Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Up to 85 civilians killed by mistake

1…6791112…18

Comments

  • #242
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Gringo180 wrote: »
    There biggest recruiting tool in the countries that are been ravaged in the middle east.

    And France. Where was the lad in Germany from ?


  • #243
    Gringo180
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,205 ✭✭✭Gringo180


    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    And France. Where was the lad in Germany from ?

    They have no links whatsoever to ISIS.


  • #244
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Gringo180 wrote: »
    They have no links whatsoever to ISIS.

    Lol who ??? I would have thought leaking ones intelligence information was a fire able offence.


  • #245
    Gatling
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Gringo180 wrote: »
    Carried out by French nationals. ISIS members are mainly Iraqi, Syrian or Libyans. Spawned by US led intervention in the above countries.

    Isis are primarily Iraqis but have a broad range of fighters from across the world with according to various accounts from people who have escaped from Iraq or Syria say the foreigners were the most vicious of all ,
    Libyans wouldn't say there's many in Syria or iraq at least not in large numbers,
    I Can understand Iraqis been pissed and wanting to kill but I find it difficult seeing people coming from apparently decent families and lives from the West butchering non Muslims and Muslims alike .

    But if you take iraq just have to look at the Iran involvement from post invasion up until today as well that has lead to a lot of situations
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • #246
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,915 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    It's a war crime. That's what it is. The rules state that it is a war crime if you fire with even the remotest possibility that there might be civilians in the area where you are firing.

    Would you care to quote chapter and verse on that?

    I believe you'll find that the rules governing such things are a bit subjective, and usually involve the word 'proportional.' The larger restrictions in practice are political and strategic, not legal. "Just how many innocents are we prepared to see dead on our TV screens in order to attain our goals, and is the political cost of the one worth the gain of the other?." "If this air strike has created X many recruits for the opposition, has this been counteracted by the gains we've made with all the other airstrikes we've conducted?". Arguing proportionality is difficult. One man's disproportionate may be two guided bombs, another man's may be a carpet bombing with a B-52's full bombload.

    Such a basic prohibition requiring being 'sure' is utterly unworkable and the sad reality is that unlike what we've been (mis)led to believe about how 'clean' a modern war is or can be, when bullets start flying, civilians will get killed. The average civilian death toll in Syria has been in excess of 30 a day on average every single day this year. This is one more blip on what is already a tragedy caused by the nature of warfare.

    There's certainly an argument to be made as to whether or not the US should be engaged in military activities in Syria, either against regime forces or IS. There is a further argument to be made as to what form that military activity is to have. But if it is in the US's interests to engage in military action, and military action is supportable under the various Just War principles, then civilian casualties are inevitable and not illegal.


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    MaroonAndGreen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭MaroonAndGreen


    A simple question for all the posters on this thread that would help the uninformed like myself. What is the solution to this ISIS problem? I don't want the cause of it etc but what is actually the solution? How can this be stopped? Thank you


  • #248
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    MaroonAndGreen wrote: »
    A simple question for all the posters on this thread that would help the uninformed like myself. What is the solution to this ISIS problem? I don't want the cause of it etc but what is actually the solution? How can this be stopped? Thank you

    There are groups in the world (Like ISIS) that simply can not be reasoned with. You can not tell them 'You know what, we'll leave you alone, just don't bother us and we won't bother you'. They are not interested in that and will see it as weakness.

    I know it's an easy and lazy link to make but it's similar to the fight against Nazi Germany imo. Pure evil that can only be fought in one way: Unrelenting war until they are destroyed.

    I know people will say that this will breed more radical Muslims, which it may well do, but I do not believe it's a fight we can just ignore or hope it goes away. The thing is that while we fight ISIS, we should at the same time focus on the underlying sources of why young kids get radicalized and go to join them. Combat mosques that spread hatred, cut ties with the Saudi's and their vile form of Islam,...


  • #249
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,569 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    BrokenArrows wrote: »
    85 is barely even scratching the surface of the amount of civillians that have been killed in Syria, Afganstan and Iraq by the US drone strikes.

    The US will happily drone strike a house with a whole family if one of the family is a target but the whole family is reported as militants.

    All the US is succeeding in doing is creating more terrorists.
    For every dead civilian you have countless relatives who are pissed off at the "west". Even the most peaceful of people will be likely to retaliate if their child just got blown up by a drone.

    There's a documentary on Netflix called Only The Dead about a photojournalist in Iraq. You can see the rage in some people at the actions of Americans.


  • #250
    Musketeer4
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 657 ✭✭✭Musketeer4


    suicide_circus wrote: »
    How do you propose combatting isis?

    Well my take on this is that the vast majority of terrorist incidents are committed by males in the 18-30 age bracket. In the hotspots like the mid east or areas like Molenbeek, I would favour to see all males in this demographic, unless gainfully employed or in education, detained indefinitely. Perhaps there may be treatments that can make them a lesser risk? I don't know.


  • #251
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,569 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    unseenfootage wrote: »
    So none of the MSM who reported on this video about US targeting the university are credible?
    I haven't seen the video but the Guardian report shows a still image of Cantlie standing in front of what appears to be the bombed university.

    It's gas, isn't it. These people dismiss RT as nothing more than propaganda when it reports something they find uncomfortable yet will gleefully post RT clips if it backs up their position or reports on something they find amusing like the Russian tank breaking down.


  • Advertisement
  • #252
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,220 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    Musketeer4 wrote: »
    Well my take on this is that the vast majority of terrorist incidents are committed by males in the 18-30 age bracket. In the hotspots like the mid east or areas like Molenbeek, I would favour to see all males in this demographic, unless gainfully employed or in education, detained indefinitely. Perhaps there may be treatments that can make them a lesser risk? I don't know.

    Holy shít. :eek:


  • #253
    Moo Moo Land
    Closed Accounts Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Moo Moo Land


    Kamari Tight Computer wrote: »
    Holy shít. :eek:

    It was a great first post. So restrained.

    12 years of detention will make them fine upstanding gentlemen.


  • #254
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,023 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    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

    It's not the same thing

    A terrorist attack is a cynical deliberate attempt to murder

    An attack on ISIS which accidentally kills civilians is a horrendous tragedy, but it's not deliberate

    If countries don't engage ISIS, then ISIS will just continue to slaughter and cause immense suffering - e.g. if the Iraqi army does not engage ISIS, then they just continue to take larger swathes of the country

    Peace talks with them don't work. There's no diplomatic option.

    The only option available is to fight ISIS militarily, but avoid civilian casualties at all costs. In reality, this is a huge challenge.

    Also those that come and say but x should never have invaded y or dredge up the past - correct, but that doesn't deal with a problem now. A problem that has to be addressed.

    Most involved countries are dealing with the situation in the same way - they are fighting ISIS


  • #255
    Musketeer4
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 657 ✭✭✭Musketeer4


    It would be an impractical and unwieldly thing to do but I think all would agree that the overwhelming majority of terrorism is committed by males in this age range.

    Exactly what is done with the at risk segment of this demographic is open to debate, but the important thing is that something is done to curb them from engaging is such acts.


  • #256
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,862 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Musketeer4 wrote: »
    Well my take on this is that the vast majority of terrorist incidents are committed by males in the 18-30 age bracket. In the hotspots like the mid east or areas like Molenbeek, I would favour to see all males in this demographic, unless gainfully employed or in education, detained indefinitely. Perhaps there may be treatments that can make them a lesser risk? I don't know.

    Wow!


  • #257
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,862 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    Musketeer4 wrote: »
    It would be an impractical and unwieldly thing to do but I think all would agree that the overwhelming majority of terrorism is committed by males in this age range.

    Exactly what is done with the at risk segment of this demographic is open to debate, but the important thing is that something is done to curb them from engaging is such acts.

    Most serial killers in the US are white males aged 30 to 50, should all of them be interred too?


  • #258
    MaroonAndGreen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭MaroonAndGreen


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote:
    Most serial killers in the US are white males aged 30 to 50, should all of them be interred too?


    Why are all your posts on a high horse?


  • #259
    MaroonAndGreen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,249 ✭✭✭MaroonAndGreen


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote:
    Most serial killers in the US are white males aged 30 to 50, should all of them be interred too?


    What's your idea? How should it be stopped?


  • #260
    unseenfootage
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 976 ✭✭✭unseenfootage


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    There are groups in the world (Like ISIS) that simply can not be reasoned with. You can not tell them 'You know what, we'll leave you alone, just don't bother us and we won't bother you'. They are not interested in that and will see it as weakness.

    .

    This American "policy" of not negotiating with terrorists is untenable and hypocritical. All options should be on the table.
    I recall that ISIS didn't have the West in its sights. Their whole objective was to fight the enemy on their turf. Al Qaida strategy was to attack westerners. It was only when American Alliance entered the war after Mosul that ISIS adopted this terrorism tactic in the West. Obama even acknowledged that ISIS are just regional players. You can check.
    I am fearing that when they finally get crushed, that they will morph into a purely terrorist group and focus on terror attack. Attacks here in the West will then escalate dramatically. It doesn't look good at all.


  • #261
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,023 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    HensVassal wrote: »
    It's gas, isn't it. These people dismiss RT as nothing more than propaganda when it reports something they find uncomfortable yet will gleefully post RT clips if it backs up their position or reports on something they find amusing like the Russian tank breaking down.

    RT is a state-sponsored version of Fox News run by the Kremlin. No criticism of Putin is allowed on the station - in fact he created the station. It's still functions as news channel, it still puts out factual information, but there's a heavy narrative which is more akin to international PR for Russia. Less than 5% of the Russian population speak or understand English, it's a very slick outfit for a foreign audience

    It's popular with conspiracy theorists and those who are ultra cynical toward the US/West


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,862 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    MaroonAndGreen wrote: »
    Why are all your posts on a high horse?

    Pointing out the utter stupidity of his "suggestion" is all, feel free to place me on ignore if my posts upset you so much.


  • #263
    Nermal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,837 ✭✭✭Nermal


    These reports are from the 'Syrian Observatory for Human Rights', which sounds fancy but is actually just a man living above a clothes shop in Coventry.

    His 'reports' routinely classify killed jihadists as being civilians, and our media lap it up. The most newsworthy thing the 'moderate' rebels he supports have recently done is behead a Palestinian child.


  • #264
    Timberrrrrrrr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,862 ✭✭✭✭Timberrrrrrrr


    MaroonAndGreen wrote: »
    What's your idea? How should it be stopped?

    Well placing millions under internment is certainly not the answer.


  • #265
    CdeC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 510 ✭✭✭CdeC


    It doesn't make sense.
    The list of belligerents on Wikipedia are as follows

    Wikipedia war on ISIS

    It seems like half the world is against ISIS. How are they operating?. I know they are losing ground in Iraq and Mosul is close to falling but they have forever changed the face of our planet. Do Muslim majority countries want an Islamic state?
    Is this the start of more groups fighting for this so called caliphate?
    What is happening in Turkey now is really frightening. Reminds of Stalins purges in Russia.


  • #266
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    unseenfootage wrote: »
    This American "policy" of not negotiating with terrorists is untenable and hypocritical options should be on the table.
    I recall that ISIS didn't have the West in its sights. Their whole objective was to fight the enemy on their turf. Al Qaida strategy was to attack westerners. It was only when American Alliance entered the war after Mosul that ISIS adopted this terrorism tactic in the West. Obama even acknowledged that ISIS are just regional players. You can check.
    I am fearing that when they finally get crushed, that they will morph into a purely terrorist group and focus on terror attack. Attacks here in the West will then escalate dramatically. It doesn't look good at all.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
    IV. The Fight

    The ideological purity of the Islamic State has one compensating virtue: it allows us to predict some of the group’s actions. Osama bin Laden was seldom predictable. He ended his first television interview cryptically. CNN’s Peter Arnett asked him, “What are your future plans?” Bin Laden replied, “You’ll see them and hear about them in the media, God willing.” By contrast, the Islamic State boasts openly about its plans—not all of them, but enough so that by listening carefully, we can deduce how it intends to govern and expand.

    In London, Choudary and his students provided detailed descriptions of how the Islamic State must conduct its foreign policy, now that it is a caliphate. It has already taken up what Islamic law refers to as “offensive jihad,” the forcible expansion into countries that are ruled by non-Muslims. “Hitherto, we were just defending ourselves,” Choudary said; without a caliphate, offensive jihad is an inapplicable concept. But the waging of war to expand the caliphate is an essential duty of the caliph.

    Choudary took pains to present the laws of war under which the Islamic State operates as policies of mercy rather than of brutality. He told me the state has an obligation to terrorize its enemies—a holy order to scare the **** out of them with beheadings and crucifixions and enslavement of women and children, because doing so hastens victory and avoids prolonged conflict.

    Choudary’s colleague Abu Baraa explained that Islamic law permits only temporary peace treaties, lasting no longer than a decade. Similarly, accepting any border is anathema, as stated by the Prophet and echoed in the Islamic State’s propaganda videos. If the caliph consents to a longer-term peace or permanent border, he will be in error. Temporary peace treaties are renewable, but may not be applied to all enemies at once: the caliph must wage jihad at least once a year. He may not rest, or he will fall into a state of sin.

    Saying that all they want is to just fight their local enemies is wrong.

    I agree that in other circumstances negotiations and discussions would be the best option, but you simply can not do this with them, they are not open to it.
    And after the acts they carried out and still carry out to this day I also don't see why we should negotiate with them. They are pure evil.


  • #267
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,569 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    Fleawuss wrote: »
    Asserting something as a fact does not make it a fact.
    For your post to be be true you must produce evidence of the state sanction for this attack precisely as an attack intended and planned to kil these people in the full knowledge that they were innocent.

    If you have that, you have my full support.

    If, on the other hand, you don't you have simply indulged in the empty rhetoric of outrage.

    What one needs to understand is that the US routinely targets civilians for killing as part of a wider campaign. In Korea the US bombed every single urban area in the North so that no building higher than one storey remained. After Nixon spoke of "Peace with Honour" in Vietnam he then proceeded to drop more bombs on that tiny country than the combined bomb load dropped in WW2. It was basically saying "We've lost this war on the ground and have to leave but we're gonna destroy everything and kill as many as we can before we go, so fuck you".

    Targetting and killing civilians is used to completely terrorise and traumatise a population thus removing any abilty they might have of fighting back. It's a ruthless form of collective punishment. It was standard practice in Iraq to target civilian centres killing thousands of men, women and children.

    Anyone who has read Power and Terror by Noam Chomsky would know this. It's a worthwhile read for some of the rose-tinted fantasists on here.

    People need to grow a pair and face up to this very unsavoury fact. Their Hollywood version of war where civilians deaths are always a tragic accident and are always attempted to be avoided, where the Geneva Conventions are strictly adhered to and violators are harshly punished is a fantasy


  • #268
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,569 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    There are groups in the world (Like ISIS) that simply can not be reasoned with. You can not tell them 'You know what, we'll leave you alone, just don't bother us and we won't bother you'. They are not interested in that and will see it as weakness.

    I know it's an easy and lazy link to make but it's similar to the fight against Nazi Germany imo. Pure evil that can only be fought in one way: Unrelenting war until they are destroyed.

    I know people will say that this will breed more radical Muslims, which it may well do, but I do not believe it's a fight we can just ignore or hope it goes away. The thing is that while we fight ISIS, we should at the same time focus on the underlying sources of why young kids get radicalized and go to join them. Combat mosques that spread hatred, cut ties with the Saudi's and their vile form of Islam,...


    This is complete and utter bullshit. The same argument was tabled by the clueless regarding the Viet Cong, the IRA, The Algerian Resistance and was always spectaculary wrong much like you are now.

    And the Nazis analogy is absurd as well. The Nazis were the Action not Reaction. ISIS are the Reaction.

    You get your house consistently pelted with eggs by neighbourhood kids because, surprise surprise, you are an asshole who slashes their football every time it comes over your wall and you think that maybe continuing this action will coerce them into desisting from egging your house and vandalising your car?

    Don't apply for any jobs that involve any kind of diplomacy, compromise or negotiating. You won't last long.


  • #269
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,023 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    HensVassal wrote: »
    This is complete and utter bullshit. The same argument was tabled by the clueless regarding the Viet Cong, the IRA, The Algerian Resistance and was always spectaculary wrong much like you are now.

    ISIS aren't anything like those movements

    They don't have an achievable aim and they won't settle for anything less than a very large swath of Iraq and Syria - which is incompatible with Iraq and the rest of the world, their principles and methods are also completely incompatible - which is why we have countries as diverse as Russia, US, Iran, Israel, etc aligned against them

    They aren't anything like a national army or a "cause". They are an out and out death cult.

    Likewise, they are not "resisting" anything either, they are the aggressor


  • #270
    wes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭wes


    Musketeer4 wrote: »
    Well my take on this is that the vast majority of terrorist incidents are committed by males in the 18-30 age bracket. In the hotspots like the mid east or areas like Molenbeek, I would favour to see all males in this demographic, unless gainfully employed or in education, detained indefinitely. Perhaps there may be treatments that can make them a lesser risk? I don't know.

    You should include all males in general world wide, as most violent crime is committed by males ;). That same logic would apply every where.


  • Advertisement
  • #271
    jacksie66
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,988 ✭✭✭jacksie66


    This post has been deleted.


Advertisement