New York Times:
The American-led military coalition in Iraq said Saturday that an initial review of recent airstrikes in Mosul, the Islamic State’s last stronghold in Iraq, had confirmed that the strikes hit a site where scores of civilians were killed.Because bombs dropped from military aircraft cannot possibly bring down buildings?
The inquiry, military officials said, found that a building had collapsed a few days after strikes by American forces. United States officials are seeking to determine whether the airstrikes brought down the building, leaving many Iraqis dead, or the Islamic State used the strikes as an opportunity to detonate an explosive in the building.
The March 17 airstrikes — which Iraqis said had led to the deaths of possibly 200 people — could have produced among the highest civilian death tolls in an American air mission since the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.With as many as 200 people dead, most or all civilians, we need to stop and ask how many civilian casualties are too many? If there is no number, then why don't we just launch the nukes and turn the Middle East into a parking lot?
The reports of heavy civilian casualties have come at a critical point in the military campaign to defeat the Islamic State. Iraqi officials said that the Trump administration had appeared to loosen restrictions on the rules of engagement, making it easier for the Iraqis to call in airstrikes. The Iraqis had been frustrated by the Obama administration’s deliberate approach.
At what point is saying "sorry" not enough?
Clearly, the Trump administration hasn't reached it yet:
Orlando Sentinel:
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has asked the White House to lift Obama-era restrictions on U.S. military support for Persian Gulf states engaged in a protracted civil war against Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, according to senior Trump administration officials.This means the U.S. is basically involved as a proxy in an internal Islamic religious war. Maybe this is why it is ok to kill "some" Muslim civilians?
In a memo this month to national security adviser H.R. McMaster, Mattis said that "limited support" for Yemen operations being conducted by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates - including a planned Emirati offensive to retake a key Red Sea port - would help combat a "common threat."
Approval of the request would mark a significant policy shift. U.S. military activity in Yemen until now has been confined mainly to counterterrorism operations against al-Qaida's affiliate there, with limited indirect backing for Gulf state efforts in a two-year-old war that has yielded significant civilian casualties.
It would also be a clear signal of the administration's intention to move more aggressively against Iran. The Trump White House, in far stronger terms than its predecessor, has echoed Saudi and Emirati charges that Iran is training, arming and directing the Shiite Houthis in a proxy war to increase its regional clout against the Gulf's Sunni monarchies.
In other news...
The Japan Times:
The Science Council of Japan has officially adopted a policy against conducting research for military purposes.It must be nice to never have to worry about paying for your own defense.
A statement adopted by the council’s executive board on Friday said there are many problems with a Defense Ministry program that funds research into defense equipment and pointed to significant intervention by the government.
The statement, adopted after nearly a year of discussion by a 15-member committee set up by the council, upholds two statements adopted in 1950 and 1967 that state the group will “never engage in military research.”
No comments:
Post a Comment