Army veterans reveal how they gunned down innocent Palestinian families

[Flagg]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...a-1649527.html

"A second squad leader, who described the killing of the elderly woman, says he argued with his commander over loose rules of engagement that allowed the clearing out of houses by shooting without warning residents beforehand. After the orders were changed, soldiers had complained that "we should kill everyone there [in the centre of Gaza]. Everyone there is a terrorist." The squad leader said: "To write 'death to the Arabs' on walls, to take family pictures and spit on them, just because you can. I think this is the main thing: To understand how much the IDF has fallen in the realm of ethics."

Ehud Barak, Israel's Defence Minister, said: "I say to you that from the chief of staff down to the last soldier, the most moral army in the world stands ready to take orders from the government of Israel. I have no doubt that every incident will be individually examined."

The most moral army? How I laugh at that, and how I laugh at the claim that each 1,434 "incidents" will be investigated.

[reardbandit]

Don't believe everything you read. There is a lot of anti-military, anti-Semitic propaganda out there. The IDF is a fine fighting force, always has been. That nation has fought for every inch of ground from the word go, with the IDF always there wth their front towards the enemy, even if they are surrounded by them.

[Flagg]

Don't believe everything you read. There is a lot of anti-military, anti-Semitic propaganda out there. The IDF is a fine fighting force, always has been. That nation has fought for every inch of ground from the word go, with the IDF always there wth their front towards the enemy, even if they are surrounded by them.

I know what you are saying, but these claims are supposedly coming from Israeli Soldiers themselves. But would the IDF be the mighty force it is if it wasn't for the US funding them? It would be interesting to see how mighty they would be if they had to stand on their own two feet.

At the end of the day, people can say "Well Hamas shouldn't have hid behind innocent targets", but I find it very hard to believe that with 1400 + people killed, Hamas was hiding behind every single one of those people. And besides, they still shot through innocents to get to the target. They still pulled the trigger.

[Keenstyle1]

It's called casualties of war. In the beginning of every invasion the picture is never pretty. The young soldiers with no combat under their belt will always scream murder in the beginning. I've seen them deny orders after they've been traumatized. But after initial invasions the officers will come in and things will get organized and the enemy will be more clearly identified. You have to make out alive, it's a soldiers job to live.

When there is war, innocent women and children die.

[Flagg]

It's called casualties of war. In the beginning of every invasion the picture is never pretty. The young soldiers with no combat under their belt will always scream murder in the beginning. I've seen them deny orders after they've been traumatized. But after initial invasions the officers will come in and things will get organized and the enemy will be more clearly identified. You have to make out alive, it's a soldiers job to live.

When there is war, innocent women and children die.

Yeah, im also aware of that...but lets be honest. That wasnt a war. A war are when two sides are blasting away at each other. The whole Gaza event was completely one sided. If that was a War, what did the IDF actually win or achieve? It looked to me like Israeli soldiers doing what they want. And, for every innocent killed I wonder how many Hamas were killed? Do you think 1400 innocents killed justifies a handful of dead fanatics? These reports are stating that some of these soldiers were hesitant themselves about their zero tollerance orders. There are still codes of honour in War, especially achknowledged between the Brits and Germans in North Africa during WW II. Like no fighting at Midday, exchanging presents/ceasefire during christmas.

There is a difference between War and Genocide.

[subaruwrx04]

I served 23 months in Iraq. Never once did I see that any of that shit happen. Hooooorrraaaahhh, Semper Fi..

[reardbandit]

I was in Iraq for 12 and another 6 in Afghanistan, and I never saw anything of the sort either. However, not every nation has the C2 capabilities and discipline our armed forces have. As far as the US funding them and if they would be strong, of course they would not if we didn't. But then again, do we really want to lose such a crucial ally in that area over a few billion dollars? I mean, look at the state of our economy. We are throwing money at bank executives to spend on themselves with bonuses, everyone is fleecing the American taxpayer, and all the while Israel fights for it's survival. I think it is a worthy and noble expenditure every time we do anything for Israel.

[Dizz28]

^^ I did....n't (subaru)

[subaruwrx04]

Shhhhhh.

[BuffedGuy]

It is truly unbelievable how some people will defend the IDF. The IDF originated from a terrorist group, the Haganah. They are just living up to that brutal legacy.

As for all those people who say "it's war", umm no. In war, you kill soldiers. If you are a war criminal, then yes, you kill innocents. Virtually any massacre can be justified by saying "it's war."

I also think that the reaction of certain people shows that no matter what Israel or America does--and I do mean *whatever* they may do--it will be excused by these people. It is a horrible double-standard and the epitome of bigotry. Israel and America are excused for anything and everything, whereas the Muslim world must be taken to task for whatever it does. This is the dynamic established by such people. This two-faced hypocrisy can be seen by the fact that Saddam Hussein was taken to task by the West for gassing his countrymen (well, it was used as an excuse to invade Iraq YEARS later), yet America used even worse weapons against the Iraqi people. When the West does it, "oh well, that's war, folks!" When Saddam--a supposed Muslim does it--then "let's get those sons of b*tches."

[spywizard]

war is hell, those that get in the way and or support those that hide behind them or stand in front to passively protect/support them will be a casualty or war..

Only the strong make the rules, and can bring others to justice, and only the strong determine what is just..

see how that works??

[Matt]

war is hell, those that get in the way and or support those that hide behind them or stand in front to passively protect/support them will be a casualty or war..

Only the strong make the rules, and can bring others to justice, and only the strong determine what is just..

see how that works??

Sad but true and this goes for every day life...

[ufcfighter4]

Sad but true and this goes for every day life...

There is nothing sad about this, what are you talking about????

[eliteforce]

The reason you have 'enemies' in that area in the first place is because support for israel-particularly support it's extremest racist policies in the occupied territories, apartheid, political oppression, and ethnic cleansing..for the last 30 years

Why not support them with strings attached? like if they want the billions of dollars they can't have settlements and jewish only roads in the westbank.. the main criticism of US policy is that it has been supporting israel unconditionally since the occupation began in 1967, even as US aid was used to build all these settlements, creating a situation that today cannot be solved except for open ended apartheid. What kind of country or 'regime' 'fights for its survival' through occupation and apartheid? What kind of a country, has another country inside of it?

The reason the state of the US economy is so bad because of these wars america is fighting that have no end.. support for israel and related oppressive policies (like blockading iraq) causes america to have a 'terrorism' problem, america responds to the terrorism by invading iraq and more oppression, it then tries to get out of this mess by fighting war and trying to 'develop' these oppressed countries at the same time--something so expensive that it bankrupts the economy .. apparently the reason this is all happening is because america needs "crucial allies" in "that region" because there is oil in that region .. like america can't just buy oil on the open market like everyone else, it needs to have allies and enemies there.. the whole thing is a sham and it has nothing to do with oil or strategic this and that.. like in the 1960s vietnam was supposedly this big 'strategic' thing..

and the US military has committed atrocities like that, atrocities are part of an oppressive occupation.. that one where they raped that girl murdered her family then burned her , or when a vehicle was hit by a roadside killing one soldier and the rest of them go door to door killing everyone they see, and who knows what hasn't been reported or what was reported and dismissed because the victims didn't have evidence.. putting snipers in urban areas with orders to kill anyone who violates curfew...

But then again, do we really want to lose such a crucial ally in that area over a few billion dollars? I mean, look at the state of our economy. We are throwing money at bank executives to spend on themselves with bonuses, everyone is fleecing the American taxpayer, and all the while Israel fights for it's survival. I think it is a worthy and noble expenditure every time we do anything for Israel.

[Keenstyle1]

ok, It wasn't a war, it was an invasion. It was an invaision to rid out the missile sites that were hurling missiles into Israel. The Palestine people did one thing wrong, they voted for Hamas. They're killing themselves.

[eliteforce]

before they voted for hamas they voted for fatah, that also got them destruction and death (remember Jenin?) all the Palestinian groups are basically the same in that they will resort to militancy when there is no clear and imminent plan for israel to end the occupation, and when the resist the aphartied and occupation, israel controls the violence with punitive military attacks and additional restrictions..but you can't blame the people for continuing the fight for their equal rights as human beings, if they weren't resisting it, then they surrender to the most disgusting oppression we have seen post wwII ..

[BuffedGuy]

war is hell, those that get in the way and or support those that hide behind them or stand in front to passively protect/support them will be a casualty or war..

Only the strong make the rules, and can bring others to justice, and only the strong determine what is just..

see how that works??

There is something called the Geneva conventions. The war-mongers should learn to honor their word. As signatories of the Geneva convention, surely they should abide by it? Or is their word meaningless? Why did they become signatories if they never intended to abide by it because "war is hell" ?

This here is a golden reply by EliteForce:

before they voted for hamas they voted for fatah, that also got them destruction and death (remember Jenin?) all the Palestinian groups are basically the same in that they will resort to militancy when there is no clear and imminent plan for israel to end the occupation, and when the resist the aphartied and occupation, israel controls the violence with punitive military attacks and additional restrictions..but you can't blame the people for continuing the fight for their equal rights as human beings, if they weren't resisting it, then they surrender to the most disgusting oppression we have seen post wwII ..

The bold part above completely refutes the argument put forth by Keenstyle. Blows it completely out of the water.

Great response, EliteForce.

The entire plan of the Israelis was to box in the Palestinians so that the only possible response by the colonized would be to lash out in desperation, thereby retroactively justifying the invasion in the first place.

It is well-known that there is nothing the Palestinians could do that would quench the thirst Israel has for Palestinian land. They want their Eretz Israel.

[JiGGaMaN]

Yeah, im also aware of that...but lets be honest. That wasnt a war. A war are when two sides are blasting away at each other. The whole Gaza event was completely one sided. If that was a War, what did the IDF actually win or achieve? It looked to me like Israeli soldiers doing what they want. And, for every innocent killed I wonder how many Hamas were killed? Do you think 1400 innocents killed justifies a handful of dead fanatics? These reports are stating that some of these soldiers were hesitant themselves about their zero tollerance orders. There are still codes of honour in War, especially achknowledged between the Brits and Germans in North Africa during WW II. Like no fighting at Midday, exchanging presents/ceasefire during christmas.

There is a difference between War and Genocide.

i dont usually come around here because bickering over the internet solves nothing. nevertheless, you have no proof 1400 innocent people were killed or a handful of fanatics were killed. in fact, hamas media ban in gaza prevents anyone from really knowing anything aside from what suits their ends.

Also, you left out a crucial piece of information from the article (not that i think the independent is a real newspaper anyhow): That each home was given 5 minutes to exit before troops entered. they didnt have to die...


also your note of 'codes of honour' in war is completely retarded. go to any warzone and stop shooting mid day or give someone a present see how long you live.

[BuffedGuy]

i dont usually come around here because bickering over the internet solves nothing.

It has nothing to do with the fact that you know you will lose in debate, right?

nevertheless, you have no proof 1400 innocent people were killed or a handful of fanatics were killed.

Your argument is similar to what the anti-Semites say: "there is no proof that 6 million Jews were killed."

When it comes to dead Jews, then you balk at anyone even doubting the number (and rightfully so). But when it comes to dead Gentiles--especially those heathen terrorist loving Muslims (and ESPECIALLY the "cockroach" Palestinians)--then suddenly you can't believe anything! Suddenly you don't know anything!

The spokesman for the Israeli human rights group, B'Tselem, placed the estimate at 1,400 dead Palestinians.

How on earth do you have any credibility when you claim that only a "handful" were killed? I can understand if you--in your bigoted ways--would say that all 1,000 were terrorists (since that is the Zionist thing to do!)--but to deny the facts altogether and say that only a "handful" died...!!! You are quite the joker.

Perhaps we should say only a handful of Jews died in the Holocaust then?

in fact, hamas media ban in gaza prevents anyone from really knowing anything aside from what suits their ends.

Ummm...can you give proof that Hamas banned the media in Gaza?

It is Israel who banned the media in Gaza:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009...ated-over-gaza

Is it upside down day again?

Also, you left out a crucial piece of information from the article (not that i think the independent is a real newspaper anyhow): That each home was given 5 minutes to exit before troops entered. they didnt have to die...

There are two issues here:

First, Israel has created more refugees than any other country on the earth. There are nine MILLION Palestinian refugees in the world. One out of every four refugees in the world is Palestinian. So the issue is not simply just killing. It is also about creating refugees: destroying the homes of people, and running them out of their land. This number--9 million--should put the issue into perspective. This is what your colonial Zionism has done. Yitzhak Rubin, a former Israeli prime minister, said about Ben Gurion (another Israeli Prime minister):

"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!'" (Yitzhak Rabin remembering the establishment of Israel in 1948, 23 October 1979)

Second, five minutes to leave your house or you will be blown up? So let's say I was a soldier and I said "I am going to blow your house up in five minutes." Inside that house are women and children and old men. Let's say they don't leave after five minutes. Then I am justified in killing them all? Even the babies who "refused" to leave? Really? That is purity of arms to you? What kind of deranged world do you live in?

[j4ever41]

putting snipers in urban areas with orders to kill anyone who violates curfew...

yeah i will go along with that one. if you think that our economic times are result of war you are misguided.

[eliteforce]

There is alot of 'fog' in war and I'm not going to bother trying to find some indisputable source that this happened, all I know is I had read this scenario repeatedly in the Iraq war that the Americans were placing snipers with orders to kill people who violate a curfew, a curfew that was extended for a long period of time while they conduct clearing operations, and that the victims of the sniper attacks were unarmed.. I call that policy a blatant war crime but if you want to insist that it never happened then that's your opinion but not indisputable fact.

and if you think the economic 'debt' crises has nothing to do with military and war spending, most of this spending is borrowed money..and that in 2003-2004 the US economy was booming with some quarters that had 8% economic growth, but at the same time the US was running large deficits and borrowing money from foreigners, and at the same time relaxing lending regulations; they just happened to deregulate the banking and debt industry right about the time the wars started so money is flying all over the place..money backed by bad paper..if you think these things are not interrelated than that's your opinion but not mine.

[j4ever41]

i am not saying the sniper situation did not happen i am saying i agree with it.

i am not saying that war spending does not have something to do with our debts and situation but you act like it is the sole purpose.

[eliteforce]

You agree with it but it's a war crime, putting down a extended curfew and shooting dead anyone that violates it even if they unarmed-what if they are hungry or sick? Their lives are this cheap ? The USM is fighting for their "freedom"? It doesn't even serve a military goal when the higher the non-combatant death rate, the higher the rate that those people become combatants.

[j4ever41]

i know you call it a war crime. What would be your plan to clear a parameter and maintain control?

[eliteforce]

whatever i'm against occupying these countries in the first place, my original post was a response to posts stating the Americans don't do war crimes thing like the Israelis do , they both do it.

[j4ever41]

i expected an answer like whatever.

[*RAGE*]

whatever i'm against occupying these countries in the first place, my original post was a response to posts stating the Americans don't do war crimes thing like the Israelis do , they both do it.

all of you post have been about this kind of subject, Why?

Have you ever been there and if so when and for how long?

Do you have any clue what you are talking about?

If so from what information?

Please explain why you feel this way?

Why would you come to a steroid-bodybuilding website to take about war?

[*RAGE*]

It is truly unbelievable how some people will defend the IDF. The IDF originated from a terrorist group, the Haganah. They are just living up to that brutal legacy.

As for all those people who say "it's war", umm no. In war, you kill soldiers. If you are a war criminal, then yes, you kill innocents. Virtually any massacre can be justified by saying "it's war."

I also think that the reaction of certain people shows that no matter what Israel or America does--and I do mean *whatever* they may do--it will be excused by these people. It is a horrible double-standard and the epitome of bigotry. Israel and America are excused for anything and everything, whereas the Muslim world must be taken to task for whatever it does. This is the dynamic established by such people. This two-faced hypocrisy can be seen by the fact that Saddam Hussein was taken to task by the West for gassing his countrymen (well, it was used as an excuse to invade Iraq YEARS later), yet America used even worse weapons against the Iraqi people. When the West does it, "oh well, that's war, folks!" When Saddam--a supposed Muslim does it--then "let's get those sons of b*tches."

this has been talked about till we are blue in the face. It is the same old crap. You said your time was up here so is it?

[Kratos]

this has been talked about till we are blue in the face. It is the same old crap. You said your time was up here so is it?

I think it's in fact not the same old crap. When buff first started posting he was more about educating and understanding of muslims. His message has shifted to one of muslim persecution and whites hating browns. I think his motives have been made much more clear by this shift. His message has changed from acceptance to anger and he contiuously loses his cool and resorts to insults, with a flagrent overuse of the term "bigot".

[*RAGE*]

I think it's in fact not the same old crap. When buff first started posting he was more about educating and understanding of muslims. His message has shifted to one of muslim persecution and whites hating browns. I think his motives have been made much more clear by this shift. His message has changed from acceptance to anger and he contiuously loses his cool and resorts to insults, with a flagrent overuse of the term "bigot".

I could not agree with you more sir. I suspected this from the start and know it has been proven true.

ps.

kratos you can debate with the best

much respected bro.

[eliteforce]

It is a subject that I have spent 20 years educating myself on, Zionist ideology is often based on misinformation, when I see it posted- i dispute it, or I dispute things like "we Americans don't commit war crimes like those Israelis do." Yes I have been to Lebanon and visited the refugee camps there, , I have also been to jordan, israel, the west bank, syria and egypt.

"Do you have any clue what you are talking about?"
Do you really think that you are so much more educated? If you did you wouldn't be asking questions like that.

I have opinions, my opinion is that everything the US does militarily in this region, Iraq, Afghanistan is oppression and cannot be consistent with promoting "freedom and democracy"-you wind up with nothing more than a puppet regime supported by a military government (standard imperialism) especially while the US backs the most oppressive Israeli policy-but not as a direct result, in other words there was no Palestine issue in Vietnam and the war still failed.

Why do you come to a steroid site to talk about war? I dunno, i didn't say i never used a steroid, i have used a steroids and antiestrogens a little which is how i wound up here in the first place..

all of you post have been about this kind of subject, Why?

Have you ever been there and if so when and for how long?

Do you have any clue what you are talking about?

If so from what information?

Please explain why you feel this way?

Why would you come to a steroid-bodybuilding website to take about war?

[CSAR]

There is alot of 'fog' in war and I'm not going to bother trying to find some indisputable source that this happened, all I know is I had read this scenario repeatedly in the Iraq war that the Americans were placing snipers with orders to kill people who violate a curfew, a curfew that was extended for a long period of time while they conduct clearing operations, and that the victims of the sniper attacks were unarmed.. I call that policy a blatant war crime but if you want to insist that it never happened then that's your opinion but not indisputable fact.

Where did you repeatedly read these scenarios? Can you give specific sources? The reason I ask is that initial rules of engagement (ROE) for American military operations in urban terrain (MOUT) are almost never as simple as "Kill anyone in violation of the curfew." ROE can be modified as the situation develops, but only after the initial ROE are rendered useless.

The only specific example that approximates such simplicity that I know of came in Fallujah, when Iraqi Prime Minister Allawi visited SEAL snipers prior to the main assault. Allawi asked if the snipers could see any enemy activity and after being told yes, he asked why the SEAL snipers were not engaging. The snipers replied that they weren't being fired upon and didn't see any weapons. Allawi told them that everyone in Fallujah had been given 3 months to leave and any person in town was to be killed. Still, the snipers followed the original rules of engagement as Allawi was not part of their chain of command. The ROE were in effect until the insurgents figured them out and began to work around them. After that, the ROE were modified and eventually dropped as it became apparent there were no civilians in Fallujah.
(http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/...ain/index.html)

Personally, I don't believe in rules of warfare and rules of engagement. Such things are usually created by politicians who've never been in combat and feel the need to impose moral restrictions on the most immoral of acts. American and German soldiers singing carols and exchanging gifts during Christmas in WWII is nice, but rare and most likely due to cultural similarities.

[eliteforce]

what a dirtbag people like Allowi are.. No i said from the start-this is just stuff I see in news and the reports are often vague, but the sniper attacks are complaints that i heard several times in sunni areas and also in areas where al-sadrs supportsers are.. during the first seige on falluja many people were killed in american bombing shelling before the broke off the seige and that many of them were families caught in the crossfire and hiding in the city..

but at least you defend against the charge of warcrimes instead of saying "yea i agree with doing that" like this other guy did..

i'm not attacking the character of israeli and us soldiers (and I am aware that the cases of rape and/or mass murder are not common practice and only happen in 1 out of many occurrences involving us/israeli soldier contact with civilians) as i am the policy in general in which they are put in these countries as an oppressive force and they wind up at war with the civilian population because a large % of the civilians support the "resistance" as they call it.. and every time the result is consistent and large scale death of that countries people and outright war crimes in some cases.

[j4ever41]

csar did put it more elegant than i did,then reason i was straight to the point was i have no interest in attempting to explain something to someone that has no idea about rules of engagement how fluid the situation is.

[j4ever41]

Personally, I don't believe in rules of warfare and rules of engagement. Such things are usually created by politicians who've never been in combat and feel the need to impose moral restrictions on the most immoral of acts. American and German soldiers singing carols and exchanging gifts during Christmas in WWII is nice, but rare and most likely due to cultural similarities.

Thankyou.

[CSAR]

what a dirtbag people like Allowi are.. No i said from the start-this is just stuff I see in news and the reports are often vague, but the sniper attacks are complaints that i heard several times in sunni areas and also in areas where al-sadrs supportsers are.. during the first seige on falluja many people were killed in american bombing shelling before the broke off the seige and that many of them were families caught in the crossfire and hiding in the city

Moqtada al Sadr is 10 times the dirtbag Allawi is. al Sadr went to the headquarters of the 327th Brigade of the 101st Airborne and demanded that he be the conduit for US aid to Iraqis. He did this to enhance his stature, while at the same time he preached violence against the US in his sermons. al Sadr even butchered Abdul Majid al Khoei, a fellow Shi'ite cleric, on the steps of the grand mosque in downtown Baghdad. He did so because al Khoei was more moderate in his beliefs, was extremely popular among Iraqis, and favored by the US. If al Khoei hadn't been murdered by al Sadr, a lot less Iraqis would have been killed and security could have been maintained in what is now known as "Sadr City."

From my experience in the Middle East, this is typical of most so-called "good Muslims." They are hypocrites of the highest order, who are more than willing to put an AK47 in the hands of a woman or child or to use them as spotters, so they can remain "unarmed" (thus exploiting the ROE against the Americans). Then when that woman or child (ferrying weapons or acting as a spotter) is shot by an American sniper, those same "good Muslims" run to the cameras of al Jazeera wailing, "See what the murderous American invaders have done? They only wish to steal our oil, rape our good Muslim women, and kill our innocent Muslim children."

During the initial Fallujah stand-off, when JDAMs were used, Iraqis were more than happy to parade the supposedly injured "innocents" in front of al-Jazeera's cameras. When American politicians were swayed by these images, the US military scaled back our response. Then, after the insurgents were being eliminated by precision fire from American snipers, the Fallujah city elders and Baghdad delegation from the Iraqi Governing Council complained that Americans were inhumane, killing their foreign "guests", and had to stop shooting. Once again, gullible American politicians were blinded by the hypocrisy of these "good Muslims." Only after aid workers were being kidnapped, tortured, and beheaded by these "good Muslims" did the politicians realize they'd been played for fools.

Americans (especially politicians) are too concerned with our image abroad and wanting everyone to like us. Morals and ROE have no place in war. The Geneva convention has become nothing more than a bunch of worthless rules that are apparently fine to be violated by others, but are conveniently used to remind Americans (and Israelis) that we have to abide by them. Until we forget all this "rules/fairness" nonsense and unleash Hell, we'll continue to be seen as weak and impotent by the International community, especially those in Asia and the Middle East.

[eliteforce]

al-Sadr may be, but he has a consistent and unyielding message-that the US occupation of his country must end-in it's entirety , not like these illegitimate puppet rulers like maliki or allowi that want it to prop them up forever..their traitors, vichy rulers

nationalist guerrillas are never pretty, the vietcong were brutal but they were ultimately right when they insisted on national liberation / end to occupation and foreign domination.

don't give me this "we must unleashe hell" crap when there are half a million dead iraqis and less than 5000 dead invaders.. with countries in that region armed with nuclear weapons and with Iran having ICBMs and strategic submarines.. and in the past , harsher tactics have not made these types of wars successful.

[CSAR]

al Sadr has not been consistent and unyielding. The only thing consistent about al Sadr is his inconsistency:

1. One minute he preaches violence against the US, the next he orders his "army" to cease hostilities. He changes his mind whenever he feels he can gain political favor.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3811215.stm
http://www.newsweek.com/id/96370/output/print

2. On more than one occasion, he has pledged his support to help form a new Iraqi government and then changed his mind when he doesn't get what he wants.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security...conference.htm

3. His Mahdi "army" has been responsible for a good portion of sectarian bloodshed in Iraq.
http://www.time.com/time/world/artic...0.html?cnn=yes
http://www.thewest.com.au/default.as...ontentID=10668

4. He has lost control over a significant portion of his "army."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...e-in-Iraq.html

5. He runs and hides in Iran whenever he feels threatened. When the surge began, he tucked his tail between his fat little legs and made a run for the border, because he was scared the US would arrest him.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/...ain/index.html

6. He lacks the religious education and degrees required by Shi'a doctrines. Thus he cannot claim the title of mujtahid nor can he issue fatwas. While he was a student at the Najaf Hawza he was known as "Mulla Atari", because he preferred playing video games over studying the Quran.
Nasr, V. (2006). The Shia Revival, p.192


Only half a million dead Iraqis and less than 5,000 dead invaders? The former should be much higher, while the latter should be much lower. I guess we're not doing our job right.

[eliteforce]

nice research, what a jerk that guy is.. BUT let me be redundant
..he and other insurgent groups have a consistent message-that the US occupation of his country must end-in it's entirety.. that is paramount .. things like he lacks religious education- his followers are not gonna be overly concerned with that..

the iraq war was sold as a thing to 'make America safe' when it kills as many people as if the place was nuked, and it spurs to Iran to develop ICBM technology and nuclear weapons and for Pakistan to make more of them.. and the 'war on terror' (afghan&iraq wars) bankrupts America..there's a disconnect there

and if your an American military person, you should be warned against these politics-later they will take your pension or your entitlements or your va medical care or whatever.. the more resources America wastes on these conflicts the worse it's future, America has been falling behind other countries in infrastructure, housing, education, standard of living..
and what do you think is gonna happen in that country in 2012 when the occupation is supposedly going to end?

[j4ever41]

nobody took my va ( i think thats hopeful wishing on your behalf ) ,by the way what elitforce are you or have you been a part of?