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.

 

WAR: Fallujah hit by deadly US air strikes

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2004 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Tesla says,


We wouldn't have pre-empted a war with out thinking it through, or having the backing of most if not all of our Allies and the World.
No, back in WW2 you let Hitler take 3 countries before Brittan and France decided enough was enough! Czechoslovokia was actually ENCOURAGED to give hitler what he wanted by the "allies" before the war started in order to appease hitler.
When will we learn, that much like a shark or a preadator, if they (tyrant/terrorists) sence weakness, they WILL strike. There IS no appeasing this kind of evil, and doing NOTHING risks prolonging and escalating the suffering?

I believe the USA tried to keep its head in the sand for quite a while and actually was condemming getting involved until Pearl Harbor changed that.

Lessons from the past? how many countries had Saddam attacked while the world stood by and filled a stack of no toothed sanctions? How many atrocities occured there before someone with decency stepped in and said enough?

How much leeway will we allow those committed to destabalizing Iraq, continuing suffering in the name of their god?



posted on Sep, 26 2004 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by CazMedia

NOTHING i have EVER seen has made me as sick, angry, appalled, and wishing to kill another human as seeing the full, unedited, BRUTAL, viscious, evil, and INHUMAN acts as the insurgant terrorists have put on tape.



Did you ever stop to think that's the response the crime is intended to elicit?




How much doing nothing to oppose them is tolorable before someone says enough is enough and TAKES ACTION?


No matter how hard you 'strike back' the fact is in our current situation we don't have the assets to make effective change over there. War against an insurgency is not merely a matter of firepower, unless you set out to obliterate the population entirely.

Cutting off your countrymen's heads and showing it on an .mpeg you can download is entirely intended to create military reaction, with its side effect of civilian casualties, which causes further hatred toward the US among the resident population. This provides the criminals who did it with protection among civilians, which of course simply blurs the line between insurgent and non-combatant even further. It's a well-established cycle and there are texts on how to perform this kind of warfare. There are texts on how to perform counter-insurgency as well, but notice they have not been used one bit.

And like I said earlier, that guy's head would never have been cut off of this ill-fated war had never been started.



posted on Sep, 26 2004 @ 02:20 PM
link   
You know what would work!

Pull our guys out...drop a few ADAMS on the whole of the Middle East and turn the place into a self lighting..glassfloored parking lot!!

Save the bickering...save us wasting our time on a futile cause and make the whole damn world happy again!





posted on Sep, 26 2004 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gryffen
You know what would work!

Pull our guys out...drop a few ADAMS on the whole of the Middle East and turn the place into a self lighting..glassfloored parking lot!!



Uh-huh. Mass murder always proves very productive.



posted on Sep, 26 2004 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Yeah well i aint really in favour of mass murder...they seem to be doing a good job of it on there own people already.

The fact is...we take radical action to stop the attacks or we pull out and risk attacks on our own countries.

Its them or us....we deal or we dont.

the only reason this war is going on is due to greed and politics....they back off...we do our job and nail them hard.



posted on Sep, 26 2004 @ 03:42 PM
link   
There are other solutions besides war. This war with Iraq was ill-fated from the start and I have no idea what the Middle East will look like when it's over, but I don't think the concept of Democracy spreading everywhere is really taking hold.

I think the US is just holding off until the election to be honest. Transfer of funds from reconstruction to security seems like a stop-gap measure.



posted on Sep, 27 2004 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by taibunsuu
����..No matter how hard you 'strike back' the fact is in our current situation we don't have the assets to make effective change over there. ����

And at least on that point you would be wrong, as we already have made effective changes in the region�.in two countries the administrations are no longer. In a third they gave up a good portion of their WMD program; whether they have turned the corner or not they have at least started to pretend that they do not support terrorism. Another country has gone from a blind eye to terrorism, to helping America at great risk. Saudis appear to have figured out that turning a blind eye to their radical Islamic homebrew is not the best policy. That is more support for America then I�ve previously seen from that region in a very long time.



posted on Sep, 27 2004 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by keholmes

Originally posted by taibunsuu
����..No matter how hard you 'strike back' the fact is in our current situation we don't have the assets to make effective change over there. ����

And at least on that point you would be wrong, as we already have made effective changes in the region�.in two countries the administrations are no longer. In a third they gave up a good portion of their WMD program; whether they have turned the corner or not they have at least started to pretend that they do not support terrorism. Another country has gone from a blind eye to terrorism, to helping America at great risk. Saudis appear to have figured out that turning a blind eye to their radical Islamic homebrew is not the best policy. That is more support for America then I�ve previously seen from that region in a very long time.


Basically what I mean in this statement isn't the Middle East in general, but in Iraq. At the current levels it doesn't seem we're able to both rebuild the country and maintain security. If the country is degraded to the point of non-functionality, residents eventually move to the side that they feel is going to win in the long term. In that regard, American doesn't have strong precedent. A lot of Iraqis remember that they were incited to help fight Saddam's regime during the Gulf War, but when the Iraq military made peace on the front lines they came back and subdued the resistance. Everyone realizes that the US military can pack a huge punch, but the military visits are sporadic while the insurgents lead by fundies are ever-present and overall more threatening.



posted on Sep, 28 2004 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Taibunsuu responds to my emotional statement,


Did you ever stop to think that's the response the crime is intended to elicit?
Ask and ye shall recieve......Dont pick a fight your not willing to finnish.....30 years of NOT taking a definative action has bred the idea that we WILL quit, that we're affraid to take and dish out casualties.....
Those days are over.

Taibunsu continues,


No matter how hard you 'strike back' the fact is in our current situation we don't have the assets to make effective change over there. War against an insurgency is not merely a matter of firepower, unless you set out to obliterate the population entirely.
We DO have the means to make effective change, not only millitarily but economically and diplomatically as well. As far as the millitary option, we can force a change whenever we'd like IF we stop playing politics and DOMINATE the situation.
Its NOT about killing everyone or blowing up everything, but that is part of the way that you break their will to resist/fight you. Warfare is the ultimate end of diplomatic relations. Without the threat of war, how much is a treaty worth? How much hot air gets spewed out of diplomats oral orfaces before ACTIONS are required to back up the rhetoric?
Diplomacy is meaningless without enforcement as the UN proved with a 10 year pile of paperwork against Saddam.

Taibunsuu claims USA actions,


which causes further hatred toward the US among the resident population.
Excuse me? You pretty much have to HATE someone to become a suicide attacker. If you already HATE me that much, its unlikley that your going to HATE me more. Hate is Hate. We're not talking about a vauge dislike, or being in the middle of the dislike scale....Hate is the extreme end of this scale, so again, how much HATE can you exhibit if your blowing yourself up to get your enemy? How many years of this HATE have we tolorated? Reap what youve sown, Im tired of embassy bombings, attacks against USA intrests, and thousands marching in the streets chanting DEATH to America (for decades now) while burning our flag and Presidents in effigy. Since ive seen their hatred since i was a boy, i say if you hated me this whole time, then now we'll give you a REAL reason to hate us. Again...we're going to finnish what radical muslims in MANY places started.

Taibunsuu says semi-erroniously,


There are texts on how to perform counter-insurgency as well, but notice they have not been used one bit.
Counter insurgency is often times a SECRATIVE affair...i wouldnt expect that we would hear ANYTHING about its activities or successes now, during the conflict, as it would be counter productive and dangerous to those involved. I must conclude this IS ocuring, but that because its not do-able in the spotlight...we're not seeing it in action. This does NOT mean it is not occuring.



posted on Sep, 28 2004 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by taibunsuu
Basically what I mean in this statement isn't the Middle East in general, but in Iraq. At the current levels it doesn't seem we're able to both rebuild the country and maintain security. If the country is degraded to the point of non-functionality, residents eventually move to the side that they feel is going to win in the long term�����

In general I would agree that iraq has a bleak out look at this point; however, if one looks back to WW2 things looked pretty bleak in both theaters. What I was pointing out was that the region used to take the stance that placating the radicals with somewhat blind eye policies was a viable option. There seems to be sincere acknowledgement from several of the governments in the region that it is no longer a viable option.



posted on Sep, 28 2004 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Well CazMedia I read the whole post and you bring up some good points. The one about counter-insurgency being largely invisible is definitely true, and since we're not in Iraq and not involved with that, but relying on information that besides first-hand accounts, for all we know there could be a large-scale counter-insurgency effort.

Largely what I know of counter-insurgency comes from the "Small Wars Manual" compiled by the Marine Corps from the wars in Central and South America. Essentially what has to be done, besides the stick of military force, is to sweeten the day-to-day life of civilians who otherwise harbor insurgents against what they may be lead to believe are hostile occupiers. That way, the civilians choose 'your way' of life over the strife accompanying banditos with guns. What motivates civilians to harbor banditos is they see them as the providers of security and the long-term winners.

Right now from what we can see the country, security situation isn't nearly good enough to convince the population to go with the law and order we want to provide. This is quite visible unlike the counter-insurgency methods you mentioned which of course are below the radar.

As far as hate goes, yes it's a motivator to risk death, or suicide. However, plenty of times when someone's sacrificed themselves, it's not out of hatred for the individuals, but for what they represent, or for what an individual loves or is loyal to. Plenty of times guys have jumped on grenades to take the impact for friends. Other times say in WW2 Americans and Germans are blasting away at each other for hours, then a cease-fire is called to recover dead. The soldiers from each side have a smoke with one another, trade souveniers, and then return to each side and resume fighting. They don't hate one another as much as what the individuals represent.

The motivations that can lead to a single suicide in exchange for what's percieved as the common good are very foreign to us here in the free world except for in military camps. For example, if you're in a dive bomber and are attacking an enemy carrier, and at the time of release the bomb arms but does not release, you then have the chance of destroying your own life as well as an entire carrier, or pull our and let that carrier resume operations. I believe more than one US pilot made the decision to exchange their lives for the common good of destroying hundreds or thousands of enemies along with their ship.

In countries in which people are desperate, the population becomes militarized and self-sacrifice becomes more familiar. Also, oppression is a time-proven method of building religious fanaticism, though other factors exist as well.



posted on Sep, 28 2004 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by taibunsuu
��������
Right now from what we can see the country, security situation isn't nearly good enough to convince the population to go with the law and order we want to provide. This is quite visible unlike the counter-insurgency methods you mentioned which of course are below the radar.���.

and that would be largely due to the biggest mistake that they made in the handling of the war to date and that was to dissolve the police and military�..currently they are trying to make up for that and I believe if they can do that then you will see things start to stabilize. As we will be able to take the American face off of their government and get our troops out. The only question is can they create the Iraqi forces fast enough to prevent decay in the situation.


Originally posted by taibunsuu
As far as hate goes, yes it's a motivator to risk death, or suicide. However, plenty of times when someone's sacrificed themselves, it's not out of hatred for the individuals, but for what they represent, or for what an individual loves or is loyal to����.

What you point out is to a large extent viable, however most of your examples are instantaneous decisions not the thought out over time planned events that you are seeing in the Middle East at this time. Also, most of your examples are military on military�..not military targeting individuals who may or may not have anything to do with something�..that sounds pretty hateful. I don�t remember any reports or historical recording of suicide bombers in either Japan or Germany, there might have been I just don�t remember it.


[edit on 28-9-2004 by keholmes]



posted on Sep, 28 2004 @ 10:20 PM
link   
Well have you never heard the phrase "I'm willing to die for my country?" That shows prior intent to sacrifice life for principles, and has nothing to do with hatred.



posted on Sep, 29 2004 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by taibunsuu
Well have you never heard the phrase "I'm willing to die for my country?" That shows prior intent to sacrifice life for principles, and has nothing to do with hatred.

Actually I believe it shows acknowledgement that it might happen.�. not intent. If the statement was I�m going to or will then I would agree. But I�ve heard of other statements too like�...your job is to help the other guy be a hero for his country, also saying and doing are two different things.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join