Children & women killed in US Iraq raid.

Six children and eight women are among at least 32 people killed in a US air raid northwest of Baghdad, according to Iraqi police and local officials............

.........Mayor Amer Alwan told Reuters news agency that US aircraft bombed two homes in the early hours of Friday.

He said 32 civilians were believed to be inside and that of 25 bodies pulled so far from the rubble, eight were women and six children.

Source

Is it a sign of shift in Iraq policy.

We entered Iraq to overthrow Saddam and establish examplary Democracy in the Middle East.

It seems we are frightened of the real situation of Iraq that did not follow our plans. And now instead of proliferating democracy into ME, we are losing our own democracy at home as well as in the battle-field.

Are we following 'the path of Saddam'?........
The tactics he used against dissidents,
The laws he imposed to usurp civil/human rights of Iraqi citizens,
......Similarities are endless!

The victorious military's comments........

The statement said: "This is another step closer to defeating al-Qaeda in Iraq and helping establish a safe and peaceful Iraq."

Is USA only soldiers & guns, satellites, spies and missiles?

Where is the New World?.....
The openness?
The liberty?
The institutions?
The statesmanship?
The Think-tanks?
The leadership for democracy, for human rights, for peace and prosperity............................................................................................................................................ .......................?

Are we losing war or just everything of USA in Iraq?







chaudri

I guess women and children are never killed when a suicide bomber deliberately targets shops and business filled with women and children, right?

They are terrorists, are we?
We are for freedom, are they?

If we are to follow the terrorist's path and tactics, then what a drama of Freedom, Democracy, Principals, Internationa conventions & these and those.....................

It must not ever be free-for all, lest we do the terrorist's aspire to do.


Lieutenant Colonel Chris Garver, a US military spokesman, said:

"If there is a weapon with or next to the person or they are holding it, they are a terrorist," he said.

What an irony if some General gets mad-enough to apply the saying globally, including USA?

Listen to the Iraqis and the world

In March, Iraqis accused US forces of shooting 11 people in al-Ishaqi, including four women and five children, while US forces maintained it had only killed two women and a child in an air strike.....
...
.....
......
........The BBC later broadcast video footage from the scene showing people with gunshot wounds. The soldiers involved in the case, however, were cleared of all misconduct.

chaudri

As far as I know we arent targeting women and children as a matter of policy.
The quote about someone having a gun they are a terrorist? Youd feel the same way if you were there. Being shot at from nowhere. Getting chased by kids, one of which could blow himself up at any second.

So until our military starts blowing up hospitals and homes and business as a matter of policy Im willing to look beyond the occasional accident of bad intel. Its war for Christs sake.

You think you can do better get over there and help out.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere.

So until our military starts blowing up hospitals and homes and business as a matter of policy Im willing to look beyond the occasional accident of bad intel. Its war for Christs sake.

Occasional!
So casual?

Count from the beginning of war on Iraq, it is tens of thousands of such bad inelS.


So far we are successfull in providing Alqaeda with volunteers and safe heaven in Iraq.

Saddam's regime was anti-Alqaeda & anti-fundamentalism. During his regime both could not grow in Iraq.
We, the flag bearers of freedom and anti-terrorism are faced with both of them, and our intel is 'often' bad enough to kill the civillians and spare terrorists.

I'm afraid, we are losing battle as well as morality.







chaudri

Very bad intel.........? Indeed.........?

Amr Alwan, the mayor of Ishaqi, the main town in Taima's district, vigorously disputed the US military's account.

"This is the third crime done by Americans in this area of Ishaqi. All the casualties were innocent women and children and everything they said about them being part of al-Qaeda is a lie," he said.

Local police provided AFP with the names of 17 victims, four of them women. The names seemed to indicate that the victims were members of two extended families living in neighbouring houses.

[url=[url=SOURCE


Bad intel is costing USA of its image and world peace.
Are we not intelligent enough to read the 'writing on the wall'.
Are we promoting sectarianism and terrorism 'intelligently'?
A strategy or a tactic?








chaudri

[edit on 8/12/2006 by chaudri]

So I still dont understand your responses. Where is the proof that the U.S. is maliciously killing women and children as a matter of policy outside of he said/she said?

I shot some guy trying to jump me 3 years ago and had to go to court. He said I attacked him. Even had "witnesses." All of which were whitey hating relatives of this criminal kid. Fortunately he had a record and common sense and justice prevailed.

So unless you have something other than; "the guys who got bombed said they were the good guys and the guys who dropped the bomb said they were the good guys" the debate cant go any further then; I feel compelled to trust our military (to some extent) knows what its doing and you dont. And thats that.

Not like there could of been any terrorists in those houses........I guess that would be impossible.

Not like terrorists don't use women and children as human shields...or blow them up themselves.

What are US soldgers supposed to do when they come under fire from a house? They are not supposed to defend themselves?

I got advise for the Iraqis. Dont harbor, aid, shelter or abet insurgents and terrorists. Even if they are freedom fighters in your perspective, why would you let them set up camp in your house and if you can't control what they do then why not do the right thing and take your family to a location where they won't be in direct contact with these people?

Just curious why they don't take these steps to protect their own children. Besides we've been bombing houses to get at undesireables for a long time where entire drug lord families (women and children too) are killed in the airstrike just to get 2-3 bad guys. Nobody cared then why now?

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
I guess women and children are never killed when a suicide bomber deliberately targets shops and business filled with women and children, right?

LOL

Those are freedom fighters remember??

OP - Either study war, or.. stop spewing anti American BS .. unless you want to make a thread every time a suicide bomber kills a woman.

Well said guys ... I am so sick and tired of seeing:

"US soldiers deliberately kill women and children"

when you click on it, it says,

In an air raid on a house that had 25 people inside.

Why the hell were there 25 people in a hut?

They didnt intentionally kill women and children.

I think this thread title showed be changed to reflect this.

Originally posted by Rockpuck

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
I guess women and children are never killed when a suicide bomber deliberately targets shops and business filled with women and children, right?

LOL

Those are freedom fighters remember??

OP - Either study war, or.. stop spewing anti American BS .. unless you want to make a thread every time a suicide bomber kills a woman.

Would that you could see what are we accomplishing in the war on terror

With his lips quivering and voice breaking, a tearful President Hamid Karzai on Sunday lamented that Afghan children are being killed by NATO and U.S. bombs and by terrorists from Pakistan — a portrait of helplessness in the face of spiraling chaos.

...............In a heartfelt speech that brought audience members to tears, Karzai said the cruelty imposed on his people "is too much" and that Afghanistan cannot stop "the coalition from killing our children."

...............The president, who turned tearful after relating stories of children maimed by bombings, took long pauses between sentences and at one point covered both eyes with a white handkerchief.

A single tear rolled down his right cheek and bounced off his suit lapel.
......................

..............................................

These tears from a presidants eyes, whom we empowered, ..........to rule Afganistan, an occupied terratory....!
Are we GUNS?
Reminds me of a cartoon film named 'The Iron Giant'.
"You are what you choose to be"
What have we chosen to be?
.....................The conquerers of the world?
.....
......

Sorry, forgot to type the link to the External Source in the last post.

news.yahoo.com...

A nice comparison by a responsible authority.!






chaudri

By this time in the so call war for the Iraqi freedom . . . people sill complain about the death?

By some of the post is very clear that if our government doesn't give a darn about Iraqi lives . . . why should the American people.

Remember they are expendable. . . . but . . . so are we the American people when it comes to the dealings of our government.

The same way the Iraqi people is deal with . . . so the time will come when we will be deal with also.

Welcome to the NWO.

Interesting to note that Saddam is going to hang because he wiped out a village...

Saddam was among eight co-defendants accused of revenge killings in the city of Dujail, 35 miles north of Baghdad, after a 1982 assassination attempt on the former dictator. The current Iraqi prime minister's Islamic Dawa party, then an underground opposition, claimed responsibility for organizing the attempt on Saddam's life.

Source

Most people seem to forget that the reason he attacked that village was because he'd traced an attack on his life back to it. Attack on his life by "extremist fundamentalist Islamics"... in other words, he attacked what the US calls a "terrorist camp".

Yes, many innocents died under Saddam's rule, but I'm left wondering how many have died under the US occupation? It's impossible to tell for sure since the military doesn't do body counts for civilians (it looks bad). I'm willing to bet that the number of innocents that have died as a direct result of US bombings and operations is rapidly approaching those that Saddam was responsible for.

If Saddam is to hang for his actions resulting in collateral damage, should that same ruling not be applied to Bush?

OR... if the US is justified in their use of semi-discriminant force that results in mistakes and innocent losses in their fight against terror, should Saddam not be given the same leeway?

This is a HUGE double standard.

Lets not foreget that these insergents/freedom fighters, which ever float your boat; hide among civilians to perform some of their tactics...

Childrens are also out there throwing grenades at humvees

Good intent this thread chaudri.
Though some people quickly get tired of hearing about atrocities when the victims are "the others", such stories can't be told often enough.

Originally posted by chaudri
Are we losing war or just everything of USA in Iraq?

You are losing your soul if you carry on long enough ...just like the terrorists.

Originally posted by chaudri

He said 32 civilians were believed to be inside and that of 25 bodies pulled so far from the rubble, eight were women and six children.

The victorious military's comments........

The statement said: "This is another step closer to defeating al-Qaeda in Iraq and helping establish a safe and peaceful Iraq."

So 8+6 from 25= 11 possible bad guys. How many lifes are one al-Qaeda worth?

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
Why the hell were there 25 people in a hut?

Actually it was 32... They live in extended families, and what you refer to as "a hut" is what they call "home".

Originally posted by marg6043

By some of the post is very clear that if our government doesn't give a darn about Iraqi lives . . . why should the American people.

Remember they are expendable. . . . but . . . so are we the American people when it comes to the dealings of our government.

That's right marg, you're all in line... if neglect is chosen, along the old racist trail ...or the more trendy islamophobic one, I should say.

Originally posted by BitRaiser
Most people seem to forget that the reason he attacked that village was because he'd traced an attack on his life back to it. Attack on his life by "extremist fundamentalist Islamics"... in other words, he attacked what the US calls a "terrorist camp".

A lot of people are going to hang then.

Originally posted by IspyU
Childrens are also out there throwing grenades at humvees

... or stones ...I would too if I were kid in Iraq.

Annan criticizes U.S. in farewell speech

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, in his farewell address, criticized the Bush administration, warning that America must not sacrifice its Democratic ideals while waging war against terrorism......

........."Human rights and the rule of law are vital to global security and prosperity," Annan's text said. When the U.S. "appears to abandon its own ideals and objectives, its friends abroad are naturally troubled and confused," he said.

THE SOURCE

War against terrorists........yes
Innocent killings.................No
USA is the only super-power & trend setter of this era, if we are afraid of children throwing stones on humvees, losing our temper and senses like an insane and bomb every thing in our way.


Then why not to hire people like Saddam & Osama, equip them with our state of the art weaponry, & let them do the job more precisely.


We are totally exposed as killing machines in Middle-East, no family of Iraq, Afganistan, Lebanon & Palestine without wound, disease or death.

Let us think again, DOES democracy in Middle East suit us. Electoral results so far are not in our favour. All winners against USA, all loosers with USA.

Can we appreciate the threat posed by empowerment of those wounded and killed by our weapons and policies?

We are derailed ......! We shall have to promote and protect Puppet dictators, to serve us and to controll the anti-USA masses.


Again, Are we losing everything of USA in the war on terror?




chaudri

As long as western militaries treat alleged terrorism as a military measure instead of actual criminal investigations the swathes of innocent bystanders killed and maimed in alleged anti-terror attacks instantly become martyrs for violent efforts in revenge and also create support for such violence.

This is why the USA and any other country treating terrorism as a "war" have failed miserably in their alleged tactics.

Now clearly the goal of the War on Terror is not to stem terrorism, but instead to do the opposite to create an endless war scenario to support western government/military industry and its benefactors. Thats never going to be a subject that anybody is going to bring up in a public venue however.

You got a good point there, Frith, every time that our government creates a war be on poverty, drugs or terror.

We know already by the way the early wars have ended that . . . is not mean not to stop it but to keep them going.

As you say, the war on terror is very profitable indeed but also a maker of casualties with not one to blame but the ones that has been target with.

It also means a none ending supply of money for as long as needed and as long as it makes profits.