Footage of Apache company in Iraq

[metalbrew]

Iraq was never a part of the US - Fact

Us led forces invaded Iraq - Fact

which leads to the premise : .. but it is their country after all and it is a given that they fight against foreign troops ..

How can that be wrong ? It is not my "opinion" it is a fact.

You think this is an important distinction and it's simply not. Again: your premise is wrong. The only people that believe the Insurgent mission is to oust the foreign invaders are the 16 year old suicide bombers and apparently yourself. The Insurgents are fighting to get their share of the money and power in Iraq, nothing more. The notion of jihad is simply a rallying point for the weakminded fools.

You can cry all day about fact versus opinion but if you don't bring germane facts to the discussion we may as well be talking about the weather.

[Melnibone]

Originally posted by metalbrew:

we may as well be talking about the weather.

Which also would have no place in this forum - unless it's an in-game weather issue. I hope this forum is not going to descend into countless threads like this one. Please take it somewhere more appropriate.

[hoolaman]

Holy **** that video is pretty amazing.

I pray the violence may end and those guys can go home to their families.

[Bigduke6]

Other Means, thanks, that was an excellent report.

As to this:

About the journalist work, well, that´s wath journalists do, sell their story and keep the "boring", "uninteresting" stuff out for our viewing pleasure. And of course an old lady or children crying is always excellent to keep audiences aroused.

I disagree with that. The "story" here, as I see it, is the men of Apache company are in an extremely stressful situation, and the troops know it. Further, it is possible it is a no-win situation.

U.S. troops crashing into the house of a cripped Iraqi grandmother, twice, is evidence that the situation is no-win. This is because the key to winning the war is getting the Iraqi people on the side of the US forces. This is unlikely to happen, when the main contact the typical contact Iraqi people have with U.S. forces is, violence and death comes into the Iraqi person's house.

Shooting up what appears to be a taxi cab driver because he didn't stop is another bit of evidence in favor of the arguement that the war is no-win. The troops had no choice, the rules of engagement are clear. But as a result, if that woman was telling the truth, the neighborhood just got an example of what the U.S. troops do: Come onto the block and kill Iraqis for reasons that - as good as they may be to the Americans - seem bad to the Iraqis.

Even when the Americans start patching up little children harmed in bomb blasts, from an Iraqi POV the logic is strong: if these foreign soldiers would go away maybe my life will be safer, and my children will not get injured and killed. The bottom line is that the populace had no rights but a general peace until the Americans destroyed the Saddam regime, and for an average Iraqi it makes sense to blame the Americans for the war and violence killing and injuring Iraqi kids.

Finally, interviews with the troops of Apache company do not give viewers the impression that the troops are hard-core committed to victory. Since that commitment is critical to the sacrifice needed to win most wars, its absence is further evidence the war ain't going well.

Now, if the war is going great and contact between U.S. troops and the Iraqi people is just wonderful, then of course the journo is to be condemned for picking out the sensationalist nasty bits and griping troopies and playing them up for a sexy news story.

But if the war is going badly, or even if the war might be goign badly, voters interested in deciding whether to support politicians who say the war is going great, then the news piece is an excellent piece of journalism. The facts are there, and the viewer is welcome to draw whatever conclusions he wants.

The notion of jihad is simply a rallying point for the weakminded fools.

This is an arrogant statement and absolutely wrong. Jihad is the Sixth Pillar of Islam, it is a basic tenet of the Shia faith. Jihad is only a shade less important to the Sunni faith, and it is worth bearing in mind that, though the Sunni faith does not include jihad in its Five Pillars, it was precisely Sunnis that were displaced from power by the American invasion.

Which, by and large, is seen in Iraq as a Christian invasion, and often a Crusader invasion. "Crusader" is of course a code word for the region: The successful Jihads against Christian invaders of Moslem lands in the 13th and 14th centuries are taught to every member of Islam to this day.

To denigrate Jihad as a sop for the Islamic weak-minded, is to ignore one of the most basic and widely-held values of Islamic, and so Iraqi society.

It is the concept of Jihad that keeps the contributions from Saudia Arabia and Kuwait flowing, the suicide bombers volunteering, and even makes a nut like Osama bin Laden a vague hero figure to probably close a billion people on this planet.

Which, interestingly enough, means that the news report Other Means brought us calls into question stay-the-course mentality of the two present wars into question in another way:

If -

On one side you have professional soldiers burning out in what they see as an effectively futile conflict

And -

On the other side you have Moslems believing they are fighting a Holy War

Then -

Which side do you put your money on?

[MikoyanPT]

Bigduke6

Don´t feel surprised if i say that i agree with most of your post... not all, but most of it...

But this forum is not place for political discussion !

So i will keep my opinions on political matters to myself.

[tiny_tanker]

Originally posted by konstantine:

I see. Thanks for the added info guys. I am aware it's a warzone, my questions are wholly out of curiosity mixed with ignorance. I'm not implying any criticism.

Also Mikoyan, to clarify: in the video there are two separate incidents. The first involves the Bradley, the second involves the ambush of Iraqi troops. The soldiers following the Stryker on patrol occurs after the Bradley gets wasted. Both houses are breached on that occasion. Then, the old lady's house is entered again, on the second occasion, to treat the wounded Iraqi (who lives or dies, who knows).

My conclusion is that while the video is interesting the narration is complete crap. There is no context, just a series of disconnected vignettes with interviews of some understandably shaken up soldiers.

Most of the issue is your only seeing one squad not the whole platoon. There should be 5 or 7 other squads in the area (Strykers don't leave home alone, ever) and after the IED Bradley thing they would all be raiding houses in the vicinity. We only see two of those houses. I'm sure they raided 4 or 5 houses at least. Of course detaining people and making an old lady cry makes good dramatic tv.

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Bigduke6:On one side you have professional soldiers burning out in what they see as an effectively futile conflict

I didn't take that from the video. It seemed to me that the soldiers in the piece were just plain tired.

[Bigduke6]

Yeah, it could be that too.