The US hasn't quite reached the depths of depravity of Israel or Hitler but we are heading in that direction fast. With the psychopaths in charge of the US today, we have at least reached the levels of Vietnam with astounding speed.

I am really struck by the irony of this statement: "This fence is here for your protection. Do not approach or try to cross, or you will be shot."


Iraq through the American looking glass
Insurgents are civilians. Tanks that crush civilians are traffic accidents. And civilians should endure heavy doses of fear and violence
By Robert Fisk in Baghdad
26 December 2003

Something very unpleasant is being let loose in Iraq. Just this week, a company commander in the US 1st Infantry Division in the north of the country admitted that, in order to elicit information about the guerrillas who are killing American troops, it was necessary to "instill fear" in the local villagers. An Iraqi interpreter working for the Americans had just taken an old lady from her home to frighten her daughters and grand-daughters into believing that she was being arrested.

A battalion commander in the same area put the point even more baldly. "With a heavy dose of fear and violence, and a lot of money for projects, I think we can convince these people that we are here to help them," he said. He was speaking from a village that his men had surrounded with barbed wire, upon which was a sign, stating: "This fence is here for your protection. Do not approach or try to cross, or you will be shot."

Try to explain that this treatment - and these words - offend the very basic humanity of the people whom the Americans claimed they came to "liberate" and you are met in Baghdad with the same explanation: that a very small "remnant" of "diehards" - loyal to the now-captured Saddam Hussein, etc, etc - have to be separated from the civilians whom they are "intimidating".

To point out that the intimidation is largely coming from the American occupation force - to the horror of the British in southern Iraq who fear, understandably, that Iraqi revenge will be visited upon them as it was on the Italians and the Spanish - is useless.

Instead, we are told that American troops are winning those famous hearts and minds with the spirit of Christmas. There was a grim example of this - and the inherent racism that pervades even reporting of such events - on the Associated Press wire agency just this week.

Describing how an American soldier in a Santa Claus hat was giving out stuffed animals to children, reporter Jason Keyser wrote that one 11-year- old child "looked puzzled, then smiled" as the soldier gave him a small, stuffed goat. Then the report continued: "Others in the crowd of mostly Muslims grabbed greedily at the box," adding the soldier's remark that: "They don't know how to handle generosity."

I don't doubt the soldier's wish to do good. But what is one to make of the "mostly Muslims" who "grabbed greedily" at the gifts? Or the soldier's insensitive remarks about generosity? Iraqi newspapers have been front--paging a Christmas card produced by US troops in Baghdad: "1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Wishes you a very Merry Christmas!" it says.

But the illustration is of Saddam Hussein in his scruffy beard just after his capture, with a Santa hat superimposed on top of his head. Funny enough for us, no doubt - I can't personally think of a better fall-guy for St Nicholas - but a clear insult to Sunni Arabs who, however much they may loathe the beast of Baghdad, will see in this card a deliberate attempt to humiliate Muslim Iraqis. It is for Iraqis to demean their ex-president - not their American occupiers.

It's almost as if the occupying powers want to look through Alice's looking glass. This week, we had the odd statement by British General Graeme Lamb that Saddam could be compared to the Emperor Caligula. Now the good general was probably relying on Suetonius's Twelve Caesars for his views on Caligula. But if anything, the Roman was a good deal more insane than Saddam and even more heedless of human life.

The crazy Uday Hussein, son of Saddam, might have been a more appropriate parallel. But what was all this supposed to achieve? A serious war crimes trial - preferably outside Iraq and far from the country's contaminated judiciary - is the way to define the nature of Saddam's repulsive regime.

All references to the ex-dictator as Hitler, Stalin, Attila the Hun or Caligula - like all suggestions that Tony Blair or George Bush are Winston Churchill - are infantile. And again, they will appear insulting to the Sunni Muslims of Iraq, the one community which the Americans should be desperate to placate, since it is the Sunnis who are primarily resisting the occupation.

But the looking-glass effect seems to have taken hold of US pro-consul Paul Bremer's entire authority. Like President George Bush, Bremer has now taken to repeating the absurdity that the greater the West's success in Iraq, the more frequent will be the attacks on American troops.

"I personally feel that we'll actually have more violence in the next six months," he said a couple of week ago, "and the violence will be precisely because of the fact that we're building momentum toward success." In other words, the better things become, the worse they're going to get. And the greater the violence, the better we're doing in Iraq.

I wouldn't worry about this nonsense so much if it wasn't mirrored on the ground in Iraq. Take the US claim - now regarded as an absurdity - that they killed "54 insurgents" in Samara a month ago. The truth is that they killed at least eight civilians and there's not a smidgen of evidence that they killed anyone else. But still they insist on sticking to the story of their great victory.

Last week, they pushed out a similar version of the same story. This time there were 11 dead "insurgents" in Samara. But when The Independent investigated, it could only find records of four dead civilians and a lot of wounded. None of the wounded - presumably "insurgents" if the Americans believe their own story - had been visited in hospital by US forces who might, if they didn't question them, at least have apologised.

An even more peculiar habit has now manifest itself among spokesmen for the occupation authorities. When a tank drove over a prominent Shiite Muslim cleric in the Baghdad suburb of Sadr City three weeks ago, they claimed this was a "traffic accident", as if driving an M1A1 Abrams tank over a car and a robed prelate is the kind of thing that can happen on any downtown street.

A few days later, after a truck-bomber crashed into a car and killed 17 civilians, the occupation lads churned out the same rubbish again. It was, they said, a "traffic accident" involving a petrol tanker. But there was no tanker attached to the lorry.

The first American troops on the scene found the grenades intended to detonate the bomb and the victims were all blasted to bits - not burned, as they would have been if the petrol tanker had simply caught fire. Those of us who reached the scene shortly after the slaughter could still smell the explosives. But it was a "traffic accident".

Only yesterday we had an equally bizarre event. Jets, C-130 aircraft mounted with chain guns, and heavy artillery were all reported to be striking "guerrilla bases" in Operation Iron Hammer south of Baghdad. But investigation proved that the targets were empty fields and that some of the heavy guns were firing blank rounds as part of an artillery maintenance routine.

So let's get this right. Insurgents are civilians. Truck bombs and tanks that crush civilians are traffic accidents. And the "liberated" civilians who live in villages surrounded by razor wire should endure "a heavy dose of fear and violence" to keep them on the straight and narrow.

Somewhere along the way, they will probably be told about democracy as well.

Now that Saddam and most of the top cards have been caught, who do you the American government fear most taking over if they for some reasons left iraq tomorrow ?:

- the sunni triangle
- the sjiites supported by iran
- a bloody ongoing lebanon stalemate situation where all kinds of factions fight for their little piece and serves as hideout and breedingground for al-quaida???

Jagger: The following is an outrageous statement, which diminishes the credibility of the remainder of your post.The US hasn't quite reached the depths of depravity of Israel or Hitler but we are heading in that direction fast.The USSR and perhaps some African cultures (EG: Idi Amin) belong in a class with Nazi Germany under Hitler. Equating Israel to Nazi Germany is the intellectual equivalent of an outright lie. Suggesting USA is almost as evil as Nazi Germany is similarly dishonest and shows pathological hatred of Americans.

After your introduction, I took time to read the rest of the thread, but I will look elsewhere for information about the mess in Iraq. Perhaps what you posted is close to the truth, but why should I pay any attention to it after the obviously exaggerated and biased introduction?

BTW: I am an American with an Anglo-Saxon heritage and am proud of what my ancestors did in the last 300 or so years. I think that those who post opinions about controversial political and religious subjects should identify their background. It helps in assessing bias.

Originally posted by Dinosaur
[BI am an American with an Anglo-Saxon heritage and am proud of what my ancestors did in the last 300 or so years.

So you are proud of the thousands of innocent Native Americans you have murdered because you thought were superior and had the right given by God?

You are proud of forcing people into converting to your religon?

You are proud of treating blacks as slaves?

You are proud of stealing land from both the Spanish and the Native Americans because of a Manifest Destiny you think God gave you?

You are proud of giving Iraq WMDs?

You are proud of supporting dictators like Saddam/Shah of Iran as long as they did nothing to you?

You are proud of raping little Native American girls and woman?

You are proud of torturing blacks?

You are proud of killing thousands of Iraqis just to find a WMD?

You are proud of your country letting out lies such as Jessica Lynch and the fake Osama tapes?

You are proud of sending all those Cuban exiles to their death in the Bay of Pigs invasion?

You are proud of the FBI and CIA spying on civilians back in the late 60s and early 70s?

You are proud of telling other countries not to make nukes, but then you change face and make them?

You are proud of killing the Chileans who did not support your government back in 1973?

You are proud of letting criminals steal stuff from Iraqi museums?

Pakman & Jagger: What are your backgrounds?

BTW: How much time do you spend researching the evils of America?

The good old USA really is a terrible place. That is why people from all over the world want to come here.

America did not invent slavery. We inherited it. Our founding fathers established the best (although flawed) system of government ever conceived.

I am not proud of many our our actions, but I would compare our actions favorably to those of the Islamic and African cultures. We do not hack thousands of non combatants to death with machetes. We stopped treating women as property over 100 years ago. Our culture has evolved since the 10th century.

If I did a bit of research, I am sure that I could come up with a lot of evils perpetrated by your cultures, what ever they are.

Originally posted by Dinosaur
Pakman & Jagger: What are your backgrounds?

What does that have to do with anything?

America did not invent slavery. We inherited it. Our founding fathers established the best (although flawed) system of government ever conceived.
You inherited it and then adopted it wholeheartedly with no thought or recognition that it was a disgusting practice.

And you can really say you have the best system of Government ever conceived, in all seriousness, in the face of how your current President was elected?

I am not proud of many our our actions, but I would compare our actions favorably to those of the Islamic and African cultures. We do not hack thousands of non combatants to death with machetes. We stopped treating women as property over 100 years ago. Our culture has evolved since the 10th century.
No you just drop bombs on them or supply bombs and weapons to the enemies of your enemy. And some of your country folk have also been known to tie up a black man and drag him along behind a moving car until he died a horrid death while others used to hang black people from trees, all because they were black. Other of your country folk have been known to murder homosexuals in ways that can't even be spoken about due to their vile nature. And some other of your country folk are quite happy to take a gun and shoot others in schools, work places, etc. The list goes on, but I'm sure you're getting the drift.

And your culture has evolved since the 10th century? And which culture would that be? Unless of course your particular culture evolved from Eric the Red, who was a Viking and was said to have travelled to America in the 10th century, however they only settled there briefly. So I'd suggest you go back and read your history books as to when your american culture actually began as the US was supposed to have been discovered in what? 1492 Columbus discovered the 'New World' and in 1497 John Cabot discovered Newfoundland, but England didn't show much interest in the so called new world until around 100 years later, if memory of your country's history serves me right.

If I did a bit of research, I am sure that I could come up with a lot of evils perpetrated by your cultures, what ever they are.
I'm sure you could. However they were not saying that they were proud of the atrocities that their country may have committed in the past. YOU were the one who was saying that you were proud of what your ancestors did in the last 300 years or so.



:eek:

Originally posted by Dinosaur
Pakman & Jagger: What are your backgrounds?

I'm a Pakistani, but I live in America. You can find atrocities, that not all, but some of my people did, but I would not be proud of it.

BTW: How much time do you spend researching the evils of America?

It's in the history books I learn at school. As for America's foreign policy, that stuff I am a critic of because of recent events. I picked it up sometime in May. I couldn't really tell you how much time I spent, since I hear something first, and then decide to read up on it later.

The good old USA really is a terrible place. That is why people from all over the world want to come here.

Most of the atrocities that happened was in your past. You're talking about the present, where most of the atrocities happen outside of where you live.

I am not proud of many our our actions, but I would compare our actions favorably to those of the Islamic and African cultures. We do not hack thousands of non combatants to death with machetes. We stopped treating women as property over 100 years ago. Our culture has evolved since the 10th century.

Yes, that is why 1 out of every 5 kids have sex before the age of 15. That is why "let's go party tonight" is now "let's go get pissed drunk tonight." That is why kids do drugs. Yep, you are right. Your country has evoloved.

As for the women being treated as property in Islam, that is forbidden in it, so that part of your post is irrevelant. But hey, wasn't this country founded on Christian principles? And the Bible everywhere says women are inferior, they are the propety of their husband, etc. Perhaps that would explain why women worked for so long to gain equal rights.

If I did a bit of research, I am sure that I could come up with a lot of evils perpetrated by your cultures, what ever they are.

Very well. But I'm not proud of it.

I see the results of jealousy in the anti-American posts here. Compared to the Arab and African cultures, we have more colleges and industry, a far better standard of living, more respect for human rights. I wonder if the Arab world has more than 2-3 decent colleges.

If we had the persuasive drug and sex culture described at this thread, we could hardly be as successful as we are.

Why do so many come here for jobs and education? Why have the best and the brightest come here for the last 2 centuries? What other nation treated hated enemies (Germany and Japan) as well as we did?

One of my friends is a Russian immigrant women who still cannot speak without a noticable accent. She came here 20 years ago with almost nothing and now has a successful business and a lot of friends. How well would she have done if she went to any Islamic country? We have many Asian immigrants who have thrived here. Yes we have some racist rednecks, but how many Asians immigrants to Arab countires have thrived in the last 100 years?

What other nation treated hated enemies (Germany and Japan) as well as we did?


I don't mean to be disrespectful, Dinosaur, but Christ, killing a few hundred thousand Japanese with nukes is treating them nice? Come on now. You have a better brain than that don't you?

I think you fail to see what is really going on in Iraq. Civilians are dileberately being targeted by marines. Women and children are being killed or maimed for life, Dinosaur. No one really knows what the count is in Iraq for civilian casualties, but I have heard it's around 10,000 people. You know what that is really going to do? You and your fellow Americans will be hated more. The U.S. is an imperialistic nation looking for world domination. If history repeats itself, this will be the death of the U.S. as it was for the Roman empire.

Originally posted by Dinosaur
I see the results of jealousy in the anti-American posts here. Compared to the Arab and African cultures, we have more colleges and industry, a far better standard of living, more respect for human rights. I wonder if the Arab world has more than 2-3 decent colleges.

I agree that life is brilliant here in America. I said that in my prevous posts. I just don't agree on its foreign policy and it's past which you seem to be proud of.

As for the colleges in the Arab world, if I asked you to list one, would you be able to? I highly doubt it. But since these are forums, you have an plenty of time to do some research and then you would list them. Among the research you would find there are many decent colleges there.

The ME is capable of having a better industry and everything, but they are disunited and that is their major weakness. If they weren't, they would be one of the striving people in teh world. For example, Iraq used to have the best public education and the best free public healthcare in the world. Now it is one of the poorest countries in the world. The same goes for Saudi Arabia.

If we had the persuasive drug and sex culture described at this thread, we could hardly be as successful as we are.

Huh? What are you referring to here?

Why do so many come here for jobs and education? Why have the best and the brightest come here for the last 2 centuries? What other nation treated hated enemies (Germany and Japan) as well as we did?

One of my friends is a Russian immigrant women who still cannot speak without a noticable accent. She came here 20 years ago with almost nothing and now has a successful business and a lot of friends. How well would she have done if she went to any Islamic country? We have many Asian immigrants who have thrived here. Yes we have some racist rednecks, but how many Asians immigrants to Arab countires have thrived in the last 100 years? [/B]

Yes, I must agree with you here. It is easy to make a living here unlike over there in the other parts of the world. That's why so many people come here.

Is the poster of the following being deliberating ignorant?I don't mean to be disrespectful, Dinosaur, but Christ, killing a few hundred thousand Japanese with nukes is treating them nice? Come on now. You have a better brain than that don't you?Of course I was referring to our treatment of Germany and Japan after they unconditionally surrendered. If you know anything about history (which I doubt), you must be aware of how France and Britain (mostly due to Clemanceau) forced Germany to sign a humiliating and financially devastating treaty after WW1. Some believe that the Nazi party and WW2 might not have occurred if the WW1 treaty had been more reasonable. The treaties signed after WW2 (primarily due to American influence) were not that bad. America later financed the rebuilding of Germany and Japan as well as various other countries. Has any other nation ever helped rebuild the nation of a hated and defeated enemy?

The devastation caused by the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki has been unrealistically hyped. What do you expect in a war? We should have sent them roses? Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cities built primary of paper and wood. We could have done as much or more damage with incendiaries and conventional weapons. Consider the fire storms in Dresden and a few other German cities.

BTW: It is more than just easier to make a living in the USA. An immigrant with no financial resources and little knowledge of the language would not be given a chance in most other countries, especiially in Arab countries. A women immigrant would have to rely on marrying a citizen if she went to an Arab country.

Originally posted by Dinosaur
The devastation caused by the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki has been unrealistically hyped. What do you expect in a war? We should have sent them roses? Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cities built primary of paper and wood. We could have done as much or more damage with incendiaries and conventional weapons. Consider the fire storms in Dresden and a few other German cities.

BTW: It is more than just easier to make a living in the USA. An immigrant with no financial resources and little knowledge of the language would not be given a chance in most other countries, especiially in Arab countries. A women immigrant would have to rely on marrying a citizen if she went to an Arab country. [/B]
Unrealistically hyped? Oh dear, give me strength. The fact remains that the US is the only country to have EVER used a nuclear weapon in an armed conflict. The bomb was used because the US wanted a quick end to the war. Even the pilots who flew the planes which dropped the bombs were reported to have been horrified by what they had dropped on those cities. Have you ever thought to ask yourself why nuclear arms were never used again after that event? It was because the devastation was so bad and the damage so extreme.

oh and BTW, you stated that it is more than just easier to make a living in the USA than anywhere else? Hmmm... is that why the amount of homeless people and why the level of poverty in the USA is so high and rising? Here is a link from from the US Census Bureau in regards to the levels of poverty in 2002:

Poverty: 2002 Highlights (http://www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/poverty02/pov02hi.html)

And is that why people without health insurance because they're too poor to afford it get turned away from hospitals on a daily basis? Is that why to actually immigrate to the US is so difficult, especially now if you're from an Arab back ground? The list is long and frankly I can't be stuffed typing it all out. And I'm not even going to go into your education policies and lack of funding to both education and health as I'd be typing forever. Sheesh, even Brunei offers its populace free education and health care plus housing incentives which makes the US and other Western nations literally pale in comparison.

But I'm sure you are aware that the US is not the perfect paradise you make it out to be. If you're not, I'd suggest leave the comfort of your home and go and visit a few of the poor regions in your town and see how people on the other side actually live. The US is not the easiest place in the world to make a living. All countries have their faults, but I don't see anyone saying that their country is best above all.


:eek:

Is the poster of the following being deliberating ignorant?


No, but you definitely are:

If you know anything about history (which I doubt)


Listen here Dinosaur, you know nothing of me, nor my educational background.


Of course I was referring to our treatment of Germany and Japan after they unconditionally surrendered


Of course, after you pulverized two Japanese cities. You know, let's see this happen to SF, LA, or NY. I know your blood would boil over an attack like that, but hey, it's all right for it to happen in another country right?

You're saying conventional weapons would have done the same, if not worse, than the nukes? Dinosaur, you need to go back to school and learn because the conventional weapons of today could no doubt level the same amount of damage, thank you U.S.A. for using depleted uranium in your ammunition, than the weapons of the WWII era.

I also fail to see why it would have been different if all the buildings were made of concrete and steel. We're talking about nukes, Dinosaur. You must be going on the premise of the three little pigs story. Straw house gets blown over by the wolf, the wood house too, but not the brick house.

Norad: Are you really ignorant (not stupid) or do you just not read carefully?I also fail to see why it would have been different if all the buildings were made of concrete and steel. We're talking about nukes, Dinosaur. You must be going on the premise of the three little pigs story. Straw house gets blown over by the wolf, the wood house too, but not the brick house. I mentioned the construction in Hiroshima & Nagasaki because incendiaries and conventional explosives would have done every bit as much damage as nukes to a city built primarily of wood and paper. Do you have even a little understanding of the damage that can be done with conventional explosives to disrupt transportation and fire fighting facilities followed by incendiaries? Read about the fire storms created in German cities.

You also have no concept of the effect of a 20 kiloton nuke, which was the size of the weapons dropped on Hiroshima & Nagasaki. If you detonated one of them a quarter mile from the Pentagon, you would not damage the far side. You are thinking of megaton or bigger fusion bombs, not the puny fission weapons dropped on the Japanese cities. 20 kiloton weapons are considered tactical nukes today. There is hardly any difference in damage caused by an attack with a 20 kiloton nuclear weapon and a dozen attacks with squadrons of Flying Fortresses and conventional explosives. The nuclear attack takes less airplanes, pilots, and crew members.

Next, people have a lot of nerve criticizing a decision to drop those weapons from the vantage point of 60 years later. You have no idea of the context. Do you know about the rape of Nanking and the other atrocities committed by the Japanese? Are you aware of the suicidal mentality of the Japanese of that era? When they got desperate, they sent Kamikaze pilots against American ships. They were expected to fight to the death of the last man if we invaded Japan. Better those killed at Hiroshima and Nagasaki than a few hundred thousand American and Japanese soldiers in a bloody invasion. Perhaps you would have opted for continuous aerial attacks with explosives and incendiaries. Once we got air bases nearby, we could have leveled every one of their paper and wooden cities without nuclear weapons. That was the other alternative to an invasion.

You can kill a lot of people with a 20 ton nuclear weapon or with conventional bombs, incendiaries, small arms fire, bayonets, and hand grenades. What is the difference? War is a bloody business. I regret our being involved in any war, and have misgivings about all those since WW1 & WW2 (which were not started by us).

I do not need to know your educational background. It is obvious that you know little about the history of WW1 & WW2, and are not familiar with the effects of nuclear weapons. You probably never heard of the fire storms created in German cities. I wonder if you know what a Kamikaze was.

BTW: You made no comment about the American financed rebuilding of Germany and the rest of Europe after WW2. You also made no comment about the Clemenceau (French) inspired WW1 treaty as compared to WW2 treaty influenced by America.

We now take a break from this debate to show what Dinosaur so proudly claims as the great America.....happy viewing!

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9608/10/japan.hiroshima.film/index.html

As for not commenting on the latter half of your post, I don't dispute it, at the moment. ;)

Your country sucks!

No, your country sucks worse!

Well, my dad can whip your dad!

Nice to see an entire thread devoted to nothing in particular.

Oh and Bells, way to COMPLETELY miss the point about "evolving since the 10th century". He wasn't referring to America there bright boy!

Norad: That site really opened my eyes. I did not know that the Hiroshima bomb killed more than a dozen people. Gee, that war was bloodier than I thought. I imagine that more than a few hundred were killed in Europe, Africa, and elsewhere in the Pacific. I think the Chinese and Russians also had some casualties.

Dinosaur:

I'm glad that you can see it killed more than a dozen people ;)

And you were right. It didn't really take down brick buildings, but it certainly hollowed them out!

Can we now go back to the Iraq debate?

I would prefer to ignore countries like Iraq, but better to depose a dictator than finance him & supply weapons, which used to be our standard foreign policy.

A neutral foreign policy toward Arab countries with no change in their behavior would surely benefit the US. In 50-100 years, they will be an over populated 10th century culture living on a pile of sand. Except perhaps for Egypt, none of them seem to be making plans for the time when the oil runs out. Their power structure seems concerned with keeping power and acquiring wealth for the governing elite.

Ayn Rand had the right idea 50 years ago when she was the only one who predicted that the USSR would fall apart. She astutely pointed out that they had no infrastructure. They could build a limited number of weapons and one or two space satellites, but could not produce millions of cars, TV sets, refrigerators, et cetera every year. They had a primitive agriculture, not much of a transportation network, minimal electric power facilities. Everybody else was worried about them because they had some nuclear weapons and a big army.

Similarly, the Arab world will fall apart if ignored. As long as they rely on suicidal terrorists, dictatorial political systems, and/or religious fanaticism as the way to survive and thrive, they are doomed. America has well over 100 major universities and thousands of very good small colleges. We have millions of people with significant technical and work skills, as well as many thousands with entrepreneurial and management skills. The Islamic world cannot come close to making similar claims.

I would like to see us close our borders to Islamic immigrants and not worry about how they run their countires. The ones who are not potential terrorists contribute nothing to our country that would not be contributed by Russians, Asians, and others quite willing to come here and be productive.