ProperCharlie

i don't agree. IMO people within the bush administration had decided to go after Saddam long before 9/11. 9/11 just helped to con the american public into thinking it was a good idea. even if 9/11 was used as a justification, it was a completely irrational one. Saddam and Bin Laden were not associates. Bin Laden viewed Saddam as being only one stop better than an infidel, as he ran a secular state in Iraq. He had a christian in his govt, ffs. if you wanted to respond to 9/11 militarily, it would have been better to invade saudi arabia.

jasey

MarkO - you're nearly right . It takes leadership to change things and what we need are leaders that are interested in solving issues rather than some self-gratification glory hunt that all sides seem to be exhibiting at the moment.


Leadership isn't about making friends (or getting re-elected) it's about making things happen !

jasey

Oh - and I'm gonna learn from Saxo Boy's near-mistake and do some work now

gsm1

It was posted by Mitchy on another forum for peoples' enjoyment. Now he claims to be shocked by murder?

It's pathetic to see all these people defend what was done by coalition forces and then condemn these murderers of Berg. Yes, torture people for days, gang rape them, set dogs on them, stick bags over their head and kick their faces in till their noses are hanging off and their teeth lying on the floor, smash their necks and let them die in a pool of blood but please don't let the media tell us about this stuff - please sweep it under the carpet. We don't want to know about it. But these bloody Arabs - they're animals

gsm1

Correct, they had been looking for an excuse to inavde Iraq for years. The puppet Iraqi government to be installed had been formed many years before. This invasion was exactly what Bin Laden and his handful of cronies wanted.

Brendan Hughes

October 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, UN approved (IIRC), has been wiped off the history books already then? Short memories here. THAT was the military response to 9/11.

9/11 death toll - 2,792 (perhaps minus 40 listed as "missing") very innocent civilians.
Afghanistan invasion death toll - seems to be about 3000-3500 similarly very innocent civilians (statistics not so easy).

So, if you just want revenge, heartless mathematicians can call it quits, no?

Bin Laden still hasn't been found, and with his god-like status and his money is still a massive threat to innocents in the west - Madrid, FFS.
Saddam never threatened the west, he was all mouth and no trousers, except perhaps through oil prices. Anyone else notice that, now that he's gone, the world price of oil has RISEN?

Only one other point to make on this thread - for those of you who clicked on the link, after hearing the news, reading the warning beforehand, knowing that it was going to be a graphic snuff movie about an innocent guy being decapitated, and were then utterly disgusted afterwards.

WHY DID YOU DO IT?

Only MarkO has made the comment that it could be fake, suggesting some sort of investigative viewpoint. But the rest of you - sorry, to want to watch something like that, knowing what you're going to see, and volunteering to see it, makes you not far away from the people who did it, IMHO.

BTW, note to moderators (and I am guilty as I didn't complain) - taking the pictures of Martin Hadland's wrecked Cossie off due to respect for his family, and leaving the snuff video link on, was a tad inconsistent (though I'll accept that Nick Berg's family and friends are less likely to read scoobynet).

Faire D'Income

Brendan. Your post made a lot of sense until you started talking complete bollocks by comparing those who clicked on the link to those who actually carried out this atrocity. I was oblivious to the whole issue until I read this thread and I hadn't a clue how descriptive the video was after clicking the link to it. Out of curiosity, morbid or otherwise, I watched it and although disgusted and horrified by what I saw I'm bloody glad I did because as much as I feel for Nick Berg and his poor family and the trauma they must be going through - it made me realise how lucky I am to live in an innocent part of the world where this kind of thing doesn't happen.

Presumably, readers of various newspapers who dare to even look at the pictures of Mr.Berg are guilty in your eyes and should be condemned and as for people daring to comment on videos and pictures of misdemeanours by American troops - well, they should be strung up and shot.

Mitchy260

Im sorry you lot should hold your heads in shame.

Iraq has benefited from this war, the majority of people are happy to be ridden of saddam and his evil ways. If the coalition hadnt moved in, he would still be murdering hundreds per day. Have you forgotton that Saddam has been captured and his 2 evil sons are dead?? Isn't that a good thing?? Dont you think its strange how Saddam won his elections with 100% of the vote?? I bet that wont happen again.

Being a UK soldier people like you GSM make me sick to the teeth. I'll tell you what lets swap jobs for a week. You do my job, ill do yours! Had it been 60 years earlier, its people like you who would be shot dead for things like desertion.

You tell me why Iraq have not benefited from this, okay there are a few down points, the accidental deaths of civilians, destruction of infastructure...... How many innocent civilians were killed during the German bombing raids 60 years ago? Its a war, not a beach party.
When Iraq eventually settles, the Iraqi people will be free to do as and what they please, vote how they want etc.

Did you not see the delight last year when saddams statue was toppled or the delight when they caught saddam last december?? That's a BIG BIG BIG achievement for the coalition troops.

I was shocked with the video of the beheading. Refferring back to the other video with the apache and the 'innocent' injured iraqi.........

GSM.....you tell me what you would have done with that injured man that day?? I would have done exactly the same and stuck a bullet in him. The Americans opened up for a reason, i can guarantee you that he was armed. Okay, he's injured and you leave him lying there, a couple of minutes later, he gets the strength to position himself and bang, a bullet in YOUR head, or a CLOSE FRIENDS head. Dont you wish you had killed him now? what about suicide bombers, these men are fanatical lunatics believing a better life is set aside for them after death. How do you know he wasn't one of these? Soldiers are trained shoot to kill not incapacitate and he was a major major risk lying there injured. Thank god people like you dont run the Army, we would have lost the world wars. Oh there's an injured german, lets go and see if he's okay!! Don't be so daft!! The world does not work like this!!

Taff107

Yet another example of our loyal, patriotic public.
66 Blue, unless you were unaware, the British and US soldiers didn't really have a choice in being there. We go where the government tell us to go regardless of our personal views, as to whether there are WMD or any other reason.
You think that these executions only happened after these 'torturing' stories came to light? I saw quite a few coalition bodies that had been executed by these scum over a year ago. I wonder, would you be so sympathetic if your relation had been murdered by these 'people'?
Personally, I questioned why we were there until I saw the state of the nation and heard from Iraqiis how bad life was under Saddams regime. I now no longer have any feelings towards these backward people and think that we should all pull out and let them murder each other.

Taff107

Amen

gsm1

What the hell are you on about Mitchy260?

You took great pleasure in watching someone die, so don't try your Tony Blair-esque ****e to deflect the argument. You referred to Iraqis as 'dirty smelly Iraqis' and they deserved whatever they got, I seem to recall. I know your agenda, mate.

Brendan Hughes

Fd'I - read my post again. I have tried to carefully distinguish between those who have something thrust upon them and those who know full well what they are doing. Your sweeping examples and extrapolations completely ignore that distinction.

Faire D'Income

Fair point and one which I acknowledge but I still think you're being unfair to people who despite prior knowledge of the content, still viewed the video and in my opinion they're not comparable in any way to the scum who carried out this atrocity.

Geezer

Perhaps if more people watched the video they'd realise what a digusting business war is instead of ranting on like idiots about how we should kill them all. En eye for an eye mentality does not end a conflict, it just makes for more suffering.

Geezer

jasey

Brendan - You typed

"But the rest of you - sorry, to want to watch something like that, knowing what you're going to see, and volunteering to see it, makes you not far away from the people who did it, IMHO"

Well , as you think I'm so near to them - maybe we should meet up for a chat, a pint, a bite to eat - then I can cut your head off with a blunt knife.

Steve PPP

It's a shame Piers Morgan didn't make some checks on the UK photos before trying to sell more papers by publishing something that would get people killed.
The attack in Saudi Arabia one and a half weeks ago was brought forward as a result of the Mirror photos. They now almost certainly are fake/staged.
He certainly has blood on his hands.
7 innocent people died in that attack.

I also think that perpetuating that video by watching it dishonours Nick Berg's family.
Show some respect.

Brendan Hughes

OK. BTW, did anyone tell you your headlights aren't on?

Geezer

That's like saying we should not watch footage of WWII or Vietnam, etc. It doesn't dishonour them in the slightest! It's tragic, but all footage of a violent nature shows someones son/father/daighter/brother being abused. If people didn't see these things, they would have no idea of the barbarism and futility of conflict and make stupid statements on how to fix it. Oh hang on a minute....................

Geezer

jasey

I'd better be careful - that's twice I mentioned your demise in as many days .

ps Are the boys still watching you .

Steve PPP

But surely if you know the horrific content of the video, what point is served by watching it, except to watch him suffering?

Surely that shows a lack of respect to his family, who I am sure would rather people didn't watch it, even though we all know it exists and what it shows, so can comment on it, if we feel like it?

PS I'm not saying how anything can be fixed, just think it is sad that links to this video were put on this board.

Brendan Hughes

Trying to explain this below, not sure if I'm going to get it right.

I would genuinely like to know why the average viewer of scoobynet (late 20s British male IT chappie, say) ACTIVELY CHOOSES to watch a real-life video of an American civilian having his head cut off. Why not be satisfied with the news reports, the discussion, the written details? Why consciously click on the link? (Which was preceded by a pretty clear warning.)

Because if it's simply "I want to see what it's REALLY like to see someone's head get cut off, instead of Hollywood SFX" - and I think for a number of people, consciously or sub-consciously, that's the real reason - then I find that abhorrent. If your interest in watching such a death overrides your disgust at the reports of it, then surely you are more interested than disgusted. You have chosen the curiousity and interest in the spectacle above the disgust that you feel towards it. Although society and your moral code says that it's disgusting, instead you chose to overrule that with curiosity. So to then come on here and bleat about how disgusting it was - shouldn't you honestly be saying about how interesting it was?

And if you want to discuss how interesting it was, then that makes you either a doctor, a conflict psychology expert, or more than a bit sick IMHO.

Petrol can be fuel for an engine that does useful work, or the cause of a massive explosion. Here's the petrol question. What's the difference between choosing to watch a genuine act that is morally repulsive, and actually taking part in it? I certainly agree there is a difference. But how much? If you know it's morally repulsive, why don't you just refuse to watch it?

Steve PPP

Well said Mr Hughes, although I don't totally agree with you comparing the viewers to the doers, they are both wrong, but the doers in this case are taking a life. So incaculably (sp?) worse than watching the video.
I totally agree with the rest of your words though, well said.

Steve W

Jye

For Brendan, I viewed the link btw.

If we as the voting public allow our government to sent troops into war then we should all understand the true horror and nature of war. How else can we justify the carnage, bloodshed and deaths that will surely follow, perhaps for years to come.

If this means some people viewing death in graphic detail then so be it. At least some of us can say, 'do you REALLY know what happens in war?'.

To put this into context I told a female collegue at work what I had seen in the video and she said, "oh I dont want to know about any of that sort of stuff, I know what it's like", she then quickly clicked on a link on the site she was looking at and started chuckling at a stupid joke on the site.

People do not know what someone being killed in this manner is like, in fact they dont want to know, they may quickly think about it and then just as quickly put it out of their thoughts for ever.

Geezer

Because to see something so abhorrent (and I admit I looked at it because it interested me, out of what compulsion, who knows? who cares?) brings home the horror of the act, hopefully to make people so revolted by it that they condemn it.

Making people confront things like this is proven to have an effect on their behaviour. There are several policemen on this board, and I bet they could all tell you that attending RTAs is a very sobering experience, and has an effect on how they treat other road users.

There are also soldiers on here who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan, Ulster etc. and I am also willing to bet that some of the things they have witnessed will have changed their outlook too.

The biggest opponents to armed conflict are invariable veterans. They have first hand experience of the death and suffering it brings. Those who are not exposed to it are always the ones who talk a good war.

Now whether you are forced to witness these things through your job, or whether you choose to view them out of curiosity, one thing remains true, they will shock you, make you realise just how ******* awful this whole thing is. If you watch and think "hey, that wasn't very nice but hey ho, unlucky Nick" then you have a problem. However, myself and I suspect 99% of the other people who have seen it find it utterly depraved, horrific and de-humanising, and realise that reprisals are not the answer. That has to be a good thing

Geezer

Jye

Exactly Geezer.

jasey

95% of the british public do not realise that the guys head was hacked off with a small knife - is my guess.

95% of the british public think that the worse thing to happen to an Iraqi prisoner is to have a hood put on his head and told he would die if he fell off the box - is my guess.

I'm no longer part of the 95% and My View on this (and every other war) has now changed forever.

Trust me when I say - this is not a bad thing (my view changing )

unclebuck

Quite. You could almost argue that unless you have seen it, you are not really qualified to comment.

I can't believe someone posted that it wasn't that bad, and that there are far worse things in horror films... How desensitised and flippent can a person get, being barely able to distinquish reality from fiction.

UB

jasey

I still can't believe a human being could do that to another human being - I probably couldn't do what he did to an already dead dog !!!


Although I could do it to Brendan (apparently)