Suicide bombers. Split from Obama/armed forces thread

[MA-Caver]

.

 

[Twin Fist]

Andrew,
One thing you need to remember. before say, 1980 or so, there was no such things as "precision munitions" Now, we can target very specific locations, and hit them. And we do. We can avoid civilian deaths, and we do.

These guys pack a truck with explosives and drive it into a market and detonate. THATS targeting civilians.

They are BAD GUYS.

Stuff like this is why some people find it is easy to accuse people of not being proud americans. As soon as someone mentions bad behavior from bad guys, someone like you has to pop up and start talking about all the bad things america has done, as if that matters to the discussion at hand.

it doesnt.

We are talking about NOW, indians, WW2, whatever else doesnt have anything to do with NOW. Right NOW we dont target civilians because it is wrong. Right NOW the bag guys DO target civilians, cuz they cant handle a stand up fight. Why cant you just admit that without trying to obscure the issue by dragging up all this past bad behavior?

Dont get me wrong, you are not saying anything that is false, I know that, but it is meaningless NOW because we are not doing that stuff NOW. And we havnt for a long time.

do you see the difference?

 

[Andrew Green]

Andrew,
One thing you need to remember. before say, 1980 or so, there was no such things as "precision munitions" Now, we can target very specific locations, and hit them. And we do. We can avoid civilian deaths, and we do.

Well, there are still a large number of civilian casualties, but we can ignore that as you kinda made my point.

YOU have precision munitions, THEY do not. You use the tactics you have available to you, however the insurgents do not have those same tactics available to them. They cannot land cruise missiles on US mainland military targets, they can't even fire missiles into US bases in their territory.

You have million dollar guidance & delivery systems, they are lucky to get a old truck. Expecting them to adhere to the same tactics the US military does is just not going to happen.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

What were the civilian casulties from those precise munitions again?

 

[Twin Fist]

Andrew,
they dont HAVE to suit up in plastic explosive and go into a market where there are no soldiers, just civilians.

They choose to.

i understand attacks on military personel. And there is a big difference between killing civilians by accident, and killing civilians intentionally

the islamics do it intentionally.

thats BAD
that makes them BAD GUYS

Yeah Bob, it is too many. but that happens because the BAD GUYS hide among the civilians. So when those civilians are killed? thats the bad guys fault too.

 

[Andrew Green]

And I will say again, deliberatly targeting civilians to effect morale of the civilian population, the military and to pressure the politicians is a tactic that the US has used in recent memory. Does that mean the US is the "bad guys" as well?

War sucks all around, when a country is a warzone then the civilians end up getting killed too, this is something the US has never experienced, it has never been occupied by a foriegn military. It has however targeted civilians.

So I really don't think you can claim this glorious "we are good they are bad" line that you are trying to. From their perspective a foriegn military is occupying their country, they are going to do everything they possibly can to remove the occupying force. They can't fight a "clean" fight, The US probably spends more on weapons in a week then they have to spend in a year. They are severly outnumbered, and severly out gunned. That means fighting a "fair" fight is out of the question, and things are going to get dirty.

I'm not saying they are right, but try to see things from their perspective, this is not a clear case of "good vs evil", both sides are doing some nasty things and neither side can claim to be "good" IMO.

From their perspective they are fighting for their freedom, and their independence. Their right to exist as a self-determined people. A vastly more powerful military force is trying to take that away, using tactics and weapons that they lack the ability to respond in kind with. Which means the only thing they can do is fight dirty. Something a martial arts forum, where many styles advocate dirty fighting against a larger, stronger opponent, whould be able to relate to.

 

[Flying Crane]

Take the gloves off. A vastly disproportional response to acts of terrorism. Make the penalty for terrorism so freaking horrific no one would dare it.

Care to elaborate with a hypothetical example?

 

[Big Don]

What's really unfair is the time difference that means when I'm up and posting you lot are in bed and when I get up in the morning I find hundreds of posts added! then I have to go to work for 12 hours so no hope of adding more ( sighs of relief form TF and Big Don there rofl).
Bob, the Crusaders aong with talk of gods and religion always bring me back to Monty Python, they've ruined most subjects really lol!

You should just adjust your life to PDT.

 

[Flying Crane]

Flying Crane,
While what you say is true, I mean, we DID help Bin Laden fight the Soviets, and we DID help Saddam when he was at war with the Iranians, we cannot be blamed for their later actions.

Bin Laden isnt mad at the US because we cut him off. he HAD money, he didnt need ours. Most reports say that he started hating the US in 90 when he offered to fight the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, and the Saudi royals told him to pack sand and called the US for help. he is more mad at the Saudi royals than at us.

Likewise, Saddam was pissed at us not for helping him, but because we stood up to him when he decided he might like an ocean front palace in Kuwait for the off season. Wether we helped him before that or not, he would still have invaded, and we would still have stopped him.

And, there are bad guys in the world. They strap retarded women with vests of plastique, and remote detonate them.They do this with kids too. And dogs. They flew planes into buildings. They blew up the marine barracks in 1984.They slaughtered Israeli athletes in Munich

The hate comes from the imams. They know their only power comes from the people having nothing else in thier life BUT islam. The imams depend of the sheep being miserable and angry.

The imams hate us because our lifestyle places less importance on faith, yet we all live like kings. Thats a threat to thier power. The good life? without Allah?

So what happens? the arabic people see us, see that we are NOT devoted to allah, yet we live great lives, so the imams tell their sheep that we are evil. That we are keeping them down. That we should die. And that by killing us, they will gain the favor of the prophet. For alot of them, the Koran is the only book they ever read. And it doesnt help that the koran is perhaps the most violent book ever written. It tells that that infidels are not even human, much less equal to themselves. It tells them that it is ok to lie to us, because we are infidels, deserving only of death.

So we cant trust them, we cant reason with them, we cant negotiate with them. All we can do, with the RADICALS is die, or kill them. This isnt our fault. We would happily leave them alone if they would stop trying to kill us all........

i agree with you that the US, with the best of intentions, does often create problems for itself, but i disagree that these two examples are good ones.

I see we simply have a very different worldly viewpoint.

 

[Flying Crane]

I guess in my ethical economy, whether you commit murder because you "hate our freedom" or you commit murder because you "are pissed because we gave guns to your enemies"... it's still murder; the rest is just excuse making

well, "they hate our freedom" is just a silly line used by the Bush regime.

However, giving guns to one's enemies would obviously be viewed as unlawfully aiding our enemies to commit murder, and thereby an accomplice to murder.

There's a bigger picture here. It's not just individual, or even groups of acts of violence. It's generations of ugly history and violence and messy politics. Why does the US believe it can step into the middle of this, throw our weight around, and remain unscathed?

 

[Big Don]

well, "they hate our freedom" is just a silly line used by the Bush regime.

Oh, but, it is NOT:
Following are excerpts from an interview with Saudi cleric Muhammad Al-Munajid, which aired on Al-Majd TV on March 30, 2008.
Muhammad Al-Munajid: Some of these heretics say: "Islam is not the private property of anyone." So what do they want? They say: "No sect has a monopoly on Islam." So what do they want? They say: "We want to issue rulings." Someone who is ignorant, who does not know any Arabic, or who has no knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence wants to issue rulings?! They say: "We reinterpret the texts." There is a very dangerous conspiracy against the religion of Islam in newspapers and in what these people say. A journalist, or one of those lowlifes, wants to... These people are a mixture of Western, local, and imported ideologies, but they want to express their views with regard to religious rulings. This is the prerogative of religious scholars, not of ignorant people, the prerogative of knowledgeable people, not of fools or heretics.
[...]
The problem is that they want to open a debate on whether Islam is true or not, and on whether Judaism and Christianity are false or not. In other words, they want to open up everything for debate. Now they want to open up all issues for debate. That's it. It begins with freedom of thought, it continues with freedom of speech, and it ends up with freedom of belief. So where's the conspiracy? They say: Let's have freedom of thought in Islam. Well, what do they want? They say: I think, therefore I want to express my thoughts. I want to express myself, I want to talk and say, for example, that there are loopholes in Islam, or that Christianity is the truth. Then they will talk about freedom of belief, and say that anyone is entitled to believe in whatever he wants... If you want to become an apostate – go ahead. Fancy Buddhism? Leave Islam, and join Buddhism. No problem. That's what freedom of belief is all about. They want freedom of everything. What they want is very dangerous.



You can choose not to believe wether or not any/most/or few Muslims believe the same way this particular imam does, but, his statement (quoted and linked above) puts lie to your's.

 

[Andrew Green]

You can choose not to believe wether or not any/most/or few Muslims believe the same way this particular imam does, but, his statement (quoted and linked above) puts lie to your's.

Some Christians are pretty similar, including this US politician:

[yt]qW6sRUuVVSY[/yt]

"What you have to spew and spread is extremely dangerous . . . it's dangerous for our children to even know that your philosophy exists!"

Referring to people not believing in God.

It's just political rhetoric though, on both sides. Believing that it was the cause of hostilities is simply ignoring way too many other issues.

 

[Twin Fist]

Andrew,
AGAIN, we are talking about NOW, and no, America does not do that NOW. Could you please focus or do you just feel compelled to bring up all the past acts that you feel make us bad guys too?

If so i would ask you WHY you feel compelled to bring up american bad acts that are NO LONGER BEING DONE. Like I said before, this tendency to smear America is why some people listen to people like yourself, and label them "America haters"

I know this is a shock to you since you seem to revel in bringing up American bad acts from the past, but yes, we are the good guys. Whenever anyone else's *** in in the fryer, they call US for help, and we go help.

And I DONT CARE what their perspective is, they mutilate women's genitals, they stone women for being raped. They cut off people's heads on VIDEO FOR CRAPS SAKE. And compared to them you dont think the US is the good guy??????

No we have not always been perfect, but we at least TRY. Can you say the same about the other guys? well, YOU might, but not many many would.

" From their perspective a foriegn military is occupying their country, they are going to do everything they possibly can to remove the occupying force. "

WRONG. Most of the insurgants these days are from IRAN. Got that? these are not Iraqi's trying to repel "invaders" So you are flat out WRONG about that.

"From their perspective they are fighting for their freedom, and their independence. Their right to exist as a self-determined people."

Wrong again Andrew, there is no freedom or self determination, they are trying to create a caliphate. A theocracy. No free elections, no democracy. You are wrong about that too.


Andrew, i know you are a smart guy, and you are very polite, but you insist on smearing America, i feel un-fairly. And you are actually just wrong about some stuff.

 

[Twin Fist]

Flying Crane,
We may well have a different world view.

One piece of advice for you though, using the word "regime". I wouldnt advise doing that. The reason is, usually the people who do that are the far left loonies. Your opinions may get discounted if you use that sort of language. I wouldnt want to see that happen. Even if I dont agree with you, your opinions are thought provoking and interesting.

Just advice, ignore if you like.

 

[elder999]

Flying Crane,
We may well have a different world view.

One piece of advice for you though, using the word "regime". I wouldnt advise doing that. The reason is, usually the people who do that are the far left loonies. Your opinions may get discounted if you use that sort of language. I wouldnt want to see that happen. Even if I dont agree with you, your opinions are thought provoking and interesting.

Just advice, ignore if you like.

dictionary[/i], dontcha know?) ]

Main Entry: re·gime Variant(s): also ré·gime \rā-ˈzhēm, ri- also ri-ˈjēm\ Function: noun Etymology: French régime, from Old French regimen, regime, from Late Latin regimin-, regimen Date: 1776 1 a: regimen 1 b: a regular pattern of occurrence or action (as of seasonal rainfall) c: the characteristic behavior or orderly procedure of a natural phenomenon or process

2 a: mode of rule or management b: a form of government <a socialist regime> c: a government in power <predicted that the new regime would fall> d: a period of rule

snark, snark, snark!

 

[elder999]

If so i would ask you WHY you feel compelled to bring up american bad acts that are NO LONGER BEING DONE. Like I said before, this tendency to smear America is why some people listen to people like yourself, and label them "America haters"
.

How is it any different than bringing up the pro-slavery, racist past of the Democratic party? Or is it the same?

 

[Twin Fist]

*sigh*
some people's kids.................:duh:

 

[Twin Fist]

How is it any different than bringing up the pro-slavery, racist past of the Democratic party? Or is it the same?

I would say it is about the same. it's differnet in that it isnt "America" it is just a political party, but thats not much different.Thats why i dont do that.

 

[Andrew Green]

Andrew,
AGAIN, we are talking about NOW, and no, America does not do that NOW. Could you please focus or do you just feel compelled to bring up all the past acts that you feel make us bad guys too?

If so i would ask you WHY you feel compelled to bring up american bad acts that are NO LONGER BEING DONE. Like I said before, this tendency to smear America is why some people listen to people like yourself, and label them "America haters"

No, you are missing a key piece of what I am saying. Circumstances have a lot to do with how people act. The US has never been in the same situation that Iraq is in, the closest it has been was WW2, when there was a threat of the fighting coming to US soil. At that time the US did bomb civilians. (As did many other countries) I am not trying to "blame America", but as I am debating Americans who are trying to hold the high ground, America's history seems the most relevant.

It is very easy to say "we don't do that now" when the situation is entirely different, you have the most powerful military on the planet and are fighting a 3rd world country with a very limited and organized military. Who are as much resistance fighters as they are a organized military.

I know this is a shock to you since you seem to revel in bringing up American bad acts from the past, but yes, we are the good guys. Whenever anyone else's *** in in the fryer, they call US for help, and we go help.

"Good guys" is a matter of perspective. I suspect if you where to survey people from a range of nations you would get a mixed response on that. Not everyone thinks you are the good guys. Some nations do, some nations don't, some nations are split.

And I DONT CARE what their perspective is, they mutilate women's genitals, they stone women for being raped. They cut off people's heads on VIDEO FOR CRAPS SAKE. And compared to them you dont think the US is the good guy??????

What you don't seem to want to accept is that I am trying to say "look at it from all perspectives, not just the US one."

Yes, there is some morally bad things that go on there, however morality is not a cut and dry issue. There are also things in the US legal system that are objectionable IMO, and in the Canadian one. But is it anyone elses place to step in and force us to follow their moral code? I don't think it is.

Most of the things that they do where done in our own past, we grew out of them on our own. I imagine we will grow out of more things as well over time. Trying to change their moral code by military force won't work, and it wouldn't have worked on us either.

No we have not always been perfect, but we at least TRY. Can you say the same about the other guys? well, YOU might, but not many many would.

Yes, they are living as they believe their God has told them too. As their culture and society grows it will evolve and change, same as ours did.

" From their perspective a foriegn military is occupying their country, they are going to do everything they possibly can to remove the occupying force. "

WRONG. Most of the insurgants these days are from IRAN. Got that? these are not Iraqi's trying to repel "invaders" So you are flat out WRONG about that.

I wonder, has the US said or done anything recently that would leave Iran feeling threatened?

Not to mention lack of proof, some might be from Iran, but not all, not at this point anyways. Not to mention that they are much more a like then we are to them, and that brings people together. If a foreign power was occupying the US, and the US was battered and in ruins, I suspect Canadians would start helping the US fight back.

"From their perspective they are fighting for their freedom, and their independence. Their right to exist as a self-determined people."

Wrong again Andrew, there is no freedom or self determination, they are trying to create a caliphate. A theocracy. No free elections, no democracy. You are wrong about that too.

"Freedom" is a matter of perspective, why do you assume that our form of democracy forced on them would be a improvement? It's certainely not a perfect system, and shouldn't they be free to choose the system they want?

btw - Iraq was one of the most secular countries in the region under Sudam, it was not a theocracy.

Andrew, i know you are a smart guy, and you are very polite, but you insist on smearing America, i feel un-fairly. And you are actually just wrong about some stuff.

If you believe that pointing out similarities between where the middle east is now, and how the the US was in fairly recent history is smearing the US, then there is really not much I can do to change that.

But if the US (and Canada) cannot be "perfect" despite the fact that we are very well isolated from any potential threats, and we have not had our warfare occur within our countries in a very long time, how can you expect a region that does not have that luxury, and has seen conflict in pretty much every generation for a very long time to not have some pretty major problems?

But bombing them isn't the solution, if anything it will make things worse.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I find any nation that condones torture, secret trials, secret police, spying on its own people, unlawful and open ended detainments, and continuous violation of international law and treaty to be reprehensible. Now, who fits that description?

Going back to suicide bombers and their reason for going kaboom....ok, "they hate us". That's obvious. But, who is they? The guys at the top of those groups, and alot of the middlemen, and alot of the guys going kaboom. But, "they" is not all Muslims, all Iraqis, all Iranians, etc. It's a small portion of their population. The average person there, is most likely just like the average person here...could care less, they have more immediate needs to deal with. Identifying the "who" is important.

Identifying the "why" is also important. Looking at a timeline of "we hate america" protests world wide, and then looking to see what the US was doing at those times might shed some real light on things, rather than all the poitical BS that's floating around.

The -main- reason I've seen tends to be American support and muscle (economic and military) in regards to Israel, and intererence in domestic affairs of foriegn nations. Nothing to do with decadent strip clubs, excessive eating or rap music here.

So, if it's our involvement that's the problem, maybe the fix is rather simple.
Reject Hamilton, return to Jefferson.
Stop being the worlds policeman. Pull our military back, stop sending aid out, stop trying to help, and take care of our own here. Let Israel go it alone, or lean on others more than ol' Unkle Sam. Course, this also means, stop buying OPEC oil, and develop our own sources here and alternates as well. Make the US self-sufficient.