Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

World Politics
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Politics : World Politics
Message Icon Topic: A timeline of US atrocities in Afghanistan Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 10 Next >>
Author Message
Umm Hufsah
Female Islam
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 27 February 2010
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 93
Quote Umm Hufsah Replybullet Posted: 26 May 2010 at 1:58am
In every war its important to consider the strategy like why a war is being actually fought? and what result is it seeking? How long it will go on? what is end result of one actions etc, in that respect US strategy is as I explained before is utterly flawed, if it can't stop itself from murdering civilians whether deliberately or not, than its no different from its enemy, US might as well join them.  However its obvious that US won't do that because it won't have any reason to stay in Afghanistan would it? If US is fighting war in Afghanistan to protect Afghans from Talibans then its responsible for every innocent person dying at their own hands. It can't turn a blind eye to the endless innocent people dying in this war for nothing and keep carry on pointlessly.

Its easy for US to say oops we didn't mean to but let the civilians die as long as we get what we want - to kill Talibans or whatever the reason, we can't do any thing about it because its war, it's perfectly normal that civilians are dying and then carry on causing more innocent people to lose lives in this war that US refuses to end.

So, when its about taking sides with civilians being murdered and asking to stop the war,  every thing is exaggerated but when its about US endlessly war mongering and keep on attacking one country after another on basis of endless excuses, every thing is perfectly believable, is it?

Would you be alright if 1000's of Americans civilians including women and children were dying in a war year after year, fought for whatever reason by what ever strategy would you not want that war to end so innocent people stop getting hurt.

I'm sure that soldiers are provided with protocols but tell me if that protocol did any good in preventing a collateral murders from accuring? in this video:


http://stopwar.org.uk/content/view/1826/27/

Light 'em all up! The true face of US 'liberation'

The video released by Wikileaks showing airmen in US helicopters slaughtering Iraqi civilians with unrestrained glee, is shocking enough in itself, but it is only unique in the footage we can now watch and hear, which makes the atrocity irrefutable, unlike the countless occassions when Iraqis -- and Afghans -- have reported equivalent atrocities and were ignored.



The Reuters photographer we see being killed so casually in the film, Namir Noor-Eldeen, did not live there, but went to cover a story, risking his life at a time when most western journalists were imbedded with the military. Noor-Eldeen was 22 (he must have felt extremely proud to be working for Reuters) and single. His driver Saeed Chmagh, who is also seen being killed, was 40 and married. He left behind a widow and four children, adding to the millions of Iraqi widows and orphans.

Witnesses to the slaughter reported the harrowing details in 2007, but they had to wait for a western whistleblower to hand over a video before anyone listened. Watching the video, my first impression was, I have no impression. But the total numbness gradually grows into a now familiar anger. I listen to the excited voices of death coming from the sky, enjoying the chase and killing. I whisper: do they think they are God?

"Light 'em all up!" one shooter says.

"Ah, yeah, look at those dead ******s. Nice," says another.

"Well, it's their fault bringing their kids into the battle," one says when ground troops discover two children among the wounded.



The war US is fighting is destructive not constructive, have a look at this report Iraq's progress has gone downwards not upowards because of the war:
stopwar.org.uk

Has the US/UK invasion liberated the women of Iraq?

The US/UK invasion and occupation of Iraq has been catastrophic for the Iraqi people. But has it brought Iraqi women the liberation that George Bush and Tony Blair promised? Surely their conditions are better now than they were under Saddam Hussein?


By Abdu Rahman and Dahr Jamail
AntiWar.com
14 March 2010

Iraqi%20
women

BAGHDAD – Under Saddam Hussein, women in government got a year’s maternity leave; that is now cut to six months. Under the Personal Status Law in force since Jul. 14, 1958, when Iraqis overthrew the British-installed monarchy, Iraqi women had most of the rights that Western women do.

Now they have Article 2 of the Constitution: "Islam is the official religion of the state and is a basic source of legislation." Sub-head A says "No law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed rules of Islam." Under this Article the interpretation of women’s rights is left to religious leaders – and many of them are under Iranian influence. 

"The U.S. occupation has decided to let go of women’s rights," Yanar Mohammed, who campaigns for women’s rights in Iraq, says. "Political Islamic groups have taken southern Iraq, are fully in power there, and are using the financial support of Iran to recruit troops and allies. The financial and political support from Iran is why the Iraqis in the south accept this, not because the Iraqi people want Islamic law." 

With the new law has come the new lawlessness. Nora Hamaid, 30, a graduate from Baghdad University, has now given up the career she dreamt of. "I completed my studies before the invaders arrived because there was good security and I could freely go to university," Hamaid tells IPS. Now she says she cannot even move around freely, and worries for her children every day. "I mean every day, from when they depart to when they return from school, for fear of abductions."

There is 25-percent representation for women in parliament, but Sabria says "these women from party lists stand up to defend their party in the parliament, not for women’s rights." For women in Iraq, the invasion is not over. 

The situation for Iraq’s women reflects the overall situation: everyone is affected by lack of security and lack of infrastructure. 

"The status of women here is linked to the general situation," Maha Sabria, professor of political science at Al-Nahrain University in Baghdad tells IPS. "The violation of women’s rights was part of the violation of the rights of all Iraqis." But, she said, "women bear a double burden under occupation because we have lost a lot of freedom because of it. 

Abductions

"More men are now under the weight of detention, so now women bear the entire burden of the family and are obliged to provide full support to the families and children. At the same time women do not have freedom of movement because of the deteriorated security conditions and because of abductions of women and children by criminal gangs." 

Women, she says, are also now under pressure to marry young in family hope that a husband will bring security. 

Sabria tells IPS that the abduction of women "did not exist prior to the occupation. We find that women lost their right to learn and their right to a free and normal life, so Iraqi women are struggling with oppression and denial of all their rights, more than ever before." 

Yanar Mohammed believes the constitution neither protects women nor ensures their basic rights. She blames the United States for abdicating its responsibility to help develop a pluralistic democracy in Iraq. 

"The real ruler in Iraq now is the rule of old traditions and tribal, backward laws," Sabria says. "The biggest problem is that more women in Iraq are unaware of their rights because of the backwardness and ignorance prevailing in Iraqi society today." 

Many women have fled Iraq because their husband was arbitrarily arrested by occupation forces or government security personnel, says Sabria. 

Displaced

More than four million Iraqis were estimated to have been displaced through the occupation, including approximately 2.8 million internally. The rest live as refugees mainly in neighboring countries, according to a report by Elizabeth Ferris, co-director of the Brookings Institution-University of Bern Project on Internal Displacement.

The report, titled, "Going Home? Prospects and Pitfalls For Large-Scale Return Of Iraqis," says most displaced Iraqi women are reluctant to return home because of continuing uncertainties. 

The Washington-based Refugees International (RI) says in a report "Iraqi Refugees: Women’s Rights and Security Critical to Returns" that "Iraqi women will resist returning home, even if conditions improve in Iraq, if there is no focus on securing their rights as women and assuring their personal security and their families’ well-being."

The RI report covered internally displaced women in Iraq’s semi-autonomous northern Kurdish region and female refugees in Syria. "Not one woman interviewed by RI indicated her intention to return," the report says. 

"This tent is more comfortable than a palace in Baghdad; my family is safe here," a displaced woman in northern Iraq told RI. 

The situation continues to be challenging for women within Iraq. 

"I am an employee, and everyday go to my work place, and the biggest challenge for me and all the suffering Iraqis is the roads are closed and you feel you are a person without rights, without respect," a 35-year-old government employee, who asked to be referred to as Iman, told IPS.

"To what extent has this improved my security?" she asked. "We have better salaries now, but how can women live with no security? How can we enjoy our rights if there is no safe place to go, for rest and recreation and living?"

 

Edited by Umm Hufsah - 26 May 2010 at 6:53am
IP IP Logged
Boomer
 
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 25 February 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 180
Quote Boomer Replybullet Posted: 26 May 2010 at 5:36am
Originally posted by Umm Hufsah

In every war its important to consider the strategy like why a war is being actually fought? and what result is it seeking? How long it will go on? what is end result of one actions etc, in that respect US strategy is as I explained before is utterly flawed, if it can't stop itself from murdering civilians whether deliberately or not, than its no different from its enemy, US might as well join them.  However its obvious that US won't do that because it won't have any reason to stay in Afghanistan would it? If US is fighting war in Afghanistan to protect Afghans from Talibans then its responsible for every innocent person dying at their own hands. It can't turn a blind eye to the endless innocent people dying in this war for nothing and keep carry on pointlessly. 

Not surprisingly, with all of your earlier false claims being exposed as falsehoods, you have decided to move on to copying and pasting from your usual tabloid propaganda site “infowars”. You know, one of the downsides to the web is that it can become a playground for conspiracy theorists and other, how shall we say… "less than discriminating" types who scour the web in feverish attempts to find something, anything to support a conspiracy. I recognized your copying and pasting from infowars. It’s one of the  ultra-leftist internet based tabloids. Do yourself a favor, dear, don't make your posts a total joke by linking to a website run by a bunch of frothing-at-the-mouth Stalinist wannabes.

Ultimately, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are about people being given the opportunity to determine their own fate, their own future. It shouldn’t be about the irrational contentions of the rulers-for-life, embittered islamist utopians (mullahs, self-hating islamists and islamist ideologues), who are willing to ally themselves with fascist and supremacist ideologies if it will serve their partisan agenda. The abovementioned thugs are ready to throw every ounce of fear, intimidation and callous hatred they have at everyday people who are risking life and limb to eke out a living. Self-hating islamists are looking to preserve the status quo of fear and oppression that many people would hope to eradicate. Why would anyone want to side with such vicious, ruthless Autocrats?

The Islamist agenda is crystal clear on what Islam's mission and goals are. Why aren't we? Are we so complacent in the assumption that everyone must respect the rule of law, equality, plurality, and other benefits of liberal democracy, that we are unable to conceive of entire cultures holding such concepts in utter contempt? The teachings of the koran, the sunnah, and shari'ah law are absolutely hostile to precepts of personal freedom. That's why the ruling mullahs, your Taliban heroes and the other brutish islamists you are flailing your pom-poms for will beat to a pulp and jail those who challenge their fascist agenda.

Islamic fear societies are increasingly crushed under their own dead weight of untenable claims of inerrancy and the maddening frustration that comes of its failure, which only becomes more apparent with the passage of time. Under rule of law with representative elections, the spirit of Democracy is forever born anew, able to adapt to changing times, to help shape those times and help make sense of them.

IP IP Logged
Gibbs
 
Guest Group
Guest Group


Joined: 29 April 2009
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 939
Quote Gibbs Replybullet Posted: 26 May 2010 at 7:15am
Hufsah I think I'm done here. I understand your point and agree with some of the things you've said but since you seem to prefer to only hear your voice I will bow out. This is going to turn into a discussion where people *****and moan.

You see, I can always google pictures and read articles about "collateral casualties" and I can always fault some things people do but an ultimate slap in the face to me is responding to me with long winded post of copy and paste pictures.

I guess me telling you that I have friends who serve who gave me some knowledge of US military protocol was not good enough I see.

Edited by Gibbs - 26 May 2010 at 7:19am
IP IP Logged
abuayisha
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 05 October 1999
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4380
Quote abuayisha Replybullet Posted: 26 May 2010 at 8:53am

"The teachings of the koran, the sunnah, and shari'ah law are absolutely hostile to precepts of personal freedom."

 

Wow, “sigh”; truly rhetoric has consequences.  The very teachings of Quran, Sunnah, and Shariah are the reasons why Muslims fight against Al Qaeda’s narrative, and  that America is anti-Islam and hates Muslims.   America is fighting a war against radical political islamist who use terror as a means to political goals.  To hold that Islam is against personal freedom only unwittingly supports the narrative from Jihadis that America is at war with Islam.  This is not the position of the American government.

 

To hold that Islam is against personal freedom by extension would mean all religions are against personal freedom.   Most Muslims want neither total theocracy nor a purely secular democracy and are happy where religious principles and democratic values coexist. 

 

IP IP Logged
Hayfa
Female  Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 07 June 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2370
Quote Hayfa Replybullet Posted: 26 May 2010 at 12:33pm
I think we are in Afghanistan for a bit of side reason. Since the Us returned the cultivation of the poppy is abound. Where is this going? To Russian and China.

I don't at all agree with the war but I do agree with Gibbs that the soldiers do have protocals.

Martha you mentioned about "human shields": these people LIVE in the villages. Where do you expect them to live? 

And you mention its coward to "use women and children as human shields.. I would agree is that is the intention.. but do we know? AND is it not cowardly to fire on those same women and children?

And having read alot on war it does tend to blend what is a "civilian" and what is a "soldier." People don't have a "uniform" to tell the difference.

When you do things from your soul, you feel a river moving in you, a joy. Rumi
IP IP Logged
martha
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 October 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1141
Quote martha Replybullet Posted: 26 May 2010 at 1:52pm

Hayfa,
Well, there seems to be plenty of evidence of human shields in Afghanistan. I am not talking about people living in villages, and I am pretty sure that US soldiers (etc) are not in the habit of firing on women and children deliberately.
I am not sure I understand your final comment. Do you mean Afghani's are dressing as civilians to confuse their enemy? I know some Afghani kids start fighting young, but NOT that young.

Certainly I know that on one attack earlier this year by the US etc..they gave the civilians a week(?) to leave the area that was going to be attacked. BUt that resulted in some of the so called Taliban moving to be with the civilians again. That's what is cowardly... hiding behind women and children's skirts.


http://muslimmatters.org/2010/02/17/bbc-afghanistan-taliban-using-human-shields-general/
some of us are a lot like cement:- all mixed up and permanently set
IP IP Logged
Boomer
 
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 25 February 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 180
Quote Boomer Replybullet Posted: 26 May 2010 at 3:54pm
Originally posted by abuayisha

"The teachings of the koran, the sunnah, and shari'ah law are absolutely hostile to precepts of personal freedom."

 

Wow, “sigh”; truly rhetoric has consequences.  The very teachings of Quran, Sunnah, and Shariah are the reasons why Muslims fight against Al Qaeda’s narrative, and  that America is anti-Islam and hates Muslims.   America is fighting a war against radical political islamist who use terror as a means to political goals.  To hold that Islam is against personal freedom only unwittingly supports the narrative from Jihadis that America is at war with Islam.  This is not the position of the American government.

Rhetoric surely does have consequences as does ignoring events around us. The very teachings you described above are what give traction to islamic terrorism. Isn't it funny how we see all these islamist "victims" running around with machine guns, complaining of discrimination, whining about being unfairly accused of terrorist bombings, and warning their enemies of the innocent civilians that would be killed in a military reprisal? They justify their murderous acts by claiming to be oppressed by non-Muslims. But if they were truly fighting oppression, they would surely lash out at their own oppressive governments first. On the contrary; they seem to be doing their oppressive government's bidding. When terrorists are given the chance to run their own governments, the first thing they do is lock down their society, remove all human rights, and oppress everyone within their borders with intolerable religious laws and vicious, cruel, and ruthless enforcement. It's no accident that these patterns are seen over and over again; it's a well-thought-out, effective strategy, and it will continue to succeed unless and until their lies are exposed. These are not random acts perpetrated by insane criminals; they are deliberately orchestrated by well-organized, deeply religious, petrol-funded terrorist organizations, many of whom operate under the guise of Islamic "charities" and receive direct aid from Arab governments and oil companies.

To hold that Islam is against personal freedom by extension would mean all religions are against personal freedom.   Most Muslims want neither total theocracy nor a purely secular democracy and are happy where religious principles and democratic values coexist. 

 

I see a flaw with your proposed “extension”. There’s no reason to believe that one necessarily implies the other. Christianity, as we know, met with reform and enlightenment (and bea in mind that I hold no religion). In short, it grew up, and became a positive force for civilization and progress worldwide. In fact, it was instrumental in shaping social climate which fostered the freedoms, science, and prosperity of Western civilization. Islam, on the other hand, has not managed a similar enlightenment and reformation. Islam's holy warriors, united under their ersatz Saladin, Osama bin Laden, still fancy themselves to be fighting the Christian invaders in the name of their deity. To this day, the wounded adolescent pride of the holy warriors is still seething for revenge. In God's name, of course.

I have no reason to believe that you speak for most muslims regarding what they want or don’t want. What we can demonstrate, however, is that there is this peculiar propensity for a crushing theocracy to take hold wherever muslims gain strength of numbers.

IP IP Logged
Umm Hufsah
Female Islam
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 27 February 2010
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 93
Quote Umm Hufsah Replybullet Posted: 27 May 2010 at 1:37am
Originally posted by Gibbs

Hufsah I think I'm done here. I understand your point and agree with some of the things you've said but since you seem to prefer to only hear your voice I will bow out. This is going to turn into a discussion where people *****and moan.

You see, I can always google pictures and read articles about "collateral casualties" and I can always fault some things people do but an ultimate slap in the face to me is responding to me with long winded post of copy and paste pictures.

I guess me telling you that I have friends who serve who gave me some knowledge of US military protocol was not good enough I see.


I don't know why you got offended with me posting that link - true that anyone can just read about it anywhere but I posted that video to discuss collateral murders in relation to our discussion of protocols, I am sure that your US soldiers friends are good people, who are just doing their duties and following orders, however, their are good and bad people every where with corrupt hearts given the opportunity in a war they can always commit inhuman war crimes that even protocols can't prevent and easily get away with them without anyone holding them to accountability. Given that they eventually are driven by politicians' foreign policies in a war which can very well be wrong.

Any way, it was nice having conversation with you regarding this topic and listening to your side of it and just because we are in disagreement, does not mean I am not listening or trying to understand your point of views. I am expressing my opinions and you are yours.

Someone here is assuming that US and its allies are leading a crusaders army against all the Muslims with their Holy Quran and therefore cheering on the invading forces in the middle east, we only needed this one more excuse that can allow US and its allies to stay in opponent countries indefinitely causing death and destruction forever...........sigh



Edited by Umm Hufsah - 27 May 2010 at 5:14am
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 10 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com