Page 5 of 6
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:07 pm
by Pirlo
thegreekdog wrote:Again, Pirlo, I understand the hatred, angst, etc. of the average Middle East person towards the United States.
What I'm trying to understand is why one guy decided it would be a good idea to kill a lot of innocent people and then why people in the Middle East thought it was awesome and/or thought it was bad that the US killed the guy responsible for killing all those innocent people.
it's kinda hard to read an extremist's mind. though I still doubt he did. he denied it for 6 month before he admitted? and the attack itself looked too hard for a caveman. not that it matters.
I still remember that day. we were having lunch and my brother likes to watch news during having his meal. the news cut and breaking news said that a plane hit the tower. we had thought it was an accident before the other tower was hit. the first impression was a shock (like who would do that to america. bearing in mind Oklahoma bombing few years earlier, i thought it was a domestic terrorism.
but yes, a lot of people found it awesome including close friends of me (of both religions muslims and christians). they didn't look at it as an attack on civilians; they rather took it as an attack on the symbols of America. if you learnt that 5 or 6 innocent people were killed in the process of killing Ben Laden, you might still find it good because the fact that the asshole was killed would prevail.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:09 pm
by thegreekdog
Pirlo wrote:if you learnt that 5 or 6 innocent people were killed in the process of killing Ben Laden, you might still find it good because the fact that the asshole was killed would prevail.
No, actually, I wouldn't. I propose a moratorium on gross generalizations about groups of people.
Also - 5 or 6 vs. thousands?
You guys really confuse me.
EDIT - In the United States, if someone saw a picture of some US people flying planes into skyscrapers in the Middle East, I'm doubtful they would think it was cool (I know I'm making a generalization). I'm kind of shocked and disappointed actually. I should probably just creep on out of this thread because it's unbelievably disturbing to me. Like, really disturbing.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:11 pm
by BigBallinStalin
thegreekdog wrote:Again, Pirlo, I understand the hatred, angst, etc. of the average Middle East person towards the United States.
What I'm trying to understand is why one guy decided it would be a good idea to kill a lot of innocent people and then why people in the Middle East thought it was awesome and/or thought it was bad that the US killed the guy responsible for killing all those innocent people.
How does one conventionally fight a military force like the US without having the resources to do so?
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:13 pm
by thegreekdog
BigBallinStalin wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Again, Pirlo, I understand the hatred, angst, etc. of the average Middle East person towards the United States.
What I'm trying to understand is why one guy decided it would be a good idea to kill a lot of innocent people and then why people in the Middle East thought it was awesome and/or thought it was bad that the US killed the guy responsible for killing all those innocent people.
How does one conventionally fight a military force like the US without having the resources to do so?
I understand your point and I agree with it.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:17 pm
by BigBallinStalin
Ok, I'll let you pummel Pirlo.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:19 pm
by Phatscotty
It's a fight. This is what a fight looks like. The losers lose, so we had better f'n win!
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:21 pm
by thegreekdog
Phatscotty wrote:It's a fight. This is what a fight looks like. The losers lose, so we had better f'n win!
Maybe I can put it another way - if we were the Evil Empire we would have killed everyone that disagrees with us (or lives near the people that disagree with us) already. Because we probably can.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:28 pm
by Juan_Bottom
radiojake wrote:Great post Juan,
Some of his rhetoric sounds quite stable and sane, too bad it gets caught up in religious rhetoric and he misses the point that even in Democracies it is really fucking hard to vote out corrupt leaders.
It's hard for a free-thinking person not to empathize with him on some level. But the empathy ends where Osama's hypocrisy begins. He want's American's to stop killing Muslim children, but he himself orders the killings of Muslim Children. Furthermore, he ordered the killing of American and Israeli children too.
Pirlo wrote:it is just a sample of Israel's brutal crimes, yet they always play the victim role.
Your average American has no idea what you're talking about. Most of them cant find France on a map. But your average CC OTer knows what you're talking about and is likely on your side of this argument. It's all political and that's all it is.
thegreekdog wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:
How does one conventionally fight a military force like the US without having the resources to do so?
I understand your point and I agree with it.
That doesn't mean that I do though. Osama had a long time to plan this out. Theoretically he could have just as easily sent his suicide planes into Fort Bragg. That would have sent a completely different message to America and the rest of the world than the message that was sent. Instead of waking America up to the fact that we have been at war with Osama since the 90s, he united us all and gave our government a blank check to do even more imperialism and domestic subjugation.
What would the world be like today if, following 9-11, the United States Government had not had conducted a telephone conference call directing the heads of the five dominant American television networks to agree to censor free speech, public discourse and debate by suppressing from broadcast any statements by bin Laden, and suppressing the horrific video images that the rest of the “civilized” world was watching – i.e., the pictures of the United States military killing tens of thousands of innocent people while intentionally bombing civilian facilities and homes in Afghanistan. Prime Minster Blair did the same in England, wrestling a similar agreement from the three T.V. networks of the United Kingdom. In all likelihood, there would have been more knowledge about the truth, more public condemnation of the “coalition” governments, no invasion of Iraq, no Police State and no erosion of individual Liberties in America.
*I did not endorse the bold part*
But because this happened, the general public has not heard the other side of the story.
thegreekdog wrote:Maybe I can put it another way - if we were the Evil Empire we would have killed everyone that disagrees with us (or lives near the people that disagree with us) already. Because we probably can.
thegreekdog wrote:Phatscotty wrote:It's a fight. This is what a fight looks like. The losers lose, so we had better f'n win!
Maybe I can put it another way - if we were the Evil Empire we would have killed everyone that disagrees with us (or lives near the people that disagree with us) already. Because we probably can.
I love history. And one thing that has always stood out to me is the condition of the world after 1945. America put it all back together. We could have taken everything but we didn't. And that's why they are the greatest generation. Since that time however, we have engaged in all sorts of new-age imperialism. But we also are the world's most charitable country. And we financially support the UN.... Obviously I feel a lot of ambivalence toward our country.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:30 pm
by Juan_Bottom
Phatscotty wrote:It's a fight. This is what a fight looks like. The losers lose, so we had better f'n win!
Juan_Bottom wrote:And I just have to point out again:
When I say that we have killed more civilians... the Boston Globe estimated the number between twice and ten times the numbers killed by insurgents bombs.
6/2/2005 Iraqi Interior Ministry announces that:
Insurgent violence has claimed some 12,000 civilian lives. The American military has killed between 21,000 and 50,000 civilians.
However that same year the Iraqiyun Humanitarian Organization released it's study that the US had killed 128,000 civilians.
That's as of 2005. And not counting the million Iraqi children that the US killed since 1991. Someone in Iraq has to be supporting the Insurgents. Someone from Syria can't just go into hiding in Iraq for months and then pop out of no where with a Rocket Propelled Grenade... Not without someone getting suspicious first. American's can't kill that many people without making blood enemies.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:30 pm
by thegreekdog
The imperialist nature of the United States is related entirely to economics (natural resources mostly) in the guise of "we care about other peoples' welfare). We don't care about the Libyans, Syrians, Afghanis, Iraqis, or Yemeni. We care about what they have and what they have access to. That generally is why I would consider the US imperialist. I'm still unclear as to why other countries don't get involved in the act (the Russias and Chinas of the world).
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:42 pm
by Pirlo
BigBallinStalin wrote:Ok, I'll let you pummel Pirlo.
I'm not disagreeing with him
I'm just trying to explain how some people in different parts of the world may think.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 4:47 pm
by Juan_Bottom
The nature of everything is related to economics. But one of my big issues is the SOFA base agreements that we force on other countrys. Or, like in Japan for example, we force them on one ethnic group of people. And some times, we take money from the host country in exchange for keeping our base there, even if the country's population doesn't want our military there to begin with. It's a complex and perplexing issue.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 5:10 pm
by Woodruff
Phatscotty wrote:Woodruff wrote:thegreekdog wrote:Killing a whole bunch of innocent people because the country they were in had military bases in Muslim countries is insane.
While I agree with you that it is not a legitimate reason to engage in a war of terror against a nation, I wouldn't agree that it's insane at all. Considering that infidel military forces are stationed in your holy land...that's a pretty big deal, I think, from a religious perspective.
how about.... it would be more sane if they attacked a military target rather than civilians?
No, in fact it absolutely would NOT be sane to do that. Think about this for a moment...you're talking about individuals with very limited resources or capabilities. The impact they can have by attacking a soft target (civilians) is AT LEAST equal to the impact they can have attacking a hard target (military). So if the payoff is equal, why would they attack the harder target? That doesn't make good sense.
Note that I am NOT agreeing with their tactics, I am merely pointing out the rationale behind them.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 5:13 pm
by Woodruff
thegreekdog wrote:Maybe I can put it another way - if we were the Evil Empire we would have killed everyone that disagrees with us (or lives near the people that disagree with us) already. Because we probably can.
No. It means we COULD, but why would we want to waste all of that cheap labor that could be used to build the monuments to our greed? So just because we haven't killed them all doesn't necessarily make us NOT "the Evil Empire" in their eyes.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 5:16 pm
by Woodruff
Juan_Bottom wrote:Your average American has no idea what you're talking about. Most of them cant find France on a map. But your average CC OTer knows what you're talking about
This is a powerful statement and one that I agree with. It's entirely why I have not run away from these fora even though I have completely stopped supporting this site in every other way.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 5:18 pm
by Woodruff
Juan_Bottom wrote:thegreekdog wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:
How does one conventionally fight a military force like the US without having the resources to do so?
I understand your point and I agree with it.
That doesn't mean that I do though. Osama had a long time to plan this out. Theoretically he could have just as easily sent his suicide planes into Fort Bragg. That would have sent a completely different message to America and the rest of the world than the message that was sent. Instead of waking America up to the fact that we have been at war with Osama since the 90s, he united us all and gave our government a blank check to do even more imperialism and domestic subjugation.
I am of the opinion that was completely intentional. Osama had made it clear many times that he wanted a holy war. His actions were directed toward that end.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 5:21 pm
by BigBallinStalin
Juan_Bottom wrote:thegreekdog wrote:BigBallinStalin wrote:
How does one conventionally fight a military force like the US without having the resources to do so?
I understand your point and I agree with it.
That doesn't mean that I do though. Osama had a long time to plan this out. Theoretically he could have just as easily sent his suicide planes into Fort Bragg. That would have sent a completely different message to America and the rest of the world than the message that was sent. Instead of waking America up to the fact that we have been at war with Osama since the 90s, he united us all and gave our government a blank check to do even more imperialism and domestic subjugation.
We should keep this in mind: after viewing a break in security, it becomes apparent how easy the breach was performed.
Pre 9/11, it still would seem much more difficult to hit military targets like Fort Bragg compared to hitting two buildings (100+ floors) in a large, open city. Besides, I'm fairly certain Fort Bragg has very strict rules concerning its immediate air space.
But, I do agree with your choice of targets. Had they targetted American military installations only, then the US government would be harder pressed to muster support from its own citizens. I just don't think their chances were good enough for them to risk the resources.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 5:25 pm
by BigBallinStalin
Woodruff wrote:Juan_Bottom wrote:Your average American has no idea what you're talking about. Most of them cant find France on a map. But your average CC OTer knows what you're talking about
This is a powerful statement and one that I agree with. It's
entirely why I have not run away from these fora even though I have completely stopped supporting this site in every other way.
Same here.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 5:33 pm
by radiojake
Slightly off-topic, but within the realms of discussing the 'legitimacy' of targets (military vs civilian), I wanted to ask what you thought about this;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holsworthy ... error_plot Now, basically two years ago a couple of 'terrorists' (as the media and govt labelled them) apparently planned on a shooting rampage of the Holsworthy Army Barracks in Melbourne, but were arrested before they were able to go through with their plan. It got a lot of media attention here in Australia, but even at the time I considered the label 'terrorism' a bit odd considering they were targeting a military compound. Is this terrorism, or an act or declaration of war?
This could be just semantics, but I wanted to know what the distinguished philosophers of the CC fora had to say about this distinction
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 5:38 pm
by Woodruff
radiojake wrote:Slightly off-topic, but within the realms of discussing the 'legitimacy' of targets (military vs civilian), I wanted to ask what you thought about this;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holsworthy ... error_plot Now, basically two years ago a couple of 'terrorists' (as the media and govt labelled them) apparently planned on a shooting rampage of the Holsworthy Army Barracks in Melbourne, but were arrested before they were able to go through with their plan. It got a lot of media attention here in Australia, but even at the time I considered the label 'terrorism' a bit odd considering they were targeting a military compound. Is this terrorism, or an act or declaration of war?
This could be just semantics, but I wanted to know what the distinguished philosophers of the CC fora had to say about this distinction
How aggressively were the Australians pursuing the al-Shabaab terrorist group specifically? I would say your answer lies there.
If the Australians were not at all involved in this, then I would consider it to be terrorism.
If the Australians were involved with them already, then I would consider it an act of war.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 5:44 pm
by Pirlo
radiojake wrote:Slightly off-topic, but within the realms of discussing the 'legitimacy' of targets (military vs civilian), I wanted to ask what you thought about this;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holsworthy ... error_plot Now, basically two years ago a couple of 'terrorists' (as the media and govt labelled them) apparently planned on a shooting rampage of the Holsworthy Army Barracks in Melbourne, but were arrested before they were able to go through with their plan. It got a lot of media attention here in Australia, but even at the time I considered the label 'terrorism' a bit odd considering they were targeting a military compound. Is this terrorism, or an act or declaration of war?
This could be just semantics, but I wanted to know what the distinguished philosophers of the CC fora had to say about this distinction
a stronger example of this, Dubya described the Iraqis who tried to kill/resist American soldiers upon Iraq invasions as "terrorists".
another way stronger example, is this
this Palestinian kid is described as "terrorist"..
the term "terrorist" is now used to describe enemy..
your post does not surprise me at all.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 6:02 pm
by Pirlo
Woodruff wrote:Juan_Bottom wrote:Your average American has no idea what you're talking about. Most of them cant find France on a map. But your average CC OTer knows what you're talking about
This is a powerful statement and one that I agree with. It's entirely why I have not run away from these fora even though I have completely stopped supporting this site in every other way.
I have to agree with this fact too... people on this forum are very smart IMO.. not all of them of course, but most... al least they spend time discussing and reading rather than watching TV all the time.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 8:52 pm
by notyou2
This site draws map strategists to it. If you are a strategist that loves maps, you are probably fairly well educated and somewhat of a current affairs junkie, and, most importantly, have an opinion.
Voila, CC poster.
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Thu May 12, 2011 8:57 pm
by Pirlo
notyou2 wrote:This site draws map strategists to it. If you are a strategist that loves maps, you are probably fairly well educated and somewhat of a current affairs junkie, and, most importantly, have an opinion.
Voila, CC poster.
good point mate..
Re: Osama Bin Laden is not dead
Posted: Fri May 13, 2011 1:42 am
by Pope Joan
Phatscotty wrote: how about.... it would be more sane if they attacked a military target rather than civilians?
And how about you, yanks be more like men and stop sending unmanned drones and send your president to sort it out in 1v1 sword fight with Al-Zarqawi like real samurays?