no i don't think you do see the difference , and spare me the anti Islamic bull ****e. and i shouldn't need to make a case against the 9/11 bombers unless of course you are of a similar ideology then you are beyond the pale.

In this case, my ideology is "What's good for the goose is good for the gander". If killing a few thousand American civilians on 9-11 for political reasons was "bad", then killing a few hundred thousand Iraqi and Afghani civilians for political reasons is "worse". If you don't see this yourself, then you're "wrong".

I don't see things in terms of good and evil though, but in terms of cause and effect. Without the fraudulent and misleading concepts of good and evil people in your mind, events in the world are much more easily (and accurately) understood.

 

[kai]

well i havnt mentioned evil ,i i am not sure whether i agree it even exists so i rarely use the term.

what i do beleive is that the 911 attacks were murder.

you will have to source me again if you can for the "few hundred thousand Iraqi and Afghani civilians" i am not so flipant with the numbers.

i like facts lets see you produce them.

 

[OutOfTime]

more like million+ but ppl don't matter

 

[tomspug]

If you don't see this yourself, then you're "wrong".

That's pretty broken logic right there.

Odd that some would criticize people that are pro-just-war as being "black and white" and yet look at the loss of human life in strictly black and white terms. Apparently there's gray area in every circumstance, except war, which is always bad.

 

[Alceste]

well i havnt mentioned evil ,i i am not sure whether i agree it even exists so i rarely use the term.

what i do beleive is that the 911 attacks were murder.

you will have to source me again if you can for the "few hundred thousand Iraqi and Afghani civilians" i am not so flipant with the numbers.

i like facts lets see you produce them.

Here you go.

To summarize the article, civilian deaths resulting from the invasion were estimated at 655,000 in Iraq alone as of October 2006 in one of the only two scientific studies existing at the time.

 

[kai]

Here you go.

To summarize the article, civilian deaths resulting from the invasion were estimated at 655,000 in Iraq alone as of October 2006 in one of the only two scientific studies existing at the time.

interesting reading 69% of those killed by insurgents ,whats your point i seem to have forgotten oh yeah coalition bad insurgents good. theres a war on, we are trying to help the Iraqis defend themselves when they can do that were gone.

a few facts to remind you what we are doing there apart from killing civilians

from the MOD

The coalition has been involved in what was probably the most ambitious security sector reform effort in modern times. More than 400,000 members of the Iraqi Security Forces have now been trained and equipped.
The capability of the Iraqi Security Forces is increasing all the time. The Iraqis have assumed operational control of the Iraq Navy and Air Force as well as 11 divisions of the Iraqi Army – all clear demonstrations of the progress being made. Around three quarters of Iraqi Army Battalions are capable of operating independently or only require minimal support in areas such as planning or logistics.
Largely as a result of increasing ISF capability, nine out of Iraq's 18 provinces are now under Iraqi control.
Political Progress
Iraqis adopted a new permanent constitution by referendum in October 2005, with a turnout of 63%. The constitution defines Iraq as democratic and pluralist.
Iraqis have their first ever democratically-elected government. The elections held in December 2005 saw a turnout of over 12 million people, or 76% of the electorate. Iraq's Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, announced his Government of National Unity on 20 May 2006.

yes a hard job against a determined enemy.


.

 

[Alceste]

interesting reading 69% of those killed by insurgents ,whats your point i seem to have forgotten oh yeah coalition bad insurgents good. theres a war on, we are trying to help the Iraqis defend themselves when they can do that were gone.

a few facts to remind you what we are doing there apart from killing civilians

from the MOD

The coalition has been involved in what was probably the most ambitious security sector reform effort in modern times. More than 400,000 members of the Iraqi Security Forces have now been trained and equipped.
The capability of the Iraqi Security Forces is increasing all the time. The Iraqis have assumed operational control of the Iraq Navy and Air Force as well as 11 divisions of the Iraqi Army – all clear demonstrations of the progress being made. Around three quarters of Iraqi Army Battalions are capable of operating independently or only require minimal support in areas such as planning or logistics.
Largely as a result of increasing ISF capability, nine out of Iraq's 18 provinces are now under Iraqi control.
Political Progress
Iraqis adopted a new permanent constitution by referendum in October 2005, with a turnout of 63%. The constitution defines Iraq as democratic and pluralist.
Iraqis have their first ever democratically-elected government. The elections held in December 2005 saw a turnout of over 12 million people, or 76% of the electorate. Iraq's Prime Minister, Nouri al-Maliki, announced his Government of National Unity on 20 May 2006.

yes a hard job against a determined enemy.


.

I think you have missed the point. The civil war is a result of the invasion. There wouldn't be a state of anarchy in Iraq if the UK/US hadn't invaded and imposed it on them. The collapse into violence and anarchy was a foreseeable consequence of invasion - so obvious even Bush I backed away from the idea of a ground war, realizing the consequences of a leadership vacuum in Iraq would be too dire to justify the effort. So Bush and Blair and the poor soldiers who now find themselves acting as their personal armies bear a large share of moral responsibility for these deaths. All of these deaths - whether caused by bombing, US chemical weapons attacks, random shootings from joyriding private security forces, or local groups battling amongst themselves for power or revenge - would not have occurred without the intrusion of US/UK forces into Iraq. That's what the study established. The death rate before and after invasion. The 655,000 casualties are civilian deaths in excess of the death rate prior to invasion.

At any rate, even if you insist on distinguishing between who is doing the killing in Iraq (difficult, as there is some question as to whether private security firms are inciting violence by dressing up as Iraqis and shooting people), 31 % of these deaths are still attributed to the invading armies. So over a hundred thousand Iraqi men, women and children had been murdered by US/UK forces as of October 2006. (I don't know the count in Afghanistan.)

That's still "worse" than the handful of Americans (in comparison) al Qaeda murdered.

Also, please don't use MOD claims to back your argument. Sheesh.

 

[McBell]

that ought to learn them there terrorists.
They kill civilians on our land and we will go over there and show them how to kill civilians!!!

 

[kai]

I think you have missed the point. The civil war is a result of the invasion. There wouldn't be a state of anarchy in Iraq if the UK/US hadn't invaded and imposed it on them. The collapse into violence and anarchy was a foreseeable consequence of invasion - so obvious even Bush I backed away from the idea of a ground war, realizing the consequences of a leadership vacuum in Iraq would be too dire to justify the effort. So Bush and Blair and the poor soldiers who now find themselves acting as their personal armies bear a large share of moral responsibility for these deaths. All of these deaths - whether caused by bombing, US chemical weapons attacks, random shootings from joyriding private security forces, or local groups battling amongst themselves for power or revenge - would not have occurred without the intrusion of US/UK forces into Iraq. That's what the study established. The death rate before and after invasion. The 655,000 casualties are civilian deaths in excess of the death rate prior to invasion.
oh i get the point not enough thought went in to after the regime fell security is the major problem
At any rate, even if you insist on distinguishing between who is doing the killing in Iraq (difficult, as there is some question as to whether private security firms are inciting violence by dressing up as Iraqis and shooting people), 31 % of these deaths are still attributed to the invading armies. So over a hundred thousand Iraqi men, women and children had been murdered by US/UK forces as of October 2006. (I don't know the count in Afghanistan.)
I do insist ,why dont you? murder is still an offence in my book,
That's still "worse" than the handful of Americans (in comparison) al Qaeda murdered.
its obvious where your sympathies lie,
Also, please don't use MOD claims to back your argument. Sheesh.

Why not too boring for you? look there is no consensus with us , i dont agree with the way you look at things and vise versa so. i am not going to change your mind nor will i change yours so i am tired of this crap. thats the way of the world.

 

[kai]

that ought to learn them there terrorists.
They kill civilians on our land and we will go over there and show them how to kill civilians!!!

yeah tell that to the next veteran you meet.

 

[McBell]

yeah tell that to the next veteran you meet.

No need.
That was actually my fathers response when he read this thread.

He spent four tours in Nam, three of which as a tunnel rat.

So, would you care to explain what you meant by:

yeah tell that to the next veteran you meet
​

 

[Alceste]

No need.
That was actually my fathers response when he read this thread.

He spent four tours in Nam, three of which as a tunnel rat.

So, would you care to explain what you meant by:

yeah tell that to the next veteran you meet
​

Here's one veteran's opinion - well worth watching.

Tony Benn on youtube

 

[kai]

No need.
That was actually my fathers response when he read this thread.

He spent four tours in Nam, three of which as a tunnel rat.


So, would you care to explain what you meant by:

yeah tell that to the next veteran you meet​

you know exactly what i meant, a veteran of the Iraq war. would you care to explain why you didnt know what war we were talking about?

 

[Alceste]

you know exactly what i meant, a veteran of the Iraq war. would you care to explain why you didnt know what war we were talking about?

Hey man, you said "veteran."

 

[kai]

Here's one veteran's opinion - well worth watching.

Tony Benn on youtube

ha ha i might have known you would share political views with anthony wedgwood benn ----oh sorry tony benn , and when did he serve in Iraq? i would have thought he was a little old

 

[kai]

Hey man, you said "veteran."

hey man we were talking about "Iraq" and the statement about killing civilians.

 

[Alceste]

hey man we were talking about "Iraq" and the statement about killing civilians.

Well, I think WWII veteran Tony Benn's comment regarding how there is "no difference between a suicide bomber and a stealth bomber - they both kill civilians for political reasons" was pretty clear on how some veterans feel.

But really, just admit your attempt to suggest there is some unity of opinion or feeling among soldiers who have served in a war (ie. tell that to the next veteran you meet") failed.

 

[McBell]

you know exactly what i meant, a veteran of the Iraq war. would you care to explain why you didnt know what war we were talking about?

So sorry.
I was unawares that "veteran" meant only those in the Iraq war.
Interesting that you have to now add these conditional modifiers to your statement.

So, you gonna answer the question:

So, would you care to explain what you meant by:

yeah tell that to the next veteran you meet
​

Or are you going to continue backpedaling?

 

[kai]

Well, I think WWII veteran Tony Benn's comment regarding how there is "no difference between a suicide bomber and a stealth bomber - they both kill civilians for political reasons" was pretty clear on how some veterans feel.
thats his opinion he is so far left he marched around in circles left, left ,left,left
But really, just admit your attempt to suggest there is some unity of opinion or feeling among soldiers who have served in a war (ie. tell that to the next veteran you meet") failed.

this is my opinion , the more people like you accuse our armed forces of killing civilians , the more **** they get when they come home. i dont need to tell it to he next veteran i meet ,i am a veteran 15 years service including reserve, 2nd Battalion parachute regiment,