White Phosphorus Anyone?

Post Reply New Topic

Are you talking about Iraq here? Do you think the majority of Iraqis liked living under Saddam Hussein? Most Iraqis wanted the Americans to come and liberate them.

Click here for one of the best politics sites on the net. You will find links to several articles and blogs by Iraqis rejoicing at the defeat of Saddam and giving thanks to the American forces.

Witness the millions of Iraqis who turned out to vote in favour of Iraq's new constitution.

Most so-called "insurgents" still in Iraq are Baathists from Syria, or Islamist terrorists.

And suicide bombers are just a product of their own depraved culture.

Klytus, until you learn to respect other people's cultures and their right to practice them in their own lands, people like you will never be welcome in Iraq. You are just arrogant and eager to enforce your own ideas onto other people who do not want them and are angry at your arrogance.

No. It is misidentification. I was discussing something with you and GroovyDruid. It was GroovyDruid who reported me. You said people needed to get their guns ready for the coming muslim invasion something or other.

I couldn't find the post. Did you delete it?

I thought phosphorous atoms were purple, not white

You are sterotyping all troops. Not every one fighting hates muslims. And no one here said they hated them either. I for one dont. Just because I dont agree with a religious viewpoint doesnt mean I hate them. I will say that those that use religion, ANY religion to justify viloence against anyone is out of line...
I agree that preserving civilian lives is VERY important. Our troops are acting on the INTEL that they get from their higher ups as to where to shoot, bomb, etc. That Intel comes from people, computers, satalites, etc. And as in ALL wars intel is fallable. No one is saying here that we should swoop in and start blasting away at random at any and all muslims we see. That is not what people are suggesting. It is unfortunate that civilians get caught in the cross fire, and that happens in every war. No battle is perfect.
Our troops recieve training as to how to avoid civilian casualties. They are trained in the proper respect of the culture in that area. Some have not followed those orders, and they should be punished.



I wish that the world was all peace and flowers. But its not. The reality is that war has been, and most likely always will be a nessary evil in Human culture.

As far as ethics go, nothing in war is ever ethical. You are killing before you are killed. You are trying to outwit, outbomb and out kill the ememy before he does the same to you. Some weapons that are used do involve innocent casulities. But its not nearly as bad as it was in years past. And technology gets better every day. Our troops use intel to determine a target, (see above about intel) and use that to drop a presision bomb or go from house to house searching for the target on foot. Because we are all human, no method of war can be perfect.
But we are not resorting to things such as putting a live person into a plastic shredder (Saddams regime did that) nor do we use weapons that can spread for miles, ruin the air, and kill thousands as well as maim the next generation born to them (Saddam did that with chemical weapons to the Kurds). We do not beat women in the street to death because they are showing more than their eyes (Talaban did this to even young girls) and we do not kill those that do not follow the approved religion (Many countries do that). {were these not OPRESSIVE FORCES? oh I guess not if you are an opressor} On the contrary, we give our POWs religious texts and allow the people of the lands we are in to worship as they please, (we avoid their religous places too when ever we can) we use presision methods to wage a war in attempts to prevent as many civilian deaths as we possibly can. We do not TARGET civilians over the actively fighting personnel. I know that there have been some dreadful things happen in this war, those things happen in all wars. Those things that were done with intent should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. But it is unrealistic to expect that a war wont have some innocent victims.
NO ONE has the RIGHT to send someone into a place strapped with explosives. And those that do such things, can only expect retaliation in what ever form their ememies put forth.

PS worsedale, its called "white" because when it is allowed air to come in contact with it, it sort of glows a white color. at least that Is my understanding of it.

No. You can't find what you're looking for because I never said anything like that.
I haven't seen anyone else in here say anything like that either, although sensitive people might be offended by the French Revolution thread.

On the thread you're talking about, where you were discussing something with me and GroovyDruid, all I did before you called me a "racist hater" was post a news story.

Maybe you can ask Happeh to provide you with more photos so he can try to convince you that the Israelis want to rule the world.
Anyway, even though you would probably like it to, how on earth does that photo reflect badly on the U.S. armed forces? Either those soldiers are Israeli, or they're American, or they're neither. It's unlikely that they're both.

Well, I'm not an expert on military uniforms. It's not obvious to me from the photo alone that they're even Israelis, though I can believe they are. It's not obvious to me that the woman on the ground is a peace activist either. A lot of so-called "peace activists" in Palestine belong to the International Solidarity Movement, who are not really peace activists at all, but accomplices to terrorist mass murder.

Still, it is terrible behaviour to kick a woman when she's on the ground. Is this, though, supposed to be "evidence" of some sort of institutional brutality? If it is, it's really lame.

Think about the cameramen. If they were filming instances of Palestinian brutality, they'd have their cameras confiscated and quite probably be threatened with violence. Ever wondered why the countries that get criticised the most during war-time are always the most open and democratic ones? You don't get many news reports from Chechnya these days. Most journalists wouldn't last five minutes there.

Anyway, here are some more photos from Palestine:

Here are young Palestinian boys being trained to kill Jews:



Here is a picture of a Palestinian baby dressed as a suicide bomber. It was found in the house of a known Palestinian terrorist.



Here is a photo of the "peace activist", Rachel Corrie, from the International Solidarity Movement burning an American/Israeli flag while surrounded by Palestinian children.

Last edited by Klytus on 21 Nov 2005, 11:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

:roll: You know there were another group of people who believed their military would make the best decisions for them. The Naz--*gets dragged off by the Godwin police*

He doesn't need photos. He needs written material. He can start with PNAC and the Neo Cons. We could talk about John Bolton, the Israeli loyal Neo Con that Bush sent to the UN as US ambassador. We could talk about the Israeli Neo Con Paul Wolfowitz that Bush sent to the World Bank. We could talk about the 35 Israeli Congresspeople, and the rest of he Congresspeople who are loyal to Israel for money.

Then if he is not buried in information, we can talk about other things.




That is so weak. Trying to imply the photo is something other than what I said it was.



Lame? Would you rather have a picture of the soldiers raping her? Shooting her with their guns? Taking a knife and cutting her?



You are deceitful and dishonest. Comparing the obvious kicking on the ground to a baby dressed up for Halloween. Come on. Get real. Rachel Corrie burning a flag? I bet the people here do not even know Rachel Corrie. Let's get real about Rachel Corrie.

Rachel Corrie was a 24 year old American from Seattle Washington. She traveled to Palestine to help the people there. She made the mistake of thinking that Israelis acted like Americans. She thought they believed in the law, right, and wrong. Boy was she in for a surprise.

Rachel Corrie, tried to stop the home of a Palestinian from being bulldozed. She took a megaphone and she stood in front of the bulldozer yelling at the man to stop. This kind of activity is done at protests in the USA all of the time. Rachel Corrie was in Israel. Where they shoot Palestinian children for sport.

Rachel Corrie made a fatal mistake that day. She was dressed as a muslim women. The bulldozer driver saw a muslim woman and do you know what he did?

He ran over Rachel Corrie with the bulldozer. Then he backed up and ran over her again to make sure she was dead.

You tell me. You listen to Klytus and his horrifying ravings about babies dressed in Halloween costumes, and you see a young American women from Seattle Washington lying dead, crushed by a bulldozer, and who do you think is righteous in this situation?

Do you want to know the worst of it? The Bush government didn't do anything about it. They covered it up so the American people would not get angry at Israel. That is what Israeli controlling the USA is about. Controlling the news so that the cold blooded murder of an American young girl by a murderous Israeli soldier can be erased from reality like it never happened.

Trying to trump each other in gory photos is not the way to win an argument. Both of you, take a look at the terms of service on offensive content, edit the dead bodies out, and knock off the shock tactics.

--ghotistix (as mod)

several of the pictures violated the guidelines (on offensive/violent content) and have been removed.

Vivi
(as Mod)

Leave it to Happeh to unite liberals and conservatives...against him!

Happeh, do you have the link to a recognized news site that I can find the photo of the Israelis kicking the woman on to see that it is not doctored by somebody?

RobertN, the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan are not muslim haters. Some of them are muslim and have people from other religious and ethnic backgrounds fighting beside them.

I am not concerned with ethics on the battlefield when it comes to National security. Avoid killing civilians whenever possible, but not at the expense of letting enemy combatants find safety behind them. If a family's assets or the family itself has to be destroyed to stop the spread off terrorism, fine. Abide by the Geneva Convetnion when dealing with kids playing jihad, but when interrogating ranking members of a terrorist organization, go ahead and use torture methods that would have made the Nazis puke to watch if it will help preserve National security.

Bush will probably have to pull out of Iraq fairly soon anyway if he intends to launch an assault on Iran or maybe North Korea.

That statement's not accurate — go and read some history books.

And you're an expert?

Well, they're unlikely to complain if dead, RobertN. The trouble is, that if policy did reflect your views, nobody would want to join the miltary. We could enforce conscription, but I doubt that would go along with your political beliefs, either. Or, along with the rest of Europe, we could leave ourselves defenceless and become an Islamic state within your lifetime. I bet you'd really like that!!

The world's offensive and violent. You do nobody a service by maintaining the illusion it's not.