U.S. Iraq war casualties reach new milestone

[rjs246]

I hate you all.

[Diomedes]

2,677 is the current count.  In the past 14 days, 34 U.S. military have died and dozens have been injured.

If you resent being reminded, screw you.

[Diomedes]

[Diomedes]

2,700

Have a nice day.

[Butchers Bill]

2,700

Have a nice day.

wOOt!

[mpmcgraw]

This thread truly gets the point across to the government and this definitely helps the troops you care so much about.

Please continue.

[Diomedes]

In the last 35 day, 94 U.S. Soldiers have been killed in Iraq.  20 in the last five days.

[Diomedes]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/10/13/lloyd.inquest/index.html

U.S. forces 'killed UK reporter'

OXFORD, England (CNN) -- A coroner ruled on Friday that a British journalist who died in Iraq at the start of the war was unlawfully killed by American forces.

Lloyd, a correspondent with the British TV network ITN , was killed outside Basra in southern Iraq in March 2003.

Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner Andrew Walker said he'll be writing the director of public prosecutions to seek to bring the perpetrators to justice.

"Terry Lloyd died following a gunshot wound to the head. The evidence this bullet was fired by the Americans is overwhelming," Walker said.

Lebanese interpreter Hussein Osman also was killed in the ITN crew, and cameraman Fred Nerac remains missing. ITN cameraman Daniel Demoustier survived.

Lloyd -- who was aged 50 -- was shot in the back during U.S. and Iraqi crossfire and was apparently shot by U.S. forces when he was taken away in a minibus for treatment.

"There is no doubt that the minibus presented no threat to the American forces. There is no doubt it was an unlawful act of fire upon the minibus," Walker said.

There were statements from U.S. military officers about the incident, but the coroner said "it was and is essential they attend and it is not satisfactory to have their statements read in court."

Lloyd's family members denounced the action and want justice.

Chelsea Lloyd, Terry Lloyd's daughter, urged after the inquest that the soldiers and their commanding officers be brought to justice.

"They did not come to this inquest to explain their actions. Let them now do so in our criminal courts where they are guaranteed to get a fair trial."

She said the "value of the inquest has been demonstrated."

"Until now we were unaware that my father was able to stand and walk to a makeshift ambulance after being shot once by an Iraqi bullet. The man who stopped to help my father was an ordinary Iraqi whose intentions were to take him and other wounded to a nearby hospital.

"After helping my father into his minibus the evidence shows that the vehicle whilst driving the wounded away was fired on by U.S. forces, and that one bullet entered my father's head after passing through the vehicle, and it was this American bullet which killed him."

A statement read by an attorney for Lloyd's widow, Lynn, said the court established that the "circumstances of his death from an American bullet whilst being ferried to hospital is a very serious war crime" and that the Marines should now stand trial.

"The evidence of how Terry Lloyd was unlawfully killed has shown that this was not, I wish to stress, a friendly fire blue on blue incident or a crossfire incident. It was a despicable, deliberate, vengeful act, particularly as it came many minutes after the end of the initial exchanges in which Mr. Lloyd had been hit by an Iraqi bullet."

Her statement said "U.S. forces appeared to have allowed their soldiers to behave like trigger-happy cowboys in an area in which there were civilians traveling on a highway, both Iraqi and European."

In other news, through 13 days of October 2006, 45 U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq.  The current total is 2,758. 

[Butchers Bill]

I read that article this AM too.  Since when is a coronor an expert in the rules of war?  The US troops, in a war zone, shot the shtein out of an unmarked van they considered a threat.

[Diomedes]

An unmarked van into which an injured civilian who had been trapped in their crossfire had just climbed into...and which was leaving the scene of the battle.

Soldiers don't get to shoot indiscriminately.  You can't simply give them a pass to fire at will.  As we have seen however, that is bascially what's going on.  U.S. soldiers and mercenaries are shooting first and asking questions later, if at all.

Makes for great PR.

[Butchers Bill]

An unmarked van into which an injured civilian who had been trapped in their crossfire had just climbed into...and which was leaving the scene of the battle.

Soldiers don't get to shoot indiscriminately.  You can't simply give them a pass to fire at will.  As we have seen however, that is bascially what's going on.  U.S. soldiers and mercenaries are shooting first and asking questions later, if at all.

Agree about the indiscriminate shooting, but who gets to decide what is indiscriminate?  Mai Lai...clear cut case...this is not such a case.  In urban warfare, its nearly impossible to determine.

There is too much missing info to make a reasonable desicion about this incident.  You are assuming (the article does not even mention this) that the US troops witnessed these civilians enter the van.  There does not seem to be any evidence of that yet.  Even if there was, we all know that Muslim extremists would never use civilians to mask an attack...never.

[Seabiscuit36]

I like RJS's idea....Make Glass

[DutchBird]

An unmarked van into which an injured civilian who had been trapped in their crossfire had just climbed into...and which was leaving the scene of the battle.

Soldiers don't get to shoot indiscriminately.  You can't simply give them a pass to fire at will.  As we have seen however, that is bascially what's going on.  U.S. soldiers and mercenaries are shooting first and asking questions later, if at all.

Agree about the indiscriminate shooting, but who gets to decide what is indiscriminate?  Mai Lai...clear cut case...this is not such a case.  In urban warfare, its nearly impossible to determine.

There is too much missing info to make a reasonable desicion about this incident.  You are assuming (the article does not even mention this) that the US troops witnessed these civilians enter the van.  There does not seem to be any evidence of that yet.  Even if there was, we all know that Muslim extremists would never use civilians to mask an attack...never.

Of course this is the easy cop-out to avoid looking at yourselves... and wonder if there is anything wrong with doctrine and training of US troops (or at least significant parts of them)... What is the list now?

Canadians in Afghanistan bombed by US fighters. Numerous wedding parties bombed. Al Jazeera TV station fired at. Civilian, and marked as such, convoy strafed by A-10. British airplanes returning from mission shot down by US missile battery. The whole Jessica Lynch partially staged operation. The operations in the Sunni triangle (Najaf and the like) where the US military has tried to suppress any images coming out... those that did come out contracdicted what the Pentagon claimed.

If others operating both in Iraq and Afghanistan (think of Canadians, British, Dutch, Germans, French etc) are consciously trying to distance themselves from the US and US troops as much as possible, that should be an indication that there might be some serious problems with US doctrine and training....

[Butchers Bill]

Civilians and innocents die in every war, and the fact is fewer civilians and friendlies have died at the hands of US troops in this conflict than any other major conflict in our history. 

Are their islated incidient of "cowboyism" surely...and those soldiers get arrested and punished.  Is it widespread and part of US military doctrine?  Surely not.

The US has, by far, the best trained military in the world and to go great lengths to limit civilian casualties.

[DutchBird]

The US has, by far, the best trained military in the world and to go great lengths to limit civilian casualties.

First of all I will disagree with the first part... the US has the largest and most powerful military (looking at pure firepower, but best trained, no. That is for the smaller armies (sheer size makes it impossible, especially if you see where the money goes)... let alone (as far as training goes) for the type of mission that is required of it in Iraq and Afghanistan...

BTW, those are observations from experienced soldiers (one the NSA guy assigned to the unit which captured Saddam, one a Dutch soldier who has served in Bosnia, Iraq and Kosovo and will go to Afghanistan in a few weeks/months) and the general comments made by European military analysts and establishment even BEFORE GW decided to invade Iraq. And comments reiterated by others who observed the way US troops operated in Iraq (and to a lesser degree in Afghanistan).

Simply put, the US military is insufficiently trained to fight the type fo conflicts it is fighting now (so yes, this means there is a problem with doctrine). With disastrous results, in particular in Afghanistan. The far too few troops deployed, the (lack of) cultural awareness let alone the propaganda and misinformation (I would say outright lies) spewed by the US administration and media before the Iraq invasion, and even to this day, only help to make this problem much much worse...

If there are elements within Iraq that are saying before the war: "we would rather have Israel doing the liberating then the US", something is seriously wrong...

Or, as someone generalized  it even before the war in Iraq: "The US military is good at flattening things with overhwelming power, but not much more..."

And unfortunately he has been proven right so far. And mind you, I do not blame so much the local grunt on the ground (in fact I pity them for having been dumped in this mess), as I do blame the US administration, the cowards on Capitol Hill (who followed Bush like sheep by and large) and elements within the Pentagon and intelligence community. And for good measure, Tony Blair and my own prime minister are a bunch of cowards and should be tried as well...

And as far as limiting civilian casualties goes, I would not even be that sure either (something that goes for all Western militaries BTW). They do in front of the camera (hence a very intense campaign to censor what comes out (specifically one of the goals of the "embedded reporter" phenomenon)), and some of the rules of engagements they have... except that in a number of cases the rules of engagement themselves are the problem (see checkpoints), especially if you want to win the hearts and minds of people, and in numerous cases images and reports that have come out despite all attempts to keep silent suggest otherwise (former Yugoslavia, Najaf, the Operation Desert Storm)....