"Cluster bombs called 'war crime'"

(BUFDRVR) wrote:
This is about cluster bombs being
used indiscriminately and killing civilians.

If its about the indiscriminate use of CBUs,
no problem since neither the UK
nor the US employed *any* weapon indiscriminately.

If the issue is UXO from CBU employment, this
is another matter and one I
believe both the UK and US have done there best
to deal with. On averag there's
going to be an approximate 10% dud rate for
CBU submunitions (BLUs). In both
Afghanistan and Iraq, leaflets were dropped
warning people to stay away from
the unexploded BLUs. Because of the high illiteracy
rate in Afghanistan, the
leaflets were in picture form. Because of the
remote areas where CBUs were used
in Afghanistan, civilian contact with UXO is
minimal. Iraq is a different
story, however a successful one. Submunition
dispenser use was pretty heavy in
Iraq and included everything from air delivered
to Army ATACMS. Use was
confined, as much as operationally practicable,
to use away from major
population areas. With all the use of CBUs in
Iraq, and they are still a very
important weapon, the low civilian incident
rate (by comparison of quantity
dropped) speaks well for allied air and ground
forces.

Those accountable should be punished for their
actions.

Current CBUs meet all international requirements
for a legal weapon, thus no
punishment is warrented.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those
bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"
I'll agree with that. The problem is not the weapon, it's the enemy putting
his military assets in civilian areas to try and make them immune to attack.
Didn't work, though.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

Rats,

In response to your eloquent rebuttal.

" Umm, what the **** are you going on about? "

It was you who stated the following "Sure, let's put them all on trial.
Let's also include the US President
responsible for dropping the atomic bombs, the US President responsible for
carpet bombing, napalm and agent orange in Vietnam. US hypocrisy never
ceases to amaze me."

Your statement makes it seem like you think that the use of the atomic bombs
by the US should be considered war crimes. As such, my original question is
valid. Do you think that the greater loss of life on both sides, that would
have
resulted from a direct invasion of Japan would have a been a better
alternative?

I eagerly await your reply.

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 14:59:49 GMT, "cypher745"
wrote:

Rats,

In response to your eloquent rebuttal.

" Umm, what the **** are you going on about? "

It was you who stated the following "Sure, let's put them all on trial.
Let's also include the US President
responsible for dropping the atomic bombs, the US President responsible for
carpet bombing, napalm and agent orange in Vietnam. US hypocrisy never
ceases to amaze me."

Where did the US "carpet bomb" in Vietnam? Tactical strikes in the
South were always FAC control. Tactical targets in the North were
strictly briefed. Did you ever read about the controversy regarding
bombing of dikes? Notice that POW camps in the center of Hanoi weren't
hit? I can give you a statement from a POW who was moved to a cell
with a window looking out on the Hanoi power plant. Wasn't hit.

More "carpet bombing" damage occurred in the North from falling AAA
shrapnel and missile debris than errant bombs.

What's wrong with napalm? Consider this, you're sitting in your living
room and I drop a mk-82 500 pound GP bomb in your front yard, fifteen
feet outside your front door. Your house is destroyed and you are
dead. Now, if it were a BLU-1B napalm can, you would hear a loud
swoosh, the bright flames would probably sear the house wall, and you
would get up from your easy chair and evacuate out the other end of
the house. Napalm any worse than a bomb? Emotionalism, that's all.

Agent Orange? You ever use weed killer in your back yard? I've seen
guys bathe in it. Emotionalism, that's all.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

"cypher745" wrote in message
m...
Your statement makes it seem like you think that the use of the atomic
bombs
by the US should be considered war crimes. As such, my original question
is
valid. Do you think that the greater loss of life on both sides, that
would
have
resulted from a direct invasion of Japan would have a been a better
alternative?

I eagerly await your reply.

How many soldiers did you kill with the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima
and Nagasaki? I also notice that you have conveniently left the part out
about carpet bombing, napalm and agent orange in Vietnam.

Yes, the use of nuclear weapons is a war crime.

On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 23:05:58 +1300, "Rats" wrote:

"cypher745" wrote in message
om...
Rats, may ask if you think that the greater loss of life that would have
resulted from a direct invasion of Japan would have a been a better
alternative?

Umm, what the **** are you going on about? This is about cluster bombs being
used indiscriminately and killing civilians.

Err. you're the one who changed the subject from cluster bombs to the
bombings in WWII, specifically carpet bombing and the nuclear bombing
neither of which had cluster bombs included.
So getting ****y because someone else challenges you on it is more
than a little immature.

"Peter Kemp" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 25 Jan 2004 23:05:58 +1300, "Rats" wrote:

"cypher745" wrote in message
om...
Rats, may ask if you think that the greater loss of life that would
have
resulted from a direct invasion of Japan would have a been a better
alternative?

Umm, what the **** are you going on about? This is about cluster bombs
being
used indiscriminately and killing civilians.

Err. you're the one who changed the subject from cluster bombs to the
bombings in WWII, specifically carpet bombing and the nuclear bombing
neither of which had cluster bombs included.
So getting ****y because someone else challenges you on it is more
than a little immature.

While war itself may very well be a crime whether political, economic or
other, Rats loses sight of the big picture. Bombs are merely tools, no more
no less. Use of a Mk81 at 250 pounds or a T12 at 42,000 pounds, CBUs,
incendiaries, yes even nuclear are just means to accomplish the mission.
Dead is dead. Condemn warfare, not the methods.

Peter, he deserves to be called on his inconsistencies.

Now if we could change this to a subject such as what parameters should you
use to deliver one or more of these bombs from a military aircraft instead
of wallowing in general warfare subjects (for which forums already exist) we
would separate the wheat (of which there has been damn little lately) from
the chaff. Some (I won't say contributors) in this forum seem inordinately
fond of submarines, tanks, NASA and politics. If we stuck to military
aviation we'd be the better for it plus I would not have to maintain a
'Block Sender' list which Rats is assuredly on.

Don't even get me started on Tarver and the fish he hauls in using civilian
bait of little quality.

Regards,

Tex Houston

Rats wrote in message
...


Umm, what the **** are you going on about? This is about cluster bombs
being
used indiscriminately and killing civilians. Those accountable should
be
punished for their actions. The original poster said that Saddam and
co
should be sued as well. To this I agreed and also added the US
presidents
he'd conveniently left out.


Who said anything about indiscriminate use of cluster bombs? You
liberals think the only bombing ever done is either carpet bombing or
randomly dropped.

--

Scott
--------
The French, God bless them, are finally joining the war against Islamic
extremism. Their targets, which will now confront the full force of
l'état, are schoolgirls who wear Muslim head scarves in French public
schools.
Wall Street Journal

Liberals and loony leftists have never heard of LGBs, JDAM or JSOW. To them,
one civilian killed by a off-target bomb is equal to Auschwitz. They also
overlook the actions of the enemy that put legitimate military targets such
as tanks, APCs, SAM and artillery batteries, radars, C3 vehicles, etc. in
civilian neighborhoods. The onus for the civilian casualties that result
from attacks is not on the attacker, it's the defender's fault for putting
said civilians at risk.
And if CBUs are available and the type of target calls for them, I would
use them. Period. War is not a game, and there are no referees.
And there's no Marquis of Quesenbery rules of war. Fair fights mean I bring
my people home alive, and screw the enemy.








"tscottme" wrote:

Rats wrote in message
...


Umm, what the **** are you going on about?
This is about cluster bombs
being
used indiscriminately and killing civilians.
Those accountable should
be
punished for their actions. The original poster
said that Saddam and
co
should be sued as well. To this I agreed and
also added the US
presidents
he'd conveniently left out.


Who said anything about indiscriminate use of
cluster bombs? You
liberals think the only bombing ever done is
either carpet bombing or
randomly dropped.

--

Scott
--------
The French, God bless them, are finally joining
the war against Islamic
extremism. Their targets, which will now confront
the full force of
l'état, are schoolgirls who wear Muslim head
scarves in French public
schools.
Wall Street Journal




Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

"Mike Yared" wrote in
:

[snip]

Why did the lawyers not sue Saddam Hussein first? Or the late Soviet
leaders for the the Soviet Union's 1956 Invasion of Hungary? the 1968
Invasion of Czechoslovakia; and the 1979 invasion of Afghanistan? Will
the late Yuri Andropov and Leonid Brezhnev be labeled as war criminals
in historical terms?

Because they ( the lawyers ) are looney leftists.
A cluster bomb is no more illegal than a rifle bullet.
The use to which these instruments are put might constitute
a crime under certain conditions however.

IBM

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source

ubject: "Cluster bombs called 'war crime'"
From: IBM
Date: 1/24/04 11:25 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: Xns947AEE42DF19Bibmsvpalorg

Why did the lawyers not sue Saddam Hussein first? Or the late Soviet
leaders for the the Soviet Union's 1956 Invasion of Hungary? the 1968
Invasion of Czechoslovakia; and the 1979 invasion of Afghanistan? Will
the late Yuri Andropov and Leonid Brezhnev be labeled as war criminals
in historical terms?

Because they ( the lawyers ) are looney leftists.
A cluster bomb is no more illegal than a rifle bullet.
The use to which these instruments are put might constitute
a crime under certain conditions however.

IBM


Lawyers as a voting block are 95% conservative.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer