It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Since World War II air power has been key to the American way of warfare--and civilian casualties have been a constant result, from Japan and Korea to Southeast Asia and now Afghanistan and Iraq. This year a seeming surge in airstrikes has led to a corresponding spike in civilian casualties. For example, in a two-day span in May, an airstrike in southern Afghanistan killed at least twenty-one civilians, while a US helicopter attack north of Baghdad killed five civilians, including two children. Yet very little is known about the air war. Due to an apparent disregard by the mainstream media, with a few notable exceptions, the full story remains one of the best-kept secrets of the Iraq War.
What we do know is that since the major combat phase of the war ended in April 2003, the United States has dropped at least 59,787 pounds of cluster bombs in Iraq--the very type of weapon that Marc Garlasco, the senior military analyst at Human Rights Watch (HRW), calls "the single greatest risk civilians face with regard to a current weapon that is in use." And expert opinion argues that rocket and cannon fire from US aircraft may account for most coalition-attributed Iraqi civilian deaths. The Pentagon has restocked hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of these weapons in recent years.
Article 48 of the Geneva Conventions clearly states: "The Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants." Article 50 dictates that "The presence within the civilian population of individuals who do not come within the definition of civilian does not deprive the population of its civilian character."
Originally posted by Desert Dawg
I wonder if some aspects of the speech were designed to elicit a response from terrorists who - while quite proud - remain hidden?
It could make it easier to find them since they would want to respond while the speech is still fresh in the mind of the pubic.
Israel left Lebanon in 2000, but the war continues.
Originally posted by Britguy
reply to post by Rasputin13
I see, when the US/UK/Israel murder civilians it's called colatteral damage, which is just dandy apparently and perfectly acceptable.
Let us also not forget such things as false flag operations, designed to point the finger of guilt at innocent parties. As for the marine barracks bombing in Beirut, that was a military target was it not? What is the difference then between that event and the US dropping tons of bombs on suspected enemies? Violent death is not pretty so what makes it ok to kill others but get all whiney when our side gets a bloody nose.
Do I believe my government when it says someone is a threat to me? Hell no! Why should I when they lie persistently and are responsible for so much death and suffering.
As for the terrorist sympathiser accusation, I have been called a lot worse over the years
Originally posted by danwild6
As far as the Continental Army using the same tactics as Hezbollah, I don't think so. The Americans fielded an army to fight the British in the field, after the British invaded, when the left the war ended. Israel left Lebanon in 2000, but the war continues.
Originally posted by xmotex
Q: when was the last time Hezbollah attacked a US target of any kind?
If you can find anything within the last decade, I'll give you a cookie