When terrorists attack from among civilians and US troops respond, whose fault is it when civilians die?

The American military said on Friday that it was vigorously investigating a Thursday evening airstrike on a stronghold of insurgent leaders northwest of Baghdad that also killed nine children and six women. The civilian toll is one of the highest to result from a single American military action since the beginning of the Iraq war.

Rear Adm. Greg Smith, an American military spokesman here, said the killings were “absolutely regrettable,” but blamed the enemy fighters for engaging American forces while using civilians as a shield.

“We do not target civilians,” the admiral said in an interview on Friday. “But when our forces are fired upon, as they are routinely, then they have no option but to return fire.”

By any definition, the US policy is absolutely correct. To argue otherwise is to legitimize hostage-taking and the use of human shields.

The terrorists could end most civilian casualties in Iraq by not using human shields and not targeting civilians with bombs. They choose not to do so because it would result in their military defeat -- and would deny their supporter in America fodder for false claims of war crimes with which to fight the propaganda war.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Blue Star Chronicles, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, and Wolf Pangloss, Stop the ACLU, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, The Virtuous Republic, The Random Yak, AZAMATTEROFACT, 123beta, Nanotechnology Today, Stix Blog, Right Truth, The Populist, Phastidio.net, Adeline and Hazel, Nuke's, Faultline USA, The World According to Carl, The Pink Flamingo, and Dumb Ox Daily News, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 04:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 284 words, total size 4 kb.