23-03-2003 10:49									#31
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

I wonder if these missiles were part of the strike on Ansar-al-Islam? That would put their target close to the Iranian border, close enough that a relatively small problem might have caused them to enter Iran...

	23-03-2003 11:34									#32
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Rufus - the Iraqis don't have reason to downplay civilian casualties, and they're not claiming huge amounts. Considering what evidence is available, lots of the appropriate targets in Baghdad were burning, so there doesn't seem to be too much of a problem. Accuracy over Baghdad seems to be better so far than GWI, if for no other reason than the Iraqis aren't putting up near as much AAA as they did originally.

Agreed, MtG. But given the sheer scale of the bombardment of Baghdad, I'll be truly impressed is each and every bomb hit its non-civilian target. And while I'm genrally one who bows to the facts in these dicussions, I'm still pissed about how the government lied its ass off about civilian casualties in GWI (and Panama, for that matter),and how our lap-dog media let them do it. So the facts, or "facts," we get this time had better be pretty convincing.

	23-03-2003 13:05									#33
	Increase Your PM Length

how did I know people would be cheering this.

You anti-war freaks would cream your pants if we actually killed some Iranians.

This just goes to show you want innocents do die so you can blame the U.S.

**** you all

	23-03-2003 15:07									#34
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Dissident how did I know people would be cheering this. You anti-war freaks would cream your pants if we actually killed some Iranians. This just goes to show you want innocents do die so you can blame the U.S. **** you all

WTF? Who the hell is cheering, Diss? Nobody wants civilian deaths; some of us think there may eventually be quite a lot and, further, that our government will try to cover them up. ("Governments lie during wartime" is up there with "2+2=4" as far as controversial statements go.)

If you're not trolling, you need to either sober up or take a break from the war coverage and watch something nice and soothing, like "Teletubbies."

	23-03-2003 15:10									#35
	Get a bigger avatar today!

you don't see what che is inferring to in his orginal post.

He is inferring that if a missile is that far off course, what could be happening inside the Bagdhad?

Yes, he is inferring that many, many civilians are dying.

Normally I would have no problem with that. But there has been no evidence of civilians dying yet. At least not by our hands. Some British journalists are dead or prisoner right now by Iraqi hands.

Reading between the lines. I gather he is saying: I told you so!

	23-03-2003 15:20									#36
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Dissident you don't see what che is inferring to in his orginal post. He is inferring that if a missile is that far off course, what could be happening inside the Bagdhad? Yes, he is inferring that many, many civilians are dying. Normally I would have no problem with that. But there has been no evidence of civilians dying yet. At least not by our hands. Some British journalists are dead or prisoner right now by Iraqi hands. Reading between the lines. I gather he is saying: I told you so!

Of course he's inferring that. I'm inferring that, too. When I see a car totalled on the side of the highway, I infer people got hurt; but I don't cheer about it, and I hope to God I'm wrong. Can you honestly not tell the difference, or have you swallowed the administration's "with-us-or-against-us" tripe? The latter would be pretty ironic fro a guy who calls himself "Dissident."

	23-03-2003 15:20									#37
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly Agreed, MtG. But given the sheer scale of the bombardment of Baghdad, I'll be truly impressed is each and every bomb hit its non-civilian target. And while I'm genrally one who bows to the facts in these dicussions, I'm still pissed about how the government lied its ass off about civilian casualties in GWI (and Panama, for that matter),and how our lap-dog media let them do it. So the facts, or "facts," we get this time had better be pretty convincing.

Actually, the Panama civilian casualty myths were pretty well settled - the Panamanians were short on casualties, but realistic and methodical estimates from independent sources put the actual number, based on missing persons reports, bodies at morgues, graves, etc. at between 280 and 350, depending on the source, compared to approximately 250 as estimated by the Panamanian government. This is way off from the rather baseless claims of mass graves, etc. - several "mass graves" turned out to be less than massive, and one of the reasons for overestimates of casualties was that due to a loss of electricity and strain on rather limited mortuary capacity, a number of non-combat related deaths ended up being buried in groups in hasty graves, along with the combat deaths. The number of bodies recovered on exhumation of the grave sites was a little over the 350 mark, but appeared to contain some non-combat deaths.

Civilian and military casualties in GW1 are still subject to a lot of dispute, but the high numbers claimed are pretty baseless. The real numbers are worse than the official US claims, but on a scale from the US claims to the higher claims, the amount is very likely to be on the lower end.

As far as the current generation of bombs, undoubtedly there will be some misses, but there are two major differences from GW1 - the use of satellite guided bombs, freeing the pilots or SOF teams from active target designation from bomb release til impact, and the lack of Iraqi AAA fire.

BTW, the three stray missiles are now reported by IRNA to be Iraqi, not US.

	23-03-2003 15:26									#38
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Dissident Yes, he is inferring that many, many civilians are dying.

There's no need to infer. One report has it that 77 civilians were killed in a bombing attack.

	23-03-2003 15:27									#39
	Got spare money?

source?

	23-03-2003 15:43									#40
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I don't have a source on the civilian casualties claim, but what I do have a source on is this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2877349.stm

RAF Tornado downed by US missile

An RAF Tornado and its crew are missing after being downed by a US missile close to the Kuwaiti border.

	23-03-2003 15:46									#41
	Remove this text

yes this is terrible.


too many aircraft and too much **** going on.

And people say how much better this would be if we had more nations in this coalition? 2 is already too many. We cannot coordinate all these aircraft. Things would be worse with other U.N. nations in the way.

	23-03-2003 15:49									#42
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Clear Skies I don't have a source on the civilian casualties claim, but what I do have a source on is this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2877349.stm RAF Tornado downed by US missile An RAF Tornado and its crew are missing after being downed by a US missile close to the Kuwaiti border.

That's one of the problems with this war plan. Everything comes in and goes out of Kuwait, except for a trickle that flies over Jordan.

When you have the Iraqis firing missiles along the same corridor your strike flights are using, then there's bound to be problems.

	23-03-2003 15:52									#43
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger There's no need to infer. One report has it that 77 civilians were killed in a bombing attack.

Big whoop. Even if true, that's what, one civilian per 20 tons of bombs? Sorry, but if anyone thought zero civilians would die, they're nuts, and the anti-sanction people have been whining, claiming sanctions have killed half a million Iraqis, which would be over 100 a day since 1991. (another BS number, but let's assume it has some validity, just for the sake of argument) So let's keep things in perspective - 77 civilian fatalies isn't a hell of a lot.

	23-03-2003 16:04									#44
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I was reading that only 25% of the "smart" bombs hit their target. The ratio is higher now but they still miss.

	23-03-2003 16:08									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I heard 99.8%

	23-03-2003 16:32									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

in any case now they are reporting those missiles were probalby Iraqi

	23-03-2003 18:11									#47
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Normally I would have no problem with that. But there has been no evidence of civilians dying yet. At least not by our hands. Some British journalists are dead or prisoner right now by Iraqi hands.

Hmm even CNN admits there have been quite a few civilian casualties already

you're tripping right now or what?

	23-03-2003 18:16									#48
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Dissident I heard 99.8% in any case now they are reporting those missiles were probalby Iraqi

What are you watching, FOX?

	23-03-2003 18:22									#49
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

can you blame them? it's a one letter difference for god's sake

	23-03-2003 22:03									#50
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/1998/msg00372.html
http://www.lights.com/~scott/morene...&feed=Iran+news
http://www.bangkokpost.com/News/23Mar2003_news11.html
http://www.tehranglobe.com/s/business/iran_index.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003...ain545305.shtml
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stor...w/35463/1/.html

	23-03-2003 22:17									#51
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Dissident source?

Haven't found any links on the Web.

Heard it on the news, supposedly to be a bombing attack on Basra with cluster bombs.

	23-03-2003 22:20									#52
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat Big whoop. Even if true, that's what, one civilian per 20 tons of bombs? Sorry, but if anyone thought zero civilians would die, they're nuts, and the anti-sanction people have been whining, claiming sanctions have killed half a million Iraqis, which would be over 100 a day since 1991. (another BS number, but let's assume it has some validity, just for the sake of argument) So let's keep things in perspective - 77 civilian fatalies isn't a hell of a lot.

So it would be all right by you if a bunch of Iraqis pop up in the middle of a US city and nail 77 US citizens?

	23-03-2003 22:21									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

edit - reply to chegitz

Your first link is about some **** from Scott Ritter five years ago.

The rest of them repeat the original story, which was superseded by one from IRNA that the rockets were apparently Iraqi and fired from the ground.

I heard that one on TV news last night, both from independent news here in México and from CNN in the US.

Last edited by MichaeltheGreat on 23-03-2003 at 23:53

	23-03-2003 22:25									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger So it would be all right by you if a bunch of Iraqis pop up in the middle of a US city and nail 77 US citizens?

If they're doing it while attempting to hit military targets, then yeah, that sort of thing can happen, especially if those military targets are interspersed in civilian areas. (say they wanted to hit a national guard armory for some obscure reason) It doesn't make it "alright" on either side, but it will inevitably happen that civilians are killed.

The account is unconfirmed, it comes from the Iraqis themselves, so it's pretty rich. Why doesn't someone ask Taha Yassin Ramadan how many Iraqi civilians he was responsible for killing in Basra?

	23-03-2003 22:29									#55
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

For now the war has seemed very clean and easy. The point of this thread is to remind the hawks that just because things seem clean and easy doesn't make it so.

	23-03-2003 23:10									#56
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

actually it was CNN that says military sources believe the missiles may have been Iraqi.

Why would you assume I'm watching Fox? Nevermind

	24-03-2003 00:25									#57
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast...iles/index.html


missile was iraqi. making assumptions makes an ASS out of U and ME

	24-03-2003 00:59									#58
	Tired of ads?

I think it's conceivable that 500,000 Iraqis could die as a result of this military action - but not soley as a result of our bombs and soldiers - the vast majority of casualties would come from peripheral effects, such as lack of food, Republican Guard attacks, lack of hospitals, etc.

	24-03-2003 01:09									#59
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

It couldn't. it's not that people that lack hospitals will just be "turned off" and die instantly. water could be a problem after a couple of weeks ( the vast majority of people stored water and food ) but so far, no water installations were targetted, same with electricity.

500,000 is exagerated by far.