Gods of War

arjun_m writes <<< The magical Rumsfeld handshake absolves Saddam of all his sins.. >>

No it does not neither did my argument suggest such. Follow the logic of my argument, rather than invent your opponents argument as a ``straw man`` against which you can argue, because the real argument stumped you. You all should learn the basics of rational argumentation instead of pursing this thuggish methodology of retards and dimwits.

Respectfully submitted (with no respect intended for behram, he follows the same thuggish mentality often enough),

#178 by masadi on June 11, 2006 3:29pm PT

It`s the power of the magical Rumsfeld handshake.. Saddam kills a bunch of iraqis..Rumsfeld shakes hands with Iraq and hey presto..Saddam`s atrocities are now ``atrocities``..and the blame for the dead iraqis is now transferred to Rumsfeld and the US government..Rumsfeld is now ``it``..

The magical Rumsfeld handshake absolves Saddam of all his sins..

Rumsfeld shook hands with Mushy too..Doesn`t that mean the paki army is now absolved of the sins of 71 and the US government is now responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of east pakistani muslims..

#178 by masadi on June 11, 2006 3:29pm PT

It`s the power of the magical Rumsfeld handshake.. Saddam kills a bunch of iraqis..Rumsfeld shakes hands with Iraq and hey presto..Saddam`s atrocities are now ``atrocities``..and the blame for the dead iraqis is now transferred to Rumsfeld and the US government..Rumsfeld is now ``it``..

The magical Rumsfeld handshake absolves Saddam of all his sins..

Rumsfeld shook hands with Mushy too..Doesn`t that mean the paki army is now absolved of the sins of 71 and the US government is now responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of east pakistani muslims..

Jay 1 writes <<< The pious masadi has chosen NOT to look at ``vicious`` yahood/hanood/amriki`` propaganda that saddam used poison gas on kurds and killed hundreds of women and children by doing so. >>>

Actually at the time this was occuring, it was ignored by the US who wanted to support Saddam. Criticism by myself at the time, when I was in my teens would not have been as effective as criticism by Donald Rumsfeld when he shook the hands of Saddam shortly thereafter. They resurrected this ``atrocity`` almost a decade and a half after the events to support the current invasion~ at the time of his worst atrocities, the US was quite happy with him, when he became mellowed down was the time when they resurrected his major atrocities. I mention this in one of my writings on page 25 of Living By the Sword: The War Addiction of America`s Elite

<<< Declassified documents show that in the 90-minute meeting Donald Rumsfeld had with Saddam Hussein in the 1980s, soon after Iraq had used chemical weapons, he made no reference to their use and presented no condemnation or threat of “sanctions” (Hiro, 2004:372). Instead, the talks centered on Iraq constructing an oil pipeline through Jordan to the Gulf of Aqaba. The chemical weapons issue was resurrected two decades after the event by the same Donald Rumsfeld to manipulate public opinion in demonizing Saddam (p.25, 2005). >>>

That said, you should have noticed that I am not concered with individuals in trying to explain phenomenon. I look at the institutional structure. I didn`t balme Bush1 for the Highway of Death Massacre or Bush junior for Hadith, I look at the US military institution, its relationship to the political economy of the US, dominated by these institutional elites, the structure of whose rule stays the same regardless of the face or name of the president. While discussing specifics I have condemned the petty barbarism of UBL and his gang of thugs, and how they and the US elite have a symbiotic relationship and feed and grow in their perversions. Recently I criticized Ahmadinejad`s letter etc. The hypocrisy is in the US elite that create conditions through their domination of the political economy of the majority world, of conditions that perpetuate such atrocities~ not to ignore in all of this is their provision of the means of those atrocities of which Saddam was a major recipient as well. You choose to blame the individual because, regardless of his contempt for Islam, he carried an Arab or Muslim name. Such methodology ensures that the real issues are ignored, distracted from and such atrocities continue in the future regardless of the name of the person in authority.

#176...
The pious masadi has chosen NOT to look at ``vicious`` yahood/hanood/amriki`` propaganda that saddam used poison gas on kurds and killed hundreds of women and children by doing so.
Pictures abounded on the web of rotting bodies of children with blisters on their faces ..eyes open ..mouths open...
Saddam`s thugs beheaded women in front of their children!
But to Masadi it is ``uislamic`` to utter a word on that...
That would be ``gaddari`` of the highest order!!!
Hain na masadi ji?

Aur pakistani jyadati in east pakistan...``tauba tauba``..!!
persecution of army officers for rape and pillage?
Oh dear..they were just indulging in pious jehad..

One paki ``minister of the time had remarked piously...``yaar! ``Imaan taaza ho gaya``!!

Hain na wonders of the paki land?
Jayen

#174 by masadi on June 10, 2006 9:24pm PT


That the US military is trained to act in this fashion has been shown time and again.


Sure..the marines are trained to blow stuff up..But civil society in the US won`t stand for marines shooting chindren, if they did that..

Unlike Pakiland, the civilians control the military in this country...The marines are being prosecuted because the US junta does care about civilian life...If people die and it`s really collateral damage, they accept it..but people sure as heck aren`t going to accept marines shooting children..

This ain`t Pakiland pal..where the military killed hundreds of thousands of (at that time) Paki citizens and a single officer or soldier hasn`t been prosecuted...

comrade masadi: if it`s not too much of an effort, can you show me one of your articles where you criticized saddam killing a whole bunch iraqis..or are your C.W. Mills stock quotes only for use when the people being accused are not muslims?

#174
Asadi,
I am glad you took care of this person with serious comprehension problems. I mean you don’t get much from someone who could not go beyond the 12th grade and failed to get into kakul.
I can only quote Richard Whately for him and he said, “He who is unaware of his ignorance will be only misled by his knowledge.”

#172 by bbabu

“Taliban regime caused as much suffering (if not more) than US troops caused in Iraq.
Do you think Taliban leadership were really Afghans ? I think more likely Pakistani military officers.”

You are kiddin me! Aren’t you?

Fuzair wrote in #169 <<< What you and the others on this site have said is that it is very US policy to have it`s troops specifically target Iraqi civilians. >>>

And where did your dim mentality come up with that conclusion. This is what I had written

<<< They involve dehumanizing the enemy and anyone who resembles them and eliminating them as easy as you would a cockroach, a dehumanized ``thing`` looks the same whether it is a six year old child, a woman, a grandfather or an insurgent, and as HP mentions race,....... >>>

The US elite are indifferent to whether civilians get killed or not. They would just as easily kill millions, if that is how their objective, whatever it happens to be is fulfilled. That the US military is trained to act in this fashion has been shown time and again. This is not a new phenomenon. How you were absolving them of any wrongdoing by deflecting the blame on the insurgents was quite idiotic, regarless of the ``law of physics`` regarding insurgencies that you were trying to tout- no such law exists. The only difference between Haditha (one of many incidents, all US raids have involved cases of Haditha like incidents, if you have followed the news there have been dozens reported so far) and the impersonal bombings of civilan cities are the #s that get killed, those bombing runs kill many more, and US soldiers who carry them out are well aware that when they drop 2000lb jdams on city centers or civilan restaurants (like they did when they tried to ``assassinate`` saddam) that civilans are going to get killed in large numbers. This does not have anything to do with ``insurgent tactics``, it has everything to do with not caring for dehumanized opponents, in which race plays a very important role.

The racial nature of such dehumanization was recognized by Bonner F. Fellers, General MacArthur`s military secretary and chief of psychological warfare operations, who called the civilian bombings of Japanese cities by the Allies, “the most ruthless and barbaric killings of non-combatants in all history” [internal memorandum dated June 17, 1945]. Regarding this ruthless killing of Japanese civilians, he stated: ``The war with Europe was both political and social; the war in the Pacific was racial.`` (Quoted by John Dower, Embracing Defeat 1999:286).

Fuzair wrote

<< Its pointless trying to discuss things with a pathological liar like you >>

Please show us the lies otherwise don`t hide behind slogans because you have been intellectually stumped in these debates.

shobig_sifar #53

`` Re: # 49 Pakistan is an independent state, so its people and rulers enjoy all the liberty to support any regime or any political party in any country if that`s n its best interest, why on earth should that be a problem for the US, or for anybody else for that matter? ``

I have no problem if Pakistanis want to support the Taliban.

It is really funny that Army/ISI do not feel Taliban ideology is necessary for Pakistan Punjab and Karachi. Why would the fine citizens of Punjab or Karachi enjoy the Taliban laws. It seems unfair :-)

Also your President agreed to abandon the support of Taliban after a friend or foe phone call. It does not seem like Pakistan has abandoned the support of Taliban.

HP #51

``A simple question to irfan hamid:
Under what rock were you hiding when Pakistani generals were supporting the Taliban ?``

`` Non sense! What massacres in Iraq have to do with afghanistan? I hope you are not going to argue that Saddam was responsible for 911. ``

Taliban regime caused as much suffering (if not more) than US troops caused in Iraq.
Do you think Taliban leadership were really Afghans ? I think more likely Pakistani military officers.

Fuzair writes <<< Masadi you are beneath contempt. Here is the full quotation, not the bits you posted (emphasis added): >>>

I cannot help you if you lack the power of comprehension. It is very clear what Gupta is getting at (even though whatever he says or doesn`t say, does not prove anything, he is not some revelation from on high to which you are clinging to as if it were the word of God). He is saying very clearly that these incidents are not the MAJOR cause of death and destruction in Iraq today. The major cause, like he makes clear using the famous Johns Hopkins study are US airstrikes. If you cannot grasp his point, I cannot help you. He is not discounting that many such Haditha like incidents exist in the Iraq, nothing that he says is discounting that- there are as fact many such incidents, many have been covered in the press as well, but those are not the major cause of death and destruction in Iraq. That is what my post said and that is what Gupta was saying. The ``bits`` that I posted were still bigger than the bits that you posted of the article, even though you prove my point not yours. Further I didn`t bring up that article to prove anything, you did.

Regarding butchering the withdrawing Iraqi soldiers and civilians who were returning from Kuwait, it violates the Geneva Conventions of 1949, Common Article III, which outlaws the killing of soldiers who are out of combat. Colin Powell at the time called it a massacre, those soldiers were out of combat, wihtdrawing in accordance with UN resolution 660. This barbarism on soldiers out of combat and civilians, the traffic jam there contained civilian vehicles, violates even the U.S. Field Manual of 1956. The 1907 Hague Convention governing land warfare also makes it illegal to declare that no quarter will be given to withdrawing soldiers.

You don`t have to respond because you have no point. You want to defend barbarism when the US does it, and you have made that choice, live with it and your tained conscience.

Bharat writes in #170 <<< Why is W and his army responsible for the ongoing Sunni-Shia strife in Iraq? If you are so much concerned about human rights why don`t you ever condemn this or talk about this? >>>

That ``strife`` has the war as its cause, and the resulting mess it has created by ruining the civil society in Iraq. You cannot view this stife isolated from the broader context in which this war, an illegal barbaric war, is being conducted, which has the US military as its source. Of course it set in place a dynamic, created conditions in which such sectarianism fluorishes and finds legitimacy.

Masadi,

Haditha and Abughraib deserve condemnation....I accept some of your contentions/ condemnation of US warmongering..........but the Islamists and your liberal supporters NEVER discuss the huge elephant in the room...you would like to push this under the carpet...(always blame outsiders since it is very convenient)..... and that is .....


Why is W and his army responsible for the ongoing Sunni-Shia strife in Iraq? If you are so much concerned about human rights why don`t you ever condemn this or talk about this?


or more accurately why don`t you ever discuss the Sunni brutality, genocide unleashed on Shias...pulling unarmed passengers out of buses, separating the Shias and excuting them.....bombing places of worship..bombing them at market places even when there are no US soldiers..................suicide bombing Shia funeral processions....


Sunnis were OK as long they wielded power and ruled over Shias...but it is unacceptable for them to share power.........


Are you going to hide behind accusations of bigotry, media propaganda, etc?

regards,

Masadi you are beneath contempt. Here is the full quotation, not the bits you posted (emphasis added):

AMY GOODMAN: Arun Gupta, you`ve also been writing about the killings in Haditha, in Ishaqi. Can you talk about your response?

ARUN GUPTA: Sure, I think it is important to understand that those are aberrations. And what`s really important to realize is that it obscures how the war itself is just an ongoing massacre. Most Iraqis are killed by bombings, coalition air strikes, at checkpoints, in accidents, during raids. There isn`t this deliberate campaign of U.S. troops going out and slaughtering Iraqi residents in their homes. By focusing on this, it plays a certain convenient role for the Pentagon. That they can say, well, these are the aberrations, just as in Abu Ghraib, this is just a few bad apples, rather than dealing with the fact that the whole war itself is just one great massacre.

IF you will go back and read my post, you will see that I have said essentially what Arun Gupta has: the govt forces (here I include, obviously, US forces in Iraq) have used massive force against the insurgents AND civilian casualties have been very, very high BUT individual acts of terror carried out by specific US units have been very, very few. What you and the others on this site have said is that it is very US policy to have it`s troops specifically target Iraqi civilians.

Here is your own earlier post (emphasis added):
+++
The cause for Haditha (one incident out of many) lies in the social psychology of the members of the US military machine, directly caused by the way they have been trained. That is why these incidents are commonplace and wide and cannot be isolated into one or two or few instances;and cannot be blamed on insurgent tactics becuase they occur in the open battlefield as well, like what happened on the ``highway of death`` in Gulf War 1, where the attacks were totally unprovoked. They involve dehumanizing the enemy and anyone who resembles them and eliminating them as easy as you would a cockroach, a dehumanized ``thing`` looks the same whether it is a six year old child, a woman, a grandfather or an insurgent, and as HP mentions race, more so with the American and European forces than with the others he mentioned, plays a major role in this. Successful insurrections, like the Cuban one, are popular insurrections- they do not involve baiting government forces to deliberately target the public time and again- which would alienate those movements and take away their popular support. Further, better equipped, better trained, better resourced government forces (or in this case the invasion forces) could easily grasp this trend and guard against it, if that were the case.
+++

Since when is attacking a retreating enemy, no matter how one sided the fight turns out to be, a war crime or an atrocity? Leaving aside the fact that all war is atrocity, the Highway of Death was a legitimate military operation. Why leave Hussein`s military intact and more capable than you have to?

Its pointless trying to discuss things with a pathological liar like you; I`m going to treat you the way you deserve and simply ignore your blatherings from now on.

Maj.Gen Smedley Butler, USMC (He was, along with Dan Daly, one of two U.S. Marines to have been awarded the Medal of Honor twice)

The following is from his 1935 publication, ``War is a Racket``:

I have visited eighteen government hospitals for veterans. In them are a total of about 50,000 destroyed men-men who were the pick of the nation eighteen years ago. The very able chief surgeon at the government hospital at Milwaukee . . . told me that mortality among veterans is three times as great as among those who stayed home. Boys with a normal viewpoint were taken out of the fields and offices and factories and classrooms and put into the ranks. There they were remolded; they were made over; they were made to ``about face``; to regard murder as the order of the day. They were put shoulder to shoulder and, through mass psychology, they were entirely changed . . . Then suddenly, we discharged them and told them to make another ``about face``! This time they had to do their own readjusting, sans mass psychology, sans officers` aid and advice, sans nation-wide propaganda. We didn`t need them any more . . . Many, too many, of these fine young boys are eventually destroyed, mentally, because they could not make that final ``about face.``