BREAKING NEWS: Retired General Norman Schwarzkopf has Died

[earth_as_one]

IMO, a ceasefire means to stop firing. But in the case of Schwarzkopf Jr., a ceasefire agreement is just a ruse to get Iraqi soldiers and collaborators out of Kuwait City, where they could be easily attacked. The fact that US soldiers continued to attack and kill Iraqi soldiers for two days after they agreed to US ceasefire conditions should be reason enough not to idolize Schwarzkopf as some sort of war hero. Schwarzkopf's orders to shoot Iraqi soldiers attempting to surrender is a despicable cowardly war crime.

...Veterans Jerry Williamson and Dr. Bill Warrick cited examples of U.S. military conduct under Schwarzkopf's command which was anything but "public service" or heroic. Dr. Warrick spoke of the thousands of surrendering Iraqis buried in trenches while pinned down under fire, in effect mass graves in which the living were entombed. Under the Geneva Convention, surrendering troops are to be allowed to surrender.

The more widely reported attack on retreating Iraqis on the road to Basra was also cited by Warrick, when U.S. aircraft attacked the front and rear of a long exodus of retreating tanks, cars and trucks on an isolated 2 lane road, then proceeded to destroy everything in between. According to the Geneva Convention, retreating troops are supposed to be given quarter, that is, they are supposed to be allowed to flee. Thus these miles of carnage clearly constitute a war crime, Warrick said. He said U.S. troops actions on the road to Basra have been mentioned by both military command and President Bush as such unacceptable conduct that the war was actually shortened because of the bad publicity resulting from it.

Williamson brought up first hand testimony from a local Gulf War vet on board the USS Ranger whose planes attacked oil facilities in the Persian Gulf. Williamson reported: "This particular person was in charge of the ship's missile defense system, so he was present at all the briefings of the pilots before and after each of their missions. This person told me that early on in the war they launched a raid from the USS Ranger to bomb the main oil storage terminal off of Kuwait City. After the mission was completed and the planes were coming back, the leader of the bombing raid communicated to the ship that the raid had been a complete success, that all the storage facilities had been completely destroyed, every structure was either burning or rubble, and that there was a huge oil slick moving out away from the island. Over the next several days the Ranger sent out planes to monitor this oil slick which eventually covered the whole northern end of the Persian Gulf and was shown clearly on the television news in this country."

Williamson stated that among the closed circuit television channels the ship had access to was CNN, the same CNN we saw in the US. "Crew members that were aware of the oil slick knew that it had been caused by the bombing raids from their ship. You can imagine their surprise when they saw news about the oil spill on CNN several days after they were aware of it, with the report being that it was caused by the Iraqis. This person who told me about the story said that he was greatly alarmed about the credibility of the newsreporting on television because it was obvious it had been influenced by the Defense Department. Most of the crew members that he was familiar with laughed about it, and said that 'if we could do this, and blame this on the Iraqis, then we can get away with anything.'" Williamson concluded, :"That's pretty much the rules of conduct of war, I suppose, going back to Machiavelli, that if you've got enough power, whatever you do is right."...
Veterans for peace charge General Schwarzkopf with war crimes

 

[Locutus]

Can You Spot What’s Wrong With This White House Statement on the Passing of Gen. Schwarzkopf? | TheBlaze.com

 

[CDNBear]

IMO, a ceasefire means to stop firing.

There was no cease fire agreement between the UN or coalition forces and Iraq in February.

There was however a cease fire order given to coalition ground forces in Kuwait. That wasn't an agreement between Iraq and the coalition.

But in the case of Schwarzkopf Jr., a ceasefire agreement is just a ruse to get Iraqi soldiers and collaborators out of Kuwait City, where they could be easily attacked. The fact that US soldiers continued to attack and kill Iraqi soldiers for two days after they agreed to US ceasefire conditions should be reason enough not to idolize Schwarzkopf as some sort of war hero.

The dishonesty or ignorance of your post is absolutely astounding.

Schwarzkopf's orders to shoot Iraqi soldiers attempting to surrender is a despicable cowardly war crime.

He gave no such order.

The retreating Iraqi troops had not, did not surrender. They were retreating, armed. Therefor under law, still a valid target. Just like the Nazi troops fleeing Russia.

His orders were to take every piece of Iraqi armour.

And since there was no surrender, no cease fire agreement, they were valid and legal targets.

If you want to use other peoples opinions, I can post the opinions of two professors of international law, that trump your silly Vet's opinions hands down.

I know what part of the Geneva Convention they claim to have been breached and I can say with all certainty, they're wrong, and I'll prove it...

They claim The 3rd Geneva Convention, 3rd Article, which is as follows...

Article 3 has been called a "Convention in miniature." It is the only article of the Geneva Conventions that applies in non-international conflicts.[1] It describes minimal protections which must be adhered to by all individuals within a signatory's territory during an armed conflict not of an international character (regardless of citizenship or lack thereof): Noncombatants, combatants who have laid down their arms, and combatants who are hors de combat (out of the fight) due to wounds, detention, or any other cause shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, including prohibition of outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment. The passing of sentences must also be pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. Article 3's protections exist even if one is not classified as a prisoner of war. Article 3 also states that parties to the internal conflict should endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of GCIII. Wikiality

1, They had not laid down their arms.
2, Retreat is to escape.
3, Protocol I of the Geneva Convention defines hors de combat as...

A person is 'hors de combat' if:
(a) he is in the power of an adverse Party;
(b) he clearly expresses an intention to surrender; or
(c) he has been rendered unconscious or is otherwise incapacitated by wounds or sickness, and therefore is incapable of defending himself;
provided that in any of these cases he abstains from any hostile act and does not attempt to escape.

That clearly proves your idiotic posts and your absurd cut and pastes, wrong!

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

Farewell General Scharzkopf, aka Storming Norman, aka Bear.

Stand Easy End of Mission.

 

[talloola]

I rememnber watching every minute of the first gulf war,including the iraqis leaving and crossing
on that road, and none of us were given any indication that those troops had surrendered.

We would have been horrified knowing and watching what happened, if that had been the case.

There was no surrender by the iraqi's at that point. They were retreating after doing their
dirty deeds in kuwait, fully armed.

 

[DaSleeper]

I rememnber watching every minute of the first gulf war,including the iraqis leaving and crossing
on that road, and none of us were given any indication that those troops had surrendered.

We would have been horrified knowing and watching what happened, if that had been the case.

There was no surrender by the iraqi's at that point. They were retreating after doing their
dirty deeds in kuwait, fully armed.

They were retreating....fully armed...
Some people just love rewriting history to serve their ideology....

 

[talloola]

They were retreating....fully armed...
Some people just love rewriting history to serve their ideology....

thats right 'some' people do that.

 

[earth_as_one]

The Massacre of Withdrawing Soldiers on "The Highway of Death"

[SIZE=-1]by Joyce Chediac[/SIZE]

I want to give testimony on what are called the "highways of death." These are the two Kuwaiti roadways, littered with remains of 2,000 mangled Iraqi military vehicles, and the charred and dismembered bodies of tens of thousands of Iraqi soldiers, who were withdrawing from Kuwait on February 26th and 27th 1991 in compliance with UN resolutions. U.S. planes trapped the long convoys by disabling vehicles in the front, and at the rear, and then pounded the resulting traffic jams for hours. "It was like shooting fish in a barrel," said one U.S. pilot. The horror is still there to see.

On the inland highway to Basra is mile after mile of burned, smashed, shattered vehicles of every description - tanks, armored cars, trucks, autos, fire trucks, according to the March 18, 1991, Time magazine. On the sixty miles of coastal highway, Iraqi military units sit in gruesome repose, scorched skeletons of vehicles and men alike, black and awful under the sun, says the Los Angeles Times of March 11, 1991. While 450 people survived the inland road bombing to surrender, this was not the case with the 60 miles of the coastal road. There for 60 miles every vehicle was strafed or bombed, every windshield is shattered, every tank is burned, every truck is riddled with shell fragments. No survivors are known or likely. The cabs of trucks were bombed so much that they were pushed into the ground, and it's impossible to see if they contain drivers or not. Windshields were melted away, and huge tanks were reduced to shrapnel.

"Even in Vietnam I didn't see anything like this. It's pathetic," said Major Bob Nugent, an Army intelligence officer. This one-sided carnage, this racist mass murder of Arab people, occurred while White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater promised that the U.S. and its coalition partners would not attack Iraqi forces leaving Kuwait. This is surely one of the most heinous war crimes in contemporary history.

The Iraqi troops were not being driven out of Kuwait by U.S. troops as the Bush administration maintains. They were not retreating in order to regroup and fight again. In fact, they were withdrawing, they were going home, responding to orders issued by Baghdad, announcing that it was complying with Resolution 660 and leaving Kuwait. At 5:35 p.m. (Eastern standard Time) Baghdad radio announced that Iraq's Foreign Minister had accepted the Soviet cease-fire proposal and had issued the order for all Iraqi troops to withdraw to postions held before August 2, 1990 in compliance with UN Resolution 660. President Bush responded immediately from the White House saying (through spokesman Marlin Fitzwater) that "there was no evidence to suggest the Iraqi army is withdrawing. In fact, Iraqi units are continuing to fight. . . We continue to prosecute the war." On the next day, February 26, 1991, Saddam Hussein announced on Baghdad radio that Iraqi troops had, indeed, begun to withdraw from Kuwait and that the withdrawal would be complete that day. Again, Bush reacted, calling Hussein's announcement "an outrage" and "a cruel hoax."

Eyewitness Kuwaitis attest that the withdrawal began the afternoon of February 26, 1991 and Baghdad radio announced at 2:00 AM (local time) that morning that the government had ordered all troops to withdraw.

The massacre of withdrawing Iraqi soldiers violates the Geneva Conventions of 1949, Common Article III, which outlaws the killing of soldiers who are out of combat. The point of contention involves the Bush administration's claim that the Iraqi troops were retreating to regroup and fight again. Such a claim is the only way that the massacre which occurred could be considered legal under international law. But in fact the claim is false and obviously so. The troops were withdrawing and removing themselves from combat under direct orders from Baghdad that the war was over and that Iraq had quit and would fully comply with UN resolutions. To attack the soldiers returning home under these circumstances is a war crime.

Iraq accepted UN Resolution 660 and offered to withdraw from Kuwait through Soviet mediation on February 21, 1991. A statement made by George Bush on February 27, 1991, that no quarter would be given to remaining Iraqi soldiers violates even the U.S. Field Manual of 1956. The 1907 Hague Convention governing land warfare also makes it illegal to declare that no quarter will be given to withdrawing soldiers. ...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/remember-the-1991-gulf-war-the-massacre-of-withdrawing-soldiers-on-the-highway-of-death/767

Regarding the 1991 Iraqi rebellion:

...President George H. W. Bush was very much involved. It was he who in February 1991, as American forces were driving Saddam's troops out of Kuwait, called for the people of Iraq to rise up and overthrow the dictator. That message was repeatedly broadcast across Iraq. It was also contained in millions of leaflets dropped by the U.S. Air Force. Eager to end decades of repression, the Shiites arose. Their revolt spread like wildfire; in the north, the Kurds also rose up. Key Iraqi army units joined in. It looked as if Saddam's days were over.

But then George H. W. Bush blew the whistle. Things had got out of hand. What Bush had wanted was not a messy popular uprising but a neat military coup -- another strongman more amenable to Western interests. The White House feared that turmoil would give the Iranians increased influence, upset the Turks, wreak havoc throughout the region.

But the Bush administration didn't just turn its back; it actually aided Saddam to suppress the Intifada.

details:
How George H.W. Bush Helped Saddam Hussein Prevent an Iraqi Uprising | Alternet

General Schwarzkopf was in charge of US forces in the region which dropped the leaflets and made the radio broadcasts which promised US support if the Iraqi revolted against Hussein. The Iraqi people rebelled and then US forces under Schwarzkopf did not keep their word to support them as per the millions of leaflets and months of broadcasts calling on the Iraqi people to rise up and overthrow Hussein. As a result the rebellion failed and about 100,000 people were slaughtered.

The US either should have said nothing and done nothing or said something and done something. But saying you'll support a popular rebellion and then do nothing as the people are slaughtered is cowardly and despicable...

Perhaps the people who gave me a thumbs down can explain why a General with a record of saying one thing and doing another should be praised? Try to frame your response so that is not directed at me, but directed to the thousands of mothers of the conscripted Iraqi teenage soldiers who were slaughtered on the Highway of Death or the tens of thousands of children who were orphaned when forces loyal to Hussein tortured and murdered their parents.

Please explain to these people why Schwarzkopf deserves your praise.

 

[lone wolf]

I read "Rest in Peace". There's a P and an R . You added the rest

 

[Goober]

The Massacre of Withdrawing Soldiers on "The Highway of Death"

Gulf War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Coalition forces enter Iraq
Destroyed Iraqi civilian and military vehicles on the Highway of Death.
Aerial view of destroyed Iraqi T-72 tank, BMP-1 and Type 63 armored personnel carriers and trucks on Highway 8 in March 1991
The oil fires caused were a result of the scorched earth policy of Iraqi military forces retreating from Kuwait

Shortly afterwards, the U.S. VII Corps, in full strength and spearheaded by the 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment, launched an armored attack into Iraq early on 24 February, just to the west of Kuwait, taking Iraqi forces by surprise. Simultaneously, the U.S. XVIII Airborne Corps launched a sweeping “left-hook” attack across southern Iraq's largely undefended desert, led by the U.S. 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment and the 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized). This movement's left flank was protected by France's 6th Light Armoured Division Daguet.

The French force quickly overcame Iraq's 45th Infantry Division, suffering light casualties and taking a large number of prisoners, and took up blocking positions to prevent an Iraqi counter-attack on the Coalition flank. The movement's right flank was protected by Britain's 1st Armoured Division. Once the allies had penetrated deep into Iraqi territory, they turned eastward, launching a flank attack against the elite Republican Guard before it could escape. The Iraqis resisted fiercely from dug-in positions and stationary vehicles, and even mounted armored charges.

Unlike many previous engagements, the destruction of the first Iraqi tanks did not result in a mass surrender. The Iraqis suffered massive losses and lost dozens of tanks and vehicles, while U.S. casualties were comparatively low, with a single Bradley knocked out. Coalition forces pressed another ten kilometers into Iraqi territory, and captured their objective within three hours. They took 500 prisoners and inflicted heavy losses, defeating Iraq's 26th Infantry Division. A U.S. soldier was killed by an Iraqi land mine, another five by friendly fire, and thirty wounded during the battle. Meanwhile, British forces attacked Iraq's Medina Division and a major Republican Guard logistics base. In nearly two days of some of the war's most intense fighting, the British destroyed 40 enemy tanks and captured a division commander.

Meanwhile, U.S. forces attacked the village of Al Busayyah, meeting fierce resistance. They suffered no casualties, but destroyed a considerable amount of military hardware and took prisoners.

On 25 February 1991, Iraqi forces fired a Scud missile at an American barracks in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. The missile attack killed 28 U.S. military personnel.[95]

The Coalition advance was much swifter than U.S. generals had expected. On 26 February, Iraqi troops began retreating from Kuwait, after they had set its oil fields on fire (737 oil wells were set on fire). A long convoy of retreating Iraqi troops formed along the main Iraq-Kuwait highway. Although they were retreating, this convoy was bombed so extensively by Coalition air forces that it came to be known as the Highway of Death. Hundreds of Iraqi troops were killed. American, British, and French forces continued to pursue retreating Iraqi forces over the border and back into Iraq, eventually moving to within 150 miles (240 km) of Baghdad before withdrawing back to Iraq's border with Kuwait and Saudi Arabia.

One hundred hours after the ground campaign started, on 28 February, President Bush declared a ceasefire, and he also declared that Kuwait had been liberated.

 

[earth_as_one]

The point is that on February 22, 1991 Iraq agreed to a Soviet-proposed cease-fire agreement. While the US rejected the proposal, they also said that retreating Iraqi forces would not be attacked. On February 26 Iraqi forces left the relative security of Kuwait City to cross the open desert, believing that the US would keep their word.

How many tanks and fighting vehicles do you see in the de-corpsified images? I see lots of vehicles designed for moving people, not many that appear designed for fighting.

The Highway of Death

Officially known as Highway 80, the Highway of Death runs from Kuwait City to Basra in Iraq. During the Gulf War (1991), it became the scene of one of the most haunting images of the war.

On the night of February 26-27, 1991, Iraqi military personnel and civilians retreating from Kuwait were attacked and destroyed by American aircraft and ground forces during the United Nations Coalition offensive. The use of force was disproportionate, and the retreating forces included hostages and refugees. The scenes of carnage on the road were seen by the international community as a turkey shoot (Elaine Sciolino, the New York Times) and led to the war’s quick end subsequently.
The Highway of Death « Iconic Photos

Highway of Death
On February 25, 1991, the Iraqi occupiers began a mass retreat from Kuwait City. Their convey was trapped near Mutla Ridge on Jahra Road and pounded by coalition air strikes. The city of Jahra is in the background.

Kuwait Invasion: The Evidence - Highway of Death

Besides the fact that the commonly believed in North America scenario defies common sense. I doubt Iraqi soldiers would leave fortified positions in the middle of a city to cross open desert if they believed they would be attacked. An agreement to avoid house to house fighting made sense to both sides. But once Iraq's forces cleared the city, a mass slaughter served American interests.

Believe what you like about Schwarzkopf. But IMO, the evidence supports claims that he was responsible for a lot of senseless death and his word meant nothing.

 

[Goober]

The point is that on February 22, 1991 Iraq agreed to a Soviet-proposed cease-fire agreement. While the US rejected the proposal, they also said that retreating Iraqi forces would not be attacked. On February 26 Iraqi forces left the relative security of Kuwait City to cross the open desert, believing that the US would keep their word.

How many tanks and fighting vehicles do you see in the de-corpsified images? I see lots of vehicles designed for moving people, not many that appear designed for fighting.

The Highway of Death

Officially known as Highway 80, the Highway of Death runs from Kuwait City to Basra in Iraq. During the Gulf War (1991), it became the scene of one of the most haunting images of the war.

On the night of February 26-27, 1991, Iraqi military personnel and civilians retreating from Kuwait were attacked and destroyed by American aircraft and ground forces during the United Nations Coalition offensive. The use of force was disproportionate, and the retreating forces included hostages and refugees. The scenes of carnage on the road were seen by the international community as a turkey shoot (Elaine Sciolino, the New York Times) and led to the war’s quick end subsequently.
The Highway of Death « Iconic Photos

Highway of Death
On February 25, 1991, the Iraqi occupiers began a mass retreat from Kuwait City. Their convey was trapped near Mutla Ridge on Jahra Road and pounded by coalition air strikes. The city of Jahra is in the background.

Kuwait Invasion: The Evidence - Highway of Death

Besides the fact that the commonly believed in North America scenario defies common sense. I doubt Iraqi soldiers would leave fortified positions in the middle of a city to cross open desert if they believed they would be attacked. An agreement to avoid house to house fighting made sense to both sides. But once Iraq's forces cleared the city, a mass slaughter served American interests.

Believe what you like about Schwarzkopf. But IMO, the evidence supports claims that he was responsible for a lot of senseless death and his word meant nothing.

The war was not over- Figure it this way or that way.

 

[earth_as_one]

I see buses, troop transports and cars in the above images. Where are the tanks and other fighting vehicles? (I suspect they were abandoned as per the Soviet proposed ceasefire agreement.)

My understanding is that the US took no prisoners and showed no mercy.

 

[gerryh]

Go ahead and worship the butcher if you like L, but you should be aware that Schwarzkopf had a lot of blood on his hands. Based on what I know about Schwarzkopf, I certainly would not trust my life on his word.

No one survived the Highway of Death. Iraqi soldiers and collaborators would have killed more Americans if they fought to the death in Kuwait City. My understanding is that Schwarzkopf who was in charge of Desert Storm negotiated the Iraqi surrender, then broke the surrender/retreat agreement and gave the order to show no mercy and take no prisoners.

When the residents of Basra revolted against Saddam Hussein, they believed that US led forces under Schwarzkopf's command would enforce a no-fly zone over southern Iraq. Schwarzkopf broke his word to these people and gave Iraqi attack helicopters the green light to slaughter tens of thousands of civilians. Hussein's forces didn't just torture and kill adversaries. He also tortured the families and friends of his adversaries. US forces had the means to enforce a no-fly zone at the time, but instead decided that Hussein's slaughter of Shiites served American interests in the region better than an autonomous Shiite enclave in southern Iraq.

This is a memorial thread. For a man. Another human.


What surprises me, is the last time "I" shyte in a memorial thread to a soldier, I was timed out for 30 days. Why is this ****** idiot still here?

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

I see buses, troop transports and cars in the above images. Where are the tanks and other fighting vehicles? (I suspect they were abandoned as per the Soviet proposed ceasefire agreement.)

My understanding is that the US took no prisoners and showed no mercy.

Funny are we looking at the same picture? I see troop carrying vehicles. I also think that if the United States had dealt with the Iraqis in the the second Gulf war the same way Stormin Norman did, there would have been a hell of a lot less Nato casualties.

If you want to blame someone, blame Saddam or if that offends your sensibilities you can always blame it on the ZIONISTS!

 

[lone wolf]

What does a vehicle designed for fighting look like? Doors painted white as in a demolition derby? Buses, cars and trucks that couldn't possibly transport retreating troops? You go ahead and see what you want to see and rewrite history in any way that paints roses, rainbows and bunnies on your comfortable little bubble ... but don't shyte in a memorial thread. It paints a clear picture of the artist.

 

[shadowshiv]

Sure is a lot of old people dieiing lately.

Seventy-eight doesn't really seem that old to me, to be honest!8O

The Highway of...

I cut the rest of your post, as it didn't say anything I cared to read.

I truly hope that you don't decide to "piss on my grave" when I pass on, as I am sure that people that cared about me would find it disrespectful...

 

[lone wolf]

Seventy-eight doesn't really seem that old to me, to be honest!8O

Dad just got there a week ago ... and I still wouldn't dare call him old....

Complications with pneumonia still takes a whackload of otherwise strong people

 

[gerryh]

I cut the rest of your post, as it didn't say anything I cared to read.

I truly hope that you don't decide to "piss on my grave" when I pass on, as I am sure that people that cared about me would find it disrespectful...

Just in case you missed my statement/observation.

What surprises me, is the last time "I" shyte in a memorial thread to a soldier, I was timed out for 30 days. Why is this ****** idiot still here?

 

[shadowshiv]

Just in case you missed my statement/observation.

Okay, well I'll Report your post and discuss it with the other Mods. If you were banned for the exact same reason, I don't see any reason why it wouldn't happen here as well.

Dad just got there a week ago ... and I still wouldn't dare call him old....

Complications with pneumonia still takes a whackload of otherwise strong people

That's true. Also, something as seemingly innocuous as a broken hip has taken far too many people as well(ultimately, it was the reason my grandmother was in the hospital where she ended up contracting pneumonia ).