http://www.frontierpost.com.pk/topstory.asp?2state terrorism
ISLAMABAD (Online): Declaring US air strike on Bajaur Agency as worst act of state terrorism , mainstream opposition leaders have announced to visit Bajaur Agency tomorrow (Monday) to witness the destruction and condole the death of innocent citizens killed in the attack.
without comment
I think the operative words here are “Opposition Leaders”. In other words, politicians trying to use this for leverage, no matter the truth.
If you are not for us you are against us?
When it comes to proving aid and assistance to AQ - that is a correct statement
And all the innocent civilians? The women and children?
Would you cheer on Cuba bombing a Miami hotel to get at terrorists? The UK bombing as boston bar back when Reagan, Carter, Ford and Nixon allowed the IRA to fund its terror campaign with pass-the-hat-round dollars despite decades of protest by an ally?
Rhetorical question, of course you would, 'cos otherwise you’d be a hypocrite.
Right there is one of the saddest comments on this world we live in that I’ve ever heard.
[QUOTE=tagos]
And all the innocent civilians? The women and children?
QUOTE]
IF there are innocent civilians, they were brought into the line of fire by their own family members and the anger should be directed at them for being AQ collaborators.
The notion that killing women and children was unavoidable, and justified by the mere suspicion of the presence of combatants is repugnant and evil.
Wow. That’s amazing.
-Joe
[QUOTE=flickster]
And I repeat. If Cuba did it in Miami? If the UK did it in Boston during the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s?
And my anger is righteously directed at blood-thirsty, amoral savages who make me less safe through their stupid, counter-productive actions or support for same.
What about Philadelphia? Remember MOVE?
Do you actually think a missle strike would have been launched on “mere suspicion”? They had to have an informant providing details of this meeting and were waiting for it to take place. As for the innocent family members, that’s part of the tragedy of war. But I again reiterate that the blame lies with whoever opened their home for the meeting in the first place.
Let’s go back in time to 1863 and put Lee, Jackson, Stuart & Longstreet having a meeting over dinner in a Pennsylvania farmhouse (sponsored by a friendly farmer & family). Do you think that Grant would have launched a cannon ball through the window if he would have had the chance? Of course he would have. Would there have been the loss of some innocents? Yes, and that’s unfortunate. Would they have put been in harms way if the group wasn’t meeting there? NO
You also need to look at how many possible lives would have been spared by said action. How many were killed at Gettysburg alone? (51,000+) How many are going to be spared because some high level AQ’s are no more? Time will tell for sure, but I’d wager a lot of people just got an extension on life.
The tragedy of war is when children are killed needlessly, and good men remain silent.
So, if you were Grant in the imaginary scenario above, would you have spared the farmer’s kids but yet sent 51,000+ to their grave the next day?
I have stopped beating my wife, if that is what you are asking.
Sure. Lowered standards of evidence are a critical facet of the Bush Doctrine. We invaded Iraq based on ‘mere suspicions’. We’ve seen the CIA maintain they had photographic ‘proof’ of Saddam’s mobile biological weapons facilities for months after people skilled in the relevant arts declared their pictures of fermentors showed no such thing. We’ve seen all these conflicting reports as to who may or may not have been killed in this latest missile attacks, without seeing any evidence to back things up one way or another. Just this week, we’ve heard the principal deputy director of national intelligence defend warrantless wiretaps using the standard of ‘reasonable belief’ rather than ‘probable cause’.
The bar for actionable intelligence is way down.
Bush and friends would kill people for any reason. If he wanted a bump in the polls, and thought a missle strike on some “terrorists” would give him one, I’m sure he would do it. He’d kill some random foreigners, claim there were imporant terrorists at the target, and never feel a moment of guilt or compassion.
What is the motive behind terrorism? In a nutshell, it is to randomly and indiscriminately murder people, usually of your own culture, in order to destabalize the government. What was the motive behind this attack? It was an act of war, aimed at a specific target with a specific objective.
Nobody likes collateral damage, but it happens during war. It has happened since the dawn of time and it will continue to happen.
What is the motive behind terrorism? In a nutshell, it is to randomly and indiscriminately murder people, usually of your own culture, in order to destabalize the government. What was the motive behind this attack? It was an act of war, aimed at a specific target with a specific objective.
Nobody likes collateral damage, but it happens during war. It has happened since the dawn of time and it will continue to happen.
Only if good men remain silent.