Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
soupBDC

Video Documentary Discussion: The Afghan Massacre

Recommended Posts

So here's the link to the video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8763367484184611493&q=Afghan+Massacre

 

And the reason I bring this up isn't because Im skeptical about the video. It's obvious it happened. Taliban troops who put their lives in our hands were tortured, sent to Guantanamo Bay, killed with their hands tied behind their backs, and all because we thought the Taliban was Al Quaida, even though most of the troops wern't even from Afghanistan. One was even American.

 

The question is, if and when this massacre is brought to the attention of Americans, will we ever care?

-They're middle eastern= something we don't understand.

-They're casualties of war, something we do understand, but accept as part of our war on terrorism.

-They're troops, meaning they get to die without any respect from America. Just like in this story we persecute people just for being associated with "the enemy".

 

It's the biggest fucking double standard in america today. I'm amazed I'm not sitting in an internment camp right now for being Chinese, which I bet to the mid west is the same shit as being Japanese.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess im about to make this thread a twofer, since i want to ask some questions about that story. A German woman was a guard for an concentration camp in Nazi Germany. She said she never fired a shot her entire time there. If this is true, shouldn't we be somewhat greatful for her filling that position instead of letting it go to some guncrazy antisemite? Maybe not greatful, but why, after she started her life over in the Bay, and after marrying into a jewish family, would we demand that she's deported? Who the fuck is she a threat to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IF it's true. Which it in all likelihood is not. 90,000 dead at that camp and she was a guard. I'll tell you right now that anyone who joined the Nazi party was an anti-semite, that was their party line. She might have changed and repented or whatever, she married a Jewish guy and had kids so probably. But she lied on her visa application and she didn't take what she had coming to her when her time came. You can't run forever.

 

Dozens of people get kicked out of this country for lying on their visas or having fake papers every day and they weren't former members of the Nazi party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point isn't that we deported her. I think it's great: my taxdollars go hunting down and dropkicking of senior citizens back to Europe. As for us deporting dozens of immigrants, She's an 84 year old widow. If this was a falsified work visa, I doubt we could make a very strong case why Germany deserves her.

 

To get even more distracted: the law says we deport aliens who were involved with Nazis. Whoopdee fucking doo. Did Ford get even a slap on the wrists for selling army trucks to Hitler? What's the point of sending old people to a modern Germany. Today, I see Americans delivering old people to Germany and Germany saying "uh gee thanks, what the occasion?" ANYWAY....

 

My point is that Americans are intollerant to german nazi soldiers and could give a fuck about what happens to them. In this case point, are we going to care about what happened to these Taliban? Will we accept that some Americans are guilty of warcrimes and need to be put on trial and convicted for their participation in the brutal slaughter of over 4,000 people? My concern is that double standard for. In America's eyes, 4,000 troops (albeit unarmed surendered and imprisioned troops) dead is irelevant when a year earlier 3,000 american civilians died on 9/11, regardless if the only thing they have in common with Bin Laden is they're Middle Eastern, and they carry guns.

 

who da bigots now mafuckas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Taliban are the ones that we were fighting in Afghanistan, for supporting Al Queda. They're intolerant bastards, also. I'd have to say that I don't find issue with being intolerant to members of the Nazi party or the Taliban.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you werent part or considered supportive of the nazi party you were fucked. being a gaurd is alittle extreme but being a member allowed yourself not to die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ginger Bread Man
if you werent part or considered supportive of the nazi party you were fucked. being a gaurd is alittle extreme but being a member allowed yourself not to die.

 

so what you are saying is you would condone the genocide by joining the nazi party to save your skin against all your ideals?

 

i would rather die standing and proud than live on my knees forever hating myself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^

We're condoning it right now. Torture in Iraq is happening MORE than when Saddam Hussein was in power, only now we passed laws that make it legal. American soldiers are killing 3,000 Iraqis every month. We have put their country into a civil war, given up trying to achieve peace in 30% of the country and left hoping we can at least do something with the other 70%.

 

 

And no fermentor. Al Qaeda's got shit to do with Taliban, except that they're middle easterners with Ak47's. Al Qaeda's not even a real organization like the Taliban. Al Qaeda was a group sixteen men s who came together like Oceans 11, devised a scheme, executed it, then went their separate ways. That's fuckin it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ginger Bread Man

all i know is this is why im now full blown mexican so no im not condoning shit son.

 

feel free to no longer include me when creating statements

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck that.

 

Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, and fuck you.

 

What I saw in this video is mass murder, a war crime, perpetrated by my government. Now, why would I want to support a government that does this sort of thing. Haul me away for gods sake. This is not about who was killed, the Taliban, Al Qaeda, or maybe an unlucky local; this is about the crimes commited under US command. War crimes.

 

This video is pretty conclusive, but there is much to be discovered. The mainstream media ignores it, the criminal courts will get to it maybe never. These people who surrendered, were locked into shipping containers, and executed one way or another in the desert of Afghanistan. To defend that is to defend murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
American soldiers are killing 3,000 Iraqis every month..

 

sorry to get off topic, but are you just taking the security issue and consolidating it into a general, black and white picture to come up with such an assertion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're telling me I'm generalizing this shit and you just called the mass chaos in Iraq a "security issue?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, you don't know what the fuck it means to paint a picture in black and white. I'm just listing facts on the war, if anything I'm broadening the list of problems. 'Black and white' is what Bush did when he said this is a war on terror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ginger Bread Man

^^^^^

listen to him, he speaks truth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whoa tiger, take the panties out from your ass crack for a second. you said the americans are killing 3000 iraqi's a month....i'm asking you if you're blaming the whole situation on the americans, which is pretty black and white whether you 'know what the fuck it means' or not. the 3000 figure must include a hefty portion of ethnic violence, NOT purely american on iraqi violence. but yo dunny, i'm willing to hear you out since you're spouting 'facts'. perhaps you can back this claim up. or you can give another empty knee jerk response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're annoying. You don't write based on what I type, you write on your own assumptions that come out of thin air, and when I call you on it you get embarassed and defend yourself with dumbass wedgie humor. When it comes to this discussion, you're a joke.

 

Where have I even begun to do anything more than correct misinformation? I'm discussing a situation and you want me to pick a side and defend it? I haven't said anything that would remotely sound like I'm picking one side over another so I don't have a clue where you're getting this shit. Stop typing. Please.

 

Anyway, back to the discussion:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
isnt the phrase 'war crime' a bit redundant? arent most wars crimes to begin with? how is just straight up shooting someone not a 'war crime?'

 

If you're against war of any kind then I hope it makes you wonder what we're doing attacking militant groups of any kind, or voting for a "war-time president" since you just said that means "crime-time president."

 

My point to this thread was to discuss also the idea of how when we go after someone guilty of warcrimes, we use any means necessary to capture them, even if we in the process become wartime criminals. This masacre of Taliban troops may seem like nothing since it happens a lot in Afghanistan, but this time it wasn't some Afgani freedom fighter group led by some sociopath Cleric.. it was a twelve man unit of Special Op Army Rangers, and CIA field agents. They justified the masacre by claiming it was done to find Bin Laden since he gave some financial backing to the Taliban, just like he gave financial backing to several US proxies in the middle east over the decades.

 

I'll reiterate the value of this information: Any time someone says this is to uproot an evil dictator, or to start social reform and uphold human rights, these are facts to remove the validity of their statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking a little about this today, how no one in the US would get called before the war crimes court or basically any other government of a first world country. If it were to happen, it wouldn't happen for many years--well after the worst could be done.

 

What are the steps that must be taken to begin a war crimes trial? Who makes the decision to try the person? The UN?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're annoying. You don't write based on what I type, you write on your own assumptions that come out of thin air, and when I call you on it you get embarassed and defend yourself with dumbass wedgie humor. When it comes to this discussion, you're a joke.

 

Where have I even begun to do anything more than correct misinformation? I'm discussing a situation and you want me to pick a side and defend it? I haven't said anything that would remotely sound like I'm picking one side over another so I don't have a clue where you're getting this shit. Stop typing. Please.

 

Anyway, back to the discussion:

 

In short - “your question confused me, so I am going to insult you and then change the subject.”

 

Torture in Iraq is happening MORE than when Saddam Hussein was in power, only now we passed laws that make it legal. American soldiers are killing 3,000 Iraqis every month

Read the report you are referencing and not just the title.

 

Al Qaeda was a group sixteen men s who came together like Oceans 11, devised a scheme, executed it, then went their separate ways. That's fuckin it.

Not quite, poppa-san.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha stereotype came back from the dead just to rip on me.

 

In short - “your question confused me, so I am going to insult you and then change the subject.”

Did you read what he wrote? He first jumped to an unbased assumption that i was trying to say we were bad, and they were good. Then after I said that's the complete opposite of the situation he jumps back to assuming that I was trying to say we were bad and they were good. The dude is talking to himself there. Why are you jocking me on this one?

 

Read the report you are referencing and not just the title.

Wasn't in the title bud, and I'm not wasting time writing out details of the reports, kinda like how newspapers are written for a ninth grade reading level because that's all the readers understand.

 

Not quite, poppa-san.

I know YOU know about this shit, but im not writing to YOU, I'm writing to a CH-O audience that's not exactly up on what the media's been misinforming viewers about. If you want to drop info on what I'm skimming over here then do it, that's the point of the discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the tubular mainstream media dissage aside, the way you originally worded “US soldiers are killing 3,000 Iraqis a month” and “there is more torture now than during Saddam” it seemed like you were saying US forces were personally doing it. I could be wrong since I only read at a 9th grade level, but I think pubic hairs was asking for you to clarify if you meant that US soldiers are themselves murdering thousands of Iraqis a month, or if you think they (the US mil) are indirectly responsible for originally knocking over the ba’athist system that prevented full scale sectarian violence. You replied with a “my pussy hurts” speech and didn't explain. So, assuming you mean the US is responsible directly, I’m just suggesting you actually read the UN report you are referencing instead of the title that you basically quoted and you will see that they are talking about sectarian killings and torture, not US war crimes.

 

I know YOU know about this shit, but im not writing to YOU, I'm writing to a CH-O audience that's not exactly up on what the media's been misinforming viewers about. If you want to drop info on what I'm skimming over here then do it, that's the point of the discussion.

 

I don’t see the point of elaborating how asinine it is to say al Qaeda is just “16 guys who got together, like oceans 11.” And any reply I could give would just be more neocon media lies anyhow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If you're against war of any kind then I hope it makes you wonder what we're doing attacking militant groups of any kind, or voting for a "war-time president" since you just said that means "crime-time president."

 

im definately not against war of any kind, which is why i reject the anti war label. im against aggressive war that is not in self defense. im also for a war to over throw a tyrannical government that is oppressing me. so to me, i can say the 'stan phase of the war on terror was justified. the iraq war, i have become totally opposed to it. there have been 3 totally justified wars in the USA's history. the revolution, the south fighting the invading federal armies, and ww2 after we were attacked and germany declared war on us. it is interesting to note that since we have stopped actually declaring wars, we have lost every one, and we are still basically fighting every war since korea in the early 50's.

 

but my point is that it is absolutely retarded to 'regulate' war with a world court or some such nonsense. war boils down to killing mutherfuckers. i just think its sort of odd thats all. war is war. its sort of like some higher up decides "OMG! You totally killed that guy the wrong way! it was inhumanE!#$@^%"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- It's a fact that most newspapers write at a ninth grade reading level so to include more readers. The articles are then geared towards intelectuals on a ninthgrade level. New York times is considered one of the more sophistocated newspapers, which writes articles geared towards 12th graders. That wasn't a stab at Stereobox, since his posts in previous Middle East discussions and I would assume he would know these references. Guess not.

 

- It's also a fact that the news over the last few decades has felt it less and less necessary to factually validate claims made by political officials, and return later to report on developments following the initial claim. That isn't to say that in general the media can't be trusted, it's just that statistically speaking the use of objective skepticism in reporting has decreased, and nearly gone in Fox's case.

 

- The value of "3,000 Iraqis are killed every month" isn't to say there's an ongoing masaccre of iraqis at the hands of Americans. It's a bloodbath between Americans, nationalists trying to oppose foreign invasion, religious warlords, etc, and the citizens of Iraq are either dieing from being among these wargames. It's to say that you can't oust violence with more violence, and this "war on terror" is a horrible joke, when noone's discussing why America was targeted to begin with. America was targeted by students of a philosophy which believed that evil was seeded in our "atheistic" "individualistic" consumer culture, and that we're out to get those who have opposing more indiideologies. Those students, like Bin Laden, who were taught these things, then witnessed what looked like a US military invasion into Afghanistan a couple decades ago, and felt it just to take extremist action against the people of the united states.

 

-The validity of Al Qaeda being a militant terrorist group is still in question. The videos of Bin Laden walking with soldiers being trained in a boot camp has been proven to be fake. The "soldiers" in the video were local residents hired for the day and asked to bring their own guns to the set. The evidence of Al Qaeda bases in the Mountain ridges has been completly inconclusive, since we never found any "secret bases in caves." All "Al Qaeda" troops in the mountains could not be prooven to actually be with any Al Qaeda group, since the US proxie sent into those mountains was paid every time they brought anyone to the CIA. It was a situation where the proxie just wanted to get paid so anyone they found they would capture and tell the CIA that they were Al Qaeda. The CIA didn't want to look stupid in front of Washington, so they went along with it in order to look like they had this search for Bin Laden under control. The only proof that we even have of an Al Qaeda is that Bin Laden claimed 9-11 and said Al Qaeda did it.

 

Stereotype, you're still way the fuck out there. Like i said in every fucking post I've made thus far, I HAVENT POINTED FINGERS and because I haven't yet doesn't mean I'm about to. I'm just trying to point out the players in this game.

 

As interested as I am in people admitting their biases about the Iraq war, I'm more interested in facutal information that may be floating out there on the interweb with you folks.

 

 

 

Who's got something to say that isn't some self interested ego boosting battle of wordplay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Register for a 12ozProphet forum account or sign in to comment

You need to be a forum member in order to comment. Forum accounts are separate from shop accounts.

Create an account

Register to become a 12ozProphet forum member.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×