White Phosphorus, ‘trophy videos’ and ending this foolish war


by Sunny
28th November, 2005 at 6:53 am    

Where do I start? Developments in Iraq take place so rapidly that articles mutate everytime a new piece of news comes in. The past few weeks have seen plenty of controversy that have made pitched debates between pro-war and anti-war sides even more ferocious.

Let me briefly start with White Phosphorus. Rumours were floating for months before two sources : IslamOnline and Italy’s RAI documentary kicked it off. The US military denied using it as a weapon and the doc was flaky. Then it emerged they had been using it as a weapon, and that is banned as such.

Although some apologists for the Pentagon have been questioning whether it was intentional, they miss the point. It’s a fucking PR disaster and I doubt those in Iraq are really having the same debate.

Yesterday it emerged some contractors had been making ‘trophy videos‘ and posting them on the internet.

A “trophy” video appearing to show security guards in Baghdad randomly shooting Iraqi civilians has sparked two investigations after it was posted on the internet, the Sunday Telegraph can reveal.

The video has sparked concern that private security companies, which are not subject to any form of regulation either in Britain or in Iraq, could be responsible for the deaths of hundreds of innocent Iraqis.

[Postman Patel has more]. The day before that, CNN reported that four American soldiers had been reprimanded for burning bodies of terrorists to taunt Al-Qaeda. It’s not even worth pointing out this is also against the Geneva Convention.

Iraqis are not the only ones suffering in a war that has gotten out of control because the US administration never planned for the Iraqis after “liberating” them. Too busy awarding contracts to Halliburton you see.

Unsurprisingly, talks of withdrawal are louder and even admitted by the administration.

Now, the pro-war lefties come into the equation. Starting with the assumption that we all want the best for Iraqis, their accusation that we are not as committed to human rights or democracy fall flat in light of the events above. As Robert Sharp so perfectly puts it:

For me, the debate about the Iraq war was not ideological, but practical. Dictators should be stopped, no question, but my objections were over the best way to achieve that aim. Telling lies over WMD and ignoring our blood-stained hand in the history of the region was not a good footing for a military campaign. If the intervention had been managed more honestly, I may have had a different view…

It is difficult to support a war started on lies and carries on with standards that sometimes mirror those of terrorists.

I support the troops currently being there because a full-blown civil war may erupt otherwise. Even the Grand Ayatollah Al-Sistani has so far refused to ask for a full withdrawal because he knows the violence is primarily by Sunni terrorists against Shia and Kurd innocents. More here, via Terence.

In fact we are more committed because we want our governments to live up to our standards. The big split is that the pro-war left is failing to make them account for not upholding the same principles. Any criticism, based on the events above, is dismissed as anti-American lefty thinking.

Admittedly, people like Yvonne Ridley, whose absurd theories make the anti-war left look stupid, are not helping.

Nevertheless, regardless of what these apologists say, unless our governments and military embody the values we keep promoting, this will become another Vietnam with increasingly desperate actions justified by increasingly desperate circumstances.

While hearts and minds are being lost, some are more obsessed with definitions and playing with words. This ‘split’ in the left is rubbish. It is perpetuated by those on both sides who prefer to only look at half the picture.

For the sake of our democracy and for the future of the Iraqis, we have to keep asking our governments to be more honest with their citizens. That is the only way to defeat the disease that is al-Qaeda.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Current affairs,Media,The World






81 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Englishman in New York

    [...] More links for today: Sunny at Pickled Politics takes the pro-war and the anti-war left to task and knocks some heads together. For the sake of our democracy and for the future of the Iraqis, we have to keep asking our governments to be more honest with their citizens. That is the only way to defeat the disease that is al-Qaeda. [...]




  1. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 8:14 am  

    I support the troops currently being there because a full-blown civil war may erupt otherwise. Even the Grand Ayatollah Al-Sistani has so far refused to ask for a full withdrawal because he knows the violence is primarily by Sunni terrorists against Shia and Kurd innocents.

    Nevertheless, regardless of what these apologists say, unless our governments and military embody the values we keep promoting, this will become another Vietnam with increasingly desperate actions justified by increasingly desperate circumstances.

    I think you are confused

    Nevertheless, regardless of what these apologists say, unless our governments and military embody the values ….

    The American and British Government and Military embodies the values that their people have.This is how the Nazis,Fascists and the Communists got defeated. Sooner or later similar fate awaits Al Qaeda.

    Soldiers.sailors and traders always behave strangely in a foreign land. Compare American milatary record in Iraq with Soviets in Czechoslovakia. I would say Americans are behaving in a much more civilised manner that any other country in this world. Remember how Saddam brutalised Kuwait and Iran and what Pak army did in Bangladesh ?

  2. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 8:26 am  

    Iraq will never become another Vietnam. The entire Vietnamese population was behind Communists but it’s not so in the case of Iraq. Viet congs had two big backers Soviets and Chinese but no one will back Sunni rebels.The terrain and atmosphere was difficult in Vietnam. It’s very difficult to hide in deserts!! You dont even have the mountains of Afganistan.

    Sunni rebel resistance will fizzle out in a year or two. Sistani is a smart man. He is just waiting for his turn.

  3. Vikrant — on 28th November, 2005 at 8:29 am  

    no one will back Sunni rebels

    Dude, Sunnis insurgents have got entire Ummah, Salafi Ummah at any rate, behind them.

  4. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 8:35 am  

    dont ever utter that nonsensical word “ummah”

  5. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 9:01 am  

    Btw Sunny …who told you that this war is foolish ??

  6. Siddharth — on 28th November, 2005 at 10:22 am  

    Sunny, thats fighting talk! Monday morning and a blistering post from you. Great way to start the week. :-D

  7. j0nz — on 28th November, 2005 at 10:48 am  

    Harrys just made a post about Yvonne Ridley. She thinks there’s something rupungant about people who rush to condemn acts of terrorism!

  8. rizwand — on 28th November, 2005 at 11:18 am  

    blue mountain,

    if you think Sunny is confused I am totally perplexed by the whole situation. I am against the war in Iraq but I support the troops being there to clean up the mess they made. If they pull out too early and delegate responsibility to either the Iraqi forces (uh hum..cough cough) or to the UN, this may create what economist’s call ‘moral hazard’. In this case it would give the US greater incentive to attack other countries, knowing they may effectively be bailed out after they have looted the country, sorry I mean after they have removed the evil dictators.

    What worries me is the debate in the media that the US military presence is itself causing aggrevation and amplifying the violence as various Iraqi groups target the yanks. This would be the perfect kind of guise that politicians could use to bring the boys back home. No doubt, they would leave enough soldiers to ensure the pipelines are kept secure.

    Hold on, now that they have ‘installed’ a form of democracy if they really want to know if pulling out is good for the Iraqi’s, why not ask them using a great democratic tool: the referendum ?

    PS – When soldiers fight abroad it is no excuse to lower their morality and standards. Their actions should not be compared against the actions of the previous brutal regimes. They are acting on behalf of their home countries and should be held accountable to the standards of their home countries.

  9. Steve M — on 28th November, 2005 at 12:47 pm  

    Yes, but as I read somewhere recently, we haven’t seen any ‘Troops Out’ demonstrations on the streets of Baghdad – not even a small one, whereas hundreds of thousands marched in Jordan against the recent bombing in Amman.

    Nevertheless, as rizwand says: “When soldiers fight abroad it is no excuse to lower their morality and standards”

  10. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 12:56 pm  

    ……….US military presence is itself causing aggrevation and amplifying the violence as various Iraqi groups target the yanks

    Dont twist the truth. Apart from some noises made by Moqtada Al Sadr(reigned in by Sistani since) no Iraqi group except the Sunni rebels are attacking Americans.

    In this case it would give the US greater incentive to attack other countries, knowing they may effectively be bailed out after they have looted the country, sorry I mean after they have removed the evil dictators.

    If the Americans are looting Iraq why do the leader of the majority population (70%) want the Americans to stay ?

    Supposing the Americans and the British are looting Iraq then then they are following a time honoured convention of war “loot your enemy”

    What about other countries? They loot their own people !!

    When soldiers fight abroad it is no excuse to lower their morality and standards. Their actions should not be compared against the actions of the previous brutal regimes. They are acting on behalf of their home countries and should be held accountable to the standards of their home countries.

    Huh.Good one !!

  11. Col. Mustafa — on 28th November, 2005 at 1:49 pm  

    “Dont twist the truth. Apart from some noises made by Moqtada Al Sadr(reigned in by Sistani since) no Iraqi group except the Sunni rebels are attacking Americans.”

    One of my friends is from iraq and still has many cousins living there at this point in time.
    Now hes a Shia hes quite upset at the fact that many of the youth there regardless of whether there Shia, Sunni or Kurd are in some sort of lost world at the moment.
    More lost than when he lived there.
    Theres no employment or institutions or clubs or just something for the young men to do.
    Alot of them however follow the trend of looting, and mindless violence.
    Thier anger is at the Americans becuase there the easiest target.
    But then you get complete anarchy as the ball has already started rolling.
    So Sunnis find another cause, lets attack shias as well as americans.
    There trying to take our land away, lets kill them.
    Then you get shia youth saying Fuck the Sunnis, lets kill them.
    Lets also see if we can now get Americans to side with us.
    Its a land with no law, or mass employment.
    Theres no one to condemn them, well at least no one that matters anyway.

    You put things in black/white but things are much different.
    You write that noone else is fighting the americans, how did you come up with that?
    How can you write that with such confidence when you nothing about it.
    Have you been to iraq, are you living there daily lives for them?
    The fact is not many of us will know much about the real story because were not getting the real story from real people.

  12. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:11 pm  

    Mustafa dude

    One of the foremost scholars of Indology Maxmuller never travelled to the subcontinent.

    Edward Gibbon never travelled all over Roman Empire to write “The decine and fall of Roman Empire”.

    Scientist do not need to land on stars in order to know their nature.

    Scholars discovered that the earth is round long before Magellan’s expedition.

    When an empire falls and a new empire takes it’s shape- the intervening peroid is always characterised by anarchy,violence and hardship for the common man.

  13. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:12 pm  

    hehe

  14. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:14 pm  

    Tell your friend not to worry. Everthing will fall in place after a few years.

  15. Geezer — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:15 pm  

    I’d rather put up with a brother like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi any day than have a traitor or sell-out for a father, son or grandfather.[Yvonne Ridley]

    Gasps…..

  16. Col. Mustafa — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:20 pm  

    “When an empire falls and a new empire takes it’s shape- the intervening peroid is always characterised by anarchy,violence and hardship for the common man.”

    Saddams regieme was hardly an empire.
    And you state the obvious, whats your point?
    Im saying dont assume too much and also take the facts that you read to be the gospel truth.
    As theres no such thing.

    “One of the foremost scholars of Indology Maxmuller never travelled to the subcontinent.”

    So what, people that lived there still knew more about it.

    “Edward Gibbon never travelled all over Roman Empire to write “The decine and fall of Roman Empire”.

    Again, whats that gotta do with anything, as we still strive to calculate most of the facts of prior civilisations through ARCHAEOLOGY, and ANTHROPOLOGY.
    Not texts written by other scholars in other countries.

    “Scientist do not need to land on stars in order to know their nature.”

    But they might get a fucking big surprise when eventually do.
    They are the first to admit that.

    “Scholars discovered that the earth is round long before Magellan’s expedition.”

    Thats pretty impressive but sadly doesn’t compare to what im talking about.

  17. Al-Hack — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:20 pm  

    One of the foremost scholars of Indology Maxmuller never travelled to the subcontinent.

    Edward Gibbon never travelled all over Roman Empire to write “The decine and fall of Roman Empire”.

    Sounds like an excuse to me Blue Mountain. An excuse for not really knowing what is going on and speculating according what you want to believe.

  18. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:21 pm  

    So Sunnis find another cause, lets attack shias as well as americans.
    There trying to take our land away, lets kill them.
    Then you get shia youth saying Fuck the Sunnis, lets kill them.
    Lets also see if we can now get Americans to side with us.

    So you want to say that the Americans are the initiators of Shia Vs. Sunni battle

  19. rizwand — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:23 pm  

    blue mountain, are directing “Don’t twist the truth to me”. Did I say or even imply it was the truth?

    anyway, i go now.

  20. Col. Mustafa — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:25 pm  

    “So you want to say that the Americans are the initiators of Shia Vs. Sunni battle”

    No, its called adapt to your environment.
    People will do whatever to adapt and benefit from the options they have at hand.

    So im not quite sure how your saying what your saying.
    Its actually quite stupid, that your putting those words in my mouth.
    Why would i say its americas fault that sunnis and shias are fighting?
    Im baffled.

  21. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:25 pm  

    You can always know what’s going on by using your common sense rather than mindless hatred and rhetoric.

  22. Al-Hack — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:32 pm  

    The Americans effed up by never planning what do do after they would drive out Saddam. Probably because they thought it would just be a matter of dividing up oil revenues and making some easy cash. Liberation or not, they cannot be excused for making a tit out of themselves out there. That Trophy video thing is mad!

  23. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:33 pm  

    Saddam regime was hardly an empire

    So what was it ? A nation state of the Sunnis ??

    So what, people that lived there still knew more about it.

    Good one !!

    we still strive to calculate most of the facts of prior civilisations through ARCHAEOLOGY, and ANTHROPOLOGY.
    Not texts written by other scholars in other countries

    Great one !!!!

    But they might get a fucking big surprise when eventually do.
    They are the first to admit that.

    Tell that to S. Chandrashekhar who found out the maximum mass for a White Dwarf Star sitting in our dear ol’ Earth

  24. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:35 pm  

    That Trophy video thing is mad!

    I bet the beheading videos are cool

  25. Col. Mustafa — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:43 pm  

    “Saddam regime was hardly an empire”

    “So what was it ? A nation state of the Sunnis ??”

    He just ran a country and might i add very badly.
    There were divisions right from the start of Iraq being formed.
    It was kinda destined for failure especially with religion playing a role in it.
    But what can ya do?

    Nasa will one day embark on a journey to Europa, a moon of Jupiter.
    Why because it is possible that beneath Europas surfce ice there is a layer of liquid water, perhaps as much as 50 km deep.
    Its the only place in the soloar system besides earth where liquid water exists in significant quantities.

    We know that much being here in earth, but whats in the water we dont know.
    What plant life has grown there, we dont know, or what species may of evolved.
    We can speculate and assume according to the process on earth but we dont know until we get there.

  26. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:53 pm  

    I agrre.

    Scientific theories must be put to sterner test.

    They even travelled to Africa and Brazil to test his theory of relativity

  27. blue mountain — on 28th November, 2005 at 2:55 pm  

    Probably because they thought it would just be a matter of dividing up oil revenues and making some easy cash

    Same old hackneyed rhetoric

  28. sonia — on 28th November, 2005 at 4:05 pm  

    round and round the mulberry bush. here we go again. why? because some people have fundamentally dodgy ideas and no one seems to be on the same page.

    Guardian Newsblog story

  29. tim osman — on 28th November, 2005 at 6:15 pm  

    The war is based on a buffet of lies, the only people who want our boys dying over there are the sick gangsters who sell the bullets and send our brothers to die.

    http://www.loosechange911.com/?ABCDEFGH

  30. nukh — on 28th November, 2005 at 8:01 pm  

    tim osman,
    how is one supposed to confirm all those preposterous claims made by the loosechange people?
    they obviously seem to have a everything is a conspiracy agenda…which can not be taken on face value.

  31. Dances With Typos — on 28th November, 2005 at 10:21 pm  

    White Phosphorus is not banned as a weapon by any treaty which the US is signatory to.

  32. Sunny — on 28th November, 2005 at 11:02 pm  

    Whether WP is banned by a treaty, or whether it is a chemical weapon or not when used for specific purposes including chucking it while holding your nose and singing “ba ba black sheep” is irrelevant.

    As I stated above, those Iraqis burnt by this material, and those who look at the American troops with horror doing this, are probably not checking in their books for what is banned under what treaty.

    It simply gives the impression that Iraqi lives are expendable and that if a few get burnt here and there, it’s no big deal. It is not caring for those people and that attitude, which led to Abu Ghraib, that bothers me.

    Lets start with you BlueMountain. I don’t know how you came to the conclusion I was confused. You didn’t even offer any contradictions. Just excuses.

    Soldiers.sailors and traders always behave strangely in a foreign land…..Remember how Saddam brutalised Kuwait and Iran and what Pak army did in Bangladesh ?

    Yeah that makes it all the better doesn’t it? Hey, at least we ain’t as bad as the the Pakistanis 30 years ago or Saddam Hussain. Thats the same sort of moral relativism that makes others say “well if the Israelis can kill Palestinians, why can’t the Palestinians legitimately blow up innocent Israelies?” Either have standards and follow them, or don’t.

    The entire Vietnamese population was behind Communists but it’s not so in the case of Iraq.
    I don’t see things in Iraq getting better. In fact they’ve been consistently getting worse. What makes you think this will “fizzle out”? Crystal ball working now is it? You reckon Al-Qaeda might just get up one day and decide they’ve had enough? Such naivety I swear.

    Yes, but as I read somewhere recently, we haven’t seen any ‘Troops Out’ demonstrations on the streets of Baghdad – not even a small one
    Steve M – There have been loads. Mostly by Sunnis, but they do form 1/3 of the population. Once Sistani asks the troops to leave, will the governments leave?

    Bluey, by the way Al-Sadr is the new kingmaker in Iraq that even the American troops are making alliances with now.
    http://news.google.com/news?q=Al+Sadr
    Funny how he was enemy no 1 a few months ago.

  33. Siddharth — on 28th November, 2005 at 11:32 pm  

    Sonic has posted a very relevant cartoon here.

  34. gunduwhitegirl — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:29 am  

    As an American this whole thing makes me sick. We’ve not only had these trophy videos but also beheading videos and abu grahib pictures. When will it stop? It’s the Iraqi people who suffer, and I know they suffered before we came to help them. But, I can’t help but feel for them.

    Confused?

    What is so confusing? I hate this damned war and this administration that can’t tell its ass from a hole in the ground. Let alone fix this mess. It will be the Iraqis who will fix it. I agree with bluemountiain – in two or three years this whole thing will work itself out. But that doesn’t mean I like to see the trash that is going on over there.

    I support my troops. I have SO SO SO many friends over there fighting right now. Still more come home wounded. A childhood friend lost his right arm. He has two little babies and didn’t get to see the birth of either one. Another childhood friend and his brother were attacked and bombed. Nearly 3/4 of their platoon were wiped out. They were lucky.

    And now…it’s like all they fight for goes up in smoke because some idiots making these videos. No respect for life. I thought this administration was supposed to be pro life. I guess war isn’t though.

    OFF SUBJECT FOR A MINUTE:
    Did anyone see the video of the President in China? When he tried to open the doors to leave the press confrence?

    http://www.dubyaspeak.com/incidents.shtml

  35. Tanvir — on 29th November, 2005 at 3:46 am  

    Cant belive some people are still trying to convince themselves ‘we went there to help them’ … just like Saddam was installed there to ‘help them’ or given weapons to ‘help them’

    Well we lied..but now we are there..lets try to ‘help them’ !

    Iraq abuse as bad as Saddam era
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4475030.stm

  36. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 5:44 am  

    Like your Pakistani brethern “helped” you in 1972

  37. tim osman — on 29th November, 2005 at 8:32 am  

    hey nukh – watch Loose Change and make your own mind up, but IMO the WTC were felled by explosives and there is no evidence of Flight77 at the Pentagon.

    check out Jimmy Walters – http://www.reopen911.org

  38. Siddharth — on 29th November, 2005 at 8:33 am  

    Blue Mountain: I know your game. You want to drag every thread into some fucking nationalistic and sectarian jerk off between India and Pakistan and throw in the odd Bangladesh reference.
    Now is your chance to get it off your chest: What has your comment got to do with the the topic of this thread? Or even as a reply to Tanvir’s post. Take your time.

  39. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:01 am  

    Siddharth you missed my point

    People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones at others!! And what about the abuses of minorities in Bangladesh ?

    I appreciate your intelligence

  40. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:03 am  

    I know your game

    Are you straight off Baker Street ?

  41. Siddharth — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:12 am  

    People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones at others!!”

    What exactly do you mean by that in this context?

  42. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:17 am  

    Use your imagination !!

  43. Siddharth — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:20 am  

    Yeah, I kind of knew you would avoid that when you were brought to task on it. Why am I not surprised.

    Incidentally, its been noticed that you have realised your faux pas because you are now trying to shift your argument to abuse of minorities in Bangladesh. You should know, as we all do, that India is not exactly the paragon of virtue when it comes to treatment of minorities, so enough of that one. heh heh.

  44. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:28 am  

    That is why Indians do not care any more why always the West is morally wrong and why Americans are the most devilish persons ever to have walked in this Earth.

  45. Siddharth — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:29 am  

    Is that the sound of glass shattering? ;-)

  46. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:30 am  

    Incidentally, its been noticed that you have realised your faux pas

    I knew it all along. You are the right person to claim the legacy of Sherlock Holmes and Hercule Poirot !!

  47. Jai Singh — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:31 am  

    =>”That is why Indians do not care any more why always the West is morally wrong and why Americans are the most devilish persons ever to have walked in this Earth. ”

    Blue Mountain, are you just being sarcastic or ironic here, or do you actually believe the above statement ?

  48. Siddharth — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:38 am  

    Blue Mountain obviously posts first and thinks about it second. Which is why he finds himself at a loss to explain himself when asked to.

  49. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:42 am  

    huh……

    Jai Singh ….Why did India vote against Iran ?

    Siddharth….You are a priceless piece

  50. Siddharth — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:45 am  

    Thank you. Sorry but I can’t return the compliment.

  51. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 11:55 am  

    Of course…one needs a mimimum level of intelligence and courtesy to return compliments.

    hehe..

  52. Siddharth — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:04 pm  

    No, one has to deserve them to receive them. :-)

  53. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:07 pm  

    yes …like you get all my respect and attention..

    hehe…

  54. Siddharth — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:09 pm  

    Once again, thanks. ;-)

  55. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:12 pm  

    welcome

  56. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:12 pm  

    come again..

    hehe

  57. Siddharth — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:19 pm  

    Don’t forget to clean up the glass after you. :-D

  58. tim osman — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:20 pm  

    Do Muslims not care the secret service set them up for the London bombings.

    Why wont the Met release pictures of the ‘bombers’ at King’s Cross? – Because there isn’t any.

    checktheevidence.com

  59. Jai Singh — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:26 pm  

    Blue Mountain,

    =>”Why did India vote against Iran ?”

    What exactly are you referring to ?

  60. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:27 pm  

    Sure mate…

    Someone is here to help me out…..guess who ???

    hehe

  61. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:29 pm  

    Osman Dude…

    You are pretty shabby with your conspiracy theories…

    Aljazeera does a better job.

  62. sonia — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:36 pm  

    ooh tim are you onto a ‘conspiracy theory’ ..ill have to check that url out. ( don’t imagine i’m one of those people who say conspiracy theory in a dismissive fashion )

  63. tim osman — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:41 pm  

    hey blue mountain, you want to check this, the actual movements of the alleged London bombers was physically impossible.

    http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/61251

    Some good research here too – http://www.nineeleven.co.uk

    Why not challenge the evidence instead of acting like a child?

  64. tim osman — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:46 pm  

    But this is the best research on the subject –
    http://team8plus.org/forum_viewforum.php?9

  65. blue mountain — on 29th November, 2005 at 12:54 pm  

    So who bombed London ?

    CIA ?

    Christian Fundamentalists ?

    Hindu Fascists ?

    or James Bond ?

    or is it a global hegemonistic conspiracy hatched by that fiendish duo Bush and Blair ?

  66. tim osman — on 29th November, 2005 at 1:29 pm  

    DO SOME RESEARCH – you’ll soon find it wasn’t who the government claimed it was, much like Sept 11th.

  67. Col. Mustafa — on 29th November, 2005 at 1:57 pm  

    Was it actually the Teletubbies?
    The last lot of teletubbies were sacked due to them getting too high on set.
    Their voices were becoming funnier and sillier, and also they kept on doing stupid things so the producers warned em not too.
    But all that fame had got to the teletubbies heads and they told the producers to go and fuck themselves.

    The producers then went and spent another billion on trying to get a different bunch of teletubbies from the thier planet.
    Which happens to be called noooooiiii.

    While this was happening we saw some drastic changes to the show Teletubbies, with these now fame hungry, drug snorting, cigarette smoking, vodka jelly eating motherfuckers running around on thier own show and pretty much shagging each other at every chance they got.
    To the children watching they couldn’t tell what was going on as the process of mating within teletubbies looks like they just rubbing each other.

    None the less once the new tele tubbies had arrived on earth the old ones were physically chucked out of the studio.
    They then got a reality check, the biggest reality of thier time on earth.
    It became evident that they couldn’t fend for themselves and they needed food and shelter.
    So they walked around the streets of somewhere for a while and came across an HMV.
    Luckily they got a job there, to just stand around and dance.
    They felt happy again and understood that humans still thought they were the original teletubbies.

    Time however passed as they kept on doing gigs all over the uk, dancing from here to there and paying off thier drug and drink habits as well as the rock candy which they love for both consumption and sexual purposes.

    But at one of the gigs the real tele tubbies showed up, surrounded by paparazzi climbing out of thier limos.
    At that moment people realised who the fakes were, and they were stoned to death.
    But having such great armour the teletubbies just faked thier deaths instead.
    The stones didn’t even hurt them physically but emotionally left them scarred.

    The story from there on is that some renegade young man from the highlands aptly named Highlander took them on to be his students.
    They were taught to blend in with society and learn how to harm other humans.

    So its a strong possibility that infact the london bombers were linked or infact the teletubbies.

  68. nukh — on 29th November, 2005 at 4:41 pm  

    why does the intelligentsia [ broad assumption for the visitors to this blog] only discuss the situation in iraq [of all the "human rights" related developments in the world]

    and as an aside, i would like to ask the iraq war critics, would you have or did you also oppose the american intervention in the balkans

  69. sonia — on 29th November, 2005 at 4:44 pm  

    the reason that’s being discussed is its current. other discussions can be had as well

  70. Rohin — on 29th November, 2005 at 4:50 pm  

    I love conspiracy theorists, they’re so…they’re so…quaint.

  71. nukh — on 29th November, 2005 at 5:20 pm  

    sonia, there are sevral other equally relevant [at least to the people involved] events unfolding all over the globe…….yet, i never see those being discussed on this or any other similar blog.
    e.g, burma or myanmar is ruled by a military junta, which is supported by india and china……america incidentally is not on talking terms. and this is despite evidence of huge gas reserves in burma..the burmese generals lord over nearly 50 million people and summary execution of the citizenry are commonplace.

    sudan: thousands of christians and animists sudanese are being killed the arab [mulsim] sudan….etc, etc…..

  72. sonia — on 29th November, 2005 at 5:26 pm  

    absolutely! and very good areas to highlight as well. so start the thread then, what’s stopping ya? i dont think you’ll find that people here will have a terribly different view – if that’s what you’re implying. human rights are human rights!

  73. nukh — on 29th November, 2005 at 7:43 pm  

    great idea! maybe i will start my own blog – “the contrarian view”
    or “the realist”
    or “what is good for the goose is good for the gander”
    or “suggest name for blog here”

  74. Tanvir — on 30th November, 2005 at 2:19 am  

    ok ok enough digressing….

    So we have those who still believe The Coalition invaded Iraq to help Iraq…despite lying initially.

    So are the troops sitting there to help Iraq? Surely those watering at the mouth for power in Iraq need the help of the Americans..so they are not going be to calling for their exit.

    Is the Coalition in Iraq solely to bring law and order and bring a fair and just rule? Or is it there to make money, and sew the seeds that will bring to their control the economy of a nation that has the potential to be a massive economic machine?

    I think if even the most anti-war people ( myself included) could be convinced, that the coalition was there purely for law and order, establishment of infrastructure and a just government, Coalition presence in Iraq would not be so strongly disliked. Even if they were making a few lil moves and favoring their own in terms of rebuilding contracts….but PRIMARILY there for the good reasons people claim they should stay there and stick it out for.

    The truth of the situation is, the coalition have from the beginning shown more interest in making money, taking over state assets, giving away contracts to powerful people and their friends, installing their preferred allied in power, installing their ‘democratic’ ideology [democracy as we are led to believe is meant to be a fair and representative just system of law, but in reality means pure submission to the principles of capitalism, pro-Americanism], making ‘peace’ with Israel [with which there is nothing wrong - as long as Israel delivers justice to the Palestinians...but this little detail is what they want to bypass ... remember the Iraqi interim gov't rep and Israel diplomat meeting.... and lets not forget the pseudo-israeli new Iraqi flag]…. the Coalition have shown more dedication to their own interests which are against Iraqi interests from day one! Further to that you have the neo-con conservative / right wing evangelicalism Christian ideology making its moves… so you have some right-wing religious ideology forwarding its plans…. ALL of which are coming before the reason they are giving for staying there…that is to bring stability and peace to the country.

    Add to that the immense human rights abuses, the brainwashed 18 year old soldiers who just want to kill Iraqis because they think all Iraqis believe in al-quaida as their religion and had something to do with 9-11… oh and lets not forget the permanent establishment of the USA in Iraq for decades to come, with military bases, and the biggest US embassy deploying CIA agents in every sector of the nation to take and hold full control…

    I say the troops should leave, now. The Iraqi government should request troops via the UN, from ‘friendly’ countries that the Iraqi population won’t have a problem with, Bangladeshi troops have done a good job in Sierra-Leone… perhaps they could work along side Pakistani troops with whom they already do military exercises and will probably work very well together.

  75. Sunny — on 30th November, 2005 at 2:47 am  

    To be fair Tanvir….

    Add to that the immense human rights abuses, the brainwashed 18 year old soldiers who just want to kill Iraqis because they think all Iraqis believe in al-quaida as their religion and had something to do with 9-11

    The human rights abuses (which I have pointed out) are still much smaller than the abuses of many alternatives (incl. Saddam Hussain, the Taliban, a Saudi style dictatorship).

    oh and lets not forget the permanent establishment of the USA in Iraq for decades to come, with military bases, and the biggest US embassy deploying CIA agents in every sector of the nation to take and hold full control…
    Some presence maybe, but I doubt they’ll have a huge presence for much longer, the losses and the money it costs is too much. America can’t afford that economic deficit forever.

    The Iraqi government should request troops via the UN, from ‘friendly’ countries that the Iraqi population won’t have a problem with, Bangladeshi troops have done a good job in Sierra-Leone

    Unfortunately thy tried that already, remember? Most Arab govts largely said no, even India said no. How many Pak troops are there in Iraq out of interest?

  76. Tanvir — on 30th November, 2005 at 5:30 am  

    The point of human rights abuses was made in contrast to the reasons given by America for staying there, Human rights abuses are human rights abuses, I don’t see the relevance of picking out other human rights abuses and saying the Americans are not as bad.

    Yes other nations were invited to send troops… but they would have served under the present Coalition system (which has flaws in both action and intent) – I don’t think any of the nations you mentioned would like to be associated with this American project in Iraq. If you re-read what I said, I suggested a fresh system of security under the UN – doing exactly what the Americans claim (and supports of ‘keep the troops’ like yourself) they are doing… but without the lies, abuses, economic, political and ideological take-over being perpetrated by the US. You are either naive or have conceded shared overall ideological interests if you believe or are actually trying to say America are in this war primarily for the interests of the Iraqi people.

  77. Steve — on 30th November, 2005 at 10:19 am  

    “The use of WP on the battlefield rather than HE preserves lives and reduces collateral damage. Death from a WP explosion is no more gruesome or horrid than death from an HE explosion, and is a great deal less likely”.

    http://iraqnow.blogspot.com/2005/11/how-i-stopped-worrying-and-learned-to.html

    Provocative thoughts from a man who served in Iraq.

  78. Sunny — on 30th November, 2005 at 3:32 pm  

    Tanvir:
    I don’t see the relevance of picking out other human rights abuses and saying the Americans are not as bad.
    Maybe because no one in the Arab world really gave a shit about the deaths of innocent Iraqis when Saddam was doing the killing? The fact that the Americans may not be as bad suggests some lives have been saved bu getting rid of Saddam. True or not?

    Yes other nations were invited to send troops… but they would have served under the present Coalition system (which has flaws in both action and intent) –
    Agree but I think the UN also rejected such a course of action. Though maybe it will change its mind now.

    You are either naive or have conceded shared overall ideological interests if you believe or are actually trying to say America are in this war primarily for the interests of the Iraqi people.
    Did you actually read my article or not above?

  79. freedom — on 5th December, 2005 at 1:28 am  

    Insurgents, freedom fighters keep up the good work don’t let the coalition scumbags walk all over you.To all the idiots arguing this and that crap.The unquestioned fact, this is an illegal invasion based on lies an the greed of the true axis of evil.Bush,Blair and the rest of the vultures want control of your resources and you.Another Palestine? god forbid.Fight to the bitter end make this another Vietnam send their sons/daughters home in coffins .Iraq for Iraqis. BY the way I’m a New Zealander of no middle eastern descent.The recent trophy videos of security forces mowing down innocent Iraqis just trying to live a normal life .Along with other atrocities has shown me these so called security ,soldiers any person involved in the coalition, this filthy lie of a War” send them home in bodybags These people are old enough.I dont know whether they’re intelligent enough (morally) to realise this is wrong .It’s not good enough to say I was just following orders.

  80. Özgür — on 8th February, 2006 at 12:07 am  

    You don’t believe in conspiracy theories, but you do believe that USA went to Iraq to help Iraqi people! How thoughtful, how kind of you to spend your resources for the well-being of people thousands of kilometres away from you. Do you really believe the US army went there to help people and to bring them democracy? You idiots, don’t you remember that the first ‘reason’ for the war was the claim that Iraq had WMDs? Do you really think a country would invade another for any other reason than its own profits? No other public than than the US public is so eager to buy the official doctrine imposed on them. Maybe it’s because it makes them proud to be powerful and challenge the world. Well then, look closely in the faces of burnt Iraqi babies in agony, and you’ll be even more proud of the irresistable power… of the United States… of America. They are bad, we are good. In God we trust. We are idiots.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.