Notes from Fallujah

[DaBeeeenster]

This is a quite astonishing article...

http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates...-2-95-1843.jsp

And another one here...

http://www.empirenotes.org/fallujah.html

Thoughts?

[Blub2k]

This would be the "brave" US servicemen, makes me sick.

[daverobev]

Things are Not Good. But then that's been true for a while now. But yeah, its pretty sickening. But people don't want to know, so people won't let themselves know. I'm off to Dubai in two weeks, it'll be interesting to see what it's like out there, or if life just goes on as normal...

[andybasford]

It does seem on the surface to be an insanley over the top response to the deaths in Falluja, After all the US said they only wanted to catch the people responsible.
You have to ask where the 600 deaths came from.

[Pete]

ffs they really have to sort this out why has it been so easily botched?
probably because they were supposed to be winning over the iraqis hearts and minds remember all that? at the start of the war it was working quite well but when they started busting into people homes and killing fathers and older sons or at least the iraqis say they did that was so stupid surely the americans knew that it would start to turn the people against them and now they wonder why there has been rebelions?
of course it might not be that at all could jsut be taliban doing something?
basra is the only major city i can think of that hasnt been talked about on the news recently or has it well done the british army i say
any thoughts
Pete

[Blub2k]

The order went over to "convince" hearts and minds but there was bad radio reception and someone understood "mince" hearts and minds.

Arses and elbows spring to mind.

[Pete]

hehe yeh most probably and how many british casualties do u think there would have been during the war if the americans had thought before they shot our chaps planes down? thats what annoys me about this war or cock up also i guess iraq probably did have weapons at some point but they obviously dont now so there must be something more sinister i think the oil maby?
Pete

[Blub2k]

PNAC is the reason I think myself have a look here:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm

look at who signed up for this statement on PNAC's objectives, then reflect on the fact that they are all players in the Iraq saga, also have a look at the front page and notice that Iraq is the ONLY country that gets a mention, everywhere else is a global region not a country.

Rumsfeld was of the opinion that Iraqi weapons were no threat shortly before 9/11, so what changed?

[Blub2k]

Just a point if you are interested
Enter any of the names on the list with the word Israel into Google and see what comes back, it is interesting to say the least.

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

[Blub2k]

Sorry if this looks like a thread hijack but I think it is relevant and interesting.

[TeePee]

Not everything you read on the internet is true.
Not everything you read on the internet is true.
Not everything you read on the internet is true.
Not everything you read on the internet is true.
Not everything you read on the internet is true.


Five times each please everyone.

[Zathras]

I don't see anyone from the US military making any specific rebuttals of anything in either of those stories. Tell me TeePee, do you think using Apache gunships and F14s is a sensible way of attacking some terrorists, who we're all told are in the extreme minority and don't represent the public in Falluja? The numbers of women and children killed in Falluja have been widely reported in well-respected media including the Telegraph (not exactly a loony-leftie paper now is it?) and Times. Getting revenge for the death of four servicemen is hardly the winning of hearts and minds now is it?

[TeePee]

I'm not saying it's all lies (although being on the internet makes it very likely) just that I don't accept obviously anti-US propaganda as gospel truth (and don't get me started on what I think of the gospels). It's a war, people die. Not every 'innocent' death is exactly that. In Israel ambulances are used by palestinians to transport munitions. In Mogadishu, women and children were heavily involved in the fighting, standing in front of militiamen knowing the americans would think twice about shooting back. 'He was unarmed (Honest, guv!)'.
I'm not a supporter of this war or any other, but my opinion is not made by anti-US propaganda, which is all this is.

[DaBeeeenster]

I'm not saying it's all lies (although being on the internet makes it very likely) just that I don't accept obviously anti-US propaganda as gospel truth (and don't get me started on what I think of the gospels). It's a war, people die. Not every 'innocent' death is exactly that. In Israel ambulances are used by palestinians to transport munitions. In Mogadishu, women and children were heavily involved in the fighting, standing in front of militiamen knowing the americans would think twice about shooting back. 'He was unarmed (Honest, guv!)'.
I'm not a supporter of this war or any other, but my opinion is not made by anti-US propaganda, which is all this is.

So you are saying that both the reports are falsifications, are you?

These are primary sources, written by people without an obvious hidden agenda (they dont work for the companies that are disseminating the information, they dont work for news agencies, they dont work for the government). As historical documents I would suggest that they are fairly valuable? Additionally, a large number of facts in the articles are corroborated by a number of articles in the mainstream press, as Zathras mentioned.

Personally, I am likely to place more trust in these documents than I am in, say, a US army briefing, for the obvious reasons.

If you are not going to believe ANYTHING on the internet, why on earth are you using it?

[TeePee]

I'm saying that both reports are to be treated with the same scepticism as anything on the internet. Both articles are posted on obviously anti-US websites. They're agendas aren't hidden, they're out in the open! Next you'll be saying indymedia is a reliable news source. I don't see why you'd place any more trust in these reports than a US army press release, they are both about equal.

I'm not disputing there are some facts, but in a situation where thirteen year old boys are 'Handy with a Kalashnikov', how do you define a 'non-combatant'?

I also don't disbelieve everthing on the internet, only about 90% of it. I don't believe stuff just because some wacko makes a webpage about it.

[DaBeeeenster]

You are prepared to place a US Army report on the same level as a personal, independent primary source? Do you think that is wise?