My boys in action

[Grand Danois]

What you imply is that all of them are talibans.

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.

It should be quite clear now that I do not.

Not all mil operations are perfect, just like police operations.

I think, however, you are equating the unintended death with deliberate murder. The death from a car accident with murder one.

 

[dioditto]

It should be quite clear now that I do not.

Not all mil operations are perfect, just like police operations.

I think, however, you are equating the unintended death with deliberate murder. The death from a car accident with murder one.

This is not car accident, where it can be unintentional. The military takes into account the intended effect of collateral damage however undesirable as acceptable. The act of considering to take a life knowing before hand is premediatated, is murder one.
On the other hand, Homicide is the act of one human killing another regardless of whether it was legal, intentional or premeditated.

 

[Aussie Digger]

This is not car accident, where it can be unintentional. The military takes into account the intended effect of collateral damage however undesirable as acceptable. The act of considering to take a life knowing before hand is premediatated, is murder one.
On the other hand, Homicide is the act of one human killing another regardless of whether it was legal, intentional or premeditated.

I think you are getting your definitions confused with reality their Dio. Both murder and Homicide mean the same thing and are the legal definition of "unlawful killing". They are irrelevent to a military scenario as conducting military operations against another Country transcends petty legal arguments over definition.

It is only uninformed or deliberately misleading media who use such terms to describe a genuine military operation.

Anyway, this argument is going nowhere (like so many lately) and the thread was opened in relation to a particular US Navy Super Hornet unit. Please re-direct any further discussion BACK to the thread topic, or unfortunately yet another thread will be closed.

Cheers

AD.

 

[Rich]

"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?

Lecturing now? "You" are the one who introduced bombing civilians into the thread, "maybe you should go back and actually read the thing". While your at it, and during your spasm of holier then thou'ness, why dont you look up some of the videos made by these animals of them beheading innocent civilians while they plead for their lives , or, the pictures of all the little limbs and body parts after one of their "targeted" bombings of woman and kids. I find it....."funny" how the horrible crimes of these terrorists just dont register with people like you. Well they register with me, hence, my statements that we should murder everyone of them.

While talking about "injustice" Ive had criminals try and kill me a number of times. I forget the number of times Ive been shot at. And regarding your scenario again you are wondering into fantasy. Because nobody in this thread, except you, ever mentioned bombing civilians.

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.

Now your a psychologist? This statement further proves how your sliding into the irrational. Besides I avoid flame wars here.

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.

"Reverence" for terrorists?:lol3 Spoken like a man who has no experience with dangerous criminals.

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.

What do Saddams WMDs have to do with it? You screeching Liberals always bring up Saddams WMDs anytime your talking about the war on terror dont you?

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.

Yeah...........I know. I'm a military veteran my ownself. So spare me the condescension about what these weapons can do. Nothing makes me happier then when we kill the enemy ensuring the safety of our boys and our allies. Liberals, and the anti-military crowd, never seem to have any empathy or concern for the safety of our own. Strange isnt it how they expend so much energy crowing about the prisons we keep these criminals in, the way we fight them...ect, and never express concern for our own boys? Isn't it strange? And disgusting too, that anyone would think for a minute that we shouldn't use air power or other advanced strike packages to kill the enemy and keep our own safe!

Course these types, like who, have never worn a uniform and never had anyone trying to kill them. As to the rest of this thread now were arguing semantics. If it does make some of you feel better instead of saying, "Im glad when our boys kills the enemy", I'll say instead, "Im glad when our boys neutralize the enemy".:sick Your not a lawyer are you Dio?

Now I'll leave this thread before it descends further. I cant have a reasonable discussion with someone whos so smart he says I said things I didnt, and so smart that he knows what I meant, when saying the things I didnt. Dioditto is just not making sense.

 

[Retired-Oz]

War

I feel for the innocents adversely affected in any war. But it might be appropriate at this time to remember who set the rules of engagement. The terrorists made it quite clear with the 9/11 attack that they have little regard for innocents. To the best of my knowledge only their side has deliberately targeted an area of no military value.
The fact that the target in question happened to be the hub of the western world left the US and the rest of us with no choice but to engage this enemy. Make no mistake; this war has to be fought to its conclusion, and the sooner governments realize this and commit the necessary forces, the sooner it will be over. All care should be taken to avoid civilian casualties, but not at the expense of the lives of coalition forces.
It’s the compliant western media that’s responsible for attempting to make the US and coalition forces look like the bad guys and it’s the terrorist leadership that deliberately use their own civilians as human shields.

 

[Capt. Picard]

I find it quite interesting here that when a topic strays off "defence" into politics that if the administrators believe that their political views are being supported then the discussion is allowed to continue. If not then it is stopped. I sugest that since this topic strayed off the forum rules on the first page then instead of pushing a certain political line the administrators lock the thread.

 

[webmaster]

Picard, what is the administrator's position on this topic? Or even the moderators? And where (which post) was the position expressed in?

 

[dioditto]

Lecturing now? "You" are the one who introduced bombing civilians into the thread, "maybe you should go back and actually read the thing". While your at it, and during your spasm of holier then thou'ness, why dont you look up some of the videos made by these animals of them beheading innocent civilians while they plead for their lives , or, the pictures of all the little limbs and body parts after one of their "targeted" bombings of woman and kids. I find it....."funny" how the horrible crimes of these terrorists just dont register with people like you. Well they register with me, hence, my statements that we should murder everyone of them.

You should listen to yourself Rich, you are no different than those terrorists you despised so much, switching your name with Osama Bin Ladin, and you sound just as hateful and twisted as him.

"Reverence" for terrorists?:lol3 Spoken like a man who has no experience with dangerous criminals.

Perhaps, it is exactly this extreme hateful attitude that cause the Abu Ghraib, or Haditha massacre. In the frontline of this war, the insurgents are not easy to differentiate from the enemies, and since you shows little respect to even enemy combatants, To you, every Iraqi/afganistani would look like "THEM" since insurgents is mixed into it. So when emotion runs high in stressful condition (eg, when your convoy got hit) and the enemies looks like civilians and the civilians looks like enemies, you would "murder every last one of them" - and bingo, another mass murderer in the making.



While talking about "injustice" Ive had criminals try and kill me a number of times. I forget the number of times Ive been shot at. And regarding your scenario again you are wondering into fantasy. Because nobody in this thread, except you, ever mentioned bombing civilians.


Oh, really, working at the local 7-11 convenient store ?? How's that comparable to what I just mention before?? Here you have a clear target, the aggressor INFRONT of you, with the offending weapon. That clearly is different to an enemy that is NOT infront of you, but among a group of suspects (including A LARGE percentage of innocent people).

And nobody is mentioning doesn't mean the reality isn't happening. I do not believe ALL the bombs drops on target in afganistan, iraq have ZERO civilian casualties. Quite contrary, if US can't even get reliable intelligence where EXACTLY Bin Ladin is, or to prevent the 911, or whether Saddam have WMD, I highly doubt US knows where the insurgents are among the civilians. Let's just put it this way, In Iraq or Afganistan, when it is

SO DANGEROUS

(as reported) to even slow down on street let along to verify or interview people without getting hit, how do you know the house ahead is habouring insurgent? and how do you know how many civilians are in there? The military simply assumed in these cases, and since the dead (majority of them innocent) don't talk, it is acceptable behavior.

What do Saddams WMDs have to do with it? You screeching Liberals always bring up Saddams WMDs anytime your talking about the war on terror dont you?

Everything. what I talked about in previous paragraph. If you have no intelligence (no pun intended ) and got into a war you are not suppose to fight, you become the terrorist. US have not been attacked by Iraq before 911 EVER. Now, US is the aggressor in this illegal war.




Yeah...........I know. I'm a military veteran my ownself. So spare me the condescension about what these weapons can do.


Oh really? I found the chicken hawks love to pretend they are the real deal.

Course these types, like who, have never worn a uniform and never had anyone trying to kill them. As to the rest of this thread now were arguing semantics. If it does make some of you feel better instead of saying, "Im glad when our boys kills the enemy", I'll say instead, "Im glad when our boys neutralize the enemy".:sick Your not a lawyer are you Dio?

This is not semantics we are talking about here. There are real innocent human lives lost here right this minute, in a country US have no business to be in. Enemies are not neutralised, but instead, populations are enraged and terroriost are multiplied. If you think we are safe, think again.

Mod edit. Enough. Apparently the warnings were a bit too subtle. Thread's closed. Now everyone can stop calling me a hypocrite... AD.