Some more information on what led to this beating.
In the beginning of 2004 Shiites in southern Iraq began a series of protests in Basra, Southern Iraq that spread to other cities. They were protesting against the continued occupation of Iraq by the U.S. and Britain and against the high unemployment and bad economic conditions.
On January 6, 2004 British and Iraqi troops opened fire into a march by 6000 former Iraqi soldiers who were protesting unpaid wages. 4 were wounded. The Iraqis started throwing rocks at the British troops and tanks were called in to put down the protest which had turned violent.
On January 10, 2004 in Amarah Iraqi police backed by U.S. and British troops opened fire on hundreds of Shiites protesting outside the town hall. 6 were killed and 7 wounded. The protest was about a broken promise to create 8000 jobs in the defense forces in the area. They also were demanding food and an end to corruption. The English claimed that people in the crowd were throwing bombs or explosives at the Iraqi police and British troops, but those reports are disputed.
The next day British troops had rocks thrown at them and the British responded by charging the crowd.
On January 12 there were another round of protests in Amarah.
It was during these several days of protests that British soldiers arrested these kids and beat them.
So let's recap this series of events:
1. Shiites are mad at the continued occupation and lack of jobs and protest.
2. British and Iraqi troops shoot at these protestors several times on different days
3. Iraqis get mad and start throwing rocks at soldiers
4. British soldiers arrest some kids during protests
5. Soldiers take kids to a military base and beat the shit out of them
Can someone please re-iterate how this is related to prisoners of war, soldiers risking their lives for freedom everyday, Islamists chopping off heads, etc.????????
I'm not gonna sit here and be grilled by you over every word I use and in what context it's being used. If you can't figure out where I stand on the issue by now I'm not gonna be able to help.
What a fucking cop out.
The people being beat in the video were prisoners of WAR...what politically correct term would you like to call them??
How about kids that were throwing rocks at soldiers that just shot at them????
Some kids got involved in a riot and got a beatdown for their troubles. Its no big deal.
This footage does not contain the earlier bit that was shown on the UK news of the soilders being stoned outside of the compound. You can't throw rocks at people then cry when they hit you back...
And you forgot to mention that British and Iraqi troops had fired into the crowd on several occasions in different towns. And the fact that the Shiites were out there protesting over the occupation, lack of jobs and corruption not just throwing rocks at the "occupiers" or anything. I guess when you go protest you've got the right to get shot at, and no right to get mad and throw some rocks. This is what fighting for freedom is about.
People are punished every day for reaching this "breaking point." Are you denying that these soliers committed a crime? Are you saying that they were morally right in kicking the shit out of someone smaller than them?
Did they commit a crime ? I don't think so, considering the posibility that these people could have been armed or violent I think it is justified force. Were they morally right ? I don't know, but in that situation i would probably respond in a similar manner...
The soldiers that did the beating are being investigated by the British military police and the British Defense Ministry condemned the actions. So the matter of whether they committed a crime seems to be a real issue with the British army.
Here on SS the difference seems to be one is a crime [/b] that people applaud(and BTW...I understand the Austin brawl was a 2 on 1 situation) and the other is part of a War, where our enemy is chopping prisoners heads clean off, yet the beating of a prisoner, who may or may not have initiated the violence, is considered outrageous.
Rock--would you like to know the FACTS behind the Austin incident? Because what you're presenting is a very distorted version of the facts.
FACTS:
Two guys (Ayres and Cosmo) were on the sidewalk minding their own business when two couples walked up. One of the guys pushed Ayres face. Ayres said something, then the dude ran over to fight him. In SELF-DEFENSE, Ayres kicked his ass. Or punched him in the dick, depending on who you ask.
The first guy's friend came over to join in, at which point he was struck by Cosmo. Not a 2 on 1 situation, as you state. Nor did A & C initiate violence. And it doesn't sound the least bit like a crime to me.
Oh, and it was two DJs--no rappers involved at all.
Was there a crime committed??
Did the people here ask to see the video of someone getting beat??
Was there some bragging going on about beating someone regardless of who started it??
Those were my main contentions....
however,
Since the video was never posted, and the story was never told as above I could only assume what happened....if it was as you state above then my assumptions/details were incorrect. And I apologize if I misrepresented what happened and insulted someone while doing so.
I got stoned and then subsequently sucked into this thread, and this is what I've deduced:
If the British Army have condemned the actions, and are investigating the incident, how can anyone here even begin to try and justify them?? This seems unreal to me.
This whole "they threw rocks at us so of course we beat the shit out of them" is part of the base mentality that begins and propogates wars. Violence solving violence. Yes, it's part of human nature. But that doesn't mean it's always the best option. There isn't going to be a nice clear line of this-is-ok-force vs this-is-too-much-force in war. I hope though, that the armies in Iraq trying to 'free' it from oppression, would draw the line somewhere above grown men with rifles outnumbering some kids, clearly taking them into custody, and beating the shit out of them with malice. Here is a position where an aggressor in power can use their power to stop violence, but instead they follow the cycle. That in itself is sadening.
It blows my mind that this shit is even being argued.
And you forgot to mention that British and Iraqi troops had fired into the crowd on several occasions in different towns.
I think it unlikely that US or UK troops fired into crowds of demonstrators without provocation of some description. Please post source of UK troops firing on crowds in several different towns, so I can read it, thank you.
Mr Shaker said he was among more than 200 people demonstrating that day in protest at the lack of jobs. The crowd had been "surprised" to encounter British troops and "started throwing stones at them "because we believed that they were behind all our misery", he said.
Mr Shaker said British troops fired volleys of rubber bullets at the protesters in a bid to disperse them.
Witnesses and officials at the time said British troops and Iraqi police had fired at armed, stone-throwing protesters, killing six people and wounding 11.
British soldiers from the 1st Battalion Light Infantry, based in Amara at the time, were seen moving in with armoured vehicles to support the police, according to witness reports at the time.
Assailants in the crowd lobbed three explosive devices at them, believed to be hand grenades, the British military reported later that day. Today Mr Shaker said: "A group of British soldiers then rushed out from their base and arrested nine of us, dragging us for about 30 metres to the governor's office.
"They were beating us with fists and batons and were kicking us. Then they cuffed our hands and also dragged us to their base, which is about 15 metres from the governor's office, where they also beat us and frightened us with dogs before releasing us before sunset."
From the Gaurdian newspaper in the UK.
The protestors are not the innocent defenceless people that some people here like to think...
We're not hearing the whole story of what is going on in Iraq. This was 2 years ago, I watch the news and read, I didn't hear about this at all. Case in point. I'd like this thread deaded plaese.
Comments
In the beginning of 2004 Shiites in southern Iraq began a series of protests in Basra, Southern Iraq that spread to other cities. They were protesting against the continued occupation of Iraq by the U.S. and Britain and against the high unemployment and bad economic conditions.
On January 6, 2004 British and Iraqi troops opened fire into a march by 6000 former Iraqi soldiers who were protesting unpaid wages. 4 were wounded. The Iraqis started throwing rocks at the British troops and tanks were called in to put down the protest which had turned violent.
On January 10, 2004 in Amarah Iraqi police backed by U.S. and British troops opened fire on hundreds of Shiites protesting outside the town hall. 6 were killed and 7 wounded. The protest was about a broken promise to create 8000 jobs in the defense forces in the area. They also were demanding food and an end to corruption. The English claimed that people in the crowd were throwing bombs or explosives at the Iraqi police and British troops, but those reports are disputed.
The next day British troops had rocks thrown at them and the British responded by charging the crowd.
On January 12 there were another round of protests in Amarah.
It was during these several days of protests that British soldiers arrested these kids and beat them.
So let's recap this series of events:
1. Shiites are mad at the continued occupation and lack of jobs and protest.
2. British and Iraqi troops shoot at these protestors several times on different days
3. Iraqis get mad and start throwing rocks at soldiers
4. British soldiers arrest some kids during protests
5. Soldiers take kids to a military base and beat the shit out of them
Can someone please re-iterate how this is related to prisoners of war, soldiers risking their lives for freedom everyday, Islamists chopping off heads, etc.????????
How about kids that were throwing rocks at soldiers that just shot at them????
And you forgot to mention that British and Iraqi troops had fired into the crowd on several occasions in different towns. And the fact that the Shiites were out there protesting over the occupation, lack of jobs and corruption not just throwing rocks at the "occupiers" or anything. I guess when you go protest you've got the right to get shot at, and no right to get mad and throw some rocks. This is what fighting for freedom is about.
The soldiers that did the beating are being investigated by the British military police and the British Defense Ministry condemned the actions. So the matter of whether they committed a crime seems to be a real issue with the British army.
Apology accepted. Please don't do that again.
If the British Army have condemned the actions, and are investigating the incident, how can anyone here even begin to try and justify them?? This seems unreal to me.
This whole "they threw rocks at us so of course we beat the shit out of them" is part of the base mentality that begins and propogates wars. Violence solving violence. Yes, it's part of human nature. But that doesn't mean it's always the best option. There isn't going to be a nice clear line of this-is-ok-force vs this-is-too-much-force in war. I hope though, that the armies in Iraq trying to 'free' it from oppression, would draw the line somewhere above grown men with rifles outnumbering some kids, clearly taking them into custody, and beating the shit out of them with malice. Here is a position where an aggressor in power can use their power to stop violence, but instead they follow the cycle. That in itself is sadening.
It blows my mind that this shit is even being argued.
I think it unlikely that US or UK troops fired into crowds of demonstrators without provocation of some description.
Please post source of UK troops firing on crowds in several different towns, so I can read it, thank you.
Mr Shaker said he was among more than 200 people demonstrating that day in protest at the lack of jobs. The crowd had been "surprised" to encounter British troops and "started throwing stones at them "because we believed that they were behind all our misery", he said.
Mr Shaker said British troops fired volleys of rubber bullets at the protesters in a bid to disperse them.
Witnesses and officials at the time said British troops and Iraqi police had fired at armed, stone-throwing protesters, killing six people and wounding 11.
British soldiers from the 1st Battalion Light Infantry, based in Amara at the time, were seen moving in with armoured vehicles to support the police, according to witness reports at the time.
Assailants in the crowd lobbed three explosive devices at them, believed to be hand grenades, the British military reported later that day. Today Mr Shaker said: "A group of British soldiers then rushed out from their base and arrested nine of us, dragging us for about 30 metres to the governor's office.
"They were beating us with fists and batons and were kicking us. Then they cuffed our hands and also dragged us to their base, which is about 15 metres from the governor's office, where they also beat us and frightened us with dogs before releasing us before sunset."
From the Gaurdian newspaper in the UK.
The protestors are not the innocent defenceless people that some people here like to think...
You got it.....especially since you were in the State that accepts the "But Judge, he needed a beating" defense.