saddest picture i've seen today

[Rusty T]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2003/03/23/war23.jpeg

The pic is of two British troops peering down into a bunker containing two dead Iraqi soldiers, one of whom was holding a white flag.

[Piebald]

I can't really tell whats going on there, but is that a white flag?

[yxboom]

I don't get it either :huh:

[Rusty T]

I'll add this to my original post. The pic is of two British troops peering down into a bunker containing two dead Iraqi soldiers, one of whom was holding a white flag.

[yxboom]

Ah that is messed up. Good thing I withheld my comment "its not like they were dead" :hrm:

[Piebald]

Ohh.. I see.. I couldn't tell that they were dead.. that is very sad.

[Rusty T]

THIS is the saddest picture I've seen. It is of a young boy who was killed during the battle for Basra. As I can't read arabic, I do not know the exact circumstances.



rusty

Graphic picture.
http://www.aljazeera.net/mritems/images/2003/3/23/1_145858_1_6.jpg


Note: post a link with a warning instead of just posting the picture. Have respect towards this being a family oriented board. Thanks.

[yxboom]

I removed the image and left the link.

:no:

[The Laughing Man]

Be very careful of creating/assuming stories based on one picture especially considering the recent reports of Iraqi soldiers launching ambushes using white flags. [needs an "very angry" emote to insert here]

[Socrates]

www.kdp.pp.se/chemical.html
Halabja-March 1988 (some disturbing pix)

Blame the APPEASENIKS for betraying these people. They stopped Saddam being toppled the first time, and refused to give the help that was promised for their uprising. We are still paying for the appeaseniks' treachery, because now the Iraqis are reluctant to revolt against Saddam for fear that they will be abandoned AGAIN.

[kiwimac]

Everywhere I look on this board there is Scotchbrite waving his tongue about, pontificating and thrusting his right-wing, Neo-con self about brutishly insisting that all that is wrong in the world is because of the liberals!

Yeah right! As if!

Kiwimac

[Vorkosigan]

Today @ 07:30 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=48369#post48369)
Socrates:

www.kdp.pp.se/chemical.html
Halabja-March 1988 (some disturbing pix)

Blame the APPEASENIKS for betraying these people.

'crates, you are aware that the Defense Intelligence Agency originally identified Iran as the perp in that event, and that this conclusion vanished into the mist as Iraq became our new bad guy (although not so bad that our current Vice President couldn't bust a few sanctions to sell them stuff back in the mid-1990s)? I mean, it is by no means certain that Hussein did that. But then, Oceania is at war with Eastasia, Oceania is always at war with Eastasia

[ur=http://truthout.org/docs_02/020303C.htm]This article is from a NYTimes commentary[/url].

"The agency did find that each side used gas against the other in the battle around Halabja. The condition of the dead Kurds' bodies, however, indicated they had been killed with a blood agent -- that is, a cyanide-based gas -- which Iran was known to use. The Iraqis, who are thought to have used mustard gas in the battle, are not known to have possessed blood agents at the time. "

It also contains some interesting thoughts on one of the real motivations for the war.

"Before the Persian Gulf war, Iraq had built an impressive system of dams and river control projects, the largest being the Darbandikhan dam in the Kurdish area. And it was this dam the Iranians were aiming to take control of when they seized Halabja. In the 1990's there was much discussion over the construction of a so-called Peace Pipeline that would bring the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates south to the parched Gulf states and, by extension, Israel. No progress has been made on this, largely because of Iraqi intransigence. With Iraq in American hands, of course, all that could change."

Enjoy!

Vorkosigan

[brother vinny]

Today @ 01:30 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=48369#post48369)
Socrates:

www.kdp.pp.se/chemical.html
Halabja-March 1988 (some disturbing pix)

Blame the APPEASENIKS for betraying these people. They stopped Saddam being toppled the first time, and refused to give the help that was promised for their uprising. We are still paying for the appeaseniks' treachery, because now the Iraqis are reluctant to revolt against Saddam for fear that they will be abandoned AGAIN.




Today @ 05:22 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=48439#post48439)
kiwimac:

Everywhere I look on this board there is Scotchbrite waving his tongue about, pontificating and thrusting his right-wing, Neo-con self about brutishly insisting that all that is wrong in the world is because of the liberals!

Yeah right! As if!

Kiwimac

Interesting, Kiwimac.

I see only one charge being leveled here (on this thread) against liberals, and that only at a specific group of liberals-- those who seek to appease the whims of an evil dictator.

Your response seems to assume that all liberals are appeasers. Furthermore, rather than answer to the specific charge leveled at the specific group, you obfuscate by claiming "Scotchbrite" (Socrates?) blames "all that is wrong in the world" on "liberals."

I see nothing inherently wrong with being a liberal. Some of my best friends are liberals ;) . But it is intellectually dishonest to divert the train of conversation away from the topic at hand simply because you don't like the methods of one of the conversants. It may very well be that Socrates blames all the world's evils on liberals. He'll be right at least some of the time (just as you, Kiwimac, will be right some of the time), and just because his main premise might be flawed doesn't mean he won't bring up some valid points.

In this case, I think Socrates has a point: Appeasers on both sides of the political aisle halted the First Gulf War way to soon (of course it never really ended, only went into a sort of cease-fire, but history will remember it as two seperate wars), subjecting the Iraqi people to needless suffering.

[bar Jonah]

03-22-2003 @ 10:07 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=42784#post42784)
tizzidale:

I'll add this to my original post. The pic is of two British troops peering down into a bunker containing two dead Iraqi soldiers, one of whom was holding a white flag.
Yes, I agree, it's terrible that such Iraqi soldiers would attack our troops under a false "white flag of surrender."

But it shouldn't be surprising, coming from a nation that uses chemical weapons against its own people, uses giant shredders as instruments of torture and death, and whose citizens feel so hopelessly oppressed that they make statements like, "If the U.S. doesn't bomb Iraq, I will commit suicide."