If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
US Army at it again
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
US Solidiers kill 6 children in Afghanistan
Does the American Miliatary not have reliable intelligence? How many civilians are going to be killed in this 'War on Terror':rolleyes: That moron Bush, cant even wait until his wars are finished before he starts a new one to 'liberate' countries.
Makes me sick.
Does the American Miliatary not have reliable intelligence? How many civilians are going to be killed in this 'War on Terror':rolleyes: That moron Bush, cant even wait until his wars are finished before he starts a new one to 'liberate' countries.
Makes me sick.
0
Comments
With the earlier incident, they basically followed this "terrorist" into a house. Despite being a group of children playing next to the house they bombed it to fuck.
In the aftermath I saw a US army spokesman speaking of the operation. He said that the militant had seen running into a house and hiding. Upon which US helicopter gunships/aircraft proceeded to neutralise him. The result of the operation was that the target had been killed, as well as 8 others who unfortunately happened to be innocent children.
Beautiful.
I assume this is to minimise casualties which is fair enough but this has to be weighed against the increased risk to civillians etc.
It seems that the US military does not put that much emphsais on the lives of civillians..........
Double standards and spin are such wonderful tools, wouldn't you agree?
Not very brave, and certainly not good for the general health of the local population...
Of course, also attempt to exercise democratic freedom and self determination by calling for a referendum on independence from a well documented human rights abusing anti-democrat nation (ala Taiwan - China) without the Bush admin's approval and all rhetoric from these magnanimous "freedom loving" champions of liberty transforms into dire warnings against as they and the PRC reps shake hands around the table.
The reason why 400 of their soldiers have died, compared to about 15 of ours is because they don't know how to treat civilians. They think placating them is a sign of weakness, even though we can't win the war without the consent of the population.
If the Iraqis wanted to now they could easily overwhlem the American forces, we've all seen before how American soldiers shit themselves when they're being shot at from buildings.
Give them a field to run around in and they're fine, give them something more challenging and they go beserk killing everything BUT the people shooting at them.:rolleyes:
i'd use that word VERY losely mate.
Perhaps because you bombed it from the air?
The Americans might be good at killing but are indeed shite at building relations or treating the locals with the respect they deserve.
But if you think the Americans have been bad until now, wait for this:
US adopts Israeli army tactics on the Iraqis
Who, they? I hear you scream... Yep. Obviously the Americans regard the Israeli occupation of Palestine as a success (in which respect I'm not sure) so they have started to cut off and barb wire entire towns. I'm sure the Iraqis will show their eternal gratitude to their "liberators" for it. Another piece on the issue.
"Best" of all is the profound understanding and diplomacy the US army is graced with. Look what a US Army officer in charge of the operations had to say:
Bunch of racist c unts! And they wonder why the Iraqis are not showing their gratitude towards their "saviours"
:mad:
Just a thought, looking at a bigger picture, but if this man was indeed a terrorist how many lives would have been lost had he been able to continue?
Or shouldn't we be considering that?
Perhaps if we did closer raids, actualy using troops on the ground in snatch squads then there wouldnt be as many little chilrens bodies to put on the news.
I suspect there is also an obligation under several conventions to respect civilian lives whenever possible- although since the US has spat on the Geneva accords repeatedly in the last 2 years I don't expect them to pay much attention to rules or legality anymore.
But for their own sake, if they want to earn the respect of the locals (many of which are fighting them not because they are Taleban/Saddam supporters, but because they see them as a hostile, unwelcome invaders) they should at least abandon their gun-ho attitude, put more soldiers on the ground when conducting such operations and try not to blow up villages from the air and to hell with who might be playing nearby.
And how many think again because of what happened to the terrorist?
Tougher than you think to "snatch" someone...
It would make little odds to me if one "terrorist" was killed, what would matter to me would be the death of my child at the hands of the foreign troops.
Don't get me wrong, I have no doubt that such incident give a greater ifluence for someone to "join-up". However, the goal is to eradicate terrorism and this cannot be achieved through negotiation alone and force maybe necessary.
When force is necessary then incidents like this will happen.
Mainly from those on the outside, who let's be honest, don't actually understand and aren't informed enough to make the tough decisions.
It's easy for us to sit outside of the loop and criticise, but when you know the full facts things may appear to be more appropriate that first thought.
No, the truth of the matter doesn't reside with our leaders. They are if anything the ones proving systematically the very folly that they were warned against by the many who stood opposed to their outright militarism from the start.
Of course, you can choose to believe proven liars rather than the rest of us "conspiracy nuts" if it helps you sleep at night. For my part I consider the opposition's stance to have been long vindicated and more so with each passing day.
It could be that the man would have killed all of those children himself, as hostages. It could be that the US knew that he was planning a kill even more, and this was their only chance to stop him...
There is so much about this case that neither I nor you will ever know.
Of course, you may find a tenous link which says that Bush personally agree to this "Hit" because he didn't like the children's parents but personally I would rather accept that there are somethings which I will never know, and sometimes I would rather never know.
Misinformed and uninformed objection is just as bad as what the US may be doing. Hell look at the actions of the OSS etc during WW2. Some of those things were extremely unpalatable and if we'd known about them then you can be pretty sure that some people would have objected strongly.
you do know i was being sarcastic in the use of that word right?
From that one certain conclusion can be reached: The US did not give a flying toss about so-called collateral damaged and destroyed the house without any regard for who else might be killed in the process.
That is simply unacceptable.
I can reach one other conclusion: if the US surveillance team could see the man running and hiding into a house, they must have also seen the group of children playing next to it. Whether they decided that killing 8 children was a small price to pay or that their bombs would be able to destroy the house while leaving the children uninjured remains to be seen. But either scenario is, again, completely unacceptable.
If some or all of my boys had been killed by a foreign army that clearly doesn't give a fuck about the locals you can bet your arse I'd be taking up arms the second my kids are buried and would make my mission in life to kill as many soldiers as possible. Even if I had been glad to see the Taleban go.
Now, as to the issue above, I don't claim to have every shred or detail available from our various agencies according to which decisions are supposedly made.
Nevertheless, bear in mind the facts of the matter in terms of the BIG picture. From the start these invasions and their repercussions have been justified on shaky assertions which systematically have been scrutinised and debunked by many of us out there "on the sidelines" as you would wish to put it.
With each revelation, the administrations on both sides of the Atlantic have danced and spun their reversals and retractions or denials. To wit they demonstrate, by any standard of legitimacy, an all too significant reliance upon an apriori "ideology" and pre-planned agenda to which they have desperately tried to make the "data" conform.
This, backed with such misinformation and outright historical decontextualisation as could be mustered by their corporate media cronies, should leave those with any sense in serious doubt of any further claims eminating from "insiders" (especially Pentagon spokesmen).
Now, you of course may believe what you will as I conceded many times over to you. I, on the other hand see contrivance afoot not only in this instance (i.e. tell the world we were chasing a "terrorist") but in numerous others such as the Turkish bombings which resound with a signature (in principle if not in deed) seen repeatedly in the history of my government's machinations around the globe.
Plausible deniability is ever the shroud in which they cloak themselves and their wrongful acts (easier to scream conspiracy theory at any who take them to task), whilst convincing many like yourself that those they choose to target should be rightfully attacked for similar wrongdoing. Ah the double standard lives on and on and on.
Which is the point I was trying to make. You do not have the full information and so your conclusion could be seriously flawed. There is a reason that you don't know everything, and that is operational security.
You can be damned sure that no government is going to compromise that just to avoid a backlash on a single incident. Especially when that backlash is coming from people who didn't support them in the first place.
Like it or not, there is a bigger issue than the deaths of eight children. Am I happy that they died - no, but does that mean that I am going to condemn the people who were there - no.
Given the apparently crap success rate at killing them from the air with planes and heicopters it is probably relatively likely to succeed........
Just goes to show what mindset our finest Pentagon training produces.
What can you say to that? Could that be an isolated incident, or do we think a majority of US soldiers would cheer as well? Because I find it increasingly difficult to find any sympathy whatsoever for what appears to be a force composed in its majority of murdering, racist scumbags.
Is anyone at all surprised that the US soldiers are not welcome or idolised? Frankly I just want to shout 'Vive la Resistance' to the top of my voice.
What chances are of the shooter and his friends being tried for war crimes? :rolleyes: Fucking murdering scum. :mad:
But no doubt certain people will somehow find justification for cold-blooded murder. So much for fucking 'honour'.
I'm sick to my stomach.
Aladdin: "Don't confuse me with the truth! I have my five second sound-bite to justify my delusional prejudices!"
Non-uniformed combatant aka terrorist, armed and engaged in the act of placing an explosive devise, is apprehended. Short battle ensues... Non-uniformed combatant is terminated.
Terminated according to international law.
And those who would have been his target, survive the moment and cheer? Exactly what the bloody fuck would YOU do, if the one who had planned on murdering YOU, had been terminated, instead?
That Aladdin is "sickened" by the termination of a terrorist? Surprises me not the least. I consider the source.
Of course you didnt bother to post those items. How typical.
Moral of the attitude you regularly display is, don't dare fight back against our foreign aggression or that will make you a terrorist!
Hope you remember to teach your children and grandchildren that in preparation for day when it's our turn to be invaded by the next world power that arises. Wouldn't want them thinking they had a duty to fight back to protect their nation or anything.
Get our boys out of Iraq and there wont be any need to try justifying murder on such flimsy pretexts in the first place.