dagblog - Comments for "'Staggering' loss of civilian life from US-led airstrikes in Raqqa, says UN "

Yeah, I feel a few narrative

PeraclesPlease — Sat, 17 Jun 2017 02:18:53 +0000

Yeah, I feel a few narrative pushers from different sides. I felt there was a rush by the Russians to get a "we killed al-Baghdadi (maybe)" in along with atrocity condemnations before any praise for allied fighters might occur in Mosul. Watch it - every time there's some budding good news in either Syria or Iraq, some balancing horrible news has to appear. Come to think of it, last year's election was largely orchestrated that way.

Tend to agree with you

artappraiser — Sat, 17 Jun 2017 01:29:19 +0000

In reply to 200,000 civilians essentially

Tend to agree with you especially on this point. War is a ruthless brutal numbers game, even when most everyone agrees about who "the good guys:are", a percentage of innocent individuals need to be sacrificed.

I really posted the story because it was of a U.N. report and it is atypical for them to criticize "us" so loudly.

200,000 civilians essentially

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 16 Jun 2017 20:06:00 +0000

In reply to Bullshit synopsis, especially

200,000 civilians essentially captive and liable to summary execution, but the US causing civilian deaths through largely careful attacks is pushed as a "both sides do it" scenario. Propaganda indeed works - to suckers.

Bullshit synopsis, especially

PeraclesPlease — Fri, 16 Jun 2017 10:54:16 +0000

In reply to Oh no, when we do it it is

Bullshit synopsis, especially with the care coalition forces have taken in communicating with trapped civilians, as documented by Airwars.org. The Guardian seems to point to a particular incident in al-Monsoura causing 200 of the 300 civilian deaths, but no details, and nothing in Airwars' daily tallies that correlates with that big a hit. Airwars does denote mixed & unsure causes of airstrikes and artillery, but I'm sure it's comforting to lump them all into airstrikes, as that can be blamed on Americans.

This is largely between Raqqa and Mosul, and previousl a major civilian hit in the hundreds in March was investigated and most likely ISIS had seduced/forced civilians into a building to be attacked.

In any case, from how wars usually go, civilian deaths seem to me quite proportionate for a major offensive.

Oh, and al-Baghdadi? Fuck him. Still looking around to see if Russians got him and how.

Oh no, when we do it it is

Aaron Carine — Thu, 15 Jun 2017 16:47:48 +0000

In reply to 'Staggering' loss of civilian life from US-led airstrikes in Raqqa, says UN

Oh no, when we do it it is merely "collateral", and it is the fault of the enemy anyway, for "hiding behind civilians(Alan Dershowitz's favorite phrase).