NATO Helicopter Kills Two Children, page 5


Pages: <<  2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 131 times


reply posted on 8-3-2013 @ 04:16 PM by squarehead666
reply to post by greatfriendbadfoe

They ain't slithering anywhere you muppet.....Those people are their families, they live there, it is their home.


reply posted on 9-3-2013 @ 12:09 AM by greatfriendbadfoe
Originally posted by squarehead666
reply to post by greatfriendbadfoe

They ain't slithering anywhere you muppet.....Those people are their families, they live there, it is their home.


I said it "was" their friends and family fool. Guess you forgot to learn how to read well maybe just comprehend. Amazing how you ridicule what I typed, actually half of it and neglected the other half of what I typed. Guess you're one of the muzzy infiltrators over there in pommy land. I feel so sorry for that once great country. Mass multiculturalism is running its course. White poms are leaving london in numbers not seen before, muslim gangs are being the right real thugs to those who won't become muslim in their neighbourhoods (gleened these from other ats threads), taliban thinking it's appropriate to disfigure the genitals of women. 5h1t what a fantastic religion. no wonder so many people are flocking to it


reply posted on 9-3-2013 @ 12:33 AM by greatfriendbadfoe
Originally posted by squarehead666
reply to post by greatfriendbadfoe

They ain't slithering anywhere you muppet.....Those people are their families, they live there, it is their home.


Here's another ats thread that might grab your attention. On this actual page there are a couple of poms who have commented on what is happening there. Guess there are still some people who won't sit back and take what is happening to their country
www.abovetopsecret.com...&addstar=1&on=16049811#pid16049811

How does this fit in with this thread? Well I commented on how I perceive the happenings over in the ME that were associated with why there are innocents being killed and you came back with a hopeless attempt (imo) in bagging out my comment. Hence, my reply was showing the character of this pathetic religion and linking it ot other ats threads. and this page supports my line of thought.


reply posted on 9-3-2013 @ 12:42 AM by greatfriendbadfoe








reply posted on 10-3-2013 @ 10:49 AM by ThinkingHuman
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Originally posted by ThinkingHuman
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

I don't convict American or NATO forces on the insistence of an Afghan Village Official though. Not without a proper trial. Recall all that innocent until proven guilty stuff? ... Innocent until proven guilty DOES apply to all sides.

So when was the trial that found those two children guilty?
And which judge convicted them to be executed?
edit on 8-3-2013 by ThinkingHuman because: (no reason given)

It's called the court of public opinion, as modern folks refer to it. It seemed to be in full session on this thread as it has on other threads of a similar nature in the past. I was commenting and addressing myself to that general side of this.
Playing on words like this is not somebody who is voicing of an opinion but an attempt to obstruct the incongruity of your statement, IMO. You said: "Innocent until proven guilty DOES apply to all sides."
Yet,

On the one hand, you do not want to hold NATO accountable by stating that nobody can be convicted without (NATO sanctioned) court trial.

On the other hand, you brush over the fact that the Afghanis, even IF they are militants, are executed without trial.

"Court of public opinion" is not where "Innocent until proven guilty DOES apply". We are lucky that we still have the right to an opinion. But NATO does not give that right to the Afghanis. And maybe soon they will not give that right to Americans any longer.


reply posted on 10-3-2013 @ 11:19 AM by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by ThinkingHuman

On the other hand, you brush over the fact that the Afghanis, even IF they are militants, are executed without trial.


Okay, quick terminology lesson here because playing word game gotcha is getting out of hand here.

Afghan Militants = Recognized Combatants in *WAR ZONE*. People in war zones get shot and killed without a trial. (Where was Daniel Pearl's trial, btw? That wasn't even a war zone and some of these same lovely people)

This is why we call them war zones. In Afghanistan there are two clearly defined (when actively fighting anyway) sides to a very real an ongoing WAR. There are the Western forces represented by NATO and the United States commands and there are the Taliban fighting diligently to retake control of Afghanistan and return it to a theocracy from some long past century in history. The Taliban are sometimes aided and supported by Al Qaeda but Al Qaeda is an umbrella term for a world wide franchise and Afghanistan is just one location they're active in.

Now in this thread's story, we have what MAY or MAY NOT have been militants. I don't know that and neither do you. We have the local villagers who are saying they were innocent kids out collecting wood or something. We have a local police chief saying about the same with more detail. If they HAD BEEN militants, those saying this would also be guilty by being sympathizers. Had you considered that? There IS a very real motivation for the Afghanis to LIE.

So...it's with that in mind for very detailed context, that I have said Innocent until proven Guilty for the allegation of killing innocent civilians on a hillside and not militants. I'd prefer we withdraw ALL troops and end this war. Should have done that years ago........but while we have troops in combat, a LITTLE SUPPORT might be the least we can give them ....until proven otherwise on a case by case basis.
edit on 10-3-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 10-3-2013 @ 09:57 PM by ThinkingHuman
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Okay, quick terminology lesson here because playing word game gotcha is getting out of hand here.

Afghan Militants = Recognized Combatants in *WAR ZONE*. People in war zones get shot and killed without a trial. (Where was Daniel Pearl's trial, btw? That wasn't even a war zone and some of these same lovely people)

This is why we call them war zones. In Afghanistan there are two clearly defined (when actively fighting anyway) sides to a very real an ongoing WAR. There are the Western forces represented by NATO and the United States commands and there are the Taliban fighting diligently to retake control of Afghanistan and return it to a theocracy from some long past century in history. The Taliban are sometimes aided and supported by Al Qaeda but Al Qaeda is an umbrella term for a world wide franchise and Afghanistan is just one location they're active in.

This "terminology lesson" reflects your wishful thinking, not reality.

When was Afghanistan declared a *WAR ZONE*? Never. Bush labeled the people terrorists. Terrorists are bad people - but what identifies people you can see only from a helicopter a terrorist? (Maybe the fact of carrying cameras or sticks??)

You used the terminology "Innocent until proven guilty DOES apply to all sides."
Now you say, well, it does not apply to what we label "militants". Why? Because if we say they are militants - then they are militants!

So, in this terminology lesson, you forgot to define the word "militant". Did the US declare "WAR against militants"?
If not, what, in your belief, justifies that, IF they really are militants, they do NOT have a right to live and we have the right to kill them without a trial? (Karzai was democratically elected, we are not at war.)

Daniel Pearl was murdered. Does that justify that we go around and kill whoever we decide?

You described the "very real motivation for the Afghanis to LIE". You implicitly suggest that this gives Americans the licence to kill - and you ignore the very real motivation for the Americans to LIE.

"a LITTLE SUPPORT might be the least we can give them" for the KILLERS our government is sending to foreign countries? Sugar-coated enough.


"Al Qaeda is an umbrella term for a world wide franchise and Afghanistan is just one location they're active in". So Americans can kill people "world wide", we just need to label them "militants".
"world wide" btw includes the US. Thank you for the lesson.


reply posted on 12-3-2013 @ 10:04 AM by Shamrock6
reply to post by jcarpenter


again, cool story. till somebody appoints you to a bench somewhere and wraps you in the mantle of justice, you may call me whatever you like. its fine. but all your drivel remains your OPINION. not a fact, simply your opinion and nothing more. cite all the historical examples you care to. nothing changes the fact that everything you're spouting is nothing more than your own views, and it really doesn't matter how many here agree with you, because still none of you have any judicial authority.

you have a right to your own opinion, but not your own facts. and i have the right to disagree, and point out your lack of facts. thanks for playing.
Pages: <<  2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^