US-led Coalition airstrike kills more than 30 civilians near Raqqa

Autonomous Cowherd

Iraq this time..while our eyes were on London a US Led coalition bomb is claimed to have killed 130 civilians near Mosul, and some 100 further persons nearby.

Approximately 230 people are reported to have been killed in what is thought to have been a US-led coalition air strike on an Isis-held neighbourhood in Mosul.

A correspondent for Rudaw, a Kurdish news agency operating in northern Iraq, said that 137 people – most believed to be civilians – died when a bomb hit a single building in al-Jadida, in the western side of the city on Thursday. Another 100 were killed nearby.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-air-strikes-mosul-230-civilians-killed-dead-isis-held-iraq-battle-islamic-state-a7646011.html


I am not hesitant to use the term ''US led coalition'' in spite of prior criticism; the chain of command and accountability refers to such. If a reader wants to know my ''point'' in posting this, it is that it seems to me that this coalition of western forces that sees itself as a force for good and order in the world is going ever further in recent days and weeks in its flagrant and brazen breaches of the fundamental and humanitarian rules of combat re civilians. And this should be front and centre of international news and subject to independent investigation immediately.

Jelle1880

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

Iraq this time..while our eyes were on London a US Led coalition bomb is claimed to have killed 130 civilians near Mosul, and some 100 further persons nearby.



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-air-strikes-mosul-230-civilians-killed-dead-isis-held-iraq-battle-islamic-state-a7646011.html


I am not hesitant to use the term ''US led coalition'' in spite of prior criticism; the chain of command and accountability refers to such. If a reader wants to know my ''point'' in posting this, it is that it seems to me that this coalition of western forces that sees itself as a force for good and order in the world is going ever further in recent days and weeks in its flagrant and brazen breaches of the fundamental and humanitarian rules of combat re civilians. And this should be front and centre of international news and subject to independent investigation immediately.

Do you believe that building was bombed with the knowledge of civilians inside ?

The only people who talk about rules of combat are those that have never seen combat. It's a nice sentiment but ultimately it does not exist in war.

Autonomous Cowherd

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Do you believe that building was bombed with the knowledge of civilians inside ?

The only people who talk about rules of combat are those that have never seen combat. It's a nice sentiment but ultimately it does not exist in war.

It seems about 400,000 civilians are trapped in the area, and are unsafe whether they remain or move to seek shelter. Yes, I do believe in a civilised context that every effort should be made to prevent civilian massacres, even in war. The recent numbers of those possibly killed as collateral damage are becoming intolerable. I would not be the only person to have such ''nice'' sentiments...there are international standards and rulings about such matters.

Jelle1880

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

It seems about 400,000 civilians are trapped in the area, and are unsafe whether they remain or move to seek shelter. Yes, I do believe in a civilised context that every effort should be made to prevent civilian massacres, even in war. The recent numbers of those possibly killed as collateral damage are becoming intolerable. I would not be the only person to have such ''nice'' sentiments...there are international standards and rulings about such matters.

Commendable, but it's clear to me that this is being done. If they wanted they could flatten the entire city with ISIS in it, but they don't.

In general these air strikes are done to support troop movements on the ground (in this case as well I believe), like for example the bombing of the MSF hospital in Kunduz. That was done on the request of Afghan troops on the ground, claiming it was full of insurgents.

And those international standards and rulings only really apply for the losers of wars or conflicts, such is the reality. The example of Dresden in WWII is perfect for that. Clearly a war crime, but since the Allies won nobody ever got punished.

Billy86

Elemonator wrote: »

Sure he's only the leader of a small, influence barren, insignificant island off the coast of Europe yet he get's to meet the most powerful man for a special day largely celebrating Ireland a day a year.

It's not fawning, he's got an opportunity most other world leaders and countries would love.

But it must be bad, because its Enda Kenny.

I'm not too fond of Enda (though he's no Brian Cowen either) but he did himself well in the US, made a pretty strong statement on immigration only a few days after Trump tried his second Muslim ban, and even took the p*ss out of him for "managing to keep to your script this time" while keeping the infamously thin skinned narcissist onside at the same time. He had both the left and right sides of the US media very impressed. Said it in politics cafe, for a man with the charisma of a wet shoe he did quite well over there.

Autonomous Cowherd

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39392232

In a statement, US Central Command said US planes struck an area in west Mosul corresponding to the reports of civilian casualties, at the request of Iraqi security forces.
"Coalition forces comply with the Law of Armed Conflict and take all reasonable precautions during the planning and execution of airstrikes to reduce the risk of harm to civilians," the statement said....Reporters in the Jadideh neighbourhood of west Mosul said they saw 50 bodies being pulled out of rubble on Friday, after the buildings were razed in attacks earlier in March.
One resident who escaped Mosul said hundreds of bodies remained under rubble, the BBC's Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen reports. She lost nine members of her family.

It seems that reports are increasing from Iraq about the Al-Jedida attack, near Mosul, though there has yet to be any further clarification about Al-Mansoura.
I saw some particular poignant remarks on Facebook posts from people who live in the area remarking that while 5 dead in London causes headlines and international front page news for days, that it seems to them that hundreds of brown-skinned / Muslim people being killed as collateral damage is worth very little attention or reporting - the poster's wondered if their lives are really that cheap.
I still say an International enquiry should be opened immediately into civilian massacres by coalition forces. It says something about the present state of the world that my husband has asked me not to call too loudly for one.

Manic Moran

Iraq is saying that the casualties were caused by IS booby traps, not an airstrike.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-39398336

Iraqi military experts checked a house "reportedly targeted by an air strike and they found out that the house was completely destroyed and there was no sign that it was destroyed by a strike".
The Iraqi statement goes on: "A huge detonated booby-trapped vehicle was found near the house. Some 61 dead bodies were pulled from under the rubble."

Take it for what it's worth, but they haven't been averse to blaming US (Or other) nations in the past.

Autonomous Cowherd

Manic Moran wrote: »

Iraq is saying that the casualties were caused by IS booby traps, not an airstrike.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-39398336



Take it for what it's worth, but they haven't been averse to blaming US (Or other) nations in the past.

I saw that. It is possibly true in some (or at least one) cases, although not in Al-Mansoura, Raqqa. The part of Mosul in question seems to be occupied primarily by civilians, and some claim quite few Daesh terrorists. To rout those comparatively few while causing large amounts of civilian deaths, however it occurs, seems cruel and unusual. The coalition forces are capable of gathering on the ground information and reconnaissance. Whatever it takes to defeat Daesh and at the same time prevent civilian massacres should be the method used. They can wait another day to take Daesh terrorists if the risk to innocent people is too high. Can you imagine if the British Army had blown up whole housing complexes on the Bogside to eliminate a few IRA men? It is just not acceptable.

Widdershins

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

The absolutely crazy thing that we may have to consider at some time in the future when the world has grown truly weary of senseless slaughter is that extremists may have to be brought to the peace table, just like we did here in Northern Ireland. Yes, we will actually at some point have to speak to these lunatics. We will not bomb and slaughter a fundamentalist idea into submission, we will simply drive it to breed more ferociously, and as a consequence all our lives will be more unsafe.
We should do it sooner rather than later.

That won't happen. The IRA and Isil are very different entities and Isil cannot be placated nor is there any possibility of compromise.

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39392232



It seems that reports are increasing from Iraq about the Al-Jedida attack, near Mosul, though there has yet to be any further clarification about Al-Mansoura.
I saw some particular poignant remarks on Facebook posts from people who live in the area remarking that while 5 dead in London causes headlines and international front page news for days, that it seems to them that hundreds of brown-skinned / Muslim people being killed as collateral damage is worth very little attention or reporting - the poster's wondered if their lives are really that cheap.
I still say an International enquiry should be opened immediately into civilian massacres by coalition forces. It says something about the present state of the world that my husband has asked me not to call too loudly for one.

I don't believe this is true. People become numbed to a degree when they hear regular news from war zones, but war crimes in a country that is in peace time is unexpected and alarming.

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

I saw that. It is possibly true in some (or at least one) cases, although not in Al-Mansoura, Raqqa. The part of Mosul in question seems to be occupied primarily by civilians, and some claim quite few Daesh terrorists. To rout those comparatively few while causing large amounts of civilian deaths, however it occurs, seems cruel and unusual. The coalition forces are capable of gathering on the ground information and reconnaissance. Whatever it takes to defeat Daesh and at the same time prevent civilian massacres should be the method used. They can wait another day to take Daesh terrorists if the risk to innocent people is too high. Can you imagine if the British Army had blown up whole housing complexes on the Bogside to eliminate a few IRA men? It is just not acceptable.

The Ira/Isil comparisons are not the most appropriate...

Anyway, I think most people would share your views on the tragedy of civilian deaths but the fact is that these cases are often not what they first appear, sometimes the civilians are used as human shields or used in other ways, by isil et. al, that result in their deaths in an air strike, sometimes the reports are heavily skewed, often by people like the syrian observatory man. Sometimes the civilians are far from civilians...I'm sure you realise this, though.

steddyeddy

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Raqqa is a war zone. It's a tragedy civilians get killed but that's the reality of things unfortunately.

Jelle on the McGuinness and other threads about the troubles you were attacking the IRA ect because civillians were killed. Nice to see you changed your position.

Autonomous Cowherd

Widdershins wrote: »

.

Anyway, I think most people would share your views on the tragedy of civilian deaths but the fact is that these cases are often not what they first appear, sometimes the civilians are used as human shields or used in other ways, by isil et. al, that result in their deaths in an air strike, sometimes the reports are heavily skewed, often by people like the syrian observatory man. Sometimes the civilians are far from civilians...I'm sure you realise this, though.

I do realise that it is not black and white and that civilians are being used as human shields and that the SOHR is at best very biased (although usually in favour of Coalition activities,). It is also next to impossible to get clear information out of Syria and Iraq, even looking at feeds from locals on Twitter/Facebook. Personally though I feel like it has been a continuous running sore since the Shock and Awe operation in Iraq in 2003 which gave me vivid nightmares, and which we discover much much later on has left up to between 200,000 and one million Iraqis dead. I feel that these operations taking place right now will prove in the future to have caused much more carnage than we are presently being told.
It's just horrifying. All of it.
Sorry to batter on about it, but I feel.....too many emotions about it.

Yourself isit

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39392232



It seems that reports are increasing from Iraq about the Al-Jedida attack, near Mosul, though there has yet to be any further clarification about Al-Mansoura.
I saw some particular poignant remarks on Facebook posts from people who live in the area remarking that while 5 dead in London causes headlines and international front page news for days, that it seems to them that hundreds of brown-skinned / Muslim people being killed as collateral damage is worth very little attention or reporting - the poster's wondered if their lives are really that cheap.
I still say an International enquiry should be opened immediately into civilian massacres by coalition forces. It says something about the present state of the world that my husband has asked me not to call too loudly for one.

Well they weren't killed by Russians.

I dont actually watch the local news anymore but is it fair to say that RTE and the BBC were not reporting this as fervently as they reported strikes in Aleppo?

nacho libre

Yourself isit wrote: »

Well they weren't killed by Russians.

I dont actually watch the local news anymore but is it fair to say that RTE and the BBC were not reporting this as fervently as they reported strikes in Aleppo?

So what you seem to be suggesting is that the noisy campaign against the bombing in Aleppo and the silence up to now about the bombing in Mosul tell us, together with the refusal to draw the obvious comparison between the two and the harsh treatment of anyone who did, is that the outcry about the bombing in Aleppo last year was propaganda pure and simple.

The real concern was not for the civilians in Aleppo but for the fact that the Jihadis in the city were about to be defeated, with the civilians being cynically used as props and pawns in a propaganda game which colluded in Al-Qaeda’s use of them as human shields.