@oralloy,
Quote:Not really. It was not illegal for our soldiers to carry out precision strikes against military targets.
If the invasion itself is illegal (and it was), any attack which constitutes a portion of it is illegal. As usual, you speak
ex cathedra, but you provide no support for your allegations.
It appears that you don't do sarcasm, and i suspect you haven't paid attention to the Iraqi death toll. Conservative estimates put it at 250,000 dead, and many estimate as many as a million. That hardly suggests either precision targeting, nor strictly military targets.
Quote:No, we didn't do anything in Iraq that was even remotely like the UK's carpet bombing and firestorm in Dresden.
Straw man . . . i wasn't contending that we did anything like carpet bombing in Iraq, i was pointing out that the invasion, and any military actions which constituted a portion of it were illegal.
Quote:While I have certainly been wrong before, it isn't very often.
My increasing experience is that you are frequently wrong, and that you offer personal opinion as though it were fact, and often state that it is fact. You reek of hubris with a remark such as this, but it is part and parcel of your habit of speaking as though from authority, speaking
ex cathedra, when in fact, you almost never offer evidence for your opinion, but just offer it as though it were fact.
Quote:I didn't say the US did no damage to the city. The US however, had nothing to do with the firestorm that the UK intentionally set there.
This is only true to the extent that we cobbled together our own little fire storm centered on the railway marshalling yards, as opposed to participating in the RAF firestorm.
Quote:Are you under the impression that anything you quoted contradicts me in any way?
You are contradicted absolutely, it is not an impression. The mix of ordnance on February 14 is 40% incendiary. That is precisely the mix which the RAF customarily used to initiate fire storms. That ordnance mix was not either accidental or coincidental, and the evidence for it comes from the United States Army Air Force.
You're an arrogant s0b. You claim to rarely be wrong, and you speak as though your opinions were fact. You have no case.
In an earlier post, you wrote:
Quote:Since any war crime at Dresden would be related that firestorm, I think it is fair to pin all the blame for any Dresden-related crimes solely on the UK.
One of the few occasions upon which i have seen you offer an opinion as a recognizable opinion, and not alleged to be fact. Your criterion, apparently, is starting a firestorm. That is precisely what the USAAF did with its ordnance mix on February 14. It was intentional.
However, we are not restricted to your narrow and self-serving view of what constitutes a war crime, the obvious intent of which is to whitewash the USAAF in the instance of the attack on Dresden. Bombing a refugee camp and indiscriminately strafing the roads in the environs of Dresden constitute criminal military activity as much as did starting a firestorm centered on the railway marshalling yards. In other USAAF documents, the city center was listed as "a target of opportunity," which is hardly surprising, given the location of the railway yards in the city center.
I have read that USAFHD document, but i don't see any reason to do all the legwork when you do none. Therefore, adopting your typical tone--it is a fact that the USAAF used 40% incendiary mix on the morning of February 14, it is a fact that the USAAF knowingly started a firestorm in the city center, it is a fact that 92nd Bomb Group also targeted a refugee assembly and housing center, it is a fact that Mustangs strafed roads around the city. If you want to dispute that, come up with some evidence. Your statements from authority are meaningless.
