It's not an "every president" thing. Trump specifically relaxed the tolerance of civilian casualties.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
More than 200 dead in suspected U.S. airstrike that hits civilians in Mosul
- Thread starter chadskin
- Start date
- Status
m_shortpants
Member
arewethebaddies.gif
Seriously, this is fucking disgusting. There will be no apology or accountability for this. No headlines. No nothing. No international mourning. No Facebook pictures.
Just more persecuted brown people dead.
Seriously, this is fucking disgusting. There will be no apology or accountability for this. No headlines. No nothing. No international mourning. No Facebook pictures.
Just more persecuted brown people dead.
The bodycount must be close to a million since that evil fuck Dubya started his "war on terror", and nobody gives a fuck. Just 200 more inconsequential brown people getting bombed into oblivion on the other side of the globe.
Parmadillo Marshmallow
Member
I disagree. Obama's ill advised strikes are one of my greatest criticisms of him. It's not ok under any president.
Wenger'sBakedBaguettes
Member
Western pundits can't attribute this to an anti-Russia or anti-Iran angle so there won't be a huge outcry about it. Waiting for the inevitable attribution error label by western media, really the contrast of western media coverage between E. Aleppo and Yemen, Mosul, W. Aleppo couldn't be more obvious. I can't wait for CNN anchors to start crying for civilians in Mosul. Can't wait for the vigils, hashtags and marches in Boston and all talk about the million last hospitals being bombed in Mosul being mentioned. Western media continues being a hypocritical laughing stock. Anyway, frustrating double standards in coverage aside the US-Russia rivalry shouldn't take away from the hard work and sacrifices the Iraqi forces on the ground are doing to liberate the remaining parts of W. Mosul. The sooner they finish it the better.
moderate rebelsSalafi rebels and their AQ and ISIS buddies in Syria. Still doesn't excuse this by any means.
Some pretty bad images circulating on some Iraqi media on the net showing the victims being buried in mass family graves
Not giving an excuse for this but ISIS has and continues to use human shields. I know it's an old excuse to justify straight up slaughter by the big boys Russia/US and it's disgusting but ISIS has used human shield plenty of times against IA and ISF which has slowed down liberation of cities significantly. Same with the
"Brown Moooslims. Who cares." That's the world we live in.
Some pretty bad images circulating on some Iraqi media on the net showing the victims being buried in mass family graves
SSGMUN10000
Connoisseur Of Tedium
What was the total tally of civilian deaths during Obama's presidency?
Both sides. But one side happens to have awesome weapons and are able to deal a lot more death and destruction.
Portugeezer
Member
This drone technology sucks balls, that's appalling.
Regulus Tera
Romanes Eunt Domus
Drone technology is working exactly as it was intended to do. But don't worry, I'm sure the US will hurry to put some guidelines on drone warfare the moment another entity gets its hands on the tech. It's only bad when somebody else does it.
Portugeezer
Member
Accidentally hitting a fuel truck sounds like shit tech to me.
Or shit targeting. Or shit excuse.
Exactly this.
This is just blatantly false. I feel embarrassed for you.
Frustrated_me
Member
Care to explain?
VanquishUK
Member
arewethebaddies.gif
You Are Viewtiful
Member
Standards have indeed been loosened under Trump. http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/14...und-weapons-factory-state-fighting-budget-cu/
SSGMUN10000
Connoisseur Of Tedium
Well I guess I will quote myself.
Here is what The Bureau of Investigative Journalism says. It covers up to 2015.
https://www.thebureauinvestigates.c...r-in-numbers-ten-times-more-strikes-than-bush
Seems like cheeto breath is going to top this within the first few months of his presidency.
There is no reason to hold back. Several Human Rights groups have reported since Trump took over US strikes have suddenly been targeting traditionally civilian facilities etc. Yes under Obama there were mistakes made but under Trump we are seeing a deliberate change in tactics which he himself said he would do. He openly bragged he would kill men, women, children and bomb the shit out of everything
This has been happening for years, screw people being giddy to turn this into just a trump thing.
With the only consequence being a possible statement if we're lucky about doing their best to minimize civilian casualties.
Complete fucking horseshit.
More deaths than all the terrorist attacks in Europe in the last year.
But we didn't mean to kill all these families.
Then fucking do better because this is not okay.
With the only consequence being a possible statement if we're lucky about doing their best to minimize civilian casualties.
Complete fucking horseshit.
More deaths than all the terrorist attacks in Europe in the last year.
But we didn't mean to kill all these families.
Then fucking do better because this is not okay.
DontBeThatGuy
Member
In 4 years he's gonna dwarf the amount of civilians killed compared to previous admin, can't even imagine those numbers if re-elected. (and who knows if other wars lay ahead)
V
Vilix
Unconfirmed Member
He did? I'm no Trump supporter. But I'd like to know where he said to relax tolerance of civilian casualties.
Holy shit, fuck you in ass trump. I hope you fall down some stairs and crack your neck.
The Greek Freak
Member
Can't imagine any presidential candidate in the next 20 years not continuing the now tradition of murdering middle eastern civilians.
Elfotografoalocado
Banned
To him, being a "killer" is cool, and a good thing, because his only moral guidance (if this can be called so) is getting the upper hand on every petty issue by whatever means, and he can't conceive winning without somebody losing. And that who wins gets to dictate what's right and wrong.
He's a fascist after all.
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
Honest question: is it possible to do better? If this a case of Trump being evil and lowering standards, fine. But in general, can this actually be avoided in a large-scale bombing campaign?
Air Zombie Meat
Member
Pisses me off how shit like this gets handwaved as whataboutism then we have a specific thread for it those same posters are silent.
They bombed a school being used as a shelter just the other day in Syria.
If they put more fucking effort into verifying what they're blowing to shreds it wouldn't have happened.
Either carelessness or military incompetence. Either way, it's horrifically unacceptable.
Fix your shit.
CadetMahoney
Member
That's an enormous amount of casualties in on go. Aren't they always selling that snake-oil about precision strikes and intelligence, I guess they've given up trying to do that by now.
Door to door knockdown fighting with tens of thousands of boots on the ground and high casualty to success ratio.
Solving the problem of making up with air directed artillery what you cannot make up with boots on the ground due to political problems concerned with high deployment numbers has been an issue plaguing the US government since Vietnam. I remember reading that the Chiefs originally wanted 3-400k more troops for the initial invasion (keyword here being /invasion/, this was before the plan was changed unilaterally by the White House post regime change to stay and occupy the nation) of Iraq but Rumsfeld shot them down every time over and over again until they got down to a number he wanted, then he told the White House the plan. Same thing happened in Vietnam with McNamara > Johnson White House. When you're actively terrified of thousands and thousands of caskets with american flags on them coming back home your ability to wage war any other style but the Roman style of "make a desert and call it peace" dramatically diminishes.
*A sad lol*
cryptosporidium
Member
Obama killed a lot of civilians, but at least he fucking reviewed many of the missions. From my understanding Trump (this actually is probably a good thing..) just handwaves everything and lets other people take care of it
Damn.
This is state sponsored terrorism being waged against the middle east. Sickening and evil.
Vigilant Walrus
Member
I'll do you one further. How many people do you think died in Iraq during Clintons precidency due to sanctions?
When Saddam gasses thousands of his own people with chemical weapons- Which by international law warrants invasion and declarations of war for crimes against humanity, the US didn't do anything in 87' because Saddam, like many puppet regime dictators was a boon that played ball with US interests. The US might not have liked it, but those Kurds getting gassed in their own villages are worth less than the allure of lost oil revenues.
The US only cared enough to stop Saddam when he invaded Kuwait which was a sign they couldn't control him anymore. In a massive blunder they decided to not remove Saddam while at the same time, telling the Iraqis to fight for a revolution, with the US withdrawing and leaving them to die in the hands of a genocide imposed by Saddam throughout the 90s.
It's not that a war against Iraq was not warranted. Saddam had broken every sort of violation you could think of. His sadism is the stuff of legends. People opposed to war because people didn't think that the US had the Iraqis best interest in their focus. If it did, there would have been an invasion after the chemical weapons.
The US looks the other way. It's why it sells for billions of dollars in weapons to Saudi Arabia, who gives them Sunni groups like ISIS who can then start proxy wars in Shia territories. The Shias themselves are distursting of the US after the CIA backed coup during Eisenhowers administration which overturned a conservative leader and replaced it with 20 years of ruthless dictatorship which turned Iran into a fanatical state that set that country back hundreds of years and regressed into a oppressive revolution.
Sunnis and Shias have fought since the days of Muhammed, but the escalation in recent years rest highly on Western imperalism. There is enough blame to go around with colonization, puppet states, drawing map lines. And then we have the nerve to see them as toxic enemies when our governments are the ones who've destabilized them.
You cannot blame Muslims not to buy it when western leaders talk about peace in the middle east, and sells so many weapons to groups and regimes who're going to use them. The disconnect is extreme.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked