Quote:
Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004
Civilians killed by accident?
I take it that the government know the area before an attack is launched?
They would know it is populated by a high percentage of innocent civilians, just as, as bill pointed out about warrington, the ira knew the area.
" Indiscriminate bombing " you call this an emotive phrase, when I look up the meaning of the word " Indiscriminate " here is what I get:
" not showing careful thought or planning, especially so that harm results "
To twist my opinion to be some " anti troop " comment is out of order.
My whole point is against this government, they cannot say they do not condone execution on humanitarian grounds, yet allow bombings of areas highly populated by innocent civilains, what are they trying to say? are they saying that it is not right in a humanitarian " improving people's lives and reducing suffering " way to not agree to execution? but it is ok to do the other? and this is why I am saying it is hypocritic.
I dont need a lecture from you or anyone about conflict, I am so sorry that my opinions do not " tally " with the stereotypical profile held in peoples heads.
Tell me how you differentiate between what the IRA were doing, the suffering they were causing, and what this government is now doing, tell me how we can take the moral higher ground?
Having served in the forces the troops have my utmost respect, sadly that does not carry forward to our leaders.
I would love to be proved wrong if the place is at peace next year, I mean, sadam has now been removed from power, which was the mandate for our troops going over there, so they should all be home soon thankfully.
|
arcamalpha, I wasn't trying to twist your comment into an anti-troop statement - if it came out that way, it wasn't meant to. No one is trying to lecture you, they just have a different opinion to you (the joy of a democratic society).
The statements are only "hypocritical" if you believe that "acts of war" are in the same category as "state execution", and the UN disagrees with you.
Once again, you appear to be comparing the IRA actions (who set out deliberately to bomb civilians) with those of our troops (who when returning fire or attacking enemy strongpoints, accidently cause civilian casualties and deaths). And you also equate "state execution" with "acts of war", which if you were in the forces, is a very strange equation to make. I think you will find there is a
huge difference in deliberately targeting civilians and "collateral damage" in a war crimes tribunal (though not unfortunately to those killed or injured).
Do you actually believe our troops would take part in "indiscriminate bombing"? I find this deeply offensive, having been in the RAF (Comms/SigInt), having being posted to Germany, Cyprus, NI, Masirah, HK, etc, and worked alongside 2 Para, 2nd Royal Anglians, IntCorp, Royal Signals, and others.
I was asking (imho) a valid question - if insurgents are firing from a building, and there are civilians are in that, or nearby, buildings, are you saying it is indiscriminate to attack that building? If so, what would you suggest - as you say, you have served in the forces, so surely you have some opinion on tactics? (what were your last three, btw?).
---------- Post added at 10:19 ---------- Previous post was at 10:14 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramrod
Possibly. (leaving aside the need to remove a dictator).
|
As has been stated many times in this thread - best get our uniforms on, then, there are still a lot of dictators waiting to be removed; I wonder why this one was chosen?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramrod
I don't think so. I think he is demonstrating some understanding of their mindset.
|
Or perhaps just his opinion, which he is entitled to, but does not necessarily make him an expert.