Surveillance/Attack Drones... Coming to an area near you. Wonderful world.

And what about afterwards? When the end at which we are at clearly did not justify the means. What did they tell them would happen? What actually happened?

If I'd murdered 3,000 people, I'd expect some results. Not just some stupid war, thousands more dead, temporary profits for Halliburton, reductions in defense spending, the rise of China. What exactly was 9/11 for?
 
And what about afterwards? When the end at which we are at clearly did not justify the means. What did they tell them would happen? What actually happened?

If I'd murdered 3,000 people, I'd expect some results. Not just some stupid war, thousands more dead, temporary profits for Halliburton, reductions in defense spending, the rise of China. What exactly was 9/11 for?

I would say that PNAC has come to fruition and then some... beyond their wildest dreams I would imagine. They wanted PNAC and they got it and so did everyone else whether they like it or not.
 
I would say that PNAC has come to fruition and then some... beyond their wildest dreams I would imagine. They wanted PNAC and they got it and so did everyone else whether they like it or not.

What does that mean in practice though, what does PNAC have? Did PNAC want Obama to serve two terms?
 
What does that mean in practice though, what does PNAC have? Did PNAC want Obama to serve two terms?

What it means in practice is that ALL the goals set out in PNAC have been achieved; and more.

Take out some domestic issues and Obama is now virtually indistinguishable from Bush. The two party election system is an illusion of democracy. What we have is a Corporatocracy; the Corporation of the USA and let's face it company law is not designed for use of corporations the size of Sovereign States.
 
What it means in practice is that ALL the goals set out in PNAC have been achieved; and more.

Take out some domestic issues and Obama is now virtually indistinguishable from Bush. The two party election system is an illusion of democracy. What we have is a Corporatocracy; the Corporation of the USA and let's face it company law is not designed for use of corporations the size of Sovereign States.

So PNACs goals were to let corporations rule America, and that's why nobody was too bothered with murdering 3000 people to do that?
 
So PNACs goals were to let corporations rule America, and that's why nobody was too bothered with murdering 3000 people to do that?

Like I said, collateral damage, ends justifying means... yes they would have preferred to achieve the aims of PNAC in another way but as noted 'Section V of Rebuilding America's Defenses, entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", includes the sentence: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor" (51).[14'

External Quote:
In 2010 there were 358 murders involving rifles. Murders involving the use of handguns in the US that same year totaled 6,009, with another 1,939 murders with the firearm type unreported.[SUP][4][/SUP]
External Quote:
Reports of missing persons have increased sixfold in the past 25 years, from roughly 150,000 in 1980 to about 900,000 this year. The increase was driven in part by the country's growing population. But the numbers also indicate that law enforcement treats the cases more seriously now, including those of marginalized citizens.

An astounding 2,300 Americans are reported missing every day, including both adults and children.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war

Politicians make these life and death decisions all the time.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-psychopaths-teach-us-about-how-to-succeed


External Quote:
Traits that are common among psychopathic serial killers—a grandiose sense of self-worth, persuasiveness, superficial charm, ruthlessness, lack of remorse and the manipulation of others—are also shared by politicians and world leaders. Individuals, in other words, running not from the police. But for office. Such a profile allows those who present with these traits to do what they like when they like, completely unfazed by the social, moral or legal consequences of their actions.

If you are born under the right star, for example, and have power over the human mind as the moon over the sea, you might order the genocide of 100,000 Kurds and shuffle to the gallows with such arcane recalcitrance as to elicit, from even your harshest detractors, perverse, unspoken deference.
“Do not be afraid, doctor,” said Saddam Hussein on the scaffold, moments before his execution. “This is for men.”

 
Like I said, collateral damage, ends justifying means... yes they would have preferred to achieve the aims of PNAC in another way but as noted 'Section V of Rebuilding America's Defenses, entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", includes the sentence: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor" (51).[14'

External Quote:
In 2010 there were 358 murders involving rifles. Murders involving the use of handguns in the US that same year totaled 6,009, with another 1,939 murders with the firearm type unreported.[SUP][4][/SUP]
External Quote:
Reports of missing persons have increased sixfold in the past 25 years, from roughly 150,000 in 1980 to about 900,000 this year. The increase was driven in part by the country's growing population. But the numbers also indicate that law enforcement treats the cases more seriously now, including those of marginalized citizens.

An astounding 2,300 Americans are reported missing every day, including both adults and children.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war

Politicians make these life and death decisions all the time.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-psychopaths-teach-us-about-how-to-succeed


External Quote:
Traits that are common among psychopathic serial killers—a grandiose sense of self-worth, persuasiveness, superficial charm, ruthlessness, lack of remorse and the manipulation of others—are also shared by politicians and world leaders. Individuals, in other words, running not from the police. But for office. Such a profile allows those who present with these traits to do what they like when they like, completely unfazed by the social, moral or legal consequences of their actions.

If you are born under the right star, for example, and have power over the human mind as the moon over the sea, you might order the genocide of 100,000 Kurds and shuffle to the gallows with such arcane recalcitrance as to elicit, from even your harshest detractors, perverse, unspoken deference.
“Do not be afraid, doctor,” said Saddam Hussein on the scaffold, moments before his execution. “This is for men.”


So what? This is not metaphilosophy or metadebate but metabunk.org. Is there any proof anyone is doing these things?
 
This is the mentality of some of these CEOs. You probably know it well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis

External Quote:
The California electricity crisis, also known as the Western U.S. Energy Crisis of 2000 and 2001, was a situation in which California had a shortage of electricity caused by market manipulations, illegal[SUP][citation needed][/SUP] shutdowns of pipelines by Texas energy consortiums, and capped retail electricity prices.[SUP][5][/SUP] The state suffered from multiple large-scale blackouts, one of the state's largest energy companies collapsed, and the economic fall-out greatly harmed Governor Gray Davis's standing.
Drought, delays in approval of new power plants,[SUP][6][/SUP] and market manipulation decreased supply. This caused 800% increase in wholesale prices from April 2000 to December 2000.[SUP][7][/SUP] In addition, rolling blackouts adversely affected many businesses dependent upon a reliable supply of electricity, and inconvenienced a large number of retail consumers.
California had an installed generating capacity of 45GW. At the time of the blackouts, demand was 28GW. A demand supply gap was created by energy companies, mainly Enron, to create an artificial shortage. Energy traders took power plants offline for maintenance in days of peak demand to increase the price.[SUP][8][/SUP][SUP][9][/SUP] Traders were thus able to sell power at premium prices, sometimes up to a factor of 20 times its normal value. Because the state government had a cap on retail electricity charges, this market manipulation squeezed the industry's revenue margins, causing the bankruptcy of Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and near bankruptcy of Southern California Edison in early 2001.[SUP][10][/SUP]

External Quote:
One of the energy wholesalers that became notorious for "gaming the market" and reaping huge speculative profits was Enron Corporation. Enron CEO Kenneth Lay mocked the efforts by the California State government to thwart the practices of the energy wholesalers, saying, "In the final analysis, it doesn't matter what you crazy people in California do, because I got smart guys who can always figure out how to make money." The original statement was made in a phone conversation between David Freeman (Chairman of the California Power Authority) and Kenneth Lay (CEO of Enron) in 2000, according to the statements made by Freeman to the Senate Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs, Foreign Commerce and Tourism in April[SUP][22][/SUP] and May 2002.[SUP][23][/SUP]
External Quote:
As the FERC report concluded, market manipulation was only possible as a result of the complex market design produced by the process of partial deregulation. Manipulation strategies were known to energy traders under names such as "Fat Boy", "Death Star", "Forney Perpetual Loop", "Ricochet", "Ping Pong", "Black Widow", "Big Foot", "Red Congo", "Cong Catcher" and "Get Shorty".[SUP][13][/SUP] Some of these have been extensively investigated and described in reports
External Quote:
Vice President Dick Cheney was appointed in January, 2001 to head the National Energy Development Task Force. In the Spring of that year, officials of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power met with the Task Force, asking for price controls to protect consumers. The Task Force refused, and insisted that deregulation must remain in place
 
Collateral damage to Americans, sure. Drone strikes very often employ a 'double-tap' policy however; in which, after striking a target, they circle back and strike it again a few moments later, both to confirm the kill and vaporize any surrounding 'militants'. As good an advertising campaign as they've conducted convincing Americans the newer bombs and missiles are brilliant entities capable of avoiding civilian casualties, it doesn't change the fact that they result in rather massive explosions. Inherently civilians are bound to get caught in these massive explosions, and they very frequently do. With the double-tap policy, it became somewhat common for civilians who were simply trying to collect bodies/the injured to be killed in the second strike, and so when drone strikes occur in a civilian-populated area now, the wounded and dying are frequently left to suffer alone until the community can be certain the drone isn't coming back. Could you imagine living in such horror?


While certainly removing the danger to American soldiers, the risk of killing innocent civilians is likewise much less with drone strikes than any other form of contemporary warfare. An important thing to note is that the largest cause of innocent causalities in recent years is not ISAF but the Taliban: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/09/afghanistan-insurgents-civilian-victims


And not only that, not content with gunning down people with machine gun fire from helicopters, (who are obviously unarmed and wandering around), they then gun down anyone who who comes to try and help and take the injured to hospital, all the time whooping it up.


No wonder Bradley Manning was so sickened by it he had to whistle blow. Instead of being prosecuted he should get a medal. It just shows how systemic all this is.


Those who instigate this, (and it comes from the top), should be prosecuted for war crimes.


Subhuman, mercenary, profiteering politicians and corporations behind this


That's a bit sensationalist. There's actually quite a bit of oversight that goes into giving the go-ahead to fire on anyone over there. I've spoken with many who served in the country who were frustrated by their inability to appropriately deal with people shooting at them because it was unclear if there were civilians with the people shooting at them.


If it comes from the (hazily defined) top, then why do they bother to let any war crimes come to light especially when the whistle is blown from within? Take the Maywand district murders for example, why wouldn't the chain of command have just looked the other way without escalating to a court martial? There are quite functional channels for whistleblowing(FWAC) and there is accountability, believe it or not. I think it's important to keep some perspective here as well, contrast what a military in the US's position could be doing (nuke+pave the region) to what they are doing(billions of taxpayer dollars in humanitarian aid, dustoff crews).

If you can point out to me where anyone has been brought to justice for war crimes revealed as a result of Manning's leak, I'd love to see it. For the time being I'll judge his motivations based off of his chat transcripts with Adrian Lamo which imply a different motive for the leak.


Oxymoron said:
I forgot to say, it really shoots some massive holes in the oft quoted false meme, "If there is a conspiracy, where are all the whistlblowers, they would be coming out the woodwork in droves".


No they don't... they keep their heads down and their mouths shut apart from extremely rare instances, 1) because they are conditioned to carry out these things and see nothing wrong in it as it is sanctioned and 2) they know the consequences.


Several people have stepped forward and blown the whistle on the NSA in recent years. It's a shame the Espionage act has been used against some of them, but they aren't keeping their heads down by any means. One of them has had success in defending himself:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_A._Drake


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russ_Tice


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Tamm


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Klein


http://www.whistleblower.org/progra...nsa-whistleblowers-bill-binney-a-j-kirk-wiebe
 
While certainly removing the danger to American soldiers, the risk of killing innocent civilians is likewise much less with drone strikes than any other form of contemporary warfare. An important thing to note is that the largest cause of innocent causalities in recent years is not ISAF but the Taliban: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/mar/09/afghanistan-insurgents-civilian-victims


Yes the civilians get it from both sides... glad I don't live there. I think they are caught in a very difficult position, when people come to your town/village with guns, what are you supposed to do? Cooperate with the military and face reprisals from the Taliban and vice versa.

I think it a reasonable analysis to compare the Taliban with the IRA?

quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by Oxymoron

And not only that, not content with gunning down people with machine gun fire from helicopters, (who are obviously unarmed and wandering around), they then gun down anyone who who comes to try and help and take the injured to hospital, all the time whooping it up.
No wonder Bradley Manning was so sickened by it he had to whistle blow. Instead of being prosecuted he should get a medal. It just shows how systemic all this is.
Those who instigate this, (and it comes from the top), should be prosecuted for war crimes.
Subhuman, mercenary, profiteering politicians and corporations behind this

That's a bit sensationalist. There's actually quite a bit of oversight that goes into giving the go-ahead to fire on anyone over there. I've spoken with many who served in the country who were frustrated by their inability to appropriately deal with people shooting at them because it was unclear if there were civilians with the people shooting at them.

I think what I said was 'unglossed'. According to footage and testimony, 'oversight', appears somewhat ambiguous. Often the facts are far from what is presented in sanitised news.

If it comes from the (hazily defined) top, then why do they bother to let any war crimes come to light especially when the whistle is blown from within? Take the Maywand district murders for example, why wouldn't the chain of command have just looked the other way without escalating to a court martial? There are quite functional channels for whistleblowing(FWAC) and there is accountability, believe it or not. I think it's important to keep some perspective here as well, contrast what a military in the US's position could be doing (nuke+pave the region) to what they are doing(billions of taxpayer dollars in humanitarian aid, dustoff crews).

Thanks, I was unaware of that. It seems there was so much evidence that there was no leeway in this case. Quite some mindset I think to take body parts, pictures and other trophies and make the evidence so available.
External Quote:

  • On May 2, 2010, Mullah Adahdad was attacked with a grenade and fatally shot, allegedly by Gibbs, Morlock, and Winfield.[SUP][16][/SUP][SUP][17][/SUP] Three days after Adahdad was killed members of a Stryker platoon returned to his village. Tribal elders had complained to Army officers that the cleric had been unarmed and that the shooting was a setup. "This guy was shot because he took an aggressive action against coalition forces," Lt. Stefan Moye, the platoon leader, explained to village residents in Qualaday. "We didn’t just [expletive] come over here and just shoot him randomly. And we don’t do that." This conversation was recorded by embedded photojournalist Max Becherer.[SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP]
Photos and trophies of killings

[Broken External Image]:[URL]http://bits.wikimedia.org/static-1.21wmf10/skins/common/images/magnify-clip.png[/URL]
Andrew Holmes poses with the body of Gul Mudin immediately after the boy was killed.


Der Spiegel published three photos of U.S. soldiers posing with the bodies of Afghans they had killed. One of the photos shows Spc. Jeremy Morlock next to one of them. He appears to be smiling and raising the head of a corpse by the hair.[SUP][19][/SUP][SUP][20][/SUP] Other images published later in Rolling Stone include one of two unidentified Afghans cuffed together around a milestone and wearing a cardboard handwritten sign made out of a MRE package box that read "Talibans are Dead". Other photos were taken of mutilated body parts, among them one of a head being maneuvered with a stick.[SUP][21][/SUP] Two videos were also published, one of two possibly armed Afghans on a motorcycle gunned down by members of another battalion of the 5th Stryker brigade called "Motorcycle Kill",[SUP][22][/SUP] and one called "Death Zone" of gunsight footage with jeerings heard in the background showing two Afghans suspected of planting an IED killed in an airstrike with Apocalyptica single "En Vie" as a soundtrack.[SUP][23][/SUP] Senior officials at NATO's International Security Assistance Force in Kabul have compared the pictures published to the images of U.S. soldiers abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib in Iraq.[SUP][24][/SUP]
Gibbs used medical shears to sever several fingers that he kept as a form of human trophy collecting. He gave one of them to Holmes, who kept it dried in a Ziploc bag.[SUP][21][/SUP][SUP][25][/SUP]

As some type of analogy: If someone does good works all week and then at the weekend engages in atrocities, does the fact they do good works all week mitigate the weekend rampage?

If you can point out to me where anyone has been brought to justice for war crimes revealed as a result of Manning's leak, I'd love to see it. For the time being I'll judge his motivations based off of his chat transcripts with Adrian Lamo which imply a different motive for the leak.

There appears to be no action taken with regard to the leaked information but is that not part of the problem? Should the helicopter gunship crew not have faced charges for such callous killings. Yes of course there is mitigation due to stress of circumstances of war but there should not be 'carte blanche' acceptance. What message is sent?


Several people have stepped forward and blown the whistle on the NSA in recent years. It's a shame the Espionage act has been used against some of them, but they aren't keeping their heads down by any means. One of them has had success in defending himself:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_A._Drake


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russ_Tice
Ah the old psychiatric attack again?

External Quote:
Psychiatric reprisals
Whistle-blowers who part ranks with a government agency or major corporation can expect to be depicted as unhinged; it's in the agency's best interests. For example, Russ Tice was punished with psychiatric evaluations that labeled him as "mentally unbalanced" after persisting in his investigations of potentially illegal spying activity at the NSA.[SUP][42][/SUP] As another example, an NYPD veteran who alleged falsified crime statistics in his department was forcibly committed to a mental institution.[SUP][43][/SUP]


Yes there are a few brave enough to whistleblow but the meme is: 'If there were all these conspiracies there would be whistle blowers coming out the woodwork in great numbers; where are they? Ergo the conspiracies are false'.

I am saying the meme is false. I am saying the difficulty and reprisals are such as to make the numbers very low. That fits with the whole context of Black Ops, Compartmentalization, Ideology, Psychological Conditioning and Patriotism/Loyalty conflicts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes the civilians get it from both sides... glad I don't live there. I think they are caught in a very difficult position, when people come to your town/village with guns, what are you supposed to do? Cooperate with the military and face reprisals from the Taliban and vice versa.


I think it a reasonable analysis to compare the Taliban with the IRA?


Perhaps, though ISAF can at least offer protection to civilians and make decisions to mitigate/eliminate the possibility of them being harmed. ISAF allows civilians into their bases during attacks to hide, provides them with food/water/reparations money, calls in medevacs to take them to the best trauma care available anywhere in the world(they do this for wounded enemy combatants as well), among other things. AFAIK the Taliban just threaten to kill civilians if they talk to ISAF.


Oxymoron said:
As some type of analogy: If someone does good works all week and then at the weekend engages in atrocities, does the fact they do good works all week mitigate the weekend rampage?


No, absolutely not. But on the other hand that analogy doesn't really apply to an organization as large as ISAF. The "weekend rampages" take place in isolated pockets. Despite what the film Generation Kill would have you believe, the soldiers often do have morals and compassion for human life.


oxymoron said:
There appears to be no action taken with regard to the leaked information but is that not part of the problem? Should the helicopter gunship crew not have faced charges for such callous killings. Yes of course there is mitigation due to stress of circumstances of war but there should not be 'carte blanche' acceptance. What message is sent?


There was a large investigation into the incident, the military knew about it and was investigating before wikileaks released the video(CENTCOM released a bunch of documents regarding it the day of the Wikileaks release). Personally I think this may have had something to do with why Manning released it, he knew of the controversy around the video but didn't see anything being done. The military's defense was the photographers were with armed individuals(which you can see in the video).


oxymoron said:
Ah the old psychiatric attack again?


External Quote:
Psychiatric reprisals
Whistle-blowers who part ranks with a government agency or major corporation can expect to be depicted as unhinged; it's in the agency's best interests. For example, Russ Tice was punished with psychiatric evaluations that labeled him as "mentally unbalanced" after persisting in his investigations of potentially illegal spying activity at the NSA.[SUP][42][/SUP] As another example, an NYPD veteran who alleged falsified crime statistics in his department was forcibly committed to a mental institution.[SUP][43][/SUP]





Yes there are a few brave enough to whistleblow but the meme is: 'If there were all these conspiracies there would be whistle blowers coming out the woodwork in great numbers; where are they? Ergo the conspiracies are false'.


I am saying the meme is false. I am saying the difficulty and reprisals are such as to make the numbers very low. That fits with the whole context of Black Ops, Compartmentalization, Ideology, Psychological Conditioning and Patriotism/Loyalty conflicts.


I guess we need to establish what exact conspiracy it is we're talking about. Several have come out in regards to warrant-less wiretapping, so I don't think that's a conspiracy because firstly everyone suspected it(even in the "mainstream" press) and secondly the whistle-blowers have pretty much outright confirmed it. Additionally, I don't see anyone supporting it in any fashion.

Anyways, on the subject of drones, I'm still not certain why people are freaking out now as opposed to the last decade where drones very well could have been armed and in our skies. There are plenty of civilian/commercial uses for UAVs that I'd like to see come to fruition, in addition to legal frameworks that regulate their use by government agencies(seems to be on the way in many states).
 
Lets face it simply because they are not American or European (just add a country). It seems that often a foreigners life has less value.

And there you have it, this guy gets it, just like the day of the CT mass killing my co-worker let out a big OMG, then she covered her mouth and gasped and told me what happened, when I told her something similar happened in China today also her reply was "Oh yeah I read that too"......now why not the big gasp and teary eyes? cause they were "just a bunch of chinese". Same thing, now if the Ishmaelites actually fight back now they're terrorists? tell me whats logical about that.
 
If there was a murder on your street, then you're going to be more affected than if there's a murder in another city in another state. Proximity increases empathy.
 
Doubt it, it someone went into a school in Bloody Ol' England and did the same thing, the reaction woulda been totally different by the American public, or if a Drone flew over Canada and killed a confirmed Al Quaida leader but in the process also killed 10 Canadians drinking a pint in their local pub, it's a much bigger deal than if 10 Afghani Civilians get killed in the process. No one can dispute that.
 
And there you have it, this guy gets it, just like the day of the CT mass killing my co-worker let out a big OMG, then she covered her mouth and gasped and told me what happened, when I told her something similar happened in China today also her reply was "Oh yeah I read that too"......now why not the big gasp and teary eyes? cause they were "just a bunch of chinese". Same thing, now if the Ishmaelites actually fight back now they're terrorists? tell me whats logical about that.

CT was closer, and in China no one was killed.
 
Doubt it, it someone went into a school in Bloody Ol' England and did the same thing, the reaction woulda been totally different by the American public, or if a Drone flew over Canada and killed a confirmed Al Quaida leader but in the process also killed 10 Canadians drinking a pint in their local pub, it's a much bigger deal than if 10 Afghani Civilians get killed in the process. No one can dispute that.

How much coverage did the CT killings get in the UK. I doubt it was on the tv all day.
 
Drones are becoming ubiquitous now...I see many hobbyists these days with their personal drones out flying around complete with cameras- I imagine the laws will have to catch up.
They are catching up go to the AMA web site . I am a member of the AMA and the FAA has new guildlines and regulations they are pushing for . http://www.modelaircraft.org/
 
Doubt it, it someone went into a school in Bloody Ol' England and did the same thing, the reaction woulda been totally different by the American public, or if a Drone flew over Canada and killed a confirmed Al Quaida leader but in the process also killed 10 Canadians drinking a pint in their local pub, it's a much bigger deal than if 10 Afghani Civilians get killed in the process. No one can dispute that.

Of course, because there is really hardly any difference between cultures there, so the grounds for making comparisons is much easier, we can easily imagine how devastating that must be. People's imaginations aren't stimulated by reports of devastation in places people aren't familiar with, it's a simple blind-spot.
Other cultures are perceived as alien simply because of unfamiliarity, but watch a documentary on the life of someone from another culture and that boundary disappears rapidly and empathy becomes easy. Anyone exposed in this way would respond the same.
It is not anything other 'than out of sight out of mind', as opposed to a systematic western callousness about people who are not us. As soon as people are informed and shown the reality of those 'others' empathy is naturally aroused. Until then they are in the category of 'over there'.
 
And what about afterwards? When the end at which we are at clearly did not justify the means. What did they tell them would happen? What actually happened?
many would find any means justified by an ending that fattens their pockets. For a select some, the current global unrest and financial crisis is Christmas every morning. You ever play the game when you were younger "Would you do it for a million dollars? How about two...?" how many millions of dollars do you think it would take to get your average person to do something unthinkable? How many millions of dollars do you think it would take a mercenary? Did Judas blow the whistle, or just quietly hang himself?
 
TBH, I think most folks have a decent set of morals and I doubt if many would do real harm to others, just to make some money. It that wasn't so, we would have a lot more drug dealers out there.

That may be one big difference in me and many in the CT community. I have a lot of faith in humans, not to be perfect, but to overall act for the good of others.
 
TBH, I think most folks have a decent set of morals and I doubt if many would do real harm to others, just to make some money. It that wasn't so, we would have a lot more drug dealers out there.

That may be one big difference in me and many in the CT community. I have a lot of faith in humans, not to be perfect, but to overall act for the good of others.

Like beauty, good and bad are in the eye of the beholder and how their world feels to them.

I wonder if you would feel the same if the Taliban ruled America and were drone striking American 'terrorists/freedom fighters' for a decade with no or little regard for innocents.

If you were sat there watching Fox and Friends with the threat of a missile coming through your window any minute, you may not be so sure about peoples good morals.
 
sorry, I don't watch Fox. I listen to NPR and watch a lot of PBS. It seems that YOU decided my political views without paying a lot of attention to my posts.

It seems that you are IGNORING the toll that the Taliban took when they controlled Afghanistan and the toll that they are still taking today. The Taliban uses fear to demand that they be allowed to hide among the civilian population. You hide them or they KILL you or family members. I have to wonder if you approve of that.

The drone strike removes those 'blackmailers'

I have a question for you, Are any of family members in the military? Of any close friends?
 
sorry, I don't watch Fox. I listen to NPR and watch a lot of PBS. It seems that YOU decided my political views without paying a lot of attention to my posts.

I was painting a scenario and asking if you would, under such circumstances, be so confident in the 'peoples morality and goodness' as a general assumption.

It seems that you are IGNORING the toll that the Taliban took when they controlled Afghanistan and the toll that they are still taking today. The Taliban uses fear to demand that they be allowed to hide among the civilian population. You hide them or they KILL you or family members. I have to wonder if you approve of that.
The drone strike removes those 'blackmailers'

But who are 'we' to decide the political nature of an independent Nation which goes back millenia.

No doubt the Russians were saying exactly the same as you have just said in defense of their invasion.

I seem to remember Rambo going over to help free those poor resistance fighters and civilians from the oppression of the Russian brutality and we all cheered him on and condemned the Russians. It appears you think the American occupation is different in some way to the Russian one. I doubt the Afghan people see much difference.

The Taliban will be back in power to some extent as soon as foreigners have been kicked out... and we can say 'Oh we are withdrawing now' but we have been kicked out as much as the russians were... and what was it all for one has to ask?

I have a question for you, Are any of family members in the military? Of any close friends?
I don't see the relevance to be honest but yes I have had.

I have every regard for the military when they are doing what they are supposed to be doing, defending their homeland or coming to the defence of an ally when requested but the days of mustering up the proletariat for conquest should be long past.
 
The Taliban is who kicked the Russians out---they were not in charge when the Russians invaded

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saur_Revolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan


Estimates of Afghan civilian deaths vary from 850,000 to 1,500,000.[20][21] 5–10 million Afghans fled to Pakistan and Iran, 1/3 of the prewar population of the country, and another 2 million were displaced within the country. In the 1980s, half of all refugees in the world were Afghan.[124]


According to a 55-page report by the United Nations, the Taliban, while trying to consolidate control over northern and western Afghanistan, committed systematic massacres against civilians.[26][27] UN officials stated that there had been "15 massacres" between 1996 and 2001.[26][27] They also said, that "[t]hese have been highly systematic and they all lead back to the [Taliban] Ministry of Defense or to Mullah Omar himself."[26][27] "These are the same type of war crimes as were committed in Bosnia and should be prosecuted in international courts", one UN official was quoted as saying.[26] The documents also reveal the role of Arab and Pakistani support troops in these killings.[26][27] Bin Laden's so-called 055 Brigade was responsible for mass-killings of Afghan civilians.[21] The report by the United Nations quotes "eyewitnesses in many villages describing Arab fighters carrying long knives used for slitting throats and skinning people".[26][27] The Taliban's former ambassador to Pakistan, Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, in late 2011 stated that cruel behaviour under and by the Taliban had been "necessary".[149]

In 1998, the United Nations accused the Taliban of denying emergency food by the UN's World Food Programme to 160,000 hungry and starving people "for political and military reasons".[150] The UN said the Taliban were starving people for their military agenda and using humanitarian assistance as a weapon of war.

On August 8, 1998 the Taliban launched an attack on Mazar-i Sharif. Of 1500 defenders only 100 survived the engagement. Once in control the Taliban began to kill people indiscriminately. At first shooting people in the street, they soon began to target Hazaras. Women were raped, and thousands of people were locked in containers and left to suffocate. This ethnic cleansing left an estimated 5,000 to 6,000 dead.[71][151] At this time ten Iranian diplomats and a journalist were killed. Iran assumed the Taliban had murdered them, and mobilized its army, deploying men along the border with Afghanistan. By the middle of September there were 250,000 Iranian personal stationed on the border. Pakistan mediated and the bodies were returned to Tehran towards the end of the month. The killings of the Diplomats had been carried out by Sipah-e-Sahaba a Pakistani Sunni group with close ties to the ISI.[98][152] They burned orchards, crops and destroyed irrigation systems, and forced more than 100,000 people from their homes with hundreds of men, women and children still unaccounted for.[153]

That should put the deaths from drone strikes into some kind of a perspective for you.
 
Oxymoron said:
But who are 'we' to decide the political nature of an independent Nation which goes back millenia.


No doubt the Russians were saying exactly the same as you have just said in defense of their invasion.


I seem to remember Rambo going over to help free those poor resistance fighters and civilians from the oppression of the Russian brutality and we all cheered him on and condemned the Russians. It appears you think the American occupation is different in some way to the Russian one. I doubt the Afghan people see much difference.


The Taliban will be back in power to some extent as soon as foreigners have been kicked out... and we can say 'Oh we are withdrawing now' but we have been kicked out as much as the russians were... and what was it all for one has to ask?


As Cairenn pointed out, the Soviet occupation was much more brutal in every conceivable sense. There was zero regard for civilians. The Soviets would literally destroy everything in the direction they were shot at from. One need only look at the estimated civilian causalities for each conflict. Estimates range as high as 1.5 million civilian deaths from the Soviet occupation compared to ~15,000 for the entirety of the ISAF occupation.
None of that justifies civilian deaths, but some perspective as to what a brutal occupation is actually like can be helpful.


Additionally, it's worth noting that half of ISAF's role in the country has nothing to do with "conquest"(more accurately called peacekeeping if we look at what conquest actually means). They're actually the largest humanitarian force in the world, seeing as they have the supply chain and equipment to get aid to pretty much any corner of the world. It's where the majority of the money spent on the war goes.
 
As Cairenn pointed out, the Soviet occupation was much more brutal in every conceivable sense. There was zero regard for civilians. The Soviets would literally destroy everything in the direction they were shot at from. One need only look at the estimated civilian causalities for each conflict. Estimates range as high as 1.5 million civilian deaths from the Soviet occupation compared to ~15,000 for the entirety of the ISAF occupation.

Ok, America = bad.... Taliban = very bad... Russians = much worse than Taliban.

So what made Bush think he could succeed in Afghanistan where Russia failed?
 
Ok, America = bad.... Taliban = very bad... Russians = much worse than Taliban.

So what made Bush think he could succeed in Afghanistan where Russia failed?

I find the mindset "America = bad" to be a bit repugnant.
I'm sure the intention was not to "fail", if indeed you think we did.
 
I find the mindset "America = bad" to be a bit repugnant.

From your previous posts, I am not surprised by that but like I said earlier 'good and bad' are subjective terms. If we had Taliban or 'patriotic' Russian contributors on here, I guess they would find my statement even more repugnant.

I admit my statement was intended to be controversial but more importantly I intended it to be 'thought provoking'.

It is not my intention to 'malign America' but to look at whether the motives of and ensuing actions taken by American politicians are 'as objectively as possible', sound and justifiable. I think they are flawed and self serving and do not contribute to peaceful relations in the area or indeed worldwide.

I am open to criticism of that view and if it is shown as flawed I am happy to change my viewpoint accordingly. The reason I cite America is because America is the driving force behind the policy.

I'm sure the intention was not to "fail", if indeed you think we did.
But what exactly was/is the intention and is it achievable or desirable?

I recognise it is the easiest thing in the world to criticise and there are often difficult and ambiguous decisions that must be made but I think it entirely reasonable to question/review our own individual motives and actions on a regular basis as well as TPTB's to ensure that if and when we make mistakes, they are rectified asap.

Hope that helps take some of the sting from my comment but in the context, I think it valid.
 
'Peace' is a subjective term itself. We would need to ask a lot of Afghanis if they think they are better off, since the US and their allies have driven the Taliban back. I think we can agree that women are better off now, and folks like artists.

The US is providing a lot of aid to the common folks there. One thing that few know about is the units with veterinarians that are treating the Afghani's animals. Saving a donkey can mean a lot to farmer
 
'Peace' is a subjective term itself.
Very true.
We would need to ask a lot of Afghanis if they think they are better off, since the US and their allies have driven the Taliban back.
Have they...?
I think we can agree that women are better off now, and folks like artists.
Can we...?
The report,issued on Tuesday, came a day after gunmen shot and killed the head of the women's affairs department for eastern Laghman province. Afghan officials said Najia Sediqi, who took the job after her predecessor was killed in a bomb attack in July, was on her way to her office when she was shot dead.
The US is providing a lot of aid to the common folks there. One thing that few know about is the units with veterinarians that are treating the Afghani's animals. Saving a donkey can mean a lot to farmer
And what's often being farmed...?

Ah the Wars, they will be fought again
The holy dove, she will be caught again
bought and sold and bought again
the dove is never free.
 
The other things are up in the air, but I think we can safely say the condition of women in Afghanistan, while still not optimal(and certainly nowhere near where it was in the 60s), has improved:


http://www.ted.com/talks/shabana_basij_rasikh_dare_to_educate_afghan_girls.html


http://www.sola-afghanistan.org/


http://www.salem-news.com/articles/march102013/afghan-women.php


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women's_rights_in_Afghanistan

Yes American politicians have done a lot for the Afghan people:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/BRZ110A.html

External Quote:
Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?
B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?
B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?
Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.
B: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.

The Taliban is who kicked the Russians out---they were not in charge when the Russians invaded

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saur_Revolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan


Estimates of Afghan civilian deaths vary from 850,000 to 1,500,000.[20][21] 5–10 million Afghans fled to Pakistan and Iran, 1/3 of the prewar population of the country, and another 2 million were displaced within the country. In the 1980s, half of all refugees in the world were Afghan.[124]


According to a 55-page report by the United Nations, the Taliban, while trying to consolidate control over northern and western Afghanistan, committed systematic massacres against civilians.[26][27] UN officials stated that there had been "15 massacres" between 1996 and 2001.[26][27] They also said, that "[t]hese have been highly systematic and they all lead back to the [Taliban] Ministry of Defense or to Mullah Omar himself."[26][27] "These are the same type of war crimes as were committed in Bosnia and should be prosecuted in international courts", one UN official was quoted as saying.[26] The documents also reveal the role of Arab and Pakistani support troops in these killings.[26][27] Bin Laden's so-called 055 Brigade was responsible for mass-killings of Afghan civilians.[21] The report by the United Nations quotes "eyewitnesses in many villages describing Arab fighters carrying long knives used for slitting throats and skinning people".[26][27] The Taliban's former ambassador to Pakistan, Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, in late 2011 stated that cruel behaviour under and by the Taliban had been "necessary".[149]
 
Are you suggesting that it is the US government's fault that the Soviets invaded and the Taliban massacred people?

Brzezinsky makes himself clear on this does he not?

Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?
B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.
 
Back
Top