PhillyKev 0 #101 November 12, 2002 QuoteApples and oranges The thing that scares me is the above sentiment. Actually we're not dealing with either apples or oranges, we're dealing with human lives. If we start letting the CIA make judgment calls about who should be killed or not, without the due process and safeguards in the constitution, then we're headed down a scary path. I don't care if the person happens to be on mars and accused of killing 10,000 babies. When we start throwing away the basic ideas of individual life, liberty and justice for ALL, we're corrupting what makes me glad to be an American. Here's another definition: ALL 1 - the whole number, quantity, or amount 2 - EVERYBODY, EVERYTHING That doesn't say "including those accused of commiting one crime, but not those accused (but not tried or convicted) of commiting another crime that is more repugnant to the general populace". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #102 November 12, 2002 QuoteHard to claim any kind of moral superiority there, beyond wanting to win a war quickly. I think it was a highly moral decision. It would be hard to tell the American people that I thought that many more young American kids should die even though I had a way to avoid that. That decision took a lot of guts. Period. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #103 November 12, 2002 QuoteI think it was a highly moral decision. It would be hard to tell the American people that I thought that many more young American kids should die even though I had a way to avoid that. Do you have a chart you could provide that details the worth of human life based on nationality? Like, if I kill 5 innocent civilians of nation B to save the life of 1 combatant from nation A, how do I score that to determine if that was morally right or not? If you really want to get down to it, wouldn't the only response that could truly be called moral by a predominantly Christian nation be to turn the other cheek? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #104 November 13, 2002 QuoteThis may be true, but I find it hard to believe that Yemen finds a US warplane dropping bombs on Yemeni people more acceptable than a US agent arresting the same people. Well, you might be surprised. QuoteAshcroft has made it clear that being a US citizen does not guarantee you any rights if you are implicated in the war on terror (i.e. Padilla.) He may have said that, but what happened in Yemen was done by the CIA. The CIA does not fall under Ashcroft they are under George Tenet. QuoteWell, nor do we normally execute people in a third country we're not at war with. We're not currently at war with a country. We are at war with Al Quaida and that is who we attacked. Just because they are in a different country doesn't mean they won't be attacked. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #105 November 13, 2002 QuoteIf these things were occuring in the US I think we have the Law Enforcement and intel resources to deal with it. First incident was set in Niagra Falls, Canada - so would that one be OK? Or do we trust the Canadians enough that we'd just have them arrested? I think that the Yemeni gov't probably didn't have the resources (Or maybe the will) to capture these guys so killing them was the next best thing. Perhaps, but I worry that we are taking the easy way out, ... Neither Yemen, nor Canada have the Intelligence or Military resources to fully engage in the problem as it affects them. Canada has a fully combined military force of 55,000 men/women. That's 55,000 protecting a populace of almost 30 million. Who's really protecting Canada? Canada's special forces in Afghanistan were not replaced when the first rotation was up because they did not have the resources to replace properly trained troops to do the job. Canada can barely meet minimum NATO readiness standards as it is. This is the result of decades of inflated social spending, more than simple corruption in the leadship in Ottawa. Two significant problems loom for Canada, which make it uniquely vulnerable: 1-The still unresolved issue with Quebec, and the prospects of a possible split of the Federation. 2-Another long term concern of the steady exodus of skilled labor leaving for the USA, attracted by lower taxes and immense infrastructure. This has been brewing since the early 1980s. Canada is ill equipped to handle the task at hand unfortunately. Yemen on the other hand has taken much broader steps in the past 12 years: Unified as a republic in 1990, Yemen has a representative government based on Islamic, Turkish and English law. They were not able to begin stabalizing their economy until the mid-90s and they have opened their country for support in the war on terror. Their lack of resources is due to nearly four decades of separation North Yemen (ex-Ottoman Empire, republic) and South Yemen (ex-communist state). The main political and economic differences is that Yemen is allowing training, buildout of infrastructure and private investment which will allow it to build its own oil industry etc. Certainly this will foster better overall relations between the US and Yemen, despite a Yemeni-American being killed in the attack on November 3. Ultimately, Yemen and the US are intricately cooperating on these issues. The US gets access, Yemen gets resources. Yemen preserves its republic, the US gets to invest politically and financially. Canada however does not like foreign investment, heavily regulates its markets, and has a political structure of varying degrees of social liberalism. I'm not criticizing that fact, simply stating that all the social programs that are worth bragging about have left Canada exposed, over extended and still in danger of a split in the country. Not the warmest fuzzy feeling. This is very good timing since Yemen's neighbor to the north Saudi Arabia is not stepping up to the plate in a lot of areas. US/Saudi relations appear to be chilled... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jraf 0 #106 November 13, 2002 I know nothing of reilgion. I am just astonished by your argumentation, but to each his own. I think killing people for the sake of increasing our prosperity and living area is a neccessity. The United States is becoming overpopulated and needs more energy sources. We have enough tanks and jet fighters to take what we want. Countries like Iraq should be colinized. Non complacent locals should be detained in labor camps and render services to the US industry. Resisting locals should be eradicated. Civilians should be treated as combatants. If agression takes place against a US citizen, civilian hostages should be taken. A number of at least 10 local civilians should be executed for every American live taken. We have the means to do it. There should be no sentiment. The US Armed Forces should treat all locals as potential resiting individuals. In war trial by jury is not neccessary. Summary execution for acts of agression against the US is fully natural. The US Armed Forces should create appropriate living space and conditions for US citizens to go and populate these territories. This newly acquired living space should become the energy and raw material provider for the United States. Education of locals should be kept to a minimum. They need just basic reading and writing skills. They are to be tought complacency towards their US supervisors. Resistance should be summarily punished. Special Reaction groups should be created to pacify towna and villages supporting any resistance fighters. It is advisible to use the criminal element from US prisons to staff these Special Reaction Groups. This way we give our criminals a way of returning to society and perhaps becoming the backbone of the collonizing community.jraf Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui. Muff #3275 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kmcguffee 0 #107 November 13, 2002 QuoteIf you really want to get down to it, wouldn't the only response that could truly be called moral by a predominantly Christian nation be to turn the other cheek? Not to get in a religious debate (and this is all I will say on the subject) but, you seem to have a misunderstanding of the "turn the other cheek" lesson given by Jesus in the Bible. It does not take away a nation's right to self defense. "Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jdhill 0 #108 November 13, 2002 Quotewe start letting the CIA make judgment calls about who should be killed or not, If you think the CIA is making these decisions by themselves or in a vacuum, and without the nod from someone else, you've been watching too many spy movies. That's not how the intel/defense community works. JoshAll that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #109 November 13, 2002 QuoteDo you have a chart you could provide that details the worth of human life based on nationality? Actually.....by using nuclear weapons to end WWII didn't we save lives. Estimates of US casualties were anywhere from 500,000 to 1M. That's just US casualties. How many Japanese would have died. A lot more than that I can assure you. As it was we ended WWII at a cost of 350,000 I think was the number Bill gave. Wasn't that the most MORAL decision we could have made? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #110 November 13, 2002 QuoteI think killing people for the sake of increasing our prosperity and living area is a neccessity. You're kidding...right? God, I hope you are kidding. PS. You guys know that technically you are not at war...right. No war has been declared. The war against terrorism has the same standing as the war against drugs or the war against illileracy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jdhill 0 #111 November 13, 2002 QuotePS. You guys know that technically you are not at war...right. No war has been declared. The war against terrorism has the same standing as the war against drugs or the war against illileracy. Vietnam, Korea, the Gulf War... all not declared "wars"... There has, however, been a congressional authorization for operations in the "War on Terror". The syntax may be different but the execution is the same. JoshAll that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jraf 0 #112 November 13, 2002 No I am not kidding. There is nothing wrong with it. We need our living space and our resources. We should mercylessly crush those who oppose us! Destiny has made us a great nation, we should follow it's path!jraf Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui. Muff #3275 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jdhill 0 #113 November 13, 2002 QuoteFrom the Your Heritege thread - 100% Native American - hence my tribal name Mad Giraffe. jraf QuoteWe need our living space and our resources. We should mercylessly crush those who oppose us! Same excuse used by the white man. JoshAll that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #114 November 13, 2002 Quote We should mercylessly crush those who oppose us! Mr Burns: "Yes......we must move on the rebels before the rainy season. There will be one shiny new donkey for the man that brings me the head of the rebel commander." Smithers: "Uuuummm....sir.....we're at the power plant." Mr Burns: "Oooohhh" Jraf......are you German by any chance? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #115 November 13, 2002 Quote100% Native American - hence my tribal name Mad Giraffe. With a last name like Saykiewitz, how are you 100% native American? I won't even discuss your opinions on expanding. It's a free country and you are entitled to your opinions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
txojumps 0 #116 November 13, 2002 Quote"War as an extension of politics" will lead to a lot of US soldiers dying for political reasons, Isn't that what war is.....a difference of political opinion? *************************************** Awright, guys, you don't have one, so don't act like one Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jraf 0 #117 November 13, 2002 Quote Quote100% Native American - hence my tribal name Mad Giraffe. With a last name like Saykiewitz, how are you 100% native American? The same way my tribal brothers have names like Jones, Poitiers or Mueller I won't even discuss your opinions on expanding. It's a free country and you are entitled to your opinions. And we should expand out freedoms and our way of life to new territories assymilating the worthy and erradicating the undesireable elements.jraf Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui. Muff #3275 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #118 November 13, 2002 Jraf........stop insiting riots with old quotes!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #119 November 13, 2002 Either you're playing with us or I have to say that you are one sick puppy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #120 November 13, 2002 Quote Either you're playing with us or I have to say that you are one sick puppy Do some reading.......it'll help. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #121 November 13, 2002 Let me guess....Mein Kampf? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #122 November 13, 2002 You are on the right track Kev....-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jraf 0 #123 November 13, 2002 Wrong answer but not far. History Quiz: 1. When and where was Mein Kampf written 2. Who helped write it (presumed author by the way) 3. Where and when did that person die 4. What are the official dates of the beginning and end of WWIIjraf Me Jungleman! Me have large Babalui. Muff #3275 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #124 November 13, 2002 QuoteIf you think the CIA is making these decisions by themselves or in a vacuum, and without the nod from someone else, you've been watching too many spy movies. That's not how the intel/defense community works. Well the original article I posted had a quote from an "intelligence official" who said the reason they used the CIA for the op is because they can act autonomously with less beauracracy. Which to me means with less checks and accountability than a standard military op. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
meatmissile 0 #125 November 13, 2002 Quote .... or I have to say that you are one sick puppy. Compliments get you nowhere with the 'Rafster ! -- ZZZzzzz.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)