When the Iraqis, Peshmerga and the US led coalition decided to attack Mosul didn't they know there were 1 million civilians there?
Four days into the offensive they are talking about a 'humanitarian' crisis.
Another example of little or no forward planning.
My main point is that it should have been clear that an attack on Mosul was going to involve the deaths of thousands of civilians. It shouldn't have come as a 'surprise' after the attack had started.
And let's not forget, that when ISIL took over Mosul, many fled to the Kurdish region of North Iraq, including Christians, and all were made welcome. The Iraqi Kurds also gave shelter to Yezidis from the Sinjar Mountains.
- Comrade BolshevLv 73 years agoBest Answer
No doubt, but I doubt it particularly worries them. It might be otherwise if US ground forces were engaged, as they would certainly take casualties, but, sadly more important, would be open to accusations that they has committed atrocities. I have very little doubt that in that case, retreating jihadists would massacre civilians, and claim it was the Americans.
- spottyLv 63 years ago
Civilians =collateral damage. We'll shake our heads, say "poor Iraqis", and turn to Dancing With The Stars.
- 3 years ago
Perhaps, but our recent military ventures (Vietnam too!) have had very little to do with things like freedom and self determination of the citizens of a country, and all about natural resources, military materiel, and psychopathogical behavior. This truly is the American Empire (and American Nightmare)!!!
And, BTW, please note that the two leading presidential candidates do NOT have ending these terrible wars on their agendas. Dr. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are concerned about this.
- AdamLv 53 years ago
They were very much aware, but greed and racism reigns supreme in these situations. Civvie deaths are listed off as "necessary casualties"