"My view and the view of the British chain of command is that the Americans' use of violence is not proportionate and is over-responsive to the threat they are facing," or why you shouldn't trust those stupid Brits who need to shut the fuck up
The "fog of war" of course makes it hard to tell what is going on exactly, but what the U.S. has done over the last few days in Iraq doesn't look good.
From the moving but anecdotal file, there is this compilation of photos put together by Axis of Logic. Tragic, for sure, but the degree to which this damage is widespread is not discernable.
It would be quite widespread if the allegation made in this April 11 AP piece is correct:
More than 600 Iraqis have been killed in Fallujah since Marines began a siege against Sunni insurgents in the city a week ago, most of them women, children and the elderly, the head of the city's hospital said Sunday.
Statistics and names of the dead were gathered from four main clinics around the city and from Fallujah General Hospital, said hospital's director Rafie al-Issawi.
Bodies were being buried in two soccer fields, one of which was visited by an Associated Press reporter. It was filled with row after row of graves.
The death toll from the siege, which started early last Monday, may be even higher than the hospital's tally[.]
"We have reports of an unknown number of dead being buried in people's homes without coming to the clinics," al-Issawi said.
Not content to say the new mass graves are better than the old ones, the U.S. military is now criticizing reporters for saying unflattering things about U.S. troops
Charges presented in an article published today by Sean Rayment of The Telegraph don't exactly back up Uncle Sam's story:
Senior British commanders have condemned American military tactics in Iraq as heavy-handed and disproportionate.
One senior Army officer told The Telegraph that America's aggressive methods were causing friction among allied commanders and that there was a growing sense of "unease and frustration" among the British high command.
The officer, who agreed to the interview on the condition of anonymity, said that part of the problem was that American troops viewed Iraqis as untermenschen - the Nazi expression for "sub-humans".
Speaking from his base in southern Iraq, the officer said: "My view and the view of the British chain of command is that the Americans' use of violence is not proportionate and is over-responsive to the threat they are facing. They don't see the Iraqi people the way we see them. They view them as untermenschen. They are not concerned about the Iraqi loss of life in the way the British are. Their attitude towards the Iraqis is tragic, it's awful.
"The US troops view things in very simplistic terms. It seems hard for them to reconcile subtleties between who supports what and who doesn't in Iraq. It's easier for their soldiers to group all Iraqis as the bad guys. As far as they are concerned Iraq is bandit country and everybody is out to kill them."...
Although no formal complaints have as yet been made to their American counterparts, the officer said the British Government was aware of its commanders' "concerns and fears".
The officer explained that, under British military rules of war, British troops would never be given clearance to carry out attacks similar to those being conducted by the US military, in which helicopter gunships have been used to fire on targets in urban areas.
British rules of engagement only allow troops to open fire when attacked, using the minimum force necessary and only at identified targets. [Well those aren't always followed.]
The American approach was markedly different: "When US troops are attacked with mortars in Baghdad, they use mortar-locating radar to find the firing point and then attack the general area with artillery, even though the area they are attacking may be in the middle of a densely populated residential area.
"They may well kill the terrorists in the barrage but they will also kill and maim innocent civilians. That has been their response on a number of occasions. It is trite, but American troops do shoot first and ask questions later. They are very concerned about taking casualties and have even trained their guns on British troops, which has led to some confrontations between soldiers..."
Personally I think you have to believe America, a country that would never help cause harm to civilians
, be in a situation where "Six soldiers who have fallen ill since their return from Iraq said Friday that the Army ignored their complaints about uranium poisoning from U.S. weapons fired during combat,"
or tolerate a situation where "soldiers accused of rape and other sex crimes while serving in Iraq routinely dodged prosecution during the last year with the help of commanders who gave them light punishments such as reprimands and pay cuts."
But if America did, as Freud might have said, it was because Saddam was evil!