You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Iraq
Catastrophe Averted, 5000 lb. Truck Bomb Uncovered
2008-02-23
MOSUL, Iraq – Coalition forces discovered a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device disguised as a Red Crescent food relief truck in southeastern Mosul Feb. 15.
Isn't using relief trucks as weapons some kind of war crime?
The truck was labeled with hospital markings but contained eight 55-gallon drums with more than 5,000 pounds of unknown bulk explosives.

The discovery was made during a route clearance operation as part of Operation Phantom Phoenix. Because of the proximity of the VBIED to civilian population, an explosive ordnance disposal team determined the truck would need to be removed from the neighborhood before its destruction.

“A VBIED detonation of this size would kill or injure many innocent civilians. This just shows how ruthless al Qaeda is and their lack of concern for the effect of their operations on the Iraqi people,“ said Lt. Col. Christopher Johnson, commander of 1st Battalion, 8th Infantry Regiment.
Posted by:Glenmore

#10  Isn't using relief trucks as weapons some kind of war crime?

Turd Worlders aren't required to follow the laws of war.
Posted by: Rob Crawford   2008-02-23 19:08  

#9  The 'Rules of War' were a creation of the late 19th Century finding a home in the Hague and Geneva Conventions more than over a 100 years after our experience in the War of Independence where the British thought nothing of letting the natives loose to butcher along the frontier. Just like AQ in Iraq, that disregard of and targeting of civilians drove fence sitters and even those who were up to that time Crown loyalist Tories to throw in with the Continental Congress.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2008-02-23 18:54  

#8  I guess I'm a brutal fascist then because this sort of attack is aimed primarily at civilians and that is a war crime. It was when Timothy McVeigh did it in OKC and it would have been here as well.

Terrorists are war criminals. They deserve the penalty for non-uniformed combatants spelled out by the Geneva Convention, to be shot out of hand on the battlefield.

PS. Don't try to tell me that Dresden, Tokyo, and the Hiroshima/Nagasaki attacks were war crimes as well - those were legitimate economic targets, if nothing else, during a long, brutal war and without those attacks thousands, possibly millions more would have died and the war would have gone on for perhaps a decade more.

Posted by: FOTSGreg   2008-02-23 18:47  

#7  Isn't using relief trucks as weapons some kind of war crime?

The Red Crescent is the internationally recognized symbol for "contains weapons and/or irregular combatants".
Posted by: SteveS   2008-02-23 18:45  

#6  George Washington and the Continental Army didn't slaughter civilians with kegs of gunpowder.

The rules of war were created to try and keep disputes between governments as much as possible, and provide a bare minimum of protection. Rabble could wear uniforms if they wanted, but they don't want to, because wearing one makes you a huge target anywhere you go - that's the entire purpose of a uniform, to distinguish between civilians and soldiers.

I remember crosspatch; he's the one who called us brutal fascists because we don't agree with his worldview. Unlike others, I can have a difference of opinion with someone else, and it doesn't mean that they're unfeeling racists. But then again, I'm not closedminded.
Posted by: gromky   2008-02-23 18:29  

#5  sad thing is that it's not just the NY Times but you will prob never hear about this in any other media outlet
Posted by: sinse   2008-02-23 18:01  

#4  I'm sure this will be a lead news item at the NY Times

Indeed - well, perhaps not lead. More four lines on page B-110.
Posted by: DMFD   2008-02-23 17:10  

#3  Well, the thing is that the rules of war were designed to create an economic barrier of entry into warfare so as to keep the riffraff out of it. In order to fight within the rules of war, one needs some significant financial backing and training and leadership not generally found in the lower classes. The purpose is to reserve war fighting for the upper classes as far as the conduct of it is concerned. Rabble can't afford uniforms and don't really care about rules. The British thought as much about us not playing by the rules in the Revolution. Imagine, us hiding behind rocks rather than standing in neat lines and facing our enemy!
Posted by: crosspatch   2008-02-23 16:58  

#2  Isn't using relief trucks as weapons some kind of war crime?

Not if you're a terr-er-militant. Then it's simply "resistance" or "activism."
Posted by: xbalanke   2008-02-23 16:45  

#1  I'm sure this will be a lead news item at the NY Times and Al-Jazeera
Posted by: Frank G   2008-02-23 16:25  

00:00