RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Excerpt: "Iraqi military leaders have halted their push to recapture west Mosul from Islamic State as international outrage grew over the civilian toll from airstrikes that killed at least 150 people in a single district of the city."

Residents of Mosul Jadida retrieve bodies from the rubble following the coalition airstrikes. (photo: Felipe Dana/AP)
Residents of Mosul Jadida retrieve bodies from the rubble following the coalition airstrikes. (photo: Felipe Dana/AP)


Iraq Suspends Mosul Offensive After US Airstrike Atrocity

By Martin Chulov and Emma Graham-Harrison, Guardian UK

26 March 17

 

Move comes as international outrage grows over airstrikes that killed at least 150 people in Mosul Jadida neighbourhood

raqi military leaders have halted their push to recapture west Mosul from Islamic State as international outrage grew over the civilian toll from airstrikes that killed at least 150 people in a single district of the city.

The attack on the Mosul Jadida neighbourhood is thought to have been one of the deadliest bombing raids for civilians since the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. Rescuers were still pulling bodies from the rubble on Saturday, more than a week after the bombs landed, when the US-led coalition confirmed that its aircraft had targeted Isis fighters in the area.

They carried out the attack on 17 March “at the request of the Iraqi security forces”, and have now launched a formal investigation into reports of civilian casualties, the coalition said.

British planes were among those operating in western Mosul at the time. Asked if they could have been involved in the airstrikes, a spokesman did not rule out the possibility of British involvement, saying: “We are aware of reports [of civilian casualties] and will support the coalition investigation.”

There had been no reports of a UK role in any civilian casualties in more than two years of fighting Isis, he added. “We have not seen evidence that we have been responsible for civilian casualties so far. Through our rigorous targeting processes we will continue to seek to minimise the risk of civilian casualties, but that risk can never be removed entirely.”

A UK report on the 17 March fighting, which was issued just a couple of days later, described “very challenging conditions with heavy cloud”. Tornado jets were sent to “support Iraqi troops advancing inside western Mosul” in intense urban fighting, where crews had to “engage targets perilously close to the Iraqi troops whom they were assisting”. They used Paveway guided missiles to hit five targets. The coalition said in a separate statement it had carried out four airstrikes aimed at “three Isis tactical units”. They destroyed more than 50 vehicles and 25 “fighting positions”.

The deaths have intensified concerns over up to 400,000 Mosul residents who are still packed into the crowded western half of the city, as Iraqi security forces backed by foreign air power advance on Isis’s last major stronghold in the country.

Civil defence workers say they have pulled more than 140 bodies from the ruins of three buildings in Mosul Jadida and believe that dozens more remain under the rubble of one building, a large home with a once cavernous basement, in which up to 100 people had hidden last Friday morning.

Local people at the site told the Observer that the enormous damage inflicted on the homes and much of the surrounding area had been caused by airstrikes, which battered the neighbourhood in the middle of a pitched battle with Isis members, who were under attack from Iraqi forces.

The UN’s humanitarian coordinator in Iraq, Lise Grande, said: “We are stunned by this terrible loss of life.”

Chris Woods, director of monitoring group Airwars, said: “The Jadida incident alone is the worst toll of a single [airstrike] incident that I can recall in decades. The coalition’s argument that it doesn’t target noncombatants risks being devalued when so many civilians are being killed in west Mosul.”

He warned that the deaths, and other recent attacks in Syria that have claimed dozens of lives, risked turning public sentiment against the coalition. “We have until recently always credited the coalition for taking care to avoid civilian casualties, compared with the Russians. But since the last months of 2016 you have seen this steep climb in ­civilian casualties and public sentiment has turned very sharply against the US-led coalition.”

As the scale of the disaster became apparent, Iraqi military sources confirmed that they had been ordered not to launch new operations.

The Australian defence force issued a statement on Sunday in response to questions about its involvement. “While there are no specific allegations against Australian aircraft, Australia will fully support the coalition-led (Operation Inherent Resolve) investigation into these allegations.”

Mosul Jadida residents said three homes had taken direct hits from airstrikes and others had been damaged by debris and shelling. “They started in the morning and they continued till around 2pm,” said Mustafa Yeheya. “There were Isis on the roof of several of the buildings and they were in the streets fighting. But the strange thing is that the house they were hiding in, their military room, was not even hit. None of their bases was.”

Journalists were banned from entering west Mosul on Saturday and Iraqi commanders could not be contacted. Iraqi and US forces have previously said that Isis deliberately blended among the civilian population and, in some cases, fighters were posted near civilian targets in a bid to increase casualties and slow the offensive against them.

A United States Central Command statement said: “Our goal has always been for zero civilian casualties, but the coalition will not abandon our commitment to our Iraqi partners because of Isis’s inhuman tactics terrorising civilians, using human shields and fighting from protected sites such as schools, hospitals, religious sites and civilian neighbourhoods.”

Muawiya Ismael, who said he had lost six members of his clan in the attack, said: “It is true that this was a battle zone and that Isis were here. They had about 15 people in the area, and they were in high positions. But they did not have heavy guns. Nothing that should justify an attack of this scale. It was not in proportion to the threat and soldiers could have fixed this.”


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+5 # RMF 2017-03-26 10:35
To paraphrase Trumpolini himself..."who knew prosecuting war could be so complicated."

And is yet more vidence that those indirectly supporting Trump (by refusing to vote for Hillary, as Bernie had urged) bought a pig-in-a-poke.
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2017-03-26 15:45
Yep, Trump is continuing the Bush/Obama programs that HRC promised to continue and expand.

BTW: Unlike in East Aleppo, these atrocities were kept out of the corporate media for 1 1/2 weeks. And there were no tweets or Facebook posts from "activists" who were magically able to communicate even though there was no electricity, cell towers or wifi for months.
 
 
-1 # RLF 2017-03-29 05:40
I'd say the Dems have caused this because they refused to see the writing on the wall and nominate the obviously better candidate, Bernie. I'll never vote for a Republican light Dem. candidate again.
 
 
+5 # Robbee 2017-03-26 11:44
“We have until recently always credited the coalition for taking care to avoid civilian casualties, compared with the Russians. But since the last months of 2016 you have seen this steep climb in ­civilian casualties and public sentiment has turned very sharply against the US-led coalition.”

- so much for rump's promised, glorious, quick victory over isis? ground to a quick halt?
 
 
+5 # Robbee 2017-03-26 11:45
inglorious bastards?
 
 
+5 # Robbee 2017-03-26 11:53
isis? "they'll be defeated very quickly!" - snake oil salesman-in-chi ef
 
 
+3 # DongiC 2017-03-26 14:04
The poor people, caught between the Islamic Republic and the American Air Force. So sad.
 
 
+2 # Radscal 2017-03-26 15:51
And why do you suppose that the coalition is not targeting the "house they (ISIS) were hiding in, their military room, was not even hit. None of their bases was.”

Could it be related to why the coalition allowed 5,000 ISIS militants and their Humvees and tanks to drive out of Western Mosul and across the border into Syria at the start of this campaign?

Is it just a coincidence that the very next week, the US "accidentally" bombed Syrian Army positions, allowing ISIS to complete a major offensive operation?
 
 
+2 # progressiveguy 2017-03-26 14:18
Yes, keep the news media out of Mosul. They might print or broadcast the truth. Republicans and conservatives hate the truth. It's too confining for them. They think of the good old days of Vietnam when Johnson and Nixon ordered and our military killed about 2 million, half of which were civilians. Now days someone will investigate if only a couple hundred are killed by accident. That's progress but I hope someday human life will be of more value to these jerks that love war because of the profits.
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2017-03-26 15:53
Oh jeez, like the Democrats and liberals were honestly facing the truth of Obama's 8 years of constant war.

We have one party: the War Party, and there will be no progress against them as long as we fall for their partisan divisionism.
 
 
+2 # chrisconnolly 2017-03-26 15:51
War is such an egregious way to make a $billion. What are we doing in Iraq besides letting a few make $millions and $billions off the suffering of a whole people? We are creating ISIS. If a country invaded the US, bombed our cities and towns, kicked down our doors at night to drag all the men and boys into torture prisons, privatized all our utilities and public assets, confiscated our oil, on and on and on, what would we do? Would we just lay down and give in? Or would we fight like banshees? We need to get out of the for profit wars the corporatists started on our behalf. Iraq nor Afghanistan had anything to do with 911.
 
 
0 # RLF 2017-03-29 05:43
Its the only way to have jobs when you have Globalized the rest of the work. Cut the war budget and suddenly the jobless rate go up to 30%!
 
 
+1 # MarkGonzalez 2017-03-26 15:54
Where are all the establishment powerful Democrats that made all these sweeping promises during the election? Where are Mr and Mrs Clinton? Where are the Obamas? Sanders and Biden are the main people from Whom we've heard anything. The Democratic Party is pitiful. Mike Moore is right and understands the common, middle class.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN