Page 24 of 24 FirstFirst ... 14222324
Results 231 to 239 of 239

Thread: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

  1. #231
    Libertarian socialist

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,730

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post
    Well I would like to see a source on this for one. And for two if that is true, the reason would seem obvious, the ISI has been infiltrated at its highest levels of power and has tipped off these people when the intelligence was given to them, for example rogue elements within the ISI have tipped off the head of Pakistani Taliban one Baitullah Mehsud before Pakistani troops could take him out, in the end he had to be killed by a CIA drone attack. In fact the former head of the ISI helped to fund the 9-11 attacks.
    See the section on the pakistani responce on the wikipedia article on U.S drone attacks that i posted earlyer.

    There seams to be a consensus that ISI is heavily infiltrated by islamists, though its debateable how far up this goes. Even so how can simply telling the pakistani government where these people are make the situation any worse? The islamists already know where they are. Also why not help the ISI to route these people out/.

  2. #232
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Past the edge of the universe, through the singularity, and out the other side.
    Last Seen
    09-01-10 @ 05:23 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,324

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Red_Dave View Post
    See the section on the pakistani responce on the wikipedia article on U.S drone attacks that i posted earlyer.
    Well maybe if they haven't constantly tipped off the targets including even OBL then we would be more willing to share intel, but given the circumstances are unwillingness to share intel with an organization which has been infiltrated at the highest echelons by the enemy is IMHO entirely reasonable.

    There seams to be a consensus that ISI is heavily infiltrated by islamists, though its debateable how far up this goes.
    Not really they've been infiltrated at the highest echelons, as I said former head of the ISI funded the 9-11 attacks.

    Even so how can simply telling the pakistani government where these people are make the situation any worse?
    They tip them off that we know where they're at so they switch locations, that's how OBL dodged a hellfire strike in 1998.

    The islamists already know where they are. Also why not help the ISI to route these people out/.
    No they'll tip them off that WE know where they're at, so not only will the Pakistani military not be able to get them using the intel we give the ISI but we won't be able to get them either which is why it is far far better for us to get them ourselves.

  3. #233
    Libertarian socialist

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Staffs, England
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    6,730

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Ferris View Post

    Not really they've been infiltrated at the highest echelons, as I said former head of the ISI funded the 9-11 attacks.
    .
    Can i have a source for that? I would have thought if it was that high the government would have cottend on.

  4. #234
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In your dreams...
    Last Seen
    05-29-12 @ 02:53 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,621

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Wow! Just how offensive does one have to be? I don't see the line of thinking that would lead any normal person to come to this sort of conclusion.

    It is a FACT that AQ and the Taliban are harbored in the largely lawless section of Pakistan, this is indisputable. The argument I was having was one, (not even with you, mind you) that this fretting over the loss of civilians that in in close proximity to the targets that must be taken out is a fools errand. And the best you can come up with is that I only take that stance because I am somehow racist?

    Get a clue man.


    j-mac
    Its not that your racist. It's that thats just ignorant... and almost racist in its implications. Its that you really wanna win the war and dont care if a few little brown people get toasted at the same time apparently.

    I remember an incident. The taliban captured some diesel gas tankers and was giving out gas. Some smart people decided to bomb the lot of them including civilians in queue to pick up some free gas. Killing dozens of mostly innocent people. Is this an example of what you think needs to be done? They got some taliban didnt they?

  5. #235
    Professor Charles Martel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    03-21-10 @ 08:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,668

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by SE102 View Post
    The taliban captured some diesel gas tankers and was giving out gas.
    Giving out gas? These Taliban...they uh....they look out for the populace, care-givers more or less?
    It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.

  6. #236
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    In your dreams...
    Last Seen
    05-29-12 @ 02:53 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,621

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    They were giving out free gas, I made no other implications.
    What are you getting at?

  7. #237
    Professor Charles Martel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Last Seen
    03-21-10 @ 08:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,668

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by SE102 View Post
    They were giving out free gas, I made no other implications.
    What are you getting at?
    Here's what I was getting at:

    I remember an incident. The taliban captured some diesel gas tankers and was giving out gas. Some smart people decided to bomb the lot of them including civilians in queue to pick up some free gas. Killing dozens of mostly innocent people
    Cause this doesn't seem to jive with my memory in fact:

    Probe reveals 30 civilians died in NATO fuel-truck bombing | France 24

    Thirty civilians, along with 69 Taliban militants, died in a NATO bombing of a hijacked fuel truck in early September,
    Seems to suggest more militants were killed than civilians and your opinion that the taliban was giving out free gas....
    The strike was reportedly ordered by a German commander after Taliban militants hijacked two fuel trucks on a NATO supply route from Tajikistan.

    When one of the trucks stalled in a river, the Taliban called on villagers to syphon away the fuel and civilians were gathered round the vehicles when the the bombs stuck, witnesses have said.
    Giving away free gas? I was always taught there is no free gas and who are the smart people here. The Taliban "captured" truck gets stuck and you...out in the open now, go to syphon off the gas? With scores of Taliban all around you.........again...out in the open where you know drones and Nato/American air patrols rocket in all day and all night ESPECIALLY when they know a tanker that can be used to kill civilians elsewhere has been abducted.

    As...these Cats do use truck bombs and gasoline..don't they?

    No one claimed responsibility for Monday's bombing of a truck at a gas station in another area of the northwest.

    Three children were among the seven people killed, and at least 15 were wounded, police said. Television footage showed bloodstained clothes and sandals scattered around the gas station in Charsada district, about 12 miles (20 kilometers) outside the main northwestern city of Peshawar.
    Baitullah Mehsud Is Dead, Says Captured Taliban Spokesman Maulvi Umar

    See the difference now SE102? The NATO pilots targeted a stolen truck that they assume will be used for a terror attack.....they target the Taliban that took the truck and the innocent are killed as they are in every conflict. The three children and many civilians I can link to countless of times where the Taliban planet bombs...the children ARE the TARGET.

    Police officer Sifwat Ghayur said a timed explosive device had been loaded onto the truck in a package marked "medicine" without the driver's knowledge. The truck functioned as a taxi service between towns. Most of the dead were passengers.
    A taxi service between towns........you sure yer lookin at things in the proper perspective, SE?
    It was the Austrasians, that hewed on bravely through the thick of the fight, it was they who found and cut down the Saracen King.

  8. #238
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 12:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,301

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Are we planning to discuss the drone anymore? I don't want to be criticized for discussing the topic?
    Last edited by American; 10-30-09 at 03:10 PM.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  9. #239
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,274

    Re: US drone strikes may break international law: UN

    Quote Originally Posted by Charles Martel View Post
    Here's what I was getting at:



    Cause this doesn't seem to jive with my memory in fact:

    Probe reveals 30 civilians died in NATO fuel-truck bombing | France 24



    Seems to suggest more militants were killed than civilians and your opinion that the taliban was giving out free gas....
    The strike was reportedly ordered by a German commander after Taliban militants hijacked two fuel trucks on a NATO supply route from Tajikistan.



    Giving away free gas? I was always taught there is no free gas and who are the smart people here. The Taliban "captured" truck gets stuck and you...out in the open now, go to syphon off the gas? With scores of Taliban all around you.........again...out in the open where you know drones and Nato/American air patrols rocket in all day and all night ESPECIALLY when they know a tanker that can be used to kill civilians elsewhere has been abducted.

    As...these Cats do use truck bombs and gasoline..don't they?



    Baitullah Mehsud Is Dead, Says Captured Taliban Spokesman Maulvi Umar

    See the difference now SE102? The NATO pilots targeted a stolen truck that they assume will be used for a terror attack.....they target the Taliban that took the truck and the innocent are killed as they are in every conflict. The three children and many civilians I can link to countless of times where the Taliban planet bombs...the children ARE the TARGET.



    A taxi service between towns........you sure yer lookin at things in the proper perspective, SE?


    Ah yes.....The 'oldschool' way.....I love it!


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

Page 24 of 24 FirstFirst ... 14222324

Posting Permissions

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