|
6 Canadian soldiers killed in Afghan bomb blast (pg. 7)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| EvilTree |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magnetonium
EDIT: Actually, these clips just show that these "terrorists" are quite moderate, and instead of bombing and shooting civilians at will they instead aim at occupational forces. Thats part of the war. They cant engage them openly because Americans and NATO outnumber, outgun and outmaneuvre them, so thats what they do to succeed. How else do you expect the resistance to successfully attack the enemy? |
That's the thing.
Suicide bombers and IEDs are only effective methods to target NATO troops.
It is still indiscriminant consider how many civvies get hurt in the process. I don't think that's mild at all.
So many posts to reply to on this thread. Exams blow. It's going to take me a while to post a rebuttal. |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
That's the thing.
Suicide bombers and IEDs are only effective methods to target NATO troops.
It is still indiscriminant consider how many civvies get hurt in the process. I don't think that's mild at all.
So many posts to reply to on this thread. Exams blow. It's going to take me a while to post a rebuttal. |
Heck, in World War II in the most desperate times some Soviet troops literally were suicide bombers - they loved their homeland so much they literally willingly killed themselves to kill enemy - but they werent called "suicide bombers" - there are plenty of heroes who charged on tanks and blew themselves up along with German soldiers. Its happened in history. It works. It also works as a good morale booster. If the enemy is attacking you with hundred times the armour, bombs, weapons and people, you cant engage them on equal terms and win, its pointless. Thats why there's guerilla warfare and it has been successful. Cant blame these people, though I still disagree with the terrorists and them attacking the civilians, but I wont get down to the cospiracies. Some of these people are resistance fighters, while others are terrorists who come to Afghanistan with shady agendas to benefit some other dark forces, not Afghanis. |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magnetonium
What the hell is the point of that retarded spamming on previous page? Duh, its obvious the terrorists like to videotape their work. Obviously they exist, no doubt about it. Too bad American forces dont follow the same videotaping scenario when they shoot innocent civilians ... I read plenty of articles and watched clips on television where bloodied Afghani civilians were telling the camera how disoriented Americans, scared and panicking shooting at will. Around Kabul last year that actually resulted in a big Afghani riot that eventually killed over 100 people. But you dont see American government or pro-American forces showing Americans shooting the civilians, do you?
EDIT: Actually, these clips just show that these "terrorists" are quite moderate, and instead of bombing and shooting civilians at will they instead aim at occupational forces. Thats part of the war. They cant engage them openly because Americans and NATO outnumber, outgun and outmaneuvre them, so thats what they do to succeed. How else do you expect the resistance to successfully attack the enemy? |
I'd like to put you in a battle with George Bush to see who's more delusional. It could be a new reality show on Fox. |
|
|
| erdega |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
i think spammers are the scum of the earth.
...just right below biased, internet-forum moderators. |
What do you think about your government wanting to ban any video and informantion coming from the war zones ?
Apparently the US tyrranical regime wants to ban all the "enemy propaganda" so to speak. So in America it's ok to lie and deceive and launch genocidal wars of aggression against defenseless people and get promoted and reelected for it but it's not ok to show consequences of those actions. Are American people really standing up for this and how long can they espouse "democracy" and "free media" while doing everything against it ?
http://www.toptechnews.com/story.xhtml?story_id=51045
| quote: | March 28, 2007 - Cyberattacks can take different forms, including eliminating terrorists' Web sites and creating doubts among insurgents about their networks' security, said John Arquilla, a professor at the Naval Postgraduate School who favors an offensive approach he calls a "virtual scorched-earth policy."
The U.S. military is quietly expanding capabilities to attack terrorists' computer networks, including Web sites that glorify insurgent attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq, military officials and experts say.
The move comes as al-Qaeda and other groups fighting in Iraq and elsewhere have expanded their activities on the Internet and increased the sophistication and volume of their videos and messages. Much of the material is designed to raise money and recruit fighters for Iraq.
"You should not let them operate uncontested" on the Internet and elsewhere in cyberspace, said Marine Brig. Gen. John Davis, who heads a military command located at the National Security Agency. The command was established to develop ways to attack computer networks.
Davis and other officials declined to say whether the military has actually attacked any networks, which would require presidential authorization. The techniques are highly classified.
Pentagon contract documents show the military asks companies to develop a "full spectrum ... of computer network attack techniques." Run by the Air Force Research Laboratory, this program aims to spend $40 million over four years, documents show.
The growth in offensive capabilities signals a shift in military thinking from just monitoring terrorists' Web sites for intelligence to attacking those sites.
"The offensive is increasingly on leaders' minds," said John Arquilla, a professor at the Naval Postgraduate School who also works for the Defense Department on cyberwar issues.
Some officials say cyberattacks can result in losing critical intelligence.
"You always have the built-in tension between the operator who wants to destroy the target and the intelligence officer who wants to use the target to gain more information," said Lani Kass, director of the Air Force's cyberspace task force.
"Our opponents do a heck of a lot more than just watch us in cyberspace," Davis said. "They are acting in cyberspace. We need to develop options so that we can ... dominate cyberspace."
Cyber attacks can take different forms, including eliminating terrorists' Web sites and creating doubts among insurgents about their networks' security Relevant Products/Services, said Arquilla, who favors an offensive approach he calls a "virtual scorched-earth policy." |
|
|
|
| erdega |
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
So many posts to reply to on this thread. Exams blow. It's going to take me a while to post a rebuttal. |
I am busy so I'll respond later |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
ostrich-759977.jpg
I'd like to put you in a battle with George Bush to see who's more delusional. It could be a new reality show on Fox. |
Aaaagh. I see ... instead of having a decent argument to present or to continue the discussion in civilized means, you are going personal. Keep up the good work! What you are forgetting is that I hate Fox News and Bush, so I find it funny you add those two to my posts. I am neither supporting Bush's propaganda machine nor the occupational tactics and not the terrorists either. I am trying to draw a fine line in between. Current ways of doing thing in Afghanistan are failing, doomed strategy. One way or another, changes need to be implemented or one day hell will break loose again in Afghanistan once the order and bribing of warlords will end. |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magnetonium
Aaaagh. I see ... instead of having a decent argument to present or to continue the discussion in civilized means, you are going personal. Keep up the good work! What you are forgetting is that I hate Fox News and Bush, so I find it funny you add those two to my posts. I am neither supporting Bush's propaganda machine nor the occupational tactics and not the terrorists either. I am trying to draw a fine line in between. Current ways of doing thing in Afghanistan are failing, doomed strategy. One way or another, changes need to be implemented or one day hell will break loose again in Afghanistan once the order and bribing of warlords will end. |
Sorry, I've attempted, and witnessed numerous others attempt to discuss things with you, but you seem like one of the most dense people that I've ever encountered, on a forum, or in real life. You ignore numerous facts, which has left you with hardly anyone who agrees with you. That says a lot since this is a pretty liberal board.
Also, if you couldn't get the point of the Fox or Bush references (in relation to you), you're even less perceptive than I thought. Since that's the case, why would I bother to discuss something?
Anyhow, I've given up with you. I used to try, and like you said, now I just make personal attacks, so I'll stop dealing with you period after this. |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by Groundhog Boy
Sorry, I've attempted, and witnessed numerous others attempt to discuss things with you, but you seem like one of the most dense people that I've ever encountered, on a forum, or in real life. You ignore numerous facts, which has left you with hardly anyone who agrees with you. That says a lot since this is a pretty liberal board.
Also, if you couldn't get the point of the Fox or Bush references (in relation to you), you're even less perceptive than I thought. Since that's the case, why would I bother to discuss something?
Anyhow, I've given up with you. I used to try, and like you said, now I just make personal attacks, so I'll stop dealing with you period after this. |
Which numerous facts did I ignore again? Taliban is no Al Qaeda, bud. Plus dont forget who supported both of those ******s in the first place. U - S - A. And who do we have to blame for current problems in Afghanistan? Well, you guessed it - US politicians for giving rise to power to these radicals. Just like what they are doing in Iran right now, funding terrorists to strike within Iran.
And who is running Afghanistan right now? Mostly former war criminals, drug traders, warlords. Drug production still legal. Human rights still denied. Law still enforced by warlords. And that's democracy my Canadian men and women are dying for? Fork that !!!! |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magnetonium
And who is running Afghanistan right now? Mostly former war criminals, drug traders, warlords. Drug production still legal. Human rights still denied. Law still enforced by warlords. And that's democracy my Canadian men and women are dying for? Fork that !!!![/COLOR] |
What?
Did you think it was going to happen as fast as that microwave dinner you enjoy behind your keyboard?
Comeon...:rolleyes: |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by erdega
What do you think about your government wanting to ban any video and informantion coming from the war zones? |
you'll have to be more specific.
| quote: | | Apparently the US tyrranical regime wants to ban all the "enemy propaganda" so to speak. So in America it's ok to lie and deceive and launch genocidal wars of aggression against defenseless people and get promoted and reelected for it but it's not ok to show consequences of those actions. Are American people really standing up for this and how long can they espouse "democracy" and "free media" while doing everything against it? |
most Americans obviously don't see it the way you do.
most Iraqis also see differently as well.
the people that do here and there represent a very small and i dare say insignifigant percentage of the pop..
but not so insignifigant to be very loud and very homicidal. |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
you'll have to be more specific. |
You'll have to be less of a neocon lol.
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
most Americans obviously don't see it the way you do.
most Iraqis also see differently as well.
the people that do here and there represent a very small and i dare say insignifigant percentage of the pop..
but not so insignifigant to be very loud and very homicidal. |
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Thanks for the laughs Q, that's was f'n great. I've never seen such blatant horse from you before, wait... I think I have LOL. |
|
|
| erdega |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
you'll have to be more specific. |
I clearly meant and I provided an article that US agencies and their subsidiaries like nato,eu,un want to search and ban all the videos they deem against their military effort
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
most Americans obviously don't see it the way you do. |
See what exactly ? I think I speak for growing number of americans but who are maybe timid and afraid of being called out unpatriotic or what not.
| quote: | | Originally posted by Q5echo most Iraqis also see differently as well |
Ok this is weird, are you in Iraq? I think the chaos and brutal slaughter happening under american army watch speaks clearly as to who is responsible and how it got there but I don't expect them to admit to anything and there is no one to hold them responsible least of all the american people , after all these are the same people who targeted tv stations and bridges and laughed about it and the guy who ordered it ran for a president
| quote: | | Originally posted by Q5echo the people that do here and there represent a very small and i dare say insignifigant percentage of the pop.. |
and yet the US government and their allies are threatened by mere videos and you can't view anything on mainstream media |
|
|
|
|
