Page 1 of At the risk of offending...(Adults: caution advised)

http://videos.informationclearinghouse.info/fallujah_INGb.rm

Disturbing video regarding the Iraq war.

No offence taken. I think the results of the "suicide" bombings are much more distressing. Chuffed to bits to see one of these d*******s failed in their grisly task this week...How many innocents does it take before these idiots see that even amongst people who may, (for their own purposes) have sympathised with them, murdering their own (Jordan, UK) doesn`t do anything but alienate them within their own society & diminish whatever support they may have had.

So you find the wholesale destruction and massacre of a people by a government more acceptable and less `distressing` than tactics used by a `rogue element`? Why is indiscriminant bombing using chemical weapons akin to napalm better/less `distressing` than suicide bombing?

Is it because one is against civilians? Oh no wait - they both are.

Is it because one is done via a `suicide` and the other via distance? And if that is the case, should these rogue elements switch to using guided missiles when targetting the hotels? Would that be more acceptable and less `distressing`?

Or maybe because `these` people deserve no better. Which is the same argument that the `rogue elements` use as a banner under pictures of the dead from places like Falluja.

Perhaps it is attitudes like yours than give credance to the idea of a double standard existing - and thereby fuelling the resentment felt by `these` people. Resentment which then leads to development of radical ideas, and so easier recruitment by these rogue elements. Attitudes that lead to statements like the recent bomber`s recorded message, stating that `until we feel security, you will be our targets. And until you stop the bombing, gassing, imprisonment and torture of my people we will not stop this fight.`


If you have time, listen in to Radio 4`s `Quran And Country`.

This item was edited on Monday, 14th November 2005, 10:32

Quote:
Perhaps it is attitudes like yours

What attitude? Thinking suicide bombers are d*******s?

F*** me, then lock him up right now. The monster.

Oh yeah... Ken is a badass dude!

As far as Im aware, the government has never designated a Wedding Reception as a legitimate target.

Not that im defending the government nor its actions, but I absolutely fail to see how bombing a wedding reception furthers your cause or gains it more credibility. There are plenty of legitimate military targets in that area, so it mystifies me how this could be considered a credible target.

I have to agree with the assesment of them being utter d*******s. Well, thats to put it mildly. These people are, essentially, cultists, perpetuating crimes against humanity that their leaders have neither the nerve nor the inclination to commit themselves.

Our government may have commited some attrocities in the name of freeing the s*** out Iraq, but sinking to an even worse level is in no way, shape or form justified. If you want to take the moral high ground in this issue, it might be handy for the `oppressed` to stop acting like maniacs for one minute.

For all cultists out there, follow this equation for lack of international derision:

Tank = Military = Legitimate target of an occupying force

Wedding reception = not so much

Quote:
Attitudes that lead to statements like the recent bomber`s recorded message
No, I think you`ll find that it is fundamentalist fascist nonsense that leads to statements like the one that was made...where he goes on to sing the praises of the beloved Bin Laden and Al-Zaqawi. By pretending that it is anything else is almost arguing that they are justified...Which I am sure you are not.

The reason suicide bombing should be more distressing is because any state sponsored war should be UN ratified and thereforee not necessarily illegal (admittedly, a grey area in Iraq), and the targets should only be military. Suicide Bombers target military and innocents.

Neil.

This item was edited on Monday, 14th November 2005, 11:21

Well, maybe the innocents that occur in suicide bombings are what the US military would call `collateral damage`. And how does a WHOLE CITY constitute a legitmate military target?

And when you speak of wedding parties, isn`t that what the US has attacked in Iraq in the past, stating that it was a gathering of militants?

The attitude I was referring to was that of how one side (i.e. the west) seems to belittle the killing of non-Western people unless they are from `friendly` countries/communities. Hundreds if not thousands burned with chemical weapons in Fallujah is still not as `distressing` as fifty killed in Jordan. The fact that it is governments doing this and not rogue elements should make it all the more sad and angering, yet it doesn`t.

That, to my mind, is a sad state of affairs, and can only beget worse incidents. You can call this a prophecy if you so desire.

EDIT: Regarding whether I am justifying these incidents, no I am not. But others can and do. And still others find reasons behind them understandable. I have had discussions with people who lived through the Irish situation, where catholics were massacred etc., and all these people repeatedly said they abhorred what the IRA did in return, but they could understand it.

I pray this never happens to you, but if your family is killed by a country or their army, their skins burned off their body, their bodies mutilated, and those that survive need amputations, can you honestly tell me you would not want revenge?

In fact, is this not the very reason so many people are out for blood from the side of the US? Because of the attack on them? So it never happens again? Why then should these rogue elements not have the same thinking?

This item was edited on Monday, 14th November 2005, 12:03

Quote:
The attitude I was referring to was that of how one side (i.e. the west) seems to belittle the killing of non-Western people unless they are from `friendly` countries/communities.

mmmm.......well theres obviously going to be a pro-west political stance on everything you hear as you are in the UK.......I mean exactly what would you expect to hear if you are in Saudi Arabia or Iran or Iraq pakistan or [Insert any muslim country here]. If you dont like the way its reported then pack up and move to a country where you do like it......

________________________________________________
Companies that have p**sed me off so much that I will never use them again and I hope you dont either....

Alloy Bodies of Manchester
Orange Telecom
that random dude off e-bay who never posted my pillows!
....more coming soon no doubt.....

Which is my point. People in the East would find these same things justifiable, since the images they get would be those of the likes of Fallujah.

The end result being more bombs etc. Then more from the west. Then the east. And so on and so forth. Do not expect people to step back and say `ok enough` - people do not have that restraint, but governments should.

And my response was not to what was being reported. It was what people here feel about the situation. I know the media is a voice for policy - the Sun is a perfect example of this when it came to the recent vote.

This item was edited on Monday, 14th November 2005, 12:09

Oh Saqib your such a little tinker with your let`s stir it up post`s.Bet this one reaches 5 pages eh?? go on unload some hate my way cheers ;)



TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF CLOWN`S/JESTER`S AND PIERROT (NOT THE BLOODY BELGIAN DETECTIVE THAT`S POIROT) ;)