Who is in Iraq's mass graves and why.

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
70,091
5,283
126
Heard on NPR that most of the mass graves found In Iraq are filled with the bodies of people who rebelled around 91 after we encouraged them to do so and then pulled out without giving the promised support, or from the time when Saddam was fighting Iran and we were kissing his hand.
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Most of the people that are in the mass graves are there because they are, in fact dead.
I doubt that very many live people are, or were in the graves, and if they were there, they
soon thereafter became dead, as were most of those around them.
Seems like in that part of the country they bury dead people in graves.

Now the next issue - why were they dead ? Did they just get tired of living and decide to lay down
and take a dirt nap, or had they been made that way by one of the following methods:

A) U.S. Bombing during Desset Storm - there may be as many as 200,000 from that.

B) After the U.S. stoped item (A) above, they encouraged an uprising against what
was left that they had not finished bombing, item (A) again.
Unfortunatelly we just stood by and allowed that which that had not finished bombing
(Ref: item A) to supress and kill those who had followed our calling for action, so we helped
with their demise - actually orchestrated it since we initiated the uprising, just didn't support it.

There probably are more mass graves to be found, we seem to be a lot more
efficient in finding mass graves than we are at finding the WMD that we knew
exactly where they were.
I guess that we really didn't know anything about Iraq - did we, or at least George didn't.
 

sMiLeYz

Platinum Member
Feb 3, 2003
2,696
0
76
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Heard on NPR that most of the mass graves found In Iraq are filled with the bodies of people who rebelled around 91 after we encouraged them to do so and then pulled out without giving the promised support, or from the time when Saddam was fighting Iran and we were kissing his hand.
See thats the reason most of the world doesnt trust us. I don't blame them at all, considering Afghanistan is starting to slip back into lawlessness while we continue to focus on Iraq.

 

HombrePequeno

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2001
4,657
0
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Most of the people that are in the mass graves are there because they are, in fact dead.
I doubt that very many live people are, or were in the graves, and if they were there, they
soon thereafter became dead, as were most of those around them.
Seems like in that part of the country they bury dead people in graves.

Now the next issue - why were they dead ? Did they just get tired of living and decide to lay down
and take a dirt nap, or had they been made that way by one of the following methods:

A) U.S. Bombing during Desset Storm - there may be as many as 200,000 from that.

B) After the U.S. stoped item (A) above, they encouraged an uprising against what
was left that they had not finished bombing, item (A) again.
Unfortunatelly we just stood by and allowed that which that had not finished bombing
(Ref: item A) to supress and kill those who had followed our calling for action, so we helped
with their demise - actually orchestrated it since we initiated the uprising, just didn't support it.

There probably are more mass graves to be found, we seem to be a lot more
efficient in finding mass graves than we are at finding the WMD that we knew
exactly where they were.
I guess that we really didn't know anything about Iraq - did we, or at least George didn't.
So are you saying that we should have invaded Iraq without any international support?

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
See thats the reason most of the world doesnt trust us. I don't blame them at all, considering Afghanistan is starting to slip back into lawlessness while we continue to focus on Iraq.
Slip back into lawlessness? Pretty much the only part of the country that has ever been protected has been Kabul and it's still doing about the same as it has ever. We still have thousands of troops there and give them hundreds of millions in aid each year. You do realize though that there are more people than just the US in Afghanistan right? It's couldn't be all our fault that the place is a sh!thole.
 

Sleestak

Banned
Nov 20, 2002
342
0
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Most of the people that are in the mass graves are there because they are, in fact dead.
I doubt that very many live people are, or were in the graves, and if they were there, they
soon thereafter became dead, as were most of those around them.
Seems like in that part of the country they bury dead people in graves.

Now the next issue - why were they dead ? Did they just get tired of living and decide to lay down
and take a dirt nap, or had they been made that way by one of the following methods:

A) U.S. Bombing during Desset Storm - there may be as many as 200,000 from that.

B) After the U.S. stoped item (A) above, they encouraged an uprising against what
was left that they had not finished bombing, item (A) again.
Unfortunatelly we just stood by and allowed that which that had not finished bombing
(Ref: item A) to supress and kill those who had followed our calling for action, so we helped
with their demise - actually orchestrated it since we initiated the uprising, just didn't support it.

There probably are more mass graves to be found, we seem to be a lot more
efficient in finding mass graves than we are at finding the WMD that we knew
exactly where they were.
I guess that we really didn't know anything about Iraq - did we, or at least George didn't.
Yes, yes, yes. It's all the fault of the U.S. that all those people are dead. Get a grip on reality son. Hussein was an evil man who killed people on whatever whim he felt like. Where do you get your numbers of 200,000 Iraqi civilians killed in the Gulf War? As for the uprisings that we failed to support, you need to look back in time and look at the nations who were complaining that we were even suggesting a popular uprising. After all, it wasn't an U.N. mandate and therefore not legal. It is sad that those people were killed due to a broken promise, but then again the Bay of Pigs was sad as well.
 

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2000
1,652
0
0
Originally posted by: Sleestak

Yes, yes, yes. It's all the fault of the U.S. that all those people are dead. Get a grip on reality son. Hussein was an evil man who killed people on whatever whim he felt like. Where do you get your numbers of 200,000 Iraqi civilians killed in the Gulf War? As for the uprisings that we failed to support, you need to look back in time and look at the nations who were complaining that we were even suggesting a popular uprising. After all, it wasn't an U.N. mandate and therefore not legal. It is sad that those people were killed due to a broken promise, but then again the Bay of Pigs was sad as well.
Just because points are being brought up on US guilt for Iraqi civilian deaths, doesn't mean its "all the fault" of the U.S. Of course we all know that Saddam was an evil man, that's a given. But Americans should also realize that their country can be at fault as well, and that America doesn't do everything right 100% of the time. The sad thing is, whenever someone points something out negative about America, they are immediately branded as trying to blame everything on America, which of course is ridiculous to an objective eye.

The point is, America should have never encouraged an uprising if it couldn't help the Iraqi people succesfully wage that uprising. It has nothing to do with blaming America for Saddam's murderous ways.

 

Sleestak

Banned
Nov 20, 2002
342
0
0
Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
Originally posted by: Sleestak

Yes, yes, yes. It's all the fault of the U.S. that all those people are dead. Get a grip on reality son. Hussein was an evil man who killed people on whatever whim he felt like. Where do you get your numbers of 200,000 Iraqi civilians killed in the Gulf War? As for the uprisings that we failed to support, you need to look back in time and look at the nations who were complaining that we were even suggesting a popular uprising. After all, it wasn't an U.N. mandate and therefore not legal. It is sad that those people were killed due to a broken promise, but then again the Bay of Pigs was sad as well.
Just because points are being brought up on US guilt for Iraqi civilian deaths, doesn't mean its "all the fault" of the U.S. Of course we all know that Saddam was an evil man, that's a given. But Americans should also realize that their country can be at fault as well, and that America doesn't do everything right 100% of the time. The sad thing is, whenever someone points something out negative about America, they are immediately branded as trying to blame everything on America, which of course is ridiculous to an objective eye.

The point is, America should have never encouraged an uprising if it couldn't help the Iraqi people succesfully wage that uprising. It has nothing to do with blaming America for Saddam's murderous ways.
Ahhh but that's not what the captain was going for in his post. He was clearly trying to paint the U.S. as the bad guy and as being responsible for the Iraqi deaths because of evil intentions. Would he have been happier if the U.S. would have lost an equal amount of people during the war? By the glee with which some people post death counts of U.S. soldiers on here I bet they would like nothing more than for more servicemen & women to die. Anything to make Bush look bad. Nevermind the fact that people do die in a war and that we have managed to free and entire country with less deaths than anyone could have predicted.

 

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2000
1,652
0
0
Originally posted by: Sleestak

Ahhh but that's not what the captain was going for in his post. He was clearly trying to paint the U.S. as the bad guy and as being responsible for the Iraqi deaths because of evil intentions. Would he have been happier if the U.S. would have lost an equal amount of people during the war? By the glee with which some people post death counts of U.S. soldiers on here I bet they would like nothing more than for more servicemen & women to die. Anything to make Bush look bad. Nevermind the fact that people do die in a war and that we have managed to free and entire country with less deaths than anyone could have predicted.
Well then its obvious that this is a matter of interpretation based on previous biases we have. I don't think he was trying to paint the US as evil, he was just telling the facts. The fact is that the choices America made during 1991 led to the deaths of many many Iraqi civilians. That's the fact. There are many other facts, that is just one, and it should be taken in the context of the liberation of Kuwait and the crippling of Saddam's power (two good outcomes of the Gulf War). Its all a matter of how you look at things.

We all bring a certain bias to discussion, and your bias guides your views just as much as others.
 

Lonyo

Lifer
Aug 10, 2002
21,939
6
81
I think he was pointing out that using mass graves as an excuse for invading Iraq was not necessarily justified as we need to look at why there are people in the mass graves.

Yes, Saddam was evil and did inhumane things to his own citizens, and yes, he should have been stopped, but you can't use mass graves as evideence of his atrocities if they weren't 100% his fault and did infact stem from the Gulf War in 1991.

The Bush administration seems to be trying to make people look at the mass graves to use them as an escape for not finding much else, and if they are not a valid scapegoat, they shouldn't be misused to confuse the public.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
I think Saddam executed some folks from time to time but I doubt he needed to dig "Mass" graves to Hide what he did given he'd want it to be well known by the folks so it would set the proper example... so it is reasonable to assume the graves are from the earlier hand holding or our bombing campaign when we used less smart bombs.

I wish we'd spend time finding the WMD before it or they kill innocent folks... if they exist.
 

Sleestak

Banned
Nov 20, 2002
342
0
0
Originally posted by: LunarRay
I think Saddam executed some folks from time to time but I doubt he needed to dig "Mass" graves to Hide what he did given he'd want it to be well known by the folks so it would set the proper example... so it is reasonable to assume the graves are from the earlier hand holding or our bombing campaign when we used less smart bombs.

I wish we'd spend time finding the WMD before it or they kill innocent folks... if they exist.
Yeah, Saddam is really a nice guy.

Saddam Hussein

AKA 'Great Uncle'. Saddam translates to 'One Who Confronts'.

Country: Iraq.

Kill tally: Approaching two million, including between 150,000 and 340,000 Iraqis and between 450,000 and 730,000 Iranians killed during the Iran-Iraq War. Over 100,000 Kurds killed or "disappeared". An estimated 1,000 Kuwaiti nationals killed following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. No reliable figures for the number of Iraqis killed during the Gulf War, with estimates varying from as few as 1,500 to as many as 200,000. No reliable figures for the number of Iraqi dissidents and Shi'ite Muslims killed during Hussein's reign, though estimates put the figure between 60,000 and 100,000. Approximately 500,000 Iraqi children dead because of international trade sanctions introduced following the Gulf War.


From here
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: Sleestak
Originally posted by: LunarRay
I think Saddam executed some folks from time to time but I doubt he needed to dig "Mass" graves to Hide what he did given he'd want it to be well known by the folks so it would set the proper example... so it is reasonable to assume the graves are from the earlier hand holding or our bombing campaign when we used less smart bombs.

I wish we'd spend time finding the WMD before it or they kill innocent folks... if they exist.
Yeah, Saddam is really a nice guy.

Saddam Hussein

AKA 'Great Uncle'. Saddam translates to 'One Who Confronts'.

Country: Iraq.

Kill tally: Approaching two million, including between 150,000 and 340,000 Iraqis and between 450,000 and 730,000 Iranians killed during the Iran-Iraq War. Over 100,000 Kurds killed or "disappeared". An estimated 1,000 Kuwaiti nationals killed following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. No reliable figures for the number of Iraqis killed during the Gulf War, with estimates varying from as few as 1,500 to as many as 200,000. No reliable figures for the number of Iraqi dissidents and Shi'ite Muslims killed during Hussein's reign, though estimates put the figure between 60,000 and 100,000. Approximately 500,000 Iraqi children dead because of international trade sanctions introduced following the Gulf War.


From here
Well.. I guess it could be some of the folks you mentioned above occupying the mass graves.. who they are may be important to their relatives and I suppose by digging up all the mass graves we'll find something out.. I think everyone will agree that Saddam is a Stalinist Dictator... who killed lots of folks... My wonder is: Are we unearthing the corpses for some purpose or is it something deeper... like; are the WMD among the dead?

 

Sleestak

Banned
Nov 20, 2002
342
0
0
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Originally posted by: Sleestak
Originally posted by: LunarRay
I think Saddam executed some folks from time to time but I doubt he needed to dig "Mass" graves to Hide what he did given he'd want it to be well known by the folks so it would set the proper example... so it is reasonable to assume the graves are from the earlier hand holding or our bombing campaign when we used less smart bombs.

I wish we'd spend time finding the WMD before it or they kill innocent folks... if they exist.
Yeah, Saddam is really a nice guy.

Saddam Hussein

AKA 'Great Uncle'. Saddam translates to 'One Who Confronts'.

Country: Iraq.

Kill tally: Approaching two million, including between 150,000 and 340,000 Iraqis and between 450,000 and 730,000 Iranians killed during the Iran-Iraq War. Over 100,000 Kurds killed or "disappeared". An estimated 1,000 Kuwaiti nationals killed following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. No reliable figures for the number of Iraqis killed during the Gulf War, with estimates varying from as few as 1,500 to as many as 200,000. No reliable figures for the number of Iraqi dissidents and Shi'ite Muslims killed during Hussein's reign, though estimates put the figure between 60,000 and 100,000. Approximately 500,000 Iraqi children dead because of international trade sanctions introduced following the Gulf War.


From here
Well.. I guess it could be some of the folks you mentioned above occupying the mass graves.. who they are may be important to their relatives and I suppose by digging up all the mass graves we'll find something out.. I think everyone will agree that Saddam is a Stalinist Dictator... who killed lots of folks... My wonder is: Are we unearthing the corpses for some purpose or is it something deeper... like; are the WMD among the dead?
You're right. We should leave them rotting there. Who cares if their familes never find out what happened to their loved ones. Assuming of course that Hussein didn't have the whole family killed.

 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Originally posted by: Sleestak
Originally posted by: LunarRay
Originally posted by: Sleestak
Originally posted by: LunarRay
I think Saddam executed some folks from time to time but I doubt he needed to dig "Mass" graves to Hide what he did given he'd want it to be well known by the folks so it would set the proper example... so it is reasonable to assume the graves are from the earlier hand holding or our bombing campaign when we used less smart bombs.

I wish we'd spend time finding the WMD before it or they kill innocent folks... if they exist.
Yeah, Saddam is really a nice guy.

Saddam Hussein

AKA 'Great Uncle'. Saddam translates to 'One Who Confronts'.

Country: Iraq.

Kill tally: Approaching two million, including between 150,000 and 340,000 Iraqis and between 450,000 and 730,000 Iranians killed during the Iran-Iraq War. Over 100,000 Kurds killed or "disappeared". An estimated 1,000 Kuwaiti nationals killed following the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. No reliable figures for the number of Iraqis killed during the Gulf War, with estimates varying from as few as 1,500 to as many as 200,000. No reliable figures for the number of Iraqi dissidents and Shi'ite Muslims killed during Hussein's reign, though estimates put the figure between 60,000 and 100,000. Approximately 500,000 Iraqi children dead because of international trade sanctions introduced following the Gulf War.


From here
Well.. I guess it could be some of the folks you mentioned above occupying the mass graves.. who they are may be important to their relatives and I suppose by digging up all the mass graves we'll find something out.. I think everyone will agree that Saddam is a Stalinist Dictator... who killed lots of folks... My wonder is: Are we unearthing the corpses for some purpose or is it something deeper... like; are the WMD among the dead?
You're right. We should leave them rotting there. Who cares if their familes never find out what happened to their loved ones. Assuming of course that Hussein didn't have the whole family killed.
Now don't take offense here but.... are you related to my wife? :) I Suppose the unearthing of the corpses could be on the agenda but, I'd prefer it a bit lower than it apparently is... how about we seek out the WMD first and perhaps save lives... then deal with the already dead... they won't rot too much more in any event... As a worst case scenario we could just give some pieces to each claimant still looking for their loved ones and assure them via DNA that this is their missing kin... They be happy and we save time and win friends and all that important domestic relations stuff..
 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,862
84
91
bush 1 seriously flubbed the end of gulf 1. he let the slaughter happen. giving saddam permission to fly gunships to mow down the opposition we called for, ruining our credibility in the middle east and the world. just like how bush jr is flubbing the situation now:p

funny how bush ran on "integrity" :p
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Sleestak -

Son ? Are you trying to be a little condecending there junior ?
Seems to me that I'm a little older and wiser than to be addressed as 'Son'
Lets see - 'Nam in '66 was 38 years ago, when I was 21 - 3rd year in the service.

200,000 civilians ? Don't see that I wrote that, did write 200,000 killed in Gulf war -
thats the initial figures that were released by the U.S. as to Iraqi Military deaths
from our bombing and advancements in freeing Kuwait from the Iraqi invasion.
Seems we were pretty good at bursting their tanks and buildings with our weaponry.

Do you think that 1 kill per expended ordanance is an appropriate figure ?
I would hope that our weapons which cost thousands of dollars each have a better
kill ratio than 1 person per bomb, Hell we dropped somewhat more than 10,000
in this last game of tag, do you think that most of them went off without affecting anyone.

I have spent 40 years in the defense industry, so I know better than most what our stuff will, or will not do.
I look at Gulf 1 Bosnia, Afganistan, Gulf 2, etc. - as a validation of my resume, I either fixed it, built it,
designed it, or built the equipment that delivered it. I do WMD.

As to Iraqi dead there were over a million killed in the war with Iran, by our proxie - when we supplied
and supported their side, after we backed Saddam in his takeover of the country before that.
Is Iraq our Redheaded Arab Bastard Stepchild ? Well, yes it is. We grew it - we chew it.

The question was Iraq Mass graves - Threat or Menace. Is this the WMD in the form of a B-Movie
thriller 'Night of the Iraqi Dead' where past history comes back from the grave to haunt us.
"Cursed be they that moves these bones" Shakespeare, or some local or psycological curse.
Could be, We may not have pulled the trigger each and every time, but we shared in the
profit taking in the sales to Iraq of materials and equipment that has no other purpose than war.
Gassed Kurds ? Gassed Iranian Soldiers ? Canisters stamped 'Made in U.S.A.' Great product.
Union made and Quality control you know. War is big business - invest your children.

Been there - done that, don't need no lectures - too easy to sit back and cheer the Cowboy's
without having to face the Indians, Germans, Viet Cong, Notre Dame, or St. Louis Rams.
Unless youv're invested a part of your life in the situation you know not what you're doing.

Oh, by the way according to Dubyas Daddy, Big George the Mediocre - "Saddam" translates
into 'Boot-Black Lacky' and thats why he pronounced it like he did.
 

Sleestak

Banned
Nov 20, 2002
342
0
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Sleestak -

Son ? Are you trying to be a little condecending there junior ?
Seems to me that I'm a little older and wiser than to be addressed as 'Son'
Lets see - 'Nam in '66 was 38 years ago, when I was 21 - 3rd year in the service.

200,000 civilians ? Don't see that I wrote that, did write 200,000 killed in Gulf war -
thats the initial figures that were released by the U.S. as to Iraqi Military deaths
from our bombing and advancements in freeing Kuwait from the Iraqi invasion.
Seems we were pretty good at bursting their tanks and buildings with our weaponry.

Do you think that 1 kill per expended ordanance is an appropriate figure ?
I would hope that our weapons which cost thousands of dollars each have a better
kill ratio than 1 person per bomb, Hell we dropped somewhat more than 10,000
in this last game of tag, do you think that most of them went off without affecting anyone.

I have spent 40 years in the defense industry, so I know better than most what our stuff will, or will not do.
I look at Gulf 1 Bosnia, Afganistan, Gulf 2, etc. - as a validation of my resume, I either fixed it, built it,
designed it, or built the equipment that delivered it. I do WMD.

As to Iraqi dead there were over a million killed in the war with Iran, by our proxie - when we supplied
and supported their side, after we backed Saddam in his takeover of the country before that.
Is Iraq our Redheaded Arab Bastard Stepchild ? Well, yes it is. We grew it - we chew it.

The question was Iraq Mass graves - Threat or Menace. Is this the WMD in the form of a B-Movie
thriller 'Night of the Iraqi Dead' where past history comes back from the grave to haunt us.
Could be, We may not have pulled the trigger each and every time, but we shared in the
profit taking in the sales to Iraq of materials and equipment that has no other purpose than war.
Gassed Kurds ? Gassed Iranian Soldiers ? Canisters stamped 'Made in U.S.A.' Great product.
Union made and Quality control you know. War is big business - invest your children.

Been there - done that, don't need no lectures - too easy to sit back and cheer the Cowboy's
without having to face the Indians, Germans, Viet Cong, Notre Dame, or St. Louis Rams.
Unless youv're invested a part of your life in the situation you know not what you're doing.

Oh, by the way according to Dubyas Daddy, Big George the Mediocre - "Saddam" translates
into 'Boot-Black Lacky' and thats why he pronounced it like he did.
Ahh yes, the ever popular The United States made Saddam argument. You might want to look at the timeline about Saddam's rise to power here and rethink your little diatribe. It's true the U.S turned somewhat of a blind eye towards Iraq's use of chemical weapons in the Iran v. Iraq war, but there is no proof of the U.S. supplying Iraq with munitions. If you will remember, the chemical weapons the U.N. did find and was destroying in Iraq were all either home grown, stamped Fait en France or Gemacht in Deutschland.

Yes Iraqi's died in the war. You should know as well as anyone that people die in war. It is unfortunate that civilians are killed but the U.S. goes out of it's way to keep that from happening.
 

Ferocious

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2000
4,584
2
71
Reagan gave Saddam billions in agricutural grants.....knowing what would happen.

Saddam of course used that money to buy weapons.

 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Iran Contra was not about peaceful détente. It was about folks better enabled to kill their fellow folks.. and we the enabler..
 

HombrePequeno

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2001
4,657
0
0
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
bush 1 seriously flubbed the end of gulf 1. he let the slaughter happen. giving saddam permission to fly gunships to mow down the opposition we called for, ruining our credibility in the middle east and the world. just like how bush jr is flubbing the situation now:p

funny how bush ran on "integrity" :p
I guess I should repeat myself. You're telling me we should have helped out the uprising by invading Iraq which would have gone against the UN's wishes? Invading Iraq back in '91 would have been kind of hard considering we would have had no support (no coalition, no Saudi Arabia, and no Kuwait).
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
What you're missing here is that we told them that they could fly the helicopters,
and stood by and watched when they started using the helicopters to kill their own.

We set up the No-Fly Zones and said what they were allowed to fly where.
We specifically said that they could fly the helicopters in the 'No-Fly' Zones,
as they we not fixed wing aircraft. All we would have have to do with what we
had in the region was take down a couple of the helicopters when they used
them outside the scope of what we had said we would allow - but we didn't.

We permitted them to use those helicopters to attack - and could have intervened.
Excuses, excuses. We dropped the ball.
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
What you're missing here is that we told them that they could fly the helicopters,
and stood by and watched when they started using the helicopters to kill their own.

We set up the No-Fly Zones and said what they were allowed to fly where.
We specifically said that they could fly the helicopters in the 'No-Fly' Zones,
as they we not fixed wing aircraft. All we would have have to do with what we
had in the region was take down a couple of the helicopters when they used
them outside the scope of what we had said we would allow - but we didn't.

We permitted them to use those helicopters to attack - and could have intervened.
Excuses, excuses. We dropped the ball.
I agree with you. A great mistake was made during that time.

That mistake is now being rectified.

 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
70,091
5,283
126
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
What you're missing here is that we told them that they could fly the helicopters,
and stood by and watched when they started using the helicopters to kill their own.

We set up the No-Fly Zones and said what they were allowed to fly where.
We specifically said that they could fly the helicopters in the 'No-Fly' Zones,
as they we not fixed wing aircraft. All we would have have to do with what we
had in the region was take down a couple of the helicopters when they used
them outside the scope of what we had said we would allow - but we didn't.

We permitted them to use those helicopters to attack - and could have intervened.
Excuses, excuses. We dropped the ball.
I agree with you. A great mistake was made during that time.


That mistake is now being rectified.
Or compounded as the case may be. It isn't the end of history yet, perhaps, and we do not as yet know our fate.

 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Found this on MSNBC
It's consistent with machine gun fire from a helicopter:

On Monday, the coalition director for human rights said the investigation of a newly uncovered mass grave
outside Mosul had been delayed until more forensic teams arrived in the next few weeks.
The 101st Airborne discovered the site last week. Initial findings revealed that the grave held the
remains of women and children all with bullet holes in their heads, many shot from above.
Residents have said there were 4,000 to 5,000 bodies in that region.
 

glugglug

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2002
5,340
1
0
Originally posted by: LunarRay

Now don't take offense here but.... are you related to my wife? :) I Suppose the unearthing of the corpses could be on the agenda but, I'd prefer it a bit lower than it apparently is... how about we seek out the WMD first and perhaps save lives... then deal with the already dead... they won't rot too much more in any event... As a worst case scenario we could just give some pieces to each claimant still looking for their loved ones and assure them via DNA that this is their missing kin... They be happy and we save time and win friends and all that important domestic relations stuff..
What better place to plant, ahem... "hide" the WMD? Have you not yet seen Terminator 3?

Also, who is buried in the mass graves in Queens, and why?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY