0
   

The World's Leading Butcher

 
 
camlok
 
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 07:05 pm
camlok wrote:
Paul Ryan - To deliberately target innocent children is cowardice in its most heinous form.
==============
Do you mean with cluster bombs, phosphorus bombs, napalm, two ton trucks, carpet bombing, drones, ..., Paul?

oralloy: I doubt that you can produce credible accounts of the US targeting children with these or any other weapons.

camlok wrote:
Or maybe you are referring to the half million Iraqi children you were able to slaughter in the 1990s with the help of the poodle UK.

oralloy: I question whether the half million figure is even true. But even if it is, your accusation here is hardly fair.

The sanctions on Iraq were the world's response to Saddam's horrible crimes. He is the one who is responsible for those sanctions.

And if the brunt of the sanctions harmed the very poor while Saddam's inner circle lived high on the hog, that was due to Saddam's own corruption.

Perhaps lessons should be learned here so that future sanctions are less easy for a dictator to deflect onto the poor. But to blame anyone other than Saddam for what happened is grossly unfair. The alternative to sanctions, after all, would have been a return to war, which would have meant more bombs being dropped on Iraq.

And I doubt that these figures of a half million dead children are even accurate.

https://able2know.org/topic/267070-361#top

===============

Killing Children Is the All-American Way
by Finian Cunningham / December 22nd, 2012

Madeleine Albright, the American ambassador the United Nations, was asked on nationwide television in 1996 if the death of half a million Iraqi children from US war and sanctions on that country was a price worth paying. Albright replied: “This is a very hard choice, but the price – we think is worth it.

That was before the so-called Second Persian Gulf War that began in 2003 with American air force “shock and awe”, followed by nearly nine years of illegal military occupation – an occupation that included the use of nuclear munitions and white phosphorus on the civilian populations in Fallujah and elsewhere, and involved countless massacres of families and children by US helicopter gunships and troopers.

Since Albright’s infamous admission, the death toll of Iraqi children from American military crimes can be safely assumed to run into multiples of what she candidly thought was a price worth paying more than 16 years ago.

Earlier this week when President Barack Obama was offering condolences to the families of the 20 children shot dead in an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, he said: “Whatever portion of sadness that can share with you to ease your heavy load, we will gladly bear it. Newtown, you are not alone.”

Indeed, Newtown is not alone. Children are slaughtered every week by Americans all over the world on the watch of Commander-in-Chief Barack Obama and his White House predecessors.

One study by James Lucas in 2007 put the death toll of civilians from American wars and sponsored conflicts in 37 countries since the Second World War at up to 30 million lives. The proportion of that figure corresponding to child deaths is not known but if the casualty rate of Iraq is anything to go by, we can estimate that the number of children killed by American militarism and covert wars since WWII is easily in the order of 20 million – that is, a million times the carnage last week in Connecticut.

The countries where these American-inflicted deaths occurred include: Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Angola, Congo, Afghanistan, Pakistan, El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua. They also include Iran during the American-backed Iraq war of 1980-88. Every continent on Earth has felt the American hand of death.

...

http://dissidentvoice.org/2012/12/killing-children-is-the-all-american-way/
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,888 • Replies: 67
No top replies

 
camlok
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 07:12 pm
Some people think that Vietnam was a particularly brutal, vicious US attempted overthrow/occupation, but it was/is standard American fare, the usual American method of saving the people, bringing democracy to the poor of the world.

Quote:

Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam
By: Nick Turse
Picador, 2014. 361 pp.

...

Unlike standard histories of the Vietnam War that dwell on diplomatic overtures, military tactics, and the grave deliberations of political leaders, Kill Anything That Moves shows how American atrocities in Vietnam came to happen. First, drill instructors subjected recruits to shock, deprivation, humiliation, and stress in order to turn them into programmed killers who saw Vietnamese as subhuman gooks (26-28, 39). Second, the U.S. military designated vast stretches of Vietnam as “free-fire zones” where, according to a U.S. Senate study, three hundred thousand Vietnamese civilians would be killed by 1968 (59-60). Third, officers and soldiers were motivated to kill since higher body counts earned them more beer, food, medals, vacation time, and chances of survival (44-45). Fourth, with rare exceptions, American soldiers could not communicate in Vietnamese, a language with six tones that varied in pitch and length (36). Finally, the U.S. military routinely covered up war crime allegations from whistleblowers, who were ostracized, injured, or even murdered by fellow soldiers (38).



0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 07:15 pm
camlok: two ton trucks

oralloy: I doubt that you can produce credible accounts of the US targeting children with these or any other weapons.

Quote:
U.S. soldiers engaged in sadistic games in Vietnam, sometimes deliberately swerving their vehicles to run over Vietnamese in a game that some referred to as “gook hockey” (156-157). The U.S. soldiers who carried out this kind of mayhem were in Vietnam ostensibly for the protection of the Vietnamese people.

Ibid

0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 07:36 pm
I forgot about Agent Orange, oralloy, my bad.

Quote:

Monsanto's Agent Orange:
The Persistent Ghost from the Vietnam War
Meryl Nass, MD

...

Casarett and Doull's Toxicology, 1996
From 1962 to 1970, the US military sprayed 72 million liters of
herbicides, mostly Agent Orange, in Vietnam. Over one million
Vietnamese were exposed to the spraying, as well as over 100,000
Americans and allied troops. Dr. James Clary, a scientist at the
Chemical Weapons Branch, Eglin Air Force Base, who designed the
herbicide spray tank and wrote a 1979 report on Operation Ranch Hand
(the name of the spraying program), told Senator Daschle in 1988,

"When we (military scientists) initiated the herbicide program in the
1960s, we were aware of the potential for damage due to dioxin
contamination in the herbicide. We were even aware that the 'military'
formulation had a higher dioxin concentration than the 'civilian'
version due to the lower cost and speed of manufacture. However,
because the material was to be used on the 'enemy,' none of us were
overly concerned.


We never considered a scenario in which our own
personnel would become contaminated with the herbicide."
quoted by Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt, 1990

https://www.organicconsumers.org/old_articles/monsanto/agentorange032102.php

0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 08:13 pm
@camlok,
camlok wrote:
Madeleine Albright, the American ambassador the United Nations, was asked on nationwide television in 1996 if the death of half a million Iraqi children from US war and sanctions on that country was a price worth paying. Albright replied: “This is a very hard choice, but the price – we think is worth it.

The fact that she answered the question as if the estimate were true, doesn't mean the estimate is actually true.

And she was probably right to think it was worth it. Even if the estimate were true, the sanctions were probably still the least bad option.

At any rate, since the sanctions were the world's response to Saddam's crimes, and since Saddam was the one who redirected them to impact the poor of his country, any dead children here are entirely Saddam's fault. The US bears no blame here.


camlok wrote:
That was before the so-called Second Persian Gulf War that began in 2003 with American air force “shock and awe”,

Shock and Awe never happened. It was an interesting idea, but it was only publicized as disinformation to throw Saddam's defenses off from what our true attack would be.

We started the 2003 war off with an attempt to bomb Saddam followed by a sudden overland ground thrust.


camlok wrote:
followed by nearly nine years of illegal military occupation – an occupation that included the use of nuclear munitions and white phosphorus on the civilian populations in Fallujah and elsewhere, and involved countless massacres of families and children by US helicopter gunships and troopers.

We haven't used nuclear weapons since 1945.

Our use of white phosphorus was targeted at enemy fighters, not at civilians.

I really wish the anti-war kooks had not vomited so much hysteria about white phosphorus here. We used an entire new weapon at Fallujah, but all the nonsense about white phosphorus completely obscured that fact.

I don't know if you are familiar with thermobaric explosives, but they are essentially rocket fuel with a small explosive charge to ignite it and send it spraying outward. The result is a very brief (rocket fuel burns fast) but very high temperature (over 4000 degrees) fireball that instantly flash fries anyone caught within it.

That's why if you see footage of many of our dronestrikes, the dead are all charred but otherwise entirely intact.

Anyway at Fallujah we loaded thermobaric explosives in bazookas, and our guys used them to systematically flash-fry the insides of all suspicious houses before entering them.

I would have greatly enjoyed reading some analyses about how the new weapons worked out for urban combat. Unfortunately because the anti-war goons were ranting about white phosphorus 24 hours a day, our use of thermobaric bazookas at Fallujah was completely obscured and nothing has been written about it.

Sad


camlok wrote:
Since Albright’s infamous admission, the death toll of Iraqi children from American military crimes can be safely assumed to run into multiples of what she candidly thought was a price worth paying more than 16 years ago.

We can safely assume that these "estimates" are completely fraudulent.
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 08:21 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy's world wide infamous no evidence song and dance routine.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 08:23 pm
@camlok,
If you'd like a cite for something specific, feel free to make a request.
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 08:25 pm
@oralloy,
Not only does the US murder and maim innocents world wide, it also does the same to its own people and other westerners; witness the events of 911.
0 Replies
 
Glennn
 
  0  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 09:13 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
and since Saddam was the one who redirected them to impact the poor of his country, any dead children here are entirely Saddam's fault.

How is it that you interpret the U.S.'s deliberate destruction of Iraq's water supply as Saddam's doing?
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 10:58 pm
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:
How is it that you interpret the U.S.'s deliberate destruction of Iraq's water supply as Saddam's doing?

Easy. The US did not destroy Iraq's water supply. Any damage to their water supply that occurred, was carried out by Saddam. I question whether much damage occurred.
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 11:02 pm
@oralloy,
You lack the knowledge to ever offer anything of merit because oralloy opinion has zero merit and that's all you EVER offer.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 11:08 pm
@camlok,
You may well see facts as meritless. Others differ.
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Sun 28 May, 2017 11:16 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy opinions are the farthest thing from facts.
0 Replies
 
Glennn
 
  2  
Reply Mon 29 May, 2017 07:30 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
The US did not destroy Iraq's water supply. Any damage to their water supply that occurred, was carried out by Saddam.

How could you not be aware of this: http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/NAG108A.html

oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 29 May, 2017 07:33 pm
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:
How could you not be aware of this:

Globalresearch.ca is a great comedy site. They are so terrible at concocting falsehoods that it is a lot of fun to laugh at them.

But they have so many lies on their site that it is impossible to view every single falsehood that they make.
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Mon 29 May, 2017 07:42 pm
@oralloy,
More oralloy uninformed opinion. You do realize that your opinions are worth nothing. You are as rabid a follower of the US and its carnage as Khmer Rouge adherents were to Pol Pot's US caused carnage.

It is ludicrous for you to suggest these academics are doing research that is worse than your nonexistent research in every area that you interact with here at A2K.

But then ludicrous has always been your stalwart associate.

In fact, had you read the first few sentences, you would have discovered that the information was taken from US government sources.

You had a terribly miserable showing, about the same as farmerman's, in the 911 Physics thread.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 29 May, 2017 07:53 pm
@camlok,
camlok wrote:
More oralloy uninformed opinion.

As usual everything that I've said is completely factual.


camlok wrote:
these academics are doing research

Globalresearch.ca are not academics and they are not doing research. They are retards spouting gibberish.

Anyone with a jr. high level of science education can tell that these kooks' claims are complete nonsense.

But it is a lot of fun laughing at them when they make claim after claim that is contrary to basic science.

Like I said, wonderful comedy site.
Glennn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 May, 2017 08:00 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
Globalresearch.ca is a great comedy site. They are so terrible at concocting falsehoods that it is a lot of fun to laugh at them.

That is no rebuttal to the information I've provided. By the way, Global Research is not the author of the information. Other than attacking the messenger, you have no rebuttal.

Do you not believe that the document referred to in the link I provided exists?
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Mon 29 May, 2017 08:03 pm
@oralloy,
Note, oralloy, that you have done what you always do, assert nonsense with absolutely nothing to back up your nonsense. You have got to patent this. Not that anyone else would want to.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Mon 29 May, 2017 08:11 pm
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:
That is no rebuttal to the information I've provided. By the way, Global Research is not the author of the information. Other than attacking the messenger, you have no rebuttal.

Attacking the messenger is the correct response. Everything that the messenger says is laughably untrue.

Pointing out that something is untrue seems a good rebuttal.


Glennn wrote:
Do you not believe that the document referred to in the link I provided exists?

Not if Globalresearch.ca says it does.
 

 
  1. Forums
  2. » The World's Leading Butcher
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/26/2021 at 06:34:25