Why are Afghan civilian casualties "accidents" but Palestinian civilian casualties are "war crimes"?
Double Standards? Nato's Afghan Errors
Double Standards? Nato's Afghan Errors
Double Standards? Nato's Afghan Errors
- Thread starter CDNBear
- Start date
Id compare Israel's use of phosphorus bombs equivalent to Americans use of depleted uranium as crimes against humanity...
And UAV reavers are terror weapons in my opinion.
And UAV reavers are terror weapons in my opinion.
How far should this double-standard go? It would seem they are equal as long as you are either Israeli or NATO (US mostly).Who says they are accidents to begin with, the only side that a lie would help is the ones putting out the statements. What constitutes a war-crime has had defination since about the start of WWII. Making civilians refugees is a war-crime, how can killing them so they have no chance to flee NOT a war-crime.
The very best part of your link is the suggestion that anytime there is somebody called a 'Taliban' by US Forces then any civilans around (that get killed) are being held hostage.
Why should we care that our side uses the least force, for one it gives them a set of rules that would apply to them in any action on the homeland if/when martial law is declared.
Who identified the workers as 'hostile' they could have been putting up a curve-ahead sign. The current policy is 'if it moves, shoot it'.
Neither Israel nor the US will have commanders swinging in the wind, one or two swing and watch the improvement in the identification of 'hostiles'.
"Why is the IDF treated by different standards to other Western militaries and why is it accused of deliberately targeting civilians?"
What a bunch of clowns, put millions in an open air prison and then attack them with the most modern war equipment is how a civilized country acts.
Americans applaud that tactic when they used it successfully against the Britisah a few hundred years ago.
A few points your article mentioned included fighters using civilians as sheilds yet there are certainly photo's of the IDF having a child bound a vehicle's hood or just held by force in front of a soldier. This incident says 3 fighters were in the building according to 'intelligence' received. No proof is ever (about the 3 being there but no children being around) offered as the word 'classified' would enter the conversation. Rather than that being the reason no charges ever go foreward (that is only to the benifit of the US Forces) the charges should go foreward and the 'secret things' just means they will not be offerring that as proof in their defense against the charges. Really how would it look if the building was under surveilance and (God forbid)kids could be seen coming and going at some point in the video. Isreal is quite free about publishing pictures of their children signing bombs that are later used against other people no older than the ones in the picture.
Here's a double standard for you, After America sucks Saddam into thing it would be okay to invade Kuwait (over the slant-drilling going on) they got help from a lot of countries in the destruction of a large part of Iraq's army and the about 10 years of intensive inspections before they felt brave enough to send in warm bodies. Any resistance is classified as terror but killing over a million and making refugees out of 5x that is how a humane military force operates. How can you swallow such a blatant lie? Over a million 'accidents'.
The very best part of your link is the suggestion that anytime there is somebody called a 'Taliban' by US Forces then any civilans around (that get killed) are being held hostage.
Why should we care that our side uses the least force, for one it gives them a set of rules that would apply to them in any action on the homeland if/when martial law is declared.
Who identified the workers as 'hostile' they could have been putting up a curve-ahead sign. The current policy is 'if it moves, shoot it'.
Neither Israel nor the US will have commanders swinging in the wind, one or two swing and watch the improvement in the identification of 'hostiles'.
"Why is the IDF treated by different standards to other Western militaries and why is it accused of deliberately targeting civilians?"
What a bunch of clowns, put millions in an open air prison and then attack them with the most modern war equipment is how a civilized country acts.
Americans applaud that tactic when they used it successfully against the Britisah a few hundred years ago.
A few points your article mentioned included fighters using civilians as sheilds yet there are certainly photo's of the IDF having a child bound a vehicle's hood or just held by force in front of a soldier. This incident says 3 fighters were in the building according to 'intelligence' received. No proof is ever (about the 3 being there but no children being around) offered as the word 'classified' would enter the conversation. Rather than that being the reason no charges ever go foreward (that is only to the benifit of the US Forces) the charges should go foreward and the 'secret things' just means they will not be offerring that as proof in their defense against the charges. Really how would it look if the building was under surveilance and (God forbid)kids could be seen coming and going at some point in the video. Isreal is quite free about publishing pictures of their children signing bombs that are later used against other people no older than the ones in the picture.
Here's a double standard for you, After America sucks Saddam into thing it would be okay to invade Kuwait (over the slant-drilling going on) they got help from a lot of countries in the destruction of a large part of Iraq's army and the about 10 years of intensive inspections before they felt brave enough to send in warm bodies. Any resistance is classified as terror but killing over a million and making refugees out of 5x that is how a humane military force operates. How can you swallow such a blatant lie? Over a million 'accidents'.
Oh please. DU tank rounds are great weapons. Nothing can slice through armor like DU. A hot knife through butter.
What does Canada use? Marshmellow tank rounds? Paintballs?
DU the gift that keeps on giving.
Fallujah doctors report growth in birth defects
BBC News - Fallujah doctors report growth in birth defects
Fallujah doctors report growth in birth defects
BBC News - Fallujah doctors report growth in birth defects
go back to the tungsten carbide
Nah, DU is the way to go. As I have said many times in here... nothing pops the turret off a tank like DU.
its true, and you guys arent the only ones using it anyways so we cant single america out for using DU
Operation Desert Storm was the first conflict to see the extensive use of DU munitions and armor. The new DU rounds gave coalition forces a marked operational advantage. Unit histories from the Gulf War contain many anecdotes attesting to the effectiveness of DU "silver bullets," as they were called by US tankers. One armor brigade commander described looking on in "amazement" as his soldiers -- who in training had never fired at targets beyond 2,400 meters (1.5 miles) -- routinely scored first-shot kills on targets out to 3,000 meters (1.9 miles) and beyond.[219] DU armor gained an equally impressive reputation. A story illustrating DU's offensive and defensive renown involves an M1A1 "Heavy Armor" tank that had become mired in the mud.
The unit (part of the 24th Infantry Division) had gone on, leaving this tank to wait for a recovery vehicle. Three T-72's appeared and attacked. The first fired from under 1,000 meters, scoring a hit with a shaped-charge (high explosive) round on the M1A1's frontal armor. The hit did no damage. The M1A1 fired a 120mm armor-piercing round that penetrated the T-72 turret, causing an explosion that blew the turret into the air. The second T-72 fired another shaped-charge round, hit the frontal armor, and did no damage. This T-72 turned to run, and took a 120mm round in the engine compartment and blew the engine into the air. The last T-72 fired a solid shot (sabot) round from 400 meters. This left a groove in the M1A1's frontal armor and bounced off. The T-72 then backed up behind a sand berm and was completely concealed from view. The M1A1 depressed its gun and put a sabot round through the berm, into the T-72, causing an explosion.[220]
The United Kingdom is the only other country known to have fired DU munitions in the Gulf War. The UK Ministry of Defence estimates that its Challenger tanks fired fewer than 100 120mm Armor Piercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot (APFSDS) rounds against Iraqi military forces during hostilities, although the British tanks fired additional rounds during earlier work-up training in Saudi Arabia.
OUCH!
That is definately a DU hit. Just like I said...tank turrets pop like corks off a champagne bottle!
Please don't try and pass off tank shells as being the only du munition manufactured. The machines mentioned are those hit by friendly fire.
(in part)
During the Persian Gulf War in 1991, Army officials assembled a team to clean up the DU contaminated tanks and Bradley fighting vehicles. Most team members became sick within 48 hours, with the first cancers developing within nine months and first deaths from lung cancer within two years. Today, 14 years later, some veterans are still attempting to obtain medical testing and care, but say that military and Veterans Administration (VA) officials simply refuse to provide mandated services.
Permanent contamination, impossible containment
Many U.S. weapons, such as missiles, bombs, bullets, and tank shells contain DU, and act as "kinetic energy penetrators" that ignite during flight, and break into burning fragments upon impact. DU weapons are effective because they can penetrate and destroy all targets, including boring through 20 feet of super-reinforced concrete bunkers. DU is virtually cost-free, since it is a by-product of nuclear weapons production. The U.S. ADAM and PDM sub-munitions are called "the perfect dirty bombs" as each has a uranium casing filled with high explosives.
But these weapons are the proverbial double-edged swords. On detonation, uranium particles vaporize into a radioactive dust (uranium oxide) that coats everything within proximity. The dust can be swept high into the atmosphere, where upper level winds redistribute toxins across national boundaries.
When inhaled, these nano-particles, 100 times smaller than a cell, follow the respiratory system to attack the master code of DNA, and disable the immune system. Uranium has a half-life of 4.5 billion years, so contamination is permanent, and containment is impossible.
According to Leuren Moret, a geoscientist who has worked around the world on radiation issues, depleted uranium is coming back into the U.S. "in veterans' uniforms and trophies and bags." It's also coming back in their bodies, transferred through semen.
Moret cited a U.S. government study, conducted by the VA on post-Gulf War babies in a group of 251 soldiers in Mississippi who all had normal babies before the Gulf War. The study found 67 percent of their post-war babies were born with severe birth defects. Some were born without eyes (anophthalmos), ears, with missing organs, missing legs and arms, fused fingers, thyroid or other organ malformations. Moret said that in some families, the only healthy members are those born before the Gulf Wars.
A WMD used against our own?
The health repercussions in Iraq are unprecedented. In babies born in 2002, the incidence of anophthalmos was 250,000 times greater (20 cases in 4,000 births) than the natural occurrence, one in 50 million births.
The Army and Air Force fired at least 127 tons of DU shells in Iraq last year, according to Pentagon spokesman Michael Kilpatrick, in an interview with the New York Daily News. "Because of its density, it is the superior heavy metal for armor to protect tanks and to penetrate armor," Kilpatrick said.
In fact, the effects of DU meet U.S. government standards of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). According to the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) Joint Publication 1-02, WMDs are "Weapons that are capable of a high order of destruction and/or of being used in such a manner as to destroy large numbers of people. Weapons of mass destruction can be high explosives or nuclear, biological, chemical, and radiological weapons."
"DU is illegal in any sense of the imagination," said Dr. Doug Rokke, a retired U.S. Army Major, nuclear health physicist, and the Pentagon's expert on the health effects of DU ammunition on the battlefield. Rokke was director of the Army's DU project, and wrote the Army regulations for handling and clean up for DU -- regulations he says the U.S. government is blatantly refusing to enforce. Today, although US Army Regulation 700-48 (Traprock Peace Center - Doug Rokke asks DoD 3 questions on DU) requires DOD officials to provide medical care to all DU casualties and clean up DU contamination, Rokke said they simply refuse to do so.
Rokke said that by continuing to use DU, and by refusing to admit the acknowledged adverse environmental and health effects, DOD officials violate their own orders and regulations. "When we can no longer clean up the environment and we can no longer provide medical care for anybody that's exposed, then that weapon must never be used in conflict," Rokke said.
Louisanna: Toxic Tours of Duty? Historic legislation would ensure uranium testing for local soldiers | U.S. Military |Axisoflogic.com
Nah...I've already posted the Atomic Energy Commisions report on DU. Harmless except for tankers in tanks that begin with the letter "T".
Just don't sprinkle it on your cereal and you should be OK.
Just don't sprinkle it on your cereal and you should be OK.
Eagle I think you are covering your eyes:
Depleted Uranium deaths could surpass worst-case predictions
by Amy Worthington
The Pentagon has just announced that 18,000 American troops were medically evacuated from Iraq during the first year of operations there. Thousands more have been sickened and maimed in Afghanistan since 2001. No one knows how many U.S. troops have actually died in these two quagmires, because the Pentagon cooks the books by listing the not quite dead as “wounded,” conveniently excluding them from the death count when they do die.
Depleted Uranium deaths could surpass worst-case predictions
by Amy Worthington
The Pentagon has just announced that 18,000 American troops were medically evacuated from Iraq during the first year of operations there. Thousands more have been sickened and maimed in Afghanistan since 2001. No one knows how many U.S. troops have actually died in these two quagmires, because the Pentagon cooks the books by listing the not quite dead as “wounded,” conveniently excluding them from the death count when they do die.
Any of them willing to carry a gram next to their nuts for a long period of time?
You also base your 911 info on what was published by 913. Guess that is why you made it to 'grunt' phase only. Your term used in a post to AnnaG after she criticized the US Forces role in the deaths of some innocents.
Well you aren't supposed to carry it by your nuts MHz.
You load it in a tank barrell, fire it down range towards a tank. When it hits it blows THEIR nuts off.
And what actually happened then?
Shows how little you know about what a Grunt is. A grunt is an infantryman. Many Generals are Grunts. Canadians have Grunts as Canadians have infantry. Unless you think all infantrymen are stupid including Canadian infantrymen.
So in your feeble attempt to insult me you showed your ignorance.
Yeah you should probably go back and read that as you obviously didn't retain any knowledge.