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.

 

Missiles Strike Sadr City, Damaging Hospital

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2008 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Missiles Strike Sadr City, Damaging Hospital


www.nytimes.com

After a night of clashes in the neighborhood, the Americans fired at least three "precision-guided munitions" at the small building next door to the hospital. Neighbors said the building was used as a place of prayer for pilgrims, hospital employees and neighborhood residents, but the military identified it as a command center for the Shiite militias that it is battling.

Haider Abbas, 10, was brought to the hospital with what appeared to be a gaping hole in his back and shrapnel injuries.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
afp.google.com




posted on May, 3 2008 @ 09:02 PM
link   
The so called "collateral damage" in Iraq is becoming extreme. How long will this war of attrition last?

What this article does not mention is that an entire fleet of ambulances was destroyed by the munitions. It almost seems as if the military is dead set on destroying this country.

www.nytimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 3 2008 @ 09:21 PM
link   
HMM, I wonder why terrorist were out hiding near a hospital? Could it be because they were using innocent iraqis as human shields?



posted on May, 3 2008 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by West Coast
HMM, I wonder why terrorist were out hiding near a hospital?


To generate headlines and shape opinions (when and if it was taken out) such as the one displayed by the OP. Mission accomplished, those weapons are very precise but also very powerful; there will be damage to the hospital and nearby automobiles/people when the enemy building is destroyed.



posted on May, 3 2008 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by West Coast
HMM, I wonder why terrorist were out hiding near a hospital?


To generate headlines and shape opinions (when and if it was taken out) such as the one displayed by the OP. Mission accomplished, those weapons are very precise but also very powerful; there will be damage to the hospital and nearby automobiles/people when the enemy building is destroyed.


No need to explain that to me, I agree with everything you said. Well put.



posted on May, 3 2008 @ 11:26 PM
link   
reply to post by West Coast
 


I knew that your question was somewhat rhetorical I'm just trying to clarify it.



posted on May, 3 2008 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by West Coast
HMM, I wonder why terrorist were out hiding near a hospital? Could it be because they were using innocent iraqis as human shields?


You're most likely correct. Sooo... killing innocent civilians is justified because your enemy is using them as a shield? Killing and injuring dozens of civilians is justified by killing 3 or 4 "criminals" in the attack?

Hey, West Coast... let me know where you live, exactly... if anyone is ever after me with heavy artillary, I'll be sure to come to your place in an attempt to use you and your neighbors as a shield. It's obvious you would see nothing wrong with it when you get blown to hell right along with me.



posted on May, 3 2008 @ 11:40 PM
link   
I am pretty sure that if there was a hostage situation in NY the police are not going to send in their missiles. Why should the army not treat the hospital the same way? Then they wonder why Iraqi's are revolting against the American army.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Equinox99
 


Seeing as how a Military and combat point of view will not suffice in this case, I'll use common sense instead.

Your logic is flawed. You are advocating allowing criminal perpetrators free reign and a continuation of mass murder, chaos and problems, since there is a likelihood of minimal unintended casualties in the event of an attack? That's logically absurd, and even more morally repulsive than striving to achieve minimal risk to others while eliminating the criminals.

[edit on 4-5-2008 by WestPoint23]



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 12:23 AM
link   
reply to post by WestPoint23
 


The only mass-murder, chaos and problems are the ones caused by indiscriminate smart bombing.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by RabbitChaser
 


I am blaming the insurgents for their tactics. They most likely had their safe house near a hospital because they were banking on the Americans to steer clear of collateral damage. Thus the term "human shield."



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
reply to post by Equinox99
 


Seeing as how a Military and combat point of view will not suffice in this case, I'll use common sense instead.

Your logic is flawed. You are advocating allowing criminal perpetrators free reign and a continuation of mass murder, chaos and problems, since there is a likelihood of minimal unintended casualties in the event of an attack? That's logically absurd, and even more morally repulsive than striving to achieve minimal risk to others while eliminating the criminals.

[edit on 4-5-2008 by WestPoint23]


So instead of the great American army storming the building or using all the gadgets that they spend your tax dollars on...they shoot aimlessly into an area? I hope you don't want to be treated like that if another country ever invaded yours.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
The only mass-murder, chaos and problems are the ones caused by indiscriminate smart bombing.


I'm sorry but incoherent and illogical smug comments are not going to gain you any credibility or ground on this topic. Please be more clear on what you mean.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 12:34 AM
link   
From my opening post:

Neighbors said the building was used as a place of prayer for pilgrims, hospital employees and neighborhood residents, but the military identified it as a command center for the Shiite militias that it is battling.

Notice the contradiction there? Seems we hit the wrong target.. again.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by West Coast
 


They know full well by now that Americans will NOT shy away due to possible "collateral damage" -- yes, you can blame them for their tactics, but it is, ultimately, U.S. who are doing the actual killing of the civilians; not the "insurgents." I see you don't question Americas "tactics" here... why is that?



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 12:47 AM
link   
I just switched comps again, and cannot open this video at present, could someone tell me if this is relevent to this discussion? I brought the video over and found this thread and figured it may be appropriate.

www.reuters.com...



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
Notice the contradiction there? Seems we hit the wrong target.. again.


You're displaying a dangerous level of naiveté there, consider the source, situation and outcome. Don't let bias could your judgment, logic and reasoning.



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by West Coast
 


This is the most conveniently used, yet categorically absurd points of view I stumble across. Breaking News, 100 civilians killed. "It's those terrorist using civilian shields again." Come on! Stop firing shots into crowds of civilians and we won't have this problem.

AAC



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by RabbitChaser
They know full well by now that Americans will NOT shy away due to possible "collateral damage"


This has not stopped anything, as the terrorist get a good PR campaign out of this.

America is damned if they do, and damned if they don't.


yes, you can blame them for their tactics, but it is, ultimately, U.S. who are doing the actual killing of the civilians; not the "insurgents."


I guess you haven't heard about those nasty suicide bombings taking place in open markets, weddings, funerals, etc. Oh, but that would'nt suit your maligned argument.


I see you don't question Americas "tactics" here... why is that?

As the battlefield changes, so do the tactics.

Americas tactics are in direct response to the terrorists tactics.

[edit on 4-5-2008 by West Coast]



posted on May, 4 2008 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation


This is the most conveniently used, yet categorically absurd points of view I stumble across. Breaking News, 100 civilians killed. "It's those terrorist using civilian shields again." Come on! Stop firing shots into crowds of civilians and we won't have this problem.
AAC


The best defense against logic is ignorance.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join