You forgot the Western value of shoving their beliefs down other people's throat by the use of military force and soft power. They prop up dictatorships all over the world. They undermine other people's way of life.
As for the Muslims, you might be right. They are responsible for more deaths than anyone except for maybe the Christians. It's not really religion they are promoting. It's a gang mentality.
And by the way, the so-called qualities of the Western world you mentioned might only be somewhat true for the past few decades. Before that, they were just as brutish as anyone else, if not more.
Aw, how dare anyone speak against our great leader.
Crap country? Have you been there or you just like to repeat other people's lines? Naive and stupid? Do you know her personally?
BoberFett
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 37,563
- 9
- 81
And yet SHE still prefers peaceful resolution to more violence. Imagine that.
When I was a kid I thought that my psych degree would net me riches. I also thought that Jesse Ventura would be a good governor. I also thought there was a Santa Claus.
Kids are fucking stupid. There's a reason a reason why we have parents.
If she knew what she was talking about she'd stop hiding behind her protector's skirt and demand the Muslim world be held accountable for the misogyny that is rampant in their culture. Until that she is nothing more than a mouthpiece for a medieval viewpoint.
Yeah, how dare she speaks from a position of security when if she went back to her own country she'd be killed. Perhaps she should think about that before she rips on the only reason she is alive.
You don't need to go to Pakistan to know its a crap country. Every metric around shows it is a shithole.
And logic stands to reason that she can't think beyond the muslim talking points.
- Nov 23, 2001
- 44,303
- 15
- 81
Throughout its history, Islam has always been about tolerance, peace, compassion, and coexistence. Its believers and proponents find it unthinkable to use force and coercion to convert or wipe out rivals. That is what Malala would have you believe, and apparently she has you convinced.
Sure she does, and we would all like to sing kumbaya around a fire. That's not reality though, as she found out before and will likely find out again. I applaud her bravery, but she's just a dumb naive child.
Yeah, everyone knows I'm such a big fan of our 'leader', there's no way I would consider any viewpoint other than that he's right. Oh, wait.....
Yes, crap country, by any and every conceivable measure. I don't need to go to the arctic to know that it's cold there.
I don't need to know her personally to come to that conclusion. Her statements are sufficient.
Good for Malala on confronting obama. She is right that drone attacks in Pakistan help to create more terrorists but of course he is too stupid to understand this.
This, basically.
You have to clean your own home before telling others how they should clean theirs.
Braznor
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2005
- 4,497
- 349
- 126
None of you here know the complete truth and neither do I claim I do.
All I wish to make you understand is that this world is too devilish for innocent humans and too simple for extremely clever people who knows how to exploit figures, symbols and events for their own benefit.
All of you have been cautioned. Believe only half of what you see and believe absolutely nothing of what you hear.
All I wish to make you understand is that this world is too devilish for innocent humans and too simple for extremely clever people who knows how to exploit figures, symbols and events for their own benefit.
All of you have been cautioned. Believe only half of what you see and believe absolutely nothing of what you hear.
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
Great post. It's always worth pointing out that Islam has similar hatred toward Buddism, Judaism, and Hinduism. Everywhere Islam meets another religion, there is Islamic terrorism. (Although granted, in some places like Africa there is even greater terrorism by the Christians.) We all remember historic statues of Buddha being blown up because they aren't Islamic.Lol so that would make you Morpheus? Matrix analogies, meaningless insults based on post count, and allegations of brain washing. Yep, I'm on the internet!
No one's saying America has a spotless record, and I'm sure our misdeeds abroad have caused more than a few converts to terrorism, but you seem to be accepting and apologizing for the propaganda that the terrorists put in their recruitment tapes. There's another generally common thread to modern terrorism: Islam. An Israeli Colonel once put it nicely when defending racial profiling: "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim."
Now why is that exactly? Why aren't Hindus, Buddhists, Jews and Christians abroad attacking America in similar proportions? If the cause is, as you say, our foreign policy, plenty of them have been affected just as negatively by it over the years. Hell you want to go back to 1954? We fought a massive war with Germany not too long before that, and killed millions of German civilians along with our allies. Where are the German suicide bombers today? Why didn't they blow up the world trade center? God knows terrorists rationalize their actions by going back to the freaking Crusades if they have to.
Hell Vietnam is an even better example. We butchered their country and then retreated, leaving those who had supported us to mostly very gruesome fates. They have every reason to hate us, and we've killed far more Vietnamese than Arabs or Afghans. Where are the Vietnamese terror cells?
Americans are "hated" by Muslims (only some Muslims mind you, the Kurds love us), in large part because the religion of Islam seems to promote a disproportional amount of hate of outsiders relative to to other modern religions. It also provides more rewards for such hate through the promotion of martyrdom. I know of no modern Christian denomination of any significance that preaches killing others will get you into heaven. Even the Westboro Baptist Church doesn't sink that low. On the other hand, look up "Mother of Hamas". Read and listen to the teachings of Imams out of Mecca and Medina, entire cities where no non-Muslims are allowed. It's freaking scary, and I can make direct analogies to medieval Christan rhetoric at the time of the Crusades. Hell their notorious Allah hu'Akbar ("God is Great!") is near identical to the Crusaders' "God wills it!".
Islam is a medieval belief system in a modern world. That's not to say that there aren't people who modernized it, either on their own or through organized means; but those that don't or lack the means to are following a medieval governmental and religious institution, that is directly analogous to the medieval Catholic Church in terms of its power and influence. Christianity has had its enlightenment. Muslims can walk the streets of the Vatican with everyone. Muslim dignitaries meet there with the Pope. When was the last time the Pope was greeted in Mecca?
I imagine many will disagree with this for some reason or other, but IMO if you could take the modern Islamic nations and replace Islam with any other mainstream religion, you'd see far less international terrorism in the world.
The irony here is that this girl was shot for doing what she says we should be doing, educating people. In reality the best we can do is to wind up Afghanistan as quickly as possible and get the hell out of the region. We cannot cooperate with Pakistan because Pakistan is to a large degree in league with the terrorists, and any important target of a joint operation will be long gone before that force gets there to arrest him - probably leaving a massive booby trap behind to kill the arresting force and a lot of innocents. We need to get the hell out of Afghanistan, Pakistan and surrounding nations as quickly as possible. Yes, it's going to turn back into a long-neglected outhouse when we leave; that's true whether we leave tomorrow or in freakin' 2050. Everyone knows this.
As far as US intervention, I'd be pleased as punch to divide the world into Muslim and no-Muslim areas, with zero mixing. No Muslims in the New World, none in Europe, no non-Muslims in the Middle East. I'd even be willing to suffer through astronomical gas prices & rationing to cut off trade. Failing that, I see no reason why Western nations should develop Middle Easter resources only to have the Muslims seize them. Although granted, in the USA we took a dim view of European colonialism as well, so I certainly don't support our helping them when the natives inevitably nationalize their hard work. Want protection? Cut more generous deals going in.
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
Catch even more flies with a flyswatter.
Short of that, honey can't compete with bullshit.
kage69
Lifer
- Jul 17, 2003
- 27,303
- 36,455
- 136
Bubblehulk,
First of all, drones don't kill people from thousands of miles away. The operators may be thousands of miles away, but the drones themselves have to close with the target and 99% of the time that occurs within 5 miles, usually about 2.
I realize you have beef with the 'war on terror' - good, you should. You bring up a number of excellent points, but wrt to drones you're injecting notions like evil and fear into a situation where it doesn't exist. Drones are used not out of apprehension of harm to pilots (definitely a bonus though), drones are used because they are relatively cheap, disposable, precise, and are not limited by a pilots physical and mental endurance. Closing with the enemy is not the issue here. Access and discretion is the real game here. Drones are tools used because they make fiscal, tactical and political sense given where we are with Afghanistan and Pakistan. Dealing with the enemy in a precise manner without engaging in full on wars and invasions is what is being done, and I take comfort in knowing that it's been waged quite effectively by the Obama admin. This is what Cheney should have done, but then that would have spoiled other things I suppose. Regardless, the US military takes costly and difficult measures to limit collateral damage, but of course nothing is perfect, certainly not in war. I'm not excusing clear cases of wrongdoing at all either, but credit goes where credit is due. Just imagine if we rolled in like the Russians did in the 80s, shooting anything that moved.
Transparent to whom, becomes the question then. I bet if you were aware of the recent history in Pakistan wrt Taliban, AQ and the Haqqani network - not to mention clandestine operations in general - you wouldn't be asking that. Or was that meant for Congress? Yeah, let's get as many of those guys involved as possible, just to be safe. There is a selection and approval process for last resort scenarios you know.
Allies don't violate each other, they have 'navigation issues,' just ask Mexico. You believe Pakistan when they say they had no idea he was there? Heh. Oh you.
It's a pity you didn't make an account here a few years ago. You might have read about all the raids that were compromised or dodged when the Paks were told of what we were about to do. You might have heard about where our farmboys brought in some Arab looking coworkers masquerading as Saudi Intelligence to question captured AQ. The hope being of scaring him shitless under threat of a 'down home' style interrogation. I think you would have been amused to hear how the guy wasn't terrified, but relieved, and asked the new "Saudis" to call a number for him and told them everything would be explained and that they would be rewarded. That number led to a Saudi prince (found dead in desert later, from "exposure") as well as the Pakistani Air Marshall (who then died along with his wife in a plane crash).
You don't sound like you're familiar with the ISI, or with their military institution's history in general. I hope I'm wrong.
And again, basic strategy seems to elude you here somehow. I get the impression that if you were even a little familiar with the topic, you wouldn't be trying patronize sensible procedure dealing with a violent fundie that claims to represent a religion that reveres martyrs.
While I applaud your scorn for the whole "Merica, fuck yeah!" notion, I'm dismayed by the reference to "killing Americans without due process" as some kind of recent event unique to the Obama admin. I find it hard to take seriously, not just because it's a bit naive given the dirty, no holds barred nature of counter terrorism, but because I'm relatively sure you don't give a single shit about the Americans who weren't fugitives plotting to kill more Americans - The ones who just had the misfortune of pulling a gun on a cop, taking a hostage with a knife, or some other scenario where LEOs were forced, by the actions of the perpetrator, to use lethal force Where are all the stories of outrage over thosekillings ? Why the disparity? Really reminds me of the penchant some on the right have of wishing abrupt and final solutions to domestic crime, yet howl when when an American terror suspect is captured on American soil and eventually read his rights.
I guess I just don't understand how association with a terrorist network and a desire to kill Americans via jihad makes lethal action even less appropriate. Am I mad an American had to die? Yeah, kinda. Would I be mad if additional Americans continued to die while their killer was allowed to rampage out of fear his rights would be violated? Fuck yes!
I think I'm going to just stop there. Others can address the conspiratorial and racial themes you post if they want, I'm suddenly very bored now. Welcome to AT though.
First of all, drones don't kill people from thousands of miles away. The operators may be thousands of miles away, but the drones themselves have to close with the target and 99% of the time that occurs within 5 miles, usually about 2.
I realize you have beef with the 'war on terror' - good, you should. You bring up a number of excellent points, but wrt to drones you're injecting notions like evil and fear into a situation where it doesn't exist. Drones are used not out of apprehension of harm to pilots (definitely a bonus though), drones are used because they are relatively cheap, disposable, precise, and are not limited by a pilots physical and mental endurance. Closing with the enemy is not the issue here. Access and discretion is the real game here. Drones are tools used because they make fiscal, tactical and political sense given where we are with Afghanistan and Pakistan. Dealing with the enemy in a precise manner without engaging in full on wars and invasions is what is being done, and I take comfort in knowing that it's been waged quite effectively by the Obama admin. This is what Cheney should have done, but then that would have spoiled other things I suppose. Regardless, the US military takes costly and difficult measures to limit collateral damage, but of course nothing is perfect, certainly not in war. I'm not excusing clear cases of wrongdoing at all either, but credit goes where credit is due. Just imagine if we rolled in like the Russians did in the 80s, shooting anything that moved.
Transparent to whom, becomes the question then. I bet if you were aware of the recent history in Pakistan wrt Taliban, AQ and the Haqqani network - not to mention clandestine operations in general - you wouldn't be asking that. Or was that meant for Congress? Yeah, let's get as many of those guys involved as possible, just to be safe. There is a selection and approval process for last resort scenarios you know.
Allies don't violate each other, they have 'navigation issues,' just ask Mexico. You believe Pakistan when they say they had no idea he was there? Heh. Oh you.
It's a pity you didn't make an account here a few years ago. You might have read about all the raids that were compromised or dodged when the Paks were told of what we were about to do. You might have heard about where our farmboys brought in some Arab looking coworkers masquerading as Saudi Intelligence to question captured AQ. The hope being of scaring him shitless under threat of a 'down home' style interrogation. I think you would have been amused to hear how the guy wasn't terrified, but relieved, and asked the new "Saudis" to call a number for him and told them everything would be explained and that they would be rewarded. That number led to a Saudi prince (found dead in desert later, from "exposure") as well as the Pakistani Air Marshall (who then died along with his wife in a plane crash).
You don't sound like you're familiar with the ISI, or with their military institution's history in general. I hope I'm wrong.
And again, basic strategy seems to elude you here somehow. I get the impression that if you were even a little familiar with the topic, you wouldn't be trying patronize sensible procedure dealing with a violent fundie that claims to represent a religion that reveres martyrs.
While I applaud your scorn for the whole "Merica, fuck yeah!" notion, I'm dismayed by the reference to "killing Americans without due process" as some kind of recent event unique to the Obama admin. I find it hard to take seriously, not just because it's a bit naive given the dirty, no holds barred nature of counter terrorism, but because I'm relatively sure you don't give a single shit about the Americans who weren't fugitives plotting to kill more Americans - The ones who just had the misfortune of pulling a gun on a cop, taking a hostage with a knife, or some other scenario where LEOs were forced, by the actions of the perpetrator, to use lethal force Where are all the stories of outrage over thosekillings ? Why the disparity? Really reminds me of the penchant some on the right have of wishing abrupt and final solutions to domestic crime, yet howl when when an American terror suspect is captured on American soil and eventually read his rights.
I guess I just don't understand how association with a terrorist network and a desire to kill Americans via jihad makes lethal action even less appropriate. Am I mad an American had to die? Yeah, kinda. Would I be mad if additional Americans continued to die while their killer was allowed to rampage out of fear his rights would be violated? Fuck yes!
I think I'm going to just stop there. Others can address the conspiratorial and racial themes you post if they want, I'm suddenly very bored now. Welcome to AT though.
Last edited:
sportage
Lifer
- Feb 1, 2008
- 11,493
- 3,159
- 136
This may be off a bit, but recently seen the movie Captain Phillips. The scene where the ship has been breached and the captain captive, then the US military comes to the rescue.
The first evidence the military has arrived on scene is a drone flying over Captain Phillips ship to evaluate the situation.
Pretty damn impressive.
I for one was tickled pink THIS country has the drone technology.
Probably the same feeling the settlers must have felt back in the 1800's when the US Cavalry appeared on the horizon charging to the rescue.
I fail to understand this drone bashing.
Just be thankful that we control our drone technology.
And as with any weapon be it bombs, guns, or drones, there will be some unfortunate incidents.
That little winged fellow flying over Captain Phillips ship was a proud USA moment in my book. And when you also realize that drove was most likely controlled and operated from a military base located far away back in the states.
The first evidence the military has arrived on scene is a drone flying over Captain Phillips ship to evaluate the situation.
Pretty damn impressive.
I for one was tickled pink THIS country has the drone technology.
Probably the same feeling the settlers must have felt back in the 1800's when the US Cavalry appeared on the horizon charging to the rescue.
I fail to understand this drone bashing.
Just be thankful that we control our drone technology.
And as with any weapon be it bombs, guns, or drones, there will be some unfortunate incidents.
That little winged fellow flying over Captain Phillips ship was a proud USA moment in my book. And when you also realize that drove was most likely controlled and operated from a military base located far away back in the states.
thraashman
Lifer
- Apr 10, 2000
- 11,072
- 1,476
- 126
Dammit stop being reasonable. You and I aren't supposed to be on the same side.
BoberFett
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 37,563
- 9
- 81
BoberFett
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 37,563
- 9
- 81
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
Great rant. Although personally I would have preferred building UBL a giant hardened tomb with a 4" armored glass plate viewing portal and simply droning everyone who shows up to pay their respects, I can understand the logic behind dumping his sorry ass in the ocean. Satisfies the Muslim requirement for immediate burial, denies the faithful a body to worship and fight over, and sends the message that to us he's just another piece of garbage to be jettisoned into oblivion and ignominiously eaten by other bottom-feeding scavengers.
Yes, innocent people tend to be killed in drone attacks. What people forget is that even more innocent people tend to be killed in conventional attacks. It's not just our own soldiers we're saving - although I'm fine with that justification alone. Our choices are to use drones, or to accept high allied AND civilian casualties, or to accept defeat.
It's also worth pointing out that a drone can actually come in closer, affording its operator a better visual picture, than can a manned aircraft precisely (pun intended) because the drone is expendable and our pilots are not. Thus risks (from ground fire and AA missiles) unacceptable for our pilots are acceptable to a drone and we have a picture from 2,000 ft, limited only by the operator's determination to not let the opportunity expire without action, rather than a picture from 12,000 ft, limited by the aircraft's endurance and the pilot's need to get out of the engagement area before taking a missile up the tailpipe.
And as far as killing Americans, I've never understood why killing an American on foreign soil is supposedly worse than killing the natives there. The American is at the least under jurisdiction of the American government; the natives are not.
Granted, Obama's Peace Prize was another nail in the already very well-secured coffin of Nobel Peace Prize credibility, but it's worth pointing out that peace takes both sides agreeing. Unilateral peace isn't peace, it's a massacre.but but... Obama won a "Peace Prize", right? Surely he knows all about peace and stuff.
Interventionist policy has worked out horribly for America. We left Vietnam finally, would we have stayed there if the people we were fighting had resources that could attack America similar to Al-Qaeda? It's a scary thought.
kage69
Lifer
- Jul 17, 2003
- 27,303
- 36,455
- 136
Heh. Makes me recall a coworker musing about that very notion awhile back. He was thinking something like the corpse being sealed in 20' diameter cylinder of the hardest transparent polymer epoxy there is, situated at the center of a large stadium- like area. The absolute center of this area would be a good 40 or 50 ft lower in elevation then the perimeter. Hidden vents would fill the basin with CO2, N, or some other gas. You get the idea.
We'd just have to show up every couple days and dredge the bodies out. I was thinking robots, or maybe we'd just go Russian and spiral out some MIKLIK and touch'er off.
You get it. Well played sir.
Anti-war peaceniks and frothy Obama haters alike should take note here, maybe repeat that to themselves a few times. Good on ya old boy.
Still, just imagine the uproar if Obama suddenly said "Alright, fine. I'm going to send 8,000 "advisers" there instead, starting tomorrow. We've already got 9 conventional raids scheduled for the same time in the coming weeks. I'll get back to you with the causality report and list of targets who got away or killed themselves. Happy now?"
Sheeeyit.
I was focusing on the type of drone bubblehulk was referring to, the larger Hellfire equipped models capable of extended loiter time. They have optics that generally remove the need to get in that close, but you are very much correct on the risk/payoff ratio here, as you are about the gravity of a mission like that to pilot. Drones are great, especially the little ones that can be carried in a back pack and launched with a surgical tube slingshot. Something the size of a seagull circling you and your buddies silently at 400ft, streaming you a picture of who's chillin around the next corner or hill? Oh hell yeah. That's a huge, non evil plus in my book - I'll take two!
I wonder if his drone hate also applies to the ones that don't carry any weapons systems at all. Is taking HD grids of an area looking for tire tracks and footprints evil?
Last edited:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
Facebook
Twitter