[RightOnline]

"General Freakly said that in an attack like the one on the helicopters, ``you have 10 guys lying on top of a building firing R.P.G.'s and small arms. You can go in and bomb that building and reduce it to rubble,'' but at the potential cost of many civilian lives."

If the other side doesn't give a s**t, then why should we? I'm being perfectly serious. I'm not willing to see any more of our boys sacrificed in exchange for supposedly fewer "civilian casualties". Frankly, any civilians hanging around are just stupid. You shoot, you die........and if that means taking out a building, c'est la guerre.

[over3Owithabrain]

I'm getting sick of hearing that pansy crap from our leaders. It's killing our men in uniform. It's bad enough that is our strategy, but to brag about it worldwide every day just makes it worse, since it telegraphs to the enemy what to do to fight us.
Yeah, let's not use our most proficient weapons of war, le's get oor guys shot up to appease world opinion who will hate what we're doing there no matter what.
If this is going to be our MO, I would have preffered giving in diplomatically rather than militarily.
Dow is down over 300 now that they see we aren't going to end this soon.

[TheLurkerX]

Exactly. Who gives a flying crap about "civilians" who are by the very nature of being there helping the enemy by providing "don't shoot the innocent" cover.

[FreedomPoster]

Bingo - bump for all of that.

Arclight'em.

[HiTech RedNeck]

I think we are going to have to escalate the force. Bush warned Iraq about human shields. Now it's time to assume they understand that warning (as if they care, which they don't, but at least we lived up to our side of our promise not to deliberately target civilians). But why would a bomb be needed for shooters on top of a building? Why wouldn't grenades suffice?

[biblewonk]

If the other side doesn't give a s**t, then why should we? I'm being perfectly serious. I'm not willing to see any more of our boys sacrificed in exchange for supposedly fewer "civilian casualties". Frankly, any civilians hanging around are just stupid. You shoot, you die........and if that means taking out a building, c'est la guerre.

Our losses will be higher because we are being careful to keep their losses to a minimum.

[HardStarboard]

>>> You can go in and bomb that building and reduce it to rubble,'' but at the potential cost of many civilian lives."<<<

Gen. Franks, will all due respect Sir; if such a structure and its occupants are holding up the coalition advance, and if it is causing, or has the potential to cause, coalition casualities, then your job, Sir, is to make it cease to exist!