Wounded Afghans say U.S. forces fired on civilians after suicide bomb

[Troll Virus]

Have you ever read any Nietzsche, specifically any of his thoughts on "slave morality"?

Can't say I have, but one quote of his that sticks in my head is "there can be no art without intoxication"

here's the point, the logic you're following looks outside yourself to first define what is "evil". "good" then comes about as that which is opposed to evil. basically this means you're ok as long as you're less evil than the evil guys. this is "slave morality".

Not quite.
It means "you're ok as long as you're less evil than the evil guys by an outside parties definition".

The most powerful military in the world must hold itself to higher standards than average men.

The most powerful military forces in the world are largely made up of average men.

If you're attacked in a dark alley by three men with weapons, it's ok to fight dirty. by all means kick, scratch, bite, grab a handful of nuts and twist. but a war, an invasion, is different.

How so?

If we can't accomplish in Iraq what we want to accomplish while at the same time never compromising the unwavering standards of goodness we have established for ourselves, we have no business there.

What unwavering standards of goodness did we establish exactly?

If we compromise, there is no outcome but violence forever.

Indeed.

[Troll Virus]

So if I become a quote whore and simply post other people's opinions, I'm innocent?

If Boar chooses to seek out and re-post anti-American stories and articles, that's his right. But it does not divorce him from criticism. Choosing to quote the people and stories he quotes casts him very clearly in a particular light. That he chooses to quote without answering for his own opinions makes that light even more negative. For instance, I still have not seen him (or you, as his apparent champion) reconcile the statement that "we need to stop casting stones until we get our own house in order" with the apparent lack of concern for the far greater numbers and occurences of offenses here at home. I have not seen any reconciliation for the founding philosophy of "responsible BoarSpear self defense" of fight dirty and don't play by the rules, and the all-too-monotonous rants about how our fighting men are not fighting fair in Iraq. In short, there is a great inconsistency of character in nearly everything he posts. Excuse me....everything he chooses to quote.

I provide my own opinions because I am not afraid to let people know where I stand. I am not interested in building in an excuse by saying, "This is just what some other guy wrote. You don't like it? Go talk to him." No, when I post my opinions, they are just that - mine, and opinions. I've been wrong plenty of times, and I've admitted it freely.

I'm not seeing posts here from anyone currently serving over there?

I've counted no less than a half-dozen blatantly anti-US posts by Boar in a week. Whole topics dedicated to stories about how awful our guys are, and how immoral our troops are behaving. Maybe it's just irresponsible choices in which journalists to quote. Maybe he really feels like casting our guys in a negative light is the way to get politicians to listen. (assuming, of course, that they peruse defend.net with some regularity)

Well , one of the points I was trying to get at before my thread was locked, was the issue of responsibility.
Are the troops responsible, or their officers?
Are the officers responsible, or their intelligence?
Are the intelligence responsible, or the government?
Are the government responsible, or are those who voted for them?

Either way, I think it makes him a detriment to all the guys who are over there doing it right, which is by all accounts a far greater number than the minority he's choosing to spotlight. But I could be wrong. We'll see how the guys who fought well and idd it right get treated as a result of the flood of negative articles and harmelss quotes.

Relying on 'media', from whatever orientation, is no foundation for constructive debate!

[BoarSpear]

If Boar chooses to seek out and re-post anti-American

I've never met anyone so bent on defending rapist and murders. My post are anti rapist and murders but for some reason Mike Brewer thinks all Americans are rapist and Murders...now I've NEVER said that but Mr Brewer sure chooses to read my post that way....I wonder what his real problem with my pointing out rapist/murders and piss poor leadership is...because damn if he doesn't object strenuously to it being reported, never once does he complain it happened...but damn he screams when it gets reported... really makes you wonder why he is soooo bent on stopping this from being pointed out. I mean really, it's anti American to report the activities of the US Military? Maybe the Us Military is guilty of Un American Actions and its too fucking embarrassing to see it reported...so instead of screaming for the behavior to stop he wants the reporting of it stopped...But I'm Anti-American according to the guy who supports covering up rape and murder.

[BoarSpear]

I'm not seeing posts here from anyone currently serving over there?

The only member I'm aware of from this board who is currently there is Velcroninja, he quit posting over Brewers nonsense awhile ago....aside form that the only person on this board I'm aware of who ever set foot in either current war zone is me...but somehow we get shouted down by the resident experts who I suspect have never been close to either region...... much less combat.

[Troll Virus]

I've never met anyone so bent on defending rapist and murders. My post are anti rapist and murders but for some reason Mike Brewer thinks all Americans are rapist and Murders....

'Rape' seems to be a HUGE personal issue for you, as you've mentiond it many times before.
I'm truly sorry if this is a personal experience of you or yours.

Boarspear, I'd love to take your points on board, but seeing as you would not afford me the human decency of 'reasonable doubt' in the past, I'm struggling!

If you struggle to remember about 'reasonable doubt', that's when you had me in your sig as a "Whiniest Troll".
Mike, despite your (unbeknownst to me)animosity, attempted to mediate.
Now that I seem to be saying something you can take advantage of, you're all for it.

Not taking one side nor another, but Mike never did that!

Nor did he try and influence members here by posting stuff in their sig, which is what you did to me and now do to Mike.

It makes you more weasel than man and that's dissapointing to me, because I've enjoyed some of your posts, especially on CMA.

[BoarSpear]

I've counted no less than a half-dozen blatantly anti-US posts by Boar in a week. Whole topics dedicated to stories about how awful our guys are, and how immoral our troops are behaving.

Say hello to the hypocrite, when Iraqi's dont speak out when their side commits atrocities Mike Brewer claims they support the actions and starts threads screaming for a Muslim to complain, he swears the very few people speaking out prove how all the Muslims are supporting the behavior by remaining quiet....yet when I decry the VERY SAME behaviors from Americans, I'm unAmaerican...if the Muslims dont speak out when their people commit evil Muslims are bad....If Americans commit evil and an American speaks out the American is bad. Brewers a hypocrite at minimum.

[BoarSpear]

'Rape' seems to be a HUGE personal issue for you, as you've mentiond it many times before.
I'm truly sorry if this is a personal experience of you or yours.

Boarspear, I'd love to take your points on board, but seeing as you would not afford me the human decency of 'reasonable doubt' in the past, I'm struggling!

If you struggle to remember about 'reasonable doubt', that's when you had me in your sig as a "Whiniest Troll".
Mike, despite your (unbeknownst to me)animosity, attempted to mediate.
Now that I seem to be saying something you can take advantage of, you're all for it.

Not taking one side nor another, but Mike never did that!

Nor did he try and influence members here by posting stuff in their sig, which is what you did to me and now do to Mike.

It makes you more weasel than man and that's dissapointing to me, because I've enjoyed some of your posts, especially on CMA.

You think I'm backing you up? Or that your frickin opinion matters to me? You had me in your sig as "Faggot" ...And YES my daughter was raped...Rape pisses me off, so do people who defend it and help hide it.

As for Mike trying to help, you pmed him and begged him to plead your case because you were concerned I would turn the board against you...Like people listen to me in the first place...you might notice at that time I didnt know Brewer And we got along, once I got to know him that changed, but that was after you were here with Andy Murray and Nutter in tow...

[Uke]

if the Muslims dont speak out when their people commit evil Muslims are bad....If Americans commit evil and an American speaks out the American is bad. Brewers a hypocrite at minimum.

Let's examine that.

We? Are you not an American? Why did they not fight Saddam? Was he not an oppressor of muslims as well? Why do honorable muslims there and elsewhere stand for oppressors and tyrants who pervert the holy Q'uran and allow themselves to be forced to live in poverty and need?

If we substitute "muslims" with Americans, "Q'uran" with Democracy and "poverty and need" with corruption and scandal then ... I guess you have a point!

[DickHardman]

inmop, mike b was wrong to say that muslims dont speak out against violence. i wanted to mention this earlier, but i was banned for the last week. mike you say that muslims dont want to speak out/act out against extremists and whatnot, but you are not giving any credit to all the iraqis who get blown up everyday waiting in line to join the police force, or the iraqi army. you arent giving credit to our iraqi brothers who fight side by side next to our own country men in attempting to rid their country of insurgents. you are also not giving any credit to the local iraqi tribe volunteers who now back up coalition troops because coalition troops alone arent enough to fight off all the militatnts and extremists in iraq.

not only that, but i have read many articles about how local iraqis wanted to defend their own homes and cities from insurgents, but had all their weapons taken away by american troops who are not able to provide suffient security for the people they disarmed. and even after that, american troops are still relying on local fighters friendly to coalition troops to back them up during offensives.

you are also not giving any credit to the many iraqis who have been killed and tortured by insurgents for helping out the coalition.

[BoarSpear]

inmop, mike b was wrong to say that muslims dont speak out against violence. i wanted to mention this earlier, but i was banned for the last week. mike you say that muslims dont want to speak out/act out against extremists and whatnot, but you are not giving any credit to all the iraqis who get blown up everyday waiting in line to join the police force, or the iraqi army. you arent giving credit to our iraqi brothers who fight side by side next to our own country men in attempting to rid their country of insurgents. you are also not giving any credit to the local iraqi tribe volunteers who now back up coalition troops because coalition troops alone arent enough to fight off all the militatnts and extremists in iraq.

not only that, but i have read many articles about how local iraqis wanted to defend their own homes and cities from insurgents, but had all their weapons taken away by american troops who are not able to provide suffient security for the people they disarmed. and even after that, american troops are still relying on local fighters friendly to coalition troops to back them up during offensives.

you are also not giving any credit to the many iraqis who have been killed and tortured by insurgents for helping out the coalition.

Well said.

[BoarSpear]

yeah if I didn't know better, reading boars stuff would be enough to turn me against all military people. Wonder why people don't treat vets with the respect the deserve? Here's why.

So which armed service were you a member of XF?
You ever been to a VA hospital? Do you TALK to vets? Freakin go spend an afternoon at ANY VA hospital....you'll hear one hell of a lot of people who sound just like me....and you'll find ZERO people who are happy with ANY part of current events in the Military or veterans affairs....so perhaps ignorance really is bliss eh? Do you know why the VFW died damn near out? Because the vets from WW2 wouldnt have a fukkin thing to do with the vietnam vets....So before you comment on a veterans viewpoint, you might wanna have an idea what you're talking about.

[DickHardman]

With Al Qaeda still remaining a major force in Iraq – according to a classified Marine intelligence assessment that was leaked to reporters last year – President Bush is now considering whether to give greater support to Sunni Arab tribal leaders who have grown disillusioned with the radical arm of the insurgency. It is a strategy long urged by many Saudi Arabian officials, now backed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and one that will, seemingly, provide long-awaited tenable results.

Abdul Sattar Buzaigh al-Rishawi is the public face of the Sunni Arab tribes in lawless Anbar Province who have turned against the Sunni jihadists of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. He is also, at least for now, fighting on the side of the Shiite-led Iraqi government and the American military and appears committed toward eradicating fundamentalists in Iraq.

“I swear to God, if we have good weapons, if we have good vehicles, if we have good support, I can fight Al Qaeda all the way to Afghanistan,” he said recently. But, Sheik Abdul Sattar, as he is known to Iraqis and American commanders, complains that he doesn’t receive the kind of financial support he needs.

If America were to implement a strategy supporting Sunni Arab tribal leaders, Sheik Abdul Sattar and the Anbar Salvation Council, the group of 25 tribes that the sheik said he had helped pull together to fight Al Qaeda, would be central to any such move.

The sheik said he and his allies, who also call themselves the Anbar Awakening, had recruited 6,000 fighters from the tribes into the Anbar police, helped appoint a new provincial police chief and formed a 2,500-member “emergency brigade” answering to him. Furthermore, Capt. Travis L. Patriquin, a United States Army civil affairs officer in Ramadi, said that tribal fighters in the Iraqi police constituted “the first successful, large force of men we’ve had since the start of the war.” Of Sheik Abdul Sattar he wrote, “He is the most effective local leader in Ramadi I believe the coalition has worked with since they arrived in Anbar in 2003.” Some counterinsurgency experts have even likened the strategy to that of the “village militias” used during the Vietnam War, which a number have called a relative success.

Of course, the plan does have its risks. One need only recall the Falluja Brigade, which eventually turned against the coalition after the Marines handed over Falluja.

Still, Sheik Abdul Sattar’s commitment seems real. He speaks of the Iraqi government with ambivalence and praises its stated goals. He has met three times with Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki. His face has been shown in anti-insurgent commercials on the government-run Iraqiya television network.

Beating the insurgency, for Sheik Abdul Sattar, though, requires a continued American commitment. Only after “we complete the police and the army, if we make them strong enough, it’ll be possible for the American forces to leave and go home, and they’ll be friends of the Iraqis,” he said.

http://www.tothecenter.com/news.php?readmore=1184

[The_Judo_Jibboo]

Can't say I have, but one quote of his that sticks in my head is "there can be no art without intoxication"

lol, hadn't heard that one myself, but i can say with a fair degree of confidence that he's not talking about booze.

Not quite.
It means "you're ok as long as you're less evil than the evil guys by an outside parties definition".

Not sure i follow the distinction you're making. Are you saying if a third party is making the judgement and they say you're not as bad as the worst, then you're ok? Still doesn't sound good to me.

The most powerful military forces in the world are largely made up of average men.

Assuming that to be true for a moment's discussion, how do you feel about that? How would you feel if your home town was occupied by a force comprised of men no more intelligent, merciful, or morally upright than yourself? On what authority would they hold the power to take your life? How could you relate to them if whenever there was a dispute they had the option of saying "Well this is getting boring, we don't want to debate with you over philosophy anymore, do as we say or we shoot"?

How so?

How is an invasion different from a mugging? Well, maybe i should amend the statement, because depending on which side you're on the two may appear highly analogous. The difference isn't so much in the scenarios as it is in which side are you on. Are you invading/attacking or being invaded/defending.

Let me ask this: do you think the "rules of engagement" are intended more for the invaders or for the invaded? More for the strong or for the weak?

is it not obvious when dirty tactics are acceptable and when they are not? I'll get into it if you want, but it'll be a long post

What unwavering standards of goodness did we establish exactly?

Good question, can't say there's a good answer. Sad, huh?

[BoarSpear]

Interesting post Dick, except that Sunni's in Iraq are not the best solution to Afghanistan. Just givin' you shit Bro....like I've never sidetracked a thread.

[DickHardman]

BAGHDAD, March 2 — The sheik stared at the cake that the hotel workers had brought up to his room as a gift. Across the red gelatinlike surface was written, “God protect you from the enemies and keep you for the Iraqi people.”

God is indeed his guardian, said the sheik, Abdul Sattar Buzaigh al-Rishawi. So were the three burly Iraqi men standing outside the door of his suite here in the Mansour Hotel, and the five others by the elevators at the end of the hall. They had walkie-talkies, Kalashnikov rifles and camouflage vests stuffed with ammunition clips.

The sheik needs as much protection as loyalty and prayers can bring, not to mention money. He is the public face of the Sunni Arab tribes in lawless Anbar Province who have turned against the Sunni jihadists of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, many of whom belong to other, sometimes more militant Iraqi tribes.

“I swear to God, if we have good weapons, if we have good vehicles, if we have good support, I can fight Al Qaeda all the way to Afghanistan,” he said recently as he sat smoking in a dark jacket and brown robes while meeting with a sheik from another Sunni tribe in his hotel room.

Sheik Abdul Sattar, a wiry 35-year-old with a thin goatee who comes from the provincial capital, Ramadi, is the most outspoken Sunni tribal figure in the country who is fighting, at least for now, on the side of the Shiite-led Iraqi government and the American military.

He has met three times with Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki since announcing his campaign in September, and there is talk that the sheik has received large amounts of money from the Iraqi government or the Americans. His face has been shown in anti-insurgent commercials on the government-run Iraqiya television network.

But Sheik Abdul Sattar, as he is known to Iraqis and American commanders, complains that he does not get nearly enough financial or military support. “We don’t have enough weapons, cars, uniforms,” he said.

Part of the sheik’s mission is rooted in the tribal law of revenge. His father was killed by Al Qaeda in 2004 for opposing its kind of fundamentalism. Two brothers were abducted and never heard from again, and a third brother was shot dead, he said. He has survived three car bombs outside the home he shares with his wife and five children.

Residents in parts of Anbar say the split in the Sunni insurgency is widening, with moderate tribal leaders and nationalist guerrillas pitted against fundamentalist warriors and rival tribes. That has led to a sharp increase in Sunni-on-Sunni violence across Anbar, especially in the past week, deepening the chaos of Iraq’s civil war.

Al Qaeda remains a major force, and the relentless violence from all sides has turned the province into a failed region, according to a classified Marine intelligence assessment that was leaked to reporters last year.

As part of a broad review of options in Iraq, President Bush is looking at whether to give greater support to Sunni Arab tribal leaders who have grown disillusioned with the radical arm of the insurgency. It is a strategy long urged by officials in Sunni-dominated Saudi Arabia and now vigorously backed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

The effort would have echoes of the American military’s promotion of South Vietnamese “village militias” during the Vietnam War, which some American counterinsurgency experts say was a relative success.

Sheik Abdul Sattar and the Anbar Salvation Council, the group of 25 tribes that the sheik said he had helped pull together to fight Al Qaeda, would be central to any such move by the Americans.

The sheik said he and his allies, who also call themselves the Anbar Awakening, had recruited 6,000 fighters from the tribes into the Anbar police, helped appoint a new provincial police chief and formed a 2,500-member “emergency brigade” answering to him.

A United States Army civil affairs officer in Ramadi, Capt. Travis L. Patriquin, said in an e-mail message shortly before he was killed by a roadside bomb in Ramadi in December that the tribal fighters in the Iraqi police constituted “the first successful, large force of men we’ve had since the start of the war.”

The captain wrote of Sheik Abdul Sattar, “He is the most effective local leader in Ramadi I believe the coalition has worked with since they arrived in Anbar in 2003.”

Once the Anbar Salvation Council began its recruitment efforts, more than 300 people a month signed up to join the Iraqi police, up from just 30 in May, Captain Patriquin said. American commanders have armed the recruits with weapons, munitions and vehicles provided by the Iraqi Interior Ministry. The Americans have also taken the recruits to academies in Jordan or Baghdad for schooling and given them a week of specialized combat training at an American base in Ramadi.

The plan has risks. The Americans and governing Shiite parties could be building up a Sunni militia that will eventually turn against them, as one such group, the Falluja Brigade, did in 2004 after the Marines handed it control of Falluja.

Some moderate Sunni sheiks in Anbar have said that for purposes of survival, they might be forced to ally themselves with Al Qaeda if the American military and, in particular, the Shiite-led Iraqi government did not provide them with more money and weapons, given the powerful presence of Al Qaeda in the province.

Sheik Abdul Sattar speaks of the Iraqi government with ambivalence, praising its stated goals while criticizing its ties to Shiite militias and its ignorance of the power of the tribes.

“They’re not cooperative, and they don’t want security,” he said. “This is true of all the political blocs.”

He has been to Baghdad twice to ask senior Iraqi officials for financial backing and equipment. He has met with the prime minister and with Jawad al-Bolani, the interior minister. But he said Iraqi leaders here were reluctant to give him what he needed to fight Al Qaeda.

An adviser to the Iraqi cabinet on tribal affairs, Sheik Minahi Minshid Hussein al-Shammari, said the government had responded to Sheik Abdul Sattar’s requests “within a limited capacity,” because “this is what the government can give.”

“The government extends a hand to anyone who wants to cooperate,” he added.

The formation of the group in September shocked many Sunni Arabs. It was the most public stand anyone in Anbar had taken against Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, which was founded by the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. In November, Sheik Harith al-Dhari, the leader of the Muslim Scholars Association, a hard-line Sunni religious group that calls itself the “legitimate resistance,” denounced the Anbar Salvation Council in a television interview, saying, “They don’t represent the Anbar tribes, and they are a group of criminals and thugs.”

Sheik Abdul Sattar said his tribe, the Rishawi, which accounts for a tenth of the 400,000 residents of Ramadi, had always tried to make peace with the Americans in Anbar. That was one reason his father was killed while attending a funeral more than two years ago, he said. Al Qaeda had begun killing sheiks and clerics, even selling videos of the crimes.

“They became people who didn’t distinguish between right and wrong, and that’s when we believed these people were terrorists,” he said.

Recent violence in Anbar has underscored the brutality of the fighting among the Sunnis there.

Two soccer players in Ramadi had been shot dead in front of teammates by masked gunmen who had accused them of having ties to the Anbar Salvation Council. On Thursday, a car bomb in Falluja killed at least seven people in a policeman’s wedding party, while intense fighting broke out in Amariyat, a community to the south where residents say tribes aligned with Al Qaeda have been battling nationalist insurgent groups.

A car bomb next to a Ramadi mosque killed 15 people on Monday, and a truck bomb exploded in Habbaniya on Feb. 24, killing at least 31 people and wounding dozens, outside a Sunni mosque where the imam had been preaching resistance to Al Qaeda.

In their clashes with Al Qaeda, the sheik’s tribal fighters have captured about 80 militants and put them into a “prison” in Ramadi, the sheik said.

Saudis and Syrians were among them, he said. The Saudis, under interrogation, said they had been recruited in their home country by being shown anti-American propaganda, including images of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, the sheik said. Then they were shipped off to Syria to enter Iraq.

The sheik has little love for the Syrian government. One morning as he ate breakfast in his hotel room, a television program about the assassination of the Lebanese cabinet member Pierre Gemayel on Nov. 21 came on. “This is all Syria’s doing,” he said. “Syria is doing bad things.”

Just as nefarious is Iran, with its ties to the Shiite militias, Sheik Abdul Sattar said.

“In my personal opinion, and in the opinion of most of the wise men of Anbar, if the American forces leave right now, there will be civil war and the area will fall into total chaos,” he said. “If we complete the police and the army, if we make them strong enough, it’ll be possible for the American forces to leave and go home, and they’ll be friends of the Iraqis.”

The evening call to prayer echoed through the streets of Baghdad as he ended the talk. Darkness had fallen. The sheik got up to show two foreign visitors from his room, warning them that no one could ensure their safety at that hour.

Four of his men were shot dead while driving through the capital the previous day, he said, and they surely would not be the last.

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070303/ZNYT03/703030625/1006/SPORTS