From 'Gook' to 'Raghead'




 
--
Boots
 
May 2nd, 2005  
chewie_nz
 

Topic: From 'Gook' to '*******'


This article appeared in the op-ed column of the NY Times...what do you guys think?

From 'Gook' to '*******'
By BOB HERBERT

spent some time recently with Aidan Delgado, a 23-year-old religion major at New College of Florida, a small, highly selective school in Sarasota.

On the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, before hearing anything about the terror attacks that would change the direction of American history, Mr. Delgado enlisted as a private in the Army Reserve. Suddenly, in ways he had never anticipated, the military took over his life. He was trained as a mechanic and assigned to the 320th Military Police Company in St. Petersburg. By the spring of 2003, he was in Iraq. Eventually he would be stationed at the prison compound in Abu Ghraib.

Mr. Delgado's background is unusual. He is an American citizen, but because his father was in the diplomatic corps, he grew up overseas. He spent eight years in Egypt, speaks Arabic and knows a great deal about the various cultures of the Middle East. He wasn't happy when, even before his unit left the states, a top officer made wisecracks about the soldiers heading off to Iraq to kill some *******s and burn some turbans.

"He laughed," Mr. Delgado said, "and everybody in the unit laughed with him."

The officer's comment was a harbinger of the gratuitous violence that, according to Mr. Delgado, is routinely inflicted by American soldiers on ordinary Iraqis. He said: "Guys in my unit, particularly the younger guys, would drive by in their Humvee and shatter bottles over the heads of Iraqi civilians passing by. They'd keep a bunch of empty Coke bottles in the Humvee to break over people's heads."

He said he had confronted guys who were his friends about this practice. "I said to them: 'What the hell are you doing? Like, what does this accomplish?' And they responded just completely openly. They said: 'Look, I hate being in Iraq. I hate being stuck here. And I hate being surrounded by hajis.' "

"Haji" is the troops' term of choice for an Iraqi. It's used the way "gook" or "Charlie" was used in Vietnam.

Mr. Delgado said he had witnessed incidents in which an Army sergeant lashed a group of children with a steel Humvee antenna, and a Marine corporal planted a vicious kick in the chest of a kid about 6 years old. There were many occasions, he said, when soldiers or marines would yell and curse and point their guns at Iraqis who had done nothing wrong.

He said he believes that the absence of any real understanding of Arab or Muslim culture by most G.I.'s, combined with a lack of proper training and the unrelieved tension of life in a war zone, contributes to levels of fear and rage that lead to frequent instances of unnecessary violence.

Mr. Delgado, an extremely thoughtful and serious young man, balked at the entire scene. "It drove me into a moral quagmire," he said. "I walked up to my commander and gave him my weapon. I said: 'I'm not going to fight. I'm not going to kill anyone. This war is wrong. I'll stay. I'll finish my job as a mechanic. But I'm not going to hurt anyone. And I want to be processed as a conscientious objector.' "

He stayed with his unit and endured a fair amount of ostracism. "People would say I was a traitor or a coward," he said. "The stuff you would expect."

In November 2003, after several months in Nasiriya in southern Iraq, the 320th was redeployed to Abu Ghraib. The violence there was sickening, Mr. Delgado said. Some inmates were beaten nearly to death. The G.I.'s at Abu Ghraib lived in cells while most of the detainees were housed in large overcrowded tents set up in outdoor compounds that were vulnerable to mortars fired by insurgents. The Army acknowledges that at least 32 Abu Ghraib detainees were killed by mortar fire.

Mr. Delgado, who eventually got conscientious objector status and was honorably discharged last January, recalled a disturbance that occurred while he was working in the Abu Ghraib motor pool. Detainees who had been demonstrating over a variety of grievances began throwing rocks at the guards. As the disturbance grew, the Army authorized lethal force. Four detainees were shot to death.

Mr. Delgado confronted a sergeant who, he said, had fired on the detainees. "I asked him," said Mr. Delgado, "if he was proud that he had shot unarmed men behind barbed wire for throwing stones. He didn't get mad at all. He was, like, 'Well, I saw them bloody my buddy's nose, so I knelt down. I said a prayer. I stood up, and I shot them down.' "


http://www.chatarea.com/BdGTactical.m2964846
May 2nd, 2005  
Charge 7
 
 
I think this story sounds made up. Two big problems with it. (1) If this was a widespread and as terrible as this sounds you can bet it would be on every news program and (2) this whole business of "Mr. Delgado, who eventually got conscientious objector status and was honorably discharged last January" is so extremely unlikely that you would have a better chance of winning the lottery and getting struck by lightning the same day.
May 2nd, 2005  
03USMC
 
 

Topic: Re: From 'Gook' to '*******'


Quote:
Originally Posted by chewie_nz
.Delgado, who eventually got conscientious objector status and was honorably discharged last January, recalled a disturbance that occurred while he was working in the Abu Ghraib motor pool. Detainees who had been demonstrating over a variety of grievances began throwing rocks at the guards. As the disturbance grew, the Army authorized lethal force. Four detainees were shot to death.

Mr. Delgado confronted a sergeant who, he said, had fired on the detainees. "I asked him," said Mr. Delgado, "if he was proud that he had shot unarmed men behind barbed wire for throwing stones. He didn't get mad at all. He was, like, 'Well, I saw them bloody my buddy's nose, so I knelt down. I said a prayer. I stood up, and I shot them down.' "


http://www.chatarea.com/BdGTactical.m2964846

I think Delgado is another malcontent who wanted out. I don't see a little mechanic confronting a Sgt. after an incident like that and not taking a vertical butt stroke for his trouble.

I'm glad the Army booted him and I think he needs to quit running his pie hole and trying to make himself out as the liberal left media darling.

In short Freak Delgado.
--
Boots
May 2nd, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
I can't tell whether this guy is telling the truth or not but let's just for a moment assume that some of these stories are true.

Calling your enemy "towlheads"? Really? You expect soldiers to treat their enemies with political correctness? I call em' towlheads when I'm pissed at the arabs! This isn't anything odd for warfare. Would our modern media cry if taken back to WW2 their 'investigative journalists' found out our boys where calling the Germans Krauts? OMG!!!!

Shooting prisoners who are attacking prison guards with rocks? That's an atrocity? If you are a prisoner of war then perhaps it would be in your best intrest NOT TO ASSAULT THE GUARDS. It's a very simple rule, if you're a prisoner don't attack your guards. Soldiers arn't police officers who are restraining American Citizens, THEY'RE SOLDIERS IN A WAR.

Oh and worst of all they housed the prisoners of war in tents outside! 32 of these prisoners where killed my mortar fire from enemy insurgents. How the hell is that our fault? Maybe, just maybe, the insurgents shouldn't be shooting mortars at their own guys. Who in their right mind would fault America for that one?

In sum, this is exactly the sort of "investigative journalism" I'd expect from the NY Times, the same paper that ran FIFTY-TWO front page stories about Abu Garaib. Granted it was a big story but FIFTY-TWO FRONT PAGE STORIES, and you don't think they have a STROOOOONG political bias?
May 2nd, 2005  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whispering Death
I can't tell whether this guy is telling the truth or not but let's just for a moment assume that some of these stories are true.

Calling your enemy "towlheads"? Really? You expect soldiers to treat their enemies with political correctness? I call em' towlheads when I'm pissed at the arabs! This isn't anything odd for warfare. Would our modern media cry if taken back to WW2 their 'investigative journalists' found out our boys where calling the Germans Krauts? OMG!!!!

Shooting prisoners who are attacking prison guards with rocks? That's an atrocity? If you are a prisoner of war then perhaps it would be in your best intrest NOT TO ASSAULT THE GUARDS. It's a very simple rule, if you're a prisoner don't attack your guards. Soldiers arn't police officers who are restraining American Citizens, THEY'RE SOLDIERS IN A WAR.

Oh and worst of all they housed the prisoners of war in tents outside! 32 of these prisoners where killed my mortar fire from enemy insurgents. How the h**l is that our fault? Maybe, just maybe, the insurgents shouldn't be shooting mortars at their own guys. Who in their right mind would fault America for that one?

In sum, this is exactly the sort of "investigative journalism" I'd expect from the NY Times, the same paper that ran FIFTY-TWO front page stories about Abu Garaib. Granted it was a big story but FIFTY-TWO FRONT PAGE STORIES, and you don't think they have a STROOOOONG political bias?
Well this is a first I sort of agree with you.
The *******s thing absolutely it happens everywhere and isn't confined to warzones nor is it necessarily derogatory as after a while it becomes slang rather than a meaningful term.

Quote:
Shooting prisoners who are attacking prison guards with rocks? That's an atrocity? If you are a prisoner of war then perhaps it would be in your best intrest NOT TO ASSAULT THE GUARDS. It's a very simple rule, if you're a prisoner don't attack your guards. Soldiers arn't police officers who are restraining American Citizens, THEY'RE SOLDIERS IN A WAR.
I sort of agree with this however surely the level of actual threat should be used to determine response, a firing response shouldn't be automatic in this case.

Quote:
Oh and worst of all they housed the prisoners of war in tents outside! 32 of these prisoners where killed my mortar fire from enemy insurgents. How the h**l is that our fault? Maybe, just maybe, the insurgents shouldn't be shooting mortars at their own guys. Who in their right mind would fault America for that one?
Agreed, assuming of course there were no "more appropriate" accommodations available.
But hell if they want to mortar their own people I cant see how that is the US's problem.

However one thing that does amaze me with these stories is that you read how they were not happy about being sent to warzones or overseas which leads me to wonder why the hell these people would volunteer to join the military it makes about as much sense as becoming a doctor and complaining about having to deal with sick people.
May 2nd, 2005  
Desert_Eagle
 
Quote:
However one thing that does amaze me with these stories is that you read how they were not happy about being sent to warzones or overseas which leads me to wonder why the h**l these people would volunteer to join the military it makes about as much sense as becoming a doctor and complaining about having to deal with sick people.
Couldn't agree more. You don't have the stomach for combat and frontline jokes, then don't enlist.
May 3rd, 2005  
thegrinch073
 
 
I read an article several months ago about hate and the United States Military. There was a pamphlet written by a private during the North Africa campiagn back when the same problem of believe it or not political correctness and hate words. Sadly many Americans then and now believed that if anything got serious where people would get hurt, it would be stopped, as in a football game. Since Americans are taught to tolerate everyone, even our enemies, it makes us weaker by not as willing to kill them. The private suggested calling the enemy names such as krauts in order to dehumanize their enemy so soliders would be more at ease killing their fellow man. This is still relevant today. I hate to say this, but there should be some name calling among the ranks such as towel heads, camel jockeys, and other terms to dehumanize the terroists so our soliders do not give it a second thought to kill them. It's not like the insurgent would give a second thought. Source of the article was the Navy Times but it may have been ran in all of them.
May 3rd, 2005  
Vitaly
 
So along those lines is it a bad thing that the Army replaced the term Indian Run?
May 3rd, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
TheGrinch - This has been done all throughout human history, "dehumanizing the enemy". What? Do you think the Muslim extremists think of us Americans as equal to a well-principled follower of Islam? No, we're capitalist christian heathens! They make caricatures of our leaders that they then burn all the while shouting "god is great" and "kill in infidels"

The whole point of their propoganda is that we are colonising ungodly heathenistic hordes whom the right islamic men of the world have to kill!

And the NYTimes is bent out of shape because our boys are calling them towlheads?
May 3rd, 2005  
A Can of Man
 
 
if you don't dehumanize, you don't kill and when you don't kill, you are killed.