Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Blackwater licence cancelled by Iraqi Govt

bluestreak said:
who gets to decide?
Click to expand...

The Iraqi's, apparently.

Donna Ferentes said:
I was wondering- do you think Giles' comments on here are the most objectionable things you've ever seen written on Urban75? Christ knows there's some stiff competition, but having the right to kill Iraqi civilians with impunity because they're savages - well, that's setting the bar pretty high.
Click to expand...

Not really, the Muslim's are the new untermensch, 1.2 million killed in four years and many more to come.
 
Donna Ferentes said:
I was wondering- do you think Giles' comments on here are the most objectionable things you've ever seen written on Urban75? Christ knows there's some stiff competition, but having the right to kill Iraqi civilians with impunity because they're savages - well, that's setting the bar pretty high.
Click to expand...

That is peanuts, really. You should pay a few visits to US boards. After a few minutes you are surprized they aren't all in Iraq to re-invent civilisation at the spot. It is also a special treat of US boards to offer you the direct comments of the US Heroes, in Iraq or having been there. Really special.

salaam.
 
TAE said:
Many by each other, not by some Übermenschen, it should be noted.
Click to expand...

Causality, everyone from Chomsky to er, me, knew what was going to happen.

Ask yourself - do the numbers killed really matter (by that, I mean are they of any meaningful consequence as things stand) ? What always baffles me about the faux indignation that always meet the latest round of horrific calculations, is the implication that there's some point, some number that can be reached whereby some element of regret might be expressed or justice sought when it's increasingly clear there is not.

They just don't matter.

And there's one thing you need to understand in the military now: there is a lot of ingrained racism now towards arabs and they indoctrinate that while you're going in. While you're going through bootcamp, through whatever training that you're doing. You are to refer to Arabs, whatever nationality, you're to refer to them as "haji".
Click to expand...

"My view and the view of the British chain of command is that the Americans' use of violence is not proportionate and is over-responsive to the threat they are facing. They don't see the Iraqi people the way we see them. They view them as untermenschen. They are not concerned about the Iraqi loss of life in the way the British are. Their attitude towards the Iraqis is tragic, it's awful."
Click to expand...
 
bluestreak said:
anyone?

anyone at all, even those not defending criminal murderers of some or another?
Click to expand...
Three per person. The T&C also state you're not allowed to use up another serviceman's quota, he himself must do the killing. The traditional way around this is to attempt to "wing" the target and then finish the job once totals have been taken.

Silly question really. If you call in an air strike on a crowd because you got a brick thrown at you it's exceissive force. If you happen to be trapped in a trench by AK wielding insurgents and kill a dozen with the same airpower then you're doing a good job.
 
Giles said:
No, just stating the obvious: in a violent country where there is no law, and life has little value, and where people kill each other in large numbers every day, then if you attack a person or group obviously defended by armed professionals, you can only expect them to respond with long bursts of automatic fire......

Don't be surprised.

Giles..
Click to expand...

You know what pisses me off? Ignorant people such as yourself, and people who should know better (such as journalists) talking about there being "no law", about "lawlessness".
Here's some news: There is law, and was law. If the Iraqi police were allowed to apply the criminal codes in place at the time of invasion (not much different to any other states' criminal code, before you start making noises about "Saddam's torturers" etc), and had the same establishment, then there wouldn't be a need for small-dicked mercenaries with large guns.

Oh and anyone who thinks an armed professional would respond with "long bursts of automatic fire" has watched too much cinema, so cut down on the DVDs.
 
Giles said:
That's about right
Click to expand...

When do you plan to emigrate to Iraq to take possession of the rightfully conquered territory? Shall I look for a great spot for you to settle and feel at home immediately?

salaam.
 
rich! said:
Except what seems to be happening is:
a few Iraqis are shooting at mercenaries who currently occupy their country.
The mercenaries are committing indiscriminate slaughter of anyone within range of their weapons.

Which somehow seems to be, oh I don't know, wrong or something?
Click to expand...

A big part of the problem (IMO) is the way many US-trained forces are indoctrinated to not give a fuck about so-called "collateral damage", to first and foremost preserve their own lives (bodies being shipped home in caskets being bad publicity).
These mercenaries, of course, have the added protection of a law promulgated by Bremer to specifically ensure they're not called to account for any of that "collateral damage".
They're licenced to kill, and by G-d are they taking full advantage. :(
 
FridgeMagnet said:
It's a trick question, you can't fool me. Anyone you shoot when you're under attack is an insurgent.
Click to expand...

Ah, the old South Park standby "oh my G-d, it's coming straight at us!!".
 
ViolentPanda said:
If the Iraqi police were allowed to apply the criminal codes in place at the time of invasion (not much different to any other states' criminal code, before you start making noises about "Saddam's torturers" etc), and had the same establishment, then there wouldn't be a need for small-dicked mercenaries with large guns.
Click to expand...

Interestingly enough, parts of Saddam's legal code were kept. The bits about outlawing strikes by public sector workers, for example.
 
The Joys of the Free Market part 478

Outsourcing the war makes perfect sense

Clearly the real problem here is that the market does not have all the information it needs in order to be effective. Privatisation has not gone far enough and this is the result of continuing state competition in this sector. The solution is obvious. State provision of military services must be replaced with more effective market based solutions. If state militaries were to be privatised this would lead to reduced costs and improved performance.

Market in operational risk futures and derivatives of objectival realisation will more than offset the impact of any inefficiencies, and will incentivise the kind of creativity in military markets that is desperately needed. Personnel and asset insurance can be factored into this, as can stakes in regeneration and recovery value.

This is a blueprint for a more prosperous, safer tomorrow for the army of consultants, executives and accountants who will get rich off of it. We cannot fight this, it is the will of the market.
 
bell512ready.jpg
 
Random said:
Interestingly enough, parts of Saddam's legal code were kept. The bits about outlawing strikes by public sector workers, for example.
Click to expand...

In other words the bits that accorded to neo-liberal values, then?
 
JoePolitix said:
Outsourcing the war makes perfect sense

Clearly the real problem here is that the market does not have all the information it needs in order to be effective. Privatisation has not gone far enough and this is the result of continuing state competition in this sector. The solution is obvious. State provision of military services must be replaced with more effective market based solutions. If state militaries were to be privatised this would lead to reduced costs and improved performance.

Market in operational risk futures and derivatives of objectival realisation will more than offset the impact of any inefficiencies, and will incentivise the kind of creativity in military markets that is desperately needed. Personnel and asset insurance can be factored into this, as can stakes in regeneration and recovery value.

This is a blueprint for a more prosperous, safer tomorrow for the army of consultants, executives and accountants who will get rich off of it. We cannot fight this, it is the will of the market.
Click to expand...

Bastard, you owe me a new keyboard!! :eek: :eek:
 
Oh look, they're back at work.

The report says:

The initial response of the Iraqi interior ministry was to terminate Blackwater's licence to operate in Iraq, and to order its employees to leave the country.

But now Blackwater is merely suspended pending the outcome of the investigation into the incident.

Posters are invited to guess in which time zone this decision was taken.
 
I wish they, the Blackwater shits had all been beaten to death my mobs of enraged Iraqis
The utter loathesomeness of this is hard to bear
I feel I want to run up to an American any America and just beat them senseless, they ought to be out on the streets at least trying to stop what their govt is up to, but they really dont seem to give a shit. ( I know that I wont do this, its simply a description of the feelings I have)

Hope Bin laden can get his act together soon
This time, take out the White House big guy
 
Donna Ferentes said:
Oh look, they're back at work.

The report says:

The initial response of the Iraqi interior ministry was to terminate Blackwater's licence to operate in Iraq, and to order its employees to leave the country.

But now Blackwater is merely suspended pending the outcome of the investigation into the incident.

Posters are invited to guess in which time zone this decision was taken.
Click to expand...

It is remarkable how determined the US is to undermine, belittle and generally denigrate the people who they put into power, and those who they expect to run Iraq - Blackwater cannot be so important (lets face it, there is no shortage of mercenaries in Iraq at the moment) to the overall security situation in Iraq that they would allow Maliki to lose what little credibility he has, but I guess that assumes that the US do not want to have a weak puppet they can push around at will.
 
Did they shoot first as they saw a threat ? Or did they shoot just because they could ?Nothing wrong with shooting first if you see a threat .
Shooting someone cos you had a hunch they might be a threat is tricky you
might get away with it .
Dont know what rules of engagement they operate on ,but, as they were not covered by anyones law seems to be if whoever they were paid to protect was still alive its ok .
 
dylanredefined said:
Did they shoot first as they saw a threat ? Or did they shoot just because they could ?Nothing wrong with shooting first if you see a threat .
Shooting someone cos you had a hunch they might be a threat is tricky you
might get away with it .
Dont know what rules of engagement they operate on ,but, as they were not covered by anyones law seems to be if whoever they were paid to protect was still alive its ok .
Click to expand...

I think when "a threat" includes "driving too close to a convoy" on a public road, its not ok.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dom Traynor
Bong Bong's time is up. Anti corruption hearings and protests in the Phillipines.
Replies
0
Views
202
Dom Traynor
Dom Traynor
T & P
Spain to introduce 100% tax levy on property bought by non-EU residents
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
isvicthere?
isvicthere?
teqniq
Captain Ibrahim Traoré of Burkina Faso. I have questions.
2
Replies
58
Views
2K
trabuquera
trabuquera
P
Tom Phillips, fugitive father on run with kids for four years, shot dead by NZ police
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Dom Traynor
Dom Traynor
editor
  • Poll Poll
Merging Hamas/Israel conflict and West Bank Front threads?
Replies
23
Views
705
freshapple
F
Back
Top Bottom