Up to 85 civilians killed by mistake

RobertKK

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/19/us-air-strike-in-syria-kills-up-to-85-civilians-mistaken-for-isi/

A US air strike killed more than 85 civilians, including children, in Syria on Tuesday after the coalition mistook them for Islamic State fighters. Some eight families were hit as they tried to flee fighting in their area

Apart from the death toll being similar to the Nice massacre, and we are told who killed all these people in Nice, the fact is no one will be held accountable for killing all these people, it is being put down as a mistake.
At the very least it is manslaughter, but 8 families have been wiped out. I don't think it is aceptable with all the technology we have these days for these kind of mass casualty events to be happening by accident.
A terrorist couldn't use the excuse they killed up to 85 people by accident, these events are done to kill.
It is very disturbing these events continue to happen, with seemingly no accountability.

suicide_circus

Horrific. War is an ugly business.

Chijj

How come westerners don't speak out about the atrocities carried in their name ?

This is the type of stuff people ask when a radical Islamic terrorist carries out an attack.but funnily it isn't said after state sanctioned murder

Samaris

Unfortunately, with air strikes, civilian casualties will happen. The tragedy of war is the innocent people with the misfortune of being born in the wrong place at the wrong time suffering for the ideals of the leaders (or factions). Hell, Ireland was struck a few times by German planes aiming for Britain and missing.

Doesn't make it okay, 85 innocent people are dead, entire families wiped out. Just..sadly inevitable.

wes

This is a consequence of a policy where the US doesn't actually know who they are killing, and are rather attacking people on the basis of behavior, and pretty much any "military" age male is considered a legitimate target.

Effectively, the system is designed to allow themselves to very often count civilians killed as "militants", with the exception being the blatant cases, where its impossible to deny.

suicide_circus

Chijj wrote: »

How come westerners don't speak out about the atrocities carried in their name ?

This is the type of stuff people ask when a radical Islamic terrorist carries out an attack.but funnily it isn't said after state sanctioned murder

How do you propose combatting isis?

Son Of A Vidic

Last summer the Americans and their exceptionalism, wiped out a well known & clearly identified Medicane Sans Frontieres hospital in Afghanistan, killing dozens of medical staff & patients. It was weeks before snippets of reports made it into the Western media. I'm just surprised their latest massacre has leaked out so quickly.

Dyr

suicide_circus wrote: »

How do you propose combatting isis?

Not funding them and not having allies who support them would be a start

The Backwards Man

suicide_circus wrote: »

How do you propose combatting isis?

I know one way you shouldn't combat ISIS, by providing them with a steady supply of the accelerant to radicalise impressionable youths.

biko

RobertKK wrote: »

It is very disturbing these events continue to happen, with seemingly no accountability.

Indeed, US and UK needs to face war crime tribunals over their senseless killing of civilians.
"Collateral damage" my hole.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

It will be interesting to see how this thread plays out in contrast to the multiple other threads relating to terrorism on AH.

The Backwards Man

Kamari Tight Computer wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how this thread plays out in contrast to the multiple other threads relating to terrorism on AH.

It will just peter out in all probability, it doesn't suit the narrative of the resident hate merchants so that will be that.

Shocking and unacceptable, but I think we have to maintain a distinction between an intentional act of terrorism that kills 80 people, and one which was merely negligent, i.e. an act of inadvertence.

The result is a matter of indifference for the victims, of course, since in the cases of Nice and this air strike, all victims are equally dead.

Nevertheless, morally, the two catastrophes are not directly comparable, since we must take the intentions of the attacker into account when apportioning moral culpability.

SEPT 23 1989

loss of innocent life is not right but the old ways of bombing an enemy would be far worse for civilians

Timberrrrrrrr

Samaris wrote: »

Unfortunately, with air strikes, civilian casualties will happen. The tragedy of war is the innocent people with the misfortune of being born in the wrong place at the wrong time suffering for the ideals of the leaders (or factions). Hell, Ireland was struck a few times by German planes aiming for Britain and missing.

Doesn't make it okay, 85 innocent people are dead, entire families wiped out. Just..sadly inevitable.

And when some young Muslim outraged at this committs another Nice or Paris like attack then he will be labeled a terrorist.

Timberrrrrrrr

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Shocking and unacceptable, but I think we have to maintain a distinction between an intentional act of terrorism that kills 80 people, and one which was merely negligent, i.e. an act of inadvertence.

The result is a matter of indifference for the victims, of course, since in the cases of Nice and this air strike, all victims are equally dead.

Nevertheless, morally, the two catastrophes are not directly comparable, since we must take the intentions of the attacker into account when apportioning moral culpability.

Both attackers meant to kill. Calling this a "mistake" does not justify the fact that it is blatant state sanctioned murder of innocent men women and children

suicide_circus

The Backwards Man wrote: »

I know one way you shouldn't combat ISIS, by providing them with a steady supply of the accelerant to radicalise impressionable youths.

I'll repeat the question, how do you combat isis as the occupy large swathes of syria and Iraq commiting unspeakable horrors?

wes

suicide_circus wrote: »

I'll repeat the question, how do you combat isis as the occupy large swathes of syria and Iraq commiting unspeakable horrors?

Don't indiscriminately target people based on behavior observed from drones, and also not every male of military age should be considered a legit target. You know simple things, like having a good idea of who your actually shooting at, and with targetted drone strikes knowing the name of the target would help, and when they do know the name, maybe don't kill a taxi driver who just so happened to take the wrong fare.

Pretty simple stuff I would think to implement.

The Backwards Man

suicide_circus wrote: »

I'll repeat the question, how do you combat isis as the occupy large swathes of syria and Iraq commiting unspeakable horrors?

And I'll repeat the answer, by not bombing civilians would be a good start. There's a lot of good work being done in the fight against ISIS, and they will be defeated, but 'mistakes' like this are completely unacceptable.

testaccount123

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And when some young Muslim outraged at this committs another Nice or Paris like attack then he will be labeled a terrorist.

You disagree that the Nice and Paris attacks were terrorism?

People in the US and UK should be up on war criminal charges for these and similar killings IMO.

suicide_circus

The Backwards Man wrote: »

And I'll repeat the answer, by not bombing civilians would be a good start. There's a lot of good work being done in the fight against ISIS, and they will be defeated, but 'mistakes' like this are completely unacceptable.

I agree, totally unacceptable. But, given that isis are already a reality, they need to be removed. This will require bombs, rockets, bullets. This is unpalatable but necessary. I agree mistakes like this only bolster their ranks but this is a complex situation in which there will be no winners.

My name is URL

suicide_circus wrote: »

I'll repeat the question, how do you combat isis as the occupy large swathes of syria and Iraq commiting unspeakable horrors?

Unspeakable horrors?

The ones that are shown and reported on constantly in the news?

I wonder if the aftermath of this bombing will be broadcast around the world.

Timberrrrrrrr

testaccount123 wrote: »

You disagree that the Nice and Paris attacks were terrorism?

People in the US and UK should be up on war criminal charges for these and similar killings IMO.

Yes nice and Paris were terrorist attacks but I also consider this "mistake" on par with them

suicide_circus

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Yes nice and Paris were terrorist attacks but I also consider this "mistake" on par with them

One was a deliberate killing of innocents, one was an accident.

Timberrrrrrrr

suicide_circus wrote: »

One was a deliberate killing of innocents, one was an accident.

Accident me bollix

85 men, women and children are dead, blown to bits by so called fcuking precision targeting. No one should be allowed to pass this sh/t off as an "accident"

Brown people killed = accident

White people killed = terrorism

Gatling

Odd we rarely hear about when others intentionally kill civilians in the region ,
Mistakes happen in fast moving wars it's gas how if it's a civilian killed by the us people call war crime if other countries do it it's an accident

Gatling

Odd we rarely hear about when others intentionally kill civilians in the region ,
Mistakes can happen in fast moving wars,
it's gas how if it's a civilian killed by the us people call war crime if other countries do it it's an accident,
For all we know it's not how it's been made out to be

My name is URL

suicide_circus wrote: »

One was a deliberate killing of innocents, one was an accident.

Easy to claim things as accidental when you're dropping bombs from 5000 miles away.

Call it what it is... collateral damage. Those people's lives have no value to the people doing the bombing. Just like victims of terror have no value to those responsible for killing them

Moo Moo Land

Sickening. The US and UK created ISIS and are just making things worse ever since.

I wonder will those disgusting ghouls in Sky News provide much coverage of this atrocity.

RIP.

suicide_circus

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Accident me bollix

You have evidence that the US knew these werent isis fighters? Do share

Timberrrrrrrr

suicide_circus wrote: »

You have evidence that the US knew these were werent isis fighters? Do share

You have evidence that they were sure these were isis fighter's?

Because if they were not 100% absolutely positive then they shouldn't have pushed the damn button to launch!

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Both attackers meant to kill. Calling this a "mistake" does not justify the fact that it is blatant state sanctioned murder of innocent men women and children

One intended to kill innocent civilians.
The other intended to kill IS soldiers in an act of war, but inadvertantly killed civilians.

Both are wrongful acts, but the latter does not carry the same degree of moral culpability, since inadvertent acts of violence are less blameworthy than deliberate acts of violence.

suicide_circus

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You have evidence that they were sure these were isis fighter's?

Because if they were not 100% absolutely positive then they shouldn't have pushed the damn button to launch!

Thanks Captain Hindsight!

Timberrrrrrrr

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

One intended to kill innocent civilians.
The other intended to kill IS soldiers in an act of war, but inadvertantly killed civilians.

Both are wrongful acts, but the latter does not carry the same degree of moral culpability, since inadvertent acts of violence are less blameworthy than deliberate acts of violence.

85 dead

If they are not 100% sure then don't fcuking fire

Skylinehead

My name is URL wrote: »

Unspeakable horrors?

The ones that are shown and reported on constantly in the news?

I wonder if the aftermath of this bombing will be broadcast around the world.

Eventually found it hidden away on the BBC site, Middle East section. If it were the Russians, I guarantee that it would be front page.

Timberrrrrrrr

suicide_circus wrote: »

Thanks Captain Hindsight!

Oops

Sorry folks we thought you were all is is fighters, even the little kids.

Oh wait, apology not needed cos your all fcuking dead!

My name is URL

So how many people will lose their jobs over this?

In any other walk of life if a mistake you make leads to the death of someone (never mind 85 someones) you'd be at least charged with criminal neglect.

These lads will probably be awarded medals for their bravery. Like the soldiers involved in shooting down that flight full of civilians a few years back.

RustyNut

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

One intended to kill innocent civilians.
The other intended to kill IS soldiers in an act of war, but inadvertantly killed civilians.

Both are wrongful acts, but the latter does not carry the same degree of moral culpability, since inadvertent acts of violence are less blameworthy than deliberate acts of violence.

Dropping a bomb is hardly inadvertent.

andekwarhola

I think the deaths from both events are comparable in their awfulness.

That said, I don't believe the very act of instantly dredging the internet for comparable drone or missile deaths whenever there's a 'terrorist' event will usher the end of either type of event that bit closer.

Still an important maneuver in the ideological internet wars, mind you.

Its dead Jim

suicide_circus wrote: »

One was a deliberate killing of innocents, one was an accident.

It wasn't an accident. They intended to kill them. They just ****ed up in identifying them but the plan was to kill them and that's exactly what they did.

The_Kew_Tour

Shocking to have 85 innocent people killed
This has to stop. Killing of innocent women and children is as big deal as anything in Europe.

The problem is most people in America and Western Europe don't want this. Sadly it's the Government's who win and cause carnage

suicide_circus

So the message here is....don't make mistakes? Lads if we had your astute military minds out in Syria, isis would be history.

Irish Praetorian

Is this another case of;
'100 Iraqis/Syrians/other dead by Western forces' SHOCK - HORROR - SHAME
'100 Iraqis/Syrians/other dead by local terrorists/regime forces/Russian actions' That's not news!

Gatling

Be interesting to see if this actually happened at all ,
The story broke on some minor Syrian website's yesterday with 20 + dead under rubble and then it was 56 and then it was 85 but there not sure because of the supposed rubble

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

85 dead

RustyNut wrote: »

Dropping a bomb is hardly inadvertent.

Are you both deliberately avoiding understanding the point?

It's not that complicated. An inadvertent attack on innocent civilians is less morally culpable than a deliberate attack on innocent civilians.

It isn't that the air strike was inadvertent per se, it was an airstrike on innocent civilians that was inadvertent.

Both Nice and this airstrike are wrongful acts, but are fundamentally different in character. One is an act of terrorism, the other an act of negligence.

unseenfootage

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And when some young Muslim outraged at this committs another Nice or Paris like attack then he will be labeled a terrorist.

Yes.
Anybody who targets and kills civilians to achieve a political objective (or even a criminal objective) is a terrorist, even if he did so in retaliation.
So the label is correct.
The issue is that it needs to be applied to state players as well, who use violence against their enemies and don't seem to care much about the innocent civilians who are killed in the process.

This may very well be a mistake but that doesn't gel with the civilians who are getting killed by these aircraft.

testaccount123

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Is this another case of;
'100 Iraqis/Syrians/other dead by Western forces' SHOCK - HORROR - SHAME
'100 Iraqis/Syrians/other dead by local terrorists/regime forces/Russian actions' That's not news!

Some might say the leaders of our western liberal democracies ought to be held to a slightly higher moral standard than some brainwashed Islamist or Vladimir Putin...

Walter H Price

RobertKK wrote: »

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/19/us-air-strike-in-syria-kills-up-to-85-civilians-mistaken-for-isi/



Apart from the death toll being similar to the Nice massacre, and we are told who killed all these people in Nice, the fact is no one will be held accountable for killing all these people, it is being put down as a mistake.
At the very least it is manslaughter, but 8 families have been wiped out. I don't think it is aceptable with all the technology we have these days for these kind of mass casualty events to be happening by accident.
A terrorist couldn't use the excuse they killed up to 85 people by accident, these events are done to kill.
It is very disturbing these events continue to happen, with seemingly no accountability.

Yeh the diffence is Syria is a warzone , unless your suggesting that France is now on an equal footing to Syria you can clearly see why its more shocking that 85 people are killed on a promanade in Nice celebrating bastile day the 85 people killed in Syria an active warzone .

Its not the numbers or the race that cause the shock and outrage its the locaton.

unseenfootage

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

One intended to kill innocent civilians.
The other intended to kill IS soldiers in an act of war, but inadvertantly killed civilians.

Both are wrongful acts, but the latter does not carry the same degree of moral culpability, since inadvertent acts of violence are less blameworthy than deliberate acts of violence.

The mother sheds tears whether her baby is inadvertently or deliberately killed.
To her it is the same.
She will not grieve any less.

If your highly sophisticated inadvertent bombs have killed hundreds of thousands of innocents then maybe you should fight differently or not fight at all.

Theresa May said in parliament yesterday, with a smile on her face, that she would press the nuclear button even if it meant that 100 000 innocents got killed.
Inadvertently of course.

Gatling

unseenfootage wrote: »

Theresa May said in parliament yesterday, with a smile on her face, that she would press the nuclear button

In Defence of a Nuclear attack on the uk

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

testaccount123 wrote: »

You disagree that the Nice and Paris attacks were terrorism?

People in the US and UK should be up on war criminal charges for these and similar killings IMO.

The poster is trying to convey that both acts are awful but only one of them is terrorism... somehow...

suicide_circus wrote: »

One was a deliberate killing of innocents, one was an accident.

Ah, sure that's grand. Sorry lads, we blew you to bits, but sure it was an accident, so we're all good, right?

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Are you both deliberately avoiding understanding the point?

It's not that complicated. An inadvertent attack on innocent civilians is less morally culpable than a deliberate attack on innocent civilians.

It isn't that the air strike was inadvertent per se, it was an airstrike on innocent civilians that was inadvertent.

Both Nice and this airstrike are wrongful acts, but are fundamentally different in character. One is an act of terrorism, the other an act of negligence.

That would really depend on your point of view, wouldn't it? To the people living in the area, it's bloody terrorism. Terrorism seems to be exclusively reserved for us western folk.