Another one bites the dust. Of course, more seething and whining that civilians were killed.
US Air Force F-16 war jets launched airstrikes Tuesday near the Syrian border, destroying three houses and killing a "known terrorist," the US military said. Iraqi authorities said fighting had broken out in the area between a tribe that supports foreign fighters and another that backs the government.
Iraqi officials said at least 45 people had been killed in the fighting between the pro-government Bumahl tribe and the pro-insurgent Karabilah tribe, including some in the airstrikes. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. The area is among the most dangerous in the country, and access is difficult.
The airstrikes, which included 500-pound guided bombs, began about 6:20 a.m. in a cluster of towns near Qaim along the Syrian border 200 miles northwest of Baghdad.
A US statement made no mention of tribal fighting but said four bombs were used to destroy a house occupied by terrorists outside the town of Husaybah. Two more bombs destroyed a second house in Husaybah, occupied by Abu Islam, described as "a known terrorist," the statement added.
1
Why are you so insensitive? Do you think people can just ask a terrorist to leave? They fear for their lives! And civillians shouldn't be dying, that is horrible. How would you feel if your son got killed just to capture some low-level Al-qaeda croonie?
Posted by: Sheila at August 30, 2005 04:37 PM (l72kO)
2
That's funny Sheila. I wonder if you understand that this is what war is like?
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at August 30, 2005 04:55 PM (JQjhA)
3
Sheila,
Name for me one war in which civilians DIDN'T get killed?
tick tock, Clarise....
DING! Correct! The answer is ZERO!!!!!
Civilian casualties are an unfortunate side effect of war. Countless millions died in WWII. Yet for all your whining, the fact remains that ours is the first military in history thet deploys weapons technology specifically designed to
minimize civilian casualties whenever possible.
Posted by: Brian B at August 30, 2005 05:22 PM (CouWh)
4
Let's hope Abu was home at the time!
Posted by: slickdpdx at August 30, 2005 05:43 PM (MjGRu)
5
Lessee, wasn't it Mao's Little Red Book that said "the Guerilla could not exist without the support of the peasant?"
Based on that, there were no "Civilians" in that town!
Sooo, I'd say, We missed a few!
Damn, I hate when that happens . . . .
Posted by: large at August 30, 2005 05:52 PM (Ny1Tj)
6
How come every time terrorists are bombed all the sudden everyone of them turn out to be innocent civilians? I really can't figure out that one.
Fortunately the other side doesn't kill any civilians by mistake, they just kill them on purpose.
Posted by: Ren at August 30, 2005 06:17 PM (7ZsmI)
7
Rusty,
I never said war was supposed to be violence free. But you act like it is the civillians fault that they died, which is so cruel and insensitive. The same thing happened to us: innocent people died, 9/11. Of course we were in a tiff about it, why aren't the Iraqis allowed to complain that the US troops are killing civillians.
Besides, it is stupid war, and our soldiers and Iraqi civillians are dying for a lost cause. Why are we pushing democracy on Iraq when we aren't even a demcracy: we are a republic!
Posted by: Sheila at August 30, 2005 07:54 PM (l72kO)
8
It wasn't the civilians fault, but it was the fault of the terrorists that were hiding among them. That is why the Geneva Conventions offer no protection for military operatives out of uniform--to protect civilians. Thus, the onus of their deaths is at the feet of al Qaeda, not us.
Al Qaeda targetted civilians, we did not. And yes, it does make a difference to the relatives of those that die. There is a difference in the way I feel about a murderer of my son and some one who accidentally kills him.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at August 30, 2005 08:23 PM (JQjhA)
9
Live by the srord die by the sword and was he blown into itsy bitsy peices?
Posted by: sandpiper at August 30, 2005 08:33 PM (slksM)
10
Sheila, how do you know the terrorists weren't their at the behest of their hosts? You're just assuming it was different. Just like you're assuming any of us are "insensitive".
Posted by: Oyster at August 30, 2005 08:36 PM (YudAC)
11
Sheila: " Why are we pushing democracy on Iraq when we aren't even a demcracy: we are a republic!"
Answer: Democracies are extremely easy to control from abroad. If people actually have the power to decide who gets to do what for how long, unlike in your country, any country with enough meaningless paper or metal with a predetermined value can manipulate decisions ruthlessly through agitators, bribes and, most importantly, mediabrainwash of forcing their ways and ideas everywhere until it surrounds the peoples everyday life. (which explains why your and the Soviets retarded TV-shows and movies were given for free to everyone throughout the Cold War...)
Posted by: A Finn at August 31, 2005 03:02 AM (cWMi4)
12
Look, I was just saying that this statement:
Public service announcement: The best way to keep us from dropping a bomb on your house is if you kindly ask all terrorists to leave. Thank you.
is insensitive. My opinion, deal with it.
It would be good if the people had the control in this country, that is what a democracy is. If the people don't agree, are the governments really working for our cause?
Posted by: Sheila at August 31, 2005 07:02 AM (l72kO)
13
The real answer is "not" that they're easily "controlled" from abroad. The are easily controlled from within; and fairly with equal rights for everyone. Democratically run countires don't declare war on each other. They trade goods, technology, science and services with each other so that each can build opportunities for better lives for their citizens. This can be done, and has been done, without forcing religious values or customs on each other.
Posted by: Oyster at August 31, 2005 07:09 AM (YudAC)
14
Sheila
We are a representitive republic, which is like a democracy with built in statistical smoothing. The war is not a lost cause, but given the one sided nature of the MSM coverage it is easy to see why so many think that.
One other little thing to consider. If we just stopped tomorrow, our enemy would not. So the killing will continue until they say 'enough'.
Posted by: Defense Guy at August 31, 2005 09:59 AM (jPCiN)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
