 |
Who suggested they were, but, once upon a time, long, long, ago, it was rumored that the rule of law was upper most in the mind of americans who would never assassinate their enemies, Obviously, your mind set is who cares. All it took for that rumor to disappear is for someone to shake your confidence in your own superiority. We have seen the enemy and it is USQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
So I guess you don't want us to kill our enemies who are trying to kill us HUH?
Our rule of law, in war allows for that and its not assassination, and we are not YOUR enemy, unless you are with OUR enemy.
When Australia has that kind of power, AND has powerful enemies then you may understand that concept. When Australia has made US an enemy, you will be the first to know, and some ex american who takes up with terrorists against us was not a rumor, nor did it shake our confidence.
And get your eyes checked while you are at it.
Tal don't twist it, I have no objection to you or US killing their/our enemies on the battlefield, but taking the cowards way is just making yourself like your enemy. For the record, Tal, we don't want the power to assassinate our enemies because those actions are what makes enemies. Our nation has no enemies because we don't interfere in other nations. The last direct enemy we had, you helped us see off but then they were your enemy too and you would have done that whether or no.
Had my eyes checked only last week Tal
Then I am confused Clete, who did we Assassinate?
Well let me see, we will start with OBL, a resident in an allied country, and then there was one of your own citizens, in Yemen, was it? And of course, there are those many people in Pakistan, where you couldn't tell whether they were actual enemies or not. Now there was a little explosion in Iran the other day, that coincidently took out a weapons expert, that one is unconfirmed. You have a team in central Africa right now, it will be iinteresting to see who they account for.Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
OBL was the leader of our sworn enemies Al-Quaida, you know, the ones that killed more than 3000 Americans, on 9/11, and the traitor in Yemen was his buddy, and WE knew they were the enemy, even if you didn't. That why they were TARGETED for something bad to happen to them.
So we wait for some confirmation.Quote:
Now there was a little explosion in Iran the other day, that coincidently took out a weapons expert, that one is unconfirmed.
Not make assumptions.
Making sure that UN food and supplies get to the ones they are intended for, not some rebels, and yes we are armed and will shoot if fired upon... DUH!Quote:
You have a team in central Africa right now, it will be iinteresting to see who they account for.
Hey whose side are YOU on, I wouldn't want you mistaken for a terrorist, or rebel that was going to steal food, or kill women and children in cold blood.
So don't get in the middle of a fight between two ENEMIES. It's a WAR for crissake, not a tea party, or debate.
It isn't a question of whether I know they are the enemy or not. In WWII you wouldn't assassinate Hitler the most evil man to ever walk the Earth but you would violate thesoveriegnty of a country you are not at war with to kill someone who only killed a mere 3000 people. I know the difference, he killed americans and they are worth more, right.
This statement bothers me. When you mention war you act like all the lines are so clear a definite. We have had a war on drugs for many many years. Should we just start to assassinate those producing the drugs? After all they are far more responsible for more lives being ruined as well as deaths directly or indirectly. There are rules to war. If you choose not to follow them then you slip into the enemies mindset and become no better then your opponent. Is that what we want?Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
They are terrorist, they blow up planes and buildings, with car bombs and such. They hide among people.
Better ideas??
Some facts are due here .Quote:
In WWII you wouldn't assassinate Hitler the most evil man to ever walk the Earth but you would violate thesoveriegnty of a country you are not at war with to kill someone who only killed a mere 3000 people. I know the difference, he killed americans and they are worth more, right.
We did in fact assassinate Yamamoto . He was a military commander and a legitimate target. Hilter directly commanded the military of Germany making him a legitimate target.
What is this ? The Brits used to complain when the colonials would shoot at officers . Why should the leaders be exempt ? If I had my way they would be the only ones to fight.
I have yet to hear of 1 instance when anyone besides a legit military leaders was targeted by US drones or special ops .
Then your media have been very selective in reporting the hundreds of drone strikes in Pakistan in recent years. Not all of those killed were "military" leaders or fighters, some were children.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Tom you need to get your head out of you know where and realise that things are not as you see them. The operations of your country are at times very black and whose country are you doing this in? Not your own. The people of Afghanistan and Pakistan did not attack the United States. Some extremists attacked the United States. They did it because you had a military presence in what they regarded as a sacred place. For ten years you have bombed the crap out of them, and maybe a few have been placed on trial or worse. The Taliban are not the communists, they have no interest in taking over the world, they just want you to leave.
They gave safe haven and support to Al Quaida, and they have there families with them. (how dumb is that) Sorry to sound cold, but that makes them all targets. We wouldn't be talking if they had left us alone, and NO we were not in afpak before 9/11.
Heck they would all be Russian satellites if we hadn't helped them way back when. You need a better cable news company.
There are no safe havens for those that attack us, NONE,so be careful who you invite for dinner. What part of that is confusing you?
No, Tal, you don't get it, we would not be talking if you had left them alone. I'm not saying OBL didn't need dealing with, but aggressive foreign policy is what caused all of this. It is not a recent development but a legacy
Don't know where you get your rhetoric from, but last I checked we haven't made any aggressive moves to people without good reason (OKay Iraq), so do you have some facts we can examine?
If you feel that way why not tell the prez to stay home?
I didn't say only those killed were military leaders. In WWII whole cities were wasted . Drone attacks by comparison are surgical.
I am frankly shocked that you defend the Taliban . They were told of the consequences when they refused to hand over OBL .
Where I agree with you is that we have to rethink this notion that Pakistan is an ally. Me ;I'd tell India it's OK the unleash the kraken.
Pakistan let us have access through their country for cash, so its business rather than allies united for a common goal.
Shocked, you should be mortified. You are unable to see you are ensnared in a web of your own making. The Taliban were a soveriegn nation, why should they bow to your threats. They said provide evidence and all you provided was rhetoric. Stop behaving like the bully on the block. You attacked a backward nation thinking them a pushover, you think instant they think generationally, this why ten years on you don't have victory. Now I admit the Taliban are extremist and it is better they don't govern but that is not your call.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Why would you side with India? Or Pakistan for that matter? If you had met the people over there you would not say what you did, they are not responsible for what their government does. Those governments over there are even more corrupt than your own. At least you don't have criminals leading the country
aaQuote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
We got what we came for, time to go home, we can always come back if we have to. And for the record, the taliban is not a sovereign nation, but a tribe within a sovereign nation. We didn't attack Afghanistan, but the tribes that harbored our enemies with the help, and cooperation of other tribes friendly to us.
Osama is dead, Al Qaida scattered and leaderless, mission accomplished, going home. There is no safe haven for anyone who attacks us, not even on your island paradise. Not taking crap from religious idealogs isn't bulling, and what part of don't mess with us is so hard to understand?
Tough talk but the reality is you did attack Afghanistan, not some misguided individuals. Yes, Al Quaeda in Afghanistan is a shadow of its former self, that much you accomplished, but in the process you awakened a slumbering people who have seen off invaders before and you managed to piss off an allied nation. It is apparent how little you think of your allies with your we rule you fool attitude. It seem s you have managed to piss the afghans off tooQuote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/11/16/wo...html?hpt=hp_t3
Let me say this, Tal, we would fight you just as fiercely if you attempted the same thing here
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:24 AM. |