Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We withdraw troops this very instant, you will see chaos over there that will eclipse 100 in a single event.
According to friends of mine who were there you have 3 subsets of religion that hate each other that only collaborate to purge the infidel.
We withdraw completely... 100 killed in a bombing will be nothing compared to the unorganized "military" and "police force" they have. Even guys who trained the Iraqis say they don't want to fight. If they did they'd do as they're trained and instructed to do...
Sit on that for a minute. Claim being a humanitarian. 100 is a drop in the bucket compared to what they will do.
Only way I see theach hostility to end over there is when the people get fed up seeing their cities leveled and loved ones lost and say enough enough. You want to keep poking the wasp nest, go do it somewhere else. Not in my backyard.
I'll never understand what would motivate someone to harbor those with ill intentions against a far superior force then cry foul when their towns cities and villages are being destroyed... I guess logic, common sense, and having a pair to stand up to those who seek to bring you down is something they lack...
As for that jihad... going to take a whole lot more than a religion to motivate me to want to go to war with someone who's far superior to me...
I don't think we should leave. Not now. We have to address ISIS and the messes that our battles and occupations have helped cause.
It doesn't change the fact that when we do these bombing raids and kill innocent people, we just play right into the extremist's narratives.
So far I see you as the ONLY person falsely testifying to that. Maybe you can link to a post that says Americans are purposely targeting civilians. Either way I'm not the one saying it, so again, what's your point.
sure, glad to do so.
last time I checked, lovesthiscountry is YOUR user name, and you are the one who post the below bolded part. I am just saying you are wrong, that is all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry
It's not a tragedy when it happens over and over again. And yes America does target innocents. That has been exposed time and time again. Thousands of innocents were killed during Obamas drone strikes. That doesn't matter though because people in the Middle East don't count as humans, right? We should never respecr their rights as individuals.
ISIS killed the civilians. Read the article, not the headline.
We have to get better at recognizing their tactics. If that means they're putting innocent civilians in harm's way, maybe we need new militaristic tactics. Maybe a drone strike isn't the best decision or method of fighting them?
We have to get better at recognizing their tactics. If that means they're putting innocent civilians in harm's way, maybe we need new militaristic tactics. Maybe a drone strike isn't the best decision or method of fighting them?
The strike was ordered by the country this was in. It wasn't our call, it was theirs.
The strike was ordered by the country this was in. It wasn't our call, it was theirs.
In Afghanistan, the local military command rule is that all airstrikes requested by Afghan military require validation by American "eyes on target." When that rule has not been followed, things like hospital bombings occur.
US allies in those areas are not reliable adherents to the Law of Armed Conflict.
last time I checked, lovesthiscountry is YOUR user name, and you are the one who post the below bolded part. I am just saying you are wrong, that is all.
It's about hitting innocents when the perp is among them. THAT is targeting. Are they specifically targeting innocent family A? No.
Are they disregarding the safety of family A by making them part of the target? Absolutely.
I said time and time again. It's in our history. Sometimes it's more blatant. Hiroshima and Nagasaki ring a bell?
I am just saying you don't get it, that is all.
And yes there are reports of our enemies knowingly, specifically, using innocents as human shields and putting them in harms way.
In Afghanistan, the local military command rule is that all airstrikes requested by Afghan military require validation by American "eyes on target." When that rule has not been followed, things like hospital bombings occur.
US allies in those areas are not reliable adherents to the Law of Armed Conflict.
Eyes on target wasn't the issue, they knew fully well what the target was. Did they know at the time the place was rigged by ISIS and they were going to kill the innocents?
It's about hitting innocents when the perp is among them. THAT is targeting. Are they specifically targeting innocent family A? No.
Are they disregarding the safety of family A? Absolutely.
The alternative is not fighting the war.
Go all the way back to WWII. Hitler kept Eva Braun right there in his bunker with him. Osama bin Laden was with his wives.
In order to strike a terrorist, you have to know where he will be at a point in time in the future.
Terrorist leaders spend most of their time at home. The location intelligence will be able to place them with reliability will be at home. You can't find them when they're out on move doing "terrorist stuff"--you'll find them at home with their feet up...and surrounded by family.
Now back in WWII, the Allies would have bombed the entire city. Today's smart munitions allow us to at least restrict the casualties to, say, a single sedan or the living room.
We have to get better at recognizing their tactics. If that means they're putting innocent civilians in harm's way, maybe we need new militaristic tactics. Maybe a drone strike isn't the best decision or method of fighting them?
Don't get me wrong, I DO agree with you. In my humble opinion, the ONLY way to avoid unnecessary deaths is to stop the war. Bring troop home, problem solved.
This said,
In Guerilla wars, they simply can’t be prevented. Why? Insurgents in the Middle East, or Vietnam before, hid inside of the populace. When this happens, civilians die when fighting them. They simply do. Doesn’t matter how much training, how restrictive the rules of engagement are, or even how small of a presence the occupying power may have. Civilian deaths are part of the collateral damage of war.
As much as I wish we could completely eliminate civilian casualties from warfare, or warfare all together, it is ultimately impossible. Even with the most advanced technology available.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
