There goes the neighborhood - Tunisia Edition

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Yes we do.
And we do it with a proper calling card and uniformed soldiers.
Bin Laden and his buddies changed the rules when they chose to start a conflict anonymously. Any collateral damage is their fault AFAIC.

and once again, i'm sure the people you advocate accidently killing wouldn't possibly mis-direct their hate at the americans that are actually killing them instead of the terrorists that "made them do it".

that's the same excuse abusive husbands use.

this thread seems to be going in circles, but i personally don't think there's justification to kill thousands of innocent civillians just because they're located in the wrong part of the world, and i don't think that kind of work helps our standing or safety in any way. we should go after the bad guys, but not by shooting everything in sight.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by That Guy

and once again, i'm sure the people you advocate accidently killing wouldn't possibly mis-direct their hate at the americans that are actually killing them instead of the terrorists that "made them do it".

that's the same excuse abusive husbands use.

this thread seems to be going in circles, but i personally don't think there's justification to kill thousands of innocent civillians just because they're located in the wrong part of the world, and i don't think that kind of work helps our standing or safety in any way. we should go after the bad guys, but not by shooting everything in sight.

Thanks for the information that we justify killing thousands of innocent civilians just because they're located in the wrong part of the world. And not to help take down a brutal dictator. And that we shoot everything in sight when we do so.

It's not the people killing over a movie they don't like, that are the problem. We are the problem.

If we accept the random killing, ethnic cleansing, driving people of a certain religion out of their homes, and burning of churches, is our fault, things will be better. We'll be in better standing and safety......... "abusive husbands" syndrome indeed.

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by That Guy

and once again, i'm sure the people you advocate accidently killing wouldn't possibly mis-direct their hate at the americans that are actually killing them instead of the terrorists that "made them do it".

that's the same excuse abusive husbands use.

this thread seems to be going in circles, but i personally don't think there's justification to kill thousands of innocent civillians just because they're located in the wrong part of the world, and i don't think that kind of work helps our standing or safety in any way. we should go after the bad guys, but not by shooting everything in sight.

I can't understand why this is such a hard concept for some to comprehend or accept. And if you acknowledge that our actions in the past have played some part in the current climate, you're some kind of anti-American asshole. It's no wonder we keep making the same mistakes over and over again.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by BleedBurgundy

I can't understand why this is such a hard concept for some to comprehend or accept. And if you acknowledge that our actions in the past have played some part in the current climate, you're some kind of anti-American asshole. It's no wonder we keep making the same mistakes over and over again.

Thatguy's premise is faulty, and his conclusion best applied to his own argument rather than current policy.

Sure we aren't perfect or saints. But seriously, what "actions (of ours) in the past play some part in the current climate" over there, of storming embassies and killing people over a movie?

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by BleedBurgundy

Also, way to go America for sticking your collective nose where it doesn't belong for decades. That policy is clearly working out for you. You should stick with that.

Agree totally. Our fail foreign policy is only creating more enemies across the world.

Originally Posted by hooskins

Religion can be great but there are many examples where it abused. This is one of them. Violence is never the answer.

Tell that to our founding fathers. Violence is sometimes the answer. Not in this case though.

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Cracks me up when people bring up the Crusades.
How long ago was that?

Well, the KKK hangs on tightly to it's religious beliefs and we know all too well what they are capable of. There is a lot of violence from christianity over the years as well.

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Yea, and so do a lot of other people.
Far more than that what the nukes killed.

You can't say that because you simply don't know. Not that I don't disagree with your point in regards to how we attacked them and why we attacked that particular place.

Originally Posted by That Guy

remember, iran was a democracy till the US/UK blew it up for english oil interests in the 1950s. the US put saddam, the taliban, and the shah into power. the allied powers sorta kicked the palestinians out of palestine in the 1940s, so all of this meddling in the ME/SWA has caused some long term problems for us there.

THIS is so key to it all. People talk about "knowing history", yet refuse to actually look at history. We are largely reponsible for the instability in the middle east right now and it's all about oil. It's always been about oil.

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Yes we do.
And we do it with a proper calling card and uniformed soldiers.
Bin Laden and his buddies changed the rules when they chose to start a conflict anonymously. Any collateral damage is their fault AFAIC.

No, we really can't. Well, not without being a huge hypocrite.

[Alvin Walton]

Efff any hypocriyte analogy right in the a$$.
I really dont give a flying fox.
As far as I'm concerned the Muslim idiots have made the situation what it is by fighting outside of a govt and outside of a uniform.
Oh and eff them in the a$$ too.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Efff any hypocriyte analogy right in the a$$.
I really dont give a flying fox.
As far as I'm concerned the Muslim idiots have made the situation what it is by fighting outside of a govt and outside of a uniform.
Oh and eff them in the a$$ too.

Of course you don't care, you aren't the one being bombed. That's the problem with humanity. It's amazing how one changes their views when the tables are turned on themselves.

[Alvin Walton]

Because you are hugging the tree so hard you are missing the point.
This is still a war. A very unconventional one but still a war. And it is extremely complicated.
You dont win a war by avoiding the hypocrisy tag. You win by killing them.

Do you know a better way to combat a non-govt and non uniformed aggressor?

Should we all go home and sing Kumbaya by the fire instead?

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Should we all go home and sing Kumbaya by the fire instead?

No. We should pack up, and get the **** out of other people's country that we have no business being in. We are there for the resources, not to spread democracy and fight for the good guys. If that were the case, we would have intervened a long time ago in South Africa.

Again, failed foreign policies have led to these conflicts. Mind your business, stay the hell out of people's country and protect our borders.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by HailGreen28

Thanks for the information that we justify killing thousands of innocent civilians just because they're located in the wrong part of the world. And not to help take down a brutal dictator. And that we shoot everything in sight when we do so.

It's not the people killing over a movie they don't like, that are the problem. We are the problem.

If we accept the random killing, ethnic cleansing, driving people of a certain religion out of their homes, and burning of churches, is our fault, things will be better. We'll be in better standing and safety......... "abusive husbands" syndrome indeed.

congrats on misreading this thread and missing the point.

Taking down brutal dictators or those that target americans isn't something i'm against. it's the willingness to flush thousands of non combatants in the crossfire that i'm seeing in these threads thats the issue. the only point i've been making is that killing the wrong people doesn't help anyone.

we did that in vietnam, and it didn't help us there. it's happened quite a bit in iraq and afghanistan and it just makes it harder to "win" or accomplish the mission or whatever when you say "hey, we're here to help" right before you blow up the wrong town.

the "wars" or conflicts or whatever you want to call them against non nation states requires a LOT of intel and discipline in targetting or you end up taking two steps foward and three steps back. which just lets you pile up bodies and further bad will. fighting to fight is nice and all, but if you're not moving towards the end game, you're losing.

again, my point is simply that going in and killing whoever "just cause" doesn't work or help us in the long run. trust me, it's been done. and it has nothing to do with hugging trees.

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by That Guy

congrats on misreading this thread and missing the point.

Taking down brutal dictators or those that target americans isn't something i'm against. it's the willingness to flush thousands of non combatants in the crossfire that i'm seeing in these threads thats the issue. the only point i've been making is that killing the wrong people doesn't help anyone.

we did that in vietnam, and it didn't help us there. it's happened quite a bit in iraq and afghanistan and it just makes it harder to "win" or accomplish the mission or whatever when you say "hey, we're here to help" right before you blow up the wrong town.

the "wars" or conflicts or whatever you want to call them against non nation states requires a LOT of intel and discipline in targetting or you end up taking two steps foward and three steps back. which just lets you pile up bodies and further bad will. fighting to fight is nice and all, but if you're not moving towards the end game, you're losing.

again, my point is simply that going in and killing whoever "just cause" doesn't work or help us in the long run. trust me, it's been done. and it has nothing to do with hugging trees.

Are you even responding to my posts? Where did I express a willingness to flush thousands of non combatants in the crossfire, or not to care about killing "the wrong people"? Why insult me accusing me of "misreading the thread", when you make a reply to me not addressing anything I said?

You said we deliberately killed people for being in the wrong place, that we shoot everything in sight. I pointed out those premises are faulty. And that you misapplied the "abusive husbands" situation in excusing a mobs reaction to violence. Feel free to try defending your strawmen now, if you want. But please don't accuse me of missing the point of the thread when you don't even address the point you reply to.

So what is this latest post of yours about? Lots of intel and discipline are needed to fight non-nation states? We actually tried that in vietnam, iraq, and afghanistan. So I'm not really sure what or who you're arguing against. We've gotten better at it through the years. Not because we're more virtuous people percentage-wise now than before, but from experience and tech. Yet we still hit the wrong house, the wrong people on occasion. Do you think we as a people, or whole armed forces, do it deliberately? Do you think that real life weapons and people have become perfect like some video game? Or do you realize you're arguing for more of the same?

PS. Look at reports of drones in Afghanistan and Pakistan. High resolution cameras are no more accurate at picking out who's who than eyes of people on the ground. With drones, we've just decided we can shoot without getting local confirmation. This has had mixed results, we can shoot at people we think are the bad guys more quickly, but we're still also hitting "the wrong people" you cite.

[That Guy]

wow fail. I'm probably not going to bother, because you're still arguing things i'm not saying and misreading things i am. i also don't know how "in these threads" means you and you alone.

and yes, buring down entire villages in vietnam was definitely what i'd call disciplined targetting. it's intel on the ground. we had it for the russians, but not for the ME, and it's still probably lacking.

and yes, i think we deliberately kill civillians :P (/sarcasm) statements/questions like that just prove why this is a waste of time. are you trolling or do you just have it all figured out?

[HailGreen28]

Originally Posted by That Guy

wow fail. I'm probably not going to bother, because you're still arguing things i'm not saying and misreading things i am. i also don't know how "in these threads" means you and you alone.

and yes, buring down entire villages in vietnam was definitely what i'd call disciplined targetting. it's intel on the ground. we had it for the russians, but not for the ME, and it's still probably lacking.

and yes, i think we deliberately kill civillians :P (/sarcasm) statements/questions like that just prove why this is a waste of time. are you trolling or do you just have it all figured out?

No, if you're going to reply to mine or anyone posts, you ought to at least respond to the post you're replying to, in addition to whoever else you want. (You can also use the "quick reply" at the bottom of each page, if you can't decide who you're actually replying to.)

This is your post I was replying to originally, BTW.

Originally Posted by That Guy

and once again, i'm sure the people you advocate accidently killing wouldn't possibly mis-direct their hate at the americans that are actually killing them instead of the terrorists that "made them do it".

that's the same excuse abusive husbands use.

this thread seems to be going in circles, but i personally don't think there's justification to kill thousands of innocent civillians just because they're located in the wrong part of the world, and i don't think that kind of work helps our standing or safety in any way. we should go after the bad guys, but not by shooting everything in sight.

I say again, your premise is faulty, and the "abusive husband" comment is more approprate towards the attitude of excusing the mob violence, than justifying it. You want to discuss that, feel free.

If you were just trolling, or didn't mean a word you said in that post, fine. If not, you're backpedaling faster than D.Hall trying to cover a WR that just juked him.

On what we're discussing since, did you see what we did to Fallujah? Think we didn't have intel on the ground in Vietnam, and the other places we've mentioned? You're aren't advocating us doing anything different than what we've been doing. Just calling it "lacking" is about the same as sitting at home watching our D play, and the only criticism you have is that they should play "better" without saying why or what. Unless you really meant what you said in your post I quoted, in which case... well I answered that already.