agreed. if it has to happen (and i'm not suggesting this thread turn into a debate on whether or not it should, because it's already started and everyone knows that rumsfeld will not stop it) at least it's just against political/military targets.
Absolutely. We're committed, for better or worse, let's get it the hell over with for many reasons.
I'm impressed and thankful that this is, so far, truly proving to be a strike against the govt/military and not civilian infrastructure or citizens.
Rumsfeld was taking serious issue with reporters comparing this to WWII bombing campaigns, and with good reason: WWII bombing was basically just throwing a buttload of explosives at a general area and hoping you hit the actual military targets. Civilians died left and right... it was like using a shotgun to take out a tumor. This is more like a scalpel.
groverat could you link me to the post where you got giants amazing quote from please- i've detested saddam since the 80's when as a student union guy we were lobbied by iraqi exiles at our national conference who shocked us with their appalling stories and leaflets of atrocities by that benign mans regime. thanks in advance -alex
Well it's already more humane than '91. We took out all kinds of crap like that in Gulf War 1.0
Here's hoping it stays that way.
Yes, let's all hope it stay that way. For the moment the US army did not use the "carpet bombing", but just selective strikes on selective target, especially the symbolic ones. They also invade on earth some important town and secure, oil fields. Everything is fine : very few death among civils, and no destruction of civil goods.
I wish that they can win the war this way, and that Saddam will be defeated quickly. If it's not the case, the war will become less clean and more bloodly. I wish that the Bet that have done the US and UK military staff will work, a psychological war with well balanced and limited strikes, that will lead the population or Iraqi leaders to remove themself Saddam from power.
I liked the way the war began. The first shot was aimed sqarely at Saddam and if we didn't get him, we certainly parted his hair.
There was a debate at the Pentagon about how to do this. Some wanted a large force of 250,000 troops and a more conventional approach. Others wanted a smaller, more nimble force of 75,000 or so and a focus on decapitating the command and control. Looks like they did the big buildup but went with the latter battleplan.
Why does this strike me hard as very symbolic of you as a person? You may correct me, but the first step is asking for a tv, the second for a drink and a snack, then take off your shoes, and you're all set for a nice evening's entertainment. Meanwhile... what the hell. Just reread the little post groverat, I guess even you can see that this can be read in different ways.
Why does this strike me hard as very symbolic of you as a person? You may correct me, but the first step is asking for a tv, the second for a drink and a snack, then take off your shoes, and you're all set for a nice evening's entertainment. Meanwhile... what the hell. Just reread the little post groverat, I guess even you can see that this can be read in different ways.
Groverat is a man of strong opinion, but i think you completely miss-unterpret him. He is a student in journalism : so these events are important for im. He is not looking things , like a spectator like in a gladiator contest eating pop-corns, but he is interested by the world, and the way media report it.
****ing monitor screen, i have to wait until tuesday to have a new one.
Groverat is a man of strong opinion, but i think you completely miss-unterpret him. He is a student in journalism : so these events are important for im. He is not looking things , like a spectator like in a gladiator contest eating pop-corns, but he is interested by the world, and the way media report it.
****ing monitor screen, i have to wait until tuesday to have a new one.
Ok. My bad (anyhow, it struck me that the first impulse of anyone would be to go look at the destruction... then again, come to think of it, we are all disaster-fetishists, aren't we?).
Comments
How many buildings did they estimate went down in 2 minutes?
WOW
I think they were serious when they said that the 'precision' part of 'precision bombing' had improved. Good god.
Originally posted by Kickaha
And yet... the lights are still on in the city.
I think they were serious when they said that the 'precision' part of 'precision bombing' had improved. Good god.
i think leaving the power on is key in the 'not targeting iraqi civilians' thing.
the power grid would be expensive as shit to fix.
Here's hoping it stays that way.
I'm impressed and thankful that this is, so far, truly proving to be a strike against the govt/military and not civilian infrastructure or citizens.
Rumsfeld was taking serious issue with reporters comparing this to WWII bombing campaigns, and with good reason: WWII bombing was basically just throwing a buttload of explosives at a general area and hoping you hit the actual military targets. Civilians died left and right... it was like using a shotgun to take out a tumor. This is more like a scalpel.
But good *god*...
Originally posted by groverat
Well it's already more humane than '91. We took out all kinds of crap like that in Gulf War 1.0
Here's hoping it stays that way.
Yes, let's all hope it stay that way. For the moment the US army did not use the "carpet bombing", but just selective strikes on selective target, especially the symbolic ones. They also invade on earth some important town and secure, oil fields. Everything is fine : very few death among civils, and no destruction of civil goods.
I wish that they can win the war this way, and that Saddam will be defeated quickly. If it's not the case, the war will become less clean and more bloodly. I wish that the Bet that have done the US and UK military staff will work, a psychological war with well balanced and limited strikes, that will lead the population or Iraqi leaders to remove themself Saddam from power.
There was a debate at the Pentagon about how to do this. Some wanted a large force of 250,000 troops and a more conventional approach. Others wanted a smaller, more nimble force of 75,000 or so and a focus on decapitating the command and control. Looks like they did the big buildup but went with the latter battleplan.
Originally posted by groverat
And me with no TV at work!
Why does this strike me hard as very symbolic of you as a person? You may correct me, but the first step is asking for a tv, the second for a drink and a snack, then take off your shoes, and you're all set for a nice evening's entertainment. Meanwhile... what the hell. Just reread the little post groverat, I guess even you can see that this can be read in different ways.
Originally posted by sapi
I honestly can not imagine a lot of people didn't die tonight...
You mean civilians or military?
Originally posted by der Kopf
Why does this strike me hard as very symbolic of you as a person? You may correct me, but the first step is asking for a tv, the second for a drink and a snack, then take off your shoes, and you're all set for a nice evening's entertainment. Meanwhile... what the hell. Just reread the little post groverat, I guess even you can see that this can be read in different ways.
Groverat is a man of strong opinion, but i think you completely miss-unterpret him. He is a student in journalism : so these events are important for im. He is not looking things , like a spectator like in a gladiator contest eating pop-corns, but he is interested by the world, and the way media report it.
****ing monitor screen, i have to wait until tuesday to have a new one.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
Groverat is a man of strong opinion, but i think you completely miss-unterpret him. He is a student in journalism : so these events are important for im. He is not looking things , like a spectator like in a gladiator contest eating pop-corns, but he is interested by the world, and the way media report it.
****ing monitor screen, i have to wait until tuesday to have a new one.
Ok. My bad (anyhow, it struck me that the first impulse of anyone would be to go look at the destruction... then again, come to think of it, we are all disaster-fetishists, aren't we?).
You mean civilians or military?
both...
you think the soldiers could have avoid their deaths?