Picture of the Day - "Progress" in Iraq / Update

[inahurry]

If the actions justify the definition then, most certainly, US airforce in WW2 acted like a criminal force, held terror bombings as a valid strategy, its commanders are to be held responsible for war crimes and were accomplices to war crimes committed by their closest ally. Same or even before the Americans that goes for British too. This kind of bombings reached a size unimagined until WW2. Cities like Dresden, Hamburg, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were practically wiped out but many other major cities suffered terrible damage. In Romania, Ploesti city was deliberately bombed, the downtown. There was no error, none of the strategic targets was there or in such a proximity an error could be explainable. Ioan Grigorescu, who is born in Ploesti, described this pretty clear in one of the episodes of his documentary series – it was aired this summer. Ploesti and Romania aside, which didn’t suffer too much from terror bombings, the strategy of British and American air command (obviously approved by the political factors of the 2 countries) is not justifiable. They had the means but might doesn’t make the right.

Almost any time that USA and UK had the opportunity they were involved in massacres. More than other nations, not less. And often they couldn’t even invoke revenge. I can understand the need for revenge without approving it, it is in the human nature, but Americans (and Brits and anyone else who claim doing the right thing and do the opposite) can take their double standard and sanctimonious preaches and shove them up their arse.

Post WW2, an era with stricter rules for how to carry a war confirmed the same kind of criminal behavior. If the USA, who are the most bellicose nation on earth, feel compelled to act like that at least they could shut up and don’t pretend they are crusaders of the good and the police force of mankind.

Iraq is a clear cut case also. The discussion should even stop immediately after : USA and allies attacked a sovereign state without provocation. This is war of aggression, the same as when Iraq attacked Kuwait and triggered the response of international community.

Coventry and Guernica, what an excellent argument ! The US and UK democracies were worse, because of their proclaimed just war and through the magnitude of the devastation they caused, than the nazi Germany. They weren’t even in a desperate situation like USSR was. US at least were not for a single moment threatened. The more powerful and (self-proclaimed) righteous the party that uses the means it publicly abhors the more disgusting.

[dragos]

QUOTE

If the actions justify the definition then, most certainly, US airforce in WW2 acted like a criminal force, held terror bombings as a valid strategy, its commanders are to be held responsible for war crimes and were accomplices to war crimes committed by their closest ally.

What you name "terror bombings" started in 1939 over Warszaw, and continued with the "Blitz" over London. This was the way of the second world war, the English responded with the bombing of Berlin, and the Americans supported them later to deliver real blows. What I don't understand is why you blame the Americans and the Brits, and not the ones who started it ?

QUOTE

There was no error, none of the strategic targets was there or in such a proximity an error could be explainable.

Due to inaccuracy of high and medium level bombing, the key of reducing target was mass bombing. Often a wide area around target was affected. Of course that the population's reaction was strong, but that doesn't mean the Americans wanted to raze the city to the ground !

QUOTE

Almost any time that USA and UK had the opportunity they were involved in massacres. More than other nations, not less.

Can you support this statement with examples? It is sure they did not have as many opportunities as the Germans !

QUOTE

Post WW2, an era with stricter rules for how to carry a war confirmed the same kind of criminal behavior. If the USA, who are the most bellicose nation on earth, feel compelled to act like that at least they could shut up and don’t pretend they are crusaders of the good and the police force of mankind.

I presume you refer to the interventions in Korea and Vietnam. If you think this was a criminal behaviour, then think what communist regime could have done or what have done in these countries. "Red Khmers" in Cambodia tells you something? Or you liked to yell: "Ceausescu - pace !".

QUOTE

Iraq is a clear cut case also. The discussion should even stop immediately after : USA and allies attacked a sovereign state without provocation. This is war of aggression, the same as when Iraq attacked Kuwait and triggered the response of international community.

Oh yes, poor Iraq of Saddam Hussein was a peaceful, sovereign state, who cared about its people and the countries around. We should mourn their great leader which had fell in the claws of imperialists.

QUOTE

The US and UK democracies were worse, because of their proclaimed just war and through the magnitude of the devastation they caused, than the nazi Germany.

This gets pathological...

[Chandernagore]

There is a saying which applies globally quite well to nazi Germany :

"Who sows the wind reaps the whirlwind".

They looked after... and they got it.

[Alexandru H.]

While I can agree that US and UK's conduct in WW2 wasn't always honourable, I don't think I have to think about my winner options. No, I didn't want any Nazi or Communist regime. Democracy isn't always the best regime, but if I have to choose between 1950 US and 1950 North Korea, I'll jump in the boat with McCarthy and start shooting communists ...kidding

QUOTE

The US and UK democracies were worse, because of their proclaimed just war and through the magnitude of the devastation they caused, than the nazi Germany.

Oh, yes, nothing is worse than Churchill, that killer of nations, that creator of evil....this is a sickness and you should get specialized help. Every nation involved in WW2 had its idea about a just war and if I have to choose, I prefer life and freedom over poverty and death. Stalin may seem like Santa Claus after 50 years but, trust me, he wasn't like that :blbl:

[Indrid]

interesting joke about Churchill:

his little nephew asked him: grandpa, is it true that you are the most important man in the world?
churchill answered: that`s true, now bugger off!!


this was real.

[inahurry]

Dragos, the whole purpose of my previous post was : US&UK had no justification for what they did in WW2. Or anywhere else if such kind of criminal actions were taken. Who started it is irrelevant. It is obvious you or “the thing” don’t care a bit as long as the victims are those you dislike and the victors those you like.

I will give just one example for each of the 2 countries : the secession war – Sherman terror raid through the south ( so I can’t be accused of anti-Americanism) and the notorious, for its later implications, treatment the British applied to the Boers. But there is a long history, longer for UK, naturally. Some massacres were response to massacres carried against them, in India for instance, again the causes are not important when you pretend you are civilized and especially when you accuse others for the things you d on a constant basis.

Understandable is not justifiable and yes, there were other possible options. It is also disgusting to smear those defeated long after you punished them at least twice - one when you chose barbaric means to fight and then when you chose simulated justice to kill and extort.

[Chandernagore]

One could argue that war has always something criminal by nature and you will find few nations exempt from bad behaviour in any war. In the case concerned, the nazis were the ones who choosed to fight in a barbaric manner. I say nazis, because wherever they were not heavily involved (like in north Africa for example) the war tended to be somewhat cleaner as opponents developped respect.

If you find that it is irrelevant who started it, you're heavily mistaken. It was very relevant to all involved at that time. Your insistance at pointing out some misbehaviour by the allies and daring to compare it with the systemic nazis misdeeds at a much higher scale is leading nowhere. The legacy of the regime was such that, at some point, almost anything helping to defeat it was deemed acceptable.

[PanzerKing]

QUOTE

One could argue that war has always something criminal by nature and you will find few nations exempt from bad behaviour in any war. In the case concerned, the nazis were the ones who choosed to fight in a barbaric manner. I say nazis, because wherever they were not heavily involved (like in north Africa for example) the war tended to be somewhat cleaner as opponents developped respect.   If you find that it is irrelevant who started it, you're heavily mistaken. It was very relevant to all involved at that time. Your insistance at pointing out some misbehaviour by the allies and daring to compare it with the systemic nazis misdeeds at a much higher scale is leading nowhere. The legacy of the regime was such that, at some point, almost anything helping to defeat it was deemed acceptable.

Nicely put!

[Chandernagore]

The ultimate solution to Middle East problems :

http://www.theonion.com/onion3723/west_bank.html

[Indrid]

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:
that was great! i believe it is a jewish idea :blbl:

[Chandernagore]

Maybe Indrid maybe

Meanwhile the WMD have been finally found !!! =>

http://www.theonion.com/onion3904/north_dakota.html

And here is what should be done :
http://www.theonion.com/onion3641/serbia_d...oys_forces.html

[Indrid]

good one!

[inahurry]

There’s no surprise the same attitude US&UK adopt is mimicked by few (the same) on the forum. Same people justifying recent carnage while raising hell for old ones (always only those they have strong interest to advertise). Both stances easy to explain through their partisan loyalties. There is no justification for deliberate massacre of civilian population from a moral point of view or all massacres are acceptable then.

The Dresden destruction, for instance, was a sadistic experiment that didn’t change the outcome of the war or shortened it in any way. No justification whatsoever.

Obviously, no weapon of mass destruction was found. Not even in the Iraqian vegetables market. I understand now though why the American soldiers are pulling down the date trees, you can never tell what you can find beneath the roots in Aladdin’s lands. It would be pointless to mention, no doubt, that just a few hundreds kilometers to the west of Iraq, the GI’s could dig a little and find some healthy nukes. No, not in Syria. Nope, not Lebanon either. Jordan? Let me see… wrong answer, sorry. Try again!

[inahurry]

What we were spared. There are a few minor advantages of indirect occupation. Even if some idiots advocated the destruction of Casa Poporului (a well known robber-baron ex-architect turned into oilman for instance, or a perpetual shaved skull (by mother’s nature will) owner, known for being an expert in everything, admittedly only for a brief moment at the beginning of 1990 ), we were spared that humiliation.

“Occupation troops to destroy Saddam's palatial homes - Al Bawaba, Jan 28

US authorities on Wednesday prepared to destroy Saddam Hussein's five palatial homes in the village where he was born, having stripped them of expensive marbles, tiles and valuable furniture.
The 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, stationed in Tikrit, received permission from occupation authorities Tuesday to go ahead with the demolition in Uja village, said the commander, Lt. Col. Steve Russell.
For the past couple of months, contractors hired by the American forces have been removing valuable materials from the homes including hand-cut Italian bricks and polished marble tiles, Russell told reporters taken on a tour of the captive leader's home.
Saddam's home and adjoining gardens were surrounded by dates and orange groves. The main entrance to the building was covered in blue and white tiles. Inside, the high ceilings were covered with Arabesque geometrical designs and artwork.
A covered walkway connected the main house to an indoor swimming pool with glass walls and red-and-white tiled floors. The walls are now shattered and the pool partially drained. Salvaged tiles were laid in neat piles.
Parts of the house were destroyed by US missiles during the war on Iraq last year.
In addition to the massive four-story residence toured by reporters, the other homes expected to be demolished were built by Saddam for the exclusive use of his two brothers and sons Udai and Qusai.
According to The AP, Russell added that once the homes are leveled the property would be returned to the owner, Sheikh Mahmoud Nassiri, from whom Saddam had "seized the land". “

[Indrid]

if anybody would have tried to demolish CASA poporului, i believe we would still be gathering the rubble, considering its gigantic size. the costs would have been enormous. it took the americans two years to clean up after 9/11 , imagine us doing the same job here