Missiles Strike Sadr City, Damaging Hospital

reply to post by West Coast

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

As you see it, I suppose. I'll accept the first half of that... not the second.

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.

Oh... I'm sorry... I thought we were talking about Americans bombing this hospital according to this article. Your comment has nothing to do with this incident.

Americas tactics are in direct response to the terrorists tactics.

Again, you are simply justifying the actions here.

Give me your address.

[edit on 5/4/2008 by RabbitChaser]

Originally posted by West Coast

The best defense against logic is ignorance.

Unfortunately, this pithy statement is only applicable to your perverse interpretation of right & wrong. I will not try to convert a man of pride, it is impossible. Carry on with your false-logic.

AAC

[edit on 4-5-2008 by AnAbsoluteCreation]

reply to post by WestPoint23


Your opinion is impaired by the constant brainwashing undergone by all or most military personnel, your philosophy is the cause of much bloodshed and death and pain and hatred in this world. I think you should do your very best to re-educate yourself as to what is wrong and what is right.

I imagine most of the insurgents are Iraqi, they have many reasons to rid their country of the butchering invaders. It would help a great deal if the US just got the hell out of there and mind their own business.




[edit on 4-5-2008 by willywagga]

[edit on 4-5-2008 by willywagga]

reply to post by RabbitChaser


So when they shoot at everyone from a mosque or any other place that you feel is loaded with innocent people we should just do nothing then?

Your logic is astoundingly Ignorant. How long has Sadr city been nothing but a stronghold for terrorist? Years, Their should be nothing in that town except the terrorist and their family's. Not one person in that town is innocent and thats what you do not understand.

reply to post by Sky watcher


Since you won't respond to my statements anymore, i will respond to yours aimed at other people.

If you seriously believe that everyone in a whole town is guilty? You are merely revealing the size of your heart.

Why don't you answer me these three questions, and I'll leave you alone.

1). Why are there terrorists?

2). Why did we call Bin Liden a freedom fighter in the 80's when we bankrolled their terror attacks against the occupying Soviets, yet now that we are the occupiers, he is a terrorist?

3). Would you not assume that our actions against these "entire towns" as you claim, are creating more freedom fighters/terrorists?

I believe a good discussion could manifest from these questions & answers.

AAC






[edit on 4-5-2008 by AnAbsoluteCreation]

The rhetoric of oh, the insurgency is hiding behind innocent civilians is getting so old that it doesn't make sense anymore.

But then again nothing makes any sense anymore when it comes to Bushes war.

Let's wave the American flag.

Here's some good current info that I believe is true:

Night Watch: rfn=SADR CITY - Baghdad and Sadr City have experienced their heaviest fighting in a month, since the latest wave of war began when Teheran had Iraq Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki begin the Iraq Army offensive in Basra. That offensive in late March was made without consultation from Washington but al-Maliki realizes his security is more guaranteed through Teheran and now, with Iran’s preparations over, it is time for (f)allout war to begin and the removal of Western military forces and bases in the region. Swissinfo/Reuters report Shia militias, ignoring Muqtada al-Sadr’s Friday call for calm, used another sand storm as cover to launch a large attack on a U. S.-Iraq Army checkpoint in Sadr City. At the same time there were multiple rocket attacks on the International Green Zone where foreign embassies and government buildings are based. Though Muqtada al-Sadr is head of the Mahdi Army it is an extension of Iran’s military, like Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, and it is quite possible Teheran is having him issue calls for calm just to portray him as a responsible leader and a force for stability as a way of preparing for his role in post-war Iraq.

al-Sadr is fully aware Teheran is having the war intensify as Wahington has its United Nations Ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, accuse Iran in front of the Security Council, “The recent clashes between armed militias elements and Iraqi government forces in Basra and Baghdad have highlighted Iran’s destabilizing influence and actions.” It is an action that is going to increase as M-1 Abrams tanks had to be called in to fight off the attack. The reason U. S. forces are so heavily engaged is indicated by the admission of Iraq Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih that the “militias have infiltrated the state, the society.” More and more I am seeing reports of only U. S. forces involved in the fighting and fewer reports of Iraq Army units in action which is excactly what Teheran wants.

MODERATOR-NOTE: I put your external source post into EX-quote tags. Please be sure to use them the next time you take text from another source. Thanks.




[edit on 4-5-2008 by Skyfloating]

Its not easy fighting insurgents in urban areas, which insurgents know America's strategy dealing with civilian population. However I believe that if you kill enough civilians along with the insurgents, then perhaps the insurgents would give up hiding behind civilians in belief Americans will not do such a thing. Thats my view. If I was an insurgent, I don't expect to hide behind women and children anymore if Americans are willing to kill civilians to get to me.

reply to post by deltaboy


So that I know what you're implying, kill more civilians, to get the insurgents to cease from using them as shields?

AAC

reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation


Exactly AAC. Imagine how easy it would be if the insurgents got an official uniform.

Originally posted by AnAbsoluteCreation
reply to post by Sky watcher

 

Why don't you answer me these three questions, and I'll leave you alone.

1). Why are there terrorists?

2). Why did we call Bin Liden a freedom fighter in the 80's when we bankrolled their terror attacks against the occupying Soviets, yet now that we are the occupiers, he is a terrorist?

3). Would you not assume that our actions against these "entire towns" as you claim, are creating more freedom fighters/terrorists?

I believe a good discussion could manifest from these questions & answers.

AAC






[edit on 4-5-2008 by AnAbsoluteCreation]

1. Because the anti-Christ needs them to attack people and start WW III.

2. Because we wanted to remove the Soviets from there and get some payback for Vietnam. I don't think OBL gave the order for 9/11 and that is almost becoming a widely known fact in the Arab world. His radical goon squad dis-Obed him. The evil #2.

3. Thats just it, They are not just Locals who want us out. Some maybe low on the food chain but the leaders are playing their hearts and minds. They are Iranian stooges who want Iran to move in.

Our troops have big hearts and most have kids of their own. The last thing they want is to hurt innocents. Hell they give wounded terrorist medical care and that should show everyone how we fight. We go out of our way to not damage vital buildings like this.

This town and a few like it are infested with terrorist who bully and kill anyone who gets in their way. We have been way to nice in dealing with Sadr and it has come back to bite us. We can only take so much and we will have another Fallujah type action to wipe them out for good.

I for one don't support this nation building crap. Our troops are built to destroy army's. Once that is done and the enemies have no army left we should leave because it will be along time before they ever bother us again. If they build a terrorist camp, Blow it to kingdom come or send in special ops and kill them that way.

Originally posted by West Coast
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."

you are so right ...some people on here who sit in comfy chairs in warm cosy houses dont understand that terrorist will use anything and anyone to complete there objectives,,,as we have seen time after time that the insurgents dont care how many civilians die when they are on attacking the enemie or hiding from them.....

Well no to worry, at the pace Bushes war is going, very soon is not going to be any more Innocent civilians to hide behind.

reply to post by fatdad


Yes and neither the liberators when they kill anybody in their way trying to get to the evil insurgents.

You know the sword have two edges and both are as lethal.

im sorry but America is trying to destroy the infrastructure. the terroists and any one else that just happens to be around. because in their book if you have a scalf on your head your a terrorist... maby you have a rare skin condition, sunburn... who knows.. lol

one only need to take a look at backwater vids on you tube to see the extent of this.

whole sniper teams shooting anything that moves..... that means kids women old people anything. now thats just sick.

now obviously there are some real insurgents but im sure there are better ways to deal with the issue. because all this extra violence and depravity will just create more.


lets do some simple maths

(www.iraqbodycount.org...) Documented civilian deaths from violence

83,336 – 90,897 (only recorded mind you probably nearly double if not more)


so lets imagine say 90,000 dead now lets think say half of them had family's (1 members) and their is a 1 percent chance of these family members doing something about it

that breaks down to 90,000 / 2 = 45,000

1 % = 4,500 more insurgents...... now this model is probably a bit low...... im assuming only half the people in iraq have family's and they only have one family member!!!!!!!!

now lets think about real Iraq... larger family's and much more factors like friends nebour's dying...... if even every death caused a 0.1 percent chance of new insurgent you would still be looking at an sizable amount of 450 ....



do you see where im going...... violence solves nothing it just creates more....

in real terms the out come of the equation would probably be much nearer 10% not 0.01 resulting in a lot of new recruits fulling the war witch is slowly destroying the infrastructure of the country.


and to the die hard American military fans out there.... 2 words sock and awe
the weeks around this and the event the kill rate 9recorded once again was nearly 2,500 a week. this is mental and there was no aiming they blitzed the city.. and this has just continued just on a smaller scale.

Originally posted by jericanman
im sorry but America is trying to destroy the infrastructure.

My thoughts exactly. The aim is simple. Destroy Iraq thereby creating a permanent need to 'stay'. As Cheney says... we don't leave until the job is done. The idea is, the 'job' will never be done. 5 years and counting folks.

Originally posted by jericanman
whole sniper teams shooting anything that moves..... that means kids women old people anything. now thats just sick.

I've seen it too. The leniency of the military tribunals is a joke, too.

Originally posted by jericanman
im sorry but America is trying to destroy the infrastructure.

Trying to destroy? Gee man that hospital was freaking hard to hit eh? Its hard to destroy anything in Iraq now, hence the need for more precision bombs. Carpet bombing would have done a better job than precision.

Originally posted by jericanman


do you see where im going...... violence solves nothing it just creates more....

The Japanese probably disagree with you. I don't see any kamikazes after the atomic bombings. You think they be pissed off after that?

Originally posted by WestPoint23
You're displaying a dangerous level of naiveté there, consider the source, situation and outcome.

It is not naive to know the military has a history of hitting 'wrong' targets. I've heard the excuses. It was the equipment's fault, yeah. Just because one day they tell us it was the 'right' target afterall, that does not mean we should heave a sigh of relief. That's naiveté.

The source? Residents of Sady City? We should disbelieve them over the military automatically? Talk about dangerous!

The situation? Military bombs civilian buildings?

The outcome? An entire fleet of ambulances wiped out, a mosque and residential building flattened? 10 year old boys with critical injuries?

It is your naive optimism and gung-ho military lustre I do not share. This is a honorless war against civilians, no matter how you want to spin it.

Thanks for the post.

reply to post by SteveR


Tell the insurgents to meet the military in the desert and let civilians out of the way. O yeah that ain't gonna happen.