Support NeoGAF

[King Tubby]

This isn't meant to sound cheesy or B level quotable but sometimes I wonder if we are the terrorists. From their point of view I can see why they hate western civilization so much. Just imagine what would happen if they shot a mistsle at a Costco in FL to kill two enlisted Marines and everyone died in Costco. The nation would be in an uproar and you bet your ass we'd be retaliating.

This is also exactly why 'just leave ISIS alone" isn't viable. Eventually they will get an attack off in the country, and the people who did "nothing" to stop them will be held accountable by being voted out in favor of heavy handed morons.

 

[Yoshimitsu126]

I hate to say it but ISIS probably saw that attack coming.

 

[TarNaru33]

So much for precision guided



I understand this is sarcasm, right?

Cool. That'll show em.

Did you two even read the article? The bomb itself detonated other bombs, causing the building to collapse. It isn't easy going after dug in snipers in an urban environment, the safest way is to blow up wherever they are encamped.

It is a sad result, but I would of done the same if I was commander and didn't think 200+ civilians were in the lower levels of the building. I put the blame solely on ISIS using a building that many civilians are in as a sniping location.

I hate to say it but ISIS probably saw that attack coming.

It does sound like they were hoping for this building to be hit with an explosive device to kill the civilians... either that, or they were going to threaten blowing up the building with the civilians in it to prevent an assault on the building.

Can't really tell what reasoning was behind it; to prevent an attack or to hope an attack hits it and kill the civilians along with it.

 

[Xe4]

The building was not rigged with explosives, there was a depot in the building that intel didn't know.

The facts are:

-American Intel knew there were civilians in there that could be at risk no matter how much they tried to "minimize risk"
-The civilians were not forced there by terrorist but seeking refugee, american intel knew this
-The strike was to target 2 people and they knew there was (although allegedly minimal) a chance that civilian casualties would happen and they would vastly outnumber the target if hit

America thought that the chance of hitting over 100 civilians was worth the shot to kill 2 terrorists, turns out there was a bomb deposit their intel didn't know, you can't go "oopsie!" from this, those civilian casualties were something they were totally okay to waste.

No the US did not know there were civilians in the building. Read the article.

Those organising the strike "could not have predicted the presence of civilians in the structure prior to the engagement," it added.

And the reason the civilians were in the building at all was because ISIS forced them out of their houses.

The civilians had gathered in the lower floors of the building after being expelled from their homes by IS fighters, a declassified summary of the report said.

Whether or not herding took place, ISIS is mostly responsible for their deaths. The US has to take responsibility as well, as does the Iraqi Security Forces, but let's not pretend the US saw 100 civilians in there, and said "Fuck it", let's do it anyways.

 

[CountAntonius]

Rest in peace to the lost. We need to be called out on this shit constantly. We are creating the enemy with every one of these attacks.

 

[Shaanyboi]

For all the money spent on the military, how much more fucking inept and grossly irresponsible could you be?

This is disgusting.

 

[Hale-XF11]

For all the money spent on the military, how much more fucking inept and grossly irresponsible could you be?

This is disgusting.

We clearly aren't spending the bulk of that money on intelligence.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

The building was not rigged with explosives, there was a depot in the building that intel didn't know.

The facts are:

-American Intel knew there were civilians in there that could be at risk no matter how much they tried to "minimize risk"
-The civilians were not forced there by terrorist but seeking refugee, american intel knew this
-The strike was to target 2 people and they knew there was (although allegedly minimal) a chance that civilian casualties would happen and they would vastly outnumber the target if hit

America thought that the chance of hitting over 100 civilians was worth the shot to kill 2 terrorists, turns out there was a bomb deposit their intel didn't know, you can't go "oopsie!" from this, those civilian casualties were something they were totally okay to waste.

The civilians had gathered in the lower floors of the building after being expelled from their homes by IS fighters

.

 

[Atolm]

But this isn't terrorism, right guys? Because we're on the side of justice and FREEDOM. Right?

 

[The Technomancer]

At what point do we admit the efficacy of all of this is basically negligible?

 

[yanipheonu]

This isn't meant to sound cheesy or B level quotable but sometimes I wonder if we are the terrorists. From their point of view I can see why they hate western civilization so much. Just imagine what would happen if they shot a mistsle at a Costco in FL to kill two enlisted Marines and everyone died in Costco. The nation would be in an uproar and you bet your ass we'd be retaliating.

There's a point to be made that killing innocent civilians does not seem to be a unique condition to terrorism. War does it all the time.

I've read genuine arguments that terrorism doesn't really exist, and it's all just small scale warfare. Not my particular take, but the argument exists.

 

[Dilly]

We're going to pay for this dearly one day, aren't we. Maybe not tomorrow or the next day, but some day.

No, Europe pays for US' crimes.

 

[fantomena]

Paging George Carlin.

This country is only 200 years old, and already we've had ten major wars. We average a major war every twenty years, So we're good at it. And it's just as well we are, because we're not very good at anything else. Can't build a decent car anymore. Can't make a TV set, a cell phone, or a VCR. Got no steel industry left. No textiles. Can't educate our young people. Can't get health care to our old people. But we can bomb the shit outta your country, all right. We can bomb the shit outta your country. Especially if your country is full of brown people. Oh, we like that, don't we? That's our hobby now. But it's also our new job in the world: bombing brown people. Iraq, Panama, Grenada, Libya. You got some brown people in your country? Tell 'em to watch the fuck out, or we'll goddamn bomb them!

 

[One Eyed Willy]

War crime.

Ya ISIS shouldn't be hiding behind civilians I agree.

 

[Shaanyboi]

Ya ISIS shouldn't be hiding behind civilians I agree.

Shocker, terrorist regimes don't abide by international law. But that means everything's game at that point, right?

/s

 

[PSqueak]

No the US did not know there were civilians in the building. Read the article.

Im not buying that part about them not knowing the civilians were there. specially since the article also mentions the strike was supposed accounted to minimize civilian damage.

 

[Xe4]

No, Europe pays for US' crimes.

Totally why 50 people got shot in an Orlando nightclub, right? Or how 3,000 people died on 9/11. I suppose that's Europe paying for the US's crimes right?

C'mon man. Europe has it's problems with terrorism as well, but let's not whitewash what the US deals with.

Im not buying that part about them not knowing the civilians were there. specially since the article also mentions the strike was supposed accounted to minimize civilian damage.

I don't care what you do or do not buy. Opinions are opinions, you know? But then don't state that the US knew as a fact, when the article states clearly that it did not. Source your claims, or say it it is an opinion.

 

[Nesotenso]

so basically human shields.

no easy answers in conflict.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

If people want rid of ISIS, civilians are going to have to die. How quickly you want rid of them determines how many civilians will end up dying in total. It's not nice, it's not pretty and it's not right. It's just how it is.

Especially since ISIS is eager and willing to kill civilians.

 

[MisterFalcon]

Better issue orders to the Iraqi Army to not use firearms against ISIS. They could hit an IED which will kill civilians which will create new terrorists apparently. From a population that has lived under ISIS rule for years and has not risen up then but if an American or even worse a Shia kills one of them will turn into an army instantly.

 

[i-Lo]

Amidst information and misinformation overflow, what is an actual and pragmatic solution to end this conflict?

I mean, purely based on numbers the repercussion for killing 105 civilians as part of collateral damage, in all likelihood, will be far less than the Manchester bombing. Disenfranchisement of muslim youths will follow in UK and in war torn zones in the middle east, providing fodder for ISIL recruitment. "Hate" is what these fuckers rely on and there is plenty of resentment and hate to go around which will just perpetuate the current situation.

 

[Yoshimitsu126]

No, Europe pays for US' crimes.

Sad but true.

US is currently getting attack by their own people though.

 

[v0yce]

The thread title and the content of the OP are different enough that it's interesting to see who didn't bother to even read the info.

Not really.

"But how we're supposed to know.." isn't an excuse for killing over 100 innocent people.

We screwed up.

 

[Tovarisc]

Shocker, terrorist regimes don't abide by international law. But that means everything's game at that point, right?

/s

Why /s?

Sentiment of some posts in this thread is that when killing terrorists its all good and nothing to be sorry about because
A) We didn't order strike, Iraqi's did
B) It's on ISIS to hide among civilians, not on us

 

[Obliterator]

Truly horrible shit. Disgraceful

 

[PeskyToaster]

This is the real issue. You chop off one head in a reckless manner like this and two more will grow in it's place.

But they aren't going to go after ISIS?

 

[Ahasverus]

The US are terrorists in those countries.

 

[Triggerhappytel]

You killed two but how many more did you create?

Exactly. Bullshit like this is creating situations like the attack in Manchester as a direct result.

 

[Hoje0308]

Im not buying that part about them not knowing the civilians were there. specially since the article also mentions the strike was supposed accounted to minimize civilian damage.

Urban warfare necessitates plans to minimize civilian damage.

 

[RedStep]

The US are terrorists in those countries.

Yes, the actual terrorists that took over their homes and packed them with explosives are not the terrorists. They would have been fine huddled in that corner for the rest of their lives, if it wasn't for the US!

 

[Mohonky]

I hate to say it but ISIS probably saw that attack coming.

Well they did remove residents from their homes and thise residents ended up taking shelter in a building that was loaded up with explosives.

Its a win win for ISIS; you dont hit them and they have free reign of a position to fire from, you hit them and its a colossal fuck up of dead civilians.

They are well aware of this, it makes for excellent propagandha.

I know people are saying 'well they shouldnt have fired on the building' but the alternative is you put boots on the ground, and I dont think anyone is jumping at that idea either.

They are being played into an unwinnable situation. No ordinary army would shelter the population into a building full of munitions and then use it as a battle front, but we've seen ISIS and similar have no qualms about using the civilians as human shields as its a win for them any which way they look at it.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

The US are terrorists in those countries.

If you have a grade school level of understanding, sure.



You can point fingers all the way back to the Sassanids as to why that region is the way it is now. It's not going to do any good. Best thing to do is chip away at ISIS until they are all dead.

 

[Sarcastic Poster]

"Why do they hate us so much?!"

Gee, Jim-Bob, I don't have any idea.

That doesn't explain terror attacks in Indonesia and the like though.

 

[SolarMystic]

Ah yes, another game of "Let's see who read the OP".

Tragic loss of innocent lives nonetheless.

 

[And_Gignac]

This is terrorism, too. No dancing around it.

I wonder if this thread would be 4 pages long if 100 American civilians were part of the casualties.

 

[EatinOlives]

And we wonder how ISIS can recruit people so easily.

 

[Jotaka]

Congratulations USA... you just created more potential terrorists.

 

[Randolph Freelander]

Ah yes, another game of "Let's see who read the OP".

Tragic loss of innocent lives nonetheless.

Looks like a game of projection on your part and others. We've read the OP. The US is guilty.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Terrible result but ISIS fights very dirty


These poor people were doomed to suffer either way in the captivity of ISIS cruelty and tactics

I just we had a more effective means of stopping these snipers and actually rescuing innocent civilians

Were bombs really the most effective tactic here?

 

[ebullientprism]

Its appalling that people are willing to justify an air strike in a civilian crowded area just to kill 2 bad guys. Even if there were no explosives buried anywhere, this shouldn't have ever been green-lit. Imagine SWAT/FBI calling in an air strike to kill a couple of active shooters in a USA suburb, try to justify that.

This casual "well thats just bad luck" is what gets you more terrorists.

105 is about 5 times the number of people that died in Manchester. Let that sink in.

 

[HariKari]

Looks like a game of projection on your part and others. We've read the OP. The US is guilty.

Yeah, because war is so clean cut and precise. Get real. These strikes are called in by Iraqi spotters for the most part, and there was no way of knowing the place a storage facility for explosives to begin with.

 

[TarNaru33]

This isn't meant to sound cheesy or B level quotable but sometimes I wonder if we are the terrorists. From their point of view I can see why they hate western civilization so much. Just imagine what would happen if they shot a mistsle at a Costco in FL to kill two enlisted Marines and everyone died in Costco. The nation would be in an uproar and you bet your ass we'd be retaliating.

Yes... because U.S marines will stockpile weapons where 200+ U.S citizens are, which would constitute a war crime that U.S would likely prosecute.

Don't be stupid dude

Im not buying that part about them not knowing the civilians were there. specially since the article also mentions the strike was supposed accounted to minimize civilian damage.

Civilian damage can be buildings as well. It is a war crime to blow up civilian buildings just to blow them up, so yes, they would still use whatever ordnance they have that wouldn't collapse the building. Also using a weapon to prevent possible civilian casualties do not = knowing there are civilians in the area. Just because you don't think 1000 civilians is in a city does not mean you can go ahead and nuke it to kill 500 soldiers.

 

[Ray Wonder]

And we wonder how ISIS can recruit people so easily.

"Let's go join the people that chased our families out of our homes, surrounded them in explosives, and waited on top of the building baiting the US to bomb them."

It's only partially the US's fault. The ground crew that ordered the strike was Iraq Security Services. The US bomber pilots aren't capable of analyzing the building's interior for civilians.

 

[Randolph Freelander]

Yeah, because war is so clean cut and precise. Get real. These strikes are called in by Iraqi spotters for the most part, and there was no way of knowing the place a storage facility for explosives to begin with.

Pardon me for not advocating bombing buildings without knowing what's in them.

 

[Fox Mulder]

.

 

[boiled goose]

We should all think about this when we criticize terrorists for targeting civilians.



We just killed over 100 of them.


We have to criticize unnecessary violence in all its forms.

 

[Hale-XF11]

If you're one of the people excusing this because of some bad intelligence, then guess what, you're part of the problem.

 

[Mohonky]

Terrible result but ISIS fights very dirty


These poor people were doomed to suffer either way in the captivity of ISIS cruelty and tactics

I just we had a more effective means of stopping these snipers and actually rescuing innocent civilians

Were bombs really the most effective tactic here?

Like I said earlier, the other alternative is boots on the ground for intel and clearing buildings slowly but methodically.

A big part of the reason the Iraqi army and Kurds have been effective is because they have had air support. ISIS have nothing to counter or prevent it except to ensure as much collateral damage as possible to make the enemy second guess, which is what is happening here.

 

[Real Hero]

Pardon me for not advocating bombing buildings without knowing what's in them.

Your are just an idealist!

 

[TheRealTalker]

That is a 0.019% success ratio

'MERICA

Spoiler

condolences to the victims of this atrocity