New and shocking footage of British troops torturing Iraqis...

cleanbluesky · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:10

Lt. Manlove said:
And maybe invite them back to the barracks to stay over for tea

Perhaps we could send over the people who are so sure that they know 'what is Right' on this forum, send them over to explain to the Iraqis that there is no need for all this really, while wearing "Not in my Name" shirts so that the Iraqis know that just because they're white and English it doesn't mean they have to be 'the Enemy'...

That would work well I feel

Visage · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:11

If you film your mates beating someone up in a street, you're a Happy Slapper, and are castigated, rightly so.

Do it in the uniform of the British Army and it seems, on these forums at least, you are lauded for it.

Double standards.

AJUK · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:12

Visage said:
If you film your mates beating someone up in a street, you're a Happy Slapper, and are castigated, rightly so.

Do it in the uniform of the British Army and it seems, on these forums at least, you are lauded for it.

Double standards.

Not really, happy slapping is an unprovoked attack for entertaiment purposes, the other was in response to rioters throwing stones.

Robert · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:13

Are the random people in the streets highly charged rioters who have access to grenades/weapons/with intent to hurt/damage?

Lt. Manlove · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:14

Robert said:
Are the random people in the streets highly charged rioters who have access to grenades/weapons/with intent to hurt/damage?

Probably.

cleanbluesky · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:16

Visage said:
If you film your mates beating someone up in a street, you're a Happy Slapper, and are castigated, rightly so.

Do it in the uniform of the British Army and it seems, on these forums at least, you are lauded for it.

Double standards.

Are you suggesting that a violent soldier is somehow arbitrarily innapropriate?

Lt. Manlove · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:17

It's like comparing your mate and a soldier shooting someone.

Stringy · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:17

me said:
You claimed that the beating of the prisoners was necessary for the maintaining of disclipine among the Iraqi populace? I sure as hell hope you aren't going for a commission in the RM.

Then you start saying something about riot control???

Lt. Manlove said:
The troops that are running to scatter the target, what happens if the target doesn't scatter? Would you be happy with the use of sticks or batons to get a point across? What happens if the target doesn't scatter after a single strike?

What the hell? They were beating prisoners, and that is what I said I'm against. Once you have them in your custody, inside your own compound, why the hell do you need to beat them? This has nothing at all to do with breaking up a riot

Robert · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:18

Lt. Manlove said:
Probably.

I was on about the victims of happy slapping not the ones on the streets in those riots

.

Desmo · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:18

Robert said:
Are the random people in the streets highly charged rioters who have access to grenades/weapons/with intent to hurt/damage?

Wouldn't have thought so. Otherwise why did I see about 15 of our troops run off down the road towards them? If they were hurling grenades surely our guys would have stayed in the barracks?

edit - lol, just seen who you were talking about

Visage · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:19

AJUK said:
Not really, happy slapping is an unprovoked attack for entertaiment purposes, the other was in response to rioters throwing stones.

But they were under no immediate danger.

Its akin to a suspect being beaten up by half a dozen coppers in a police cell.

Would that be acceptable?

I've no problem with the army using all the violence they need - thats their job, but to carry on with unnecessary violence is pointless and will only lead to more problems.

Why should the army provide the insurgents with all the propaganda they need?

Lt. Manlove · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:20

Robert said:
I was on about the victims of happy slapping not the ones on the streets in those riots .

My mistake!

cleanbluesky · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:24

Visage, how can you make so many assertions about the situation when we've got no solid background on the video?

At least we can all agree that taping it was a stupid idea

dirtydog · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:26

I wonder if this was an isolated incident or is it the tip of a large iceberg. Naturally if there were more events of this nature then most of them would not be video taped.

Desmo · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:27

cleanbluesky said:
Visage, how can you make so many assertions about the situation when we've got no solid background on the video?

Whilst many are also saying the troops were right, despite the lack of evidence on the situation.

seaviewuk · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:29

Visage said:
Why should the army provide the insurgents with all the propaganda they need?

The gutter tabloid revels in just that.

The rights and wrongs can be debated ad nauseum, but there was no need to release this, especially whilst troops are on active duty, and more importantly, hostages are still being held, including a British one.

Visage · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:30

cleanbluesky said:
Visage, how can you make so many assertions about the situation when we've got no solid background on the video?

I think there are more people suggesting the troops were right, despite an equally large lack of evidence to support that view.

At least we can all agree that taping it was a stupid idea

Of course.

dirtydog · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:33

seaviewuk said:
The gutter tabloid revels in just that.

The NOTW and the Sun (sister papers) are both very strongly in favour of the Iraq war and staunch supporters of the soldiers BUT even they have strongly condemned this incident. I'm still amazed anyone is defending it here.

VIRII · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:44

zain said:
Before clicking this I knew some people would say "they deserved it" and ironically its the people with the danish banners...*sensing patterns* I just hope one day that when a loved one of yours gets hurt bad someone doesnt say to you "they deserved it", but wait....they wont will they? After all youre always right!! Am I the only one who thinks about the pain it can cause hurting an innocent or anyone for that matter?

Anyway, would you believe me if I said in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine women are raped, pregnant women and children killed and other victms? By our "troops" and the USA/Israel. I doubt you would and the question always asked "Evidence?", just because evidence isnt there and in your face doesnt mean it doesnt exist. Its all hipocracy and double standards inside out as usual.

Indeed it is a sad thing what goes on by our own so called troops, we all pay for our deeds in the end though.

*edit* lmfao I just have to laugh at the freekin irony here!!!! Its ok to torture criminals in Iraq but if its in the UK its wrong? daaamn youre stupid

I checked how many danes signatures were in agreement at the time of your post and I found one.
That seems to be enough for you to draw a conclusion about all people with dane sigs and to launch your tirade and assumption about as though it is fact.

British Troops are certainly not allowed to give a kicking to a bunch of kids like that. Behaviour such as that muddies the name of the Army and the Regiment, bad press all round.

The thing that strikes me is how opportune a moment it has surfaced at. Just after we have a bunch of sickos demanding beheadings in london this appears and suddenly attention shifts to the Army. My,my , what a co-incidence.

Visage · 13 Feb 2006 at 12:47

VIRII said:
The thing that strikes me is how opportune a moment it has surfaced at. Just after we have a bunch of sickos demanding beheadings in london this appears and suddenly attention shifts to the Army. My,my , what a co-incidence.

I understand what you're saying, but the problem with this conspiracy theory is that the people that have most to gain from it are the people that are most unable to bring it about (i.e radical muslims)...