It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump credits himself for Raqqa victory

page: 5
8
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Compare the civilian casualties to be really fair?


Executive order 13732 lays out the US approach to civilian casualties across multiple conflict zones including Iraq and Syria, as well as in countries like Pakistan and Yemen where the US carries out covert drone strikes.

Obama instructed “all relevant agencies” to take precautions to reduce the likelihood of civilian casualties, and to conduct assessments “that assist in the reduction of civilian casualties by identifying risks to civilians and evaluating efforts to reduce risks to civilians.” The July 1st order includes a wide range of best practice ranging from the training of Pentagon and CIA staff, to developing and acquiring greater intelligence in the field with an eye to protecting non-combatants.

airwars.org...

The numbers always have been lousy estimates but they're still off the charts. Are they not?

Donald Trump's campaign against Isis results in nearly as many civilian deaths as during Obama's entire administration




posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 07:37 PM
link   
And The genocide committed by IsIsa reply to: UKTruth



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy


Are you for or against the Geneva Conventions? Just curious?



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 08:40 PM
link   
Anyone who hasn't kicked in a door in this region or bothered to serve their country can Shut Right the F Up on criticizing how this is being currently handled. The Obama Administration built this situation and we who serve get to clean up the mess. You're F'ing Welcome.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 08:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: DBCowboy


Are you for or against the Geneva Conventions? Just curious?



If you don't want to answer the question, then don't. I am aware of the Geneva Convention. I just wanted to know if you were for or against the war on ISIS.

But your deflection basically answered the question anyway.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy




But your deflection basically answered the question anyway.


Answered.......If think that the conclusions that you jump to are valid.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: DBCowboy




But your deflection basically answered the question anyway.


Answered.......If think that the conclusions that you jump to are valid.



And your obvious continued obfuscation just reinforced my initial impression.

You never wanted a war with ISIS.

QED



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: peacewar
a reply to: windword

Families of enemy warriors are fair game.


Terrorists say the same thing about your family.

What makes you or us better if we do the same?

ETA:

By the way: Hi Steve!


Ha ha - we are talking about WAR and debating the finer points of who is and who is not off limits.



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 09:21 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy




You never wanted a war with ISIS.


Has Congress declared war on ISIS? Maybe Congress never wanted a war with ISIS.


edit on 17-10-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2017 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Trump didn't do sht in Raqqa, YPG and SDF did and are the ones that pushed out ISIS.


The YPG dominates the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), an alliance of Arab and Kurdish militias that has been battling since June to defeat ISIL at Raqqa, which served as the group's de facto capital in Syria.


al Jazeera
edit on 10/17/2017 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 05:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Shamrock6


I know, but the OP, as well as Trump himself on the campaign trail, seem to think that it's "fair game" to target the families of terrorists.

Obviously, there is an acceptable level of "collateral damage" in war time, as long as there is at least the pretense that the civilians were NOT the intended target.


To be fair, as far back as 2009 the previous administration had given the green light to target civilians who were "supporting" hostile forces. And made no distinction as to whether that person had to be doing so voluntarily or otherwise. I know you have a big ol boner for Trump, but Obama put the above on paper, and acted on it, years before Trump ever mentioned it in a campaign.


You're giving me too much credit. The OP, now banned, claimed that Trump, I suppose to fulfill his campaign promise to kill terrorists' families, until it was pointed out to him that tactic is actually illegal, was doing just that because Obama didn't.

I'm merely pointing that out. I'm not suggesting that our military ignored/violated the Geneva Conventions on Trump's orders.



And I was pointing out that you mentioned Trump’s thoughts on things but for some reason neglected to mention Obama’s. Which are nearly identical.



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 09:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6


Obama didn't campaign on the promise to violate the Geneva Convention, like Trump did.


"The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families, when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. When they say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families," Trump said.
www.cnn.com...


Obama's base never reveled in the idea of purposefully hunting down and murdering civilian women and children.


O’Reilly asked Trump if he meant it when he said that he would "take out" the family members of terrorists. He didn’t believe that Trump would "put out hits on women and children" if he were elected. Trump replied, "I would do pretty severe stuff." The Mesa crowd erupted in applause. "Yeah, baby!" a man near me yelled.
www.vox.com...


Obama was widely criticized for his drone strikes, even by his base.


edit on 18-10-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

It’s called a threat. It’s useful in order to instil fear in the enemy. Political correctness and prostration never seemed to work.
edit on 18-10-2017 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: peacewar
Today, after a grueling 4 months battle, Raqqa is cleared of Islamic State filth. Trump changed the rules of engagement, bombing the # out of families of Islamic State warriors, their wives and kids, killed thousands, Raqqa in rubble. Something Obama would never do.

syria.liveuamap.com...

www.aljazeera.com...

twitter.com...



Something Obama would never do? Try Googling how many civilians Obama killed with drone strikes.



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   


Anyone who hasn't kicked in a door in this region or bothered to serve their country can Shut Right the F Up on criticizing how this is being currently handled.


Veterans against the First Amendment?



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


It's enormously dangerous to our own soldiers to threaten to suspend the Geneva Conventions, by going after civilians and bringing back torture. What's good for the goose, and all.

If our global critics think that we've stooped to the level of the terrorists we're fighting, we'll lose international goodwill equity, and we'll see our own soldiers' families being targeted as well as more domestic terrorism, while the world says, "Well, they suspended the Geneva Conventions. What did they expect?"





edit on 18-10-2017 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: jjkenobi

US citizens no less....teenage US citizens.



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

You’re right, Obama didn’t campaign on it.

He just signed a paper that said “# happens, it’s okay.”

But yea let’s focus on words not deeds, because it’s trump.



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6


From the OP:


Today, after a grueling 4 months battle, Raqqa is cleared of Islamic State filth. Trump changed the rules of engagement, bombing the # out of families of Islamic State warriors, their wives and kids, killed thousands, Raqqa in rubble. Something Obama would never do.


Damn! You're still attacking me for pointing that this ^^, from the OP, is a violation of the Geneva Conventions. I never said that Trump or Obama violated the Geneva Conventions. What I'm "attacking" is the notion that suspending the Geneva Convention, i.e. "changing the rules of engagement", is a good move, that it happened and that innocent civilians are "fair game".

It seems that Trump supporters are willing to believe that Pres Trump is a war criminal, and they like it! But, they still hate Obama, even though he did bad ass (questionable) stuff too!



posted on Oct, 18 2017 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: windword



It's enormously dangerous to our own soldiers to threaten to suspend the Geneva Conventions, by going after civilians and bringing back torture. What's good for the goose, and all.

If our global critics think that we've stooped to the level of the terrorists we're fighting, we'll lose international goodwill equity, and we'll see our own soldiers' families being targeted as well as more domestic terrorism, while the world says, "Well, they suspended the Geneva Conventions. What did they expect?"


The whole time our leaders were trying the nice-guy, politically correct approach, ISIS was getting away with murder, rape, torture, genocide. A little threat here and there should be the least of their worries, but the "global critics" are too worried about their self-image to engage in some tough talk, which is the absolute least one could do to ISIS and other terrorists.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join