Is the current surge working? - Page 12

oldreliable67 · 07-26-07, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Volker

When some idiots coming from far away to a town, kill a lot of people and claim to "serve" their country, this is disgusting.

Kinda like your grandpa, when he was Waffen SS? Are you willing to say the same about the actions of your countrymen in WWII?

Your statement strongly implies that the US military comes into towns and indiscriminately kills people, without regard to their status as combatants, civilians, women, or children. If such were true, as it was with the Waffen SS and your grandpa, it was then and would now indeed be disgusting. But, thankfully, you are quite wrong: such is simply not true of the US military in Iraq.

oldreliable67 · 07-26-07, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gladiator

Certainly many US soldiers have gone to great lengths, and increased personal peril, in attempts to avoid civilian casualties.

Correct. But its not just the individual US soldier. It is a matter of both humanity (something lacking in the radical Islamist/AQ approach) and strategy. Here is an excerpt from a Michael Yon article that illustrates the high priority placed on avoiding civilian casualties. Read the whole thing here.

Quote:

I walked into the TOC at about 0320 that Saturday morning, and there was a video feed coming in from an F-16. Crosshairs were steady on a house the pilot was circling. We could sometimes hear the jet as it orbited over the Baqubah. The Shadow was circling the same house but from a lower altitude.

“What’s up with the house?” I asked.

“An element took SAFIRE (small arms fire) and the enemy ran into that house.”

“What’re you gonna do?”

“Trying to decide. Probably bomb it.”

“Bomb it,” he said. Sounded simple. Question is, with what? Commanders have myriad options. Some weapons are within their direct authority to use, while other weapons require higher permission. Rules of Engagement (ROE) constantly change, and in order not to tip the enemy, I’ll only talk about the ROE in a general sense. For the early days of operation Arrowhead Ripper, the ROE were relaxed, giving robust options further down the chain, with caveats to mitigate civilian deaths, which had been few.

The 3-2 is combat seasoned — many 3-2 soldiers have served three or more combat tours — but if such relaxed rules were extended to a brigade without a similar depth, the results might be muddier missions from commanders whose soldiers had either sticky trigger fingers, or were too quick on the draw. Either extreme could result in catastrophe.

A week after serious fighting began on June 19, I watched as Michael Gordon of the New York Times and Alexandra Zavis of the Los Angeles Times tried to tally civilian deaths. After being out and seeing the battle first-hand, Gordon and Zavis were a few feet away from me, talking with Major Robbie Parke and comparing notes, trying to figure out the civilian deaths, and finally arriving at a consensus of about 7. Their earnestness was not an agenda-driven hunt for collateral damage victims. A number that low — and five of those deaths were from a single explosion that locals said had come from a U.S. bomb — is almost unbelievable, considering the amount of firepower that had been used. Except when commanders have made avoiding civilian casualties a primary part of the battle plan, which is a basic tenet of counterinsurgency warfare. It’s hard to build civic relationships out of body parts.

[emphasis added]

Jaguar b. p. · 07-26-07, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cherokee

Who cares how those Islamo-rejects spell their name.

It just shows total ignorance, it's impossible to be learned in this area without a basic comprehension of the language

Just because q's are followed with a u in English, he thinks he should use it here; and that reveals the depths of his douchery

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldreliable67

it is an indisputable fact that AQ and the insurgents deliberately target civilians in pursuit of their objectives

Actually we don't know who's behind the attacks on civilians, I've never seen anyone claim such an operation

When I say I support the bombing of pro-American voters in Iraq, I don't necessarily care who is doing it. It could be a number of parties, including Western black ops and Mossad.
Zarqawi's group once explicitly said they weren't behind it

Quote:

I was there [Vietnam], in '67 and '68.

Really, did you kill a lot of Third World farmers for no reason?
Are you trying to justify your own murders by supporting these modern-day criminals in Iraq

Volker · 07-26-07, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldreliable67

Kinda like your grandpa, when he was Waffen SS? Are you willing to say the same about the actions of your countrymen in WWII?

Yes, sure, the people in the Soviet Union or in Yugoslavia for instance had no intention to start a fight with German people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldreliable67

Your statement strongly implies that the US military comes into towns and indiscriminately kills people, without regard to their status as combatants, civilians, women, or children. If such were true, as it was with the Waffen SS and your grandpa, it was then and would now indeed be disgusting.The Waffen SS was more a fighting unit.

The Germans did not kill indiscriminately. They were very interested in who they killed, it started with Polish professors and writers, than other Polish people, Gypsys and Jewish people.

I heard an interesting theory, but I did not know if it is true. In Russia there was a lot of resistance and when resistance was successful in an area, German Einsatzgruppen started to kill the Jewish population there.

The Germans knew, that almost all of the resistance was Russian, not Jewish. By killing the Jewish people they tried to show, that they are able to do terrible things, by not killing Russian people they tried to not make them more angry.

This strategy, if it was one, has not been followed the whole time of the war.

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldreliable67

But, thankfully, you are quite wrong: such is simply not true of the US military in Iraq.

The Americans have a different approach with a comparable effect.

oldreliable67 · 07-26-07, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaguar

Actually we don't know who's behind the attacks on civilians, I've never seen anyone claim such an operation

Then you haven't been paying attention. In addition, some very graphic evidence of attacks/beheadings/torture have been posted on various Islamic websites.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaguar

Really, did you kill a lot of Third World farmers for no reason?
Are you trying to justify your own murders by supporting these modern-day criminals in Iraq

This is what passes for debate/discussion with you? This flaming and baiting is garbage and not deserving of any further response. Too bad. From your first few posts, I thought maybe we had a poster who was really into the radical Islamist mind set and knowledgeable and could show DP'ers what that was all about. But it seems that you're just too sophomoric and phony. Disappointing.

Volker · 07-26-07, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldreliable67

This is what passes for debate/discussion with you? This flaming and baiting is garbage and not deserving of any further response. Too bad. From your first few posts, I thought maybe we had a poster who was really into the radical Islamist mind set and knowledgeable and could show DP'ers what that was all about. But it seems that you're just too sophomoric and phony. Disappointing.

This sounds like a "yes" to me.

bhkad · 07-26-07, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaguar b. p.

If you go back to earlier articles by these same authors, all their rosy predictions have failed

Notice he spells "Queda" with a U, sure sign of a dumbass

You say al Qaeda. He says al Queda. Let's snuff the whole thing out.

bhkad · 07-26-07, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldreliable67

In today's world, the US military goes to greater lengths than ever before, to eliminate when possible and to minimize when not, civilian casualties. No matter how you try to spin it, it is an indisputable fact that AQ and the insurgents deliberately target civilians in pursuit of their objectives, while the US makes every effort to avoid civilian casualties. That is not history, that is here and now.

And that is what is driving the people to start embracing us and rejecting the Jihadists.

Michael J. Totten: In the Wake of the Surge

mikhail · 07-26-07, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldreliable67

Then you haven't been paying attention. In addition, some very graphic evidence of attacks/beheadings/torture have been posted on various Islamic websites.

This is what passes for debate/discussion with you? This flaming and baiting is garbage and not deserving of any further response. Too bad. From your first few posts, I thought maybe we had a poster who was really into the radical Islamist mind set and knowledgeable and could show DP'ers what that was all about. But it seems that you're just too sophomoric and phony. Disappointing.

You ever thought because your not happy with her mindset doesent mean its not valid.

cherokee · 07-26-07, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaguar b. p.

It just shows total ignorance, it's impossible to be learned in this area without a basic comprehension of the language
Just because q's are followed with a u in English, he thinks he should use it here; and that reveals the depths of his douchery

I would say something about how the English language compares to Arabic but that would mean I actually care and that’s just not the case. So the way I spell will Al-Qaeda is Islamotard, which is a combination of the words Islamo and retard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaguar b. p.

Actually we don't know who's behind the attacks on civilians, I've never seen anyone claim such an operation

Actually we do know who is doing the killing. Take your pick Sunnia, ****te or some other islamotard group.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaguar b. p.

When I say I support the bombing of pro-American voters in Iraq, I don't necessarily care who is doing it. It could be a number of parties, including Western black ops and Mossad.
Zarqawi's group once explicitly said they weren't behind it

Wow you approve of Muslims killing Good Muslims. Now I know you’ve never read the Koran. And terrorist never lie do they, Mohamed wasn’t a child molester was he..

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jaguar b. p.

Really, did you kill a lot of Third World farmers for no reason?
Are you trying to justify your own murders by supporting these modern-day criminals in Iraq……..

Wow a whole 1/3? Might I ask where you got that number (1/3) from? I’ve noticed in your other post your good at pulling numbers out of thin air.

As for your last sentence I have but a single question for you to answer. Lets see if you can do this. How many people were killed today by US and Iraqi military forces compared to the number killed by, by Hell lets group them all together and called them the retarded Islamic rejects.

So far for today I see

US and Iraqi forces……..…0

Retarded Islamic rejects…..20