Video of Of US Soldiers Shooting Iraqi
 

BUSH = LOSS OF LIFE

"Roger"

"HIT HIM AND THE TRUCK"

The guy is on the ground, crawling, severely injured and helpless

Fucking bullshit

Seen that last week...Roger :ak47:

Stop fucking posting this vid...its posted 3 times a day now for 10 days already.

Fucking idiots!

Where can I find more of this videos... :winkwink:

oh, are you a doctor? besides, even if he was severely wounded, at least they put him out of his misery, right?

No shit

Well first of all they shouldn't have taken his life away to begin with, Second of all they should have left him with a chance to survive, Third Yes, I'm a doctor of logic

DIE MATHA FUCKA DIE MATHA FUCKA DIE

just for a moment forget Saddam, WMD, Bush, etc

Dying here are ordinary people (who probably know little of world politics)
defending their own (undisputed) land against a foreign armys invasion.
What would you do if someone was bombing your city? Defend yourself?
All they know is they're being attacked. Friends and family have been killed..
Ethical debates about the enemys motives don't matter much then.

Still, some people cheer at this video of US raining death from the sky.
Lucky you were born here and not there, eh?

No shit, they should of left them lying there wounded. There would of been a good chance that a Iraqi ambulance would of took him to the hospital

btw, that wasn't a real video but rather a trailer to a new PS2 game comming out

Suck a fat one

What's the context of this video?

Are these guys the guys that were shooting RPGs at our troops?

Don't assume that these Iraqis were on their way to Church to pray right after they stopped by a shelter to help feed the homeless.

i hope it really is a video if iraqis getting popped so i can add to my collection...

There is no bullshit in war. Its very black and white. Either you kill them or they'll kill you.

:ak47:

ah man, is this the one of the 2 idiots and the 2 trucks getting capped?

Either they die or our guys die. Take your pick.

It was nice of him to put him out of his misery

KC:

The context is most relevant. Did you see anyone carrying an RPG? Sorry.. I didn't either. Did you see these three people firing at anything? No, I didn't either.

What I did see was three people walking around, two were shot and the other ended up crawling over some yard to escape and he too, was killed.

I can't think that these brave lads behind the guns were on their way to Church for prayers either, after stopping to feed some of the homeless who were already bombed out by them.

There is nothing to be proud of in this video - "excuses" are meaningless.

you think they just be flying around for no reason looking for people in the desert to shoot? They was the enemy.

War is hell, crazy thing was that the helicopters were prolly miles away. didn't even hear them comming. They actually thought they can hide at night

I got no clue as to what they do flying around. I could see they were sure making sure they just pressed buttons - a favorite pastime - takes "real" courage to do that.

BTW ... I got full respect for troops - that includes both sides - whether you call em the "enemy", that's fine!

or if the 'soldiers' (ordinary people) from both sides just stayed home,
then neither would die. :glugglug

in this case, people from the USA went there.

I won't ever understand why masses of people will pick up weapons,
travel to distant lands, and kill strangers just because they're told to.

WTF should they give him the chance to survive? So he can try to killl them later? Dumbass

You really do not see the bigger picture.

Don't you understand Bush snr missed out on getting Saddam, Bush jnr has to do something to justify being in office once and it's an election year.

Now do you understand?

*Turn off sarcasm mode*

Do Americans not care what is done in their name?

You forgot the third choice,

Get the fuck out of there.

Remeber it was all about WMD, which it appears now did not exist, So why are the troops staying? Maybe it's to win over the people.

Saddam went into Kuwait and was headed to Saudi Arabia.

He put a contract hit out on a former US President.

He may or may not have had his fingers in 9/11, but without a doubt he and his two goony sons surely had a celebration party on that day.

He fucked over his lenders to the tune of $100 Billion.

He fucked over his own people out of hundreds of billions.

We gave him and his entire family the opportunity to survive and leave gracefully with his money intact.

He chose not to. It was his choice. He paid the price.

When you turn 18 you may understand.

fucktard

CamChicks:

:thumbsup

They went there because they were told - this is the enemy and they have WMD and will attack us, if not now - they will in the future.

They were also told, but "suitably vaguely", that the "ememy" had some connection to "terrorists". That tale lives on in many, although the instigators of the tale side-step the issue and lie again.

The end result?? A mass murderer was captured. No WMD found, thousands of innocent men, women and children were killed, the country in shreds and the invaders can't get out quick enough before an election. Meanwhile, the instigators continue to lie on a daily basis in an attempt to justify their actions and seek help from other nations in extracting themselves from the region.

It's the same with the USSR in Afghanistan and the US in Vietnam, Somalia and most of the other places there was this need for an "adventure'.

Add this to your collection :thumbsup

http://www.aeronautics.ru/img/img006...iraq_00004.jpg

This is why the context is important. Without context, having a discussion about it is useless. It's all speculation.

Until then, I will speculate that the Iraqi's had just attacked US forces and you can speculate that these Iraqi's were innocent and were actually using those trucks to transport food for the homeless.

Context is everything.

I don't think any invasion is justified;
whoever shoots first is most at fault.

However IF the secular Saddam had taken control of the region,
and the west didn't get involved, he would probably have wiped out all the
corrupt Saudi rulers who fund the religious extremists that attack the USA.

Saddam was opposed to fanatical Islam.
He didn't want to compete with the clergy for power.

If the West had allowed him to war with the Saudis,
oil prices would have gone up for a while and some contracts may
have been lost, but it MAY have ultimately been better for the world.
(easier to negotiate with people who don't think god wants them to kill you)
It would have been worse for terrorists. Saddam made clear he
wanted nothing to do with those groups, right up until the end.

He was not opposed to western culture. Clearly he had embraced
it in his personal life (he liked american movies and music and tv).
Until we got involved during the Gulf War, he had no particular hostility
toward the West. We considered him an ally when he fought Iran.
He was probably surprised/confused why we'd defend other Islamic states.
He was doing our dirtywork. Until he fucked with our oil contracts.

No debate, the guy was a brutal evil fucker. But still,
it's tempting to wish he was the one battling Jihadists.
Instead what happened is, rather than becming an enemy
of the islamic state, he became a living martyr to many of them.
He was still too secular for Osama and Co. They didn't like him,
but were able to point to Iraq as an example of US imperialism.


To be fair, that US President put out a hit on him first.


Noone thinks he was involved in 9-11 except confused hicks.
Even the current administration has said as much.
They want to make an psychological tie, but they dont directly accuse him
because everyone paying attention knows it's untrue.


Unfortunately he was the only one given a choice.
He's still alive.
The people defending their land in that video are not.

now thats some fucking firepower !!:ak47:

And you wonder why you are the most hated country on earth

You are probably the most brainwashed ...more so than USSR ever was

Your main danger is within...

and there is nothing worse than your hypocritical bullshit

you kill your own troops and those of your allies

Bush is the one that should be tried for war crimes!!!!

:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

And your point is?

you have stats to back that up?

I thought this video was in afghanistan?

I thought it was a trailer for the next release of Rainbow Six :winkwink:

Your post is nieve and not how the real world works.

The weak are always getting the short end of the stick. Nothing has changed about that since the caveman days.

The strong rule and propser. The weak are enslaved, manipulated, brutalized and suffer.

Don't blame anyone but Mother Nature for that. Its her design. Survival of the fittest. Its the principal law of the Universe and has to be that way.

I've got a bigger (12mb) version of this, shows a little bit more of it. Hit me up with an email, and I'll try to get it to ya. See sig.

True, being at the top of the mountain is indeed a lonely place.

And you know how the real world thinks?

I suppose like every other god fearing red neck American. Well I've news for you. The real world knows the reason for going to war with Iraq was at best wrong at worse a straight lie.

Living in your real world any tough guy can walk into your house shoot you and take posession of your house. And don't come back with some stupid childish response that you will shoot him first, there is always some one bigger and tougher out there than you. And he shot you first.

We have a thing called civilisation to protect the less strong. Laws both local and International to protect the weak and punish the wrong. A lot has changed since the days of cavemen, except for a few throwbacks who like to fantasise.

Saddam was a tyrant, but no threat to the US. He tried it with Kuwait and never recovered. There was NO reasons to go to war with him that the US and UK would have swallowed, so the reasons were found.

If you do the job,do it correct and at your best.
Well,thats what we did in Kosovo-war :winkwink:


Take care,
JOKER

No reason to go to war with Saddam?

You need to do some serious research Charles.

Does it strike fear that the USA can wield its stick of liberation anywhere it wants?

KRL:

Hi KRL!

There was one good think that actually came out of the "Iraqi War" - ie the deposing of Saddam Hussein.

Was this a "reason" to go to war? I could not say that Hussein's regime justified a war. The premise of the war (and all the obvious urgency), was based on solid hard evidence that he had WMD and "apparently", (more by slanted propaganda than anything), he was planning to attack the US and had connections with bin Laden and lots more "innudeno" etc.

If this was in fact the case, yes - these are powerful reasons for this war. However, there is little doubt, (and I never actually doubted before the war), that this "evidence" was in fact, false. Those who produced the "evidence" in the first instance are either stepping away from their statements or currently under pressure to resign (as may be the case with Blair in the UK). I have little doubt many other countries and the IAEA had more concrete information that this soap opera was untrue.

This action, not just by the US, but by the UK, - has been manufactured to support an ideology, which, when you analyse it, - has no credibility in any civilized world. Add to that the fact that many thousands of people have been killed, maimed or left homeless and the situation is clearly that the attacking countries are in more danger from "terrorist" attacks than they ever were, prior to 9/11. What you sow, you will reap.

So, no - I can't see *anyone* claiming this was a reason to go to war.

Does it strike fear that the US can wield it's stick of liberation? No... however there is in this world an issue that may be more on the minds of many. That is "trust". Trust in a government that basically cannot be trusted where they have been proven to lie and decieve there own citizens. (BTW.. that is a liberal use of the word "liberation" - did you really mean "occupation"? :-) )

When one talks about uploading the Constitution of the land, that means simply that, - in both spirit and in daily life. Leaders are elected to be entrusted with upholding those ideals and serve the citizens of the land.

When the world watches the activities of some current leaders, it is clear, that they have mislead people and act in a fashion where the Founding Fathers would be spinning in their graves.

It is not unreasonable to expect much higher standards of conduct from leaders and less "words" ("words" = "innuendo" and "lies").

This "adventure" into Iraq, although it is good to have Saddam gone, it is nowhere near "justified" and the judgement of the instigators is certainly in question - hence "trust". My own opinion? I would not trust them in any way, - they are totally untrustworthy and fall below any standards for any elected office of government.

i have seen this fucking video 10 times!

shoot those lil muslim fags and blow up there schools while class is on.

this is war people wtf do you expect they all want to kill you and your american children, and i want to do the same deed for them.

hopefully by the end of this year there will be barely any muslim nations having children because of the massive amount of radiation that should be dropped on them. :thumbsup

i have seen that vid alot my damn self and to be honest , its just as crazy as the last time

Webby you are thinking too hard on this. Americans have changed.

In the USA no one has time or desire anymore to worry about it.

All they want to know is get the job done anyway you need to guys. Nobody cares if its justified or not justified. They just want anyone who they perceive to be a potential threat either taken out or subdued to the point where they are no longer able to do anything to hurt the US or its allies.

George Tenet, Director of US Cental Intelligence summed it up best.

"After 9/11, the gloves came off."

The public has given Washington card blanche.