HomeForumsWhat's newResources 
 
 
Beheading
Jeffrey - May 15, 2004

 < Prev  1  2  3  Next> 

  Curtis May 16, 2004
I think you're confusing the two issues. An unknown militant group beheading an American civilian is completely different to posible US sanctioned torture of PoWs. You can't make a blanket "Iraq appear to be the savages" statement about this abhorrent act anymore than you can make a blanket "America is evil" statment from the actions of it's troops.

Aditionally, the beheading does not nullify what happened in that prison in any way.

 Gallstaff May 16, 2004
Was anyone killed in that prison? I thought just tortured

 mal May 16, 2004
I believe there have been some deaths as well.

 Pearl Jammzz May 16, 2004
what gets me is that he wasn't even a soldier! he was a construction worker...

 Curtis May 16, 2004

  
	
	

		
		

			Originally posted by mal@May 16, 2004 @ 12:50 PM



 I believe there have been some deaths as well.


Yes, I have heard of reports of murders as well. That isn't the point though. In the case of the beheading, we have an American civilian (who shouldn't have even been in the country - wasn't he a TV repairman basically looking for work?) captured and brutally murdered in a war zone. On the other hand, American troops (and, by proxy in the eyes of many in the region, America) - keepers of the peace eternal, bringers of harmony, champion of human rights - committing war crimes. Whereas Nick Berg had a choice to be in Iraq, those in that prison did not.

 mal May 16, 2004
If it wasn't clear before, it's certainly clear now why Bush wants the US to be exempted from the International Criminal Court's jurisdiction.

 Nadius May 16, 2004
Apparently he was a telecommunications business owner looking to secure some contracts for his business in iraq. He was held in an iraqi jail for 12 days or so after being detained at a checkpoint for some reason, then reportedly refused an offer from US officials to be escorted home. Thereafter he went to baghdad where a day after he wasn't heard from again.

I looked around and found this kind of interesting:


  
	
	

		
		

			On May 13, it was revealed that Nick Berg had been investigated during the U. S. government's investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui. Berg's email address had been used by Moussaoui prior to the September 11, 2001 attacks. According to Berg's father, Nick Berg had a chance encounter with Moussaoui on a bus in Norman, Oklahoma, and Moussaoui had asked Berg to borrow his laptop computer to send an email.


Wikipedia link...

 it290 May 16, 2004

  
	
	

		
		

			I don't know why they were so stupid as to release the video. Thanks to the liberal news media, America had lost the high moral ground due to the torture of some POWs... But Iraq went and one-upped us. Despite the fact that the media is trying to avoid mentioning the beheading (it was on page 8 of our 8 page local paper), it's still made it into the public eye. Now Iraq appear to be the savages, as opposed to our troops.


Damn that liberal news media for depicting the events that show the grim truth of war! And yes, of course the murderers were being incomprehensibly foolish by releasing the video.. they should have just beheaded him and kept it secret, so that they could make the murder of an innocent completely pointless.

Okay, now that that's over with, how about I mention that to a great number of people, America NEVER had the 'high moral ground' in the first place? Or that the 'liberal news media' have avoided mentioning many important things, such as the fact that the four 'civilian contractors' killed the other month were basically well-armed mercenaries? Or that, although some people may be fucking stupid enough to think 'Gosh, them damn heathen Iraqis sure are a buncha savages' because of this video, others may think 'Jesus, what a fucking mess?'

Of course, with the kind of attitude you're taking, you probably feel that the public never should have known about the torture going on at Abu Ghraib. Hell, Saddam did it, so why not use his methods against his 'loyalists'? Who cares about human rights abuses when you have the power of 'freedom and democracy' on your side? Bring 'em on!

 Pearl Jammzz May 16, 2004


I support the troops!

I, however, dont think Bush should be pres. anymore...

 Alexvrb May 16, 2004

  
	
	

		
		

			Originally posted by Curtis@May 17, 2004 @ 12:43 AM



 An unknown militant group beheading an American civilian


Unknown? Heh...

 Curtis May 16, 2004
Compared to, say, the United States Military...

 Alexvrb May 16, 2004
As opposed to, say, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi? Oh yeah. He's such an unknown.

 Curtis May 16, 2004
Terrorists yes. Even known terrorists, yes. The line I'm drawing here is that it's a group of individuals, with no particular national agenda. Consider a murder in your own country, just a plain old regular murder. Does that murderer reflect the values of the country, of everyone in it? Does the family of the victim demand an apology from the Government?

I'm saying that you can't compare the actions of the militant group with the actions of a so-called organised military force, answerable to higher authorities.

 Jeffrey May 17, 2004
He was not a soldier. But reports show that one of the pictures found from the prison scandal includes a young iraqi girl estimated to be around 12. She was nude and appeared to be in the process of being beaten. It matched a former prisoner's story of a girl being tortured in front of her soldier father. War is ugly. I am american, and I could never say we had the "moral high ground".

 Caelestis May 17, 2004

  
	
	

		
		

			Originally posted by it290@May 16, 2004 @ 10:11 PM



 




  
	
	

		
		

			



I don't know why they were so stupid as to release the video. Thanks to the liberal news media, America had lost the high moral ground due to the torture of some POWs... But Iraq went and one-upped us. Despite the fact that the media is trying to avoid mentioning the beheading (it was on page 8 of our 8 page local paper), it's still made it into the public eye. Now Iraq appear to be the savages, as opposed to our troops.
		

		

	





Damn that liberal news media for depicting the events that show the grim truth of war!  And yes, of course the murderers were being incomprehensibly foolish by releasing the video.. they should have just beheaded him and kept it secret, so that they could make the murder of an innocent completely pointless.



Okay, now that that's over with, how about I mention that to a great number of people, America NEVER had the 'high moral ground' in the first place?  Or that the 'liberal news media' have avoided mentioning many important things, such as the fact that the four 'civilian contractors' killed the other month were basically well-armed mercenaries?  Or that, although some people may be fucking stupid enough to think 'Gosh, them damn heathen Iraqis sure are a buncha savages' because of this video, others may think 'Jesus, what a fucking mess?' 



Of course, with the kind of attitude you're taking, you probably feel that the public never should have known about the torture going on at Abu Ghraib.  Hell, Saddam did it, so why not use his methods against his 'loyalists'?  Who cares about human rights abuses when you have the power of 'freedom and democracy' on your side?  Bring 'em on!


I was actually referring to the people who beheaded the man as being stupid for releasing it. Infuriating a country by beheading one of it's own is not the way to gain sympathy from anybody... Would you have felt more or less sorry for Iraq if you hadn't just seen them saw an innocent man's head off with a dull blade? Making a point aside, they'll never get what they want if they keep killing innocent people, as they'll have absolutely no support. From a PR standpoint, they should be shot for being so stupid.

In the same way that the media is trying to portray the actions of a few of our troops as representative of the entire military, the same can work in the other direction. I showed the beheading to a completely clueless friend of mine, who doesn't keep up on politics or current events at all (a blank slate of sorts...) He mentioned something along the lines of 'nuking the entire nation of camel jockeys'. I showed him the pictures of the torture, and even he was able to distinguish that there's a difference between publicity beheadings and interrogation (or even torture for amusement, sick though it may be). While all of those are far across the line, publicity beheadings are so far off you can't even see em.

I don't support the torture. Let me say that flat out. However, I also don't support the release of the photographs. Journalists still haven't recognized that releasing this sort of media will result in the death of troops. They aren't inspired by patriotism, or else they wouldn't be sacrificing the men fighting for them... they're inspired entirely by money... and lots of it. While there's no clear solution, as they obviously need to make sure changes come about, they could still satisfy their dirty needs by blackmailing and extortion... and that wouldn't result in a direct loss of human life. The lesser of two evils if you will...

 Curtis May 17, 2004
I'm sorry, but it's a bit of a hard sell to blame the media for future coalition deaths in Iraq. Remember, the military invited them to this war - embedded journalists was the buzz word as I recall. The photos were released, so if they should have been or not is moot. I don't think this should have been covered up - this is major news. Like I said before, this is direct evidence of war crimes in Iraq by coalition troops. The importance of this can not be underestimated, nor understated.

This is 100% a war of your Government's choosing - they are going to have to deal with the consequences of that action.

 VertigoXX May 17, 2004
The reality of what's happening? American troops commiting war crimes is not new. Americans did some pretty horrible stuff in WWII, Korea, and especialy Vietnam. The difference this time? We're hearing about it now, not years later, plus the news spreads at a much faster rate and is much more proliferated.

Does the torture of Iraqui prisoners need to be stopped? Hell yes. But is the media again blowing it out of proportion? Hell yes again. But this is the burden we must bear in this "information age."

As for the beheading, sorry, I won't watch the video. The only way I would watch it is if it is officialy determined to be fake (then I'd be first in line to check out the awesome f/x). However, as all indications point to its authenticity, no way in hell am I gonna watch it. So I can't comment on the Mortal Kombat question.

However, my initial reaction to the news of it was that the US military needs to release a tape showing the fast, less brutal, guilotine beheadings of TEN Iraqui prisoners, including a statement saying "For every one of us you kill, we'll kill ten of you. We outpopulate you by 100 to 1." HOWEVER, what they don't tell Al-Jazera or even the American news media is, the tape is a fake, with special effects designed by someone like Tom Savini or Peter Jackson's WETA team. That bit of info only comes out years later.

But on the other hand, when you're up against forces that believe in suicide bombings, how far would that get us?

 Lyzel May 17, 2004
I think it is really sad that this is being discussed here...

 Curtis May 17, 2004
Why?

I believe what is perhaps the most important point of the prisoner abuse, is that to a fairly large degree, it is what this war is about. Coalition forces have gone into this country to make a point about right and wrong - all of the coalition leaders wax lyrical about the greatness of democracy, the sanctity of human rights. I agree, the media does tend to get into a frenzy about these thing, but we are all old enough to make our own judgement calls about what is being shown.

My call is that the pictures and reports have done more to lose this war than any other single event. The video of the beheading has done little to change Western sentiment ("oh yeah, that's about what I expect from those damn camel lickers"), but the images of Abu Ghraib have destroyed any of the goodwill that many in the Arab nations may have had towards coalition forces.

 Alexvrb May 17, 2004

  
	
	

		
		

			Originally posted by Curtis+May 17, 2004 @ 04:48 AM-->
QUOTE(Curtis @ May 17, 2004 @ 04:48 AM)
I'm saying that you can't compare the actions of the militant group with the actions of a so-called organised military force, answerable to higher authorities.[/b]



War isn't nice and clean cut these days, not like it ever is, but at least in WWII you usually knew who the enemy was. That "militant group" in question in this particular incident, aka Al Qaeda, is not a country (If I've lost you here, google Abu Musab al-Zarqawi). It isn't the "organized military" of any country either, but it IS organized. Not being the military of any country doesn't stop them from killing us, in any country. They are still an organized group set on destroying us, so yes, you can compare them to our military to some extent. That's the kind of thing we are up against.

If we only had to take out a country, and didn't give a rat's about anyone inside it, we'd be done. There'd be a lot of craters, but we'd be done. That's not what we're doing, that isn't the war we're fighting.