No one seems to care about the enemy soldiers...

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-10-11 04:39pm

I was reading the wikipedia article about the Iraq war and was surprised to see that up to 124k Iraqi soldiers may have been killed.

Obviously, this is a war and in a war the soldiers are the ones who are supposed to kill eachother. But I tend to disregard ideas like that, and think of it simply as a hundred thousand people being dead.

Wasn't the vast majority of the old Iraq Army made up of conscripts who were forced to fight? Is it really ok to wipe them out with no concern, as we have done? If they were drafted to join the military, I don't see how they're any less innocent than the civilians we blow up by mistake. When we bombed/shot them from miles away, they had no chance to surrender. If they fought back when our soldiers attacked them, I can't blame them for trying to defend themselves.

So does anyone else see my point? We destroyed the enemy army, which as far as 'rules of war' go is a pretty legitimate thing to do, but what we did effectively was kill tens of thousands of innocent people. As far as I can see, nobody cares that they died with anywhere near the same level of concern as when any civilian bites it. Sort of unfair..?

CJvR · Post by **CJvR** » 2004-10-11 04:44pm

Seggybop wrote:that up to 124k Iraqi soldiers may have been killed.

That figure sounds very inflated, it is about four times than any figure I have seen before.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-10-11 04:49pm

The actual number doesn't matter, only that a massive amount of people died. That was an upper limit. You can check out the link if you want more detailed information.

Jason von Evil · Post by **Jason von Evil** » 2004-10-11 04:53pm

Okay, the war went on for how long? A few weeks, a month at most? No way in hell we could've killed that many so quickly. Whoever wrote it is probably one of those anti-war hippy palm fuckers who decided to label the insurgents as soldiers.

Robert Walper · Post by **Robert Walper** » 2004-10-11 05:03pm

Any human dying unnecessarily is a bad thing. The thing with soldiers, conscripts, etc, is that it isn't so unexpected in the overall picture. Death on a large scale is one of the reasons war is so terrible. It's not that we care less about them, it that we know dying while fighting is something that is unavoidable in their position.

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2004-10-11 05:10pm

-shrugs- call me a bastard. I care more when my guys die then when their's do.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2004-10-11 05:44pm

"It is good that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it," -- Robert E. Lee

salm · Post by **salm** » 2004-10-11 06:07pm

people also tend to completely forget about the 12.000 to 40.000 civilians the article mentions.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-10-11 06:19pm

jegs2 wrote:"It is good that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it," -- Robert E. Lee

Indeed. All the more reason for the US to be more forthright with their enemy and civilian casuality numbers. The Bush Administration has a standing policy NOT to talk about Iraqi casuality numbers; who exactly does this serve?

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-10-11 07:22pm

Seggybop wrote:The actual number doesn't matter, only that a massive amount of people died. That was an upper limit. You can check out the link if you want more detailed information.

It's not an upper limit, it's flat-out wrong.

salm · Post by **salm** » 2004-10-11 07:38pm

jegs2 wrote:"It is good that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it," -- Robert E. Lee

was lee being sarcastic when he said that?

(because of the circular logic he´s using.)

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2004-10-11 08:14pm

salm wrote:
jegs2 wrote:"It is well* that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it," -- Robert E. Lee
was lee being sarcastic when he said that?

(because of the circular logic he´s using.)

No, it's the idea that the horrors of war are the only thing that prevent us from resorting to it to easily. Given that it's a lament for how easily the south was lead into the Civil War it seems entirely appropriate.

And given how easy in this age of smart bombs on CNN it is to forget the human factor there are people that would do well to remember that quote.

* Fixed the actual quote.

Kon_El · Post by **Kon_El** » 2004-10-12 02:17am

People also seem to forget about the mass graves found with three hundred thousand plus in them.

Who was carrying out these killings for him? the local girl scouts?

Lots of the soldiers didn't want to fight and gave up with white flags in large groups without the U.S. or other aliance troops fireing a shot. Some didn't and died. It was their choice to fight.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-10-12 02:35am

I was "ambushed" by the fucks, 3 times before Bush declared the war over and forgot to tell the Iraqis. I don't give a damn about enemy combatents. These are the same bastards who kill a farmer in his own truck on the way to marker for not pulling off to the side fast enough! WHEN THEY WERE RUNNING AWAY FROM US! It was my job and duty to kill them, what did you fucking think was going to happen, we walk up and trade candy bars!?!

What the Fuck are you smoking?

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2004-10-12 03:19am

To those people who forget exactly what War is like
What the fuck do you people think we can do?
Have scorekeepers handy when we drop fourty thousand pounds of explosives on a target, they stop shooting at us and we send in the Ref's to go in and count?

Indeed. All the more reason for the US to be more forthright with their enemy and civilian casuality numbers. The Bush Administration has a standing policy NOT to talk about Iraqi casuality numbers; who exactly does this serve?

Gdamn it man do you think Churchill came on the radio each night during the Blitz and annocued how many people died during that nights bombing?

When the war was over did he talk about how many civilians down, name them off and repeat himself?

If you want to know how many people died ask CNN, it serves no purpose for the US goverment to go around annocing how many notches they have on the American gunbelt

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-10-13 04:19pm

I'm not trying to blame the allied soldiers for doing anything! They fought because they were supposed to, it's definitely not their fault. I was only trying to point out that way more people died because of this war then people generally consider. People complain at Bush for making however many Iraqi civilians and ~1000 of our soldiers get killed, but don't acknowledge that tens of thousands of other people who were as innocent also got killed because of him.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-10-13 04:29pm

Mr Bean wrote: Gdamn it man do you think Churchill came on the radio each night during the Blitz and annocued how many people died during that nights bombing?

When the war was over did he talk about how many civilians down, name them off and repeat himself?

If you want to know how many people died ask CNN, it serves no purpose for the US goverment to go around annocing how many notches they have on the American gunbelt

The American people are being asked to decide whether or not this war is worth it. Don't you think a critical factor in that is to know how many people are being killed in Iraq?

Besides, the US government has no problem reporting American casualties so what possible reason is there not to report Iraqi casualties? Are they afraid that we'll leap to the (right) conclusion that this war is not worth it?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-10-13 04:43pm

Mr Bean wrote:Gdamn it man do you think Churchill came on the radio each night during the Blitz and annocued how many people died during that nights bombing?

The Allies did not start that war, nor did they justify it by claiming that they were making life better for the German people, so this analogy does not fly.

Fixed your quote for you.
-Your Friendly Neighborhood Rampant AI

EmperorChrostas the Cruel · Post by **EmperorChrostas the Cruel** » 2004-10-13 04:51pm

Do you understand how profouncdly baffled we are, at your suggestion that we sympathise with enemy combatants during an active conflict?

Have you ever had a chronic pain?
Bad things NEVER get better by dwelling on the bad, and when perception is reality, saying things are bad makes them worse.
Given that this will be an endurence event, why would the coach ask his athletes to think about how tired they are?

If YOUR side talks defeatist, gloomy, negative why should you expect success?
Do ideas with names like, morale, motivation, and effort connect in your head?
Why would the USA play this way?
How is it in the interests of the USA to engender sympathy for the dead, and soon to be killed?
Why SHOULD the government spend MY tax dollars on shooting it's self in the foot?(helping the enemy)

How would this in any measurable way HELP?

and Kernel,
I literaly couldn't care less how many of their men died trying to kill our men.(exept as a measure of combat effectivness. The effect of the war on ME, my family, or fellow countryment is all important.

It is not MY government's concerne about the safety, health and well being of foriegners. They have their OWN government for advancing theire own interests.
The US government's actions = US citizen> Non USA citizen, USA intersests> non USA intersets.
This concept seems to elude many. ^

Next thing you know, you will be asking why prosecuting attorneys for the state don't make the defence's case for them.

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2004-10-13 05:07pm

That's Bean's quote Mike.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-10-13 05:16pm

EmperorChrostas the Cruel wrote:Do you understand how profouncdly baffled we are, at your suggestion that we sympathise with enemy combatants during an active conflict?

If "enemy combatants" were the only ones being killed during this conflict, it might be a different issue. They aren't and it isn't.

Have you ever had a chronic pain?
Bad things NEVER get better by dwelling on the bad, and when perception is reality, saying things are bad makes them worse.
Given that this will be an endurence event, why would the coach ask his athletes to think about how tired they are?

Because lying to yourselves about the state of your military and the support inside an occupying country is ultimately counterproductive.

If YOUR side talks defeatist, gloomy, negative why should you expect success?

If the situation IS gloomy then the people involved have a right to know. Your call for organized deception has no bearing in morality or logic beyond "it is good for the current administration". Worse, how can we admit a mistake if we don't see all the facts?

How would this in any measurable way HELP?

It would allow the people of the US to make an informed decision about whether or not the war in Iraq is worth fighting. This is one of those little inherent things about a Democracy which GWB would like nothing more than to sweep under the rug.

and Kernel,
I literaly couldn't care less how many of their men died trying to kill our men.(exept as a measure of combat effectivness. The effect of the war on ME, my family, or fellow countryment is all important.

Gee, that's funny, I forgot that only hostiles have been killed in Iraq when they send in air strikes.

What are you a fucking idiot? Do you not realize that we are dealing with a country where the citizens are under our protection, yet we accept regular civilian casualties? We have no more right to kill civilians in Iraq that are not fighting our forces then the LAPD does.

It is not MY government's concerne about the safety, health and well being of foriegners. They have their OWN government for advancing theire own interests.

Sure, the Iraq government is totally in control of the peacekeeping forces.

The US government's actions = US citizen> Non USA citizen, USA intersests> non USA intersets.
This concept seems to elude many. ^

Then why did we invade Iraq on the (revised) pretense of helping out the Iraqi people?

Next thing you know, you will be asking why prosecuting attorneys for the state don't make the defence's case for them.

No, the next thing I want to know is why you haven't been banned for being a trolling little shit that doesn't have the balls to back up your arguments.

frigidmagi · Post by **frigidmagi** » 2004-10-13 05:26pm

If "enemy combatants" were the only ones being killed during this conflict, it might be a different issue. They aren't and it isn't.

I'll point out that the OP was asking about Iraqi solders killed by American ones. At which point the answer is Hell No, we shouldn't give a blue damn.

Has to non-combatents, the answer is yes, we should give a damn. However, it's war people are going to die and alot of them are not going to deserve death. That's what makes it a horrorible thing. Yes, normal Iraqi citizens that want nothing more than to live our their livies in peace are getting blown up by car bombs, caught in cross fires, hit by sharpel, the list goes on and on.

Those are the people you should be worring about Seggy, not the forgien Arabs, not Saddams thugs, the normal Iraqis who didn't ask for this shit.

EmperorChrostas the Cruel · Post by **EmperorChrostas the Cruel** » 2004-10-13 05:28pm

You aked for why, I told you why.

If you don't like it tough shit.
Your last comment said it all. Rather than answer my point, you called me a name, (boo hoo) and either didn't get, or refused to aknowledged it.
Simply put, the USA is for USA.It isn't their function to do as you wish.
Just like wanting a DA to help a defendant.
This and other stunningly obvious conctrete realities are forthcoming.
When we next question why the guy working at the Unemployment Benifits Office doesn't fight fires or arrest criminals. Or why the dogcatcher doesn't work on the streetlights.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2004-10-13 05:32pm

frigidmagi wrote: Has to non-combatents, the answer is yes, we should give a damn. However, it's war people are going to die and alot of them are not going to deserve death. That's what makes it a horrorible thing. Yes, normal Iraqi citizens that want nothing more than to live our their livies in peace are getting blown up by car bombs, caught in cross fires, hit by sharpel, the list goes on and on.

There are certain unpreventable things that will happend to civilians during this conflict (terrorist bombings and such), but the civilian casualities I'm talking about don't involve these. I'm talking about when the US finds an insurgent stronghold inside a city and decides to send in fucking air strikes against it, which is obviously wrong. Don't you get that as of now, the United States is the law in Iraq? That means that their people are under our protection and to indiscriminately kill them is akin to the National Guard inside the US demolishing a building that contains Militia while there are civilians still inside.

By deciding that civilian casualities are acceptable we are in effect saying that an Iraqi life is worth less than an American one.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-10-13 05:34pm

I care about thousands of Iraqi soldiers dying because the only reason they're 'enemy combatants' in the first place is that our dear leader the mechanized chimp declared them to be such. There is nothing intrinisically wrong with them that makes them deserve to get wiped out. They're the same as anyone else. I feel bad that any soldier on any side gets killed.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

No one seems to care about the enemy soldiers...

No one seems to care about the enemy soldiers...

Re: No one seems to care about the enemy soldiers...