New posts

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Frank Underwood" data-source="post: 63902" data-attributes="member: 35">The Trump administration has a civilian casualties problem.Updated by <a href="https://www.vox.com/authors/alex-ward" target="_blank">Alex Ward</a>  May 26, 2017, 3:20pm EDTIt’s becoming clear that the Pentagon has a civilian casualties problem. Two recent events make that fairly evident, and it’s showing the problems the anti-ISIS coalition has to keep bystanders off the coroner’s table.In the midst of Trump’s ramped-up campaign to defeat ISIS, more and more civilians have died in Iraq and Syria. Despite the advanced military techniques of the US-led, anti-ISIS coalition, it still cannot stop killing non-combatants.Yesterday, the Department of Defense <a href="https://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/1194311/isis-planted-explosives-caused-civilian-deaths-in-mosul-strike/source/GovDelivery/" target="_blank">responded</a> to an incident that killed 105 civilians in Mosul, Iraq, back in March when a bomb was dropped on a building with two ISIS snipers — and over a hundred civilians.On Friday, Al Jazeera <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/05/strikes-kill-106-civilians-mayadeen-170526132541011.html" target="_blank">reports</a> that more than 106 civilians, including 42 children, died during two days of bombing in Al-Mayadeen, Syria, by the US-led anti-ISIS coalition. The planes fired strikes at buildings that housed families of ISIS fighters.In an interview, Maj. Adrian Rankine-Galloway, a Pentagon spokesperson, said the US is “still assessing the results of those strikes.” But while defense officials look into these events, there’s a larger lesson about what’s happening during the fight to defeat ISIS in Iraq and Syria.Basically, because the US chooses to fight ISIS primarily from the skies, it was inevitable that civilians would become collateral damage. America is good at dropping bombs exactly where it wants to, but it can’t control the explosion and those who might get hurt as the dust settles. The Pentagon knows this, of course, but it has historically done a very poor job policing itself and its allies to take all measures to minimize innocent deaths.The bombing campaign is a clear sign that ISIS members aren’t safe. But it’s also clear that civilians’ lives are imperiled, too.“I would bomb the shit out of them”During the presidential campaign, then-candidate Donald Trump sent a clear message to voters: He would “bomb the shit” out of ISIS.This seems to be one promise he’s lived up to. In the first four months of 2017, the US has dropped <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/05/23/us-led-coalition-increases-airstrikes-islamic-state/102063168/" target="_blank">14,192</a> rockets, bombs, and other munitions on ISIS. That’s a <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/05/23/us-led-coalition-increases-airstrikes-islamic-state/102063168/" target="_blank">50 percent</a> increase during the same period in 2016. It appears the “<a href="https://www.vox.com/2017/5/25/15632614/trump-military-generals-syria-yemen-afghanistan" target="_blank">total authorization</a>” Trump gave to his battlefield commanders has led to more weapons dropped to annihilate ISIS.The increased tempo has come with good and bad consequences. Positively, ISIS is <a href="http://www.dia.mil/News/Articles/Article-View/Article/1190994/dia-director-briefs-senate-armed-services-committee-on-worldwide-threats/" target="_blank">losing tons of territory</a>, including 60 percent less in Iraq and 45 percent less in Syria, according to the Defense Intelligence Agency. Negatively, civilians are now threatened with death at a higher rate because more bombs are dropping than before.According to <a href="https://airwars.org/" target="_blank">Airwars</a>, a watchdog group that monitors the anti-ISIS coalition’s operations, 3,681 civilians have died since the <a href="http://theglobalcoalition.org/en/home/" target="_blank">anti-ISIS coalition</a> was formed in September 2014.But what else was to be expected? The Obama administration decided to pursue an air campaign against ISIS because it didn’t want troops on the ground in the Middle East. After all, that’s what Obama campaigned against. Trump decided not only to follow the Obama administration’s approach — but also decided to accelerate it.So this is partly an issue of math: More bombs equals more enemy and civilian deaths. It’s the gruesome reality of war. But that doesn’t mean the Pentagon couldn’t do better to curb the fatalities.The Pentagon does a poor job minimizing casualties and defending itselfThere are multiple steps the military can take to lessen civilian casualties. Retired Gen. Norton Schwartz, a former chief of staff of the Air Force, told me in an interview that before strikes are ordered, someone is charged with ensuring no civilians are near — or in — the target. That also includes figuring out if civilians who are near the strike would be harmed, too.If that’s the case, something went wrong with a recent operation in Mosul. Per a coalition <a href="https://www.defense.gov/News/Article/Article/1194311/isis-planted-explosives-caused-civilian-deaths-in-mosul-strike/source/GovDelivery/" target="_blank">statement</a>, on March 17, it wanted to take out two ISIS snipers who were inside of a structure. It dropped a bomb that detonated on the top floor of the building. But ISIS had booby-trapped the building with other explosives that killed the ISIS snipers, the 101 civilians on the bottom floor, and four civilians near the structure. That statement said “[n]either Coalition nor Iraqi forces knew that civilians were sheltered within the structure.”Yes, the ISIS snipers died. But let’s evaluate. The targets were two snipers. They were in a structure. Coalition and Iraqi forces — working in tandem — had no idea civilians were in the structure. But even then, the commander decided to drop a bomb through the roof to take out the two targets.This seems to be a pattern. The strikes in <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/05/strikes-kill-106-civilians-mayadeen-170526132541011.html" target="_blank">Al-Mayadeen</a> yesterday and today provide a sad clue: Maybe the anti-ISIS coalition doesn’t care all that much about civilian casualties. In this case, the targets were two buildings, one of them a four-story block which housed families of ISIS fighters, <a href="https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/05/26/us-led-syria-air-strikes-against-isis-kill-more-than-100-including-children/22111209/" target="_blank">Reuters</a> reports.Anti-ISIS warplanes struck these buildings Thursday evening and then again after midnight, killing 106 civilians. And while they were ISIS family members, it’s still unsure whether they were actually fighting on behalf of the group. It’s more than possible that they were innocent, despite their dubious affiliations.So, we’re seeing two patterns. One, the anti-ISIS force, which the US leads, is racking up civilian casualties at an alarming pace. Second, the Pentagon’s own explanations bring up more questions than answers.As the fight continues, the hope is that the US finds ways to minimize the casualties. But seeing how things are going, it doesn’t look promising for the foreseeable future.Source:  <a href="https://www.vox.com/world/2017/5/26/15701262/trumps-civilian-mosul-iraq-syria-mayadin" target="_blank">https://www.vox.com/world/2017/5/26/15701262/trumps-civilian-mosul-iraq-syria-mayadin</a>The only campaign promises Trump kept were his most vile.  With the deaths of countless innocent civilians on his hands (which he promised would happen), he is now a terrorist himself.</blockquote>

Verification: Who played Sue Ellen in Dallas?