Proof that US cruise missile hit Iraqi marketplace

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
Iraqui military were observed and reported days ago to have been sanitizen the market place of all debris of the missle that landed there. I and sure they have also had time to collect and use fragments of USA missles that have struck elsewhere.

You might be right, but I find it hard to believe the Iraqis would spend so much time collecting all of the debris from the hundreds of bombs that have hit Baghdad and the thousands of fragments created from the explosion.

[Tingkai]

Re: Re: Proof that US cruise missile hit Iraqi marketplace

Originally posted by Jaguar Warrior

I don't think a wink smiley is appropriate. If you expressed condolences, it would have been ok, but you didn't.

This is sad. We're supposed to be able to keep better control of our weapons.

What? Do we have to express condolences everytime we start a thread that involves death. And Condolences to whom? To the American government because their lies have been explosed?

If this was a thread reporting for the first time that civilians were killed in a marketplace then condolences might be in order, but this about finding out who dropped the bomb/missile/whatever.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Re: Re: Re: Proof that US cruise missile hit Iraqi marketplace

Originally posted by Tingkai


What? Do we have to express condolences everytime we start a thread that involves death. And Condolences to whom? To the American government because their lies have been explosed?

What lies, Saddam lover ? The only thing exposed is that four days after the explosion, a British journalist found a piece of US made ordnance that happened to be identifiable as such.

The US might have hit it, the Iraqis might have done it and planted "evidence", or the Iraqis may have shot down a US cruise missile and it landed where it did as a result of that. We didn't know before, and we don't know now.

If this was a thread reporting for the first time that civilians were killed in a marketplace then condolences might be in order, but this about finding out who dropped the bomb/missile/whatever.

No, this is about blaming the US based on a piece of convenient "evidence" when there's absolutely no way to know how it got there.

[ravagon]

This rather reminds me of the story from GW1 in which the Iraqis produced a section of another tomahawk, full of "shell holes", and claimed that they'd shot it down (using an S-60 IIRC?).
It had about 5-6 holes in a section < 1m long.
They didn't even take account of the rate of fire of the weapon nor the speed of the missile when they faked it.

[Tingkai]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Proof that US cruise missile hit Iraqi marketplace

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
No, this is about blaming the US based on a piece of convenient "evidence" when there's absolutely no way to know how it got there.

Look at the way the story unfolds. The reporter did not find the evidence and then link it to an American weapons manufacturer. The link was spotted by a newspaper reader.

You may choose to ignore the evidence, but anwways there is no doubt that the civilians died because the US was bombing Baghdad.

Even if the explosion was caused by the Iraqi anti-missile defences, these defences were firing because the US was attacking. No attack, no casaulties. The Bush administration's attempt to blame the Iraqi for these deaths is a rather lame spin.

[Asher]

In Gulf War I, didn't Iraqi AA fire hit a cruise missile that sent it off-course?

[Drake Tungsten]

Even if the explosion was caused by the Iraqi anti-missile defences, these defences were firing because the US was attacking. No attack, no casaulties. The Bush administration's attempt to blame the Iraqi for these deaths is a rather lame spin.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

I agree, it's great logic.

Let's play with it some more.

No Saddam, no attack, no casualties.
No Iraq, no attack, no casualties.
No Man, no attack, no casualties.

Sweet.

[Drake Tungsten]

No Saddam, no attack, no casualties.
No Iraq, no attack, no casualties.
No Man, no attack, no casualties.

Exactly. All of our friendly fire deaths should be counted as killed by the Iraqis. Saddam brought on this war with his defiance, so all the deaths are his fault.

[Az]

Even if the explosion was caused by the Iraqi anti-missile defences, these defences were firing because the US was attacking. No attack, no casaulties. The Bush administration's attempt to blame the Iraqi for these deaths is a rather lame spin.

So basically, you agree that the whole point of this thread, a proof that a US missile struck the market, is lost, and you backtrack to safer grounds?

[Tingkai]

Oh that's good. The Iraqis act in self-defence, but it's their fault for defending themselves.



And murder victims have themselves to blame for allowing the murderer to see them.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Oh that's good. The Iraqis act in self-defence, but it's their fault for defending themselves.

If the Iraqis act in self-defence by launching shoddy AA artillery above populated areas when they know damn well their AA fire won't detur the cruise missiles and just comes back down, I'd say yes, it is their own fault.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Azazel

So basically, you agree that the whole point of this thread, a proof that a US missile struck the market, is lost, and you backtrack to safer grounds?

Nope. All we've seen here is some desperate clutching at straws.

The best one has been that the Iraqis clean up all the fragments from the thousands of bombs dropped on their country so any fragments that are found must have been planted.

[Az]

I am glad that we all agree that it was not a US missile, but an Iraqi one. Now, that the starting issue of the thread was dealt with, we can go on to the usual Iraq thread mambo jumbo.

[Tingkai]

The only evidence we have is that it was an American-built missile/bomb that killed the civilians in the marketplace.