4 ms·

Thanks for sharing and I’m glad you and her are both okay. Well, who knows maybe somebody else ended up shooting her since the. I can’t help but feel like you

Thanks for sharing and I’m glad you and her are both okay. Well, who knows maybe somebody else ended up shooting her since the. I can’t help but feel like you are blaming the victims. The bottom line is that those are civilians who were killed by US military. When the most powerful military in the world invades and occupies a country it can’t expect its people to fight according to its rules and expectations. And when those occupied people indeed fight back it does not justify the killing hundreds of thousands of civilians by the US military.

kongolongo 5y ago
The most powerful military in the world doesn't mean it can identify citizen from enemy combatants 100% of time. A lot of this is kinda meaningless to discuss without some sort of comparison to what other militaries false-positive rates are. Where is the US rank in mis-identification and accidental civilian killings in modern wars?
willis936 5y ago
It's not as simple as placing all blame on one side. Had guerrilla tactics not been used then collateral would be greatly reduced. Both sides have to be equally willing to kill civillians.
nine_k 5y ago
The most powerful military in the world is not powerful enough to be completely invincible to modern weapons accessible to guerilla fighters. They cannot just come close and check that the person they are facing is actually a peaceful bystander, and not a carefully concealed guerilla fighter waiting to hurt them. They could try to, but the casualties among them would be significant. US Marines are not WH40k Marines yet.
- American12143 5y ago
  In the described cases, no one in the U.S. coalition was even taking fire from a particular building. They literally obliterated buildings full of civilians because they thought the buildings might have fighters. Personally, I find that morally abhorrent and a total disregard for the value of life.
tomjen3 5y ago
>And when those occupied people indeed fight back That too was my understanding for the longest time. However Jocko Wilink (today a podcaster, then a Seal commander fighting in Ramadi) specifically said that the people wanted them there and most of the people they fought were either teenagers being paid to plant IEDs (basically the same as the drugs gangs in the US who will pay teenagers to be lookouts and mules), former Sadam regime people or foreign fighters.
- DSingularity 5y ago
  Maybe. But we need hard evidence which we can examine before we reject the most logical explanation wrt who is fighting the invading forces. Obviously we expect that the bulk of the fighters are the invaded are resisting the invaders.
  - tomjen3 5y ago
    Indeed, the bulk of the fighters were old Sadam people. When the US took over and destroyed the regime all of these people were out of a job, and used to being evil they began to fight back.

kongolongo 5y ago

The most powerful military in the world doesn't mean it can identify citizen from enemy combatants 100% of time. A lot of this is kinda meaningless to discuss without some sort of comparison to what other militaries false-positive rates are. Where is the US rank in mis-identification and accidental civilian killings in modern wars?

willis936 5y ago

It's not as simple as placing all blame on one side. Had guerrilla tactics not been used then collateral would be greatly reduced. Both sides have to be equally willing to kill civillians.

nine_k 5y ago

The most powerful military in the world is not powerful enough to be completely invincible to modern weapons accessible to guerilla fighters. They cannot just come close and check that the person they are facing is actually a peaceful bystander, and not a carefully concealed guerilla fighter waiting to hurt them. They could try to, but the casualties among them would be significant. US Marines are not WH40k Marines yet.

American12143 5y ago
In the described cases, no one in the U.S. coalition was even taking fire from a particular building. They literally obliterated buildings full of civilians because they thought the buildings might have fighters. Personally, I find that morally abhorrent and a total disregard for the value of life.

tomjen3 5y ago

>And when those occupied people indeed fight back That too was my understanding for the longest time. However Jocko Wilink (today a podcaster, then a Seal commander fighting in Ramadi) specifically said that the people wanted them there and most of the people they fought were either teenagers being paid to plant IEDs (basically the same as the drugs gangs in the US who will pay teenagers to be lookouts and mules), former Sadam regime people or foreign fighters.

DSingularity 5y ago
Maybe. But we need hard evidence which we can examine before we reject the most logical explanation wrt who is fighting the invading forces. Obviously we expect that the bulk of the fighters are the invaded are resisting the invaders.
- tomjen3 5y ago
  Indeed, the bulk of the fighters were old Sadam people. When the US took over and destroyed the regime all of these people were out of a job, and used to being evil they began to fight back.