Insurgents or Civilians?

Some controversy over that air attack outside of Ramadi. Some of the US milblogs  are claiming to have information from one of the attack controllers, as in this piece. Others, such as Rory Carroll in the Guardian are arguing that it was civilians who were killed.

Difficult to know who to believe but there’s always an inclination to go with the named source on the ground. Claim and counter claim is always dificult but given the neutral tone of Rory Carroll’s reporting on the referendum I guess the balance of probability is with him.

5 responses

  1. Isn’t the most likely explanation that the US targeted insurgents, but the casualties included some civilians? Rory Carroll doesn’t say that ALL of the victims were civilians.
    Judge

  2. Rob Read Avatar
    Rob Read

    Who cares?
    Dance on peoples graves and you might find yourself in one!

  3. Tom Kratman Avatar
    Tom Kratman

    Very soon, one suspects, Rory won’t be arguing with anyone about anything.

  4. I just deleted a rather similar comment from you elsewhere, Rob.
    Personally I wouldn’t care to cheer on terrorists and kidnappers.

  5. Tom Kratman Avatar
    Tom Kratman

    Natalie:
    No, never cheer. One can, however, smile wryly at terrorists shooting themselves in the foot.
    I swear, if we win this war it will be because of the idiocy of our enemies exceeds our own.
    Then again, that’s normal.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Tim Worstall

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading