Britain's Abu Ghraib?

Will newly-released video footage of British troops beating four Iraqi teenagers turn out to be Britain's own Abu Ghraib nightmare?

The story has prompted a round of soul searching in the United Kingdom's online media, even among pro-war commentators, and drawn a stark reaction in the Arab world. The footage was first reported last weekend by the News of the World, a British tabloid that strongly supported the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

"The cowardly beating is believed to have taken place in early 2004 amid a series of street riots in southern Iraq," the publication said in an editorial. "Troops were involved in running battles with hundreds of screaming demonstrators armed with stones, sticks, shovels and home-made grenades."

In the Arab world, the condemnation was more harsh. The Arab News in Saudi Arabia called the video "Britain's Abu Ghraib." The story comes at a time when tempers are still flaring over the publication of cartoon depictions of the prophet Muhammad by a Danish newspaper.

"The Arab and Muslim world is already sitting on a powder keg over the offensive cartoons," the English-language Bahrain Tribune said, according to a Reuters report. "The illusion of the British being a friendly force is no longer there. The grainy video has exposed the deep-seated animosity they too have for the Iraqis."

The video shows the soldiers dragging the Iraqis away from a street confrontation and beating them with nightsticks.

"All the while the callous cameraman delivers a stomach-churning commentary urging his mates on, cackling with laughter and screaming: 'Oh yes! Oh yes! You're gonna get it. Yes, naughty little boys! You little f***ers, you little f***ers. DIE! Ha, ha!'" News of the World reported.

"The reputation of the British Army in Iraq has suffered another serious setback," said The Times of London, which, like News of the World, is owned by media magnate Rupert Murdoch.

"No matter how often the Ministry of Defence and senior military figures put such incidents into statistical context, emphasising that a tiny minority of soldiers have erred when compared with the 80,000 who have served in Iraq since 2003, the apparent violent indiscipline demonstrated by the troops in the video provides further evidence of an extraordinary lack of control . . . These are not soldiers engaging in some form of unauthorised extracurricular activity, but members of a battle group sent out to deal with rioting Iraqis and to take arrested offenders for interrogation back in the barracks."

Patrick Bishop of the pro-war Daily Telegraph wrote that "the dreamlike sequence of kicks and bludgeoning reminded me of the videos of beatings filmed in Iraqi jails that were on sale in the markets of Baghdad after the fall of Saddam. This time the boots and clubs belonged to the British Army."

"The problem with pictures, however," Bishop wrote, "is that they exclude everything but the subject in hand. Looking at the Basra video, we would do well to remember the warning delivered by the Defence Secretary John Reid last week. 'Let us be very slow to condemn our troops,' he said 'and very quick to support and understand them.'"

The event may have been isolated, says the pro-war Scotsman, but it is also "inexcusable."

The Independent, which opposed the war, called the video a "propaganda gift for our enemies."

The images "will be cited as an indication of the Western world's contempt for Muslim life. What the soldiers in this video have perpetrated is not simply a criminal act of violence against four Iraqi youths; this is a betrayal of all the thousands of British troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, the vast majority of whom have been doing their jobs impeccably."

By Jefferson Morley |  February 15, 2006; 8:34 AM ET  | Category:  Europe
Previous: Mexico Fumes After Booting of Cubans | Next: 'Double Standards' and Dissenters

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



In reply to the video of British soldiers beating up Iraqi youths who had been stone and grenade throwing would you recommend that the British army adopt the tactics employed by israeli army when dealing with Palestinian stone throwers, namely shoot to kill?

Posted by: Craig Hart | February 15, 2006 08:57 AM

I saw the video whats the big deal? Its a warzone, who throws rocks at soldiers in a warzone? I'm a black male in America, if I saw a groop of police standing on the street and started throwing rocks at them I would get a lot worse than this. These are people who willingly blow themselves up and they are upset about getting kicked and hit with batons?

Posted by: Andre | February 15, 2006 09:45 AM

Andre is right. this is war. the children who threw the stones should be happy they were not shot on the spot. As a student of Middle East culture I can tell you that the Arab psyche respects strength... I guarantee you those same Iraqis will not be throwing rocks the next time round. The UK and US forces should not hold back.

Posted by: William | February 15, 2006 12:09 PM

More from the pro-war paper:

"The Iraqi teenagers posed no threat...the dreamlike sequence of kicks and bludgeoning reminded me of the videos of beatings filmed in Iraqi jails"

So it is of no consequence that these kids who were admittedly of little threat were so sadistically beaten--by an occupying army? The transcript of the audio from that video is indeed stomach-turning.

And the supposition that you may or may not have been treated worse had it been you does not make this particular situation acceptable.

Posted by: bk07 | February 15, 2006 12:16 PM

The ony reason there is any outrage is because the Western press makes the statement. Our problem is that we (the West) do not understand the mentality of the middle east. Force is envied, kindness is seen as a weakness. Take a looksee at how the cops in Pakistan are banging on the protesters. Same tactics, but no outrage. We are our own worst enemies.

Posted by: Iraqi Vet | February 15, 2006 12:29 PM

There was no dream like sequence of anything in the video. Sure the guy laughing at the kids getting beat is a shame, but really who cares. I don't find this sort of provoked retaliation disturbing at all. The kids know what they did and know what they got and thats that. Its much more crazy things like soldiers pissing in bottles on patrol and throwing it on people or Isreali's kicking in peoples doors to watch soccer games that are actually disturbing.

Posted by: Andre | February 15, 2006 12:37 PM

Hmm... just seems to show that there is only limited control over soldiers' actions if the heat is on. So what's new? There is military law that should take care of this etc. etc.

Let's just wait for more info. If this turns out to be a non-event in the same vein as the oh-so-despicable (NOT!) Mohammed cartoons, why should blood pressure rise here? It will be whipped in frenzy by hate-spewing imams over there anyway.

I just hope the Brits keep their eyes peeled for more Paradise-seeking suicide bombers. Le sigh.

Posted by: El Tonno | February 15, 2006 12:41 PM

Again the difference here is it's an occupying force, not domestic; that's not to excuse the other kind, I'm just pointing it out (and this is Iraq, not Pakistan, jeeze). So as long as events like this take place, don't expect the locals to shower the troops with hugs and kisses.

Posted by: bk07 | February 15, 2006 01:01 PM

I find it amazing some of the attitudes that are given here, sure they threw the rocks but look, if your a professional soldier you carry yourself that way, I'm sure the mission that day was not to hide behind walls and beat up kids! In a gang fashion thats really tough I thought the Brits would know better! I wonder if it was those of you who say it was "no big deal", how you would feel if it were you getting beat up on. I dont think you would like it.

Posted by: Patriq | February 15, 2006 01:25 PM


Those blithering idiots! ! Now how in the world can we steal there oil! ! if knuckleheads like these guys and at the fools at the prison (Abu craze) keep drawing all this attention to the Iraq! We cant make of with a single boat load of oil because of it! ! ! I bet ya....

Posted by: LPT | February 15, 2006 01:42 PM

William wrote:

"As a student of Middle East culture I can tell you that the Arab psyche respects strength"

As an Arab myself, I can tell you that your statement is RACIST and bigoted.

What you talk about is YOUR RIGHT-WING IDEOLOGY that is as murderous as any fascist ideology.

The way you justify the abuse of CHILDREN by the British army that invaded THEIR COUNTRY illegally is DISGUSTING.

The local Iraqis, like other Arabs like myself, do NOT welcome your FASCIST ARMY, led by the war criminal Rumsfeld, who has destroyed most of the country and who is responsible for the murder of at least 100,000 civilians in Iraq within 2 years.

LEAVE THE MIDDLE EAST AND STOP KILLING FOREIGN PEOPLE.

Posted by: Karim | February 15, 2006 01:52 PM

Patriq,

You are trying to reason with people who have contempt for foreign people and anyone foreign who oppose their policies.

They regard themselves as some CHOSEN NATION, blessed by God, that can not be challenged by outsiders.

Insiders can challenge it (that's why they say they have a democracy) but when the INSIDERS come up with a decision, the rest of the world is to COMPLY. The CHOSEN NATION has decided, period.

Even the leftists who challenge their views are called traitors.

Imagine how they look at the rest of the world.

Posted by: Karim | February 15, 2006 02:20 PM

America speaks with two voices once again
you have people saying love all human life no abortion, but they have no problem killing women and children who are already hear on earth!?! Just like the white man called the american Indian a savage because they didnt understand them, called blacks sub human because they feared and didnt understand them, also the Chinese, Japanese and anyother non white human, even though we bleed and our women give birth the same way its the white mans fear of what they dont understand is now why the muslim people are getting their turn to feel sub human and be called savages and such what they fear they have to give a name to it. when you look at history it was they who turned out to be just as savage and sub human as those they labled, now terrorist is a name that will be linked to arabs and muslims whether it fits or not, but you never hear anything about the white supremecist or KKK or any of the white terrorist groups anymore I wonder why?? for all america knows they could be plotting right under all of there noses right now. think about oklahoma....

Posted by: Rasheid | February 15, 2006 02:31 PM

The "THEY only understand force" logic is not only racist, but very much similar to what fundamentalists say about the West.
Also, if you "need to show force", why not "punish them" in the street, for everybody to see?
The truth is that this and Abu Graib are acts of cowardice.

Posted by: FromMacondo | February 15, 2006 02:36 PM

No dogs. No nudity. No secret prisons. Amateurs.

They should leave public relations in the hands of the professionals.

Ok, ok I admit it. They do show utter contempt to the locals and their quaint law enforcement - Iraq is supposed to be an independent sovereign nation remember? - so they do show *some* promise.

On the other hand - the US gets all weak in the knees when someone gets whacked with a cane a couple of times.

http://icreport.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?r103:./temp/~r103GOZb5R

"The State Department's annual human rights report has cited caning as an example of torture. Asia Watch and other human rights groups have concurred in the State Department's assessment."

Gimme a break!

Posted by: Steve | February 15, 2006 02:44 PM

The people here who seek to excuse the savage beating of children only expose their own depravity. You're so desperate to avoid the coming failure of your crappy, misguided, pointless war you'll defend any behaviour.

Flattening a whole city - Falluja - as a collective punishment.

Forcing male civilians to remain in the city and then bombarding them with heavy artillery (of course every American will tell you Falluja was evacuated and the Army made every effort not to target civilians. So explain this then: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,138376,00.html)

Arbitrarily rounding up all the men from whole neighbourhoods and villages and throwing them into Abu Ghraib without charges or evidence.

Torturing hundreds and murdering dozens of detainees, most of whom later turned out to be completely innocent. (Again, the war's defenders refer to this as "panties on heads", even though the Pentagon admitted dozens of "detainee homicides".)

Dropping 500lb bombs and 155mm howitzer shells in urban areas.

Gunning down demonstrators in massacres that would cause shock and horror if they happened in the west.

Firing at traffic, and killing countless people at roadblocks.

Murdering an unarmed, wounded prisoner in a mosque, right in front of a TV camera.

And now beating captive children with truncheons. One of these kids is lying motionless at the end of the video with a pool of blood spreading around his head, after being headbutted by a helmeted soldier and pummelled with boots and truncheons.

And by the way, since you're all defending the stuff in this video, you can also defend the other stuff on this film that was deemed too nasty for the internet, such as the soldiers abusing the dead bodies of Iraqis they killed in the riot.

Posted by: OD | February 15, 2006 03:28 PM

The funny thing is you all keep defending brutality as militarily necessary, but you don't realise brutality is what's lost you this war.

Where have the military used the toughest methods? Falluja.

What city remains the worst casualty blackspot? Falluja.

Posted by: OD | February 15, 2006 03:31 PM

Some people here say this is better than Israeli army behaviour. But no doubt if people accused the Israeli army of brutality, you'd defend them, too, on the basis that they still behave better than somebody else.

As a matter of fact, the IDF did adopt an official policy of beating children captured stonethrowing early in the Intifada. They defended it on the basis that it was better than shooting them. But they had to stop the policy due to Israeli public unease, after several children had multiple bones broken.

Anyway, all the Americans here defending these actions have chosen a different PR tack than the British Government and British Army, who have condemned the beatings and actually arrested people.

Their way of sweeping this under the carpet is the same as the Pentagon's: pretend it's a tiny minority of enlisted men and pick on a few of them.

Unfortunately for them, in this case the video clearly shows a whole platoon of soldiers trooping by the beatings looking completely unconcerned. It also was clearly an army operation, not a bunch of squaddies freelancing. Those snatch squads were ultimately authorised by an officer. The beatings took place in full view in the central courtyard of the base, right inside the main gate. The MoD will only persuade the usual idiots that this wasn't sanctioned behaviour.

There's nothing aberrant about this, it's par for the course. The British Army has spent three years boasting about its 'softly, softly' approach to civilians in Basra, and in that whole time, the only behaviour they've been able to cite as evidence is their practice of wearing berets instead of helmets.

They used to go on about it endlessly, as if invading people's homes wearing soft hats is somehow less likely to piss them off.

The British forces are touted as ultra-professional, but they're riddled with psychopaths and repressed homosexual stalkers. Your own Charles Graner would feel right at home in most British barracks.

He would have enjoyed this typical Royal Marines initiation ceremony: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4475034.stm, in which a bunch of recruits just out of basic training were delivered by their instructor to a group of marines just back from Iraq. They were forced to fight naked in the mud by the two senior NCOs present, one of whom was dressed up as a surgeon and the other one as a schoolgirl! When one of the men passed out in the mud from his naked beating, the most senior NCO (the 'surgeon') started kicking his unconscious body in the head. That's how they treat their own recruits.

That video, like this one, was accompanied by a repressed homosexual soundtrack: "Ooo, you naughty boy, you're gonna get it now", etc, etc.

That's what makes the Iraq war so peculiarly embarrassing for conservatives. They can comfortably enjoy the most extreme acts of straight violence, so long as it's perpetrated by 'our' soldiers against foreigners. But it really spoils their fun when so many of the soldiers also seem to be sexual perverts.

Posted by: | February 15, 2006 03:33 PM

I rarely attack people so directly, but I don't think there is an alternative.

I am amazed at how inhumane and ignorant some of the posters are. Do you people care about anyone except yourselves? "Arabs respect strength, fear is a weakness" What do you think they are? Klingons?
You people are ridiculous and truly have never had any meaningful interaction with people of the Middle East. You barbarians are no better than the crusaders of old.

Posted by: Shocked at the Evil | February 15, 2006 04:19 PM

I find the hipocrsy on this forum fascinating. On one hand we get

"Arabs respect strength, fear is a weakness"

and on the other hand we get

"You are trying to reason with people who have contempt for foreign people and anyone foreign who oppose their policies."

And both sides tell the other that their racist.

"You people are ridiculous and truly have never had any meaningful interaction with people of the Middle East. "

Considering most of the people form the Middle East haven't had any meaninfull interaction with the people of the United States whats your point?

"Insiders can challenge it (that's why they say they have a democracy) but when the INSIDERS come up with a decision, the rest of the world is to COMPLY. The CHOSEN NATION has decided, period."

How is this different from any other nation on the planet? I seem to be noticing a good portion of the Middle East is trying to impose its views on the dutch and europe at the moment.

Posted by: Duck | February 15, 2006 04:43 PM

I think people need to apply some context here. The British army is probably the most well trained in the world, and has long experience of urban medium to low level conflict. Yet still its troops get carried away? Why is that? Is it because this video was taken in 2004 shortly after a very violent period where the British Army stated that it had expended more ammo than even in the Korean War? A period where a VC was earned? A notorious base that was under attack with grenades. Those troops ran out with shields and wooden clubs... anyone other military in the world would have either gone out all guns blazing,... or would have bugged out. Get some perspective.. and do some comparisons.

Posted by: Andy | February 15, 2006 04:52 PM

All you're doing, Duck, is pointing out the similarity between US militarists and Islamic radicals. Most of us had already spotted that.
"How is this different from any other nation on the planet?"

The vast majority of countries aren't trying to spread their values by blowing people up. That's pretty much a Republican-al Qaeda monopoly.

Posted by: OD | February 15, 2006 04:55 PM

...plus Tony Blair and his transvestite army, of course.

Posted by: OD | February 15, 2006 04:57 PM

Is this a reference to a commando?

Posted by: Ahh | February 15, 2006 04:59 PM

The commando were just bringing back the customs they picked up in Afghanistan. See John Simpsons books. Lipstick and gloss!

Posted by: Taliban | February 15, 2006 05:02 PM

Shocked at the Evil wrote:

"You people are ridiculous and truly have never had any meaningful interaction with people of the Middle East."

Well before you start down that track i spent over a month in the Moroccan countryside studying Arabic and middle east politics in 2004 and time and time again my Moroccan classmates remarked that 'the US and UK simply do not have the stomach to do what was necessary to win a war'.

I'll accept your apology at your convenience.

Posted by: | February 15, 2006 05:06 PM

...sorry that un-named post was mine.

Posted by: William | February 15, 2006 05:08 PM

Tells us.. what do the US and UK need to do?

What sort of argument is that?

Posted by: So .. | February 15, 2006 05:10 PM

> Anyway, all the Americans here defending
> these actions have chosen a different PR
> tack than the British Government and
> British Army, who have condemned the
> beatings and actually arrested people.

I would hope so. This is not supposed
to be the 2nd SS Panzer rampaging through
Ouradour.

But let's face it. These guys are not necessarily the sharpest tools in the box and may be a bit out of whack so to speak.
Which gives us pure Oliver Stone material.

Always make a large circle around the gentlemen in uniform. Especially if they are nervous (around here we recycle army people into the police force and I can tell you it *shows*.. army people are *not* police material)

Posted by: El Tonno | February 15, 2006 05:11 PM

Sorry William, now I see the thread.
I think Dr John Read was right the other day when he commented that we should be less swift to judge. We see an aversary who has no problem with killing numerous civilians, beheading hostages, calling for holy war against free speech... but British soldiers are taken to court for the slightest infringement. Those grenade throwing youths are also now going to court to claim damages against the British government. Some justice.

Lets compare Malaysia and Vietnam?

Posted by: Andy | February 15, 2006 05:17 PM

Apologies for the gramma. I'm 1 bottle of red in.

Posted by: Andy | February 15, 2006 05:19 PM

A little bit over a month? And then you are an expert? I have lived, studied, worked and traveled in the US considerably more than that, and I would not be ignorant enough to claim mastering the US psyche.
Probably you can enlight me and explain how a "gang" attack on teenagers, inside a walled compound helps to win a war or furthers democracy for that matter?
Furthermore, the way the war has been carried so far has proven to be anything but lacking of stomach.

Posted by: FromMacondo | February 15, 2006 05:26 PM

By the way fellows,
If you are going to come up with the lame defense of

"We see an aversary who has no problem with killing numerous civilians, beheading hostages, calling for holy war against free speech... but British soldiers are taken to court for the slightest infringement."

Then, do not ever use the words democracy, freedom or liberation when you refer to what your armies are doing in Iraq.

Posted by: FromMacondo | February 15, 2006 05:34 PM

So what do you thnk about the clip Macondo?

Posted by: Andy | February 15, 2006 05:36 PM

So do you think it's a good idea to leave right now?

Posted by: Andy | February 15, 2006 05:41 PM

Trick question, Andy. Everyone knows the only GOOD idea was never going in in the first place.
All the remaining options are just various degrees of bad.

Posted by: OD | February 15, 2006 05:43 PM

Andy,
Where do you leave? North Korea? Where in the world is a shameful gang attack on kids by soldiers a "slightest infringement." Also, as pointed above, the line of soldiers passing by and looking as this is something normal is very disturbing. And if you think that they should have been beaten, can a single UK soldier take on a teenager, or does he need his buddies to do the job? Very disturbing and coward.

Posted by: FromMacondo | February 15, 2006 05:50 PM

Well, I think its very easy to sit back on a moral thrown now as the grand politician.

I too was against the war, and marched in London to demonstrate my absolute rejection of that course of action.... but it's done.

The US and the UK owe a debt of responsibility to the Iraqi people to make amends, BUT the situation isn't clear cut. If a UK or US commentator wants to make an objection about the conduct of British troops in Iraq, I suggest that they spend time on patrol. Not in Wapping or NY, and not in the Green Zone or a speeding 4*4 on Irish. At the sharp end.

AND I do think a comparison between the sensationalised war in Vietnam and the conflict in Malaysia are worth review.

Posted by: Andy | February 15, 2006 05:55 PM

Wow there Macondo, those teenagers were picked out from the crowd as the ring leaders and grenade throwers.. you know..those things that go bang and blow your arm off? They were snatched from the crowd because of that. Perhaps you would have preferred if the snipper who picked them out, would have 'picked them off' too?

Posted by: Andy | February 15, 2006 06:01 PM

Gee, Andy, I had no idea that saying "I could have killed him instead" was now an adequate defence for savagely beating defenceless kids with their hands tied behind their backs.

I'll remember to use that one next time I'm caught clubbing children into bloody unconscious heaps.

Posted by: OD | February 15, 2006 06:14 PM

Irony. The fact is that any other military force faced with a grenade throwing mob would have employed lethal force, not sticks and shields.

That's the context.

Posted by: Andy | February 15, 2006 06:27 PM

The context my friend is that you probably have opened your third bottle of red. Why is there need to beat the crap out of them? What strategic or military purpose does this serve? Is that the way a "modern and professional" military behaves? Or did Englad just sent former Chelsea hooligans to Iraq?

Posted by: FromMacondo | February 15, 2006 06:38 PM

Violence only begats violence.

As I said long ago, when "everyone" (polls showed?) was rattling their war swords, "once the fight begins it is hard to stop."

Do you really think we can just leave and this will not come back to haunt us all?

And besides all that, this entire matter is totally unnecessary and counter productive in the big picture.

Think of it as being neighbors.

Think of it as needing to live together and getting along in order to do that.

Unless we all cooperate, we are all doomed to a terrible future truly not understood by the average american. I read it in National Geographic.

Yes, the world population is going to get so big that there will barely be enough resources to go around.

We really have only two choices: get along or fight to last man and personally I don't feel like spending my retirement in a fox hole or condemning my children to a worse faith.

Schrodinger's wave equation has not yet fully collapsed so the outcome is not yet totally determine, but once it does, than that will be that.

Getting out of this mess is an entirely other matter all together, dis-irregardlessly.

Posted by: IB | February 15, 2006 07:11 PM

"THEY only understand force"? No. They also understand pride. Like it or not, they are a very proud people.

You want to break up a violent demonstration without appalling the world? What's wrong with tear gas, or some other substance that causes strong discomfort? What's wrong with the old Bull Conner special, fire hoses? Is violence the only solution you have to a problem like this? If so, why not just bomb them back to the stone age? That always works.

Posted by: Psych 101 | February 15, 2006 07:16 PM

well since you asked...

first we need to expel the media as their biased and selective editing (for the most part) is our own worst enemy and only inflames anti western feelings.

second we need to eliminate all the enemies of freedom in Iraq which would include bulldozing the houses of insurgents and those who hide them.

And thirdly we need to redouble our efforts to bring moderate insurgents to the bargaining table and thus the political arena. This is the only way to isolate UBL's in Iraq.


Also, I never claimed to be an expert but you (in your arrogant attempt to discredit me) alleged that I had no experience with the Middle East. I guarantee you that my 5 weeks is more time than most of these ignorant stone throwing/ embassy burning/ religious zealot street hooligans have had with the United Kingdom or America.

Posted by: | February 15, 2006 07:46 PM

...that retort was mine again. Keep forgetting the name.

Posted by: William | February 15, 2006 07:47 PM

oh, and violence only begets more violence?

it seems to me that it worked pretty well against the Fascists in WWII and the slave owners of the American Civil War.

Posted by: William | February 15, 2006 07:50 PM

Willy,
Thanks for sharing your honest advise with us.
So, if the media is kept out, and you bulldoze people's houses, nobody would get mad, right? Because clearly people who lose their homes and their neighbors won't get mad, if they don't see it on TV.

And yes, there is need to eliminate the "enemies of freedom", so a "free friendly puppet-state" can take over. Who are the enemies of freedom? All Iraqis who don't agree with the US?

You mention history as proof that your approach works. Well, meddling in other country's politics has not been helpful in the two countries the US is currently occupying. Since you know the Middle East, I do not have to point to the previous "nation state and stability building" excersises carried out by Western powers, and their consequences.

War is war, but please do not prostitute "freedom" to justify realist policies.

Posted by: FromMacondo | February 15, 2006 08:47 PM

the main point is that they went to this war claming that, people are totured,killed and thier is no human right and they said they are going to bring justice and freedome to Iraqis. If they committed all those actions themselves then what was the pupose of killing 100000 people.

Posted by: AN | February 15, 2006 11:00 PM

Suckers- The US military is a Halliburton security detail right now in Iraq. Getting all drunk and righteous about it won't change the fact that our leaders were either very shady, or very incompetent, when they made the decision to invade Iraq. I still can't see any geopolitical or strategic sense in it. It's a huge waste of my tax money and many lives, including those maimed. Let Halliburton and Co. fight their own battles in the Middle East- vote warmongers out.

Posted by: Legal Scholar | February 15, 2006 11:04 PM

Considering they were threatening the soldiers lives with home made grenades, they are lucky they weren't executed. They SHOULD have been shot in the face. Considering these people are waging war with IEDs now that they can't best outnumbered and surrounded American forces in Ramadi, this is as good a chance as we'll get to set them straight. If your life is being threatened, you have the right to kill in turn. Perhaps these Iraqis learned their lesson, they got to keep their lives. It was incredibly cowardly of them to throw home made grenades, and then run away, only to be caught up with by guys wearing up to 100 pounds of gear. Pretty pathetic.

Posted by: Spittle | February 16, 2006 12:50 AM

This thing is arguably being blown out of proportion. Any analogy with the truly sickening Abu Ghraib pictures seems far-fetched, to put it mildly. Demonstrators at the G8 meeting in Genova got a rougher treatment than that seen on the Basra video.
On the other hand, there are a couple things that should be taken into account. The videos shows Iraqis being viciously beaten by foreign troops on Iraqi soil. Someone wrote that those youths will not throw stones again. Indeed. They may use guns when they get the chance. Foreign occupants have two ways to maintain their presence. One is brute force, the other is consensus building. The video deals a serious blow to the latter.

Posted by: tito | February 16, 2006 03:20 AM

More frightening than the video are some of the comments posted here encouraging the soldiers to go on. Plainly shows the racsism that the western world is harboring against the islamic world.

Posted by: Anoob Hakim | February 16, 2006 04:23 AM

Well all the time what americans and british do gagaga about human rights and democracy,bla,bla is all Ridiculous and insane, the truth is what we are getting now, infact history is proof what the west has given to world where ever they go you will find this savage acts on their name labled under the screen of all bla bla things and after that they say we are most civilized people, it really makes me laugh about their stupidity civilized people, huh, you people are savages or worse than that Indians in USA, Blacks in USA, World War I, World War II, Holocaust for Jews, Vitenam, Japan Atomic Bomb, South Africa Racism, Muslim Killing & Atrocities, Aborgines in Australia, Lots and Lots what is their for you to call civilized people you should be called most savaged people on planet. Thanks!

Posted by: IGM | February 16, 2006 04:42 AM

I am British, I am not "you" people.
It is so obvious that Bush and Blair had their own agenda going into Iraq and it wasn't to liberate the Iraqui people from their pal Sadaam!
Not just beatings, teenagers are being raped and tortured in jails in Iraq.
Did they all stand around Christmas trees and sing peace on earth, goodwill towards men?
The whole situation is sickening and I personally don't believe a word our leader tells us.
Unfortunately it seems that ordinary people who do believe that human beings are all the same, regardless of race, colour or creed are rarely listened to on this planet. It makes me want to leave!

Posted by: Ashamed | February 16, 2006 05:53 AM

Leave then.

The whole situation is sickening and I personally don't believe a word our leader tells us.

i agree with you there but i think the only way to deal with the situation now is to retaliate with huge force. if they kidnap 1 of us blow up one of there cities. We should either be at war or not at war no fannying about in the middle somewhere.
get on with it and get it over with.

Posted by: ashamed for diff reason | February 16, 2006 06:26 AM

Sid Vicious, call your office.

Posted by: Reynolds | February 16, 2006 08:11 AM

Everyone here seems to be forgetting why the war started in the first place. I myself don't believe their would have been a war if it wasn't for the september 11th bombings. And I know it had nothing to do with Iraq but i believe that that was what started it muslim terrorists killing thousands of innocent people for no good reason.

So maybe if the middle east governments had kept a tighter hold on Al Quieda then none of this would have happened so don't get on at the british for them not keeping their troops under control when if the middle east governments would have kept the Al quieda under control or maybe even just took action against them instead of letting them run round freely because they pose no threat to them then maybe we would have avoided all this.

Now on the topic of the cartoon, a few media money hungry fools post a cartoon that's gonna upset a lot of muslims ok very stupid and the muslims have definatly got a right to protest. But instead of protesting peacefully to get their point across they proceed to rip flags down and burn them, trash streets ,shout abuse ,carry flags threatning people with terrorist attacks and some even dress up as terrorists what condones this i dont know but you cant expect to be taken seriously by the western people while u threaten them and burn their flags all i can say is grow up and sort yourselves out.

and finally on the comment on the recent pics of british troops hitting teenagers with sticks. Yes its not very nice to watch but I see it on the news alot its only the same when teenage hooligans throw stones and rocks so police run in with battons and guess what THEY HIT THEM its what their told to do and alot better than putting a bullet in their head.

so like the soldiers their getting pelted with rocks and even grenades so they take people down by hitting them with sticks its what their trained to do and u cant expect them to just stand their and get hit with grenades frankly i think the british government should stop being so cowardly and back their boys up they were in the right n they shouldnt care what anyone else thinks.

look forward to your opinions

Posted by: pres. Bush | February 16, 2006 08:22 AM

I see you at least understand Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with Sept. 11
At the time I realized the hornet's nest stirred up would do nothing but spread misery from self-righteous aggrieved ignoramuses who cared for nothing but a good lynching ; not to say there wasn't good reason for outrage.
There are no winners in war. Why that lesson is so hard to learn is because the young carry their emotions to the field of battle where they are faced with mind-breaking trauma. The future is squandered.
Targeting has been lauded as America's best weapon in war. When people can't even find the enemy you have to wonder at their definition of "winning".

Posted by: opit | February 16, 2006 09:02 AM

It really looks like there are people who just cant or wont see the truth, until it happens to them! ! You should put yourself in the place of a person whos country has been invaded by people who you cant communicate with or understand their actions what would you do?? some of you I feel would piss your pants and curl up into a corner, The media and so called people (talking heads) get on CNN and say its fighters comming into Iraq! ! Bull its clearly men women and old people who are saying they are tired of being occupied by so called freedom and liberty! ! HA ha ha Bush wants to bring american values to the middle east, make it look like america, the greed and drugs and X-rated porn shops and bars on every corner thats what he wants to bring?!?! Have our women walk around with their ass hanging out and gay marriage thats America you guys like that!?! And Great Briton is trying to mirror america also. And all this just to steal oil, N. Korea has built and are building Nukes but Bush cant go after them because they will fight to the last man and woman, and mostly because they have NO OIL! ! ! !

Posted by: Rasheid | February 16, 2006 09:19 AM

I am a student of American history, and I am not surprised at all to see some of the comments. "I can tell you that the Arab psyche respects strength". I recall that very similar comments were given against the Red Indians. That they are barbaric, uncultured and therefore its perfectly OK to grab their land, kill them indiscriminately if they dong voluntarily give up and this attitude resulted in the most horrific genocide ever committed on Earth. Similar comments may be given when Americans were heavily trading in Slaves from Africa. That they are just savages and whites could give them better careers in the USA, by giving them employement on their plantations. That manner slaves didnt have to worry about their food at least. May I call the British/American psyche in question?
What we saw in Abu-Gharaib gives us an insight to American culture, what they thin is appropriate at home they think would be appropriate anywhere. Arabs are different in this regard among many other. This is a clash of civilizations. The problem with Americans and British are that they do not learn any lessons from History, they just want to forget and move on and keep on doing what they did all through the glorious past.

Posted by: Ali | February 16, 2006 11:51 AM

"I can tell you that the Arab psyche respects strength". The very reason that most of them are ruled by Western puppets who understand this psyche quite well. & in case a puppets ever disobeys us, the West can easily get rid of him by occupation. & they had to do it because now it is time to introduce the stupid Arabs of their values too - Abu Ghraib for instance. This is how they win the bettle of hearts and minds.
I hate the insurgent tactics equally. I hate the American tactics just as much. They have both got their weird values that they think should be imposed Worldwide. Both are a disgrace to humanity.

Posted by: Ali | February 16, 2006 12:12 PM

"i agree with you there but i think the only way to deal with the situation now is to retaliate with huge force. if they kidnap 1 of us blow up one of there cities. We should either be at war or not at war no fannying about in the middle somewhere.
get on with it and get it over with."

Inside of the mind of a terrorist is well depicted in the above argument. This comment and many others above combined with the histroical evidence tells us where the actual roots of terrorism/genocite existed, before some Muslims embrassed them too.

Posted by: Ali | February 16, 2006 12:32 PM

"it seems to me that it worked pretty well against the Fascists in WWII and the slave owners of the American Civil War."

NO IT DIDNT, NO IT DIDNT!!!! YOU STILL GOT GEORGE BUSH!!!???

Posted by: Ali | February 16, 2006 12:46 PM

"Considering they were threatening the soldiers lives with home made grenades, they are lucky they weren't executed"
Americans would do worse to anyone doing it on their soil. Thats right. They have the bloodiest history among all the nations in the World.

Posted by: Ali | February 16, 2006 12:51 PM

"We see an aversary who has no problem with killing numerous civilians, beheading hostages, calling for holy war against free speech... but British soldiers are taken to court for the slightest infringement."

Well your soldiers have killed more innocent civilians than even the insurgents. Its a very close match & i am not sure who is winning in brutality.

Posted by: Ali | February 16, 2006 12:57 PM

"Considering they were threatening the soldiers lives with home made grenades, they are lucky they weren't executed. They SHOULD have been shot in the face."

So, if Russia or China decided to invade the U.S. and / or Britain and declare martial law while dragging people out of their homes and send them into secret prisons, you'll sit inside your home and watch the occupying army destroy your country ?

You wouldn't join any opposition movement to take your country back ?

Hey, we here in the states know that the U.S. and Brits are SUPPOSED to be the good guys. But when you invade a foreign country, no matter what your intentions are, you become the enemy of the other side and they see you as evil. It's the reality of war - if you can't take it, then you either get out of the country or don't invade in the first place.

Posted by: Heh | February 16, 2006 01:16 PM


It appears that all those who would insult people of the muslim faith have taken the day off! ! Or have come to their senses and realize that pitiful reasoning and hand wringing is futile, there really is no justification to slam a race or faith with fake and faulty information, As I said we dont need the drugs and crime, that you see on the news every night?! the X-rated porn shops and bars on every corner?!? I would invite you to come and see the beauty of the middle east the cradle of civilization yes. there you can open your mind and forget what you see on CNN and Fox news who like in Iraq only show you the bad things and you can be well informed. peace

Posted by: Rasheid | February 16, 2006 01:18 PM

Like the bodies of four innocent Iraqi school children destroyed by a stupid suicide bomber? That made quite the statement to the world. Killing children who did nothing but be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Posted by: | February 16, 2006 02:54 PM

It is shocking to see how biased people can get. No matter what, it is simply wrong to invade another country, that too on false assumptions.
It is only greed!! greed!! greed!! all the way. To control oil and the middle east.
Once great empires have fallen by the way side, the Romans, Greek, Persian etc etc.
The time will come for the western world also, to lick the dust.
Watch out!! - The Chinese, Russians and the Indians are coming.

Posted by: Neutral from India | February 16, 2006 05:16 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20060209/cm_ucac/calvinandhobbesandmuhammad

Posted by: His Infernal Majesty | February 16, 2006 05:57 PM

I agree with Ali that we had no right to invade iraq it was purely on assumptions and even if saddam did have nukes we still had no right to invade america seem to forget that their the only nation to ever launch a nuclear bomb on another country and pretty soon after that they got all pro-non-nukes so i agree britain and america should've never invaded iraq but you still seem to be avoiding all the points i made Ali like for example muslims terrorists probably started the war on sept 11th and that muslims still bombbard us with terrorist threats and actions and instead of peaceful protests they throw rocks burn flags and buildings and threaten whole countrys. Just an idea but if muslims tried to protest the the war peacefully american and british troops wouldnt and couldnt touch them for media coverage and they would probably get alot further in their protests instead of just causing more widespread hatred for each other

Posted by: pres. Bush | February 16, 2006 09:14 PM

What is war in terrorism, who benefits from this war? Whose control over the world become stronger and stronger? Is politics as simple as it was before or it is million times dirtier than ever before? Who is controlling all those poor countries and how long they have been controlled? Who gives them a puppet leader? Is there an opponent to the game of chess played on the world after cold war, or its only one person playing both sides?
No matter how dirty politics become, truth can not be hidden. http://www.starvation.net/#news read it.

Posted by: starving | February 17, 2006 12:23 AM

I agree with Ali on certain points and disagree with others. The war is no longer supported by majority of American citizens since it has turned bloody. The British and American citizens are feeling just as helpless as citizens of other peace loving nations around the World & we have moved on from issues like Slavery and exploitation of the Red Indians. The problems the World is facing today is not solely the responsibility of the West. However we chose our friends wrongly. Friends such as Saudi Arabia and Israel. While we were a libreal democracy where religion had no say in politics we should never have pursued a religious/biblical cause, i.e. to give Jewish people their long lost homeland that had no basis on any grounds other than religion. We should never have made friends with Saudi Arabia that is one of the worst dictatorships in the World and where most of the terrorists invloved in 9/11 belonged to. We should not have fought a war in Afghanistan with Wahabi extremists and given them a false illusion that they are strong and they can rule the entire World.

Posted by: Micheal | February 17, 2006 05:47 AM

Isn't the "war" supposed to be over? I'm not Muslim but I agree totally with Rasheid, western society is so decadent, children are starving and people are paying thousands to get a face lift, have lipo-suction or drive some big 4x4 that will cause more problems to the environment.
Let's face it, there's no will to change the way the human race has been going on always.
Democracy is not charging into other peoples countries, killing thousands of innocent people and telling them what to do. That's facism. No wonder there's kids throwing stones. I would if it was my country!

Posted by: Ashamed | February 17, 2006 07:11 AM

Patriq: Yes they are professional soldiers. Yes they took people that were throwing rocks and bottles at them and beat then back. Good for them........

Karim: Tell me again how 100,000 people have died in Iraq in 2 years? Where do you get those figures from? Also, you say stop killing foreign people. Do you propose we continue to allow the insurgents keep blowing up markets, and schools, and _____(fill in the blank)
Do you propose that I stop giving food to local Iraqi children who thank us as we make our rounds and open up new schools, police stations, and medical clinics in the Baghdad area?

OD: You are a complete idiot. Fallujah is not still the "worst casualty blackspot". Fallujah's local govt actually works hand in hand with the local marines as of now and occasionally is killed by the aspiring terrorist because he is trying to better his city.

Ali: I am not going to say that the Arab Culture respects strength, but I will say that here in Iraq after the people have been told what to do and have been ruled by an iron fist for how many years? They do see kindness as a weakness. I do believe people in general(americans as well) are the same as animals and if you have been beaten into submission for so long than you are looking for someone to tell you what to do. The Iraqis as a group are not prepared to make their own decisions. they are blinded by religious, cultural, and tribal differences too much.

Oh and Ashamed: If you are brave (or dumb) enough to throw rocks at a fully armed soldier when you have no weapons then you should not be surprised when they beat your skull in. Its either you being really dumb or willing to make that sacrifice
......lol

Posted by: In Iraq Right Now | February 17, 2006 07:55 AM


I would like (in Iraq Now) to know this, ahh yes, you have to make your self feel better about your mission, but there is still no justification for whats been done, look at it like this ok, had this WAR never happened people who died because of it would still be living, these people who you call insurgents are brave to take on a soldier who thinks he can force them to see that (his) way is the better way., Look at whats going on at your home, You are loosing these so called rights your fighting for each and every day, your government want to listen to you on the phone, damn you have just as many poor people in america than Bahrain will ever have! ! Who need your help but because they dont have money they are pissed on! ! People have lost hope in the American dream, thats why the X-rated porn shops and bars and hard drugs like heroin take their minds off of their desperate way of life, MONEY has become americas idol, and those who have it send YOU and others around the world to tell them, look come after this false dream fall into the the trap?!. So what if schools are open in Iraq, without safety what good is it. Saddam was a bastard but it seems they feard him more than they fear you. I truly believe you would rather be home in Kansas than over (in Iraq)?!?! Your there not because you want to be, its because your made to be there soldier. keep it real.

Posted by: Rasheid | February 17, 2006 08:51 AM

In Iraq Right Now:-

'OD: You are a complete idiot. Fallujah is not still the "worst casualty blackspot".'

Thanks for the hot military intelligence, General Stupid.

Last month, eight US soldiers were killed in Falluja. Only two places had worse casualties: Baghdad, of course, and Tal Afar, where there was a large operation and nine soldiers were killed around Jan 7.

In almost every month, Falluja comes second only to Baghdad for US casualties. Way ahead of other, bigger cities.

Also, the second-biggest attack of last year, an IED that killed ten marines on foot, was in Falluja.

Falluja IS a casualty blackspot. I'm right, and all you've got is mindless CENTCOM spin with no figures.

So give us more of the real goods on Iraq, Colonel Clueless. Found any WMD yet?

Posted by: OD | February 17, 2006 01:38 PM

And spare us the candy for children crap.

Even German soldiers in WW2 gave candy to children. So what?

We've all seen photos of US soldiers giving candy to Vietnamese children. They were less keen to release photos of US servicemen carpet-bombing Vietnamese children with B52s and napalm, or burning down children's villages, or piling them into drainage ditches and machine-gunning them.

Somehow your candy distribution campaign in Southeast Asia managed to leave about 1.5 million children dead and countless more horribly injured.

So you can take your candy and shove it up your ass.

Posted by: OD | February 17, 2006 01:44 PM

And one more thing: the Falluja casualty stats, bad as they are, only represent a portion of the attacks carried out by Falluja insurgents. Most of the original Falluja insurgents are either dead or scattered around the country. The ones killing US troops there now are mostly new insurgents, people pissed off by your destruction of their city.

For example, in Nov 2004, while the Army's collective-punishment reprisal against the citizens of Falluja was underway, a large group of the original Falluja insurgents turned up in Mosul, taking over the city for several days and shattering an 'elite' police paramilitary force of 5,400 men who deserted and have not since returned to duty. That's according to a US Army war college report.
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB627.pdf

The attempt to crush Falluja only multiplied the number of insurgents, as anyone familiar with counterinsurgency could have predicted. Every act of brutality by foreign troops has multiplied the insurgency.

That's why you're losing, and why you deserve to lose.

Posted by: OD | February 17, 2006 02:07 PM

In fact, Sgt Rove, you might find it educational to peruse the writings of the War College and Strategic Studies Institute on Iraq.

You'll quickly find that what the Army really thinks about the war, and what CENTCOM tells the grunts, are two very different things.

In fact the difference is as great as the difference between these two statements:

"I can't tell you if the use of force in Iraq today will last five days, five weeks or five months, but it won't last any longer than that."
Donald Rumsfeld
Nov 15, 2002
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/11/14/rumsfeld.iraq/

"That insurgency could go on for any number of years. Insurgencies tend to go on five, six, eight, 10, 12 years."
Donald Rumsfeld
June 27, 2005
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160716,00.html

Scary stuff, eh? It must be unpleasant to know that the people who sent you into a war zone to look for things that didn't exist haven't got the faintest effing idea what they're doing.

Posted by: OD | February 17, 2006 02:18 PM

OD, Yes WMDS were found in Iraqi, Check your info. Just no in the amounts we wanted them to be. Furthermore, I condemn the actions of any soldier that commits senseless acts fo violence. However it needs to be pointed out that no matter how much training a person recieves he will inevitably break. Walking around in 100 degree temps. with 70 to 100 lbs on your back, have stones constantly thrown at you and the threat of death around every corner, eventually something will give. And by the way it is a global economy, he who has the oil controls world, for example China's economy is rivialing that of the United States, and its oil consumption has gone up threefold, so how do u control them ? Control the oil. And on one last note, reguardless of what happens those men are serving their country, and may die for it, so that in itself deserves respect.

Posted by: Just another guy | February 17, 2006 02:35 PM

"OD, Yes WMDS were found in Iraqi..."

Are you referring to that IED that had trace amounts of sarin in it? That has already been dismissed by the Pentagon itself as not a WMD find. David Kay, head of the ISG, has said there was no WMD. Duelfer, his replacement, has said the same thing. The only people who claim to have found WMD in Iraq are GOP spinners. Then again, I've heard GOP spinners claim that HE is WMD so anything's possible in the Republican world of 'truthiness'.
"And by the way it is a global economy, he who has the oil controls world, for example China's economy is rivialing that of the United States, and its oil consumption has gone up threefold, so how do u control them ? Control the oil."

Well, at least you're honest about your motives. So we can forget all that democracy-spreading crap. Clearly the US is not spreading democracy in Iraq, since Iraq's human rights minister yesterday asked the US Army to release its detainees into Iraqi custody, and got completely ignored.

It's some democracy when foreign troops can kidnap you from your home without charges, and your elected government is powerless to demand your release.

"However it needs to be pointed out that no matter how much training a person recieves he will inevitably break."

Actually I realise that. Clearly the trick is not to send them into pointless, open-ended wars in heavily-populated areas.

"And on one last note, reguardless of what happens those men are serving their country, and may die for it, so that in itself deserves respect."

If all soldiers who serve their government loyally deserve my respect, I'll remember to bring a bouquet of flowers next time I pass an SS military cemetery.

We established at Nuremburg that following orders is no excuse. It's not enough to be a loyal soldier. Patriotism doesn't excuse murder, it just encourages it.

Posted by: OD | February 17, 2006 02:48 PM

I heve been trying to read this thread through in an honest an open-minded mannner and got to about half way through before realising that Kipling may have been right ... East is East and West is West, etc etc etc .... what a load of hypocritical hogwash in reaction to provoking a poor public relations response to hooliganism, which was relatively mild compared with a volley of shots to kill those idientified as ringleaders.

What is so utterly depressing and frightening is the fact one seems to be dealing with those with little grasp of rationality .... why on earth should the Danish government be in the least sense blameworthy for what is published in, thank heavens, an uncensored free press?

If this reflects the utter irrationality of Islam, it is imperative that Iran are NOT allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, whatever it might cost to prevent it, vaporisation included. If people in the name of Islam can carry out atrocities like September 11th and that massacre at that Russian school, there seems to be something terribly evil about Islam, and bravo to the Danish cartoonists who perceived a connection. Many other people with sensitive beliefs have to put up with satire and parody, so what on earth is so sacrosanct about Islam to except them from lampoonery?

If it breeds extremists with so little respect for the sanctity of human life there might well be something inherently EVIL about it and the sooner it is eradicated the better. And could we really care a monkey's for some minor infringement of those interned in Cuba when most of them were cheering the major infringement of the rights of those on various aircraft on September 11th not to mention those conducting their normal daily tasks in the twin towers. Let the *******s out, to deprive a lot more travellers on Spanish & London transport, and attendees of Russian schools of their life and liberty by all means. It might be a good place to investigate just how deadly bird 'flu might be .... providing a laboratory to test innoculations etc etc which might provide some advantage to (civilised) mankind.

Posted by: ozymandias | February 17, 2006 04:08 PM

I am an American Egyptian, i have lived in the US for 19 years now, so I know a bit about both cultures.

The problem with some (notice i said SOME) of the people here, they have a redneck mindset. By a redneck mindset i mean that in their squabbely little heads they believe that all Arabs and Afghanis are all barbarian style people, who throw rocks and blow them selves up. If thats what you think, then you, quite frankly, are an ignorant stubborn son of a gun who really doesnt know crap about crap.

Have you no sincerety nor any respect for humanity as a whole? WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU AND ANY RANDOM IRAQI? No difference except your religon, and language. His heart beats like yours, he eats, drinks and breathes like you.

So to simply say "they threw rocks at us, we should go beat them" is just totally absurd. Correct me if im wrong, but im pretty sure the Iraqi's see the american and british pressence in their country an invasion, not a liberation process. And with us americans, and you britts abusing them because they merely threw rocks at you just sounds plain childish to me.

Now, i read some people saying "this is a warzone"... correction, its NOT a war zone. The war was over when the leader was overthrown and found in a rat hole, this is 3 years later and youre still calling it a war zone? EVEN IF IT WAS STILL A WARZONE, you would not be allowed to attack any unarmed indivisual unless they are considered a threat.... now.... youre gonna sit here and tell me that the 2 greatest, strongest armies in the world, consider a couple of teenagers throwing ROCKS a threat? .... .... .... .... .... .... Even if it was considered a threat, they were unarmed and helpless at the time of the beating, hence, making them no longer a threat and they should have been arrested, but no, you people say (not all of you) that harrasing, beating, cursing, and thrashing of unarmed teenagers is part of war? .......


Knowledge is power, but ignorance is bliss. And to be quite honest, alot of the people here have been blessed with all the bliss in the world.

Posted by: Some other guy | February 17, 2006 04:17 PM

I am an American Egyptian, i have lived in the US for 19 years now, so I know a bit about both cultures.

The problem with some (notice i said SOME) of the people here, they have a redneck mindset. By a redneck mindset i mean that in their squabbely little heads they believe that all Arabs and Afghanis are all barbarian style people, who throw rocks and blow them selves up. If thats what you think, then you, quite frankly, are an ignorant stubborn son of a gun who really doesnt know crap about crap.

Have you no sincerety nor any respect for humanity as a whole? WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU AND ANY RANDOM IRAQI? No difference except your religon, and language. His heart beats like yours, he eats, drinks and breathes like you.

So to simply say "they threw rocks at us, we should go beat them" is just totally absurd. Correct me if im wrong, but im pretty sure the Iraqi's see the american and british pressence in their country an invasion, not a liberation process. And with us americans, and you britts abusing them because they merely threw rocks at you just sounds plain childish to me.

Now, i read some people saying "this is a warzone"... correction, its NOT a war zone. The war was over when the leader was overthrown and found in a rat hole, this is 3 years later and youre still calling it a war zone? EVEN IF IT WAS STILL A WARZONE, you would not be allowed to attack any unarmed indivisual unless they are considered a threat.... now.... youre gonna sit here and tell me that the 2 greatest, strongest armies in the world, consider a couple of teenagers throwing ROCKS a threat? .... .... .... .... .... .... Even if it was considered a threat, they were unarmed and helpless at the time of the beating, hence, making them no longer a threat and they should have been arrested, but no, you people say (not all of you) that harrasing, beating, cursing, and thrashing of unarmed teenagers is part of war? .......


Knowledge is power, but ignorance is bliss. And to be quite honest, alot of the people here have been blessed with all the bliss in the world.

Posted by: Some other guy | February 17, 2006 04:18 PM

Right so we've all been arguin for how many days now?? and surprise surprise the westerners think their in the right and middle east think their in the right aand lets face of it none of us really know what were talkin about nobody can trust the media so we dont know the real reason the british troops were attackin the teenagers and we dont know what really happens to muslims in the streets we all just assume that were right before we know that facts and when we think somethings right we'll fight to make a stand and to push our views on other people as we've all been doing which is the reason wars start in the first place, so while were all hear arguing and blaming each other were just basically doing the same as both sides of the war the difference being we don't have blood on our hands.

Posted by: Truth | February 17, 2006 04:59 PM

Hmm ... some other guy

Shskespeare said it (I think) some 500 years or so ago .... if you prick him, (a Jew), doth he not bleed?

Seems to me this is also true of the Chinese, the Africans, (Australian) aboriginals, American indigenous folk,
Eskomos & Aztecs ... and even A-rabs. (And those of British extraction,which, whether they like it or not, includes Americans.)

LOL

Posted by: ozymandias | February 17, 2006 05:02 PM

For Eskomos read "Eskimos"

The American (illegal) declaration of independence was very inconvenient to Britain .... where could she send her miscreants ???

Posted by: ozymandias | February 17, 2006 05:08 PM

Selective invasions of other peoples countries,lies and more lies from Bush. Blair etc..
How was Iraq a threat to the USA or Britain? Who was really responsible for 9/11?
What on earth are you doing there?
God knows how you live with yourselves.
Gauntanamo, torture, beating and raping children and kicking their heads in. We've all seen the pictures guys, and you call yourselves liberators!
Yes, redneck sounds about accurate, don't forget in your so called land of the free black people are still treated like second class citizens unless your name is Condi!

Posted by: Ashamed | February 17, 2006 05:46 PM

Gee, Dave, I had no idea that 9/11 was engineered by children from Basra.

Silly me, believing all that OBL stuff.

Basically, there are two types of people who complain about atrocities:
1. Those who dislike atrocities, and
2. Those who want to use someone else's atrocities to justify their own.

You fall into the second category.

"fight fire with fire i always say!"

It would be most amusing to watch your house burn down as you put that technique to the test.

Posted by: OD | February 17, 2006 06:03 PM

We all know why this war is going on look at the shootings of JFK and lincoln and martin luther king. They all died because they were aiming to keep peace if a country will take out its own leaders to stop peace happening you think they'll be bothered about invading other countrys the oil is just a bonus the real reason this war is still going on is because war is the most profitable business in the world and the americans want to drag it on for as long as they can

Posted by: Truth | February 17, 2006 06:19 PM

If you lose control over oil in middle east you would pay 100$ a gallon for it and in few days there wont be any car in your streets running. it is not water that still want to get it free its black gold. the life of those 3000 innocent that you are talking about were sacrificed for that contol.

Posted by: DD | February 18, 2006 11:57 AM

Dave... to tell you the truth, a monkey's testicle is bigger than your brain.

"lets fight fire with fire i always say"... you are such a redneck. ONE GROUP CARRIES OUT AN ATTACK AND YOU WANA GO AND TORTURE THE WHOLE RACE AND RELIGON OF THE PEOPLE THAT DID IT????????


LOOK AT AMERICA BUDDY! HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN ABOUT THE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS TAHT DIED IN HIROSHIMA.... HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN ABOUT THAT? And if we go by your theory, all americans would have been nuked and tortured right? Because... as you say "fight fire with fire" ....


Thats the problem with you ignorant rednecks... you can never think outside the box... as a matter a fact, you cant even think at all. Go figure.

Posted by: Some other guy | February 18, 2006 08:17 PM

The Rules of War:

So let me get the Iraqi rules of war straight:-
Normally, in war, if an enemy soldier shoots at you with a machine-gun or RPG, trying to kill you, and you then capture and disarm him, rendering him no threat, you are expected to treat him well and take care of him. Any violence against him is a war crime.
But in Iraq, if a civilian child throws rocks at you, and you then capture him, eliminating even that minor threat, you are expected to beat the kid into a bloody, unconscious pulp.

Why is that? Are civilian children with rocks a graver menace than enemy soldiers with guns?

Is it just that soldiers are pussies? They fear mistreating enemy soldier POWs, because they themselves could be in that position one day. But they know they'll never be kids again, so anything goes with them. No danger of reciprocation.

And here, on this page, we have people who would claim to be shocked if military PoWs were beaten by a gang of soldiers with truncheons...but they're all in favour of doing it to civilian kids.

Crazy world we live in. Look at the US. They have a law against assassinating foreign heads of state, no matter how evil, but they're all in favour of pressuring foreign states by killing large numbers of completely innocent ordinary citizens.

"War is the gambling-table of governments," said Tom Paine, "and citizens the dupes of the game."

The chips, more like.

Posted by: OD | February 18, 2006 11:40 PM

It may be fashionable for an inadequate negro in America to self-conflagerate or even prostrate before his evolutionary superiors in the white race, and be equally agreed upon by self-appointed pundits who've never seen the other side of any ocean, but the truth lies in the inadequacies of a neo-colonial occupying army of a degenerate society being shown in its true colours. It has taken a long time to arrive, but the truth always surfaces; and the truth in this instance is the hatred the west truly holds for others they consider inferior, whether it is due to skin color, religious belief or else.
Britain picked a fight, instigating and hiding behind the might of the US army, knowing that they cannot be a militarily capable of occupying anyone alone in this day and age. If Blair and the other arm-chair toughs want a real fight, try us for size. We'll teach 'em a lesson that would be decisively conclusive.

Posted by: Anil Kapoor | February 22, 2006 11:21 AM

Why does the media insist on feeling sorry for the terrorists, murderers, and other so-called prisoners? Why doesn't the media start concentrating on the victims for a change instead of obsessing over prison conditions?

Posted by: Jack Smythe | February 22, 2006 06:55 PM

Hmmm....From my little corner of the world here...all i can see is that the deaths of 3000+(?) people that day in Sept set off an orgy of destruction and deaths in other part of the world, espcially in Iraq. I'm not wrong is putting that figure at 100,00 (maybe around that no?)most of them innocents and most of them not whites, so i guess that makes the figures palatable to the west. Hmm...A pretty damn uneven trade-offs huh..Funny World..Oh well..Bush and Cheney and Blair will eventually answer to the Maker.. :-[]

Posted by: Hmmm... | February 22, 2006 08:39 PM

Hmmm....Here's a thought : Wonder what Truman's gonna say when he's asked bout the hundreds of thousands of HIS creations dead from the atomic bombings on judgement day? Maybe 'Gee..they're only yellow skin japs..who cares rite Lord?' :-[]
Hey..now I know why Bush is so gung-ho on militarism...His Grandad did business with the nazis..! Must be the genes..Hmmmm...

Posted by: Hmmm.... | February 22, 2006 08:47 PM

Ok first of all lets get this straight. "NEVER judge a man till you walked a mile in his moccasins" Until you have been scared, hot , and stressed for months on end andseen your friends die you can't judge anyone. YES there are bad soldiers.....just like there are bad people. Also most of the deaths in Iraq against Iraqis have been the Sunni v. Shiite so you can't blame the white man for watching Arabs Kill Arabs. And to let you know I CHOSE to be over in Iraq. My days as a soldier are behind me and I leave the friendly confines of the base everyday in support of the the Iraqi Reconstruction Program. I have IN PERSON seen new schools, new clinics, new hospitals, new orphanages built. There is no carpet bombing going on here, no rampant murdering of children. People say that all of these people would have been alive if we had not invaded......Maybe....but Maybe Saddam would have killed another 10,000+ people(actual numbers no one will ever know) Like he did in the Karbala uprising in 1991 and that was just over a VERY short period of time. At least this way the country can sort itself out no matter how long it may take.

Posted by: In Iraq Right Now | March 3, 2006 07:32 AM

The most objective conclusion that I draw from the misconduct of the British troops on the video (irrespective of any political aspect) is that: the discipline of the British troops is no better than that of a gangster mob. Professional soldiers anywhere across the world have a military code, which strictly prohibits such acts, the kind of misconduct disclosed on the video. When the quality and competence of military leadership and organization starts to detoriorate, so does the discipline of troops. Simple as that. It seems the British military training doctrine and ways need a thorough reform.

I had heard much of the discipline of US and British armed forced, yet in the past three years it appears that both are overrated. With that kind of professionalism (or lack thereof), they better not face a competent armed force for they would not fare any better than a fly against a windshield. Simple fact: psychopaths never make good soldiers.

Regards

Posted by: ozyaman | March 17, 2006 01:43 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2006 The Washington Post Company