Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 131

Thread: 100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London

  1. #111
    Student TheGreatSandeno's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 01:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    192

    Re: 100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London

    Quote Originally Posted by Councilman View Post
    With a few exceptions during WW-II ours has been a Nation that goes out of it's way to to fair and civil and to try to limit civilian loses.
    Like our involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, right?

  2. #112
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Windy City
    Last Seen
    09-21-11 @ 11:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    397

    Re: 100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    It was mostly sarcasm and cynicism. Essentially if one side kills civilians they call it terrorism; but if the other side does it it's retaliation or military operation or anything other than terrorism.
    Gotcha. I like to classify this as such:

    If your intention for blowing up a structure or person is because that structure or person poses a direct threat to you (ie he is the only guy who can effectively lead your opposition's front, or the building contains all military intelligence of the opposition), then it is more classifiable (in my opinion) as a militaristic-type attack.

    If your intention for blowing up a structure or person is not because that structure or person poses a direct threat to you, but more so that the person or structure represent a symbol of what you are trying to defeat, and your intention is to get an idea across rather than to simply destroy something that is of danger to you, than it is an act of terrorism.

    Line gets fuzzy though, and I think often times attacks are combinations of both (ie attack a symbolic and direct threat type target).
    Last edited by David D.; 09-15-11 at 02:50 PM.

  3. #113
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,727

    Re: 100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London

    Quote Originally Posted by Serenity View Post
    you're always confused. my previous response was in reply to your trolling comment about my perspective being "recently manufactured". classy.
    Seriously? You've called me any number of names and bashed me in every post, yet I'm the one making trolling comments? I guess I'll just have to aspire to be as classy as you've been.

  4. #114
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    08-08-13 @ 08:21 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,932

    Re: 100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    They can beg all they want. A person blowing themselves up in a market place, killing 4 injuring 10 others...terrorism. Dropping a bomb from a plane or launching a missile from a proper military platform killing 100's if not more....not terrorism.
    You could call it a war crime, there's no need to stress it's not terrorism.

  5. #115
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: 100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    What? Really?

    World opinion and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee at McDonalds.

    What would all those other nations have us do, sit back and do nothing? Now, I was against invading Iraq, but I definitely supported the invasion of Afghanistan. There is nothing wrong in rooting out the problem, and if that takes invasion, so be it.

    We are not a nation of appeasement, unlike European nations. When Madrid got hit, Spain pulled out of the coalition. When London hit, they just lay there and took it like a fat girl at a frat party. Hell, the millions of Pakistanis living in London and other areas of England are practically carving out law.

    If America had given the diplomatic equivalent of "We're sorry, we'll leave you alone, please don't hurt us again...please?" to radical Islam, our own morale would have been crushed. I will tell you now - I give 100x more of a damn what America thinks about America than what every other nation on Earth combined thinks of America. If you don't like it, the collective world population can line up and kiss my ass. Princes don't appeal to paupers.
    Fortunately, John Prine wrote a song in response to your sentiments, so I don't have to waste my time responding to them:

    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  6. #116
    Holy Crap!
    Red Crow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Hawaii, USA
    Last Seen
    12-06-15 @ 11:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,429

    Re: 100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London

    Burning the USA flag in Europe??

    I guess Obama's apologizing for the USA being a mean country and all that didn't do any good after all.
    Catch me if you can.

  7. #117
    Professor
    Kane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    09-09-13 @ 09:13 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,661

    Re: 100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London

    This is breaking news?

    These news forums are about two things:

    bland corp. news dogma and censorship.

    That's the whole point behind sub-dividing all these topics,

    Just because the NYT, LAT, WaHoPo, avoid things doesn't
    our free speech zones should be cordoned off into sub topics

    Its like the Community>User Map function. Its Moderator abuse!

  8. #118
    Dungeon Master
    anti socialist

    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas Proud
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    44,727

    Re: 100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London

    Quote Originally Posted by Kane View Post
    This is breaking news?

    These news forums are about two things:

    bland corp. news dogma and censorship.

    That's the whole point behind sub-dividing all these topics,

    Just because the NYT, LAT, WaHoPo, avoid things doesn't
    our free speech zones should be cordoned off into sub topics

    Its like the Community>User Map function. Its Moderator abuse!
    Like....WTF are you talking about? Subforums=censorship?

  9. #119
    Sage

    Ahlevah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Flyoverland
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,925

    Re: 100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London

    Quote Originally Posted by Serenity View Post
    not sure what point you are actually trying to make here. whether our support for the U.S. war on terrorism was 50% the reason, or 10% the reason or 99% the reason for the attacks, what difference does it make?
    You wrote:

    Quote Originally Posted by Serenity View Post
    (The deaths that resulted from the 2002 Bali bombings) were a direct result of my Countries (sic) support of the U.S. war on terror and the support we continue to offer as a result of 9/11. they were targeted purely because of that support....
    My point is you either don't have a handle on the facts or you're being disingenuous when you say Australia was targeted "purely" due to its support of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan. You seem to be laying sole responsibility for the deaths of Australians on America's doorstep, and I have to say that as an American I resent that. And if you're implying that lack of support for the invasion on Australia's part would have kept it out of Jemaah Islamiyah's crosshairs, you're delusional.
    Нава́льный 2018

  10. #120
    Advisor Tubub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    05-22-13 @ 03:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    521

    Re: 100 protesters burn American flag outside U.S. embassy in London

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I reference the Rand report because it is the most in-depth analysis of the war on terror that I am aware of.
    Fair




    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba
    The alternative would have been what the Rand Corp recommended, using an approach with the world's intelligence agencies and forces with as small of a military footprint as possible, thereby killing less innocent civilians.
    The Rand Corp recommended this in 2008 with Iraq and Afghanistan in hindsight, not in 2001 as America headed down the road. There is a key difference there worth noting; more importantly though, Rand is not suggesting what you are. It claims that US efforts have been mislead, yes; It claims America's War on Terror strategy since 9/11 has failed, yes; but it doesn't claim the best route to victory would've been to send a few CIA agents in dark cloaks to parachute down and choke hold Osama, not ever and especially not from the beginning.

    Quote Originally Posted by How Terrorist Groups End: Lessons for countering al'Qaida Rand Report, Military Force and al'Qaida in Iraq
    U.S. operations in al Anbar province provide a useful illustration of when military forces can be appropriate against terrorist groups. While politics and policing may be more effective in most cases, military force can be critical when facing a terrorist group involved in an insurgency. Such groups are often well equipped, well organized, and well motivated, and police acting alone would be quickly overpowered...
    Policing and politics may be preferable against most terrorist groups. But military force may sometimes be more useful against large terrorist groups engaged in insurgencies. In Iraq, military force was helpful, at least temporarily, against AQI. But the U.S. military largely played a background role...
    The current U.S. strategy against al Qa’ida centers on the use of mili- tary force. Military force was not, of course, the only instrument that the United States used against al Qa’ida. The U.S. Department of State engaged in a range of diplomatic counterterrorism initiatives, includ- ing through its Antiterrorism Assistance Program. The FBI and local police agencies historically tracked and arrested terrorists in the United States. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security implemented numerous policies at ports of entry and critical infrastructure to secure the United States from terrorist attacks. The U.S. Department of Trea- sury targeted terrorist financial networks.....
    Force was necessary in Afghanistan in 2001, for example, to target al Qa’ida’s base of operations. But U.S. military and intelligence forces acted primarily in support of the Northern Alliance, which conducted most of the ground fighting.36 In the majority of cases, the United States should avoid direct, large-scale military force in the Muslim world to target al Qa’ida
    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba
    And I would not have diverted most of our resources for a war on behalf of big oil in Iraq.
    That is an asinine statement that expresses political motivation instead of actual analysis


    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba
    Before our invasion, we knew that we completely destroyed Iraq's capability to be a threat to the US or its neighbors in the Persian Gulf war followed by ten years of sanctions.
    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/20/opinion/recasting-the-iraq-sanctions.html?src=pm
    A decade after the Persian Gulf war, most of the world has lost interest in isolating Iraq. Some nations are lured toward complacency by short memories of Mr. Hussein's invasion of Kuwait and the prospect of profitable business deals with Baghdad. The change in attitude is shortsighted, but with permanent members of the Security Council like France, Russia and China anxious to abandon the embargo, the United States and Britain have no choice but to fashion a new approach.
    Quote Originally Posted by http://archives.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/07/26/iraq7_25.a.tm/
    On the eve of the 10th anniversary of Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, there's growing concern both in the U.S. and abroad that continued sanctions are not only causing terrible suffering among Saddam's luckless subjects, but have also failed miserably as a strategy to bring down his unlovely regime.

    Despite nine years of sanctions, Saddam is doing pretty nicely, thank you. His grip on power is stronger than ever; he and his cohorts grow rich smuggling goods from Jordan to beat the economic embargo; and the sanctions policy of his worst enemies -- the U.S. and Britain -- are today the subject of greater Arab hostility than his own odious regime. Sanctions haven't exactly crippled Saddam, but they've put the Iraqi people through hell.
    Quote Originally Posted by http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1998-03-16/news/9803160160_1_sanctions-policy-iraqi-compliance-sanctions-don-t-work
    The long-term effect, in the view of United Nations humanitarian aid experts, is likely to be an entire generation of Iraqi children stunted in their physical and mental development. The long-term political effect, say critics of sanctions, might be generations of Iraqis embittered toward the U.S. and other nations that have subjected them to a cruel punishment for the crimes of their leader....."We've demonstrated the sanctions don't work, and the cost is appalling," said Rosemary Hollis, director of Middle East studies for the Royal Institute for International Affairs in London. "Sanctions have taken an enormous toll on people and have not done anything to unseat the regime. They ought to be lifted immediately.
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraq late 1990s report by Rand
    Allied and international support proved far less consistent than U.S. domestic support and posed a major challenge for U.S. policy. Although U.S. allies in Europe and other major powers initially strongly supported attempts to coerce Iraq, over time France, Russia, and China became increasingly critical of U.S. policy in the region and sought to end or curtail sanctions and inspections. Regional allies often did not support U.S. strikes on Iraq or sought to limit their extent to avoid criticism at home. Lack of consistent regional or allied support undermined the credibility of U.S. threats, encourage Saddam to defy U.S. ultimatums, and restricted U.S. military options.
    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba
    We also knew that Saddam and al Qaeda did not get along, and there were few in Iraq before our invasion.
    Then why was Al Zarqawi in Baghdad in 2002?

    Saddam Hussein harbored horrible terrorists like Abu Nidal, and personally gave $25,000 to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. He was not an enemy of terrorism

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba
    Most of the suicide bombers in Iraq were in fact Saudi, just as were those who attacked us on 9/11.
    Source?


    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba
    If you compare the violent death rates before and after our wars, you will see they dramatically increased after our wars.
    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.nytimes.com/1995/12/01/world/iraq-sanctions-kill-children-un-reports.html?src=pm
    As many as 576,000 Iraqi children may have died since the end of the Persian Gulf war because of economic sanctions imposed by the Security Council, according to two scientists who surveyed the country for the Food and Agriculture Organization.
    Iraqbodycount.org: Between 100,000 and 150,000 killed

    But most importantly, You're missing the point. If you constantly favor instant results over delayed ones, you will not see long-term success. If you want to make an omelette, you have to break a few eggs
    Last edited by Tubub; 09-16-11 at 01:04 AM.
    “Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checked by failure...than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.”
    -TR

Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •