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.

 

Massive civilian slaughter by US Marines in Falluja

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:20 AM
link   
According to international humanitarian organizations, US Marines are not fit for modern warfare, because they kill indiscrinately. Here's the proof :

800 Civilians Feared Dead in Fallujah

Dahr Jamail, Electronic Iraq, 16 November 2004

BAGHDAD, Nov 16 (IPS) - At least 800 civilians have been killed during the U.S. military siege of Fallujah, a Red Cross official estimates.

Speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of U.S. military reprisal, a high- ranking official with the Red Cross in Baghdad told IPS that "at least 800 civilians" have been killed in Fallujah so far.

His estimate is based on reports from Red Crescent aid workers stationed around the embattled city, from residents within the city and from refugees, he said.

"Several of our Red Cross workers have just returned from Fallujah since the Americans won't let them into the city," he said. "And they said the people they are tending to in the refugee camps set up in the desert outside the city are telling horrible stories of suffering and death inside Fallujah."

electroniciraq.net...

[edit on 17-11-2004 by Mokuhadzushi]




posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:32 AM
link   
They were told for days and days to get out if you will recall.

While I despise collateral damage...these people basically CHOSE it...for themselves, and unfortunately, for their children who had no say in the matter.

You can't expect to conduct urban warfare without civilian casualties. We did everything we could do to minimize this...more than any other power in history. If they chose to ignore the warnings....well, there you go.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:43 AM
link   
Yeah, there was nothing sudden about our attack. Granted, maybe a lot of people had no where to go, but if they are such a tight-knit group of people, why didn't they travel to Mosul with the rest who fled? In my eyes, they stayed for a reason.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
They were told for days and days to get out if you will recall.

While I despise collateral damage...these people basically CHOSE it...for themselves, and unfortunately, for their children who had no say in the matter.

You can't expect to conduct urban warfare without civilian casualties. We did everything we could do to minimize this...more than any other power in history. If they chose to ignore the warnings....well, there you go.


"The official estimated that at least 50,000 residents remain trapped within the city. They were too poor to leave, lacked friends or family outside the city and therefore had nowhere to go, or they simply had not had enough time to escape before the siege began, he said."

Yes. because they were going to go...where? Oh yes, to a packed refugee camp out in the desert! Damn, that's safe. And I suppose they should leave behind wounded family and friends from previous American bombings, right? Oh yeah! They can't even carry weapons to defend themselves with on the way out, or they'll be shot. That must sure seem appealing, over hunkering down in your basement where there's at least a possibility of survival.

DE

[edit on 17-11-2004 by DeusEx]



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx

Originally posted by Gazrok
They were told for days and days to get out if you will recall.

While I despise collateral damage...these people basically CHOSE it...for themselves, and unfortunately, for their children who had no say in the matter.

You can't expect to conduct urban warfare without civilian casualties. We did everything we could do to minimize this...more than any other power in history. If they chose to ignore the warnings....well, there you go.


"The official estimated that at least 50,000 residents remain trapped within the city. They were too poor to leave, lacked friends or family outside the city and therefore had nowhere to go, or they simply had not had enough time to escape before the siege began, he said."

Yes. because they were going to go...where? Oh yes, to a packed refugee camp out in the desert! Damn, that's safe. And I suppose they should leave behind wounded family and friends from previous American bombings, right? Oh yeah! They can't even carry weapons to defend themselves with on the way out, or they'll be shot. That must sure seem appealing, over hunkering down in your basement where there's at least a possibility of survival.

DE

[edit on 17-11-2004 by DeusEx]



So, you're saying if you had a choice of getting away from the fighting or staying, that you would stay? If I had the option of a camp, I would take it. It's probably not the best situation, but it's better than being in the middle of it all.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:49 AM
link   
If you read and research a little more carefully, you will find many of these "civilians" we executed by the terrorists. Same game new day, lie, murder, whatever it takes to provide "Allah" with more blood.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:50 AM
link   
Males aged 15-55 weren't allowed to leave the city, as they were considered enemy fighters.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:51 AM
link   
They could have left at anytime.

We are fighting an enemy without a uniform people. Don't blame the U.S. for this, if these "terrorists" could think in a resonable manner, things like this would not happen.

Shoot, Move, Communicate.

Don't screw up the process.

I know that if there was an army outside my city that was planning an assualt, and was encouring me to get out of harm's way, I would.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
They were told for days and days to get out if you will recall.


My exact thought. If you are standing in the middle of a five lane interstate, what do you expect is going to happen to you?



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by SupaFly
So, you're saying if you had a choice of getting away from the fighting or staying, that you would stay? If I had the option of a camp, I would take it. It's probably not the best situation, but it's better than being in the middle of it all.


Well, let's put this into persepctive:

1. You attempt to escape the city, armed. The US catches you and shoots you on sight. Game over.

2. You attempt to escape unarmed. The US, terrorists, or bandits catches you, and shoots you on sight. Game over.

3. You stay in your house, and hope it doesn't get carpet bombed.


Now, think about those choices, except you have a family to think about.

DE



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:55 AM
link   
U.S. Troops Force Men Trying to Flee Assault on Fallujah to Return to City

abcnews.go.com...



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Regardless, the citizens and the government of the city harbored and aided the insurgents.

A choice they made.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by crisko
Regardless, the citizens and the government of the city harbored and aided the insurgents.

A choice they made.


Yes, because it's not like the citizens have families, and the insurgents weren't armed...

Iraqi civillian doesn't neccesarily mean Iraqi insurgent....unless you keep pushing them.

DE



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 09:00 AM
link   
They were warned. Leaflets were dropped and enough time was given. Even if you had no where to go, the leaflets told you we were coming and they have seen since the first Gulf War what we will do.
Our munitions they have seen before, even on Iraqui TV. They know we mean business.
If I were an invalid and received one of the leaflets, I would crawl from my bed and get out.
As to the Marine that shot the so-called "un-armed, wounded insurgent"....I don't trust anyone in a "War Zone".



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mokuhadzushi
800 civilians have been killed during the U.S. military siege of Fallujah ...His estimate is based on reports from Red Crescent ..


BS.

The Red Crescent has it's own agenda.

The insurgants wear civilian clothing ...
IF there are 800 dead people (and I stress IF)
in civilian clothing .. they are insurgants who
deserved to die.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
The insurgants wear civilian clothing ...
IF there are 800 dead people (and I stress IF)
in civilian clothing .. they are insurgants who
deserved to die.


Since you know... of course civillians don't wear civvies. they wear bright green jackets with the word "NONCOMBATANT" stenciled on the back in red.

DE



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 09:04 AM
link   
They could have voiced objection and requested aid at anytime.

Does this mean they are just cowards? Who knows.



[edit on 17-11-2004 by crisko]



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mokuhadzushi
Males aged 15-55 weren't allowed to leave the city, as they were considered enemy fighters.


They WERE enemy fighters.
The whole city was full of them.
They were either fighters or they
assisted the fighters.

It's impossible that every male between 15-55 was
forced to stay in the city. If they were, there
would be a lot more dead people than just 800.
It is a large city.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 09:07 AM
link   
FlyersFan,

Exactly...As far as I am concerned, anyone left there after the leaflets were dropped are insurgents. The peaceful population should have left, by whatever means possible. And I believe they did. Anyone left are open targets.



posted on Nov, 17 2004 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Even if this were true, this indicates a casulty rate of less than 2%



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join