# So Sue Us!( Not happy we shot up your wedding party? Tell it to the judge...) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 20, 2004, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124 "2004-05-20T05:10:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/21 "2004-05-20T14:06:28Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Or the freakin’ wedding party screwed up. This is a freakin’ WAR ZONE, folks! Shooting off lots of firearms randomly into the air really just isn’t a very good idea right now! Maybe, just maybe, this custom could be suspended until things have quieted down a little. > The “blame America first” attitude is getting pretty tiresome, too. > > This incident may have been a mistake, but it was a very understandable mistake. If the lefties want us to take their criticisms seriously, they should make more of an attempt to be even-handed and fair–or at least try not to be so blatant and obvious about their prejudices. That’s right, blame the victims. Typical response. The US attacked them, who else would anyone not blinded by misplaced patriotism blame? People are dead, women and children are dead. “Whoops - its your own fault” is a shameful response for a nation with such an inflated view of its own goodness to take. Went down well in the USA over 9/11 didn’t it? (& for the record that was a completely unjustifiable attack and rightly countered by displacing the Taliban IMO) It’s their bloody country and they can celebrate weddings how they damn well please and it is completely up to the occupying power to take every effort to minimise civilian caualties. If it’s stupid, how much more stupid is it to risk losing yet more hearts and minds by not going above and beyond to avoid these incidents, particularly at this time. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/22 "2004-05-20T14:21:35Z")
> [@Jurph](#): > > I recognize that there are certain “cultural practices” that we need to learn to respect. But you would think that after the third or fourth wedding party we bombed (because the celebratory gunfire spooked the pilots) that the Iraqis would learn the simple, simple, lesson: > > **When there are crazy pissed-off Americans in your country who attack out of a pitch-black sky with 500-lb bombs and who seem unable to tell a military target from a civilian target, do not shoot your gun up in the air at night, for lo, that appears to piss them off pretty good, boy howdy.** Bullshit. It’s the responsibility of the AMERICANS to exercise caution while illegally occupying another country. The Iraqi people have every right to celebrate weddings however the hell they feel like without fear of trigger happy invaders murdering their children. The inability of Americans to accept any responsibility for their actions is the reason we are despised by the rest of the world. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/23 "2004-05-20T14:30:50Z")
> [@tagos](#): > > That’s right, blame the victims. Typical response. The US attacked them, who else would anyone not blinded by misplaced patriotism blame? People are dead, women and children are dead. > … > It’s their bloody country and they can celebrate weddings how they damn well please and it is completely up to the occupying power to take every effort to minimise civilian caualties. If it’s stupid, how much more stupid is it to risk losing yet more hearts and minds by not going above and beyond to avoid these incidents, particularly at this time. Boo freakin’ hoo, yer breakin’ my heart. It’s a war, and acting stupidly in a war is very likely to get you killed. I don’t give a rat’s patoot about their precious customs; anyone with a spoonful of brains knows that shooting off firearms at random in those conditions is likely to draw fire. If they’re too freaking dumb to make the appropriate adaptations in their culture, that’s just natural selection in action, and those fools deserve a Darwin award. We’re trying to win a war here, and Sensitive New Age Guys are a liability, not an asset. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/24 "2004-05-20T14:33:38Z")
And your suggestion is up and running in the UK, And a good thing too - if troops know that they can be legally be held accountable for shit, perhaps less shit will happen. [Iraqi’s can sue](http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1525297,00.html) > [@](#): > > London - A judge ruled on Tuesday that a dozen Iraqi families had a legal case to try and win compensation and an independent probe into the deaths of relatives who they claim were killed by British troops in Iraq. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/25 "2004-05-20T14:37:20Z")
I’m reserving judgement, myself. The presence of women and children prove nothing. They’ve been present in safe houses before, alongside terrorists or foreign fighters. This particular enemy often doesn’t shield it’s noncombatants from the fighting. ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/26 "2004-05-20T14:38:01Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Boo freakin’ hoo, yer breakin’ my heart. It’s a war, and acting stupidly in a war is very likely to get you killed. I don’t give a rat’s patoot about their precious customs; anyone with a spoonful of brains knows that shooting off firearms at random in those conditions is likely to draw fire. If they’re too freaking dumb to make the appropriate adaptations in their culture, that’s just natural selection in action, and those fools deserve a Darwin award. > > We’re trying to win a war here, and Sensitive New Age Guys are a liability, not an asset. Well don’t come boo-bloody-hooing here next time the terrorists come a calling on the US. Nice of you to retrospectively validate OBL’s savagery. It’s a war, anything goes so 9/11 was justified. Not in my world but in yours apparently. And don’t come whining back that ‘it was different’. Blood for the goose… ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/27 "2004-05-20T14:44:51Z")
[Laws of War](http://www.phrusa.org/research/iraq/release_032803.html) > [@](#): > > Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) calls upon all parties engaged in the Iraq war to strictly comply with international humanitarian law (also known as the law of war) that governs the conduct of war and sets out protections that apply in times of armed conflict and occupation. The 1949 Geneva Conventions and 1977 Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions form the basis of protections afforded to civilians (Geneva IV) and prisoners of war (Geneva III) during armed conflict and occupation. The most fundamental protection to be afforded to civilians and POWs at all times and in all circumstances is the right to humane treatment. > > The Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols stipulate that civilians may never be targeted for attack; attacks may only be directed against specific military objectives. In directing attacks against military objectives, the law requires precautions to be taken to ensure that civilians are protected against the effects of the attacks. \*\*If an attack against a military target is expected to result in civilian harm despite precautionary measures, the attack must be cancelled if the incidental harm caused to civilians or civilian objects would be disproportional (excessive) to the direct military advantage anticipated. \*\* Military objectives are combatants or objects which, by their nature, location, purpose, or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose destruction or neutralization offers a definite military advantage. Anything else constitutes a civilian object, which cannot be the object of attack. Bolding mine. I’m pretty confident that weddings, even if held near a safe house whacking off AA rounds, falls into this category. We are meant to be the good guys, not trigger-happy savages and should act like it, not attack objectives with callous disregard of civilian casualties and the Geneva Conventions. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/28 "2004-05-20T14:45:15Z")
> [@tagos](#): > > Well don’t come boo-bloody-hooing here next time the terrorists come a calling on the US. You may wish to continue this in the Pit. [LonesomePolecat: Asshole](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=257253). ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/29 "2004-05-20T14:56:50Z")
Something I didn’t realise until I just read it now: > [@](#): > > Among the first U.S. military decrees after the April 2003 fall of Baghdad was a prohibition on celebratory gunfire, an age-old custom in tribal areas across the Middle East and Central Asia. > > But few Iraqis heeded the new rule. Celebratory fire rang out over Baghdad last week after the Iraqi national soccer team qualified for the 2004 Olympics. [http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/8710966.htm?1c](http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/8710966.htm?1c) So I guess it can be said that, if the gunfire was indeed a wedding celebration, then it was a stupid thing to be doing. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/30 "2004-05-20T15:09:52Z")
The US military had no right to “decree” a fucking thing. It’s not our country, we have no right to be there and the Iraqis have zero obligation to follow our orders. And what is all this nonsense about “anti-aircraft” fire? Since when does firing celebratory shots in the air qualify as “anti-aircraft fire?” ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/31 "2004-05-20T15:10:48Z")
> [@](#): > > We’re trying to win a war here, and Sensitive New Age Guys are a liability, not an asset. Actually, the President declared that we already won the war over a year ago. Now we are trying to win the peace (and doing a darned fine job of blowing every chance we get). * * * How widely spread has been the report that U.S. ground forces actually visited the wedding site and left some time before the air attack? If that is true, then the communications screw up in the WTC is nothing compared to the ongoing failure of U.S. forces to communicate in the field in Iraq. ---
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/32 "2004-05-20T15:28:06Z")
> [@tagos](#): > > And your suggestion is up and running in the UK, And a good thing too - if troops know that they can be legally be held accountable for shit, perhaps less shit will happen. > > [Iraqi’s can sue](http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1525297,00.html) I confess, I have trouble grasping the reasoning that would have it otherwise Even if what is happening in iraq places us in a state of war (dubious), surely iraqi civilians are suposed to be on OUR side. in ordinary life, if you roll over & crush a car with a steamroller, you will not be heard to say that you ought not replace the car because you were trying to pave a street for cars to use, and its just too bad about this particular car… ---
**Author:** ![theR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/977dab/32.png) [@theR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/theR)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/33 "2004-05-20T15:41:45Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > How widely spread has been the report that U.S. ground forces actually visited the wedding site and left some time before the air attack? If that is true, then the communications screw up in the WTC is nothing compared to the ongoing failure of U.S. forces to communicate in the field in Iraq. It is not a communications screwup if the ground forces are the ones that called in the air support. In that case, it is just a plain old screwup. ---
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/34 "2004-05-20T15:43:46Z")
> [@Machetero](#): > > One American citizen gets killed and “let’s kill them all,” “BFD about torture,” and/or “the lowly Arabs weren’t pissed off enough about the ONE murder.” Americans slaugther a bunch of innocent civillians and “so, sue me.” Some wonder why we aren’t too well liked worldwide . :rolleyes: It pains me to have to report that “sue me” so often the punchline of a long string of abuse, and the last refuge of the goniff, would in this case represent a giant step towards accepting responsibility for our blunders and their consequences… ---
**Author:** ![alaricthegoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/4bbf92/32.png) [@alaricthegoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alaricthegoth)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/35 "2004-05-20T15:52:38Z")
> [@tagos](#): > > [Laws of War](http://www.phrusa.org/research/iraq/release_032803.html) > > Bolding mine. > > I’m pretty confident that weddings, even if held near a safe house whacking off AA rounds, falls into this category. We are meant to be the good guys, not trigger-happy savages and should act like it, not attack objectives with callous disregard of civilian casualties and the Geneva Conventions. It is charmingly naive to use the expression: obligations (of an occupying power) ``` or ``` (International) Law. This administration has made it explicit policy that they are outlaws who recognize no obligations, because, after all, wearefightingtheevildoersinaglobalandeternalwaronterrorforthefutureofmank… ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/36 "2004-05-20T15:55:41Z")
> [@alaricthegoth](#): > > It is charmingly naive to use the expression: > > obligations (of an occupying power) > > ``` > or > > ``` > > (International) Law. > > This administration has made it explicit policy that they are outlaws who recognize no obligations, because, after all, > > wearefightingtheevildoersinaglobalandeternalwaronterrorforthefutureofmank… I knew I was wasting my breath when I posted (and I recognise you are being ironic!). It’s only a matter of time before someone makes that point seriously. Actions are what the US is judged on, not words, no matter how fine. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/37 "2004-05-20T16:16:20Z")
> [@tagos](#): > > [Laws of War](http://www.phrusa.org/research/iraq/release_032803.html) > > Bolding mine. > > I’m pretty confident that weddings, even if held near a safe house whacking off AA rounds, falls into this category. We are meant to be the good guys, not trigger-happy savages and should act like it, not attack objectives with callous disregard of civilian casualties and the Geneva Conventions. Nice link. Did you bother reading all of it? Because, if you had, you would have seen that keeping women and children in a safe house for foreign fighters is prohibited by those same laws of war. > [@](#): > > No party may use human shields. Again, like I said, I’m reserving judgement. But if terrorists were keeping women and children in the safe house with them, it’s a clear violation of the rules of war. And it is the terrorists who put the noncombatants at risk. ---
**Author:** ![Gaudere](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@Gaudere](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gaudere)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/38 "2004-05-20T16:34:32Z")
**Machetero** > [@](#): > > As blood thirsty Christian Americans, they probably don’t care. Just another chance to kill some brown Muslims. [Moderator Hat ON] Take it to the Pit. Demo, linking to the pit post is fine but _don’t_ call people assholes in GD, even if it’s the name of the thread! Everyone, chill a little. [Moderator Hat OFF] ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/39 "2004-05-20T16:44:38Z")
> [@](#): > > It is not a communications screwup if the ground forces are the ones that called in the air support. In that case, it is just a plain old screwup. No. If the ground forces called in an air strike after ascertaining that the firing came from a wedding, that would not be a screwup, that would be a crime. If ground forces investigated firing (who were the targets?) and discovered terrorists trying to reveal their position (?), then they should have responded with a force large enough to contain the terrorists, then used an air strike only if it looked as though the ground forces could not safely apprehend those terrorists. Since the US. military did not break the story as an assault on a terrorist location, I figure that it is pretty safe to say that such was not the case. There may have been no ground force investigation (in which case _that_ aspect of the story is simply an irrelevant bit of misinformation), or the ground forces may have determined that a wedding was in progress and the word simply failed to reach the air patrols, or the ground forces actually called a strike on a wedding. So the ground force story may be false/irrelevant, an indication of a crime, or an indication that the best equipped and best trained and most technologically advanced military in history cannot figure out how to convey simple information to people who need it. On this point I will await further information, but if there was any ground force investigation, the U.S. is clearly in the wrong. ---
**Author:** ![GorillaMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@GorillaMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GorillaMan)\ **Post date:** [May 20, 2004, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124/40 "2004-05-20T16:45:19Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > The US military had no right to “decree” a fucking thing. It’s not our country, we have no right to be there and the Iraqis have zero obligation to follow our orders. I agree fully. Nonetheless, ignoring such a ‘decree’ and firing off rounds anyway is a damn stupid thing to do. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-sue-us-not-happy-we-shot-up-your-wedding-party-tell-it-to-the-judge/246124.md?page=3)