Declassified C130 vid

[cphilip]

Welcome back Postal. Very well said I must say.

And yea avoiding the filter to say it is still a violation. Sorry you had to learn that the hard way. But again...welcome back to the board.

[impostal22]

Originally posted by Butterfingers


Ya except they did it with malicous intent and it would have continued if we did not stop them. Saddam killed people if they spoke badly of him.

Civillians will always die in war its an unfortunate reality. However I belive the US does its best to avoid such situations. If we didnt care we would have just dropped the H-bomb and it would have been over with ZERO US casualties.

Be thankful we have this technology and not a repeat of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

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."

[impostal22]

Originally posted by cphilip
Welcome back Postal. Very well said I must say.

And yea avoiding the filter to say it is still a violation. Sorry you had to learn that the hard way. But again...welcome back to the board.

thanks phil. good to be back!

[Beemer]

Originally posted by Lone Brain Cell


Yes Well I suppose I owe you guys an apology, I wasnt very polite in the way I went about things.

Thanks that means a lot and I take back what I said about not showing up. I'm just up tight cause we got guys on the line giving it all. You know we got your back. Its all good mate.

cphilip. Good Posts I always thought Bush should have finished the job we had half done back in 91.

Zygote. Thanks for the link, as was said everyone should read it.

Quote from this link

http://slate.msn.com/id/2093015/

"Not to end on too festive or seasonal a note, but the disarming of three rogue regimes in under one year isn't bad."

[cphilip]

Originally posted by Beemer
cphilip. Good Posts I always thought Bush should have finished the job we had half done back in 91.

Well the whole idea that nothing was going to be accomplished without regime change was not finaly publicly acknowledged until 98 when Clinton did so. So back in George Seniors day there was still some hope things could be done through sanctions and international pressure. Seems by that time even Bill had about given up as well as most of congress so that act was formed and passed. So its rather silly now to try and make this out as a personal thing. One fact is for certain is that any incoming President that was not aware of that Act and the preceeding inteligence and conclusions by the preceeding administration and not ready to continue to follow through on it would be derelict in his duty to not do so! But of course its politicaly expedient to now try and compartmentalize the issue due to an election! I don't think that most of Americans are so stupid to fall for that spin. But yet thats all we hear the last few weeks and people keep saying as if were they to say it enough it would make it so! I mean you can disagree on wether or not we should have done it now or waited. But its ludicrous to try and say it was a political decision. When both sides clearly looked at the evidence and decided to go the same way with it. You can arm chair quarterback all day long but the people that were in the know both were moved to act in some fashion by what they saw. And both in the same general direction. And regardless of political affiliation. Now however they chose to spin it one way or the other but those facts remain central to the REAL direction we were going anyway.

Also... What I think people do not want to even think about is that as bad as Saddam was... think of what would have happened to those poor people when Oday and Qusay became rulers? They would have you know? I mean they turned out to be worse thugs than perhaps Saddam even! Well... pretty bad anyway.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by impostal22
i guess i'm back...

NOthing good lasts forever!


1. i was unaware that self-censoring curse words was considered cursing as well (i'm not making excuses, i'm telling you why i didn't just use **** instead of what i did).

Well now you know, and knowing is half the battle!

2. i believe two things about extremists...#1 they're extremists for a reason...#2 chances are you're right about the brainwashing thing (not taking brainwashing literally though). however, again we must look at why the brainwashers are doing what they're doing.

i believe that extremist bombers are a product of extreme circumstances. take, for instance, our role in the middle east for however long it has been. we've been a controlling power (even when controlling wasn't necessarily needed), and interfered when interfering wasn't needed. this tends to anger the inhabitants of countries. imagine canada coming over and telling us (yes, US) how to live our lives. and if we don't like it, they'll bomb us incessantly. it's unimaginable cuz it won't happen until the whole world is angry enough to take us over (which, i think, WILL happen someday). the point is, people in general don't like being told what to do...and they'll retaliate. we (the usa) are the kings of telling people what to do. it is only logical that we become the targets of terrorism. england tried controlling ireland...terrorists retaliated. israel tries telling palestine what to do...terrorists retaliated. notice it's always a much bigger fish picking ona much smaller fish in all instances. the only logical form of retaliation is terrorism. palestinians aren't about to get the means to combat the tanks we give israel, so they have to resort to terrorism. same sort of thing here.

Your reasoning is twisted. British troops engaged the IRA, Israeli Troops engage the Palestinians. No American troops have fought in Israel have they?

As for the rest of the world taking us over. Not gonna happen. That would be the end of the world. Mutually Assured Destruction is still a policy of ours remember! We have a large enough nuclear arsenal to destroy this planet. Would we use it if ever invaded by overwhelming force? You bet!

Also who could invade us? China can't even invade Taiwan!! No foreign army could ever reach our shores. The only way America could ever fall is from within. Which is why I favor limiting immigration and evicting ALL illegal aliens.

oh..and let me clarify for the recently-gone FACTS OF LIFE...I *NEVER* *EVER* said we deserved 9-11. EVER. DO NOT put words like that into my mouth. oh and i really pity you, being the victim and all (says your goodbye thread), after all..YOU started the personal attacks in THIS discussion. but hey, you're the victim. i was wished harm upon, got angry and cursed once..and got banned. such is life.

No, but you said that the 9/11 bombers had balls! You said our planes dropping the bombs were piloted by cowards!

anyway, we didn't deserve 9-11. but i'm also saying we need to pull out of the middle east..or should have never gone there to begin with. all the crap the CIA does in foreign countries is what makes us so hateable by other countries and make them resort to terrorism. those people who had family who died on 9-11...99% of them seek/sought revenge. understandably so. now..pretend you're an iraqi whose entire family was killed by (supposedly) stray bombs in our *ILLEGAL* bombings. you wouldn't want revenge? SURE YOU WOULD. how would you go about getting it? TRY just for A SECOND imagining the life of an iraqi. then try to think of a way of getting revenge that ISNT terrorist in nature.

Pull out and run away. THat sure worked in Somalia and Afghanistan didn't it? After we pulled out, they became our friends didn't they?

[Jeffy-CanCon]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye

Your reasoning is twisted. British troops engaged the IRA, Israeli Troops engage the Palestinians. No American troops have fought in Israel have they?

1DE, you are oversimplifying & misunderstanding impostal. He never said anything about using troops. He spoke of one country controlling another, and terrorism being the response from the weaker side. In both Israel and Ireland, the troops came in as a response to terrorist acts, not as a provocation.

The USA is seen (truthfully or not) as a controlling influence in the Middle East. America props up several unpopular governments in the region with billions of dollars in military aid. Israel, Egypt & Saudi Arabia today, and Iran and Iraq at different times in the past.

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye

No, but you said that the 9/11 bombers had balls! You said our planes dropping the bombs were piloted by cowards!

Does everyone agree it is cowardly to attack a defenseless target? Does anyone disagree that it takes courage to willingly sacrifice your life for a cause? I don't agree with what terrorist do. What the suicide bombers of 9-11 did fits both those descriptions. Which one you choose is up to you, but either answer will offend someone.

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye

Pull out and run away. THat sure worked in Somalia and Afghanistan didn't it? After we pulled out, they became our friends didn't they?

It is important to recognize the time for disengagement. Mistakes have been made, but hopefully they won't be repeated in Iraq.

[impostal22]

Originally posted by Jeffy-CanCon


1DE, you are oversimplifying & misunderstanding impostal. He never said anything about using troops. He spoke of one country controlling another, and terrorism being the response from the weaker side.

*ya, i wasn't saying at all that the U.S. invaded these countries. i was saying what he just explained*


Does everyone agree it is cowardly to attack a defenseless target? Does anyone disagree that it takes courage to willingly sacrifice your life for a cause? I don't agree with what terrorist do. What the suicide bombers of 9-11 did fits both those descriptions. Which one you choose is up to you, but either answer will offend someone.


i like this description a lot, it explains what i've been trying to get at much better than i was able to do lol. thanks man.

It is important to recognize the time for disengagement. Mistakes have been made, but hopefully they won't be repeated in Iraq.

ya, it's pretty sad that people are taking a defeatist attitude towards foreign policy. let's be active people. and i think the problem is that we went into those places in the first place, not that we pulled out. (this is more of a response to 1DE).

[1stdeadeye]

I must disagree. It does not take courage to commit suicide attacks. If you are so brainwashed that you believe killing yourself will lead you to nirvana, what bravery is required? You are taking the cowards way out and trying to cheat your way into heavan instead of earning it through a lifetime of good deeds and works!

As for controlling the region, you can not control perception. The two largest recepients of US foreign aid are indeed Israel and Egypt. However if we controlled them, Israel would not be building that fence now would they. We can not control how the leadership of terrorist organizations perceive and decry us.

I restate that terrorism is a criminal act, not an act of war. It is a cowards way of fighting.

As for collateral damage, as others have stated, we have killed up to 9600 innocents which we apologize for and attempt to make right. Terrorists and despots kill far more and take credit for it or cover it up in mass graves. Big difference here.

[oldsoldier]

Tell you what...I see these same people who swear an oath to kill Americans every god damned day here. These people fight for IDEALS. They are brainwashed from youth. They get EXCELLENT treatment here...despite what you see on CNN. They receive medical care, often at the expense of the soldiers and sailors here...they eat well, they are provided with a roof over their head. They are in a prison camp, to be sure...but, they get more luxuries than alot of prisons in the US, I assure you. Anyway, I digress...
These people, even though there is NO chance for escape (where the hell they gonna go?), still, on a daily basis, attempt to hurt, embarass, or otherwise intimidate those of us here. Why? Simple. They have been told we are evil, uncaring people, only interested in taking over thier country. Now, most that come here are malnourished and in desperate need of medical/dental care. A CONDITION of them leaving is that ALL treatable medical problems are dealt with. Does this sound uncaring to you?
I cant even get physical therapy for my foot, injured during duty, protecting this place, because the doctor is too busy right now taking care of the detainees. So, next time we talk about "inhumane treatment", think of that.
Oh, and yes, "puff" were nicknames for several types of aircraft in Viet Nam, but, officially, it was the 105mm platform. I dont recall if it was a C-130 that originally carried it though...old age is killing my mind

[Jeffy-CanCon]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
I must disagree. It does not take courage to commit suicide attacks. If you are so brainwashed that you believe killing yourself will lead you to nirvana, what bravery is required? You are taking the cowards way out and trying to cheat your way into heavan instead of earning it through a lifetime of good deeds and works!

That's an excellent point. If suicide is not a sacrifice, but a way to a reward (or an escape from a problem) it takes less courage. I think it still takes some to go through with it. And consider the all-too-similar case of Japanese kamikaze pilots in WW2. Would you call them cowards?

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye

As for controlling the region, you can not control perception. The two largest recepients of US foreign aid are indeed Israel and Egypt. However if we controlled them, Israel would not be building that fence now would they. We can not control how the leadership of terrorist organizations perceive and decry us.

True.

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye

I restate that terrorism is a criminal act, not an act of war. It is a cowards way of fighting.

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.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Jeffy-CanCon


That's an excellent point. If suicide is not a sacrifice, but a way to a reward (or an escape from a problem) it takes less courage. I think it still takes some to go through with it. And consider the all-too-similar case of Japanese kamikaze pilots in WW2. Would you call them cowards?

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!


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!

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

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

[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!

[cphilip]

Ok and on another note... and since this thread drifted off again this way...

The new news tonight is the releasing of many documents found and even provided by Iraqis show Saddam had insisted that every sale of Food and Medicine under the UN sanctioned program be charged an additional 10% "surcharge" and that this money be deposted into bank accounts (his) in Jordan and Palestine. And this of course all went through the UN to approve. So we talking 10% of 65 Billion DOLLARS! And possibly is being used even now to finance insurgents in Iraq. Which is why the Iraqis that knew this turned the documents over to the Coalition authorities. They want that money back for their new government. Of course it appears that no company COULD do business through the UN program without paying this "Surcharge" or it would not be approved by either Saddam OR THE UN!!! But for some reason the UN official in charge of it denies responsibility for knowing what it was for. Says it probably was for Saddam but the fact it was going to Saddam was only "rumor" until now so he could of course do nothing about it! But of course looking the other way is easy I suppose. But then again any payment outside of the direct aid under that program for ANYTHING other than food and medicine was against UN sanctions. But of course they were indeed APPROVING IT ANYWAY! So there ya go.... Coruption within the UN itself even. No wonder people didn't want us in there digging around huh?

[Butterfingers]

Impostal... im not sure if you read this or not but... REPOST...


Bottom Line: What happened in the past happened... There is nothing you can do but complain about it.

Personally Im elated that the US decided to do somthing about regimes that pose a threat to our security.

Regime change in Iraq has always been a well know stated US policy It was the policy in the Clinton Administration as it is in the Bush Administration.

While clinton just threw a few tomahawks here, blew up a few bases here and there... Trade sanctions here and there... kinda half arsing it... It simply pissed the terrorists off while promoting the "paper tiger" image of the US. While the missused oil for food program just went into the pocket of Saddam while his country starved. Further pissing people off...

Bush decided to go all the way and demonstrated the resolve of the american people and demonstrated we as a united country will not tolerate such actions.

Now we have 2 less rouge states to worry about. Sure there are always going to be pissed off terrorists but at least now they have 2 less places to hide and 2 less sources of money.

Now, Maybe, just maybe next time they will think twice about flying planes into buildings.

Ask an iraqi that left his country because of opression nearly 100 percent support the action.

The Latest Bahgdad university poll shows greater than 70 percent support for the coalition. Thats MORE THAN HERE! in the USA!!

Now is it so bad? Are you an iraqi?

If not how can you comment that what we are doing is wrong?

A similar GALLUP poll was also done... Gallup is the leading polling organization and is usually withing a few percent accurate...

http://www.gallup.com/subscription/?m=f&c_id=13919

so much for "suffering iraqis...."

It would be fair to say that the action was the "better of the two evils"


Start newpost...


You cant control percepion... we do what we do becuase there is a reason for it at the time...

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.