Bush stacked news media with military anlysists

[drankin]

For crying out loud, they killed the enemy. How else are they supposed to do it?

 

[Poop-Loops]

I weep for this country. But I'm still getting the hell out. If people like you are the norm, then it will crumble very soon.

 

[Poop-Loops]

But hell, that probably flew right over your head, so let's do it in math/logic terms.

Enemy is bad because it they kill innocent civilians.
We have to kill enemy in order to save civilians.
We end up killing civilians with enemy.
We are bad.
We are enemy?

 

[drankin]

But hell, that probably flew right over your head, so let's do it in math/logic terms.

Enemy is bad because it they kill innocent civilians.
We have to kill enemy in order to save civilians.
We end up killing civilians with enemy.
We are bad.
We are enemy?

Take a look the history of warfare during the course of human existence. Once upon a time you would roll in with a massive army and slaughter every living thing just because they are in your way. Now, at least, we can pin-point an attack and minimize collateral damage. But, you can't get around collateral damage! It sucks, it's warfare, people on both sides are playing with lethal weapons, if you are in the neighborhood you are in bad proximity. Like I asked, "How else are the suppose to do it?".

Enough with the insults, poops.

 

[drankin]

I weep for this country. But I'm still getting the hell out. If people like you are the norm, then it will crumble very soon.

I find this interesting. If people like me are the norm our country will crumble very soon? This country has been this way from the beginning when it comes to bloody war and it hasn't crumbled yet. In fact, it took being this "way" to have a freakin country. While you are getting the hell out, millions are trying to get the hell in every year! Why? Because it's soooo aaaawful here!

 

[Poop-Loops]

Forget it. It's just too easy to deny the pain of someone else's suffering when you've never been through it. I hope you never have to, either.

 

[drankin]

Forget it. It's just too easy to deny the pain of someone else's suffering when you've never been through it. I hope you never have to, either.

Well, we are getting off topic but what kind of suffering are you talking about that I have not been through?

 

[Poop-Loops]

Exploding?

 

[drankin]

Exploding?

Got me, never experienced that. I'm sure it hurts, I don't "deny" it as you accuse. Now, please, answer the question: How else would you have the military take out that particular target?

 

[Poop-Loops]

Wait until he leaves? Get some infantry in there? Deliver a package that explodes once it's inside, not a frickin rocket?

Or here's a radical idea, how about not solving all of our problems by using the military?

 

[drankin]

Wait until he leaves? Get some infantry in there? Deliver a package that explodes once it's inside, not a frickin rocket?

Or here's a radical idea, how about not solving all of our problems by using the military?

Deliver a package? Look, the military doesn't contract UPS to deliver bombs. And even then, the likely hood of collateral damage is huge. Personally, I like the idea of sneaking in special ops guys but they probably are already doing that, we just never hear about that specifically. For some reason this is how they had to get this particular target.

Your idea isn't radical, it's just not going to solve ALL problems. If that were the case, we wouldn't need a military, now would we? As long as someone else has a military, we HAVE to have one too.

Getting way off topic. If you want to discuss that further, start another thread about the benefits of not having a military, how we should dissolve it, and how we will be secure as a world power without it.

 

[LightbulbSun]

Or here's a radical idea, how about not solving all of our problems by using the military?

Peace is an illusion. You either have military force or deceptive force (aka Ghandi).

 

[Art]

For crying out loud, they killed the enemy. How else are they supposed to do it?

Enemy? When did the US declare war on Somalia? I must have missed that bulletin.

Still waiting for you to respond on whether you think the British would have been justified in using missile strikes in residential areas to take out IRA sympathisers in the US

Fact is if the British had even attacked targets in Dublin like that during the troubles there would have been uproar in the US media but because this was an attack on impoverished black Africans it hardly warrants a byline and then Republicans feign shock and surprise that these people hate them. Give me a break

 

[drankin]

Enemy? When did the US declare war on Somalia? I must have missed that bulletin.

Still waiting for you to respond on whether you think the British would have been justified in using missile strikes in residential areas to take out IRA sympathisers in the US

No, I don't think they would be justified. See, they could enlist us to take care of that problem. But, in Somolia, I don't think we have folks that would do that for us so we have to. I don't think you have a good comparison argument here.

 

[W3pcq]

How about this idea, hire mercenaries who need not follow laws and let them do the dirty work.

 

[Art]

No, I don't think they would be justified. See, they could enlist us to take care of that problem. But, in Somolia, I don't think we have folks that would do that for us so we have to. I don't think you have a good comparison argument here.

Who do you think funded the IRA's campaign Drankin? And by virtue of the fact the leaders of Noraid for example were not arrested your contention that you would take care of it is obviously false. Extradition requests from Britain for specific individuals were routinely turned down or thrown out by the US courts but I somehow doubt that even given these facts you would have condoned a military strike on US soil by Britain. It seems you agree with the Bush maxim of 'do as I say, don't do as I do'

Still waiting for you to provide a link to show when the US and Somalia went to war with each other.

 

[drankin]

Who do you think funded the IRA's campaign Drankin? And by virtue of the fact the leaders of Noraid for example were not arrested your contention that you would take care of it is obviously false. Extradition requests from Britain for specific individuals were routinely turned down or thrown out by the US courts but I somehow doubt that even given these facts you would have condoned a military strike on US soil by Britain. It seems you agree with the Bush maxim of 'do as I say, don't do as I do'

Still waiting for you to provide a link to show when the US and Somalia went to war with each other.

I never said we went to war, Art. It's a third world country in chaos. How can you compare Britain and the IRA with this situation?? Apples and Oranges.

 

[Gokul43201]

It's a third world country in chaos. How can you compare Britain and the IRA with this situation??

I don't follow your logic.

It's a third world country in chaos, so it's okay if we blow up a dozen or so of them?

 

[Art]

I never said we went to war, Art. I

You said

Take a look the history of warfare during the course of human existence. Once upon a time you would roll in with a massive army and slaughter every living thing just because they are in your way. Now, at least, we can pin-point an attack and minimize collateral damage. But, you can't get around collateral damage! It sucks, it's warfare, people on both sides are playing with lethal weapons, if you are in the neighborhood you are in bad proximity. Like I asked, "How else are the suppose to do it?".

You seem to be confused as to whether the US and Somalia are at war. On the one hand you say they are not and on the other you use warfare as a justification for the mass murder of civilians. Explain!

t's a third world country in chaos. How can you compare Britain and the IRA with this situation?? Apples and Oranges.

Enlighten me. Please tell me why the lives of citizens of 3rd world countries are worth less than the lives of 1st world citizens which is the obvious inference to draw from your statement.

 

[drankin]

You said You seem to be confused as to whether the US and Somalia are at war. On the one hand you say they are not and on the other you use warfare as a justification for the mass murder of civilians. Explain!

The use of the means of warfare does not require a party to actually be IN A WAR. I was referring to the use of the military. You are suggesting that in order for the military to strike it needs to be in a formal war, you know that isn't so. So why are you trying to say that is what I meant? Are you just mincing words for no reason but to argue?

Enlighten me. Please tell me why the lives of citizens of 3rd world countries are worth less than the lives of 1st world citizens which is the obvious inference to draw from your statement.

There you go, putting words in my mouth. You apparently think that my attitude is that Somalian citizens are worth less than 1st world citizens. I assure you, that is not my attitude. Are you enlightened, yet?

 

[Art]

The use of the means of warfare does not require a party to actually be IN A WAR. I was referring to the use of the military. You are suggesting that in order for the military to strike it needs to be in a formal war, you know that isn't so. So why are you trying to say that is what I meant? Are you just mincing words for no reason but to argue?

Not at all just trying to make sense of your ramblings. You see when I check the definition for warfare I get.

war·fare Audio Help /ˈwɔrˌfɛər/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[wawr-fair] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. the process of military struggle between two nations or groups of nations; war.
2. armed conflict between two massed enemies, armies, or the like.

So you can see why I saw a conflict in your two statements.

Now obviously you have a different definition so perhaps you can supply your reference and also explain how a Somali is an enemy of the US?

There you go, putting words in my mouth. You apparently think that my attitude is that Somalian citizens are worth less than 1st world citizens. I assure you, that is not my attitude. Are you enlightened, yet?

No I am not enlightened. As I obviously missed your cryptic meaning perhaps you would be so good as to explain it to me.

 

[drankin]

Ok, Art. I was wrong on my choice of words. I apologize if you were confused. But, we are at war with "terror" which is supposed to be Al Qaida. And the target was an Al Qaida leader in a country where many are trying to get rid of them.

Remember the "Blackhawk Down", incident? Same place. Instead of flying in and "extracting" the target like the last time, they figured it would be cleaner to just blow him up. Most likely, LESS lives would be lost on both sides, civilians and combatants, if we didn't do that again.

 

[mgb_phys]

But, we are at war with "terror"

There is also a war on drugs - I hope the DEA don't get helfire missiles, just in case there's a grow-op in my neighbourhood.

 

[drankin]

There is also a war on drugs - I hope the DEA don't get helfire missiles, just in case there's a grow-op in my neighbourhood.

I agree that it's unsatisfyingly ambiguous. But, in this case the target was Al Qaida. BTW, there probably is a grow-op in your neighborhood.

 

[Gokul43201]

So, it's the "war on Al Qaida", not the "war on terror"?

 

[Poop-Loops]

I agree that it's unsatisfyingly ambiguous. But, in this case the target was Al Qaida. BTW, there probably is a grow-op in your neighborhood.

Then I hope there is nobody connected to Al Qaeda in my neighborhood. I don't want my house exploding while I'm watching reruns of Scrubs.

 

[flowerthrower]

Hmmm, if I knew of a military leader of an organization that could be bombed by aircraft at any moment in my neighborhood, I think I'd move.

I wouldn't be so quick to assume that all bystanders are "innocent".

So I'm assuming that you would encourage all people to investigate their neighbors' affairs and then judge them? If you disagree with your neighbors' politics or actions, the answer is to move away as if defeated? That's not a realistic look at what it's like to live in the world. There should always be time to work things out with your neighbors, community members.

And of course we need to assume that this neighbor was even guilty of anything in the first place...especially something which might be universally accepted as "wrong" or "dangerous". Why else would you choose to move away from your own home?

What if all the neighbors had the "moving boxes" packed but the bomb hit a day too soon? (this is ridiculous of course. the world is huge and most people aren't anticipating bombs falling from the sky, even if someone nearby is a radical) If it was your sister or cousin who got blown to bits by the sloppy attack, I'm sure you'd be upset about it.

The main problem with the war on terror is that it's a preemptive war against both faraway peoples and american citizens alike. It takes different forms for different categories of people. It is preemptive however, as with domestic spying/profiling, as with detaining here and abroad, and as with killing worldwide. The guilt of most targets of this war lies in the future. It hasn't happened yet. It's a best guess. That's the evil of the "war on terror". It is a war of judgment.

I always thought that assassination was against U.S. foreign policy anyway. Am i wrong? Is that soooo 1994?


Somalia can't defend itself the way more industrialized countries can, and if it were a European nation that received this missile attack, it would probably be considered and act of war against the whole country. What a mess.

For every bomb that we happen to hear about, there are many more falling every day.

I'd also like to point out that the US military constantly downplays casualties. The local hospitals always report more deaths and injuries than our government does, which implies that we're trying to mitigate public outcry through dishonesty. In other words, this is not proud work, even by our own standards. There's no reason to support it.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

If someone needs to be gotten rid of I don't see what's wrong with assassination. Of course assassination by missile is pretty sloppy.

Drankin, if you look back in history over a thousand years ago there was a Muslim who decided that the best way to get rid of your enemies was to kill the one person responsible for them being your enemies and that one person alone to prevent the needless deaths of innocents. Even soldiers are just men doing a job and following orders. So an assassin was sent and often that assassin would die. But it was one life for one life instead of a few guys several miles away pushing a button and watching a dozen people get blown to smitherines.

At any rate... Who does everyone think military analysts work for anyway? Even if they just sit around waiting for an opportunity to get on the news they would still have a vested interest in the continuation of the war wouldn't they?

 

[drankin]

If someone needs to be gotten rid of I don't see what's wrong with assassination. Of course assassination by missile is pretty sloppy.

Drankin, if you look back in history over a thousand years ago there was a Muslim who decided that the best way to get rid of your enemies was to kill the one person responsible for them being your enemies and that one person alone to prevent the needless deaths of innocents. Even soldiers are just men doing a job and following orders. So an assassin was sent and often that assassin would die. But it was one life for one life instead of a few guys several miles away pushing a button and watching a dozen people get blown to smitherines.

At any rate... Who does everyone think military analysts work for anyway? Even if they just sit around waiting for an opportunity to get on the news they would still have a vested interest in the continuation of the war wouldn't they?

Like I said earlier. Remember the Blackhawk Down incident. This happened in the same place. Under Clinton we tried to go in and take the target. That turned into a disaster. They aren't going to do that again in Somalia. I'm not going to pretend to know the best way to kill someone. This was how they decided to carry it out. We can second guess the military all we want but it's their job to pull the trigger.

I think you provide a bad example comparing how Muslims kill people. There are plenty of examples of Muslim exteremists killing civilians intentionally.

 

[Poop-Loops]

Of course. The difference is we claim they are batsh** insane and evil. We are supposed to have the moral high-ground here. I think that requires us to take more care in carrying out our [strike]murders[/strike] assassinations.

 

[Hurkyl]

We are supposed to have the moral high-ground here. I think that requires us to take more care in carrying out our [strike]murders[/strike] assassinations.

That's a good idea. I think we should start by limiting our pool of intended targets so as to exclude innocent civilians. Oh wait, we already do that.

 

[Hurkyl]

The local hospitals always report more deaths and injuries than our government does, which implies that we're trying to mitigate public outcry through dishonesty.

No, it doesn't. There are many reasonable situations consistent with this data. Your allegation is one of them. Another is that the enemy is trying to incite public outcry by inflating the number of deaths and injuries. Another is that both sides are well-intentioned and simply use different techniques to gather and analyze information. Yet another is that the two sides are actually reporting different figures, which the media conflates in an attempt to stir up some ratings.

 

[Poop-Loops]

That's a good idea. I think we should start by limiting our pool of intended targets so as to exclude innocent civilians. Oh wait, we already do that.

Cute. I guess you'll be the one telling the guy who got his kid blown up "Dude, calm down. It's not like we meant to kill your son!"

 

[Hurkyl]

Cute. I guess you'll be the one telling the guy who got his kid blown up "Dude, calm down. It's not like we meant to kill your son!"

What does that have to do with anything? Whether or not this makes for a good Lifetime television movie, isn't relevant to the situation we're disussing.

 

[Poop-Loops]

Honestly? You do physics and you can't figure something as simple as that out?

I'll help you out: Claiming that they aren't intended targets doesn't make the act of killing civilians any less deplorable.