...On the eve of large anti-war demonstrations in Washington and London, Hart Viges has told how indiscriminate fire from US troops is likely to have killed an untold number of Iraqi civilians...
Sep 24, '05
"Collateral damage" is killing and is wrong in a preventable war that was planned years before it was started.
Killing innocent people whether in the NYC World Trade Center, the London Tube, or in Basra or Baghdad is wrong.
Iraq Judge Renews Troops' Arrest Warrant
"It is a sin and a crime to kill or punish innocent people for crimes of the guilty." George Galloway MP, September 24, 2005
Last edit by pickledpepperRN on Sep 24, '05
Sep 25, '05
Quote from mwbeah
I am not agreeing or disagreeing but try this out:
Ask your parents and grandparents if they felt the atomic bombs on japan were worth the lives of american soldiers it saved (the ones that would have been lost).
"Collateral" damage is what it is (like it or not), and has been a part of warfare since the dawn of man.
I am thankful that I do not live like my ancestors (see chart below).....
I do believe that they had "collateral damage" as well. I am in the business of caring for the "collateral damage" and let me tell you it sucks. But on the same token, I am torn by the fact that I have no connection to them. Like it or not I, at times, find myself saying "well as long as american soldiers didn't get hurt..."
Like in many of my previous posts, Civilians make the decisions to go to war and the military carries out that decision. Nothing more nothing less.
Last edit by mwbeah on Sep 25, '05