Residents of Baghdad are facing heightened danger as allied forces close in on the Iraqi capital and military commanders may have to engage in street fighting in the city. It is not known how many residents have died in the attacks so far, but the Iraqi Government claims it runs into hundreds.
King Abdullah of Jordan has condemned the killing of citizens, while General Patrick Cordingley told the BBC we must "harden our hearts" and accept that tragically civilian deaths will happen.
B-52s have dropped cluster bombs on tanks protecting Baghdad, seen as controversial because unexploded bomblets create a long-term hazard on the ground.
Should cluster bombs be used in this conflict? Could more be done to shield citizens from the warfare?
This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.
Your reaction
 We know before the first shot is fired that many mothers and fathers will be childless  |
I am an Army veteran from the first Gulf War. Please understand that there is nobody who hates war more than the soldiers on either side of the front. We know very well the fire power we possess, the destruction they cause. We know before the first shot is fired that many mothers and fathers will be childless, children will be orphaned. This happens to all parties involved. I did not want this war as many of you have said. I understand the outrage the Arab world is expressing and ask one thing- Lead by example. Help to stop extremists on both sides, Islamic and Christian. Those of us in the middle, we are the majority of the world, must speak out against ALL violence, especially violence aimed at civilians whether that violence originates from a 500 pound bomb or a "martyr".
Chris Walsh, USA The 'coalition' claims that it is taking all necessary measures to avoid civilian casualties. One can only presume that they are also doing their best not to target their own troops. As they have been spectacularly unsuccessful in the latter why should we assume that they have been any more successful in limiting civilian casualties.
Steve, UK
From the news sources I have read and watched and listened to, I would say the Coalition Forces have been doing about as much as they possibly can to limit the deaths of innocents, given the tactics being employed against them, and the urban battlefield.
Roger Cotton, USA
If the coalition was to pull out now, Saddam would execute whole villages |
If the coalition was to pull out now, Saddam would execute whole villages of Iraqis for welcoming our troops. Anyone who deserted, surrendered, or defected would be killed, most likely with their families. Others would be killed for suspicion of helping the coalition or suspicion of not helping the Baathists enough. The death toll would be in the thousands. So to pretend that the coalition can pull out and Iraqis will be safe is just wrong. The war is horrible and I don't believe the US is above criticism of its tactics. But the war will end in a few months at the longest and as long as the people of the region allow it, Iraq will be safe. If Saddam was allowed to stay in power, there would have been carnage for decades to come. There is no pretty way to get rid of a dictator like him, but ignoring the problem doesn't help.
Jim, USA I am sick of reading comments from Readers saying that not enough is being done to protect civilians. The reality is that the UK, US and Australia are the only countries that are prepared to remove the Iraqi tyrant. Nobody seems to have mentioned the millions of civilians that died at the hands of the regime while they were in power. It's a devils alternative decision. Civilians will be killed in the course of conflict to prevent such regimes in the future. That is the reality, not this rose tinted "we could have made a difference with words" attitude.
Phil Clapham, Australia / UK
No enough is not being done. The allies have reported that they are only facing small arms fire from disparate, unorganised groups. Why then are they responding with heavy munitions fire giving no thought for the innocent people who are killed as a result. The coalition chose to fight this war - they should go into buildings and single out the combatants. If this means greater risk to allied troops that is the risk we undertook.
Nigel, UK
So many innocent lives have been taken just for the sake of one man Pierre Spiteri, Rabat, Malta |
Name one Iraqi parent who wanted this liberation knowing that it was going to be at the expense of his or her children or immediate family. So many innocent lives have been taken just for the sake of one man. Shame on the Coalition Forces for botching up bombing operations at the cost of innocent civilians. What a sad period in history we are passing through.
Pierre Spiteri, Rabat, Malta I was delighted with the way the war was going until I saw a young Iraqi child in hospital with both his arms blown off and his parents dead. We may win this war but I will not be celebrating. Too many people have paid such a high price.
Pete, Manchester, UK
The fact that Saddam Hussein is putting army HQs in residential areas just increases the chances that more innocent people will die |
This is a war and of course innocent people are dying. We may not like it or want it, but the reality is that in war innocent people die. Of course the fact that Saddam Hussein is storing guns in primary schools, putting army HQs in residential areas and using Mosques as barracks for soldiers, just increases the chances that more innocent people will die, but somehow I fear that people will find a way to blame that on the USA also.
Mairi, Germany Why is there such an irrational stir over the use of cluster bombs? For those of you who obviously have no idea how they work, they are not used against buildings in urban areas. They are used in open areas against personnel and armour. Cluster bombs should be used as needed. They are the quickest way to end this war and save innocent lives in the long run.
Drew, USA
Drew, USA: For those of you who obviously don't understand the problem, it's the cluster bombs that do not work properly that matter. 4,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed or injured by unexploded bomblets left over from the first Gulf War.
George, UK
Nothing has been done to prevent civilian casualties. Instead British leaders are making it legal to kill more civilians by saying that Saddam has killed one million Iraqis, so if they kill a few thousand it will make no difference. I'll just say to them: shame on your excuses.
Agha, London, UK
Considering the many friendly fire incidents, I doubt that enough is being done to protect helpless Iraqi citizens. Saddam Hussein gassed his people, and Bush and Blair are bombing them. They are both deplorable crimes against the innocent, and they should be held accountable for these massacres.
Roseanne, USA
In the USA there is a double standard about civilian casualties. A misguided belief that we are preventing another September 11 is an often-cited reason for supporting the war, yet the numbers of civilians dead in Iraq will likely eclipse the number of Americans killed on 9/11. Perhaps Middle Easterners don't count as much as Americans do.
Christopher, USA
Two wrongs do not make a right |
No. Doing enough to protect civilians would have been continuing the diplomacy, the weapons inspections, and other forms of surveillance. I know Saddam Hussein tortures and kills dissidents but two wrongs do not make a right.
Matt, US While the discussion of the killing of innocent civilians is fine and proper it is at the same time assumed that the killing of soldiers and other defenders is quite acceptable. The Iraqi military did not attack the coalition - they are innocent defenders of their state.
Ray Hotson, Australia
Hospitals in the south do not have water for a week if not more. Should this not have been a priority project for US/Britain so far? The cost of that would be negligible by comparison to the cost of the bombs dropped every day. When the major reason stated for this war was to alleviate risk from weapons of mass destruction, why do the US and Britain use weapons such as cluster bombs with long term effects for the health of the population? Finally Iraqi military personnel should be given the opportunity to surrender before being targeted as the human life is always precious.
Michael, UK
Comments like "they will be better off when the war is over" or "we won't kill as many as Saddam has killed" won't help the dead. Many Iraqis would rather die than live under Western rule. Bush and Blair should have left well alone. B-52s, cluster bombs, cruise missiles are being used and all that Iraq has to fight back with are a few old Russian tanks and rifles, not weapons of mass destruction as the world was led to believe by Bush.
Sandra, Scotland
They have to walk 20 miles in the desert with no food or water |
I think more needs to be done because Saddam is saying "If you don't want to die, leave." They have to walk 20 miles in the desert with no food or water.
Meghan Oliver, USA The repercussions of this war go far beyond who controls Baghdad or whether Saddam Hussein is alive or dead. It is about what we are going to say to our children. Will we tell them that it is alright to force your way into another country, kill people who never hurt you and then lie to yourself and to the world by pretending you have altruistic motives to do it? Is that the sort of men we have become? Truth is simple. If we are not able to answer the simple questions of our children, we must be lying. The only clean war is a war which is not fought.
Sherif Yacoub, Egypt
The US bombs everything that moves including civilians, UK troops, other countries and even their own troops. What kind of protection can we talk about when the images show us children crying at the loss of their parents and loved ones? I only hope God is watching and will punish the people guilty of these terrible crimes against human beings.
IL, Russia
Every day three or four people get injured. This is not only a crime against humanity but a crime against the generations yet to be born. There is no noble cause for this war. Both parties have little regard for civilian casualties. The Western media repeatedly show a few American soldiers killed but their lenses are never focused on thousands of innocent people killed. Perceptions differ, but life is still precious for all of us.
Buradagunta Veerraju, Kosovo
Who will do enough to stop civilian killing? Those who brutally and mindlessly started this completely unnecessary war? To protect Iraqi civilians there should have been no war.
Irfan Jafri, Pakistan
Why does Saddam place his armed men in the midst of non-military people? Why does he fill the schools with munitions? Why do his troops fire on coalition forces from the safety of mosques and holy sites? He cares nothing for civilian lives. The coalition forces take more care to spare them than their leader does. How do you determine who is civilian when you have suicide bombers coming at you in the form of men and women dressed in robes or civilian clothes?
Sandy, Ohio, USA
How many people are they going to kill, dad? Nobody you know, dear. They are all strangers Julieta Clua , Zagreb, Croatia |
Many people are talking about the civilian casualties of the war and the cynical "collateral damage" expression used by the US. What about all the simple soldiers of the Iraqi army killed in huge numbers? Are they not casualties of this war also? How many children in Iraq have lost their parents, be they civilians or Iraqi recruits? Do the Americans fully realise that this will create a new huge wave of hatred towards America, fuelling more terrorism? Let me here paraphrase a sentence of a famous author: How many people are they going to kill, dad? Nobody you know, dear. They are all strangers.
Julieta Clua , Zagreb, Croatia Many smart bombs have landed in Iran, Syria and Turkey and we know that their accuracy is far from perfect. Both sides have a vested interest in underestimating civilian casualties. If we ever find out the truth we will discover that enormous quantities of civilians have died. Remember in Vietnam the US killed two million Vietnamese civilians? I just hope American troops will never suffer the pain that so many ordinary Iraqi mothers are feeling today.
Neil Rogall, UK
The question of cluster bombs is specious. When Saddam Hussein's regime is no longer in power, the Iraqi people will be perfectly safe. Coalition forces continue to take great care, adopting tactics to protect civilians from harm. Most civilian injuries and deaths are sadly a consequence of tactical decisions made by the regime to place civilians in close proximity to the Iraqi military.
Barry Liimakka, USA
For the first time ever during war the coalition has really tried to limit the effect of the war on civilians |
I think for the first time ever during war the coalition has really tried to limit the effect of the war on civilians. The production of smart weapons with unbelievable accuracy has done much to assist this. No one wants to see civilians die needlessly but please give the coalition credit for doing its very best not to cause death to those who do not deserve it.
Grace Ingram, England All this controversy about the war is a joke. No one cared when Saddam's regime killed more than one-and-a-half million of his own people and now the global public is making so much noise over a few hundred civilian deaths. A rational thinking person would be able to realise that Saddam has every intention to maximise civilian losses as they mean nothing to him anyway. The biggest joke was a recent clip of Saddam on the streets of Baghdad, embracing a kid and talking to people on the streets. What are they trying to tell us now? That Saddam cares?
Anon, Malaysia
Freedom is not free |
Maybe coalition troops should go and hug every civilian in Iraq before killing only the bad guys. Will the anti-war ignorants be satisfied then? The brave civilians now are paving the way for the better Iraq in the future. Freedom is not free, and it wasn't for us either. We know how it was to fight for freedom, it's too bad that 90 per cent of the world doesn't know the same.
Dave, US People who say that civilian deaths are inevitable in Iraq should remember that the war was not needed.
David de Vere Webb, Britain
I am really sad to hear dead civilians called inevitable victims of war. Every family who has had a member killed in this war will not think enough care has been taken to avoid civilian casualties. The people of Iraq were no threat to the US and the UK, so why are they the ones who are paying and will continue to pay the price of this bloody war?
Sanjyot, UK
It is obvious that the USA and UK are doing their very best to limit civilian death and injury and are quick to respond to help the injured and wounded including the Iraqi soldiers. Saddam and his band however have demonstrated a lack of due care to Iraqi citizens.
Brian Zelley, Canada
Little has been done to protect them Mariana del Campo, Argentina |
If allied forces have lost around 50 lives, and more than 500 civilians have died, it is clear little has been done to protect them. We should return to the old concept of ground fighting where only soldiers fight. Bombing cities should be forbidden.
Mariana del Campo, Argentina Protect them by stopping the war and respect their ability to sort out their own political problems. The Red Cross, as well as the British and US forces, should not need to be there at all.
Allie, UK
Absolutely not. The mercenaries should not be there to kill and sanctions should not have been imposed. Britain and the US are responsible for the deaths. If Britain had not supported the USA, all those innocent people would not have died. We somehow need to get back our world credibility which we have lost.
Michael Ka, Great Britain
In war the care of civilians is, I believe, always second in the military's mind. The military does not go to render aid, only destruction, however unintentional it may be. They also hinder the ability of humanitarian workers to enter the battle field and help the helpless caught between the forces at war. Civilian casualties are a sad aspect of every war, and should be first in any countries' mind before taking the step of going to war. Sadly, it seems to never be the case.
Kathleen Thorn, USA
It seems to be difficult to do more in sparing civilians. Coalition soldiers are taking more risks to avoid killing them.
George Gray, Monaco
They need more food and medicine - we all know the suffering brought to such a rich country by Saddam. May God grant all the civilian casualties eternal life. It is not their fault but the fault of their president that turned Iraq into a terrorist headquarters.
Valentine Matthew, Nigeria
The life of a Baghdad beggar is just as valuable as that of any American or UK citizen |
No nation that uses cluster bombs can claim to be minimising civilian casualties. The carpet bombing of opponents with no air strike capability is cowardly enough, without the added brutality of this disgusting weapon. I used to think my armed forces had an ethical stance - not any more. The public school educated officers cited on the media completely miss the point. The life of a Baghdad beggar is just as valuable as that of any American or UK citizen. If you don't accept that, you cannot be trusted with any weapon.
Tom, UK We are supposedly waging this war in order to free Iraqi citizens from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. In other words: protecting Iraqi civilians is the purpose of the war. It follows that everything possible must be done to protect them.
Bryan, UK
We are doing all we can to protect the civilians in Iraq, often to the point of putting our forces in danger or at least dragging out a battle. Just compare the bombing of London, Coventry, Berlin or Dresden during WW2. Do you see and mass bombing of Baghdad? No you don't, so get off the backs of the UK and US and support them.
Jon Eeles, England
Yes more could be done to protect civilians. Saddam should stop using civilians as human shields and surrender. That would end the violence immediately.
Tom, USA
Get Saddam with a special force, like the SAS and leave the people alone |
Starting a war always means not doing enough to protect civilians. What a perverted euphemism "collateral damage" is from countries where people have a bad day when they lose their pet. Get Saddam and his government with a special force, like SAS and leave the people alone.
Uwe, CA, USA I am very, very sorry that civilians have been made to bear the brunt of this conflict. The best way to protect them - from our forces and from Saddam's brutality - is to win this war as quickly as possible and to send a Marshall Plan program to Iraq.
Inna Tysoe, USA
Cluster bombs are just one example of how ridiculous the notion of liberation is. Dead people cannot be liberated, and the ones left alive will never be liberated by a foreign power.
Ember Teijeiro, USA
I wonder how the world would feel if Saddam published the pictures of all the people he has killed? You see what he wants you to see, just like the weapons inspectors who were in Iraq. Should we permit him to kill his people endlessly? For every civilian the Americans, Brits, and Australians kill by accident, Saddam has and will kill many more on purpose. The difference is the world will never see those pictures because they won't do it in front of the hotel where the foreign press is at.
Barry Raymond, USA
If the coalition governments are so keen to show that they are concerned about Iraqi civilians, why don't they drop medical supplies by parachute near hospitals in Baghdad/Basra? I understand that the hospitals are running very short of basic supplies.
Robert Ulph, UK
Many countries have lost countless lives preserving or gaining their freedom |
Despite how sterile this war was supposed to be, let us not forget that war is a gruesome affair. Anyone who believes that the accidental killing of innocent civilians is unacceptable in war, has obviously never read a history book. Unfortunate as these casualties are, they are nevertheless inevitable. Many countries have lost countless lives preserving or gaining their freedom, Iraq is no different.
Mark Nowicki, USA Who do you believe? Americans and Britons are not liberators, you are always invaders. Please do not be so hypocritical to use the word "liberation", this is an euphemism to hide your real intention, while you are ripping out the financial benefits obtained from this pseudo "liberation".
Rosario, Paraguay
Has anyone ever heard of an aggressor ever admitting to harming the public? The bare sad fact is the public are used in these situations as expandable collateral damage by both side.
Rajiva Govil, United Kingdom
No, cluster bombs should not be used - what horrific litter to leave once the military have gone home. What sort of leadership does Iraq have when their military quite blatantly take cover amongst their citizens and then shout "murder by the invaders" when the innocents get killed?
Jean Harris, England
It is too easy for those who live in free and civilised societies, whose governments do not torture and kill, to say that freedom is not worth a single life. Do not make the mistake of ignoring the fact that many, many less innocent lives will be lost in the long run if Saddam and his regime are removed from power. I am very saddened by any loss of life, which is exactly why I support this action to remove Saddam so that many innocent lives are spared in the future.
Brett, USA
Statistically one could argue that the number of civilians killed has been remarkably low given the amount of ordnance dropped. But if it was your child, how much consolation would that be?
Spike, USA
There is no justification in saying that you committed ten crimes so I will commit five |
There is no justification in saying that you committed ten crimes so I will commit five. If people have died under Saddam's rule and Saddam is being held responsible for it then the US/UK must be held responsible for killing innocent civilians. No one has the right to kill fellow human beings. US/UK people should treat other nations' people as human beings too. When their people died the whole world shared their feelings. Now they should share the feelings of other nations too and stop the war. The world doesn't comprise of US/UK or Western Europe nations alone. The more the civilian deaths are the more the number of enemies they will be creating and no nation can survive by having so many enemies. Never forget Soviet Union which had too many enemies.
Raghavendra P, USA No doubt, the surest way to protect the Iraqi people, in the long term, is to get rid of Saddam and his thugs. Problem is, no matter how careful the coalition try to be, it's a thankless job and, at least according to the anti-war protestors, one that's not worth the cost.
Garry S, Australia
Why are you shedding crocodile tears for the civilians of Iraq? You chose to inflict this war upon them when you could have got rid of Saddam by other means
Khalid Rahim, Canada
The one thing that astounds me the most about this war this the criticism that America continues to receive. Saddam bombs and places his own people as shields. He uses schools and hospitals as bases and we are writing about the criticisms of cluster bombs?! The civilian danger lies in the hands of the Saddam regime. More are dying from him than the coalition. When will we as nations become more vocal about those atrocities?
Wendy, USA
Cluster bombs are terrorism at its worst and dropped in cities are a war crime. The people responsible will not be tried by courts of law, but let us hope public opinion turns them into the pariahs that they are.
Sam Greene, Sydney Australia
I am surprised at so many people's use of the term civilian - surely a civilian is a non-combatant who takes no active part in the conduct of combat. Any "civilian" who acts as a spotter for Iraqi forces or who places themselves as a "shield" between Iraqi forces and those of the coalition are placing themselves in harms way. At best they could be viewed as illegal combatants. If we are to believe that this is forced behaviour then let them take their grievance to the Iraqi regime and let us see what justice Saddam, Aziz and their cohorts afford them.
Eazy, London
British and American forces are taking extraordinary measures to protect civilians as well as Muslim holy places. I find it disturbing that there is so much blame on Allied forces, who go out of their way to protect civilians, and no blame on Saddam Hussein, who has gassed, tortured, murdered and bombed civilians intentionally and whose tactics make Allied soldiers more wary of apparent "civilians". Hussein, more than the Allies soldiers, has harmed and endangered the civilians of Iraq.
J Sawyer, USA
Would it not be possible to evacuate them to tents outside the city? B.A. Mutoka-Vidtfeldt, Faroe Islands |
To protect Iraqi civilians, especially those in Baghdad, would it not be possible to evacuate all of them from their homes to tents outside the city? The people could be encouraged to leave homes and businesses and move to a coalition protected area. This would be before the fight to rid Saddam and his thugs begins earnestly in the city. The hospitals and all aid agencies could pitch tents with the civilians (including all journalists). Meanwhile, the coalition forces will sweep the streets, house by house to ensure nobody is left behind. This may seem a mammoth task but it is possible. Getting civilians out of harm's way will defeat Saddam's intention to use them as human shields.
BA Mutoka-Vidtfeldt, Faroe Islands
Self-determination is very important regarding lasting freedom and justice. The Iraqi people are told this war is for their benefit, from outside forces determined to rule and maintain their ideas of order and justice. I remember being told we were engaging in war to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, I do not remember hearing the Iraqi people asking for mass destruction to obtain freedom.
Jon, USA
Please don't be naive; everything possible is being done to prevent civilian casualties, at the cost of forces lives. We are trying to free the people of Iraq, not harm them. I hope Saddam is brought to justice for bombing his own people in marketplaces, to try and win a propaganda war. Don't be silly enough to be taken in by him, read up about him or speak to some Iraqis that have escaped.
Craig, UK
Yes, enough is being done in making the Iraqis homeless. The Americans and the British think that food is what they all need, and not dignity. The coalition is happy, even if the Iraqis are blowing their food before they can eat it - to clear off the dust it gathered from laying on the floor. And they call this protection?
Mohamed Shameem, Indian in Malaysia
This war is turning out to be a big atrocity to mankind.
Vernon, South Africa
Iraqi citizens have no option but be subjected and face trauma by both Saddam and the allied forces. Poor kids have to face guns and the sights and sounds of powerful bombs, and they will be scarred for life. While Bush, Blair and Saddam have political scores to settle, innocent people suffer. While Bush and Blair reap economic benefits out of re-building Iraq, citizens of Iraq have to put their sufferings a side and start re-building their lives. No one wins in any war.
Rama Krishna Yellapu, New Zealand
It is quite ridiculous in my view to think that enough is being done to protect innocent Iraqis as evidenced by the number that have been killed, injured and mutilated. Perhaps, if we had more access to true human horror of what we are inflicting on Iraqi civilians this was would come to swifter end.
Nick, London, England
The civilians are the ones suffering the most in this war of 'liberation'. To add to their misery, coalition forces have now cut off the power and water in Baghdad. The coalition forces are at the gates of Baghdad and there is still no evidence of the WMD which were the justification for this invasion. A war crimes tribunal should be set up when this is all over to investigate the civilian deaths in a war which should never have happened in the first place.
Tony Portley, Ireland
I don't believe enough is being done to protect the civilian people of Iraq. I mean, how much protection can you give when you have a B52 randomly bombing a city of 5 million people>
Vedat, Australia
We seem to be showing more care and respect for the Iraqi people, than their own regime does. The loss of life is terrible, but nothing compared to the lives taken by their own government. They will be better off once the coalition has fully liberated them.
Mike Plank, Scotland
I think it' a no-win situation. How can you protect the Iraqi civilians when it's hard to determine who the innocent Iraqi's are, and the ones willing to fight by any means possible. My heart just goes out to the Iraqi children. If only there is a way to put them in a safe place until the war is over. But people have also got to realise that this is what happens in war and innocent lives will be lost. Just like we and America are losing innocent soldiers.
Anon,
Most of the casualties so far reported are of civilians... The best way to stop this massacre is to stop this war!
Raza, Karachi, Pakistan
A small suggestion for my betters; when seeking to avoid murdering innocent people try not to start any wars |
We should applaud the heroic efforts of the coalition to avoid murdering innocent people. I myself make similar efforts on a daily basis, and have met with some success. I therefore have a small suggestion for my betters, which I think may help: when seeking to avoid murdering innocent people try not to start any wars.
Dave, London, UK Is it not good for others to have weapons of mass destruction but ok to use weapons such as cluster bombs? Are cluster bombs high tech devices which target only military personnel? Shame on anyone who uses such weapons.
Ninu, Malta
Cluster bombs should not be used. But when we are dragged into street fighting like in Basra, where women and children are reportedly sent back and forth across streets to report on the position of allied forces to Iraqi soldiers in order for them to get a better shot, it just gives you an idea of what you are up against.
Emily, UK
It is true that the Americans and the British are doing their best to protect Iraqi civilians. Yet, a war is war and ultimately civilians shall die or get wounded. But this is the first war in which civilian life is respected and best efforts are put in to protect them as much as possible.
V.V. Srinivasu, India
The number of deaths given the mass of ordnance dropped is miniscule. Yes it may get messier, as long as Hussein sticks civilians in the way deliberately, it will happen. The end toll will still be much less than Hussein has had killed over the years when he was left alone. Furthermore, instead of prattling on about civilian deaths, just imagine how many coalition deaths would have occurred if they were not allowed to return fire at all !!
Chris White, Germany
Anyone who supports the war is being hypocritical when regretting 'unfortunate' but 'inevitable' and 'unavoidable' civilian casualties |
Anyone who supports the war is being hypocritical when regretting 'unfortunate' but 'inevitable' and 'unavoidable' civilian casualties. Going to war causes civilian casualties and most deaths in modern wars are civilian. Let's have no crocodile tears.
JOHN M, UK How can any one say enough have been done to protect Iraqis? We hear of hundreds of casualties every day. History has shown that the US does not care about civilian casualties - wars in Vietnam, Cambodia Korea and many other countries. The big issue for US war planers and politicians is one and only one - to secure the US interests at any cost to other nations.
Bahdaasoo, Norway
Anyone that believes that Saddam can be removed from power without the loss of civilian life is unrealistic and foolish, particularly when the regime is intentionally putting Iraqis at risk in order to win a propaganda war.
Guy, UK
I don't think enough is being done to protect Iraqi civilians because everyday tens of Iraqi people die.
Muna Mohamud, Kenya
UK says cluster bombs will not be used in populated areas--But 10,000 missiles and bunker busters are an OK use of force. What a despicable lot we are.
Olene, US
The US has gone out of their way to avoid civilian casualties. We could have easily turned Baghdad into a moon-like surface. But our strikes have been so accurate that we have even left their electricity on. Of course there have been civilian casualties, very few considering how many air sorties we have done.
Douglas Mozingo, Daytona Beach, FL USA
Efforts have obviously been made to minimise civilian casualties, although hundreds of lives have still been wasted. The problem is we haven't got to the messy part of the war yet - capturing Basra and Baghdad. We were assured before the invasion that cluster bombs would not be used - what happened?
George, UK
If we even say that one death is acceptable we have degraded ourselves as human beings |
If anyone thinks civilian casualties are acceptable - try to imagine your own family blown to pieces in front of you, your newborn baby decapitated by a bomb, your wife/husband dying in your arms. If we even say that one death is acceptable we have degraded ourselves as human beings. Don't forget, this war sprang from revulsion at carnage in world Trade Centre. Now we, the 'civilised West' are doing the same to others. Cosily sat in front of our TVs, it is very easy to make crass judgements about such things.
Nick, UK I think Washington has not done enough to prevent deaths of civilians.
JoseRortiz, USA
We heard a lot of rhetoric about how this war was at least partially about freeing the Iraqis from Saddam's regime. Dead people are not free! While I am impressed, on the whole, by the measures that UK troops have taken to minimise civilian casualties, there is always room for improvement.
Josephine, UK
Why doesn't the UN say anything about the man/men who are deliberately putting civilians in harm's way? Why is it always the US and UK that takes the blame? Perhaps because we're the only ones who would listen and do something about it.
Dan, Scotland
To Dan, Scotland - Because US and UK are the one's who attacked. Because they are the ones who claim they are liberators.
Reddy, India
It is indeed tragic that civilians have been killed despite the best efforts of the coalition forces to avoid them. An Iraqi life is every bit as valuable as a British or American life. However it is quite clear from their despicable tactics that the Iraqi regime values its' own citizens less than the coalition does. By using civilians to shield military sites, and cover for troops during ambushes among other things, this regime has proved once again how vile they are.
Jonathan Michaud, US/UK
Do they think civilians more willingly accept being murdered by state-funded armies rather than by terrorists? |
The glib dismissal of civilian casualties reminds me of the hollow apologies that the IRA used to produce when their "military operations" resulted in unintended civilian deaths. And our politicians would use words like 'vile' and 'barbaric' to describe such statements and actions. Why not now? Do they think civilians more willingly accept being murdered by state-funded armies rather than by terrorists?
I.L., Scotland I am sure that Hussein and his Republican Guard are not doing anything about protecting civilians except using them as their own shield. So we have to urge Coalition troops to do as much as possible to protect civilians. The reality is that in every war there will be casualties; let just hope that there will not be many of them from any side. All we can do is pray for them and hope that Iraqi people will soon enjoy their freedom and never live in fear again.
Mergime, Prishtina, Kosovo
Everything is fair in love and war as the old clich� goes. As long as it's some poor Iraqi and not so called 'coalition' soldiers dying as a result of these bombs it doesn't matter really, does it? Can anyone help me with the definition of a cluster bomb please? Isn't that a weapon of mass destruction?
Tariq, UK
Civilian deaths are inevitable and should be investigated on a case by case basis - e.g. the women & children gunned down at a check point. However, the cautious manner of this war has helped minimise civilian casualties. I believe that, once again, it's the British influence that has achieved this, persuading the careless and trigger-happy war-mongers in the US administration to quit the "shock & awe" tactics which would definitely have led to a greater number of civilian deaths.
Shabaz Ali, London, UK
No, on the contrary, very little is being done to protect the civilians. From the attitude displayed by the marines, they don't give a damn who they kill, they just want to get to Baghdad and win the war. Despite all the good news we hear about the civilians being given aid by the allies, they are definitely not being given the protection they deserve, they are, in fact, being targeted now as the enemy.
Nik, USA
Our troops are doing their best; they are not going out to kill civilians |
Saddam's regime is using the civilians as shields. What do people expect? Our troops are doing their best; they are not going out to kill civilians. People should start blaming the Iraqi regime and not our troops.
Elle, UK Definitely more care is essential to avoid repeated 'mistakes' which resulted in killing innocent civilians
Hady, Egypt
Cluster bombs are weapons of mass destruction, no debate. I get the impression that the US and UK will be happy as long as they keep the number of civilian murders less than that of 9/11, however they seem to be well on their way to reaching that milestone. If the US and UK really cared about the civilians then they would not have used military force. Those that dismiss civilian deaths as a consequence of war are no better than the murdering monsters on either side.
JS, UK
No matter how many measures are taking to minimise civilian deaths, the fact remains that it would be better to have 100 free Saddam Husseins than accidentally kill an innocent child.
Andreas, Cyprus
"Clean up" of areas where the "bomblets" are would be a real step towards "humanitarian aid"! |
So cluster bombs have been dropped, hopefully to aid bringing this war to a conclusion. Is it expecting too much to ask the US forces, as soon as possible, to go in and to "clean up" the areas where these "bomblets" are? This would be a real step towards "humanitarian aid"!
Alan Hall, UK The Geneva Convention doesn't set a threshold below which the number of civilian deaths is not considered a war crime. It therefore follows that even a single civilian death in war is a war crime. Cluster bombs are singularly indiscriminate in their destruction, and therefore increase the risk of civilians being killed. Those that transport, use, order and/or authorise the use or transport of a cluster bomb that goes on to kill even a single civilian is guilty of war crimes.
L Moran, New Zealand
I'm seriously disturbed by the news of UK troops using cluster bombs. -What are you thinking of?
Karl, Sweden
Is the media to blame for the lack of casualties or is it an indication that the coalition have done an extremely good job at minimizing them? |
One day before this war began it was widely, and with authority, reported that 10,000 Iraqi's would die in the first day of the conflict! What went wrong with the media expectations? Is the media to blame for the lack of casualties or is it an indication that the coalition have done an extremely good job at minimizing them?
Ian Melvin, UK Too much is being done to protect civilians. A faster, more forcefully-prosecuted war would have a lower death toll overall. Sadly civilians always get caught up when there's this much military activity - but let's just get Saddam's regime out.
Simon, UK
The coalition forces could have won this war in hours if they had gone in all guns blazing, with no regard for civilians.
Helen, UK
The coalition are taking every possible action to reduce civilian deaths. Saddam, however, responsible for murdering over a million of his people anyway, just carries on using them as human shields and executing those who fall foul of him. Let's hope we can destroy Saddam Hussein, before he murders any more of his own people and blames it on us.
Rick, UK
In my on view there is little the allied forces could do to prevent the occasional loss of life in this conflict. I strongly believe that much needs to be done by the Iraqi citizens and their government to keep them away from military equipments and installation, even if means possible evacuation of the cities that are being bombed by the allied forces.
I still want to commend the U.S.A, the British and the rest of the countries that have sent personnel and equipment, they are doing well to humanity by acting as the world police.
Iwuji Fabian, Nigeria
If Western cultures cared about Iraqi children they wouldn't have imposed such harsh sanctions from the beginning Selim Gamal, Cairo, Egypt |
Of course the invaders are not doing anything to protect the Iraqi children. If the US and Western cultures cared about Iraqi children they wouldn't have imposed such harsh sanctions from the beginning. Before this invasion one out of five infants died in Iraq from malnutrition.
Selim Gamal, Cairo, Egypt We all must be aware by now that not all of the Iraqi civilians are happy to be 'liberated'. Many are fighting back and killing our soldiers when they enter the cities. How can we kill the 'bad' civilians but not the 'good' when it's impossible to tell between them. This is the reality of war and because our troops' safety is paramount then civilian casualties must not be allowed to be an issue until they all surrender. I never supported this war for this very reason.
Alastair, UK
One-Minute World News 
News services
Email this to a friend 
Printable version 
