[OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.

[Some1]

Krsqk
As the attack on the Pentagon was not in time of war, it was unannounced, and it was done via hijacking civilian aircraft, I would call that terrorism. If war came here, I would expect the Pentagon to be shelled/bombed.

I would call it terrorism too, but for them it was war already... And bombing the pentagon in a normal way is not possible for them. This is what you get when to not equal enemies fight.

Krsqk
Indeed. Now, if we could only find an unbiased perspective. I know, there is no such thing.

Because, the first thing that dies in a war..... is the truth.

DavidG: Calm down plz..., i didn't suggest it.

Geoschmo
If one wanted to stretch the definitions a bit I could almost see some logic that the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole was an act of war and not terrorism. And if the 9/11 terrorists had taken a private plane loaded with explosives or something and flown it into the Pentagon you could make the same case. You can have a war that is undeclared afterall. But calling the innocents on the airliners collateral damage is ridiculous. Collateral damage is not intentional by definition. The 9/11 terrorists purposly murdered those pasengers. They made no effort to prevent their deaths. Their deaths were in fact part of the objective.

Its ridiculous for us... Thats the problem (i want to add that i do see it as an terrorist act, but also GWB his war is.)
The bombs that miss and hit civilians are what?? Collateral damage? Remeber that US can permit itself to say what to attack and destroy, something the opposition can't.
The problem is that this was (i guess) the only way to "make their point". Bomb the pentagon? (no way), use a private plane (shot from the air in a sec).... Its just an to unequal war (for them) to stick to the "principles of war".
Guerilla tactics are largely based on: hit, run & fear.

IMO: First look at what you do wrong, before telling someone else what he does wrong (when you are just as wrong yourself).
&
This war is just to enequal to make them stick to any rules.

R.

[primitive]

So, another ”interesting ” incident. Marines kill 10 civilians, including 5 children under 5 years of age, in a van.

Probable reason: The vans driver did not understand a stop signal.

War Crime or acceptable collateral damage ?

[DavidG]

Originally posted by Some1:

DavidG: Calm down plz..., i didn't suggest it.

Yea you did. And not not only that now you've made another post that appears to justify their actions as it is the 'only way to make their point'

[DavidG]

Originally posted by primitive:

War Crime or acceptable collateral damage ?

How about unaceptable collateral damage. Clearly if they had know it was a bus full of unarmed women and children they would not have fired.

As a side note on civilian casualties why is it that Iraq seems to be held to a different standard than the coalition? Has anyone asked Iraq why they are lobbing missles into Kuwait city or firing at civilians leaving Basra?

[DavidG]

Originally posted by primitive:
Geo
“Interesting” theory. I have not seen any pictures of that actual roadblock yet, but it is not always obvious where you are supposed to stop. If the cover-up is not too big, we may learn something later today.

Cover-up? It has already been reported that the platoon leader's commander tore a strip out of the guy for not firing the warning shot early enough. "You f--ing killed a family" he supposedly said. That said I would still view this as an accident and one that quite likely was caused in part by what Geo suggested. Given the tactics used so far I for one am not in a postition to second guess the actions of troops in the field. The only way this could be considered a war crime is if you consider the whole conflict a war crime (which some obviously do)

[DavidG]

Originally posted by primitive:
DavidG
There is no such thing as unacceptable collateral damage. Its either a crime or it is what should be expected and therefore is acceptable.

Everybody knows Saddam is a war criminal and the number one bad guy. Please do not take every criticism of USA or US forces as support for Saddam.

If that second part was also directed at me then I apologize. It is not what I believe or intended to come across in my Posts. (and yea I know I have taken exception to a couple of Posts (not yours) I thought were pro Saddam but the vast majority of anti war Posts put forward perfectly valid points. A lot of which I agree with)

[primitive]

DavidG

It is the "You f--ing killed a family" quote that makes me believe it’s not a stupid suicide driver as Geo suggests, but a misunderstanding of the proper procedures from the drivers side.

We will know in a couple of days if there is a cover-up or not.

Re: The other post.
It was both a general message and a hint to you. Anyway, No hard feelings .

[geoschmo]

Well if this article turns out to be true, then it starts to look more like a stupid mistake, or even gross incompetance. It's way to early to know for sure at this point of course. I'd be very suprised if it turns to be some sort of deliberate act on the part of the soldiers. Contrary to Iraqi propoaganda the US soldiers are not targetting civilians. They are getting themselves injured and killed in many cases going out of their way to avoid civilian casualties. That's not to say however they mistakes won't be made. And if it turns out someone didn't act quick enough and that caused or contributed to this tragedy they should be punished accordingly. But that doesn't make it a war crime.

I wonder if anyone has ever done a study of the number of French/Belgian/etc civilians inadvertantly killed by Allied actions during the liberation of Europe in WWII. Might be interesting, if nothing else for context.

Geoschmo

[Some1]

Originally posted by DavidG:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Some1:

DavidG: Calm down plz..., i didn't suggest it.

Yea you did. And not not only that now you've made another post that appears to justify their actions as it is the 'only way to make their point'

---

If you actually read my post.

I said that i condemn all kinds of terrorist action, ALSO GWB actions...

And i didn't say/justify, i ask myself the question and compared, anyway... one war is enough (to much).

Peace,
R.

[tesco samoa]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...round/oicw.htm

check out this piece of hardware.