Non AMP
Sky Blues Talk
  • Home
  • Forums
  • General Discussion
  • Off Topic Chat
This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

US bombing in Syria (1 Viewer)

  • Thread starter ccfc92
  • Start date Apr 7, 2017
Forums New posts
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

dutchman

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #36
ccfc92 said:
I'm not 100% sure what you're trying to make out I'm saying?
Click to expand...

You said you don't believe there is any random attacking by coalition forces in Syria yet admit that there is elsewhere in the region.
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #37
At least 112 bodies have been pulled from the site of a US-led coalition airstrike in Mosul, senior Iraqi health official Ahmed Dubardani said Monday.

The deaths have sparked renewed concerns about civilian casualties from coalition airstrikes targeting ISIS fighters in the city.
A senior Iraqi military officer said a March 17 coalition airstrike on an explosives-laden ISIS truck led to the deaths of dozens of civilians.
The coalition said a review confirmed one strike that day in the area where the casualties were reported. But US officials have not confirmed the senior Iraqi officer's account.
Both the Iraqi and US defense departments launched investigations Saturday into possible civilian deaths in airstrikes between March 17 and 23.
While those investigations continue, US Defense Secretary James Mattis said, "There is no military force in the world that is proven more sensitive to civilian casualties."
"We are keenly aware that every battlefield where an enemy hides behind women and children is also a humanitarian field, and we go out of our way to always do everything humanly possible to reduce the loss of life or injury among innocent people," Mattis said. "The same cannot be said for our adversaries."

'Told to stay at home'

US and Iraqi forces have been trying to regain control of Mosul -- Iraq's second-largest city -- from ISIS since October.
ISIS had a firm grip on Mosul since 2014, but suffered a major blow when Iraqi security forces regained control of eastern Mosul in January. But the arduous fight for western Mosul continues.
According to Amnesty International, many of those killed in the airstrikes were "following Iraqi government advice not to leave during the offensive."
"The high civilian toll suggests that coalition forces leading the offensive in Mosul have failed to take adequate precautions to prevent civilian deaths, in flagrant violation of international humanitarian law," said Amnesty's Donatella Rovera, who carried out field investigations in Mosul, in a statement.
"The fact that Iraqi authorities repeatedly advised civilians to remain at home instead of fleeing the area, indicates that coalition forces should have known that these strikes were likely to result in a significant numbers of civilian casualties."
Amnesty also accused ISIS forces of "shamefully resort(ing) to using civilians as human shields."

Life under ISIS rule

For Iraqis in recently freed parts of Mosul, the haunting memories of ISIS are still fresh.
One woman in the southern Wadi Hajer neighborhood said ISIS fighters forced her and her family from their home and took them to another house to be used as human shields. She said life under ISIS was humiliating and painful.
A grandmother in the same neighborhood said she lived with her son, his wife and their children as ISIS tormented the area.
She recalled a time when her family's water got cut off, and the whole family had to share one last remaining glass.
"I would go around and give my grandson a sip, and then the others," the grandmother said. "We would all take one sip at a time."




What do you do? Reading this, it's poor Iraq-US advice for citizens to stay.

Yet ISIS have a certain amount of control over these people, and use them to their advantage.

The headline makes the US look like murdering conquerors, the article itself contradicts the headline IMO in some degree.

If the US said; Right, get out of Mosul, we're flattening the place with bombs. A) Do you think innocent people will be allowed to leave and ISIS will stay there, and B) Do you not think ISIS will leave too?
 
Reactions: kdrinkell

dutchman

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #38
The US already allowed large numbers of ISIS fighters to escape from Mosul so as to be able to attack Syria.
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #39
dutchman said:
You said you don't believe there is any random attacking by coalition forces in Syria yet admit that there is elsewhere in the region.
Click to expand...

Exactly, random.

"civilian casualties from coalition airstrikes targeting ISIS fighters in the city"

I don't know what people think, but the US aren't going over there, dropping bombs randomly on civilians and flying home. There's days or months of planning and surveillance of ISIS targets, then there's permission to actually bomb the place. Then there is investigations into the bombings. Unfortunately, civilians get caught in the cross fire, as they have throughout history.

I don't agree with it, I think the whole world should just grow up and get along.

However, the world isn't like that. Innocent people get killed, for no reason by extremists or corrupt governments, whatever, but I don't know the answer to these problems.
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #40
dutchman said:
The US already allowed large numbers of ISIS fighters to escape from Mosul so as to be able to attack Syria.
Click to expand...

Can you provide a link? I'd like to read that.

By the way, I'm not suggesting there's dodgy dealings on both sides. "The West" has a lot to answer for, i.e arms deals, oil etc...
 

dutchman

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #41
ccfc92 said:
Can you provide a link? I'd like to read that.
Click to expand...
‘US gave ISIS escape route from Mosul to Syria; now civilians are paying the price’
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #42
dutchman said:
‘US gave ISIS escape route from Mosul to Syria; now civilians are paying the price’
Click to expand...

Isn't that the Russian news network? RT?
 

dutchman

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #43
ccfc92 said:
Isn't that the Russian news network? RT?
Click to expand...
So?
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #44
dutchman said:
So?
Click to expand...

Well, it's not like they have an agenda against the US :shy:

Look, it's such a web of lies, deceit and corruption. All I'm trying to say is, there is strategic attacks going on by "the west" if you believe they want to help Syria, Iraq etc.

Personally, I don't know if they're trying to help, or access oil etc. But Russia are there too for whatever reason. Then there's arms deals etc

I'm still not sure what point you're trying to make about what I said, I know the US (mainly) and the rest of the west can be evil SOBs, but the whole world is corrupt and fucked IMO.
 

dutchman

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #45
ccfc92 said:
Well, it's not like they have an agenda against the US :shy:
Click to expand...

Does US Newsweek have an agenda against the US too?

ISIS leaders are fleeing Mosul for Syria ahead of a planned Iraqi offensive

Many Islamic State militant group (ISIS) leaders have fled Mosul with their families toward Syria ahead of a planned offensive by U.S.-backed Iraqi forces on the city, Iraq's defense minister said on Saturday.
Click to expand...

There were many more reports at the time but for some reason Google has made them very difficult to find now.
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #46
dutchman said:
Does US Newsweek have an agenda against the US too?

ISIS leaders are fleeing Mosul for Syria ahead of a planned Iraqi offensive



There were many more reports at the time but for some reason Google has made them very difficult to find now.
Click to expand...


I'm not sure, but a simple google of US newsweek would suggest so.

This headline is one example, hardly a pro-US stance:

TRUMP'S ATTACK ON SYRIA KILLED FOUR CHILDREN, STATE NEWS AGENCY CLAIMS


 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #47
Dutch, I'm not suggesting the US aren't shady characters in all this, and agree that the media hide and manipulate things.

I don't know all the facts, and do not claim to. I hope "we" are trying to make the world a better place, but I'm also not naive enough to know the US and the West can be corrupt as anything.

Hopefully, in our lifetime, the world will be a better place, for everyone.
 
S

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #48
They describe DTs announcement as being quite 'emotional' - but when I heard it I thought he sounded a little self-satisfied...as-in 'Yes! This is the moment I have been waiting for...as last I have been able to bomb the buggery outta somebody'

Russian response is rhetoric only imo. They want to show solidarity with Assad, but no way will they take on the US'

...onwards & upwards PUSB
 

dutchman

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #49
SkyblueBazza said:
Russian response is rhetoric only imo. They want to show solidarity with Assad, but no way will they take on the US'
Click to expand...

Not directly but my guess is they will now bomb the shit out of US-backed rebels in Syria and also supply Assad with the high-tech weapons they've been denying him for so long.
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #50
dutchman said:
Not directly but my guess is they will now bomb the shit out of US-backed rebels in Syria and also supply Assad with the high-tech weapons they've been denying him for so long.
Click to expand...

Surely not another Vietnam?
 
S

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 7, 2017
  • #51
dutchman said:
Not directly but my guess is they will now bomb the shit out of US-backed rebels in Syria and also supply Assad with the high-tech weapons they've been denying him for so long.
Click to expand...
Yep...you may well be right on that one. For every action there is a reaction...sometimes the reactions are disguised

...onwards & upwards PUSB
 
Reactions: ccfc92

Gazolba

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 8, 2017
  • #52
You can't wage a war without killing innocent civilians. It's doubtful you could fire one cruise missile, never mind 59, without killing one non-combatant.
You can try to minimise collateral damage but you cannot eliminate it.
It's a fact, and it's the price of maintaining freedom.
If you think otherwise, you are a misguided fool.
 
Reactions: ccfc92 and Sky Blue Pete

dutchman

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 8, 2017
  • #53
 
Reactions: kdrinkell

kdrinkell

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 8, 2017
  • #54
I watched this video and it does make sense,the ex ambassador is no mug

 
Reactions: Sky Blue Pete, SkyblueBazza and dutchman
M

martcov

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 8, 2017
  • #55
Gazolba said:
It wasn't a bombing, it was 59 cruise missiles. And they deserved what they got.
Click to expand...

Some did, but some civilians in a neighboring village got something they didn't deserve.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 8, 2017
  • #56
Gazolba said:
It wasn't a bombing, it was 59 cruise missiles. And they deserved what they got.
Click to expand...
Who did? Who deserved it? Again war impacts the innocent
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 9, 2017
  • #57
So Raytheon's share price surged on Friday morning after their Tomahawks were used to bomb Syria. The value of the company increased by more than $1bn.

Donald Trump is a Raytheon shareholder.
 
S

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 9, 2017
  • #58
chiefdave said:
So Raytheon's share price surged on Friday morning after their Tomahawks were used to bomb Syria. The value of the company increased by more than $1bn.

Donald Trump is a Raytheon shareholder.
Click to expand...
You surely aren't suggesting what I think you are Dave?

He is not really a stupid man. He would surely avoid doing such things having freely declared his financial interest. It was the least risky option to US interests.

His shareholding is more a reflection of an intelligent approach imo...the US would mostly prefer Tomahawk Missile use to putting pilots & planes at risk of being shot down by anyone else's forces. Especially Russian forces in Syria...coz that would definitely bring things to a direct confrontation.

This would not be a decision he would take alone, or unadvised, nor against other's advice.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 9, 2017
  • #59
Anyone see the CNN new slady shot down by a Syrian man live on TV?

Completely went against what she was trying to insinuate :smuggrin:
 

dutchman

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 10, 2017
  • #60
Generals taking over the White House says JOHN R BRADLEY | Daily Mail Online
 

BackRoomRummermill

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 10, 2017
  • #61
It needs sorting out for everyone's sake

We could could all end up melting in instant sunshine if they get it wrong I am sorry to say
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 10, 2017
  • #62
 

ccfc92

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 10, 2017
  • #63
It's all a total mess.

Why the US have done a full u-turn on their stance with Assad is beyond me. I think Trump is being used as a puppet by the people that really run America.

I just hope Theresa May has the backbone to say no to our troops going in, if the US declare war in Syria. We should keep out of it, IMO.
 

covcity4life

Well-Known Member
  • Apr 11, 2017
  • #64
price for maintaining freedom

lol
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Share:
Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest Tumblr WhatsApp Email
  • Home
  • Forums
  • General Discussion
  • Off Topic Chat
  • Default Style
  • Contact us
  • Terms and rules
  • Privacy policy
  • Help
  • Home
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2021 XenForo Ltd.
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Home
  • Forums
    • New posts
    • Search forums
  • What's new
    • New posts
    • Latest activity
  • Members
    • Current visitors
  • Donate to the Season Ticket Fund
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?