nigel99 150 #1 February 28, 2008 A number of years ago Bill posted this QuoteI agree that the whole "they're intentionally killing journalists" thing is silly. However, if we have troops over there that can't tell cameras from RPG's we have big problems. Will they mistake water jugs for bombs next? Down vests for suicide bombers? Are we going to defend our military for killing kids wearing thick jackets next? "Hey, he looked just like that suicide bomber we got here last week. What, you want us to ask them if they're suicide bombers before we shoot them?" We are going to lose US military over there. We're averaging one a day, and it's not going to get better any time soon. That means around 600 over the next two years. We will lose more in the long run if we keep shooting people with cameras, because the clerics who call for a holy war against the murderous invaders will have all the ammunition they need to 'prove' we are there to kill Arabs. That means we can't just take the attitude "I'm going to kill any son of a bitch that points anything at anyone" - unless we're OK with losing even more than 600. See todays news http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7268645.stmExperienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #2 February 28, 2008 QuoteA number of years ago Bill posted this QuoteI agree that the whole "they're intentionally killing journalists" thing is silly. However, if we have troops over there that can't tell cameras from RPG's we have big problems. Will they mistake water jugs for bombs next? Down vests for suicide bombers? Are we going to defend our military for killing kids wearing thick jackets next? "Hey, he looked just like that suicide bomber we got here last week. What, you want us to ask them if they're suicide bombers before we shoot them?" We are going to lose US military over there. We're averaging one a day, and it's not going to get better any time soon. That means around 600 over the next two years. We will lose more in the long run if we keep shooting people with cameras, because the clerics who call for a holy war against the murderous invaders will have all the ammunition they need to 'prove' we are there to kill Arabs. That means we can't just take the attitude "I'm going to kill any son of a bitch that points anything at anyone" - unless we're OK with losing even more than 600. See todays news http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7268645.stm Interesting. Especially since some of what is being reported here is no where to be found in the bbc report."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,260 #3 February 28, 2008 QuoteInteresting. Especially since some of what is being reported here is no where to be found in the bbc report. Like...Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #4 February 28, 2008 QuoteQuoteInteresting. Especially since some of what is being reported here is no where to be found in the bbc report. Like... ....like he was told repeatedly to remove his hands from his pockets, (I read that he was hard of hearing) which he did not. My main point is we will only get details that support the agenda of those reporting and more than likely we will never get ALL the info. In either case it is a sad event."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,260 #5 February 28, 2008 Quote....like he was told repeatedly to remove his hands from his pockets, (I read that he was hard of hearing) which he did not. The BBC article does state that he ignored (or didn't hear/ couldn't understand) repeated instructions to stop and a warning shot. QuoteMy main point is we will only get details that support the agenda of those reporting and more than likely we will never get ALL the info. So what details have you herd that were left out of the BBC report?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 150 #6 February 28, 2008 Quote ....like he was told repeatedly to remove his hands from his pockets, (I read that he was hard of hearing) which he did not. My main point is we will only get details that support the agenda of those reporting and more than likely we will never get ALL the info. In either case it is a sad event. I posted the story not because it was very "newsworthy" but because the original comment about someone being shot and a contributing factor was the clothes they wore. At the time of the comment (August 2003) many people laughed at the concept (along with the fact that the war would be here 5 years later! Another interesting "fact" is that the thread in question is in the bonfireExperienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydyvr 0 #7 February 28, 2008 Quote A number of years ago Bill posted this Damn, I thought I was good at remembering who said what and when around here. However, I must now bow to your mad skillz in that department. . . =(_8^(1) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #8 February 28, 2008 Another prediction I wish I had been wrong about. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #9 February 28, 2008 QuoteThat means around 600 over the next two years. You were wrong about this one. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #10 February 28, 2008 > You were wrong about this one. By almost a factor of three. I wish I had been _right_ about that one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #11 February 29, 2008 Anybody got ballpark estimates on what the war has cost so far in lives and money? When it is over, and the numbers are in; does anybody think we will be able to say, Yeah - it was worth it. We may have started this little fiasco in error, based on our own incorrect information, and the desire of a leader who so badly wanted it to be true; so now we justify it by saying - But he was a bad man. So what have we changed by taking out the bad man? People are still dying. But hey, we've changed who is dying. Or have we even done that? Since it is now pretty well accepted this thing got started by bad intelligence, has anyone yet apologized for that little mistake? Oops, sorry, should've went elsewhere, our mistake. One last thought. Now that we have established that taking out bad men who mistreat their civilian populations is close enough to a good reason to start a war; we should all be psyched and ready to invade Sudan next. As soon as we finish up in Iraq, give the military a few days rest, then let's go get the bad man in Sudan. On 3, . . . .Goooooooooooo Team!" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #12 February 29, 2008 >has anyone yet apologized for that little mistake? Forget an apology. I'd settle for a simple admission of error. When Bush was asked a while back what his biggest mistake was in office, he couldn't think of one. Later, when asked the same question, he replied "I trusted people too much." If that's really the lessons we took away from the Iraq debacle, we are in sorry shape. >we should all be psyched and ready to invade Sudan next. Exactly. Can they PROVE they don't have WMD's? After all, Saddam's WMD's went across the border to Sudan. So either their government has the WMD's, or they have the records proving they have been destroyed. And if they say they don't have the records, well - we don't want the proof to come in the shape of a mushroom cloud over LA, do we? But it should be a piece of cake. We'll be greeted as liberators. It might take six days, six weeks - I doubt six months. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #13 February 29, 2008 Quote>has anyone yet apologized for that little mistake? Forget an apology. I'd settle for a simple admission of error. When Bush was asked a while back what his biggest mistake was in office, he couldn't think of one. Later, when asked the same question, he replied "I trusted people too much." If that's really the lessons we took away from the Iraq debacle, we are in sorry shape. >we should all be psyched and ready to invade Sudan next. Exactly. Can they PROVE they don't have WMD's? After all, Saddam's WMD's went across the border to Sudan. So either their government has the WMD's, or they have the records proving they have been destroyed. And if they say they don't have the records, well - we don't want the proof to come in the shape of a mushroom cloud over LA, do we? But it should be a piece of cake. We'll be greeted as liberators. It might take six days, six weeks - I doubt six months. Don't forget the flowers - they will shower our troops with flowers.... 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
