to whom?

The maggots.

And all the people that the us military is killing with drone strikes have done that, have they?

Well, their families will be angry enough to.

The US military: Producing terrorists for 11 years!

And what did the American women and children who died on the planes which flew into the Twin Towers ever do to those pieces of crap who hijacked the aircraft? What did those poor folks on the bus blown up in London do? What did those people do, who were killed on the trains in Spain?

I'm past caring about the poor terrorists, they started this, and by God if we have to finish it with Predator strikes, then so be it!!!!!!!!! And they can quit using humans as shields, but then, scumbags like them never will. They are worthless!!!

When the enemy is cowering in the general populace, using them as meat shields so they can continue their murderous campaign, it's impossible to deal with them with no civilian casualties against an enemy so deeply integrated into the general populace. If Abdul Rehman Al-Hussainan wants to do his terrible work in Pakistan. so be it. The fact that he's in pakistan isn't a deterrent for taking him out.

So i don't see your point whatsoever. This is a terrorist leader, who was taken out by a smart weapon with little collateral damage.

Then planned it. They funded it. They sent people to do the dirty work. They continue to do the afforementioned. This is war, and not a war of the US's choosing. Sorry you don't like it, but it is your pals hiding behind women and children. I would suggest that your vitriol is misdirected.

You don't want to see this LOL

He's talking about the 'collateral damage', obviously.

So am I, obviously. I've highlighted the relevant parts for your convenience.

Sorry. My mistake.

I'm not for killing innocent civilians, no matter where they live!!! You make it sound like I enjoy seeing civilians killed, I didn't say that at all. I was talking about killing every terrorist we can reach.

So get off your damned high horse, and preach to someone else.

You were calling someone an Al Qaeda supporter because he expressed his anger at the large amounts of civilians killed accidentally by US forces.

Fun fact! 'Civilian' and 'Terrorist' are two different things! Perhaps you should have realized that before making yourself look like a guy who thinks that all Afghans hate America.

A couple of things.

1. That was me that labeled someone a supporter of Al Qaeda, not eddie.

2. I did so because of the poster's anger over what was, as mentioned before, over a pretty clean kill of an Al Qaeda leader. There was very little collateral loss of life. This would seem to suggest some sympathies in the manner that I had indicated.

And so I suggest that you read more carefully before shooting your mouth off about who looks like what and telling people to leave the forum. Yes?

Excuse me, but where did he ever say or even infer that all people from Afghanistan are terrorists. Never.

These attacks are precision weapons, that have comparatively little collateral damage. The drone strikes against al Queda leaders are therefore easily justified. Robhalford made it seem like civilian casualties in these strikes were unwarranted, and eddie provided a retort about the civilian casualties that Al Queda has caused and therefore the justification of drone strikes to take out these AQ leaders even if it means a few civilians get injured. Takeda and i also mentioned that AQ is using the general populace as meat shields, and that civilian casualties is almost inevitable because of their dirty tactics, however unfortunate.

You are making something out of nothing. Eddie made no such claims. It was an argument about the justification of drone strikes with possible civilian casualties to take out high ranking Al Queda leaders.

Takeda, you have a point, but:

This, to me, seems like a 'polite' way of telling someone that their an Al Qaeda supporter.

Takeda, in your last post in this thread, you made it clear that you were not calling him an Al Qaeda supporter.

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with that persons fault. Look at this:

He's not talking about the piece of crap that got what he deserved, he's talking about the civilains who were killed as 'collateral damage'

Also, the US military admitted that only 2% of people killed by drone strikes are important Al Qaeda/Taliban members.

And, about 174 children have been killed by drone strikes.

This guy getting angry about drone strikes seems, to me, understandable, even if you disagree with him.

I, personally, am supportive of drone strikes like the one discussed in this thread. It's the ones that kill innocent people that anger me.

Sigh. Let's look at this again.

Now, tell me who is implying that robhalford88 was a supporter of Al Qaeda.

You told me that he was talking about collateral damage. I told you that I was aware of this, and so was I. That was the part before the comma. After the comma was the implication that he may be sympathetic to the movement. And once again, collateral damage happens because Al Qaeda uses it's fellow good Muslim women and children like meatshields.

NATO does not get up in the morning wishing to put innocents in harm's way. Al Qaeda, by contrast, wakes up with exactly that wish. The blood is on their hands.

^^^^^^^^^^^^

Yes, I see what you mean. I can't speak for him, but my opinion is that drones are an unreliable method of killing bloodthirsty monsters, but strikes like the one discussed here are effective.

Also, this seems to have escalated way to far. Let's all just take a deep breath, get off the computer, and go for a walk.

Also, I am very sorry for any offense I caused.

Also, I am sorry for starting every single paragraph with Also.

It's eddie you should be apologizing to, not me.

^^^^

I just did.

And let's stop arguing, or well end up like a broken record :o