| |
> Quite frankly I don't blame the allies at all. Not one bit.
I don't blame the *allies* either. UK armed forces have been openly criticising
"heavy handed" practices used by the US ground troops. Have a gander at this:
British military critical of US troops' heavy-handed style with civilians
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,926929,00.html
==+==
Senior British military officers on the ground are making it clear they are
dismayed by the failure of US troops to try to fight the battle for hearts and
minds.
They also made plain they are appalled by reports over the weekend that US
marines killed Iraqi civilians, including women and children, as they seized
bridges outside Nassiriya in southern Iraq.
==+==
The analysis is quite thorough, and includes a few examples of US practice;
here is one:
US troops accused of excess force
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,926934,00.html
==+==
After suffering heavy losses in the southern city of Nassiriya, US marines were
ordered to fire at any vehicle which drove at American positions, Sunday Times
reporter Mark Franchetti reported. He described how one night "we listened a
dozen times as the machine guns opened fire, cutting through cars and trucks
like paper".
Next morning he said he saw 15 vehicles, including a mini-van and two lorries,
riddled with bullet holes. He said he counted 12 dead civilians lying in the
road or in nearby ditches.
One man's body was still on fire. A girl aged no more than five lay dead in a
ditch beside the body of a man who may have been her father. On the bridge an
Iraqi civilian lay next to the carcass of a donkey. A father, baby girl and boy
had been buried in a shallow grave. Franchetti said the civilians had been
trying to leave the town, probably for fear of being killed by US helicopter
attacks or heavy artillery. He wrote: "Their mistake had been to flee over a
bridge that is crucial to the coalition's supply lines and to run into a group
of shell-shocked young American marines with orders to shoot anything that
moved."
==+==
Not in my name!
Winning "hearts & minds" has the potential to reduce the duration of this
conflict, and so potentially reduce the death toll on *both* sides. Read at how
the UK troops are doing this, and compare that with US practice. The contrast
is quite stark:
==+==
One difference emphasised yesterday by senior British military sources was the
attitude towards "force protection". A defence source added: "The Americans put
on more and more armour and firepower. The British go light and go on the
ground." He made it plain what approach should be adopted towards what he
called "frightened Iraqis".
British defence sources contrast the patient tactics deployed by their troops
around Basra and what they call the more brutal tactics used by American forces
around Nassiriya.
US marines in the southern Iraqi town appeared to have fired indiscriminately,
with orders to shoot at civilian vehicles. One was reported to have knowingly
killed an Iraqi civilian woman.
==+==
NB: I'm not saying the UK is perfect; I'm deeply concerned about our use of
cluster munitions for starters.
Scott A
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
