Quote:
|
Originally Posted by martinguerre
Anyhow. In chosing to engage an enemy, you take responsbility for what happens. Yeah, it sucks when they hide among civilians. But you did know that was going to happen. Yeah, it sucks when they shelter in shrines, or don't wear regular uniforms. But you knew they were going to. i'm not so impressed by the arguements that blame US inflicted casualties on to the militants. yeah, they're stupid to fight US forces. but we'd be smoking crack to think they wouldn't. it's called nationalism...
|
Engaging an enemy is a horrible reality. Our soldiers had no say in us going to war. They don't deserve to die just as much as the Iraqi nationalists don't deserve to die. Our soldiers are not responsable for what happens with the militant Iraqi soldiers/civilians that choose to use illegal (whether fair or not) methods to try and kill them. The responsibility of the soldiers is simply to follow all legal orders. Yes, these terrible acts were considered a likelyhood from the get-go. That does not mean we are responsable for their actions. We are responsible for our actions, and they are responsible for theirs. If Iraq had signed any rules of engagement or rules of war treaties before this all began, any of these militant forces or people who break those treaties will be guilty of war crimes. It is irrelevant whether it was a last resort or not.
Nationalism is not a get out of jail free card. It is just a reason.
Who do you think is the most responsible for the civilan deaths?