PoWs on parade

[moggie]

Living abroad as I do, I do not have access to BBC/ITV/SKY etc. at home so have to get by with BBC World TV and CNN. On neither of those channels have I seen any footage of the US PoWs being paraded by the Iraqis.

Have I missed this or has there been an outbreak of the good taste and decency that was sadly lacking when John Nichol made his unscheduled appearance in GW1? I recall at the time being surprised that the pictures were shown - although in retrospect I suppose that they added to the coalition sense of detrmination (as I suspect it will do this time).

I'm not asking for those pics to be shown - just in case anyone gets the wrong idea - just wondering if they had.

PS - has anyone heard anymore on the accidental bombing/Tomahawk-ing of Iran the other day? All seems to have gone quiet on that story?

PPS - must go out and buy a SKY dish soon..............

[SASless]

Fox News showed one still pic....no faces...no graphic wounds....fair bit of blood ....the commentary was strained.....they had viewed the video and were repulsed by what they saw it seems. They reported US DOD viewers of the video were also visibly bothered by what they saw. American public opinion will be affected by this....and not in Iraq's favor one bit.

[Archimedes]

Moggie,

I think that Sky had no such inhibitions earlier. I had the misfortune to catch part of the 'display' thanks to finger trouble with the Sky remote, but didn't dwell.

I don't know whether or not Sky are still showing the item.

The Iran story isn't clear here - as far as I can tell from the variety of report, 'rockets' have fallen in their territory, but there's been no confirmation whether these were coalition or Iraqi rockets as far as I can tell. Others will probably know better than I on this one.

[edited in the light of SASless beating me to it]

From what you say, SASless, unless the thing's staged for the benefit of Saddam's sympathisers rather than aimed at reducing US public support, it looks like another great blunder on Saddam's part.

We can only hope that the PoWs are released swiftly, and my thoughts are with them and their families.

[S76Heavy]

While I hope for their swift and safe return, I cannot help but wonder whether the Geneva convention that is quoted by Mr. Rumsfeld does not equally apply to the scores of Iraqi POWs that can be seen on the networks.
I would think they have the same human and combattant's rights as the coalition troops and should not be shown recognisable on western tv either. Just imagine what may happen to their families if the Iraqi secret service sees them giving up.. These are the same people we're claiming to liberate.

[moggie]

CNN have just shown some bcause they said it "was part of the war in Iraq". Credit to them they only showed 4 people giving name, rank number and no more.

They chose not to show any footage of dead soldiers, but did show one "still" which they said "showed no detail of wounds or any identifying marks on the bodies".

However, they also said that it looked like some of the dead had received "gunshot wounds to the forehead" (but did not show those pics). Again, all credit, they did not speculate on how those wounds were inflicted (and neither shall I).

Rather like blitzing civilian targets in WW2, I can not see this doing anything to dampen morale and determination - quite the reverse.

We got the PoWs back last time - so fingers crossed they all come home safe this time. My thoughts go out to the families of those Pows, but at least they know they were taken alive, not killed in action.

[Danny]

I was watching Sky News as they showed the live feed from Al Jazeera. The luvvie director had no problem letting us see one soldier being questioned by someone in very broken and illogical english. The soldier was very polite and was making the point that he didn't understand the questions. The rest of the media pack appeared to be throwing questikns in Arabic.

The package then cut to an injured soldier who was lying down on a bed in bloodstained clothes and in obvious pain and discomfort. The sodomising Baath party t@sser holding a microphone then held the soldier by the head and was forcing him to face the camera while he shoved the mic into his face.

At this point the feed was cut as someone slightly less 'luvvie' than the tw@t who was directing the news at that point realised that the families of these POW's probably didn't know that their loved ones were even captured. The anchors then fluffed about and cut to other packages. They eventually mentione that they wouldn't show the footage until the families had been informed.

S76Heavy, I will repeat what I wrote on a similar thread on Jet Blast to one dipstick:there is a substantial difference between shots of soldiers surrendering or being taken off to a POW camp and placing individuals in front of a camera and bombarding them with stupid questions from some Baath party sodomiser or grabbiong hold of the head of an injured POW who is lying downand forcing him to face the camera whilst he is in shock and pain. I hope that those Batth party swine are strung up by their testicles for that kind of treatment. Unfortunately for some on here who are so rabidly anti-American that they are prepared to overlook the differences mentioned above. :*

[Jackonicko]

The Geneva Convention is hugely irritating and inconvenient, but it's there for a reason and should be strictly adhered to. Any breaches should be punished, depending on the severity of the breach. People should recognise that US/UK breaches tend to be minor and technical in nature and that Iraqi PoWs are being treated with extraordinary kindness, care and even dignity, while Iraq's breaches have been major, and these US PoWs appear to be receiving extremely harsh treatment.

Even more worrying to me, though, are the reports that US prisoners may have been shot after surrendering, while the footage of a mob shooting the reed beds beside the Euphrates (suspecting that they might hide a downed allied airman) was shocking and worrying. The impression last time was that allied aircrew could expect decent treatment until they fell into the hands of what Danny refers to as the 'sodomisers', it now looks like they will be in danger from semi-organised lynch mobs from the moment they hit the ground. Let's hope that anyone involved is prosecuted/punished post war.

I hope to god that no more aircrew (following the Tornado loss yesterday) are even injured, let alone killed or forced to bail out over enemy territory. Let's all hope that the spotters count you all back.....

[S76Heavy]

Capt. Pprune,

I am NOT rabidly anti-American. I am, however, a critical and independent thinker. Like some Americans are.

I have no love for the Iraqi dictatorship. I do feel that this war was inevitable. I am not sure about the timing, but then, when is a good time to go to war. Also, I am well aware of the human cost of war.

While I support the troops in theatre, I do not have to agree with the politics that brought them there. Especially the "if you're not for us, you're against us" rethoric is not very becoming for a state that claims to be a true democracy. What ever happened to freedom of speech, then let the majority decide? Why all these knee-jerk reactions to other viewpoints?

What I am saying, is that with this Iraqi dictatorial regime still in power, I feel it is not in the interest of the Iraqi POWs, nor in the interest of their families behind enemy lines, to be shown recognisable in the media. If this war is meant to be a liberation of the people of Iraq, and by God, they deserve it, why jeopardise these families unnecessarily? Just so we at home can endulge in a few moments of feelings of superiority? What's the point and who benefits from it?
Remember, the war is just the start of the process. After the war is over, Iraq needs to be rebuilt. WW1 sowed the seeds for WW2 and we should not repeat that mistake, it has cost the world dearly.

I don't intend to enter a p1ssing contest about who is the best soldier and therefore has the right to post here and what is banned because of not conforming with the view of the governments involved or the moderators. But if there is no more room for critical thoughts, then that's the end of democracy, no matter how you call it.

And if this post gets me banned, so be it.

[Ali Barber]

I have to say there is a hint of hypocrisy over the US reaction to the showing of these POWs on TV. The western TV channels have been showing Iraqi POWs since day one, and sight of their faces is likely to have severe consequences for their families back in Iraqi/Sadaam controlled territory. At what distance does the cameraman have to be for it to be within the terms of the Geneva Convention? I am sure that if I personally knew some of those Iraqi POWs I could have recognmised them from some of the western coverage.

As for the coverage of the dead bodies. Apart from the lack of respect showed to the dead (commented on my muslim colleagues incidentally), does anyone recall the coverage of the road of death in Gulf War 1? I suppose you could say that even their mothers wouldn't have recognised them from their burnt away skulls.

Lets start talking Geneva Convention when serious breaches and mistreatment starts occurring - which, unfortunately, probably will happen in the not too distant future.

By the way, I am not pro-Iraq. I support the war against Sadaam's regime and have nothing but admiration for our people involved, and especially their treatment of EPOWs as they are being called on the US networks.

[CaptSnails]

Gentlemen yesterday 23/03/03 Qatar based Al Jasira TV showed repetedly footage of an Iraqi morgue with about 10-12 dead US servicemen on the floor. I was amased to see that all close ups showed execution style wounds to the head.
In particular one dead US serviceman who was closely examined by the camera had a wound to the abdomen and his uniform was covered in blood around the wound. The man also had a bullet hole on the right temple.
Obviously this US service man was severly wounded in battle (abdomen wound) and when the Iraqi's approached him decided to finish the job by a brutal and inhumane execution.
This gentlemen is the reality of the Iraqi regime and Iraqi militari. As for Al Jasira TV who re-played the video for a good two hours I have one thing to say. YOU ARE NO BETTER THAN THE IRAQIS AND YOU BELONG IN THE STONEAGE. The repeted footage of this macabre spectacle was intended by Al Jasira to "satisfy" their arab "brothers" around the world.
The hatered is mindboggling.

To those of you who speak about the Geneva Convention, please realize that these "animals" have no respect for anything and above all human life.

[Man-on-the-fence]

Big Mistake

In one swift move they have just pissed off 250000 heavily armed American, British and Australian troops. Not the best move they could have made.

for info Sky are still showing the pictures but with the faces pixelated out. To$$ers

Edited to ask people more educated than me if there is any mileage in cutting off Al Jazera at its point of origin. I can get it but I will have to pay a subscription...YGBSM:eek:

[TomPierce]

Ali Barber

Are you deliberately trying to be thick?

Iraqi POW's are NOT - repeat NOT - treated in front of TV cameras in the same way that the US POW's are. The Iraqi POW's are shown as walking prisoners - just that and nothing more. There is nothing wrong with that and does not contravene the GC.

The Iraqis on the other hand are deliberately, and without any regard to the GC, are showing and questioning wounded prisoners. This is what is wrong. In the same way that that so called soldiers were DELIBERATELY trying to seek and kill "downed aviators" in the Tigris. Fortunately, it seems that their kill kill instincts were not satisfied.

Get your facts right please. This is an example of GW1 all over again, and the fact that the Iraqi's seem to enjoy doing this is all the more sickening.

I note on TV this morning that the faces of the US POW's have been 'pixelated.' Still wrong to show it though.

[BlueWolf]

TVNZ showed what sounds, from the description, a lot like what Danny saw. It was a video attributed to Al-Jazeera.

One female prisoner, four males. One of the men had his head lifted up from a bed - if you could call it that - where a moment earlier he had been briefly shown lying with what I would describe as a grimace of pain.

All the individuals were clearly identifiable, as were their injuries.

The accompanying soundtrack was in Arabic, with questions being asked of the prisoners as a microphone was thrust in their faces. Answers were drowned out by music and subtitles in Arabic appeared.

The footage then showed the bodies of some dead service people. It was not the most graphic I have ever seen, but it was bad enough. There were no close up views of execution style wounds.

The coverage ended with the TVNZ anchor stating that the rest of the video was too graphic to broadcast. The US-based British journalist to whom he spoke next, commented that what we had seen was a great deal more detailed and explicit than anything being broadcast in the US.

[Ali Barber]

TP,

I never said that they were treated in the same way as the Iraqi POWs. In fact, I can get both Al-Jazeera and Iraqi TV on my satellite, although I can't understand a word of what they're saying, and I have seen the full coverage of the US dead and POWs. To say it was horrific and barbaric is an understatement. It was also in dircet contravention of the Geneva Convention on the treatment of POWs, injured and dead combatants.

My objection was the apparent hobby horse that the media got on about the Geneva Convention, especially with Sky who went with the flow and rebroadcast the Al-Jazeera coverage until they finally thought better of it. They then proceeded to talk about the GC and how they film Iraqi POWs from further away and that makes it all right for them in terms of the GC.

I do not doubt for one minute that the Iraqis are in breach of the GC with what they did and then showed on their TV. My point is that so are the western media, although to a lesser degree. The Iraqi POWs are recognisable to those who know them which, considering the risk to their families when accusations of Kamikazi missions being ordered under threat of torture to the families of the pilots are also being bandied about on the media, is either "outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment" or not being "treated humanely".

We started this war with the moral high ground. Lets stay there. Maybe the media are too close to all this and we (the military) no longer have much say in what is being broadcast.

[John (Gary) Cooper]

I haven't seen these pictures and further more I do not wish to see them. If an Arab TV station wishes to show them that is their prerogative, perhaps the West TV stations have the right NOT to show them and the viewer has the right NOT to watch them. Are the West TV Stations trying to whip up some kind of hatred by showing them.

When showing these pictures have the West TV Stations issued a warning to viewers in advance of the stress this may cause?

I find the whole conflict an absolute mess, and whilst it appears that the things are going relatively OK for the coalition, I do feel that a whole load of 'nasties' are yet to come, I just hope that someone gets SH before the CF enter the streets of Baghdad.

[Vizsla]

I hope that those Batth party swine are strung up by their testicles for that kind of treatment. Unfortunately for some on here who are so rabidly anti-American that they are prepared to overlook the differences mentioned above.

Guantanamo Bay & Bagram are OK then ?

[G.Khan]

You would appear to be beyond help.

Looking at the demenour and the faces of the one girl and four guys who had been taken prisoner it was fairly obvious that they had recently witnessed the summary execution of their fellow soldiers whose bodies were present and feared the same fate for themselves, a scare tactic not uncommon within Iraq.

When you have irrefutable evidence of summary executions at Guantanamo Bay and Bagram please be sure to post it here.

Feel free, at any time, to say something good about the coalitions efforts to rid the world of the murderous regime of Saddam Hussein.

[DamienB]

I see Sky are now pixellating faces of Iraqi POWs - clearly they have been told their own footage of these is breaching the GC - however minor a breach, it is a breach and no doubt has embarassed HMG and the US.

What I really do not understand is the level of surprise. The Iraqis did this before, it should have been expected. Doesn't half make the military spokesmen look stupid when they say 'nonsense' when asked if the Iraqis have POWs, only to be presented with video tape of them minutes later. Similarly with the AH-64 loss today, denied until the video tape of it is shown.

Al J is showing a lot of things not appearing on Western news channels, including extremely graphic images of what was said to be civvy casualties of air raids. I do worry that our media is glossing over anything nasty we may have caused on the basis of 'taste and decency' yet were quite happy to show gruesome images of dead civvies killed by Saddam's troops before the war started to try and prove to the public what a nasty bloke Saddam was.

This does not do the PR effort any good at all - it's looking like the BBC, Sky etc. are simply government mouthpieces revelling in all those gosh-wow explosions in Baghdad. Imagine how that looks to the rest of the Arab world. Al Qaeda must be struggling to cope with the amount of new volunteers at the moment :(

And then the scum at Sky etc. repeatedly show 'what may be the moment when an RAF Tornado was shot down'. Well cheers, I bet the families and friends of the crew are delighted to see that bit of footage played repeatedly. Beggars belief, it really does. I don't think there's an ounce of human decency among these sods.

[Vortex what...ouch!]

Sky’s coverage was appalling. I will not be surprised if they find themselves on the end of a multi million dollar lawsuit from the families of those soldiers for the stress caused by this disgusting one up man ship. Indeed I hope this is the case. It really is about time these people are held accountable for their actions.

Well done to those TV stations that decided not to show this footage.

[Check 6]

Gentlemen, the Geneva Convention applies to those States who are signatories.

It does not apply to private corporations or private TV networks.

Iraqi TV is State TV, not a private Corporation, so they SHALL comply with the Geneva Convention.

CNN, FOX News, ABC, CBS, NBC, Sky News, etc. are private corporations. They are not held to the Geneva Convention. However, they typically only show POW's walking down a road, or being searched by soldiers. They do not INTERVIEW them, they do not TORTURE them, they do not ROLL dead soldiers around for a better view. They do not STICK MICROPHONES in their faces!!!!

[Hwel]

I have been pretty much sickened by the TV coverage by western media. Tapes of POW's wounded and dead (from either side) should not be shown untill the families have been informed and given consent. How would you feel if your son, wife, husband was out there. The last time you spoke to them might have been 7 or more days ago when they moved up to forward positions. they probably told you they were fine "dear I drive a fuel tanker we have all these tanks protecting us Ill be miles from the front line" next thing you see is their corpse on the floor of an Iraqi TV studio. Or more relevant to us perhaps live pictures of your brother being burnt alive by the Iraqi military on the banks of the tigris. Thankfully yesterday there was no pilot hiding in the reeds but what happens tommorrow if there is. And its a journo who spots him. Then what price having live feeds from the enemy capital.:mad:

[kbf1]

An interesting comment that was made a couple of days ago is that the BBC may have inadvertantly broken the Geneva Convention by showing the faces of Iraqi POWs as they were being passed back down the line, even though the point they were trying to make in the report is that they were being treated well and being fed and watered.

If you listen to some of Bush's comments he takes care to quite open language and not to use definitive statements about how the US treats prisoners of war. One news channel (Euronews I think) suggested that this may be on account of the criticism that has been made of the way Al Quaeda prisoners have been treated in Guantanamo Bay and the way in which the Geneva Convention has been interpreted there. (Note that I am relaying what others have discussed in news reports, I am NOT commenting on the rights or wrongs of the issue).

Gentlemen, the Geneva Convention applies to those States who are signatories.

That is correct, but secondary legislation framed in the ratification of the Geneva Convention will usually compell media organisations to adhere to the edicts of the act as part of any process of providing credentials. Some even go further in enshringing compliance in law.

[Chronic Snoozer]

I was watching CNN and the reporter asked the question re GC and whether CNN would be contravening it by showing Iraqi POWs. He didn't seem to be all that aware of the GC and was somewhat caught out by the US bringing it up in its news conferences.

Surely, networks would have had some sort of planning meeting where the restrictions, pros and cons of all this are determined and the rules of broadcasting the action set? Seems a bit of an oversight in my book?

[TomPierce]

Then.........................BBC TV at lunchtime show the POW's and their fear for us all to see. No pixelation, nothing. Then the reporter who was in Washington said "we decided to cut it there because the rest was sickening!" "We didn't want show dead soldiers!" Well how bloody considerate of you BBC. I think your attitude to publishing those images at all, puts you down in the drains that SKY TV and the other come from. You are about as low as they come now.

The image of fear on that girl's face was pitiful. All the more so because it was the Iraqi's who put it there!!!!!! They are scumbags and the day of judgement is not far now. You watch the Americans get mad now.

I can only hope the BBC read this because I am sick that they should stoop so low.

An e-mail is going off to them.

[newswatcher]

For those of us with longer memories, it is difficult to forget what happened in "My Lai"(1968).

The atrocities carried out by a few, tarnished the name of the US army, not helped by the apparent whitewash during the investigation into this incident, and the subsequent pardon for Lt. Calley, by Nixon.

All concerned in the Iraq conflict would do well to remember the words of General MacArthur, during the Second World War.

"The soldier, be he friend or foe, is charged with the protection of the weak and the unarmed."

[Deaf]

I know this is OT and insensitive but unfortunately it shows we haven't nailed their comms (or IC3) yet and that is/should be the main aim at this point.

[RatherBeFlying]

While USA treatment of "illegal combatants" is felt in many quarters to fall well short of the GCs, Iraqi treatment of GWI POWs in many cases was out and out torture and degradation.

Being shown on Al Jazeera might just give Iraqis pause before inflicting further injuries on these POWs now that their present condition has been broadcast to the entire world.

[jumpseater]

John Nichol was on lunch time TV today during a piece on the POW pictures. He stated he had never watched the clip of himself, which was obviously filmed under duress. JN made an interesting comment that these images possibly gave the relations some comfort that the people were alive, but ONLY at the time they were filmed. I wondered that maybe 'between the lines' this meant that the famillies may have suffered more stress because of the showing of the film. He also made the comment that part of the reason for filming was to further degrade the POW's. As a civillian seeing those images first time round, made me realise just what a debt of gratitude we owe all our servicemen/women, for the sacrifices and risks they are prepared to take on our behalf.

I am not surprised at all that we have seen these images, after all as above we have seen that a precedent has been set in GW1. Regarding the images of the deceased soldiers, we have to remember that in the 'west' we have seen similar images. Towards the end of the Afghan conflict in the UK there was photographic coverage of the shooting of what was described as an Afghan Al-Quida member. Any of this mans family or friends who would have had access to these pictures would have seen how his life was ended. Those were front and second page images on many UK papers. If we as a society are happy to purchase those papers with such graphic images, we should not be surprised that other countries follow suit. I can also recall images of 9/11 with recognisable faces of trapped people in the upper stories, who obviously did not survive. Our society was also happy to 'purchase' and view those images too. I am not condoning the use or showing of any of the above images, but it is a fact that if we view such images without complaint, then we should not be surprised that other societies are 'happy' to view images we are uncomfortable with. In due course we might even find them in a 'lads' magazine like FHM for example, one of that genre of mags has already used graphic pictures of the failed Iranian hostage mission with 'witty' captions.

Just for a bit of background to this post I have occaisionally free-lanced as a photographer, and have family members in the services.

[moggie]

Excellent post jumpseater.

I was not at all impressed at the end of GW1 when we were shown VERY graphic pictures of the carnage on the Basra highway.

I think that we are shown way too many images of death and mutilation in the press and on TV - I'm not squeamish but I do feel that there are certain boundaries to taste and decency.

After all, do we not often use these standards of decency to suggest that we (in the civilized, western world) are better than those "backward cultures" elsewhere?

Every single dead or wounded soldier or civilian is or was a human being, is/was the son or daughter of other human beings and quite possibly has other human beings depending upon them for love, support and livelihood.

Sky worry me - they have a lot of influence on their viewers and we may just come to regard their gutter reporting as the norm.

that said, if you want to see REALLY tastless reporting, the Spanish media take some beating. They show graphic, close ups of terrorist killings, the like of which I have NEVER before seen in European media and they do on-line, computer animations of how the latest ETA victim met their end. These are similar in feel to video games - yet they depict ACTUAL deaths - sickening.

[Skitzoid]

If you feel that you want to complain about UK news coverage
go to: WWW.BSC.ORG.UK

[solotk]

Is there an address to complain about Prime Ministers comments?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2893757.stm

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair earlier accused the Iraqi regime of "executing" the two men.

"If anyone needed any further evidence of the depravity of Saddam's regime, this atrocity provides it," he said at a joint news conference in the US with George W Bush.

"It is yet one more flagrant breach of all the proper conventions of war."


I'm sure the families of these brave men, who have been told they were missing, then that there was hope they were E+E, then told that they might be dead, then confirmed that they were dead, then have the PRIME MINISTER announce to the world that they were EXECUTED, has really helped then in the grieving process. Any feelings the families had, that their men had given their lives for a better Iraq, or had died courageously were crushed right there. What an awful vision, their men executed, in some sh1tty street by a mob they were trying to help.

All for Bluppet to gain some political smartie points in front of the worlds press. "America has had PW's executed, now we have too, see George, we're really side by side"

Or maybe the family had already been told the manner, and I'm getting very upset over nothing?

Rest in Peace. Whatever the manner of dying, you are still heroes.

[John (Gary) Cooper]

Personally I think the whole war from showing POW's on screen to bombing Baggers is an absolute disgrace.

I support the troops 100% and when (or if) they see images of that nature they must despair for their own future, I couldn't go along with this conflict from the start (one of the very few I haven't supported). I just hope and pray that 'Liberation' is swift and that all get their just desserts at the end of the day. :*

[TomPierce]

Are you not being more than a little naive?solotk

Do you hide the fact that the Iraqui's deliberately, in cold blood, shot two of our men in the head? And what about the US guys who got the same despicable treatment?

The people who did this are not soldiers, they are murderers. It is NOT what you do in war and the world should know what the enemy is doing Iraq. "Solidiers" changing into civilian clothes and shooting at our guys. "Surrendering" and then killing our guys.

They DID execute real soldiers. They are war criminals and have to be bought to account. The families will want to know that wouldn't you say. They would certainly want to know the way it happened.

What the Iraqi's are doing is deserving of the worst kind of retribution but they will be treated properly, as POW's should be.

Nothing alters the fact that they are still heroes. God bless all our true fighting soldiers.

[solotk]

Am I Tom?

Have the forensic people already looked at the bodies, and come to that decision then? Very quick work if they did.

Without being technical, if you shoot at people in a Land Rover, or a truck, what is your point of aim? Of course the Iraqis are perfectly capable of executing people in cold blood, I would rather wait until a forensic scientist had made that statement. Just because they behave like degenerates, is no reason for us to go the same route "Moral High Ground" and all that.

Blair, went for the political points. He used the death of 2 Brave ,(and they were brave, they were EOD specialists) men, for political mileage, and attention grabbing soundbites.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12783733&meth od=full&siteid=50143

http://www.express.co.uk/story.html?story=2&r=31316725545587632


OUR LUKE WAS NOT EXECUTED


Mar 28 2003


By Stephen Moyes and James Hardy


THE heartbroken sister of ambushed soldier Luke Allsopp insisted last night: "My brother was not executed."

Nina Allsopp hit out at "lies" surrounding his death.

Grieving Nina - 29 today - said: "We have been told by the Army that Luke died in action.

"The Colonel from his barracks came around to our house to tell us he was not executed. Luke's Land Rover was ambushed and he died instantly.

"The Colonel told us he was doing what he could to set the record straight. We are very angry.

"It makes a big difference to us knowing that he died quickly. We can't understand why people are lying about what happened.

"It must be a mistake. It's important to us that people know the truth. That people know what really happened."

[Tigs2]

Posted part of this on another forum folks but feel that it is relevant to this thread.


As the last post highlights, there is a statement in the press today from the Colonel of the regiment that the two unfortunate British soldiers belonged to that they were NOT executed, but rather died in combat after their vehicle was ambushed. This is important for their famalies to know. If they were executed it is a crime. It is also a crime if Blair was trying to score a few points with a little spin. They are saying the boys were executed because they were missing there Helmets and Flak jackets. If you were an iraqi soldier under fire from the coilition what would be the first spoils of war you would take from a dead British soldier if it might just save your arse. This is war, it happens, I have witnessed the 'gizzit' collecting myself in the last Gulf conflict. We need a proper examination of bodies before we jump to conclusions that shock the masses. We are whipping the troops up into a frenzy of emotion by the irresponsible, unproven statements in the media. We need to find out what happened, not react to what we think happened. These people all deserve our unswerving support, and that includes responsible media coverage(including statements by OUR prime president)

Everyone is getting so mad about the various coverage we are seeing of dead soldiers, parading of POW's etc. They(the media) are all as bad as each other. When we show disgusting things it's OK, when they show it - outrage! - and visa versa. It is all propoganda and you are all falling for it. I did not like the pictures of our dead british troops, or the parading of POW's. BUT! we did the same. The parading of Iraqi POW's, showing them lay down on the floor, full face shots whilst they are being searched. Thats pretty humiliating as well isn't it? They can be identified.

The pictures of the 2 dead Iraqi's in the trench with the white flag. Is that any less disgraceful than the photos of those two poor british lads yesterday? Even today in the tabloids they are calling the incident disgusting, and then blow me down, turn the next page in the same newspaper to see a picture of two US soldiers leaning over two dead Iraqi's in a bus. Faces and expression of death clearly visible(and identifiable). They are all a bunch of To****s who want to sell newspapers and get TV scoops. The politicians who will use any excuse to score propoganda will 'Spin' anything they can to make themselves feel justified are all w*****s. I have no problem with condeming Al Jazeera for what they show. But lets stop being a bunch of Hypocritical, self opinionated Bas****s!

:mad: :mad:

[theblether]

cast your mind back to 1991, Nicol & Peters wrote Tornado Down, Andy McNab wrote Bravo Two Zero, both books contain long and detailed descriptions of treatments meted out by the Ba 'ath Party to the prisoners in the cells to get them to talk. The fly boys held out for 24 hours before telling who they were. The regiment gang lasted eight days before starting to release information. Interestingly, according to Peters, the "interogators" were happy with simple info that could have come from anyone following the press reports or in possession of Jane's military aircraft of the world. Nonetheless, one now assumes the POWs are now having a pretty uncomfortable time of it in the cells.

[Tigs2]

theblether

I totally agree. The thing that we must do now, is everything possible to support their families and to extradite their release by whatever means possible.Thoughts and prayers are with them.

[gravity victim]

Amid the huge amount of comment about the displaying of prisoners by the Iraqis to news media, nobody seems to have picked up on the positive aspect.

Once these prisoners' faces have been seen by the world as captives, their subsequent survival is assured, as they are known to be alive and cannot easily then be 'dissappeared.' If I were in the grim position of one of those prisoners I would be very relieved to get my face and name on the telly!

[S76Heavy]

Gravity Victim,
sorry to spoil the theory, but what if the Iraqi forces were to claim that coalition POW were killed as a result of a stray coalition bomb? And how can you prove otherwise?
Unfortunately, it is as has been said before: it only determines that they were still alive when it was taped. Nothing more.

[moggie]

Mr Blair says that the the two dead Brirtish sevicemen were executed, Luke Allsop's CO told his parents that he died (instantly) when his vehicle was attacked. One of them is not telling the truth.

If it is Mr Blair - then this kind of scaremongering is unforgiveable - if it was Luke's CO then he was trying to spare the anguish of the parents, anguish which Mr Blair then dumped upon them anyway. Pity we can't leave the bl**dy politicians out all together - given a chance I think that the two armies would settle it with a football match (as in WW1 at christmas).

I trust our lot not to torture and execute people - but but I don't trust our politicians as far as I could throw an Al Samoud 2 missile.

We expect dirty tricks from the Iraqis - dressing as civvies, pretending to surrender then launching an ambush, human shields and all that - but where are all those "weapons of mass destruction" that were going to be found all over Iraq? General Myers (US Chief of Staff) says "we will find them" - did he mean to add "even if we have to plant them"?

Mind you, I do worry about what may happen if it looks like Baghdad is going to be over run - if there are any dirty tricks up the sleeve, I would not be surprised to see them deployed.

If 1 week of intense warfare has only produced 350 Iraqi dead then that is a pretty good show on our part - and having seen footage of British and American medics treating Iraqi military and civilian casualties, I think this is our best hope of winning "hearts and minds".

Final analysis, in my opinion, is that Bush, Blair and Saddam are all equally to blame for any deaths that occur - there was no need to go in when they did - half-cocked, understrength and hopelessly optimistic on time frame. Thursday last week, Tony Blair said "we will be in Baghdad in 3-4 days", General Franks wanted 400,000 troops and Donald Rumsfeld told him he only needed 250,000 (now 100,000 more are on the way).

Politicians - please keep noses out, gobs shut and let the military clear up the mess you have created in the last week or so.

solotk:

try this link for number 10 website:

http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/page3.asp

gives you a number to phone or fax your thoughts (and the address, but I guess MOST of us can work out that it's "Number 10 Downing Street"!)

Apparently, you will soon be able to e-mail him!

maybe we could hack and delete him - Danny, you tracked those hackers down yet!

[West Coast]

Moggie
Your correct about at least one thing, Rumsfield is going to bear the brunt of any due criticism on manning levels. Especially so after the Generals involved retire and publish their memoirs. That said, anyone who purports to have enough knowledge after seven days of battle to draw any conclusions goes by the name of free press

[SASless]

My but do we not live in a unusual world.....Moggie, Solotk, KBF, all wander around thinking it is so nice....except when the Good Guys (meaning our side......by my definition) do something a bit harsh. I do not recall them suggesting an Iraqi soldier carrying a brand new gas mask has any importance. Guess the brutish Good Guys will violate the International Treaty on the use of Tear Gas in combat.....could not be the Iraqi's actually have Bio/Chem weapons. They never uttered a peep when thousands of Protective suits were found in a hospital....nor when the thousands of Atrophine injectors were found.....nor made a squawk when POW's were murdered by the Bad Guys( meaning the Iraqi's .....by my definition) despite sufficient circumstantial evidence. (like a video tape.....showing chest and head wounds on four bodies of troops known to have been captured while wearing body armor and kevlar helmets).

Utter ignorance in my book! .....and they do with each new post!

[moggie]

SASless - chem suits and gas masks may mean that they have and are going to use chem weapons - but until they do, there have been no WMD on display.

My post was not on that subject - just on Mr Blair's outburst (for which he has now apologised - saying that there is no evidence for execution theory yet) and on the precipitously early ground offensive without sufficient forces. Lying lie that to gain credibility at the expense of the bereaved's emotions is unacceptble behaviour.

Gen Myers told us last week that he had enough troops - now he has 130,000 on the way (30,000 now, another 100,000 to follow).

Half cocked and as such we now see the whole show bogged down and held up by people who did not want to be invaded!

[G.Khan]

Highly improbable that the troops would even be looking for WMD at this stage, they are more concerned with their principle task. Looking for WMD in the more remote parts of Iraq which have yet to be secured would be highly dangerous and time consuming, particularly whilst the irregulars are known to be embedded with the locals and possibly very hostile. Plenty of time to go looking when they have manpower to spare and they can be properly protected.

Of course it is possible that they may stumble on some but only if they happen to be in their intended path to their main objective.

[Jackonicko]

The Bush administration's claim was that all Iraqi Army units could deploy chemical weapons within 45 minutes. That's a very real and very persuasive threat. But if it's true surely to goodness there'd be some evidence of that capability by now, instead of evidence of only protective measures.

The Iraqis had NBC suits stored near the frontline. Iraqi troops have been captured and killed carrying respirators. How exactly does that differ from what our troops are doing? Yes I know that we were not ever likely to use gas against the Iraqis, but can we assume so readily that they know and believe that?

The balance of probability does suggest that the Iraqis are far more likely to use WMD than we are, but there seems to be no evidence so far that they actually had any plans to do so, or that they had deployable chemical weapons in place with frontline forces. Their possession of protective equipment does not (in itself) constitute such evidence.

I hope that we do find such evidence - it would justify everything that Bush and Blair have said and done.

[SASless]

Jacko....

What will it take to convince you.....an actual bio/chem attack with hundreds or thousands of dead and crippled? You must be French....sitting at the sidewalk cafe....looking up to see a hundred thousand German troops marching under the Arc......and muttering "Sacre Bleu!"

[steamchicken]

SASless, you are aware that France declared war some time before that, and mobilised 100+ divisions when the best WE could do was send 'em 4 and 4 more later...and the wonderful Americans hadn't even noticed yet, except to pass a special law (the Neutrality Act) making it illegal to sell us any arms?

BTW, if the fact that the Iraqi army, like every other army in the world, has gas masks means that they are going to use gas, why does that not apply to us? It is a silly argument to say that because they carry gas masks they must be about to use the stuff - like saying that a motorcyclist who wears a crash helmet will clearly crash his bike on purpose. Which worthwhile army doesn't possess protective gear? Even the police do!

[SASless]

SteamChicken....now which army is under International sanctions to rid themselves of Bio/Chem weapons.....which army has used Chemical weapons in the past twenty years....which army has used chemical weapons on its own people? Duh....must be all the Western military I guess? We have the masks for defensive need....now why would the Iraqi's need them? You merely play with words and ignore the facts. Try again.

[Jackonicko]

No, I don't need an actual attack. Just some evidence that the Iraqis have some intent and the deployed capability to mount a chemical attack. Empty rocket warheads dumped in the back of an abandoned dump don't count. Chem agents in a laboratory don't count. Iraqi troops with gas masks don't count. Of course I believe that Iraq is more likely to use WMD than we are, but there isn't actually any evidence. That suspicion is a good reason for us to be prepared and to be very careful, and it may be a very good reason for us to redouble our efforts to find Iraqi WMD. but it isn't proof that we were right all along about their WMD.

Your characterisation of the French and analysis of the Fall of France would be offensive if it were not so silly. They weren't defeated because the Wehrmacht's attack came as a huge surprise, they were defeated because they made mistakes, and because they were not equipped or prepared to halt Hitler's blitzkrieg.

[G.Khan]

Where exactly do you think you are going to find this evidence? It won't be in a grenade on a soldiers belt or in a mortar round.

The closest to the front line it is likely to be is with the artillery or rocket batteries. How many of these have the coalition over run so far? Iraq knows that as soon as it uses such weapons their secret is out. They will have made very elaborate plans to hide their stocks in the event that their batteries and launchers come under threat, they have had twelve years to do it.

It only needs one artillery round in every five hundred fired to be full of Anthrax and the coalition are bound to react as though every round was a biological or chemical threat, thus constricting them yet further and creating havoc.

Don't expect anyone to find huge chemical plants or laboratories hidden in caves or underground labyrinths. Far more likely that in a stock of old 45gal. drums will be a few that are false, that look old and used on the outside, but are full of enough evil to wipe out half the world. The plants that convert this into shells and rockets can be equally nondescript. Provided the whole operation is fragmented, and one must assume after all this time that it is, it will be like looking for a needle in a haystack. Little wonder the UN inspectors found little of import. It will only become obvious after the first shell/rocket has landed.

Far more likely they will wait until coalition forces are concentrated into a smaller area, if they use them at all. Given the limited amount of money the Iraqis have had to spend on military equipment don't you think it unlikely they would spend it on counter NBC unless they thought they might really need it?

[BarryMonday]

Yes Mr. Khan, I am inclined to agree with you.

The amount of biological matter required to cause total chaos amongst allied troops could be contained in a 1litre water bottle and hidden just as easily. A few artillery round deliberatley wrongly marked as HE would probably pass inspection unless closely examined, which the troops don't have time for. One oil drum or jerry can amongst a hundred others probably wouldn't be spotted either.

The idea that any WMD are going to stand out for all to see is erroneous in the extreme. A more fragmented and highly camouflaged operation would probably be hard to find, (pun not intended!).

[A Civilian]

This is what Robin Cook had to say during his resignation speech

"Iraq probably has no weapons of mass destruction in the commonly understood sense of the term - namely a credible device capable of being delivered against a strategic city target.

It probably still has biological toxins and battlefield chemical munitions, but it has had them since the 1980s when US companies sold Saddam anthrax agents and the then British Government approved chemical and munitions factories."



And the best bit


"Why is it now so urgent that we should take military action to disarm a military capacity that has been there for 20 years, and which we helped to create?"



As Robin Cook read every single MI6 intel document on Iraq as part of his job as foreign secretary from 1997 - 2001 he knows what he's talking about.

[G.Khan]

A Civilian said:

"As Robin Cook read every single MI6 intel document on Iraq as part of his job as foreign secretary from 1997 - 2001 he knows what he's talking about."

Read every single MI6 Document on Iraq? - Possibly.

"he knows what he is talking about" ? - This would be a first.

[Surly Bondslipper]

An earlier poster suggested that the parading of POW's to the world on telly might at least safeguard them from the risk of being 'disappeared' subsequently.

There is an unconfirmed report this morning that four bodies found in a shallow grave outside Nasiriyah may be those of the Americans who were shown to the media earlier. Sickening if true, and bang goes that theory. :(