Interesting…the US military is usually hush-hush on this kind of distruction…we’re meant to think it’s all about rebuilding schools for girls, and such nonsense.
The article, I think, subtly points out the worth of professional journalism that’s guided by an inquiring mind, rather than ramblings on some blog, or a twtitter blurb, that too many people use as a source of “information”.
about the rebuilding.. this is a nice quote telling of their mentality:
Reminds me of a conversation on a radio show:
Karl: “It’s not good, is it?” And it’s because he’s got a big house and loads of cars. If you live, you know, on a council estate it’s like, “Well… if it gets bombed, probably doing us all a favour. We’ll get nice, new blocks of flats to live in an’ that.” It happened with Manchester! With the, with the bomb that happened and they bombed the Arndale Centre. Did us a favour. Got a nice, new Marks & Spencers an’ that.
Ricky: So this- hold on. This puts a whole new twist on the argument when people say bombing the world’s poorest countries is wrong. Cause I remember when the Afghan problem was on, people were saying, “Bombing the world’s poorest country’s wrong,” but-but it’s like home improvement, according to you then.
Steve: Yeah. Cause they’ve got a brand new B & Q, have they, over now?
Tell me that village had been abondoned beforhand please…
If that was a current settlement then we have a case for war crimes here… ther is no way every house could have had a terrorist and even then destruction on that size goes against international conventions.
I see it’s one rule for Americans and another for other states. Hypocracy!