[Bobboau]

there seems to have been something of a find in Al Tuwaitha,
weapons grade plutonium, some are saying that is IAEA stuff, but it was suposedly found in an underground facility that 'didn't exsist'

[Stryke 9]

Trippy.

[Snakeseyes]

Originally posted by Falcon X


Wrong.  Over 80% of the munitions were guided.  Carpet bombing involves leveling a city.  We were extremely targeted.

Thats how you hit Baghdads markets.

[Bobboau]

yes that is how after the thousands and thousands of bombs we droped only one (or was it two) hit a market place. though it could just as easily been a malfunctioning Iraqi missle, though I will accept that they were ours, seeing as there would be absolutly no malfunctioning bombs if not for this and that seems a bit odd given the number of bombs droped,
does anyone have any statistics of bombs droped people killed Iraqi vs coalition/military vs civilian

you know I find it some what funny that the only people in the world that seem to beleve us when we say we are not targeting civilians are the people in the contry we are bombing

[Stryke 9]

Actually, they don't. But this is probably the time to note that I never said anything like that the Army was going for civvies. Y'all seem to confuse everyone like that, so that if one person has a certain political stance, and also thinks that the Illuminati is trying to plant a mind-controlling bullfrog in his brain when he sleeps, ya assume we all do. Razor and such do not represent the views of the management.

Anyway, it'd serve really no function to intentionally slaughter civilians. The Army was a bit less careful than it maybe should have been ideally, but they're soldiers- indiscriminate killing is their modus operandi. The damage was relatively contained compared to most wars, and a PR nightmare was averted.

[Bobboau]

I know you have never said that but there have been those who have implied it here, and there are many in the world who do beleve we are intentionaly killing civilians

[Shrike]

Originally posted by Stryke 9
Shrike: Technically, we were carpet-bombing Baghdad. And I'm not sure whether or not we used the MOAB (not really of interest to me), but if we did, that sure would qualify as an "area" bomb no matter what definition you use.

Oh, come on.  The brits and americans did thousand-bomber raids in WWII.  That is carpet bombing.

[J.F.K.]

AFAIK, bombs as a general weapon type have always been 'inaccurate', for whatever reason - including both incorrect term and lack of precision. Strategic rather than tactical.

[Falcon X]

Originally posted by Snakeseyes


Thats how you hit Baghdads markets.

Oh nice try skippy.  Military analysts at the pentagon and also abroad have said that couldn't have been us for two reasons.

1.  Way off course.

2.  The blast looked nothing like a cruise missle detonation, or even a bomb detonation.  It resembled more of a car bomb blast.

Even if we did hit the market, that's like one in a million.  Are you expecting perfection?

[vyper]

Originally posted by Falcon X


Oh nice try skippy.  Military analysts at the pentagon and also abroad have said that couldn't have been us for two reasons.

1.  Way off course.

2.  The blast looked nothing like a cruise missle detonation, or even a bomb detonation.  It resembled more of a car bomb blast.

Even if we did hit the market, that's like one in a million.  Are you expecting perfection?

As a general note, may I say there is no room for mistakes in war.

[Tiara]

Originally posted by vyper


As a general note, may I say there is no room for mistakes in war.

May I note; "A war isn't a war without mistakes."

Hell,

"War IS[/u] a mistake"

[Tiara]

Originally posted by Falcon X

or even a bomb detonation.  It resembled more of a car bomb blast.
 

Ok, what is wrong in that sentence?

[Snakeseyes]

Originally posted by Falcon X


Oh nice try skippy.  Military analysts at the pentagon and also abroad have said that couldn't have been us for two reasons.

1.  Way off course.

2.  The blast looked nothing like a cruise missle detonation, or even a bomb detonation.  It resembled more of a car bomb blast.

Even if we did hit the market, that's like one in a million.  Are you expecting perfection?

Two different markets, an orphanage(sp?), the Al Jazeera and Abu Dabhi TV stations in Iraq (don't think that they were mistakes).

It reminds me of the Chinese embassy bombing in Yugoslavia. They were lucky this time.

[Bobboau]

we did go after Iraq's TV stations but not Al Jazeera and Abu Dabhi, though some of them did get hit the other day when we were getting sniped at from there building

[Snakeseyes]

The Palestine is the hotel that all the foreign reporters live. The tank couldn't be sniped from the balcony of the spanish reporters room. Of course you can say that he was taking "shots" with his camera. No, your soldiers are just stupid.

They can't even understand who is the enemy and who is the ally. The brits had more loss from your soldiers than from Iraqis. Hell, even you had more casualties due to friendly fire you than from the Iraqis.

[Tiara]

Originally posted by Snakeseyes
No, your soldiers are just stupid.

Ok, I think its best for you to shut up now seeing as you know absolutely nothing regarding this topic.

I'm not a US invasion fan but thats just not true (Though every army has its exception ).

[Snakeseyes]

I know nothing??? How did you understand that?

[Bobboau]

go fight a ****ing war and come back here and say that you ****ing dumbass.

[Styxx]

Originally posted by Bobboau
go fight a ****ing war and come back here and say that you ****ing dumbass.

Careful...

[Snakeseyes]

Originally posted by Bobboau
go fight a ****ing war and come back here and say that you ****ing dumbass.

I am not saying that I don't respect the soldiers, as they are the people that had the most chances to die, but I still believe what I said.

I mean, the brits didn't hit any americans, or kurds, or journalists. And they had difficult assignments, like Basra.