To Bomb or Not to Bomb to Kill bin Laden - Page 6




 
--
To Bomb or Not to Bomb to Kill bin Laden
 
June 20th, 2005  
ozmilman
 
To Bomb or Not to Bomb to Kill bin Laden
Doody, who said the kids were letting Bin Laden stay with them? The families might be, but the damn kids don't have a clue what's going on in the world. Of course the US would be responsible for the deaths of the people around Bin Laden, they damn well dropped the friggin bomb, therefore the bomb was their responsibility. Sure enough HE would be the one endangering them, but the responsibility for killing them would have to be taken by America if they dropped a bomb on the kids.

So what if history shows us that civilians die in war. Most civilian deaths are ACCIDENTS - they don't deliberately get murdered unless the killing of innocent civilians is the aim of the attacks. Think of it this way:

Bin Laden is WILLING to kill civilians to achieve his goals. Bin Laden is a terrorist. If the US is willing to kill civilians to achieve its goals, doesn't that make IT a Terrorist organization too? Fighting terrorism with terrorism is not what Democratic society is all about. That would essentially undermine all systems of government and reveal the total hypocracy of all forms of politics.

And as a last point - "we can never stop civilians from dying on the battlefield". We CAN choose not to kill civilians if it can be helped. Why kill them just because they are around Bin Laden.

I bet nobody thought through the idea that mayeb he could take American or Australian or British or any "western" kids hostage. I wonder how many people would still want him to get bombed if the kids were American and didn't wear towels on their head. What makes an Islamic kid from Pakistan any different from a Christian kid from Texas? Anyone who fronts up and says to me now that they would still drop the bomb if the kids were western is flat out lying, because for some reason it becomes different when the kids are from our culture. Plus if old George W. pressed the button his career would be toast, and he would probably get thrown in prison or something ridiculous. But at least Oprah would have someone to interview.

Rich.
June 22nd, 2005  
Duty Honor Country
 
 
My point is that in most of the muslim world, the man runs the house hold. If the father allows Bin Laden to hind, the father assumes the risk of a US attack.

During the Afganistan Campaign, an American general complained that he was fighting with one hand tied behind his back. A drone had targeted a large group of taliban leadership. They had surrounded themselves with civilians and the order was not to attack.

Now it seems to me that no one gives a damn if American civilians are killed EVEN ON PURPOSE. I know the number of American civilians murdered in Iraq numbers in the hundreds. I have watched as Americans are beheaded and NO ONE outside of America gives a crap. But if we kill one innocent civilian, the muslim world erupts in anger. Remember, the laws of war say any unarmed person is not considered a combative. The Geneva Convention says you cannot specifically target civilians. BUT if you target a military leader and kill a few civilians, there no law broken.

I have been through Iraq during and after the war. Saddam's forces took up defensive positions inside residential areas. I am sorry, but when the enemy tries to hide in civilian areas, sometimes you must attack regardless of the civilian casualties.
June 22nd, 2005  
ozmilman
 
Okay, okay, okay - i know western civilians have died - and everyone gives a crap. But the whole point is to not lower ourselves to that level. Doing it on purpose and doing it accidentally are two different things (obviously).

Say you go in with your troops in a residential area and you get into a firefight and for some stupid reason a civilian runs through the middle of the battlefield. They get shot and die, that's tragic and couldn't be helped. But dropping a bomb on a household, EVEN if the FATHER/MAN or whatever is running the show, in order to kill one man and not giving a damn about the others is careless.

Having "one hand tied behind our back" is what makes us the good guys in these situations. If we kill civvies deliberately just to obtain what we want, then we become the bad guys too.

Like AussieNick said, it's all about maintaining morals. I don't know how to explain it any better.

Rich.
--
To Bomb or Not to Bomb to Kill bin Laden
June 22nd, 2005  
CSmaster
 
maybe Americans should not even try to go change others' way of life, and create this mass where they have to kill civilians..
June 22nd, 2005  
bulldogg
 
 
Now there is a novel idea worthy of reflection.
Seriously.
June 22nd, 2005  
CSmaster
 
ppl talking about respecting others' way of life......

yet why americans try so hard to change those Islamic nations...

think about it, they are not happy to change, and they dont appreciate ur effort, thus the mass in Iraq is created...


according to U.S's own report, Saddam has no connection with Laden, and there has been no WMD been found in Iraq,

why bother go into there, unless americans want something else
June 22nd, 2005  
PershingOfLSU
 
Ya know, Canada has alot of oil. And diamonds to. Heck, virtually no military.

The Canadian liberal party practically is a dictatorship. Certainly is corrupt. Who knows, might even be WMD up there. Hmm...
June 22nd, 2005  
bulldogg
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PershingOfLSU
Ya know, Canada has alot of oil. And diamonds to. Heck, virtually no military.

The Canadian liberal party practically is a dictatorship. Certainly is corrupt. Who knows, might even be WMD up there. Hmm...
I think the humour will be lost on Counter Strike Master my esteemed CONUS foe. He's Chinese. 8)
June 22nd, 2005  
ozmilman
 
Heh, humour wasn't lost on me though, that was damn funny!

I don't think America is trying to change the Islamic way of life, they're just trying to make life a bit fairer for them. I'm not really in to the whole cloak and dagger conspiracy theory rubbish - but i do know that Saddam was a very bad man who lived in palaces while his people were in abject poverty.

Rich.
June 22nd, 2005  
CSmaster
 
lol...now who is talking crap

at least liberal party provides EVERY canadian with health care..not like those unlucky 40million americans who have to pay like millions to get cured..


and by the way, americans stop come to Canada and beg our doctors to sell u cheap LIBERAL medicines.

and u call Liberal a dictatorship.....at least they are better than Republican's shenanigans such as "oh god, there is WMD in iraq" or "oh lord, Saddam supports Laden".

and i know americans are very religious, but plz respect others' belief too, that is what Canadians are proud of --- multi-culturalism,

it is just not right to go into there and use force to change others' way of life