It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Regensturm
The hijackers were purportedly Saudi, from wealthy families, from a wealthy nation. They did not live in a cave.
Well, actually, I can indeed tell you how it feels.
I'm from the UK.
In my childhood, my Grandparents, Aunt and Great Uncle all lived in London.
Every holiday, we used to all go and visit them, and travel around London.
It was at the height of the IRA campaign. We used to drive past bombed buildings not far from where my Nan lived.
A house that my Great Uncle used to walk past everyday turned out to be IRA bomb factory. We found out because it exploded and the police found all the gear inside.
We used to go to the popular spots of London, regardless of the IRA.
But never did we fear. Never did we paralyse ours and think what if?
In 2003, the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei, wrote a letter to the US, offering a diplomatic relationship between Iran and the US, for Iran to stop it's support for Hezbollah, for Iran to give up it's nuclear programme, and to help the US against a common enemy: Al Qaeda.
The US Administration threw this away. An opportunity was missed.
Originally posted by semperfortis
Just to those of you that continually "misquote" the oath one takes when entering into the service for the United States...
I just saw it on a previous post where a poster said that you take the oath to defend the Constitution and not the President...???
Well having taken the Oath and being somewhat familiar, I thought I would post the actual Oath here so that we may reference it in our debate...
Here is the oath for enlisted
"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).
And commissioned
"I, [insert name here], do solemnly swear, (or affirm), that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
The enlisted oath is pretty cut and dry
In the Officers oath, it is the "Faithfully Discharge the Duties of the Office" ...
One of the duties of the office is to obey the orders of those appointed above you..
It really is pretty simple
Semper
Originally posted by Electro38
These are excellent points. But in our case here in NY the fear is very well founded. Everyone knows NY is the #1 target.
Originally posted by Electro38
Huge buildings were demolished, not just a bomb here and there. Also, was there ever the real threat of having a nuke (or bio/chem weapon) go off in your city?
Originally posted by Electro38I understand what you're saying and these are great points. The IRA seems like a very good comparison. I thinks its a little different though.
What if it was known that the IRA wanted to acquire a nuke, bio/chem weapon and they had sponsors who were actively developing a nuclear program? Such as the case of Iran and the terrorists.
Originally posted by Electro38
They might call them dogs, etc. (Sunni and Shia), but don't they use each other when needed?
Originally posted by Electro38
Wasn't Bin Laden's son living in Iran? I don't know what the significance of that is, but seems strange to live in the land of your mortal enemies.
Originally posted by Electro38
I had no idea about this. If this is true, then we screwed up on many levels. (Have to look for more info on that, are there any referrences on the web?)
Good points, I appreciate it.
[edit on 19-9-2007 by Electro38]
Originally posted by Bunch
reply to post by lee anoma
I have always being intrigued on why people bring past episodes of our history to critize actions or issues that we face on the present.
How does that help us resolve the current conflict?
Originally posted by Electro38
I guess the situations are very similar.
Did the IRA stuff stop because their leaders got involved in the political system of the UK?
Originally posted by Electro38
I found an article describing the building of a coalition in the gulf. All we see on the news here in the US is OJ (he was arrested again).
www.newsvine.com...
What a job that guy has (Fallon).
Also, the French Foreign minister, said we should prepare for war if Iran obtains a nuclear weapon. Then he went and changed his advice:
www.newsvine.com...
You would have no idea any of this stuff was happening if you watch the new media. You'll know all there is about Brittney's custody battle with K-Fed, and OJ of course.
Originally posted by BlueRaja
I agree that if you feel an order is immoral/unethical, you should bring that up, and if the order stands, then do what your conscience tells you.
On the otherhand, it's not up to you to decide based on your opinion what is legal, if something has already been determined to be legal by JAG lawyers, etc...
Originally posted by Electro38
"Iran Draws Up Plans To Bomb Israel"
www.newsvine.com...
Originally posted by Truth4hire
Originally posted by Electro38
"Iran Draws Up Plans To Bomb Israel"
www.newsvine.com...
Hrm. If you read the article it simply states that IF Israël attacks Iran, they will respond by bombing Israël, and that the response plans to do so are being made.
So: IF Israël decides to ATTACK Iran, Iran will respond by bombing them.
What exactly is strange or disturbing about drawing up a plan to defend you country against an agressor?
Nice headline by the media B.T.W. Almost as good as "Iranian President Wants To Wipe Israël Off The Map".
Originally posted by astmonster
Originally posted by BlueRaja
I agree that if you feel an order is immoral/unethical, you should bring that up, and if the order stands, then do what your conscience tells you.
On the otherhand, it's not up to you to decide based on your opinion what is legal, if something has already been determined to be legal by JAG lawyers, etc...
This entire train of thought is very dangerous. Soldiers follow orders, period. JAG does not belong in combat whatsoever. "Rules-of-engagement" belong on TV not in real combat.
Kill the enemy period. If the enemy is hiding behind so called "civilians" too bad. Shoot anyway. Soon the enemy learns it wont stop the good guys from killing them. If the terrorist hide in home surrounded by "so called" civilians, drop a bigger bomb.
"rules or civility" in WAR is insane.
[edit on 9/19/0707 by astmonster]