warpus
In pork I trust
You're describing the horrors of war and what they can do to soldiers.
That's a problem, but it doesn't at all relate to most of the problems with the U.S. that I was talking about.
A stain on US history...
- Thread starter bathsheba666
- Start date
You're describing the horrors of war and what they can do to soldiers.
That's a problem, but it doesn't at all relate to most of the problems with the U.S. that I was talking about.
Farm Boy
run boy run
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 26,612
I gave you a clear cut example and hoped you would extrapolate. I think the concept applies pretty significantly to many of the problems my country faces right now. You think being reviled and empowered doesn't take a toll on police officers in bad neighborhoods? You don't think that tension brings to power exactly the sort of people we shouldn't want as cops? Do you think having a country build a security apparatus intended to be capable of burning the world a dozen times over doesn't cost more than cash? It makes new problems and complicates the old ones all at the same time.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
I would use a different term. Terrorism is done in plain view, because the purpose is to terrorize. Media attention is vital. People disappearing does not have the same impact as a beheading.
J
MWWS has quite the impact.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
The purpose of terrorism is to terrorize.
Lenin
Not the stereotypical Muslims. The ones that attack children then hide in schools. The ones that behead journalists on TV. The ones that threaten to cut off parts of a fellow muslim's body if they don't join the army or a paramilitary group. It is unnecessary to stereotype. We have plenty of specifics. Notice that the constant is enforcing acquiecence or obedience with fear.
If you want an American example, using IRS audits for the same purpose. One of the hypocrisies here is that the supposed transparency is not of the current administration, but an attack on a previous one. An attack so common as to be a stereotype.
J
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
Yeah but these guys IRS Audits!
classical_hero
In whom I trust
If you are in a war situation and you fire from civilians position, you are they ones who have put civilians at risk of being fired upon because you put them in harms way. But it seems such basic knowledge of international law is missing from so many people.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
This is kind of irrelevant:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/11/jihadi-attacks-killed-more-than-5000-people-in-november-the-vast-majority-of-them-muslims
Interesting, though.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/11/jihadi-attacks-killed-more-than-5000-people-in-november-the-vast-majority-of-them-muslims
Interesting, though.
or phrases. Like using "extraordinary rendition" to take "detainees" to "black sites" where they experience "enhanced interrogation techniques".
I've always wondered what the exact line is between "enhanced interrogation technique" and "method of torture". One doesn't leave visible scars? I mean, the difference between "waterboarding" and "Chinese water torture" seems to be that one takes longer than the other and requires more water.
Gary Childress
Student for and of life
Hmm. But how do all those civilian casualties "suggest a transformation from terrorists to more conventional forces"? Is this to say that they are killing less civilians? I don't follow.
James Stuart
King
It's poorly worded.
The author is trying to say that ISIL and Boko Haram have crossed the line from non-state actors to states-in-being. They control territory, tax the populace, enact laws, control conventional military forces, have functioning economies and legal systems, etc., in the same manner as a state would. This is not unheard of: the Tamil Tigers, for example, were in this category for years. This state-in-being status has enabled them to switch over from guerilla and terrorist activities to full-blown conventional warfare. In ISIL's case, this is clearly true. I don't know about Boko Haram.
Using casualty counts to make this claim also doesn't make a lick of sense; I have no idea why the author would do that. It almost looks as if a sentence in between has been edited out,
I'm not sure what this again has to with torture, but if you attack an urban area, the people firing back are breaking international law? Interesting argument, I'm sure.
I will point out how we've been told for the last 13 years that Al Qaeda has secret death camps around the world where they kidnap hostages, torture and kill them. And not only are we told it's justified to hit them with drone strikes in other countries, violating national sovereignty--but the civilian casualties in these same countries we are not even at war with are unfortunate but necessary collateral damage.
And then you do the very same bloody thing, set up the very same camps, but you slap a bald eagle emblem on it, and suddenly you start fishing for excuses not to even call it terrorism at all.
And then you do the very same bloody thing, set up the very same camps, but you slap a bald eagle emblem on it, and suddenly you start fishing for excuses not to even call it terrorism at all.
Gary Childress
Student for and of life
Are you saying, then, that there are no such things as civilians and that therefore no one is breaking international law?
Gary Childress
Student for and of life
I don't remember ever hearing of "secret death camps" of Al Qaida. No one has been telling me that for 13 years. I know I've heard of plenty of cases of them kidnapping hostages and torturing and killing them, though.
Farm Boy
run boy run
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 26,612
While we definitely have our share of people stateside with double standards could we get some more assists in closing Gitmo? Obama's been trying to for 6 years now. Idjits in Congress won't let him ship detainees stateside, despite places like my home state, God bless their horribly budgeting souls, offering to house them. There was a quick burst of Western nations that helped with the easier cases when Obama came into office, but that's mostly dried up(thank you Uruguay, btw). Yes, we've got plenty of problems. Yes, we've caused lots of them. But if people are going to stand and throw rocks, that's cool, but if the world would indeed be better if we could do something like close Gitmo could we have some ya'know, help?
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
See? Doesn't give 2 flying farts about them. All he cares about is who to blame. And since he's incapable of blaming Israel, they can all get blown up for all he cares. It's all the Palestinians fault anyway. In fact I suspect the more blame he can pile on the Palestinians, the better, so kill away Israeli Soldiers. You've got people cheering for you.
