Are we enjoying this war too much?

Great Debates
61

“A city in flames”???

What you saw was a very large military compound being levelled.

The shots in the morning showed no smoke, no fired ongoing.

Comparing this to Tokyo or Dresden is just phenomenally ignorant, or intentionally exaggerated for effect.

Even the Iraqis themselves said the next day that only 207 people were injured, and didn’t mention any deaths. Of those injured, we don’t know how many were civilians.

You marginalize your own position when you make wild claims like this.

As for Americans cheering, why shouldn’t they? This is a war, and they want to win it. Were the Americans bastards in WWII for cheering when they heard about the Doolittle bombing of Tokyo? Bombing, I might point out, that was indiscriminate and dropped on civilian targets?

62

Yes.

63

The Doolittle raid (aptly yclept!) was small potatoes. The raids in 1945, led by Curtis LeMay, were monstrous in both thier intent and their effect. The announced intention was to inflict as much in the way of civilian casualties as humanly possible. Were we bastards to cheer such an event? I think that entirely too mild.

64

Actually the idea was to destroy the civilian defense industry which was concentrated in a mixed residential-industrial area. The result was a huge firestorm and casualties worse than the initial blast in Hiroshima. (Tokyo)

65

Ok, let me clarify my position. Bagdag will not suffer the same fate of Dresden but the fact is that when you see a picture of Bagdag’s ** downtown **, the image is pretty strong. I haven’t yet seen actuall pictures of the effect of the bombings (so I should perhaps shut up for the moment). Anyway the píctures were pretty strong.

My whole point is that a precission bombing campaign will only achieve (if it really works) to hit wathever you want. The problem is that military objectives are never really isolated in a city. Some weeks ago I mentioned that if a bombing campaign was ever launched at my city I would be dead (I live half a block away from the Goverment House). No matter the precission, many people will die.

And it can be worst in every city were the Irakie regime refuses to die tanks will be rolling over rubble (unless the militar commanders send infantry without artillery support).

Will just have to wait and see. Sorry for my outburst

66

May I hold up the Pol Pot regime for us to study for a few minutes. What was it, 1 in 5 Cambodian’s murdered in just 4 years in the program to implement Year Zero?

And ironically, who rescued them? The Vietnamese Government of all people. A country at war with the USA just 5 years earlier. The Communist Vietnamese government invaded the country of Cambodia - not to annex it - but to crush the Pol Pot regime.

I don’t think there’s a reasonable person on the planet who would criticise the Vietnamese for nullifying the Pol Pot regime. To do so would be to apply dreadful double standards it seems to me… if anything, I would criticise the Vietnamese for NOT staying, and for allowing Cambodia to fall back into the morass.

Here’s the thing… Diogenes, you already enjoy the benefits of a free society. You’re allowed to make your arguements here on this postboard, and I applaud your right to do so - even if I disagree with your sentiments. And in 21 months from now, if you really wanna put your money where your mouth is, go and vote President Bush out of office. Coz that’s democracy in action. It happened to his father, and it can happen again if that’s the way the cookie needs to crumble.

The rest of us, outside of the USA, aren’t dumb you know. We can see when things are going silly, and we can also see when things are going well. We can bring pressure to bear on your Administration, and we can whisper discreetly in your President’s ear. And I might add, many of us have been doing so too.

Only a fool, like Chirac, gets up on the public stage and offers his advice to the US President for all the world media to hear. Most unwise. In doing so, he’s condeming his advice to the “Please Ignore” basket.

67

Boo Boo Foo:

It would certainly seem that no

Still, that was excactly what the US administration did at the time! Would you believe it?

As a side note the Vietnameses immediate reason for intervening was Cambodian persecutions of the viatnamese minority as i remember it…

68

Estsilicon:

‘Downtown’ is a bit of a misnomer. It’s only ‘downtown’ really because Saddam’s palace is along the river, which goes through the heart of the city. I believe most or all of the bombs dropped so far have been into buildings where civilians are not even allowed.

That they were. But we don’t have a good frame of reference to judge the actual collateral damage, because we’ve never seen this kiind of attack before.

Well, you’re probably wrong unless you got unlucky and bomb went astray. The accuracy of these bombs is WAY better than half a block. You could live next door to a house that was hit by a bombing attack, and suffer only a few broken windows.

I read that not only were these buildings very carefully chosen, but even the direction from which they were struck was chosen so that any bombs that overshot would not hit civilian areas, and that the explosive force would be aimed away from civilian areas. Extraordinary care has been taken to protect the populace.

And if you think about the actual numbers of injuries, it’s truly astounding. Think about it - THOUSANDS of bombs have been dropped - probably hundreds on Baghdad. And yet, even the Iraqis are only reporting 3 civilians deaths and 207 injuries. Even if that number is not inflated, it is astoundingly low - testament to the extreme care the U.S. military is taking to protect the innocent.

69

And thats perfectly splendid, Sam. Even if I find your adulation of our sanitized warfare a bit exaggerated (to say the least) thats almost irrelevent. The US has accepted the certainty of civilian casualties by the very act of war. Carnage lite is carnage, nonetheless.

And your description of a bomb going off and leaving the house next door undamaged is, well, just plain silly. Explosions by thier nature are messy things.

But are we given to understand that your approval of all this is contingent upon such purity of war? That you might not, if it were the old-fashioned way?

Or are you cheering for the new way of war, which, like Windows, is so utterly reliable we need never worry? Never crash, never glitch?

70

Moreover Sam, there’s a strong “overtone” I’m constantly perceiving as though the Coalition has only just shown up on the scene - and nothing could be further from the truth.

The USA in particular has had at least 5 years to plan this attack. Their “intel” analysts would have been studying every single major node of electro-magnetic transmission. Given time, analysts can accurately recognise command centres. And more importantly, they can discern the levels of importance of those command centres.

Saddam’s regime, in terms of being an effective decision making entity, has been anlalysed by the best spooks in the world for years now. And whilst it’s true that SOME of their communications might be taking place on secure fibre optic comms provided by the Chinese - it’s accepted wisdom that there’s no way the Iraqis have laid an entire “country wide”, totally impervious undergound network of fibre optic cable - and given this, at some point, their top to bottom comms have to travel by electro-magnetic comms - encrypted or not.

And THAT is Saddam’s downfall now… those communcations can be heard. Even if they’re encrypted, your intel spooks know where they emanated from, and how long they went for. And then, you can listen for responses…

And BAM! That is what General Franks has been slamming. Some of it, sure, has been for show - inarguably. But 98% of it has been devasting to Saddam’s ability to function in a hierarchical manner.

So, as I said in another thread, it really doesn’t matter now if Baghdad falls or not. The Coalition shortly will control Iraqi’s revenue streams - the oil fields and ports. They merely have to disperse themselves strategically around the country and let Iraqi TV do their bidding.

The Iraqi people aren’t stupid. Sooner or later the realisation that, “Hey, all we’re seeing are old re-runs of Saddam and his cabinet…” will dawn on them, and the PEOPLE will make their decision - just like Cuacescu in Romania in 1989. Indeed, various press journalists are already noting the Iraqi people are saying these things.

General Franks merely needs to incapacitate the Iraqi Army’s ability to present a cohesive fighting force. He doesn’t need to kill 80,000 men in one night - even though he could. His strategy at the moment is a glorious one. It’s allowing the Iraqi people to make up their minds - at their own pace.

If the Iraqi Army dares to show their hand - in any capacity - they’ll be cut to pieces. Nope, Iraq has to be conquered from within - and the Coalition is allowing this to happen. You have to remember - already, the Coalition has demonstrated the ability to “Jam” Iraqi State TV. When the time comes, they will simply overpower the ground transmitters and start broadcasting pictures of the “true state of play” - that is - where all of the Coalition forces are positioned.

71

“Are we enjoying this war too much?”

This guy sure is:

http://news.lycos.com/news/photo.asp?section=BreakingPhotos&photoId=293740&captions=off

72

RE the OP:

Nope. I know it’s necessary, and I support it, but I’m not enjoying it one little bit.