• 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!

An Officer & a Gentleman

Yes, invading and occupying countries that never attacked us most certainly is a cultural threat, not to mention the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.

Are you saying that WE killed hundreds of thousands of civilians? That is simply untrue and a heinous accusation. Think of the intense scrutiny that American military have gone though for killing a single person...let alone that many.
 
Are you saying that WE killed hundreds of thousands of civilians? That is simply untrue and a heinous accusation. Think of the intense scrutiny that American military have gone though for killing a single person...let alone that many.

Must mean us Blood Hungry, Right Wing, Heavy Industry Loving, Capitalist Pig-dogs.
 
Actually a Librarian said that...[/QUO

So you had no problems with the 3,000 civilians killed on 9/11 because they were not innocent???
 
Are you saying that WE killed hundreds of thousands of civilians? That is simply untrue and a heinous accusation. Think of the intense scrutiny that American military have gone though for killing a single person...let alone that many.

Apparently you are not familiar with the Dual-Use targeting we did in Gulf War 1. The terrorists and their recruits are very familiar with it.

Excerpt from Rizer's "Bombing of Dual-Use Targets":

"A key example of such dual-use targeting was the destruction of Iraqi electrical power facilities in Desert Storm. While crippling Iraq's military command and control capability, destruction of these facilities shut down water purification and sewage treatment plants. As a result, epidemics of gastroenteritis, cholera, and typhoid broke out, leading to perhaps as many as 100,000 civilian deaths and a doubling of the infant mortality rate. Given such effects on non-combatants, are electrical power facilities legitimate military targets? Does airpower doctrine acknowledge, support, or condemn such indirect effects? Must air campaign planners weigh these indirect effects in their target selection process? ...

"Finally, the US Air Force has a vested interest in attacking dual-use targets so long as dual-use target destruction serves the double role of destroying legitimate military capabilities and indirectly targeting civilian morale. So long as this remains within the letter if not the spirit of the law and the JWE [Christian Just-War Ethic], the Air Force will cling to the status quo."
Citizens Concerned for the People of Iraq
 
Apparently you are not familiar with the Dual-Use targeting we did in Gulf War 1. The terrorists and their recruits are very familiar with it.

Excerpt from Rizer's "Bombing of Dual-Use Targets":

"A key example of such dual-use targeting was the destruction of Iraqi electrical power facilities in Desert Storm. While crippling Iraq's military command and control capability, destruction of these facilities shut down water purification and sewage treatment plants. As a result, epidemics of gastroenteritis, cholera, and typhoid broke out, leading to perhaps as many as 100,000 civilian deaths and a doubling of the infant mortality rate. Given such effects on non-combatants, are electrical power facilities legitimate military targets? Does airpower doctrine acknowledge, support, or condemn such indirect effects? Must air campaign planners weigh these indirect effects in their target selection process? ...

"Finally, the US Air Force has a vested interest in attacking dual-use targets so long as dual-use target destruction serves the double role of destroying legitimate military capabilities and indirectly targeting civilian morale. So long as this remains within the letter if not the spirit of the law and the JWE [Christian Just-War Ethic], the Air Force will cling to the status quo."
Citizens Concerned for the People of Iraq

If any of that is true, I can't vouch for it because I wasn't there.

I'm talking post-2001.

Jesus, why don't you bring up Dresden while you are at it?
 
If any of that is true, I can't vouch for it because I wasn't there.

It is true, do your own research. My son was there. It is why he left the Air Force after 13 years.

I'm talking post-2001.

Jesus, why don't you bring up Dresden while you are at it?

I'm not Jesus and Dresden had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks on 9/11. It is not possible to effectively address the war on terror without being aware of its origins.
 
I'm not Jesus and Dresden had nothing to do with the terrorist attacks on 9/11. It is not possible to effectively address the war on terror without being aware of its origins.

I'm fully aware you aren't Jesus...because he loves the contingency operation formerly known as the Global War on Terror. You don't.

Origins? U.S. military presence in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and support of Israel, IIRC what OBL said.

Oh, yeah and our overwhelming refusal to acknowledge that there is one and only God, Allah and Mohammed is his profit, and inforce Sharia law on our country.
 
I'm fully aware you aren't Jesus...because he loves the contingency operation formerly known as the Global War on Terror.

Got a link for that? :lol:

Origins? U.S. military presence in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and support of Israel, IIRC what OBL said.

Oh, yeah and our overwhelming refusal to acknowledge that there is one and only God, Allah and Mohammed is his profit, and inforce Sharia law on our country.

From al Qaeda's 1998 Fatwa:

"First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.

If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.

Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once against trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation."

Online NewsHour: Al Qaeda's 1998 Fatwa
 
Apparently you are not familiar with the Dual-Use targeting we did in Gulf War 1. The terrorists and their recruits are very familiar with it.

Excerpt from Rizer's "Bombing of Dual-Use Targets":

"A key example of such dual-use targeting was the destruction of Iraqi electrical power facilities in Desert Storm. While crippling Iraq's military command and control capability, destruction of these facilities shut down water purification and sewage treatment plants. As a result, epidemics of gastroenteritis, cholera, and typhoid broke out, leading to perhaps as many as 100,000 civilian deaths and a doubling of the infant mortality rate. Given such effects on non-combatants, are electrical power facilities legitimate military targets? Does airpower doctrine acknowledge, support, or condemn such indirect effects? Must air campaign planners weigh these indirect effects in their target selection process? ...

"Finally, the US Air Force has a vested interest in attacking dual-use targets so long as dual-use target destruction serves the double role of destroying legitimate military capabilities and indirectly targeting civilian morale. So long as this remains within the letter if not the spirit of the law and the JWE [Christian Just-War Ethic], the Air Force will cling to the status quo."
Citizens Concerned for the People of Iraq


People die in combat... American's have become so afraid of "civilian casualties" that our enemies not only use this to their advantage, but take joy in watching people get upset after the fact.
 
People die in combat... American's have become so afraid of "civilian casualties" that our enemies not only use this to their advantage, but take joy in watching people get upset after the fact.

No one (on either side) takes the deaths of innocent civilians lightly. That is why we are losing the war on terror. As long as that continues so will the war on terror. How many more trillion dollars do you figure we can afford in waging war that only increases the number of terrorist recruits?

That was Bin Laden's plan, to bankrupt us into fighting and winless wars. So far, we have been playing according to his plans.
 
No one (on either side) takes the deaths of innocent civilians lightly. That is why we are losing the war on terror. As long as that continues so will the war on terror. How many more trillion dollars do you figure we can afford in waging war that only increases the number of terrorist recruits?

That was Bin Laden's plan, to bankrupt us into fighting and winless wars. So far, we have been playing according to his plans.

What I find ironic is we watched Russia do the same damn thing.
 
Back
Top Bottom