OK, so UAVs have killed people in Pakistan on the war on terror

[QUOTE="Harisemo"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] So Pakistan wants to pick and choose which insurgents are a target? Also they don't give a source for much of that article so it has no credibility as far as I'm concerned.LJS9502_basic

Does anything have credibility that goes against your views of saintly US government? Not even worth arguing with you tbh

exactly what do you find hard to believe that you want source for it?

[QUOTE="DigitalExile"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"] well they could always movemems_1224

Aaaah, naivety at it's finest.

[QUOTE="evilrobot1991"]Maybe if they didnt hang out with terrorists they wouldnt be killedhydralisk86

Most Americans don't know what's happening so I don't blame them.

Harisemo

Yet you support terrorists that target our people...

[QUOTE="Harisemo"]

Most Americans don't know what's happening so I don't blame them.

airshocker

Yet you support terrorists that target our people...

if you say so

if you say so

Harisemo

You said so. I don't remember what thread it was but you've said you supported the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, one supports terrorists and one is a terrorist organization.

[QUOTE="Harisemo"]

if you say so

airshocker

You said so. I don't remember what thread it was but you've said you supported the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, one supports terrorists and one is a terrorist organization.

lol I've never said I support Al Qaeda and Taliban don't support Al Qaeda either.

That's the US Army for you. Civilians died in Vietnam, they didn't care, now civilians are dying in Pakistan, and they still don't care.

[QUOTE="TurkInLondon"]

That's the US Army for you. Civilians died in Vietnam, they didn't care, now civilians are dying in Pakistan, and they still don't care.

parkurtommo

That's the US Army for you. Civilians died in Vietnam, they didn't care, now civilians are dying in Pakistan, and they still don't care.

TurkInLondon

[QUOTE="TurkInLondon"]

That's the US Army for you. Civilians died in Vietnam, they didn't care, now civilians are dying in Pakistan, and they still don't care.

ad1x2

[QUOTE="hydralisk86"][QUOTE="evilrobot1991"]Maybe if they didnt hang out with terrorists they wouldnt be killedLJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="parkurtommo"][QUOTE="TurkInLondon"]

That's the US Army for you. Civilians died in Vietnam, they didn't care, now civilians are dying in Pakistan, and they still don't care.

Verge_6

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]Well...they are casualties. War doesn't exempt civilians. hydralisk86

its a sad part of war and, while I do not like it one bit, it is something we must grudgingly accept.

If the US, or any other country for that matter, were to be invaded, I imagine some of the targets would include oil refineries, airports, manufacturing plants, etc. All staffed by civilians. And yet these places are contributing to the war effort, so that makes them completely legitimate targets for the other side.

As a result, it is up to the country to protect their civilians from harm; build shelters, get them offsite when an attack is coming, etc.. People blame the US for collateral damage, when the simple truth Pakistan and/or the terrorists hold all the power if they want their civilians to stop getting killed.

But they don't. Because as long as they keep sacrificing innocents, they will have a constant stream of uneducated, mistreated, angry mobs to enlist in their forces.

Sounds corny, but don't hate the player, hate the game.

[QUOTE="hydralisk86"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]Well...they are casualties. War doesn't exempt civilians. mrbojangles25

its a sad part of war and, while I do not like it one bit, it is something we must grudgingly accept.

If the US, or any other country for that matter, were to be invaded, I imagine some of the targets would include oil refineries, airports, manufacturing plants, etc. All staffed by civilians. And yet these places are contributing to the war effort, so that makes them completely legitimate targets for the other side.

As a result, it is up to the country to protect their civilians from harm; build shelters, get them offsite when an attack is coming, etc.. People blame the US for collateral damage, when the simple truth Pakistan and/or the terrorists hold all the power if they want their civilians to stop getting killed.

But they don't. Because as long as they keep sacrificing innocents, they will have a constant stream of uneducated, mistreated, angry mobs to enlist in their forces.

Sounds corny, but don't hate the player, hate the game.

[QUOTE="hydralisk86"]Uhhh what? Hang around with terrorists? airshocker

Osama bin Laden was hiding in their country. Fertilizer from their plants goes into making IEDs that are used against enemy troops. That doesn't sound like an innocent country.

The civilian casualties are regrettable, but that's the nature of this kind of warfare.

Its so easy to say such things when its not your country and your sitting back sipping on your mocha feeling completely safe.. These are wars that are 100% matters of choice, in such events I would think every one here would see why the protection of said civilians need to be on top of the list.. When these wars are not for the very survival of our nation but more or less trying to enforce a regime change more than anything else.

[QUOTE="TurkInLondon"]

That's the US Army for you. Civilians died in Vietnam, they didn't care, now civilians are dying in Pakistan, and they still don't care.

ad1x2

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="hydralisk86"] But do a lot of us care? And I said this already, but I'd be pretty mad if some foreign country was doing that here. kuraimen

its a sad part of war and, while I do not like it one bit, it is something we must grudgingly accept.

If the US, or any other country for that matter, were to be invaded, I imagine some of the targets would include oil refineries, airports, manufacturing plants, etc. All staffed by civilians. And yet these places are contributing to the war effort, so that makes them completely legitimate targets for the other side.

As a result, it is up to the country to protect their civilians from harm; build shelters, get them offsite when an attack is coming, etc.. People blame the US for collateral damage, when the simple truth Pakistan and/or the terrorists hold all the power if they want their civilians to stop getting killed.

But they don't. Because as long as they keep sacrificing innocents, they will have a constant stream of uneducated, mistreated, angry mobs to enlist in their forces.

Sounds corny, but don't hate the player, hate the game.

where did I even remotely say "blame the victims"? And your example is just ridiculous and irrelevant.

I clearly said it is up to the government to protect its people. Obviously, the Pakistani government or insurgent leadership is failing to do that and, with the latter, they are intentionally putting innocents in harms way to stir up support.

Like I said, I do not like it any more than they do, but in times of war the government should be looking out for its own people. If they fail to protect, that is their fault. The US is not intentionally targeting civilians, and the US has been extremely open and cooperative with the stubborn and close-door Pakistani government.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

its a sad part of war and, while I do not like it one bit, it is something we must grudgingly accept.

If the US, or any other country for that matter, were to be invaded, I imagine some of the targets would include oil refineries, airports, manufacturing plants, etc. All staffed by civilians. And yet these places are contributing to the war effort, so that makes them completely legitimate targets for the other side.

As a result, it is up to the country to protect their civilians from harm; build shelters, get them offsite when an attack is coming, etc.. People blame the US for collateral damage, when the simple truth Pakistan and/or the terrorists hold all the power if they want their civilians to stop getting killed.

But they don't. Because as long as they keep sacrificing innocents, they will have a constant stream of uneducated, mistreated, angry mobs to enlist in their forces.

Sounds corny, but don't hate the player, hate the game.

mrbojangles25

where did I even remotely say "blame the victims"? And your example is just ridiculous and irrelevant.

I clearly said it is up to the government to protect its people. Obviously, the Pakistani government or insurgent leadership is failing to do that and, with the latter, they are intentionally putting innocents in harms way to stir up support.

Like I said, I do not like it any more than they do, but in times of war the government should be looking out for its own people. If they fail to protect, that is their fault. The US is not intentionally targeting civilians, and the US has been extremely open and cooperative with the stubborn and close-door Pakistani government.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

its a sad part of war and, while I do not like it one bit, it is something we must grudgingly accept.

If the US, or any other country for that matter, were to be invaded, I imagine some of the targets would include oil refineries, airports, manufacturing plants, etc. All staffed by civilians. And yet these places are contributing to the war effort, so that makes them completely legitimate targets for the other side.

As a result, it is up to the country to protect their civilians from harm; build shelters, get them offsite when an attack is coming, etc.. People blame the US for collateral damage, when the simple truth Pakistan and/or the terrorists hold all the power if they want their civilians to stop getting killed.

But they don't. Because as long as they keep sacrificing innocents, they will have a constant stream of uneducated, mistreated, angry mobs to enlist in their forces.

Sounds corny, but don't hate the player, hate the game.

mrbojangles25

where did I even remotely say "blame the victims"? And your example is just ridiculous and irrelevant.

I clearly said it is up to the government to protect its people. Obviously, the Pakistani government or insurgent leadership is failing to do that and, with the latter, they are intentionally putting innocents in harms way to stir up support.

Like I said, I do not like it any more than they do, but in times of war the government should be looking out for its own people. If they fail to protect, that is their fault. The US is not intentionally targeting civilians, and the US has been extremely open and cooperative with the stubborn and close-door Pakistani government.

Times of war? This is a war of choice and not for the security of our country.. Just because the Pakistani government is corrupt doesn't some how mean we should compare ourselves to them.. Guess what we have our OWN standards and I would certainly hope that our government which is suppose to represent us is trying to avoid all civilian deaths in its power in a war completely based upon choice.. I suppose this must have justified the huge amount of deaths caused by the Vietnam war as completely not the US fault?

Civilian deaths are always tragic. I wish we could do more to avoid them but unfortunately it's sometimes unavoidable especially when terrorists hide among the locals. The difference between the US and the terrorists is that when we killed innocent people it was an accident while when the terrorists do it it's intentional. Kind of like the difference between accidently killing somebody in a car accident and intentionally shooting somebody because you didn't like them.ad1x2

False Flag attacks are even in the 219 page US military counterinsurgency manual that was leaked by WikiLeaks.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] So we are supposed to blame victims now? That's like some guys invading a house and killing a family and you blaming the owners of the family for not having panic rooms where their family could hide while coming up with excuses for the invaders.kuraimen

where did I even remotely say "blame the victims"? And your example is just ridiculous and irrelevant.

I clearly said it is up to the government to protect its people. Obviously, the Pakistani government or insurgent leadership is failing to do that and, with the latter, they are intentionally putting innocents in harms way to stir up support.

Like I said, I do not like it any more than they do, but in times of war the government should be looking out for its own people. If they fail to protect, that is their fault. The US is not intentionally targeting civilians, and the US has been extremely open and cooperative with the stubborn and close-door Pakistani government.

In America "Omg! [Insert date here] never forget! Waaaaaah!" Anywhere else "Lol casualties happen no1curr"Oil_rope_bombs

Canadian citizen here. I'd like to point out an important distinction. I care when civilians die anywhere in the world...as long as they aren't adherents of a backward, repressive, dark age ideology that seeks to impose said ideology on the West. For example, I cared greatly about the victims of the Japanese earthquake/tsunami.

In other words, ditch the outdated ideologies, move your mind into the 21st century, and I will start caring.

I dont understand why they don't use troops, they are cheaper to replace and less likely to make mistakes. Those drones must cost a fortune.

lol I've never said I support Al Qaeda and Taliban don't support Al Qaeda either.

Harisemo

So is terrorism bad? Or is it okay when it's used against America and other Western nations?

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="DigitalExile"]Yeah but you can't blame people if they are being complacent with their bullies. Americans might have the power to stand up against tyrants but farmers and villagers don't. Again, just like the gangs in America, if you cooperate with them the cops wants you, if you cooperate with the cops the gangs want you. You can't win. You deal with whoever is in power, and unfortunately it's usually the tyrant that lives next door not the cops who police the area when they feel like it.

DigitalExile

Well, lets see what we have here.....

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

where did I even remotely say "blame the victims"? And your example is just ridiculous and irrelevant.

I clearly said it is up to the government to protect its people. Obviously, the Pakistani government or insurgent leadership is failing to do that and, with the latter, they are intentionally putting innocents in harms way to stir up support.

Like I said, I do not like it any more than they do, but in times of war the government should be looking out for its own people. If they fail to protect, that is their fault. The US is not intentionally targeting civilians, and the US has been extremely open and cooperative with the stubborn and close-door Pakistani government.

parkurtommo

what exactly were you trying to say? That a religiously motivated attack directly on civilians in a time of relative peace is equal to a drone attack on a military target during a time of war? That both are equally despicable?

Like I said, again for the fourth time, I do not like it when civilians are killed, but this is not a black and white situation. Civilians will get killed when they are in proximity to military targets. The US military does its best to limit civilian casualties, contrary to what you want to believe, and I only wish the Pakistani government would look after their own people half as much as the US does.

During WWII, the Germans constantly bombarded and attackedEngland. To protect their people, the British government built bunkers, put up sirens, and made sure every family had places to go when the bombs fell. This included preparations for the civilians working in munitions factories and places that are legitimate targets for military strikes.

Do we blame the civilian for getting killed because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time? Of course not, that would be rediculous. But at the same time, we have to expect them to know better. When armed gunmen move into your apartment complex and take over the bottom three floors, it is time to reconsider your living arrangements, because chances are there is a high-value target down there and the Americans will come after it. That is, of course, assuming the gunmen will even let the civilians leave.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="kuraimen"] So we are supposed to blame victims now? That's like some guys invading a house and killing a family and you blaming the owners of the family for not having panic rooms where their family could hide while coming up with excuses for the invaders.kuraimen

where did I even remotely say "blame the victims"? And your example is just ridiculous and irrelevant.

I clearly said it is up to the government to protect its people. Obviously, the Pakistani government or insurgent leadership is failing to do that and, with the latter, they are intentionally putting innocents in harms way to stir up support.

Like I said, I do not like it any more than they do, but in times of war the government should be looking out for its own people. If they fail to protect, that is their fault. The US is not intentionally targeting civilians, and the US has been extremely open and cooperative with the stubborn and close-door Pakistani government.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

where did I even remotely say "blame the victims"? And your example is just ridiculous and irrelevant.

I clearly said it is up to the government to protect its people. Obviously, the Pakistani government or insurgent leadership is failing to do that and, with the latter, they are intentionally putting innocents in harms way to stir up support.

Like I said, I do not like it any more than they do, but in times of war the government should be looking out for its own people. If they fail to protect, that is their fault. The US is not intentionally targeting civilians, and the US has been extremely open and cooperative with the stubborn and close-door Pakistani government.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="parkurtommo"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] I'm sorry but I don't buy that crap that the US is innocent when they are the ones dropping the bombs and call civilians killed collateral damage. It pisses me off that people think it somehow makes the US better because they didn't really mean it when they kill all those people and then expect others to be outraged when something like 9/11 happens.mrbojangles25

what exactly were you trying to say? That a religiously motivated attack directly on civilians in a time of relative peace is equal to a drone attack on a military target during a time of war? That both are equally despicable?

Like I said, again for the fourth time, I do not like it when civilians are killed, but this is not a black and white situation. Civilians will get killed when they are in proximity to military targets. The US military does its best to limit civilian casualties, contrary to what you want to believe, and I only wish the Pakistani government would look after their own people half as much as the US does.

During WWII, the Germans constantly bombarded and attackedEngland. To protect their people, the British government built bunkers, put up sirens, and made sure every family had places to go when the bombs fell. This included preparations for the civilians working in munitions factories and places that are legitimate targets for military strikes.

Do we blame the civilian for getting killed because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time? Of course not, that would be rediculous. But at the same time, we have to expect them to know better. When armed gunmen move into your apartment complex and take over the bottom three floors, it is time to reconsider your living arrangements, because chances are there is a high-value target down there and the Americans will come after it. That is, of course, assuming the gunmen will even let the civilians leave.

[QUOTE="kuraimen"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

where did I even remotely say "blame the victims"? And your example is just ridiculous and irrelevant.

I clearly said it is up to the government to protect its people. Obviously, the Pakistani government or insurgent leadership is failing to do that and, with the latter, they are intentionally putting innocents in harms way to stir up support.

Like I said, I do not like it any more than they do, but in times of war the government should be looking out for its own people. If they fail to protect, that is their fault. The US is not intentionally targeting civilians, and the US has been extremely open and cooperative with the stubborn and close-door Pakistani government.

LJS9502_basic

So your saying, we can't aim, however we don't really care?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] I'm sorry but I don't buy that crap that the US is innocent when they are the ones dropping the bombs and call civilians killed collateral damage. It pisses me off that people think it somehow makes the US better because they didn't really mean it when they kill all those people and then expect others to be outraged when something like 9/11 happens.parkurtommo

no, because the US is not targeting civilians. When will you people accept the difference?

You think the general is sitting there at the drone screen and saying "Ooooh, look, a nice Pakistani farmer's market. Take 'em out"? C'mon people get a grip; we are targeting military targets, and civilians are in proximity.

Lets go over this again:

insurgents attack civilians, with the purpose of killing civilians, to acheive political ends

military attacks military to achieve political ends, and unfortunately civilians get killed despite attempts not to.

[QUOTE="parkurtommo"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Civilians are collateral damage because insurgents use them as shields and propaganda.mrbojangles25

no, because the US is not targeting civilians. When will you people accept the difference?

You think the general is sitting there at the drone screen and saying "Ooooh, look, a nice Pakistani farmer's market. Take 'em out"? C'mon people get a grip; we are targeting military targets, and civilians are in proximity.

Lets go over this again:

insurgents attack civilians, with the purpose of killing civilians, to acheive political ends

military attacks military to achieve political ends, and unfortunately civilians get killed despite attempts not to.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] I'm sorry but I don't buy that crap that the US is innocent when they are the ones dropping the bombs and call civilians killed collateral damage. It pisses me off that people think it somehow makes the US better because they didn't really mean it when they kill all those people and then expect others to be outraged when something like 9/11 happens.parkurtommo

America has probably murdered more civilians than killed terrorists.

America has probably murdered more civilians than kill terrorists.

Mind_Mover

And I am talking about innocent civilians. However, there is something I thought about. I think I remember reading on these forums about these drone attacks killing civilians along the way. The people who responded said something that sounded like, "Well, they're just casualties." IMO, that's the problem. If it happens in some far off country, we are like, "Well, too bad." But if some country different from our own were to do that stuff in our territory and killing innocent civilians, I think we'd be pretty mad. What do you guys think?

hydralisk86

[QUOTE="Mind_Mover"]

America has probably murdered more civilians than kill terrorists.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Mind_Mover"]

America has probably murdered more civilians than kill terrorists.

Mind_Mover

[QUOTE="Mind_Mover"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] Not at all.....kuraimen

[QUOTE="Mind_Mover"]

America has probably murdered more civilians than kill terrorists.

LJS9502_basic

Actually yes, america has killed more innocent muslems then any amount of terrorists, its why muslems have the hump.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Mind_Mover"]

America has probably murdered more civilians than kill terrorists.

tenaka2

Actually yes, america has killed more innocent muslems then any amount of terrorists, its why muslems have the hump.