WingColors

Puts things into perspective doesn't it? It's definitely time for a change.

Where is Iron Man when we need him?

lol, that Doctor sounds like a totally reasonable guy, doesn't sound biased or sympathetic to the insurgents at all.

Yup, we continue to inflict death and destruction on the population of the nation of Iraq — a population which, when we began this preemptive war, was %50 children under the age of 15, god knows what happened to them or where they are now.

We use equipment for these missions which is so large it can't discern a small target - that is unconscionable when children and a hospital is involved.

Not to mention our soldiers, many on extended tours are continuing to get hurt and they come back here to be treated like crap.

This is one item in a huge list of things that if other nations did we'd be outraged. It's hypocracy on a massive scale that we talk of delivering democracy to Iraq and look down on their in theory barbaric ways when we (allies) are doing so much wrong. Turning "Prisoners of War" in to "Detainees" and having them in a a part of the world where you can get around laws and treaties is a disgusting violation that the entire world can see for what it is. On top of that, redefining the definition of torture so that that is also possible. Waterboarding is torture no matter how you define it.

It's just so wrong that we're doing a lot of the things that we look down on other nations for doing. We should be leading by example and doing things by the book, properly. It's harder to do things properly, but if the world sees you doing things fairly for good reasons, that is different from just making the reputation of our countries get worse and worse and more hated as time goes by.

On top of all that, after recking Iraq, it turned in to a sales bonanza for western companies.

All of these things have been said before and will continue to be said. There's been no real sign of improvement for years. Maybe a change at the top in the US will change things - I certainly hope so. Being the leader of the most powerful nation on Earth is a huge responsibility and should be a position that people look up to, not an opportunity to bully people.

If all of this wasn't sad enough, the history of western interference in that region goes back to before World War 1 and some of the attrocities committed by us then were just as bad. (Winston Churchill ordering poisen gas attacks for example - chemical weapons weren't frowned upon back then - especially when we were the ones using them). So the US isn't alone in thinking you have a great leader who's done some unsavory things (understatement!).

Geeez, whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty. You get a mass media report of a Hospital being DAMAGED in a bombing and suddenly WE are the bad guys. Holy crap people.

Look, I would love it if we had a way to zap the bad guys and ONLY the bad guys but when they're not clearly identifiable as the enemies and they make a concerted effort to hide in public locales, churches and schools, innocent people will be injured or worse. Innocent people will ALWAYS be a casualty of war and to think otherwise is simply foolish.

Now I'm not saying that we shouldn't do our best effort to minimize them and we ARE... but to think we could make that somehow NIL is just ridiculous.

Turning "Prisoners of War" in to "Detainees" and having them in a a part of the world where you can get around laws and treaties is a disgusting violation that the entire world can see for what it is.

Since we've already brought up the Geneva Conventions, Prisoners of War are defined as armed militia or armed forces who pledge allegiance to a government not recognized by the detaining force. That would be a member of an army under the flag of a specific country.

Last time I checked, Al Queda and the insurgent forces in Iraq were not firing on the US armed forces under pledge allegiance to any specific government, therefore are not deemed Prisoners of War by the geneva conventions... and the aforementioned scenario has been upheld in the courts (not that it matters much to most outside the US as we're ALL corrupt and evil).

Not to mention our soldiers, many on extended tours are continuing to get hurt and they come back here to be treated like crap.

I won't deny they're being handled incorrectly upon their return but the statistics show that a HUGE portion of our officers are volunteering for return tours in Iraq over being forced back to duty. The ones that make noise about going back, are the ones who make your nightly news not the ones honorably serving their country and commander-in-chief.

"Geeez, whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty."

The people in Guantanamo who've been there for years are probably wondering that.

Prisoners are people who are held against their will - they haven't been charged with anything and are locked away in a place off-shore to enable rule bending and law avoidance. However you define it, they're people who havenen't been proved guilty who have been locked up for years.

If this hospital was an isolated event it'd be bad enough, but the current civilian death toll in Iraq since 2003 is around 80,000 (not all people caught up in bombs aimed at military targets obviously).

As Mike said at the top, the world was sympathetic after 9/11, but that sympathy has gone due to the conduct of the country since. If this was was handled honourably and played straight by the rules, people would be more sympathetic. As it is, most people I know are disgusted by it.

Since we've already brought up the Geneva Conventions, Prisoners of War are defined as armed militia or armed forces who pledge allegiance to a government not recognized by the detaining force. That would be a member of an army under the flag of a specific country.

Last time I checked, Al Queda and the insurgent forces in Iraq were not firing on the US armed forces under pledge allegiance to any specific government

Emphasis mine. Under that wording, you could certainly argue that they're governed by Al Queda.

And even skating around the direct wording doesn't make it any less against the spirit of the agreement.

The argument saying this is just collateral damage, which I'll agree is expected in conflict, doesn't carry as much merit when the whole war is illegal, massively disproportionate and thoroughly unnecessary in the first place.

Right after 9/11 the world was with us and felt our pain. That's all gone now and I don't know if it will ever come back.

I don't think any amount of pulling out could repair the damage that has already been done.

I think you either have to stay there until you've killed/bagged everybody that opposes your presence and fix their infrastructure, economy and general quality of life; or you pull out and let chaos reign.

The first costs more than any of us can afford. The second is wildly dangerous and would probably result in a NY/Madrid/London mach II.

There's certainly no clear or clean solution.