Salty

iTrader: (14)

I swear to God... people give Soldiers too much credit sometimes. This Italian Reporter actually thinks she was targeted because "U.S. forces may have deliberately targeted her because Washington opposed Italy's policy of dealing with kidnappers." Wow...

Who here honestly thinks Joe (a Soldier) thinks about political implications when his finger is in the trigger guard? Anyone? I have no use for leftist ideology. In my opinion, it holds no water in the real world whatsoever.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...ly_shooting_dc


Here's what happened according to military statement...

"About 2100 [1800 GMT], a patrol in western Baghdad observed the vehicle speeding towards their checkpoint and attempted to warn the driver to stop by hand and arm signals, flashing white lights, and firing warning shots in front of the car," it said in a statement.

"When the driver didn't stop, the soldiers shot into the engine block, which stopped the vehicle, killing one and wounding two others."

What do you expect to happen when an unidentified vehicle is approaching a military checkpoint at a high rate of speed? I mean seriously?! Makes sense, right? Take out the radiator or hose in the engine bay to stop the vehicle in the middle of a scorching desert.

You want to know why I think this reporter is upset? Lack of personal Responsibility. Let me explain...

They get this idea in their head that everything is candy land. That these troops are there to act as an American, LAPD police force that walks on eggshells regarding their every move. Fact is, she's in a war-zone. It's as simple as that!

It's the same type of ideology regarding dead allied forces in Iraq. Although it's a tragedy, those that protest are never willing to bestow responsibility for the troops choices. This reporter just can't accept personal responsibility and chooses to ride her BS leftist ideology wagon in order to create controversy and sympathy.

psoper

She has first hand witness accounts of US war crimes including use of napalm and chemical agents against civilians and the US doesn't want that getting out so they tried to knock her off- its as simple as that you jackass.

subaruguru

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

If they wanted to knock her off, why didn't they blow up the car? Or let the insurgents do it? Or do a million other things besides shooting, then stopping, and pulling her wounded out of a car to rescue her?


Psoper, this is pretty close to the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen you say. You honestly think someone who wouldn't buy this "theory" of yours is a jackass for not thinking of it!??

Retarded. Plain and simple. There's no other way to respond to that comment.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

Read the article I linked, psoper... She specifically states that “U.S. forces may have deliberately targeted her because Washington opposed Italy's policy of dealing with kidnappers.”

See:

ROME (Reuters) - Italian hostage Giuliana Sgrena, shot and wounded after being freed in Iraq (news - web sites), said Sunday U.S. forces may have deliberately targeted her because Washington opposed Italy's policy of dealing with kidnappers.

If your theory is true then it would have replaced the bolded and italicized segment of the quote above. Plain and simple. There’s no fooling you though...

Salty

iTrader: (14)

Seriously though... Do you have any solid proof of your claims, Psoper? I don’t want BS stories about Soldiers using CS grenades (which I’ve inhaled numerous times) -or- insurgents misusing gasoline and styrofoam.

VIBEELEVEN

iTrader: (2)

Yeah, If they really wanted this "media representative" out of the way I'm sure they wouldn't have had a problem doing so without error. And as far as napalms go I think that's a crock too. Do you really think our guys use napalms on civilians? She may have first had account but I'm sure there's a dozen or so soldiers that do as well who will tell you otherwise. Plus the woman has been a captive for the last few weeks... is her account really credible, remember Patty Hearst? If you believe her over our boys it's a pretty sad thing.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

Here's the kicker on top of the fact Napalm hasn't legally been used since Vietnam. You have to wonder how valid this reporter's first hand accounts are regarding U.S./allied military SOP when she didn't have enough common sense to slow down for a check point. You know what I’m saying? It's sorta like reading an article written by an obese person on effective diet plans.

Napalm is an insurgent weapon in this war. They'll mix gasoline (burning agent) with detergent -or- Styrofoam (sticking agent) as a molotov cocktail. There's been pictures of innocent bystanders with napalm like wounds but they were not inflicted by U.S. Soldiers. There's just no use for is when you have access to conventional frag grenades and larger, conventional weapons. The preparation of such a volatile cocktail would leave your weapon unsecured for an extended period of time just to make one bottles worth. It just doesn't make any sense, psoper. Give it up.

If you don't believe insurgents would stoop to such tactics then explain their car bombings that have killed numerous innocent Iraqis.

I'd love to see your argument on Chemical weapons.

psoper

http://electroniciraq.net/news/1800.shtml

http://www.ilmanifesto.it/pag/sgrena...d721e0ff0.html

http://www.ilmanifesto.it/pag/sgrena...c3a05e58d.html

http://www.gnn.tv/headlines/1310/US_...rate_companion

http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/pu...er_16096.shtml

http://rense.com/general63/giulianatoldUSwouldnt.htm

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...3/s1317181.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4321913.stm

Actually, the only reason I called him a jackass is because he did the same to me.

subaruguru

The only two credible sources you cite assert a DIFFERENT accusation, the one levelled by the reporter, that the US tried to kill her to stop Italy from negotiating with terrorists. NOT A SINGLE ONE of your sources claims that the US tried to kill this woman because she knew something about napalm.

Psoper, this is just plain retarded. How the hell do you explain the fact that the US soldiers pulled her out of that car, if they were trying to kill her? Why didn't they use a damned bomb and make sure they were all dead? How hard would it have been to KEEP SHOOTING until she was dead? This theory is crackpot. It is worse than tinfoil-hat--It's "super secret ingredients in aluminum foil ruin its effectiveness against mind control" level paranoia.

You've got three things to provide solid evidence on here:

1. That the US even uses napalm. Why they would use it when they have thousands of pounds of explosives and other more exotic incendiaries makes zero sense.

2. That the Italian reporter was even visible to the US troops. Driving in the middle of the night in a car, and you think the US checkpoint was able to pick her face out from the back seat before deciding to shoot?

3. That this woman herself even claims to have witnessed the use of napalm by US troops.

As far as I'm concerned, "axisoflogic" type sites are out of bounds for this. They don't even pretend to be credible. They just reprint trash from "Turkish independent news" or quote some made-up Iraqi civillian saying "uh, I saw stuff burning, so they were using napalm." The fact that you have a bunch of these wacko sources means nothing; there are literally thousands of sites that claim to have evidence proving that the holocaust never happened. The thing they all have in common is that they're "indepdenant" and without any repute for reporting whatsoever.

So let's see it Psoper, your one shred of credible reporting to back up this claim.

VIBEELEVEN

iTrader: (2)

ilmanifesto is the official newspaper of the comunist(not using the term lightly) party in italty.

HellaDumb

iTrader: (3)

IMO, that's why I think they'd mark her for death, IF that were the case.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

What pisses me off the most is that Giuliana Sgrena actually has the right to suggest such bull**** ideals. Lawyers can issue gag orders to Tonight Show hosts for making jokes about an accused child molester during a trail like it’s a parking ticket. Others get issued gag orders and cease-and-desist orders for complaining about how unhealthy McDonald’s french fries are and about Wal-Mart’s business ethics.

But when it comes to verbal testimony that could potentially damage international relations and popularity during war time it's all hunky-freakin'-dory. It's *** backwards if you ask me. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if she mentioned how well her kidnappers treater her at this point. I honestly wouldn't expect anything less of her at this point.

I don’t count Psoper’s rambling though... if anyone were to stumble across his posts I’d have no concern that they’d agree with one word he’s said.

Salty

iTrader: (14)

I'm bumping this for psoper.

I'm tired of people making these bunk statements against our troops, their tactics and arsenal and not being able to vouch for them.

People like yourself throw a fit when others suggest you’re for the insurgency and against our troops. What I want to know is when people like yourself are going to prove them otherwise.

I'm waiting, psoper...

dub2w

bring out the baby oil. there's gonna be a cat fight! wait, you're both dudes... never mind

:banana:

svo+wrx

even if this was true (i highly doubt it) i dont think that soldier manning that checkpoint would know that she did or even who she was (hence the attempt to stop the vehicle)

________
WENDIE 99