US Suggests Iraqi Missle Struck Market Place

Exactly. At this point, sadly, I've decided to start by assuming that EVERYTHING coming out of a U.S. military official's mouth is a lie. They've just done too much of it so far. And this one is just the straw on the camel's back:

"IT'S ENTIRELY POSSIBLE" that this was done by an Iraqi bomb???!!!! They do have weapons in the area, so it COULD HAVE BEEN one of theres???"

Well, big f-ing deal... It's entirely possible it was LOTS of things. But what was it likely? So frustrating.

 

b/c god forbid that could be the truth, right sardinia and doc?

i dont believe anything coming out of anyone right now, but i tell ya what, i won't condemn the coalition that it was an american missle until the proof is there...just like i won't condemn the iraqi's that their own missle killed some of their people.

but you guys go ahead.

are you also the ones who find people guilty before any evidence is brought to light saying so?

 

Sure, though it's far more probable that 2 of your missiles (there were 2 explosions) hit that market since it's US/uk that are bombing bagdad.

 

Or it could have been Saddam intentionally blowing up his own people to use as propaganda against the US.

What is more reliable--our PGM technology, or Saddam's human rights record?

 

What you were criticizing for Russia?
What were they supposed to have sold to saddam?

 

Tanks, Scuds GPS jammers, ect...

 

Re: Re: US Suggests Iraqi Missle Struck Market Place

If you want to discount everything thats coming out of CENTCOM, fine. But you had better discount everything coming out of the Baathist's mouth.

 

Isn't that why we're at war?

 

Re: Re: Re: US Suggests Iraqi Missle Struck Market Place

Why does everybody assume that when somebody says they are skeptical of official reports coming from the US government, that those people must somehow believe everything Saddam says?

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: US Suggests Iraqi Missle Struck Market Place

SoFla - what do you think about the Iraqi SCUDs - you know the ones they said they did not have?

 

I agree with the whole trust no one concept.

That being said, it conveniently made for good television and they conveniently had it covered. Our technology is so good, I place more faith in it than the Baathist lies. I mean they are still in control in Um Qasar right? Propoganda is Propaganda, the jury is still out on this one in my mind.

What makes me sick is the news coverage of it so far. It is absurd. I didn't even see Al Hate the US Jazeera, I saw ABC. The reporter reviewed the incident and said, I don't know why the US bombed here (indicating it was US when it was in dispute) as there should be no military targets here (ignoring the placements of tanks in hospitals, and weapons in schools etc., in other cities). It was just so conclusory about how we intentionally bombed a market. It made me sick. No more ABC for me. Sorry Ted Koppel who i actually have been kind of enjoying.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: US Suggests Iraqi Missle Struck Market Place

You mean the same ones the Pentagon is now backing off their claims about as well, but that Fox reported as "fact" without ever retracting?

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: US Suggests Iraqi Missle Struck Market Place

a) didn't we already back off that claim.

b) did you even read what I wrote?

unbelievable.

 

Let's see if I have this right...

There have been civilian deaths. The US blames Iraq and Iraq blames the US.

Have I got that right?

Is anyone at all even remotely surprised that neither side wants to be seen as responsible for these deaths?

 

Good god, the US/UK have already killed over 1,000,000 children as a result of the brutal sanctions over the past 12 years--this is the reason why the two UN Heads of the Oil For Food program have resigned in disgust--along with the leaders of the previous Weapons Inspector teams (Scott Ritter, Richard Butler, Dennis Holiday, et al.). Dennis Holiday has publically gone on record as saying he resigned because he could "no longer be an accomplice to genocide".

Several years ago, Madeline Halfbright said the death of 500,000 Iraqi children as a result of the Sanctions regime was "worth it".

When Hussein gassed the Kurds in '88, I was a member of Amnesty International; we tried to publicize that horrible tragedy, but it fell on deaf ears--particularly in the context of governmental condemnation. Rumsfeld, as a member of the Reagan adimistration at the time, himself at the time tried to defect blame onto Iran for that incident. Even after the death of thousands of Kurds, the US contined it's long standing practice of providing military aid to the Hussein regime, a practice which finally ended when Iraq invaded that fellow bastion of democracy and goodwill, the "Republic" of Kuwait (aka-a series of oilfields with an actual flag in the UN).

The point is: the US government has NEVER, EVER cared one iota about the Iraqi people, their welfare, human rights, International Law except to the extent it may have coincided or incidentially intersected with their economic/political interests.

So, the most likely scenario is that they would like the defect the propoganda flowing from one of their missles gone astray. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that...

Remember, "Smart bombs" are supposed to,by definition be hit within 50 feet of their target only 50% of the time!

 

Whatever you believe about this, one has to admit that Yahoo's headline is incredibly misleading:

"US: Iraqi Missle May Have Killed Civilians"

All the generals have done is raise the slightest possibility (without ANY evidence) that maybe the obvious conclusion from this tragedy might not be the correct. The obvious conclusion is clearly that A) the US is bombing the piss out of a city, B) two bombs destroy a market in that city, so C) the US bombing is likely to have done it.

Basically, the argument from the Pentagon is that in a world of infinite possibilities, it actually "could have been" an Iraqi missle somehow. Well, gosh, nice argument, General!

 

I'm betting it was a tragic kabob grill explosion.

 

In the end, it doesn't really matter whether it was a US missle or Iraqi AA fire. The media's shown images of dead Iraqi civilians in an Iraqi city under US bombing attack, and for most of the world, the US is to blame for their deaths. Even if they were killed by Iraqi fire, it doesn't matter because there is no way to convince a majority of the world's people that this was the case. And it's not a matter of biased journalism, it's a price of fighting a war that the majority of the world opposes. Until the war ends, on any civilian deaths, we're going to be the bad guys. It's one of the great advantages Saddam has.

 

On the balance of probabiltites, what do you think it was? I mean really, nobody is going to step up to the plate and accept the blame. Obviously, in either scenario, it wouldn't have happened had their not been missiles blasting into Baghdad but the most likely scenario to me is errant US missiles. I don't think any notion that the US would have targeted the market is credible, although undoubtedly millions in the middle east will believe it possible. Just as millions of american's believe all sorts of things possible of the Iraqi's I suppose.

Here is an AP story that makes me lean more towards the errant Tomahawk theory.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&e=4&u=/ap/20030326/ap_on_re_mi_ea/war_f_16s_2

 

But the US has admitted accidentally killing civilians in other instances, so if we know that's what happened this time, why would we not admit it?


Alex

 

It is not unusual for denials and misdirections to precede the admission though? I would think that in this environment that the US, or Britain, or anyone for that matter, would want to rush right in and accept responsibility, even in the case of accident.

 

I think most rational minds can agree that the target, even if it was the US was not intentional?

I don't understand why the US doesn't get more leeway.

1. Iraq has bought/purchased GPS blockers to eliminate the pin point accuracy of some of our GPS guided weapons. I believe we have taken these out (allegedly.).

2. Iraqi military has placed weapons caches in a school, placed a tank in a hospital, another one under a bridge.

3. Iraqi military has used tactics such as blending in with civilians, dressing up like civilians, surrendering and then opening fire at an opportune time.

From my understanding this is the first real story that I have seen about civilian casualties. The other one I believe was Al Jazeera claiming a terrorist training camp in the North was actually civilian deaths. Otherwise, I haven't seen that many civilian casualties. As many bombs that we have been dropping and with the above conduct, I don't know why the world doesn't see it as miraculous that more civilians aren't dead. We are doing our part, in my mind.