Troops 'took turns' to rape Iraqi

[Awesome]

This Green is an animal.

A total disgrace to any uniform.

That's the thing about uniforms being used as a force to enforce occupation. They are oft given a freehand. Local populace are nobodies. Take any place of occupation, soldiers always degrade down to rape.

May I add, "Some soldiers", but still a few too many.

 

[MrConcerned]

Some? What percentage? 10%? 20%?

How come only a very few cases have come to light? Some is a dubious term. A few is much more accurate. And I think, compared to the long and bloody history of man, that is already *comparatively* better.

some of you don't understand that the reason US army persecutes wrong doers in its own ranks is not just because of damage to its reputation but also because it wants to maintain high discipline and honour. It's not just a selfless thing, hence there is very much incentive to clear out their ranks of these few bastards. An army that wants to stay at the top must be willing to go after law breakers, incompetents and cowards, no matter the price.

Training, doctrine and tradition.

 

[MrConcerned]

I don't see how anyone can dispute a civil war if Americans are not there to hold things down anymore.

Even with Americans there, Sunnis are blowing car bombs up in markets, mosques and funerals, and Shiites are going around at check points and bus stations checking for Sunni names such as Omar, taking them away and using electric drills on their bones and skulls until they die. Electric drills is a specialty of some in Iraq. Up to 1000 a month are killed this way, if not more. Tens of thousands are witnesses that it's Sunnis and Shias killing each other - the Badr Brigade, al Sadr's militia, Al Qaeda in Iraq, Saddam's ex security officers.

Are we going to assume that should the Americans leave abruptly, the Shias and Sunnis are going to say, "hey buddy, the reason we're attackign *each other* is to make the Amis leave?" How does that work?

I am not justifying the war. In the light that there is no WMD, there is much less justification for the war and America has been humiliated as a result. and if Iraq fails because the people just want to kill each other, fomented by its neighbouring countries, then it would be doubly so.

 

[sigatoka]

Some? What percentage? 10%? 20%?

How come only a very few cases have come to light? Some is a dubious term. A few is much more accurate. And I think, compared to the long and bloody history of man, that is already *comparatively* better.

some of you don't understand that the reason US army persecutes wrong doers in its own ranks is not just because of damage to its reputation but also because it wants to maintain high discipline and honour. It's not just a selfless thing, hence there is very much incentive to clear out their ranks of these few bastards. An army that wants to stay at the top must be willing to go after law breakers, incompetents and cowards, no matter the price.

Training, doctrine and tradition.

I think its more to do with the fact that the story was blown by a News agency. Take your crap elsewhere.

 

[parihaka]

A show of hands here if you will. Who here would prefer that the coalition forces had not invaded and Saddam Hussein was still in power?

Scratch that, I've started a new thread/poll
http://www.pakistaniforces.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1747

 

[sigatoka]

I don't see how anyone can dispute a civil war if Americans are not there to hold things down anymore.

Even with Americans there, Sunnis are blowing car bombs up in markets, mosques and funerals, and Shiites are going around at check points and bus stations checking for Sunni names such as Omar, taking them away and using electric drills on their bones and skulls until they die. Electric drills is a specialty of some in Iraq. Up to 1000 a month are killed this way, if not more. Tens of thousands are witnesses that it's Sunnis and Shias killing each other - the Badr Brigade, al Sadr's militia, Al Qaeda in Iraq, Saddam's ex security officers.

Are we going to assume that should the Americans leave abruptly, the Shias and Sunnis are going to say, "hey buddy, the reason we're attackign *each other* is to make the Amis leave?" How does that work?

I am not justifying the war. In the light that there is no WMD, there is much less justification for the war and America has been humiliated as a result. and if Iraq fails because the people just want to kill each other, fomented by its neighbouring countries, then it would be doubly so.

Was all these mass murder happening before the U.S. invaded? An invading and occuping force that is not capable of providing law and order should not attempt recolonisation of the middle east. (p.s. are you on the Pentagon's payrol? If you are, you are doing a bad job)

 

[MrConcerned]

Why didn't these news agencies, who have basically full run of the information, blow up other cases then? Why wasn't there more accusations of rape and murder by the Iraqis then, who have nothign to lose if something like this happened many times before? Why do Iraqis prefer Americans searching their homes (sometimes) than Iraqi police? Refuse reality and be deluded.

 

[MrConcerned]

Yes Saddam was a benevolent leader. Iraq was the land of milk and honey.

Go read how Saddam lead thugs, goons and murderers to suppress 85% of the population, the Shias and Kurds, how he tortured, murdered and later used poison gas on over a million Iraqis over the years, not to mention the hundreds of thousands he threw away in a meaningless war with Iran and Kuwait. btw, this is not an excuse for the 2003 invasion at all.

Why, if Iraq had nothing of this happening, are some Shias so eager now to kill Sunnis?

I am on nobody's payroll. I am not even on american's side. this is how a perfectly neutral and truth seeking viewpoint looks like. typical of you to accuse me of being an agent when I'm merely presenting a different point of view and not going along wiht all that you say.

 

[parihaka]

Was all these mass murder happening before the U.S. invaded?

Yes.
http://hrw.org/campaigns/iraq/graves/slideshow_as2/slideshow_as2.html

 

[sigatoka]

Yes.
http://hrw.org/campaigns/iraq/graves/slideshow_as2/slideshow_as2.html

You **** ****, a 100,000 extra people have died that othewise would not have (because of bullets, breakdown in healthcare and so forth) in two years after the invasion.

As a comparision, in halabja 5,000 people died. The key word here is scale.

 

[sigatoka]

1. Yes Saddam was a benevolent leader. Iraq was the land of milk and honey.

2. Why, if Iraq had nothing of this happening, are some Shias so eager now to kill Sunnis?

3. I am on nobody's payroll. I am not even on american's side. this is how a perfectly neutral and truth seeking viewpoint looks like. typical of you to accuse me of being an agent when I'm merely presenting a different point of view and not going along wiht all that you say.

1. I never said that, but even in his terrible form Saddam was unable to send as many civilians to their early grave than the U.S. invasion has.

2. The Mehdi army was quite eager to kill U.S. soldiers as well. Note: Keep a close eye on them because after what has happened in Lebanon I wouldnt be suprised if they go after U.S. troops again.

3. Maaf Karna, your stupidity confused me.

 

[Officer of Engineers]

1 is too many, especially when you're trying to win hearts and minds. This entire fiasco has just set back the process at least 3 years. The local commanders work hard at gaining trust and establishing superiority.

Resistance may not need to be active. It can be passive. The locals just shut up when in the past, it was in their interests to *** out the thugs so that they can go earning a living. Now, with this fiasco, there is at least silence if not outright hostility.

Green did a hell of alot of harm. They're going to throw the Book at him if for no other reason just to show that the Americans will punish their own. For the commanders, if you accept less, you are less.

This is without a doubt a failure of leadership. Brigadier, I don't know how the company CO (usually a Captain as compared to a Major in your army and mine) could have kept in touch with Green. Section and Platoon leaders are supposed to identify the problems but in this case, they're part of the problem.

These guys are supposed to be bad *** killers. They're 101st Airborne Division (Air Assualt). While no better trained than other divisions, they do have a reputation to live up to. This living up to aspects got to be checked. And talking to the good Major Shek, he's a very good leader.

The part about Iraqi cough syrup gets me. How did they get their hands on it? It must be easy but by the same token, it should have been obvious.

In fact, Sir, in the American system, I would not be looking towards the Company CO but the CSM (Company Sergeant-Major) and then, the RSM. They should have been identifying the problem sergeants right off the bat.

 

[A.Rahman]

1 is too many, especially when you're trying to win hearts and minds. This entire fiasco has just set back the process at least 3 years. The local commanders work hard at gaining trust and establishing superiority.

Americans can never win the hearts & minds of Iraqis, how can they forget the civilian-casulties they got by US invasion.

Resistance may not need to be active. It can be passive. The locals just shut up when in the past, it was in their interests to *** out the thugs so that they can go earning a living. Now, with this fiasco, there is at least silence if not outright hostility.

Resistance is pretty much active in Iraq, but US occupation has made life hell for normal people.

Green did a hell of alot of harm. They're going to throw the Book at him if for no other reason just to show that the Americans will punish their own. For the commanders, if you accept less, you are less.

The damage was already done:
1) US marines killing civilians.
2) Abu gharaib scandal
3) butt-pyramid & Marines gay orgies
4)now rape

 

[parihaka]

You **** ****, a 100,000 extra people have died that othewise would not have (because of bullets, breakdown in healthcare and so forth) in two years after the invasion.

As a comparision, in halabja 5,000 people died. The key word here is scale.

Based purely on the forensic evidence so far, the HRW et al estimates of total deaths through torture and execution during Saddams regime lie between 400,000 to 450,000.


A May 25 article by Hazem Saghiya in Al-Hayat claimed, "The number of those murdered by Saddam ... ranges between a million and a million and a half ..."


In "Saddam's Mass Graves," columnist 'Ureib Al-Rintawi wrote in the Jordanian daily Al-Dustour, "For one thing, the dictatorship of the Iraqi Baath dictatorship reached the level of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, and next to it the other Arab capitals looked like oases of democracy and human rights ..."

Oh, and

War's Iraqi Death Toll Tops 50,000

Higher than the U.S. estimate, the tally likely is undercounted. Proportionately, it is as if 570,000 Americans were slain in three years.
By Louise Roug and Doug Smith, Times Staff Writers
June 25, 2006

BAGHDAD — At least 50,000 Iraqis have died violently since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, according to statistics from the Baghdad morgue, the Iraqi Health Ministry and other agencies — a toll 20,000 higher than previously acknowledged by the Bush administration.

from here
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-deathtoll25jun25,0,4970736.story?coll=la-home-headlines
[FONT=Palatino, Book Antiqua, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times][/FONT]

 

[A.Rahman]

A May 25 article by Hazem Saghiya in Al-Hayat claimed, "The number of those murdered by Saddam ... ranges between a million and a million and a half ..."


In "Saddam's Mass Graves," columnist 'Ureib Al-Rintawi wrote in the Jordanian daily Al-Dustour,

Thank-God for US invasion of Iraq, Finally Iraq is liberated. I can go to bed happliy as long as US troops dont kill more people then Saddam.

I think you are forgettin, who armed saddam & gave him WMD in first place? Saddam got his orders from White-house, when he started "disobeying" them, the change of regime button was pressed.