|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
View Poll Results: What the hell should we do?
|
Get out now!!
|
|
1 |
3.70% |
Send mre troops and beat them down, even if we draft?
|
|
11 |
40.74% |
Throw it on the United Nations Lap. Thats what they there for.
|
|
7 |
25.93% |
Impeach Bush and charge him and Chenny and Rummy with war crimes
|
|
8 |
29.63% |
12-14-2006, 08:10 PM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 3,781
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stripersnipr
Wow you must be privy to some real secret stuff because this is the first time I've heard of civilians being targeted by America in Iraq including the shock and awe campaign which targeted strictly Government and Military Targets. That probably bums you out huh?
|
If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.
|
Good health and family
|
|
|
12-14-2006, 08:41 PM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,183
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skitterpop
If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.
|
Well, I think we've killed on the low end many tens of thousands to on the high end several hundred thousand innocent Iraqi's.
Any way you cut it it's a lot of death.
If I remember correctly, International law does provide for a "reasonable" number of civilian deaths as acceptable in times of war.
But considering the context...
The the ratio of civilians to hostiles isn't very productive.
That most of the world (including America) doesn't buy the justification.
That it's clear the war was planned and executed at the top in a most incompetent manner.
So given all of that, it's really not all that difficult for a Muslim in some far off country to think the local Imam might just be preaching the truth when he calls for Jihad against the West who's waging a crusade aginst Islam.
Please think
Bing! because in that time another few young men or women joined the dark side.
Get it?
-spence
|
|
|
|
12-14-2006, 10:32 PM
|
#3
|
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 35,012
|
I would not consider war crimes just or practical. Certainly to the military - just doesn't fly for me. I wouldn't mind seeing some investigations at the very top...
Interesting read from Iraq - I'm about 1/2 way through but my eyes are burnt out...
http://www.brookings.edu/comm/events/20061026.pdf
|
~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~
Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers
Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.
Apocalypse is Coming:
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 12:22 PM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plymouth, Ma
Posts: 1,405
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Well, I think we've killed on the low end many tens of thousands to on the high end several hundred thousand innocent Iraqi's.
So given all of that, it's really not all that difficult for a Muslim in some far off country to think the local Imam might just be preaching the truth when he calls for Jihad against the West who's waging a crusade aginst Islam.
Please think
Bing! because in that time another few young men or women joined the dark side.
Get it?
-spence
|
You make it sound like Terrorism was born as a result of the Iraq invasion.......It simply isn't true.
|
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 12:32 PM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,183
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stripersnipr
You make it sound like Terrorism was born as a result of the Iraq invasion.......It simply isn't true.
|
Not at all, I only cited recent examples that are having tremendous impact. There's plenty to pick from in the past half century. Granted you or I might not agree with an alternate assessment, but that simply is the way it is...
-spence
|
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 07:33 PM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 3,781
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Not at all, I only cited recent examples that are having tremendous impact. There's plenty to pick from in the past half century. Granted you or I might not agree with an alternate assessment, but that simply is the way it is...
-spence
|
You say Toma toe they say Tahmahto
|
Good health and family
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 11:10 PM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Seekonk
Posts: 1,796
|
In Skitterpops mind, every member of a US Bomber crew that flew flights over Germany during WWII should be charged with war crimes. I mean, how many tens of thousands of civilians were killed during those bombings!? FDR and IKE should've been charged with war crimes and murder also. After all, they ordered the attacks that killed those civilians! In Skitterpops mind, they must be war criminals too.
Just needed to put into perspective how insane his logic is.
|
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 11:03 PM
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Seekonk
Posts: 1,796
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skitterpop
If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.
|
No one ever stated that no civilians were killed during shock and awe, they certainly werent targeted though, we have the most precise bombs ever known to man, but civilians will always be killed by accident. We went after military targets of importance, but civilians were killed because they were around those targets, but they werent the intended targets. You know this, quit playing your stupid war crimes bull %$%$%$%$. But you seem to believe that any civilian killed by accident means that Bush is Guilty of a war crime. Thats just insane! If he was ordering bombs dropped on civilians to kill them, then i'd be outraged too! But we both know this is NOT the case. I know you'd like to believe we are targeting civilians, but it aint the case buddy!
Wake up, and stop with this Bush is going out of his way to kill civilians bull %$%$%$%$. Of course civilians were killed during shock and awe, but they were NOT the intended targets. God you need to get a clue
|
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 11:20 PM
|
#9
|
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 35,012
|
I don't think Bush is going out of his way to get civillians killed - kinda rediculous. Sure, he has ranged from stupid to less than brilliant on many things but trying to kill civilians is as foolish as him being behind 9/11.
The rules of engagement by the US military are probably more inline with minimizing civilian casualties than any military in the past 100 years.
Shock and Awe was just that. Precision munitions and missiles that destroy what they are aiming at 85% of the time.
From a military standpoint to be able to take out a single target now means that one aircraft can often destroy today, in 2006, what probably would have taken a squadron of B17s in WW2. Two smart weapons from one aircraft hitting the intended target instead of a fleet of aircraft indiscriminently unloading hundreds of bombs for the same target. Even in Vietnam there was often several attempts at a target with "dumb" bombs that were within a few years hit with the early versions of laser guided weapons.
Using the unguided weapons caused far more civilian deaths and the deaths of our military (takes a lot more planes to hit a target means a lot more planes can get shot down).
Add to the top of it that these people on the other side put THEIR civilians in harm's way. Mosques, schools, hospitals.
|
~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~
Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers
Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.
Apocalypse is Coming:
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 02:39 AM
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Seekonk
Posts: 1,796
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR
I don't think Bush is going out of his way to get civillians killed - kinda rediculous. Sure, he has ranged from stupid to less than brilliant on many things but trying to kill civilians is as foolish as him being behind 9/11.
The rules of engagement by the US military are probably more inline with minimizing civilian casualties than any military in the past 100 years.
Shock and Awe was just that. Precision munitions and missiles that destroy what they are aiming at 85% of the time.
From a military standpoint to be able to take out a single target now means that one aircraft can often destroy today, in 2006, what probably would have taken a squadron of B17s in WW2. Two smart weapons from one aircraft hitting the intended target instead of a fleet of aircraft indiscriminently unloading hundreds of bombs for the same target. Even in Vietnam there was often several attempts at a target with "dumb" bombs that were within a few years hit with the early versions of laser guided weapons.
Using the unguided weapons caused far more civilian deaths and the deaths of our military (takes a lot more planes to hit a target means a lot more planes can get shot down).
Add to the top of it that these people on the other side put THEIR civilians in harm's way. Mosques, schools, hospitals.
|
Good post, right on the money!
But Skitterpop thinks we are bunch of dummies for thinking this way!
|
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 09:08 AM
|
#11
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,183
|
STOP
You guys are missing the point.
Nobody has said Bush targets civilians, and the fact that terrorists might do it is moot unless you care to stoop to their level.
The simply fact is that many tens of thousands of civilians are being killed for a variety of reasons and this is adding kerosene to the already blazing fire. Regardless if it's a US bomb, insurgent or terrorist attack...the Iraqi finger points back at the USA as we're supposed to be providing protection.
More Iraqis pushed into the insurgency for nationalistic reasons means even more pushed into sectarian violence and more into Jihad.
We're in a very bad place right now. I hope everyone has a lot of tuna stocked under the bed.
-spence
|
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 09:14 AM
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plymouth, Ma
Posts: 1,405
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
STOP
You guys are missing the point.
Nobody has said Bush targets civilians, and the fact that terrorists might do it is moot unless you care to stoop to their level.
-spence
|
I'm not sure Skitter will agree with you on that.
|
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 09:12 AM
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 3,781
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip N
Good post, right on the money!
But Skitterpop thinks we are bunch of dummies for thinking this way!
|
No I don`t Skip....but nice try at the cover....I make one very brief statement which you add names and much content to which I never mention....you make up all this crap I never said to fit your war on you being right about everything you comment on.....its funny
|
Good health and family
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 09:16 AM
|
#14
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plymouth, Ma
Posts: 1,405
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skitterpop
No I don`t Skip....but nice try at the cover....I make one very brief statement which you add names and much content to which I never mention....you make up all this crap I never said to fit your war on you being right about everything you comment on.....its funny
|
So you are now saying that Bush hasn't targeted civilians? Should Clinton have been charged with War Crimes for his bombing in the Balkins?
|
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 09:33 AM
|
#15
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,183
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stripersnipr
So you are now saying that Bush hasn't targeted civilians?
|
No, he's never said that. He may be saying that he believes our use of force has at times been illegal...
-spence
|
|
|
|
12-15-2006, 11:25 PM
|
#16
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 3,781
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip N
No one ever stated that no civilians were killed during shock and awe, they certainly werent targeted though, we have the most precise bombs ever known to man, but civilians will always be killed by accident. We went after military targets of importance, but civilians were killed because they were around those targets, but they werent the intended targets. You know this, quit playing your stupid war crimes bull %$%$%$%$. But you seem to believe that any civilian killed by accident means that Bush is Guilty of a war crime. Thats just insane! If he was ordering bombs dropped on civilians to kill them, then i'd be outraged too! But we both know this is NOT the case. I know you'd like to believe we are targeting civilians, but it aint the case buddy!
Wake up, and stop with this Bush is going out of his way to kill civilians bull %$%$%$%$. Of course civilians were killed during shock and awe, but they were NOT the intended targets. God you need to get a clue
|
Skip....are you really this dumb?
|
Good health and family
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 10:03 AM
|
#17
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 3,781
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skitterpop
If you believe that because we targeted only military sites that no civilians were killed in the massive bombings then good for you but you are wrong.
|
Here it is..... nice gymnastics TRYING to make it something else
|
Good health and family
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 10:08 AM
|
#18
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plymouth, Ma
Posts: 1,405
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skitterpop
Here it is..... nice gymnastics TRYING to make it something else
|
Then we can assume that the Bombing of the Balkins was a war crime for the same reasons and those responsible should stand trial?
|
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 10:28 AM
|
#19
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 3,781
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stripersnipr
Then we can assume that the Bombing of the Balkins was a war crime for the same reasons and those responsible should stand trial?
|
Skip? Is that you? You can continue to assume as much as you want as that is your forte.
|
Good health and family
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 10:44 AM
|
#20
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plymouth, Ma
Posts: 1,405
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skitterpop
Skip? Is that you? You can continue to assume as much as you want as that is your forte.
|
Cute. Now answer the question please.
|
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 11:02 AM
|
#21
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,183
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stripersnipr
Cute. Now answer the question please.
|
How is this relevent to the conversation on Iraq? Unless you want to dive into the nuances of each action it doesn't add much value.
-spence
|
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 11:10 AM
|
#22
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plymouth, Ma
Posts: 1,405
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
How is this relevent to the conversation on Iraq? Unless you want to dive into the nuances of each action it doesn't add much value.
-spence
|
It's totally relevant to the point of Bush being charged with War Crimes for actions in Iraq which as you'll remember is the fourth choice in the poll question.
Or maybe we should start a new poll which could be:
Should Bush be held to higher standards than past Presidents?
|
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 01:04 PM
|
#23
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 3,781
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stripersnipr
Cute. Now answer the question please.
|
I would if your question had anything to do with what I`ve posted.....assuming you have read my post?
|
Good health and family
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 01:08 PM
|
#24
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Plymouth, Ma
Posts: 1,405
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skitterpop
I would if your question had anything to do with what I`ve posted.....assuming you have read my post?
|
Asking if you felt War Crimes were commited in the Balkins bombing isn't relative to your feeling that War Crimes were commited in the bombing of Iraq? Okay. Like I said I didn't expect you to answer.
|
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 12:29 PM
|
#25
|
Retired Surfer
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sunset Grill
Posts: 9,511
|
Spence, entering the mosques and killing Sadr is my stated opinon, not that of anyone else, yet anyways. We've been told we cannot enter mosques for any reasons. Only Iwaqi soldiers and stupid dumb rabbits can. My only point here is that is an assinine policy. Most of the murderers in Iraq hide there.
|
Swimmer a.k.a. YO YO MA
Serial Mailbox Killer/Seal Fisherman
|
|
|
12-16-2006, 12:40 PM
|
#26
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,183
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swimmer
Spence, entering the mosques and killing Sadr is my stated opinon, not that of anyone else, yet anyways. We've been told we cannot enter mosques for any reasons. Only Iwaqi soldiers and stupid dumb rabbits can. My only point here is that is an assinine policy. Most of the murderers in Iraq hide there.
|
It's simply not feasable most of the time. This isn't political correctness as much as pragmatic strategy. There are so many negatives they outweight the benefit. I'm speaking both locally (revolt) and Globally as it would be a PR boon for Jihadists.
We may have had an opportunity to nail Sadr a few years ago, but his position is so strong now that to directly go after him would be very difficult. It would appear to be US hegemony rather than democratic process.
We do need to find a way to minimize his influence in the Iraqi government. This certainly looks to be a long tent pole.
-spence
|
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Rate This Thread |
Hybrid Mode
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:57 PM.
|
| |