Well.. this is the stuff we dont see on tv The truth in the wat WARNING *GRAPHIC* http://fallujapictures.blogspot.com/
It's war. People die horible gory deaths. The only difference is this time nothing's censored. The photos don't make this war any different from others.
It doesnt bother me so much if grown men want to run around a kill each other, but it seems that the ones that really end up taking the brunt of it are the kids. No kid in diapers needs to be an amputee. And as for the rational the war is hell- I dont buy it. The ratio of combatant causualties to civilian causualties is so low, that it makes you wonder if both sides didn't just agree ahead of time to limit killing each other and focus on the population. I know it's not what happened but compare US dead >2000 to the civilain dead est. 100,000. http://image.thelancet.com/extras/04art10342web.pdf Kids shouldn't have to worry about this ****, they should be worrying about pimples and graphics cards.
Can you verify that everything in all these pictures are caused by coalition weaponry and not car bombings, roadside bombs, or similar weapons which are far more indiscriminate than US & coalition weapons? Everytime I read the news on cnn, fox news, msnbc, bbc or where ever, I see an article about a car bombing or road side bomb which has killed a bunch of Iraqi civilians. Can you prove to me that none of these pictures are a result of that? Again, can you prove to me that all 100k of these civilians were killed by US or coalition forces and not suicide bombers or car bombs? Understand that I'm not saying that any civilian casualties are acceptable, I'm only trying to put things into perspective here.
Civi deaths are acceptable, i dont see what the big outcry is in the worlds media when civis get killed, you will always get civi's being killed in conflict, yes its awful if its someone you know, but it happens.
Not my point at all. Yes there will be collateral damage durring war, which should be accepted as fact, however my point is that no one can prove that all those pictures are collateral damage caused by coalition weapons when the "insurgents" use tactics like indiscriminate suicide bombings, car bombs and road-side explosives.
Erm, those pictures arnt falluja or one definatly isn't due to the fact my best mates girlfriend used it in her AS Level coursework 2 years ago (the one with the toddler/kid with the cut face from glass) she turned it into some cool anti-war poster...but yeah, think its just some anti-war people putting up a site full of random battle photos, not from recent falluja - M@
The grim reality, for something that shows on the headlines for 2 weeks and from the US’ point of view, seems pretty trivial. It turns out to be an utter massacre; I think the images are relevant.
And you're basing this "fact" on what exactly? What makes you think that we in the US think this is trivial? As compared to what? The 30 Million killed in WW1? The 40 Million killed in WW2? How about the 2.5 Million in the Korean war or the 5.4 Million in Vietnam? Stallin killed an estimated 20 million of his own people, 730,000 Iranians were killed in the Iran-Iraq war. It's estimated that Hussain killed up to 300,000 of his own people while 15% of the rest of the population fled the country seeking refuge. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to justify anything here, I just want things put into perspective. I hate war as much as the next person, but you have to look at things without blinders.
Two wrongs don't make a right. I bet it makes you feel really macho to say this. Reality is ugly. Deal. I can verify that all this sh*t wasn't going on before we invaded Iraq. Except in some Kurdish villages. But that was done with weapons that we sold to a dictator who we supported for a decade. I don't think it is really possible to put war into "perspective".
You completely missed my point. It seems to be assumed that coalition weapons were responsable for the pain and suffering in these pictures. All I'm trying to say is that who's to say some, most or nearly all of these injuries wern't caused by suicide bombings, car bombs, road-side bombs or the like? The "insurgents" have stated quite clearly that they will target civilians - both American and Iraqis (mainly Sunni) who work with us. My statement has nothing to do with the war being right or being wrong - it wasn't a political statement. I'm not trying to put war into perspective, just the pictures.
That 100k figure probably includes the 10s of thousands murdered by Saddam during his rule. People need to shut up about the war. Yeah, it was started illegally but if they pulled out THEY WOULD TEAR THE COUNTRY APART. These 'rebels' are like football hooligans at a match. They're not there for the sport, but for the fight - justifying it as a 'holy war' is wrong, as any muslim will tell you. If people looked past the hate and strived for a safer world we'd ALL be better off.
I think that my point wasn't made as clearly as I had hoped. I don't care who or what killed them-I think that is a pointless question. It's the fact that they were killed, period. Chris, if civillian causalties are acceptable, the why the out cry over 9/11? Why did we feel the need to invade other countries? Do you really want to suggest that those 3,000 peoples deaths were acceptable? After all that conflict has been raging since the early 80's, this is just another chapter in it. Or are the Iraqi dead less valued because they are a different color, religion and ethicity? A human life is just that, a life, with all the promise and possiblity that your life has. I have a hard time beliving that you think it's perfectly ok for a child to have it's leg amputated due to a war wound. Would you want to have the kid living next door have to go through that? or a sibling? or you? Take 30 seconds and step out of your 15 tough guy facade and really think about what life means. And if there is, in the end, a difference as to who does the killing and the maiming. I cretainly can't prove anything, I think that the Lancet study was conducted as best it could be, and others who looked at the method of the study have agreed that it's as sound as it could be in a war zone. It does say that it involves only numbers since the start of the hostilities. But the numbers from the previous regiem are just as horrific. As to who killed them? Who cares? I'm not niave enough to think that all the killing in the world is going to stop, but I'm also not willing to throw my morals aside and try to split hairs over who killed them. I belive in the sanctity of human life and of the hope and promise that young people have in making this a better place. Even if you take that 100K and only take half as real, that still 50K. And I will bet that over 50% of them are women and kids. There is no way to rationalize this away. If you can rationalize this, then we have lost more then just lives.
You completely missed mine. I'm saying that regardless which Tom, Dick or Terrorist is responsible for the deaths and injuries depicted in these photos, they wouldn't have happened if we hadn't started messing in Iraq. We can point fingers at exactly who hit who over the head with which bottle, but in the end we started the brawl. OK, fair enough. PS Nicely put, Jumeira Johnnie.
No, actually I totally agree with you on that - if we wern't there, these people would probably never gotten hurt like this. My whole point was that we don't know WHO caused the injuries / deaths. It seems that when ever this suvject gets brought up, the assumption is that US & coalition forces caused the injuries, but in fact the people who belong to the insurgency have gone on record that they will indeed target civilian targets. Plus since they use things like suicide bombs, roadside explosives, car bombs and the like, it's very possible that many, most or maybe the majority of these injuries could have been caused by insurgents. My point had nothing to do with the politics of the injuries or deaths, only the immediate cause.
Its ok for civilians to get killed.... but not for a website to use a modified, publicly published picture of yours? Get your priorities in order.
