And there are no other non-nuclear countries with Brown people and Muslims except these three? Jordan, Indonesia, Iran, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Egypt, Saudi Arabia… all non-brown? Non-Muslim? Do they all have nukes?
It’s not intended to be the end of the argument. But it’s a question that has largely gone unaddressed. Yes, these strikes kill innocent people and that’s tragic. But except for people who deny there are any terrorists at all (which makes for an easy decision because it’s based on fantasy), we’re still left with the problem of how this problem gets dealt with. I don’t think this way of handling it, but the other options all seem worse.
Well, they could stop launching terrorist attacks and killing women for wanting to go to school or refusing to wear beekeeper costumes. I don’t think that option is off the table.
I just love how you think you know my thoughts, and how ridiculously wrong you are. War sucks, and innocent people have always been caught in the crossfire. Ask some poeple from Dresden, or Hiroshima. I’ve lost ancestors in Europe during WWII who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Nowadays, many of those collateral deaths wouldn’t have happened. Some still do, but in your amazing wonderful holier-than-thou world, unless we have 100% guarantee of no collateral deaths, then we shouldn’t be using the tools at hand.
When it’s a war of choice against an ill-defined target such as “terrorists” or “militants” then yes, we should not be doing it. Furthermore, if you and the rest of Team Obama so proud of all the civilians that are being killed, why do you have to lie about it, deny it, and ignore it on a constant basis?
Since you’ve already made it clear you wouldn’t even impose sanctions on Apartheid South Africa and were content to doom the blacks there to life under Apartheid because doing so would kill some people, I’m not sure if there any circumstances where you would allow for any actions that would have any collateral damage.
Can we also assume you objected to all the bombing done during WWII against Nazi Germany.
Oh okay, anyone who doesn’t want to go out and massacre some Muslims right now is not only racist, but also a Nazi. Gotcha.
Keep flailing! I hope someone asks a question about the “build a pyramid out of the corpses of children” policy at the debate tonight, because I’m sure the response from Jesus himself will be a sight to behold.
See, I don’t think killing innocents can result in only one group to blame. It’s not as if, because terrorists are bad, suddenly we are excused of any later killing of innocents that occurs. In my view, there doesn’t have to be only one group that bears all the responsibility and everyone else involved is suddenly blameless.
Dude, you’re the one who objected to sanctions against Apartheid South Africa and apparently feels that Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu were monsters for supporting them, and who also objected to any bombing in WWII that might kill civilians, not me, so I’d be careful before accusing others of saying “ridiculous things”.
Correct me if I’m wrong.
Anyway, please explain why you think that Mandela and Tutu were wrong to support sanctions against Apartheid South Africa.
Also, please show me where you were accused of being a Nazi and a racist, because your reading comprehension skills are clearly not calibrated the way most people’s are.
Stop putting words in my mouth about irrelevant issues, and stop with the fucking cutesy dance where you say things without using magic words so you can pretend you didn’t say them. The Obama administration’s murder of civilians on a daily basis is a serious issue, deserving more attention and thought than you seem to be capable of.
At this point I’m having a great deal of difficulty believing you mean anything you say other than being opposed to the drone strikes. Almost every single one of your posts in this thread has contained a ludicrous strawman argument or other distortion. If you want to make an argument against the current policies, make it instead of doing this:
And while I’m at it, keep your tone appropriate for Great Debates and stop the personal remarks.
OK, I get it, as long as you support Obama killing people you can accuse others of being the most vile things, but those who don’t like murder can’t object. Checking out of this thread since obviously the discussion can’t happen.
After you insisted you’d never support any policies that might lead to some civilian deaths, I asked you your opinion of sanctions against Apartheid South Africa fully expecting you to say “yes” you supported them, but you promptly declared that you didn’t.
Also, you seem to feel that anyone who supports the drone strikes which kill fewer civilians than the sanctions against South Africa, so since you feel that anyone who supports those drone strikes is a monster, presumably you feel that people who support sanctions against South Africa(such as Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu) is a monster.
Now, if you’ve reconsidered your opposition to the sanctions against South Africa, please explain why you had the change of heart and if you don’t feel that Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu are monsters then please explain why you have different attitude towards them then supporters of drone strikes.
Also, please do it without making personal attacks on me.
It is not as if the Americans one day decided ‘terrorists are bad’, lets go kill some innocents. No, the civilians in the strike zones are getting killed as a direct result of the terrorists’ choice of tactics in a conflict that they triggered. The primary responsibility is theirs. After that, the responsibility lies with governments that allow and abet the use of their territory for terrorist activity, which Pakistan has been doing for more than two decades.
Is America blameless in the matter of civilians losing their lives in drone strikes? Maybe not. But the extent of that blame is not managing to have zero civilian casualties, instead of the minimal civilian casualties that they do have. I don’t know about you, but I don’t often go around picking on people for not being god.