We blew up a wedding

Dylflon · 05-24-2004, 02:58 AM

I'm rather surprised by Hero2's insensitivity.

I think the wedding bombing is a terrible thing. Those people didn't deserve to die.

Will these people be classified as "casualties of war"?

The Iraqi people have been so dehumanized to American people that people laugh when they read about innocent people being killed while attending a wedding.

Sickening.

GameMaster · 05-24-2004, 04:13 AM

I was sad when I read it. The troops are getting a little too relaxed if you ask me, they need to do more detailed checks before they attack someone or something. And even worse, the General guy tries to clear his name by saying it didn't look like a wedding celebration to him, he says, "Bad people have celebrations too." Very lame.

gekko · 05-24-2004, 04:39 AM

The troops? What are the troops doing? It was bombed, meaning the most the troops got is something like "NA 08565 36452." That, BTW, is a 5-digit grid coordinate, accurate to within 1 meter. Pilot gets it, drops the bomb. Troops getting too relaxed, they have no idea what they are bombing.

It could have been bad intelligence. Oops. Better luck next time.

Or, we could've had someone on the ground who designated the target, and if that was the case, there's a reason that place was hit.

Since when did America need to justify every bombing to the world? You have no idea what is going on over there, and you don't care until you can spin it to suit your political argument. None of you cared when these people died before, because you don't care about these people. You only pretend to now, because you can use it as an attack on Bush, who, by the way, does not approve every shot fired in Iraq.

Some crazy journalist who knows nothing of the military strategy is going in after each battle and creating some stupid story for the NYTimes and you guys get all excited, like Bush is going to lose. There's a million reasons why this place could've been bombed, and some of them are not exactly going to be disclosed to the public. For example, say a Syrian or Iranian leader was going to be at the wedding, and we had intel that they were paying the insurgents to go into Iraq and fight. Well guess what? We're not at war with those countries, you can't just go tell the world "Hey, we're killing your guys now" without starting another war. God damn, that actually makes sense. One of many possible reasons.

No journalist knows why we're doing what we're doing. They're kept completely out of the military strategy, they just go in after we attack and interview civilians. Well her husband just got shot, no **** she's not happy with us. Then again, the husband was shooting at us with RPGs, but of course, let's leave that out of the story.

Oh no, some innocent civilians got hit with a bomb blast. Well no ****, I thought bombs only killed one person. Here's a better idea, to prevent that, how about we send more soldiers on foot. Oh wait, we don't have that many. Well good, let's draft em from all you ****ers sitting back and whining about innocents dying. Then I can sit back and train you draftees and send you over to die. But look on the bright side, less innocent Iraqis will die.

Canyarion · 05-24-2004, 07:51 AM

Leave Iraq. Now.

Professor S · 05-24-2004, 08:18 AM

This is a perfect example of what I have been talking about. The keft have taken an example of a mistake made during wartime, analyze it to death and try to put more importance on their lives that ever trying to look at THE BIG PICTURE.

Why do they do that?

Because if they looked at the big picture they'd see the thousands of lives that have actually been SAVED by the war. But no, 40+ people at a wedding were killed so the entire war and all the people who won't be terrorized and murdered out of hand mean absolutely NOTHING. You have to love human rights issues when they become pure politics.

Crash · 05-24-2004, 11:38 AM

it says there were rifles and foreign passports, they suspect it was a camp (who just happened to also have a wedding)

terrorists get married to. damn liberal reporters, just writing up the "sad, poor iraqi's" crap. american media sickens me.

keep serving your country boys!

*prepares to vote for bush*

Dylflon · 05-24-2004, 02:04 PM

Grrr!

You people have little or no regard for human life. You just don't give a ****.

At this point I don't give a flying **** who is in the White House this year. Republican or Democrat, this war will continue.

And don't just think I'm anti-American. I care about the lives of the soldiers that this war is costing.

But to say you want to go into a country and help it and then kill thousands of civilians? What the hell is that!?

What's your excuse? You're killing them so that they don't die!? Granted, some civilians will get killed in cross fire and such. I can handle that. But SO MANY civilians have died.

You're not protecting them from terror. You're subjecting them to terror this very moment. Is it a surprise they're fighting back? There was an estimate (which I'll attempt to find) that said that every person in Iraq has lost at least one member of their family in one branch in every direction.

When this war is done, the Iraqis will have nothing but hate for the Americans. This could spawn more terror attacks against America. Therefore, this has to be the most pointless war since Vietnam.

I don't have some sort of political agenda when I talk about civilian death. I'm simply disgusted by the fact that so many civilians are dying. I can't help but think some of the reporters reporting these stories feel the same way.

Hero2 · 05-24-2004, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylflon

I'm rather surprised by Hero2's insensitivity.

I think the wedding bombing is a terrible thing. Those people didn't deserve to die.

Will these people be classified as "casualties of war"?

The Iraqi people have been so dehumanized to American people that people laugh when they read about innocent people being killed while attending a wedding.

Sickening.

Im srry if I offened anyone I dident mean for it to come out so harsh. I dont think it was a good thing that we bombed them or that we killed civilans. I was laughing at the fact that we screwed up BIG. I wasnt lauging at the dead people but the fact that we bombed a wedding it seems like something out of a hot shots movie.

Crash · 05-24-2004, 04:58 PM

the only reason it seems so bad is because all the stupid reporters, reporting everything that happens all day long (well, the stuff that makes americans looks bad anyways)

this stuff happens in all wars, just isn't covered as well as it is today. The truth is: War is Hell

You can't expect america to be the all righteous perfect nation that does nothing wrong and saves everyone, nation that we claim it to be. This is why I said younger poeple are democrats (aka idealists, but not realists)

and later, when they realize how the real world is run, they become republicans.

yeah, democrats complain all day about the weather, but never do anything about it.

lets imagine if hitler was taken out before he came to power... dont you think it would have been worth the collateral damage?

Bond · 05-24-2004, 05:04 PM

In an effort to provide a fair and balanced look at the issue, which you rarely get here at GT:

Quote:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The U.S. military said Monday its photographs of rifles, machine guns, white powder and foreign passports support its case that it attacked a safehouse for foreign fighters — not a wedding party — near the Syrian border.

Iraqi survivors and police said up to 45 people died, and that the victims had been celebrating a wedding. Video that Associated Press Television News shot a day after the attack shows fragments of musical instruments, pots and pans, and brightly colored beddings used for celebrations, scattered around a bombed out tent.

"At this point, we have seen really nothing that causes us to change our minds. That's why we need to get as much evidence as possible and hand it to the investigators," said Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, the coalition deputy chief of staff for operations in Iraq (news - web sites).

"What we found on the ground and our post-strike analysis suggests that what we had was a significant foreign fighter smuggler waystation in the middle of the desert that was bringing people into this country for the sole purpose of attacking to kill the people of Iraq," he said.

Kimmitt said the U.S. operation lasted from midnight until about 4 a.m. and that ground forces moved in after the bombing.

"We have found no evidence of any children being killed by people on the ground," he said at a news conference. "We have witnesses say that there were no children there."

For the second time, Kimmitt showed pictures of items the military said it found at the attack site, including machine guns, rounds of ammunition, a Sudan Airways plane ticket, medical gear, a Sudanese passport and battery packs associated with improvised explosive devises.

"These are pictures that are somewhat inconsistent, to my mind, with a wedding party," Kimmitt said.

New evidence showed the events on the ground to be "somewhat inconsistent with a wedding party," he said.

Earlier Monday, a senior coalition official said on condition of anonymity that the U.S. military hasn't ruled anything out as it looks into Wednesday's pre-dawn operation, but said he is confident that a legitimate target had been hit.

The official said an investigation into the events "probably" would take weeks.

"We have not denied anything about this incident. We still don't believe there was a wedding going on, or a wedding party going on, when we hit in the early morning hours. Could there have been some sort of celebration going on earlier? Certainly," the official said.

Several hours of video footage obtained Sunday by Associated Press Television News showed a wedding party that survivors said was later attacked by U.S. planes. The dead included the cameraman, Yasser Shawkat Abdullah, hired to record the festivities, which ended Tuesday night before the planes struck.

Among those killed were 27 members of the same family, survivors said.

APTN footage taken on Wednesday in the city of Ramadi shows the burials of women and children who allegedly died in the wedding attack. The U.S. military has said up to six women may have died in its operation.

Source

Crash · 05-24-2004, 06:08 PM

ha!!!

see, i told you the American press sucks hardcore... dont believe the media, (cept fox new channel)

DeathsHand · 05-24-2004, 06:18 PM

I don't see how the article Bond posted is a more fair and balanced look, considering it's written by the same guy... Unless I'm missing the point of posting that, which I probably am...

Seems like nowadays, "Fair and balanced" means "Whatever articles proves my arguement the best"...

Liberals find stories that make the US look bad and say "This is the truth" and then Republicans find another source that paints a different picture and says "No, this is the truth..."...

And come on, Fox News? Granted it's the cable news channel I watch the most (and I watch a lot of the cable news... well, kinda), isn't it supposed to be very aligned to the right? How is that any better than "the rest" of the media which is supposed to be aligned more to the left? Unless of course you're a republican, which makes it better because they're on your side...

Crash · 05-24-2004, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathsHand

And come on, Fox News? Granted it's the cable news channel I watch the most (and I watch a lot of the cable news... well, kinda), isn't it supposed to be very aligned to the right? How is that any better than "the rest" of the media which is supposed to be aligned more to the left? Unless of course you're a republican, which makes it better because they're on your side...

yep, you're right... it isn't any better, it is not fair and balanced, but it supports my views... lol... politics are dumb. Nothing is ever fair and balanced.