The Hypocrisy of War

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,033
Points
280
Location
Earth
In all the news coverage of the Jordanian pilot being burned to death by ISIS, very little coverage mentions how ISIS' execution of the captured pilot was entirely symbolic as was made clear in the rest of the video. The pilot dropped bombs, the boms oblittered buildings in which men, women, and children resided. Some of these likely died in the fires which ensued. That ISIS "buried" the pilot in the very rubble he created dropping his bombs says the execution, and the means was totally symbollic. Yet we pretend like it's unjustified animalistic murder without any possible justification. It was totally justified. Or at least, as justified as our own dropping of bombs on civilian targets is and was.

In perhaps the most recognizable image of any war ever, US forces have done far worse than burn one responsible pilot to death for his actions.

Phan Thi Kim Phuc - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Warning: graphic image at link (famous photo of the Vietnamese girl running down a road nude her clothes having been burned right off her body and screaming after US planes dropped naplam bombs on her village.)

So before letting a modern presentation of a captured pilot being executed in the same fashion some of his victims likely died upset you, remember we've donw much worse. Wanna be pissy about something be pissy about the hypocrisy of how US-led wars are being conducted these days.
 

Toddsterpatriot

Diamond Member
Joined
May 3, 2011
Messages
65,509
Reaction score
13,548
Points
2,180
Location
Chicago
In all the news coverage of the Jordanian pilot being burned to death by ISIS, very little coverage mentions how ISIS' execution of the captured pilot was entirely symbolic as was made clear in the rest of the video. The pilot dropped bombs, the boms oblittered buildings in which men, women, and children resided. Some of these likely died in the fires which ensued. That ISIS "buried" the pilot in the very rubble he created dropping his bombs says the execution, and the means was totally symbollic. Yet we pretend like it's unjustified animalistic murder without any possible justification. It was totally justified. Or at least, as justified as our own dropping of bombs on civilian targets is and was.

In perhaps the most recognizable image of any war ever, US forces have done far worse than burn one responsible pilot to death for his actions.

Phan Thi Kim Phuc - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Warning: graphic image at link (famous photo of the Vietnamese girl running down a road nude her clothes having been burned right off her body and screaming after US planes dropped naplam bombs on her village.)

So before letting a modern presentation of a captured pilot being executed in the same fashion some of his victims likely died upset you, remember we've donw much worse. Wanna be pissy about something be pissy about the hypocrisy of how US-led wars are being conducted these days.
ISIS would happily thank you for your support, by cutting your stupid head off.
Afterwards, the quality of your posts might even improve.
 

M14 Shooter

The Light of Truth
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
25,772
Reaction score
2,479
Points
275
Location
Where I can see you, but you can't see me
....Yet we pretend like it's unjustified animalistic murder without any possible justification. It was totally justified. Or at least, as justified as our own dropping of bombs on civilian targets is and was.
In every way shape and form, incidentally killing civilians during a legitimate attack on a legitimate military target differs from intentionally, and brutally, killing someone you hold as a prisoner.
Your equivocation is sickening.
 
OP
D

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,033
Points
280
Location
Earth
....Yet we pretend like it's unjustified animalistic murder without any possible justification. It was totally justified. Or at least, as justified as our own dropping of bombs on civilian targets is and was.
In every way shape and form, incidentally killing civilians during a legitimate attack on a legitimate military target differs from intentionally, and brutally, killing someone you hold as a prisoner.
Your equivocation is sickening.
Your justifying the deliberate bombing of a wedding party because one or more militants might be present is worse.

They say the first casualty of war is the truth. All wars are criminal animalistic undefensible murder. Trying to say some is ok some isn't is assinine.
 
OP
D

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,033
Points
280
Location
Earth
You need to hire on as an obama explainer of things concerning why we should hate our country.
Might last a few minutes, but given the turnover rate of his Press Secretaries I'm not hopeful I"d last very long. :) First time he's waffling on gay issues came up I'd promise to tow the party line, but soon as the cameras came on say what a gutless wonder he is. :)
 

M14 Shooter

The Light of Truth
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
25,772
Reaction score
2,479
Points
275
Location
Where I can see you, but you can't see me
....Yet we pretend like it's unjustified animalistic murder without any possible justification. It was totally justified. Or at least, as justified as our own dropping of bombs on civilian targets is and was.
In every way shape and form, incidentally killing civilians during a legitimate attack on a legitimate military target differs from intentionally, and brutally, killing someone you hold as a prisoner.
Your equivocation is sickening.
Your justifying the deliberate bombing of a wedding party because one or more militants might be present is worse.
Legitimate military targets are legitimate military targets; attacking them with military force is legitimate. Period.
The fact that civilians die in war is unfortunate but sometimes unavoidable - especially if one side hides legitimate military targets among them.
They say the first casualty of war is the truth. All wars are criminal animalistic undefensible murder.
Funny how your second sentence proves your first.
 
OP
D

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,033
Points
280
Location
Earth
....Yet we pretend like it's unjustified animalistic murder without any possible justification. It was totally justified. Or at least, as justified as our own dropping of bombs on civilian targets is and was.
In every way shape and form, incidentally killing civilians during a legitimate attack on a legitimate military target differs from intentionally, and brutally, killing someone you hold as a prisoner.
Your equivocation is sickening.
Your justifying the deliberate bombing of a wedding party because one or more militants might be present is worse.
Legitimate military targets are legitimate military targets; attacking them with military force is legitimate. Period.
The fact that civilians die in war is unfortunate but sometimes unavoidable - especially if one side hides legitimate military targets among them.
They say the first casualty of war is the truth. All wars are criminal animalistic undefensible murder.
Funny how your second sentence proves your first.
What about non-military targets as during WWII? You support nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the former having no military value, or firebombing cities to inflict civilian casualties? That acceptable to you or no? If not then isn't your case weakened by saying "as long as we give it our best effort to minimize civilian casualties, wars are fine." But if all wars today are fought in civilian poplation centers (gone are the days of wars in big empty fields) then how do you justify a known percentage of casualties being civilians? If you understand you're dropping bombs on civilian structures how can you reaosnably claim to being hitting them inadvertantly?
 

M14 Shooter

The Light of Truth
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
25,772
Reaction score
2,479
Points
275
Location
Where I can see you, but you can't see me
....Yet we pretend like it's unjustified animalistic murder without any possible justification. It was totally justified. Or at least, as justified as our own dropping of bombs on civilian targets is and was.
In every way shape and form, incidentally killing civilians during a legitimate attack on a legitimate military target differs from intentionally, and brutally, killing someone you hold as a prisoner.
Your equivocation is sickening.
Your justifying the deliberate bombing of a wedding party because one or more militants might be present is worse.
Legitimate military targets are legitimate military targets; attacking them with military force is legitimate. Period.
The fact that civilians die in war is unfortunate but sometimes unavoidable - especially if one side hides legitimate military targets among them.
They say the first casualty of war is the truth. All wars are criminal animalistic undefensible murder.
Funny how your second sentence proves your first.
What about non-military targets as during WWII?
What about "Legitimate military targets are legitimate military targets; attacking them with military force is legitimate. Period." creates confusion for you?
But if all wars today are fought in civilian poplation centers (gone are the days of wars in big empty fields) then how do you justify a known percentage of casualties being civilians?
Simple:
To not destroy the eneny and his ability to make war means you leave him a greater capacity to attack your own civilians. Your job is to protect your civilians, and so, even if it means some enemy civilians must die, you must make war on the enemy.
 
OP
D

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,033
Points
280
Location
Earth
....Yet we pretend like it's unjustified animalistic murder without any possible justification. It was totally justified. Or at least, as justified as our own dropping of bombs on civilian targets is and was.
In every way shape and form, incidentally killing civilians during a legitimate attack on a legitimate military target differs from intentionally, and brutally, killing someone you hold as a prisoner.
Your equivocation is sickening.
Your justifying the deliberate bombing of a wedding party because one or more militants might be present is worse.
Legitimate military targets are legitimate military targets; attacking them with military force is legitimate. Period.
The fact that civilians die in war is unfortunate but sometimes unavoidable - especially if one side hides legitimate military targets among them.
They say the first casualty of war is the truth. All wars are criminal animalistic undefensible murder.
Funny how your second sentence proves your first.
What about non-military targets as during WWII?
What about "Legitimate military targets are legitimate military targets; attacking them with military force is legitimate. Period." creates confusion for you?
But if all wars today are fought in civilian poplation centers (gone are the days of wars in big empty fields) then how do you justify a known percentage of casualties being civilians?
Simple:
To not destroy the eneny and his ability to make war means you leave him a greater capacity to attack your own civilians. Your job is to protect your civilians, and so, even if it means some enemy civilians must die, you must make war on the enemy.
My solution to ensuring we protect US civilians is to not go to other countries, drop bombs pissing off their people then say the folks back home are safer for it. Once we leave, where dya think the pissed off people are gonna go?

Terrorism is the result of our meddling in foreign country affairs. We either decimated their military, or are siding with the oppressors of their people (as in KSA and elsewhere,)resulting in non-national military forces (we call them patriots when we do it) rising up, getting what arms they can get ahold of, and mounting an armed resistance to our occupation or other offensive role intheir homeland. Wanna shoot at em fine, but don't pretend to be in a morally superior position when you're the invading force complaining about resistance.

If the situation were reversed, ask yourselves what you'd do and how you'd feel if foreign military aircraft were flying over US soil and dropping bombs on US towns. Gonna welcome them as friends you can't wait to have dinner with, or mount an armed resistance ala "Red Dawn" becomming "terrorists?"

Bad enough we're murdering people in other countries, lets not be such obvious hypocrites about it is all I'm sayin'.
 

M14 Shooter

The Light of Truth
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
25,772
Reaction score
2,479
Points
275
Location
Where I can see you, but you can't see me
My solution to ensuring we protect US civilians is to not go to other countries, drop bombs pissing off their people then say the folks back home are safer for it. Once we leave, where dya think the pissed off people are gonna go?
That's nice.
And what do you do when, say, NK fuels up a functional missile with a functional nuclear warhead, aims it at Seattle, and makes ready to fire?
Do you attack the missile site, knowing that NK civilians will die, or do you let them nuke Seattle?
 
Last edited:

Penelope

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
50,823
Reaction score
8,441
Points
2,060
We have to thank Cheney and his neoconservatives for bringing us into Iraq In the first place, and then Obama Admin for trying to do a coup on Syria, because Israel wanted it, we are the cause of this nightmare and its time we admit it. We need to stay out of it. No one is attacking us, ask those billionaires how worried they are in their nice new high-rises in NY, not a bit.
 

M14 Shooter

The Light of Truth
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
25,772
Reaction score
2,479
Points
275
Location
Where I can see you, but you can't see me
My solution to ensuring we protect US civilians is to not go to other countries, drop bombs pissing off their people then say the folks back home are safer for it. Once we leave, where dya think the pissed off people are gonna go?
That's nice.
And what do you do when, say, NK fuels up a functional missile with a functional nuclear warhead, aims it at Seattle, and makes ready to fire?
Do you attack the missile site, knowing that NK civilians will die, or do you let them nuke Seattle?
No response...?
 
OP
D

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,033
Points
280
Location
Earth
My solution to ensuring we protect US civilians is to not go to other countries, drop bombs pissing off their people then say the folks back home are safer for it. Once we leave, where dya think the pissed off people are gonna go?
That's nice.
And what do you do when, say, NK fuels up a functional missile with a functional nuclear warhead, aims it at Seattle, and makes ready to fire?
Do you attack the missile site, knowing that NK civilians will die, or do you let them nuke Seattle?
No response...?
Doing other things than waiting for some little boy who plays with guns to say something stupid.
 

M14 Shooter

The Light of Truth
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
25,772
Reaction score
2,479
Points
275
Location
Where I can see you, but you can't see me
My solution to ensuring we protect US civilians is to not go to other countries, drop bombs pissing off their people then say the folks back home are safer for it. Once we leave, where dya think the pissed off people are gonna go?
That's nice.
And what do you do when, say, NK fuels up a functional missile with a functional nuclear warhead, aims it at Seattle, and makes ready to fire?
Do you attack the missile site, knowing that NK civilians will die, or do you let them nuke Seattle?
No response...?
Doing other things than waiting for some little boy who plays with guns to say something stupid.
I see you understand that your position is unsound and that the only way to protect yourself is to not answer my questions..
Fair enough, I accept your concession.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top