Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 152

Thread: Wikileaks: Secret Iraq War Death Toll Set at 285,000

  1. #111
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,465

    Re: Wikileaks: Secret Iraq War Death Toll Set at 285,000

    Quote Originally Posted by Demon of Light View Post
    They would not need to arrest them. Maybe provide the evidence acquired in an investigation to a domestic body that might impartially pursue charges, or just released the results of the investigation and change policies concerning the release of detainees. Never mind there is the old-fashioned use of political pressure. You are acting like we were completely powerless and it just isn't the case.
    If Iraq doesn't have any laws, or military regulations that prohibit torture, then there's nothing U.S. troops could do.



    At the time he had only leaked the video. Also, calling him a traitor is rather absurd. He was looking to make this information publicly available out of concern about the abuses being concealed by the government. That makes him a whistleblower. Obviously some people have a hard time distinguishing between the two.
    I don't buy that his intentions were quite so noble.




    I do not know if that is true. Just because some Iraqi has a gun does not mean that person is an insurgent. Also, if you watch the video they do not appear to be in the company of them at all. The armed individuals were across the street as I recall.
    On a battlefield, a soldier doesn't wait to get shot at, to engage a target. it's ridiculous to suggest that they should.



    Whoever they thought they were, there are no visible weapons and only someone attempting to evacuated a wounded person. Soldiers do not have legal cover to fire on people providing help to the wounded in any country. Had an insurgent shot a person in cold blood simply for attempting to evacuate a wounded soldier I do not think you would be so defensive of them. You may very well cite it as an example of how the insurgents are decrepit people who don't abide by the laws of war.
    Yes they do. Medics, on a battlefield, are targets of oppurtunity.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  2. #112
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    04-28-17 @ 01:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,095

    Re: Wikileaks: Secret Iraq War Death Toll Set at 285,000

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Most of which were caused by your own people. I would be sick, too. Are you just as sick at the 300,000 people that Saddam murdered and torchered during his reign?

    Oh, let me guess; that's different?
    I don't have 'my' people.

    And it's exactly the same hence why I am so sick.
    What have we actually done that is good? I laugh every time someone tells me we did good in Iraq. We have a Government torturing people with the eyes turned away by the UK and US. How is that any different to Saddam torturing and US/UK turning a blind eye? Hey, maybe we'll next start giving the Iraqi Government biological weapons to use against their own people. No wait, we've done that already haven't we?

    I wonder how much **** US and the allies have covered up. No doubt there will many more leaks about torture, deaths and rape either done by our soldiers or someone else and if that report about a British soldier killing a 8 year old for no reason is true ... :/

    I support the leaks and I hope British files are leaked too. Americans and British need to suck it up and deal with the consequences. Iraqi's deserves to know the truth of what is happening in their country not when US deems it is good for them to know

    The leaks if they are all true tell us more about this war and the casualties than any bull**** the Governments feed us and I hope it continues.
    Last edited by Laila; 10-24-10 at 12:35 AM.


  3. #113
    Bohemian Revolutionary
    Demon of Light's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    03-07-17 @ 12:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,095

    Re: Wikileaks: Secret Iraq War Death Toll Set at 285,000

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I've read all about this and I haven't seen anything saying what you're claiming. I'm asking for a link to the story talking about how we arrested the people we're talking about and turned them over to the Iraqis so that they could be tortured. I don't think you'll be able to find such a link because I don't think that's what happened.
    Obviously, you aren't looking hard enough or maybe you just don't want to look hard enough.

    Again, you're operating under the assumption that

    1) Our information was solid,
    2) The Iraqi authorities didn't already know,
    3) It had something to do with our detainee release policies, and
    4) We had the authority to do something.
    Again the data that was leaked indicated that our people not only knew, but had definitive evidence implicating Iraqi forces in torture. Even just having very well-founded suspicions is enough reason for us not to release them as you are not supposed to release detainees to people who will torture. As far as Iraqi authorities knowing, that would just mean we would have to take other actions. With regards to our authority, there was more than enough influence to get them to support. For much of the time Iraq has been dependent on us for everything and is still dependent on us in various ways.

    If we're going to discuss the propriety of US actions in particular instances, then that's not very useful, is it?
    All that matters is that for much of the time we had more than enough authority to prevent these activities, but did not. That is what data attests to on this matter.

    Obviously, because that's not what a whistleblower is. A whistleblower is someone who reports suspected malfeasance to the appropriate entity designed to hear those things.
    That is not a working definition anywhere, except maybe a country hostile to whistleblowers. By your logic Deep Throat wasn't a whistleblower because he went to the media.

    Again, you're missing my point. You are arguing for a system that would, in practice, mean that there was no such thing as classification. Whether or not a weapon is legal or illegal or dangerous is, for many, a matter of opinion. Under your system, someone could just leak weapons plans because he was opposed to war and didn't want to see people killed. That is an entirely unworkable and unrealistic idea.
    I am not arguing for a system beyond protecting people who expose abuses of authority. Protecting people who reveal information concerning the direct or indirect violation of human rights by authority is central to a democratic society. Without such protection we might as well resign ourselves to a totalitarian system.

    I notice that you deliberately ignore the presence of the RPGs. Why is that?
    I recall one image that seemed to be of an RPG that was of one of the people at the other end of a street.

    And no, they were absolutely with them. They were traveling as a group down the street.

    It says that guy is armed, but I am not seeing the weapon.

    This was a group of insurgents carrying AK47s and RPGs in an active war zone just a few blocks from where US troops had reported being fired upon. How can you say with a straight face that there is "no indication that these individuals showed hostile intent"?
    You keep assuming they are insurgents. Iraq was, probably still is, littered with weapons and anyone with good sense would want to have some defense at a time when death squads were wandering about killing dozens of people. As far as no indication, I am referring to the fact they were not pointing their weapons at anyone or showing any indication that they intended to use their weapons offensively.

    Well, this is where your personal beliefs and the law come into conflict. It's perfectly legal to fire on combatants while they are trying to escape from a battlefield, wounded or not.
    No, it is not legal at all. The Geneva Conventions explicitly prohibits firing on wounded soldiers. Even if that person had been a combatant as opposed to a journalist, killing him when he was wounded and unarmed constitutes a war crime. So is firing on an unarmed person attempting to assist said wounded individual.

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    I don't buy that his intentions were quite so noble.
    Of course you don't, but you are free to be wrong.

    On a battlefield, a soldier doesn't wait to get shot at, to engage a target. it's ridiculous to suggest that they should.
    They don't have to wait to get shot at, but someone just having a weapon is not sufficient reason to open fire.

    Yes they do. Medics, on a battlefield, are targets of oppurtunity.
    The hell they are. Killing medical personnel is a war crime. It is explicitly forbidden by law.
    Last edited by Demon of Light; 10-24-10 at 12:50 AM.
    "For what is Evil but Good-tortured by its own hunger and thirst?"
    - Khalil Gibran

  4. #114
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Wikileaks: Secret Iraq War Death Toll Set at 285,000

    Quote Originally Posted by Demon of Light View Post
    Obviously, you aren't looking hard enough or maybe you just don't want to look hard enough.
    Bull****. You know that there's nothing that says that and now you're trying to dodge. You made a claim, now back it up.

    Again the data that was leaked indicated that our people not only knew, but had definitive evidence implicating Iraqi forces in torture.
    Link? Rather than trusting your own claims, I'd rather see the actual evidence.

    Even just having very well-founded suspicions is enough reason for us not to release them as you are not supposed to release detainees to people who will torture.
    And you have proof that they did? Let's see it.

    As far as Iraqi authorities knowing, that would just mean we would have to take other actions. With regards to our authority, there was more than enough influence to get them to support. For much of the time Iraq has been dependent on us for everything and is still dependent on us in various ways.
    Tell me exactly what you think we should have done and why.

    All that matters is that for much of the time we had more than enough authority to prevent these activities, but did not. That is what data attests to on this matter.
    No, that's what you claim. Again, rather than just saying what you think happened, why not prove it with actual evidence?

    That is not a working definition anywhere, except maybe a country hostile to whistleblowers. By your logic Deep Throat wasn't a whistleblower because he went to the media.
    Yea, who would ever define whistleblower like that?

    Under most U.S. federal whistleblower statutes, in order to be considered a whistleblower, the federal employee must have reason to believe his or her employer has violated some law, rule or regulation; testify or commence a legal proceeding on the legally protected matter; or refuse to violate the law.
    The US whistleblower laws explicitly do not include people who illegally leak information to the public. But yea, your definition of whistleblower definitely trumps theirs.

    I am not arguing for a system beyond protecting people who expose abuses of authority. Protecting people who reveal information concerning the direct or indirect violation of human rights by authority is central to a democratic society. Without such protection we might as well resign ourselves to a totalitarian system.
    I'll take out current "totalitarian system" over your fantasyland.

    I recall one image that seemed to be of an RPG that was of one of the people at the other end of a street.
    lol, this is such a load of ****.

    The Jawa Report: Case Closed: Weapons Clearly Seen on Video of Reuters Reporters Killed in Iraq (UPDATED & Bumped Yet Again)

    There's a guy standing IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GROUP, CARRYING AN RPG. When the troops arrived on the scene, they discovered multiple RPGs and RPG rounds. You might not want to admit that, but that's the reality.

    It says that guy is armed, but I am not seeing the weapon.
    It's a screencap from the video. There are a multitude of other shots that show the weapons more clearly - I simply chose that one to show you that you were wrong with your claim that they weren't near the insurgents.

    You keep assuming they are insurgents. Iraq was, probably still is, littered with weapons and anyone with good sense would want to have some defense at a time when death squads were wandering about killing dozens of people. As far as no indication, I am referring to the fact they were not pointing their weapons at anyone or showing any indication that they intended to use their weapons offensively.
    I just really don't know what else to say to this, as your position is essentially the equivalent of being a 9/11 truther. The facts are there in front of you, along with video, pictures, and a multitude of evidence showing that these people were insurgents in a live war zone carrying RPGs and AK47s. Despite that, you keep on insisting that they were just innocents walking down the street for a stroll. It's disgusting.

    No, it is not legal at all. The Geneva Conventions explicitly prohibits firing on wounded soldiers.
    Give me a link. I'm tired of you throwing out claims without any evidence.

    Even if that person had been a combatant as opposed to a journalist, killing him when he was wounded and unarmed constitutes a war crime.
    Link?

    So is firing on an unarmed person attempting to assist said wounded individual.
    Link?
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  5. #115
    Educator Jucon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    04-22-14 @ 07:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    787

    Re: Wikileaks: Secret Iraq War Death Toll Set at 285,000

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    I just really don't know what else to say to this, as your position is essentially the equivalent of being a 9/11 truther. The facts are there in front of you, along with video, pictures, and a multitude of evidence showing that these people were insurgents in a live war zone carrying RPGs and AK47s. Despite that, you keep on insisting that they were just innocents walking down the street for a stroll. It's disgusting.
    So if you were in Iraq during the time period, you wouldn't walk around with a weapon to protect yourself? I doubt that. I know I'd have an AK with me at all times.

    They might have been enemy combatants, but I'm not ruling anything out. The presence of weapons is not a telltale sign of an enemy.


    As for your request for a link on the Geneva Convention, here you go...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions

    The Geneva Conventions comprise rules that apply in times of armed conflict and seek to protect people who are not or are no longer taking part in hostilities, for example:

    * wounded or sick fighters
    * prisoners of war
    * civilians
    * medical and religious personnel
    Last edited by Jucon; 10-24-10 at 05:03 AM.
    "There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, it to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution." —John Adams

  6. #116
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,611

    Re: Wikileaks: Secret Iraq War Death Toll Set at 285,000

    Quote Originally Posted by Jucon View Post
    So if you were in Iraq during the time period, you wouldn't walk around with a weapon to protect yourself? I doubt that. I know I'd have an AK with me at all times.

    They might have been enemy combatants, but I'm just saying...

    I'm not ruling anything out. The presence of weapons is not a telltale sign of an enemy.


    As for your request for a link on the Geneva Convention, here you go...

    Geneva Conventions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    That was the big problem for journalist during the time. Either stay with the american soldiers and get a very narrow and slanted view of that was going on. Or choose to try to do your job and go out with out the protection of american soldiers. Then you had the option either go out with no armed security and most likely end up as hostage or killed by insurgents or regular crimilans. Or go out with armed security and be considerd fair target by american helicopters.

  7. #117
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Wikileaks: Secret Iraq War Death Toll Set at 285,000

    Quote Originally Posted by Jucon View Post
    So if you were in Iraq during the time period, you wouldn't walk around with a weapon to protect yourself? I doubt that. I know I'd have an AK with me at all times.

    They might have been enemy combatants, but I'm not ruling anything out. The presence of weapons is not a telltale sign of an enemy.
    It was a group of nine males carrying AK47s AND RPGS just a few blocks from an active war zone and right next to where US troops reported taking fire.

    Why is it that all of you keep ignoring these other facts that eviscerate your position?



    As for your request for a link on the Geneva Convention, here you go...

    [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions[/url
    I'm asking for you to show me the actual language that says this was illegal, not a layman's summary of some general principles. The reason why I'm asking for that is because different provisions of the GC apply to different classes of people in different scenarios. I think you'll be surprised to find that there was absolutely nothing prohibiting what the US did here.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  8. #118
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Wikileaks: Secret Iraq War Death Toll Set at 285,000

    Quote Originally Posted by Bergslagstroll View Post
    That was the big problem for journalist during the time. Either stay with the american soldiers and get a very narrow and slanted view of that was going on. Or choose to try to do your job and go out with out the protection of american soldiers. Then you had the option either go out with no armed security and most likely end up as hostage or killed by insurgents or regular crimilans. Or go out with armed security and be considerd fair target by american helicopters.
    Did most neutral security carry RPGs?

    Look, the facts here are that these journalists were walking around with a group of insurgents in a live war zone. They got shot. They probably shouldn't have been walking around with a group of insurgents in a live war zone.
    Last edited by RightinNYC; 10-24-10 at 02:38 PM.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  9. #119
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:18 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,569

    Re: Wikileaks: Secret Iraq War Death Toll Set at 285,000

    Why is it that some people want to believe so badly that in this case, the US military was in the wrong, and will ignore anything they have to which doesn't fit the narrative?

    What do you get out of it? Seriously?
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  10. #120
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,465

    Re: Wikileaks: Secret Iraq War Death Toll Set at 285,000

    Quote Originally Posted by Laila View Post
    I don't have 'my' people.

    And it's exactly the same hence why I am so sick.
    What have we actually done that is good? I laugh every time someone tells me we did good in Iraq. We have a Government torturing people with the eyes turned away by the UK and US. How is that any different to Saddam torturing and US/UK turning a blind eye? Hey, maybe we'll next start giving the Iraqi Government biological weapons to use against their own people. No wait, we've done that already haven't we?

    I wonder how much **** US and the allies have covered up. No doubt there will many more leaks about torture, deaths and rape either done by our soldiers or someone else and if that report about a British soldier killing a 8 year old for no reason is true ... :/

    I support the leaks and I hope British files are leaked too. Americans and British need to suck it up and deal with the consequences. Iraqi's deserves to know the truth of what is happening in their country not when US deems it is good for them to know

    The leaks if they are all true tell us more about this war and the casualties than any bull**** the Governments feed us and I hope it continues.
    All that and not once did you deal with the fact that most of the Iraqis killed during the war, were killed by Muslim insurgents.

    Leaking these docs is nothing less than an act of treason and espionage. The entire motive for the leaks is to undermine the war effort. Therefore ending the war, by causing the Coalition forces to lose. Your post is defeatism, at it's worst.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •