------------------
"We're all monkeys......HEY! Get Outta my CHAIR!" - 12 Monkeys

quote:

---

Originally posted by C_Puppy:
totally, but you have to admit that you would post sentries to keep an eye on those supplies--

---

No, actually they wouldn't. They aren't even flying low enough to -see- the drop zone; for all they know they could be dropping all that food on top of somebody's head.

Wondering, has anyone even heard any plans for ground occupation/strikes at all?

quote:

---

we need to feed the local groups that are non taliban,

---

quote:

---

I mean if you promise a bunch of oppresed people aid you for their help

---

quote:

---

you should definatly follow up on your end of the deal-- as long as it is done wisely

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by askheaves:
Anybody else concerned about the ramifications of dropping humanitarian aid there right now? I mean, if I'm the broken down Taliban army, and my supplies are running low, and I know villages are getting food and supplies... I think that's a tasty target for a raid... you know, the ones that get civilians executed. Not a pleasant thought.

---

i think thats what theyre doing.

infact, im almost sure of it.

------------------
Screw this crap, I've had it. I ain't no Mr. Cool.
< =rwa= >

quote:

---

Originally posted by C_Puppy:
You have been watching CNN too much-- we have talked to the opposition leaders and have been asking their aid for intelligence and for their efforts to help find terrorist hideouts--

---

I was under the impression that CNN was a -reliable- news source...as opposed to National Enquirer ("Secret Deals Struck! Turn to Page 43! Next week, breaking news on the coming Apocalypse!")...

And of -course- we've talked to them...we've talked to just about everybody lately. Did we go "Give us military intel or we won't drop those people any food"? No...

quote:

---

Originally posted by StanVanDam:
I think the US is in trouble now that they started bombing. I hope no American lives are lost. I really think the US gov't could and should have done something else. Violence doesn't solve anything (in this situation) because they can do terrorist shit back to the US which will hurt Americans much more than the "terrorists".

---

With what? The WTC attack took a year in planning, and a huge amounts of resources, as well as depending on our rather lax security. Not that we're completely invulnerable now, but still...

So violence isn't the answer...what is then? Got an alternative?

quote:

---

Plus civilian casualties are definitely gonna happen in Afghanistan. All the US technology and laser sights and GPS won't stop missiles and bombs from hitting civilian homes and hospitals. Such as Iraq, a "stray" cruise missile nailed a hospital.

---

quote:

---

I dunno if this technology exists back in 'Nam, which I really doubt it did, meaning these B-52s bombed the hospital on purpose. My dad watched it happen. That's such a cheapshot (besides a violation of the rules of war I think...aren't u not allowed to bomb civilians and hospitals and indiscriminately carpet bomb everything?)

---

::tries to figure out whether that -interesting- little passage was talking about Vietnam, or Iraq, or both::

So, basically, the tech for precision targeting did not exist back during Vietnam, which somehow leads to the conclusion that the US purposely bombed a hospital in Iraq for no reason? Huh?

quote:

---

Originally posted by sHuoReNviOLiN:
I was under the impression that CNN was a -reliable- news source...as opposed to National Enquirer ("Secret Deals Struck! Turn to Page 43! Next week, breaking news on the coming Apocalypse!")...

And of -course- we've talked to them...we've talked to just about everybody lately. Did we go "Give us military intel or we won't drop those people any food"? No...

---

What I am saying is that the US has done similar deeds when fighting Iraq with the kurds, we just back out of what we were doing when we felt our oil fields were safe.
Now you know better than to say that CNN is completely reliable--- BBC or CBC would be what you should be watching, BBC has always kicked the shit out of our reporting by keeping it a bit cleaner of sensationalism, americans way of reporting is way too damn egocentric--Come On dude! CNN has really gone downhill-- not saying it is as bad as the FOX news channel. But still, I would never use it exculsively.

------------------
"We're all monkeys......HEY! Get Outta my CHAIR!" - 12 Monkeys

None of the above, please...

------------------
Screw this crap, I've had it. I ain't no Mr. Cool.
< =rwa= >

The targets that seem to be getting hit are mostly air-defense systems and weapons depots... located mostly in the middle of nowhere. Very few ordinance are making their way to Kabul and the other cities now, and they seem to have been pretty accurate from current accounts.

The coolest thing about this is that it's not a purely overt military operation. Probably 90\% of the work being done right now has nothing to do with bombs. It has more to do with forming coalitions, stopping resource flow, propeganda, humanitarian aid, special recon operations, diplomacy, etc. It's not a situation where we're relying on violence to solve everything. We're relying on violence to aid in accomplishing our true goals.

quote:

---

Originally posted by sHuoReNviOLiN:
No, actually they wouldn't. They aren't even flying low enough to -see- the drop zone; for all they know they could be dropping all that food on top of somebody's head.

Wondering, has anyone even heard any plans for ground occupation/strikes at all?

[QUOTE][b]
we need to feed the local groups that are non taliban,

---

quote:

---

I mean if you promise a bunch of oppresed people aid you for their help

---

quote:

---

you should definatly follow up on your end of the deal-- as long as it is done wisely

---

You have been watching CNN too much-- we have talked to the opposition leaders and have been asking their aid for intelligence and for their efforts to help find terrorist hideouts--

This message has been edited by C_Puppy on October 07, 2001 at 12:55 PM

quote:

---

Originally posted by StanVanDam:
Such as Iraq, a "stray" cruise missile nailed a hospital.

---

IIRC, That was a SAM depot they put wounded people in so that when we bombed it they could claim we hit a hospital.

------------------
L33T_h4x0r_d00d you are the king of obscure references - miNus

------------------
simultaneity is not absolute. So just because you think i'm wrong, from my frame of reference i'm right!

quote:

---

Originally posted by sHuoReNviOLiN:
I was under the impression that CNN was a -reliable- news source.

---

huh huh (chuckle etc). he called cnn a reliable news source.

ah kids.

(Yes, I know bagdad (or how ever you spell it...) is not in afganistan, but it's still the same effect )

------------------
Net Syndrome - < www.netsyndrome.net >
Catch The Sickness

And now the US is saying they're gonna expand their attacks to other countries, probably Iraq and other places that disagree with this "War on Terrorists".

I think it's mainly only the minority groups who think a little bit different *cough* opposite *cough* from the mainstream American who support this bombing campaign. The US does act like a big bully indeed. That poem that was posted a little while ago was pretty good.

I'm being serious here, because a lot of the rules we followed for combat had to be broken when the enemy armed women and children and sent them against us. You couldn't be sure who exactly was against you at any given time.

And just the politics of it all were very messy. Presidential candidates saying they're going to bring our boys home and then they ship out more.

Seriously, sit down and have a good talk with someone who lived through that time before slinging all that around here.

------------------
When 1337 hax0rs start impaling each other with swords and typing code with a hook on one hand, then they can modify the term "pirate."

The basic idea is that 4 basic rules are applied. (from memory)

1. Only use violent force if all diplomatic means have failed.
2. If you use force, use overwhelming force
3. Have clear goals in mind.
4. Have an exit strategy that is triggered by meeting those goals.

Pretty straightforward to me, especially when you have the upper hand. This is a direct response to Colin Powell's experiences and frustrations with Vietnam. I believe that this is the doctrine that is being followed in this situations. We're not smacking the country of Afganistan with the "HAMMER OF JUSTICE". We're excising a problem from the world. One that normally doesn't hurt us directly, but more importantly hurts our world culture by oppressing their own. I think this is going to be an exercise demonstrating the maturation of our foreign policy.

------------------
simultaneity is not absolute. So just because you think i'm wrong, from my frame of reference i'm right!

quote:

---

Originally posted by StanVanDam:
What I meant before, which apparently was interpreted wrong, was that my dad watched a hospital in Vietnam get bombed by Americans. And the thing about Iraq was that a hospital (I didn't hear about that SAM depot thing but I'm not saying it's not true) was hit by a "stray" missile.

And now the US is saying they're gonna expand their attacks to other countries, probably Iraq and other places that disagree with this "War on Terrorists".

I think it's mainly only the minority groups who think a little bit different *cough* opposite *cough* from the mainstream American who support this bombing campaign. The US does act like a big bully indeed. That poem that was posted a little while ago was pretty good.

---

the 'big bully' isn't usually the one who get's stabbed in the back repeatadly first.

------------------
Old farts never die, they just get blown away.

quote:

---

or that they're always right or superior above all.

---

i don't remember making any such claim...in fact quite the opposite. let me go fetch that quote...

quote:

---

Originally posted by CatKnight:
this is not a battle of good versus evil. this is a battle of us versus them. personally, I'd choose us. but that's just me.

---

This message has been edited by CatKnight on October 09, 2001 at 10:30 PM

Catknight, I know nothing will change your attitude of Americans being hurt first or that they're always right or superior above all. I respect your opinion. I'm just voicing what I think, based off facts which I truly believe are unbiased.

quote:

---

Originally posted by askheaves:
I miss you, hellraiser. Stick around more.

---

Erm, yeah, so...

Wanna go out sometime?

j/k of course. But if you have any hot friends who are girls, don't hesitate to hook me up...

I wasn't aware that I'd been away though. Been here pretty regularly since the 11th, and been sorta a lurker too.

------------------
Old farts never die, they just get blown away.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 1LT:
...This weakens the Taliban support...

---

Taliban support? What Taliban support? How much of the population do you think supported the Taliban even before this?

quote:

---

Originally posted by sHuoReNviOLiN:
Taliban support? What Taliban support? How much of the population do you think supported the Taliban even before this?

---

There still is some....the less of the little they have is better for us.

U.S. gave aid to Northern Alliance, that wanted to rise again to power and to tyrannize Afghanistan once again.

Taleban was formed out of studients and non-military people that had enough of their government, but were newer recognized as the ruling party by many western countries (mostly due to the fact that U.S. was on the other side).

Taleban is NOT a terrorist organisation/party no matter what your media wants you to think. They are now just protecting their country against foreign invaders. Talevan is not Al-Queida.

From my point of view, U.S. is not defending itself against terrorism, but attacking a country and declaring war. This is not very civilized. The Taleban has agreed to surrender bin Laden to a neutral country for trial (becouse he'd probably be dead before U.S. "justice" would be done) but Bush & partners hasn't agreed to this.

There has been no *proof* in the media about bin Laden's participation in the airplane attacks, but yet you people can't wait to get him killed. I belive it was "innocent until proven guilty"?

To me it seems that he is just a scapegoat. Once he is killed or inprisoned for life, U.S. people are safe. He is the leader of all world's terrorists and once he is in custody, no more terrorist actions will happen.

Even if he would be guilty for planning these attacks, does that justify killing of any innocent people? What have those Afghanistan people done to you? They had absolutely nothing to do with any attacking, those women and children who's homes you are bombing right now.

Nothing justifies attacking another country. Nothing. War is never acceptable.

Vietnam was over a long time ago, people. Get over it.

edit: guess I'll take on the rest of this nonsense, since I'm so sick of seeing it every time I turn my head.

bin laden is not a scapegoat. Not only did he as much as admit in his videos responsibilty for the eleventh, he's murdered (or conspired to murder) a whole fuckload of other people before this. some people need killing; he is one.

fortunately, there is every indication that some of the others that need it are going to get it too. it's rather likely that our old buddy saddam is responsible for the [legitimate] anthrax packages popping up around the states. but just like bin laden, he needs killing even regardless of whatever part he has in the current events.

more that need killing: taliban. they (the ruling members, I suppose) were indeed pakistani students and civilians who went up there to clean up the mess the soviet war had left behind... of course in doing so they became the typical sort of oppressing totalitarian regime that all the other islamic states are.

(I know I'm going to catch hell for that islam comment, since it has recently jumped to the very top of the political correcteness list. let me qualify it: I don't give any more or less shit about the merits of islam than I do about the merits of christianity or shintoism or scientology.)

finally, proof. war has not been declared against a state, but this is war. I, personally, do not need to see proof of which persons declared war on us. I've elected officials to deal with that. and apparently sufficient proof has been provided to the elected officials of our allies that they are satisfied enough to actively support our course of military action. this is not the time for conspiracy theories (regardless of the fact that our stealth bombers that flew 14 hours to open up some cruise missiles of whoopass are built from reverse engineered ufos.)

This message has been edited by Vigilante on October 16, 2001 at 04:57 PM

If they want to be present at the trial to expound on the good-nature of bin/laden, then they have every right to be.

It's a lot like OJ taking refuge in the Bronco. It's within the police right to ram the truck off the road, potentially killing those aiding, in order to not let him get away with his crime.

And if he didn't do it, then we'll find that out in a court. Aside from that, we've got enough charges racked up over the last 10 years to put him out of our misery anyways.