My boys in action

[Big-E]

I don't normally post our news links but if anyone missed it, my students kicked some butt! Go Big-E and goooooo SideWinders! :usa

http://www.defencetalk.com/news/pub...y_Taliban_Targets_in_Afghanistan_20060906.php

 

[Wooki]

I don't normally post our news links but if anyone missed it, my students kicked some butt! Go Big-E and goooooo SideWinders! :usa

http://www.defencetalk.com/news/pub...y_Taliban_Targets_in_Afghanistan_20060906.php

Good to see. Not that I am a hate filled person, but good egg all the same.

So when is the Big 'E' going to be retired big-e? Whats the scuttlebut? Sidewinders? Were they an F-14 outfit at one stage, or has it always been hornets?

cheers

W

 

[kams]

Good show Big-E, Bring it on

 

[Big-E]

Good to see. Not that I am a hate filled person, but good egg all the same.

So when is the Big 'E' going to be retired big-e? Whats the scuttlebut? Sidewinders? Were they an F-14 outfit at one stage, or has it always been hornets?

cheers

W

Thank guys! I just got emails back from the flight saying it was 100% kill ratio. All that bombing practice payed off.

Enterprise is due for decom in 2014. The Sidewinders have been in the Hornet as long as I can remember which was well into the days of the Tomcats.

 

[Rich]

Good to see. Not that I am a hate filled person, but good egg all the same.

So when is the Big 'E' going to be retired big-e? Whats the scuttlebut? Sidewinders? Were they an F-14 outfit at one stage, or has it always been hornets?

cheers

W

I'm fairly "hate-filled" when it comes to terrorists. As far as I'm concerned the only good one is a dead one! And its good to see our boys getting some good shooting in.:finger I hope we murder everyone of them!

 

[Archer]

I agree.

 

[stryker NZ]

so Big E this might sound like a stupid question and all but whats it like to fly the Hornet i always wanted to join the airforce (although to be able to fly what i want ill probably have to shift to Aussie) and fly fighter aircraft, is it as great as they say it is.

 

[Big-E]

so Big E this might sound like a stupid question and all but whats it like to fly the Hornet i always wanted to join the airforce (although to be able to fly what i want ill probably have to shift to Aussie) and fly fighter aircraft, is it as great as they say it is.

Let me just say I would do it for free.

 

[chargerRT]

salute to your boys Big E.good hunting,and hope they all make it home safe'n'sound

 

[RubiconNZ]

Ditto

salute to your boys Big E.good hunting,and hope they all make it home safe'n'sound

Here Here!

 

[dioditto]

I'm fairly "hate-filled" when it comes to terrorists. As far as I'm concerned the only good one is a dead one! And its good to see our boys getting some good shooting in.:finger I hope we murder everyone of them!

I am just curious, if the local Counter-Terrorist Unit just discovered your neighbour is the head of Al-Quada in USA, and decided to drop a 500 pound "precision guided bomb" into his house to make sure he is dead, that happen to blow up the whole neighbourhood, killing ALL YOUR FAMILIES nearby who are innocent bystanders.
Now, the authority gave no compensation and apologies, would you still be smiling and clapping for job well done?

 

[Rich]

I am just curious, if the local Counter-Terrorist Unit just discovered your neighbour is the head of Al-Quada in USA, and decided to drop a 500 pound "precision guided bomb" into his house to make sure he is dead, that happen to blow up the whole neighbourhood, killing ALL YOUR FAMILIES nearby who are innocent bystanders.
Now, the authority gave no compensation and apologies, would you still be smiling and clapping for job well done?

This could descend into a flame here so I'm just going to say this and leave. First off your scenerio exists only in fantasy. The US Military cannot operate in the US due to Posse Comitatus. Second we make every effort to limit civilians casualties, unlike our enemies, and I resent your irrational comparison. And when did I say we shoul drop 500 lb bombs on civilians anyway?

Third, and most of all, people like you so easily believe news reports as long as such reports affirm your own personal beliefs and Politcal views. And we do compensate the families of victims. usually there is a long line of them even tho no body can be produced.

Lastly were at war and my main concerns is with our own boys coming home alive. But your twisting my words and not making much sense. Besides I have to go to work, which involves risking my own rear end for people. So I'm done with this thread.

 

[dioditto]

This could descend into a flame here so I'm just going to say this and leave. First off your scenerio exists only in fantasy. The US Military cannot operate in the US due to Posse Comitatus. Second we make every effort to limit civilians casualties, unlike our enemies, and I resent your irrational comparison. And when did I say we shoul drop 500 lb bombs on civilians anyway?

I am refering to your wording of :

"I'm fairly "hate-filled" when it comes to terrorists. As far as I'm concerned the only good one is a dead one! And its good to see our boys getting some good shooting in. I hope we murder everyone of them!"

"good shooting".. good riddance. There is never good shooting when it comes to dropping bombs in civilian area. I find it funny people like you seems to lack any empathy for others, I merely presents a scenerio to put yourself in the other people's shoe, and you got mighty tick off. Perhaps you are afraid such injustice would be done to you?

Third, and most of all, people like you so easily believe news reports as long as such reports affirm your own personal beliefs and Politcal views. And we do compensate the families of victims. usually there is a long line of them even tho no body can be produced.

Oh, so, I am the one that's easily believe the news?.. Hah, that's rich...(pun not intended LOL) ..What is to believe? Saddam have weapon of mass destruction? LOL. I think you are talking about yourself... if you can believe going to war past any rational reasonings, credible intelligence of threat that exist, I think you are deluding yourself.

As for compensating the families of victims, oh... such cynicism when it comes time to give money to the victim. There is never enough money put to bombs to kill or maim innocents, but never have any money to pay out the victims?... let's put it in previous scenerio, now, your family who just got vapourised by the bomb (maybe with a few that survive but now permanently maimed and in excruciating pain, gets $5000 dollars each, would that make you happy now??) Really, put yourself in other's shoe. I am just amazed at the number of people who lacks empathy for other people.

Lastly were at war and my main concerns is with our own boys coming home alive. But your twisting my words and not making much sense. Besides I have to go to work, which involves risking my own rear end for people. So I'm done with this thread.

This "I am right, your are wrong, I am done with this thread!" attitude just tells me you are a selfish person who is not going to risk your neck out for anyone else. So, stop lying to yourself.


Have some reverence for the dead. Whether it is our own, the innocent, or even the enemy. This prevalent attitudes of reveling in the thought of killing and maiming is really just sickening.




...

 

[Grand Danois]

I am just curious, if the local Counter-Terrorist Unit just discovered your neighbour is the head of Al-Quada in USA, and decided to drop a 500 pound "precision guided bomb" into his house to make sure he is dead, that happen to blow up the whole neighbourhood, killing ALL YOUR FAMILIES nearby who are innocent bystanders.
Now, the authority gave no compensation and apologies, would you still be smiling and clapping for job well done?

The basic answer is, that in the US you would use the police and arrest the terrorist. You would also do that in Europe. And in Egypt, India and in Pakistan where possible.

If the police is too light or does not have a presence ie weak central government like in Afghanistan and the terrorists are heavily armed and many in number, then military options are needed. The military use bombs.

No joy should be taken from killing humans beings. Need I say that ?

Every time people die in Afghanistan, the taliban claims they were innocent.

Denmark has used its F-16's in Afghanistan in 2003. They dropped bombs which killed people. Taliban claimed they were innocent families out picking berries or whatever.

Some people seized upon this in order to criminalize the use of military force. Well, it turned out they had felled bombs in order to protect convoys and patrols. The targets hit were high in the mountains, in the middle of nowhere, males, armed to the teeth, in ambush positions.

And, sigh, we're getting into another one, as Danish forces were involved in heavy infantry fighting around Musa Qala and a lot of Taliban died. Taliban claimed they were all civies and the far left has seized upon it (Note that I am describing the situation in Denmark, not commenting on any posters political stance).

How is Operation MEDUSA going. Taliban has claimed no (not a single) Taliban fighters have died so far. I guess the Brits, the Dutch and Canadians have killed several hundred innocent civilians.

So this is the credibility of the Taliban statements. Oh, didn't they recently claim to have shot down a Nimrod MR2? Basically, they don't even have to know what happened, they just say it anyway in order to compromise the effort done in Afghanistan. This to reinforce the sense of injustice done by West and legitimize their methods.

If compensations are handed out, why not then get in line if you're dirt poor? Taliban even exert pressure on the population to make such claims, for obvious reasons.

 

[dioditto]

The basic answer is, that in the US you would use the police and arrest the terrorist. You would also do that in Europe. And in Egypt, India and in Pakistan where possible.

If the police is too light or does not have a presence ie weak central government like in Afghanistan and the terrorists are heavily armed and many in number, then military options are needed. The military use bombs.

No joy should be taken from killing humans beings. Need I say that ?

Every time people die in Afghanistan, the taliban claims they were innocent.

Denmark has used its F-16's in Afghanistan in 2003. They dropped bombs which killed people. Taliban claimed they were innocent families out picking berries or whatever.

Some people seized upon this in order to criminalize the use of military force. Well, it turned out they had felled bombs in order to protect convoys and patrols. The targets hit were high in the mountains, in the middle of nowhere, males, armed to the teeth, in ambush positions.

And, sigh, we're getting into another one, as Danish forces were involved in heavy infantry fighting around Musa Qala and a lot of Taliban died. Taliban claimed they were all civies and the far left has seized upon it (Note that I am describing the situation in Denmark, not commenting on any posters political stance).

How is Operation MEDUSA going. Taliban has claimed no (not a single) Taliban fighters have died so far. I guess the Brits, the Dutch and Canadians have killed several hundred innocent civilians.

So this is the credibility of the Taliban statements. Oh, didn't they recently claim to have shot down a Nimrod MR2? Basically, they don't even have to know what happened, they just say it anyway in order to compromise the effort done in Afghanistan. This to reinforce the sense of injustice done by West and legitimize their methods.

If compensations are handed out, why not then get in line if you're dirt poor? Taliban even exert pressure on the population to make such claims, for obvious reasons.

I am not saying the scenerio I described was correct one, ofcourse I know the standard procedures in dealing with terrorist in our own homeland. I am merely saying, provided a scenerio for people like Rich to understand that, even with precision strike weaponeries, there are collateral damages, and YOU should not revel in such savagery nor condon it.

 

[Grand Danois]

I am not saying the scenerio I described was correct one, ofcourse I know the standard procedures in dealing with terrorist in our own homeland. I am merely saying, provided a scenerio for people like Rich to understand that, even with precision strike weaponeries, there are collateral damages, and YOU should not revel in such savagery nor condon it.

I am not revelling in savagery, but I am afraid I under certain circumstances will have to condone the use of military force.

 

[dioditto]

No joy should be taken from killing humans beings. Need I say that ?

Every time people die in Afghanistan, the taliban claims they were innocent.

Denmark has used its F-16's in Afghanistan in 2003. They dropped bombs which killed people. Taliban claimed they were innocent families out picking berries or whatever.


If compensations are handed out, why not then get in line if you're dirt poor? Taliban even exert pressure on the population to make such claims, for obvious reasons.

Also, I do not deny the fact that there are bogus claims of innocents been targeted, BUT, that does not give you the right to categorically claiming ALL military targets are without any collaterial damage. By saying ALL of the victims are cheating the systems, I think is a low blow and a disrespect to the innocent lives lost. It is the same as you would claim that all the 3000 victims of 911 are all bogus and may not even exist.

 

[Grand Danois]

Also, I do not deny the fact that there are bogus claims of innocents been targeted, BUT, that does not give you the right to categorically claiming ALL military targets are without any collaterial damage. By saying ALL of the victims are cheating the systems, I think is a low blow and a disrespect to the innocent lives lost. It is the same as you would claim that all the 3000 victims of 911 are all bogus and may not even exist.

I did not say that, did I? What I did say was

1) why different solutions are used in different environments. Police vs military.

2) that Taliban claims are hugely inflated. This does not exclude innocents getting killed.

The targetting in Afghanistan is only effective when hitting military targets. Otherwise it puts the innocents off.

I suggest we deal with one context at a time. Referring to Iraq or 9/11 is out of context and framework, and a lateral displacement of discourse. However, please elaborate. You consider WTC a legitimate military target?

 

[Sea Toby]

Back to the rules of engagement. Even the police under the rules of engagement eventually will have to choose whether to take the terrorist hostage takers out, even at the risk of losing civilian innocent lives. I would suspect any military rules of engagement would have less strings, including the use of air strike. And you'll notice that these rules of engagement reach far beyond any one nation, just about EVERY nation WILL take out a hostage taker despite the risk of losing civilian lives: police or military.

And in every case, the innocent civilian lives can be spared by the terrorist hostage takers discarding their arms. Its so simple, but most terrorist hostage takers refuse this peaceful action. Instead, most of the time they shoot hostages one at a time in an attempt to get their uncompromising way.

 

[dioditto]

I did not say that, did I? What I did say was

1) why different solutions are used in different environments. Police vs military.

2) that Taliban claims are hugely inflated. This does not exclude innocents getting killed.

The targetting in Afghanistan is only effective when hitting military targets. Otherwise it puts the innocents off.

I suggest we deal with one context at a time. Referring to Iraq or 9/11 is out of context and framework, and a lateral displacement of discourse. However, please elaborate. You consider WTC a legitimate military target?

Every time people die in Afghanistan, the taliban claims they were innocent.

What you imply is that all of them are talibans.

However, please elaborate. You consider WTC a legitimate military target?

No, quite contrary, I never condon the use of force against civilians and that is the central point of my argument, YOU, on the other hand seems to be the one that support such idea, that's why you have the inclination to claim all the victims in afganistan are talibans, and are thus, all fair targets.