I'm sure atleast a few civilians were killed, but lets face it America is avoiding civilian deaths as much as humanly possible, therefore allowing more of our boys to die as we do it. Since it seems not to matter either way we might as well level the hot spots and get it over with. I'm for giving these areas 72 hours to allow the women and children to leave and then bomb day and night until the real white flags come out.
more drivel from Gameface
Yet more drivel from the guy who would have you believe that Iraq had credible nuclear weapons before the invasions
"I'm sure atleast a few civilians were killed, but lets face it America is avoiding civilian deaths as much as humanly possible
in fact the following appears to me to be true:
lets face it America is avoiding US military deaths as much as humanly possible
If you wish to minimise civilian casulaties in this sort of conflict you use the sorts of tactics employed by the UK in Northern ireland. You do not:
1. Bomb civilian areas from the air.
2. Fire tank shells and similar heavy ordinance into civilian buildings.
It is still perfectly possible to root out the enemy without destroying lots of buildings. You do:
1. Carefully enter buildings you believe to contain insurgents, watching out for booby traps.
2. Use hand-held semi-automatic & automatic weapons on armed terrorist targets, since your training has enabled you to tell these apart from unarmed civilians even under pressure.
Unfortunately this second approach will result in higher troop casulaties since they will not be snug in their armoured carriers firing into buildings containing enemy but also possible civilians. You don't know who is in the building since you have not entered it.
The second approach has much lower total casualties. The choice the USA made and the reasons it made it is not lost on the rest of the world, friend & foe alike.
Yet more drivel from the guy who would have you believe that Iraq had credible nuclear weapons before the invasions
"I'm sure atleast a few civilians were killed, but lets face it America is avoiding civilian deaths as much as humanly possible
in fact the following appears to me to be true:
lets face it America is avoiding US military deaths as much as humanly possible
If you wish to minimise civilian casulaties in this sort of conflict you use the sorts of tactics employed by the UK in Northern ireland. You do not:
1. Bomb civilian areas from the air.
2. Fire tank shells and similar heavy ordinance into civilian buildings.
It is still perfectly possible to root out the enemy without destroying lots of buildings. You do:
1. Carefully enter buildings you believe to contain insurgents, watching out for booby traps.
2. Use hand-held semi-automatic & automatic weapons on armed terrorist targets, since your training has enabled you to tell these apart from unarmed civilians even under pressure.
Unfortunately this second approach will result in higher troop casulaties since they will not be snug in their armoured carriers firing into buildings containing enemy but also possible civilians. You don't know who is in the building since you have not entered it.
The second approach has much lower total casualties. The choice the USA made and the reasons it made it is not lost on the rest of the world, friend & foe alike.
72 hours, you are quite the humanitarian. Are you sure we shouldn't just drop leaflets giving them 1 hour to get out of Dodge. I mean after all their lousy terroristrs aren't they? I mean who gives a chit they'll hate us for centuries now anyway right? What's a few women and children when there's all that oi..er democracy to be had right.GAMEFACE said:
Umm, right. And I doubt the US is using chemical weapons. That would be about the dumbest PR move they could come up with.Shotgun said:
But making the decision to invade or not to invade another country is akin to making the decision to kill or not to kill innocent civilians, no? It might not be the motive, certainly, but it's a guaranteed fact of war and one that is to be taken seriously when the decision is being made. If you're going to declare war, and inevitably and positively kill innocent civilians, you'd better have a damn sound reason for doing so. I should say that is not the case here. Nothing much beyond bullying and empire, anyway.
Speaking of which, have you picked up that Friedman book yet?
xpanda said:
Innocent civilians were dying under Hussein as well; the sanctions were starving Iraqis while Saddam was collecting billions. Bush had three choices: drop the sanctions 2) invade 3) keep the sanctions. People were going to die no matter what choice he made.
xpanda said:
I picked it up but haven't started on it yet. I got sucked into reading William Manchester's books about Churchill and want to finish that up before starting Friedman's. It isn't light reading from what I've skimmed through.
Shotgun said:
How long do you think it would have been before Saddam was toppled precisely because of the sanctions? I'd guess that he'd be damn near out of power by now ... and you'll be reading shortly how the Iranians and the Shi'ia thought so, too. But seriously, drop the 'innocent civilians were dying' routine as justification for the transfer of bloody hands' ownership.
Innocent Iraqis died in droves in 1988 via Saddam, and then again from 2003 to the present via Bush. The latter is hardly better than the former, especially since there was no justification beyond empirical strategy for this war. If warmongering leaders were required to engage in a face-to-face battle with the leader of their enemy, instead of sending their minions in their place, I think we would have seen a much different build-up to this war. If any at all.
It's not difficult reading, but it certainly is an overload of information. I had to read most paragraphs twice just to keep all the players straight.
I again say that there are some people on this forum who take delight when the worst happens for the US - and Doc is the titular leader of the "hate America" crowd. He hates Bush so much that he just doesn't seem to care how far he takes his hate - or who gets caught up in his terrible web of accusations.
If some anti-American inuendo is printed somewhere - no matter how negative that article is, Doc will paste it here as though it's the truth!
Now maybe I'm sensitive about the subject, but Doc seems to push allegations of attrocities (and poison gas is an attrocity) committed by our boys in uniform - and then he says he supports our boys. It seems to me that Doc prints the negative articles about our boys while printing more favorable articles about the terrorists and their supporters.
If you support the troops, you will question the validity of allegation of attrocities until proven one way or the other - and you don't present those allegations in such a way that they're taken as gospel truth!
Many of the lefties on this forum seem to have let their hate for Bush and Cheney affect their perceptions of the troops and the war! I see all of these posts about the 60 prisoners that were abused at Abu Garib, but nothing about the 60,000 prisoners that were treated properly. I see all of these posts about some terrorist being shot - but nothing about the beheadings and other attrocities regularly committed by the terrorists. Now I see some unsupported tripe about poison gas and cluster bombs being discussed as though it were fact, while there's no supporting evidnce that such things happened.
If some anti-American inuendo is printed somewhere - no matter how negative that article is, Doc will paste it here as though it's the truth!
Now maybe I'm sensitive about the subject, but Doc seems to push allegations of attrocities (and poison gas is an attrocity) committed by our boys in uniform - and then he says he supports our boys. It seems to me that Doc prints the negative articles about our boys while printing more favorable articles about the terrorists and their supporters.
If you support the troops, you will question the validity of allegation of attrocities until proven one way or the other - and you don't present those allegations in such a way that they're taken as gospel truth!
Many of the lefties on this forum seem to have let their hate for Bush and Cheney affect their perceptions of the troops and the war! I see all of these posts about the 60 prisoners that were abused at Abu Garib, but nothing about the 60,000 prisoners that were treated properly. I see all of these posts about some terrorist being shot - but nothing about the beheadings and other attrocities regularly committed by the terrorists. Now I see some unsupported tripe about poison gas and cluster bombs being discussed as though it were fact, while there's no supporting evidnce that such things happened.
depends what deomcracy stands for
I would never claim that the US tactics in this war or any previous war - even Nam - come close to the disgusting tactics of the terrorists or the terror regimes such as Saddam's. There may be individual acts of stupidity and even brutality but it does not seem to me that any of it was authorised at a high level, it was local commanders and plattoon leaders getting it wrong.
however, is that really how you want to be judged? "We may be a bunch of blundering fools, but at least we are not vicious terrorists."
Personally, democracy for me stands for not doing a lot of the things the US Government and military have been busy doing these past 15 months. What a dreadful example we have been setting the rest of the world. The way I see it, this has put the likelihood of even one decent Middle East democracy back about 50 years.
I would never claim that the US tactics in this war or any previous war - even Nam - come close to the disgusting tactics of the terrorists or the terror regimes such as Saddam's. There may be individual acts of stupidity and even brutality but it does not seem to me that any of it was authorised at a high level, it was local commanders and plattoon leaders getting it wrong.
however, is that really how you want to be judged? "We may be a bunch of blundering fools, but at least we are not vicious terrorists."
Personally, democracy for me stands for not doing a lot of the things the US Government and military have been busy doing these past 15 months. What a dreadful example we have been setting the rest of the world. The way I see it, this has put the likelihood of even one decent Middle East democracy back about 50 years.
We still have the neutron bomb. the problem is its used to save structures while killing people, why would we want to save structures in Iraq? I believe the most humane approach to the insurgency would be to castrate every male who is captured and then quickly release them. Word would no doubt spread very quickly that the americans are now using a "neuter" bomb!
bblight:
do all of us a favor and stay on your medication ...
you get off your medication and start rambling with one jackass comment after another
What I really hate is "Your Crowd" ... the jackass bandwagon that gets a hardon when Cheney crawls out of his cave to remind everyone that anyone against this war is a Traitor to King George ...
I have a problem with this war .. a war that has cost this country over 300 billion dollars and over 1200 of our best young soldiers .. a war that was started on lies and a war where we invaded illegally a Muslim country .. a country that had no ties to 9-11 and was not a threat to this country ...
You have a problem that ??? I DONT CARE ... go back and bury your ass in that hole and ignore the facts about what the hell is going on with this Soprano form of govt
Again, please stay on your medication ....
do all of us a favor and stay on your medication ...
you get off your medication and start rambling with one jackass comment after another
What I really hate is "Your Crowd" ... the jackass bandwagon that gets a hardon when Cheney crawls out of his cave to remind everyone that anyone against this war is a Traitor to King George ...
I have a problem with this war .. a war that has cost this country over 300 billion dollars and over 1200 of our best young soldiers .. a war that was started on lies and a war where we invaded illegally a Muslim country .. a country that had no ties to 9-11 and was not a threat to this country ...
You have a problem that ??? I DONT CARE ... go back and bury your ass in that hole and ignore the facts about what the hell is going on with this Soprano form of govt
Again, please stay on your medication ....
Three hundred million so called American lives are at stake in this country because of the threat of muslim scum. About half voted in the last election. About half of those voted for a traitor to the United States of America. Ship the traitors to Iraq and we will pull our troops out. Seems fair to me.
