TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- American mass murder in Iraq
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Znack I expect, that as a self-proclaimed civilized nation, you do everything in your power to avoid killing innocent people when you invade another country. Sometimes it can not be avoided. Information may be incorrect, weapons may fail, people can assess wrong - but we goddamn have a responsibility to do as much as we possibly can, even if it means exposing ourselves to a slightly greater risk. If you want to compare with cars, i say, that car accidents can always occur, but we must nevertheless do all we possibly can to make cars safe, while you say since cars still invariably sometimes have mistakes, we might as well just drop all ethical considerations and make them highly unsafe and dangerous.

Do you even know the process that goes into this sort of shit?

Stuff usually goes through at least a dozen people before they are allowed to open fire. There are often military lawyers involved in this process as well.

It is not some wild cowboy type antics with loan gunship crews out there blasting whatever the fuck they see.

You seriously need to wake the fuck up, because the amount of deaths ALL AROUND in Iraq and Afghanistan pales in comparison to wars that were not even nearly as long and were fought not even 100 years ago.

How many civilians died in WWII? Millions and millions! Quit being such a pansy fuck and gain some apathy, you'll be a much happier person.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Znack I expect, that as a self-proclaimed civilized nation, you do everything in your power to avoid killing innocent people when you invade another country. Sometimes it can not be avoided. Information may be incorrect, weapons may fail, people can assess wrong

you forgot Muslim terrorists hiding behind women and children

So if those kids survived, thats two more people growing up to hate the west, along with the families of those who died...
Seen as thousand of civilians have been killed and thousands more injured, I guess you've made a rod for your own back?

TBH Afghanistan was a stupid idea anyway, nobody has invaded and won in the past have they?

quote:

Originally posted by Saka TBH Afghanistan was a stupid idea anyway, nobody has invaded and won in the past have they?

I don't know where that myth got started, but it couldn't be much further from the truth. Plenty of outside powers successfully invaded and went on to control modern-day Afghanistan for various lengths of time; indeed, the area has been occupied by one foreign power or another for the better part of the last two millenia.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Znack I expect, that as a self-proclaimed civilized nation, you do everything in your power to avoid killing innocent people when you invade another country. Sometimes it can not be avoided. Information may be incorrect, weapons may fail, people can assess wrong - but we goddamn have a responsibility to do as much as we possibly can, even if it means exposing ourselves to a slightly greater risk.

not taking any sides here, but isn't this one of those very circumstances where

quote:

Originally posted by Znack Sometimes it can not be avoided. Information may be incorrect ... people can assess wrong

Maybe they are doing everything they can to try to avoid killing innocent people, but as you pointed out, mistakes happen.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby Do you even know the process that goes into this sort of shit?

I do not see the relevance. Is murder of an innocent more acceptable if the decision has taken a long time, or made by many people?

quote:

How many civilians died in WWII? Millions and millions!

Is your argument then, because once something worse happened, then this is okay?

This is kindergarten logic. "I punched little Peter, but Ben from third grade did it more than me. "

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Trance Nutter not taking any sides here, but isn't this one of those very circumstances where Maybe they are doing everything they can to try to avoid killing innocent people, but as you pointed out, mistakes happen.

They're out of danger and have full view of those, they are shooting at. It is absurd to say that it was a mistake that could not be avoided. They know perfectly well what they're doing, and although they were not aware that they where non-combatants they shot at. It would not be a sufficient excuse.
An accident in war is (not) to shoot first and ask questions afterwards.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Znack I expect, that as a self-proclaimed civilized nation, you do everything in your power to avoid killing innocent people when you invade another country. Sometimes it can not be avoided. Information may be incorrect, weapons may fail, people can assess wrong - but we goddamn have a responsibility to do as much as we possibly can, even if it means exposing ourselves to a slightly greater risk. If you want to compare with cars, i say, that car accidents can always occur, but we must nevertheless do all we possibly can to make cars safe, while you say since cars still invariably sometimes have mistakes, we might as well just drop all ethical considerations and make them highly unsafe and dangerous.

Of course a country like the USA takes on the effort to avoid innocent deaths but guess what? War is war and no matter how hard you try, innocent people will die, in fact, in almost every war, far more innocent people die than actual combatants, even if measures are taken to try to limit innocent deaths. I find outrage at events that happen in war, frankly, retarded. "Those evil soldiers, how could they have executed that poor insurgent! How could those helicopter pilots killed those innocent people!?" Those soldiers and helicopter pilots are just doing their job. They didn't ask to be sent over there. If you have any anger, direct it at the politicians who sent those pilots to a foreign land, to do what they do best, which is to kill.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter That's just procrastinating. Everybody dies, it's just a matter of when and how.

-_- You get the point...

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Stalin War is war and no matter how hard you try, innocent people will die

Yes, mistakes do occur. But it is not a reason not to do the best you can, to prevent them from happening.

The fact that mistakes can happen does not mean we can shoot right and left, because there is someone who dies somewhere anyway. It's a crazy attitude and would not stand in any court.

quote:

I find outrage at events that happen in war, frankly, retarded.

Really? It is "retarded" to be angry about Hitler's mass killings of Jews? It was war, so dont bother with some innocent victims?

If this is your argument, then I think most people will find your thinking deeply frightening. If this is not your argument, you have not thought it through properly.

quote:

Those soldiers and helicopter pilots are just doing their job

So is an assassin. So is a bank robber. To call an act a job is not an excuse for crimes. Again a very ill-considered argument.

quote:

If you have any anger, direct it at the politicians who sent those pilots to a foreign land, to do what they do best, which is to kill.

Who says I don`t? The soldiers acted incorrectly, but if they have followed the rules, and apparently they have. Then it is certainly the makers of those rules who have the greatest responsibility.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Znack Yes, mistakes do occur. But it is not a reason not to do the best you can, to prevent them from happening. The fact that mistakes can happen does not mean we can shoot right and left, because there is someone who dies somewhere anyway. It's a crazy attitude and would not stand in any court.

I never said, "we can shoot right and left." Stop putting words in my mouth.

quote:

Really? It is "retarded" to be angry about Hitler's mass killings of Jews? It was war, so dont bother with some innocent victims? If this is your argument, then I think most people will find your thinking deeply frightening. If this is not your argument, you have not thought it through properly.

Yes really, and you've reached a new level retardation by invoking Nazis and Jews. WTF is your point bringing that up? I said war is war, and if innocent people dying bothers you, then direct your anger at the politicians who sent soldiers to kill.

quote:

So is an assassin. So is a bank robber. To call an act a job is not an excuse for crimes. Again a very ill-considered argument.

Soldiers are sent to war to kill, are they not? In every war, many more civilians are killed than combatants, no matter how much one side or the other tries not to kill civilians. That's war. If you can't accept that, then you really don't know what war is. It's not a video game where no one is ever hurt. You complaining and going on this moral crusade is completely useless because it's directed at the soldiers themselves who have no control over their immediate situation.

quote:

Who says I don`t? The soldiers acted incorrectly, but if they have followed the rules, and apparently they have. Then it is certainly the makers of those rules who have the greatest responsibility.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Stalin Yes really, and you've reached a new level retardation by invoking Nazis and Jews. WTF is your point bringing that up?

I think i made that pretty clear.

You say you are retarded if you're angry about anything happening in a war. I cite the example of what Hitler did during World War II, which are events that occurred during a war. You did not give the caveat that it should not be that war - which also would have been hypocritical.

I can see it is very tempting to be evasive by calling a comparison with Hitler for overkill, which it indeed is - but it nevertheless illustrates very clearly how completely ridiculous your assertion was.
Of course it is not retarded to feel angry about acts committed during war. It would be retarded if you did not feel anger at such. jew persecution or other war crimes. It is obvious you did not think before you spoke.

quote:

then direct your anger at the politicians who sent soldiers to kill.

Why repeat that when i in the previous post you replied to, told you that is exactly what I do?

quote:

Soldiers are sent to war to kill, are they not?

I doubt it frankly. I think most leaders would be happy if their wars could be won without killing anyone. If the threat of murder was enough to get the enemy to surrender, or if the soldiers peacekeeping abilities were enough to bring stability and convert the invaded country. But that is unimportant.

quote:

In every war, many more civilians are killed than combatants, no matter how much one side or the other tries not to kill civilians. That's war. If you can't accept that, then you really don't know what war is.

Nice attempt at ad-hominem, but it falls slightly to the ground when it is a repeat of something I have explained several times.

I repeat for the 4th time in this thread: I know that some innocent deaths can not be avoided. I'm just saying what i have already said (and know you have read - you are just pretending you haven't) that we have a duty to do everything in our power to keep it to a minimum. It is not done here.

quote:

You complaining and going on this moral crusade is completely useless because it's directed at the soldiers themselves who have no control over their immediate situation.

Firstly, I have already explained to you that my anger is primarily directed against the military leadership.
Secondly, it is nonsense. The shooter on the helicopter has full control over the situation, and could easily not have pulled the trigger. It does not get more immediate then that.

quote:

Originally posted by Saka nobody has invaded and won in the past have they?

lol.. on second thought.. i think religion suits you nicely.

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit lol.. on second thought.. i think religion suits you nicely.

lol,l think atheism suits you nicely.
And if that was your second thought, your first thought was what, that religion didn't suit me?

TWATS!

quote:

Originally posted by Saka lol,l think atheism suits you nicely. And if that was your second thought, your first thought was what, that religion didn't suit me?

Jesus christ walked on water, just to be with you.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Znack I think i made that pretty clear. You say you are retarded if you're angry about anything happening in a war. I cite the example of what Hitler did during World War II, which are events that occurred during a war. You did not give the caveat that it should not be that war - which also would have been hypocritical. I can see it is very tempting to be evasive by calling a comparison with Hitler for overkill, which it indeed is - but it nevertheless illustrates very clearly how completely ridiculous your assertion was. Of course it is not retarded to feel angry about acts committed during war. It would be retarded if you did not feel anger at such. jew persecution or other war crimes. It is obvious you did not think before you spoke.

Name a war in which no innocent people were killed and then you might have a point. But of course, you won't be able to, because in war, innocent people die. Why you haven't accepted that fact, I wouldn't know.

quote:

Why repeat that when i in the previous post you replied to, told you that is exactly what I do?

LOL, no you don't. Your first post was to bitch about helicopter pilots spraying people with lead. Not a single rebuke of the people who caused this war to begin with.

Hint: It wasn't the helicopter pilots.

quote:

I doubt it frankly. I think most leaders would be happy if their wars could be won without killing anyone. If the threat of murder was enough to get the enemy to surrender, or if the soldiers peacekeeping abilities were enough to bring stability and convert the invaded country. But that is unimportant.

See, this is why your civilian, arm-chair general ethics code, is completely ridiculous. Soldiers kill. That's their job. If you can't even get that basic fact down, then what's the point? Wars won without killing anyone? LOL, seriously?

quote:

Nice attempt at ad-hominem, but it falls slightly to the ground when it is a repeat of something I have explained several times.

lol, whatever, no one "attempts" to ad-hominem, they just do it.

quote:

I repeat for the 4th time in this thread: I know that some innocent deaths can not be avoided. I'm just saying what i have already said (and know you have read - you are just pretending you haven't) that we have a duty to do everything in our power to keep it to a minimum. It is not done here.

If you know innocent deaths cannot be avoided, then why are you pissed off when innocent people inevitably die?

quote:

Firstly, I have already explained to you that my anger is primarily directed against the military leadership.

You're first post doesn't demonstrate that at all.

quote:

Secondly, it is nonsense. The shooter on the helicopter has full control over the situation, and could easily not have pulled the trigger. It does not get more immediate then that.

You expect them and every soldier to have perfect judgment at all times, in every situation. Judgment is often, and inevitably, faulty. Friendly fire is one prime example of that. And down the line, collateral damage.

This stuff is war. I'm not outraged in the least bit at what the helicopter pilots did. But to you, war is supposed to be bloodless, and if it isn't, then damn it, get those helicopters pilots to the war crimes court in the Hague, pronto! This is why I said I don't think you really know what war is. Discussion of bloodless war, or war in which "we have a duty to do everything in our power to keep it to a minimum" is useless because it's impossible. Who cares? The important thing isn't these helicopter pilots, it's the idiots who sent them there.

quote:

Originally posted by Saka lol,l think atheism suits you nicely. And if that was your second thought, your first thought was what, that religion didn't suit me?

If we all followed a literal interpretation of Genesis, man, we'd still be living in the Dark Ages. Thank god for the Age of Enlightenment Glad such beliefs are relegated to obviously religiously fundamentalist anti-intellectual peasants. I especially love the stories of creationists supposedly taking on their secular humanist liberal leftist (i.e. satanic) university biology professors thinking they somehow proved creationism true. What really happened what, the other students told him to sit the fuck down, and the professor probably was laughing his ass off. "This kid isn't getting past bio 101 believing in THAT fairy tale."

quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Stalin If we all followed a literal interpretation of Genesis, man, we'd still be living in the Dark Ages. Thank god for the Age of Enlightenment Glad such beliefs are relegated to obviously religiously fundamentalist anti-intellectual peasants. I especially love the stories of creationists supposedly taking on their secular humanist liberal leftist (i.e. satanic) university biology professors thinking they somehow proved creationism true. What really happened what, the other students told him to sit the fuck down, and the professor probably was laughing his ass off. "This kid isn't getting past bio 101 believing in THAT fairy tale."

Erm, ok, thanks for that, is this thread about religion?

Why does it have to go back to religion nrg2nfinit?
You aren't going to change my view, and I'm not going to change yours, the only difference being is that i've listened to your arguments, and you skip past mine because you know better. Your insults are useless, and thats the most fun.
I mean, why would i take to heart your opinion, when I don't know you, dont care about you, I mean, I don't know your name.
Just shut up. And one day get to grips with the fact the majority of people on earth believe in a God, or gods, and you, yourself, will not change that.
I understand people don't, and to be honest, I'm ok with it, each to their own.
Have fun, k, bye bye.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: American mass murder in Iraq

quote:

Originally posted by Comrade Stalin Name a war in which no innocent people were killed and then you might have a point. But of course, you won't be able to, because in war, innocent people die. Why you haven't accepted that fact, I wouldn't know.

A completely irrelevant lie. It has nothing to do with what i said, and is completely false. I have repeatedly stated that i know perfectly well innocent people die in war. Time and again i have repeated it, just to see you repeating the same dishonest assertion in the post after. I must assume you believe that if you repeat the lie enough, I will eventually forget what i said - but unfortunately i have to disappoint you.

To focus on what I actually wrote, you still haven't come around the fact that most people feel or felt anger over Hitler's deeds during the Second World War.

You have two options: Either you think all these people are retarded, because Hitler did something that rightfully can provoke anger - or you must pull back your argument.

quote:

LOL, no you don't. Your first post was to bitch about helicopter pilots spraying people with lead. Not a single rebuke of the people who caused this war to begin with.

Lie. I at no time wrote that my anger is primarily directed at the pilots, and I've even later clarified what I meant several times.

Naturally, I think the helicopter pilots are acting deeply immoral by not only shooting innocent people, but even to laugh about it - but I put very strong emphasis on the fact that it is the military's denial of the affairs, I am indignant about.

It says clearly in the first post:

"The military has always claimed that everything went as it should and that those who were killed opened fire on the helicopters.."
"Reuters asked for an investigation (...) but was ignored by the military."
"And even worse is when the military refuses to admit mistakes"

Stick to the truth.

quote:

See, this is why your civilian, arm-chair general ethics code, is completely ridiculous. Soldiers kill. That's their job.

More childish ad-hominem attacks, which you obviously can not substantiate. A soldiers job is to kill if they (need) to. It is not to go slaughtering around, and very often their job is just to be dangerous, so the enemy does not attack.

Again, keep from smearing, keep to the truth and drop the condescendence, especially when you're wrong.

quote:

Wars won without killing anyone? LOL, seriously?

Well, if there is no violence, then that is by definition, not war, but beyond the semantics it's happened plenty of times in history. Countries have often surrendered just because the attacking country were stronger and they knew they couldn't stand a chance.

Here it is not even a question of ones Position. You are factually wrong.

quote:

lol, whatever, no one "attempts" to ad-hominem, they just do it.

Well you admit it. Then dont do it, right?

quote:

If you know innocent deaths cannot be avoided, then why are you pissed off when innocent people inevitably die?

I'm not. I think it is reprehensible when innocents people die, when its not inevitable.
If you still haven't got that point, I really do not know how to explain it to you.

quote:

You're first post doesn't demonstrate that at all.

I have just shown that it does, and besides, its irrelevant, because i later explained it to you.

quote:

You expect them and every soldier to have perfect judgment at all times

Lies again. I have several times repeated, its not like that. You even pointed out yourself that I admit there may be unavoidable accidents, therefore i can only conclude that this is a premeditated lie.

quote:

Discussion of bloodless war, or war in which "we have a duty to do everything in our power to keep it to a minimum" is useless because it's impossible.

That makes no sense. A minimum is by definition the lowest attainable. If that is impossible, its not a minimum.

quote:

Who cares? The important thing isn't these helicopter pilots, it's the idiots who sent them there.

Agreed. Do I really have to repeat myself again?

quote:

Originally posted by Saka Erm, ok, thanks for that, is this thread about religion? Why does it have to go back to religion nrg2nfinit? You aren't going to change my view, and I'm not going to change yours, the only difference being is that i've listened to your arguments, and you skip past mine because you know better. Your insults are useless, and thats the most fun. I mean, why would i take to heart your opinion, when I don't know you, dont care about you, I mean, I don't know your name. Just shut up. And one day get to grips with the fact the majority of people on earth believe in a God, or gods, and you, yourself, will not change that. I understand people don't, and to be honest, I'm ok with it, each to their own. Have fun, k, bye bye.

Good.. you can continue to take the bible literally and i'll continue to call you an idiot.

Firebombings of Tokyo and Dresden had casualty counts which far outweighed this one incident precisely because we have taken steps to reduce collateral damage. Bombs and artillery shells have been developed to follow specific trajectories and have mitigated splash radii. If you want to win an argument, one could be made that Iraq was completely unnecessary, was started with an inadequate strategy, and has yielded a significant number of civilian casualties precisely because of that. You would have to include civilians who died as a direct result of Iraq's insurgency, but what was achieved in Iraq was unacceptable.

Still, when you consider the firebombings of Japanese cities in WWII, don't include the nuclear bombs dropped on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, you'll find a civilian body count which utterly dwarfs anything which has occurred as a result of 21st Century military action. The firebombing of Tokyo, alone, matches the current body count at IBC.org.


Source: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0310-08.htm

quote:

More than 300 B-29 "Superfortress" bombers dropped nearly a half-million M-69 incendiary cylinders over Tokyo that night and early morning, destroying some 16 square miles of the city. The attack, coming a month after a similar raid on Dresden, Germany, brought the mass incineration of civilians to a new level in a conflict already characterized by unprecedented bloodshed. The official death toll was some 83,000, but historians generally agree that victims unaccounted for bring the figure to around 100,000 � overwhelmingly civilians. It is widely considered to be the most devastating air raid in history.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/


Your suggestion that we should be more careful is ludicrous in the face of the rather staggering statistics which prove that we have been.

During the German-Soviet campaigns of WW2 some 16 MILLION, yes MILLION, civilians were killed. A half dozen accidentally killed people on a street in Baghdad, where insurgents dress and blend in with civilians is not even able to be compared to something like what happened in WW2.


People get so friggin upset over the number of casualties in Iraq on the US side but fail to realize the incredibly small number of deaths it really is. There were battles in WW2 where that many people were killed in a weekend, not 7 years. 48 hours.

I am not saying either is good, but the fact that whiny little fucks like you either get a kick out of trolling for shit or are legitimately disturbed by things like this makes me really fucking sad for our generation. God forbid we ever have to fight in another real war...

quote:

Originally posted by Nrg2Nfinit Good.. you can continue to take the bible literally and i'll continue to call you an idiot.

Just for the sake of saying things, how immature.
How about we don't discuss it.
Seems a more intelligent thing to do.
And if you believe we came from cavemen, we don't want to become like 'them' again do we?
Lets be nice we both might actually like it.

quote:

Originally posted by Joss Weatherby During the German-Soviet campaigns of WW2 some 16 MILLION, yes MILLION, civilians were killed. A half dozen accidentally killed people on a street in Baghdad, where insurgents dress and blend in with civilians is not even able to be compared to something like what happened in WW2. People get so friggin upset over the number of casualties in Iraq on the US side but fail to realize the incredibly small number of deaths it really is. There were battles in WW2 where that many people were killed in a weekend, not 7 years. 48 hours. I am not saying either is good, but the fact that whiny little fucks like you either get a kick out of trolling for shit or are legitimately disturbed by things like this makes me really fucking sad for our generation. God forbid we ever have to fight in another real war...

quote:

Originally posted by Znack Is murder of an innocent more acceptable if the decision has taken a long time, or made by many people? Is your argument then, because once something worse happened, then this is okay? This is kindergarten logic. "I punched little Peter, but Ben from third grade did it more than me. "

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.