The Bush administration is busy preparing the *next* War On Terrorism

[speedracer]

Originally posted by sv:
To 80sU2isBest - You are once again equating the thugs that have taken over Afghanistan with the Afghani peasants. They are completely separate entities, and the Afghani people did not vote these people in or support their decision to nurture Al-Queda.

It is absolutely and completely immoral to bomb Afghani civilians, even in pursuit of thugs. If your next door neighbor murdered a child, would the child's father have the right to blow up your house while trying to kill the murderer?

I don't like this analogy at all. You're comparing an internal, domestic conflict with a foreign conflict, and you're comparing the pursuit of one man with the pursuit of a powerful group of guerrillas that is friendly with the foreign government.

In your analogy, the FBI and local police have enough range and finesse that they could find the murderer without having to destroy anyone's house.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban military (and perhaps some al-Qaeda bases) had been operating from populated areas. Even if we had sent in ground troops, there would have been some civilian casualties.

The only way we could have gotten rid of al-Qaeda without shedding innocent blood would have been if the prophet Mohammed had risen from the dead and personally demanded that the Taliban get rid of al-Qaeda, and even that is questionable.

[sv]

Murder is murder - it simply doesn't matter if it's domestic or foreign. Civilians have a right to live, wherever they live. Period.

The powerful group of guerrillas was "friendly with the foreign government", as you say. Imposing the death penalty for the crime of guilt by association is a dangerous precedent, as events in India/Pakistan and Israel/Palestine are demonstrating.

But my main point is that the guerrillas are guilty and should be caught. But they DON'T represent the Afghani civilians - those are INNOCENT PEOPLE - even in democratic countries the leaders often don't do what the people want - the Taliban and Al-Queda certainly didn't consult the starving Afghani populace on whether to attack NYC.

The U.S. military has enough finesse and technological superiority that it could have routed the Taliban without bombing the cities. Yes it would have been slower. Yes there would have been American casualties - but they'd be deaths of soldiers who VOLUNTEERED to fly 8000 miles away to fight, as opposed to defenseless, suffering women and children just trying to survive the day.

And again I see that it's hard for many to equate civilian Afghanis with civilian Americans or Europeans.

[speedracer]

sv, do you really think the US could have avoided civilian casualties altogether by using ground troops exclusively?

[This message has been edited by speedracer (edited 01-11-2002).]

[U2Bama]

Maybe he thinks we should train our military to conduct suicide missions from now on.

[Holy John]

I think this debate is getting a completely lost cause. While people are critisizing some of the USA's foreing policy, other people reply with the mindless "You hate us" "You are a traitor" blablabla stuff and cannot make any difference between critisizing and hate.

As one member said, this forum looks more commercial-pop kinda Britney Spears or the 'talk to my hand' brainless blonds as opposed to the "we can make a statement".

------------------
United Nations : www.un.org - UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund) : www.unicef.org
UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) : www.unesco.org

Ej�rcito Zapatista de Liberaci�n Nacional (EZLN) : www.ezln.org
"The one who governs with weapons is surely poor in ideas" - Marcos

Solidarit�s : <A HREF="http://www.solidarites.org

Parti" TARGET=_blank>www.solidarites.org

Parti</A> pour une Alternative Progressiste : www.parti-rap.org

[Anthony]

Ah, whatever. Look, on my way back to Britain a while ago I sat next to this American marine who was going home for some 'family problems'. He was a likeable fellow, and he had some real neat stuff packed in his bags, but what I remember most about him was this sudden outburst during a conversation where he said, and I quote; "we're gonna fuck up Iraq pretty bad'.

Apparently,according to military intelligence (oh, thats a hilarious oxymoron)America DOES have big plans for Iraq. I don't know how true this is or not, but I really do hope that it isn't. As much as I support the USA's efforts in Afghanistan, I really don't think the USA should go after Iraq without provocation. Hussein IS a madman and should be stopped, but Bush Sr didn't do the job and I don't see why Bush Jr should do it if there is no provocation or cause; to anyone who thinks USA should go after Iraq, or anybody else for that matter - its a bad idea. Not only is it just pushing it for countries to question how arrogant and imperious the USA is,but its also unfair at the heart of it all.

And also, I can't help notice at the beginning of the thread this talk of 'America saving the day in WW2'. This is absolute nonsense. It took America bloody ages for it to get involved (yes, I know its not constructive of me to say so, but it IS a fact)and when it did the Russians were already sacrificing millions so that the Eastern front could fall; I still crave for the day when they will make a film called 'SAVING PRIVARE VLADIMIR' and see how much that sells. I'm sorry, but I really do think that eventually credit should be given to the Russians. Don't blow the American trumpet when talking of WW2, if America had joined ealier lots of lives needlessly lost would have been saved; there's a thought.

I am not, by any means, creating a hate campaign for America, all I'm saying is that you shouldn't use WW2 as an example of your finest hours.

Ant.

[U2Bama]

Originally posted by Holy John:
the 'talk to my hand' brainless blonds

Holy John:

What is your problem with blond-haired people? This is the second time lately that I have seen you post some generalization of "blonds" and you sound like a fucking moron when you do it.

Originally posted by Holy John in another thread:
I would be the first to make the kid-trick to walk on the beaches with a magnifying glass y'know), then its a complete waiste of time for blond people.

What are your thoughts on blond people anyway?

~U2Alabama

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by Anthony:
Apparently,according to military intelligence (oh, thats a hilarious oxymoron)Ant.

Good grief, Anthony! The people who run the military are VERY intelligent people. You think they would let dumb asses run the military? Could you be more insulting? One of my best friends was a code-breaker for the army. She's incredibly smart.
I thank God for our military, who are brave enough to stand up and make the sacrifices that people like you and me are too chicken to make.

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by Danospano:

Everytime anyone starts a thread about politics or government or war, it's so predictable what each and every person is going to say. Sometimes I wonder what's point of replying, because 80sU2isBest or AucthungBebe or someone else is going to rehash why they think Republicans are perfect in every way, shape or form.
The truth is usually scaring and almost always makes you feel uncomfortable. Criticizism of government is what rock music is all about.

Dano, first, it's Achtung Bubba, not Bebe, that usually sides with me. Secondly, I don't mind criticism of teh government. What I mind is people like Doctor Gonzo or Holy John, who never have a damn thing to say on this forum except for to come in every once in a while and purposefully stir up trouble by making comments like "F***ing idiots" about Americans. And if you think that didn't happen, you're wrong. Insulting and criticism are two different things, and often, their criticisms are also filled with insults (particularly Holy John).
And no, i don't think Republicans are perfect, nor have I ever said they were. But I think conservative moral values and political idealogy are much better than their liberal alternatives.

[Anthony]

Alright 80sU2isBest, I apologise. I will admit, the people who RUN the military are probably highly intelligent people, but I don't think too much of the subservients, no matter what the sacrifice, and I don't mean to insult YOUR army particularly, but an observation of ALL armies. I'm sorry, but it doesn't take a lot of brain power to fire a weapon.

Ant.

[U2Bama]

Originally posted by Anthony:
but I don't think too much of the subservients, no matter what the sacrifice, and I don't mean to insult YOUR army particularly, but an observation of ALL armies. I'm sorry, but it doesn't take a lot of brain power to fire a weapon.

Oh, I guess this is meant for z edge and some close friends (and groomsmen and former bandmates) of mine who have served in the military. Freakin' dumbasses.

~U2Alabama

[Anthony]

Alright! I apologise for generalising already; you aren't the only ones with friends in the military; I KNOW that they're not all dumbasses, but you do get a large proportion of them who are (my friend isn't too bright either, thats why he joined - as he so eloquently put it).

Ant.

[melon]

To comment on the "dumb people" in the military bit, it is a generalization, but I think what the cause of it is is that the military is often seen as a dumping ground for those who weren't smart enough to get into college.

Plus, those who are smart enough often don't make a career out of the military, mostly because of the low pay issues (how many people in the military are on food stamps?) and the reputation the military has gotten as a hostile work environment and virtual hate group--i.e., misogynist and homophobic.

I'm not generalizing. I'm just stating what people think of it.

Melon

[sv]

Speedracer, I do think we could have minimized civilian casualties significantly. Which is not perfect, but I think any course of action would result in some deaths - but letting Bin Laden & Co. continue to operate would also result in some deaths. So I could have accepted a military solution to rout out Bin Laden & Co. under certain conditions:

1. MUCH more emphasis on minimizing civilian deaths. Bombs, despite what we're told, do not discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Bombing, even when one is trying to avoid civilian targets, is extremely subject to targeting errors. Also, bombing destroys infrastructure, which will ultimately result in many more indirect deaths of civilians.

2. Evidence of Bin Laden's involvement presented to an international forum (such as the U.N. General Assembly), with vast consensus on using military force.

3. We make a commitment to rebuild what we destroy, we pay reparations to non-combatants hurt in the process, we refrain from taking economic advantage of the situation (i.e. Central Asian oil and oil pipelines belong to Central Asians, with no special "deals" for the U.S. & allies), and we expend resources in re-building Afghanistan as a true democracy (regardless of whether the government they vote in is amenable to U.S. business interests).

I would respect that kind of effort.

[KhanadaRhodes]

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:
their criticisms are also filled with insults (particularly Holy John).

so why is gonzo being lumped in with this?

i must add, how about letting someone COUNTER their side before every damn person attacks them? (not referring to 80sU2... here, i'm speaking to everyone)
if you guys can't handle people cricizing our country's precious government, perhaps we should change to a dictatorship so our say means nothing anyway? or maybe a big brother type country where we can't complain anyway?

------------------
and today the millions cry, we eat and drink while tomorrow they die...
ME!

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by KhanadaRhodes:
so why is gonzo being lumped in with this?

i must add, how about letting someone COUNTER their side before every damn person attacks them? (not referring to 80sU2... here, i'm speaking to everyone)
if you guys can't handle people cricizing our country's precious government, perhaps we should change to a dictatorship so our say means nothing anyway? or maybe a big brother type country where we can't complain anyway?

Gonzo is lumped in with this, because he enjoys insulting Americans, also, just not as much as Holy John, it seems.
As for the part about us guys not being able to handle people criticizing teh goevrnment, I implore you to go back and read my last message to Danspano, and you will see what bothers me, and it is NOT when people merely criticize the government.