Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Al-Qaida Leaders Killed in Iraq

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • S2
    replied
    A.Q.I Strikes Tikrit Police Recruitment Center

    Just a reminder as we depart Iraq that not just new divisions might be arising but old struggles still remain an immutable part of the mosaic over fifty Iraqi police recruits were killed by a suicide bomber while queing up for a recruitment drive. Another 150 or so are estimated to be wounded by the blast-

    Suicide Bomber Kills Dozens In Tikrit-WAPO Jan. 18, 2011

    "Tuesday's attack, however, called into question the ability of the Iraqi security forces to deter the kind of mass casualty suicide bombings that are generally blamed on the fading but still active organization al-Qaeda in Iraq."

    Leave a comment:


  • Ararat
    replied
    Originally posted by Kermanshahi View Post
    This shows how little you know about what actually happened in Iraq, thinking only in terms of "the insurgents" who try to kill civilians and the governmetn which tries to protect civilians. The realities were infact so much different, it was a secterian civil war which divided both insurgents and security forces. Majority of civilians were infact killed by (Shi'a) policemen who misused their positions as police to kill Sunni civilians in revenge for the Shi'a killed by Sunni Wahabis and Ba'athists. I reccomend you watch this: The Death Squads
    In case you are still around and read this your own statement above refutes your Genocide claims. I hate it when people just throw this word around just to make it look worst or push their own agendas (in your case).

    Genocide is a State sponsored race extermination of its own citizens in planned stages........the actual killing is only one of the eight stages of Genocide. Sectarian murder, civil war, revenge killings do not qualify, not to mention different religious sects are not different races of people - they are all Iraqis - and Shias and Sunnis have been at each others throats since ancient history, who you kidding.

    You don't sound like an Iranian to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aryajet
    replied
    S-2 reply

    Originally posted by S-2 View Post
    Kermanshahi is SOOOO deposed, dead and disposed. Let us not write ill of the not-so-dearly departed.
    Point Taken Sir!
    Didn't notice the title and I personally will miss the entertainment.:D

    Leave a comment:


  • S2
    replied
    Aryajet Reply

    Kermanshahi is SOOOO deposed, dead and disposed. Let us not write ill of the not-so-dearly departed.

    Leave a comment:


  • JAD_333
    replied
    Originally posted by Aryajet View Post
    ... You don't have to appreciate that but you can cut down on hot air.
    Sir:

    I am sure you can find a more congenial way to describe his utterances.

    -jad

    Leave a comment:


  • Aryajet
    replied
    Originally posted by Kermanshahi View Post
    I was only speculating about possible scenarios of after the war. But supporting forces inside a country which are friendly towards you, against forces which are hostile, is different from occupying another country. If Iran invaded Iraq, it's citizens would have as much right to attack Iranian soldiers as they have now to attack American soldiers. Occupiers are occupiers, it doesn't matter from which country they come.
    No! They don't have the right to fight. Majority of the insurgents are not even from Iraq. If they were Iraqis they would not blow up schools, produce markets, hospitals, bus stations and kill innocent civilians mostly women and children.

    Real Iraqis hate their guts and they showed it by their overwhelming presence on ballet boxes for the second time.

    BTW: Allies and NATO went there and removed 2 of the Iran's most arch enemies, Saddam and Taliban. You don't have to appreciate that but you can cut down on hot air.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aryajet
    replied
    Islam claims and identifies its perceived enemies, but no enemy has been mentioned and emphasized on like "Hypocrisy". According to that religion a hypocrite is # 1 enemy of allah, far more than an infidel or an idolater.
    And yet these snot nosed jihadists don't mind being 1 if it serves them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Shek
    replied
    Originally posted by Kermanshahi View Post
    I read the first post of the thread, it wasn't properly debunked at all and most arguments given in that first post were themselfes proven wrong in later posts. But you can play with numbers if you want, give a few, take a few, the situation remains the same.
    Actually, it's take a lot away and changes things close to an order of magnitude.

    The Roberts et al study hasn't been replicated, it applied methodology in a very questionable manner, benchmarked poorly with pre-war mortality figures, doesn't benchmark well with other conflicts, doesn't benchmark well against other post-war conflict death counts, uses timing that biases figures upwards, can't account for some pre-war actions that biases figures upwards (i.e., the counterfactual of no war), had little to no transparency in peer review relative to other studies, and was written by someone with presupposed outcomes (not fire, but smoke in light of other fires that adds to the totality of the questionable scientific methodology used).

    I'd love to hear how you find it "not debunked" and credible, as it brings into question your own credibility and judgment given the evidence stacked against it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kermanshahi
    replied
    Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
    Yes but you've yet to make any correlation between the Iraqi police and death squads. To my knowledge, one illegal prison was shut down by US forces in 06, and a matter of dozens of members of the police force arrested over that period. Compare that to the wholesale slaughters carried out by the Iranian backed militias and we start to a certain disparity in your claims versus reality.

    Lets have a look at Iranian influence shall we


    Iranian influence
    Watch the video, you'll see and yes, Iranians have influence in the security forces.

    Originally posted by Parihaka View Post
    So on the one hand we have the US hunting and removing death squad members from the Iraqi security forces while they still had that authority, on the other we have Iran training and arming militias specifically to kill women and children in marketplaces.

    Which is the genocidal country again?
    The US never did take on death squad members in security forces, they only cracked down on elements which also attacked Americans (Sadr's supporters have also heavily infiltrated security forces, some were part-time police and part-time insurgents), but they allowed the secterian war to continue.

    Originally posted by Zinja View Post
    Irrelevant. I asked you a plain question "who is worse, the supplier of insurgents who are conducting indiscriminate killings of innocent civilians and the supplier of the government which is trying to fight the same insurgents killing its civilians?", please answer. Of cause it is logical to think in terms of insurgency because insurgents are part of vicious cycle of violence which included the death squads your are mentioning.
    This cannote be answered because the question is completely wrong. Iranian backed insurgent groups (or actually militia elements) had some small participation in the civil war, it was mainly the Sunni insurgents (which the US was fighting and Iran wasn't supporting) attacking Shi'a civilians and Shi'a security forces (which the US was supporting) killing Sunni civilians and both groups only existed because of the occupation.

    And oh yah, the video you recommended to me in the intire documentary where are the americans killing civilians?
    There's enough on that aswell, but not in this video, cause this is about what is done by Iraqi security forces.

    Ironically, your famed mahdi is the one responsible for the death squads and then you say its the americans, how wired is that? And guess who is financing Mahdi, that financer is the one responsible for Iraq death not the americasn.
    As I said, Iranian backed militia did participate somewhat, but the Mahdi Army was mostly active in the South and in Sadr City (which was purely Shi'a and besieged), the main actors were the militia in the security forces.

    And you still haven't answered my initial qustion; "Can you give your evience of 'butchered so many civilians there in their indiscriminate targetting'?", im still waiting friend. If you can not produce any evidence to your wild claims, i hope you can see how warped up you are mate.
    That wasn't your initial question and but I can look some up for you.

    Originally posted by Zinja View Post
    Leave the Wahabis and Baathists in all this, your documentary didn't mention any of them, not even once. Your obsession with blaming America is typical of your failed government policies ideology that you blame somebody else for your own shortcomings. You arm murdering rapists to kill and rape civilians and then you blame Americans as if the Americans put the barrel on their heads to commit those attrocities. I don't mean to be offensive but your rational is that of a psychopath.
    Because the video is about what is done by the Shi'a side, you only need to type "Iraq suicide bombing," in any search engine or online encyclopedia you'll find the work of the Wahabis and the Ba'athists.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kermanshahi
    replied
    Originally posted by zraver View Post
    Watching you guys argue is enough to give me a headache. The sectarian violence and genocide in Iraq, existed before the US invaded. Saddam had nearly wiped out the Shia Marsh Arabs and had brutalized the Kurd, non-Tikriti Sunni and other Shia groups. All the US invasion did is swap the pendulum to the other side. It yanked the rug out from under the Tikritis and placed it under the Shia. Iran and the US both wanted this and looked the other way when the fighting erupted as the Sunni's fought for power, and the Shia settled scores. Iran, because it let them use the Iraqi Shia militias they controlled to gain effective control long term to block Saudi backed Sunni groups. The US because, while not all Sunnis are Tikritis or members of Al Queda, all Tikritis and Al Queda members are Sunni.
    At times Saddam killed a lot but most of the time Iraq was relatively safe as long as you weren't doing anti-regime activities. As a whole life hasn't improved at all and the place has become a lot more dangerous, since 2003.
    And Ba'athists have a lot more support than you suggest Zraver, sure, all Kurds hate them and most Shi'as do but many Shi'a today are talking about Saddam not being that bad at all and many Sunnis are going as far as saying he was actually good.
    Saleh al-Mutlaq for instance, he is currently the biggest Sunni player in Iraqi politics and although he was banned from taking part in the 2010 elections because he was a member of Saddam Hussein's Ba'ath Party, his party won the most Sunni seats in March 2010, he sparked major controversy in 2005 by denying all Saddam's atrocities and murders ever happened. These kind of people are prevailing in the Sunni community.

    Once the Sunni Awakening arrived, the US turned on the Shia militias and stomped a mud puddle in their ass, it was the Shia (militias) who were decisively defeated.
    Nah, in 2008 there was a thinly veiled battle between two Shi'a militia, the Badr Brigades and the Mahdi Army which ended in an Iranian brokered cease-fire and reconciliation between the two. This was then put off as a "US-Iraqi Goverment victory against militia."

    Kermanshah, I don't think Baghdad segregated so much as returned to historic norms. Iraq is majority Shia and the only reason for so many Sunni's to be in the city was jobs when the Sunni's had power. With the removal of Saddam, I think a lot of the Sunni population went back to historic tribal areas.
    Well though some might have left because they lost their jobs, there are thousands of Sunnis who say they recieved death threats to leave their areas and plenty who where actually killed for not leaving.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dreadnought
    replied
    Originally posted by guicho80 View Post
    To get back on topic, CNN reports today that Al Qaeda in Iraq has confirmed the deaths of the two men in question. Good riddance to em.

    Al Qaeda confirms death of 2 top leaders - CNN.com
    *Ahh, the toilet of humanity has flushed once again. Enjoy hell idiots!:P
    Last edited by Dreadnought; 26 Apr 10,, 16:31.

    Leave a comment:


  • guicho80
    replied
    To get back on topic, CNN reports today that Al Qaeda in Iraq has confirmed the deaths of the two men in question. Good riddance to em.

    Al Qaeda confirms death of 2 top leaders - CNN.com

    Leave a comment:


  • Zinja
    replied
    Originally posted by Kermanshahi View Post
    Anyway, that young Sunnis were lured into the secterian war by Wahabis and Ba'athists is unfortunet. That young Shi'as responded they way they did is understandable. That it happened can be blamed soley on the American invasion and occupation.
    Leave the Wahabis and Baathists in all this, your documentary didn't mention any of them, not even once. Your obsession with blaming America is typical of your failed government policies ideology that you blame somebody else for your own shortcomings. You arm murdering rapists to kill and rape civilians and then you blame Americans as if the Americans put the barrel on their heads to commit those attrocities. I don't mean to be offensive but your rational is that of a psychopath.

    Leave a comment:


  • Zinja
    replied
    Originally posted by Kermanshahi View Post
    Who were the death squads? The Security Forces, Who trained and armed the Security Forces? The Americans.
    Your own documentary you refered me to puts Mahdi squarely at fault and not the americans. Then the logical question is who is arming the Mahdi then?

    Leave a comment:


  • Zinja
    replied
    Originally posted by Kermanshahi View Post
    This shows how little you know about what actually happened in Iraq, thinking only in terms of "the insurgents" who try to kill civilians and the governmetn which tries to protect civilians. The realities were infact so much different, it was a secterian civil war which divided both insurgents and security forces. Majority of civilians were infact killed by (Shi'a) policemen who misused their positions as police to kill Sunni civilians in revenge for the Shi'a killed by Sunni Wahabis and Ba'athists. I reccomend you watch this: The Death Squads
    Irrelevant. I asked you a plain question "who is worse, the supplier of insurgents who are conducting indiscriminate killings of innocent civilians and the supplier of the government which is trying to fight the same insurgents killing its civilians?", please answer. Of cause it is logical to think in terms of insurgency because insurgents are part of vicious cycle of violence which included the death squads your are mentioning.

    And oh yah, the video you recommended to me in the intire documentary where are the americans killing civilians? Ironically, your famed mahdi is the one responsible for the death squads and then you say its the americans, how wired is that? And guess who is financing Mahdi, that financer is the one responsible for Iraq death not the americasn. And you still haven't answered my initial qustion; "Can you give your evience of 'butchered so many civilians there in their indiscriminate targetting'?", im still waiting friend. If you can not produce any evidence to your wild claims, i hope you can see how warped up you are mate.
    Last edited by Zinja; 25 Apr 10,, 00:41.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X