Intimacy
This is in Iraq...
Chocoholic
Intimacy, no offense but I find things like this dangerous as you don't know what the context of the image is as it's cropped very tightly.
For all you know the little girl could be sneezing.
Nick81
It's just the way the picture was taken... It doesn't make it right but the guy is clearly not pointing the gun at the kid... :roll:
EDIT : Damn u beat me to it Chocs!! :lol:
EDIT 2 : oooooh, 3 more posts until the end of days! Armageddon!! :twisted:
Chocoholic
He's not actually pointing it at anyone. This is a relaxed posture. I'd be more concered about the bulge in his left pocket :wink:
Nick81
- Chocoholic wrote:
He's not actually pointing it at anyone. This is a relaxed posture. I'd be more concered about the bulge in his left pocket :wink:
naughty, naughty! :twisted:
XRW-147
Ok, I have a caption: Is that a grenade in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?
Chocoholic
ehehehe, Iwasn't going to lower myself to that X, but thanks :wink:
XRW-147
Someone's gotta take it for the team :wink:
mraph33
- Chocoholic wrote:
He's not actually pointing it at anyone. This is a relaxed posture. I'd be more concered about the bulge in his left pocket :wink:
He's not pointing it at her and also his finger is clearly not on the trigger.
No comment on the bulge.
Corcovado
i think if i saw NOW a man with such a HUGE gun i will be afraid and close my eyes so how about a little girl?>???? i dont think its the right time to make fun of an afraid girl infront of her an invader who might rape her tomorrow ... :evil: :evil: i am not laughing to ur jokes i am worried about the baby who her bad luck and fate put her face to face with war and terror :cry: :cry: :cry:
1 Dubai Jobs .com The First Place to Find a Job in Dubai
kanelli
- Corcovado wrote:
i think if i saw NOW a man with such a HUGE gun i will be afraid and close my eyes so how about a little girl?>???? i dont think its the right time to make fun of an afraid girl infront of her an invader who might rape her tomorrow ... :evil: :evil: i am not laughing to ur jokes i am worried about the baby who her bad luck and fate put her face to face with war and terror :cry: :cry: :cry:
Yes, if I was a little girl I'd be frightened too to see guns and war. I pity all the children in war torn regions around the world. Too bad Intimacy never posts pictures of the children in Somalia, or Darfur etc. Then again, there are no American soldiers to vent hatred against in those kinds of pictures. (I'm a smart cookie, aren't I?)
About the raping - don't you remember that once the coalition invaded Iraq and citizens started looting, some men also raped women? The local men raped women because they knew that they could get away with it. If Saddam was still in power that little girl could also have been kidnapped from the streets by one of Saddam's relatives to be raped, as young women were in Iraq by Saddam and his sons. So, before you want to get dramatic about rape you should get some perspective and realise that any man can take it upon himself to rape if there is opportunity. He doesn't need to come from any particular part of the world.
Nick81
It's funny you mentioned Somalia K.
Some people actually have no idea what's been going on over there for the past few years. I suggest everyone who's not aware of this, find some info about this online...
Intimacy
With Such responses.... i am speachless
fayz
- mraph33 wrote:
- Corcovado wrote:
How come u dont see Canada or italy or france invading another country?
Canada or France invade??? That you can put on the humor website. Because you can beat both of their armies together with a plastic spoon.
lol West Edmonton mall has more submarines then the entire Canadian military. What scares me is that one day Mr. Bush will look at a map and realize where Canada is and then learn that it is only second to Saudi for oil.
kanelli
Intimacy, you are a sweet and smart guy, but people can see through these shameless attempts to continue to stir up anti-US sentiment. There are children all over the world suffering in war torn areas and you only seem to care about the Iraqi ones and most likely because you want to give people more reason to hate the US/coaltion forces in Iraq. There are also little children cowering like that in their homes if they have abusive parents. You don't need a gun to terrorise a child, and you don't need to be American either.
Corcovado
KaNELLI lets think... there is war in Iraq and killing and the reason is US.. there is war in Afghanestan and the reason is US.. there is war in palestine and the reason is Israel blessed by US ..and the same in lebanon... US and ISRAEl are causing war in the world ..when they are invading countries and killing people.. How come u dont see Canada or italy or france invading another country? why its only US and its baby ISRAEL.?... Kaneli US sent Israel some missles that can destroy even more and they even said it on the news we dont wat this war to stop now :evil: :evil: :evil:
fayz
- XRW-147 wrote:
Someone's gotta take it for the team :wink:
Take it where for the team :lol: :lol:
fayz
In seriousness, what is sad is most of us that saw this picture weren’t even phased by it. That is saying something about the sad state of the world. Guns and children should never be in such close proximity, pointed at them or not, whether in Somalia or Iraq or anywhere else and of any nationality.... end of rant.
Chocoholic
And how does anyone know that the guy isn't there to PROTECT the girl and her child friends? For all you guys know she could have been covering her eyes and playing pook-a-boo.
The girls body language is also a relaxed pose, her legs are outstretched, not pulled upto the body in a frightened pose.
Look beyond the obvious to the signs underneath, when you've worked in the media as long as I have you learn to read the signs there. Pictures can be taken in various different ways, you have to look at the evidence within the image and they way it's been edit and portrayed - remember the beginning of the Da Vinci Code with the pictures on the screen? Same same.
All is never as it seems when you're dealing with images like this, the picture is innocent enough.
mraph33
- Corcovado wrote:
How come u dont see Canada or italy or france invading another country?
Canada or France invade??? That you can put on the humor website. Because you can beat both of their armies together with a plastic spoon.
mraph33
- Corcovado wrote:
KaNELLI lets think... there is war in Iraq and killing and the reason is US.. there is war in Afghanestan and the reason is US.. there is war in palestine and the reason is Israel blessed by US ..and the same in lebanon... US and ISRAEl are causing war in the world ..when they are invading countries and killing people.. How come u dont see Canada or italy or france invading another country? why its only US and its baby ISRAEL.?... Kaneli US sent Israel some missles that can destroy even more and they even said it on the news we dont wat this war to stop now :evil: :evil: :evil:
The US wouldn't have gone to Iraq if it wasn't for Sadaam. And Afghanistan? Remember the Trade Center?
There are fogotten wars going on in Sierra Leone, Somalia, Rwanda, Senegal.......
So lets make the US/Israel the root of all world evil.
I understand that you are interested ONLY in what is going on in your country. Which I guess is understandable since it is currently at war. But there are a lot of places much bloodier than Lebanon.
freza
- kanelli wrote:
Intimacy, you are a sweet and smart guy, but people can see through these shameless attempts to continue to stir up anti-US sentiment. There are children all over the world suffering in war torn areas and you only seem to care about the Iraqi ones and most likely because you want to give people more reason to hate the US/coaltion forces in Iraq. There are also little children cowering like that in their homes if they have abusive parents. You don't need a gun to terrorise a child, and you don't need to be American either.
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
freza
- kanelli wrote:
- Corcovado wrote:
i think if i saw NOW a man with such a HUGE gun i will be afraid and close my eyes so how about a little girl?>???? i dont think its the right time to make fun of an afraid girl infront of her an invader who might rape her tomorrow ... :evil: :evil: i am not laughing to ur jokes i am worried about the baby who her bad luck and fate put her face to face with war and terror :cry: :cry: :cry:
Yes, if I was a little girl I'd be frightened too to see guns and war. I pity all the children in war torn regions around the world. Too bad Intimacy never posts pictures of the children in Somalia, or Darfur etc. Then again, there are no American soldiers to vent hatred against in those kinds of pictures. (I'm a smart cookie, aren't I?)
About the raping - don't you remember that once the coalition invaded Iraq and citizens started looting, some men also raped women? The local men raped women because they knew that they could get away with it. If Saddam was still in power that little girl could also have been kidnapped from the streets by one of Saddam's relatives to be raped, as young women were in Iraq by Saddam and his sons. So, before you want to get dramatic about rape you should get some perspective and realise that any man can take it upon himself to rape if there is opportunity. He doesn't need to come from any particular part of the world.
Sometimes I wish that some people who are so luke-warm about their beliefs would just say what they REALLY mean! Something like: "We support the US and Israel no matter what and we don't really care about the war crimes that they commit as long as they meet their objective. We do
care however about the war crimes committed by Arab regimes, now those DO count".
Just say that! I mean might as well. No one buys the lukewarm beliefs, sorry but c'mon, we're not that naive. Hey, don't let the fact that you're in an Arab country stop you from preaching what you REALLY believe in. If you support what Israel is doing, just be brave and say it. No need to beat around the Bush. :wink:
Chocoholic
Freza, There's really no need for that. Kanelli is absolutely right! And there's certainly nothing wrong with the image, which is obvious to those of us who don't go deliberately looking for evidence of bad things where there is none, which is why I said it was dangerous post in the first place.
The only sad thing about the entire picture, is that the soldier is actually in it!
freza
- Chocoholic wrote:
Freza, There's really no need for that. Kanelli is absolutely right! And there's certainly nothing wrong with the image, which is obvious to those of us who don't go deliberately looking for evidence of bad things where there is none, which is why I said it was dangerous post in the first place.
The only sad thing about the entire picture, is that the soldier is actually in it!
There you go Choco, say state what you believe: " Kanelli is absolutely right! "
Absolutely. Right.
Occupation is not wrong never, sorry, my bad. We're taking things out of context, we're looking at a random picture of an occupation soldier and we're daring to be distrubed by it! So bad. What a silly thing Intimacy did, how dare he!
Chocoholic
I didn't make myself very clear in the reply and you obviously only read what you wanted to see and not what was there.
I meant Kanelli was right in the fact that it's sad people have to highlight what is going on and try and get bad reactions to an innocent photograph, when there is nothing horrible about it.
And what I said about the only sad thing about the photo is that the soldier is actually in it, means that obviously I'm against the occupation of Iraq, because if they occupying forces weren't there, then obviously there would be no soldier there to photograph.
Also I think the majority of people here know that Israels reaction is wrong and what is happening in Lebanon is wrong, no-one is denying that fact.
freza
- Chocoholic wrote:
I didn't make myself very clear in the reply and you obviously only read what you wanted to see and not what was there.
I meant Kanelli was right in the fact that it's sad people have to highlight what is going on and try and get bad reactions to an innocent photograph, when there is nothing horrible about it.
And what I said about the only sad thing about the photo is that the soldier is actually in it, means that obviously I'm against the occupation of Iraq, because if they occupying forces weren't there, then obviously there would be no soldier there to photograph.
Also I think the majority of people here know that Israels reaction is wrong and what is happening in Lebanon is wrong, no-one is denying that fact.
um, say what?? :scratch: :?:
Sorry but you sound quite contradictory to previous statements you've made and to be honest you don't make much sense. I stand by what I say: Lukewarm. Say what you really mean and it'll be more effective, and there will be no need to confuse
YOURSELF either.
Chocoholic
I always say exactly what I mean, I'm well known for it.
Too bad you only see the negative in peoples post and not the positive. Not my problem if you fail to understand what is clearly a black and white statement and not a grey area.
Corcovado
why are u all in denial ??? why u want to find excuses for war??this man should not be in her country with his big gun ... Israel should not be in palestine and lebanon... who died and made them GOD??? stop hiding behind ur fingers and open up ur eyes ... there is evil in the world and its US And Israel
Chocoholic
Corcovado, that's what I just said!
Soldier in picture = occupation = wrong
Freza - get it now?
Chocoholic
I wonder however if people would get so het up if the picture was of somewhere else, say South Africa? Or featured a UN peacekeeper.
freza
- Chocoholic wrote:
Corcovado, that's what I just said!
Soldier in picture = occupation = wrong
Freza - get it now?
"
And how does anyone know that the guy isn't there to PROTECT the girl and her child friends? "
ummm, yeah, aha
makes perfect sense :? :scratch:
Choco, I'm SURE that if Intimacy or anyone else would have put up a picture of an Al Qaeda man carrying a weapon, walking the streets and kids reacting in fright, you would have the same reaction, right? "Terrorists are bad, but maybe they're protecting the kids, so don't take things out of context people."
:)
Chocoholic
The point is when you look at the image, you see what you want to see - that's the difference. In my job I have to look at things objectively. The soldier is not in defensive stance, his hold on the weapon is relaxed, his finger isn't even on the trigger, his back is even to the little girl. The girls body posture is relaxed, there is no tension in this image whatsoever.
The only thing wrong with it is the fact that the soldier is there.
I'll ignore you comment about terrorist as it's typical that you'd change the subject to that, we're not talking about that.
raidah
- Corcovado wrote:
why are u all in denial ??? why u want to find excuses for war??this man should not be in her country with his big gun ... Israel should not be in palestine and lebanon... who died and made them GOD??? stop hiding behind ur fingers and open up ur eyes ... there is evil in the world and its US And Israel
come on Corc. nobody sane would agree with destroying a country out of political or whatever interests, but u cannot blame them for everything that goes on in the world...i know ull say u never said that, but still. there r many things to consider. one is that a conflict is never the fault of only one. the other is that abusing of power is the most common thing in the world. it has always been like this. when the US never even existed, there were others who did the same. and my guess, smtime in the near future the US will lose this power to China...they too will do the same.
i dont agree with the americans meddling in everything all the time, but since Irak came up, well they were not exactly the best example for a peaceful country either.
freza
- Chocoholic wrote:
The point is when you look at the image, you see what you want to see - that's the difference. In my job I have to look at things objectively. The soldier is not in defensive stance, his hold on the weapon is relaxed, his finger isn't even on the trigger, his back is even to the little girl. The girls body posture is relaxed, there is no tension in this image whatsoever.
The only thing wrong with it is the fact that the soldier is there.
I'll ignore you comment about terrorist as it's typical that you'd change the subject to that, we're not talking about that.
Please don't ignore my comment because I'm going to think that it's convenient for you to ignore it. You should know that there is such a thing a
state terrorism , and
military-state terrorism ...right? So I'm really not changing the subject at all.
Would you have the same type of objectivity if it was an Al Qaeda soldier in such an image?
raidah
- freza wrote:
- Chocoholic wrote:
The point is when you look at the image, you see what you want to see - that's the difference. In my job I have to look at things objectively. The soldier is not in defensive stance, his hold on the weapon is relaxed, his finger isn't even on the trigger, his back is even to the little girl. The girls body posture is relaxed, there is no tension in this image whatsoever.
The only thing wrong with it is the fact that the soldier is there.
I'll ignore you comment about terrorist as it's typical that you'd change the subject to that, we're not talking about that.
Please don't ignore my comment because I'm going to think that it's convenient for you to ignore it. You should know that there is such a thing a state terrorism , and military-state terrorism ...right? So I'm really not changing the subject at all.
Would you have the same type of objectivity if it was an Al Qaeda soldier in such an image?
why would it be different Freza?
Chocs is right. the soldier should not be there, but not because of where he is from.
freza
"why would it be different Freza?
Chocs is right. the soldier should not be there, but not because of where he is from."
raidah, that wasn't my point, what she said earlier was what I have an issue with. Please look at the thread from the start.
raidah
- freza wrote:
"why would it be different Freza?
Chocs is right. the soldier should not be there, but not because of where he is from."
raidah, that wasn't my point, what she said earlier was what I have an issue with. Please look at the thread from the start.
i asked the question exactly because i have read the thread from the start. we dont know as much about that photo as we think. so if u wanna be objective u have to interpret only what u see there. the man was not pointing the gun to the child. that photo does not suggest that the soldier represents a danger for the kid. still its not a pleasant photo to see, because the mere prezence of the armed man means some state of war. was the soldier from another nation's army in the exact same position, it would be also unpleasant, but for the same reason, war. and nothing more.
freza
- raidah wrote:
- freza wrote:
"why would it be different Freza?
Chocs is right. the soldier should not be there, but not because of where he is from."
raidah, that wasn't my point, what she said earlier was what I have an issue with. Please look at the thread from the start.
i asked the question exactly because i have read the thread from the start. we dont know as much about that photo as we think. so if u wanna be objective u have to interpret only what u see there. the man was not pointing the gun to the child. that photo does not suggest that the soldier represents a danger for the kid. still its not a pleasant photo to see, because the mere prezence of the armed man means some state of war. was the soldier from another nation's army in the exact same position, it would be also unpleasant, but for the same reason, war. and nothing more.
So since Choco is not answering my last question, maybe you can:
Would you have the same type of objectivity (and opinion as above) if it was an Al Qaeda soldier instead of an American occupation soldier in such an image?
raidah
- freza wrote:
- raidah wrote:
- freza wrote:
"why would it be different Freza?
Chocs is right. the soldier should not be there, but not because of where he is from."
raidah, that wasn't my point, what she said earlier was what I have an issue with. Please look at the thread from the start.
i asked the question exactly because i have read the thread from the start. we dont know as much about that photo as we think. so if u wanna be objective u have to interpret only what u see there. the man was not pointing the gun to the child. that photo does not suggest that the soldier represents a danger for the kid. still its not a pleasant photo to see, because the mere prezence of the armed man means some state of war. [color=red]was the soldier from another nation's army in the exact same position, it would be also unpleasant, but for the same reason, war. and nothing more[/color].
So since Choco is not answering my last question, maybe you can:
Would you have the same type of objectivity (and opinion as above) if it was an Al Qaeda soldier instead of an American occupation soldier in such an image?
i cant believe ur asking this very same question over and over, after u have received the answer both from Chocs and me...
here is what she said :"Soldier in picture = occupation = wrong"
and above in red what i said...
what is it that u dont understand?
freza
- raidah wrote:
- freza wrote:
- raidah wrote:
- freza wrote:
"why would it be different Freza?
Chocs is right. the soldier should not be there, but not because of where he is from."
raidah, that wasn't my point, what she said earlier was what I have an issue with. Please look at the thread from the start.
i asked the question exactly because i have read the thread from the start. we dont know as much about that photo as we think. so if u wanna be objective u have to interpret only what u see there. the man was not pointing the gun to the child. that photo does not suggest that the soldier represents a danger for the kid. still its not a pleasant photo to see, because the mere prezence of the armed man means some state of war. [color=red]was the soldier from another nation's army in the exact same position, it would be also unpleasant, but for the same reason, war. and nothing more[/color].
So since Choco is not answering my last question, maybe you can:
Would you have the same type of objectivity (and opinion as above) if it was an Al Qaeda soldier instead of an American occupation soldier in such an image?
i cant believe ur asking this very same question over and over, after u have received the answer both from Chocs and me...
here is what she said :"Soldier in picture = occupation = wrong"
and above in red what i said...
what is it that u dont understand?
I was being very specific, but your answer was NOT. hence I had to repeat myself. "
...was the soldier from another nation's army... " I was referring to Al Qaeda in Iraq which can hardly be considered "another nation's army". Right?
So I guess your answer is YES, if this were an Al Qaeda guy you would have the same type of objectivity and you would even say "maybe he's there to help those people". :) Got it.
I-No-Jack
I-No-Jack
raidah
- freza wrote:
- raidah wrote:
- freza wrote:
- raidah wrote:
- freza wrote:
"why would it be different Freza?
Chocs is right. the soldier should not be there, but not because of where he is from."
raidah, that wasn't my point, what she said earlier was what I have an issue with. Please look at the thread from the start.
i asked the question exactly because i have read the thread from the start. we dont know as much about that photo as we think. so if u wanna be objective u have to interpret only what u see there. the man was not pointing the gun to the child. that photo does not suggest that the soldier represents a danger for the kid. still its not a pleasant photo to see, because the mere prezence of the armed man means some state of war. [color=red]was the soldier from another nation's army in the exact same position, it would be also unpleasant, but for the same reason, war. and nothing more[/color].
So since Choco is not answering my last question, maybe you can:
Would you have the same type of objectivity (and opinion as above) if it was an Al Qaeda soldier instead of an American occupation soldier in such an image?
i cant believe ur asking this very same question over and over, after u have received the answer both from Chocs and me...
here is what she said :"Soldier in picture = occupation = wrong"
and above in red what i said...
what is it that u dont understand?
I was being very specific, but your answer was NOT. hence I had to repeat myself. " ...was the soldier from another nation's army... " I was referring to Al Qaeda in Iraq which can hardly be considered "another nation's army". Right?
So I guess your answer is YES, if this were an Al Qaeda guy you would have the same type of objectivity and you would even say "maybe he's there to help those people". :) Got it.
you are hopeless...[color=red]the photo would be sad regardless of who was the soldier and the child.[/color] i hope this answers ur question. in case it does not, try to find an answer within urself, because i dont intend to repeat myself over and over. and doubt the others will...
and please dont put words into my mouth, nor twist what i say. thank you.
freza
- I-No-Jack wrote:
![]()
Care to elaborate? (new sudden member of the dubai forums) :wink:
I-No-Jack
No, don't care to elaborate. Simply two pictures (you forgot the other) which everyone is free to rant about and make their own conclusions. Just pictures (like the first one on the thread).
freza
"you are hopeless...the photo would be sad regardless of who was the soldier and the child. i hope this answers ur question. in case it does not, try to find an answer within urself, because i dont intend to repeat myself over and over. and doubt the others will...
and please dont put words into my mouth, nor twist what i say. thank you."
I will say this ONE LAST TIME too (cuz I have to go to lunch).
raidah, what
do YOU NOT understand about my POINT? Like I said before, my issue was NOT that the scene was "sad" (awww) because occupation is bad. That was not it and you obviously failed to grasp this. My point was that Choco had previously stated that we shouldn't take the image out of context because the soldier for all we knew, might be there to help kids. OK, then she said occupation was bad, etc. etc. So that is what I was trying to get at. Would she have said the EXACT same thing if it were an Al Qaeda man? Would she have asked for objectivity? Would she have said that maybe he was there to help but still he was bad? I asked you to be specific, you were not. Why? Don't worry, I'm not really interested. I'm not putting words in your mouth, but you did say YES, so next time
get what my real point is, will you?
freza
- I-No-Jack wrote:
No, don't care to elaborate. Simply two pictures (you forgot the other) which everyone is free to rant about and make their own conclusions. Just pictures (like the first one on the thread).
Mr. suspicious new member,
Where were they taken at? Can't you at least give us the country?
Whatever it is I will say this: Whether it is a US backed War militia or an occupying force or the Taliban, they're bad but they are helping kids. AWWWW how sweet!
Intimacy
- kanelli wrote:
Intimacy, you are a sweet and smart guy, but people can see through these shameless attempts to continue to stir up anti-US sentiment. There are children all over the world suffering in war torn areas and you only seem to care about the Iraqi ones and most likely because
Kanelli....
(1) Well i dont know why you get offended whenever i post such pictures although you are a nice person indeed. but sometimes you take things personally as you are Condalisa Rice defending bush. i have nothing against the american people its the government.
(2) It makes no difference to me whether that kid or person is an Iraqi or from Mars as along he is an innocent human suffering from unfairness and depretion. in fact i could show any Afghani or Somalian or Sudanese... but it will be all the same.. its the US-Gov behind this after all. All the good decent people are my family no matter where he/she were from.. and people who know me know that as a fact.
(3) I still cant see why its Shameless?! maybe this is the new way of answering the "Freedom of press". If the its Shameless then it should be for the people who made it....
Quote:
- you want to give people more reason to hate the US/coaltion forces in Iraq. You don't need a gun to terrorise a child, and you don't need to be American either.
(1) I am not giving people anything .. its the picture which is giving.. thats why i asked for a caption not an opinion!!
(2)If showing the truth would show how brutal the US governement is .. then they have given the people the reason to hate them.. its their deeds not me who did that.
(3) i have nothing against the American people.. at the contrary.. i believe that there are alot of good in them and i like them actually and i think you guys know that.. but i think there is no 2 rational, truthful, and human loving persons would disagree that the US gov is putting her nose and guns every place in the world while they are misleading their good nation with their propaganda.
Quote:
- There are also little children cowering like that in their homes if they have abusive parents
Kanllie, Abusive parents phenomena didnt exist in our community tell the last 5-7 years and its a very seldom thing to happen.. we never experienced that and people here never heard about it. what i would like to truely suggest is an invitation for you are your husband to come and spend sometime with my family. i am serious about it and i really like you gentleman you are married to... he is a good man.... so this invitation is for real
The sun doesnt need a proof for its existence. although there always would be 2 people arguing whether its day or night.
I-No-Jack
- freza wrote:
Mr. suspicious new member,
Nothing suspicious about it. You know, "better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt"!
Eros
- I-No-Jack wrote:
- freza wrote:
Mr. suspicious new member,
Nothing suspicious about it. You know, "better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt"!
Welcome back ... HP
I-No-Jack
Don't know HP. Just know Jack!
Chocoholic
Also another point I'd like to make about the photo, is how do you know it's a U.S. soldier? The British wear the same desert uniform as do servicemen from the different countries in Iraq. There is no emblem badge that can be seen to give his regiment and rank, so he could be from anyone one of the allied forces member countries.
Once again - don't assume!
ASSUME - Makes an ASS out of U and ME!
As my news editor once said.
mraph33
Marine uniform - M4 gun.....must be a marine
Chocoholic
I used to work with UK marines - hotty totty.
Sadly the stuff they've seen you really don't want to know. These guys are very tough on the outside, but still they're very human on the inside.
freza
- Chocoholic wrote:
I used to work with UK marines - hotty totty.
Sadly the stuff they've seen you really don't want to know. These guys are very tough on the outside, but still they're very human on the inside.
So are the Iraqi occupation fighters. They're human too. They have feelings too. They've seen a lot worse that the UK marines, that's for sure.
freza
- I-No-Jack wrote:
- freza wrote:
Mr. suspicious new member,
Nothing suspicious about it. You know, "better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt"!
Hahaha, :lol: your Lincoln quote applies to you,
whoever you rare. Nice. I'm sure that was not the intention. :roll:
I-No-Jack
Oh you are so easy. I'm going to have so much fun yanking your chain!
Chocoholic
- freza wrote:
- Chocoholic wrote:
I used to work with UK marines - hotty totty.
Sadly the stuff they've seen you really don't want to know. These guys are very tough on the outside, but still they're very human on the inside.
So are the Iraqi occupation fighters. They're human too. They have feelings too. They've seen a lot worse that the UK marines, that's for sure.
I seriously doubt that, as the UK marines would have been deployed to handle situations all over the globe. They don't just work in Iraq you know. Of course everyone is human underneath. As I-No-Jack says you're a bit too easy to wind up.
Oi INJ, Shouldn't that be I-KNOW-Jack?
kanelli
Freza, I don't have lukewarm beliefs. You just want everyone on this site to say that Irael and the US are the root of all evil and must be wiped off the planet. Sorry, but I won't ever say this. And if I don't say it it doesn't mean that I support what Israel and the US are doing, even if you assume that is what I am doing.
Intimacy, I get upset because you only post pictures in the forum about Iraq. Maybe if you posted on other subjects and showed the same kind of caring and compassion for children in the same circumstances in other parts of the world I might not criticise. I get fed up of all the hate mongering on here.
Choco makes a valid point that is logical and strips down the emotion that might come from a first glance at the photo. We don't know the full context of the photo. To answer her question - if the soldier was a UN peacekeeper and the child was from another country the picture would not have been posted here and people would likely assume that the soldier was protecting the child. Because we were told that this was a picture from Iraq, the automatic assumption by some people is that the soldier is from the US and the child is being threatened because US soldiers are barbaric of course. :roll:
Some of you seem to be shrouded in emotion without tempering it with logic. Maybe you need to step back and stop over-reacting. Pictures like this are used for propaganda and this should be recognised.
freza
[quote="Chocoholic"]
- freza wrote:
- Chocoholic wrote:
I used to work with UK marines - hotty totty.
Sadly the stuff they've seen you really don't want to know. These guys are very tough on the outside, but still they're very human on the inside.
So are the Iraqi occupation fighters. They're human too. They have feelings too. They've seen a lot worse that the UK marines, that's for sure.
I seriously doubt that, as the UK marines would have been deployed to handle situations all over the globe. They don't just work in Iraq you know. [color=blue]Iraqi resistance fighters do not just work, they live in their war torn country. There's a HUGE difference between marines that are deployed for a period of time in another country and/or that "see" human catastrophes around the globe as opposed to people that are LIVING the human crisis. Many Iraqi people have seen their entire families wiped out; can you compare that to what a marine has been through?? Many Iraqis are living in chaos, suffering and fear; many lives have been completely shattered. There is no comparison between what they LIVE and see every day and what the invading and occupying forces go through. I wouldn't even dare to compare them, that's just taking things too far. [/color]
Of course everyone is human underneath. As I-No-Jack says you're a bit too easy to wind up. [color=blue]I-Know-Crap is a troll, do you let trolls get to you? So why would you think that a troll would get to me?[/color]
Oi INJ, Shouldn't that be I-KNOW-Jack?
I-No-Jack
- chocoholic wrote:
Oi INJ, Shouldn't that be I-KNOW-Jack?[/i]
Very perceptive!
I-No-Jack
Interestingly the two pictures I posted received "no comments" other than Freza questioning whether I knew when the pictures were taken, etc. Which was not a question asked of Intimacy on the original picture posted. :roll:
I now as much of the context of the 2 pictures I found at the click of a button than the context/source of the original pictures - which was precisely my point. Simply a photo (if that).
Choco and Kanelli you are right on.
mraph33
- freza wrote:
[color=blue]I-Know-Crap[/color]
ha ha!!!
kanelli
Sorry Intimacy, I didn't adress the last part of your post. It isn't true that abusive families have only existed in Iraq in the past 5 - 6 years. Abuse in families has been going on in all human families since the beginning of time. It depends on the personalities of the parents, the stresses going on their lives and their own family backgrounds and what they were exposed to. There is no way for you to know every family and what goes on in it for you to make a claim that abuse in families has only been going on for 5 - 6 years.
My hubby is definitely a nice guy and we like you too. We always enjoy meeting you and would enjoy meeting your family too. I don't expect them to be much different from a family in my country. :)
valkyrie
the little girl is rejoicing her liberation courtesy of the americans.
Chocoholic
I think this thread is now dead.
Intimacy
- kanelli wrote:
Intimacy, I get upset because you only post pictures in the forum about Iraq. Maybe if you posted on other subjects and showed the same kind of caring and compassion for children in the same circumstances in other parts of the world I might not criticise. I get fed up of all the hate mongering on here.
To answer her question - if the soldier was a UN peacekeeper and the child was from another country the picture would not have been posted here and people would likely assume that the soldier was protecting the child. Because we were told that this was a picture from Iraq, the automatic assumption by some people is that the soldier is from the US and the child is being threatened because US soldiers are barbaric of course. :roll:
Kan,
My compassion will be the same for an indian or somalian or american or from where ever... i dont see how would this change the fact by any how.
raciest are neglected by me. normally people would assume that others do act like them and feel like them.. but i feel that the world is my family as long as this world is decent.
the strange thing that i still didnt see any compassion from any other non arabs.!!! its all justifications, explanations and stories before going to sleep. the caption which i asked for is quit strange!
Quote:
- Some of you seem to be shrouded in emotion without tempering it with logic. Maybe you need to step back and stop over-reacting. Pictures like this are used for propaganda and this should be recognised.
Over-reacting!!!!!!
I think this just tells me what really going on inside. i am sure now.
XRW-147
- Chocoholic wrote:
I think this thread is now dead.
Agreed - at least getting very close to it.
Intimacy
- XRW-147 wrote:
- Chocoholic wrote:
I think this thread is now dead.
Agreed - at least getting very close to it.
I am on vacation guys :)
fayz
I was wondering why you weren't there last weekend? enjoy and if you're in Jordan be careful man.
kanelli
Intimacy, your intention was to stir up anti-US in Iraq sentiment on the back of the current US supporting Israel in Lebanon threads.
You have had 4 people in this thread telling you that we don't know the context that the picture was taken in. You can get as upset as you like, but don't accuse us of having no compassion just because we use our brains too.
There are numerous threads where you post pics about Iraq, but you haven't posted anything from any other part of the world. If you can accuse us of a lack of compassion for Iraqi children, then we can accuse you of a lack of compassion for non-Arab children.
I feel for every child that lives in conflict zones, but that point has whizzed past your head. Afterall, all you wanted was everyone to jump on the picture you posted with anti-US slogans. I guess your topic didn't turn out how you expected.
I-No-Jack
- Intimacy wrote:
... but i feel that the world is my family as long as this world is decent.
Either your family is 100% decent (I mean each and everyone) or you don't consider them family.
Intimacy
- fayz wrote:
I was wondering why you weren't there last weekend? enjoy and if you're in Jordan be careful man.
Thanks Fayz, i will talk to u once i am back mate :)
I-No-Jack
- Intimacy wrote:
- fayz wrote:
I was wondering why you weren't there last weekend? enjoy and if you're in Jordan be careful man.
Thanks Fayz, i will talk to u once i am back mate :)
why didn't you answer kanelli? wimp
Intimacy
- kanelli wrote:
Intimacy, your intention was to stir up anti-US in Iraq sentiment on the back of the current US supporting Israel in Lebanon threads.
Kan,
This is ridiculously funny... Stir it up!!!!!!! i dont have to stir up anything Kan.. your Gov. has already and still stir it up by their brutal deeds every where on earth.
I am very specific and focused on what i want to say although you keep going on different directions. This just remind me of Bush... when ever he is being asked about why did NASA go to the moon... he will go like: Yes.. we fighting terrisom.. We want democracy to be there in the ME and Bla bla.. the same exact answer everytime.
Quote:
- You have had 4 people in this thread telling you that we don't know the context that the picture was taken in.
People who have brains would answer the request. i have asked for a caption not inputs.
If the picture which made us confused here.. then.. there are thousands of other clear unquestionable pictures.... i dont think people who have brains would thing twice to make up their minds.
Quote:
- You can get as upset as you like, but don't
I am not upset, you still have no idea about how i diffrenciate between a discussion and a person matter yet kan :)
Quote:
- accuse us of having no
compassion just because we use our brains too.
Who is us??
Quote:
- If you can accuse us of a lack of compassion for Iraqi children, then we can accuse you of a lack of compassion for non-Arab children.
Did i accuse anyone?!!!!!
Did i ask for a compassion?!!!!
I said.. and i am still saying that i never said that.. and all innocent people are the same for me... regardless where they are from.
My Question is: do you mean by non arabs people like:
Bosnians? Chechens? Afghanis? vitamins?!! JAPANESE?? do you mean those people?
because i cant recall any other nations which were brutally killed by a regime which is supportted by the US Gov, or the US gov them selves directly.
Do you still want to see other pictures.. because i am ready to put it online, but i am not sure if your hearts and souls will stand it... i think you are just using this as a hopeless justification or a desparate answer kan ... with all do respect. for the 1000 times i am saying innocent humans are cnsidered the same ... at least for me.
Quote:
- I guess your topic didn't turn out how you expected.
I didnt expect anything, and i am not expecting anything.
Expectations normally are based on something else :)
Well... the post is for the people who i believe that they have seen the truth... and the arent feeling ashamed about saying it.. yes.. thats what happened.
kanelli
"Us" refers to those of us that said that the picture is out of context or pointed out that children all over the world in conflict areas are suffering, not just Iraqi ones. "Us" refers to anyone who so easily recognised the underlying purpose of the thread.
My government is committing brutal deeds all over the earth? ... Please enlighten me on how the Canadian government is doing that. :D
Not all white chicks with North American accents are American. There is large country located to the north of the USA. Many people don't seem to be aware of that. :lol:
ajb
- Intimacy wrote:
This is in Iraq...
![]()
In light of the discussion between Intimacy and Kanelli here are two captions:
1. US soldier scares little girl in Iraq.
2. Iraqi soldier creates propaganda photo using stolen US uniform.
freza
4.
Trigger-happy US soldiers make for unhappy Iraqi children.
5.
An invader and the invaded, a portrait.
kanelli
3. My brother just smacked me and stole my toy while a soldier patrols the neighbourhood.
kanelli
4. Playing hide and seek while a soldier patrols the neighbourhood.
I-No-Jack
5. look what you can do with a good photo software program
fayz
- kanelli wrote:
My government is committing brutal deeds all over the earth? ... Please enlighten me on how the Canadian government is doing that. :D
Sadly the government of the country I'm proud to call home is part of the problem.
freza
CAPTIONS:
1.
Little girl born into occupation tries to hide from her reality.
2.
Liberating Iraqis, one kid at a time.
3.
Even the tiniest of Iraqi girls are being instructed to hide their faces from US Marines who are on the prowl for cute girls to rape and kill.
mraph33
Caption:
A little girl sneezes
MaaaD
is this discussion for real ? do we need a picture to know that every iraqi child is scared shitless from what is going on there ?
and no kanelli those americans dont give two shits about protecting the children while they are playing hide and seek, they are there to protect a puppet goverment and hence the american interests in Iraq. I know you know that.
I-No-Jack
- MaaaD wrote:
is this discussion for real ? do we need a picture to know that every iraqi child is scared shitless from what is going on there ?
and no kanelli those americans dont give two shits about protecting the children while they are playing hide and seek, they are there to protect a puppet goverment and hence the american interests in Iraq. I know you know that.
you know it too :wink:
kanelli
There you go Intimacy, Freza and Nick are happy to help you out with your thread.
Fayz, that is really sad if you think that Canada is terrorising the world. I don't feel that way at all.