Smallc Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 As I told LemLeaf: "Anyway, you could also just send that sentence to the terrorists for them to use. " If you want to be intellectually dishonest you can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 We purposefully bomb innocent people? I think you're about 40 years behind in terms of military doctrine. Not sure exactly which WE, we are talking about here, but the US certainly does with its drones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 Oh, of course I do. I also get the difference between legitimate states acting with presumption of moral authority and terrorists. But, again, this was the statement I was commenting on: "We're bombing them, because they're killing innocent people." Which isn't an incorrect statement, especially given the context you've just provided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 We purposefully bomb innocent people? I think you're about 40 years behind in terms of military doctrine. Give it up. If you want to admit you stumbled with your statement, then I can accept that as a simple mistake and we can discuss other questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 Which isn't an incorrect statement, especially given the context you've just provided. Ok, you're doubling down on it... why not, instead just say "I SHOULD have added this..." then qualify it ? Is it so hard ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 Not sure exactly which WE, we are talking about here, but the US certainly does with its drones. I'm talking about Canada. I don't live in the United States. Do you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 Give it up. If you want to admit you stumbled with your statement, then I can accept that as a simple mistake and we can discuss other questions. I didn't stumble. You're being purposefully difficult and facilitating nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 Ok, you're doubling down on it... why not, instead just say "I SHOULD have added this..." then qualify it ? Why exactly are you being so difficult about this? You already knew the qualifications and context, as you're the one who posted it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 Why exactly are you being so difficult about this? You already knew the qualifications and context, as you're the one who posted it. I just saw your quote and replied to it. Does a country have moral authority over a group that *targets* innocent people ? Yes, I would say so. Any other questions ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 I didn't stumble. You're being purposefully difficult and facilitating nothing. I'm trying you to facilitate being clear and picking up after your errors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 I just saw your quote and replied to it. Does a country have moral authority over a group that *targets* innocent people ? Yes, I would say so. Any other questions ? None. I'm just not sure, given that, what your point was. We responded to them. They purposefully kill innocent people, and we don't. You knew what I meant, and yet decided to challenge it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 We responded to them. We ? It was your quote - do you really need others to step in and tell me what you meant ? Edited to add: On second read "we responded" means the west's military respond, not Smallc and his rescuers responding to my points... You knew what I meant... I'm sure you did mean that... but this is just a blunder. Here it is for the instant reply, you make the call: "We're bombing them, because they're killing innocent people." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 "We're bombing them, because they're killing innocent people." That is exactly what I meant, and exactly what I continue to mean. What you think you've gleaned from this, I'm not sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 That is exactly what I meant, and exactly what I continue to mean. What you think you've gleaned from this, I'm not sure. I get: "We kill innocent people because they kill innocent people." Do you want to add something to your quote now ? Do you feel moral superior when you get up in the morning, or do you have to have your shower first ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 I get: "We kill innocent people because they kill innocent people." Then you lack comprehension. I don't consider terrorists to be innocent people. Collateral damage is not part of Canadian military doctrine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 Then you lack comprehension. I don't consider terrorists to be innocent people. Collateral damage is not part of Canadian military doctrine. "We're bombing them" ... who are "we" bombing ? Here's an example, although not typical of the hundreds of thousands who have died in Iraq for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deh_Bala_wedding_party_airstrike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 "We're bombing them" ... who are "we" bombing ? Here's an example, although not typical of the hundreds of thousands who have died in Iraq for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deh_Bala_wedding_party_airstrike Perhaps you're not actually reading what I'm typing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 (edited) We've dealt with this too. Dead is dead, ask the families of those killed in drone strikes. Just because we are not being 'targeting' does not mean they are not being killed. Precision strikes via Predator Drones? Laughable. Here is a group of 30 people. Two are terrorists, do you take out 28 innocents to get those two terrorists? No matter your intentions, it is the action that is getting backlash. Your example is laughable. Collateral damage - while gut-wrenchingly sad - is miniscule. Ask the families of the thousands who have been murdered inside and outside of Mosques. Ask the families of suicide-bomb victims who are victimized again with bombs at the funeral processions. Ask the families of dead first-responders as they are targeted by the terrorists as they arrive on the scene of a terrorist bombing. Muslims killing Muslims. Peaceful Muslims are not stupid people. They know the enemy lurks within......... Edited March 15, 2015 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted March 15, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 To those who feel that we have a moral obligation to protect others from terrorists - On Monday, the RCMP arrested a guy in Toronto for planning to blow up the US embassy in Toronto. They intend to charge him and then - deport him to Pakistan. No, not prosecute him here or keep him here to protect others - they send him back to Pakistan. Maybe Pakistan will send him back here and then we ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 Maybe Pakistan will send him back here and then we ... How and why would they do that? He's not a Canadian citizen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 How and why would they do that? He's not a Canadian citizen. Think you may have missed the sarcasm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LemonPureLeaf Posted March 16, 2015 Report Share Posted March 16, 2015 You sort of pivoted away from the point that was being made and started a new thread. Anyway, you could also just send that sentence to the terrorists for them to use. The idea that we don't care about "the enemy" erases any moral high ground you presume to have. I don't care about sitting in a chair pontificating, doing nothing. People who sit on the internet all day posting here aren't going to help either side of this culture war. I care about defeating the enemy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LemonPureLeaf Posted March 16, 2015 Report Share Posted March 16, 2015 You went too far with that one. Unacceptable. Not everyone is the enemy - not even close. As a matter of fact, we are in Iraq to save Iraqis and Kurds FROM the enemy - ISIS. Why do you think Isralis try to call people in buildings before they knock them down.....or drop fliers in neighbourhoods before any attacks.....it's because they know that civilians are not the enemy. A cynic would say we only care because of the bad press - but c'mon, there are families out there that are just trying to survive - to feed their children and get by......and there is no better way to get someone to hate you than by killing innocents. That's why in the long run, ISIS and like ideologies are doomed. To target civilians is wrong. If some get killed along the way....meh...I don't really care to be honest. It happens. We've all gotten too touchy feely about war. They are the enemy and should be destroyed at all costs. All that matters is victory. We shouldn't care how we win. I want to go back to beheading the enemy on the battlefield and putting their heads on pikes and fence posts as a warning to the enemy that we are ruthless and wont take any prisoners. All enemies who try and surrender should be interrogated then used as slave labour or executed once they have served their purpose. Dragging out these wars is a waste of time. We should just be nuking these countries and putting our own men in power to control the area. Why waste the lives of our own men on these scum when one bomb will end the war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted March 16, 2015 Report Share Posted March 16, 2015 What difference does that make? The point is that in order to attack the Nazis, in order to engage in warfare, we had to accept that many innocent civilians were going to be killed along the way by our bombing, our shelling, our fighting. So why can't you accept the human suffering and deaths of innocents at the hands of the bastards we've employed? Are you ashamed or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted March 16, 2015 Report Share Posted March 16, 2015 To target civilians is wrong. If some get killed along the way....meh...I don't really care to be honest. It happens. We've all gotten too touchy feely about war. They are the enemy and should be destroyed at all costs. All that matters is victory. We shouldn't care how we win. I want to go back to beheading the enemy on the battlefield and putting their heads on pikes and fence posts as a warning to the enemy that we are ruthless and wont take any prisoners. All enemies who try and surrender should be interrogated then used as slave labour or executed once they have served their purpose. Dragging out these wars is a waste of time. We should just be nuking these countries and putting our own men in power to control the area. Why waste the lives of our own men on these scum when one bomb will end the war. Careful now christian soldier, you dont want your blood pressure getting away on you again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.