PDA

View Full Version : Historical debate: Was the bombing of civilians in Iraq a necessityt?



XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:01 AM
What about today? Modern times, more knowledgable. There is a war on and innocent civilians are being killed by American bombs, is this OK by our standards due to 9/11? Do these people deserve this, it's not like we can 't be inaccuate now with all the smart bombs and GPS. Is it like an eye for an eye thing or is this how war is, at the time it seams justified and people are all for it, not killing anyway, but retaliation at least . ANy comments?

<center>http://www.skalman.nu/worldwar2/bilder/su-airforce.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:01 AM
What about today? Modern times, more knowledgable. There is a war on and innocent civilians are being killed by American bombs, is this OK by our standards due to 9/11? Do these people deserve this, it's not like we can 't be inaccuate now with all the smart bombs and GPS. Is it like an eye for an eye thing or is this how war is, at the time it seams justified and people are all for it, not killing anyway, but retaliation at least . ANy comments?

<center>http://www.skalman.nu/worldwar2/bilder/su-airforce.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:04 AM
psychopetey wrote:
- What about today? Modern times, more knowledgable.
- There is a war on and innocent civilians are being
- killed by American bombs, is this OK by our
- standards due to 9/11? Do these people deserve this,
- it's not like we can 't be inaccuate now with all
- the smart bombs and GPS. Is it like an eye for an
- eye thing or is this how war is, at the time it
- seams justified and people are all for it, not
- killing anyway, but retaliation at least . ANy
- comments?

YAWN



<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:13 AM
I was going to ignore this thread as just another cyber-babble by someone with bait at the end of their hook, but then I saw you had over 100 postings.

America does not now and never has targeted civilians. Look at the great pains we took in WWII to be as accurate as possible - the Nordic Bomb Site and daytime bombing when the British thought it was impossible. How many airmen did we lose because we would rather get the snot shot out of us then miss?

How can you say that we bombed civilians in Iraq? We weren't the ones parking tanks in schoolyards. If you put a legitimate military target in a schoolyard, we still have to shoot it. Iraq used civilians in both wars as shields. America went to great pains to minimize civilian casualties.

RAF74_Wall-dog

<a href="http://www.doghousecomputing.com/scorchedearth">http://www.doghousecomputing.com/scorchedearth/images/parsersmall.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:16 AM
I smell a troll.....IBTL

"We make war that we may live in peace."

Aristotle

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:19 AM
I HOPE THIS THREAD GETS LOCKED FAST

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:19 AM
Here is a comment,

Go back under the log that you crawled out from under - you anti-American slug.
psychopetey wrote:
- What about today? Modern times, more knowledgable.
- There is a war on and innocent civilians are being
- killed by American bombs, is this OK by our
- standards due to 9/11? Do these people deserve this,
- it's not like we can 't be inaccuate now with all
- the smart bombs and GPS. Is it like an eye for an
- eye thing or is this how war is, at the time it
- seams justified and people are all for it, not
- killing anyway, but retaliation at least . ANy
- comments?
-
- <center><img
- src="http://www.skalman.nu/worldwar2/bilder/su-air
- force.gif">

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:24 AM
we did not target civilans!!!!!!!!!!!.........what is wrong with you ppl ........if we wanted to we could have carpet bombed bagdad with b-52 did we .no !!! ......damn i know this asshat is just trolling but...please lock this mods

U.S INFANTRY 84-91

Message Edited on 10/01/0307:27PM by tenmmike

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:27 AM
Here's a thought. Why don't you go and get at least moderately informed before you insult yourself? I mean serisouly, do you think that the whole world can be summarized by the front page of cnn.com? Go read a book.

Earl

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:38 AM
RAF74_Wall-dog wrote:
- I was going to ignore this thread as just another
- cyber-babble by someone with bait at the end of
- their hook, but then I saw you had over 100
- postings.

Post count means Jack if the poster is posting fishbait......... Personally I think we should have let the ingrates stew under Sadaam but thats my opinion...with hindsight of course. I was just a little upset because Sadaam didnt become the "Monster we have to destroy NOW before it's too late!!" untill the whole corporate thieving bastage thing was brewing up really hot...then we forgot about Osama and Al Qaida and threw our reservists at Sadaam...... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif I have not forgotten....about Bin Laden.... Nothing I can do though...not by myself... Hey Pety a qestion for you .... why do you continue to make ridiculous posts like this one? What is your beef with the US...what you want to move here or something? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

<CENTER>http://www.world-wide-net.com/tuskegeeairmen/ta-1943.jpg <marquee><FONT COLOR="RED"><FONT SIZE="+1">"Straighten up.......Fly right..~S~"<FONT SIZE> </marquee> http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat

<CENTER><FONT COLOR="ORANGE">vflyer@comcast.net<FONT COLOR>
<Center><div style="width:200;color:red;font-size:18pt;filter:shadow Blur[color=red,strength=8)">99th Pursuit Squadron

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:38 AM
psyshopetey gets the "IDIOTIC THREAD OF THE MONTH AWARD" also ibtl

www.fighterjocks.net (http://www.fighterjocks.net) home of the 11 time Champions Team AFJ. 6 Years Flying. Semper Invictus! <img src ="http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_120_1064715546.jpg">

adlabs6
10-02-2003, 03:43 AM
More and more, each day, I'm convinced that the mods are way to hung up in the LOMAC demo.

<html>
<body>
<table cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="600" align="center">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<font face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif"><font color="000000">adlabs<font color="#ff9900">6</font></font>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" bgcolor="#42524e">
<div align="center"><font color="#999999">
http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/bin/sigtemp.JPG (http://mudmovers.com/Sims/FB/fb_skins_historical_adlabs6.htm)
<small><font color="#ff6600">NEW</font> at mudmovers! Click the pic to download my skins from mudmovers.com!</small>
</font>
Skinner's Guide at mudmovers (http://mudmovers.com/Sims/FB/fb_skinnersguide.htm) | Skinner's heaven (http://www.1java.org/sh) | IL2skins (http://www.il2skins.com)
<font color="#999999">
My Forgotten Battles Webpage (http://www.geocities.com/adlabs6/B/index.html) Current Wallpaper: <font color="#999999">Bf-109 Morning Run</font></font>

<A HREF="http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=zhiwg" TARGET=_blank>"Whirlwind Whiner"
The first of the few</A>
</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</body>
</html>

Hawgdog
10-02-2003, 03:44 AM
psychopetey wrote:
- I'm a nancy boy, waaa waaaa waaa



good lord, and this relates to FB...how?

<center></script>The original HawgDog, dont be fooled by fneb imitations
~W~ cause S! has become USELESS
When you get to hell, tell 'em Hawgdog sent you
http://users.zoominternet.net/~cgatewood/assets/images/sharkdog.gif

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 03:48 AM
Hawgdog wrote:
-
- psychopetey wrote:
- I'm a nancy boy, waaa waaaa waaa
-
-
- good lord, and this relates to FB...how?

LOL!

<div style="background:#222222;color:#e0e0e0;font-size:24px;font-weight:bold;font-face:courier;"> TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?
</div>
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 04:20 AM
http://webpages.charter.net/Stick_Fiend/images/stupid.gif


<center> http://webpages.charter.net/Stick_Fiend/images/crazyPilot.gif
<font size= 2>

<a href="http://webpages.charter.net/Stick_Fiend/"><font size= 2> Stick_Fiend Home<a/><font size= 2>
"Altitude, speed, maneuver, fire!"-The "formula of Terror" of Aleksandr Pokryshkin, Three times awarded the rank of Hero of the Soviet Union

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 04:41 AM
Looks like a number of you fell into the trap. Hopefully cooler heads can prevail in this discussion. I certainly can't agree with psychopetey's statements however. Although I was not in favor of a war with Iraq, I do support our military (USN Active/Reserve 79-00) if not our foreign policy, and believe the U.S. military did it's utmost best in minimizing Iraqi civilian casualties. As tenmike stated, the airforce could have easily carpet bombed Bagdad proper, causing huge civilian casualties. As we all know from history though, terrorizing the civilian population by mass bombings has little effect but to harden the peoples resolve against the enemy.

However,I'm sorry to say that I must take some issue with RAF74_Wall-dog's statement that America does not now and never has targeted civilian populations. Although unlike the British the U.S.tried to conduct more accurate daylight raids, he obviously forgot about the infamous Tokyo fire bombing raids or Dresden in which the U.S. took part. The bombing of Dresden, a non-military city filled with some 1.5 million refugees. The attack lasted several days, utilizing several waves of bombers coordinated in such a way so that when the people left their shelters after the initial attack (thinking it was over) another raid materialized. In this way they would maximize casualties. In between the bomber raids the fighters would strafe civilians trying to flee the city. I lost at least one relative this way in another part of Germany during the war, when the train she was riding on was strafed by allied fighters.

But I digress. This subject is perhaps best left for another discussion thread. I suffice to say that I still can't agree with psychopetey's remarks. Remember, this is a discussion not a shouting match. We are all entitled to our own opinions. Hopefully I didn't offend anyone else. Good night all.


Man will never truly be free until the last politician has been strangled with the entrails of the last priest. "Voltaire"

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 04:45 AM
psychopetey wrote:
- Historical debate: Was the bombing of civilians in Iraq a necessity?

No. It was a result, not a necessity. Due to the circumstances, of course.
Any more questions?

- What about today?

Today will hopefully be a good day. Maybe there will be some waves to surf at the ocean. It's nice living in a free society and doing what you want to do, instead of living in fear.


- There is a war on and innocent civilians are being
- killed by American bombs, is this OK by our
- standards due to 9/11?

When there is a war you take out military targets, it is therefore ok by any standards if civilians are killed when taking out military targets.


- Do these people deserve this,
- it's not like we can 't be inaccuate now with all
- the smart bombs and GPS.

They deserve the smartest bombs possible when their brutal regime is being taken out, and that's what we gave them.


- Is it like an eye for an
- eye thing or is this how war is, at the time it
- seams justified and people are all for it, not
- killing anyway, but retaliation at least.

Neither assumption is correct.

- ANy
- comments?

You are implying that the United States Military targeted civilians in the War on Iraq instead of military targets. This never occured so "you is wrong".



Message Edited on 10/02/0312:50AM by RayBanJockey

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 04:48 AM
My God. Think if America really WAS targeting civilians in Iraq. With our weapons, even conventional ones, we could have killed millions. Think about it.

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 04:50 AM
And just what does this have to do with IL2FB?

http://www.mid-mo.net/phil/images/stg77banner.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 05:29 AM
DON'T YOU THINK! The better question would be why after 12 years, 14 United Nation Resolutions, and many attempts by other Nations too bring him into compliance Sadam allowed his people to suffer? Or are you in some way related to his information minister? And you're so smart why did I respond to this? DOH!

<img src="http://www.world-data-systems.com/aerofiles/albums/userpics/D13-Hamm109 copy.jpg"

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 05:44 AM
The US Military is taking casualties still because of our policy to minimize casualties. If we we not concerned, we could have left a big smoking hole in the desert, which by the way, would have also been a more effective means eliminating Saddam himself. The fact that this was not what happened is evidence of the restraint we had.

The F4U Corsair won the war!!!

http://www.x-plane.org/users/aonyn/Screenshots/Leisure_Chair_Aerobat_reduced_square.jpg

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 05:52 AM
Pops in...

Looks around.....

Wonders if any Fw190s are flying over Iraq.....

Looks for Iraq map in IL2 FB......

Finds none, scratches head, finds a slight dent...

Leaves, muttering 'What the bloody hell....?'

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 08:17 AM
necessityt? ?


I'd never join a club that would have ME as a member!!.

XyZspineZyX
10-02-2003, 08:22 AM
Reminds me of Pilot Lounge.

Really woke me up. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Locking.

http://members.chello.se/ven/milton.jpg