Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Sayhey, Mar 4, 2005.
so is this the biggest tactical blunder since the bombing of the chinese embassy? or the shifa pharmaceuticals factory strike? or something else?
Italians are the last major European presence besides Britain...
Berlusconi does not have to call elections until next year, so I don't know what immediate impact this will have. I believe there must be regional elections this year and those could be effected by the large anti-war sentiment in Italy.
The driver should have stopped for the checkpoint. What did they think was going to happen?
Yeah, it's always the victim's fault. What else could it be?
Of course its not the victims fault, and I don't think that is what the poster was implying.... strange they didnt stop at the checkpoint. but we weren't there so we don't really know the circumstances. But its not directly the soldiers fault either. Lets pretend you live and work in a place where on any given day you and your friends could breath their last because of a roadside bomb, a suicide bomb, etc. If a car is speeding at you with no intention of stopping and ignoring your warnings (assuming that is what happened) what do you do? Wait and see if it goes kaboom when it pulls along side or stop it a safe distance away. This was of course a gross miscalculation and a truly unfortunate event, but I don't see how the soldiers reaction was at all surprising. I don't really see this as a political event... the soldiers are too far removed from the politics, they are just doing their job. Of course it will have political ramifications, but this is first and formost a commentary on the brutal, terrible circumstances war puts combatants and innocents in. Both parties are unfortunate victims of those circumstances.
Were I driving a car in the hellhole formerly known as Iraq and someone began firing shots at my car, there's no way in hell I'd stop the car.
The driver probably didn't see or recognise the checkpoint and thought he was being attacked.
Let's pretend you've been held hostage for weeks by Iraqi militants who threatened to kill you every day you were in captivity. Let's pretend you've just been released. Let's pretend that you've got to drive one of the most dangerous roadways in a dangerous country, where people are often killed and kidnapped, at night, in order to get the hell out of that country to the safety of your own home. Let's pretend you're going to make the drive to the airport slowly and cautiously and use your turn signals.
from the turkish press
Well, well, well. What a surprising turn!
Oh, man, this is going to get interesting....
Let's have a show of hands: given the truthfulness batting average (.083) of the administration, how many don't think there's something really, really screwy here?
What information might this woman have had to warrant her death? (by the Americans, not the kidnappers).
I am trying to imagine how it would be more productive to take the press from an incident where she is killed, than whatever she might have released to the International media later on.
Of course, now you will have both.
I don't really know what to think. Echoing sentiments from above, I can hardly blame the soldiers, as at worst they were following orders about something they knew next-to-nothing about.
Depending on circumstances, I can't blame the driver either. I would assume he might have felt arrangements had been made for their travel to the airport, their route and time of travel could hardly have been a surprise to the US military patrolling the route.
This is just wierd.
Would you prefer that the troops not fire shots at any cars trying to speed through checkpoints, even after warning shots? Or should we just check for their race first?
I think it's tragic and I'm waiting to find out that there's a big blunder, but even I can't fault the troops for doing their jobs. How were they supposed to know who was in the car?
Also, I wonder why they didn't shoot out the tires instead of firing into the car.
Good point...I figured that there was a low probability of hitting a tire, so if the car actually was laden with explosives, it would be smarter to hit the easier target. Can anyone answer that?
edit: Also, the quote that you showed...We still don't know if the people at the checkpoint were told (in which case this was a HUGE blunder on the part of higher ups) or if anyone had any idea of timing...Also, was the car clearly marked as an Italian car? If not, how could they be sure it was not another car going through around the same time?
Wait, just reread zim's article post--they passed all the checkpoints?! Did they run through them? If not, this is highly suspicious, the default setting for our actions these days.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of monumental screw-up -- like, for example, the car passed all roadblocks and then was fired upon by some nervous soldier -- and the administration made up the "ran the roadblock" story to cover for it.
You know, I'm trying this thing where I give the administration the benefit of the doubt for 5 or 10 minutes when I first hear a story...That way, I feel less partisan. It usually turns out to be a royal waste of time. However, I'll try to delay judgment here until we have a wee bit more information.
Time's up. Come on, they're banking on you reserving judgment: that's how they got in again....
Although "silencing the cell-phones" could be SOP to prevent remote detonation.
Anyway, I wonder if the "investigation" will be as complete as the ones into the attacks on Al Jazeera and the ITN reporter who was killed? What was the result of those "investigations"? Does anybody know? I thought not.
It gets better:
Hmmm. Nice work, guys.
From an ABC News report:
from this bloomberg article
a lot of conflicting information out there.
Rules of engagement. Anyone that seems threatening they are allowed to shoot to kill. A lot of people have died this way in Iraq. What was it Don Rumsfeld said about freedom. Oh yeah ... it's "messy."
You're right, I'm sure. I guess I was thinking more of police procedure, which is required to use the least force necessary to achieve its objectives, as opposed to military procedure, which, when faced with danger, goes into more of a "shoot first and ask questions later" mode.
But isn't the war supposed to be over?