Milwaukee Army Recruiting Center on Oakland Attacked Again
anon, 18.03.2008 17:21
Some pictures of the army recruiting center.
"I snapped these while taking a stroll down Oakland. Whatever group did this, the message is clear -
It's on! (again, for the fucking fifth year)"
-Mark
 http://mke.indymedia.org/en/2008/03/209383.shtml
OH NO!
18.03.2008 - 17:53
Why ever would someone do this? We had a perfectly civil rally on Saturday in the exact same spot that we have had it for five years now. Sure, it hasn't done a damn thing to end war or stop even one single death but it makes us feel really good. This action makes me question tactics and the passive, loyal opposition mode of protest. THAT, my friend, is offensive.
frank>
Wow! That Was Really Courageous!
18.03.2008 - 19:22
Someone (no doubt someone with a really cool-looking black bandana over his or her face) sneaked up in the middle of the night and scrawled a few lame slogans in spray paint on a small military recruitment storefront in Milwaukee! At last the revolution has started! Tell Lenin he better come back to town in a sealed train!
Fragger>
A Rhetorical Question
18.03.2008 - 20:40
Did someone use a syringe to put urine and fecal matter
through that spiderweb broken window and get some of those
bodily fluids into the very center inside of that recruiting
station? I'm pretty sure I can see clearly that someone must've
slipped some of that horrible stuff into that building, through
those tiny little cracks, right?
cheers,
marco
marco>
!
18.03.2008 - 21:44
Expect (further) resistance!
Chaos>
well yeah
19.03.2008 - 08:59
it was really courageous. some high principled individual risked encountering the wrath of the State to assert her voice.
thank you for doing this.
and for recognizing and fixing a weakness in last year's action - that it doesn't take a big angry mob to smash a window. :]
kilgore trout>
regarding last year:
19.03.2008 - 11:12
It's a weakness to get caught, that's for sure, but it is important to break out of isolation, to be in open revolt. Otherwise resistance seems like it can only happen at night in small groups (which should definitely happen much much more often).
tout niquer>
boarded up
19.03.2008 - 11:16
As of last night, the recruiting center has boarded up its windows either out of fear of further attacks or embarassment. There are many more recruiting centers in Milwaukee and Wisconsin that haven't yet.
friend of breaking glass>
Typical liberal bigots.
19.03.2008 - 11:41
Here we see again hate filled liberals directly attacking the us military. Don't ever say you "support the troops" because you are lying. Not unusual for bigoted anti-military anti-american liberals.
SGT ME>
Flipping Cowards!
19.03.2008 - 11:59
Right... it takes a lot of courage to commit acts of common vandalism on government property.
You don't support the troops. You hate your country. Go live in your socialist utopia in North Korea or Iran. See how you like it.
SpecksBacon>
I can't wait...
19.03.2008 - 12:02
I'm all for protest and the right to be heard, but I'm looking forward to the day when you vandals go after the wrong person's home or place of business and one of you gets your brains sprayed all over the sidewalk because someone had enough of your crap. When that happens, maybe you guys will realize that it's not your right to vandalize and destroy property because you don't agree with the message. Besides, you're all a bunch of cowards anyway and only do it under the cover of darkness. You'd NEVER go toe to toe with anyone.
CitizenG>
RE: Flipping Cowards
19.03.2008 - 12:15
I agree with your sentiment, but my biggest problem with this nonsense is that the building is not government property. It's private property owned by a local small businessman. So, now he must pay to repair these damages, again, because some fucking 19-year-old vegan decided to put on a black bandana, a Defiance patch and play "anarchist." Grow the fuck up.
Evan>
Too bad
19.03.2008 - 12:45
Too bad we don't shoot traitors in this country anymore. But one day, enough people are going to get sick and tired of your anti-American crap and they're going to fix bayonets and give you a message you'll never forget. Hate America? Get the hell out!
former Marine>
Laughable
19.03.2008 - 13:38
"War is offensive." Tell that to the millions our American military have freed from the Nazis, Soviets, and other fascist outfits. How do these idiots think Hitler was defeated? By asking him to withdraw his forces and play nice? Dumbfucks.
Joel>
Re: Evan
19.03.2008 - 14:08
Perhaps it's time to find a new tenant? Surely a small businessman can find another small business that wouldn't be so strongly disliked by the community. I would bet that something like a bakery or a teen community space would be guarded as fiercely as the current place is attacked.
And for CitizenG, such vandalism makes a lot of people unhappy but faced with the ineffectiveness of traditional sign holding & chanting protests, what alternative should someone truly against war take?
For all who are upset by this vandalism, take a moment and imagine you are truly against this war and you know it in every fiber of your body. You feel it rage every second of the every day, knowing how many are dying. Knowing how many lives, surely as intricate and meaningful as any of yours, are destroyed daily by this war.
And you know protest falls on deaf ears. . .
What do you do?
Please share with me because clearly voting and mass (peaceful) opposition have done nothing. NOTHING.
What do you do?
Ron>
fruck you
19.03.2008 - 14:35
I would beat the little leftist bastard to a bloody mess.
Dan>
RE: Ron
19.03.2008 - 14:51
I really don't think a small group of "anarchists" qualifies as "the community." And I certainly don't think the owner of that building needs to bend over and evict a perfectly worthwhile tenant just to appease a small group of thugs.
But let me ask you this:
You say sign holding and chanting are ineffective. Exactly what has the effect of this vandalism been? It’s cost an innocent businessman hundreds, maybe thousands, of dollars. It’s pissed off a large swath of the community, specifically more moderate anti-war liberals, like myself.
So, I ask again, how has such vandalism in any way had a positive, or even worthwhile, effect on your cause?
You feel powerless, fine. But taking out your “rage” by smashing windows and spray painting a building is just childish. Maybe if you have a big enough hissy fit people will pay attention. But they certainly won’t take you seriously.
If you want to help people, go volunteer, join the Peace Corps, AmeriCorp, whatever. Smashing windows isn’t going to achieve anything. And it certainly doesn’t do one goddamn thing for those destroyed lives you pledge to care so much about.
Evan>
Right On!
19.03.2008 - 15:08
The method of delivery (graffiti) is wrong,
but the message is SO RIGHT.
timmers>
unthinking boot of empire
19.03.2008 - 15:11
A lot of comments here are obviously not worth responding to, their inane stupidity speaks volumes more than a reply often could.
A better question would be to ask all of you, former marine, Joel, CitizenG and other pyschopants, why you don't hate a country that only exists due to hundreds of years of genocide, slavery, domination, etc? A country that is 5% of the world population but consumes and decimates the majority of the world, that promotes the most arbitrary "achievements" producing the most isolated alienated lives ever as the pinnacle of civilization. How silly you all make yourselves look. Most under the boot of empire do not need to think about this, but you people are the boot that presses down, you are the slobbering stuttering mass of fanatical followers of order. One can know they have succeeded to an extent if they have produced froth in the mouths of scum, such as yourselves.
For all the people who don't hate america, would you kindly please get the hell out. It would be much nicer without you.
regarding evan's comment:
I'm confused what this action had at all to do with being 19, vegan, wearing a bandana, patches or playing anarchist. Such comments make one wonder who is in fact the grown up.
regarding some other idiot:
"War is offensive." "Tell that to the millions our American military have freed from the Nazis, Soviets, and other fascist outfits."
War isn't offensive? Tell that to anyone who has either fought for the US government, or been on the opposing sides for any of the conflicts that have defined the US since its inception. The US government has been in a state of war with other sovereign nations, peoples, land, individuals, ecosystems for its entire existence. Your ahistorical understanding of the world leaves you pathetically naive.
tout niquer>
Re: Ron
19.03.2008 - 15:16
So, if I feel that AT&T hasn't serviced my cell phone needs well enough and calling and writing letters hasn't done enough, I should burn their building down and that's justified? As for the guy's tenant, you're not the judge of who he can and can't rent to. They're a legitimate and paying tenant, which is all that is required. It's not like they're a NAMBLA field office. Besides, do you think breaking a window and spray painting the DUMBEST phrase ever (war is offensive) is going to change ANYTHING? You won't change anything becuse no one takes you seriously. I don't like the war anymore than anyone else and I served, but vandalizing a recruiting station solves and proves nothing. But, like I said, you're all a bunch of cowards and would never stand toe to toe with anyone. You would never get in a serviceman's face when you know that there wouldn't be a cop around to save your whiny little ass. You're a bunch of punk kids that think you have 'the system' figured out. I await the day someone spreads your face or brains on the sidewalk. That will be a telling day in your little 'revolution'.
CitizenG>
They're punks
19.03.2008 - 15:19
How brave of them to do their misdeed when no one is around.
Jeff>
It does nothing but hurt your cause!
19.03.2008 - 15:19
Vandalizing recruiting centers does nothing to help your cause. The individuals who work their signed up to defend your "Priviledge" to live in this country and protect your "Priviledge" to free speech. Protesting outside of recruiting centers and military bases is not an effective way to get your point across that you don't like us in Iraq. They are not the ones who make the decisions they are just employees. It would be like complaining to a clerk at wal-mart about the price of an item. They can't do anything about it. You have to have the manager come and adjust the price. Same with the military the ALL VOLUNTEER FORCE has no say in were they go and who they fight they listen to the "MANAGEMENT" or YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS!!!!! If you want to protest and get your point across protest in MADISON or WASHINGTON D.C. THEY are the ones who make the decisions not the soldiers, airmen, seaman, and marines working in the recruiting station or at their base. Leave those who defend your freedom alone because if it wasn't for them you would have NO FREEDOM. Go after the politicians who make the decisions and vote for the other guy!
Thank you! The Proud Airman Defending Your Freedom Everyday!
Nathan>
typical liberal activity
19.03.2008 - 15:24
We are going to see a lot more of this in the future I'm afraid becuase there are no consequences that our enforced anyway. I agree, honorable Americans will eventually get tired of this crap and when we catch these traitors we treat them as such and are put on trail for treason. This will send a strong message to those who hate America and there are stiff consequences for those who help embolden our enemies.
chris>
tout niquer
19.03.2008 - 15:28
"I'm confused what this action had at all to do with being 19, vegan, wearing a bandana, patches or playing anarchist. Such comments make one wonder who is in fact the grown up."
What this action has to do with that archetype is that I'd be willing to bet all the money in my pockets that the person, or persons, who committed this vandalism fit into that trendy mold. And their actions are no more thought out than the clothes they choose to wear or the music they choose to listen to. And I say this from experience. I know a lot of the anarchist crowd in Milwaukee. I know a lot of the Milwaukee 21. And the vast majority of them are full of shit.
In closing, I do find it very odd that you would call on those who "don't hate" America to leave. Shouldn't the ones who hate leave? Just askin'
Evan>
Sissys
19.03.2008 - 15:43
Oh, yes. Very brave. Sneak up in the middle of the night, spray some paint on private property when NO ONE is around and toss a brick or a rock. Seriously, with that level of bravery, you should consider a career as a superhero. You know, flying around in your cape and spandex leotard, fighting crime, letting bullets bounce off your chest then ducking when they throw the empty gun at you.
Perhaps you should consider that this mess your brave act made will cost everyone in Milwaukee to some extent. If this goes to the insurance carrier, the property owner's rates go up, the rents following right behind to cover it. If the property owner has to foot the bill for clean-up, rents go up to cover it. If rents go up, do you think the Domino's franchisee is going to eat that increase? It looks like there are apartments above the storefronts. Think their rent will stay the same? Sure it will.
If the rents go high enough, the cost of a pizza could be pushed up to where not enough people want to buy from that store. Or the profit (bad word) goes down to where it isn't worth it to keep the doors open. The business closes. Now there are another ten or twenty people out on the street competing for those entry level jobs. If one of those now unemployed people lives above the store, how are they supposed to pay their rent?
Yep. Pretty brave move. Hey, you keep up the good work though. Idiots.
Hope somebody decides your place of business or home (whether house or apartment and whether you own it or rent) needs some good old-fashioned "protest" efforts.
Bring It>
dear evan,
19.03.2008 - 15:49
I find it hard to believe that even if you might have met these people once that you know these people. Anything less than conflict with this society is much more of a stereotype and arbitrary, much less thought goes into flowing with the inertia of civilization which allows us hardly the room to breath. I don't know who did this, and I can bet even if you may have met people involved in last years action that you are far from KNOWING them. Milwaukee anarchists are not one solidified generalization, there are many with many different ideas and desires. Even the "Milwaukee 21" were not all anarchists and nothing close to all anarchists in Milwaukee participated in last years action.
In response to your final question; I don't really advocate for anyone to leave the country, but it is those who don't hate america that make america something that I necessarily hate.
tout niquer>
hey at least it sends a message
19.03.2008 - 16:15
no one thinks this is an action that will change shit. but who the fuck cares if it costs some money to the army... but oh no thats tax payers money.. thats our money. but then again i don't see nearly as heated arguments when the military spends 20 million dollars on planes that it never uses or deploys yet they continue to buy new ones of every year.
this is just some good clean fun to give us all a little smile. good work. i appreciate it! too bad it wasn't the recruiters face that was smashed.
up the rocks>
tout niquer
19.03.2008 - 16:45
I'd say I've "met" a fair share and I "know" a fair share. But it's really neither here nor there and I'd rather concede the point then go off on a tangent.
My original point is: vandalism like this is counter-productive and accomplishes no worthwhile goal.
Evan>
Liberal Liars
19.03.2008 - 16:46
Support our troops but dont support the war. Liberals are liars they say we support the war, but we need to get the hell out of Iraq. What the hell are they fighting for? What type of message are we sending our troops who risk their lives every day and lazy ass liberals are secretly vandalizing recruitment centers and spreading crap all over our country.
Shad>
up the rocks>
19.03.2008 - 16:54
That's exactly where you're wrong. This damage doesn't cost the army a dime. This isn't government property.
The money to repair this comes out of the pockets of a local man with a wife and kids. Are you seriously so callous and selfish not to give a shit about that?
Evan>
What make you feel good
19.03.2008 - 16:56
Typical liberals, I always find it amusing how the anti-war left says that they are against the war but they support the troops. Granted this is a extreme way to express your distaste for the war, but to me it's all the same. I am a soldier. I proudly serve my country and I have friends all over the world putting their neck on the line for idiots like this. You might not realize it, or you choose to listen to the unfounded anti-war info that the majority of the media passes out on a daily basis, but the fact is that we are winning this war. We have accomplished the majority of our objectives and the overall moral of the troops is good. We all miss home, And we all miss our family, but we understand what's at stake. So for you people here that like to protest because it makes you feel good or because you base your decisions in life off of emotions remember how you got the right to express your opinions, by soldiers fighting and dying for your freedom. If you find that hard to believe go read a history book!
ca_soldier>
War Is Offensive
19.03.2008 - 16:57
War is offensive, that's why it's the best defense. Go ahead, have another drink of cool-aid you morons.
Kenn>
evan
19.03.2008 - 17:22
"vandalism like this is counter-productive and accomplishes no worthwhile goal"
What is counter productive? So far it has accomplished dialog, excitement, closing the recruiting center for a couple days, which is something a peaceful rally has never done in Milwaukee. I know we can blather on about who actually owns the property of the recruiting center and so on. The inside of the building is owned by the federal government, but yes the outside of the building the part that is usually vandalized and damaged is owned by whoever rents them. They probably have a wife and kids. It's true, but are we to pause and think and resist ending institutions of domination merely because the people who support them have a wife and kids as sure they all do. These actions encourage those who want to support their families to pursue other means.
tout niquer>
Get your facts straight
19.03.2008 - 17:27
Evan it might not cost the military a dime but what do you think it does to their moral? How do they feel about the people of this country?
And your wrong I do care about if it hurts the average citizen. I never said that I didn't care and I didn't say that it cost the military anything when they hit recruitment facilities. I know that It hurts the average business man thats why the liberals are all full of shit. They aren't just sending a message to the military about the war they are costing people money in the process. People who are probably already in economic crisis.
Shad>
Thank God it is offensive!
19.03.2008 - 17:53
War is offensive!! I thank God that it is not defensive. This isn't tough, think about it. Our President made the tough call to make this an offensive war rather than let the terrorists bring it again to our soil. So many simpletons just aren't quite able to grasp the significance of this. Freedom, we live it every day by the grace of God and the sacrificial work of our soldiers in uniform. Next time you see a soldier thank him for fighting for your freedom. You wouldn't have it without him.
Ron Maurer>
History Indeed
19.03.2008 - 18:05
Regarding ca_soldier's "go read a history book!" I totally agree! (although I'd suggest reading several - all writers are propagandists!) Perhaps americans' freedoms were won by soldiers' deaths in years past but to think that soldiers in iraq are fighting FOR those same freedoms is nothing short of delusional. If anything, we've lost freedoms since the invasion started and I don't think that a terrorist organization is going to take over the US government and rescind the bill of rights.
Speaking of freedom and the bill of rights, what exactly does the bill of rights protect us FROM? Well, it protects us from the GOVERNMENT and the repressive laws governments have a tendency to "enact". If "freedom" is to mean anything, our allegiance must be to liberty and nothing less. America is NOT synonymous with freedom and liberty and don't give me any bullshit comparison with a country in a worse situation. (if two cars are speeding toward a cliff is it really any consolation to be going slower than the first?)
I love the land and lakes america claims as its own but am disgusted by the atrocities people continue to commit in its name. Lets be honest with ourselves. In the end, is our allegiance with liberty or with a government? With Freedom, or with the idea of freedom?
I think we can all learn a lot from tout niquer. She is obviously someone who has aligned herself with liberty and will oppose any institution that rises to its detriment.
I'm not a liberal.
I don't support the troops. (why lie? they may not choose the enemy, but they do choose to join)
and I will forever fight on the side of liberty.
Won't you join me?
Paul>
tout niquer
19.03.2008 - 18:08
I really don't know what constructive dialog this has created. I guess between you and I, but I was already more or less on your side - certainly more on your side than someone like ca_soldier's.
I don't think this vandalism will have any meaningful effect on changing the minds of those who don't agree with you, though. Because for every ounce of excitement it's created for those who agree with you it's created anger for those who don't. That's simply not constructive. Sure it's closed the center for a few days, but so what? It's still going to re-open and anyone who intended to enlist probably just went to the center on Wisconsin Avenue instead.
RE: The building
I disagree that the inside of the building is owned by the federal government (maybe the stuff inside the building is, but the building in its entirety is not) it's not the point since, as you point out, it was the outside that was vandalized.
And I don't think it's just blathering. I think talking about the owner of the building goes to my central point that whoever committed this act did not think it though. He/she did not think about the "real" consequences. He/she wanted to say "fuck you" to the army and I guess it accomplished that, but nothing real was accomplished, nothing will change as a result of this, no institution of domination will be ended. Just some guy now has to pony up a few thousand dollars out of his pocket and now paying his employees and taking care of his family becomes that much more difficult. Is that really a job well done for the anti-war movement?
Evan>
Shad
19.03.2008 - 18:19
Ummm, I don't know what you're talking about, Shad. Are you "up the rocks"?
I'm going to respond to your comment assuming you are.
What do I think spray painting the Oakland Ave. recruitment center does to the morale of the military? I don't think it even registers. I guess it upsets the guys who work there but in the grand scheme of things I think it has exactly zero effect.
And I never said you didn't care about the average citizen, I asked you if you didn't. And if you say you do I take your word for that. But by saying, "this is just some good clean fun to give us all a little smile," it sure doesn't seem like you're giving the average citizen (the owner of the building) much consideration.
Evan>
bassakwards
19.03.2008 - 18:25
It always amazes me to see peace lovers use violence to protest violence. Try that crap when the soldiers are there. No nuts to defend no nuts to protest either. Basically just nutless. Crazy really, these guys will be the ones bending over for the soap in the next set of gulags God forbid.
Y'all>
Futility
19.03.2008 - 18:27
This stuff is quite amusing to me. I was talking to a young man about joining the Army today. He had been sitting on the fence for about three weeks. I had received the link to this 'article' in my email about 10 minutes before he came into my office. During the course of our conversation he noticed the pictures on my computer and asked me what I was looking at. I explained the attack and the 'reason' behind it and he immediately straightened up, looked at me and the Sergeant beside me and said "Sarge, I'm ready to do this. No way do I ever want someone thinking I'm like those people." He'll be enlisting on Friday. HOOAH!
Sarjint>
 e-mail:: sarjintnospam@hotmail.com
WTFO
19.03.2008 - 18:38
Really, are kids this dumb now. Thinking this will help you get your message out to stop the war, and the knuckle head that wishes he could have smashed the recuriter face in, I bet he is wishing you tried. You shit heads should be greatful that you can do this and not be hunted down by your goverment like in other countries. Well you did one thing, pissed off every vet in this country. When you grow up will you be proud of your self or feel sorry and emepty. Get a life. Vote for McCain. Yut!
BREAK THIS>
What a dumb little piece of $#!T
19.03.2008 - 20:04
give me a fucking break. its an army recruiting center. there are millions of troops in iraq who are over there fighting for your freedom. and you vandalize the place people go to fight for YOU.
war is offensive. well no shit its offensive but its necessary. pull out of iraq now and chances are we'll be looking at world war 3.
expect resistance. well this one's a little unclear. it could mean if you go to iraq, watch out cuz they're gonna shoot back. well, no shit. it could also mean resistance on our own soil to the war. whats a better way to support the soldiers who are putting their lives on the line fighting for your freedom than to say the war is bad, you don't support what they're doing for oyu over there, and that they should leave? hmmmmm you know what i think your right theres nothing better you could do
5 years too many?!? yeah, okay, we've been there for 5 years. but you cant honestly tell me that you were watching the twin towers burning on tv thinking gee, we better not try to get the guy who did that, that would be war, and that would be offensive. oh my, not war. we should sit back and twiddle our thumbs until they attack us again. gimme a fuckin break. 2792 innocent people died on 9/11, and youre telling me that its bad to fight against terrorism. war is offensive but you cant expect the world's superpower to let an attack on our own soil slide. if you really think that we've been there 5 years too long get the hell out of the country.
American>
e-mail:: andthehomeofthebrave@gmail.com
Thanks
19.03.2008 - 20:23
Typical they probably don't even have a job. But let us thank our Soldiers,Marines,Sailors,and Airman who have the real jobs for their selfless service to this great nation. Some people just don't see the big picture. The Enemy is watching and laughing. Lets bring it to them and not to us!
Porterjr>
just an observation
19.03.2008 - 20:34
these are some VERRRRRRRRRRRRRY tired arguments.
marco>
"Hey at least its sends a message"
19.03.2008 - 20:58
Why so bitter, oh by the way your tax money pays for my NICE BRAND NEW Army uniform to be made, and the 10 M-16A2 Rifles that I trained my ROTC cadets on today, so they can go KILL terrorists that threaten your daily life. Hey "up the rocks" thanks for your donation to the federal goverment on payday!
Blue4>
Concerning the above comments
19.03.2008 - 21:54
Firstly, this action had nothing to do with "liberals". The action itself is inherently non-liberal. Thus it has nothing to do with "us peace lovers", with "damn liberals" or "lefties" or any other rubbish like that.
Secondly, it also wasn't necessarily done by an anarchist either. As someone who is significantly involved in anarchist organizing in Milwaukee, I can say with almost complete certainty that this wasn't done by anyone I know. So don't just assume that whatever person did this fits into your stereotype of what an anarchist is; and don't assume that any anarchist you "know" did this either. Anyone can do this (thats the important part.)
So what does this mean? It means that people are done with the channels of "resistance" allowed by authority. In 2006 politicians were swept into office promising an end to the war; yet the war continues. Voting does nothing. For years we've seen mass demonstrations and protests. That too has accomplished nothing. Thus, we're left only with revolt.
and yes, this action didn't stop the war in any quantitative way. But everyone has to start small. Insurrection can't happen over night. At the very least, this action has forced the recruitment center to board up its windows in shame and fear. At most, it has inspired everyone who feels at their very core that the culture of death must end.
So no. We aren't trying to persuade anyone. We aren't trying to protest anything. We aren't trying to appeal to those in power. We are working to create a praxis that will lead to the annihilation of power.
And as for this silly debate as to who owns the building; that is entirely immaterial. Regardless of who owns the property, the space serves the function of supplying fresh fodder to the machinery of empire. For that reason alone, it must be shut down. If it is privately owned, the owner needs to find new tenants. (and don't tell me that these tenants are "legitimate". Saying things like that legitimizes systematic warfare and rape worldwide. If an army recruiter is legitimate to you, we have nothing to say to eachother).
Oh, and for the record, the only soldier I support is a soldier that rebels. Even a volunteer army can bring the war to a screeching halt. (desertion is at its highest rate since Vietnam).
a Milwaukee anarchist.>
ignorant
19.03.2008 - 22:39
I dont think anyone in here realizes that this has no effect on anything. the office is most likely boarded up to prevent theft of things inside the office. the recruiters arent there because the windows are boarded up, I'm sure the Army has renters insurance so the only one losing money are the tax payers, which the people who did this probably are, the soldiers are probably happy that it happened because it gives them a reason to skip out of work. All this act did was make who ever did it look ignorant. this wont end the war, this wont have a dent the number of people getting killed due to war. These people are the same as the terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan, they're cowards, they probably say hello and shake hands with the recruiters every day but at night when no one is looking they make they petty attacks. I'm not sure what the point in doing this was. I understand it was a protest, and a sign that the country is frustrated but there are much better ways to express frustration, the soldiers havent done anything to anyone, except their job. to who ever said it should have been the recruiters face or what ever, I challenge you to attempt something like this at an office that is open and the recruiters are in the office, see what happens. I'm sure the news story's will sound a lot different than this one, and there will be more soldiers getting awards and more ignorant ass holes going to jail.
?>
Desertion rate?
19.03.2008 - 23:09
If the desertion rate is high, it's because people don't want to go to war PERIOD. People join the national guard for college money, go through college, and then proceed to blow off every obligation they can. I'm in the guard, people do it all the time. It's disgusting to watch.
V Drake>
HAPPY ANNIVERSARY!
19.03.2008 - 23:35
who brought cake?
well, anyways- happy 5 year anniversary to the war and a year anniversary to MKE 21.
jesus>
oh yes!
20.03.2008 - 00:09
thank you to the person who finally brought up renters insurance. christ you people are daft if you truely believe the owner of the builing pays for these repairs.
you are also daft if you believe as was theorized that the windows are boarded up in worry of theft. only the door was damaged and that had a mere spiderweb crack, unless a theif can shrink to the size of an atom they will not make it through.
of course this will raise the insurance of the tenant. that is the purpose and when the insurance raises too high for this to be a cost effective recruiting station it will be shut down. this is called strategy.
the person who said that they wish this was like other countries where the perpetrator of this would be hunted down i offer you the assurance that the police will do all that they can to find the individual(s) responsible and put them to trial i only hope the person (people) that did this have remained smart and tight lipped.
this was an act of pure strategized rage and this along with the rage of occupied iraq will be the only thing that will end this war. a huge majority of the american populace are against this war and those that are not are insane to the point that they will never see reason. there is no use in begging them to. now is the time for stop protesting and start resisting.
it is fucking on.
love and a molotov,
frank nowarcyck.
frank>
e-mail:: mkeanarchy@gmail.com
Amazing
20.03.2008 - 04:58
I find it amazing that if you support the troops, the government and the President, you are classified as "insane" by the left.
Yet if you support anarchy, law-breaking, violence and presidential assassination, you are considered "enlightened" by the left.
Where in the world has peaceful discourse gone in this country? Why is the "tolerant left" only tolerant when you agree with them? For those of you professing to hate this country, why do you stay here? If it is so oppressive, you have the opportunity to leave. Why would you stay somewhere that you hate living in? You, unlike our troops, have a choice - you can pack up and move anytime you want to. Go ahead, leave. There are plenty of people dying (literaly) to come here who would be willing to help this nation become even greater. But no, you will continue to live in this country, enjoy her freedoms, take advantage of her opportunities and still bitch and moan about how much you hate the US.
I say, enjoy the US while it still exists, because with people like the ones on the left, there will be no more US. On the day that we become a socialist/communist nation I'm sure you will celebrate. But look around at other socialist/communists nations. How long did THEY celebrate after their revolution? How is it the the "smart" left is not smart enough to realize that the first people to get put in prisons or gulags after a revolution are the revolutionaries themselves? No dictator wants revolutionaries around once the revolution has been accomplished.
Anarchists who get their wish for a lawless country would be the first ones crying for help when they get their wish.
For those of you on the Left, let's have a civilized discourse on our disagreements and stop this childish behavior on your part.
TX_patriot>
desertion rate among basic trainees very high
20.03.2008 - 05:29
November '03 I talked to a cab driver in Columbus Georgia who
"aided and abetted" 10 fence jumpers his own self in those 7 months
since this war began. And he knew about hundreds from his fellow
workers for just that one base alone.
Desertion of basic trainees at Fort Benning is so routine that the
drivers often drive these goofy awkward older teenagers to Walmart
along the way and offer to buy them a change of clothes themself
so they can do their own personal version of the Underground Railroad.
"first let's get you out of these brown and green cloths, you'll
stick out like a sore thumb," he described his methodology to me.
Then it was the long drive to Atlanta or Amtrak.
I could say so much more, but I'll leave you this.
Ethnic makeup of the desertions was stacked heavily toward the black
and assorted other non-white.
Why do mostly southern whites want to fight this war so badly, and
everyone else NOT?
marco>
Freedom
20.03.2008 - 05:35
The morons that did this should be hung up by their toes! Oh dare they dstroy a builiding in the name of peace. Wouldnt that be an oxymoron?? Destroy for peace!!
SGT C>
Renters Insurance
20.03.2008 - 06:05
The Army doesn't pay insurance on our vehicles or the facilities that the Corps of Engineers coordinates for us. The premiums on over 1600 Recruiting Stations (for the Army alone) and close to 10,000 vehicles would be entirely too expensive. When we have damage at an office or an accident in a car, the taxpayer foots the bill for repairs (and yes, I'm a taxpayer too). I will also guarantee you that those Recruiters were not slowed down in their work for an instant. All of the things we need to recruit are web-based so they just went to their Company Headquarters or the next closest station and continued to do their job. America is tired of protesters. The local protest here got a one minute spot on the news and was followed by a 'feel good' story about a National Guard unit returning from Iraq.
Sarjint>
oh frank
20.03.2008 - 06:36
"act of rage"
yeah, it looks like when my three year old has a temper tantrum and scrawls all over the walls. Thanks for clarifying that this is the mothod by which you think the war is actually going to be ended.
dream on.
bingo>
Desertion
20.03.2008 - 06:55
Bull crap you are always going to have deserters, I went through training 16 years ago and there was still trainees who couldn't handle authority,missed home they missed mommy and their girl at home no fault of their own. You got to remember retention in the Army is actually up. College money, I am an ROTC instructor alot of my cadets are nationalguard I have actually had cadets drop out of ROTC and college so they can deploy with their unit so desertion I don't buy it if they are AWOL they go to to jail bottom line or can't get a job at McDonalds.
Blue4>
Hippie Love
20.03.2008 - 07:57
If your happy and you know it clap your hands clap clap, If your happy and you know it clap your hands clap clap, Oh and lets sing kumbaya Oh what does left say "We want change" what a joke. Lets set up more recruiting stations Whats wrong with you people are you that dumb. We got Fundamentalist islamists who want to fly their flag over the White house. Typical Americans so passive they want the easy way out freedom isn't free. So go play your X-box. Go thank the soldiers for their selfless service.
Blue4>
fuck squabling
20.03.2008 - 08:43
we've all got a ways to go in this city. all groups, all people.
eric Theis>
to: "American",
20.03.2008 - 09:14
Wow, maybe I shouldn't be amazed when someone finally brings up the "we have to get them over there" theory and the "they took out 2,000 and some people on OUR land". How egotistical can this country continue to be?
How many people have WE killed in Iraq? That's ok as long as we got revenge?! Protection for the American people? That has yet to be determined. 4.3 million displaced Iraqis. Almost 4,000 soldiers dead. We will never know how many deaths we have caused for Iraq. That in the name of freedom and liberty for us and them?! I don't support the troops. It's time for people to rise up.
old fart>
more fun!
20.03.2008 - 10:32
to TX_patriot:
i actually said that the few people that are left who support the war are incurably insane, but thanks for showing me earlier on that your style of debate is the o'reillian fluff and no substance. but since you brought it up it seems only fair that i respond. while i do not want to see another american servicemen die, i do not support our troops when they are killing iraqis. the iraqis at this point are fighting for self determination and to rid them selves of an occupying army, no one that was raised with true american values can oppose that. as to the government, the united states has, since it's inception, been involved in war and genocide from the native americans to iraqis. the government of this country has continually allowed this therefore anyone that supports that government is choosing to enjoy personal gain as opposed to following an obligation to enforce universal human morals. this is, by definition, sociopathic.
as to the things you say i support, that's fairly spot on. feel free to shoot me an e-mail if you would like to know why i'd like to save space on this forum.
as for peaceful discourse it left the public sphere with the likes of bill o'reilly and sean hannity popularizing your very form of debate and with people dieing every hour in iraq it has no place left on the streets. now it does still take place in private one on one conversations just as i sure if we were talking face to face our discurse would be.
to your last question, why would i leave? where would i go that US imperialism has not touched? moreover i love this land and the majority f it's people however misled they are. since this is true i will stay and work to change the make up of how this place is run, just as i am sure you did nt leave when a president you did not support put into actions that you did not support.
to sgt C:
this building was not destroyed for peace (it actually wasn't destroyed at all) it was attacked in an effort to end this war and the culture of domination that allows wars like this to take place. i remind again this was not a liberal peace group action this was an attempt at revolutionary action the two have very different goals.
to Sarjint:
i have to admit i do not know the military's policy on insurance so i am perfectly willing to accept that i was wrong about renter's insurance and will do more looking into that aspect. that said i don't think that it changes the debate at all, in fact it makes this strategy easier and quicker seeing as the cost part of the cost benefit analysis is raised. as to the work of these recruiters not being hindered, it is my understanding from speaking to recruiters (some from this very station) that when the station is closed because of protest they get the day off. this is a win win, gave some servicemen much needed vacation and kept the army from getting new service men. moreover this station specifically has ridiculously low quotas that it still has trouble attaining even with a high school four blocks away and a college only two blocks away. at this point it is staying open more as a symbol and propaganda than as a viable asset for the army. (if you want to talk abut wasted tax dollars we can start there) this makes it the perfect target.
to Bingo:
are you really going to compare specifically targeted, planned and thought out action to the temper tantrum of a five year old? really? give me a call when your five year old's tantrum makes a bomb plants it at a recruiting center in times square has it detonate while hurting no one and gets away with no identifying evidence anywhere to be found then we will talk.
blue4:
you argue that desertion always takes place. this is true but you are ignoring the fact that while our military has not increased in size desertion has increased exponentially. this makes your argument nothing but fluff. then you have a post saying that those responsible for this action are hippies which then breaks down into a nonsensical rant that since it obviously has no substance i will not waste time with.
ok, that was fun, who's next?
frank>
e-mail:: mkeanarchy@gmail.com
american,
20.03.2008 - 10:37
Wrong country, wrong leader
I imagine you still believe in santa claus, the tooth fairy, the easter bunny and even jesus.
cheshire cat>
Ding Ding!
20.03.2008 - 11:33
Anarchists -> 4
name-calling conformists -> 0
Keep it up Frank and Tout!
Willy>
We die it before - We musn't do it again
20.03.2008 - 11:40
The comments here are pretty much by youngsters that were not around when this same type of situation was occuring during the Vietnam War. And it is shaping up to be the same.
The radical youth of this country created a panic situation the ultimately caused us to pull out of the War before, and while we were winning. In consequence tens of thousands of Vietnamese were slaughtered by the government that took over. And live in oppresion to this day.
Our country has been at war since it's inception. We are the most free society on the globe. And this is an affront to those that wish to rule by force, and/or expand their territory. So do we stay home with our heads in the sand? Pulling out of Iraq in the same manner as we pulled out of Vietnam, would make the "Killing Fields" of the far east look like a walk in the park. It would not be Thousands of people killed and enslaved, it would be millions.
Our Military is an "All Volunteer" military. Those in the service are there by choice, and have taken a solemn oath to defend the United States to the death. And unfortunately many have paid that price, so that those that defaced the Recruiting office, and demonstrate against the war can do so in a free society. In most countries of the world, they would be shot, jailed, or tortured.
Check out the death Toll in Tibet within the past few days when their youth tried the same type of protesting.
Richard>
e-mail:: altacomlv@hotmail.com
longcat is looooooooooooooong
20.03.2008 - 12:19
Keep up the lulz.
anoymous>
TX_Patriot
20.03.2008 - 12:32
I can promise you that a Recruiter does not get a day off due to their office being vandalized. As far as how many people enlist through any given station, that will vary based on the personnel assigned to that office. Recruiting Stations are placed based on historical enlistment data for each zip code in the country and the population density of an area. The proximity of a high school doesn't have much impact on enlistments, it only makes some of the 'mandatory' aspects of a recruiters job easier. The average point in life when someone enlists is two years after graduation from high school.
Bottom line, some folks feel better about themselves for having vandalized a Recruiting office.
It hasn't effected enlistments or our committment in Iraq or Afghanistan and it won't effect enlisments or that committment.
Sarjint>
Milwaukee Army Recruiting Center on Oakland A
20.03.2008 - 16:12
Your recruitment has been down for over three years now. That office on Oakland and Linwood needs to be closed, it's very obvious that you guys are NOT welcome here.
HOW CLEAR DO WE HAVE TO MAKE IT TO YOU??
To the good people that did this: SOLIDARITY!! I'm glad none of you were caught.
Evil_Stalinist>
oops... you got the recruiters upset.
20.03.2008 - 17:14
First I'd like to say I am find much of this exchange amusing.
It seems MKE Indymedia is getting increased hits this week from Army Recruiters forwarding this site link around to each other around the country. Sure there is the occasional racist bonehead who checks the site, but not nearly this much army personnel. (hence the confusion labeling people liberals. NOTE TO RECRUITERS: many of this site’s fans do not identify with the liberal left and have much different views.)
I did not support last years MKE 21. I feel it was a poorly planned, sophomoric protest that put many people at risk unnecessarily. I feel the core organizers failed many of the young people who attended the event, and painted a poor picture of their vision. The group was too large, and there was no strategy to ensure everyone didn’t get caught. Stupid.
That said, I support this years action. Initially, I was annoyed that the same tactic was used two years in a row. However, it seems to have been carried out by a smaller group, with decent security culture in mind, and I assume an exit strategy was carried out to ensure safety.
The station being closed a day doesn’t have a huge effect on the war operation, and the monetary damage doesn’t near the trillions of dollars spent on the war, but it has sent a timely message of opposition. I have read newspaper articles from across Wisconsin that mention the vandalism in Milwaukee. None condemn or support the acts, they merely state the occurrence while also listing other protests scheduled across the country.
When viewed with other actions taking place, this sends a clear message that after 5 years of war, people are angry. People will take part in seemingly irrational actions as they feel otherwise powerless.
Liberals, anarchists, leftists, and cheesehead Wisconsinites oppose this war. We all have different levels of comfort in stating our opinions. I would like to see each do what they are compelled to do without trashing other’s actions. We’re all in this together.
And to the military personnel who received an e-mail link… Remember when “whiney anti-war liberals” get on your boards and make inflammatory comments? Remember how they just seem like douchy unintelligent pricks? Yeah… that’s you this time.
someone around.>
a question for the army folks
20.03.2008 - 18:40
Since apparently the people who did this were cowards for not walking up in broad daylight, telling the recruiters what they were about to do and then doing it while waiting for the police/recruiters to do something to them, does that mean that it is a common tactic in the military to walk up to terrorists in broad daylight, tell them that you are going to kill them, and then begin to shoot? And if not, why are people in the military such cowards?
commando>
Frank
20.03.2008 - 18:55
First of all Frank, I teach ROTC we actually have to turn away young individuals because they don't qualify to become an Army officer I send them up the road to the Army recruiter so they can become enlisted. I just came from a unit I deployed 2 out of 3 years with our units reenlistment rate was over 90% it is not fluff the only ones that go AWOL are the SHITBAGS that can't handle stress and can't take authority, I have had men under my watch that have quit their High paying jobs so they could serve their country , 16 years I've been doing this job would not change it for the world . I think this whole discussion is great, democracy at its best. 300,000,000 people in the US with a 2,000,000 strong military. Bottom line Frank, I would watch your back regardless if you watched mine. and thats why I am proud of my job I understand the military isn't for everybody remember 2,000,000 strong that is are national security. So show I little goddamn gratitude.
"BAPTIZED IN FIRE AND BLOOD AND HAVE COME OUT STEEL"
"BRAVE RIFLES"
Blue 4>
Commando
20.03.2008 - 19:12
Commando,
If you could only understand But, thats okay I'll take a bullet for you and Frank, just like my brothers and sisters who fought WWII, Korea, Vietnam,and all other wars we have fought. "GOD BLESS" I'll have a cold one for ya.
Blue4>
heh, more time to pass
20.03.2008 - 19:58
to richard:
thank you for admitting that this tactic when coupled with many others is able to end war, no when people say this does nothing i can reference you. as to the other things you had to say, you are correct i was not around for the vietnam war, though my father did serve. i have no interest in debating the whether or not we should have been there as i feel history has quite clearly shown that we should no have been. as to you other point of vietnamese death after the US left i would like to point out that as a direct result of our involvement more than one million vietnamese people were killed defending their country from a foreign invader (that would be the united states). even if i do not agree with the politics of a combatant group i will always side with people defending their own land which is under occupation. as to enlistments i am sure that you are not debating the fact that enlistments are way down (since this is pure fact) and i find it odd that you would say that actions like these do not affect these enlistments when you have clearly stated that these actions end wars. hmmm, feel free to clarify.
to someone around:
if you would like to talk about the merits and drawbacks of past actions in milwaukee maybe we should organize some sort of direct action forum. this seems to be a healthy thing for our community to do.
to blue4:
your own personal experience has no part in formal debate especially when it is in direct contrast to actual statistics. enlistment is down and the majority of people in this country not only believe we should have never entered iraq but that we should no longer be there. if this country is so democratic why has this fact not ended the war? moreover if this country is so free then why not show that freedom to others by offering them self determination. or are you just referring to the freedom of US citizens? because it seems to be very selfish to take ones own freedom at the expense of others.
-frank
frank>
Wow
21.03.2008 - 05:56
I can't believe that somebody thinks it is ok to do stupid shit like that. Did they think of the person who had to put up the boards, replace the glass, repaint the bricks, etc. Don't encourage fighting fire with fire you idiot, open your eyes. You are no hero, you are selfish and just as foolish. We're in Milwaukee, not Iraq. Shit like this causes civil wars.....
Thomas>
Evan
21.03.2008 - 06:01
You said it like it is. Being a hipster doesn't make you god or immortal, or even unique. However, doing this shitty act makes them get a full page of comments. I guess at least some discussion is being made. Go to the government, but I fought authority, and authority always wins.... The truest thing I've ever repeated.
Tom
Thomas>
Realism
21.03.2008 - 12:45
For all those who oppose war to the extent of disrespecting the military like this, get a life and stop living in a fanticy world of peace, love, and harmony. Yea it would be amazing if we could, but it's not going to happen as long as "those" people want to, and will stop at nothing to, blow up innocent people (their own or american). Is war an even an option to you people or is diplomacy the only only way to go? If it's the only only way to go or even if its the last resort, answer me one question. How would you realisticaly diplomatically talk to a suiside bomber that is standing right next to you ready to kill himself and you, not to do so? BE REALISTIC!!
The_Realist>
Idiots
21.03.2008 - 17:39
I hope they catch the little bastards.
Jimmy>
Real realism
21.03.2008 - 17:46
Thomas-
Maybe we're overdue for civil war anyway. "The tree of liberty must, from time to time, be watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants," or whatever exactly Jefferson said. We've got plenty of tyrants to choose from.
Realist-
I support war and violence in some instances. Class war and social war, for example. But the strategy the US military is pursuing in Iraq and Afghanistan is failing. That's the realistic assessment. There was no militant Islamic fundamentalist movement in Iraq before the war. Now there is. The war in Afghanistan has forced the Taliban, etc in to Pakistan and destabilized the regime there, which causes crack downs which produces more and more Taliban recruits who then go right back across the border. Any way you slice it, this war is not helping the situation.
hipster scum>
Epitaph
21.03.2008 - 19:58
I have read of such great hostility against this fringe community and disturbers of peace. I do not hate them; I pity this gathering of outsiders.
What they have said is true. They can interfere for a few minutes or hit the news on one day. But they can create no lasting change. It is also true; they can never be stamped out because they have no leader and no real center. These supposed strengths are their weaknesses. They will never grow strong because they despise the very ideas of organization and leadership necessary for growth. Power in government comes from having a voice and a vote. They do not want representation in government, yet complain of not being heard and having no power.
The two concepts are incompatible. They are what the claim to hate and hate that which they wish to become. They despise the very government whose existence allows them the liberty to gather.
I came to this website searching for why they are so angry, from where such hatred comes. I have found the answer. It is no great truth, no special secret. They are mad because they choose to be so.
Society and the world will continue to choose to ignore them.
RunningOnEmpty>
Realism
21.03.2008 - 22:00
To those of you who feel you should support the troops no matter what, let me ask you a question: Do you think that the German people should have supported the Nazis in the 1930's? If you feel that the troops should be supported no matter what, than your answer is yes. That is the moral code which you subscribe to. For those of us who do not have a Nazi morality, the "war" in Iraq is something to be opposed, and all institutions which participate in the aggression towards Iraq should be opposed.
What is happening in Iraq is not a war, it is a genocide which is being waged by the US against the innocent Iraqi people. The genocide has now killed over 1 million Iraqi civilians according to the most academic and detailed survey done so far(ORB). The invasion of Iraq was the supreme war crime and a violation of international law.
If you support the US aggression towards Iraq than you support genocide. When you talk about the savagery of killing civilians you should talk about what the US has done to Iraq ever since it supported the Baathist coup in 1963. The leading terrorist organization in the world is the US government. The US aggression towards Iraq is worse than the Armenian Holocaust.
I oppose genocide and those who carry it out.
Jordan>
running on empty
21.03.2008 - 22:21
You, my friend, have much to learn about the anarchist community.
old fart>
Realism
21.03.2008 - 22:28
Genocide is defined as "the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group." How is building a democracy in Iraq genocide? Yes innocent civilians have died, and NO Americans have NOT killed that many people, they have done that to a large extent by themselves! I think if this were "genocide" as Jordan puts it why try and build a government and hold peace talks for all sides? Damn that MUST be genocide! There is a large difference between the US and Nazi Germany, the US is not out to conquer and dominate the world (even though you liberals believe that) we are simply protecting our nation and interests, any country that wants to survive, especially with the way of life we in the US are accustom to, need to protect our interests. There have been things that have gone wrong, I’m not denying that, and what I am trying to say is that many many things have gone well and not all of Iraq is like what CNN wants you to believe its like; there are many successes. Successes, which you will not acknowledge. And not one person has answered my previous question about the suicide bomber, please answer!
The_Realist>
RE: Jordan
22.03.2008 - 02:27
You are a racist for not knowing shit about the Armenian Genocide and comparing it to Iraq. Those who die in Iraq are mostly from Iraqi death squads.
Just because you heard, in passing reference, about a Genocide somewhere please don't demean the history and those who died in it by bringing it up as one of your points. Now I am sure you will wiki it and try to find some thread of relevancy for your case, but look hard you dumb shit, because it is not there.
The Armenian Genocide was a very serious thing, and not to be taken lightly by you pricks who think you can just say anything you want because you are posting anonymously.
I would beat the shit out of you if you ever say that to my face, and disrespect my fallen ancestors like that.
Get your fucking facts straight you fascist!
Hravart Karaoglanian>
Re: Realism
22.03.2008 - 04:34
To Realist: About your question of suicide bombers, I'm reminded of the movie the Battle of Algiers where a journalist asks a leader of the FLN, "Isn't it cowardly to have your women put bombs in baskets which have taken so many innocent lives?" The response is: "Isn't it even more cowardly to attack defenseless villages with napalm bombs which kill many thousands of times more? Obviously planes would make things easier for us. How about you give us your bombers and we will give you our baskets."
When you participate in the mass killing of civilians, you have no right to accuse others of terrorism. You support mass murder, therefore you have no right to talk about morality.
The Nuremburg Tribunals stated that the supreme international crime is that of aggression,i.e. "invasion by its armed forces" by one state "of the territory of another state". The supreme international crime differs from other war crimes in that "it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole". The US invasion of Iraq was an act of aggression, and all of the evil that followed from that invasion, including the deaths of 1 million Iraqi civilians, is part of that aggression.
What evidence do you have that the US is bringing democracy to Iraq? The US hasn't brought democracy anywhere else in the region, and in fact has helped overthrow dozens of democracies around the globe for the last fifty years. Just because you and George W say that the US is bringing democracy to Iraq does not make it so. The US has been supporting authoritarian regimes in Iraq since the 1960's and they opposed the effort by the Iraqi people to overthrow Saddam in the 1990's. The US is not bringing democracy to Iraq, it is trying to setup a client state like that of other key US allies, like the brutal dictatorships in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan, all of which are heavily supported by the US. The US was opposed to there being elections in Iraq and the new Iraqi government is nothing but a puppet of the US. The new Iraqi government is also closely linked with the death squads that patrol the country. Furthermore, there was never a civil war in Iraq before the invasion and many sects were intermarried. The US aggression towards Iraq qualifies as genocide. This would be true even if the US were bringing democracy to Iraq, but that claim is outrageous and completely false.
You said, "The US is not out to conquer the world..." The new imperial grand strategy which was released by the Bush Administration authorizes Washington to carry out “preventive war.” Whatever the justifications for pre-emptive war may sometimes be, they do not hold for preventive war, particularly as that concept is interpreted by its current enthusiasts: the use of military force to eliminate an invented or imagined threat, so that even the term “preventive” is too charitable. Preventive war is, very simply, the “supreme crime” condemned at Nuremberg.
As the United States invaded Iraq, Arthur Schlesinger wrote that Bush’s grand strategy is “alarmingly similar to the policy that imperial Japan employed at Pearl Harbor, on a date which, as an earlier American president said it would, lives in infamy.” FDR was right, he added, “but today it is we Americans who live in infamy.” It is no surprise that “the global wave of sympathy that engulfed the United States after 9/11 has given way to a global wave of hatred of American arrogance and militarism”.
The occupying army in Iraq (euphemistically called the Multi-National Force-Iraq) carries out extensive studies of popular attitudes. Its December 2007 report of a study of focus groups was uncharacteristically upbeat.
The report concluded that the survey "provides very strong evidence" to refute the common view that "national reconciliation is neither anticipated nor possible". On the contrary, the survey found that a sense of "optimistic possibility permeated all focus groups ... and far more commonalities than differences are found among these seemingly diverse groups of Iraqis."
This discovery of "shared beliefs" among Iraqis throughout the country is "good news, according to a military analysis of the results", Karen deYoung reports in The Washington Post.
The "shared beliefs" were identified in the report. To quote deYoung, "Iraqis of all sectarian and ethnic groups believe that the U.S. military invasion is the primary root of the violent differences among them, and see the departure of 'occupying forces' as the key to national reconciliation."
Question for you: Why is crashing planes into American buildings considered terrorism, yet bombing mosques, schools, and hospitals in Iraq is not?
P.S. I'm not a liberal. Neoliberalism and Neoconservatism are not much different. Both represent the views of the American business party.
Jordan>
Jordan, please think b4 you post.
22.03.2008 - 09:09
Why don't you protest the actions of the terrorists? Is the blood that they spill cleaner because they speak arabic?
Are they excused to kill as many innocents as possible for some reason?
thoughtful radical>
stating the obvious
22.03.2008 - 09:37
What would I do if I was next to a suicide bomber and the only way to stop him was violence? Pop him one in the forehead, obviously. But your scenario has nothing to do with either of the wars the US is engaged in at the moment.
hipster scum>
Realism
22.03.2008 - 09:59
To reply to the question "Why is crashing planes into American buildings considered terrorism, yet bombing mosques, schools, and hospitals in Iraq is not?" Show me proof that US forces have done this on a regular basis, not just once but multiple times on multiple occasions. And its funny because you answered my question with a question, you would have been blown up if you would have said that. Its not realistic! The last two posts have not shown proof of anything they have just ranted on about a "genocide" that America is doing in Iraq, show me, a link to some relyable sources!
And to Hravart Karaoglanian is Mr. Facist, THANK YOU VERY MUCH! If your ever on the Eastside i would love for you to visit me, and four of my military friends who have served in Iraq would also love to meet you too! Kiss my ass!
The_Realist>
Re: Re:
22.03.2008 - 11:29
"Why don't you protest the actions of the terrorists? Is the blood that they spill cleaner because they speak arabic? Are they excused to kill as many innocents as possible for some reason?"
I do protest the actions of terrorists. The murder of 1 million Iraqi civilians is terrorism and I protest it. Is the US excused to kill as many innocents as possible for some reason?
I already presented the evidence that the US occupation is a genocide. For statistics on the casualties from the US occupation look at the Oxford Research Bureau's latest survey. In Iraq the US continues to indiscriminately kill civilians with possibly over an 80% civilian casualty rate. To find out the situation in Iraq read some of the reports from the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Or you can listen to the testimonials of US veterans who have described a policy of indiscriminate killing. Watch "The Winter Soldier" or find accounts from human rights reports.
Jordan>
comment
22.03.2008 - 11:40
One of the most dedicated and informed journalists who has been immersed in the ongoing tragedy, Nir Rosen, has just written an epitaph entitled “The Death of Iraq” in the very mainstream and quite important journal Current History. He writes that “Iraq has been killed, never to rise again. The American occupation has been more disastrous than that of the Mongols, who sacked Baghdad in the thirteenth century,” which has been the perception of many Iraqis, as well. “Only fools talk of ‘solutions’ now,” he went on. “There is no solution. The only hope is that perhaps the damage can be contained.”
David>
regarding war, genocide and history
22.03.2008 - 12:20
War by civilization is inherently genocidal, ecocidal, etc. Its mission is to expand its influence, then control, then deepen that control, to eradicate meddling difference and produce a streamlined sameness -- a circuit board made out of pavement. Dominant states war with peoples that are valued less, financially, culturally, etc. This tends toward a justification that is nationalistic, which tends toward a justification that is racist.
What would be a reliable source to validate our history? Something that is written by those with power enough to produce it, something written by the perpetrators/victors? Anyone capable of writing history is questionable merely because they are capable and others aren’t, from time of the scribes and monks to the current context of the cultural assembly line of academia.
tout niquer>
there are no excuses
22.03.2008 - 17:09
This is wrong. Can we all agree on that? Or is someone going to argue that there an some kind of roundabout excuse for this behavior?
I know wrong from right>
Without concern for "wrong" and "right"
22.03.2008 - 17:52
To say that attacking a recruitment center is "wrong", implies that the existence of that center (and with it war, devastation, and occupation) are "right".
Re-evaluate your analysis, tool.
conflict>
Wow
24.03.2008 - 12:17
Who let the red, white, and blue imbecile parade in? It amazes me people are still trying to use 9/11 to defend this war in Iraq, and believe this and other wars are actually defending the safety and freedom of American citizens. The opposite is more accurate - the government is clamping down on civl liberties, and the military actions are just pouring gasoline on the flames animosity towards the US. And I am suppose to be thankful to the troops for this? Unless one is planning on telling their commanding officers to go fuck themselves, thanks for nothing.
Benjamin>
To all
24.03.2008 - 19:23
I understand that this type of tactic may be offensive to some, but most of the arguments against this vandalism are filled with more hate and violence than any spray paint or slogan could ever contain. It is ridiculous to attack activists verbally by calling them shitheads or saying their brains should be on sidewalks; whoever feels this way should try directing their anger at someone who is deserving of it. If some damaged property gets you mad enough to rant and rave on your little computer, how do you feel about corporations that steal from everyday people like you and me? Or how about the government that oppresses every citizen they can, and kills people all over the world? You think that swearing at some passionate kids will make you feel better at night or will make the world a safer place? These kids are trying to make change, and just because they don't conform to your ideals of how change should happen, doesn't mean they are hooligans who deserve vulgar, hateful replies. Take your anger and aim it at the system.
Bobbi>
Oxford Research Bureau's latest survey??
24.03.2008 - 22:14
Jordan - on 3/22 at 11:29, you said:
"I already presented the evidence that the US occupation is a genocide. For statistics on the casualties from the US occupation look at the Oxford Research Bureau's latest survey."
Can you provide us with a direct link to the actual survey? I see lots of stories that reference the survey. Almost all of them have this exact quote: "The highly regarded British polling agency, Oxford Research Bureau, has just updated its estimate of deaths. Their new estimate a couple of days ago is 1.3 million." However, none of those stories show any link to the actual survey and what methodology the ORB used to arrive at that estimate. Also, I am unable to locate a website for the Oxford Research Bureau. This "highly regarded" agency must also be highly secretive. Maybe I'm not using the right search engine. A direct link would be much appreciated. Thanks.
Joogle>
This is why we fight
25.03.2008 - 20:15
we fight so that this doesn't continue!
childrenareourfuture>
...
26.03.2008 - 10:51
you fight so that genocide continues.
anon>
hypocrisy
26.03.2008 - 11:28
Yeah, bombing those kids and their friends (well not really... those are all from Palestine, not Iraq or Afghanistan so YOU aren't really fighting there) will certainly make them less inclined towards violence.
And kids in the US like to put on army fatigues and play with toy guns too. But I suppose that expression of militarism and violence is acceptable? And I suppose all of the Christian fundamentalist "soldiers for Christ" who have ideas not too far from the jihadists don't need to be "fought," right? Fucking hypocrite.
GI Joe>
Failed Ideologies make Bad Protests
26.03.2008 - 16:16
Actions like this do nothing to help bring the war to a close. The people that did this are probably bursting with pride and talking up and down about "anarchist theory" and how it works. This is an immature statement of suburban youth angst.
The movement won't get anywhere until we work to INCLUDE the mainstream within our movement, not push them away with ridiculous acts of childish vandalism. Without the masses that those who did this seem to hate, we'll never get any further than this kind of action.
Get over puberty, and start doing some real organizing.
Do Something Smarter>
on the question of vandalism and violence
26.03.2008 - 17:09
If "the masses" are put off by "childish vandalism," I wonder how well they'll take to the violence that will be necessary to destroy this fucking system?
Workers are not afraid of vandalism and violence (because they use it!), only moralistic ideologues who want power are.
And no of course this action alone will not stop the war- nobody ever suggested it would. But a widespread attack on the forces that make war (the state, its financial allies) will.
some worker>
A Reply To..
27.03.2008 - 12:31
This is a response to the person who said that "actions like this do nothing to help bring the war to a close." Are you sure you don't want to rethink your claim? Because a movement without any teeth is sure to be ignored. Whether you like it or not, the Civil Rights Movement had Black Power groups and people like Malcolm X that made it a force to be reckoned with. The anti-war movement of the 1960s and 1970s had groups like the Weather Underground and others that made it a force to be reckoned with. The abolitionists had John Brown. Those who struggled to free the colonies from British rule had a whole army of rebels. You want to create social change without being a threat. Any quick look at history shows that that simply isn't possible.
Makhno>
think twice
27.03.2008 - 20:36
I GUARANTEE that the Army didn't think twice about this incident and were nonchalant. Just another day.
Vandalizing this building doesn't do anything except hurt your cause and cause the majority of people to not take you seriously. It isn't helping to end the war. They boarded up the building because they need to make repairs (ie. take the glass out of the windows to replace the coating). They didn't "shut down" in "shame." Far from it. You ideas of why and what they are doing during this past week is VERY skewed.
All you did is create a lot of work for someone who isn't involved with the army. It isn't the army that has to clean up this mess, it is some one who doesn't have time to deal with these people who believe smashing windows and spray painting private property at night is going to stop the war.
I understand people are angry and are frustrated, but you need to think of a different and productive way to help your cause, instead of filling up one person's day and night with extra avoidable work.
.>
Re: ORB Survey
27.03.2008 - 21:55
Sorry I was mistaken, the study was actually updated and the Iraqi casualty figure is 1.03 million and on this site there is a link to the details of the study: http://www.opinion.co.uk/Newsroom_details.aspx?NewsId=88
The ORB study closely corresponds with the Lancet Study. The study done by Lancet, which is a 200 year old medical journal, was described by the Washington Post as "the only study to use scientific methods". So what were those other studies using, faith-based methods? If you look at what is usually quoted by US media it is the Iraq Body Count(IBC) survey which, the IBC itself admits, is not an estimate of total casualties, it is simply a tally of reported deaths. When the countryside gets carpet-bombed those deaths are not reported. This is where the extreme difference in estimates comes from (80,000 as compared to 1.03 million). General Tommy Franks put it quite eloquently when he said, "We do not do body counts." The IBC relies heavily on government sources which are obviously unreliable. Check historically how often governments give accurate estimates of casualties for which they are responsible for. While it is not 1.3 million yet, in another 6 months the figure will be 1.3 million. Wait another 5 years and it will be near 2 million. Maybe 1 million Iraqis are alive now who will be dead due to us in the next few years. Hence the reason we protest the genocide. I don't know if vandalizing the recruitment center is effective or not but I know it's not something to be outraged over. If spray-painting a building is offensive, how much more offensive is it to burn alive Iraqi women and children?
Jordan>
No fault of the terrorists
27.03.2008 - 23:33
the people who are doing the most burning of iraqi women/children/men are iraqis - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKRjrC_d0iA
please use a more credible source then opinion UK. try http://icasualties.org/oif/IraqiDeaths.aspx
and learn arabic so you can join the fight for freedom.
it is so sad that you can only find fault in people that have the courage to serve in our military and that you justify the acts of the terrorists who are serving in the mehdi right now bombing the shit out of innocent civilians. but then again none of you who argue this shit care about facts, or truth, or justice.
you just want to keep on screaming, you probably didn't receive enough attention from your upper middle class white parents, and therefore continue your temper tantrums so that you can get attention.
well keep on crying you babies, because the more property you destroy the more you will make up for the love your mothers never gave you.
have some sense dumbass>
ORB Survey - running the math
28.03.2008 - 00:06
From the ORB link, the study summary states "we now estimate that the death toll between March 2003 and August 2007 is likely to have been of the order of 1,033,000." March 2003 to August 2007 is 1,613 days. Divide that into the estimated 1,033,000 and you get an average of 640 deaths per day. Really?? For 4 years and five months, 640 Iraqis died every day as a direct result of the conflict? 640 deaths/day seems very high - especially when I am only able to locate a few reports of daily death tolls that come close to that number.
Joogle>
re:
28.03.2008 - 10:21
640 is a high number but I’m guessing it is conservative. This is only deaths due related to violence and it doesn’t include Iraqis who have died from starvation or disease due to the destruction of Iraq’s infrastructure from US sanctions and the US occupation. Again, most deaths in Iraq go unreported as embedded journalists rarely leave the Green Zone. If you want to dispute the study’s findings then provide evidence for mistakes in the study or provide evidence of a more accurate study which has a significant different estimate. As for the claim that it is the Iraqis killing each other there was never a civil war in Iraq before the invasion and many Iraqi families included both Shias and Sunnis. The US has been funding and training both Shia death squads and Sunni death squads. Such activity leads to sectarian violence. The different sectarian militias overwhelmingly feel that violence in Iraq is due to the US occupation and that peace can be achieved when the US leaves.
Please make more serious arguments than, “Go join al-Qaeda if you hate our country.” The most elementary moral principle is that of universality. If you wish to have even the minimal level of morality then you must apply standards equally. It is obviously incorrect for any country to invade and occupy the US and it is similarly true when the US invades and occupies sovereign nations without UN approval and in opposition to world opinion.
jordan>
facts
28.03.2008 - 13:46
How many terrorist bombings occurred in Iraq before the military invasion?
And my mother and I have always gotten on fine. I come from a stable, working-class home. Sorry to dissapoint.
raised right>
Reply to "Think Twice"
28.03.2008 - 22:05
Quite the contrary, those in power only begin to take mass movements seriously when they begin to show their teeth. While I agree, it's important to do so in an intelligent manner and in a way that won't turn the majority of Americans against the anti-war movement, it still has to take place! You can't sit there with a straight face and tell me the U.S. would ever have pulled out of Vietnam if not for the hell demonstrators raised back home at the time. If you even try, you don't know your history...
Makhno>
property destruction and the cost of war
28.03.2008 - 22:33
This act of property destruction and vandalism was a non-violent form of speech.
The Common Law can be cited over and over again for the proposition that persons are to be valued over property. "Life and Limb are more valuable than property". In this case, no lives were lost and no person was physically injured.
For all of the people who are rightly concerned about losses of property and the possible effects upon people's jobs and family lives, please consider the massive destruction to buildings that occurs in a typical armed conflict. Whole cities are destroyed, women run to buy bread under the fear of being bombed, and people cannot attend their jobs for fear of being attacked. The economic impact of armed conflict is terribly grave for the civilians who experience it, and it is also rough on the Americans who pay for it with their tax dollars and their entire economy.
I am a fiscal conservative and I oppose giving money to the government and paying for this war. This punk has some brains on her and some derring-do, so I thank her and commend her for her effort to save me money as an American taxpayer.
polly>
for the conservatives
28.03.2008 - 22:50
To my fellow fiscal conservatives, including those who choose to go to the extreme lengths of not having an income to avoid paying income tax, please see the article below on Taxation and how it is impacted by the current war.
http://politicalinquirer.com/2007/10/09/fiscal-conservatives-cant-be-pro-war/
I am so glad that I am a REAL conservative, and oppose war and its effects of grave and massive property destruction and increased taxation of my fellow Americans by the Federal Government.
Yours Truly,
Polly
"fighting against excessive taxation and white collar crime"
polly>
Still don't believe the ORB study
28.03.2008 - 23:47
Jordan - there is no existing evidence or documentation to support the ORB study estimate of 640 deaths/day. The interviewers asked each household "How many members of your household have died as a result of the conflict in Iraq since 2003?" The respondents gave their answer but provided no documentation to support their response. You are already aware of other studies (Iraq Body Count, Iraq Coaltion Casualties) that offer very different estimates signficantly lower that happen to thoroughly document their estimates. So, I really have no desire to dig up additional evidence to dispute the ORB study (or the Lancet at 538 deaths/day) when they have no hard evidence to stand on.
It's also naive to state that "violence in Iraq is due to the US occupation." So Iraq was a peaceful utopia prior to 2003 and "peace can be achieved when the US leaves." You must be excluding the Eight Year Iran/Iraq War and the Iraq/Kuwait conflict from your pre-2003 historical perspective. It's also interesting you only seem to blame the US for this situation when the 2003 invasion into Iraq was a multi-national effort involving nearly 40 different countries in the first year and the US is not the only country still involved there. So drop the "US is evil/immoral/unjust" bit and we act alone "in opposition to world opinion" when there are other countries still investing people and resources into Iraq to help build stability there.
Joogle>
property destruction = non-violent????
29.03.2008 - 00:09
Polly - you have to be joking. An act of destruction is non-violent? Really?? For some reason I doubt you would make the same argument to support someone who might similarly vandalize an abortion clinic - yet your premise would exactly apply. The radical pro-lifer believes "life and limb are more valuable than property" so attacks the physical building of an abortion clinic, but no person was physically injured. You still OK with that "non-violent form of speech" ?
Joogle>
speech
29.03.2008 - 05:19
I think it is problematic when some of my fellow conservatives become over-zealous and kill doctors or obstruct patients from obtaining proper medical care.
Making threats to a person's life or body is also a crime, however no threat to life or limb was made here. If anti-abortion activists would draw the line at spray painting "Stop Abortion" on clinics, I would be happy. However, since they are well funded, the Genocide Awareness Project is probably a more effective campaign, one which can help the participants exercise their right to speech avoid criminal charges for vandalism or property destruction. (I am not certain that all of their tactics are 100% legal though).
Although I do believe that this act was a form of peaceful speech, that's not to say it was necessarily protected speech. I do think it is a kind of civil disobedience.
nana turtle>
this is boring
29.03.2008 - 10:45
The ORB study did request death certificates or evidence of deaths. Again, the Lancet study was “the only study to use scientific methods”. And the IBC itself admits it is not a total estimate of casualties. I hate repeating myself. You are not going to believe the higher estimates because you are a jingoist that blindly supports your own country, like the Nazis blindly supported their country. Of that huge coalition you’re talking about, how many of those countries receive large sums of US military funding and how many of those countries could be devastated if the US placed an embargo on them, which it typically does to countries which do not obey its orders. If you want to talk about Iraq before the invasion look at the US sponsored sanctions which killed 1.5 million Iraqi civilians or the training and funding of Saddam Hussein by the US or the CIA sponsored Baathist coup in 1963. Or the fact that the Iraqi people almost overthrew Saddam in 1991 and the US opposed the effort to do so. When Hussein attacked Iran the US stepped up military aid to Saddam. During this same period he was wiping out all political opposition. And, yes, world opinion was and is opposed to the US invasion of Iraq. Stop pretending there is morality involved with the US occupation of Iraq. Here’s the argument you should make: “The US has the right to invade and occupy Iraq because we have the guns and we can do whatever we want. US opinion, Iraqi opinion, and world opinion are irrelevant. We want Iraqi oil and we are going to take it. Try and stop us. We have the force and what we say goes.” Such an argument has no moral basis, but at least it is honest. At least be honest with yourself if you can do nothing else.
jordan>
-
29.03.2008 - 16:42
I guess I don't mind a few kids with immature aggression taking it out on an institution that needs to end.
Volume Power>
-
29.03.2008 - 16:43
I guess I don't mind a few kids with immature aggression taking it out on an institution that needs to end.
Volume Power>
RE: jordan
29.03.2008 - 16:46
your are right, they "higher number estimates" are just that, estimates. the name calling you do only means you are frustrated that you can not make a real argument and therefore must attack personally.
that is your right, as an american. in fact, as an american you can say any dumbass thing you want, because of those who have fought and died over the years for your right to do so.
and the moral superiority that is shared by those who would voluntarily join the effort to defend our freedoms and liberty is made obvious by the fact that no matter how many asinine comments that are made they will continue to do so so that more can be made.
and HSSD is right, terrorists (both iraqi and foriegn born) are doing the vast majority of the civilian murdering, and that is something your precious little orb study omits.
how many of those "640" were killed by a shiate bullet?
Nadroj>
repetition
29.03.2008 - 22:38
I can speak freely because I choose to speak freely. I am a human and my family is life and my country is the world. If you want to talk about how freedom of speech was actually acquired in this country it was through activism which demanded it. And it was acquired during the 1960’s through the Civil Rights Movement. The Constitution doesn’t guarantee it as the 1798 Alien and Sedition Act showed. I don’t remember calling anyone any names and I don’t see how I haven’t made a “real” argument so far. You haven’t disproved anything I’ve said. Yes, you’re right that the ORB study is an estimate, meaning that it could be an overestimate or it could also be an underestimate. I happen to think it is probably an underestimate. I don’t see how committing genocide is patriotic and there is obviously no way those who participate in genocide have “moral superiority”. I think those who oppose genocide have “moral superiority”. Those who enlist get paid for their work, otherwise they wouldn’t do it. If soldiers didn’t receive pay the military would be quite small. It doesn’t have much to do with patriotism. They get paid to kill people. There’s nothing noble about that. I think the occupation of Iraq is quite detrimental to this country as we now have an 8 trillion dollar deficit and we’ve violated numerous international laws which qualify us for war crimes. I’ll repeat again what I wrote above which you didn’t bother to read: The Nuremburg Tribunals stated that the supreme international crime is that of aggression, i.e. "invasion by its armed forces" by one state "of the territory of another state". The supreme international crime differs from other war crimes in that "it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole".
The US invasion of Iraq was an act of aggression, and all of the evil that followed from that invasion, including the deaths of 1 million Iraqi civilians, is part of that aggression regardless of who is responsible for each individual murder. And if you want to bring Christ’s teachings into this equation he taught: “You have heard it said before ‘Love your friends, hate your enemies’, but now I say to you ‘love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you’.” So the occupation of Iraq is also in total contradiction to the teachings of Christ. It is spelled Shiite, by the way. Or in the military they are all referred to as “Hajjis” to give you an idea of how much concern there is for bringing freedom and democracy.
MJ>
I'm bored too, Jordan - with your repetition
30.03.2008 - 13:45
I'm also bored with your repetition, Jordan as you keep spouting unsupported statements. You started by touting the "highly regarded" Oxford Research Bureau study which turns out doesn't even exist. It's the Opinion Research Business market research company that did the study - yet do a search on "highly regarded" and "Oxford Research Bureau" and you'll get hundreds of hits with people who blindly regurgitated the same information you did. Now that we know it's the Opinion Research Business, I'm sure you are aware they have a March 2008 study ( http://www.opinion.co.uk/Newsroom_details.aspx?NewsId=90) which states 80% of Iraqi adults "describe the security situation in their local area as very/fairly peaceful and stable." You clearly believe ORB has a rock-solid study with the January 2008 casualty report, so I would assume you will also feverishly defend their March 2008 security study like you are with their January 2008 casualty report. Could be a bit of a problem as you also stated that peace can only return to Iraq if the US would leave. In addition, their March survey found 51% prefer their "life today under the present political system" while only 22% preferred the "previous regime of Saddam Hussein." What was that about Iraqi opinion being irrelevant again? And when exactly are we going to start taking Iraqi oil? We get most of our oil from Canada, Mexico and Venezuela. The numbers from Iraq haven't changed much over the past few years ( http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_ep00_im0_mbbl_a.htm).
Well, Jordan, it's been fun - but as you state, this is boring. Besides, I have to put on my brownshirt and attend a Nazi jamboree.
Joogle>
Forgetful
30.03.2008 - 13:46
"The US invasion of Iraq was an act of aggression, and all of the evil that followed from that invasion, including the deaths of 1 million Iraqi civilians, is part of that aggression regardless of who is responsible for each individual murder."
Really? Act of aggression, for an ultimate good cause (getting Iraq to hold free and democratic elections). You sit there and say all of the bad and not mention any good that has come out of this "War crime" war. Such as the building of schools and hospitals. Many girls can now go to school where as before they couldn’t because they were girls. Power plants are being built, more places are seeing public utilities. Man that is sooooooo bad!!! Lets pull all the troops out so that all of this can dissolve, in a matter of months. You keep saying this war is genocide, killing is not genocide, genocide is not happening in Iraq. By you saying that, and you have NO proof of a genocide claim (death tolls, are just that death tolls not having anything to do with genocide) you are hurting the legitimacy of real genocide that is going on. I bet your one of the "save Darfur" people too, and if you are i bet that your all for military action to save those people from genocide. What if that creates more genocide? Then America would look like an even bigger "hate mongering, impearlistic POS" then we all ready are. Your pissed off because you weren’t held enough as a child or you were molested or something along those lines. Don’t take that out on other people, and not our "war crime" military who are fighting for a cause of making life better for the people of Iraq!
The_Realist>
to the realist
30.03.2008 - 14:51
ya know it's funny, before when you posted you lived up to your name mostly. i disagreed with your opinions and with your spin, but most of what you presented as truth was fact. but just like all of you right wingers when asked to further examine your points you resort to pure propaganda.
let's examine what you claimed as "good" that came from this war.and i aside from the condescension with the quotes around good i'll try to put aside my opinion. these schools and hospitals that were built (and i'd like to see evidence of this) would they have been made to replace ones destroyed by the war itself? as to girls going to school that couldn't before i gotta say that iraq in as much as it was fascisticly run by a dictator it was a secular society that had as middle east standards go had a great record on women's rights including equal schooling. as for public utilities these services only stopped with the bombings of the opening days of the war.
so let's be real
frank>
wrong again
30.03.2008 - 23:56
Dodging the argument again, how many Shiites murdered Iraqis? how many Sunnis murdered Iraqis?
the point it true and should be taken seriously. why is it that when life is taken by terrorists/militias/militants etc whatever you want to call them
that is some how righteous.
terrorists are the worst murderers of all, and the stats that were sighted by the ORB have already been repudiated
learn the facts, and stop attacking people personally.
the real real realist>
re:
31.03.2008 - 09:25
How is the aggression against Iraq an act of “good”? Every dictator and mass murderer throughout history has rhetoric about how noble their intentions are, but that doesn’t make them true. Nazi Germany claimed that it needed liberate Eastern Europe and it launched a campaign that was titled, “Terror Against Terror.” But the Nazis weren’t carrying out counter-terrorism, they were carrying out terrorism. The same is true in the case of the US ‘war on terrorism’. Iraq was a Second World country twenty years ago and now it is on par with Sub-Saharan Africa. It has been bombed into the stone age. The US was opposed to elections in Iraq, they only occurred because of nation-wide protests. Twice as many people have died in Iraq as have died in Darfur in the last five years, so if Darfur is genocide then so is Iraq. The US has a lot of responsibility for what is going on in Darfur as well; it goes back to the Clinton administration, the funding of the SPLA, and the bombing of al-Shifa. Terrorists are the worst murderers of all, and what the US is doing in Iraq qualifies as terrorism. There’s been no dodging of arguments. Under the principles of the Nuremburg Tribunals those who commit the act of aggression are responsible for all of the resulting violence.
matthew>
RE: matthew
31.03.2008 - 21:55
You wrote: "Under the principles of the Nuremburg Tribunals those who commit the act of aggression are responsible for all of the resulting violence."
Please site what you are referring to specifically in the NT.
You are saying that because the US invaded Iraq and took out Saddam, that the terrorists, death squads and militia groups that terrorize and ethnically cleanse areas are somehow not responsible for their actions.
Those who will not hold terrorists responsible for their actions and justify the behavior of groups such as the Medhi are at best being intellectually dishonest (I will not speak of the worst implications of this behavior).
Matthew, you are sadly mistaken and your line of thinking is unreasonable.
Mark>
To Mark
03.04.2008 - 16:11
Mark, if you commit an action - like the invasion of Iraq - knowing full well that it might result in massive sectarian violence and a prolonged urban guerilla war that will inevitably cost tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of lives, then YES, YOU ARE PARTIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT BLOODSHED WHEN SUCH PREDICTIONS COME TO PASS.
There is nothing "unreasonable" about this position at all. You seek to shirk all responsibility, as if they U.S. somehow didn't know that this would be the outcome. However, anyone who remembers the Gulf War or Rumsfeld and Cheney's positions within the first Bush's Presidency knows that they were fully aware that this would be the likely outcome. The fact of the matter is, in 2003, they didn't care.
Responsibility for the violence in Iraq can be spread all around, but don't think for a minute the White House is free from any of it.
Makhno>
Mark- legal support about aggression
05.04.2008 - 04:24
Hello, I have been doing a lot of legal research on International Criminal Law lately, and I thought I would see if I could contribute to the discussion regarding the citation for Mark's comment that a perpetrator of an aggressive war is responsible for the violent acts that follow from the act of aggression. I have reviewed articles on the United Nations (UN) and International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) websites, as well as primary sources of law(The Nuremberg Charter and the Judgment). Here is what I found:
1)The text of the Nuremberg Charter is available at the following link: 3. http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/350?OpenDocument in relevant part, article 6(a) of the Nurmeberg Charter states that waging a war of aggression comes under the jurisdiction of the charter. This is the only time "Aggression" is mentioned in the charter, but the Nuremberg judgment talks about the crime of aggression in detail.
2) The Nuremberg Charter criminalizes Aggression but it does not define it. A few historical articles reveal that the International Community had a hard time defining the crime of Aggression because it is difficult to get so many sovereign nations to agree.( http://www.un.org/icc/statute.htm ) They did not disagree that it should be a crime, but they could not agree on the exact wording. A consensus on the definition was finally reached in 1974. ( http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2005/issue4/0405p03.html)
Here is releveant text from the Judgment about the illegality of aggression and the complexities of defining international criminal law: “In the opinion of the Tribunal, those who wage aggressive war are doing that which is equally illegal, and of much greater moment than a breach of one of the rules of the Hague Convention. In interpreting the words of the Pact, it must be remembered that international law is not the product of an international legislature, and that such international agreements as the Pact of Paris have to deal with general principles of law, and not with administrative matters of procedure. The law of war is to be found not only in treaties, but in the customs and practices of states which gradually obtained universal recognition, and from the general principles of justice applied by jurists and practised by military courts. This law is not static, but by continual adaptation follows the needs of a changing world. Indeed, in many cases treaties do no more than express and define for more accurate reference the principles of law already existing.” 6 F.R.D. 69 Federal Rules Decisions THE NURNBERG TRIAL 1946 1946, 1947 at page 109.
This section of the text above reflects the value of deciding by consensus of the countries on principles of international law.
3) Finally, a search of the text of the Nuremberg trial opinion, (6 F.R.D. 69 Federal Rules Decisions THE NURNBERG TRIAL 1946), suggests that the International community viewed aggression as a crime that precedes other atrocities temporally and contains the accumulated evils of war. Here is some relevant text, at page 86:
In the Section “The Common Plan or Conspiracy and Aggressive War” the judgment states:
“War is essentially an evil thing. Its consequences are not confined to the belligerent states alone, but affect the whole world. To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” Page 86.
This preliminary search suggests support for Mark's claim, suggesting that the crime of Aggression is a condition precedent for other acts of war, including war crimes, and that the crime of Aggression encompasses generally the atrocities of war.
Other possible sources of legal authority for Mark's claim may include works by legal scholars, commentaries of the drafters of the statutes, treaties and commentaries on the treaties, customary law (the customs of states), minutes or hearings of the drafting of the statute. I would also recommend checking out material coming out of the International Criminal Court (ICC), because the ICC was modeled after the Nuremberg Charter.
Hope this helps. Have a nice day!
Aggro Lawskool Punk>
correction
05.04.2008 - 04:32
I realised that Mark was the person who requested the citation for Matthew's assertion about aggression, and Matthew was the person who made the claim that I researched. Apologies for the error. All the rest is correct to the best of my knowledge, given the compexities of International Law.
Aggro Lawskool Punk>
the real offense
07.04.2008 - 11:43
what offends me is that dominos calls that shit.
our government didnt give us any rights. they just specified which ones they wouldnt take away.
oh yeah. fuck the army. join the anti.
ben fucking fury>
e-mail:: hot_army_capt@hotmale.com
 Homepage:: http://www.activeduty.com/index2.html?checkbox1=on&enter=Enter+The+Site
|
|
