Here is your war on Terrorism ! America !

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by backinblack

 

Such idiotic statements is why you disgust me.

We were engaged in advanced pest control. Our pests were all armed.

They were the ones maiming and killing innocents, which is why we derived a certain satisfaction when we had a really good day against them.

You don't know black from white, good from bad, jack from ****.

You've never seen it, you've never faced the horror of scenes you'd come upon, and you don't have a clue.

The sad part?

Even if you saw it, you'd be incapable of taking care of the problem.

Give it a rest.!!
You know zero about me, though I know a little about you..

You are happy to KILL for money..
That's all I need to know..

And BTW, I couldn't possibly disgust you as much as your admissions disgust me.........

reply to post by Sinnthia

I do so wish I were so simple minded.

Right now, there is no Holy War. Got it?

We only have so many military resources, and we pick those we see as more important.

African tribes raping and killing each other en masse, is an African problem.

Why don't you take your logic, your vast experience, and your butt over to Africa since you have all this figured out - and help them.

Talk to them.

Reason with them.

Be sure to make sure your affairs are in order before you leave though.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Salamandy
reply to post by backinblack

 

Omitting facts to suit your needs huh? Busted!
But I guess facts too are only factual in the "eye of the beholder".

Nope. Facts are facts. In the matter of contractual agreements considered as "International law", the wording of each section is specific, and important. If the word "and" is used in a list of elements, they ALL must be met, or none are. If the word "or" is used in a list of elements, then any one of those elements can get you off the hook if it's met.

The beholder of Jeff Dahmers eyes thought it was fine to inject acid into peoples brains then store them in his refrigerator. Only problem is that society at large thinks he needed to be stopped.

Indeed. Tell me, was it men with guns who stopped him, or was it society as a whole saying "pretty please"?

We cant as a society try to fight gang warfare in our cities at home and then promote organized violence abroad.

Sure we can. Violence is violence. Fighting gang aggressors at home is no different than fighting insurgency aggressors "over there." You go where the bad guys are, and drop them.

Humans are inherently good.

We differ here. I'm not willing to apply that as a blanket statement. I've run across some humans that one would be fairly hard pressed to find any "good" in. It seems that I prefer evaluating on an individual level, and you prefer evaluating on a collective level. "Collective" leaves a really bad taste in my mouth to utter.

You see, there are some people who love people, but detest humanity, and there are some people who love humanity, but detest people. I am of the former, and you appear to be of the latter.

edit on 2011/1/5 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)

Yes we agreed as a society what Dahmer was doing needed to be stopped and had men with guns show up to cart him off. I have no problem with that. He was murdering and he should be stopped. This thread was created at least in part to point out the innocent deaths as a result of US occupation and the "war on terror".
Nobody in their right mind would want to kill innocent people. There should never be a reason for this to occur and the people that kill the innocents cannot be justified.

Dahmer was a ctach we could make that would A) put an end to more innocent deaths and B) NOT create more innocent death along the way. This is why we allow our men in uniform to use force at times. We must moved towards ending the political BS

reply to post by backinblack

I have no intention of giving it a rest.

I know more about you than you know about me. Believe me.

Right off the top, you really are sensitive, aren't you? Touchy? Don't deal with reality very well?

Look, it was my job to hunt and aggress these men.

I simply utilized my spare time profitably. Very profitably.

I'm a capitalist.

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

I do so wish I were so simple minded.

Right now, there is no Holy War. Got it?

We only have so many military resources, and we pick those we see as more important.

African tribes raping and killing each other en masse, is an African problem.

Why don't you take your logic, your vast experience, and your butt over to Africa since you have all this figured out - and help them.

Talk to them.

Reason with them.

Be sure to make sure your affairs are in order before you leave though.

The US has no need to invade Africa simply because, thanks to it's fractured Governments, they already have control of most African resources..
Simple as that...

When will soldiers wake up to the fact that most of their time is spent fighting for corporations and private interests.???

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Your attempt at wit and sarcasm was noted.

Like your attempt to correct me?

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Your ignorance of the actual teachings of Islam are your problem.

Not mine.

I get my teachings about Islam from Muslims. I know, how would Muslims know as much about Islam as FOX news? Crazy aint it?
This attempt at claiming my ignornace while offering nothing of substance for it to sit upon falls flat. I am worried about the state of your keyboard at this point.
If you cannot address what is wrong with what I know about Islam, then you have nothing.

reply to post by FarArcher

Right off the top, you really are sensitive, aren't you? Touchy? Don't deal with reality very well?

No mate, I usually p'ss myself laughing at half the comments..
Not sure I'd call that sensative but I do have morals, know what they are.?

reply to post by FarArcher


Do you mean you know personal info about them or are you saying you know more about their personality than they do? Either way, I gotta admit it makes you seem really mysterious. And rich too? I am so curious...

If its the personal stuff, just give us one thing that any decent troll couldnt uncover about an internet identity.

If its the personality thing, you're really a dork.

Wait Far Archer is Jesse Ventura! Former military dude, access to secret info on people (gov office).

Am I right Jesse "The Body"?

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

I do so wish I were so simple minded.

Right now, there is no Holy War. Got it?

Seems you are. What holy war are you talking about? When did I claim there was a holy war? That is certainly not my argument.

We only have so many military resources, and we pick those we see as more important.

No that is a blatant lie. Even my friends in the service readily admit that the US picks and chooses which enemies to engage and which to politically turn a blind eye to.
I do look forward to a thread from you outlining how Afghanistan and Iraq presented the largest and most imminent threat to the US when we invaded.

African tribes raping and killing each other en masse, is an African problem.

So the justification for war that Saddam was hurting his own people just goes out the window, right?

Why don't you take your logic, your vast experience, and your butt over to Africa since you have all this figured out - and help them.

I am not the one trying to pretend that the US invaded the middle East to liberate its people from a torturous dictator now am I?

Talk to them.

Reason with them.

Be sure to make sure your affairs are in order before you leave though.

When you get your emotions in check and have anything of substance to offer, I might find that interesting.

reply to post by Sinnthia

You learned what you know of Islam from Muslims?

OMG!

No wonder you don't know ****.

Your friends I'm sure showed you and had you read the multiple translations of the Qur'an so that you'd get a more complete understanding, didn't they?

And of course, you've read the Hadith, have you not?

Yeah.

I didn't think so.

This is exactly what type of ignorance I'm talking about! You think you know things - when you don't apparently know ****.

It's not what you don't know that's so pitiful. It's all the things you know that are BS.

reply to post by FarArcher


I can sit here and keep posting to you that you do not no anything without any attempt to back it up as well but you really seem to have the copyright on that for now.
Call me ignorant all you like. Until you demonstrate any knowledge on any of that, it is just funny. You learn about Islam from whomever you like. I will take your advice and learn about Americans from a strict reading of Leviticus then. Some people will be over for your virginal female relatives soon.

reply to post by Salamandy

Nope, I don't know any personal info, and really don't give a ****.

I don't care.

A duck has characteristics. We joke around that if it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, is web-footed and has a watertight ahole, it's probably a duck.

A candiass has characteristics . . .

I can read sign.

reply to post by Sinnthia


I forget is Leviticus the New Testament? If you go to learn about American Jewish folks and their cultural ways, make sure to skip the new tesy.

Originally posted by FarArcher
reply to post by Salamandy

 

Nope, I don't know any personal info, and really don't give a ****.

I don't care.

A duck has characteristics. We joke around that if it walks like a duck, swims like a duck, is web-footed and has a watertight ahole, it's probably a duck.

A candiass has characteristics . . .

I can read sign.

Candiass? The Rock coined that word!

Also, there are grown men who still like to play cowboys and Indians, get aroused by shiny guns and justify killing innocents. They too have very evident characteristics

reply to post by Sinnthia

See?

You made my point PERFECTLY.

You suggested you'd learn everything about me/Americans from reading Leviticus.

I suggested the exact opposite - read the MULTIPLE translations of the Qur'an, and read the HADITH!

That's all there is in Islam!

You are so damned narrow-minded - you want to suggest only reading one book.

That's brilliant.

Just as I thought you were.

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Yes and that would be why I asked. Back in 2001 I heard all the time about horrible world dictators that were enemies of the US. North Korea comes to mind but is hardly the only example. The US had "enemies" all over the globe. Then we were attacked by Saudies out of Afghanistan so we invaded Iraq.

No doubt there's a parcel of folks who don't care for us. Most ambitious folks are that way when they see you standing in their way, our own politicians included.

I've heard the "we should have attacked the Saudis" argument hundreds of times, and I just can't see it. The attacker weren't acting on behalf of the Saudis, they were acting on behalf of al Qaida. Iraq would likely have to have been dealt with at some point - not because of Saddam, but because of Baghdad - but as I've said dozens of times, the time they went in wasn't the time for it.

Focus should have been on Afghanistan, specifically al Qaida and their Taliban protectors, and the areas they controlled. Most folks don't realize there was already a war going on there, and the Taliban only claimed to be the government. In reality they controlled no more than 60 % of the country.

I hope you can see how it might look like the US is less interested in "enemies." to an impartial observer.

Oh, no doubt. It' pretty hard to find an impartial observer, though. Most folks are highly partisan on the issue. It's very polarized.

Why not go after the bad guys with real WMDs?

To be honest, and this is just me, I don't much care about WMDs. I think anyne who wants one should have one of their own. Use is a different matter. I think those who toss them outside their own borders as a first strike should be immediately erased.

Why not go after the people that attacked us on 9/11?

We are. it's a tough fight though. Thy just won't stand still where we can see them and fight. When they aren't terrorizing or indoctrination the local civilians, they're hiding amongst them. To be very honest, though, as I've said in other threads there is a much better way to prosecute this war. Massed troops is so 20th century, and doesn't work well at all against small dispersed units of insurgents - what they've taken to calling what we used to call "guerrillas". They will NEVER win against guerrillas like that. Conventional Generals are a strange bunch. Unconventional warfare finds them a day late and a dollar short, and still they forge onward like bulls in a china shop, floundering around because they don't know any other way. All they know is that they want their share of the "glory" (as if there's any such thing to be found in a war) and they only know one way to pursue it.

The WRONG way.

As distasteful as many of "BackinBlack's" posts are, he's right about one thing - the only way they'll get it done is to send in unconventional hunter-killer teams, small units to fix and fry the enemy, and use somewhat larger reaction forces and air power when those enemies are fixed. All the while, the conventional forces are best served sealing the borders to let the unconventional forces do their job without fresh interference filtering in from the outside.

Why not invade the wonderful villages in Africa where women are routinely raped to death with machettes?

I've often asked myself the same thing, going all the way back to the late 90's. Most African troops are a joke, with the exception of the South Africans and the old Rhodesian RLI before Mugabe took over and wrecked the country. A boy scout troop with pocket knives ought to be able to take over the whole damned continent between South Africa and the Sahara.

Of course, they probably wouldn't have to put up with the ridiculous RoE that we had to abide by in Somalia, and which have plagued the military stemming from those same conventional generals I mentioned above, who think they can fight a "gentleman's war" because they have numbers.

I'm all for sending a Ranger company against the Janjaweed. I'll take point, so that they can drop me first - if they can. I've no respect at all for grown men who make war on women and kids, and don't fear 'em in the least. They've shown their colors.

If we are going to justify war in terms of "enemies" then the US might do well to define what makes one an "enemy."

So, in my simplistic mind, bad guys = those who TARGET innocents, good guys = those who TARGET the bad guys.

Great way to be. I applaud that. Now again, let me know when the US gets on that page with us.

Unfortunately, neither you nor I set foreign policy for them. Until they get serious about fighting these wars as if they really meant to win, and let the rest of the world sit around and wring their hands over it, we will have just what we have.

The main problem, as I see it, is trying to fight an unconventional war conventionally. It's not in the identification of the enemy, it's in the employment of the troops, and that falls squarely on the shoulders of the generals and the politicians, who give every outward appearance of being completely inept. They're fighting guerrillas as if they were fighting a nation, and that will NEVER work. An unfortunate side effect of that is the misapprehension by the rest of the world, including a lot of those at home, that it IS a war against a nation, when it's not.

reply to post by Salamandy

No, once again, the Rock didn't coin the word candiass.

Nor pogey, nor pogeybait.

You must have just fallen off a turnip truck - do your parents know you're on the computer?

reply to post by FarArcher


You are right, I remember that word in Platoon right? Well before the Rock. Anyway, my parents are probably asleep. Are yours aware of the disregard you have for human life? I don't think they would be too proud.

Originally posted by Salamandy
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

I forget is Leviticus the New Testament? If you go to learn about American Jewish folks and their cultural ways, make sure to skip the new tesy.

Actually Leviticus is just specifically a way to reference what it would be like to identify an entire geographic region's population by how less than 1% of them interpret their specific holy book. That is what Leviticus is.

reply to post by Salamandy

Now your responses are starting to make more sense.

Now two of your references are from movies or movie characters.

Holy crap.