U.S. using terrorist tactics to kill terrorists?

[NoStateofMind]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...eNWsTw&feature=related

Bill: "But I'm guessing he (Bush) feels very vindicated by the surge and the fact that the violence has gone down. But, ya know, I've seen you do a number of interviews about why the surge went down and, uh, I guess I'm not going to get this out of you since nobody else did, but, I mean, you're telling the world that its not just because of the increased troops, its because of what you call Highly Classified Techniques. Which I can only assume means exploding gift baskets or something. That we have targeted our enemies over there and somehow we get them, now, I'm not gonna ask you to tell me what is highly classified but I would like to know, why'd they tell you?"

Bob: "Well that I have 2 years to work on it, you have to get people to level with you and people leveled with me and said 'Look, its not the surge, if you look at the numbers there's a very dramatic drop off in violence, its so sudden, uh, something had to happen and it turns out its these Highly Classified Operations.' Which the White House in a statement after the book came out, did confirm and said the newly developed techniques and operations and some day decades from now the story can be told. But thats really whats lowered violence and brought about a, uh, conditions in Iraq that are much more stable."

Bill: "So ya can't give us a hint? I mean its just maddening to hear that and not really know what you're talk about"

Bob: "Well you were close with the exploding gift baskets."

Well it seems the 'surge' didn't work after all. They basically took the tactics they were using against us and turned it on them. But you know, when we do it, its not terrorism, its defending freedom!


The second part of this interview I find disturbing. Reminds me of when they asked Palin what their exit strategy was and she replied "The surge werked!". Fricken loon.

Bob: "Just one thing, there's something I can say on this show which you can't say on regular television. One of the scenes in the book is admiral Falin who is the commander in 2007 he's now been replaced by general Patrayus. But he is meeting with Bush in the national security council about Iran, what to do about Iran, and Admiral Falin asks the President "Whats the strategy?" and the President looks at him and says "They're assholes".

 

[Farang]

My interpretation of this is that they are killing targets with much less discrimination than before. Basically a widespread purge of all suspected terrorists. To take assumptions a step further would be to say they are conducting these operations in unusual ways.. such as a Munich(film)-like assassination operation which would allow for "exploding gift baskets."

All just guesses, though. It could be Woodward is just trying to sell a book but I do have more respect for him than that.

 

[bamacre]

Nothing is shocking anymore.

 

[CallMeJoe]

I can't regard Bob Woodward's flippant reaction to Bill Maher's sarcastic WAG concerning "Highly Classified Techniques" as evidence of anything, much less confirmation of U.S. military or intelligence conducting terrorist acts in Iraq.

 

[First]

Caution: Tin Foil Hat Area

 

[RichardE]

Terrorism is the cause of fear among civilians with no goal besides fear.

What you see here is war, learn the difference.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Caution: Tin Foil Hat Area

No need too, you should assume operations like this happen since they have happened before and been documented. The problem is why people think it is bad?

 

[First]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Caution: Tin Foil Hat Area

No need too, you should assume operations like this happen since they have happened before and been documented. The problem is why people think it is bad?

They happen, but very rarely. Taking the "exploding gift baskets" line seriously shows definite tin foil hate paranoia, though.

 

[Fern]

U.S. using terrorist tactics to kill terrorists?

Terrorists tactics?

Even if true, who gives a damn as long as they are killing terrorists?

What's the big difference between getting blown up by a regular military grenade and one made up to look like a fruit basket?

Or an IED and land mine?

Dead is dead.

Fern

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Fern

U.S. using terrorist tactics to kill terrorists?

Terrorists tactics?

Even if true, who gives a damn as long as they are killing terrorists?

What's the big difference between getting blown up by a regular military grenade and one made up to look like a fruit basket?

Or an IED and land mine?

Dead is dead.

Fern

Sadly, I can't tell if this is serious or not.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
Caution: Tin Foil Hat Area

No need too, you should assume operations like this happen since they have happened before and been documented. The problem is why people think it is bad?

They happen, but very rarely. Taking the "exploding gift baskets" line seriously shows definite tin foil hate paranoia, though.

Well, he didn't say "exploding gift baskets" just that they were along those lines. It is easy to believe the US is able to find people within Iraq sick of the secular violence ect willing to risk there lives delivering exploding packages, car bombs ect.

On a side note, when the hell did War become clean and sanitized? What is next" "You cannot shoot someone until they are armed with an equal weapon and you are both on the same ground." Sure the war was unjustified but bitching about the way it is being dealt with, especially in a way that doesn't inflict massive civilian casualities (bombs) as well as prevents civilians casualties isn just nitpicking. If you want to go cry over these people dying than go to Iraq and attend there funeral, because for the majority of people we could care less if these people whose entire purpose is a power grab in a destabalized area die or not, in any way shape or form, and if we can do it without hurting civilians all the better.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: Fern

U.S. using terrorist tactics to kill terrorists?

Terrorists tactics?

Even if true, who gives a damn as long as they are killing terrorists?

What's the big difference between getting blown up by a regular military grenade and one made up to look like a fruit basket?

Or an IED and land mine?

Dead is dead.

Fern

Amen.

So they used new tactics are efficient, oh well. Trying to win a war holding the moral territory will never win. We did it in Vietnam and lost, we were going to lose here, we lowered ourselves to our enemies standards in WW2 (firebombing, targetting civilians, ect) and we won, and that is seen as one of the greatest victories we have had and something to be proud of. Sure war is bad, but you don't go into a war with kids gloves, and this was something the Bush admin was told at the start and refused to listen too. If they had we might be out already and worrying about something else.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: RichardE


Well, he didn't say "exploding gift baskets" just that they were along those lines.

I know, I was referring to the OP's interpretation of it, since Woodward was clearly kidding when he said it.

It is easy to believe the US is able to find people within Iraq sick of the secular violence ect willing to risk there lives delivering exploding packages, car bombs ect.

Finding people willing to do it and actually sanctioning it are two very different things that aren't anything alike.

On a side note, when the hell did War become clean and sanitized? What is next" "You cannot shoot someone until they are armed with an equal weapon and you are both on the same ground." Sure the war was unjustified but bitching about the way it is being dealt with, especially in a way that doesn't inflict massive civilian casualities (bombs) as well as prevents civilians casualties isn just nitpicking. If you want to go cry over these people dying than go to Iraq and attend there funeral, because for the majority of people we could care less if these people whose entire purpose is a power grab in a destabalized area die or not, in any way shape or form, and if we can do it without hurting civilians all the better.

Torture and murder doesn't get the U.S. anywhere; it gives us less leverage in diplomacy, makes us the moral equivalent of the terrorists that use said techniques, and worst of all using torture doesn't actually work, something that is widely accepted and believed among interrogators.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: Fern

U.S. using terrorist tactics to kill terrorists?

Terrorists tactics?

Even if true, who gives a damn as long as they are killing terrorists?

What's the big difference between getting blown up by a regular military grenade and one made up to look like a fruit basket?

Or an IED and land mine?

Dead is dead.

Fern

Sadly, I can't tell if this is serious or not.

If he weren't serious why add the part about, so long as they are terrorists. Isn't that were the line between wigged out idiot and lunatic fanatic is drawn?

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: RichardE


Well, he didn't say "exploding gift baskets" just that they were along those lines.

I know, I was referring to the OP's interpretation of it, since Woodward was clearly kidding when he said it.

It is easy to believe the US is able to find people within Iraq sick of the secular violence ect willing to risk there lives delivering exploding packages, car bombs ect.

Finding people willing to do it and actually sanctioning it are two very different things that aren't anything alike.

On a side note, when the hell did War become clean and sanitized? What is next" "You cannot shoot someone until they are armed with an equal weapon and you are both on the same ground." Sure the war was unjustified but bitching about the way it is being dealt with, especially in a way that doesn't inflict massive civilian casualities (bombs) as well as prevents civilians casualties isn just nitpicking. If you want to go cry over these people dying than go to Iraq and attend there funeral, because for the majority of people we could care less if these people whose entire purpose is a power grab in a destabalized area die or not, in any way shape or form, and if we can do it without hurting civilians all the better.

Torture and murder doesn't get the U.S. anywhere; it gives us less leverage in diplomacy, makes us the moral equivalent of the terrorists that use said techniques, and worst of all using torture doesn't actually work, something that is widely accepted and believed among interrogators.

We have leverage in diplomacy? You seem to be under the impression we have any moral say at all. Did you see what happened with Georgia? We talked alot and got nothing. What you are seeing is push to end this any way possible and move on.

Again, why do you want to have a sanitized clean war? If you are crying for these people send the famillies a "I'm sorry" card, the rest of us could care less. (Where did torture come up, from what I see they are discussing assassination).

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: Fern

U.S. using terrorist tactics to kill terrorists?

Terrorists tactics?

Even if true, who gives a damn as long as they are killing terrorists?

What's the big difference between getting blown up by a regular military grenade and one made up to look like a fruit basket?

Or an IED and land mine?

Dead is dead.

Fern

Sadly, I can't tell if this is serious or not.

Does editing my original post and underlying, and thus emphasizing, the above word help make it clear?

A terrorist tactic is killing innocent people at random.

I.e., whatever the military is doing is certainly not a terrorist tactic if they are killing terrorists instead of innocent people.

Who cares what the *weapon* looked like? I see no relevance or import to that cosmetic difference.

Fern

 

[DaveSimmons]

From what I've read our HCT is just paying off some groups of insurgents to stop attacking us and sometimes to attack other groups instead.

That, and ethnic cleansing segregating the neighborhoods, is allegedly the real causes of the drop in violence. If you've killed or scared away the other groups from your neighborhood, there's no more need for violence.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: RichardE

We have leverage in diplomacy? You seem to be under the impression we have any moral say at all. Did you see what happened with Georgia? We talked alot and got nothing. What you are seeing is push to end this any way possible and move on.

rofl. Yes, we have leverage in diplomacy. :roll:

Again, why do you want to have a sanitized clean war? If you are crying for these people send the famillies a "I'm sorry" card, the rest of us could care less. (Where did torture come up, from what I see they are discussing assassination).

We are not talking about killing terrorists in the line of duty, that is obviously completely different and absolutely justified. Listen to the Real Time clip in the OP again.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Fern

Does editing my original post and underlying, and thus emphasizing, the above word help make it clear?

A terrorist tactic is killing innocent people at random.

I.e., whatever the military is doing is certainly not a terrorist tactic if they are killing terrorists instead of innocent people.

If the United States is killing terrorists under false premises (i.e. displaying a flag of truce and then turning around and murdering them), or torturing them despite telling the world that the U.S. doesn't torture, then those are terrorist techniques. The fact that you want to only confine terrorist activity to "killing innocent people at random" is merely your way of narrowing the argument to justify torture and murder. Again, realize that the U.S. has turned terrorists, actual terrorists, onto our side of the fence by paying them off. The line between terrorist and non-terrorist among those we are paying off is not so clear to begin with, but that's another story obviously.

Who cares what the *weapon* looked like? I see no relevance or import to that cosmetic difference.

Fern

Then you don't understand the implications of said techniques to the outside world.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: RichardE
Terrorism is the cause of fear among civilians with no goal besides fear.

What you see here is war, learn the difference.

Right, this is war. Except when enemies are captured, they're not prisoners of war, they're "enemy combatants". It's only "war" when it suits the USA. When it comes time to play by the rules of war, it becomes counter-terrorism. You're a hypocrite.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: RichardE

We have leverage in diplomacy? You seem to be under the impression we have any moral say at all. Did you see what happened with Georgia? We talked alot and got nothing. What you are seeing is push to end this any way possible and move on.

rofl. Yes, we have leverage in diplomacy. :roll:

Again, why do you want to have a sanitized clean war? If you are crying for these people send the famillies a "I'm sorry" card, the rest of us could care less. (Where did torture come up, from what I see they are discussing assassination).

We are not talking about killing terrorists in the line of duty, that is obviously completely different and absolutely justified. Listen to the Real Time clip in the OP again.

You are delusional if you think this is a war where armies are linning up to fight each other.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: RichardE
Terrorism is the cause of fear among civilians with no goal besides fear.

What you see here is war, learn the difference.

Right, this is war. Except when enemies are captured, they're not prisoners of war, they're "enemy combatants". It's only "war" when it suits the USA. When it comes time to play by the rules of war, it becomes counter-terrorism. You're a hypocrite.

Of course it is war, wtf do you think it is, a practice? Jesus you are an idiot.

How about this, the people in Iraq killing the US wear some uniforms and chose a state to sponsor them, so that we can weed them out and actually prevent killing civilians, than we can call them PoW's.

With your definition and what is happened the gangsters in LA would be PoW's moreso, since at least there colors identify them

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: RichardE
Terrorism is the cause of fear among civilians with no goal besides fear.

What you see here is war, learn the difference.

You're quite wrong. Causing fear among civilians with terrorism pretty much always has the same sorts of goals as war - just a different tactic, when you don't have a military.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: RichardE

We have leverage in diplomacy? You seem to be under the impression we have any moral say at all. Did you see what happened with Georgia? We talked alot and got nothing. What you are seeing is push to end this any way possible and move on.

rofl. Yes, we have leverage in diplomacy. :roll:

Again, why do you want to have a sanitized clean war? If you are crying for these people send the famillies a "I'm sorry" card, the rest of us could care less. (Where did torture come up, from what I see they are discussing assassination).

We are not talking about killing terrorists in the line of duty, that is obviously completely different and absolutely justified. Listen to the Real Time clip in the OP again.

You are delusional if you think this is a war where armies are linning up to fight each other.

Please do a Google search or something, you totally out of your element in this debate.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Fern

U.S. using terrorist tactics to kill terrorists?

Terrorists tactics?

Even if true, who gives a damn as long as they are killing terrorists?

What's the big difference between getting blown up by a regular military grenade and one made up to look like a fruit basket?

Or an IED and land mine?

Dead is dead.

Fern

I do for one - we already have a huge problem with double standards on the use of force, on how others are treated, on using our force too easily for bad reasons with lipstick put on them about 'freedom' and 'liberty', prostituting those good words for the purposes of getting support for policies of greed. The last thing we need to do is to further lower the bar for the use of force.