Hundreds of civilian casualties’ in suspected coalition airstrikes

You've done no such thing and in fact proven me right. I'll call on you again to prove my points for me, even liberals can be useful.

 

You have no point. I'm still waiting for you to shout out "Fake News"

 

I'm most impressed with the performance of highly trained U.S pilots and their use of the U.S superior precision bombs. This was an amazing achievement. Or shall I say a tremendous success.

U.S. Confirms Coalition Strike Killed as Many as 200 Civilians in Mosul
By Reuters On 3/25/17 at 6:02 PM

http://www.newsweek.com/us-confirms-airstrike-killed-200-civilians-mosul-574221

U.S. military officials say they are investigating, but initial reports from residents and Iraqi officials in the past week said dozens of people had been killed after air strikes by U.S.-led coalition forces.

Mosul municipality chief, Abdul Sattar al-Habbo, who is supervising the rescue, said 240 bodies had been pulled from the rubble of collapsed buildings. Previous estimates from local officials had said around 130 people had died.

The United Nations also expressed its profound concern, saying it was "stunned by this terrible loss of life."

 

My point stands. There were no cries of anti-war opponents prior to Jan 20th, your examples fail to convince otherwise. I'd be glad to stand corrected should anyone do so, you haven't come close.

You deafened us with your silence then, thus no one takes you seriously now. I'm dreadfully sorry.

 

Why would you start this post off with a comment about US trained pilots?

 

That figure is now around 350 dead. Many of those belonged to one family who were well known in Mosul. This was no accident

 

You're a waste of time. Still waiting for you to shout out fake news, go on, you know that you can do it

 

If you're through with your charade, we can move on. No one believes you now, you were too silent then. Sorry.

 

Yes. The difference is that the United States did not start this war (we were attacked, and planes were crashed into buildings), and the United States does not target civilians (which does not excuse their deaths, but it does preclude making any moral equivalences).

Please explain how we know this. What are your sources?

We should drop fliers over Mosul telling civilians to leave the area immediately. At some point, people have to understand that bad things are going to happen in that area. That's what war entails: having bad things happen to those who would have bad things happen to you.

At some point, one has to wonder how many "innocent civilians" there are in Mosul. If my family was put in harms way, I'd do what I could to get them to safety. Is there anybody who thinks that Mosul is a safe place to be at this point? I'm fairly confident that not all of those killed were innocent bystanders, despite the way some organizations insist on reporting the incident.

 

I've been hearing it for over a week.
Listen to the news, "Blackbeard".
Non combatants are getting wiped out by air strikes.
And if they do survive, where is their
housing, water, sanitation, electricity, markets, jobs now?
What is a family to do except, "take the refugee hike"?

Freedom to be a refugee? What do you think they would prefer?
Saddam or Bashir vs The Freedom to be a refugee?

I miss the days when "nation building" was a bad thing.
​

Moi

r > g

Coming soon!


​

 

You're not understanding the situation. Anyone who leaves their home has a high risk of being shot or bombed by either Daesh or the Shia army. The Iraqi government has told civilians to stay inside their homes.

I can guarantee that there are of the order of less than 2000 Daesh in the remaining population of over 400,000. That family I was referring to were on par with "royalty" known as an Agha family. I see that you've used the usual excuse of they may not be innocent anyway - same excuse as was used in Viet Nam where whole villages were wiped out with all killed inside. Anyway I also refer to this post written earlier in another thread:

I see someone straight away blamed Obama. The US foreign policy does not change with changing governments. The bombings in Iraq have been on-going since the first gulf war. Mosul is currently being flattened using US bombs and Iraqi Shia army. The US backed Iraqi government does not particularly care about the civilians in Mosul primarily because they are majority Sunni and closely related to the Kurds. We have the US backed Sunni Saudis bombing Shia Yemeni civilians, we have US backed Shia Iraqis bombing Sunni Iraqi civilians. US seem to be regularly switching sides in Syria. During the Iran/Iraq war, the US secretly supported Iran in order to prolong the war. Now US constantly growling at Iran. The US desires constant turmoil in the middle east

Afghanistan is still being bombed:why?
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.c...-of-us-air-and-drone-strikes-afghanistan-2017

 

Bomb We Must.
Boeing and Lockheed are dependent on replacing depleted stocks of bomb.
If we don't use our bombs, Lockheed and Boeing - the biggest war profiteers lose money.
Think of the lay offs, the unemployment, the effect on Wall St. (War St.).
Can America really afford not to be involved in a Not At War, War?

Solution: Bring back the draft for any Executive deployment lasting over 6 months.
Then see how long these, Not At War, Wars can last.


Moi
War is good for business!

r > g

​

 

You've been hearing it for what now? "Over a week?"

Do you honestly think "for over a week" is as far as non combatants getting wiped out goes?

Are you serious right now?

​

 

Okay, then listen to the Iraqi government and stay indoors. But they're sheltering within a war zone, which is by definition not a very safe place to be.

Are you honestly going to try to tell me that over 398,000 innocent people are under the control of 2000 bad guys? How does that work, exactly? I mean, unless a good chunk of those people want to be under the control of those 2000, in which case they should cease being "innocent" people.

 

Yes I am telling you that. You do not understand that the city of Mosul being majority Sunni and has close ties to the Kurds is seen as a threat to the Iraqi Shia government, hence for my earlier post stating that I believe that the bombing killing in excess of 350 civilians was a deliberate act targeting a well known 'royal' family.

Mosul during Saddam's time was one of the most affluent cities in the country. With the installation of US rule sacking all Baath employees, people in Mosul had no jobs and no food which gave rise to protection rackets being the biggest earner. Many murders were taking place as rival gangs formed. For this reason Daesh were welcomed during the first few months because they made the city safer? Protection rackets were stopped and food became available. People were safe to go out in the evenings. Once they gained the 'trust' of the civilians they then began their agenda of control with severe punishment for any disobedience.

As for 2000 well armed ruthless bad guys controlling a population of 398,000, how do you think relatively small armies take over countries eg the Japanese army terrorising the billion Chinese in the 1930's or the relatively small German army controlling the whole of Europe

 

Combined Joint Task Force – Operation Inherent Resolve Monthly Civilian Casualty Report

http://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/NEWS-A...n-inherent-resolve-monthly-civilian-casualty/

To date, based on data between August 2014 and February 2017, the Coalition conducted a total of 18,645 strikes that included 42,089 separate engagements. During this period, the total number of reports of possible civilian casualties was 396. The total number of credible reports of civilian casualties during this period was 102.

 

Excuse me, but why did it happen that you were attacked mainly by the inhabitants of Saudi Arabia, while Iraq, Libya and Syria were destroyed?

 

Well excuse me, but why is it so easy for ISIS nuts to take over and hold large sections of territory in, you guessed it, Iraq, Libya and Syria?

 

On the ruins of states, bandits often begin to thrive. So it was with us in Chechnya. So now it is happening in Ukraine. It is not surprising that after the destruction of the statehood of the countries of the Middle East, radicals were activated there and gained strength. And the longer the disorder lasts, the stronger they will become.

 

Well- each of those states has been attacked and weakened by the West. Each of those states is anti-Zionist and so had to become ' failed states ' to conform with the US/Israeli plan to attack Iran in order to promote Israeli supremacy. The Russians have scuppered that through supporting Assad. They get to keep their only warm-water port and Iran cannot be attacked without ' catastrophic ' consequences for Israel.

ISIS took root in the vacuums that the US/Israel created.

 

Were any Palestinian homes bulldozed, or any Palestinians used as a human shields, by chance and if not, why?

 

Not unlike the Arabs grossly underreporting atrocities, ethnic cleansing and harrasing done to Palestinians by their Arab Kuwaiti brethren. Do you see any similarities, moon?