for crimes against humanity.

7000 dead are on his hands no matter the Tigers' use of human shields - civilized govts do not fire against innocent civilians

So... what do civilized governments do when their opponents employ human shields? Seriously? What is the solution to that problem?

Send in ground troops. I could go into more detail but I won't bother w/ the details here (I studied counter insurgency and we were taught how to defeat it - or how to try, w/ boots on the ground)

Innocents should never be sacrificed in the name of "peace" (the aim of all war, well most).

Granted, unfortunately civvies are sometimes caught in the crossfire and it is beyond regrettable, however en masse killing of civilians should be avoided.

I am conflicted when I read posts like this. There is always a problem when you have an evil government (which the LTTE certainly was) start to use its own population as hostages. Those who suggest you send in ground troops instead of artillery obviously don 't have any relatives among the extra govt. troops who will die because of it. I notice that governments like the UK, Canada, and the US didn't have any moral qualms about firebombing German and Japanese cities in the effort to save their own troops lives in WWII. If in this kind of war your enemy does not believe there is such a thing as an innocent civilian how can you afford to? These battles are not ultimately about morality but survival.

A close assault saves lives? Where did you study counterinsurgency? Berlin?

:P

Royal Military College, Canada.

And what is your combat experience Gixxer?

Why was your parachute regiment disbanded?