Declassified C130 vid

[cphilip]

Originally posted by impostal22
keep in mind. people are not parrots. they will not just absorb everything they are told and repeat it. they will, believe it or not, think about it (yes, even those darn middle easterners!). that's why some come here. some do not. not because they were brainwashed. but because they were influenced negatively by america. this is not a hard idea to grasp considering we're a dominating force in the middle east, when we have *NO RIGHT* to be there in the first place. i'm not even going to get into the specifics of all the messes the CIA has created around the world, especially the middle east.

and 1DE...you talk of terrorism as if it's something the united states doesn't support (directly and indirectly) when it benefits them. in fact, look up information on the school of americas, where the CIA trains terrorists. or..at least, they train people who later become terrorists and EXTREMELY HARSH DICTATORS. going with your brainwashing theory, the CIA must be brainwashing them into being terrorists! EEK!

You read too many fictional spy stories Son. You think from a perspective that we are always wrong and they are always right. In fact neither is the case. But the side that tries its best to do right is the side to get on. The side that hates and murders is not. You can never chose a totaly perfect angelic side. Get on the side that the "Righest". And then try to make it "Righter".

[cphilip]

Far as I can tell 100% of the Bathists Party aposes our being there.....

[Butterfingers]

Originally posted by impostal22


a couple things to note...keep in mind we supported both saddam hussein and osama bin laden (the cia trained the latter) when it suited our needs. both were the causes of thousands of deaths (even when we supported them). keep this in mind.


second thing...that statement about the h-bomb was not well thought. if we didn't care about civilian casualties, we'd STILL *NOT* drop the h-bomb. know why? i'm sure you can guess. it's called two things: setting a precedence, and foreign relations. countries would hate us a whole lot if we just resorted to nuclear weapons (again...). countries like israel and palestine would feel it's ok to just launch nukes now that we did...it'd open a big ole can of worms that would destroy the world. it was bad enough we set a precedence by ignoring the UN...now, if a country in the UN wants to invade another country and the UN says no, they can do so and say "well, the US did it!" even if we are a superpower, we should not act like one. i really really do not believe in superpowers, especially ones that tend to help other countries that only benefit them (for the most part). i also loathe hypocrisy, and our country would never allow say..france to invade iraq without our OK. 90% of americans would hate french people (more than they already do) within a week of france ignoring our veto against their invasion. this is how the world works, and i don't like it. but i won't sit back and accept it as "how things have been and how things will be."

we do what we do becuase there is a reason for it at the time... At the time it was to prevent the advnac of communism

Im sure we didnt know that Saddam or UBL would end up doing the things that they do today. It is years of INACTION that let them become that way.

Right we set MORAL precedence... we try to avoid civillan causalties to set a GOOD EXAMPLE. Clearly we do care...

Stop equating the present to the past they are 2 diffrent things...

Also REPOST...

Seriously as much as I would like to see a Hippe utopia happen where nobody hates each other and everybody gets along... and everybody gets together and hugs trees. Its not realistic.

Now im being serious here. I do view everybody's lives as equal if and only if they don't pose a threat to my well being or the well being of my friends and family. Now if these Taliban that we are killing did nothing and were peachy keen I would be all against war.

Somthing tells me that scenario is NEVER going to happen nor was it ever likely to happen.

Problem, reality states that isn't the case and they are killing AMERICANS. So they become our enimies and we kill our enimies to protect the ones that are closest.

Bottom Line some people need to wake up and smell the aroma of a fresh brewed cup of "the real world"

Newpost...

Ya gotta get real buddy... if our whole country adopted your mentality. Im pretty sure every terrorist in the world would jump on the oppurtunity to wreak havok.

Its kinda naive to think we can just sit there and isolate ourselves. We had a policy of isolationism before it didnt work... IE WWI

Appeasment has also proven over the course of history to be a futile effort... IE Hitler & WWII

[Butterfingers]

Impostal I would like to hear your solution to the situation now?

What would you do if you were GW Bush....

No more moral arguments, no referring to the past... do you have a solution... thats the bottom line.

[logamus]

wow, i just read this entire post. thats time i will never get back, ever. now i know why the hot chick thread is my favorite. :) got to go, aliens is on starz.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by impostal22
keep in mind. people are not parrots. they will not just absorb everything they are told and repeat it. they will, believe it or not, think about it (yes, even those darn middle easterners!). that's why some come here. some do not. not because they were brainwashed. but because they were influenced negatively by america. this is not a hard idea to grasp considering we're a dominating force in the middle east, when we have *NO RIGHT* to be there in the first place. i'm not even going to get into the specifics of all the messes the CIA has created around the world, especially the middle east.

If not us who? You are truly a fool if you believe that disengagement is the only policy we need to follow in the middle east. Nature abhors a vacuum. If we were to pull out of the middle east alltogether and cut funding to everyone in the region, what would happen? Well first off the Arab world would probably try to invade Israel again. Remember please that Israel has Nuclear weapons. Think this has the potential to screw up the entire world?

You make a big deal about what we did, but why did we do it? We were not acting again in a vacuum. We were responding to the threat (real or perceived) of Communism. Did we fund the bad guys? Sure did. 20 YEARS AGO!!!

and 1DE...you talk of terrorism as if it's something the united states doesn't support (directly and indirectly) when it benefits them. in fact, look up information on the school of americas, where the CIA trains terrorists. or..at least, they train people who later become terrorists and EXTREMELY HARSH DICTATORS. going with your brainwashing theory, the CIA must be brainwashing them into being terrorists! EEK!

Hmmm. We trained people to blow themselves up in crowds of civilians? No I did not think so.

The School of The Americas has been closed for quite some time. It was formed to fight Communist influence in our back yard. Look at Venezuela. This is the 5th largest exporter of Oil to the US. They are in turmoil due to their socialist leader. In the old days, we would have perhaps supported the coupe 2 years ago against him. Now we use Diplomatic pressure as the Communist Threat is dead.

We DO NOT TRAIN TERRORISTS! It may have happened during the cold war where our leaders at the time thought THEY WERE PROTECTING YOU AND YOUR RIGHT TO PROTEST!

You really need to look at the real world and understand that it is a very dangerous place! The good guys don't wear white hats to make themselves easily identifiable. Sometimes deals are struck with the devil to prevent greater evils from happening. Did you know that Lincoln trampled all of the State of Maryland and basically occupied it to prevent it from joining the Confederacy? That evil man deprived my home state of our rights! Forget that he saved the Union and Freed the slaves, he was an evil man by your reasoning then right?

[Jeffy-CanCon]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye

...
Yes, they were cowards as well. They believed their Emperer to be a diety. So they too were brainwashed fanatics willingly throughing away their lives! It takes no more courage then those of old who volunteered to be human sacrifices! It does not take bravery to through your life away. It takes cowardice and stupidity!

OK. What about the Light Brigade at Balaclava? Or the Polish cavalrymen in 1939? They all "threw their lives away", too.

Anyway, that's the last i'll say on this subject. I don't think anyone is reading anyway.

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye

You are correct. However, that fact is largely legalese. The purpose of both terrorism and war is to influence the policy of a government by use of force. The methodology and the targets of the violence are usually different. Targetting civilians, and operating out-of-uniform are considered war-crimes. That's usually what terrorists are guilty of. In any case, because they don't have state-authority and a declaration of war, terrorists are unlawful combatants from the beginning.

No they are war crimes because of the difference. For you to compare soldiers and terrorists is shameful. A soldier engages LEGITAMATE TARGETS while a terrorist murders to create TERROR!!! They are criminals with a cause, but they are NOT SOLDIERS! To call them that is disrespectful to all of the standing armies around the world!
[/B]

Did you read what I posted? It doesn't look like it. You have angrily restated nearly everything I said. Try and read my paragraph again, replacing the T-word with something that doesn't leave you blind with hatred.

And please don't accuse me of disrespecting soldiers. I used to be one, and I still have many friends in the army. Some of them are overseas right now.

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye

Were the Chechneyans who took over the Russian Theatre soldiers equal to the Russian soldiers who stopped them? I think not! Terrorists are murderers!

I don't think, and never suggested, that terrorists are equal to soldiers. Chechnyan/Russian or anyone else. Terrorists are (at best) war criminals, by definition.

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye

Again the difference is intent! When a soldier kills a civilian, there are repercussians. When a terrorist does it, there are congratulations!

Unfortunately, the victims are never comforted by good intentions. "You killed my father by accident? Gee, I feel so much better."


Also, there aren't always repercussions when soldiers kill civilians. Usually, during peacetime. Rarely during war, though that is slowly changing.

[impostal22]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
The School of The Americas has been closed for quite some time. [/B]

it's late and i'm tired so this is all i'm responding to right now..

do some more research on the school. it is still fully operational, but they changed the name for legal purposes...to fool people like yourself into thinking it's gone (simply cuz the name changed)...

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Jeffy-CanCon


OK. What about the Light Brigade at Balaclava? Or the Polish cavalrymen in 1939? They all "threw their lives away", too.

Anyway, that's the last i'll say on this subject. I don't think anyone is reading anyway.

Big difference between a hopeless battle and a suicide plunge or bomb!


Did you read what I posted? It doesn't look like it. You have angrily restated nearly everything I said. Try and read my paragraph again, replacing the T-word with something that doesn't leave you blind with hatred.

And please don't accuse me of disrespecting soldiers. I used to be one, and I still have many friends in the army. Some of them are overseas right now.

My reply was not meant in anger. I strongly disagreed with your verbiage. They are criminals, not unlawful combatants. I cast no aspersion upon you, only your choice of words.

I don't think, and never suggested, that terrorists are equal to soldiers. Chechnyan/Russian or anyone else. Terrorists are (at best) war criminals, by definition.

This was my point of emphasis!

Unfortunately, the victims are never comforted by good intentions. "You killed my father by accident? Gee, I feel so much better."

Also, there aren't always repercussions when soldiers kill civilians. Usually, during peacetime. Rarely during war, though that is slowly changing.

No, but intent does matter. THat is why murderers get the death penalty while someone convicted of manslaughter only goes to prison.

And as you said yourself, it is changing so that more people are facing consequences during wartime.

[Jeffy-CanCon]

I feel better now, 1DE. The posts were getting a little heated between us, I thought. But I don't think we are actually very far apart. We just emphasise different aspects of the same viewpoint.

In sum, All terrorists are unlawful combatants & war criminals, but not All war criminals or unlawful combatants are terrorists.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Jeffy-CanCon
I feel better now, 1DE. The posts were getting a little heated between us, I thought. But I don't think we are actually very far apart. We just emphasise different aspects of the same viewpoint.

Flame on! So you are putting the emPHAsis on the wrong sylABle! :)

In sum, All terrorists are unlawful combatants & war criminals, but not All war criminals or unlawful combatants are terrorists.

No, All terrorists are cowards and criminals! See the IRA, Hamas, IJ, Al Asqua for details!

However, not all war criminals or unlawful combatants are terrorists! See Saddam or Milosevich for more details!

[Jeffy-CanCon]

Ah... close enough! Bad guys is bad guys.

ToMAYto, ToMAHto.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Jeffy-CanCon
Ah... close enough! Bad guys is bad guys.

ToMAYto, ToMAHto.

..

[Butterfingers]

Originally posted by Jeffy-CanCon

In sum, All terrorists are unlawful combatants & war criminals, but not All war criminals or unlawful combatants are terrorists.

The reason they are unlawful combatants and war criminals is because they specificly target civilians and have no moral implications. Non combatants, children, women, the bloodier the better...

[logamus]

Originally posted by Butterfingers
the bloodier the better...

that is very true. blood makes the news and thats what they are looking for.




on an unrelated note, thats also how i like my steak. ymm ymm