General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBy the way, Syria almost certainly is perfectly fine with the US bombing ISIL.
Want clues?
1) No howls of outrage from Tehran, Damascus, or Moscow
2) Jordan is participating.
http://abcnews.go.com/International/us-airstrikes-syria/story?id=25686031
Jordan would not be bombing targets in Syria unless they had a lot of assurances that this would not get Iran and Syria pissed at them.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)ibegurpard
(16,685 posts)how many hungry people in this country could the money used for all those bombs buy food for?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)of military action. you disagree?
moondust
(19,993 posts)Just started a few hours ago. And there may be some "private" agreements behind closed doors in this operation in order to protect local populations from wacko retaliation.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)their talking points and draft UN resolutions already drafted and ready for release.
Iranian state news agency headline:
(though, being the Iranian state news agency, they go on to claim that ISIL was trained by the CIA)
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)neverforget
(9,436 posts)in a civil war regardless of how we term our involvement.
hedda_foil
(16,375 posts)No doubt Assad and the boys see that if the coalition bombs ISIL/ISIS et al into the ground, they'll simultaneously weaken Assad's more potent enemies. That would leave Assad more able to strengthen his hand and consolidate the power of his government.. Can't say I'd blame him.
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)This opens the door for Putin to go in and fight Assad's enemies.
Assad is a friend of Russia. Ya think Putin has played this out pretty well? So what happens when one of the Russian bombs hits some cia base or other US friendly area? Remember how we accidentally hit a Chinese Embassy in Yugoslavia? It happens.
woolldog
(8,791 posts)The bombing of the Chinese?
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)What matters is: what do the Chinese think?
We know China looks way into the future. I mean, they have to like that we have gone into Afghanistan and fought their enemies there. And now China has contracts to mine in Afghanistan.
China is not an empire. Why not? They have more people than any other country. Could it be that China knows empire is a losing proposition?
So, if Russia hits a target in Syria, that Cheney can use to make Obama do more war, where will that end?
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)I'm guessing the Syrians under our indiscriminate bombing raids might have a thing or two to say about it. But since the United States doesn't do constitutional anymore, we the people don't count so why should the Syrians?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)It does not mean "any bombs dropped by the United States"
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Never an innocent bystander, never an unintended target, never a misidentified target? I had no idea! We should drop bombs everywhere, since they never ever kill or maim someone who didn't deserve it in some way. God bless America and our faultless military and blameless leaders!
Why can't the rest of the world just get with this program? It's so simple-minded, even a terrorist could get it.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)indiscriminate killing.
Targeting military positions is not.
Shooting at a target, or trying to drop bombs on a target, and missing is not 'indiscriminate'
"Indiscriminate" means "done at random or without careful judgment."
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)But if it helps you sleep at night to tell yourself that, you keep right on telling yourself that. Then be all rah-rah-sis-BOOM-bah when the U.S. has to go on another round of bombing people, even though it didn't work last time, but who remembers last time anyway except a bunch of dirty fucking hippies who don't know what "indiscriminate" means?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Eight civilians, including three children among the dead due to our bombing. But that's not "indiscriminate." How many more civilian deaths before we get to indiscriminate?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)the numbers you'll need are number of non-combatants vs combatants killed. If it's 300 dead non-combatants vs 12 combatants, that would be Prime facile evidence of indiscriminate attacks.
If it's 12 dead civilians and 300 dead combatants, then you have a prima facile case that the attack was not indiscriminate.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)As long as you're traipsing through the dictionary, and creating rationales for indiscriminate slaughter as you go.
But in this case, the preliminary estimate was 40 dead, then 50, with reports of 8 civilian dead. I'm not sure how the terrorist/civilian divide was made, but that's at least 16% civilian casualties, about four times the rate you deem acceptable - though I notice that by no means did you admit that was your upper limit. It's probably wise not to commit to a number, lest it look like you're endorsing a crime against humanity.
I wonder what the survivors would deem an acceptable terrorist to civilian casualty rate might be? Of course, some folks who considered themselves civilians before the bombing began might come to regard themselves (or be regarded by our military leaders) as terrorists for the feelings engendered by watching their loved ones blown to smithereens.
All part of the game, I suppose.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)indicates this was not indiscriminate as an empirical matter.
Justified, moral, and wise? That is a much more subjective call.
cali
(114,904 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)This is not the same as Gaza.
cali
(114,904 posts)your post is exactly the same reasoning as those defending the bombing of Gaza. Exactly.
indiscriminate killing.
Targeting military positions is not.
Shooting at a target, or trying to drop bombs on a target, and missing is not 'indiscriminate'
"Indiscriminate" means "done at random or without careful judgment."
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)The hundreds of dead civilians, repeatedly bombed UN shelters, and implementation of the Hannibal directive all establish that those statements were not applicable to Gaza.
Your attempt to be clever by finding a 'gotcha" moment is a fail. Proportionality is an issue in EVERY conflict. So, stating the same standards as others have stated them is not evidence of bad faith or whatever. What counts is whether the conduct in question meets those standards. In Gaza, the answer was no.
cali
(114,904 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)DustyJoe
(849 posts)I mean, our personnel do type in the gps coordinates into the weapon before firing.
Bad time for a typo or dyslexia ya know.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Two days ago, I said our bombing raids were going to be indiscriminate, and . . .
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/09/23/240813_syrian-rebels-angry-that-strikes.html?rh=1
The deaths of the civilians evoked an emotional response.
People see there was a massacre in which innocent people were killed, Hamadi said. They are asking, Who is responsible, the (U.S.-led) coalition or the Assad regime?
Who was in the building at the time was unknown. One media activist told McClatchy that the missile killed at least 10 emirs of the Nusra Front, but another activist denied that any Nusra leaders were in the building.
It "may have been an erroneous strike." Seems to me that if you're going to avoid being called "indiscriminate" in your bombing, you'd better make sure what it is you're bombing. Which would be a war first whenever it happens.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)I think this is leading to bombing Assad too and I don't think he is unaware of that
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)"In recent weeks, Syrian officials insisted that any international strikes on its soil must be coordinated with Damascus or else they would be considered an act of aggression and a breach of Syria's sovereignty."
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/syria-washington-informed-strikes-25690412
(note you have to slog through the war propaganda to get to the actual meat of the article)
flamingdem
(39,313 posts)and according to CNN guy they'll highlight getting rid of chemical weapons.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)joshcryer
(62,276 posts)So yeah, Assad and Syria do not mind in the least.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Caretha
(2,737 posts)We armed ISIS (ISIL)!
Now we get to fight them - oh joy oh joy. How happy the Military Industrial Complex and all their stockholders must be.
And guess what! We, the U.S. taxpayer funded them. Surprise - surprise - surprise, as Gomer Pyle would say.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jul/15/isil-captured-52-us-made-howitzers-artillery-weapo/
By Douglas Ernst - The Washington Times - Tuesday, July 15, 2014
Sunni radicals with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) may have captured as many as 52 U.S.-made M198 howitzers in their march across Iraq in June.
They shouldnt have too much trouble shelling large area targets like a city if they have sufficient ammo, Jeremy Binnie of the British military consultancy HIS Janes told McClatchy news service Monday.
The artillery weapons, which cost roughly $500,000 each, include GPS aiming systems.
Mr. Binnie told McClatchy that the Islamic terrorist organization would have a difficult time figuring out exactly how to use the technologys pinpoint accuracy, but that members would still be able to do significant damage. Each howitzer has a range of 20 miles and can fire two rounds per minute.
In addition to the stolen artillery weapons, ISIL is also in possession of 1,500 armored Humvees, McClatchy reported.
That ain't even the half of all the weapons and equipment they toted from Iraq to Syria. Could we have taken out those supply lines and destroyed these weapons. Sure we could have, but we didn't. Now think boys & girls why would that be?
Even little ol me, even though I'm not a military strategist or General or hell...I don't even work in one of those Pentagon think tanks could have figured that one out - simple, destroy the weapons before they fall into the hands of the bad guys.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Syria did not approve.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/iran-leader-strikes-syria-illegal-govt-25696883
So, you were wrong.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)So, you know, escape hatch. Sort of like the slippery meaning of "indiscriminate."
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)And Syria says it was informed ahead of time.
marmar
(77,081 posts)I suspect it's not the latter.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)But, neither Syria nor the Syrian people asked for, condoned or gave permission for this attack.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)seveneyes
(4,631 posts)They will continue to teach their children to hate and destroy those who don't share their religious insanity.
cali
(114,904 posts)kentuck
(111,103 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Also, did you mean the Syrian people?
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)Keep shooting at the terrorists, eventually you'll get them all.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)there's not any downside to killing the bastards.
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)Please... If the American Media actually showed the level of "collateral damage" we have been causing in the "War On Terror" ,which by the way we have already lost since we are shitting in our collective pants over an massive army of 30,000 fucking cave dwellers, then you wouldn't see near as much support for your "Kill Em' All" policy.