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.
(visit the link for the full news article)
"By the launch of the surge, many of the targets of conflict had either been killed or fled the country, and they turned off the lights when they left," geography professor John Agnew of the University of California Los Angeles, who led the study, said in a statement.
"Essentially, our interpretation is that violence has declined in Baghdad because of intercommunal violence that reached a climax as the surge was beginning," said Agnew, who studies ethnic conflict.
Originally posted by matttheratt
reply to post by bruxfain
I don't think anyone ever blamed the US MILITARY for the sectarian violence (except perhaps a few wackos). They did blame the The US for invading Iraq in the first place and creating the conditions that lead to the sectarian violence. But I frankly never heard anyone say the military caused that violence. It was the policy of unprovoked pre-emptive war that caused it. The US Military did not create that policy.
[edit on 19-9-2008 by matttheratt]
Originally posted by bruxfain
Oh glad to here that but I recall hearing accusations regarding the Army killing innocent civilians in Iraq and since most of the innocent civilians died between 20 March 2006 and 16 December 2007, I just assumed that's what they were talking about. I should get my hearing checked.
Originally posted by bruxfain
I'm sure that they'll happily accept the accusation that they started the war and sent their leader to the gallows and killed his sons and grandson. Considering who they were they won't feel much guilt about that. I too can live with that, just not the innocent civilians part.
Originally posted by matttheratt
Originally posted by bruxfain
Oh glad to here that but I recall hearing accusations regarding the Army killing innocent civilians in Iraq and since most of the innocent civilians died between 20 March 2006 and 16 December 2007, I just assumed that's what they were talking about. I should get my hearing checked.
I utterly don't know what you're talking about. Could you be more specific? WHO said WHAT in this time? Did someone accuse the US Army of ethnic cleansing?
Originally posted by bruxfain
I'm sure that they'll happily accept the accusation that they started the war and sent their leader to the gallows and killed his sons and grandson. Considering who they were they won't feel much guilt about that. I too can live with that, just not the innocent civilians part.
Again, does not compute. Maybe for you, but not for me. By all means, elaborate.
Originally posted by bruxfain
The accusations I am refering may just be coming from unofficial sources on this website that generally like to allege that the US army is systematicaly killing innocent civilians in Iraq. I cannot remember the exact threads, but this study seems to suggest the military is not as much responsible for the deaths of civilians in Iraq as Iraqi themselves.
Originally posted by bruxfain
Answer #2: During the buildup to the War opinion polls reported that 7 out of 10 Americans supported the Iraq invasion. The army went in with permission, blessing even, killed Saddam's sons and his grandson, captured Saddam and sent him to the gallows for his crimes. That is no big deal to me, as the Hussein men had it coming. But I don't like hearing wild accusation that the Army turned its weapons against Iraqi civilians.