U.S. military acknowledged killing 23 civilians

[OneToughHerring]

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64S0P120100529

"The U.S. military acknowledged on Saturday killing 23 civilians and wounding 12 others earlier this year after mistaking them for a convoy of Taliban insurgents.
The U.S. report into the incident, which happened in Uruzgan, said the crew of a remote-controlled drone aircraft had "provided inaccurate reporting" ahead of the incident and local command posts "failed to properly analyze the situation.""


Just one more tidbit from the endless war.

[tomfon]

So we have two different incidents or facts ; the latter is actually more accurate. A fleet attacked by Israel's Navy resulting in the loss of 20 (?) lives and an attack made by US forces and by mistake (once more!) against civilians.

The first act was condemned by many nations (still not all of them...). The second?

[Catfish]

We have got used to it. This is certainly no justification.
Greetings,
Catfish

[tomfon]

We have got used to it. Greetings,


No. We have accepted it.

[Oberon]

It's called war, isn't it? :hmmm:

[GoldenRivet]

we live in a f*cked up world

Sh*t happens :nope:

[Weiss Pinguin]

we live in a f*cked up world

Sh*t happens :nope:
Unfortunately. The family members do have my condolences, for whatever that's worth.

[GoldenRivet]

Unfortunately. The family members do have my condolences, for whatever that's worth.

mine as well :nope:

[tater]

Yep. sh*t happens.

How many civilians died when the target was a ball bearing plant in Germany, or a Mitsubishi factory in Japan?

By any possible calculus, the number of civilian casualties in wars waged by modern democracies is now amazingly small.

[Jimbuna]

Unfortunately. The family members do have my condolences, for whatever that's worth.

Same here....probably an understatement but yet another example of the horror that warfare brings.

[gimpy117]

Coming from the same guy who supports North Korea: a horrible oppressive regime with starving citizens!

http://skepticalteacher.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/facepalm.jpg

[OneToughHerring]

Coming from the same guy who supports North Korea: a horrible oppressive regime with starving citizens!



And how many civilians have died because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, this incident included?

[Happy Times]

And how many civilians have died because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, this incident included?


No one would die if those medieval bastards would just stop their insurgency.

[Jimbuna]

Coming from the same guy who supports North Korea: a horrible oppressive regime with starving citizens!

http://skepticalteacher.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/facepalm.jpg

Oh come on....your not really suprised :DL

[OneToughHerring]

No one would die if those medieval bastards would just stop their insurgency.

I don't think I'd act much different in their place, except try to fight more effectively and mitigate my own losses. If civilians were killed it would fill me with resolve to keep on fighting until the invaders were dead.

[Oberon]

And how many civilians have died because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, this incident included?

MIDDLE EAST

Iraq body count:
96,394 – 105,130

Afghan body count:
13,372 - 32,969

Total:
109,766 - 138,099

(sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_of_the_War_in_Afghanistan_%282 001%E2%80%93present%29#Aggregation_of_estimates

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/ )


DPRK

Rummel estimates that the Communist regime of North Korea committed 1,663,000 democides between 1948 and 1987

North Korean victims: 1,293,000
South Korean victims: 363,000

Courtois, Stephane, Le Livre Noir du Communism: 2,000,000

In Party purges: 100,000
In concentration camps: 1.5M

23 June 2003 US News & WR: 400,000 died in gulags in past 3 decades.
The Center for the Advancement of North Korean Human Rights estimates that some 400,000 prisoners have died in labor camps since 1972. [http://www.nkhumanrights.or.kr/oldnkhuman/eng/nk/nknews12_01.html]
Famine, 1995-98

13 March 1999, Agence France Presse: (citing N. Korean defector) 3,500,000 deaths as of 12/98
19 Oct. 2000 Guardian: 3M
MSF: 3.5M [http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/publications/other/deadly_2001.shtml]
19 Oct. 2003 NY Times: 2M died in preventable famine.
10 May 1999, AP:

The North Korean govt. estimates 220,000 famine-related deaths, 1995-98
US Congressional delegation: 2M
South Korean intelligence estimates that the population of North Korea fell from 25M to 22M.



(source: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat2.htm )

Any questions?

[OneToughHerring]

The Iraq Body Count is a US organisation. I'm not sure if I fully trust them to tell me the truth about a war the US is waging as the aggressor, sorry.

[Dowly]

The Iraq Body Count is a US organisation. I'm not sure if I fully trust them to tell me the truth about a war the US is waging as the aggressor, sorry.

So in other words, no matter what figures we show you, your not going to believe them?

[tater]

As a reality check Rummel cites the US for ~650,000 democides in WW2, most all due to the bombing campaign (not all deaths to bombing are counted, BTW, just those he considers "excessive." The total number killed was considerably higher, but if you are in a combat zone as a civilian...

As for the Iraq body count website, it's hardly an apologist site for the US military, it's very purpose is to paint the military in a bad light for killing too many—so that's likely a high estimate (though it seems a plausible high, unlike that idiotic lancet "study" that was published (and later discredited).

[OneToughHerring]

So in other words, no matter what figures we show you, your not going to believe them?

Are you saying that only US is counting the bodies of the wars? That's a bit worrying, isn't it?

Well anyway, here's some other figures. You'll see how the Iraq Body Count is the most, should I say optimistic of the bunch.

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

[Oberon]

Well anyway, here's some other figures. You'll see how the Iraq Body Count is the most, should I say optimistic of the bunch.

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

Is it three and a half million though? :hmmm:

[Dowly]

@OTH

No, I'm not saying anything, I'm asking. Looking at your previous posts, it seems that you only have one truth you believe in and that's your own. :salute:

[Catfish]

No doubt about North Korea here :nope:

But regarding the US "war" ...
It is an old question, but the initial questions are mostly the best.

Who did initially say that the USA were "at war", after 9/11 ?
I mean, it was a terrorist assassination, not a military attack. Thought up by a Saudi-arabian. Certainly the US have invested heavily in Saudi-Arabia, as S.-A. has in the US (read: Aramco, Arbusto (b.t.w. this means "Bush", in spanish :D), in Tx., but also in numerous other industries and business in the US).
Strange enough some members of the Saudi-Arabian Bin-Laden family have been killed in, or better above, Texas, in plane crashes, and 9/11 was also thought as a kind of revenge, by Osama B.-L.

"When President George Bush jr. froze assets connected to Osama bin Laden, he didn't tell the American people that the terrorist mastermind's late brother was an investor in the president's former oil business in Texas. He also hasn't leveled with the American public about his financial connections to a host of shady Saudi characters involved in drug cartels, gun smuggling, and terrorist networks." **


So say we had an assassination (NOT an "attack") by chinese terrorists, and a bad one. Will we be at war with China, then ? And if not, would we choose another nation, as a scapegoat ? Maybe somewhere south of China ... :D

But this is not a "war", not even an asymmetric one. No 10.000s of civilians were killed in North America, nor was the US military attacked, or the nation as such in a real danger. The chance for a US citizen to be hit by a terroristic attack by Mr. Bin Laden or his family is small. If this is a war, it still is about resources and US interests in the Middle East.


Those are b.t.w. interesting stories, about the Bushs.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush073099.htm
** http://www.rense.com/general14/bushsformer.htm

Greetings,
Catfish

[Jimbuna]

Is it three and a half million though? :hmmm:

I wouldn't be putting too much faith in Wikipedia....could have been updated by a monkey for all anybody knows :know:

[Oberon]

I wouldn't be putting too much faith in Wikipedia....could have been updated by a monkey for all anybody knows :know:

Well, it's more reliable than what Pyongyang puts out, sometimes :03:
But even at the worse case scenario on those wikipedia figures, they don't come close to the worse case scenario DPRK figures.

[Sailor Steve]

So in other words, no matter what figures we show you, your not going to believe them?
Dowly, you have to realize that in this particular type of thread there is only one truth: USA bad, everybody who opposes us good.

Period.

Facts don't matter, especially the fact that there is good and bad in every person and every country. All that counts is the bad things America did.

[gimpy117]

DPRK

Rummel estimates that the Communist regime of North Korea committed 1,663,000 democides between 1948 and 1987

North Korean victims: 1,293,000
South Korean victims: 363,000


Courtois, Stephane, Le Livre Noir du Communism: 2,000,000

In Party purges: 100,000
In concentration camps: 1.5M


23 June 2003 US News & WR: 400,000 died in gulags in past 3 decades.
The Center for the Advancement of North Korean Human Rights estimates that some 400,000 prisoners have died in labor camps since 1972. [http://www.nkhumanrights.or.kr/oldnkhuman/eng/nk/nknews12_01.html]
Famine, 1995-98

13 March 1999, Agence France Presse: (citing N. Korean defector) 3,500,000 deaths as of 12/98
19 Oct. 2000 Guardian: 3M
MSF: 3.5M [http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/publications/other/deadly_2001.shtml]
19 Oct. 2003 NY Times: 2M died in preventable famine.
10 May 1999, AP:

The North Korean govt. estimates 220,000 famine-related deaths, 1995-98
US Congressional delegation: 2M
South Korean intelligence estimates that the population of North Korea fell from 25M to 22M.





(source: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat2.htm )

Any questions?

+1
Those who live in glass houses...

[Jimbuna]

Well, it's more reliable than what Pyongyang puts out, sometimes :03:
But even at the worse case scenario on those wikipedia figures, they don't come close to the worse case scenario DPRK figures.

Oh I agree....and I thank my maker Wikipedia is probably still more reliable than an internet troll :DL

Don't go asking me to don boxing gloves either....unless there is a chance of a SS Meet :haha:

[GoldenRivet]

The Iraq Body Count is a US organisation. I'm not sure if I fully trust them to tell me the truth about a war the US is waging as the aggressor, sorry.

Get yourself a notepad and a few pens, and go do a body count on behalf of finland.

Im sure the margin of error between your count and "ours" will be less than 5 to 10 thousand.

Im so glad peace loving pacifists like you exist OTH without you the world would surely lose its direction.

OTH... i dare you to go join the Peace Corps or something instead of sitting there typing about how the world should be changed - go change it.

[Stealth Hunter]

It's called war, isn't it? :hmmm:

I believe so- this just being one more reason why we should do absolutely everything within our power to keep from starting or continuing or going to war like we did with Iraq and Afghanistan.:nope:

[OneToughHerring]

Get yourself a notepad and a few pens, and go do a body count on behalf of finland.

Im sure the margin of error between your count and "ours" will be less than 5 to 10 thousand.

Im so glad peace loving pacifists like you exist OTH without you the world would surely lose its direction.

OTH... i dare you to go join the Peace Corps or something instead of sitting there typing about how the world should be changed - go change it.

Now that the US troops are largely off the streets in Iraq the fighting has died down considerably. Wish they'd done that earlier so they wouldn't have had to deliver so many US dead and wounded back home, eh? Time to do the same in Afghanistan and sieze the mindless killing of civilians which has been going on for about a decade now.

[Bubblehead1980]

War is hell, things happen.The US went into Afganistan because the Taliban were harboring terrorists, that is the truth, no spin.Now, the war was mismanaged under Bush since he was sidetracked with Iraq.The focus is on Aghanistan now and hopefully it will work out.The US was not the aggressor, terrorists had a home in Afghanistan and the Taliban was aiding Bin Laden and his bunch, so they were accessories to 9/11 in a sense, thus they were the aggressors.People who argue the US was the aggressor are usually the great thinkers:har: who say Japan was not the aggressor in the Pacific, that America provoked Japan.:damn:

No matter what there will always be a segment of Afghanistan that is unhappy with the US being there and the change due to their ignorance and backwards way of thinking heavily influenced by the great
pestilence nown as Islam.However, the US and Allies in the country have done a lot of good by building schools, hospitals etc and setting up a government to build a better nation where women and girls can learn to read and have choices.That government is much perfect, but no government is.

Bottom line, it is sad that some civs died but it was an accident and these things happen in war but things are getting better there and great care is taken to prevent civ casualties but it happened and will most likely happen again at some point, part of war and building a decent society in Afghanistan.

[Castout]

The thing is soldiers train hard to kill the enemy. When friendly forces are too great in numbers while action is rare I can understand that these men who are looking forward to kill the enemies mistakenly identify friendlies or civilians as hostile forces. These people may be living on edge.

Happens every time, happens in ArmA 2 too.

What needs to be done is to investigate whether the incident happened
due to poor honest misjudgment or lack of it or restraint.

[OneToughHerring]

Even if you're in favour of the war there is still the many questions of how the war is actually being fought. Now I'm sure a lot of people here in Subsim know a thing or two about warfare etc. and also understand that even in a war there should be an attempt being made to mitigate civilian losses, right?

There are many tactics the US military is using that are causing civilian casualties and the inaccurate drone bombings are just one of these tactics. Whenever the US causes civilian casualties there are people, usually Americans, saying that "it's just how war is".

Well that's not the case, troops from other countries are managing without killing civilians in Afghanistan, now how can this be? And it's not just a question of smaller area of responsibility, they just are not killing civilians. It's called being carefull and going after hearts & minds. The US is waging the war as if the Afghan civilians are the enemy. No wonder Karzai has been saying "US troops out" for a long time.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Now that the US troops are largely off the streets in Iraq the fighting has died down considerably. Wish they'd done that earlier so they wouldn't have had to deliver so many US dead and wounded back home, eh? Time to do the same in Afghanistan and sieze the mindless killing of civilians which has been going on for about a decade now.
Right, because American involvement is the reason for all the violence in Iraq and Afghanistan. :yep:

[OneToughHerring]

Right, because American involvement is the reason for all the violence in Iraq and Afghanistan. :yep:

Are you saying that, say, the Finnish military is welcome to invade the US and then if any commotion would ensue among the general US population we would be within our rights to say "Oh, it's those US citizens that are the cause of all the unrest".

[Catfish]

" ... War is hell, things happen.The US went into Afganistan because the Taliban were harboring terrorists, that is the truth, no spin. ..."

Well it is not really a war, just because Bush said so.

Why did the US pay the Taliban, and even Mr. Bin-Laden, directly, with money, and gave him weapons ? When Russia was still in Afghanistan, and its army being harrassed by Bin-Laden's terrorists ?
The US have paid him, and gave him the weapons he still uses.
"There must have been some misunderstanding" oh well.
:88)

"[...]
Bush's Former Oil Company
Linked To bin Laden Family
By Rick Wiles
American Freedom News.com
c. 2001
10-3-1

President Bush recently signed an executive order to freeze the US financial assets of corporations doing business with Osama bin Laden. He described the order as a "strike on the financial foundation of the global terror network." "If you do business with terrorists, if you support or succor them, you will not do business with the United States," said President Bush. He didn't say anything about doing business with a terrorist's brother - or his wealthy financier. When President George W. Bush froze assets connected to Osama bin Laden, he didn't tell the American people that the terrorist mastermind's late brother was an investor in the president's former oil business in Texas. He also hasn't leveled with the American public about his financial connections to a host of shady Saudi characters involved in drug cartels, gun smuggling, and terrorist networks. Doing business with the enemy is nothing new to the Bush family. Much of the Bush family wealth came from supplying needed raw materials and credit to Adolf Hitler's Third Reich. Several business operations managed by Prescott Bush - the president's grandfather - were seized by the US government during World War II under the Trading with the Enemy Act. On October 20, 1942, the federal government seized the Union Banking Corporation in New York City as a front operation for the Nazis. Prescott Bush was a director. Bush, E. Roland Harriman, two Bush associates, and three Nazi executives owned the bank's shares. Eight days later, the Roosevelt administration seized two other corporations managed by Prescott Bush. The Holland-American Trading Corporation and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation, both managed by the Bush-Harriman bank, were accused by the US federal government of being front organizations for Hitler's Third Reich. Again, on November 8, 1942, the federal government seized Nazi-controlled assets of Silesian-American Corporation, another Bush-Harriman company doing business with Hitler. Doing business with the bin Laden empire, therefore, is only the latest extension of the Bush family's financial ties to unsavory individuals and organizations. Now that thousands of American citizens have died in terrorist attacks and the nation is going to war, the American people should know about George W. Bush's relationship with the family of Osama bin Laden. Salem bin Laden, Osama's older brother, was an investor in Arbusto Energy. - the Texas oil company started by George W. Bush. Arbusto means "Bush" in Spanish. Salem bin Laden died in an airplane crash in Texas in 1988. Sheik Mohammed bin Laden, the family patriarch and founder of its construction empire, also died in a plane crash. Upon his death in 1968, he left behind 57 sons and daughters - the offspring he sired with 12 wives in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan. About a dozen brothers manage Bin Laden Brothers Construction - one of the largest construction firms in the Middle East. Fresh out of Harvard Business School, young George W. Bush returned to Midland, TX, in the late 1970s to follow his father's footsteps in the oil business. Beginning in 1978, he set up a series of limited partnerships - Arbusto '78, Arbusto '79, and so on - to drill for oil. One of President Bush's earliest financial backers was James Bath, a Houston aircraft broker. Bath served with President Bush in the Texas Air National Guard. Bath has a mysterious connection to the Central Intelligence Agency. According to a 1976 trust agreement, Salem bin Laden appointed James Bath as his business representative in Houston. Revelation about Bath's relationship with the bin Laden financial empire and the CIA was made public in 1992 by Bill White, a former real estate business partner with Bath. White informed federal investigators in 1992 that Bath told him that he had assisted the CIA in a liaison role since 1976 - the same year former President George Herbert Walker Bush served as director of the CIA. During a bitter legal fight between White and Bath, the real estate partner disclosed that Bath managed a portfolio worth millions of dollars for Sheik Khalid bin Mahfouz and other wealthy Saudis. Among the investments made by Bath with Mahfouz's money was the Houston Gulf Airport. A powerful banker in Saudi Arabia, Mahfouz was one of the largest stockholders in the Bank of Credit and Commerce International. BCCI was a corrupt global banking empire operating in 73 nations and was a major financial and political force in Washington, Paris, Geneva, London, and Hong Kong. Despite the appearance of a normal banking operation, BCCI was actually an international crime syndicate providing "banking services" to the Medellin drug cartel, Pamama dictator Manuel Noriega, Saddam Hussein, terrorist mastermind Abu Nidal, and Khun Sa, the heroin kingpin in Asia's Golden Triangle. The BCCI scandal implicated some of the biggest political names in Washington - both Democrats and Republicans - during the first Bush White House. The bank was accused of laundering money for drug cartels, smuggling weapons to terrorists, and using Middle Eastern oil money to influence American politicians. The chief of the Justice Department's criminal division under former President Bush was Robert Mueller. Because the major players came out of the scandal with slaps on the wrists, many critics accused Mueller of botching the investigation. Mr. Mueller was recently appointed by President George W. Bush as the new Director of the FBI, replacing Louis Freeh who did nothing while William Jefferson Clinton allowed the Red Chinese to loot our national security secrets. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), a division of the Justice Department, reviewed allegations by Bill White in 1992 that James Bath funneled money from wealthy Middle Eastern businessmen to American companies to influence the policies of the Reagan and Bush administrations. Robert Mueller, the new FBI chief, was in a senior position at the Justice Department at the time of the review. White told a Texas court in 1992 that Bath and the Justice Department had "blackballed" him professionally and financially because he refused to keep quiet about his knowledge of an Arabic conspiracy to launder Middle Eastern money into the bank accounts of American businesses and politicians. In sworn depositions, Bath admitted he represented four wealthy Saudi Arabian businessmen as a trustee. He also admitted he used his name on their investments and received, in return, a five- percent stake in their business deals. Indeed, Texas tax documents revealed that Bath owned five percent of Arbusto '79 Ltd., and Arbusto '80 Ltd. Bush Exploration Company controlled the limited partnerships, the general partnership firm owned by young George W. Bush. Although George W. Bush's Texas oil ventures were financial failures, his financial backers recovered their investments through a series of mergers and stock swaps. He changed Arbusto's name to Bush Exploration, then merged the new firm into Spectrum 7 Energy Corporation in 1984. The Bush-controlled oil business eventually ended up being folded into Harken Energy Corp., a Dallas-based corporation. Mr. Bush joined Harken as a director in 1986 and was given 212,000 shares of Harken stock. Bush used his White House connections to land a lucrative contract for the obscure Harken Energy Corp. with the Middle Eastern government of Bahrain. On June 20, 1990, George W. Bush sold his Harken stock for $848,000 and paid off his loan he took out to buy his small share in the Texas Rangers. The Bahrain deal was brokered by David Edwards, a close pal to Bill Clinton and a former employee of Stephens Inc. Shortly after Bush sold his stock, Harken's fortunes nose-dived when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. Some critics claim young George was tipped off in advance by his father about the soon-coming Gulf War. George W. Bush, however, worked wonders for Harken Energy Corp. before the stock collapse. Using the Bush family name, he managed to bring much-needed capital investment to the struggling firm. George W. Bush traveled to Little Rock, AR, to attend a meeting with Jackson Stephens - a powerful Arkansas tycoon who help bankroll the state campaigns of young Bill Clinton. He first gained political prominence as a fund-raiser for President Jimmy Carter. Stephens was also deeply involved in the BCCI scandal by helping the corrupt bank take control of First American Bank in Washington, DC. Jack Stephens didn't need an introduction to young George W. Bush. Mary Anne Stephens, his wife, managed Vice President George Bush's 1988 presidential campaign in Arkansas. Stephens Inc., the well connected brokerage firm owned by Jack Stephens, donated $100,000 to a Bush campaign fundraising dinner in 1991. When George W. Bush won the contested Florida election in 2000, Jack Stephens made a substantial contribution to the Bush inauguration. Recently, former President Bush played golf on April 11, 2001, with Jack Stephens at the Jack Stephens Youth Golf Academy in Little Rock. The former president told Stephens, "Jack, we love you and we are very, very grateful for what you have done." Perhaps the former president was thanking him for the money Stephens provided young George W. Bush. Stephens arranged for a $25 million investment from the Union des Banques Suisses. The Swiss Bank held the minority interest in the Banque de Commerce et de Placements, a Geneva-based subsidiary of BCCI. Both Stephens and Abdullah Taha Bakhsh, a wealthy and well-connected Saudi real estate investor, signed the financial transaction. The Geneva transaction was paid through a joint venture between the Union Bank of Switzerland and its Geneva branch of BCCI. The BCCI connection, therefore, linked George W. Bush with Saudi banker Khaled bin Mahfouz. Known in Arab circles as the "king's treasurer," Mahfouz held a 20 percent take in BCCI between 1986 and 1990. Mahfouz is no stranger to the Bush family. He was a big investor in the Carlyle Group, a defense-industry investment group with deep connections to the Republican Party establishment. Former President Bush is a former member of the company's board of directors. George W. Bush also held shares in Caterair, a Carlyle subsidiary. Sami Baarma, a powerful player in the Mahfouz-owned Prime Commercial Bank of Pakistan, is a member of the Carlyle Group's international advisory board. President Bush certainly is aware of that his former Saudi sugar daddy is still financing Osama bin Laden's terrorist network. USA Today newspaper reported in 1999 that a year after bin Laden's attacks on US embassies in Africa, Khaled bin Mahfouz and other wealthy Saudis were funneling tens of millions of dollars each year into bin Laden's bank accounts. Five top Saudi businessmen ordered the National Commercial Bank to transfer personal funds and $3 million pilfered from a Saudi pension fund to the Capitol Trust Bank in New York City. The money was deposited into the Islamic Relief and Bless Relief - Islamic charities operating in the US and Great Britain as fronts for Osama bin Laden. The Capitol Trust Bank is run by Mohammad Hussein al-Amoudi. His lawyer is Democratic Party bigwig Vernon Jordan, close friend of former President Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. Abdullah Taha Bakhsh, the Arab who cosigned the $25 million cash infusion into George W. Bush's Harken Energy Corporation, appointed Talat Othman to manage his 17.6 percent share in Harken Energy Corp. Othman, a native Palestinian, is president and CEO of Dearborn Financial Inc. - an investment firm in Arlington Heights, IL. Bakhsh also bought a 9.6 percent stake in Worthen Banking Corporation, the Arkansas bank controlled by Jack Stephens. Abdullah Bakhsh's share was the identical percentage as the amount of shares sold by Mochtar Riady, the godfather of the wealthy Indonesian family with close ties to the Chinese communists, Bill Clinton and evangelist Pat Robertson. Bakhsh is represented by Rogers & Wells, a well-connected Republican law firm in New York whose partners include former Secretary of State William P. Rogers. Independent investigator reporter David Twersky reported in the early 1990s that Othman had a seat on Harken's board of directors and met three times in the White House with President George Herbert Walker Bush. Organized by Chief of Staff John Sununu, Othman's first meeting with President Bush at the White House was in August 1990, just days after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. There exist to this day an Arab-Texas connection. Khalid bin Mahfouz, financier of both George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden, still maintains a palatial estate in Houston, TX. Former President George Bush also lives in Houston. James Bath, Texas political confidant of George W. Bush, managed to obtain a $1.4 million loan from Mahfouz in 1990. Bath and Mahfouz, along with former Secretary of Treasury John Connally, were also co-investors in Houston's Main Bank. Bath was also president of Skyway Aircraft Leasing Ltd, a Texas air charter company registered in the Cayman Islands. According to published reports in the early 1990s, the real owner was bin Mahfouz. When Salem bin Laden, Osama' brother, died in 1988, his interest in the Houston Gulf Airport was transferred to bin Mahfouz. Since Osama bin Laden's bloody attack on America on September 11, the federal government has moved quickly to freeze bank accounts connected to Osama bin Laden, Khalid bin Mahfouz, and a host of Islamic charities. Perhaps federal agents should freeze the financial assets of the Bush family too. It would not be the first time Bush-family assets were seized by the US government for trading with the enemy.
[...]"

Sorry for posting the whole paragraph, but i think reading it is worth it.
B.t.w. those Bin-Ladens died in plane crashes, in Texas. Some say Osama's terrorist attack was a revenge :88)


Greetings,
Catfish

[tater]

Even if you're in favour of the war there is still the many questions of how the war is actually being fought. Now I'm sure a lot of people here in Subsim know a thing or two about warfare etc. and also understand that even in a war there should be an attempt being made to mitigate civilian losses, right?

There are many tactics the US military is using that are causing civilian casualties and the inaccurate drone bombings are just one of these tactics. Whenever the US causes civilian casualties there are people, usually Americans, saying that "it's just how war is".

Well that's not the case, troops from other countries are managing without killing civilians in Afghanistan, now how can this be? And it's not just a question of smaller area of responsibility, they just are not killing civilians. It's called being carefull and going after hearts & minds. The US is waging the war as if the Afghan civilians are the enemy. No wonder Karzai has been saying "US troops out" for a long time.

The US does as much as possible to mitigate civilian deaths, period.

It's not US tactics that cause needless deaths, it's the enemy not following the rules of war, and operating out of uniform in areas mixed with civilians.

If the US wished to cause civilian deaths, there'd be MANY MANY more of them. We could in fact virtually wipe out all the civilians, but we chose not to.

Setting unrealistic expectations—say, zero casualties—helps no one. We continually work to minimize the number. Another way to look at it is to imagine how many we could cause if we wished to kill civilians, then look at how many fewer we actually do. So if the number was 25,000 killed in 10 years, and we could have killed 25 million, then we're killing 1% of the number we could if we wished to.

[OneToughHerring]

The US does as much as possible to mitigate civilian deaths, period.

It's not US tactics that cause needless deaths, it's the enemy not following the rules of war, and operating out of uniform in areas mixed with civilians.

If the US wished to cause civilian deaths, there'd be MANY MANY more of them. We could in fact virtually wipe out all the civilians, but we chose not to.

Setting unrealistic expectations—say, zero casualties—helps no one. We continually work to minimize the number. Another way to look at it is to imagine how many we could cause if we wished to kill civilians, then look at how many fewer we actually do. So if the number was 25,000 killed in 10 years, and we could have killed 25 million, then we're killing 1% of the number we could if we wished to.

Well obviously the US isn't trying to kill everyone in Afghanistan but that's not the point. The US wasn't trying to kill everyone in the North and South Vietnam's of the time but still ended up killing a significant amount of civilians.

If civilians are being killed, any civilians, for any reason (on purpose, in error or other), then it is equally wrong. Also we're not seeing any reliable numbers from Afghanistan, partly because it is in many respects a third world country. I doubt everyone is even under any kind of actual citizenship - system there, so broken down as a nation it is and has been. How would the outside world know if a whole bunch of civilians were to die there, for whatever reasons? Because of the media presence? I don't think I trust the 'embedded' media that has been there for the last decade.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Are you saying that, say, the Finnish military is welcome to invade the US and then if any commotion would ensue among the general US population we would be within our rights to say "Oh, it's those US citizens that are the cause of all the unrest".
You have different branches of Islam and different ethnicities stuck together in the area that have been fighting and killing each other for hundreds of years. Even after western forces pull out, they'll just keep right on fighting and killing each other just as they've done.

[tater]

If civilians are being killed, any civilians, for any reason (on purpose, in error or other), then it is equally wrong.

No, it's not "equally wrong" at all.

Intent matters.

By your definition, any civilian casualties negate the use of military power, period. Hitler starts WW2, and if there is ANY chance of the counterattack killing any civilians, it is tantamount to intentionally firebombing a population center with the express purpose of killing as many civilians as possible. That's what your statement I quoted means.

The enemy in this case is intentionally mixing his unmarked combatants with civilians because he knows we will tend to err on the side of not attacking civilians.

In your would-be world, al Queda would simply hide among civilians, and know they were 100% safe all the time. Allied forces could not even raid a house because of the chance they might harm a non-combatant.

[OneToughHerring]

You have different branches of Islam and different ethnicities stuck together in the area that have been fighting and killing each other for hundreds of years. Even after western forces pull out, they'll just keep right on fighting and killing each other just as they've done.

...sooo because they've been fighting each other there for so long it's perfectly ok to send US military, the various merc companies, the Brits, whatever miserable Nato-countries and Nato-slaves such as Finland to do some target practice on those camel jockeys, eh? I mean, why waste a good opportunity to do some good shootin', with live ammo, on a live target.

It's also generic payback for 9/11, so it's all good.

[tater]

Afghanistan is hardly "generic payback." AQ was aided and abetted by the Taliban. In many senses, the Taliban was AQ's creature (not theirs alone, clearly).

The geopolitics are clear, however. The US interest is in preventing a regional hegemony in the Islamic world. To the extent that area is fractured, we "win." Nothing else is required in the long term. The Taliban was not such a risk, but a pan-Islamic state is the express goal of AQ, so harming AQ is also in the geopolitical "pro" column in addition to "payback"—which is fine, BTW, nothing wrong with disproportional payback.

The Taliban, in fact, was initially the creature of Pakistan. Since it was expressly Islamist, a link up with AQ was no great leap. Pakistan, formerly a US client state (India being the CCCP's back in the day) was distanced from the US during the Clinton administration in favor of economic ties with India in a post-Soviet world. Post 9-11, the Bush Admin told the pakis in no uncertain terms that they were to do as we asked them, or they'd be treated as allies of AQ/Taliban (the specifics of the short letter sent them are in Woodward's book, BTW). Forcing Pakistan to divorce the Taliban was also in US interest.

Iraq is similar. In the past, the US interest was served by Iran and Iraq fighting each other. Post 9-11, the US could no longer risk a nuclear power in the region, and a US held Iraq is a direct threat to Iran, as is a powerful, allied Iraq. Again, to the extent the region is destabilized, US geopolitical interest is served. The big problem will continue to be Iran, however. Ideally, we'd end their nuclear adventure with airpower, frankly (the sunnis nearby would be more than pleased, it's only really Russia that concerns us with Shia Iran (they'd make some noise for the masses, but would thank us in the back rooms).

[OneToughHerring]

Yea whatever. It's just a bunch of camel jockeys, their human rights don't matter. Shoot one and you won't go to court or anything, just make up a story that you mistook them for Taliban and there won't be any questions asked.

[tater]

Yea whatever. It's just a bunch of camel jockeys, their human rights don't matter. Shoot one and you won't go to court or anything, just make up a story that you mistook them for Taliban and there won't be any questions asked.

What is your point, exactly, other than your knee-jerk anti-Americanism?

OP says the US acknowledged the mistake. The report in fact was pretty harsh. They will absorb the lesson, and try to do better next time. I have seen no posts here saying, "tough crap, 'camel jockeys,' I hope we kill more of your children."

The two POVs here seem to be:

Yours: that American is bad, and that the US accidentally killing noncombatants is tantamount to intentional attacks on civilians, and must in fact be what we want.

Mine (and others): that the US tries to minimize noncombatant deaths, but sometimes does so anyway, which is unfortunate, but a reality of war.

The US seeks to mitigate attacks largely because it is right to do so, but we also do it because it is in our interest to do so. The latter motivation is far more important, since our interest in this case is a long-term one, and is more reliable than "doing the right thing."

[OneToughHerring]

What is your point, exactly, other than your knee-jerk anti-Americanism?

OP says the US acknowledged the mistake. The report in fact was pretty harsh. They will absorb the lesson, and try to do better next time. I have seen no posts here saying, "tough crap, 'camel jockeys,' I hope we kill more of your children."

The two POVs here seem to be:

Yours: that American is bad, and that the US accidentally killing noncombatants is tantamount to intentional attacks on civilians, and must in fact be what we want.

Mine (and others): that the US tries to minimize noncombatant deaths, but sometimes does so anyway, which is unfortunate, but a reality of war.

The US seeks to mitigate attacks largely because it is right to do so, but we also do it because it is in our interest to do so. The latter motivation is far more important, since our interest in this case is a long-term one, and is more reliable than "doing the right thing."

What do you mean, anti-ah-mu-ri-can? It's those darn camel jockeys who are anti-ah-mu-ri-can. They ain't up to no good and I just know it. Yea I know some boys over there in Eye-Raac and Af-Ghaa-N-Staan who are getting some pretty good kills. Confirmed kills. So what if some aren't carrying weapons, they looked like they were. They might have just left their weapons at home. One things for sure, they won't be carrying no weapons no more, or shootin' at no Ah-mu-ri-cans no more.

[tater]

Again, you fail to answer. What is your point other than attacking the US?

Who here said that they deserved to die or that it was a good thing at any level?

It is not US policy to intentionally kill civilians, or we'd have already wiped all of them out.

It is not in US interest to kill civilians for political/geopolitical reasons.

It is not in the interest of individual US troops to kill civilians, because as decent human beings, they don't like to do this.

[Jimbuna]

Again, you fail to answer. What is your point other than attacking the US?


It looks like you've answered answered your question already.

Mr HERRING never answers with anything other than further provocative statements that blatantly fail to answer any counter opinions put against his own.

They usually consist of anti US or Brit diatribe that further degenerate the thread in question.

Look at his history of thread topics commenced by himself....a disruptive influence if ever I saw one.

I should imagine this is the only American forum, a forum with an American majority of members to boot that put up with his incessant ramblings.

I wonder who'll be sharing a room with him at the forthcoming SS Meet :cool:

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/9652/wizardbehindcurtain.jpg

[Bilge_Rat]

They usually consist of anti US or Brit diatribe that further degenerate the thread in question.





..or anti-jewish..:nope:

the only good thing is that I doubt anyone here takes what he says seriously.

[Onkel Neal]

Again, you fail to answer. What is your point other than attacking the US?

Who here said that they deserved to die or that it was a good thing at any level?

It is not US policy to intentionally kill civilians, or we'd have already wiped all of them out.

It is not in US interest to kill civilians for political/geopolitical reasons.

It is not in the interest of individual US troops to kill civilians, because as decent human beings, they don't like to do this.

Why, oh why, do you fall for this stuff? :) You keep replying to him, he will keep pushing your buttons....

[OneToughHerring]

..or anti-jewish..:nope:

the only good thing is that I doubt anyone here takes what he says seriously.

Yes, anyone who criticises the wholesale slaughter of, say, Afghanis is anti-Jewish in your eyes.

Good thing you didn't use the word anti-semitic though, since there are other Semitic people besides the Jews.

[Bilge_Rat]

Yes, anyone who criticises the wholesale slaughter of, say, Afghanis is anti-Jewish in your eyes.



no, I would not say that about any other forum member, but you have proved time and time again your prejudice against jews.

You seem to take some pleasure out of it when all it does is undercut your credibility when you try to post something semi-sensible.

As it is, I presume most members just see you as some kind of comic relief...:woot:

[tater]

Yes, anyone who criticises the wholesale slaughter of, say, Afghanis is anti-Jewish in your eyes.

Good thing you didn't use the word anti-semitic though, since there are other Semitic people besides the Jews.

Wholesale? Hardly. The Tokyo firebombing raid was "wholesale" at 102,000 killed in one night. Anything less than tens of thousands per attack is not wholesale given our capabilities.

Presumably you were one who agreed with the idiotic comparison of Gitmo to the Soviet Gulag made in the US press a few years ago. That's right, detaining a few hundred equates to the murder of millions, and the accidental death of 20-something equates to area bombing. Got it.

[tater]

Why, oh why, do you fall for this stuff? :) You keep replying to him, he will keep pushing your buttons....

I'm bored today. Nothing more than that :)

tater

PS—he actually is incapable of pushing any of my buttons. He's 100% predictable, I can imagine his take on virtually any subject like this before he posts. He acts as a characakture of a certain viewpoint that is unfortunately common. As such, he's a good straw man.

[Weiss Pinguin]

What do you mean, anti-ah-mu-ri-can? It's those darn camel jockeys who are anti-ah-mu-ri-can. They ain't up to no good and I just know it. Yea I know some boys over there in Eye-Raac and Af-Ghaa-N-Staan who are getting some pretty good kills. Confirmed kills. So what if some aren't carrying weapons, they looked like they were. They might have just left their weapons at home. One things for sure, they won't be carrying no weapons no more, or shootin' at no Ah-mu-ri-cans no more.
You seem to have developed a serious speech impediment, I suggest a good doctor. :hmmm:

[Ducimus]

I'm surprised to see so many replies to a blatant troll post from a user who's agenda and views have become quite obvious over time. He's undeserving of even the 15 seconds it took to write these two sentences.

[AVGWarhawk]

Don't take bait:

http://www.sadiethepilot.com/aaweb/blogpix5/bait_l.jpg

[Weiss Pinguin]

I'm surprised to see so many replies to a blatant troll post from a user who's agenda and views have become quite obvious over time. He's undeserving of even the 15 seconds it took to write these two sentences.
Now I'm just trying to see how ridiculous he can get ;)

[OneToughHerring]

no, I would not say that about any other forum member, but you have proved time and time again your prejudice against jews.

You seem to take some pleasure out of it when all it does is undercut your credibility when you try to post something semi-sensible.

As it is, I presume most members just see you as some kind of comic relief...:woot:

Not all Jews are zionists, as I'm sure you know but are still trying to pull the ol' smear trick on me. Also I think you know what anti-zionist Jews have to say about zionists but are just kind of trying to forget about it. :)

[Jimbuna]

My underlying concern is for the poor unfortunate who may be having a bad day some time in the future and inadvertently, without thinking responds to the constant and repetitive baiting and is punished for a moments indiscretion.

And this comes from someone who hasn't posted a BPR on this thread but has had numerous incomers stating their annoyance at the sh!te they see coming repeatedly from the same individual source.

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/9652/wizardbehindcurtain.jpg

[AVGWarhawk]

I like tater-tots. :DL

[Oberon]

Jim does make a valid point here...I mean, we've all had our fun here because we've heard it all before and we know what buttons to press but some other people might not have so much self-restraint and will get themselves banned whilst falling for the bait as opposed to nibbling at it like we do. :hmmm:

[Bilge_Rat]

so what should we do, ignore him?

where is the fun in that...:ping:

[AVGWarhawk]

http://www.pollsb.com/photos/o/29198-tater_tots.jpg

[Oberon]

so what should we do, ignore him?

where is the fun in that...:ping:

Either that or put some kind of Health and Safety warning on him, like they have on cigarettes in the UK. :hmmm:

[tater]

I always steal the tater tots from my kids when they aren't looking. Mmmm.

[AVGWarhawk]

Well it is funny....my wife got a bag at the grocery over the weekend. For some reason she was excited about the tots. I guess there really is something about tots.....:hmmm:

[Weiss Pinguin]

Well it is funny....my wife got a bag at the grocery over the weekend. For some reason she was excited about the tots. I guess there really is something about tots.....:hmmm:
We never get tots :(

[AVGWarhawk]

We never get tots :(


There was a while there we did not get tots either but this weekend she had a taste for a tot and the bag was brought home. :up:

[Ducimus]

I always steal the tater tots from my kids when they aren't looking. Mmmm.

I remember back in highschool, the cafeteria lunch's came with these tater tot like wedges. You'd get two in a pack. The pack being something akin to what you'd put fries in. They were soooo freaking greasy you could throw them at the underside of an overhang and they'd stick. They also slid down the back of your throat when you ate them. Greasy as all hell, but pretty tasty with ketchup.

[Dowly]

I think most of those who are regular visitors here in the snake pit knows what kind of man/boy OTH is and as such can brush off his baiting attempts with a laughter.

Confused he is. :yep:

[Weiss Pinguin]

I always steal the tater tots from my kids when they aren't looking. Mmmm.
http://thumbnails.hulu.com/6/289/4405_512x288_manicured__Sa9Ii+GAuU6+qReKpywNPA.jpg

Hey, give me your tots!

[OneToughHerring]

Oh all right then.

Again, you fail to answer. What is your point other than attacking the US?

To bring attention to the civilian casualties of the war in Afghanistan. Is that allowed?

Who here said that they deserved to die or that it was a good thing at any level?

By they you mean the victims mentioned in the OP? I think the action that led to their death may have been accidental. Unfortunately this doesn't change the fact that they are dead.

And yes I know the saying "you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs". Really, is that your defence here, and for all (there are a lot more then just the ones in this strike) the victims of the Afghanistan war?

It is not US policy to intentionally kill civilians, or we'd have already wiped all of them out.

Like I said, I don't believe it is. The military doctrine isn't an absolute thing. Sometimes killing civilians might be allowed. You might be surprised how lax the rules are governing this.

It is not in US interest to kill civilians for political/geopolitical reasons.

How about military reasons? You think the boots on the ground will phone up Obama when they have to decide whether to kill some civilians they think might be aiding the Taliban?

It is not in the interest of individual US troops to kill civilians, because as decent human beings, they don't like to do this.

You sure about that?

[VonHesse]

I always steal the tater tots from my kids when they aren't looking. Mmmm.

Tater's tots's tater tots :D

[Ducimus]

Tater's tots's tater tots :D

Navy beans, navy beans.... slopppy joes, slop slop sloppy joes! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_-KbstEG4E)

[TLAM Strike]

I had a bag of tater tots in the freezer for about two years until I moved, I took the tots with me and they stayed in the new freezer for another two years until I tossed them.

I don't like tater tots... :nope:

[August]

I had a bag of tater tots in the freezer for about two years until I moved, I took the tots with me and they stayed in the new freezer for another two years until I tossed them.

I don't like tater tots... :nope:

Yet you gave them space in your freezer for almost half a decade. :hmmm:

[CaptainHaplo]

I have to be in the mood for potato barrels.... but ya know what this has me thinking would be blasted good....

Onion rings... or better yet - a "Bloomin Onion" (tm)

[AVGWarhawk]

I had a bag of tater tots in the freezer for about two years until I moved, I took the tots with me and they stayed in the new freezer for another two years until I tossed them.

I don't like tater tots... :nope:

Ketchup brother!!! Kethup make everything taste better....even tots. :D

[AVGWarhawk]

Oh all right then.



To bring attention to the civilian casualties of the war in Afghanistan. Is that allowed?



By they you mean the victims mentioned in the OP? I think the action that led to their death may have been accidental. Unfortunately this doesn't change the fact that they are dead.

And yes I know the saying "you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs". Really, is that your defence here, and for all (there are a lot more then just the ones in this strike) the victims of the Afghanistan war?



Like I said, I don't believe it is. The military doctrine isn't an absolute thing. Sometimes killing civilians might be allowed. You might be surprised how lax the rules are governing this.



How about military reasons? You think the boots on the ground will phone up Obama when they have to decide whether to kill some civilians they think might be aiding the Taliban?



You sure about that?


Yes I'm sure....I like tater tots. :yeah:

[tater]

3 dead today in Germany as the result of Allied bombing...

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/LDE6502GA.htm

[Bubblehead1980]

Are you saying that, say, the Finnish military is welcome to invade the US and then if any commotion would ensue among the general US population we would be within our rights to say "Oh, it's those US citizens that are the cause of all the unrest".

:har: Fin's could not invade Rhode Island :har: good laugh there.

[OneToughHerring]

:har: Fin's could not invade Rhode Island :har: good laugh there.

Well I think this debate just has to be settled IRL, don't you agree?

[Jimbuna]

Well I think this debate just has to be settled IRL, don't you agree?

Not sure what context you meant that post in but I suspect you could well be in 'mr internet tough guy' mode AGAIN. :hmmm:

Does this mean your coming to the SS Meet? :DL

Best we see a picture of you here first in case we have to cancel the event :DL


http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/9652/wizardbehindcurtain.jpg

[Jimbuna]

Yes I'm sure....I like tater tots. :yeah:

Hey....I thought you guys lived on Macdonalds fries over there :hmmm:

Am I going to look stupider than usual if I order some of them tater tots....they look pretty goodand a bit like our potato gems :DL

http://www.simplygreatmeals.com.au/recipe/937/birds-eye-gems-dipping-sauce

http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/6899/potatow.jpg (http://img85.imageshack.us/i/potatow.jpg/)

[OneToughHerring]

Does this mean your coming to the SS Meet? :DL

Where is the SS meet (sounds a bit ominous) then?

[Jimbuna]

Where is the SS meet (sounds a bit ominous) then?

It's a sub forum to the GT, non too controversial which is possibly why you've never noticed it :DL


http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/9652/wizardbehindcurtain.jpg

[Weiss Pinguin]

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/9652/wizardbehindcurtain.jpg
I'm kind of ashamed to say that I finally realized just now what that picture was supposed to mean :lol:

[Jimbuna]

I'm kind of ashamed to say that I finally realized just now what that picture was supposed to mean :lol:

Next thing you'll be telling me you've never seen the movie :DL

[Weiss Pinguin]

Next thing you'll be telling me you've never seen the movie :DL
Oh I've seen the movie, it's just been a slow week...

http://poietes.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/if-i-only-had-a-brain.gif
If I only had a brain....

[Jimbuna]

Hey, the straw man :o

Or am I being too analytical? :hmmm::DL

[Weiss Pinguin]

Actually I didn't have anything in mind, but if I thought hard enough I could probably think up something ;)

[Jimbuna]

Actually I didn't have anything in mind, but if I thought hard enough I could probably think up something ;)

Shh...best be quiet the thread is quiet atm :03:

[Dowly]

:hmmm:
















PARTYYYYYY!!!!! :woot::woot:

[Weiss Pinguin]

PARTYYYYYY!!!!! :woot::woot:
Oooh yeeeeeeaahhh

http://www.greatdreams.com/oz/dorothy_scarecrow.gif

[Jimbuna]

The moment just before they finally meet <insert name here> :woot:

http://www.micheloud.com/FXM/MH/Scans/Back_at_Oz_1.jpg

[OneToughHerring]

http://pubrecord.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/us_war_deaths_coffins_DoD.jpg

No Dorothy, we're not in Kansas anymore.

[Happy Times]

Ýou should be taken to an American G.I. bar to show your knife and tell your stories.

Or maybe a boat trip to Israel.:hmmm:

[August]

Ýou should be taken to an American G.I. bar to show your knife and tell your stories.

Or maybe a boat trip to Israel.:hmmm:

He'd have to leave his moms basement first... :DL

[Ducimus]

Ýou should be taken to an American G.I. bar to show your knife and tell your stories.

Or maybe a boat trip to Israel.:hmmm:

He'd have to leave his moms basement first... :DL



Everyone's favorite ITG found in his natural habitat.
http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/nerd_computer_repair.jpg

[AVGWarhawk]

Well I think this debate just has to be settled IRL, don't you agree?


Yes, I like tater tots. Settled. :up:

[AVGWarhawk]

http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/nerd_computer_repair.jpg


This guy is obviously a tater tot eater.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Not as much as this guy:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_wg9lmL2DyI4/StfrdEqsU5I/AAAAAAAACtA/eWQ5_CDxMu0/s320/napoleon+dynamite+tots.jpg

[Jimbuna]

http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/nerd_computer_repair.jpg


This guy is obviously a tater tot eater.

Which one?

I can see two pussies on that photo :hmmm:

[Dowly]

Which one?



http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee274/Finnish_Ferret/Forums%20responses/skz77l-1.gif

[Weiss Pinguin]

http://i230.photobucket.com/albums/ee274/Finnish_Ferret/Forums%20responses/skz77l-1.gif
:haha:

[AVGWarhawk]

http://recipes.sparkpeople.com/great-recipes.asp?food=tater+tot+casserole

What a diverse little food.

[OneToughHerring]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37411258/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

"KABUL, Afghanistan - Inexperienced operators of a U.S. drone aircraft ignored or downplayed signs that civilians were aboard a convoy blasted by American missiles in Afghanistan earlier this year, said a military investigation report released Saturday."

Guess this drone thing is yet another US 'precise'-weapon that isn't so precise afterall.

[August]

http://recipes.sparkpeople.com/great-recipes.asp?food=tater+tot+casserole

What a diverse little food.

Broccoli casserole? Yech!

[Happy Times]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37411258/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

"KABUL, Afghanistan - Inexperienced operators of a U.S. drone aircraft ignored or downplayed signs that civilians were aboard a convoy blasted by American missiles in Afghanistan earlier this year, said a military investigation report released Saturday."

Guess this drone thing is yet another US 'precise'-weapon that isn't so precise afterall.

They should maybe respect the local culture more and do it like them, massacre all village by village.

[OneToughHerring]

They should maybe respect the local culture more and do it like them, massacre all village by village.

This is like 9/11 for the Afghanis.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Guess this drone thing is yet another US 'precise'-weapon that isn't so precise afterall.
"Inexperienced operators [...]"
Any weapon is only as effective as the person using it.

[AVGWarhawk]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37411258/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

"KABUL, Afghanistan - Inexperienced operators of a U.S. drone aircraft ignored or downplayed signs that civilians were aboard a convoy blasted by American missiles in Afghanistan earlier this year, said a military investigation report released Saturday."

Guess this drone thing is yet another US 'precise'-weapon that isn't so precise afterall.


Many are precise.... :03:

[Ducimus]

Everyones favorite troll, hard at work.
http://www.haverodwilltravel.com/images/Trolling%202.jpg


Viva la tater tots!

[Weiss Pinguin]

Fishsticks - The tater tots of the sea
http://wendyusuallywanders.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/fishsticks.jpg


Actually not really, but you know :shifty:

[Jimbuna]

Everyones favorite troll, hard at work.
http://www.haverodwilltravel.com/images/Trolling%202.jpg


Viva la tater tots!

LMAO :DL

[AVGWarhawk]

At Duci :har:

[AVGWarhawk]

http://gallerydriver.com/Art/Moms_Tater_Tots_72dpi1.jpg

[HunterICX]

^http://img375.imageshack.us/img375/2695/iconscared.gif

creepy

HunterICX

[AVGWarhawk]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2531/4076304819_5cd1bfe060.jpg

[Dowly]

I like fishsticks.

[Jimbuna]

I thought you would be more into fish fingers :DL

[Dowly]

I thought you would be more into fish fingers :DL

Jim made a funny. :DL

[AVGWarhawk]

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y214/liquidbrilliant/fishfingers800.jpg

[Jimbuna]

Jim made a funny. :DL

I weren't sure about your level of understanding....I am impressed :yeah:

@Chris....crackin mate, gotta have/pinch that :DL

[Dowly]

I weren't sure about your level of understanding....I am impressed :yeah:

I HAVENT WATCHED THE MOVIE FFS!!! :stare:

[OneToughHerring]

Links removed
(http://mikeely.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/corporal_joshua_bernard_killed_in_action_afghanist an.jpg)

[Weiss Pinguin]

Links removed
Can someone remove these links? Incredibly tasteless and crosses the line. :nope: I don't care what the point is, or who's trying to make it, posting graphic images like these is not called for.

[Oberon]

How about Fish and Chips? :hmmm:

[August]

How about Fish and Chips? :hmmm:

http://russelldavies.typepad.com/ateaandathink/images/2007/08/22/herring.jpg

[OneToughHerring]

Can someone remove these links? Incredibly tasteless and crosses the line. :nope: I don't care what the point is, or who's trying to make it, posting graphic images like these is not called for.

Yes I don't like that war either.

[AVGWarhawk]

Yes I don't like that war either.

Huh?

At least post that the links are graphic in nature. Not so hard is it?

[Jimbuna]

I HAVENT WATCHED THE MOVIE FFS!!! :stare:

I'm now convinced we're on different wavelengths :hmmm:

I'll PM you :DL

[August]

Look where he got the pictures. No wonder he bristles whenever someone badmouths commies... :rotfl2:

[Weiss Pinguin]

Huh?

At least post that the links are graphic in nature. Not so hard is it?
Well, I guess it's not like we stick warning signs to our bait when we go fishing.

[OneToughHerring]

Look where he got the pictures. No wonder he bristles whenever someone badmouths commies... :rotfl2:

They were among the first that came up with Google search. Not that the other content on that page is that off the mark, pretty spot on if you ask me.

[Oberon]

Here's some more pics of the big bad western troops in Afghanistan and Iraq:

http://i47.tinypic.com/fx7c55.jpg

http://img.slate.com/media/1/123125/123063/2156615/2179083/071226_WS_iraqEX.jpg

http://i.b5z.net/i/u/1219065/i//Soldiers_Helping_Children_1.jpg

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kzt00mMcAX1qbv6s1o1_500.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/07/27/article-1202407-05DA9F0D000005DC-571_468x286.jpg

:nope: Disgraceful...

[Weiss Pinguin]

:nope: Disgraceful...
The audacity of some soldiers is absolutely appalling :yep:

[OneToughHerring]

Ok I added the warning.

[AVGWarhawk]

Ok I added the warning.

Thanks. We can not hide or run from the atrocity of war. Truly, if we do not see it it does not mean these atrocities are not there. A warning is always nice. :up: Thanks again.

[Jimbuna]

Look where he got the pictures. No wonder he bristles whenever someone badmouths commies... :rotfl2:

Your surely not suprised :hmmm:

It's not as if this is the first time :DL

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/9652/wizardbehindcurtain.jpg

[Oberon]

Thanks. We can not hide or run from the atrocity of war. Truly, if we do not see it it does not mean these atrocities are not there. A warning is always nice. :up: Thanks again.

Well said, war is terrible, no-one who has ever fought in a war really wants to see another, however it's not as if only one side is doing the killing, civilians always face the worst of war, just ask the inhabitants of any of the nations involved in the Second World War in Europe.

You have to admit though, although the smart weapons are not infallible, they HAVE reduced civilian casualties in comparison to those in war say fifty-sixty odd years ago.

You will never end war, but you can try to make it cleaner...if the enemy is willing to co-operate that is. :damn:

[Jimbuna]

Can someone remove these links? Incredibly tasteless and crosses the line. :nope: I don't care what the point is, or who's trying to make it, posting graphic images like these is not called for.

links have been removed WP and I applaud the common sense decision/move :up:

[heartc]

Oh yeah. I know America is very bad. I hear it all the time here. Oh dear Lord, why did you bring America upon us? Let's see how much better the world would be off without it (yeah, I'm not a fan of "what if" scenarios either, but this one is pretty straight forward):

There would probably still be monarchies all over the place in Europe. But this is too complicated to grasp, or might even not have been bad in some places, so let's fast forward a bit more:

1. 1945. Probably more like 1948 / 49: All of Europe, with - probably - the exception of the British Isles, would be living in the Stalinist dictatorship. Or maybe - but far less likely - in Nazi dictatorship. The whole of Europe, starting at least from France, would probably be a Communist dictatorship.

2. There would be no free press as a result of that.

3. No free elections either.

4. No free people, responsible only to their God. Instead, only confined people under the state.

5. No access to a free internet for free citizens. No OTH posting anti-american crap, no Dowly posting boobies, no Tribesman posting about the religion of peace, no Skybird posting about the next crusade. The internet would be read-only - if it at all existed - to further the proper education of the collective.

6. No free media. Media would only be the mouthpiece of the political bureau, be it Nazi or Communist.

7. Lots of dead heroes no one would have ever heard of - those people who would try to change all the above into something better, but have neither an outside source of support, nor sufficient means for support from within to achieve that. And if anyone would ever hear about them, it would be once they were dead, disgraced by the state run information and media system as traitors to the greater glory of the state.

This is a very realistic scenario. France was conquered, and England was isolated. It WOULD have been either Communism or Nazism for all of Europe (with maybe the exception of England).
And yes, maybe at some point enough people would have stood up against all odds, and get crushed, and stood up again decades later, and get crushed again, and MAYBE would have stood up once more and MAYBE would have even re-acquired FREEDOM after all, in some countries. But that would have been a long time into the future and would have cost a lot of lifes.

But it didn't happen like that. Instead, some people from across the pond got involved. People who had gone over there to win freedom in the first place. And then, when they came back, they didn't "just" crush Nazism and kept communism at bay, but they also enabled the free people of Europe - including their former enemies - to live as free individuals in a free world. And then, after another several decades, through steadfastness - AND brave people in those other countries - this free world was extended to other countries that hadn't seen freedom since 1939.
And by God, the Americans are around when freedom happens til today. People who were formerly forbidden to educate themselves can now do so in Afghanistan. People who could not vote in Iraq can now do so. Including those whose existence previously was limited to getting gassed by chemical air attacks.

The Americans don't do it because they love mankind so much. They do it because their system - including the outside periphery - can only work when people have freedom. That's what makes it probably the best system mankind has ever come up with (and the Americans didn't invent it, but they re-introduced it in modern history, and with force). The system itself is Freedom. Is it perfect? No. Because man is not perfect.

But say whatever the **** you will - never in the history of mankind has there been a time when so many people have been living so free under fair law, had so much education, and so many possibilities.

No, America is not the Messiah. America has a lot of power, and so much power can be dangerous. But the very essence of the idea of America is that this power, in the end, is not in the hands of parties or the state, but of THE PEOPLE (and it is designed to protect that very freedom from outside offenders who would love nothing more than see America be gone).
That's why I would hate to ever see America, politically, moving into the direction of the EU or any European country. Because those countries are putting too much faith into the state, and too little trust into the citizens. If America would ever do that, it will be the end of it, and it might end up destroying the whole damn world. Because the first thing the state tries to do, once it has gained a critical mass of power, is to secure that by taking the rights from the people and dumbing them down so they stop asking questions. And once it has done that, there's no telling where this new found power is planning to stop, if at all.

But as of now, America has been the opposite: It is a country where THE PEOPLE are bearing arms and say that whenever the state gets too loud, we will shoot its ass up. Or we will impeach our President. Or we will throw our Governors into jail. And they DO IT, too. And THAT is what makes the difference. For all the bad things America might do, it is still kept in check by the only sound kind of collective there is: A collective of FREE PEOPLE. And in this imperfect world, this is the closest thing to perfection you could ever hope to achieve.

All this Anti-Americanism, which is kinda "trendy" these days, only goes to show how dumb mankind can really be. Today we are living in a world that most people in history could have only dreamed of. And it wasn't Russia, China, India, Finland or France who brought that about in recent decades. And no, it wasn't "America" either. It were the FREE PEOPLE of America. We can be as free once we get over our Anti-American inferiority complex and take care of our own countries instead of bitching about American politics.

God Bless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqlJl1LfDP4

And God damn me if the above is not part of the best music in the world.

[CaptainHaplo]

And may he bless you, Heartc.

[August]

And may he bless you, Heartc.

Seconded.

[Sailor Steve]

Heartc, if any American had said those words they would have been considered jingoistic at the very least. Coming from outside, especially from Germany, they are one of the kindest compliments we have ever been payed. With a tiny bit of editing (for correct English only - I wouldn't change a word) that could be a speech to be published and remembered.

Thank you.

[AVGWarhawk]

Damn HeartC...absolutely beautiful. It is the likes of you that I know my uncle did not die in vain flying his B17 over the Kiel subpens June 13th 1943.

[Aramike]

Okay, I'm gonna have to remember this, heartc ... my nominee for 2010 Best of Subsim Post of the Year. :salute:

[Sailor Steve]

Okay, I'm gonna have to remember this, heartc ... my nominee for 2010 Best of Subsim Post of the Year. :salute:
:yep:

[Weiss Pinguin]

Okay, I'm gonna have to remember this, heartc ... my nominee for 2010 Best of Subsim Post of the Year. :salute:
Mine too :)

[HunterICX]

@Heartc: Well said! :)

Damn HeartC...absolutely beautiful. It is the likes of you that I know my uncle did not die in vain flying his B17 over the Kiel subpens June 13th 1943.

If there's one group of people that I admire the most of World War 2 it has to be the bomber crew of the USAAF and RAF.

Their nerves and bravery where really put to the test as they had to take the beating the enemy was able to throw at them, there's no cover for them in the skies and they had to remain in formation to make sure their effort will result in the maximum amount of damage it could inflict on the enemy's war effort.

what makes them so special to me, that when they returned to base completly trashed by the enemy's defences that most of them didn't hesitate to go back and do it again.

I admire their spirit, dedication and sacrifice that helped inflicting damage on the enemy's war capabilities and made the freedom of europe possible.

and this has to be the most beautifull tribute I've ever seen about the B-17 and the crew: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcL9M9PQlIQ

Your uncle was a great man, Chris :salute:

Regards,
Wim

[OneToughHerring]

HunterICX,

http://www.stevenroyedwards.com/bombingofnijmegen.html

heartc,

if the Americans were so set on promoting freedom in the world then they should've acted when the nazi star was still in ascent. Throughout the 30's the Americans were very silent and yes, even collaborated with the nazis and helped their warmachine get on it's feet. In the US the German American Bund (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_American_Bund)was very popular having rallies in, among other places, the packed Madison Square Garden. Only with Pearl Harbor and acts of aggression against the US by the nazis did US get fully into the war and then they delayed the opening up of the second front until very late in the war.

Also during the reign of Soviet Union the US was pretty happy to divide the resources with the Soviets and not really challenge their grip on Europe. Proxy wars in the third world don't look like the acts of the vanguard of freedom but rather the continuation of the age old rule of the colonialists. And this was the role that the US tried and is still trying to grasp, the role of the colonial master in the third world given up by the Europeans. Too bad the US is constantly getting it's ass handed to it by small poor developing nations.

[Oberon]

@Heartc: Well said! :)



If there's one group of people that I admire the most of World War 2 it has to be the bomber crew of the USAAF and RAF.

Their nerves and bravery where really put to the test as they had to take the beating the enemy was able to throw at them, there's no cover for them in the skies and they had to remain in formation to make sure their effort will result in the maximum amount of damage it could inflict on the enemy's war effort.

what makes them so special to me, that when they returned to base completly trashed by the enemy's defences that most of them didn't hesitate to go back and do it again.

I admire their spirit, dedication and sacrifice that helped inflicting damage on the enemy's war capabilities and made the freedom of europe possible.

and this has to be the most beautifull tribute I've ever seen about the B-17 and the crew: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcL9M9PQlIQ

Your uncle was a great man, Chris :salute:

Regards,
Wim

I can only second this, the casualty rates of the B17s over Europe was horrendous, and the courage it took those men to go up there with nowhere to hide, nothing to do except hope that you'd make it back or if the worst came to the worst make it out of the plane alive.
God bless him :salute:

[heartc]

Just the facts as I see them guys. :salute:


heartc,


http://asset.soup.io/asset/0611/8208_c395_390.gif

[OneToughHerring]

Well I got to express my view concerning the US so I'm happy. :)

[Sailor Steve]

if the Americans were so set on promoting freedom in the world then they should've acted when the nazi star was still in ascent. Throughout the 30's the Americans were very silent and yes, even collaborated with the nazis and helped their warmachine get on it's feet. In the US the German American Bund (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_American_Bund)was very popular having rallies in, among other places, the packed Madison Square Garden. Only with Pearl Harbor and acts of aggression against the US by the nazis did US get fully into the war and then they delayed the opening up of the second front until very late in the war.
The United States decided very early on to avoid 'entanglements' with European powers. One of our earliest internal battles was between Secretary Of State Thomas Jefferson and Secretary Of The Treasury Alexander Hamilton over the latest war between the British and the French. Jefferson and his Republicans were afraid of siding with the British because the Revolution was still fresh in their minds. Hamilton and his Federalists were afraid of siding with the French because this new Revolutionary government was not the same one that had helped us during our revolution, and in fact had murdered the king who did help us.

This cause a lot of hostility between the two parties, including calling each other 'Anglomen' and 'Francomen'. The end result is that America has always been reluctant to get involved in European politics. This was true in our delayed entry into World War One as well.

But we aren't perfect, not by a long shot. Vietnam showed that quite plainly.

Also during the reign of Soviet Union the US was pretty happy to divide the resources with the Soviets and not really challenge their grip on Europe. Proxy wars in the third world don't look like the acts of the vanguard of freedom but rather the continuation of the age old rule of the colonialists. And this was the role that the US tried and is still trying to grasp, the role of the colonial master in the third world given up by the Europeans.
And there are Americans who feel exactly the same way, which is another thing that sets us apart. You aren't bringing up anything that hasn't been argued here for years. Are we being colonialists, or aren't we. We don't know ourselves, but at least we keep the discussion open.

Too bad the US is constantly getting it's ass handed to it by small poor developing nations.
And that's another misconception on your part and ours. It happens not because we are beaten, but because we play too nice. Britain lost India because they were polite and friendly with the people they subjugated. If Russia or Germany had controlled India Ghandi would have been a bug stain the first time he spoke up. The Brits put up with that sort of thing.

And so do we. We 'lost' in Vietnam because half of us were convinced we shouldn't have been there in the first place. We made up 'rules' and then we played by them. "Don't bomb here." "Don't go there." We could have easily wiped out any North Vietnamese resistance, but we refused to bomb Hanoi, and we refused to slaughter civilians wholesale like some countries would have. We could have dominated the whole country easily, but we didn't want to end up in a war with the Russians and the Chinese, who were supporting North Vietnam. We also had the problem that if we had won, what would we do with it? We would have forced ourselves into the position of dominating a people thousands of miles away who didn't want us there. Control of that type has never been our aim. We got involved because we thought we were helping the good South Vietnamese against the evil North Vietnamese. We got uninvolved because we realized we were wrong.

Now to Iraq. We didn't "get our ass handed to us". We stomped the Iraqi army into the ground and won easily in a matter of weeks. Ever since then we've had to face the fact that we're trying to police a country against a secret army which is willing to blow up their own people just to make a point, and it's looking more and more like it may just be impossible.

And you haven't answered heartc's question of what the world would have looked like if there was no America.

It's easy to hate, and it's easy to find fault. On some subjects you seem very reasonable. When America and Israel crop up you seem to do nothing but attack and spit venom. There is no discussing those subjects with you - just fighting and hatred.

[OneToughHerring]

What if there was no USA? Well Europe would be much stronger militarily then it is today. Why? Because I suppose it would have to be. Today Europe can lean on the US as a kind of a crutch, a helper. US nukes and military exist so that Europe doesn't need to have that many of them. UK is getting rid of the Tridents and many Euro nations are getting rid of military service. Not Finland though.

[Oberon]

What if there was no USA? Well Europe would be much stronger militarily then it is today.

Mate, if there was no US, Finland would be a very small smear under the Soviet boot.

[OneToughHerring]

Mate, if there was no US, Finland would be a very small smear under the Soviet boot.

Look who's talking, the British who promised us help in the Winter War and then didn't deliver. Maybe you should just keep quiet about Finland.

I piss on your brandy-sipping Churchill. :D

"Some chicken. Some neck."

Some ****ing liar.

[Dowly]

Mate, if there was no US, Finland would be a very small smear under the Soviet boot.

What exactly US did for Finland? :hmmm: Serious , curious question.

[Jimbuna]

Look who's talking, the British who promised us help in the Winter War and then didn't deliver. Maybe you should just keep quiet about Finland.

I piss on your brandy-sipping Churchill. :D

"Some chicken. Some neck."

Some ****ing liar.

And maybe you should just keep quiet about everything you post here.

Your about as welcome and popular as a fart in a spacesuit by my estimation....Mr ITG :D

You should learn some civility and respect for your peer group.

You'd be amazed how quickly it might be reiprocated.

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/9652/wizardbehindcurtain.jpg

[Oberon]

What exactly US did for Finland? :hmmm: Serious , curious question.

Not anything directly, however without the US to check the Soviet advance through Nazi territory the Soviets would have just marched through to the Channel (eventually, although the Germans would have had more forces to throw against them, so the timeframe is liquid, heck, it's quite possible some kind of treaty might have been reached, but I doubt it).
With the Soviet Union in power of most of Europe and the US nowhere to be seen, there would have been little to nothing to stop the Soviets from eating up the whole of Scandinavia and probably the UK too given enough time, since they would have had no-one and nothing to check them.
This is speculative though, and I admit things could have panned out differently, Finland was good at eating Soviet attacks so perhaps the Soviets would have decided that they weren't worth the trouble and gone around them...but with no other real trading partners than the USSR, Finland would have eventually slipped into a left-wing government no doubt, likewise the UK if we were still independent, and then probably joined the Warsaw Pact if it had been made.

[Oberon]

Look who's talking, the British who promised us help in the Winter War and then didn't deliver. Maybe you should just keep quiet about Finland.

I piss on your brandy-sipping Churchill. :D

"Some chicken. Some neck."

Some ****ing liar.

Says the man who slept under Hitlers umbrella

[AVGWarhawk]

Look who's talking, the British who promised us help in the Winter War and then didn't deliver. Maybe you should just keep quiet about Finland.

I piss on your brandy-sipping Churchill. :D

"Some chicken. Some neck."

Some ****ing liar.


Huh?

[OneToughHerring]

And maybe you should just keep quiet about everything you post here.

Your about as welcome and popular as a fart in a spacesuit by my estimation....Mr ITG :D

You should learn some civility and respect for your peer group.

You'd be amazed how quickly it might be reiprocated.



I just don't like the British telling us Finns how we should be gratefull for them or the US.

Oberon,

that's a pretty 'progressive' linguistic expression even for me.

What, are you saying that the Brits didn't deliver the aid because Finns were co-belligerents of the nazis? The French also screwed us over and then you're all "show gratitude to the US". How about NO.

[Oberon]

I just don't like the British telling us Finns how we should be gratefull for them or the US.

Oberon,

that's a pretty 'progressive' linguistic expression even for me.

What, are you saying that the Brits didn't deliver the aid because Finns were co-belligerents of the nazis? The French also screwed us over and then you're all "show gratitude to the US". How about NO.

It was a direct quote from Germany through unofficial channels to Finland in 1940.
But yeah, you know what? I like Finland, and yeah, we did screw Finland over in 1940, I will admit that, we are not perfect, no nation is, not even America.

I like Finland, I really do, and I have a lot of respect for the Finnish spirit, just ask Dowly, and I'm sorry if I offended with my comment but yours was hardly free from offense either.

So, what I am going to do, to prevent any further arguments about Finland and any further offense to Finnish people caused by your insults and my counter-insults, I will put you on ignore and I suggest that anyone else who wishes not to lose their temper trying to put forward an alternate point of view to this chap.

I bear you no ill will OTH, and I hope that you learn one day that you will have greater successes in your points of view if you care to moderate your tone, which I know you can do. After all, you are more likely to bring people to your point of view if you are not slinging around insults and making yourself look quite unbelievable.

Näkemiin

[OneToughHerring]

Oberon,

if from the last couple of messages you derived some kind of personal attack against yourself then do so. However, it wasn't meant as such.

It's just that the UK and US tend to speak categorically to Finns, and other East European nations. And many nations who have joined Nato have done what has been asked, and also Finland as a "Partnership for peace" - nation. What we don't like is being told, either from the west or the east, what we should do, think or be like. We do our thing, which has worked out quite well for us as a small northern nation without much natural resources.

We used to have an ex-general called Adolf Ehnrooth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Ehrnrooth) who disliked Finland's culture being increasingly permeated by US influence. Now this guy wasn't a left-winger by any chance, he also told Finnish neo-nazis to sod off when they tried to take him as their figurehead. So, I don't consider my views to really be that much off-center of what is the 'average' in Finland.

[Sailor Steve]

On the one hand I agree with OTH (and of course Dowly) about Finland. They fought a titanic struggle for freedom and won, and I believe they did it without any outside help.

On the other hand Dowly politely disagrees and invites discussion while OTH pisses on everybody, and in this case openly says so.

Countries help each other or don't, and we can argue about it, but hating a country for any reason is fruitless. Hitler and the Nazis tried to conquer Europe, The German people went along with it, not because they wanted to conquer anybody but because people are people. They had been stomped on by the British and the French at the end of the previous war, and Hitler was the man who proved he could take them to the top again.

The point is not that Germans are evil - they're not. The point is that it could just as easily happen in your country, or in mine. It happens because people are human.

But individuals make their own way, and their own case. Standing up for your country and having an argument is also human, but how you do it makes the difference between being respected and being laughed at.

[Jimbuna]

^^
+1 http://imgcash6.imageshack.us/img524/4528/superyestj1.gif

[CaptainHaplo]

What exactly US did for Finland? :hmmm: Serious , curious question.

Dowly - thank you for asking this. Because before you asked it, I didn't know - and now I do.

When talking about WW2 and actual conflict, the US cannot claim to have offered or rendered any substantial aid to Finland.

However, I would say that Roosevelt calling for Finland to seperate itself from its support of Germany, prior to the Russian offensive, opened the door to the Finnish parliment that they could get out of being stuck side by side with the Germans in their fall. Given the Russian offensive and its outcome that ended the Continuation War, Finland NEEDED that door open. In stepping though, that Lapland War was started its true, but that pales in comparison to the earlier conflicts. Without the US opening that door, Finland is likely to have been the "last refuge" of the Nazis, meaning it would have seen the same kind of fighting that Germany saw on its soil late in the war.

Was it a big deal? Yes and no - in the scheme of things - the same call would likely have gone out sooner or later anyway, once Ryti resigned, or Finland may have initiated feelers to the same end on its own. Still, its easier to walk through a door that has been cracked that having to open it yourself.

Does Finland "owe" the US anything - not really no. No more than any other country owes the US for its actions in history. And with that said - its important to realize that most every european nation owes the US, but its also true that the US owes alot to most every european nation as well. Too many on both sides forget that its a balance of history from all sides that has us surviving where we are today.

[Sailor Steve]

And with that said - its important to realize that most every european nation owes the US, but its also true that the US owes alot to most every european nation as well. Too many on both sides forget that its a balance of history from all sides that has us surviving where we are today.
:rock:

[Jimbuna]

And with that said - its important to realize that most every european nation owes the US, but its also true that the US owes alot to most every european nation as well. Too many on both sides forget that its a balance of history from all sides that has us surviving where we are today.

:yep::up:

[Dowly]

I might add that while many finns think badly for the Allies for not sending help to aid our effort to strike back the Sovietsm one must remember that if the allies would have done that, it would have mean't war with the Soviet Union, an open war, not cold war as it happened. World war 2 would've been much longer if the allies would have taken the side of Finland.

Now, of course I would be speaking differently if Finland had fallen, but still, something to think about. :hmmm:

EDIT: Tho, I must say OTH has a point in saying that we don't like to be told what to do. We are extremely proud people and very stubborn. But, regardless, I do see a change in our policies that tend to make us more of an lapdog to the bigger countries, dont like that at all. What happened to the independent Finland that makes due with what it has?

[Oberon]

EDIT: Tho, I must say OTH has a point in saying that we don't like to be told what to do. We are extremely proud people and very stubborn. But, regardless, I do see a change in our policies that tend to make us more of an lapdog to the bigger countries, dont like that at all. What happened to the independent Finland that makes due with what it has?

Heh, that's always been what has made Finland Finland. Sisu, I believe it is called. I don't think anyone here was saying that Finland must obey the US or UK or even the EU (heck, we don't obey the EU half the time). We just don't get the blind hatred that some people have towards us all because of some of the mistakes we have made, like I said, no-one's perfect. Particularly politicians. :damn:

[August]

What happened to the independent Finland that makes due with what it has?

I'd say the same thing that's happening to my country and nearly every other one in the world. Finland is certainly not alone in feeling a loss of autonomy. After all how can anyone be really independent when our economies depend upon each other for survival?

[Dowly]

@Oberon

Yah, didn't mean it like someone was saying us what to do, just sayign how we are over here. :salute:

@August

Yes, you are right. Economy ties all countries together nowadays, we all depend on each other.

[Oberon]

Gotcha, and I do sympathise, there's a bit of bitterness here over how dependent we are on the US and EU for continued survival when once upon a time we ran half the planet. Times change though, and certainly it's no slight on the US or EU but a sign of what a small planet it is now.

[Sailor Steve]

I EDIT: Tho, I must say OTH has a point in saying that we don't like to be told what to do.
OTH has lots of good points. Sometimes he gets a little excited, is all. :sunny:

[Oberon]

OTH has lots of good points. Sometimes he gets a little excited, is all. :sunny:

Cannot deny it. He does make good points, just in all the wrong ways. :damn:

[Jimbuna]

Cannot deny it. He does make good points, just in all the wrong ways. :damn:

Group hug...http://forums.randi.org/images/smilies/grouphug5.gif

[Sailor Steve]

Ow...<cough>...Jim...can't breathe...

[Jimbuna]

All quiet on the western front :DL

[antikristuseke]

I'd say the same thing that's happening to my country and nearly every other one in the world. Finland is certainly not alone in feeling a loss of autonomy. After all how can anyone be really independent when our economies depend upon each other for survival?

Well, the tighter world economies are linked the less likely a war is going to be so that isn't nessesarily a bad thing. Not that you said that it was.

[Bilge_Rat]

Oh yeah. I know America is very bad. I hear it all the time here. Oh dear Lord, why did you bring America upon us? Let's see how much better the world would be off without it (yeah, I'm not a fan of "what if" scenarios either, but this one is pretty straight forward):

There would probably still be monarchies all over the place in Europe. But this is too complicated to grasp, or might even not have been bad in some places, so let's fast forward a bit more:

1. 1945. Probably more like 1948 / 49: All of Europe, with - probably - the exception of the British Isles, would be living in the Stalinist dictatorship. Or maybe - but far less likely - in Nazi dictatorship. The whole of Europe, starting at least from France, would probably be a Communist dictatorship.

2. There would be no free press as a result of that.

3. No free elections either.

4. No free people, responsible only to their God. Instead, only confined people under the state.

5. No access to a free internet for free citizens. No OTH posting anti-american crap, no Dowly posting boobies, no Tribesman posting about the religion of peace, no Skybird posting about the next crusade. The internet would be read-only - if it at all existed - to further the proper education of the collective.

6. No free media. Media would only be the mouthpiece of the political bureau, be it Nazi or Communist.

7. Lots of dead heroes no one would have ever heard of - those people who would try to change all the above into something better, but have neither an outside source of support, nor sufficient means for support from within to achieve that. And if anyone would ever hear about them, it would be once they were dead, disgraced by the state run information and media system as traitors to the greater glory of the state.

This is a very realistic scenario. France was conquered, and England was isolated. It WOULD have been either Communism or Nazism for all of Europe (with maybe the exception of England).
And yes, maybe at some point enough people would have stood up against all odds, and get crushed, and stood up again decades later, and get crushed again, and MAYBE would have stood up once more and MAYBE would have even re-acquired FREEDOM after all, in some countries. But that would have been a long time into the future and would have cost a lot of lifes.

But it didn't happen like that. Instead, some people from across the pond got involved. People who had gone over there to win freedom in the first place. And then, when they came back, they didn't "just" crush Nazism and kept communism at bay, but they also enabled the free people of Europe - including their former enemies - to live as free individuals in a free world. And then, after another several decades, through steadfastness - AND brave people in those other countries - this free world was extended to other countries that hadn't seen freedom since 1939.
And by God, the Americans are around when freedom happens til today. People who were formerly forbidden to educate themselves can now do so in Afghanistan. People who could not vote in Iraq can now do so. Including those whose existence previously was limited to getting gassed by chemical air attacks.

The Americans don't do it because they love mankind so much. They do it because their system - including the outside periphery - can only work when people have freedom. That's what makes it probably the best system mankind has ever come up with (and the Americans didn't invent it, but they re-introduced it in modern history, and with force). The system itself is Freedom. Is it perfect? No. Because man is not perfect.

But say whatever the **** you will - never in the history of mankind has there been a time when so many people have been living so free under fair law, had so much education, and so many possibilities.

No, America is not the Messiah. America has a lot of power, and so much power can be dangerous. But the very essence of the idea of America is that this power, in the end, is not in the hands of parties or the state, but of THE PEOPLE (and it is designed to protect that very freedom from outside offenders who would love nothing more than see America be gone).
That's why I would hate to ever see America, politically, moving into the direction of the EU or any European country. Because those countries are putting too much faith into the state, and too little trust into the citizens. If America would ever do that, it will be the end of it, and it might end up destroying the whole damn world. Because the first thing the state tries to do, once it has gained a critical mass of power, is to secure that by taking the rights from the people and dumbing them down so they stop asking questions. And once it has done that, there's no telling where this new found power is planning to stop, if at all.

But as of now, America has been the opposite: It is a country where THE PEOPLE are bearing arms and say that whenever the state gets too loud, we will shoot its ass up. Or we will impeach our President. Or we will throw our Governors into jail. And they DO IT, too. And THAT is what makes the difference. For all the bad things America might do, it is still kept in check by the only sound kind of collective there is: A collective of FREE PEOPLE. And in this imperfect world, this is the closest thing to perfection you could ever hope to achieve.

All this Anti-Americanism, which is kinda "trendy" these days, only goes to show how dumb mankind can really be. Today we are living in a world that most people in history could have only dreamed of. And it wasn't Russia, China, India, Finland or France who brought that about in recent decades. And no, it wasn't "America" either. It were the FREE PEOPLE of America. We can be as free once we get over our Anti-American inferiority complex and take care of our own countries instead of bitching about American politics.

God Bless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqlJl1LfDP4

And God damn me if the above is not part of the best music in the world.

very good post HeartC.

It also fits very well with this quote from a movie:

"I'm from a country that's been in existence for less than two hundred years, in a very old world. That same fifty years ago, we were barely taken seriously as a nation, much less a great force for wisdom and decision. But suddenly now, a watch tick of history later, the world waits angrily for us to provide the answers it hasn't been able to find in fifty centuries."



10 points to who can identify what movie that quote comes from. :arrgh!:

[Jimbuna]

10 points to who can identify what movie that quote comes from. :arrgh!:

The Quiet American :smug:

[Bilge_Rat]

The Quiet American :smug:


you guys are good. :up:

[OneToughHerring]

How come it doesn't surprise me that zionists would be giving their blessing to US slaughtering Afghani civilians. :roll:

[August]

How come it doesn't surprise me that zionists would be giving their blessing to US slaughtering Afghani civilians. :roll:

How come it doesn't surprise me that you're continuing to be a troll?

[Bilge_Rat]

How come it doesn't surprise me that zionists would be giving their blessing to US slaughtering Afghani civilians. :roll:

off your meds again? :arrgh!:

[Jimbuna]

you guys are good. :up:

Yeah, I know :DL


http://www.psionguild.org/forums/images/smilies/wolfsmilies/google.gif

:oops:

[AVGWarhawk]

How come it doesn't surprise me that zionists would be giving their blessing to US slaughtering Afghani civilians. :roll:


Huh?

[OneToughHerring]

off your meds again? :arrgh!:

Weren't you Jews supposed to be smart?

[Happy Times]

Weren't you Jews supposed to be smart?

Neal should give you a Red herring as an avatar, it would fit in more ways than one.:hmmm:

[AVGWarhawk]

Angry Red Herring....


http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:vXvAtM2GfETNDM:http://www.thetick.ws/images/angryredherring.jpg (http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.thetick.ws/images/angryredherring.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.thetick.ws/tvvillains.html&usg=__ikmekFjIn4r8G9nXNzr6UyGgKvY=&h=214&w=226&sz=8&hl=en&start=3&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=vXvAtM2GfETNDM:&tbnh=102&tbnw=108&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dangry%2Bherring%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26 sa%3DN%26rls%3Dcom.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox%26rlz%3D1I7ADBR%26tbs%3Disch:1)
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_768TUZTo0os/Sfm8Tt4a1qI/AAAAAAAAABY/kMZndlNlOzU/s320/red+herring.jpg

[Bilge_Rat]

Weren't you Jews supposed to be smart?

smart enough not to take the bait...

...haven't you figured out by now I only respond when it furthers my argument...:arrgh!:

[OneToughHerring]

smart enough not to take the bait...

...haven't you figured out by now I only respond when it furthers my argument...:arrgh!:

Well the IDF has a long history of summary killings and torture and it's known that it is partial to the mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[tater]

Long history? The country is little more than 60 years old. Wanna go back that short length of time when your country was allied with the nazis?

Yeah, yeah, it's totally different when you paint it powder blue (who'da thought anyone could out-gay the nazis in terms of decor?) ;)

If the IDF (or the US Military for that matter) wanted to kill civilians, we'd kill them wholesale. The Allies were not even good at aiming in WW2, and we could manage to kill 10s of thousands in a single night—as many as 100,000 sometimes. If either the IDF or USAF wanted to, we could easily top those kinds of numbers today, day after day. Since we don't—and they don't—killing civilians is clearly not the goal.

In WW2 the USAAF was specifically aiming at non-civilian targets in fact, and none the less killed many hundreds per raid, sometimes thousands. These days, we drop thousands of tons of bombs, and kill orders of magnitude fewer people per ton of bombs dropped. That's the stat to check, civilian toll per ton of bombs dropped. Compare to the past, and watch the trend lines.

[Jimbuna]

All quiet on the western front :DL

Looks like I spoke too soon :nope:

[OneToughHerring]

Long history? The country is little more than 60 years old. Wanna go back that short length of time when your country was allied with the nazis?

Co-belligerant. We did give away 8 Jewish people to the nazis, plus loads of Soviet POW's with Jewish POW's among them.

Yeah, yeah, it's totally different when you paint it powder blue (who'da thought anyone could out-gay the nazis in terms of decor?) ;)

If the IDF (or the US Military for that matter) wanted to kill civilians, we'd kill them wholesale. The Allies were not even good at aiming in WW2, and we could manage to kill 10s of thousands in a single night—as many as 100,000 sometimes. If either the IDF or USAF wanted to, we could easily top those kinds of numbers today, day after day. Since we don't—and they don't—killing civilians is clearly not the goal.

In WW2 the USAAF was specifically aiming at non-civilian targets in fact, and none the less killed many hundreds per raid, sometimes thousands. These days, we drop thousands of tons of bombs, and kill orders of magnitude fewer people per ton of bombs dropped. That's the stat to check, civilian toll per ton of bombs dropped. Compare to the past, and watch the trend lines.Well all I know is that civilians have been dying and are dying. All wars have certain aims and I'm not at all convinced that these wars aren't supposed to cause civilian deahts in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course the US can't kill them all or target them openly but it can wage the war in a manner that will result in a considerable amount of civilian deaths in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Why? Because obviously nobody can stop the US from doing so.

[tater]

Co-belligerent. LOL.

Parse the language all you want, the rest of the world counts that as "allies."

BTW, the CCCP was also a co-belligerent with the nazis in Poland. Orcs fighting orcs, basically, no one expects more.

The US wages war in a way that is specifically designed to minimize civilian casualties. Again, it's not in our interest to needlessly kill civilians. The OP in fact proves this, since it references a scathing report—the point of which is to prevent situations like this.

Sh*t happens, study the problem, try and fix it.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Of course the US can't kill them all or target them openly but it can wage the war in a manner that will result in a considerable amount of civilian deaths in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Why? Because obviously nobody can stop the US from doing so.
LOL

Sorry, but that's all I have to say about drivel like this. Actually I'm not sure what else there is to say about drivel like this...

[OneToughHerring]

If there are deaths it doesn't really matter what your opinion is of the US's war plan. Look at the results, even according to your own media.

[Bilge_Rat]

just ran across an interesting article which provides a bit of background on the tragedy as well as how the USAF coordinates and disseminates the drone data:


Hunched over monitors streaming live video from a drone, Lieutenant Christopher and a team of analysts recently popped in and out of several military chat rooms, reaching out more than 7,000 miles to warn Marines about roadside bombs and to track Taliban gunfire.

“2 poss children in fov,” the team flashed as Marines on the ground lined up an air strike, chat lingo for possible innocents within the drone’s field of view. The strike was aborted.

“fire coming from cmpnd,” another message warned, referring to a Taliban compound. The Marines responded by strafing the fighters, killing nine of them.

Lieutenant Christopher and her crew might be fighting on distant keypads instead of ducking bullets, but they head into battle just the same every day. They and thousands of other young Air Force analysts are showing how the Facebook generation’s skills are being exploited — and paying dividends — in America’s wars.

The Marines say the analysts, who are mostly in their early to mid-20s, paved the way for them to roll into Marja in southern Afghanistan earlier this year with minimal casualties. And as the analysts quickly pass on the latest data from drones and other spy planes, they are creating the fluid connections needed to hunt small groups of fighters and other fleeting targets, military officials say.

But there can be difficulties in operating from so far away.

Late last month, military authorities in Afghanistan released a report chastising a Predator drone crew in an incident involving a helicopter attack that killed 23civilians in February. Military officials say analysts in Florida who were monitoring the drone’s video feed cautioned two or three times in a chat room that children were in the group, but the drone’s pilot failed to relay those warnings to the ground commander.

For the most part, though, the networking has been so productive that senior commanders are sidestepping some of the traditional military hierarchy and giving the analysts leeway in deciding how to use some spy planes.

“If you want to act quickly, you’ve got to flatten things out and engage at the lowest possible levels,” said Lt. Col. Jason M. Brown, who runs the Air Force intelligence squadron at this base near Sacramento.

The connections have been made possible by the growing fleet of remote-controlled planes, like the Predators and Reapers, which send a steady flow of battlefield video to intelligence centers across the globe.

The Central Intelligence Agency and the military use drones to wage long-distance war against insurgents, with pilots in the United States pressing the missile-firing buttons. But as commanders in Afghanistan mass drones and U-2 spy planes over the hottest areas, the networking technology is expanding a homefront that is increasingly relevant to day-to-day warfare.

And the mechanics are simple in this age of satellite relays. Besides viewing video feeds, the analysts scan still images and enemy conversations. As they log the information into chat rooms, the analysts carry on a running dialogue with drone crews and commanders and intelligence specialists in the field, who receive the information on computers, and radio the most urgent bits to troops on patrol.

Marine intelligence officers say that during the Marja offensive in February, the analysts managed to stay a step ahead of the advance, sending alerts about 300 or so possible roadside bombs.

“To be that tapped into the tactical fight from 7,000 to 8,000 miles away was pretty much unheard of before,” said Gunnery Sgt. Sean N. Smothers, a Marine who was stationed here as a liaison to the analysts.

Sergeant Smothers saw how easily the distance could melt away when an analyst, peering at images from a U-2, suddenly stuck up his hand and yelled, “Check!” — the signal for a supervisor to verify a spotting.

Sergeant Smothers said he and two Air Force officers rushed over and confirmed the existence of a roadside bomb. Nearby on a big screen map in the windowless room, they could see a Marine convoy approaching the site.

The group started sending frantic chat messages to their Marine contacts in the area.

As they watched the video feed from a drone, they could see that their messages had been heard: the convoy came to a sudden stop, 500 feet from the bomb.



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/08/technology/08homefront.html?pagewanted=1&hp

[Dowly]

Parse the language all you want, the rest of the world counts that as "allies."


The same rest of the world who turned it's back on us and forced us to seek help from the Nazis to keep our independency. :roll:

[Ducimus]

Well I got to express my view concerning the US so I'm happy. :)

That gave me an idea. Does anyone think there's a possiblity that If everyone put this racist, agenda toting, ITG bastard on ignore, so nobody reads his dribble, he'd go troll elsewhere? Or is it more fun not to, in order to mock this representative of scumbaggery for comedy relief? Inquiring minds want to know.

[Dowly]

Or is it more fun not to, in order to mock this representative of scumbaggery for comedy relief?

Yes. :DL

[AVGWarhawk]

Well I got to express my view concerning the US so I'm happy. :)


Nothing stopped you before. So what is different about this thread? :hmmm:

[Ducimus]

Nothing stopped you before. So what is different about this thread? :hmmm:

I'm not sure either, but i think its related to want of attention. It's probably severe.

http://www.elsaelsa.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/attention-whore-advisory-system.jpg

[Sailor Steve]

If the IDF (or the US Military for that matter) wanted to kill civilians, we'd kill them wholesale. The Allies were not even good at aiming in WW2, and we could manage to kill 10s of thousands in a single night—as many as 100,000 sometimes. If either the IDF or USAF wanted to, we could easily top those kinds of numbers today, day after day. Since we don't—and they don't—killing civilians is clearly not the goal.
Back in the original Gulf War I was a participant in a 'discussion' about 'Smart Bombs' in Bagdad. Someone said that the US was intentionally targeting civilians. My friend Rocky made the following comment: "How many have we intentionally killed? A dozen? A hundred? Compared to the fire bombings of Tokyo that's nothing. No, if we wanted to target civilians we'd send a squadron of B-52s out of Diego Garcia. If we wanted to we could carpet bomb Bagdad and kill an easy ten thousand every night. And there's not a thing they could do about it."

The fact is that civilians do get killed, as pointed out, try as we may to avoid it. The difference is that we do try to avoid it. I'm sorry that it happens, but there's practically no way to get around it. On the other hand I'm amazed that people try to stack that against the suicide bombers who really do target civilians in grocery stores, on city streets and in giant buildings, and if a military target happens to get in the way, so much the better.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Or is it more fun not to, in order to mock this representative of scumbaggery for comedy relief?
Very much so :DL

[OneToughHerring]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/south_asia/10260145.stm

Still laughing, lol-boys?

[August]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/south_asia/10260145.stm

Still laughing, lol-boys?

Of course, after all we're only laughing at you.

[OneToughHerring]

Of course, after all we're only laughing at you.

Huh?

[Ducimus]

Huh?

LOL! :har: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLXoLIVJ6aI)

[OneToughHerring]

Helicopter shot down in Afghanistan.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/10274262.stm

[August]

Helicopter shot down in Afghanistan.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/10274262.stm

That has nothing to do with 23 dead Afghan civilians. Do you just post it to piss people off? Is that your motivation?

[AVGWarhawk]

That has nothing to do with 23 dead Afghan civilians. Do you just post it to piss people off? Is that your motivation?

Of course! :03:

[OneToughHerring]

That has nothing to do with 23 dead Afghan civilians. Do you just post it to piss people off? Is that your motivation?

Both happened in Afghanistan, because of the US war there. I think there is a lot of things in common.

[August]

Both happened in Afghanistan, because of the US war there. I think there is a lot of things in common.

I think you're just trying to piss people off so you won't mind if we go back to just making fun of you then.

[OneToughHerring]

I think you're just trying to piss people off so you won't mind if we go back to just making fun of you then.

How cute, lol.

Iraq & Afghanistan casualties in a database where by clicking on the 'dot' you get the place where and how they died etc.

http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/war.casualties/index.html

Afghanistan blog from CNN.

http://afghanistan.blogs.cnn.com/

[Oberon]

http://img.phombo.com/img1/photocombo/129/cache/unrelated_jpg_display.jpg

[Weiss Pinguin]

That has nothing to do with 23 dead Afghan civilians. Do you just post it to piss people off? Is that your motivation?
I think he just loves to hear about NATO troops dying.

[Ducimus]

I think he just loves to hear about NATO troops dying.

Yeah, i think so too. The guy is probably some closet nazi. Professes his anti semetic feelings every chance he gets, hates the US, loves seeing US troops die, and posts about it at every opportunity. He's just a hateful, arrogant ass with a chip on his shoulder, and a skewed view of the world. There really isn't ANYTHING he says that is worth replying to, or having a conversation over. In any way shape or form.

The thing is, even making fun of him, he's getting the attention he wants. Argue with him, he gets the attention he wants. Post in a thread he created and he gets the attention he wants. That's why I'm just gonna add that SOB to my ignore list. At least then he won't get any further satisfaction from me, all be it indirectly. Rest of you can do what you want, but i wouldn't give this low life the time of day.

[Oberon]

Or we could just turn this thread into another Funny Picture thread...that always works... :hmmm:

[AVGWarhawk]

NO. Bad USA. Bad...

http://www.nickhodge.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/victoria.jpg

[Oberon]

http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/george-bush-corn.jpg

[Weiss Pinguin]

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj300/Zhusuke/CoolStoryBro.jpg

[OneToughHerring]

Or we could just turn this thread into another Funny Picture thread...that always works... :hmmm:

Meaning you'll keep bumping this thread to the top of the page?

Thanks guys. :)

[Weiss Pinguin]

Meaning you'll keep bumping this thread to the top of the page?

Thanks guys. :)
http://medicblog999.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/01-16-09-no-problem.jpg

[AVGWarhawk]

Meaning you'll keep bumping this thread to the top of the page?

Thanks guys. :)


http://www.bendigolending.com.au/images/all-about-you.jpg

[OneToughHerring]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/south_asia/10280157.stm

39 dead in an explosion in Afghanistan.

[Jimbuna]

Answer me one simple question Richard....why do you make light of those service men amd women who die whilst in the service of their country?

[tater]

US mistakenly kills civilians, investigates, decides there were many problems with the attack and works to correct it in the future.

The Taliban, meanwhile, just executed (by hanging) a SEVEN YEAR OLD BOY for spying. No accident here, this was obviously targeted.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/06/10/2010-06-10_taliban_hang_7yearold_boy_accused_of_being_a_sp y_suicide_bomber_kills_40_at_afgh.html

Animals.

[Happy Times]

The Taliban, meanwhile, just executed (by hanging) a SEVEN YEAR OLD BOY for spying. No accident here, this was obviously targeted.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/06/10/2010-06-10_taliban_hang_7yearold_boy_accused_of_being_a_sp y_suicide_bomber_kills_40_at_afgh.html

Animals.

They shoud get the same treatment or this will never end.

[OneToughHerring]

They shoud get the same treatment or this will never end.

Vice versa for the US troops. Hence, the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan.

[AVGWarhawk]

Your last statement OTH makes no sense. Also, you ignored Jimbuna's question a few post back....


Answer me one simple question Richard....why do you make light of those service men amd women who die whilst in the service of their country?


To further that notion why do you make light of a 7 year old being hung by the neck until dead? This is typical of the Taliban. Trumped up charges. This seems to be ok in your eyes.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Your last statement OTH makes no sense. Also, you ignored Jimbuna's question a few post back....
Unsurprisingly...

[OneToughHerring]

Your last statement OTH makes no sense. Also, you ignored Jimbuna's question a few post back....

Sorry, typing in a hurry. I meant the same goes for the US troops in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are just reaping what they sow.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Sorry, typing in a hurry. I meant the same goes for the US troops in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are just reaping what they sow.
When was the last time you heard of a squad of American soldiers hanging a child?

Now you're just spewing crap left and right, with no regard of the facts. Yes civilian deaths happen, and yes some are caused by soldiers and Marines, but none are on purpose and the leadership takes steps to rectify that in the future. But that doesn't matter, because civilians are still dead and America is to blame!




Doh, sorry, forgot this was going to be the next funny picture thread :oops:

http://barrykade.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/completely.jpg

[OneToughHerring]

When was the last time you heard of a squad of American soldiers hanging a child?

Now you're just spewing crap left and right, with no regard of the facts. Yes civilian deaths happen, and yes some are caused by soldiers and Marines, but none are on purpose and the leadership takes steps to rectify that in the future. But that doesn't matter, because civilians are still dead and America is to blame!

Well that's the point isn't it, what would qualify as "on purpose" for you? Like, if a US general would go on live tv and say "Watch this, I'm about to push this button that will send this missile to kill civilians in Afghanistan". Would that suffice? The end result is the same.

It you trust the US military or any military for that matter to tell you the truth then you are more gullible then me.

[Weiss Pinguin]

Well that's the point isn't it, what would qualify as "on purpose" for you? Like, if a US general would go on live tv and say "Watch this, I'm about to push this button that will send this missile to kill civilians in Afghanistan". Would that suffice? The end result is the same.
How many hunters are killed by fellow hunters every year because the latter thought they were shooting at an animal? Are those deaths on purpose?

And just what qualifies as "on purpose" to you?

[Jimbuna]

When was the last time you heard of a squad of American soldiers hanging a child?

Now you're just spewing crap left and right, with no regard of the facts. Yes civilian deaths happen, and yes some are caused by soldiers and Marines, but none are on purpose and the leadership takes steps to rectify that in the future. But that doesn't matter, because civilians are still dead and America is to blame!




Doh, sorry, forgot this was going to be the next funny picture thread :oops:

http://barrykade.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/completely.jpg

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/4568/johncleeseministryofsil.jpg (http://img143.imageshack.us/i/johncleeseministryofsil.jpg/)
http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/9968/sillywalks.jpg (http://img526.imageshack.us/i/sillywalks.jpg/)

[August]

But that doesn't matter, because civilians are still dead and America is to blame!

OTH doesn't care about civilians. When was the last time you saw him start a thread about Hamas or Hezbollah or the Iranians or even Al Quaeda killing civilians? Never. No, he just hates the US and will take every opportunity to express that hatred.

[Jimbuna]

Sorry, typing in a hurry. I meant the same goes for the US troops in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are just reaping what they sow.

Does anybody know if there are any Finnish troops in Afghanistan?

If there are, how many?

And what are they doing or in Richards words "sowing"?

[Weiss Pinguin]

According to the wikipedia article on the International Security Assistance Force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Security_Assistance_Force), Finland has (as of Apr 2010) approx. 100 troops stationed in Afghanistan. :hmmm:

[Jimbuna]

According to the wikipedia article on the International Security Assistance Force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Security_Assistance_Force), Finland has (as of Apr 2010) approx. 100 troops stationed in Afghanistan. :hmmm:


Wha!!....not even 300 Spartans? :o

[Happy Times]

Does anybody know if there are any Finnish troops in Afghanistan?

If there are, how many?

And what are they doing or in Richards words "sowing"?

140 at this time.

I have more info than i cant tell.;)

Officially they are training the locals and starting and protecting civilian projects.:salute:

My brother and friends serve in FDF and he is talking me over to do a tour.

Finns were offered own region in Helmland but our politicians refused, the military would have wanted.
Estonian are there and Finns would fit with them and the Swedes nicely.

The FDF is trying to get the politicians to deploy special forces in larger numbers there.:03:

[OneToughHerring]

How many hunters are killed by fellow hunters every year because the latter thought they were shooting at an animal? Are those deaths on purpose?

And just what qualifies as "on purpose" to you?

To start an offensive war in another nation that caused civilian casualties in that particular nation.

Hunters that get shot / shoot other people are stupid also but hunting animals doesn't quite correlate well with a war.

[AVGWarhawk]

Ye old Fins have been hanging since 2008:

http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2008/12/18/finland-sending-more-troops-to-afghanistan/

:hmmm: