^ If the author's scheme get's carried out, let him watch all the innocent children die. Or better, let him be in whatever school gets bombed, so he can get blown up himself. If he and Bush were running for president, I'd vote Bush - at least he has some restraint.

___________________
America is like a melting pot. The people at the bottom get burned and the scum floats to the top.

WorldNetDaily is what you get when you cross the Taliban with American Christians (i.e. - completely fucking insane religious nutters). I really wouldn't bother reading anything of the site, it isn't worth wasting your time on. Half of the articles are on the Passion of the Christ anyhow - apparently that qualifies as breaking news for the religious right.

___________________
Currently Whoring:

• Space Tribe Vs Electric Universe - Rabbit Hole
  
• CPU - So It Begins
  
• Too Short & Mistah FAB - The Sideshow
  

As opposed to it making you sad that we have human beings that strap explosives to children and tell them to go blow themselves up amongst innocent civilians on this planet?

Yes, writing an inflammatory article is much worse than raising your children to kill innocent people in suicide bombings.

Now here's the tricky part:

Instead of making baseless ad-hominem attacks against the author of the article in a blatant double standard, why not prove him wrong?

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter As opposed to it making you sad that we have human beings that strap explosives to children and tell them to go blow themselves up amongst innocent civilians on this planet? Yes, writing an inflammatory article is much worse than raising your children to kill innocent people in suicide bombings. Now here's the tricky part: Instead of making baseless ad-hominem attacks against the author of the article in a blatant double standard, why not prove him wrong?

Do you honestly agree with what he wrote? I certainly wouldn't think so. I take issue the most with this statement:

quote:

It's time to cease worrying about collateral damage.

By lowering our standards to the level of terrorists, and by showing a similar blatant disregard toward the innocent (which is one of the groups we try to protect, the other being ourselves, of course), do we not become terrorists ourselves?

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 By lowering our standards to the level of terrorists, and by showing a similar blatant disregard toward the innocent (which is one of the groups we try to protect, the other being ourselves, of course), do we not become terrorists ourselves?

But if the alternative is an extremly high body count for GIs that would cause the US citizens a panic to pull the troops out of Iraq, and the US does, do you see that as a world you'd like to live in?


If the US count gets even remotely close to Vietnam, the nation today has no tolerance for those numbers and will pull out in a heart beat.

The losers will be the US citizens living in large cities.

Its simple, someone has to win, and someone has to lose, how bad do you want to win?

They want it VERY badly.

___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!


Click here to support the free mustard alliance.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus But if the alternative is an extremly high body count for GIs that would cause the US citizens a panic to pull the troops out of Iraq, and the US does, do you see that as a world you'd like to live in? If the US count gets even remotely close to Vietnam, the nation today has no tolerance for those numbers and will pull out in a heart beat. The losers will be the US citizens living in large cities. Its simple, someone has to win, and someone has to lose, how bad do you want to win? They want it VERY badly.

IF this were our only alternatives, then yes, I would agree with you and would unfortunately support mindless collateral damage. However, I tend to have a little more faith in our present day military, and believe we have a little more accuracy to avoid as much collateral damage as possible. I could be wrong. I could be very wrong. But we are there not to just protect ourselves, but to protect the innocent. The innocent needed our protection from Saddam's regime, remember? So our protection to them is to blow their kid's heads off so we can get at our enemy?

Somehow, I don't think we would be very good liberators then.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 IF this were our only alternatives, then yes, I would agree with you and would unfortunately support mindless collateral damage. However, I tend to have a little more faith in our present day military, and believe we have a little more accuracy to avoid as much collateral damage as possible. I could be wrong. I could be very wrong.

Yes. All "accuracy" and efficiency is at the end of the day at the expense of collateral damage.

The most accuracy and efficient method is a sniper, but then you have to insert him, extract him, and give him a percise target.

Next you have a team of special forces to raid an area.

Next you have a team of regular forces raiding an area.

Than you have armored cars or helicopters

Next you have tanks

Then you get artillery/F-16s

and now your fresh out of options unless you want to use some nukes.


So if the USA is using the first options, say a sniper, by all means they should be using a helicopter to reduce their casualties in the right circumstances (i.e. Fulluja) and not be sending in regular forces to raid the area.

A helicopter attack is much more inaccurate than a guy on the ground -and will most likely take innocents out in a densly populated area.

Its all a degree of scale. Do I think that the US should close the city and bomb it all houses are leveled like the author of the article has said? No. Do I think they should not be afraid to use their tanks, apaches, F-16s, and exessive force more freely when warrented to say lives? Yes.

Afterall, lets say they would have sent in Apaches yesterday to kill the enemies - lets say even you get collatoral damage. I see it very unlikely you would achieve the same body count on the Iraqi side (66+ because of the raid) and surely not the same count amoungst the Americans.

quote:

So our protection to them is to blow their kid's heads off so we can get at our enemy?

Your wrong, they don't want the US protection and I don't see a US duty in protecting these people. The US duty is to protect the people of Iraq, not fullujah.

quote:

Somehow, I don't think we would be very good liberators then.

Read your history books rape in pilage is the best way to liberate a people. You'd be suprise how grateful they are to you afterwords.

___________________
SAVE ZIONIST MUSTARD: BUY ZIONIST KETCHUP!


Click here to support the free mustard alliance.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Yes. All "accuracy" and efficiency is at the end of the day at the expense of collateral damage. The most accuracy and efficient method is a sniper, but then you have to insert him, extract him, and give him a percise target. Next you have a team of special forces to raid an area. Next you have a team of regular forces raiding an area. Than you have armored cars or helicopters Next you have tanks Then you get artillery/F-16s and now your fresh out of options unless you want to use some nukes. So if the USA is using the first options, say a sniper, by all means they should be using a helicopter to reduce their casualties in the right circumstances (i.e. Fulluja) and not be sending in regular forces to raid the area. A helicopter attack is much more inaccurate than a guy on the ground -and will most likely take innocents out in a densly populated area. Its all a degree of scale. Do I think that the US should close the city and bomb it all houses are leveled like the author of the article has said? No. Do I think they should not be afraid to use their tanks, apaches, F-16s, and exessive force more freely when warrented to say lives? Yes. Afterall, lets say they would have sent in Apaches yesterday to kill the enemies - lets say even you get collatoral damage. I see it very unlikely you would achieve the same body count on the Iraqi side (66+ because of the raid) and surely not the same count amoungst the Americans.

I think in general, we probably see eye to eye here.

quote:

Your wrong, they don't want the US protection and I don't see a US duty in protecting these people. The US duty is to protect the people of Iraq, not fullujah.

You're treating Fullujah separately from Iraq. Why? Are we not there to protect the innocent in all cities in Iraq? And the innocent does not necessarily have to like us or even agree with us. That does not make them less innocent, however. Barring them picking up a rifle, grenade, or knife to attack us, we still have an obligation to protect them as best as possible. That is our policy.

quote:

Read your history books rape in pilage is the best way to liberate a people. You'd be suprise how grateful they are to you afterwords.

You needn't remind me of this unfortunate fact. The Old Testament is a "testament" to this for sure.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

so let me get this straight...we go to iraq to find WMD's..turns out to be bullshit...next we say oh no we went to free the people so they can live a nice peaceful life,free of dictatorship and a promising future..but instead we blow up the whole country???

quote:

Originally posted by tranceaholic so let me get this straight...we go to iraq to find WMD's..turns out to be bullshit...next we say oh no we went to free the people so they can live a nice peaceful life,free of dictatorship and a promising future..but instead we blow up the whole country???

Exactly. You're straight now, right?

Right?

Well I sure am.

I think.....

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Exactly. You're straight now, right? Right? Well I sure am. I think.....

hmm i dont get ur question..haha