No wonder the world hates us

WildGunsTomcat · 2012-04-11, 11:52 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...v=e1trSD3Auyo#!

US Military Contractors.....basically former military guys that got hired on by a private company and contracted by the pentagon to do high profile security runs and the like.....

Shooting at civilians in Iraq.

Now I know we're not the only country to do this, I hear tales of the British contractors doing the same thing...also the French.

But Goddammit don't we have enough negative publicity without these fucking cowboys running around the streets of Baghdad killing people without a care?

Figment · 2012-04-11, 12:19 PM

That's been an issue since the start of the war. :/ Problem is the locals are not allowed to prosecute them, or so I hear. Something the Bush administration arranged.

But that's not the only thing. The remainder is about misplaced arrogance. You think we're arrogant when we crit the US, but basically the arrogance is stating the US is supreme in everything - while it's not - and a lot of Americans being of the believe that the US runs the world and has every right to. Similarly, things like protectionism of own industry (like the steel industry) does not go down well, if the US in the meantime complains about other things.

Another thing is that the US expects to get the private info from every person travelling to the US, while refusing to return the favour for any US citizen travelling from the US, because that would be invading their privacy by a foreign country. Basically, the hypocrisy and lack of tact and concern for foreigners. I mean, Bush once made a comment where he called the War on Terror a type of crusade. Not even realising how sensitive the word crusade is in muslem countries, where he was sending his troops to fight terror. The stupidity and clumsiness of the US in foreign relations particularly under the Bush administration is tremendous. And I mean, just look at the "The Hague Invasion Act" for foreign policy mess ups. Pass a national law that says it's alright to invade your ally's seat of government with military force, just to spring US war crime suspects from jail?

It doesn't help that bureaus like Stanford's and Poor's etc have a clear bias for the US and seem to deliberately weaken the EU at every opportunity. Especially whenever a step is taken to correct something, instead of rewarding that and bring stability to the market, they punish it. While completely ignoring the state the US has been in for years (US credit should have a B- rating, rather than AAA...) and got worse due to the Reps blocking action.

It also doesn't help that the banking crisis was caused by the US.

**Malorn** · 2012-04-11, 01:25 PM

Meh.

Vash02 · 2012-04-11, 02:11 PM

To be fair on them, its either shoot at cars that are coming too close or get blown up by a car bomb.

Also, wouldnt being a soldier in a standing army during peace time be the cushiest job ever? It's just running around a field, firing guns etc. All with little chance of being killed. It may of been different during Machiavelli's time where the soldiers didnt get the "This is what happens when you get shot/stabbed/blown up" lecture and they had this gloried view of war.

BuzzCutPsycho · 2012-04-11, 02:12 PM

Originally Posted by WildGunsTomcat

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...v=e1trSD3Auyo#!

US Military Contractors.....basically former military guys that got hired on by a private company and contracted by the pentagon to do high profile security runs and the like.....

Shooting at civilians in Iraq.

Now I know we're not the only country to do this, I hear tales of the British contractors doing the same thing...also the French.

But Goddammit don't we have enough negative publicity without these fucking cowboys running around the streets of Baghdad killing people without a care?

Most of those videos are of actual U.S. Military and not PMC. Good job taking something some chuckle fuck with an agenda on Youtube said to heart.

Figment · 2012-04-11, 02:45 PM

Malorn, those guys shooting are mercenarys, more militia than standing army. How can you pin that on the army, aside from the army not doing these tasks themselves?

Also, envy? Irritation with misplaced arrogance like you just displayed with the envy comment... Your nation is not that prosperous as half of it is a third world country. Should we be envious of your crime ratings? Your national debt? No envy. Your lack of tact?

Honestly it is this sort of alienated attitude and lack of respect and appreciation towards the rest of the world that bothers people. Also annoying is that you only ever hear from the USA when it is in their personal interest. And even then you don't think of a way that is acceptable on a local level, because you don't even try to understand the people you interact with.

Figment · 2012-04-11, 03:02 PM

With Israël the problem the Arabs have is that the US supports Israël almost unconditionally and applies different humanitarian standards in what are crimes and terror. If the US was more critical and would react harsher to israeli oppression (like the wall), that'd help. They'd still be an ally of the enemy, but at least fair instead of acting biased out of holocaust guilt, lobby and cultural ties. Plus the (extremely) christian military presence on 'their' soil. Imagine if Russia had bases in Canada, or China on the border of Mexico.

Then there is the supporting of dictatorships like Egypt and other nations, just to not have communism or a population that may not like the US or Israel in charge. US hypocrisy, only spread democracy when it is in their interest. Bush Sr. call to rebel against Saddam and then not helping due to elections is also typical of this behaviour. Same for oil interest: Saudi-Arabian dictatorial and non-equality regime for instance.

**Malorn** · 2012-04-11, 03:18 PM

Meh.

Figment · 2012-04-11, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by Vash02

To be fair on them, its either shoot at cars that are coming too close or get blown up by a car bomb.

Can you imagine if that was the normal thing to do in their homeland? Car bombs and all are not felt as a justification by any innocent person and their family.

Fear and stooping down to terrorist level doesn't give you an ethical edge to wage war on terror. Plus Geneva conventions don't really allow this sort of thing. Sure, terrorists don't apply Geneva. But should the populace pay the price, or those trained and equiped to at least stand a chance? It's a lose-lose situation unfortunately.

Figment · 2012-04-11, 03:33 PM

Malorn, some militaries provide education during the tour of duty so there is no civil experience gap.

And militias cannot cope with standing armies. Not in 1812-1814, not today. Hence car bombs and terrorism as alternative tools. Would the Taliban not do guerilla by hising under the populace, you'd not have the above problem. Militias make a target out of the populace itself.

**Malorn** · 2012-04-11, 03:36 PM

Meh.

Vash02 · 2012-04-11, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

Can you imagine if that was the normal thing to do in their homeland? Car bombs and all are not felt as a justification by any innocent person and their family.

Fear and stooping down to terrorist level doesn't give you an ethical edge to wage war on terror. Plus Geneva conventions don't really allow this sort of thing. Sure, terrorists don't apply Geneva. But should the populace pay the price, or those trained and equiped to at least stand a chance? It's a lose-lose situation unfortunately.

Having people drive up to you and trigger a large bomb in their car is not a normal thing in most peoples homelands. It's better for everyone to keep a wide berth from the contractors because they are targets and the suicide bomber doesent give a shit if he takes a few civilians with him.

It's clearly not a polite thing to do and actually shooting a vehicle is taking it to the extreme.
If the guy in the video had actually wanted to kill the civilians he wouldnt be shooting their tires.

Warborn · 2012-04-11, 03:53 PM

NATO vehicles on the road will ram vehicles in front of them if they're blocking them. Hitting a civilian and not stopping also isn't that big a deal. You can't stop when you're moving through cities in these places. If you stop, you will get pinned down and potentially killed depending where you are. It sucks, but the alternative is that insurgents just block NATO vehicles in and then blow them up, or make a person walk in front of a vehicle and get clipped for cash, and when the convoy stops they blow them up. Afghanis/Iraqis quickly learn to get the fuck out of the way and not go near convoys, so this stuff doesn't really happen very often.

The guy who made the video is a dipshit and knows zero about any of the SOPs for dealing with shit like this in Afghanistan/Iraq.

Figment · 2012-04-11, 05:04 PM

That's all nice, but it doesn't really help establish a proper connection with the locals. Quite the opposite. I don't find it odd the USA is or was seen as the occupier, rather than the liberator. Is that due to (necessary) safety precautions, sure, but it doesn't allow for trust to built up, quite the contrary.

The Dutch in Afghanistan were not seen as the same kind of occupation force as the Americans. More care for local customs and tribal relations resulted in a relatively quiet province and hardly any Dutch casualties that were down to non-accidents.

http://www.humansecuritygateway.com/...bulUruzgan.pdf

This is a very interesting read in the background in which they had to operate and how the US/Australians have a more violence oriented, volatile approach that doesn't yield the same results as it would in a more western context. Why? Tribal relations, fear of being marked collaborator by either the west or the Taliban, backstabbing, etc.

The militia existing in Afghanistan are not a standing army, yet they actually result in severe widespread crime and lawlessness, as well as oppression of the locals. Why? Because there's no strong government, so it's every man for himself. A militia that does not have the purpose of defending the population, certainly in a tribal context, does not guarantee a safe and secure environment. Quite the contrary: it tempts to use violence to get your way and the lack of ethical training a modern professional soldier gets (not always true for mercenaries) and is bound to by Geneva convention, does not go for civilian militias.

Originally Posted by Malorn

There are better ways to have both.

I personally like the mandatory service model like Israel has where every citizen must put in two years of military service. The Romans did a similar thing. It ensures every citizen is properly trained and turns your entire country into a military reserve.

Yet this is used as an excuse by the Palestinians to justify targeting the civilians, since every civilian is a soldier. Basically, it creates an atmosphere where terrorism is an agreeable and acceptable form of combat: you are fighting soldiers wearing civilian clothes after all. You also don't just see the Israeli army as the enemy, but every single Israeli.

This has been literally used as an argument for attacking civilian targets and tbh, the logic is even sound as long as you don't attack people unable to serve (children/elderly) as every single Israeli doubles as a soldier.

And no, I would not say they're properly trained. Draft and mobilisation does not mean they're effective soldiers and killing machines in comparison to people who have been trained for years.

A friend of mine took up a profession as a bodyguard for politicians after having served in Afghanistan. He has very strict rules to follow. The problem is that the private security forces in Iraq feel they are above the law and they act that way too. Worse, a lot of troops in Iraq feel they're elevated above the locals as a people.

Btw, speaking of army excesses, look at this type of people in your army:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1016-01.htm
http://harpers.org/archive/2009/05/0082488

That's a bigger concern than standing armies you have: a fanatic zealot subsection within the army that treats people of other faith as sub-humans. :/ And then we haven't discussed the atrocities performed by (untrained) prison guards that get bored. Or the stupidity of officers not understanding after this many years of insane response to it, what happens if you burn a Koran (and muslems anywhere find out). Do note, I find the response of muslems to this sort of thing insane, like there are many other insane examples of fanatism within the muslem world. It would be nice if the ones reacting so strongly would have had a bit of a proper education and capacity of relativation, but alas they do not.

Warborn · 2012-04-11, 05:11 PM

Another reason there haven't been many Dutch casualties is because they don't stop their convoys in the middle of unfriendly cities because a slow driver is in front of them, or a local is struck by a vehicle. That kind of shit looks bad on camera, but so does a convoy of destroyed vehicles and dead soldiers because they made themselves a target by halting in unfriendly territory. There is a give-take relationship in dealing with Afghanis. Observing local customs is cool, but not getting fucking killed is also a benefit. Case in point: Canadian officer removes his helmet when talking to local elders, a sign of respect for local customs, and is attacked with an axe and suffers massive brain trauma as a result.