• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US troops fire on Afghan bus, killing at least 5 civilians

Boo Radley said:
Ignoring this article for a moment, just a question, is it possible to ever criticize the military on any action they take? Or is any criticism always seen as being anti military? I really am curious.
Click to expand...

Constructive criticism is necessary. Slanted analysis that fails to consider all the facts is not.
 
Having not checked this thread since I started it, I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the foaming anger from the gung-ho simpletons, though I really don't see how I deserved it. I thought I made it clear I support our military in Afghanistan, apparently they assume I'm lying.

I understand the concern of soldiers when a civilian vehicle comes close to a convoy, what I don't understand is why a civilian bus doesn't rate a little extra care. Sure they fired flares, if they flares are misunderstood does that justify killing everyone on the bus? This wasn't a van, it was a large bus that travels between cities. As was stated in the article, the bus was caught between two military convoys, and the driver got confused. At some point the military has to prioritize civilian life over the risk of the bus driver using his entire passenger load as a suicide bomb. There is no precedent for such a vehicle being used for terrorism.
 
WillRockwell said:
Having not checked this thread since I started it, I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the foaming anger from the gung-ho simpletons, though I really don't see how I deserved it. I thought I made it clear I support our military in Afghanistan, apparently they assume I'm lying.

I understand the concern of soldiers when a civilian vehicle comes close to a convoy, what I don't understand is why a civilian bus doesn't rate a little extra care. Sure they fired flares, if they flares are misunderstood does that justify killing everyone on the bus? This wasn't a van, it was a large bus that travels between cities. As was stated in the article, the bus was caught between two military convoys, and the driver got confused. At some point the military has to prioritize civilian life over the risk of the bus driver using his entire passenger load as a suicide bomb. There is no precedent for such a vehicle being used for terrorism.
Click to expand...

Is there some unspoken rule or law which says, "Buses cannot be used as vehicle-borne IED's, therefore they are never to be engaged"?
 
WillRockwell said:
Having not checked this thread since I started it, I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the foaming anger from the gung-ho simpletons, though I really don't see how I deserved it. I thought I made it clear I support our military in Afghanistan, apparently they assume I'm lying.
Click to expand...



I think you are lying. Your history has shown a disdain for those who serve. :

your tantrum over critisizm also indicatates issues as we "gung ho simpleton" are mostly veterans. ;)



I understand the concern of soldiers when a civilian vehicle comes close to a convoy, what I don't understand is why a civilian bus doesn't rate a little extra care. Sure they fired flares, if they flares are misunderstood does that justify killing everyone on the bus? This wasn't a van, it was a large bus that travels between cities. As was stated in the article, the bus was caught between two military convoys, and the driver got confused. At some point the military has to prioritize civilian life over the risk of the bus driver using his entire passenger load as a suicide bomb. There is no precedent for such a vehicle being used for terrorism.
Click to expand...




Did you bother to read about the warnings/flares etc? Or does that not fit in with your agenda?
 
Boo Radley said:
I don't think there is only the two extremes. There is a lot of middle ground, which I think you're missing, that doesn't require they shoot first. I think you will find the military doesn't agree with and as in the past, will investigate, and if they see a problem, they will act. The military, not anyone else, has sought prosecution before.
Click to expand...

There is middle ground and I'm not missing it. I just don't care. If they want to be safe and play it conservative with what they consider enough information, that's fine by me.

I imagine the military does agree with me. Unless you have specific instances of soldiers being disciplined for firing when they were feeling threatened? I'm sure there will be an investigation, and possibly they will let these soldiers know if they did anything wrong. I would be extremely surprised if they're prosecuted.
 
WillRockwell said:
Having not checked this thread since I started it, I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the foaming anger from the gung-ho simpletons, though I really don't see how I deserved it. I thought I made it clear I support our military in Afghanistan, apparently they assume I'm lying.

I understand the concern of soldiers when a civilian vehicle comes close to a convoy, what I don't understand is why a civilian bus doesn't rate a little extra care. Sure they fired flares, if they flares are misunderstood does that justify killing everyone on the bus? This wasn't a van, it was a large bus that travels between cities. As was stated in the article, the bus was caught between two military convoys, and the driver got confused. At some point the military has to prioritize civilian life over the risk of the bus driver using his entire passenger load as a suicide bomb. There is no precedent for such a vehicle being used for terrorism.
Click to expand...

Ah yes. Because suicide bombers are known for their rational behavior. :roll:
 
For me, I rather them act quickly to save other people lives. However, I do not condone people laughing at a person, because they were shot like in the Apache Helicopter video type.

However, in this incident I do not see anything that they did wrong, so I will not draw any conclusions, until I see more evidence in this matter.
 
Last edited:
RyrineaHaruno said:
For me, I rather them act quickly to save other people lives. However, I do not condone people laughing at a person, because they were shot like in the Apache Helicopter video type.

However, in this incident I do not see anything that they did wrong, so I will not draw any conclusions, until I see more evidence in this matter.
Click to expand...




Laughing is a coping mechanism..... Don't take it to seriously.
 
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Laughing is a coping mechanism..... Don't take it to seriously.
Click to expand...



I agree thought it just disturbed me a little. That they took it that casually thought



Quote from Mass Effect 1 :mrgreen:
Liara: We all most died out there, and your pilot is making jokes
Shepard Its a coping mechanism you will get use to it
Liara: I see it must be a human thing
 
Boo Radley said:
I have tried to stay away from this particular incident as we really don't have enough information and comment only on your statement, which was:



When you declare that there is never an if, you are actually saying you don't really want to know and don't care about the facts of any case. I see this far too often and is the point I have been trying to make.
Click to expand...

Where exactly did the good Reverend say that? Please note the portion in red.

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
I give them, US troops, our brothers and sisters the benefit of the doubt.... there is no "if" in my book at this point.
Click to expand...
 
RyrineaHaruno said:
I agree thought it just disturbed me a little. That they took it that casually thought



Quote from Mass Effect 1 :mrgreen:
Liara: We all most died out there, and your pilot is making jokes
Shepard Its a coping mechanism you will get use to it
Liara: I see it must be a human thing
Click to expand...





Like I said in the other thread. You would be appalled at some of the things we laughed at. ;)
 
WillRockwell said:
I totally support our military efforts in Afghanistan, but incidents like this make me question if our military can be trusted to prosecute a war without killing innocent people. What rules of engagement could possibly justify opening fire on a crowded bus?

U.S. Troops Fire on Afghan Bus, Killing at Least 5 Civilians - NYTimes.com
Click to expand...

Better safe than sorry.As long as terrorist use IEDs,fire from civilian areas and around civilians, civilians will always get hurts.Heck as long as wars are fought in populated areas civilians will always get hurt. Its not the enemy is going to agree to fight outside the populated areas. Perhaps they need to air (or air more if they already do)tv commercials,billboard ads, and news paper ads informing the civilians dangers of ignoring warning shots and flares and not to travel to close to military convoys. Do you expect the military to take an extra chance with their safety when a bus ignores their warning flares?
 
Last edited:
WillRockwell said:
Having not checked this thread since I started it, I guess I shouldn't be surprised at the foaming anger from the gung-ho simpletons, though I really don't see how I deserved it. I thought I made it clear I support our military in Afghanistan, apparently they assume I'm lying.

I understand the concern of soldiers when a civilian vehicle comes close to a convoy, what I don't understand is why a civilian bus doesn't rate a little extra care. Sure they fired flares, if they flares are misunderstood does that justify killing everyone on the bus? This wasn't a van, it was a large bus that travels between cities. As was stated in the article, the bus was caught between two military convoys, and the driver got confused. At some point the military has to prioritize civilian life over the risk of the bus driver using his entire passenger load as a suicide bomb. There is no precedent for such a vehicle being used for terrorism.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are lying. I'm not sure how you can "totally support" the troops and then wonder if you can trust them. I think it's pretty obvious that you do not trust our troops and therefore you don't "totally support" them. Just seems like typical smokescreening I've seen from some on the left before so they don't appear to be bashing the troops. Your mask slipped just a tad there.

BTW, could you point out the "foaming anger" in this thread? I haven't seen it.

WillRockwell said:
I totally support our military efforts in Afghanistan, but incidents like this make me question if our military can be trusted to prosecute a war without killing innocent people. What rules of engagement could possibly justify opening fire on a crowded bus?
Click to expand...
 
Boo Radley said:
It is however, one reason war should be avoided if possible. The willingness to enter a war too readily leads to these types of things, which is why our leaders deserve more criticism than they have received.

Still, even saying that, war isn't a blank check to do anything. There are still lines and the question will be and should be did these people cross any line.
Click to expand...

Its fine that the question be asked. I think the heartburn comes with the kneejerk tendency of some people to automatically assume the absolute worst about US ttroops.
 
VanceMack said:
Its fine that the question be asked. I think the heartburn comes with the kneejerk tendency of some people to automatically assume the absolute worst about US ttroops.
Click to expand...

While it is true some jump to that conclusion, there are also others who see any questioning as condemnation. I just think we need a little balance. And that requires an admission that they can go too far.
 
Gander said:
Constructive criticism is necessary. Slanted analysis that fails to consider all the facts is not.
Click to expand...

Who is calling for slanted analysis? :confused:
 
Kelzie said:
There is middle ground and I'm not missing it. I just don't care. If they want to be safe and play it conservative with what they consider enough information, that's fine by me.

I imagine the military does agree with me. Unless you have specific instances of soldiers being disciplined for firing when they were feeling threatened? I'm sure there will be an investigation, and possibly they will let these soldiers know if they did anything wrong. I would be extremely surprised if they're prosecuted.
Click to expand...

I might be surprised as well, but you will note that those who faced prosecution in Iraq were charged by the military and not civilians.
 
Boo Radley said:
I might be surprised as well, but you will note that those who faced prosecution in Iraq were charged by the military and not civilians.
Click to expand...

What exactly are they facing prosecution for? If they intentionally harmed a civilian, they should certainly be charged.
 
Kelzie said:
What exactly are they facing prosecution for? If they intentionally harmed a civilian, they should certainly be charged.
Click to expand...

Surely you remember it. They claimed to have been fired at and shot up some civilians. The military tried to prosecute, but evidence was hard to come by. Still, it was the military that had the problem with them.
 
Boo Radley said:
Surely you remember it. They claimed to have been fired at and shot up some civilians. The military tried to prosecute, but evidence was hard to come by. Still, it was the military that had the problem with them.
Click to expand...

No I don't remember. The military is generally responsible for prosecuting soldiers though.
 
Kelzie said:
No I don't remember. The military is generally responsible for prosecuting soldiers though.
Click to expand...

True. Which makes an interesting to hate the military for prosecuting the military. :mrgreen:;)
 
Boo Radley said:
True. Which makes an interesting to hate the military for prosecuting the military. :mrgreen:;)
Click to expand...

I don't know if anyone's saying that. It's just some people are annoyed that our soldiers are expected to walk on egg shells while they are being shot at.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom