Webmaster Forum

Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Controversial Social Issues Discussions concerning controversial social issues. Topics include politics, religion, culture, social and economic issues, etc. Respect required at all times.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Share |
  #1  
Old 12-12-2006, 02:51 AM
Ferre's Avatar
Ferre Ferre is offline
No Longer Active
 
Join Date: 10-15-03
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 6,897
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Cornered US Military Takes to Desperate Tactics in Iraq

http://www.antiwar.com/jamail/?articleid=10141

While the ship is sinking, tactics from the US military resolt more and more into uglyness.

Quote:
Abdul Kareem al-Samarrai'i, a leading member of the Islamic Party that participates in the Maliki government, stated on Baghdad Space Channel that the 13 children died in Siniyah "because of the siege and the US army orders to deprive the town of any medical care."
Duluiyah, another small town roughly 60 km north of Baghdad has been under siege by the US military for the last three weeks.
"They (US military) applied the siege upon Duluiyah (close to Samarra) many times, the last of which partially ended last week," Samir Muhammad of the Samarra municipality council told IPS.
The Geneva Conventions forbid use of collective punishment. International law says the occupying power in a country is responsible for safeguarding the civilian population.
Fallujah in al-Anbar province to the west of Baghdad continues to face attacks and harassment by the US military, according to local residents.
"Why don't those people admit their failure and leave," 55-year-old Khalaf Dawood from Fallujah told IPS. "They are being hit and their soldiers are getting killed all over the city. All they are doing is killing civilians and suffocating the city economically as revenge."
Revenge? Since when is revenge on civillians a tool to bring 'democracy and freedom'?
 
Reply With Quote

Advertisement

Advertisement

  #2  
Old 12-12-2006, 03:17 AM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Odd to see you an quoting anti-war propaganda machine when you are so diligently opposed to any other news that bears even the slightest resemblance of propaganda.

For a little fun, why not research the author's background and research some of the so-called facts he puts forth.
 
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-12-2006, 04:11 AM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...98545866574004

Not a reporter, even states that he doesn't accept standards of objectivity. He supports Hezbollah, seems to support extremist Islam, and opposes Bush, etc.

If somebody wants to be a reporter, report the facts. But he's just a propaganda machine - a political activist posing a a reporter. Sad waste of a human life.
 
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-12-2006, 08:51 AM
Ferre's Avatar
Ferre Ferre is offline
No Longer Active
 
Join Date: 10-15-03
Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
Posts: 6,897
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Correction John. He did not state that he doesn't accept the standards of objectivity. He stated that he doesn't accept the "standards of reporting that the mainstream media forces upon journalists." which is an opinion shared by many other independent journalists in the world. He also does not "supports" Hezbollah either, in fact this was a very good interview, thanks for that.

And I see nothing wrong with being against war (ant-war) John, in fact I think that people who are generally for-war are mentally ill.

About those facts, are you saying he's a liar?
 
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-12-2006, 04:42 PM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Yes, I would have to say he's a liar. Many many blantant lies in the article and the interview.
 
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-12-2006, 04:45 PM
RobS's Avatar
RobS RobS is offline
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 10-22-06
Location: Portland, Dorset, UK.
Posts: 1,467
iTrader: 0 / 0%
War is all bollocks!!
 
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-12-2006, 04:55 PM
G10's Avatar
G10 G10 is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 05-10-04
Location: UK - Cheshire
Posts: 11,763
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobS View Post
War is all bollocks!!
In one dude
 
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:07 PM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
War sucks, but so does tyranny and whatever it's called when Muslims kill each other by the thousands.
 
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:11 PM
RobS's Avatar
RobS RobS is offline
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 10-22-06
Location: Portland, Dorset, UK.
Posts: 1,467
iTrader: 0 / 0%
I agree John...

but the USA ONLY go to war when there is something in it for them....
 
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:15 PM
G10's Avatar
G10 G10 is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 05-10-04
Location: UK - Cheshire
Posts: 11,763
iTrader: 5 / 100%
I think most of them do Rob.

Half the countries do it for some sort of financial gain and the other half are defending themselves from the ones that do it for financial gain, thats just war for you.
 
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:18 PM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobS View Post
I agree John...

but the USA ONLY go to war when there is something in it for them....
When we went to war in Vietnam, it was to stop the spread of communism.

When we went to war in Europe - WW2 - it wasn't for us. The Germans never came close to the US; we did that for the allies.

And when we went to war in Korea, I suppose that was to plunder their bamboo stockpiles?
 
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:20 PM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by G10 View Post
I think most of them do Rob.

Half the countries do it for some sort of financial gain and the other half are defending themselves from the ones that do it for financial gain, thats just war for you.
War is very rarely about financial gain, IMO. It's usually about nationalism.
 
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:24 PM
RobS's Avatar
RobS RobS is offline
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 10-22-06
Location: Portland, Dorset, UK.
Posts: 1,467
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Scott View Post
When we went to war in Vietnam, it was to stop the spread of communism.
What a MESS that was....

Quote:
When we went to war in Europe - WW2 - it wasn't for us. The Germans never came close to the US; we did that for the allies.
USA would have been next though had the germans got us..and had the rest of Europe in thier pocket...

Quote:
And when we went to war in Korea, I suppose that was to plunder their bamboo stockpiles?
Probably....
 
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:24 PM
RobS's Avatar
RobS RobS is offline
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 10-22-06
Location: Portland, Dorset, UK.
Posts: 1,467
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Scott View Post
War is very rarely about financial gain, IMO. It's usually about nationalism.
Why sell the ammo then if its NOT for money?
 
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:28 PM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobS View Post
Why sell the ammo then if its NOT for money?
You think that we go to war to sell ammo?
 
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:29 PM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Quote:
USA would have been next though had the germans got us..and had the rest of Europe in thier pocket...
USA was never at risk of being invaded by Nazis. We knew that and went anyway.
 
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:29 PM
RobS's Avatar
RobS RobS is offline
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 10-22-06
Location: Portland, Dorset, UK.
Posts: 1,467
iTrader: 0 / 0%
NO... you wally....

The USA sell the bloody ammo that others use in wars agaisnt the USA... WHY?

Money...
 
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:30 PM
RobS's Avatar
RobS RobS is offline
Contributing Member
 
Join Date: 10-22-06
Location: Portland, Dorset, UK.
Posts: 1,467
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Scott View Post
USA was never at risk of being invaded by Nazis. We knew that and went anyway.
You sure about that?

Hitler wanted WORLD domination....

Think he would have stopped till he got that?

I don't...
 
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:32 PM
G10's Avatar
G10 G10 is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: 05-10-04
Location: UK - Cheshire
Posts: 11,763
iTrader: 5 / 100%
Germany would have not suceeded against the US for a few reasons.

1, Each country an invading power takes over, they lose a percentage of men due to war and also due to having to keep occupying the invading country.

2, The German tactic was blitzkrieg which could not be applied against the UK due to it being an island and their airforce got badly damaged - Granted, they left the UK's almost non-existent.

3, After air attacks, they would have had to use their Naval fleet and the British naval fleet was just as big as theirs.

Even if they would have suceeded with the UK, they would have been seriously hampered to go anywhere else after this and that is why they asked the UK to work with them as allies.
 
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-12-2006, 05:33 PM
John Scott's Avatar
John Scott John Scott is offline
Individualist
 
Join Date: 09-27-03
Location: Wherever I want.
Posts: 28,046
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobS View Post
NO... you wally....

The USA sell the bloody ammo that others use in wars agaisnt the USA... WHY?

Money...
That's like saying cops incarcerate criminals so they can get license plates.

War costs money. War is not profitable. I think you should spend some time studying these things before forming such, um, off-the-wall opinions.
 
Reply With Quote
Go Back   Webmaster Forum > The Webmaster Forums > Forum Lobby > Controversial Social Issues

Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I am in desperate need of help in CS3 Pookumz Web Design Lobby 1 10-30-2007 04:28 PM
Desperate for help!! gump2773 Coding Forum 4 09-11-2006 10:46 PM


V7N Network
Get exposure! V7N I Love Photography V7N SEO Blog V7N Directory


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:11 PM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Copyright © 2003 - 2018 VIX-WomensForum LLC