14 Sep 04
2 edits
"The helicopter fired on the Bradley to destroy it after it had been hit earlier and it was on fire", said Major Phil Smith of the 1st Cavalry Division. "It was for the safety of the people around it."
So -in the interests of safety - a helicopter bombs and machine guns a crowd of civilians. killing 12 and injuring 61. The dead included children and a journalist.
Reminds me of the Vietnam war quote "We had to destroy the vilage to save it."
Source: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=561021
14 Sep 04
Originally posted by DreamlaXI reckon soldiers are taught:
What on earth are these people taught when they join the army?
"We are the military. We are right. God is on our side and we don't want any homosexuals watering down our high moral standards."
and:
"Let's go kill us some more babies and women."
14 Sep 04
1 edit
Originally posted by shavixmirThere aren't too many bigger critics of the Iraq war than me, but that post is very unfair, Shavixmir. Having been in the US military it's training is a seriocomic affair, but deliberate killing of civilians is at least disfavored, although not completely disavowed (Hiroshima, for example). The quote by the PR officer is idiotic, undoubtedly. The most likely explanation for this incident is that it is standard operating procedure for the US military is to destroy its equipment (particulary sophisticated equipment like a Bradley) rather than let it fall int the hands of an enemy; a local commander ordered the vehicle destroyed, the pilot who's mission it was to destroy it saw a group of people around it, assumed (erroneously) that they were the same people who attacked it and destroyed the Bradley with no concern for their safety because he believed they were armed enemy. This is obviously just a small tragedy inside a bigger one; I believe the United States should pull its troops out almost immediately. But to say that these young men (young) are deliberate killers of babies and women is just too much, Shavixmir.
I reckon soldiers are taught:
"We are the military. We are right. God is on our side and we don't want any homosexuals watering down our high moral standards."
and:
"Let's go kill us some more babies and women."
14 Sep 04
Originally posted by no1marauderI personally don't agree that destroying broken equipment (before the enemy gets to it) is of higher priority than avoiding civilian deaths.
The most likely explanation for this incident is that it is standard operating procedure for the US military to destroy its equipment (particulary sophicated equipment like a Bradley) rather than let it fall int the hands of an enemy; a local commander ordered the vehicle destroyed, the pilot who's mission it was to destroy it saw a group of people arou ...[text shortened]... estroyed the Bradley with no concern for their safety because he believed they were armed enemy.
14 Sep 04
Originally posted by DreamlaXWell thats because your priorities show you live in lala land and never served in the military. Those so-called civilians were carrying a banner loyal to Zarquawi so the question of them being unarmed civilians is kind of lame. I don't see any condemnation of the killing of one US soldier and wounding of three others in this incident. Is it because they are Americans. The majority of Americans could really care less what you Kiwis think. I bet the dumb SOB's won't climb up on another tank will they?
I personally don't agree that destroying broken equipment (before the enemy gets to it) is of higher priority than avoiding civilian deaths.
14 Sep 04
1 edit
Originally posted by slimjimIf their reason for destroying the vehicles was what I said, that they honestly believed that there were armed enemy there, then that is a tragic mistake. If there reason is what Slimjim just said, that someone was carrying a banner loyal to the enemy so they didn't care if they were unarmed, they should be court-martialed as that is what we call in NY "depraved indifference" murder. And you should be ashamed of yourself for your constant indifference to the deaths of Iraqi civilians.
Well thats because your priorities show you live in lala land and never served in the military. Those so-called civilians were carrying a banner loyal to Zarquawi so the question of them being unarmed civilians is kind of lame. I don't see ...[text shortened]... . I bet the dumb SOB's won't climb up on another tank will they?
14 Sep 04
Originally posted by no1marauderThey were armed. They were shooting up in the air on top of the tank when the copter fired on it. The pilots should be commended on a job well done.
If their reason for destroying the vehicles was what I said, that they honestly believed that there were armed enemy there, then that is a tragic mistake. If there reason is what Slimjim just said, that someone was carrying a banner loyal to the enemy so they didn't care if they were unarmed, they should be court-martialed as that is what we cal ...[text shortened]... u should be ashamed of yourself for your constant indifference to the deaths of Iraqi civilians.
14 Sep 04
Originally posted by no1marauderOr was it anger that fellow US soldiers died and an US tank was destroyed .The pilot must have shot at the first recognisable enemy targets, the people surrounding the tank.Prolonged war gets on the nerves of both the occupiers as well as the occupied.The occupiers feel the hostility of the people and helpless anger at the unseen enemy the guirella attacker.The occupied feels hostile to the occupier and helpless anger at the military might and the burgeoning number of casualities.
[b] If their reason for destroying the vehicles was what I said, that they honestly believed that there were armed enemy there, then that is a tragic mistake. If there reason is what Slimjim just said, that someone was carrying a banner loyal to the enemy so they didn't care if they were unarmed,.
War is a great tragedy and does irreperable damage to the physche of both the soldiers and civilians involved in it.The only profiteers are arms dealers and coffin makers.
14 Sep 04
Originally posted by druidraviI can't argue with any one of your points. Good post.
Or was it anger that fellow US soldiers died and an US tank was destroyed .The pilot must have shot at the first recognisable enemy targets, the people surrounding the tank.Prolonged war gets on the nerves of both the occupiers as well as the occupied.The occupiers feel the hostility of the people and helpless anger at the unseen enemy the guirella attack ...[text shortened]... he soldiers and civilians involved in it.The only profiteers are arms dealers and coffin makers.
14 Sep 04
Originally posted by no1marauderIf Powell can shrug and mutter: "Collatoral damage", swivel 'round and sip his milkshake...
There aren't too many bigger critics of the Iraq war than me, but that post is very unfair, Shavixmir. Having been in the US military it's training is a seriocomic affair, but deliberate killing of civilians is at least disfavored, although not completely disavowed (Hiroshima, for example). The quote by the PR officer is idiotic, undoubtedly. Th ...[text shortened]... these young men (young) are deliberate killers of babies and women is just too much, Shavixmir.
Then, sue me, but I'm gonna do the same on this one!
14 Sep 04
Originally posted by steerpikewhat a bunch of oxy-morons.
"The helicopter fired on the Bradley to destroy it after it had been hit earlier and it was on fire", said Major Phil Smith of the 1st Cavalry Division. "It was for the safety of the people around it."
So -in the interests of safety - a helicopter bombs and machine guns a crowd of civilians. killing 12 and injuring 61. The dead included children ...[text shortened]... it."
Source: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=561021
14 Sep 04
Originally posted by shavixmirhow did you know that is what i am taught? have you been through it? you havent the slightest idea of what goes on in basic training besides some made for tv special you might have seen. i dont think you would have lasted one week in the marine corps. i am not brainwashed and i have my own ideals on the government. i am not saying they are always right, but we fight because we have a job to do. i hope you dont honestly think that killing babies is in my job description... i have never alerted a post in the forums but i came awful close to alerting this one. the only reason i dont want it removed is because it makes you look like an ingnorant, over opinionated horses arse.
I reckon soldiers are taught:
"We are the military. We are right. God is on our side and we don't want any homosexuals watering down our high moral standards."
and:
"Let's go kill us some more babies and women."