China Oppose External Interference in Sri Lanka

[Akasa]

Didnt I just say The Iraq war and Afghan war civilian casualties were wrong ???? Read my post again please....

And dont know any inside story about Iraq or Afghan ..but the civilian casualties caused by SL army was intentional ...

Go through this link---

http://www.defence.pk/forums/general-images-multimedia/114950-killings-sri-lanka.html#post1861600

There are other channel 4 links too

I wasn't referring to their "wrong" or "right". I was saying that those civilian casualties WERE NOT INTENTIONAL. This means that they were accidental or at least not preferred.

Even though the civilian casualties were high in Sri Lanka, their goal was not to hurt the civilians, but to eliminate the terrorists. If the terrorists like to use civilians as shields, then the operation has just gotten a lot harder for the Sri Lankan military. More civilian casualties are to be expected.

 

[Urbanized Greyhound]

I wasn't referring to their "wrong" or "right". I was saying that those civilian casualties WERE NOT INTENTIONAL. This means that they were accidental or at least not preferred.

Even though the civilian casualties were high in Sri Lanka, their goal was not to hurt the civilians, but to eliminate the terrorists. If the terrorists like to use civilians as shields, then the operation has just gotten a lot harder for the Sri Lankan military. More civilian casualties are to be expected.

Go through the video link please , and then tell me your opinion as to whether they were intentional or not.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Actually, the world opposes Chinese interference and massacres in the Spratly Islands.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Even though the civilian casualties were high in Sri Lanka, their goal was not to hurt the civilians, but to eliminate the terrorists. If the terrorists like to use civilians as shields, then the operation has just gotten a lot harder for the Sri Lankan military. More civilian casualties are to be expected.

So, you are suggesting that the US is correct to use their Drones in KP?

Good for you.

 

[Akasa]

So, you are suggesting that the US is correct to use their Drones in KP?

Good for you.

If their drones aren't intentionally aimed at civilians, yes. We should instead blame the terrorists for using civilians as their shields.

 

[Akasa]

Go through the video link please , and then tell me your opinion as to whether they were intentional or not.

Answer my question: why would Sri Lanka deliberately target civilians? What good will that do to their anti terrorist operations against the Tamil Tigers? Why would the Sri Lankan military attack civilian targets if there were no terrorists hiding in them?

 

[Akasa]

Actually, the world opposes Chinese interference and massacres in the Spratly Islands.

Yes, since it was China that recovered the Spratly Islands after Vietnam forcibly occupied it with its military, it's automatically called a "massacre".

I wonder what they call India's "liberation" of Goa. A "genocide"?

 

[Urbanized Greyhound]

Answer my question: why would Sri Lanka deliberately target civilians? What good will that do to their anti terrorist operations against the Tamil Tigers? Why would the Sri Lankan military attack civilian targets if there were no terrorists hiding in them?

Its because terrorizing the minority Tamil civilians is gonna silence their political voices for equitable rights as citizens of SL. Read up the history of LTTE it started due to intense discrimination. They engaged in atrocities against the civilians to teach the Tamils a lesson , and crush the spirits of separatists .

Btw : what good is answering your questions or trying to figure out

What good will that do to their anti terrorist operations against the Tamil Tigers?

when we can see evidence before our eyes that this has already happened .

Maybe you should ask them personally why they hated Tamil civilians so much, U.N human rights division and Amnesty are already asking ....

 

[Urbanized Greyhound]

Yes, since it was China that recovered the Spratly Islands after Vietnam forcibly occupied it with its military, it's automatically called a "massacre".

I wonder what they call India's "liberation" of Goa. A "genocide"?

why are you bringing in irrelevant examples , if India's liberation of Goa is genocide ...what is China's liberal of Macau --Holocaust ?

Stay on topic .

 

[misterme2]

We wont let another Tibet happen

 

[Akasa]

Its because terrorizing the minority Tamil civilians is gonna silence their political voices for equitable rights as citizens of SL. Read up the history of LTTE it started due to intense discrimination. They engaged in atrocities against the civilians to teach the Tamils a lesson , and crush the spirits of separatists .

If the terrorists are carrying out their attacks in the name of "protecting" their citizens, what do you expect the Sri Lankans to do? Do you see US troops giving Afghan and Iraqi civilians the same amount of freedom they give their own citizens in the United States? Perhaps we all are a bit too vague on what a "state of war" means.

Maybe you should ask them personally why they hated Tamil civilians so much, U.N human rights division and Amnesty are already asking ....

... and maybe you should also ask why most of the world still supports the War on Terror even after civilian casualties were instigated. You'll get the same answer.

 

[Akasa]

why are you bringing in irrelevant examples , if India's liberation of Goa is genocide ...what is China's liberal of Macau --Holocaust ?

Stay on topic .

And how many people died during the (unarmed) "invasion" of Macau?

Answer: 0


Stay on reality.

 

[Urbanized Greyhound]

If the terrorists are carrying out their attacks in the name of "protecting" their citizens, what do you expect the Sri Lankans to do? Do you see US troops giving Afghan and Iraqi civilians the same amount of freedom they give their own citizens in the United States? Perhaps we all are a bit too vague on what a "state of war" means.
.

U.S and Nato troops don't bomb hospitals full of sick patients, target explicitly marked no fire zones , engage in war crimes like rape of civilian population, and even go to the extent of precisely targeting their bombings to strike at "Red Cross" designated co-ordinates of Hospitals , even indulging in tactics such as bombing hospitals with the gap of 20 minutes so that anyone helping the wounded were hit in the second strike.

Why do you make useless comparisons without even going through the video ?

... and maybe you should also ask why most of the world still supports the War on Terror even after civilian casualties were instigated. You'll get the same answer

Ya so in your view deliberate targeting of civilians is permissible so long as the same forces are targeting terrorists ? Superb logic you 've got there ...

according to Geneva convention there is something called war crimes applicable to all armies , you might want to read it up .

 

[Urbanized Greyhound]

And how many people died during the (unarmed) "invasion" of Macau?

Answer: 0


Stay on reality.

and how many civilians were killed during the liberation of Goa ???

A little bit of research before making absurd comments would do you a lot of good , just a hint

 

[Akasa]

U.S and Nato troops don't bomb hospitals full of sick patients, target explicitly marked no fire zones , engage in war crimes like rape of civilian population, and even go to the extent of precisely targeting their bombings to strike at "Red Cross" designated co-ordinates of Hospitals , even indulging in tactics such as bombing hospitals with the gap of 20 minutes so that anyone helping the wounded were hit in the second strike.

Really? I beg to differ.

NATO Admits to Airstrike That Killed Civilians | Gamut News

PressTV - Libyan hospital vacated after air blitz

American Soldiers Arrested For Rape/Execution Of 14-Year Old Girl And Her Family « Creative Destruction

PressTV - Afghan girl raped, killed by US troops

Libya says NATO airstrike hits residential area - Photo Gallery - KansasCity.com

Ya so in your view deliberate targeting of civilians is permissible so long as the same forces are targeting terrorists ? Superb logic you 've got there ...

according to Geneva convention there is something called war crimes applicable to all armies , you might want to read it up .

Great, since terrorists live in the same country as the civilians, perhaps we can all go home now, play Princess Tea Party, and leave them to kill more innocent civilians, right? Even a better plan, buddy.

Perhaps the definition of "accidental" has not sunken into you yet.



P.S. You don't see the US forces being charged for their "violation" of the Geneva convention, do you?