• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 2/8/18)
See more
See less

War -- It has Started.

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Geneva Convention: According to what I heard on NPR, if a news source takes a picture of POWs and runs it (as some Iraqui POWs were on the front page of the Post(?), that is not a violation. But if it is an official tape/picture made by the capturing military/political body, that is where it becomes a violation. If Al-Jazeera itself had made the video and run it, no violation. But since Saddam's military did it, that is a violation.

    For the folks that were going to send care packages to the troops: CNN had a crawl running all weekend saying the Pentagon was requesting that no one but family and friends send packages right now, so you might want to check on that.

    Michael Moore was the one who "went off" at the Oscars last night and was booed for it, but the rest of the night was very well done and subdued. Those that said something about the war did so briefly and succinctly, and ended by wishing for peace and the quick return home of our troops.

    Our helicopters are killing more of our soldiers than the enemy right now...

    Laurie
    Laurie

    Comment


    • LauireP; another distinction regarding photos is this: our media has shown photos of Iraqi troops walking up to us voluntarily to surrender of their own free will. Photos may taken/shown until the soldiers are processed to be POW's by our military.

      The film of our captured troops being asked questions by the Iraqi soldiers is a clear violation of the Geneva Convention.

      SLW

      Comment


      • I took a vacation from the war this weekend, was saddened to hear of more casualties. I was wondering if there is a danger when the Iraqi's surrender, but what if they are fake surrendering. I mean, the idea of a suicide mission (such as a suicide bombing) would not surprise me. Could they fake a surrender and then blow everyone up? ANd what about that guy who threw grenades into his own tents? What's up with that?

        I do not smirk. But if I did, this would be a good opportunity. - Worf
        The truth is rarely pure, and never simple. Oscar Wilde

        Comment


        • ANd what about that guy who threw grenades into his own tents?

          bgoosewood...what's this? I didn't hear about that?
          \"Don\'t go throwing effort after foolishness\" >>>Spur, Man From Snowy River

          Comment


          • I am at a critical time for 100% selfish reasons w/ the war right now. Our oldest daughter has been accepted into an 8 week summer program w/ KU in Germany this summer.....can't decide if it's safe to go or if she needs to pass on the program this year.

            Czar- the details are still be evaluated about the soldier. It seems he became upset at the prospect of fighting fellow Muslims and threw grenades at tents. He is a converted to Muslim at some point in his life.

            SLW

            Comment


            • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Czar:
              _ANd what about that guy who threw grenades into his own tents? _

              bgoosewood...what's this? I didn't hear about that?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

              Story found here: AP: 3/23/03 Reported Muslim Accused in Grenade Attack

              Comment


              • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>It would be wonderful if the news networks would stop covering these protests. What be the point if they got no air time? Yes, they have the right to protest, but stop showing it on the news. They will go away with out publicity.
                My two cents.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                Do you really want your media outlets deciding which opinions are "worthy" of being aired? IMO, it's their job to report the news, and let US decide which opinions are worth listening to.

                There were a lot of interestng discussions about the POW tapes and the war coverage on CNN last night. They had someone from Al Jazeera (sp?) on to defend their decision to air the tape. The Al Jazeera guy's point was that it was definitely news, and was aired on an Arabic network that did not reach the US, and would not have been seen by the POW's families. (Obviously US networks pick up and carry Al Jazeera on occassion, but I don't think people in the US can see it otherwise.) Al Jazeera did, apparently, stop airing the tape after the Pentagon requested they stop.

                The CNN interviewer, Aaron Brown, quite obviously thought the Al Jazeera guy was full of crap, btw.

                Later, they had on a couple of journalism experts... someone from the University of Missouri (a big j-school) and someone else from Harvard. They were discussing both the POW tape and the issue of the embedded journalists and the coverage they'd been providing.

                Everyone interviewed said they'd struggled with the issue of the POW tapes all day, but the consensus seemed to be that it was important to show at least parts of it, once the families had been notified, because it was news, and because it was important to hold Iraq responsible for the condition of the POWs. But everyone also agreed that it wasn't the type of thing that should be run over and over.

                Very interesting discussions, anyway.

                Comment


                • Texan-perhaps one reason the Iraqis aren't out protesting is that we're bombing the s*** out of their cities. Just a thought.

                  I think the making and distribution of that tape was abhorrent, and the treatment of the POWs is awful. I hope that those still alive survive and are able to return home safely.

                  The US, recently, has done a questionable job of upholding the Geneva convention itself.

                  Does anyone have a total figure for the number of casualties thus far (on all sides)? I've been looking for one but have had no luck. It seems as though the 100 american/british forces number has already been reached, tragically.

                  Courtney
                  Courtney

                  my livejournal

                  Comment


                  • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SLW:
                    "Middle America" was watching the war yesterday. As I stopped for fuel and food along I-29 from noon until I got home at 2:00 a.m. I encountered young and old alike focused on t.v.'s and had ears turned to radios in the shops where I stopped. Saw lovely flag displays along the interstate and not one single "No War" slogan.

                    Bless our troops and their families.

                    SLW
                    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                    SLW - I was touched late last week to see that my small mid-western town has brought out the Memorial Day flags. A couple of years ago, when they rejuvinated downtown with the Main Street USA program, they encouraged local businesses to purchase these flags - all are exactly alike, size, flagpole color, etc. The city stores them and puts them up and takes them down on appropriate occaisions. They are up, and they are beautiful. They went up after 9/11 and remained until the Taliban were removed from power.

                    And I cannot find one sign protesting the war here, either.

                    ********
                    Proud to be an American!

                    Proud supporter of our Armed Forces all over the world!

                    Comment


                    • THat could be a factor Courtney . I don't know about Iraq, but protests are illegal in Saudi Arabia.

                      I do not smirk. But if I did, this would be a good opportunity. - Worf
                      The truth is rarely pure, and never simple. Oscar Wilde

                      Comment


                      • <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by CourtneyLiz:
                        The US, recently, has done a questionable job of upholding the Geneva convention itself.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                        Can you give any citations for that comment? I haven't seen any suggestion of the like from any media source - not the BBC, not ITN, Reuters, ABC/CBS/NBC, et al. Currently Allied Forces have about 2,000 Iraqi troops as POWs. They are being treated fully within the guidelines of the Geneva Convention.

                        Comment


                        • But the Afghanis were protesting, exercising this freedom that has been denied for them so long.

                          Coalition casualties: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/ira...ies/index.html

                          Laurie
                          Laurie

                          Comment


                          • Glimmerglass-
                            I'll do some research and get back to you. I heard a conversation today on the Diane Reams show with some scholars that specialized on the Geneva Convention and international law who said that the US was engaging in very questionable behavior--holding their own citizens without charges, handing over prisoners to the Northern Alliance so that other "methods" could be used to get information out of them, and the fact that the prisoners in Guantanomo do not have prisoner of war status.
                            Courtney
                            Courtney

                            my livejournal

                            Comment


                            • The United States released pictures of the prisoners in Cuba to the international media.
                              link This is from the Mirror, a British paper. The story contains the photo of an injured child, not for the faint of heart.

                              This is from an ABC affiliate in St. Paul, discussing how the decision NOT to afford prisoners in Guantanamo POW status has potentially affected the treatment of our soldiers (I think that connection in this situation is shaky, but the article does discuss our treatment of prisoners in Cuba). story What is important, and what was discussed on the Diane Reams show, is how America's actions affect the rest of the world--America is looked to as an example of appropriate and permissible behavior. If America twists the Geneva convention to suit itself, then the rest of the world may feel better about doing it themselves.

                              A US senator (Andrew Bartlett) is also speaking out about this (this article is a fairly uninformative summary from ABC). Article

                              A search on Google news for "Geneva Convention" and Guantanamo turns up many more sources.

                              Thanks for the link, lauriep.
                              Courtney
                              Courtney

                              my livejournal

                              Comment


                              • Hubby and I were away doing horsie things the last week, and have been staying somewhere without TV, so we actually had like a 24 hour lag time on even knowing it had started. It's been wierd today to have CNN on, trying to play catch up. Hubby asked why I;m watching all the coverage, and the best answer I could come up with is, "I;m trying to see something that will make me believe this is the right thing."

                                So how do you do it? You folks on this htread and other who are able to see this so black and white? It all seems an awfully murky grey to me.

                                And how does one walk the line between disliking the action, but not dissing the troops? I have utmost respect and love for our brave soldiers. I lend my prayers to others that they come home safe and sound, and I am greatful for their sacrifice. But, the people who sent them there? Not so much. . . respect for the office of the president? Um fine, them first. When I see any sign this administration has any respect for any other point of view than their own, then they will have my respect. Until then, sorry, I don't owe them any more respect than they have shown me, a voter, whom they are supposed to be representing and working for.

                                So how do you do it? I'm not a protest sort, but I don't disagree with some of their sentiment, and believe they have every right to do it. On one hand I don't want to hurt our brave troops. On the other, I don't want to remain complicitly silent, and let this administration think that this particular voter thinks they've been managing things "just fine". SO how do you make your voice of dissent heard, without it being hurtful?

                                There is no question Hussein is an evil butcher. There is no question he hates America. But, I have yet to see any proof that he poses an imminent threat, or that he was in anyway involved in 9/11. I think those bonds are tneuous at best. And, I have known from the very beginning that we would end up here no matter what. President Bush (both of them, really) have been nursing this wound for awhile, and this conflict, I believe, was inevitable. Do I think Bush went to war JUST to settle his Dad's score? No, but I also don't think it never factored in to his decision process at all. Bush is going to do what he wants to do, no matter what the world, his citizens, or advisers think, and that's why he scares me a little bit. It's why I didn't vote for him (that and the fundmanetlaist CHristian thing, but that's another thread) and I can understand why countries like France and Germany are uncomfortable with his brand of leadership.

                                The bottom line is lots of innocent Iraqi's are going to be horribly killed. We will kill a lot of them. If we weren't there, Hussein would do it himself. But the fact that our cause is "more just" doesn't make me feel one bit better about the enourmous loss of life in that country. If your entire family is dead, in the end does it matter whether it was an American missle or Hussein's goon squads that did it?

                                So I keep watching the news, hoping desperately to see something that gives me some hope, some reasons to feel good about our work there, to have an "Aha" moment where I think ,thanks heavens we were there. Hasn't happened yet. Still hopeful.

                                Comment


                                • CourtneyLiz- I think what you are misunderstanding between the U.S. releasing pictures and the Iraqi's taping and airing of each individual POW is intent. Was the U.S.'s intent to scare, intimidate and humiliate the Afghan detainees? No. Is the point of the Iraqi tape to scare intimidate and humiliate the US detainees? Without doubt.

                                  Much U.S. law, and I would imagine international law (Portia can probably confirm) is based on the "intent" of the act in question. It is almost never black and white.

                                  Comment


                                  • Heather -

                                    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>And how does one walk the line between disliking the action, but not dissing the troops? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

                                    I think many people mistake those protesting the war as those somehow protesting the military. Don't get me wrong, some of the anti-war people would be perfectly happy if the military just dissapeared, or thinks of anyone in the military as a blood thirsty babykiller, but ...

                                    While I am definitely far, FAR left of center in the political spectrum on many issues, I am firmly in the military's camp. My grandfather served in the Pacific in WWII, and was a career Army officer. My step-father saw his first combat of WWII, at the age of 18, on the beaches of Normandy. My father was in the 82nd Airborne, 352 Airborne Infantry, and later went on to become an Army Intelligence officer, as did my uncle. My family has a long tradition of service to this country. My mother is a military historian. I am following in her footsteps. I am PROUD of all the members of my family, and my friends, who made the dicision to join the military. I am proud of all the troops over in Iraq, and stationed around the world. It's not an easy calling.

                                    I support the military & our troops. I do not, however, support those who are giving the orders. GWB couldn't even be bothered to show up for National Guard exercises in Texas during the Vietnam War, and I'm supposed to believe he's an appropriate commander in chief? HA.

                                    The military can't win. They were criticized after Sept. 11, and they will be criticized after the war in Iraq is over. Some people will complain that we didn't do enough, and other people will complain that they did too much. Nevermind the fact that they are just doing what they are told.

                                    I doubt that protesting is somehow damaging the morale of the troops in Iraq. After Vietnam, being in the military has been a relatively thankless job as far as public adulation goes. It comes with the territory. What is more damaging, I think, is some of the stuff officals have been saying as of late. Rumsfeld's lovely comment about essentially not needing the Brits over there? Way to boost morale ... especially considering that the UK is the ONLY country in our corner, for all intensive purposes. Well, the Aussies are over there now, too. I was touched that American soldiers made a point to go by the British soldiers' tents to tell them that Rumsfeld is known for shooting off his mouth & THEY (the US soldiers) were glad the Brits were there.

                                    I think this war is going to take a lot longer than predicted. I'm just hoping that N. Korea doesn't decide to go marching through No Man's Land & into S. Korea ... we'll be in a hell of a mess then.

                                    -Albion

                                    'O lente, lente currite noctis equi' - Ovid

                                    Comment


                                    • Texan-perhaps one reason the Iraqis aren't out protesting is that we're bombing the s*** out of their cities. Just a thought.

                                      ______________________________________
                                      actually you are not bombing the sh.....t out of the their cities, you are only bombing one portion of bagdad, which is all military installations and palaces. if you watch CNN you can see from the camera angles, that there is other traffic out on the streets. In other parts of iraq you are including other palaces and government buildings. Keep in mind Suddam has 52 palaces located all over Iraq. As far as i can tell, you are not targeting civilian type areas, it would be the equivelent to a city centre with subburbs. Suddam head palaces and military headquarters were located in a large compound with much land and a river around it. No Iraqi was allowed near that
                                      compound. The war in 91 produced all sorts of refugees travelling to get out of Iraq heading for the camps they had set up, very few Iraqis have left their homes this time around. Prior to the start of the war, you had dropped leaflets in heavily populated areas to say stay in your homes...sounds to me like the people have every confidence in what the u.s. is doing. Sorry, but i dont think your military went in and bombed everything in sight, without care for human life. i think they identified their targets and went in and took them out,with the least amount of life lost.
                                      www.tayvalleyfarm.com
                                      My other home.

                                      Comment


                                      • The US military has been suprised with the amount of resistance they have been meeting. It's only getting worse the further north they're going ... and we'll see what happens once they hit Baghdad proper.

                                        One Iraqi POW said it was because the US told them to rise up in '91 & the US would get rid of Saddam ... and they did rise up ... but the US failed to get rid of Saddam. This time, they're not taking the chance that America is going to do the same thing again. I would NOT say they have "every confidence in what the US is doing". Sure, the ethnic majorities who are a political minority & oppressed love us. I wouldn't be so sure about some of the other ethnic minorities/political majorities. Not EVERYONE is going to welcome our arrival.

                                        This war isn't going to be pretty. It's probably not going to be over very soon, and if we have to get involved in urban combat - which is a distinct possibility - civialian causualties WILL be on the rise. The military is ALREADY having problems determining who is a civilian & who is in the military (flashback to Vietnam, anyone?), and the problem is only going to get worse. While the US would love to believe that all the Iraqi soldiers are ill-prepared and badly trained, the capture of the US soldiers by the Ruplican Guards dressed as 'regular' Iraqi soldiers just proves that no, not everyone is going to roll over on their back and surrender.

                                        -Albion

                                        'O lente, lente currite noctis equi' - Ovid

                                        Comment


                                        • Texan- We are not just bombing or fighting in Baghdad. According to The Washington Post, yesterday "US and British aircraft bombed strategic sites all around Iraq; few of the targets were known." Airstrikes have occurred (and I believe this is just yesterday) in Amarah, Nasiriyah, Basra, Karbala, and outside of Najaf. I realize we aren't targeting civilian sites, but this is a war and we are dropping bombs from the sky, not exactly the most accurate method of killing a single man available. If the Iraqis were trying to take out W. by running airstrikes over the White House, I wouldn't be attending protests in Georgetown. That's all I'm trying to say.

                                          Master Tally- I realize that (presumably) our intent and the Iraqi's intent is very different, and I'd be interesting in hearing some more knowledgeable opinions on this. From what I can tell though, the international opinion (including in England) is that the release of our photos was a violation and that it could endanger soldiers in the future.

                                          Courtney
                                          Courtney

                                          my livejournal

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X