vmsfreaky1 0 #1 April 28, 2004 Well son..... http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/22/1082616260498.html?from=top5 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lifewithoutanet 0 #2 April 28, 2004 One of the unintended consequences of having precision and non-lethal weapons and speaking of precision strikes is that folks somehow think we can hit ONLY the individuals intended. But, if we do only that, somehow it becomes assassination. Just look at what Isreal faces when they specifically target leaders of known and admitted terrorist organizations. I won't argue with a lot of what was in that thread for the context in which it was written and for the fear that my point will be lost in an argument, but one thing I can point out is that our troops do not deliberately target civilians with suicide bombs in malls, cafes or on buses. Nor do they target them for their cooperation with other forces. On the contrary, that's all I seem to be hearing from the other side when I turn on the news these days. We have spent so much energy telling people that we can wage war where only the guilty are injured that we HAVE NOW GIVEN AWAY the ability to instill fear in a populace, so that they no longer hold their own folks in check. I am not saying this is right. I am not saying that the world should fear the wrath of the US. Do not mistake my point. I'm not saying we are in Iraq for all of the right reasons. However, I'm not certain that if we hadn't done anything, and years from now Hussein had carried out another attack on his own people or further destabalized the region, that there wouldn't be countless cries of "Why didn't you do anything?! He'd used chemical weapons against his own people before. He'd used them against Iran, too. What more were you waiting for?!" I'd love to go on, for the sake of intellectual conversation, not argument, but I've got a flight to catch in the morning (a shame I'll be landing in the plane), so I'm done for now. -C. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #3 April 28, 2004 From the mouth of babes When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RoadRash 0 #4 April 28, 2004 QuoteOne of the unintended consequences of having precision and non-lethal weapons and speaking of precision strikes is that folks somehow think we can hit ONLY the individuals intended. But, if we do only that, somehow it becomes assassination. Just look at what Isreal faces when they specifically target leaders of known and admitted terrorist organizations. I won't argue with a lot of what was in that thread for the context in which it was written and for the fear that my point will be lost in an argument, but one thing I can point out is that our troops do not deliberately target civilians with suicide bombs in malls, cafes or on buses. Nor do they target them for their cooperation with other forces. On the contrary, that's all I seem to be hearing from the other side when I turn on the news these days. We have spent so much energy telling people that we can wage war where only the guilty are injured that we HAVE NOW GIVEN AWAY the ability to instill fear in a populace, so that they no longer hold their own folks in check. I am not saying this is right. I am not saying that the world should fear the wrath of the US. Do not mistake my point. I'm not saying we are in Iraq for all of the right reasons. However, I'm not certain that if we hadn't done anything, and years from now Hussein had carried out another attack on his own people or further destabalized the region, that there wouldn't be countless cries of "Why didn't you do anything?! He'd used chemical weapons against his own people before. He'd used them against Iran, too. What more were you waiting for?!" I'd love to go on, for the sake of intellectual conversation, not argument, but I've got a flight to catch in the morning (a shame I'll be landing in the plane), so I'm done for now. -C. I quoted the entire post for a reason. Because I felt that that needed to be repeated following this statement... QuoteFrom the mouth of babes I suppose that the village of Kurds that Saddam gassed really don't matter as well as the lives that were saved when the U.S. forces took him out of power. But I suppose you would prefer him to continue torturing his own people and allowing his "blood-thirsty little monsters" sons continue mutilating athletes because they didn't perform as well as they were told. But that means nothing. I agree with lifewithoutanet, we may not be there for the right reasons, however, we are there now, with good intentions and that is to prevent further bloodshed through an evil dictator and his flock of hooligans. ~R+R~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Fly the friendly skies...^_^...})ii({...^_~... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #5 April 28, 2004 '... however, we are there now, with good intentions and that is to prevent further bloodshed through an evil dictator and his flock of hooligans' Its begining to look like all thats changed is the hooligans.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #6 April 28, 2004 "I suppose that the village of Kurds that Saddam gassed really don't matter as well as the lives that were saved when the U.S. forces took him out of power." That should read Coalition Forces, surely? Also 'that village' was Hallabja, and we continued to support Saddam and his regime through that particularly unpleasant period. "A UN security council statement condemning Iraq's use of chemical weapons in the war was issued in 1986, but the US and other western governments continued supporting Baghdad militarily and politically into the closing stages of the war." source:-http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/03/v3_iraq_timeline/html/chemical_warfare.stm Mind you, 'we' supported the other side (Iran) as well.-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #7 April 28, 2004 QuoteQuote I suppose that the village of Kurds that Saddam gassed really don't matter as well as the lives that were saved when the U.S. forces took him out of power. But I suppose you would prefer him to continue torturing his own people and allowing his "blood-thirsty little monsters" sons continue mutilating athletes because they didn't perform as well as they were told. But that means nothing. I agree with lifewithoutanet, we may not be there for the right reasons, however, we are there now, with good intentions and that is to prevent further bloodshed through an evil dictator and his flock of hooligans. ~R+R Ahem, he was "our" guy when he gassed the Kurds, and we (Reagan/Bush, that is) continued to support him after that. We supported him right up until he threatened our oil supply by invading Kuwait, and even there it seems we (Bush I, that is) were going to turn a blind eye at first (Google on "April Glaspie").... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites vmsfreaky1 0 #8 April 30, 2004 Quoteas well as the lives that were saved when the U.S. forces took him out of power. Lets see, the number of iraqi people killed directly because of the U.S/British blockade numbered in the hundreds of thousands. The number of Iraqi people killed directly in the invasion of Iraq, an estimate is 15,000, its only an estimate because the US doesnt count dead Iraqis, its left up to amnesty and the like. I agree wity SkyRad, i think the hooligans have changed and not much else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #9 April 30, 2004 QuoteLets see, the number of iraqi people killed directly because of the U.S/British blockade numbered in the hundreds of thousands. Whose blockade? Check the facts. Check the timeline and recount the bodies that died under Hussein again. QuoteThe number of Iraqi people killed directly in the invasion of Iraq, an estimate is 15,000, its only an estimate because the US doesnt count dead Iraqis, its left up to amnesty and the like. Iraqbodycount.com disagrees with you and the casualty count are hardly limited to civilians.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Michele 1 #10 April 30, 2004 QuoteIraqbodycount.com disagrees with you and the casualty count are hardly limited to civilians. True. I was also wondering if we knew what an average mortality rate was for the country in the years preceding the war. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AggieDave 6 #11 April 30, 2004 Quote I was also wondering if we knew what an average mortality rate was for the country in the years preceding the war. I do believe it was 100%, still is I think... --"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Michele 1 #12 April 30, 2004 Yes, AD, I agree...it's 100% over time. What was the average mortality rate per anum? (Yes, I know you were being a smart ass...but I still have the question...) Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,473 #13 April 30, 2004 >Iraqbodycount.com disagrees with you and the casualty count are >hardly limited to civilians. Iraqbodycount.com only lists civilian deaths. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites PhillyKev 0 #14 April 30, 2004 Quote>Iraqbodycount.com disagrees with you and the casualty count are >hardly limited to civilians. Iraqbodycount.com only lists civilian deaths. Actually, iraqbodycount.com is the portal for an isp??????????? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #15 April 30, 2004 Quote>Iraqbodycount.com disagrees with you and the casualty count are >hardly limited to civilians. Iraqbodycount.com only lists civilian deaths. Well, it clearly says on the matrix in the "target" items such as "police" or "US patrol". Are they citing civilian deaths as a result of the attack? If so, then the Iraqis are more responsible for the civilian deaths than we are. http://www.iraqbodycount.net/bodycount.htmSo I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Faber 0 #16 May 1, 2004 dad,what does "to wash your hands" mean? "A terroist" is a person fighting a war but turning the attacks against civilian,to kill and injury them on purpose,instead of military targets. "to wash hands" can mean that people wants to justify their actions,or give other the blame for a mistake. Stay safe Stefan Faber Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tcnelson 1 #17 May 1, 2004 life is easy when we get to write the responses to our own questions."Don't talk to me like that assface...I don't work for you yet." - Fletch NBFT, Deseoso Rodriguez RB#1329 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #18 May 1, 2004 We could add those red coats into the equation couldn't we?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
vmsfreaky1 0 #8 April 30, 2004 Quoteas well as the lives that were saved when the U.S. forces took him out of power. Lets see, the number of iraqi people killed directly because of the U.S/British blockade numbered in the hundreds of thousands. The number of Iraqi people killed directly in the invasion of Iraq, an estimate is 15,000, its only an estimate because the US doesnt count dead Iraqis, its left up to amnesty and the like. I agree wity SkyRad, i think the hooligans have changed and not much else. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #9 April 30, 2004 QuoteLets see, the number of iraqi people killed directly because of the U.S/British blockade numbered in the hundreds of thousands. Whose blockade? Check the facts. Check the timeline and recount the bodies that died under Hussein again. QuoteThe number of Iraqi people killed directly in the invasion of Iraq, an estimate is 15,000, its only an estimate because the US doesnt count dead Iraqis, its left up to amnesty and the like. Iraqbodycount.com disagrees with you and the casualty count are hardly limited to civilians.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #10 April 30, 2004 QuoteIraqbodycount.com disagrees with you and the casualty count are hardly limited to civilians. True. I was also wondering if we knew what an average mortality rate was for the country in the years preceding the war. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #11 April 30, 2004 Quote I was also wondering if we knew what an average mortality rate was for the country in the years preceding the war. I do believe it was 100%, still is I think... --"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #12 April 30, 2004 Yes, AD, I agree...it's 100% over time. What was the average mortality rate per anum? (Yes, I know you were being a smart ass...but I still have the question...) Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,473 #13 April 30, 2004 >Iraqbodycount.com disagrees with you and the casualty count are >hardly limited to civilians. Iraqbodycount.com only lists civilian deaths. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #14 April 30, 2004 Quote>Iraqbodycount.com disagrees with you and the casualty count are >hardly limited to civilians. Iraqbodycount.com only lists civilian deaths. Actually, iraqbodycount.com is the portal for an isp??????????? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #15 April 30, 2004 Quote>Iraqbodycount.com disagrees with you and the casualty count are >hardly limited to civilians. Iraqbodycount.com only lists civilian deaths. Well, it clearly says on the matrix in the "target" items such as "police" or "US patrol". Are they citing civilian deaths as a result of the attack? If so, then the Iraqis are more responsible for the civilian deaths than we are. http://www.iraqbodycount.net/bodycount.htmSo I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faber 0 #16 May 1, 2004 dad,what does "to wash your hands" mean? "A terroist" is a person fighting a war but turning the attacks against civilian,to kill and injury them on purpose,instead of military targets. "to wash hands" can mean that people wants to justify their actions,or give other the blame for a mistake. Stay safe Stefan Faber Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tcnelson 1 #17 May 1, 2004 life is easy when we get to write the responses to our own questions."Don't talk to me like that assface...I don't work for you yet." - Fletch NBFT, Deseoso Rodriguez RB#1329 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #18 May 1, 2004 We could add those red coats into the equation couldn't we?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
