Here is your war on Terrorism ! America !

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Salamandy

Yes we agreed as a society what Dahmer was doing needed to be stopped and had men with guns show up to cart him off. I have no problem with that. He was murdering and he should be stopped. This thread was created at least in part to point out the innocent deaths as a result of US occupation and the "war on terror".

I think the focus on Iraq has sort of thrown a wrench in it, because even in MY twisted mind, there is a disconnect from the inception of the Iraq war and the war on terror. That's why I keep stressing that it was "ill timed" to me. As it turned out, it became prime hunting ground for terrorists, but that's not how it started.

There were innocent deaths in Iraq before we went in (remember the mass graves they found after the invasion?) and there will be innocent deaths after we leave. What people are reacting to here is not the abstract notion that the occupation resulted in innocent deaths, they are reacting to the insinuation that US soldiers are killing innocents themselves, intentionally and actively. They are not - apart from a psychopath here and there, who often meet their own "battlefield death" sooner rather than later, no detail of the mechanism needed.

Nobody in their right mind would want to kill innocent people. There should never be a reason for this to occur and the people that kill the innocents cannot be justified.

Correct. The insinuation that the average American soldier has done so is a personal affront to him. He's there to PREVENT that.

Dahmer was a ctach we could make that would A) put an end to more innocent deaths and B) NOT create more innocent death along the way. This is why we allow our men in uniform to use force at times. We must moved towards ending the political BS

Sometimes, it's just not possible to put an end to more innocent deaths without creating others. The monsters tend to stack the cards that way. Then it becomes a choice, and a hard one. Either way, an innocent may die, and it's nearly impossible to forecast the averages involved. The only thing certain is that if they are not stopped, more innocents WILL die.

How would you choose? Let him go on his merry, murderous way, or end him at a possible cost?

edit on 2011/1/6 by nenothtu because: I misspelled "Detail" as "Derail". See how that could read wrong?

In the case of Dahmer, if I was anywhere near the area and had knowledge of what he was doing, I would have contacted the police. If I heard screems outside his house from an obvious victim in distress, I would possibly go into the house and help the victim. But in the case of a dictator, mass murderer, or whatever who lives 1000's of miles away, I feel it is up to the people who are in this dictators immediate physical space.
In other words, I react not based on politics, but based on there in the moment occurences.
Because politics are phony, man made arguments and often each side is just as guilty as the other because each sides motivation for victory is greed (usually under the guise that they want to help their nation).
Thats why acts of murder must not be pre meditated in any way or the individual is responsible for a crime against humanity and should be punished.

Look at eyes of the children who survived bombing , just look at their eyes you war lovers !!
Just google

Originally posted by Nephi1337
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

your sick for posting that , just to prove your point you would post somthing like this ? that is the first video where i have seen a streaming security cam ,, like that .. it almost look like who ever was recording knew it was going to happen , let me be sick like you ... i think it was a set up for propaganda .. wait let me post a smile too

i see you like to go above and beyond the call of duty eh slayer ?

Don't get your panties in a bunch.

Did the truth hurt? If you can't handle the heat then stay out of the kitchen eh? I see you and few others are rather new here at ATS. That video has been posted here many times before and no, it's not new or propaganda. NEWS FLASH! Those children died. I'm against the war, always have been. What I just simply demonstrated is how quickly some will justify the actions of "Supposed Freedom fighters" when it suits their arguments. Never-mind that 14 children were killed in the name of Allah.

Oh sure we have people railing against the US/NATO forces saying that for every civilian killed it makes the Taliban stronger. Meanwhile the majority of the civilians killed in Afghanistan have been by the Taliban's hands. AND THEY KNOW IT!

United Nations: In deadliest year for Afghan civilians, Taliban did most damage

But at the same time, the report said, the Taliban has stepped up efforts at intimidation through mass-casualty suicide attacks, the use of more powerful roadside bombs and executions of suspected informants.

The report said that 2,412 Afghan civilians were killed in 2009, a 14 percent increase from 2008, and that the Taliban was responsible for two-thirds of those deaths

Taliban Intentionally target civilians: Eikenberry

The US embassy in Kabul said that the Taliban fighters deliberately target civilians in the conflict in Afghanistan.

"We are fighting against a very immoral enemy who tries to strike and cause fear in the hearts of people and in their minds,"

What many here seem to either ignore or want to forget is the very real fact is that the Taliban are mostly non Afghans. That's exactly why the West is striking targets in Pakistan. In the winter months they run back across the border and hide. Well their hiding places are not safe either. Remember the majority of the Taliban are not Afghans!

Verstehen, Capish, Comprende, Farshteyn, Capire, понять, Got it?

Good!

US drone strikes kill 15 militants in Pakistan: officials

MIRANSHAH, Pakistan — Three US missile attacks in Pakistan's lawless tribal belt on Saturday killed at least 15 militants and destroyed a Taliban compound, local officials said.

Pakistani officials said the three strikes by unmanned drones in a single day destroyed targets in North Waziristan tribal agency along the Afghan border, a known hub of the al-Qaeda-linked Haqqani network.

reply to post by xavi1000


It is sad to see the kids but, it happens in all war scenarios.

There were plenty of kids crying on sept 11 as well.

I know I'll get dressed up in my camo gear holding a Koran and making anti American statements so I can ride the bandwagon too weeeeeeeee.

Anyone who backs any man made religion and speaks through there nose about what other entities are doing are the most hypocritical or easily misled people ever.

War sucks, 9/11 was no excuse for what has and likely will continue to happen, but that's how the world is. Mulim leaders in a power struggle with christian leaders in a power stuggle with blue team in a struggle with red team.

Microsoft vs Apple vs Google.

If you really want to do the world good figure out how to turn any muslim country into someplace not considered 3rd world or temporarily propped up on just oil where religion is not used a tool to supress people. That's what this idiot dinner jacket needs to be doing building a country people actually want to come back to not escape.

Why not give his people solar energy instead of nukes, seems like the perfect place for it.

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Sinnthia

So to clarify, war should have been declared on Afghanistan?

No, war was already being waged on "Afghanistan" by Afghans.

I mean no disrespect but as I tried to say before, from the outside looking in, things are very different. Many of your responses feel slightly deflective to me but not in an intentional way. I feel like the dialouge has gotten just lengthy enough that when I ask what you think 2 + 2 is, you respond with 2, 2, and some algebra.

No, we should not have declared war on Afghanistan. We should have declared war on the Taliban.

reply to post by circuitsports

War sucks, 9/11 was no excuse for what has and likely will continue to happen, but that's how the world is. Mulim leaders in a power struggle with christian leaders in a power stuggle with blue team in a struggle with red team.

Can't say I agree with all of the above. 9/11 and the consequences are 'not how the world is'. This was exceptional and it would be dangerous to think of it as being anything otherwise. You want this to be the new norm? That's why it so important to hold these people to account for what they've done....we have to make an example of them as a warning to our future leaders and to our children. It's not too late as long as they still breathe.



The movie 'Wag the Dog' told us who/what the enemy would be in 1997....and why.

Wag The Dog

Originally posted by christina-66

Afghanistan was no better;

’ Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. Inexplicably, and with disastrous consequences, it never appears to have occurred to Washington that once Russia was out of the way, Bin Laden's organisation would turn its attention to the west.

Cook's Entire Article

I have fought this particular "the CIA made al-Qaida" lie all across ATS. At one point I was posting at least twice a week against it, presenting the facts of the matter complete with timelines and everything, yet it keeps coming.

It has been said that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

I'm tired of fighting a lie that just won't die. Point goes to you. I'm going fishing. Enjoy your new world.

Originally posted by nenothtu
No, we should not have declared war on Afghanistan. We should have declared war on the Taliban.

OK this completely alters the lengthy explanation in your last reply as this is at least closer to answering the orignal question posed. It is so far removed at this point and just sitting there all by itself. I can not go back and respond to the points you made as they stemmed from a completely different answer about Afghanistan already being at war with itself.

reply to post by SLAYER69


I have a question for you. If you have been to Afghanistan. How many times did you encounter the real Taliban?

And how did you know or decide that these people where the Taliban or the Al Qaeda?

Was it because they opened fire and engaged you?

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by nenothtu
No, we should not have declared war on Afghanistan. We should have declared war on the Taliban.

OK this completely alters the lengthy explanation in your last reply as this is at least closer to answering the orignal question posed. It is so far removed at this point and just sitting there all by itself. I can not go back and respond to the points you made as they stemmed from a completely different answer about Afghanistan already being at war with itself.

No, it's exactly the same answer, but with the branches chopped down to the trunk.

The post in question

The pared down version, directly from that post:

I give this background so that you'll hopefully understand when I say that we should NOT have declared war on Afghanistan which is what we effectively did, but that we should have declared war on the TALIBAN instead.

Precisely the same answer, but without the explanatory material about how Afghanistan was already IN a civil war.

Edit to add: "Civil War" is a bad choice of words on my part. As I said in my previous post, the Taliban were foreigners, usurpers, who were being fought by the Northern Alliance. That's not really a "civil war", even though it's all contained in one country. It was more a war of Afghans against invaders who were trying to take over, as was the case when the Soviets were there. It's perceived by many that this current Afghan War is more of the same, fighting against invaders intent on taking over. I can see how that image is fostered, with all the talk of bestowing "democracy" on Afghanistan. As near as I can tell, current US stated objectives are to deliver a democracy to the Afghans and then leave.

That simply won't work - not now, not ever. Afghanistan is entirely unsuited to "democracy". Talking heads in DC think that the way to "stabilize" Afghanistan is by forcing democracy upon them. That will NEVER bring stability to Afghanistan. What they should do instead is erase the Taliban wherever they can find them, then assist Afghanistan in setting up a stable AFGHAN system. Troops are necessary for the first, suits for the second, and money for both.

It's two entirely separate objectives, one military, one political. Mixing the two in Afghanistan can only bring heartache.

reply to post by spy66


Let me ask you a question....

Are you denying that fact?
It has been known since before this whole thing kicked off. Here is a pretty revealing report...

reply to post by nenothtu


With all due respect I find it hard to see where your answer actually addressing what it was I was asking. It seems close but slightly shifted. While your answers seem well thought out and nicely put, going back 4 posts now to what I was asking, I cannot see how it fits together. How about thanks anyway but I will just move on until it becomes relevant again.

reply to post by Nephi1337


I think any death is a shame. If you look at it from a strictly numbers aspect, US/approx. 6K Iraq/ 1MM plus? Nonetheless, and that doesn't really matter. What does matter is our US policy, as others have stated. Even aside from that the reality is that it is all about MONEY.

The MSM just sells lies as to why we are really there and we foot the bill for death, to profit the military complex, and politicians careers. How crazy is that? The irony in all this for the Americans who are not really paying attention and support these wars is that the support they give the politicians and the military industrial complex, will eventually be used to enslave them. Don't really think we need proof there, do you?

Nice post, by the way. Always nice to have a graphic to communicate things a little bit better.

reply to post by SLAYER69


forgive me for i faild to read the rest of your constant quoting , simply put you cant prove that the freedom fighters are the cause of most of the deaths in the war ! stop and thing for a second , i can sit here and post plenty of videos of U.S solders being very reckless when it comes to a shootout , in-fact i have heard plenty of storys regarding the constant slaying going on over their SLAYER! , one testimony if from my brother , who is a 3 time war vet and hes only 30 years old ... ever heard of winter solder ? google it! .. also i can think back a time or two ago when my bro was so gung ho .like most of you solders on here .. oh but how his life has changed ! OH how i get calls in the middle of the night because of his nightmares ....oh how i listen to him cry because he was forced to shoot a group of kids playing foot ball ... so dont sit here and tell me most of the death is cause by the freedom fighters , i am pritty sure that i can provide video footage with plenty of testimony from solders regarding their orders to SLAY! can you provide the same ? can you provide info that freedom fighters are causing more death ? and i dont want some survey ,i want hard core testimony , can you provide this ?

Originally posted by Nephi1337
can you provide info that freedom fighters are causing more death ? and i dont want some survey ,i want hard core testimony , can you provide this ?

So, the UN report is wrong? You know, the one that states the the Taliban did most of the killing of civilians?

How come I bet that if the UN report said that US forces killed more civilians you'd believe it?

Oh, and by the way, they are no where near "Freedom Fighters". Don't kid yourself.

Originally posted by Nephi1337
can you provide info that freedom fighters are causing more death ? and i dont want some survey ,i want hard core testimony , can you provide this ?

edit on 6-1-2011 by Nephi1337 because: (no reason given)

I can invalidate any argument, any argument at all, simply by moving the goalposts of what I will accept as "evidence".

It seems you can, too.

I think I need some clarification of what is the topic, a narrowing down of it or a focus. Is it "The War on Terror"? The Iraq war? The Afghan War?

If it's really the Iraq War, is is the inception of it, or as it stands now, or something in between?

Focus, that's what I need here.

Originally posted by Sinnthia
Really? I claimed to have military experience? Please, go back and find any quote where I said anything like that. We can play this game alllll day.

You didn't. And by your posts, it shows. You seem to have all the answers about the military, etc, but zero experience to back it up.

Originally posted by Sinnthia
Sounds like you just said they are pretty good at hiding. If they hide behind anything that makes them safe from you, they are good at it.

So, according to your logic, it's OK for insurgents to hide behind women and children?

Originally posted by Sinnthia
Really? Anyone said that? Please, go back and find the quote where anyone said that.

Just do a simple search on ATS. When insurgents kill civilians, no one posts anything expressing their outrage over the incident.

Originally posted by Sinnthia
Tell you what, I will do you one better, either that or the first insurgent you find that blows up a bunch of civillians and claims he did it in my name, to protect my freedom, for the sake of America, for the moral good of the people, asks for a parade and a holiday - get back to me.

I guess I am missing all the posts of Americans cheeering on the insurgents or even condoning their actions. Find me some or put your argument back in your pocket where it belongs.

All those headlights coming your way and nothing but taillights over here. Swatting make believe flies eventually bruises your hand.

Whatever, Gus.

reply to post by nenothtu


Forget about Freedom Fighters, Forget about Terrorists..

I just wonder how many people hated the West before these wars. opposed to how many hate the West now..?
Are they justified in hating the West for their actions.?

The answers would show if the "so called" war on terror is a success...
I highly doubt it....

reply to post by jerico65


think about what your saying ! the U.N ? are you serious ! and yes i would never except a report by the U.N they have their nose in every global conflict that is going on . they are the puppet masters dont even get me started on the U.N ... so if they are not freedom fighters then what are they ? are they not fighting for freedom of country and religion ? and F.Y.I the U.N would never post a paper saying that U.S forces are killing more civilians then the Opposing forces . Kick rocks with this hog wash ...