What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
The camera starts rolling on Best Buy holiday campaign. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - A behind the scenes look at one employee's singing debut.
52 Comments
- izzybr, on 11/15/2007, -1/+28I wish they would be held accountable to Iraqi courts, because the US government will not hold these people responsible, and they will end up as cops, still firing upon civilians for no reason.
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -1/+26Blackwater's very presence in Iraq is unjustified. History will hold all of us Americans accountable for the destruction and death in Iraq, just as the world held the German people guilty for the crimes of the Nazis.
- mrsdz50, on 11/15/2007, -0/+10Even as the Germans immigrated to the US after the war, they were shunned or worse and many Americans had a hard time seeing there could be a distinction between being German and a Nazi. 48 of the US states also had prison camps during WWII and within the camps the distinction was very clearly made.
- xGeneric, on 11/15/2007, -0/+8"Sounds like a plan. Lets round up the rednecks, muslims, scientologists and make this country a better place to live."
Rounding up those people won't make the world a better place... but getting rid of hateful ***** who want to kill everyone who doesn't think exactly like them, now that would make the world a better place. Muslims aren't the problem, it's people like you who are to stupid to realize how full of ***** they are. I would like to think you're just some little kid trolling, but I've met to many people like you to dismiss the attitude. - fantasticFlan, on 11/15/2007, -0/+7A free trip to The Hague
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -2/+9Germans were villified wherever they went for twenty years.When the next generation came to adulthood, and it was clear that Germany was not going to return to National Socialism, the world forgave the German people.
- ZeroOrDie, on 11/15/2007, -1/+7This is why we need to have death camps for rednecks.
- anachronaut, on 11/15/2007, -1/+6So if someone from a foreign country -- lets go with your example and make them Iraqis just for the heck of it -- comes over to the USA and murders your family, we can just ship them back to Iraq for justice... right? I mean, if Americans are to be tried only in America for their crimes elsewhere, then that's only fair and logically consistent. Right? Right?
Yeah, that's what I thought. Shut the ***** up. - Dumbledorito, on 11/15/2007, -1/+6Not so long as the occupying forces are being led by someone who claims Jesus talks to him.
- facttech, on 11/15/2007, -0/+4Sadly, the "deficiencies in the law" mentioned in the article were deliberately engineered. Blackwater personnel are not accountable to any criminal law by design.
One thing to consider: Put pressure on lawmakers to revoke Blackwater's status as a corporation. - geddon, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3Will that be similar to the way history has held the United States accountable for the murder of nearly a million Iraqi children through economic sanctions in the 90's?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions - lhbaker, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3***** Pinkertons.
- delafere, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3Oh please. This is so basic. You say, "if the contractors are americans they should be tried in the US court system."
Well, American citizens accused of crimes overseas are already subject to foreign jurisdiction. This is a basic and well-established principle of international law. If an American citizen or service member is accused today of a serious crime in Japan or Germany, for example, Japan or Germany have the right to try him, even if the United States wants to prosecute the crime itself.
If you don't believe me, look it up. Or go kill someone in Austria. You'll find out.
The problem is that our government refused to define ANY law to which these contractors are subject --it's called "intentional legal obfuscation" and it is a pattern with these people. - Matthew720, on 11/15/2007, -1/+4Many people on here who lack the basic knowledge in world history would like to think that Blackwater's actions are the first time when a U.S. backed group (military or civilian) killed innocent civilians indiscriminately. But, the fact is, the United States has been slaughtering innocent people for decades in the Middle East. And people wonder why 9/11 happened. It happened because actions have consequences. They hate us because we've been "talking" at them through the barrel of a gun.
- pintomp3, on 11/15/2007, -1/+4buried and reported.
- Grumps, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3Everyone says Blackwater "Security" Killings of 14 Iraqis Not Justifiable. But the government dont care.
- Matthew720, on 11/15/2007, -1/+4You two need to get yourselves some high school education or at the very least a GED. The gene pool could sure use a little chlorine in it.
- syroncoda, on 11/15/2007, -0/+3oh so the FBI figured it out... but nobody else did? i highly doubt that anything good will come from this situation. i also bet that blackwater will continue to get away with killing innocent people, whether it be in Iraq or somewhere else.
- DaManDOH, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Simply put, Blackwater employees aren't soldiers. They're "contractual security agents." At least, the armed ones are supposed to be. I prefer to call 'em mercenaries. Plus, whether the personnel are soldiers or mercs, they are paid and trained to follow orders. One of those orders includes very specific rules of engagement. These rules of engagement are in place for both soldiers and contractors. They are meant to be followed. The FBI seems to be suggesting these Blackwater mercs did otherwise. It's one of many reasons people have historically argued to keep mercenaries away from combat.
Every soldier on the ground in Iraq, every citizen they're serving in our nation's military, and every sleazy merc that Bush II bought into this conflict through the no-bid back door should keep one fact in mind. With every Iraqi life lost, especially if it's an innocent life, whether the rules of engagement were followed or not, we risk more terrorist exposure and recruitment. No one likes seeing their friends and family get killed by an occupying force...
...not that we in the U.S. could historically relate to that. - diggmediggyou, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2Yet nothing will happen to them.
- yobrodude, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLpROhIg9eA
- inactive, on 11/15/2007, -0/+2"the United States has been slaughtering innocent people for decades in the Middle East."
And in South America, Central America, the Philipines, Africa, Southeast Asia.... - inactive, on 11/15/2007, -1/+3Our government talks about respect for the Iraqi democratic process. They talk about the great strides made in Iraq and that we must have confidence in the government, but kingjacob doesn't think that Americans who commit crimes there should be tried there.
Buddy, its either one way or the other. Either we are a conquering empire or we help them as a sovereign nation. You can't have it both ways. - DaManDOH, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Well, at least the FBI -- a government agency -- seems to care. Here's hoping Bush's DOJ does something about it.
...yea right... - geddon, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1My intentions were to illustrate that history will forget about the Blackwater murders -- just as easily as it forgot about the hundreds of thousands (some count millions) of children we starved to death a little more than a decade ago in the exact same place.
History as in his story. I highly doubt those "insurgents" forgot that we murdered their children. - inactive, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2WOW.
The same story from the same source on the front page at the same time.
That has never happened before. - akatherder, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2Still waiting for the obligatory "This is a warzone, man!" post.
What would you do if you were in a warzone and you saw (fill in the blank)!? Would you shoot them in the face or would you just die man!? - GutterBall1200, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Blackwater reminds me of "The Company" in Prison Break ;-p
- geddon, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Blackwater: Coming to the War on Drugs Near You!
- delafere, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Seemingly, you're completely full of it. Strawman argument.
(For your benefit, that's when you ask a simple-minded question and then supply a fabricated, incorrect answer that misrepresents the supposedly monolithic position of the heterogeneous group you're targeting. The only part you left off was the usual idiotic closing declaration: "'Nuff said!" as though you've accomplished anything.) - DaManDOH, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1It was already made under a different submission:
http://digg.com/politics/Blackwater_killed_14_Iraq ... - inactive, on 11/16/2007, -0/+1It is against American precedents that we would employ a mercenary force in a military action run by our Federal government. It is crazy and unjustified to let mercenaries who are not in the American forces chain of command be loose in a combat situation where we are trying to win the hearts and minds of the people while controlling insurgents. It is unjustified (there is NO reasonable explanation) for the mercenaries to be immune from any type of prosecution, either military or civilian. This does not only apply to Blackwater of course, but to every military "subcontractor".
As far as the world holding the Germans responsible, that s what happened. Germans who traveled out of their borders were humbled wherever they went. Read some history. The American Forces that stayed in Germany were enjoined to punish the population, not to share food with them, fraternize with them, etc. Forgiveness took about a generation. - aaronlinderman, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Interestingly, there are significantly different accounts of events, as the Agence France-Presse reported. Read the story at http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iGy5hnvkFkHnMw ...
- DaManDOH, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1IMHO, this argument is rather out-of-scope, geddon, so you'll excuse me if I contextualize further in order to end this sub-thread.
Sanctions, like military engagement, are arguably necessary evils. Yet evils they are and should be absolutely reserved for last resort, sanctions being slightly preferable to war. There's a very simple reason why.
The 1990 U.N. approved sanctions, according to the article your wiki article cites, killed between 400,000 and 800,000 Iraqi children. This death toll occurred over more than 10 years. That's less than 40,000 to perhaps more than 80,000 Iraqi children a year. A terrible, regrettable, horrendous price; one which no living soul should have to pay. Keep in mind that Saddam Hussein had assumed power with the U.S.'s blessing and then proceeded to be the tyrannical despot we knew him to be. Take what you will from that.
We now advance to the current conflict. It was estimated that between March 2003 and October 2006 -- approximately 3.4 years -- 655,000 more Iraqis were killed than would have died had the invasion never taken place. That's a death rate of more than 190,000 Iraqis a year. And these deaths come with the added stings of foreign occupation, political chaos, and all of the impoverishing effects of the former sanctions combined.
So, geddon, where should this context end? Before the war started? Before the current administration lied to our faces? Before Bush was elected? Before the sanctions were approved by the U.N.? Before Bush's father was elected? Before Saddam Hussein took power? Hell, we could stretch this all the way back to World War I if we so chose. This march to Bush's war was informed by a long, historical series of bad choices, especially on our part. A change in any one of these events would have made this conflict very different; possibly nonexistent. While I agree that understanding the historical context is very important, it is merely prologue to our current shame.
And considering the objective nature of these numbers, it seems to me that the sanctions were preferable to having Blackwater mercenaries on the ground killing innocent Iraqis. Wouldn't you agree?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ... - obliviousfool, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Didn't you hear? Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessed to personally killing Daniel Pearl. He confessed, so it must be true. And he's in prison, so justice has been done.
- boo1, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Is that you uncle-daddy?
- Matthew720, on 11/15/2007, -1/+2The Iraqi courts were good enough to try Saddam, but they're not good enough to handle this case? Hypocrite much?
- boo1, on 11/15/2007, -0/+1Its ok for muslims to kill people because its part of their culture and we would want to offend their culture...
Hmmmm....interesting statement
So here is your culture in a nutshell.
Assaults 2,238,480 [1st of 57]
Car thefts 1,147,300 [1st of 55]
Drug offences 560.1 per 100,000 people [4th of 34]
Murders 12,658 [6th of 62]
Murders (per capita) 0.042802 per 1,000 people [24th of 62]
Murders with firearms 8,259 [4th of 32]
Murders with firearms (per capita) 0.0279271 per 1,000 people [8th of 32]
Rapes 89,110 [1st of 65]
Rapes (per capita) 0.301318 per 1,000 people [9th of 65]
Total crimes 23,677,800 [1st of 60]
So, let's take your words and try this again. "Its ok for americans to kill people because its part of their culture and we ...."
Well, you get the picture. - aaronlinderman, on 11/15/2007, -0/+0This is basically the point "Paul" made in his testimony. See http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iGy5hnvkFkHnMw ...
- Coded1, on 11/15/2007, -1/+1Today your judges are only as good as the weapons behind them.
- Bamborzled, on 11/15/2007, -1/+1You're joking... right? No?
My "status of humanity score": -250.
My "status of humanity score" after your comment: -251. - aaronlinderman, on 11/15/2007, -0/+0Caferrell, could you flesh that out? What do you mean Blackwater's presense is unjustified? That can be taken a lot of ways? Are their actions different from the US military or the other coalition militaries there? What about the other contractors, security, logistics or otherwise?
And frankly, I'm not sure the world has held the German people responsible for the Nazis' crimes, or that it should. Not fully, at least. It's worth noting that there was an anti-Nazi movement, though their attempts to stamp it out have resulted in very little recognition over the years. A rare example is Allen Dulles' Germany's Underground: The Anti-Nazi Resistance. - LoJack, on 11/15/2007, -2/+2Hey, we don't kill civilian, none. Blackwater was just target practicing, and the Iraqis tried to block the bullets. Too bad they died .. they should be sent to GITMO for protecting terrorists.
- aaronlinderman, on 11/15/2007, -0/+0Did you notice the FBI report said the convoy came under attack, contrary to other accounts? Read between the lines: 17 people died, 14 were "unjustified." But the other three killings? According to the FBI's analysis (which may or may not be right), Blackwater may have been overzealous, but the basic issue was real.
- aaronlinderman, on 11/15/2007, -0/+0Actually, Blackwater trains cops, and has done so for some time. Federal, State and local law enforcement find that many of Blackwater's training programs far surpass their own. It's a side of the company that's got very little press, but they've been doing it quietly for years.
- fainet, on 11/15/2007, -2/+1a
- darkz77, on 11/15/2007, -2/+0shutup and go back to ***** your mother/sister
- izzybr, on 11/15/2007, -5/+2Holding someone accountable is quite different from people snickering behind your back because of your heritage. The later is what happened to German citizens
- jakeson2, on 11/15/2007, -9/+3I must wonder how many of the haters of the American effort in the Mideast would want those guilty of beheadings of Westerners held accountable. Seemingly they only want to punish Americans. Every one wanted blood when that stupid female had a leash on the Iraqi prisoner. But, I heard not one person want to do anything to the people who killed Pearl. Neither did I hear anyone preach for finding and condemning the "beheaders" among the Iraqis.
- izzybr, on 11/15/2007, -9/+2What are you talking about? The leaders were held accountable, not the German people. The Nuremburg trials weren't for the whole country
-
Show 51 - 52 of 52 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is