Officials confirm dropping firebombs on Iraqi troops

[MichaeltheGreat]

Doesn't matter. If you stand and resist in the face of vastly superior forces who aren't inclined to **** around with you, your future is likely to be both very brief and very unpleasant.

[Panag]

hi ,

after looking on the net for more info , this came up ;

>>> http://www.efdsw.navfac.navy.mil/Env...NapalmHome.htm


have a nice day

[oedo]

I'm sure being shredded and spread in little bits over a couple hundred meters by conventional HE is no fun either. If they didn't want to die, they shouldn't have been there to resist. **** 'em.

so how about this:
If the Americans didn´t want to die, they shouldn´t have been there to attack, **** 'em

[Panag]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Doesn't matter. If you stand and resist in the face of vastly superior forces who aren't inclined to **** around with you, your future is likely to be both very brief and very unpleasant.

hi ,

agreed


now a Q ; its okay and accepted that the US of good old A uses it , but what if an other country uses it , ....

lets say Israel on its next war in lebanon , .....


and how come all of a sudden there is no reaction from the lefties who are so anti war and never waste an oppurtunity to say how terrible the US of A warmachine is , .......


no reactions from humanrights freeks , ......

btw , the UN does not want to comment on it , ......


have a nice day

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Doesn't matter. If you stand and resist in the face of vastly superior forces who aren't inclined to **** around with you, your future is likely to be both very brief and very unpleasant.

True enough.
I just wonder how you would have reacted, were the shoe on the other foot, so to speak.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Edit - reply to oedo:


Our cure for that is/should be to apply overwhelming firepower to destroy the enemy before he can effectively attack us.

I'm not a hand-wringing weenie about casualties - it's a ****ing war, people get hurt and sometimes require more than a bandaid.

[SlowwHand]

It's always amazing to me to see the way some people's minds operate, or don't.

Dead is dead.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns


True enough.
I just wonder how you would have reacted, were the shoe on the other foot, so to speak.

Are you kidding? I would have gotten the **** out of Dodge the moment I knew the US troops were there in any force. It's not like there weren't enough Iraqi veterans of the first time around to know how the US does things. Most of the Iraqi military was smart enough not to come out and play, and if I was stuck being one of them, I'd at least be one of the smart ones.

[Sava]

If they didn't want to get napalmed, or whatever, they should've desserted and gone home.

[Panag]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Are you kidding? I would have gotten the **** out of Dodge the moment I knew the US troops were there in any force. It's not like there weren't enough Iraqi veterans of the first time around to know how the US does things. Most of the Iraqi military was smart enough not to come out and play, and if I was stuck being one of them, I'd at least be one of the smart ones.

hi ,

huh , them vets still believed that digging in would protect them , ......

most of them where buying the farm before they even knew what hit them , ......

so they did not learn from 91 when it came to the use of airpower , .....

history repeats itself when one forgets it , ......

its rumoured around 31 000 guards lay in pieces in the vast wasteland south of baghdad , ..... with 12 500 vehicles , .....

have a nice day

[Imran Siddiqui]

Um... panag.. reading through, these bombs don't violate any convention. They were made to bomb bridges and killed Iraqi troops. No civilian deaths, not intended to kill people, but to destroy objects.

[SlowwHand]

It'd be a lot nicer to be run over by a tank, or have a piece of wood blown through your head, or go by way of terminal drips ?

[Panag]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Um... panag.. reading through, these bombs don't violate any convention. They were made to bomb bridges and killed Iraqi troops. No civilian deaths, not intended to kill people, but to destroy objects.

hi ,

um , ..... imran , ...... read above


btw , they where not only used to bomb bridges , ......

and in every war civilians get hurt , it does not mean that because there is not a report talking about civ's that there are no civ's death , .......

not intended to kill people , ......




come on , every weapon used in war is intended to kill , ....

have a nice day

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yeah, I did read above:

"We napalmed both those (bridge) approaches," said Col. James Alles in a recent interview. He commanded Marine Air Group 11, based at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station, during the war. "Unfortunately, there were people there because you could see them in the (cockpit) video.

Although many human rights groups consider incendiary bombs to be inhumane, international law does not prohibit their use against military forces. The United States has not agreed to a ban against possible civilian targets.

Case Closed

[CerberusIV]

Perhaps we should have a poll on how many more protocols get added to the Geneva Convention before they introduce one that prohibits using any weapons on anyone, anywhere, ever.