Innocent children..?

Greetings all,
I was watching sky news when I got home yesterday to get an update on the war issue in Iraque, and when I switched it on they were busy broadcasting the recent attack on a market (not sure which town) which was hit by US. What disturbed me was the innocent children who got hurt who does not know s**t about the war.Some of them were barely alive by the looks of things.I am definitely not saying that what sadam is doing is ok, but I just wish it was possible to keep children out of it.Sometimes I wish that these people who decide that the only way to deal with things is to declare war, must go to war themselves and face the dangers as they unfold and look into the eyes of these children and see the suffering they cause.WHY CHILDREN!!!!!WHY??????

Quote:

---

I wish that these people who decide that the only way to deal with things is to declare war, must go to war themselves and face the dangers

---

I'm agree with you.

Quote:

---

...the recent attack on a market...

---

Well as there are military head quarter in the town and as the bomb are exact in 30 meters to 100 meters, civils can died and in the civils there are children. But the US/UK military can also make some "mistake". In a French TV broadcast, an expert says that an information is valid if there is at least 70% of certitude. So in 100 bombs, 30 kills civils. In a war like this one where civils are between Saddam and US/UK the information must be valid at 99% (as 100% is never possible).

Though I am not condoning the war in any way, so far I have been impressed by the military's policy on trying to not harm civilians. It is war, and yes some will be hurt, but it seems to me that the U.S. and U.K. are trying their best not to hurt anyone but soldiers.
But ghostdog does make a good point in that maybe the leaders that declare war should show up themselves to see what its really like.

As most people on here know... I am extremely anti-war, it's the most useless act ever, but I have to commend the US and UK because they seem to be doing a fairly decent job of avoiding civilian casualties. A better job could be done, but compared to previous military strikes and instances of armed combat they are doing fairly well.

Yes it is a aweful thing that these children died in this war, however we are not totally sure if that was even our missile yet. Just the other day a missile exploded in Iraq killing some civillians and Iraq blamed it on us. We now know that that wasn't our missle because of the blast radius and other things. I woul not put it past Saddam that he is bombing his own town trying to blame it on us to make us look bad. Afterall he did gas thousands of his own several years ago.

Yes, but this might not be true. There is some evidence that is to the contrary. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,82563,00.html


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prime Minister Tony Blair's official spokesman said Saddam had sacked his cousin, Musahim Saab al-Tikriti, and replaced him with Gen. Shahin Yasin Muhammad al-Tikriti.

The spokesman also said new, unspecified intelligence indicated that U.S. and British bombing may not have been to blame for explosions in two marketplaces in Baghdad this week.

He stopped short, however, of saying that Iraqi missiles were responsible for the explosions, which reportedly killed scores of civilians.

According to Iraqi Information Minister Mohammed Saeed Sahhaf, 58 people were killed -- and many others wounded -- in the explosion at the Al-Nasr market Friday evening. Iraqi officials have also blamed U.S. forces for an explosion at another market that killed 14 people on Wednesday.

The Blair spokesman, whose briefings to reporters are by tradition on condition of anonymity, said many Iraqi surface-to-air missiles "have been malfunctioning and many have failed to hit their targets and have fallen back onto Baghdad before exploding."

He said the Iraqi regime had ordered civil defense workers to remove Iraqi missile fragments which fell on residential areas before Western journalists arrived on the scene.

"We are not saying definitively that these explosions were caused by Iraqi missiles. But people should approach this with due skepticism," he added.

The U.S. Central Command in Qatar, which has denied that coalition forces target civilian neighborhoods, has said it was looking into the incidents.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This might very well be another of Saddam's deceptions. The blame might be in Hussien's lap.

In all war we have information and disinformation. I think for the moment we can't say who tell the truth or not. To be objective that can be a US missile that miss its target but that can be Saddam who have done that to want the others countries believe that Bush is an evil.

here is a link that is about the market bomb i believe ,which is very informative http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?...&group=webcast seems the serials match other cruise missles

You read words like "believed" and you translate it to "definitely". I've read your valued source of info and it is far from praise.

The first victim of war is truth. Your truth is no better than mine. Just deal with it.

BTW - Cruise missiles don't arm until just before they hit their target. If the target dissapears or there is some other error, the bomb will just "bury" itself in the ground. I'm not saying all of them do this, but it is believed to be, since Saudi Arabia has complained of a few missiles running aground on their land. On another note- the U.S. put a hold on using cruise missiles because 1% of them malfunctioned. Go figure, not everything works according to plans.