Gen Dannatt: Majority of Our Opponents Are Not Bad People

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by urbanite, Sep 22, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Thought this deserved a mention - even though the mainstream media have conveniently ignored it (apart from Channel 4):

    'Our opponents in the main are Iraqi Nationalists and are most concerned with their own needs: jobs, money, security, hope. And the majority therefore, I would suggest, are not bad people.'

    Perhaps that's why there is such a growing gulf between the nation and the army? Because most of us already figured this out on day one?
  2. I think the gulf is more to do with the fact that while the the majority are not bad people, those that are need to be ground into the dust for everyone's sake, and the nation finds that hard to stomach.

    The sad fact is that it has become trendy to think that there are no bad people, as all such behaviour must have a legitimate grevence behind it. At the same time they also believe there can be no good people, as all good action must be rooted in self-interest. There are no bad people, but there are no good people either. The net result is a moral equivalance that in this case puts our troops (and foreign policy) at the same level as those in Iraq who get their kicks driving car bombs into bus stops.
  3. If even the head of the British Army has quit the bullshit, maybe it's time you lot did too?

    You're really only fooling yourself, you know.
  4. I think he's right, but then again, who's going to listen to him? The politicians? Do they listen to anyone except themselves? :roll:
  5. It could be well argued that Shock & Awe was a series of car bombs plus.
    Added to which had we not invaded the place to begin with there wouldn't be car bombs going off now would there?

    "Those to whom evil is done, do evil in return."
    W.H. Auden.
  6. cpunk

    cpunk LE Moderator

    It's always a joy to be reminded that all the worlds' problems could be solved if only all politicians and soldiers started reading the New Statesman. I curse my hitherto meaningless existence in which, I freely admit, I have oppressed a wide variety of helpless indigenous natives in their sylvan, vegan Edens. How could I have been so wrong-headed? :D
  7. I saw General Wesley Clark (Gen Petraeus' former boss) on The Daily Show recently. Asked about Iraq he laughed and said (words to the effect of): 'What would we do if someone dressed in a space suit busted down our door at 3am and roughed-up our women? That's right. We'd shoot them. That's the American way.'

    This idea that Iraqis - a proud, highly educated people - shouldn't respond to foreign occupying troops - which even Alan Greenspan (former Chairman of the Federal Reserve) now says are there only to nick the oil - in the normal manner is simply racism. And stupidity. And a form of reality denial bordering on mental illness. They may be Muslims and A-rabs and have brown skins they're still normal people.

    And if someone there to nick their national wealth busts down their door and roughs up their women they won't like it. And they'll respond like a red blooded American (or Brit).

    What are they supposed to do? Grovel in the dust?
  8. cpunk

    cpunk LE Moderator

    Ah but Annakey, I think you might well agree that the premise: 'If we leave them alone, they'll leave us alone' has been shown to be false on a number of occasions over the course of recorded human history.

    BTW, from what I could see when I was in Iraq, the US wasn't looking to steal Iraq's oil per se but just to ensure that they could carry on buying it.
  9. Nice to hear that Wesley Clarke is still speaking with integrity - I'm sure US media are doing their best to ignore him too.

    If the military started believing people they were bombing were 'normal' people they probably would find it hard to live with themselves - the racism (that is on display on this board so often) is a necessary part of being able to carry out their inhumane orders. And then they turn it all round and pretend to themselves (they're not fooling many others, after all) that it is the people whose country they have invaded, whose relatives they have murdered, whose lives they have destroyed, who are the 'extremists'. They are 'subhuman' and not like 'us'.
  10. Nehustan

    Nehustan On ROPs

    Ingroup-Outgroup stereotyping taken to its natural extreme in the case of warfare. This cognitive laziness is apparent everywhere and all the time, and is often far less functional than allowing you to stay alive, so it’s no real surprise it is found exhibited by soldiers, is it?
  11. They wouldn't drive a truck bomb into Central Park though would they?
  12. who are 'they'? people who have had their relatives murdered and country destroyed? well yes, they might well want to do that now - blame them?
  13. Elements of the iraqi 'resistence'.
  14. The more that General Dannatt speaks the more I like him.
  15. cpunk

    cpunk LE Moderator

    Having had a quick look through your other posts on this site, Urbanite, I'm fascinated by the contempt in which you hold the military. There are certainly a handful of out and out racists who post on this site, but the great majority here are more or less ordinary working class men and women with more or less ordinary working class attitudes. I'm going to take a wild guess and speculate that you are politically of the left, but you give the impression of having a deep unease about the way that working people really think and feel. Do you honestly believe that members of the forces make a conscious choice to dislike the people who spend their days trying to kill them? I'm afraid that you are guilty, at the very least, of stereotyping soldiers in the same way that, you claim, we stereotype Iraqis and Afghanis.