Antiseptic,

My silly little scenario is just an example of how things often play out.

You say >>” or do they sometimes choose to "carry the fight to the enemy"? When they choose to do that, do they stop the planned assault if civilians are known to be present?”

Yes they do, regularly. This idea that Coalition forces are regularly in a position where their own troops are in no danger from incoming fire and know for absolute sure that there are civilians present and still go ahead and kill them is just not right. It just doesn’t happen that way.

Your total lack of understanding of military operations is showing. Full blown offensive actions in Afghanistan are highly limited due to insufficient troop strengths.

Patrolling can and often is an offensive action, particularly in this type of assymetric warfare. Patrolling is an attempt to dominate the terrain and force the enemy to fight or flee. Furthermore you misunderstand the role of infantry in this type of warfare.

The first job of the infantry is to find and fix the enemy, and then destroy them yourself or, more usually, with indirect fire support like artillery and airpower. Another of the roles is to hold ground and deny an area to the enemy. Britain’s platoon house strategy in Helmland is an example of this type of role. This is also offensive in a sense, although you do cede the initiative to the enemy.

But in any case it takes little imagination to adjust my scenario to full blown offensive operations. Platoon commander is still looking to kill the enemy. He’s still being engaged by the enemy and cannot know for absolute sure whether there are unseen civilians about.

There have been a few assaults like you suggest, Fallujah being the most famous. There, millions of leaflets warning civilians that US forces were coming to clear the city were airdropped weeks in advance, even though this allowed insurgents notice to prepare their defences thoroughly.

This isn’t difficult for me, I understand what I’m talking about. As for you …

Antiseptic "Paul L., your silly little scenario is a purely defensive one in which the protagonist is none the less able to see there are no civilians present and any civilian casualties are purely an "Act of God".

Fact.

"Do you claim that the US and Israeli forces are only ever engaged in defensive actions, or do they sometimes choose to "carry the fight to the enemy"?

Of course.

"When they choose to do that, do they stop the planned assault if civilians are known to be present?

See Paul L senario.

"do US and Israeli forces use cluster munitions and anti-personnel mines, when it is clear that the weapons kill and maim many thousands of civilians?

Thousands of civilians? The bomblets are bright yellow with stainless multifins. The people in these areas know what they are, yet they choose to go & pick them up. They pick them up to recover the explosives in them. Some go off some don't. They get paid for them.

"The U.S. military is increasingly relying on deadly air strikes in Iraq and Afghanistan as the ground occupations fall apart, killing untold numbers of civilians."

Presision strikes, very accurate. They are after someone specific & their followers who always claim to be civilians. Unfortunately they always keep their wivews & children close to them as protection.

According to the residents of Datta Khel, a town in Pakistan's North Waziristan, three missiles streaked out of Afghanistan's Pakitka Province and slammed into a Madrassa, or Islamic school, this past June. When the smoke cleared, the Asia Times reported, 30 people were dead."

Yep. Terrorist school & teaching kids how to be terrorists. They do that. See the Micky Mouse video, etc.

British troops ‘tortured and killed Iraqi civilians seized after battle’

Yep. Got them & they are in jail.

cont>

<cont

The good thing about not having a uniform is you can hide your weapon & claim to be a civilian if you lose the fight.

"If you are listening to the official bull!@#$ Jayb then you are an idiot. The military CENSORS all of this as much as possible. And they are proud of it."

What given out to the papers is C & D Classifaction. I have an F clearance. But, then again so has anyone who has seen active service.

I get personel emails from troops in the field so I am kept aware of what's going on at a personel level, much more than is allowed in the paper & I know what the paper doesn't report about the very deliberate attrocities committed by the insergents, Teliban & Al Queada. You have never mentioned the good that is being done, like schools, hospitals orphanages Health & Hygene, trade schools & bridge building, etc. Do you have any praise for these projects?

What do these terrorists want for their people? Slavery, ignorance, 10th century way of life, no medical help for women, living in dirt, no womens rights, etc. Shall I go on. Disgusting in the 21st century.

Paul L and Jayb, I spent 6 years in the army, I do know the role of the infantry.

What you 2 seem incapable of understanding is that you cannot excuse bad behaviour from "our side" simply by saying their side behaves badly. We all know "their side" behaves in a particular way; in fact, that behaviour is one of the reasons for invading.

In addition to overwhelming force and almost infinite capacity for intelligence gathering, our side has a long and proud tradition of fighting with honour. One of the main precepts of that tradition is that we take all necessary steps to ensure the safety of civilans. The US/NATO forces in Afghanistan are shirking their responsibility in that regard, which is why there are massive civilian casualties.

The Afghan war is a POLICE ACTION, which means it is specifically for the purpose of ensuring the civilian population of Afghanistan is protected from the authoritarian and brutal Taliban, just as the Iraq war is justified as being for the protection of the civilian populace from the Saddam regime. If we are careless of the lives of the civilians we are meant to be protecting, we have failed. To date, the evidence is that civilian deaths are enormous in both conflicts, yet you two see that as acceptable and make every effort to put forward spurious justifications, even trying to blame the dead for cluster bomb and mine deaths, while never making any effort at all to say "this is unacceptable for the army of a civilised nation". The terrorists have won, you must be proud.

Antiseptic,

What part of the army, exactly?

You don’t seem to understand that even with our debatably “almost infinite capacity for intelligence” we cannot eliminate civilian deaths entirely. We can’t even limit blue on blue incidents. The first day of Operation Anaconda we lost something like two dozen casualties to “friendly fire”. You think it’s because we don’t care?

Secondly, Jayb is absolutely correct when he suggests that Taliban/AlQaeda wounded and dead are regularly presented as civilians. Furthermore, victims of the Taliban/AlQaeda are also attributed to the Coalition.

You say >> “One of the main precepts of that tradition is that we take all necessary steps to ensure the safety of civilans”

NO!. Our policy is to do everything within our power to avoid civilian casualties. Given that policy, you should note well that our soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq are as honourable, if not more so, than their counterparts in WW1 and WW2. Casualties among civilians in those wars far exceeded military deaths. This is not the case in Afghanistan.

Antiseptic says >> “the evidence is that civilian deaths are enormous in both conflicts”

What are you on? Iraqi civilian casualties dwarf those in Afghanistan, because they had a civil war in Iraq. Insurgents from both sides specifically targeted civilians there.

So here are some figures for Afghanistan

“4,400 Afghans killed in 2006, 1,000 of them civilians.”

“7,580 people killed in 2007, including: 926 Afghan policemen; 4,478 militants; 1,980 civilians and 232 foreign soldiers”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_of_the_U.S._invasion_of_Afghanistan

Read carefully because here is the important part

“The UN said in June, 2008 that nearly 700 Afghan civilians had been killed during the year, about two-thirds in attacks by militants”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_of_the_U.S._invasion_of_Afghanistan

That’s right; nearly 2/3rds of civilian casualties are being inflicted by INSURGENTS. This is instructive because the Coalition aren’t using the civilian populace to hide behind.

Suggesting that the terrorists have won because civilians have become casualties is inane and just plain stupid. There is no such thing as a casualty free war. We have the right policies in place and 99% of the time we are doing the right thing.

Antiseptic. "even trying to blame the dead for cluster bomb and mine deaths, while never making any effort at all to say "this is unacceptable for the army of a civilised nation".

Cluster bombs were used in the invasion of Iraq but I doubt weather they have been used since. CBU are used on large numbers of Attacking or Defending troops in the OPEN. They are useless against troops well dug in, so is Napalm.

I have been in close contact (75m) from a CBU & Napalm run. Nine VC climbed out of a shallow pit covered only with Palm leaves. None were hurt. The run was directly over them. Thats 4 Napalm canisters + 4 canisters x 500 bomblets of CBUs (1600000 pieces of shrapnel). We only found 2 unexploded & we destroyed them before we left the area. (Plain of Reeds, SVN, 5th Jan 66)

CBUs are not the type of Ordanance that you drop into a villiage for a surgical strike. Bombs like GBUs & LGBs have a 30 degree window they have to fly down, from release. If they move outside that angle they become unguided. Most GBUs & LGBs are auto release & the pilot is flown onto the target by satellite nowadays. But, you should know that, you claim to have been in the Army. In 6 years didn't you learn anything.

Your dislike of Yanks shows by your Avator, (Antiseptic) so anything we say here is wasted on you. Your support of Insurgents, the Teliban & Al Queada is noted. Your support for their deliberate killing of innocent civilians in their cause is also noted. Have you ever thought of joining them over there? You should. It maybe the wake up call you need. Good luck ;-)