Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Rowland Smith <rowland AT nc.rr.com>]

Alan MacHett wrote:

> Nine Children Killed in US Airstrike
> http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/central/12/07/afghan.strike/index.html
>
> "The children and a man were found dead in the central Afghanistan village
> of Hutala after the A-10 airstrike intended for a suspected Taliban
> terrorist, Lt. Col. Bryan Hilferty said Sunday.
>
> "He added that investigators had not determined that Saturday's strike
> killed the children. Military spokesmen also said they did not know
> whether the dead man was the intended target."
>
> <rant>
> First of all, it's interesting to note that this article doesn't appear on
> the US edition of CNN.com.  Thankfully, the local news carried it.
>
> Why the hell are we using jets to kill individual people?  The intended
> purpose of the A-10 Thunderbolt is to destroy tanks.  This is only one of
> a long list of such abuses of military might ... the cruise missle attack
> in Yemen, Apache attack helicopters picking off individual soldiers in
> Iraq I (the Apache, too, was created to destroy tanks), and all the way
> back to the bombing of Qaddafi's residence, to name a few notables.
>  
Don't forget blowing the bejesus out of 4 canadian soldiers:
http://www.canada.com/national/features/friendlyfire/story.html?id=DD8F3395-6DAF-4970-A89E-475CA61A0BC0

and an afghan wedding party (20 killed, many more injured):
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/central/07/01/afghanistan.bombing/

Is there a site that chronicles this kind of activity?  Maybe 
BushFuckups.com?

Didn't Benjamin Franklin say something like "A bush in the hand isn't 
worth birdshit" ? or maybe "A bush in office is worth two hands full of 
birdshit" ?

Rowland





> This is part and parcel for the Pentagon.  Some or many might support it,
> but I veiw it as pure cowardice.  These are not military strikes; they are
> assasinations using the most overblown level of firepower.
>
> Yeah, yeah, ... World Trade Center attack ... eye for an eye ... blah,
> blah, blah...  My ass!  We need to hold ourselves to our own standards.
>
> Y'know, it's not even cost effective.  Compare the cost of fueling,
> arming, flying, etc. a jet fighter -- add to that the mistake of killing 9
> children and maybe not killing the intended target -- to the cost of
> sending some special forces troops by helo'.  Well, who knows; maybe it
> *does* cost less money to send the A-10, but wouldn't it be so much more
> honorable and satisfying to have troops capture an enemy in a show of
> force rather than send some stick-jockey to play his video game on
> faceless and unsuspecting people below?
>
> Yeah, "honor"; I know that's a hard word to choke down in this day and
> age.  Today marks the 62nd year since the attack on Pearl Harbor.  Those
> are the kinds of soldiers I admire.  Those guys went through hell for a
> good cause, and they didn't have high-tech gadgets to distance themselves
> physically and emotionally from the enemy.  It, and maybe Korea, were the
> last "good" wars the US fought in; the rest are all just about somebody
> else's money.
>
> </rant>
> --Alan
>
>
>
> ---
> Come and play at the InterNetWorkers Web site!  
> http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> You are currently subscribed to InterNetWorkers mailing list
> To unsubscribe visit http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/internetworkers
>
>