It's May 11, 2024, 08:12:05 AM
US-British troops just bombed a civilian area in Iraq, killing 6 civilians and wounding 12 others. The allegations are polar opposites, Iraq citing a pre emptive strike while the US saying the same.But at the end of the day 6 innocents are dead for no reason, imagine if it had been the iraqis who killed 6 american soldiers (never mind civilians), the US would start bombing like fuck, no questions asked. It looks to me like the US/British are trying to battle harden the troops before full conflict. Sad how an alliance claiming to protect iraqis goes and bombs the innocents. Its happened before and it'll happen again will they be held accountable?
Look at the news man, it was the leading story on all the news stations, debating whether or not it was a legal assault under UN laws. Watch CNN tonight, im sure itll be on it. BTW it was 6 dead 15 injured. Read the papers today, its all over them
Well considering the attack was in Basra, a largely residential area, I dont see how you could attack a target without killing civilians. Secondly, no news source can prove that 6 civilians were killed OR that the iraqis opened fire. If the 6 dead wasnt based on any evidence, then why did the leading english news station have it as the lead story? America and Britain are stepping up their destruction of iraqi defense systems that could hinder a ground assault, the 6 were "collateral" damage. As a war has not been sanctioned, why is it that the states and uk can attack iraq's infrastructure without repraisal, when it seems that Iraq is doing whats being asked "disarming"For those with a short term memory, remember when Fishler said the disarming of the al-soumoud missiles would be a test of Iraqs willingness to comply? Well I think they are passing that test, and as long as iraq continues to disarm, why attack? By all means keep the pressure on but dont go gung ho when things are going smoothly.