American Soldiers out of Control in Iraq

[Arrian]

MOBIUS,

It's like the boy who cried wolf. This thread, viewed in a vacuum, might actually be worthwhile. Maybe.

Anyway, you are right about one thing. I shouldn't be getting personal.

/me exists stage left.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
Dino I expect as it is his way, but you seem to be a reaonable poster.

I'm not able to bring myself to bring myself to put forth the effort to take you seriously if you insist on regergitating the same things over and over.

[Tripledoc]

The problem is that I presume many American soldiers are frustrated and angry by what the current administration had promised, a quick victory and subsequent liberation, has not materialized. The administration used the oldest trick in the book to force soldiers to fight. As described in Sun Tzu one has to trick soldiers in a position where they cannot retreat and where the only option is to fight, otherwise they will not fight. Therefore Iraq is a de facto battlefield and on a battlefield people die, soldiers and civilians alike. And there cannot be any retreat, since that would mean defeat. The confusion arises from the administrations entirely political decision to declare the war over. And the press has since been trying to explain that the war is in fact not over. If it was still officially a war my guess would be that the civilian casualties would not be such an issue. After all many more civilians died during the invasion than has since died. This explains why the American military will never wage a succesful campaign against any poor nation. Since what is in fact war will for political reasons be described as peace to the domestic audience.

[MOBIUS]

Could a Mod put a question mark at the end of my thread title please :-) ?

Originally posted by Caligastia
I'm not there, so I can't judge. I'd say they are probably trying to make the best of a bad situation. Your thread title is awful BTW.

Yeah, I already mentioned that I should perhaps have put a question mark at the end of it!

You make it sound like US troops are just indiscriminately killing Iraqis for the fun of it.

Now, before you go puttin' words in my mouth, I was only saying an unspecified number were out of control - no fun was mentioned and words like 'indiscriminate' were lifted from a respected American Human Rights organisation (even MtG quotes them!)...

[Defiant]

MOBIUS,
We have a colonel on trial right now for shooting two rounds over a enemy's head to get him to reveal his buddies hideout so our boys wouldn't get ambushed. We take crimes pretty seriously here, most of the nation thinks it is absurd to try and court marshall this colonel and I agree he shouldn't be. But yet, his career is over but he saved American lives. I will save American lives first and worry about the rest later.

NO, our soldiers are not trained for policing, that is why the army called in the NYC police chief for help, this is flaw that I admit to in our Iraq war, we were not prepared to handle the policing after the swift initial warfront. But nobody could have anticipated this action, not even MTg. They are doing the best they can.

[Sprayber]

Why dont you and Davout and che combine your three threads into one and save a little space here on poly. Unless of course you all couldnt agree to share the spotlight.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I expected better from you than to resort to personal insults - Dino I expect as it is his way, but you seem to be a reaonable poster.

Sorry, that's kinda an ironic statement. 'I expected better than personal insults from A, but I'll just levy a personal insult at B instead' .

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I'm not able to bring myself to bring myself to put forth the effort to take you seriously if you insist on regergitating the same things over and over.

As I suspected - if you can't spell the word, doubtless you have no idea what it means...

This is the first time I have ever devoted a thread to the supposed indiscriminate killing of Iraqi civilians by US forces during peacetime.

Now don't trip over a dictionary in your haste to find this mythical creature to which you allude...!

[Caligastia]

Re: Could a Mod put a question mark at the end of my thread title please :-) ?

Originally posted by MOBIUS
Now, before you go puttin' words in my mouth, I was only saying an unspecified number were out of control

In any army there will be an unspecified number who will be out of control. I would be more inclined to criticise the behaviour of those who have been attacking US troops. Surely they are more 'out of control' than the blokes in the US army.

[MOBIUS]

Re: Re: Could a Mod put a question mark at the end of my thread title please :-) ?

Originally posted by Caligastia
In any army there will be an unspecified number who will be out of control. I would be more inclined to criticise the behaviour of those who have been attacking US troops. Surely they are more 'out of control' than the blokes in the US army.

Cal, that is a given - but perhaps potential recruits could be prevented from joining them by the US army appearing to be less trigger happy...

[MrFun]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Sorry to disappoint you. This is just a regurgitation of the same theme, been there, done that.

Besides, I have to get my ass across the border and have a pseudo "job" "interview" about doing some IT consulting work for a new prospective client.

[Caligastia]

Re: Re: Re: Could a Mod put a question mark at the end of my thread title please :-) ?

Originally posted by MOBIUS


Cal, that is a given - but perhaps potential recruits could be prevented from joining them by the US army appearing to be less trigger happy...

I doubt that would be much of a factor. It's not like the US army is going on a rampage of civilian killings or anything. I think any reasonable Iraqi would understand that accidents are going to happen when you have an occupying force with people taking pot-shots at them all the time.


As Defiant pointed out, the US military are not the ideal police force. The sooner an Iraqi police force can be sorted out the better.

[Sarxis]

I want to see a thread headed with, "Could Iraqis be doing more to ensure their own safety?"

That'd be a good discussion.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Sprayber
Why dont you and Davout and che combine your three threads into one and save a little space here on poly. Unless of course you all couldnt agree to share the spotlight.

I feel personally insulted that you associate my thread which aimed only at providing a new piece of information without any kind of negative commentary, with the ceaseless, tireless, unjust and boring american bashing uttered by the two other posters.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by Sandman
If the US wants to achieve it's strategic objective of winning hearts and minds, that means not being so trigger happy. Yes, that will mean losing more soldiers. But if they didn't want to lose soldiers, they shouldn't have started the war. When your soldiers' primary objective is 'not dying', then you have no chance of winning the peace.

Second that