BF2S Forums Abu Ghraib abuse photos 'show rape'

lowing wrote:

So we are back to my orginal observation, no evidence equals proof in order to form opinions about WMD's

Worked for Colin Powell.

and niether proof or evidence is needed to form opinions about Abu Ghraib

There is plenty of both.

Braddock wrote:

lowing wrote:

san4 wrote:

I am going to join the riots when the pictures are released.

So how violent was your rioting when people were getting there heads sawed off, or hung from a bridge and set on fire?

Yours and all the others inconsistent and selective outrage would be quite amusing if it were not so ridiculously tragic..

Where's your outrage lowing... or do you only get annoyed when Muslims rape and abuse people?

Your always so caught up in taking sides man. This is primarily an issue of right and wrong not "us against them", you were supposed to be fighting a "war on terror", I wouldn't have thought rape was a good weapon to use in this regard.

Braddock, I think you know by now, that I condemn anyone or anything that interferes with a persons right to life liberty and happiness. I hate criimnal behavior but especially violent criminals and want them punished severely. If you have not gathered that, I am consistent in that view point I am sorry.

I do not give a shit as to what happens to criminals, in fact, don't they get raped all the time in prison? Nor do I give a shit as to what happens to terrorists.


Still waiting for pics of rape.

I find it hard to believe that a soldier who is used to clean sanitary people would find a desire to rape a stinking, dirty, filthy, unsanitary, insurgent anyway. If you were a rapist, don't ya think you would find a victim more, umm desirable ( in a warped rapist mind that is)

lowing wrote:

Braddock wrote:

lowing wrote:

So how violent was your rioting when people were getting there heads sawed off, or hung from a bridge and set on fire?

Yours and all the others inconsistent and selective outrage would be quite amusing if it were not so ridiculously tragic..

Where's your outrage lowing... or do you only get annoyed when Muslims rape and abuse people?

Your always so caught up in taking sides man. This is primarily an issue of right and wrong not "us against them", you were supposed to be fighting a "war on terror", I wouldn't have thought rape was a good weapon to use in this regard.

Braddock, I think you know by now, that I condemn anyone or anything that interferes with a persons right to life liberty and happiness. I hate criimnal behavior but especially violent criminals and want them punished severely. If you have not gathered that, I am consistent in that view point I am sorry.

I do not give a shit as to what happens to criminals, in fact, don't they get raped all the time in prison? Nor do I give a shit as to what happens to terrorists.

Except when it comes down to criminals in uniform.

Bertster7 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Braddock wrote:

Where's your outrage lowing... or do you only get annoyed when Muslims rape and abuse people?

Your always so caught up in taking sides man. This is primarily an issue of right and wrong not "us against them", you were supposed to be fighting a "war on terror", I wouldn't have thought rape was a good weapon to use in this regard.

Braddock, I think you know by now, that I condemn anyone or anything that interferes with a persons right to life liberty and happiness. I hate criimnal behavior but especially violent criminals and want them punished severely. If you have not gathered that, I am consistent in that view point I am sorry.

I do not give a shit as to what happens to criminals, in fact, don't they get raped all the time in prison? Nor do I give a shit as to what happens to terrorists.

Except when it comes down to criminals in uniform.

still waiting for proof. how about you?

rdx-fx wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

No evidence of WMD's, after 7 years, one does come to the conclusion that they probably did not exist... this is not including the genocide committed against the Kurds. So don't try using that argument. Powell produced "evidence" that Saddam had new WMD's and was planning on using them.

So, no including the Al-Anfal Campaign against the Kurds?
Does that include the genocidal chemical warfare attacks conducted by "Chemical Ali", that earned him that nickname?

Does that include the chemical warfare SCUD missiles the coalition forces spent so much time hunting down during the 1st Gulf War?

How about the whole "getting slimed" experience that most any forward deployed Gulf War veteran could tell you about?

How about the Iraqi nuclear reactor the Israelis took out in 1981?
(Edit: Plutonium breeder reactor, by the name of Osirak)


You want something to be outraged about, take a look at This link.  Piles of children, dead from chemical warfare attacks.. but Aussie says Saddam gets a pass on that one.  Bullshit.

We'll just ignore the inconvenient evidence that good old Saddam did have and use WMDs on his own people.

Yes, because none of the above were reasons given by Bush Jnr to go to war. Most recent use of chemical warfare you could show us, was when... '89?

So obviously you guys were just waiting for Saddam to dismantle everything before moving in to dismantle it all yourselves and save the Kurds? Mission accomplished. High fives all round. You timed that perfectly.

rdx-fx wrote:

We'll just ignore the inconvenient evidence that good old Saddam did have and use WMDs on his own people.

He did have them, he used them - which the west did very little about, he dismantled and destroyed them.
There was no legitimate reason for OIF.

Dilbert_X wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

We'll just ignore the inconvenient evidence that good old Saddam did have and use WMDs on his own people.

He did have them, he used them - which the west did very little about, he dismantled and destroyed them.
There was no legitimate reason for OIF.

Saddam was also fully transparent with the UN weapons inspectors, never tried to play "hide & seek" with them, and was generally fully cooperative with UN efforts to verify his lack of WMDs as well...
/sarcasm

Short version:
Saddam didn't have much of a military left after the 1st Gulf War, and was playing up his WMD capabilities to keep any potentially aggressive neighbors wary of attacking him.
Unfortunately for him, his shell-game worked a little too well, and the US intelligence community & UN seemed to believe it too.

Saddam had previously demonstrated that he had chemical weapons, and was more than willing to use them against his own people (Kurds).
And.. we're supposed to take his word that he's "a good boy now, and won't never, ever be mean to the Kurds again"?

If you believe that, I've got some Chrysler stocks to sell you...

rdx-fx wrote:

And.. we're supposed to take his word that he's "a good boy now, and won't never, ever be mean to the Kurds again"?

It was never about the Kurds, not that the West really gave a shit about them.

Unfortunately for him, his shell-game worked a little too well, and the US intelligence community & UN seemed to believe it too.

Belief and proof are two different things, it was never about WMD - as Bush has alluded - that was just a ruse.

Still waiting to know whats really in the Abu Ghraib pics.

Modedit: Image removed, vulgar/obscene/graphic -Don-
Victim of a Christian interrogation in Iraq. Whats your point marine?

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-05-31 01:03:53)

erm...you still have no proof from this story.

Thats right, we don't because the proof is being withheld, thats the point.
There is ample proof of the conduct of other brave Christian members of the US military though.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-05-31 01:09:47)

Major General Antonio Taguba, the former army officer who conducted an inquiry into the Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq says there are pictures of rapes, according to the Telegraph.

If its not true there's no harm in releasing the pics.