American Human Shields -- Disturbing

[boomerfoxtrot]

I think it's sad .. but what I find sad is the fact we have people who are that DUMB in the USA.. and not only that... but that people who live here and are that Anti-American...

Let them go over there... it's just a few more DUMB@@@ that we get rid of..

[Flamebo]

The whole point is to try to deter the U.S. from striking civilian zones. I'm against bombing civilian targets too, but I also know the US Army doesn't give a damn in wartime about who they blow up, if they're anywhere within enemy borders. It's an interesting concept, but one that will likely get them all killed.

[Sparq]

I've seen similar things. Greenpeace rubber boats positioning themselves directly under heavy barrels being dumped off a ship....afterwards they seemed to think they were attacked when the barrel sank their boat...

...morons.

[oldsoldier]

Flamebo, actually, you are wrong. We go to extensive measures to try and avoid civilian casualties...however, as in any conflict, there will always be some. We will not "carpet bomb" cities...we hit industrial sites. Now, workers there know full well that they are potential targets...their dont HAVE to be there. And if they do have to be there...what does that say about their ruler?

[joeyjoe367]

Originally posted by Flamebo
The whole point is to try to deter the U.S. from striking civilian zones. I'm against bombing civilian targets too, but I also know the US Army doesn't give a damn in wartime about who they blow up, if they're anywhere within enemy borders. It's an interesting concept, but one that will likely get them all killed.

Yeah, the US takes pretty good measures to not hitting Civillian Targets. I've watched some footage of a bombing campaign in Afghanistan ( I belive) and they make sure, and specifically announce that the see a Mosque, and do not attack it.

I say target the human shields intentionally.

[1stdeadeye]

What?

Originally posted by Flamebo
The whole point is to try to deter the U.S. from striking civilian zones. I'm against bombing civilian targets too, but I also know the US Army doesn't give a damn in wartime about who they blow up, if they're anywhere within enemy borders. It's an interesting concept, but one that will likely get them all killed.

The Army doesn't bomb. The Air Force does! They care very much what they hit. Why else would we develope smart bombs? The US could just carpet bomb any area they want and totally devastate it. The smart munitions help avoid collateral damage.

[Vendetta]

Seems like a futile attempt, but you have to admit that it would take guts to stand in the line of fire for your beliefs. I don't think I could do it.

[MaChu]

Hehehe, friend said, hey they arent allies anymore, they are supporting the enemy, so it will be great target practice

[Trunnion]

i'm not sure if they are, by definition, committing an act of treason(anyone knowledgable in the field of law, could you help out with this?), but if they are, then they'd be put to death anyway. as such, them getting killed in a bombing raid would end up serving their sentences. not all of those human shields are Americans. the word Western was used delibrately. i know that some hail from the UK, and possibly some other Western European nations. yes, it is true the Air Force does try to target facilities and hit the with precision munitions, and it is also true that innocent people will probably be killed. such things are inevitable, and mistakes are sometimes made. in war, it's sometimes difficult to tell who is who. that's why friendly fire incidents occur. the US military will try to take all measures to prevent civillian casualties WITHIN the framework of keeping it's people alive. that's important too.

[SpongeBobSquarePants]

Dumbarses sure dumbarses

[AlabamaMan]

Note to Air Force: Bomb big red double decker bus driving through turkey.

[Kevmaster]

here is the definition of treason by the US Constitution:
"Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court. "

Id say, based on the bold part, that those people have commited treason

[71 LS6]

I find this absolutely disgusting. If someone wishes to openly oppose the United States during wartime by aiding/comforting the enemy, let them have it. They are basically joining the war on the other side and voluntarily going unarmed in a big red target. I wonder if they realize that no one on either side will go out of their way to protect/avoid them, in fact the opposite is probably true.

[J]

Man what were they on? I hope they brought some of it with them before they figured out what they did to themselves...




Who came up with that idea?!?

[shartley]