It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US Air Strike Kills Iraqi Family of 12

page: 9
0
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
If we had the support and cooperation of the Iraqi people....we certainly could win, and while not becoming monsters ourselves...


How are we going to get the support and cooperation of the Iraqi people, when those who cooperate are targeted by the insurgency? Iraqis have been living in a society controlled by fear for a long time, they don't know anything else, the insurgents play on that nicely. On the other hand we have American soldiers who pass out candy and try and win support through kindness, while that tactic would work much better here in the states, there it's take the Jolly Ranchers, cooperate with Americans, and get your head cut off or your family shot up, OR, keep your mouth shut and live. Not a tough choice for an Iraqi.



However, that support is hard to get when one second you're telling them mission accomplished, and the country now belongs to you....and the next second you're flying over a city and dropping a smart bomb on a house yet only managing to kill a family....


That doesn't happen very often, many more Iraqis are killed by the insurgency, and again, that's what the Iraqis understand. Fear. That's why we won't get that support.



It's a bad tactic, whether you're going after insurgents, or trying to win hearts and minds....or both.


How do you win the hearts and minds of those who only understand fear, and the insurgents are more than happy to speak their language?




posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok


If we are going to hold ourselves to a higher standard all the time, how are we ever going to win? We just won't.


If we had the support and cooperation of the Iraqi people....we certainly could win, and while not becoming monsters ourselves...

However, that support is hard to get when one second you're telling them mission accomplished, and the country now belongs to you....and the next second you're flying over a city and dropping a smart bomb on a house yet only managing to kill a family....

It's a bad tactic, whether you're going after insurgents, or trying to win hearts and minds....or both.


Very true people forget that it is iraq's country not the coalitions. All bombing raids or any pre-emptive strikes, should have stoped when they voted for there own goverment. It's not up to Bush when the US pulles out, Its up to the Iraqi people.



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by picklewalsh
It's not up to Bush when the US pulles out, Its up to the Iraqi people.

Yeah thats why they DO control when the coalition pulls out, or did you miss that memo?



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 04:31 PM
link   

If we had the support and cooperation of the Iraqi people....we certainly could win, and while not becoming monsters ourselves...


We were losing the war against the Japanese until we became more ruthless than they were. We didnt have the support of the Japanese people if i'm not mistaken.



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dronetek

My problem with this is where is it our job to install freedom ANYWHERE? Can anyone show me where in the Constitution it says we were to carry the flag of Freedom to the world?


Well guess what? The time for debate was 3 years ago! Now, we got to win the war, but the left making it awful damn hard.


I am hardly the left


I support the troops 100% and wish for a swift end to this with a few of ours killed as possible. If called (am way to old) I would go myself and give a 110%. But that doesnt change the fact that we have ZERO right to tell others how to live.



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by picklewalsh
It's not up to Bush when the US pulles out, Its up to the Iraqi people.

Yeah thats why they DO control when the coalition pulls out, or did you miss that memo?


Yeh i was out the office that day, but in all seriouseness it should now be left to the UN Peacekeepers, the coalition has done its job.



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 04:50 PM
link   
What UN peacekeepers? Oh right, the UN peacekeepers that only go into areas where there is very little or no fighting going on at all, and in many cases are mostly US or UK troops.



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Dang it AMUK if I could give you a WATS for that last post I would.
Since I can't

And back to the topic (before I get a warn
)
If the ground forces identify a target as in this case three gentlemen digging a hole in the ground, who then are seen running into a home. It is logical for the ground troops to think twice before proceeding on foot to the target. If the thought is that the three men had beren planting a land mine or an IED then it is much safer for everyone to call in an airstrike to take out the possible insurgents. Do you realize the time it takes to creep forward when you have to inspect every single centimeter in front and around you for a possible bomb?
It would have taken days at least to have gone only a few feet. If these three men that were observed running into the house were indeed insurgents (as was collaborated by other sources). The time it would have taken the ground forces as well as the attention that the ground forces would have directed to the search would have made these guys perfect sitting ducks for any snipers.
Sorry, The deaths of the family is something that is extremely regrettable, but so would have been the deaths of the ground forces if there was a land mine / IED, or if there were snipers.



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 05:21 PM
link   


The deaths of the family is something that is extremely regrettable, but so would have been the deaths of the ground forces if there was a land mine / IED, or if there were snipers.


So your saying you would rather a Iraqi die then the troops, in which case, why do the ground forces have more right to live then the innocent Iraqi's. In the end its all down to the ability and training of the soldiers, which in this case is less then should be expected.



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by picklewalsh
Yeh i was out the office that day, but in all seriouseness it should now be left to the UN Peacekeepers, the coalition has done its job.

Why?
Is it the UN's job to clean up the mess of nations , some that dont like the UN?



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by picklewalsh
Yeh i was out the office that day, but in all seriouseness it should now be left to the UN Peacekeepers, the coalition has done its job.

Why?
Is it the UN's job to clean up the mess of nations , some that dont like the UN?


No but they would probably do a better job at it, not being fronted by a person who has stated that he is a war president, and that what he said he was put here for.



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 05:30 PM
link   


So your saying you would rather a Iraqi die then the troops, in which case, why do the ground forces have more right to live then the innocent Iraqi's. In the end its all down to the ability and training of the soldiers, which in this case is less then should be expected.


Nice twist on my words there


Let me break it down for you.
1) Three men are seen digging what may have been a landmine ? IED
2) They are observed running into the house upon the approach of the troops.
3) Intel from other sources including adrone indicated that there may have been insurgents.
Insurgents = enemy comatant
Enemy combatant is a target.
If 1+1+1=3 then why should the troops not take action. If they were to have attempt to come within firing range of the house and attempt to roust the occupants so as to positively identify them as civilians or enemy combatants (also I would like to remind you that according to the latest stats, most of the insurgents that are operating in Iraq are not Iraqi
) The troop would have had to move into a possible mine field. or within range of the IED.

Would I rather that an Iraqi died instead of the troops, no. In fact I would rather for our troops to die in protecting those civilians against the insurgents / enemy combatants. Better yet, no one die!

Again though, all information indicated that the house was occupied by insurgents and thus the house was a target.



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by picklewalsh
No but they would probably do a better job at it, not being fronted by a person who has stated that he is a war president, and that what he said he was put here for.

But the fact is ; we are the un! The US, the UK, france, china, etc we are all the UN!



posted on Jan, 6 2006 @ 07:14 PM
link   

If we had the support and cooperation of the Iraqi people....we certainly could win, and while not becoming monsters ourselves...


I think the majority of the country is cooperating with the US, it's the Sunnis, former Baath members and outsiders who are fueling the insurgency that attack Iraqi people and coalition forces.



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
1) Three men are seen digging what may have been a landmine ? IED
2) They are observed running into the house upon the approach of the troops.
3) Intel from other sources including adrone indicated that there may have been insurgents.

OK - let ME Break it down for You:

1) Three Men are seeing Digging by an UAV. Nobody said 110% that they were installing an IED or planting a Landmine. Therefore, that is a SUSPECION that these 3 People were Insurgents A.K.A. Terrorists. Maybe they were Construction workers - did the US Marines Core check with the local authorities if there is any Construction going on?

2) WRONG. The Report say, that the three men were tracked to a building, meaning that they did NOT Run away to the Building, but were only Tracked to it - that means that they Walked to the House. Again, what you said is a SUSPECION, that these 3 Men were actually Insurgents and not some Workers.

3) You have Said this Statement Correctly: MAY HAVE BEEN INSURGENTS. So, what do you do, in a may have been Scenario? Come on, you're an Ex Soldier - what would YOU do?

NONE of these 3 Points you made are not PROOF that these 3 Men were actually Insurgents, or as you prefer Terrorists. So, what gives the RIGHT to the US Military Forces to Label that house as an Insurgent Stronghold, where there are several Well Armed Enemy Combatants, ready to Engage the US Forces with all they got, including a planeted IED by the Road, so that they BETTER Armed Marines, have to call AIR SUPPORT to level this House and Eliminate the Problem by Eliminating the People? Isn't that the Stalinistic Way to solver Problem; No People, No Problem?



The troop would have had to move into a possible mine field. or within range of the IED.

There was NO Mention of an Minefield, and the IED is also only a Possibility that you would love it to be True.

This Event is a Perfect Example of the Ammount of Care to the local Iraqi Population, that the US Armed Forces have in this War. The Urban Warfare is no longer a House to House Combat, where the Infantry play a Leading Role. Problems are Solved via Command Screens, when the Marines use a Laser Deisgnator to Illuminate the Suspected Enemy Stronghold (in this case a Hose with 12 Family members, including 3 Women and 3 Boys younger then 10 in their Jammies) and call to their Air Support; probably a Marines F/A-18, with Laser Guided DU Bomb, who also only sees the Enemy as a little dot on his Head Up Display, and when the onboard Targetting computer says Fire, he presses the trigger and his Job is done. He never saw the Faces of his Target and he never will. And those Marines also.

That is the Video Game Approach to Solve this Problem.

America was engaged in an illusion that it was fighting, much as the mind engages with a video game, where the experience tricks the consciousness into believing it is an active participant in something that is not happening.

The US armed Forces did not want to Face the Real Problem of this Scenario and do some Face to Face combat with it - but instead they used what they know BEST: a Simulation, just like in the Computer Game.


That is, as Gazrok has said eariler, as if the LAPD dropped a Hand Granade through the Window of Suspected Criminals somewhere in downtown LA. How would that make you feel, as a Civilan living in Los Angeles?

Would you LIKE that Police?

[edit on 7/1/06 by Souljah]



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 06:55 AM
link   



No but they would probably do a better job at it, not being fronted by a person who has stated that he is a war president, and that what he said he was put here for.


You do remember Somalia dont you? The UN isnt all that popular and probobly not trained well enough to deal with Iraq.



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 07:38 AM
link   


1) Three Men are seeing Digging by an UAV. Nobody said 110% that they were installing an IED or planting a Landmine. Therefore, that is a SUSPECION that these 3 People were Insurgents A.K.A. Terrorists. Maybe they were Construction workers - did the US Marines Core check with the local authorities if there is any Construction going on?

From your source


A U.S. military statement said that an unmanned U.S. drone detected three men digging a hole in a road in the area. Insurgents regularly bury bombs along roads in the area to target U.S. or Iraqi convoys


Digging a hole in the road that insurgents regularly plant bombs. Ok no problem that is not suspicious. Nah, just because a person who has a gun that was used to kill another does not mean that they were the shooter.





2) WRONG. The Report say, that the three men were tracked to a building, meaning that they did NOT Run away to the Building, but were only Tracked to it - that means that they Walked to the House. Again, what you said is a SUSPECION, that these 3 Men were actually Insurgents and not some Workers.


again from your source:

U.S. forces had received the information leading to the attack from multiple sources, including existing intelligence and direct observation at the time of the strike, Johnson said in the e-mail.
snip
The three men were tracked to a building, which U.S. forces then hit with precision-guided munitions, the statement said.


You are correct I should not have used the word run. but let's look at something here. three men are digging in the road. a road that is regularly mined by insurgents. Not suspicious at all. No they were only there to make mud pies or some other innocent activity. Forget the intel that there are insurgents / fighters in the area. forget that the insurgents normally plant bombs in the road.... it's ok, no problem, US military ignore all that, it is safe.
I do notice though in the report that there are no mention of any men in the deaths caused by the airstrike. Only 2 women and three children are mentioned in the article. what were the other six bodies?
There is also a most notable lack of any attempts to either deny there were insurgents or even an attempt to prove that there were any. Vey suspicious here.



There was NO Mention of an Minefield, and the IED is also only a Possibility that you would love it to be True.

No, no mention of a mine field nor the planting of IED's just direct mentioning of the road being regularly used to plant bombs by the insurgents. If you want to get into semantecs no worries just let me know ahead of time.
To me this article by the Washington Post is more an attempt to disgrace the military and attack them. It is not an article which they are attempting to report the news.
Now, let's look at another report of this same incident. Oh by the way, the death toll from this incident is not 12 but 14


The US military confirmed it attacked a house in Baiji, 200 kilometres north of Baghdad, on Monday after an unmanned drone spotted three men planting a roadside bomb and then fleeing into the building. “The individuals were assessed as posing a threat to Iraqi civilians and coalition forces, and the location of the three men was relayed to close air support pilots,” said US military spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Barry Johnson. “Coalition forces employed precision guided munitions on the structure,” he said, reading from a statement.

Daily Times

Of course these insurgents do not use civilians nor civilian homes / buisnesses etc no matter what your source says





This Event is a Perfect Example of the Ammount of Care to the local Iraqi Population, that the US Armed Forces have in this War. The Urban Warfare is no longer a House to House Combat, where the Infantry play a Leading Role. Problems are Solved via Command Screens, when the Marines use a Laser Deisgnator to Illuminate the Suspected Enemy Stronghold (in this case a Hose with 12 Family members, including 3 Women and 3 Boys younger then 10 in their Jammies) and call to their Air Support; probably a Marines F/A-18, with Laser Guided DU Bomb, who also only sees the Enemy as a little dot on his Head Up Display, and when the onboard Targetting computer says Fire, he presses the trigger and his Job is done. He never saw the Faces of his Target and he never will. And those Marines also.

Read the quote from the Daily Times that I have above. Notice the mention that the three ment were determined to pose a danger to Iraqi civilians. That kind of blows your assertion out of the water there.




The US armed Forces did not want to Face the Real Problem of this Scenario and do some Face to Face combat with it - but instead they used what they know BEST: a Simulation, just like in the Computer Game.

No not quite, even you have denied this with your various threads /posts. You may play the video games, In the real world it is very very different. The ground forces did as they were ordered and trained to do. there was a real danger of a bomb having been planted in the road. these troops had no idea if there were more than one. there were no alternatives that they could have done that would not have taken days / weeks to do. Souljah, you yourself should be aware of how hard it is to locate landmines, or in this case a planted bomb, Slovenia still is discovering landmines etc that were left over from WW1 and 2. That is over 50 years.
Are you now suggesting that the troops should have waited over 50 years before proceeding ahead? Remember the intel indicated that these three men did not only pose a threat to the ground forces but also the Iraqi civilians.



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
Digging a hole in the road that insurgents regularly plant bombs. Ok no problem that is not suspicious. Nah, just because a person who has a gun that was used to kill another does not mean that they were the shooter.

OK, you have a Possible Bomb Planted, and you have 3 Suspects on the Run - what do you do?

Do you Inspect the Location of the Possible Bomb - or yet better, declare that spot Dangerous, stop traffic on that Street, use all the Technology that you have to ELIMINATE that thread, call the Engineers or something to remove it!

Or just Blow it up - that would also Help.

Anyway, in the meantime ofcourse go and Inspect those 3 Suspected Insurgents. If you think that the Land Approach is Dangerous due to the possible threat of Roadside bombs and maybe a Minefield - call the Air Delivery, call the Helicopters to send a team of special forces to drop in directly in the Possible Insurgent Hideout and do a House Search; check out who these men were. IF there is sign of Resistance, of Shooting, of Enemy Fire from that House, that is an Insurgent Stronghold then. And IF that Threat prooves to be extremly Hazardous to the Men, call in the Airsupport and eliminate that Threat.

But not drop a bomb on the house without any knowledge of the Residents of that house and what they are doing.

That is pure Ignorance of the Human Rights of the Civilan Iraqi Population.

That is Treating EVERY Iraqi a Suspected Terrorists, and he is Guilty until proven Otherwise.

And when they are Found Guilty, the Coalition forces employe precision guided munitions on the structure of the Suspected Terrorists.


Read the quote from the Daily Times that I have above. Notice the mention that the three ment were determined to pose a danger to Iraqi civilians. That kind of blows your assertion out of the water there.



No not quite, even you have denied this with your various threads /posts. You may play the video games, In the real world it is very very different. The ground forces did as they were ordered and trained to do. there was a real danger of a bomb having been planted in the road. these troops had no idea if there were more than one. there were no alternatives that they could have done that would not have taken days / weeks to do. Souljah, you yourself should be aware of how hard it is to locate landmines, or in this case a planted bomb, Slovenia still is discovering landmines etc that were left over from WW1 and 2. That is over 50 years.

Hey, I know that the Real World is VERY Different, but that is the Enire Problem of this Topic! US Armed Forces have gained a Very Important Technological Advantage with all the High Computer Military Technology, that is used in the Army today. Men and Women get turned into little Numbers and Signs on the Screen and people do not have the Feeling that they are Killing Somebody - they have a feeling of playing a Game, a Wargame - just like a Computer Simulation. US Air Forces pilots are Trained on Simulators, US Army tank drivers also - that is all a part of the Training to create a Killing Machine.

And the Accidents such as this one, that Happened can then be Blamed on this Piece of Military Hardware, for it was Likely a Faulty Machinery, an Error in the Program, a Glitch in the Unmmaned Aerial Vehicle.


Jen Baudrillard
The first Gulf War served as a crisis point, determining whether or not war was still possible in the post-industrial age. One could imagine, with relation to this claim, that the American soldier often fought solely within the system of military technology, to the degree that the war's "culture imprint" remains that of friendly fire created by faulty machinery, and a lack of actual face-to-face combat. The video screen-mediated concept of the precision strike became an advertisement for American technological dominance, which makes it possible to view the war as, in part, an advertisement for military hardware.

Imagine this same Scenario, happening in an American City.

Would the Police call the Air National Guard to drop a Laser Guided Bomb wit DU Ammunitions to eliminate the Suspects?



Are you now suggesting that the troops should have waited over 50 years before proceeding ahead? Remember the intel indicated that these three men did not only pose a threat to the ground forces but also the Iraqi civilians.

There are Ways of REMOVING a Potential Explosive Device.

Or is every Solution Bombing the Suspects that planted this Suspected Roadside Bomb

Notice, that the Article NEVER Mentioned that it was really a Bomb - so it mean it wasn't.



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 08:18 AM
link   
actually, they have done very similar acts in the US.
Remember Waco, Ruby Ridge, The Moony compound?



posted on Jan, 7 2006 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
actually, they have done very similar acts in the US.
Remember Waco, Ruby Ridge, The Moony compound?

You mean This Waco?


Many people believe that David Koresh (or the Branch Davidians) were responsible for the deaths of the 74 men, women and children who died in the inferno at Waco on April 19, 1993. This is the story that the FBI put out. It is a lie. The guns they had were legal. The local sheriff investigated and found no basis for complaints against them. These were law-abiding American citizens, even if they thought differently to most other folks. They trusted the U.S. Constitution to ensure their political rights, but they were murdered by agents acting under the authority of the U.S. government.

Few Americans realize that on February 28, 1993 when BATF agents in National Guard helicopters zoomed in on the Branch Davidians' church and home, Mount Carmel Center, they did so with guns blazing, like Americans raiding a Vietnamese village in that far off war. ... It is likely FBI agents deliberately sabotaged negotiations with Davidians to prevent their exiting Mount Carmel. Their goal was to destroy the building and its damaging evidence, even if that meant the massacre of dozens of men, women and children, all witnesses to the brutal attack.

You have NO Problem with that?

[edit on 7/1/06 by Souljah]







 
0
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join