Iraqis: US using cluster bombs in Fallujah

[maddezmom]

A spokesman for an Iraqi delegation from the violence-gripped city of Fallujah on Monday accused US troops of using internationally banned cluster bombs against the city and said they had asked the United Nations to mediate the conflict.

Mohammed Tareq, a spokesman for the governing council of Fallujah and a member of the four-person delegation, said US military snipers were also responsible for the deaths of many children, women and elderly people.

"In Fallujah, the American troops killed at least 800 people and wounded 1,800," Tareq told reporters. "We want to inform the world about the massacres and the human rights violations by the Americans in our city."

The Iraqi delegation has been lobbying in the Jordanian capital for international pressure on the Americans to abide by a cease-fire in the battle-scarred city.

~snip~]
more: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1082948692632

[LittleApple81]

1. And do you feel the US will just respond "and what are you going to do

about it? Who cares? We have the power."
Remember Kimmitt saying that if you do not like to see dead civilians and children "just change the channel".

[Heyo]

2. Come on.....

That's kinda over the top...

Using internationally banned weapons (cluster bombs of all things) in a residential area.....? children and old people being killed by SNIPERS?!...

This story is a crock.

Heyo

[LittleApple81]

3. The sniper part is true. They even had a clip in one of the

international news sites (I am sorry, I don't remember which... I think it was the BBC).

[Tinoire]

6. Over the top? We used them in Yugoslavia & Afghanistan

What makes you think they'd suddenly rein in their use? Sheer faith that we only conduct "humane, legal" wars?

[bicentennial_baby]

8. Indeed my friend

Nice to see you! I'm a bit under the weather today, but a hearty hello to you! :hi: :pals:

[Tinoire]

11. Same here

:hi:

What a bad news day! You'd think those 4 mercenaries were Jenna & Barbara Bush, Paris & Nickki Hilton!

[Heyo]

19. Of course I know we use snipers...

The agument is not that we don't use snipers (sheesh!)

The are an intrinsic part of many battle plans...

It's that our snipers don't shoot children, women and old people.. a bomb may kill people by accident... snipers don't kill anyone by accident. Are you saying snipers have children in their crosshairs and pull the trigger? If so, would say that to the face of an American soldier?

Heyo

[Aidoneus]

25. "...snipers have children in their crosshairs and pull the trigger..."

That seems to be what is happening, yes.

Are you aware of the casualty figures for the massacre in al-Fallujah? How do you suppose they died? On what possible grounds do you assume that any invasion and occupation force--one that has already killed tens of thousands of people, adding more graveyards daily--is "morally" above that?!

I would say it to the face of anybody if the subject came up (not at random, that wouldn't be prudent).

[Heyo]

32. Okay...

If you believe that our soldiers who are snipers are picking off children, more power to ya.. don't expect me to join that jerk-off fest.

Casualty figures? I wish that I could get some real casualty figures on Iraq, I must read the figure about 5 times a day and it differs by as much as 240,000 depending on the day and source, and every time somebody links to a source, it always turns out to be some very biased site who #1 wouldn't have access to the information, and #2 have every reason to lie and no qualms about doing so. The figures are always different, too. And also, how many of those people are being killed by the insuregnts? Are you aware of their campaign to *intentionally* kill and get civilians killed, and using schools and mosques to draw fire into... propaganda is everything to these people, and the truth doesn't matter... and al-jazeera will lap it up like a thirsty labrador.....

Even if you don't agree with the war, you don't have to believe every distortion you hear...

There have been civlians casualties caused by the U.S.....

But the stories that get writted about it, 99% of them I don't believe.....

Heyo

PS. I responded to 2 posts in this thread, so forgive me if a couple of points got repeated in different wording.

[Zhade]

37. You are wasting your time explaining reality to a war crimes apologist.

He's not worth the effort.

[saskatoon]

35. Look and pull the trigger?

Yes! I wish I had the link but about 3 months ago, in Baghdad a soldier was being interviewed by a reporter re a 14 year old girl being killed and the soldier said, "Well the chick got in the way so I offed her."

[NYC]

41. I remember that.

"...the chick got in the way..."

[bahrbearian]

45. And Bush isn't one big accident.

[Aidoneus]

23. You do not need to go back in time too far, my friend

Get with the program, Tinoire--it's the 2nd most moral occupation army in the world. These brave liberators would NEVER do this! :eyes:

Please.. they've already used them in the course of the invasion and occupation of Iraq on multiple occasions. This "hear no evil" act is tiresome. On what possible grounds do you doubt this, Heyo?

[Heyo]

31. Well...

"On what possible grounds do you doubt this, Heyo?"

It's called common sense, too bad it's not contagious.

1) it's cruel and senseless, and there's no reason to. Remember these soldiers are not that much different from you and me. The are just Americans who happened to join the military.
2) Public relations disaster, which will always be exagerated and exploited.
3) No strategic benefit whatosever, in fact, the complete opposite.
4) the fact that militants in Iraq have consitently purposely killed civilians themselves as well as purposely drawn fire to them to get them killed to use it as propaganda against the U.S.

You don't have to agree with the war to think clearly.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. That tends to be the best solution when two people's opinion is so different that neither one will convince the other in 1000 years to change his mind.

But I'm still here though....

More power to ya.

:toast:

Heyo

[Ms. Clio]

43. clearly you choose to avoid posts with links to FACTS

like this one: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3653223.stm

I ask again, are the witnesses lying? Or do you live in a fantasyland?

[Heyo]

46. Thanks for the article.....

I read the whole thing. Please realize I am not trying to sound like one of people who sanitize war and claim there are no civilian casualties. As was said by somebody near the beginning of the war.. "War is not surgery, and 500 pound bombs are not antiseptic.

But there was implication in this thread that U.S. soldiers (the sames ones who you may have grown up with or be related to) were intentionally engaging in a massacre of civilians. This fact I strongly dispute. I don't believe for a second that any U.S. solder would have an Iraqi child in his cross-hairs and fire. It would take some damn solid proof for me to buy that. I was accused farther down this thread of sounding like a broken record. Let me clarify a little why I hold the opinion that I do re: the insurgency and civilian casualties.

I believe (and it should be obvious to most people) as much as as there is a war going on with bombs and bullets, I believe there is a simultaneous war going on with images and information. One side being the U.S. and coalition, who want to portray the forces as welcome liberators, the other side that wants to to portray them as marauding killers. The war of information is vital to success in the other war to defeat the insurgency, and make Iraq a success. I believe civilians have been killed on both sides. While it makes no difference to the families, there IS a difference between accidental and intentional. Why would the US intentionally kill civilians and bomb schools... that is tactical and political suicide for them, whether you like or don't like Bush and/or the military or the administration, you have to admit it's in their best interest to make their effort look good. Make Iraq look good and make it look like a safe and thriving place. The best way to make it look like that is to make it actually BE that. The best way to make the effort look good, make it look humane, is to make it be those things. And even the Iraqi R.G. and Saddam Fadayeen were known to march civilians out into the crossfire and have them shot, to score points in the info war. That is a principle tactic in the insurgency today, and a known tactic throughout the conflict. They know that the info war is huge, and they have no problem sacrificing civilian lives to score more points.

Baiting the us into bombing a place where civilians are is more effective even that killing US soldiers. So who has more to gain by intentionally killing (or indirectly causing the death of)civilians? The insurgents. Where would the best place for them to hide their stocks of ammo and weaponry? Schools and hospitals, because that makes it a win win situation. If the US doesn't get it, they don't get it, if they do, it'll look like "they blew up a hospital" or "they raided a school". The Geneva conventions states that churches, mosques, synagogues and the like are protected structures, but once those structures are using as firing positions or to store ammunition, they lose that protected status.

I have snipped some parts of the article you sent that highlight my point a little. (Sorry for using the same article you sent.. thanks though).. I have taken some flak for my position, so I thought I would elaborate as much as I could before my fingers get tired.

- snip -

US military officials have described the US operation as "humane" and say they "do everything possible to protect non-combatants". But they say insurgents' tactics are increasing the risks for civilians.

- snip -

If we're shooting vehicles, it's because those vehicles have shot at us," he said.

US officials have said that on one occasion, an insurgent gunman was seen fleeing in an ambulance, and that weapons have been found in an aid convoy west of the city.

-snip -

The Iraqi Health Minister, Khodair Abbas, said on Thursday that 271 people died and local doctors had been pressured to give inflated figures.

-snip -

Gen. Kimmit, also blamed militants who "hunker down inside mosques and hospitals and schools, and use the women and children as shields" for the civilian suffering.

- snip -

The Coalition says troops "have consistently allowed food, medical and humanitarian supplies into the city" and have "assisted in the transportation and distribution of these supplies".

It also says marines have helped ambulances from Baghdad to get into Falluja, and that humanitarian convoys have been slowed by explosive devices found on the roads.

- end snips -

Just my opinion...

regards all,

Heyo

[w13rd0]

7. What's unbelievable about it?

There's footage of several of the sniper incidents, and we already know the US military makes widespread use of cluster bombs (remember the "food packets" in Afghanistan?).

[Vladimir]

14. They used cluster bombs

in residential areas throughout the Kosovo conflict - the cleanup in both Kosovo and Serbia proper is ongoing.

[NeoConsSuck]

18. And you know it is a crock..

because?

Some facts of your own, please?

[Ms. Clio]

21. Your knowledge of history and human nature is a crock

Picture emerges of Falluja siege

"Humanitarian workers speak of US gunmen firing at ambulances and civilians."


But they are all lying, right?

Perhaps you need to remember Sand Creek and Wounded Knee.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3653223.stm

[0007]

26. How do you know?

[Zhade]

39. He doesn't. He just says he does.

Despite the evidence offered by others on this thread, reality escapes him.

[bobbyboucher]

27. Goddamn, you're a badly scratched record,

saying the same thing over and over. You've got it down to 33 words though, the needle must be wearing the scratch down so that it doesn't jump back as far, therefore sparing us much of the usual blather.

Thank goodness.

[Heyo]

33. Oh sorry....

Didn't mean to trouble you...

I take it all back.

:yourock:

Heyo

[Zhade]

36. You support an illegal invasion and occupation...

...and you think progressives will actually listen to your opinion or give it a shred of credibility?

You're free to think war crimes are fine and dandy, but we're likewise free to say (to quote someone you're rather fond of, apparently): "Who cares what you think?"

[Heyo]

47. Who is it that said that?

Also, you needn't believe or agree with me, I respect that. Variety is the spice of life, my friend.

:toast:

Heyo

[seventhson]

4. In the Jerusalem Press no less. WHEN is the US media going to tell us...

the Truth?

Not likely anytime soon.

The use of cluster bombs in the vicinity of civilians is itself abominable and revolting and worthy of war crimes.

Saddam is gobne. There ARE no WMD.

Why the fuck are we even still there?

Thanks for posting this Maddezmom!


:hi:

[DS1]

5. Could very well be a series of MK-19s from the AAVs

Fully automatic grenade launchers, which ranges just beyond 1000 yards, they could easily be confused with cluster bombs as bursts of grenades go off in a line.

[Tinoire]

9. Human Rights Watch. Cluster Bombs in Iraq & UK Observer/Guardian

Washington, D.C., April 1, 2003) - U.S. ground forces in Iraq are using cluster munitions with a very high failure rate, creating immediate and long-term dangers for civilians and friendly soldiers, Human Rights Watch reported today.

While use of the weapon has not yet been confirmed by official U.S. military sources, it is evident from television images and stories from reporters embedded with U.S. units that U.S. forces are using artillery projectiles and rockets containing large numbers of submunitions, or cluster munitions. When these submunitions fail to explode on impact as designed, they become hazardous explosive "duds"—functioning like volatile, indiscriminate antipersonnel landmines.

Two U.S. Marines were killed in separate incidents on March 27 and 28 after stepping on unexploded cluster munitions delivered by artillery in southern Iraq.

<snip>


Human Rights Watch has identified footage of the use of the Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) by artillery units of the 3rd Infantry Division. This is a system that currently uses only submunition payloads. The 1st Battalion of the 39th Field Artillery Regiment of the division deploys at least eighteen MLRS launch units.

The standard M26 warhead for the MLRS contains 644 M77 individual submunitions (also called dual-purpose grenades). According to a Department of Defense report submitted to the U.S. Congress in February 2000, these submunitions have a failure rate of 16 percent. Thus, the typical volley of twelve MLRS rockets would likely result in more than 1,200 dud submunitions scattered randomly in a 120,000 to 240,000 square meter impact area.

<snip>

It is not clear whether air-dropped cluster bombs have been used in the air campaign. Iraqi officials have repeatedly alleged use of cluster bombs by U.S. and U.K. aircraft, but these reports have not been confirmed. U.S. air forces used cluster bombs, notably the CBU-87 Combined Effects Munition, extensively in the first Gulf War in 1991, in Yugoslavia/Kosovo in 1999 and in Afghanistan in 2001 and 2002.

At least eighty U.S. casualties during the 1991 Gulf War were attributed to cluster munition duds. More than 4,000 civilians were killed or injured by cluster munition duds after the end of the war.


<snip>

http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/04/us040103.htm

=============

Revealed: the cluster bombs that litter Iraq

The shocking extent of unexploded cluster bombs dropped by American and British planes, which litter Iraq eight weeks after the conflict, is revealed in detail for the first time today.
The first map based on military intelligence to show the exact location of unexploded anti-personnel mines, cluster bombs and anti-tank mines, obtained by The Observer, shows the vast area of the country which is at danger from live munitions.

Experts in clearing conflict zones of unexploded bombs say that millions of Iraqi adults and children are at risk, along with humanitarian aid workers, United Nations personnel, civilian staff and military officials.

Its revelation raises fresh questions for Tony Blair and George Bush, who insisted that post-conflict Iraq would be a safer place than it was under Saddam Hussein.

It also reignites the controversy over the use of cluster bombs by the coalition forces. The map reveals that hundreds, or possibly thousands, of the bombs - which produce hundreds of 'bomblets' scattered out over a large area - failed to detonate.

<snip>

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12239,968181,00.html

[WVhill]

10. From the stories, we're honoring the ceasefire unless

we're being fired upon. What most seem to be missing is that many of the insurgents don't belong to an organization controlled by a chain of command. Some of them showed up apparently from Syria or Iran to help kill infidels. The radical Muslims have to stop the current process of establishing a government in Iraq because they don't have a seat at the table.

The so-called negotiations have no effect on the irregulars attacking us. As for the cluster bombs there's no way that those are being used. The fact a supposed spokesman claims such, destroys their credibility for the simple reason the use of cluster bombs would have produced many thousands of casualties. Possibly even tens of thousands of Iraqis would have been killed in the densely populated areas of Fallujah.

The Iraqi delegation in Jordan is trying to scam the world. And lest you think those casualties can all be attributed to us, think again. We're seeing disinformation.

[MetaTrope]

12. Since cluster bombs were used on Baghdad

why would the military refrain from their use on Fallujah?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-12-10-cluster-bomb-cover_x.htm

[WVhill]

13. Other than there use in the first Gulf War,

I haven't read anything that showed we used cluster bombs in Baghdad to topple Saddam's regime. Cluster bombs rip up a huge area. They work well against large masses of military vehicles and troops. In Baghdad we targeted specific buildings with missiles. That was widely reported in the news with photos. Remember the time we destroyed a restaurant and supposedly just missed Saddam? We didn't destroy the entire neighborhood to get the restaurant. That's not to say adjoining buildings weren't damaged.

Like I said earlier if we had used cluster bombs in Fallujah the number of casualties would have been enormous. There's no way the casualties would have been in the hundreds. It would have been a public relations nightmare. You're not going to conceal the killing or injuring of many thousands or tens of thousands. Bodies would have been coming out of there in tractor-trailers. You would have seen bodies stacked up like cordwood and the photos would have been on Al-Jazerra.

It's simple, We haven't seen massive causalities that cluster bombing would have caused. Therefore the delegation in Jordan is lying.

[Vladimir]

16. Depends what kind of cluster bomb

read through:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/cluster.htm

cluster bombs don't have to cause immediate high casualties, even in residential areas. Its the long term cleanup problem which is the most severe.

[MetaTrope]

20. Notation

"I haven't read anything that showed we used cluster bombs in Baghdad to topple Saddam's regime."

Then you didn't read the article I linked to? Here's the link again:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-12-10-cluster-bomb-cover_x.htm

There's even a Flash report if the words are too big to read:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/graphics/world/gcluster/flash.htm

[WVhill]

24. I did not read your link before I posted.

I have now. Since cluster bombs have a defect rate why would we fire them into areas we have to patrol to endanger ourselves later? The article did show how deadly they are. I still maintain that the casualties in Fallujah would be far higher than reported if cluster bombs had been dropped.

The other point is that with the exception of the so-called smart bombs, laser guided missile and inertial guided programmed missiles, artillery is more accurate than regular bombing. I can understand why they would use artillery and that type of munitions against military targets. The leftover unexploded bombets will continue to be a problem.

In Fallujah with a very small percentage of insurgents, it makes no sense to cluster bomb the city. If it wasn't for the politics of the situation, the marines would have already finished the operation.

[NickB79]

30. Very small percentage of insurgents

Which is why a Marine commander said "he believed his forces were vastly outnumbered and credited them with fighting "like lions" in confronting their attackers." Small number my ass.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x510272#510471

Since Fallujah has a population of 250,000-300,000, even if only 10% were "insurgents", that means 25,000-30,000 fighters! 5% is 12,000-15,000! Against what, 4000 Marines?

[Aidoneus]

28. "...we destroyed a restaurant and supposedly just missed Saddam..."

I remember the cover story for that massacre. It was absurd then and even moreso now. I can't believe you give the slightest credence to such cheap lies and a truckload more from the same source..

[Zhade]

40. Consider the post count, my friend...

NT!

[Zhade]

38. Or the U.S. media is lying.

Tell me, do you trust FOX News? CNN? ABC/CBS/ABC?

[WVhill]

44. I don't take any of the network news reports at face value.

Same with newspapers. Offhand I couldn't tell you which networks were on which channel except for CNN which is 22 in this area. Other than watching the local news at 11:00 each night, I don't watch any other news on a regular basis.

[Tinoire]

42. Read this and weep

RAF bomb count raises questions

Richard Norton-Taylor
Tuesday April 20, 2004
The Guardian

The total tonnage of ordnance dropped by British aircraft on Iraq far exceeded the amount dropped during the Kosovo war, in about half the time, figures released today show, raising questions about the conduct of the war.
The RAF dropped 914 bombs between March 20 and April 30 last year, they show.

The Ministry of Defence says that the older armaments used, including cluster bombs, added up to nearly 350 tonnes: more than the figure for the entire Kosovo war.

<snip>

Some estimates put the number of cluster weapons fired at Iraqi targets during the war as high as 13,000.

<snip>

The figures do not include more than 2,000 Israeli-made artillery cluster shells used around the southern city of Basra

<snip>

The US defence department has admitted using nearly 1,500 air-dropped cluster bombs during the war.

<snip>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1195695,00.html

Shock and Awe... Shake Rattle and Roll... Cluster bombs have a distinctive sound- the sound is no more easier to miss than the results.

Sorry for disillusioning you. You seem like a nice enough sort but what you are believing is simply propaganda. Here are some photos of Iraqi victims of cluster bombs

This is the most famous and actually one of the less graphic ones:

Look at the others and tell these kids the US is not dropping cluster bombs or that we're there to install a government and all that other crap: http://www.shianews.com/hi/middle_east/news_id/0000758.php

I'm just so proud to be an American these days. Not much to be proud of there is there? Especially not for God-fearing sorts who know we will have to answer for all of this in a later life.

[Tinoire]

15. How did you fit so much propaganda in such a small post?

Insurgents
uncontrolled raggedly insurgents not belonging to an "organization" with a "chain of command"
from Syria or Iran to help "kill" "infidels"
"radical" muslims"
stopping the process of "establishing a government"?

negotiations?
irregulars attacking "us"?
no way "we're" using cluster bombs? (because we have a chain-of-command right?)
claims
destroyed credibility
tring to scam the world

disinformation


Good God, how much propaganda can you fit into one post?

[bobbyboucher]

29. No doubt,

I could hear that on Faux News, verbatim.

[daleo]

17. Disinformation is in the eye of the beholder

Personally, I don't know which stories to trust. But I agree that negotiations that don't actually include the 'insurgents' (or resistance) are not very meaningful. It is certain that not all those casualties can be attributed to the U.S., but I am sure plenty can. In the wider sense, of who invaded whom, all of the casualties can be attributed to the U.S., except those that can be attributed to Great Britain.

[Ms. Clio]

22. Yes, we're seeing disinformation, all right

And we all know where it's coming from.

[Zhade]

34. And they're reporting it in the neocon-friendly Jerusalem Post, even.

It must be far worse than this article is saying, then.

[Junkdrawer]

48. Kick

:kick: