• We are currently experiencing technical difficulties. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience.

War Room OT Discussion v5

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think it is a big deal to target people with drones at all, much more when it's American citizens. I think we should not use drones for anything but surveillance.

Greg, you're wrong, because you are just shitting on Obama because your reflex is to be a right wing reactionary. Which, is particularly sad, because I don't think that's who you really are. I think you knee jerk to the "macho" position.
 
HomerThompson said:
I think it is a big deal to target people with drones at all, much more when it's American citizens. I think we should not use drones for anything but surveillance.

Greg, you're wrong, because you are just shitting on Obama because your reflex is to be a right wing reactionary. Which, is particularly sad, because I don't think that's who you really are. I think you knee jerk to the "macho" position.
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to shit on Obama, moreso shitting on the people that want trials then celebrated the droning of the guy in Yemen. More of a "fucking pick a side and stick with it you ass" position, or at least that's what I intended.

I'm ok with using drone strikes... for hardened military installations. We won't see those in like Afghanistan but say during the invasion of Iraq using it to bomb military basis I'd be perfectly OK with.

Surveillance I think I'd prefer actual human eyes over someone behind a computer screen looking through a camera.


EDIT:
I think I come across with that right wing reactionary sorta style because I spent 3 years in political classes at college where everyone there that was from West Bellevue and shit that grew up rich white suburban thought I was a giant Dem the way they were just cause I was brown.
 
Gregolian said:
I think my "outrage" if you can call it that is we have on one hand, members of Obama's party that were screaming for the Gitmo detainees to be tried in non-military civilian courts with court appointed attorneys and shit but at the same time praised the summary execution of a man that was born an American citizen.

My outrage is more over the hypocrisy. Dude that got the drone dropped on his head in Yemen fucking deserved it but it's the hypocrisy of the whole thing that bothers me.

One of those "you can't have it one way when it benefits you politically and another way when you can parade around body parts in a rah-rah sort of fashion" thing that bothers me.
Click to expand...

Great post.

I'll add that the justification of being able to murder indiscriminately with drones because war zone battle field blah blah is highly flawed when damn near everyone killed is innocent. If a war zone is the whole country then no rules exist anywhere? If these people were really on the battlefield then why aren't these other 9/10 folks relocating? People don't just hang out with their chips and beer to watch the fireworks.

Terrorism is a matter of crime not war. Bombing nine people to get the one supposed bad guy is a despicable practice to defend. It sure as shit wouldn't fly if it happened within our borders so it seems like a matter of questionable ethics to ignore it when it happens overseas.

Also strange how a 90% rate of collateral damage (i.e. deaths of innocents) is a reasonable measure but disallowing some immigration from various places is beyond the pale. :rolleyes:


Gregolian said:
Given @Fawlty and @HomerThompson I THINK know my actual age....

Do I actual post like a dude in his 40s the way @Leagon thought I was in the school shooting thread?
Click to expand...

I thought you were older. :oops:
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
Great post.

I'll add that the justification of being able to murder indiscriminately with drones because war zone battle field blah blah is highly flawed when damn near everyone killed is innocent. If a war zone is the whole country then no rules exist anywhere? If these people were really on the battlefield then why aren't these other 9/10 folks relocating? People don't just hang out with their chips and beer to watch the fireworks.

Terrorism is a matter of crime not war. Bombing nine people to get the one supposed bad guy is a despicable practice to defend. It sure as shit wouldn't fly if it happened within our borders so it seems like a matter of questionable ethics to ignore it when it happens overseas.

Also strange how a 90% rate of collateral damage (i.e. deaths of innocents) is a reasonable measure but disallowing some immigration from various places is beyond the pale. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Supposedly that's why the ROE exist but then shit like this happens:






Cubo de Sangre said:
I thought you were older. :oops:
Click to expand...
Damn.

PolishHeadlock said:
Did you see him kissing his son?
Click to expand...
I did not.
 
Gregolian said:
Given @Fawlty and @HomerThompson I THINK know my actual age....

Do I actual post like a dude in his 40s the way @Leagon thought I was in the school shooting thread?
Click to expand...

People on forums often think I am teenager or early 20s. Must be the way I act. They also think I am black. I have had multiple people assume I am black from my posting. lol
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
Supposedly what's why?
Click to expand...
The idea if you're at war with a whole country then it kinda turns everything into a target. The Rules of Engagement dictate who you can and cannot attack but sometimes even those don't help.
 
Gregolian said:
The idea if you're at war with a whole country then it kinda turns everything into a target. The Rules of Engagement dictate who you can and cannot attack but sometimes even those don't help.
Click to expand...


Gotcha. The US isn't at war with any countries officially so it seems to me the rules should be no engagement unless directly attacked. But people like using the military as a police force in other nations so whatever. Not my problem. Just disgusts me on a personal level the way the anti-war outrage disappeared when a Democrat took office. Sad thing is on the right they're always up for kicking someone's ass no matter what the rationale. Or is the partisan hackery more sad?
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
Gotcha. The US isn't at war with any countries officially so it seems to me the rules should be no engagement unless directly attacked. But people like using the military as a police force in other nations so whatever. Not my problem. Just disgusts me on a personal level the way the anti-war outrage disappeared when a Democrat took office. Sad thing is on the right they're always up for kicking someone's ass no matter what the rationale. Or is the partisan hackery more sad?
Click to expand...
The partisan hackery is ridiculous when it comes to vets and the military IMO.

I don't like the "no engagement unless directly attacked" concept. They tried using that in Vietnam and it, imo and from my dad who was there, lead to a lot of good men getting maimed/killed because there was that gut feeling something was up but they couldn't react until bullets started flying.

It also I think contributed some at least to the US forces doing some of the more, well, fucked up shit that they did. Like the shooting of Willy Pete rounds into villages and dropping napalm on whole swathes of farmland and such.
 
Gregolian said:
The partisan hackery is ridiculous when it comes to vets and the military IMO.

I don't like the "no engagement unless directly attacked" concept. They tried using that in Vietnam and it, imo and from my dad who was there, lead to a lot of good men getting maimed/killed because there was that gut feeling something was up but they couldn't react until bullets started flying.

It also I think contributed some at least to the US forces doing some of the more, well, fucked up shit that they did. Like the shooting of Willy Pete rounds into villages and dropping napalm on whole swathes of farmland and such.
Click to expand...


How so with the vets/military?

What are you considering engagement? Firing guns/ordnance/etc only, or is going into a foreign country and traipsing around the land with armed troops "engaging"? I'm thinking more in the broader sense of troop deployment. If some foreigners brought some troops over to America would you consider us engaged by them or would they have to shoot at you first before you shot at them? We shouldn't have troops in all these countries. We shouldn't be using the military for international police work.

Sorry that's poorly articulated. I'm thinking more like Pearl Harbor. We got attacked and we went to war. Now we just kill people all over the world when it suits whatever backroom agenda secret agencies and secretive politicians support.
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
How so with the vets/military?

What are you considering engagement? Firing guns/ordnance/etc only, or is going into a foreign country and traipsing around the land with armed troops "engaging"? I'm thinking more in the broader sense of troop deployment. If some foreigners brought some troops over to America would you consider us engaged by them or would they have to shoot at you first before you shot at them? We shouldn't have troops in all these countries. We shouldn't be using the military for international police work.

Sorry that's poorly articulated. I'm thinking more like Pearl Harbor. We got attacked and we went to war. Now we just kill people all over the world when it suits whatever backroom agenda secret agencies and secretive politicians support.
Click to expand...
They pander to them without actually doing anything (both parties). Assholes like McCain are huge fucking violators of this. When he's up for re-election it's all "I was a POW think of the vets blahblah" but he's in office and does jackshit.

I view "engaged" as a very obvious offensive (Iraq, Afghanistan as examples).
 
Gregolian said:
They pander to them without actually doing anything (both parties). Assholes like McCain are huge fucking violators of this. When he's up for re-election it's all "I was a POW think of the vets blahblah" but he's in office and does jackshit.

I view "engaged" as a very obvious offensive (Iraq, Afghanistan as examples).
Click to expand...


Politicians are scum. That is known.

Neither of those countries engaged America. We engaged them. And now we commit violence against targeted civilians all over the globe in order to achieve political ends (i.e. terrorism).
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
Politicians are scum. That is known.

Neither of those countries engaged America. We engaged them. And now we commit violence against targeted civilians all over the globe in order to achieve political ends (i.e. terrorism).
Click to expand...
"They call us the American Taliban cause we show up and people start disappearing at night" -The Punisher
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,196
Messages
58,265,423
Members
175,987
Latest member
tach

Share this page

Back
Top