Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 92
  1. #61  
    vain, surely the first 3000+ must be included in the assessment.
  2. #62  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE
    junior's war on terror -- the war without end.
    Since some people need constant reminding just who it is we're fighting:

    Three Schoolgirls Beheaded in Indonesia

    And we're still finding human remains in New York...

    Human Bone Fragments Found at WTC Site
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  3. #63  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    Since some people need constant reminding just who it is we're fighting:.......
    I stand reminded that we confront a determined adversary. I do not question that he is evil (though I am sure he believes the same of me). I do not question that he is fearsome (though I think that our collective fear of him is out of proportion to his capability if not to his intent). I do not question that the difficulty in identifying him presents us with a tactical, strategic, ethical, moral, and legal dilemma.

    It is not who but how that concerns me. The killing of innocent civilians does not justify the killing of innocent civilians. I would not favor it even if I thought that it worked rather than simply perpetuating a(n) (endless) cycle of violence. My fear, no matter how great, that a civilian might be a bomber does not justify my preemptive killing of him.

    No one ever promised me that being an American would be easy. They did not promise me a safe world. They did not promise me that being a citizen of the most powerful nation in the world would mean that no would ever take advantage of me or that I would never have to defend myself at a disadvantage.

    They did not promise me that I would never have to forgo vengeance, or God forbid, turn the other cheek. They did not promise me that there were not means that could never be justified by any end, much less the mere fact that my adversary used them. They did not promise me that my scruples or my commitment to the Rule of Law could not me used against me.
    Last edited by whmurray; 10/31/2005 at 09:58 PM.
  4. #64  
    The civil war in Iraq is a big price to pay for the removal of Saddam Hussein. Furthermore, the invasion may have galvanized opposition to the United States in the Middle East.

    The headlines below suggest we are fighting long after we ever intended to be fighting.


    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    With how fast you replied, I think it would be safe to assume you didn't bother to visit any of the links I posted. Here are just some of the headlines from what they have accomplished in the last 4 days alone....how much have you heard about any of them in the MSM?

    • Task Force Baghdad Soldiers uncover weapons cache
      TAJI, Iraq -- Task Force Baghdad Soldiers discovered a weapons cache while conducting combat operations north of Baghdad Oct. 24...more
    • Terrorist stronghold raided
      BAGHDAD, Iraq – Coalition forces raided three suspected terrorist safe houses, detained six terrorists, and killed several others in the town of...more
    • Kindergarten school receives facelift
      MOSUL, Iraq – Kindergarten children in Tal Usquf, a town north of Mosul, have a newly renovated school to learn and play...more
    • Terrorists detained and VBIEDs destroyed in Husaybah
      BAGHDAD, Iraq – Coalition forces find two car bombs and detained four suspected terrorists during raids in Husaybah Oct. 24...more
    • Stryker Brigade unearths another large weapons cache near Rawah
      MOSUL, Iraq – Soldiers from 4th Squadron, 14th Cavalry Regiment (172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team) seized a large weapons cache during...more
    • Coalition raids nab terrorists
      BAGHDAD, Iraq -- During raids on safe houses, Coalition forces killed two suspected terrorists in Mosul, Oct. 22, and detained 22...more
    • U.S. Soldiers catch terrorists planting bombs
      BAGHDAD, Iraq -- As Task Force Baghdad Soldiers continued to conduct aggressive combat patrols in districts in and around Baghdad Oct. 21, several...more
    • Stryker Brigade uncovers huge weapons caches near Euphrates River
      MOSUL, Iraq – Multi-National Forces from 172nd Infantry Brigade (Stryker Brigade Combat Team) uncovered 10 weapons caches and detained...more
    • Task Force Liberty Soldiers find cache, detain suspects in Bayji
      TIKRIT, Iraq - Task Force Liberty Soldiers followed a civilian’s tip and found a cache of explosives and weapons buried in several locations at...more
    • Coalition troops provide water in Diwaniyah
      CAMP ECHO, Iraq -- Reconstruction efforts by Multi-National Division Central-South troops give about 2,000 Diwaniyah residents with fresh...more


    I didn't challenge your statements but simply mentioned that the good the Multinational Troops are doing in Iraq are not being reported by the MSM and you change the subject twice to make your own point. I thought mine was a simple comment.
  5. #65  
    Quote Originally Posted by rosenft
    The civil war in Iraq is a big price to pay for the removal of Saddam Hussein.
    What is going on in Iraq in an insurgency that consists in large number of foreign jihadists. It is not a civil war. They just voted (all ethnic/sectarian groups) on a constitution. Such over-the-top rhetoric merely serves to discredit the opposition to the war.
    Furthermore, the invasion may have galvanized opposition to the United States in the Middle East.
    There is absolutely no evidence for this. In fact, since the invasion calls for democracy are on the increase in the Middle East.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  6. #66  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    I stand reminded that we confront a determined adversary. I do not question that he is evil (though I am sure he believes the same of me).
    I have no problem judging our adversary evil - and it does not really concern me what he thinks of us. His evil finds expression in intentional terrorist acts against civilians - acts that place him outside the boundaries of civilization.
    I do not question that he is fearsome (though I think that our collective fear of him is out of proportion to his capability if not to his intent).
    ...until the day he aquires weapons of mass destruction - which is the point of the Bush doctrine of pre-emption (which, by the way, is not a new idea unique to this administration. Pre-emptive action has always been implicit in American foreign policy where a clear threat was definable).
    I do not question that the difficulty in identifying him presents us with a tactical, strategic, ethical, moral, and legal dilemma.

    It is not who but how that concerns me. The killing of innocent civilians does not justify the killing of innocent civilians. I would not favor it even I thought that it worked rather than simply perpetuating a(n) (endless) cycle of violence. My fear, no matter how great, that a civilian might be a bomber does not justify my preemptive killing of him.
    Our opponents kill civilians purposely to make statements or to try and affect our public opinion. We do not. Cases of civilian deaths at our hands are due to error or because the terrorists choose to hide behind them. Those who choose to use civilians as shields carry the blood of resultant civilian casualties on their hands. We do not purposely kill civilians. If one of our soldiers were to do this, and were it discovered, he would be punished for it. Our opponents are not constrained by such marks of civilization.
    No one ever promised me that being an American would be easy. They did not promise me a safe world. They did not promise me that being a citizen of the most powerful nation in the world would mean that no would ever take advantage of me or that I would never have to defend myself at a disadvantage.
    We're defending ourselves at a disadvantage every day. As I said, we are bound by the constraints of civilization. Our opponents are not. I don't wish for us to not be. I also do not believe that being civilized means we can't defend ourselves from annhiliation - which is the goal of the jihadist.
    They did not promise me that I would never have to forgo vengeance, or God forbid, turn the other cheek.
    We tried turning the other cheek. It got us 9/11.
    They did not promise me that there were not means that could never be justified by any end, much less the mere fact that my adversary used them.
    The implication that we are (or that anyone believes we should) employ the same means as our enemy is completely false. We do not target civilians.
    They did not promise me that my scruples or my commitment to the Rule of Law could not me used against me.
    You have every right to believe what you wish. You have every right to try and persuade others to your cause. You have these rights because others were willing to defend them. The Quakers oppose war. Since the founding of the country, Quakers have benefitted from the religious and other freedoms guaranteed in the U.S. and are thus able to hold their pacifist views free from persecution.

    I celebrate their right to hold their beliefs (as I do your right to hold your beliefs) - I'm just thankful they aren't the majority view.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  7. #67  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    .....We do not purposely kill civilians. ......
    Sir, you are either naive or you have not read your history. Since the French and Indian war, in every conflict, we, the state, have deliberately and systematically targeted civilians for the purpose of achieving political ends. That is terrorism, by definition. That it was the policy of a nation state, that it was carried out by uniformed troops, makes it worse, not better than criminal civilians.

    You may argue that we have not targeted civilians in Iraq, that all the civilian casuaties are "collateral damage," but those whose relatives died see it differently and will not forgive us for generations. But we targeted civilians in the French and Indian war, and in the Carolinas in the Revolution. We must answer for Sherman who really did not intend to rape, pillage, and burn but just could not control his unruly but uniformed troops. We must answer for the wars of indian extermination in which children were killed because they might not starve to death, in which we gave pox infected blankets to women and children. We must answer for the civilians we killed in "liberating the Philippines." We must answer for the "strategic" bombing of Europe of which Dresden was only the most egregious example. We must answer for Nagasaki and Hiroshima, chosen in part because the damage might not show up on the cities that we had already bombed with incendiaries intended to start fires in wooden civilian homes. We have to answer for the civilians that we killed in Vietnam. Yes, it was difficult, I will even grant you impossible, to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. But the combatants were guerillas, not terrorists. They were fighting the uniformed troops of a foreign power on their soil. That is legitimate insurgency, not terror. Terror was what we did in Cambodia.

    Please do not bother to reiterate your litany of excuses. I have been listening to them for the better part of a particularly nasty century. Please do not cloak yourself in the blood of innocent and honorable young people who have killed and been killed in carrying out the policies of the state. Instead, read the Lessons of Terror by Caleb Carr.
    Last edited by whmurray; 10/30/2005 at 01:31 PM.
  8. #68  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    Sir, you are either naive or you have not read your history.
    I know my history quite well, thank you. I choose to believe that I and my country are not prisoners of it - I was referring to the war in Iraq, where we are going to great lengths to not target civilians. I am also not naive. Neither am I cynical or jaded.

    Clearly things are done in total war that would not be acceptable in peacetime. In total war, nation-states are able to wage war because they have the support of their people. The fire-bombing of Dresden happened because of Hitler's refusal to read the writing on the wall - not because we hated Germans and wanted to kill them. The purpose was to break the will to fight and prevent further loss of American and Allied (and German) life by bringing the war to a quicker conclusion. Same with Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Maybe these actions were not needed, most likely they were. Either way hindsight grants us a perspective not available to Roosevelt or Truman. Somehow the descendants of the defeated have come to forgive us (within one generation).

    The obvious rejoinder to this is, "Well that's what the jihadists are trying to do to us!". My answer is- obviously, yes, they are trying to break our will to fight by targeting civilians (and our troops). The difference is of course they are doing so in an unjust cause. This I think is where some people have trouble - being comfortable judging their cause unjust.

    In the case of World War II, the Allies were right and the Axis was wrong. Much greater evil would have come about had the Allies lost. That this even needs repeating is depressing, since clearly you feel that we should have fought in a manner that would have more likely exposed us to defeat.

    In the case of Islamic fundamentalism - should they win the world will be a much worse place - if you cherish such things as liberty, freedom and justice. In this war, attacking civilians could have no utility or moral justification. We are not fighting a nation-state supported by a populace whose will can be broken. We have every incentive in this war to avoid civilian injury and increase civilian goodwill.
    Current: iPhone 3G
    Retired from active duty: Treo 800w, Sprint Touch, Mogul, Apache, Cingular Treo 650, HP iPaq 4350, T|T, M505 - Nokia 3650 - SE R520m, T610, T637, Moto P280, etc, etc...
  9. #69  
    'F' all you damn libbies!! If u don't like it...get the F out of America and go start a friggin society in the middle east. buy a house...get a job...and see how much freedom u have over there.

    to all the soldiers who unselfishly stand gaurd in the night and fight on our behalves...i salute you.
  10. #70  
    Have you ever served in any branch of the military, baby_arm?
    If you have please tell me about your experience.
  11. #71  
    Quote Originally Posted by baby_arm
    'F' all you damn libbies!! If u don't like it...get the F out of America and go start a friggin society in the middle east. buy a house...get a job...and see how much freedom u have over there.

    to all the soldiers who unselfishly stand gaurd in the night and fight on our behalves...i salute you.
    Sir, do not patronize me. The date on my discharge papers is earlier than that on your birth certificate. I was here first and I do not need your permission to stay.
  12. #72  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    ...still waiting to hear your plan...

    I don't accept the poll you cite at face value. You want so badly to believe it that you accept it without question.
    Yes, and you so want to believe your government that you accept what it says without question. We were taught the dangers of doing that.
  13. #73  
    You must unlearn what you have learned.

    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    Sir, you are either naive or you have not read your history. Since the French and Indian war, in every conflict, we, the state, have deliberately and systematically targeted civilians for the purpose of achieving political ends. That is terrorism, by definition. That it was the policy of a nation state, that it was carried out by uniformed troops, makes it worse, not better than criminal civilians.

    You may argue that we have not targeted civilians in Iraq, that all the civilian casuaties are "collateral damage," but those whose relatives died see it differently and will not forgive us for generations. But we targeted civilians in the French and Indian war, and in the Carolinas in the Revolution. We must answer for Sherman who really did not intend to rape, pillage, and burn but just could not control his unruly but uniformed troops. We must answer for the wars of indian extermination in which children were killed because they might not starve to death, in which we gave pox infected blankets to women and children. We must answer for the civilians we killed in "liberating the Philippines." We must answer for the "strategic" bombing of Europe of which Dresden was only the most egregious example. We must answer for Nagasaki and Hiroshima, chosen in part because the damage might not show up on the cities that we had already bombed with incendiaries intended to start fires in wooden civilian homes. We have to answer for the civilians that we killed in Vietnam. Yes, it was difficult, I will even grant you impossible, to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants. But the combatants were guerillas, not terrorists. They were fighting the uniformed troops of a foreign power on their soil. That is legitimate insurgency, not terror. Terror was what we did in Cambodia.

    Please do not bother to reiterate your litany of excuses. I have been listening to them for the better part of a particularly nasty century. Please do not cloak yourself in the blood of innocent and honorable young people who have killed and been killed in carrying out the policies of the state. Instead, read the Lessons of Terror by Caleb Carr.
  14. #74  
    you are so right....u don't need my permission to stay. i'd gladly open the door for you old decaying *** to leave. if it would help...i'd even pay for the airfare to fly you out.
  15. #75  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    You must unlearn what you have learned.
    I have done that dozens of times. What have you to teach?
  16. #76  
    Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.

    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    I have done that dozens of times. What have you to teach?
  17. #77  
    Quote Originally Posted by baby_arm
    you are so right....u don't need my permission to stay. i'd gladly open the door for you old decaying *** to leave. if it would help...i'd even pay for the airfare to fly you out.
    You may be able to afford the airfare.
  18. #78  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    You may be able to afford the airfare.
    You will find only what you bring in.
  19. #79  
    Quote Originally Posted by Advance The Man
    You will find only what you bring in.
    Sir, you do not frighten me. While I do not put violence beyond you, I am not going anywhere voluntarily. At my age, the worst you can do does not frighten me very much. While you measure your time in years, I measure mine in weeks. I am much more concerned about what you will do to innocent women and children than the little you can do to me.
    Last edited by whmurray; 10/31/2005 at 10:37 PM.
  20. #80  
    Quote Originally Posted by phurth
    What is going on in Iraq in an insurgency that consists in large number of foreign jihadists. It is not a civil war. They just voted (all ethnic/sectarian groups) on a constitution. Such over-the-top rhetoric merely serves to discredit the opposition to the war.There is absolutely no evidence for this. In fact, since the invasion calls for democracy are on the increase in the Middle East.
    What planet do you live on?
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions