Go here (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=1&u=/ap/20040511/ap_on_re_mi_ea/egypt_iraq_american_beheaded)

Leave iraq!

Stop actin like the worlds police man and **** off!

[snip]

[Offensive comments removed, warning pending.] -Tal

[ May 11, 2004, 21:41: Message edited by: Taluntain ]

Wait for it...
Wait for it...
Wait...

POW!

That was quick! :eek:

what was quick?

my offensive comments? they werent really that offensive!

The commandante is damn right.

Get the hell out of there. You see, such things happen once you keep bothering those people.

Hatred against one's kin will be given back tenfold.

Just advance through the simple process of RESELECTING your president and DISMISS the candidate of his candidature. Take someone else and...BAM! All's worked out.

Again, this is no fantasy world. Yet another reason to turn to the Forgotten Realms for salvation.

Why? Because we 'still' CAN... (think about it)

The longer we stay, the more we feed the opposition. I hope it doesn't take 58,000 deaths and untold billions this time around to see the light.

The U.S should do the only thing it can reasonably do – attempt to capture those responsible and punish them in the same way that it will punish American soldiers responsible for the Iraqi prisoners whose deaths were labelled “homicide”. Iraqis won’t like this, but then they won’t like anything the U.S. does here. While it is highly unlikely that those responsible will ever be captured, what else can be done? A bombing raid or similar approach would surely be overkill, and would make worse an already inflamed situation. And to do nothing basically would say that the murder was condoned.

It’s an unfortunate situation, but not particularly surprising.

Typically American... a 'Bomb Raid'

Quite frankly, I didn't suspect otherwise. Americans are quite the problem solvers. Let hatred guide them to the doom of some, and put them in despise of others. Maybe tomorrow, day after tomorrow... You never know.

(jk) :rolleyes: just trying to be funny...

Actually, IMO the images from that tape will go a long way, in US public opinion at least, in countering the prison torture images. People will think, OK, sexual humiliation is one thing, but getting your head sawn off with a dull knife is another. These images, again IMO, increase the chances of Rumsfeld *not* getting the axe from Bush, and will take some pressure of the the CPA for the torture snaps.

I think this Scrappleface (http://www.scrappleface.com/) parody gets it right:

Arab Street Erupts in Rage Over Beheading Video

(2004-05-11) -- The so-called 'Arab Street' erupted in rage and grief today, as devoted Muslims crowded into public squares by the hundreds of thousands, in dozens of cities, to denounce the brutal videotaped beheading of American Nicholas Berg by Muslim extremists affiliated with Al Qaeda.

"This is an outrageous, disgusting and obscene act of evil done in the name of our peaceful religion and in our own backyard," said one unnamed Muslim cleric in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. "We mourn with Mr. Berg's family at this horrible loss. We renounce not only this act of violence, but all acts of terror."

The governments of all Arab League nations made a joint statement condemning the slaughter of Mr. Berg, and committing $100 billion toward the elimination of Al Qaeda and other Muslim terror groups.

"We pledge money, troops and intelligence resources in an all-out effort to end this scourge," the Arab league statement declared. "We apologize for our past failures to rein-in or arrest extremists in our ranks. As of today, we are turning the tables on the terrorists. Now, it's their turn to be afraid."

If the Iraqi's are so desperate to govern themselves without any aid, then fine let them do it. Let them go back to the place they came from. It is becoming quite evident that some countries just can't handle a democratic system where they are free to do as they wish.

Maybe opression is best for them. They complain about the prisoner abuses, right, I agree, it's sick, but to think of the fact that an American was beheaded, and all the torturing Sadam did to his people, and the killing fields, which one is worse?

The photos have turned out to be more of a political move for the Democratic Party. The Deomcrats use them to smear Bush with.

Let's leave Iraq, and let's leave the world to itslef for once, and see how they get along without us giving aid to them at all, in any shape way, or form.

If the Iraqis are so desperate to govern themselves without any aid, then fine let them do it. Let them go back to the place they came from.But who speaks for this ephermal "them"? Sadr's brigades? Ex-Ba'athist apparatchiks? Wannabe al-Qaeda imitators? Iranian SCIRI puppets? Should the aggressive few represent the passive many?

The average Iraqi - like the average human being - would like America to anonymously provide support without strings, order without control, and justice without judgement. Iraqis (and the world community) would be equally resentful at a withdrawal of support as a tug on the string. That's no different from any inner-city, where violent street thugs curse and kill the police even as they decry cuts in the social safety net.

At this point, we'd may as well stick around long enough for more-democratic elections rather than leadership-by-acclaim (or gunpoint). There are plenty of noisy South Koreans, Japanese, and Germans who want the Americans to abandon their military bases, but cooler heads have yet prevailed. I think we'll see the same in Iraq, too.

Yep. I saw a video on Ogrish that had a Russkie soldier whacked by some Chechens. Basically the same thing, which is why I'm not particularly inclined to go download the video.

Personally, I'd like to hit them (I'd say "insurgents", but I mean fundamentalist Muslims, in general) in the worst possible way. Which, remarkably, isn't all that violent in and of itself.

I want Arab (Kuwaitis, Iranian, Iraqi, Pakistani, Saudi, Syrian) girls walking down the street, listening to iPods and wearing belly-button tshirts and miniskirts with no panties. I want Arabs talking about an after-school Jihad session on the chemistry book in preparation for finals next week. I want Iraqis and Iranians telling the French how prude they are, and need to get with the times and loosen up. I want to see a synagogue in downtown Baghdad and another in Faluja and one more in Tehran.

I want to see Iraqi's orbiting satellites and sending manned vehicles to the International Space Station.

And it's totally going to happen, too. It's "in work".

Just keep doing what they've always been doing minus the unauthorised torture.

To leave would create more havoc than to stay on untill the country is under the control of a single government. It is a pity that some Iraqis don't understand why the US is there and they assume they are there to kill people when in fact they are trying to stop people from being killed.

Hunt down the murderers. I had a long rant here but it was too confused so I deleted it. However, something to keep in mind is that the US and all its forces in the region is one centrally controlled organisation and it is facing probably hundreds if not thousands of groups of dudes who are pissed off and armed with no central structure whatsoever. Any comparison between sides is void and outright stupid and silly to make.

The joke is, is that they wimper on about the Jihad whis is a holy war yes? Well from what I remember being taught by my relatives (who are from Singapore and all muslim) the only way one can carry out a Jihad is if one religion is forcefully trying to convert Islam. Now, from my understanding, Capitalism is not a religion, its an economic form that a country adopts.

So therefore, these people who are wittering on about how they are carring out Jihad well

*Taps them on the shoulder*

Well think again guys, you say God is great but you won't be meeting him. You'll be meeting Satan in Hell and I bet he'll be dead pleased to have you. Congratu*******lations!

This is what you get when you go to war, destroy a country abuse prisenors... Let me guess they stay to fight again?

The US is in there for oil and money, not to free a people? If they cared so much for the Iraqi's why did they support Saddam in the first place?

And lifemage, you are quite horribly wrong as america provides "aid" to very few countrys that actualy need it.

The US should seriously consider moving out. It wouldn't be like a retreat, although the Arab hardliners would probably think otherwise. There's nothing left to do there, Saddam has been removed, there are no weapons of mass destruction, and these people obviously don't want any foreigners on their soil.

So let them rot, Iraq is going to be another Afghanistan in no time. Clans fighting clans, warlords against warlords. If they want it that badly, let them have it. No aid, no food, no money, let them take care of their own crap.

The US is in there for oil and money Then why does gas cost nearly $2 per gallon and why did we have a record deficit in 2003, which looks like it will be broken in 2004?

The oil and money aren't coming to America, that's for sure...

Oh course it isn't.
It's being used to finace yet more wars against people Bush don't like *ahem* I mean the 'axis of evil'
Next stop, Cuba!
*Disappears muttering*

It is obviously meant as a provocation to invite the US to a massive and violent response, as seen in Fallujah.

Now guess what'll make Bin Laden and crew high-fiving each other ...

Quick side note: I am not Neo-Anything. Thank you.

Daie d'Malkin - That's simply ridiculous. Even if Bush DID want to attack Cuba, he couldn't come up with an excuse to. "Mad dictator" won't cut it. Congress would be against him, as would be the public, the UN, the press, and so on. Anyhow, Cuba wasn't even IN the "Axis of Evil." North Korea is safe, due to the fear of nuclear retaliation. THe only possible candidate is more Middle Eastern warfare, and that's unlikely. We have our hands full with Iraq, we hardly need more space for terrorists to flock to to fight "infidels."

The US is in there for oil and money, not to free a people? If they cared so much for the Iraqi's why did they support Saddam in the first place?


And lifemage, you are quite horribly wrong as america provides "aid" to very few countrys that actualy need it. Is that so? After WWII, we paid millions and billions for reparations in France, Poland, Germany, Japan, China, England (your country, interestingly enough.), and so on. France, for example, assuming interest is calculated, owes us billions for reperations we've paid them over the years. The only country, in fact, which has repaid our reparation dues is Finland. Kudos to them. Or, are we assuming that none of these countries "needed" it? Perhaps America should stay out of the world theatre altogether, and let oh-so-great Europe take the high moral ground? Of course, America should have stayed out of the European front of WWII - it wasn't our business to help there. Similarly, we shouldn't have sent money to South Korea, Turkey, Greece, and China when they needed it? Of course not, it wasn't our place. We were, of course, only in these wars for the money, which is clearly what all Americans want, and this is clearly evinced by our payment of reparations which have put us into an extremely deep deficit which doesn't really even exist, to be honest. If we tallied it with all the money owed us for REPARATIONS ALONE (interest included) we would come out ahead... strangely enough, I had never heard of a deficit during Clinton's reign as President. Such a large deficit would surely be brought up by objective Democrats, wouldn't it? Or is that only something to accuse Republican presidents of?

On an unrelated note, I think when we supported Saddam's rise to power, we never intended him to be a maniacal dictator who killed thousands to millions of his own people and otherwise. Of course, you can believe otherwise, if you want.

joacqin - I heard from a source I consider reliable (ex-military man) that it's likely that evacuated cities might be bombed to get rid of he terrorists. We're assuming here that the terrorists won't obey the evacuation orders, so they'll die in the flames. Hunting down the murderers is far too difficult - we, for one, don't have forensic experts to analyze fingerprints (and this bit is also complicated by no database of Iraqi fingerprints and residences) and we don't have the equipment or the personel to do so even if we did. Also, we have a country that wouldn't support our efforts in the name of justice, so that's another, larger, complication.


Just advance through the simple process of RESELECTING your president and DISMISS the candidate of his candidature. Take someone else and...BAM! All's worked out. Errr... how is this, exactly? The Iraqis get really scared when they find out Vietnam Veteran Kerry is in the hotseat, with his pro war crimes policies, (sarcasm here...) and just quit fighting? Ridding ourselves of Bush isn't going to do a thing, unless Kerry makes the PHENOMENALLY STUPID choice to just bail out. The only real change would be the liberal criticism of the office of the President. It would melt away. Hmmph, this is one election that needs an independent candidate to win.

[ May 13, 2004, 04:02: Message edited by: Slith ]

Here's a link to the entire unedited video:

http://www.davva.com/beheaded.wmv

By clearing out of Iraq and leaving them to take care of themselves. You'd think they would learn something from Vietnam...which would be that it doesnt pay to be "the world's policeman" as someone before me posted here.

The abuse Iraqis are facing by the American soldiers is pointless, as is the abuse of the Americans by the Iraqis...rather, WAR is pointless. Just have everyone mind their own business...problems are solved.

Edit: @Slith --> One small point I would like to make. You make out the American motives in this war to be oh so noble, but I want to ask two things here...

1) WHERE are the weapons of mass destruction America cited as the "reason" for the war?

2) Why is it that America considers itself above the governing influence of the UN, and went ahead with war when the UN expressly forbade the US or rather, Mr. Bush from proceeding with his plans?

If you can provide me answers to those two questions which I dont think is total bull****, you'll have me converted! :cool:

To answer the original question though, the US should respond to this with the standard malarkey about how the Islamic militant terrorists are devils incarnate...and after a decently reasonable time, give a full apology to the people of Iraq, and get the hell out of Iraq.

[ May 13, 2004, 11:27: Message edited by: Faraaz ]

IMHO, the USA have to leave, and they'll hafta pay for the damages dealt upon Iraq to rebuild Iraq, just be allowed to leave would be the easy way out.

@ Faraaz:

1) Americans felt they had sufficient reason to believe that there were WMD's in Iraq, and/or that Saddam was assembling/planned on assembling them in the near future. The fact that he didn't give complete access to inspectors made complete verification difficult, but obviously Bush and co. believed the risk of doing nothing outweighed the risk of finding nothing.

2) Don't know about the rest of you (and I'm sure most of you will disagree), but if I'm the leader of a country, I don't need anybody's "permission" to protect my people. They were reasonably sure Saddam had WMD's (the fact that they were wrong wouldn't really matter in the initial decision to go to war), and thus presented a threat to US security (and Britain supported this as well). They were reasonably sure that Saddam was supporting terroritst activities-- which he almost certainly was-- and that those activities presented a threat towards US citizens. Now if I'm a US president, I don't really care if France, Germany, et al shake their collective fingers at my war; they aren't the ones being targeted by this regime's violence (keep in mind that they had reason to believe that Saddam could perhaps supply terrorists with WMD's) so if they don't like the prospect of war, then too bad.

That's the way I feel about the two points you presented. I'm sure many (if not most) disagree, but then that's to be expected in an issue like this.

I think the US pulling out of Iraq right now is a terrible idea. The people want you out, fine, that's their right. But the US set a date (June 30th, was it?) in which they were scheduled to hand over soverignty to the Iraqis, and they should stick to that, regardless of what terrorists do. In no way should the US let radical groups performing atrocities like this one dictate their foreign policy, a la Spain with the bombing incident. Bin Laden should not be made to believe that he has the power to influence the US to that extent.

Disclaimer: No flaming intended...so, don't flame me back as well :p

@Shazamdude (and others who feel similarly, I guess)

Alright, what you are saying is true, but what one must realise here, is that their 'sufficient reason' has now been proven, beyond doubt, to have been unfounded, and that Iraq indeed DID NOT have any WMD. Having settled that fact, should not America leave as soon as practically possible?

Also, if you will read my post again, you will find that I said that America SHOULD hang around till "after a decently reasonable time, give a full apology to the people of Iraq, and get the hell out of Iraq." ... its a bit disjointed, but you get my point?

Also, if America feels 'threatened' by Iraq and proceeds to go to war against the wishes of the UN, WHAT is the PURPOSE of having a UN? Each country might as well go to war with whoever they like. India and Pakistan have been antagonised for ages now. So have Israel and Palestine. But due to the efforts of the UN and its member nations, full-on war has been largely avoided, and (an uneasy) peace reigns. Wouldn't you say that is better than war?

Now...saying that America is threatened, hence it will go to war against Iraq is an apalling and inexcusable reason for these events.

Britain supporting America, IMHO should be read as more of Blair supporting Bush. (Please note the use of "IMHO"...I repeat, do NOT flame me over this)

If you are a US president, you will not care if France, Germany, et al shake their collective fingers at your war...but if you do that, what difference is there between you and people like Osama bin Laden who resort to anarchy and terrorism? Is it not anarchy when America goes to war as and when it wishes? First in Afghanistan, where they miserably failed to capture Osama Bin Laden, then in Iraq where they have proceeded to compound the situation. Not to mention Vietnam.

WHEN will Bush learn from this whole debacle, that he has screwed up?

@ Faraaz

When will Bush learn?

November this year.

That's what I thought as well. Bush KNEW as good as all of us Saddam did not have any weapons. he used is to get to Saddam, to kill him, just as he killed the decapitated man. Disgusting, he cares for none but himself.

A fool he is, there can be no doubt...

Who of you actually SAW the video. Someone nice posted the link, I couldn't bear to watch after 10 seconds so I put it off. So... Anyone?

I didn't. I'm not grossed out by it, but I dont want to see the way the guy dies. I'll leave it to those more bloodthirsty than I.

Well, i'm not bloodthirsty, but curious nonetheless, so i watched. I saw something similar before though. A Russian soldier who got decapitated by Chechen rebels. Some joker found it necessary to sent that footage to me by e-mail and thought it was funny too. :rolleyes:

Can't believe they actually post that stuff. I can't say I approve, but they have to do something against Bush. Their ways of doing things are just meant to shock. And this IS electrifying. No more now... Get out of there.

I just saw it and I'm not bloodthirsty I just wanted to see it. I must say It didn't shock me at all since I knew what would happen but I think it's sick that a men can actually preform such an action. Just sick.

@Pac man Yeah, I saw that one to! It also didn't shock me but I can't call it funny though.

1) WHERE are the weapons of mass destruction America cited as the "reason" for the war?First, WMD was not the reason for the war, it was one among many.
Second, as was pointed out already, it was widely believed before the war that WMD were there.

2) Why is it that America considers itself above the governing influence of the UN, and went ahead with war when the UN expressly forbade the US or rather, Mr. Bush from proceeding with his plans?The UN did not expressly forbid the US or Mr. Bush from proceeding with his plans. It can be argued, although there are plenty who disagree, that resolution 1441 allowed for the actions. Also, the UN has not said (by passing or even drafting a resolution) that what the US has done is illegal.

Alright, what you are saying is true, but what one must realise here, is that their 'sufficient reason' has now been proven, beyond doubt, to have been unfounded, and that Iraq indeed DID NOT have any WMD. Having settled that fact, should not America leave as soon as practically possible?That is exactly what the US is doing; I suppose your definition of "practically" and that of the US's is quite different.

As to the response to the beheading, maybe all the photos/videos from the prison abuses should have the caption "God is great" added to them. :rolleyes:

I know it's a little off topic but Slith brought this up a few posts back...

strangely enough, I had never heard of a deficit during Clinton's reign as President. Such a large deficit would surely be brought up by objective Democrats, wouldn't it? Or is that only something to accuse Republican presidents of?
You didn't hear about it because out of the 8 years Clinton was president, we had a budget SURPLUS for 6 of those years. The debt was reduced about 20% while Clinton was in office. The debt started increasing again when Bush II took over.

In fact, since 1980, not one single Republican president has managed to break even any year they were in office. I thought Ronny was the deficit hawk of all time...but look out, here comes Shrub. Tax and spend liberals? It is Republicans who cannot be trusted with tax dollars. The saddest aspect of those deficits? A large majority of it is devoted to weapon systems and wars in which we did not have to be involved. Hence the term...deficit hawk.

Vote Kerry!

OK. Back on topic please.

:shame:
Well, that was horrid. I have seen attrocities like it before. Pictures of crimes in Chechnia and Jugoslavia. Rwanda? Back then it took me days to get it out of my head. What a world that we can say: "Oh, I have already seen stuff like that."
It makes me so very sad. Cruelty and hatred like this, as well as the falsehood, the lies and the corruption of the U.S. and all the other crap just make me sad, make me want to close my eyes to the world, zone it all out and stop caring what's happening out there. I am tired of it. As tired as hearing 'U.S. this' and 'U.S. that'.
Oh, and I dont *care* how the U.S. should respond. Do what you think is your 'mission', you proud liberators. You shall fail anyway. If only I werent forced to listen to the insipid speeches about democracy, freedom, human rights. It all sounds so hollow when mentioned by certain people.

What I care for is that poor guy who wasnt allowed to live to see even my age (even though he was a fool to go to Iraq in the first place). He died for absolutely nothing. I hope they drugged him, or that he was in a state of shock.

Well, I didn't watch it and don't think I ever could bring myself to... for a couple of reasons. One, I don't think my breakfast would stay down....and...Two, for some reason I can't shake a deep rooted feeling that my viewing it validates the reason that it was made and gives these creatures the effect they're looking for -- to mock this man's death, in a sense. It's a violation of everything decent and I won't be a party to it -- even in the viewing of it.

Unfortunately I doubt that they would have even given him that concession.

Fanatics like that do not care about such things as compassion, sympathy or kindness. All they care about is gaining as much twisted pleasure out of other people's suffering as they can.

Then again, it's also possible that it's not really that big of a crisis. In other words, nasty stuff happens in war and occupation, and that doesn't necessarily mean that the US is failing in Iraq. Militaries expect to work in crisis situations, hence popular use of US military slang like SNAFU and FUBAR, slang that I think was widely used even before WW2.

So, as much as I think that Bush should be sent back to Texas or Connecticut or wherever he came from in November, and as much as I think that this war was waged on false pretenses, I'm still not at all convinced that the world won't end up a better place down the line because of the Iraq adventure.

Spellbound, I took no pleasure in seeing a human die. No at all. But maybe there is a lesson here? That there is a price to be paid when we mess with other cultures? Or perhaps that war does not bring peace and overall betterment of humanity?
I dont know. Those murderers must be brought to justice. But watching this helps me realize that we are dealing with an alien people, it makes me understand what our (your) actions have created, that they utterly reject us and that we should act accordingly.
Of course we can ignore what they want us to see, but we might fail to understand what they are prepared to do and that the western nations are in grave danger. In the long run. To hear about something isnt the same as seeing it with your own eyes.

Dendri -- I understand your viewpoint, but to me -- I don't need to view horror to know that it's horror. There is no good that could come from me seeing it. They WANT it to be sensationalized... that's their goal.... for all Americans to see what an eye for an eye means. Well, I refuse. In my book, they're animals -- I don't need to see the proof.

Spelly, You just sumed up why I dont want to watch it. I've seen some unpleasent things, in medical programs and the like. But watching a person die, that's not something I want to view. More so, because it was made to make a point. My viewing it is what these people want. They want me to be revolted, and for their actions to be witnessed. I'm aware of how he died and I find it terribly sad. I dont need to see it with my own eyes to feel a sense of loss or horror.

Shock...

[snip]

I say no more...

[Link removed because it contained a malicious installer in a pop-up.] -Tal

[ May 16, 2004, 00:14: Message edited by: Taluntain ]

Well the picture with the British soldier doing the thumbs up next to two Iraqi kids, holding up that brown piece of cardboard is actually a fake. What the cardboard really says is what the soldier predicts the scores for the football clubs Gloucester and Cirencester to actually be. How do I know this? Well, that soldier is actually from Gloucester (I think) and that picture was in the local newspapers a day or so ago being used to talk about what the soldier predicted the football scores to be.

Saying that, the other pictures aren't too pleasant reguardless of their validity