I'm Confused

PrestonDaly · 09-10-2009 9:45am #1

I am confused about something.

1.5 millions civilains have been killed in Iraq since the UK/US invasion in 2003, they never get a mention.

A soldier gets whacked and we get a sob story, the mother yapping on about how he was "such a good boy". Wait a minute love, your son joined the army on his own accord, no one forced him to pick up a rifle and go overseas to "defend freedom".

The coffin will be paraded through the local town and we will get various hero stories. In all only 150 or so British soldiers have been "offed" in Iraq.

I'm sick of the propaganda.

humanji · 09-10-2009 10:17am

PrestonDaly wrote: »

I am confused about something.

1.5 millions civilains have been killed in Iraq since the UK/US invasion in 2003, they never get a mention.

A soldier gets whacked and we get a sob story, the mother yapping on about how he was "such a good boy". Wait a minute love, your son joined the army on his own accord, no one forced him to pick up a rifle and go overseas to "defend freedom".

The coffin will be paraded through the local town and we will get various hero stories. In all only 150 or so British soldiers have been "offed" in Iraq.

I'm sick of the propaganda.

Then don't read it?

09-10-2009 10:26am

PrestonDaly wrote: »

A soldier gets whacked and we get a sob story, the mother yapping on about how he was "such a good boy". Wait a minute love, your son joined the army on his own accord, no one forced him to pick up a rifle and go overseas to "defend freedom".

Every one of them who puts a bullet through the head of some Taliban fighter or some Iraqi terrorist is a hero, and is a freedom fighter.

The 1.5 million is sad too by the way...why did Hussein and Al Qaeda bring all this down bring all this horror down on their own people?

PrestonDaly · 09-10-2009 10:28am

Deleted User wrote: »

why did Hussein and Al Qaeda bring all this down bring all this horror down on their own people?

What connection did Hussein have to Al Qaeda???

09-10-2009 10:31am

PrestonDaly wrote: »

What connection did Hussein have to Al Qaeda???

I didn't say they were connected at all. I identified them as two seperate parties.

Euro_Kraut · 09-10-2009 10:32am

Deleted User wrote: »

Every one of them who puts a bullet through the head of some Taliban fighter or some Iraqi terrorist is a hero, and is a freedom fighter.

Its all a matter of perspective. Many in Britain in the 1920s would have said the same about the Black and Tans. Most people here would a very different view. I'm sure the same conflict exists in the minds of Iraqis and Afghans.

Blanket statements like yours, while succinct and seductive, ignore the complexity of warfare.

09-10-2009 10:33am

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

Blanket statements like yours, while succinct and seductive, ignore the complexity of warfare.

I appreciate that and you are right. I think I was reacting to the OPs glib reference to soldiers getting 'whacked' and 'offed' and mothers 'yapping'.

PrestonDaly · 09-10-2009 10:43am

Deleted User wrote: »

I didn't say they were connected at all. I identified them as two seperate parties.

So what did Hussein do to "deserve" the invasion? Remember the WMD's were made up by Western propaganda experts.

09-10-2009 10:44am

When theres a car accident in the al shaki area of baghdad and someone goes to hospital or is killed and this is an example of what is regularally mentioned as one of the main headlines on 2fm...then I'll be complaining.
If theres a car accident in ballsbridge and it's mentioned on 2fm then I won't be complaining.

If theres a war on somewhere and irish peace keepers get killed and this get mentioned on 2fm as a main news item,I'd not be surprised obviously.
If theres several people killed in that area every day and theres no irish involved,then I'd not expect it to be daily news over here.

Same applies to the UK media,their soldiers are involved so obviously they do report their deaths.It's a newsworthy item there unlike the traffic accident in the al shaki district.
They do regularally report civilian deaths aswell in both Iraq and afghanistan.The totals for both are often mentioned,just not every time.

PrestonDaly · 09-10-2009 10:50am

Deleted User wrote: »

When theres a car accident in the al shaki area of baghdad and someone goes to hospital or is killed and this is an example of what is regularally mentioned as one of the main headlines on 2fm...then I'll be complaining.
If theres a car accident in ballsbridge and it's mentioned on 2fm then I won't be complaining.

Huge flaws in your theory, it all depends on the issue involved.

Boskowski · 09-10-2009 11:16am

Deleted User wrote: »

Every one of them who puts a bullet through the head of some Taliban fighter or some Iraqi terrorist is a hero, and is a freedom fighter.

The 1.5 million is sad too by the way...why did Hussein and Al Qaeda bring all this down bring all this horror down on their own people?

You sure have your facts right man. Ffs, it's a only a few years since this happened. How could someones view be so distorted? What exactly did Saddam Hussein do again and who started bombing & invading based on some totally makey uppey bogus ****?

09-10-2009 11:18am

PrestonDaly wrote: »

Huge flaws in your theory, it all depends on the issue involved.

I usually don't engage with one line replies.
However just for yourself

I'll repeat, I stated as a fact the established norms in news reporting.
Norms not exceptions,if it makes you happier knowing that it's not deliberate,it's just normal.

ednwireland · 09-10-2009 11:18am

PrestonDaly wrote: »

I am confused about something.

1.5 millions civilains have been killed in Iraq since the UK/US invasion in 2003, they never get a mention.

A soldier gets whacked and we get a sob story, the mother yapping on about how he was "such a good boy". Wait a minute love, your son joined the army on his own accord, no one forced him to pick up a rifle and go overseas to "defend freedom".

The coffin will be paraded through the local town and we will get various hero stories. In all only 150 or so British soldiers have been "offed" in Iraq.

I'm sick of the propaganda.

agree totally again stopped wacthing uk news because of it
there is a propaganda war going in uk media to justify the wars in iraq and afghanistan, because without it they would pull out, noticed the huge increase in advertising for the TA and services on UK telly ? BBC and ITV particularly bad, Channel 4 news better

PrestonDaly · 09-10-2009 11:19am

realcam wrote: »

You sure have your facts right man. Ffs, it's a only a few years since this happened. How could someones view be so distorted? What exactly did Saddam Hussein do again and who started bombing & invading based on some totally makey uppey bogus ****?

I was shocked at the points this fella made, the new modern "informed" citizen, so informed that they forget the old propaganda as soon as the new "upgrade" comes along.

PomBear · 09-10-2009 11:23am

The British and Americans that die over there are soldiers that die in war. Sad albeit but they sign with a large risk of being killled in combat. Now how many of them 1.5 million can you imagine were armed and ready to kill americans or brits?

AARRRGH · 09-10-2009 11:31am

PomBear wrote: »

how many of them 1.5 million can you imagine were armed and ready to kill americans or brits?

Very few of them I would think, however even if they were all armed, I wouldn't hold that against them as their country has been invaded by a bunch of oil hungry thieves.

09-10-2009 11:44am

realcam wrote: »

What exactly did Saddam Hussein do again

Where do you want to start? Gassing thousands of Kurds. Or did they havbe 'yappy' mothers and deserve to get 'offed'?

realcam wrote: »

who started bombing & invading based on some totally makey uppey bogus ****?

Is this a quiz? Is the answer Saddam Hussein, Kuwait, and the bogus **** was that it belonged to Iraq?

PomBear · 09-10-2009 11:45am

AARRRGH wrote: »

Very few of them I would think, however even if they were all armed, I wouldn't hold that against them as their country has been invaded by a bunch of oil hungry thieves.

Wel if they were armed, under the conduct of war, they can protect themselves and their country. US and Britain forces are some of the biggest terrorists the world has ever seen

anonymous_joe · 09-10-2009 11:54am

Is it really that many? Shocking figure.

AARRRGH · 09-10-2009 11:57am

Deleted User wrote: »

Where do you want to start? Gassing thousands of Kurds. Or did they havbe 'yappy' mothers and deserve to get 'offed'?

That has nothing to do with the US/UK invasion.

I always find it funny that so many people have a problem with some of the evil things Saddam has done (mainly because "gassing" sounds dramatic) but he was an angel compared to the previous leaders of the US.

anonymous_joe · 09-10-2009 11:59am

AARRRGH wrote: »

That has nothing to do with the US/UK invasion.

I always find it funny that so many people have a problem with some of the evil things Saddam has done (mainly because "gassing" sounds dramatic) but he was an angel compared to the previous leaders of the US.

He was a horrendous dictator who butchered thousands of his citizens who lived under a reign of terror.

I don't think the UK or US are as bad as he was, though the war causes as much suffering.

AARRRGH · 09-10-2009 12:03pm

anonymous_joe wrote: »

He was a horrendous dictator who butchered thousands of his citizens who lived under a reign of terror.

I don't think the UK or US are as bad as he was, though the war causes as much suffering.

I agree Saddam Hussein killed a few thousand people, but... how many hundreds of thousands/millions of innocent people have the US/UK directly or indirectly (read: sneakily) killed over the last two decades?

It's like the Israeli/Palestine conflict. People always talk about the suicide bombs because they're so dramatic, but the Israelis have killed way more Palestinians.

09-10-2009 12:05pm

AARRRGH wrote: »

I always find it funny that so many people have a problem with some of the evil things Saddam has done (mainly because "gassing" sounds dramatic)

Not sure about the humour or drama. I don't think the Kurds got those subtleties. As long as the Brits and the Yanks patrol the borders, I'm happy that the world is a better place. Gimme the land of the free and the home of the brave over Sharia Law any day.

09-10-2009 12:06pm

AARRRGH wrote: »

People always talk about the suicide bombs because they're so dramatic, but the Israelis have killed way more Palestinians.

That might be because the Israelis are better, with stronger allies. What should they do, swap the tanks and artillery muscle for slingshots and petrol bombs to make it fair?

ednwireland · 09-10-2009 12:15pm

Deleted User wrote: »

That might be because the Israelis are better, with stronger allies. What should they do, swap the tanks and artillery muscle for slingshots and petrol bombs to make it fair?

stop killing people , might be a start

AARRRGH · 09-10-2009 12:17pm

Deleted User wrote: »

That might be because the Israelis are better, with stronger allies. What should they do, swap the tanks and artillery muscle for slingshots and petrol bombs to make it fair?

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying people tend to have poor perspective on things.

A silly example from Ireland is everyone is furious at the John O'Donoghue scandal, yet NAMA which is a waaay bigger problem (100,000's versus 10,000,000,000's) doesn't quite get the same emotional response.

Just like the larger outrage against suicide bombers, rather than the more deadly missiles and bombs.

If ya get me.

Anyway, I think we all agree violence and suffering is terrible, whoever is doing it.

09-10-2009 12:17pm

ednwireland wrote: »

stop killing people , might be a start

You referring to the Israelis or the Palestinians? It's so hard to tell, they both seem to like it, and they even elect people they think can do it better...

AARRRGH · 09-10-2009 12:22pm

Deleted User wrote: »

You referring to the Israelis or the Palestinians? It's so hard to tell, they both seem to like it, and they even elect people they think can do it better...

Come on, you're not being fair.

The Palestinians were and still are being kicked off their land.

It's very clear who is the aggressor and who is the (I'd prefer to use a better word but can't find one) "victim".

Coillte_Bhoy · 09-10-2009 12:26pm

Deleted User wrote: »

You referring to the Israelis or the Palestinians? It's so hard to tell, they both seem to like it, and they even elect people they think can do it better...

Don't be so bloody childish. You know well who he is referring to.

09-10-2009 12:26pm

AARRRGH wrote: »

The Palestinians were and still are being kicked off their land.

"Their" land or the land seized by Israel in wars that sought to crush that country? And kicked off like all the Jews that were expelled from Arab States into Israel a few decades back, which was a very significant factor in the problem now.

But it's all been argued elsewhere.

anonymous_joe · 09-10-2009 12:28pm

AARRRGH wrote: »

I agree Saddam Hussein killed a few thousand people, but... how many hundreds of thousands/millions of innocent people have the US/UK directly or indirectly (read: sneakily) killed over the last two decades?

It's like the Israeli/Palestine conflict. People always talk about the suicide bombs because they're so dramatic, but the Israelis have killed way more Palestinians.

Iraq when/if fixed will be a far better place than it was. Whether the price is worth paying is debatable, but Saddam was evil. The Yanks and Brits aren't. They might not be shining knights or anything, but they're not evil.

ednwireland wrote: »

stop killing people , might be a start

They're involved in a war. Just or otherwise. They're also better at it than their enemies.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Come on, you're not being fair.

The Palestinians were and still are being kicked off their land.

It's very clear who is the aggressor and who is the (I'd prefer to use a better word but can't find one) "victim".

Was Israel the aggressor in the 1940s? Or 1967? Or for the Yom Kippur war?

09-10-2009 12:28pm

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Don't be so bloody childish. You know well who he is referring to.

Coillte Bhoy?

Celtic fan then?

Let me guess, you support the Palestinian cause? Am I right?

I got this Derren Brown thing going on you see...

AARRRGH · 09-10-2009 12:29pm

Deleted User wrote: »

"Their" land or the land seized by Israel in wars that sought to crush that country? And kicked off like all the Jews that were expelled from Arab States into Israel a few decades back, which was a very significant factor in the problem now.

But it's all been argued elsewhere.

IMO, everything except the land they lost during the six day war, e.g. land being stolen today, land taken from them immediately after WW2, etc.

AARRRGH · 09-10-2009 12:32pm

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Iraq when/if fixed will be a far better place than it was. Whether the price is worth paying is debatable, but Saddam was evil. The Yanks and Brits aren't. They might not be shining knights or anything, but they're not evil.

They don't seem evil to you, but the average Iraqi might disagree with you.

I understand and appreciate they look like us and talk like us and share the same culture as us, but the US in particular are by far the most evil force in the world. If you don't believe me all you have to do is ask yourself who else (apart from Russia) is invading and bombing other countries, in the process killing thousands/millions of innocent people.

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Was Israel the aggressor in the 1940s? Or 1967? Or for the Yom Kippur war?

I don't think the Palestinians are innocent, but I do think one side (Israel) is worse than the other.

wes · 09-10-2009 12:33pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Where do you want to start? Gassing thousands of Kurds. Or did they havbe 'yappy' mothers and deserve to get 'offed'?

The West happily supported him, when he was gassing the poor Kurds, and even helped him gas the Iranians, during his war of aggression against Iran.

Also, the stated reasons for war, were imaginary WMD's and non-existent links to Osama, and not what you mentioned above. For some bizare reason, you seem to have ignored the real reason for the war of aggression against Iraq.

Deleted User wrote: »

Is this a quiz? Is the answer Saddam Hussein, Kuwait, and the bogus **** was that it belonged to Iraq?

His reasons are no worse than imaginary WMD's and rants about "Gog and Magog".

Coillte_Bhoy · 09-10-2009 12:34pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Coillte Bhoy?

Celtic fan then?

Let me guess, you support the Palestinian cause? Am I right?

I got this Derren Brown thing going on you see...

Right on both counts. However i don't see why you necessarily make the connection. The majority of Celtic fans dont give a toss either way.

Whats the Darren brown remark??

Manic Moran · 09-10-2009 12:35pm

PrestonDaly wrote: »

I am confused about something.

1.5 millions civilains have been killed in Iraq since the UK/US invasion in 2003, they never get a mention.

A soldier gets whacked and we get a sob story, the mother yapping on about how he was "such a good boy". Wait a minute love, your son joined the army on his own accord, no one forced him to pick up a rifle and go overseas to "defend freedom".

The coffin will be paraded through the local town and we will get various hero stories. In all only 150 or so British soldiers have been "offed" in Iraq.

I'm sick of the propaganda.

Simple: It's local news. "Woman murdered in Limerick" is going to make the front page on the RTE website. It's not going to receive a blip on the San Francisco Chronicle.

NTM

wes · 09-10-2009 12:36pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Not sure about the humour or drama. I don't think the Kurds got those subtleties. As long as the Brits and the Yanks patrol the borders, I'm happy that the world is a better place. Gimme the land of the free and the home of the brave over Sharia Law any day.

Saddam, was a secular Arab nationalist and his country had secular laws, so I can't quite fathom what your talking about exactly. Sure, Iraq under Saddam, had many a problem, but trying to justify the US/UK's war of aggression using imaginary wrongs, probably isn't the best tactic, in light of the non-existent WMD's.

09-10-2009 12:37pm

wes wrote: »

For some bizare reason, you seem to have ignored the real reason for the war of aggression against Iraq.

Possibly, to get back to the OP, because this thread isn't really about analysing the causes of war in the Middle East, but contrasting the reports of the deaths of Iraqi civilians with media treatment of military casualties.

I am aware of the whole WMD/oil/regime change ideas, when I raised the issue of Kuwait I was responding to a 'who started it' question glibly, rather than proposing some analysis of the causes.

AARRRGH · 09-10-2009 12:37pm

Manic Moran wrote: »

Simple: It's local news. "Woman murdered in Limerick" is going to make the front page on the RTE website. It's not going to receive a blip on the San Francisco Chronicle.

NTM

I agree.

People forget the news media are businesses working in the entertainment industry. They are not fair or balanced and shouldn't be seen as fair or balanced.

wes · 09-10-2009 12:38pm

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Iraq when/if fixed will be a far better place than it was. Whether the price is worth paying is debatable, but Saddam was evil. The Yanks and Brits aren't. They might not be shining knights or anything, but they're not evil.

Good and Evil, tends to be a matter of opinion really. I am sure the relatives of the people the US has murdered could care less about the democratic values of the murderer's.

wes · 09-10-2009 12:39pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Possibly, to get back to the OP, because this thread isn't really about analysing the causes of war in the Middle East, but contrasting the reports of the deaths of Iraqi civilians with media treatment of military casualties.

I am aware of the whole WMD/oil/regime change ideas, when I raised the issue of Kuwait I was responding to a 'who started it' question glibly, rather than proposing some analysis of the causes.

Well, the main problem with that line of arguement is that the US, didn't even use it, so it kind of falls flat. Saddam, was not a threat to anyone at the time, so the war served no real purpose imho. Personally, I think the US people should be just as angry and calling for those behind it to be jailed as the Iraqi's, as they have lost a lot of people and money on a unneccessary war.

anonymous_joe · 09-10-2009 12:40pm

AARRRGH wrote: »

They don't seem evil to you, but the average Iraqi might disagree with you.

I'd be more scared of hardline Islamic loopers than the Yanks.

I'd also know which group would be more likely to break out the death squads when they took over.

I understand and appreciate they look like us and talk like us and share the same culture as us, but the US in particular are by far the most evil force in the world. If you don't believe me all you have to do is ask yourself who else (apart from Russia) is invading and bombing other countries, in the process killing thousands/millions of innocent people.

Like that time they attacked the poor innocent Serbs.

Or when they ousted the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. What had they done to anybody?

America as I said, is far from perfect, but they're not evil. Most of the time they have good intentions when tehy attack/invade places, even if things work out badly.

QUOTE]
I don't think the Palestinians are innocent, but I do think one side (Israel) is worse than the other.[/QUOTE]
You're probably right, but I a;ways temper that by wondering what would happen if the positions were reversed. I don't think either side has much to be proud of.

wes wrote: »

Saddam, was a secular Arab nationalist and his country had secular laws, so I can't quite fathom what your talking about exactly. Sure, Iraq under Saddam, had many a problem, but trying to justify the US/UK's war of aggression using imaginary wrongs, probably isn't the best tactic, in light of the non-existent WMD's.

Are you takin the píss!?

He committed genocide! He murdered people for shíts and giggles! He brutalised his people when they attempted to oust him following the Gulf War! The guy was scum and deserved his fate.

09-10-2009 12:40pm

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

However i don't see why you necessarily make the connection.

Between Celtic fans and people who support the Palestinian cause? It was no great stretch of my imagination. I thought it was kinda obligatory, much the same way as someone from a crime ridden corpo estate is usually a Shinner...

09-10-2009 12:44pm

wes wrote: »

Well, the main problem with that line of arguement is that the US, didn't even use it, so it kind of fall flat.

It is a matter of fact that Iraq invaded Kuwait. I'm not sure why you are still banging on about whether it was a cause of the war or not, or whether the US used it or not. It happened. Someone asked what did Hussein invade and I pointed out Kuwait. You can't delete it from the history books just because the present conflict was based on the WMD claim. Hussein gassed Kurds. I'm not sure if the Yanks used that or not, but he did.

Coillte_Bhoy · 09-10-2009 12:45pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Between Celtic fans and people who support the Palestinian cause? It was no great stretch of my imagination. I thought it was kinda obligatory, much the same way as someone from a crime ridden corpo estate is usually a Shinner...

What a load of bull. As i said most Celtic fans have no political allegiances of any description but you obviously think you are being oh so clever.

walshb · 09-10-2009 12:47pm

PrestonDaly wrote: »

I am confused about something.

1.5 millions civilains have been killed in Iraq since the UK/US invasion in 2003, they never get a mention.

A soldier gets whacked and we get a sob story, the mother yapping on about how he was "such a good boy". Wait a minute love, your son joined the army on his own accord, no one forced him to pick up a rifle and go overseas to "defend freedom".

The coffin will be paraded through the local town and we will get various hero stories. In all only 150 or so British soldiers have been "offed" in Iraq.

I'm sick of the propaganda.

Some were "forced" over there and these I do have sympathy for. Young strong men travelling thousands of miles to die like dogs on the street.
It's scandalous, and for what exactly? I just cannot understand it.

As for the Iraq victims or others, we all know they too are dying, so if you are
bothered that much about them, then keep up the publicity.

Boskowski · 09-10-2009 12:48pm

I don't believe whats actually happening here.

There are really people out there who still believe this ' We did the right thing in Iraq' crap? People who believe that 'Iraq will be a better place eventually' stuff and that this justifies turning the place into something horrible where hundreds of thousands of people got killed?

Where have you been the last few years? In an isolation tank?

wes · 09-10-2009 12:50pm

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Are you takin the píss!?

He committed genocide! He murdered people for shíts and giggles! He brutalised his people when they attempted to oust him following the Gulf War! The guy was scum and deserved his fate.

No, I am not taking the piss. You clearly decided to ignore what I was saying and instead bang on about a whole lot of other nonsense instead. It really is rather simple, Saddam was a secular dictator, so the comments about Sharia law, made no sense and I was just pointing that out.

I also, mentioned that Iraq under Saddam, had plenty of problems, and it would make more sense to focus on those as opposed to stuff, he did not do, you know like the imaginary WMD's that the "good" US were banging on about.

The West, were best friends with Saddam, when he was commiting genocide, but its not like that matters, as it easier to ignore such things. Really, odd that so many years later that the "Good" USA suddenly cares, albeit years after the people are long dead...

Also, the US stood by and let all those poor people who tried to oust Saddam, be killed by him and normally it wouldn't be there fault, except for the fact that when they tried to oust Saddam, it was after the US encouraged them to do so. Instead of doing something then and there the US left them to be killed as per usual.

Now, we all know that the US did not invade Iraq, due to any of the above. They weren't too bothered by them at the time, or anything. So the "Good" US, is at best a self centred nation like every other one out there.

wes · 09-10-2009 12:53pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It is a matter of fact that Iraq invaded Kuwait. I'm not sure why you are still banging on about whether it was a cause of the war or not, or whether the US used it or not. It happened. Someone asked what did Hussein invade and I pointed out Kuwait. You can't delete it from the history books just because the present conflict was based on the WMD claim. Hussein gassed Kurds. I'm not sure if the Yanks used that or not, but he did.

Yeah, he did those things and no one is denying them. The simple fact remains that when Iraq was invaded, those things had no bearing on him being invaded and that he was no threat to anyone at the time. In the context of the most recent war, the genocide against the Kurds (Saddam was supported by the West at the time) and the invasion of Kuwait have no relevance to the most recent invasion. Iraq, was already being punished under crippling sanctions (half a million children died due to them), for Kuwait and were not a threat to anyone.

09-10-2009 12:55pm

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

What a load of bull. As i said most Celtic fans have no political allegiances of any description but you obviously think you are being oh so clever.

Well then I do have the Derren Brown gift. You clearly have made up your own mind on the Palestinian matter, independantly of what other Celtic fans think, and fair play to you.

You should read Celtic sites though, man they just love them Palestinians!

I'm Confused

Comments