Insurgent group unveils rocket named for girl allegedly raped and killed by U.S. soldier

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/11/03/africa/ME_GEN_Iraq_Insurgent_Rocket.php

BAGHDAD, Iraq: A major Iraqi insurgent group claimed Friday to have successfully built and tested a rocket with a range of 20 kilometers (13 miles) and has named it after a 14-year-old Iraqi girl allegedly raped and killed by a U.S. soldier.

In video footage posted online, the Islamic Army in Iraq said the "Abeer" rocket carried a payload of 20 kilograms (44 pounds) of explosives — enough to level a house.

"We called it 'Abeer' to remind the Islamic nation of the wounds of our sister ... whose virginity was violated by the worshippers of the cross," the Islamic Army, said in a statement posted together with the footage. The video was viewed on a Web site frequently used by insurgent groups to issue statements and post film footage of attacks.

"Worshippers of the cross" was an apparent reference to Christians.

[NOLADEM]

1. What a wonderful atrocity we have created over there

I wish I belived in hell, so I could believe the bastards who started this would suffer eternally.

[TheCowsCameHome]

2. They'll make a believer out of you. Give them time.

[AlamoDemoc]

3. In due time many of us will look back at this war and say "Why had we not call it as Genocide"

[NNN0LHI]

4. I won't be one of them looking back

I have been calling it genocide for years here. And when I have its usually a thread killer. Pity.

Don

[Donald Ian Rankin]

11. What definition of the word "genocide" are you using there?

The word is usually defined as "trying to wipe out an entire race or ethnic group", I believe, and that isn't happening in Iraq.

[NNN0LHI]

15. We have the same definition for genocide

I say our government is trying "trying to wipe out an entire race or ethnic group" in Iraq.

History will prove one of us right.

Don

[Donald Ian Rankin]

5. Genocide means "trying to wipe out an entire race or ethnic group".

One could make a case that Saddam Hussein's campaign against the Kurds in 88 was an attempt at genocide, I believe, although I don't know enough of the details to know whether or not that case would be valid, but nothing in Iraq since the invasion, bad as things have been, has been in any way reminiscent of genocide.

"Killing lots of people" is very rarely genocide. The word has a specific meaning, and using it to refer to anything else is simply incorrect.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

6. Killing lots of people for no reason is referred to in some

places as warcrimes. The perps should go to jail or be hanged. They will experience neither.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

10. Sure.

But "war crimes" are to "genocide" as mammals are to sheep. What's happening in Iraq may well ammount to war crimes; it's nothing like genocide.

[AlamoDemoc]

7. invading a nation without cause and killing the locals is a Genocide

The newly data released on civilian deaths in Iraq shows that there are 3000 plus Iraqis dying monthly because of our actions in Iraq....there are reports of our soldiers shooting civilians without cause; rape; deadly and inhumane interrogations; humiliation at the checkpoints; indiscriminate killings;....all that amounts to is Genocide in my book. In fact, all the 660 thousand reported Iraqi deaths have accrued on our actions there...and that is Genocide.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

9. No, it isn't. It really is as simple as that.

Genocide is an attempt to wipe out an entire race or ethnic group.

What is happening in Iraq is certainly tragic, but it isn't genocide.

"Our soldiers shooting civilians without cause" - that's not genocide.

"rape" - that's not genocide.

"deadly and inhumane interrogations" - that's not genocide.

"humiliation at the checkpoints" - that's not genocide.

"indiscriminate killings" - that's not genocide.

"....all that amounts to is Genocide in my book" Your book is wrong, then. Genocide is defined by the dictionary, not by your book.

Genocide is a word with a meaning. It doesn't just mean "bad thing of which I disapprove". I could kill millions upon millions of people, and if they were randomly distributed around the globe, it still wouldn't be genocide.

The words you're looking for are "mass murder", and possibly "war crimes". If you say "genocide" instead you massively weaken your argument by making it look as though you either don't know what you're talking about or don't care whether what you say is true or not.

[AlamoDemoc]

16. "The words you're looking for are "mass murder",

Mass murder? indeed that's the word I was looking for....YES, Iraqis are being mass murdered by the numbers...by our own action of being there in the first place..they are being killed in the hundreds by our actions of going there in the first palace, and on to top it off, with the lies, our troops acted on it, we tortured them in the name of 9/11, and assumed it was done because they attacked us.

You sir, can't seem to fathom from attackers and attacked in this case, therefore you have no idea what it feels like to be committed genocide against of such proportions that 660 thousand of your countrymen died under occupation.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

18. You're ignoring what I've said.

I've produced a very simple argument:

1) "Genocide" means "an attempt to wipe out an entire race or ethnic group".

2) "The Americans in Iraq are not wiping out or attempting to wipe out any race or ethnic group".

3) Therefore, the Americans in Iraq are not committing genocide.

You have completely ignored this argument, and responded with a bunch of claims which have nothing to do with it, and then repeated your assertion that genocide is being committed without supporting it.

Let me ask you again: which of 1, 2 and 3 do you think is wrong? If 1, look at some dictionaries; if 2, name the race or ethnic group, and explain what evidence you have that the US wants to entirely wipe it out.




If you mean the start of your last paragraph to read "you can't fathom attackers from attacked" then you're simply wrong. Saying "this isn't genocide" is nothing to do with saying "this isn't an attack", anymore than saying "this isn't a sheep" is the same as saying "this isn't a mammal".

Also, as to your figure of 660,000 deaths, it's worth noting that most of those are due to things that the American government wishes weren't and hadn't happened, especially the actions of groups hostile to it. The most one can realistically accuse the American invasion of Iraq of is a) not caring enough about reducing that number and b) increasing it through stupidity; not of statistically significantly increasing it deliberately; American troops have killed tens of thousands of people, I believe, which, while a lot, is also a lot less.

And even if the American's had deliberately killed 660,000 people, that still wouldn't be genocide unless it were part of an attempt to wipe out an entire race or ethnic group. Mass murder, yes, but that's not the same thing as genocide.

It's also worth noting that, while the Lancet study that produced the figure of 660,000 was a reputable one (as far as I can tell), it *was* by far the highest figure arrived at, and I believe other reputable studies have produced lower ones, so I'd suggest using some qualifier like "perhaps as many as" or "reportedly", rather than baldly claiming "660,000" as though that was undisputed.

[oblivious]

19. The official definition mentions twice "In whole or in part"

"Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring
about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

etc.

http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/genocide/gendef.htm
http://www.preventgenocide.org/genocide/officialtext.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide

[blm]

8. K&R - This is a VERY important story. This is the militarization of the insurgents

above and beyond a normal insurgency. And this is the beginning of a GREATER HELL for our country for decades to come .

[Cocoa]

12. Karen Hughes will take care of this

she'll go over there and win back their hearts and minds.

[canetoad]

13. What amazed me three years ago

and still does to this day is that politicians with access to the thoughts, advice and opinions of the finest minds in the world refused to project the invasion of Iraq through to a logical conclusion.

I could see how this could turn out, so could most other DUers. Why the hell did willfull arrogance win out?

[KoKo]

14. Well...it had to happen...when Israeli's and our Pentagon write names on Bombs...

It had to happen...and Abeer stands for ATROCITIES....and I have no problem with trying to support the folks of us HORRIFIED at HER DEATH...and ALL THE OTHER ATROCITIES ...in OUR NAME ...with OUR MONEY..that we have NO CONTROL OF ANYMORE!

Abeer....is a Martyr......Abeer is what we will remember.

[genie_weenie]

17. Most likely this is just a standard 122mm,

9 foot rocket. Which were used in the mrls of the Iraqi Army and litter the Iraqi countryside.

Fired from a BM-21, and depending on the rocket type, they had an effective range of 5-30km. The standard HE-Frag warhead had 20kilos of explosive.

The insurgents have been firing these in Afghanistan and Iraq for years, except in improvised launchers, which severly hampers their range and accuracy. Because counter-battery radar can hone in and fire within 2 minutes.

So, the standard mo was to lob the rockets into our FOBs and scoot. Significant accuracy isn't needed to hit a base.