Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bradclark1
What I don't seem to understand is there is a curfew, curfews mean nobody outside after a given time. It's that black and white.
|
We don't know the terms of the curfew. Iraq like most industrial nations has people working shifts. I doubt that any total curfew could be implemented where no one can be on the streets after a specific hour.
The point I was trying to make was there there are myriad reasons for an Iraqi to be making a cell phone call at a specific time. One of those reasons is setting off an IED. But what about the other reasons? Absent of any a priori information, what is the likelihood of an Iraqi making a cell phone call to set off an IED as compared with an Iraqi making a cell phone call for any of the other reasons?
Can we establish that there is an overwhelming chance that it is being used for an IED as opposed to the legitimate uses of a cell phone?
We can't evaluate the "guilt" of violating a curfew without knowing the exact terms of the curfew and the allowed exceptions.
BTW would not an Iraqi using a cell phone to set off an IED make the call from inside a building?
Why would they call attention to themselves by violating the curfew, especially when they know that the Americans will shoot first and forget the question?
An insurgent would want to
1. Ensure his or her safety
2. Ensure that the IED is activated at the proper time
Catching a slug in the head would not allow either of these objectives to be met. The insurgents are many things but they are not stupid.
If this logic is valid, it would lead more credence to the probability that an Iraqi standing outside, making a phone call is an innocent person as a guilty person would be hiding inside.
The critical question is: Do the American forces really care about innocent Iraqi citizens or are they just "collateral damage"?
Facta sunt potentiora verbis.