The hunt continues....

[213374U]

Unfortunately, it's true.  How about how Battlewookiee makes generalized statements about the U.S., it's military, but never makes an attempt to back them up?  Unfortunately for him, his posts reflect a very poor, misinformed, and naive anti-Americanism which only make him look worse.  What he fails to realize is that this war wasn't started by us, it was started by 9/11.  I don't care who you are, if you try to say the events that took place on 9/11, or the bombings in Madrid and London were in any way justified, then you are in no way deserving of any shred of credibility. 

That's not the problem. The problem is that he's absolutely impervious to reason, facts, and pretty much anything else that conflicts with the unrealistic propaganda that appears to be hard-wired in his views.

 

It's okay to have a different opinion, as long as one is able to properly defend and back them up. Just repeating the same crap over and over again while making clumsy and badly executed attempts at deflecting the points made by other people, on the other hand, is not.

Edited January 16, 2006 by 213374U

[Gorgon]

Naive Anti-Americanism. Isen't that an oxymoron ?

[Judge Hades]

No.

[213374U]

Wan't proof?

 

AL-QUAEDA only attack US targets for major attacks

See here

Uh... the attacks on the trains in Madrid are also a part of that very list. You kinda provided evidence that proves the exact opposite of what you're saying.

 

Nice job at making a fool of yourself, once again.

[Commissar]

Then why are you guys doing it? I agree it doesn't makes any sense...

We're not. That was sort of my point. If we bother expending the resources to go search/question somebody, we're doing it because we think they might know something. If we were to go house by house through every city in Iraq, nevermind the outlying villages, we wouldn't even be halfway through Baghdad alone right now. So try again.

 

And still more and more, and more recent pop up and Loads of them were not made public by your beloved US Army. Did Guatamala became public due to the army? Has the torture stopped at any way? Were the CIA camps revealed by your Army? Have the torture there stopped at any way?

I imagine you're talking about Guantanamo. I'd love to see you provide some actual proof to back up all of these claims of yours. Last thing I remember hearing out of Gitmo was that we flushed a Koran down the toilet. American news magazine reported that, sparked a lot of worldwide condemnation. Turned out to be patently false.

 

Now, come on. Flushing a Koran down the toilet is the best you can do with abuse allegations? Why not ask how many guys are forced to watch a Bible being burned at SERE?

 

As far as the CIA camps go, no one's proven their existence, either. Do they exist? Probably. But you have no idea what they're for, because you haven't been to one, and neither has anybody else who's talking.

 

Some explenation; always when there was said you supported Bush you denied. You weren't a follower. So like you followed Bush I followed the insurgents...

NOT

I don't support Bush, in the sense that I didn't vote for him and don't support many of his policies, but, you know, he's sort of my boss. Also, a loss for him sort of means a loss for the US, and I most definitely do support the US. You, on the other hand, have clearly stated your preference for an insurgent victory time and time again. No matter what the insurgency has managed to pull off, the vile, imperialistic Americans have always managed to do something worse. They sawed off a guy's head on camera? Well, golly gee, some of our half-wits took naked pictures of people! And got put in jail for it! That's much, much worse!

 

Did the anti-US parties win? Did the US expended the time they should stay again and again and again? Was the eventual government pro-US?

Well, Iraq is entirely incapable of defending itself at the moment, so you're right, we're going to stick around for a while. Of course, being entirely unable to defend yourself isn't really all that uncommon in your neck of the woods, I'm aware, but it actually means something in the Middle East with a neighbor like Iran.

 

Yeah, the US surely doesn't seem to bother about International oppinion on any action they make. But who befoe if there is a leader choosen in another country the US doesn't like (or there was Election Fraud... just like in the US)...   

I don't know of any country in the world that allows non-citizens to determine who's put in charge of it. Do you?

[BattleCookiee]

Uh... the attacks on the trains in Madrid are also a part of that very list. You kinda provided evidence that proves the exact opposite of what you're saying.

 

Nice job at making a fool of yourself, once again.

 

Up to 9/11...

[Chupacabra]

Wan't proof?

 

AL-QUAEDA only attack US targets for major attacks

See here

 

Wait...so now you're changing your statements? That al-Quaida only attacks U.S. for "major attacks"? The only "major" bombing listed there was 9/11, which actually destroyed far more than they intended. But in case you chose to ignore your own link, it also lists attacks that occurred against non-U.S. targets.

 

And look, US soldiers raving into a random house blowing everything up

See here

 

Ofcouse, as you guys all start "1 source!!!!OMFG" I will try some other sites in a short while too...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

US soldiers never blow up "random targets". The targets are picked for legitimate reasons. Sometimes the intelligence is wrong, unfortunately. But that is war. Tragedies are unavoidable. It's happened throughout history. And there is a distinct difference between a "random house" and a house of a terrorist who uses it to while he plans strikes against US soldiers and Iraqi civilians.

 

Naive Anti-Americanism. Isn't that an oxymoron ?

Well, you pretty much now proved it's not.

Edited January 16, 2006 by Chupacabra

[213374U]

Up to 9/11...

Congratulations on making the most irrelevant comment in the thread, so far.

[Commissar]

And look, US soldiers raving into a random house blowing everything up

See here

 

Ofcouse, as you guys all start "1 source!!!!OMFG" I will try some other sites in a short while too...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That sort of proves my point, you realize. How can there be a mistake made if it's entirely random? They had some particular target in mind, and got the wrong one. Your theory of random searches has been pushed right out the window by your very own evidence.

[~Di]

Wan't proof?

 

AL-QUAEDA only attack US targets for major attacks

See here

 

 

There is nothing from that link that says Al Qaeda only attacks US targets, major attacks or otherwise. Please share what you are smoking.

 

I can't download video, but I can pretty much guarantee that US soldiers don't just wander into random houses to blow stuff up. Hopefully someone who can download video will give a brief explanation of what the film really does show.

[Hildegard]

If you're still rather weepy over my pointing out that the Balkans are not known for, you know, civility.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm not weepy at all, the Balkans are known for everything but civility - I agree with that, too many many wars have been waged here for it to be known for civility or anything similar to that. If you want to generalize I'll be the first to tell you that, Croatians for an example, are 'only' good as warriors and soldiers - must be because we were in almost every war in Europe in the last 1300 years, heck my surname was forged in battle in the 17th century....I wish this wasn't so and I can only hope it won't be in the future - which I highly doubt.

 

 

I'm not entirely sure what to say to you.  I was not in fact flaming, simply making the point that the United States, Great Britain, and Israel aren't the only ones in the world capable of producing...what was it you said?  Ah, yes.  Butchers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes they aren't the only ones capable but if you ran a competition on this matter those three countries would sure as hell be runners up in recent history.

[Commissar]

Wan't proof?

 

AL-QUAEDA only attack US targets for major attacks

See here

 

 

There is nothing from that link that says Al Qaeda only attacks US targets, major attacks or otherwise. Please share what you are smoking.

 

I can't download video, but I can pretty much guarantee that US soldiers don't just wander into random houses to blow stuff up. Hopefully someone who can download video will give a brief explanation of what the film really does show.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Iraqi who apparently works for Western media explains how his home was raided by mistake. Our boys came in behind a flashbang - described as a 'huge explosion' - and detained him. He was taken to a 'military facility' and asked if he knew why he was there. He replied that he was being investigated, officer corrected him, said that he was there 'cause of a mistake.

 

Then some footage of Marines going to the wrong house. CNN narrator calling Marines 'soldiers' several times. Heart-wrenching story of how this guy now fears another US military raid, and then out.

[Volourn]

"You guys"

 

Who the heck is 'you guys', Battlewookiee? I'm not even Amerikan. Talk about being a bigot. Just because one disagrees with you on this subject doens't automatically make them Ameirkan, ya know

Edited January 16, 2006 by Volourn

[Judge Hades]

Kanada is close enough. I mean it is only a matter of time you are annexed to the US for your own protection. Someone needs to save you from the terrorists.

[BattleCookiee]

What he fails to realize is that this war wasn't started by us, it was started by 9/11.

 

Talk about naieve. In NO WAY did 9/11 lead to the War in Iraq. Don't take me wrong, I found 9/11 horrible and supported the assault on Afghanistan and the hunt for Al-Quada, but I do not support a "War for Oil". SPECIFICALLY if they have to use a totally unrelated terrorist attack to do so.

 

Did you knew WO II was started due to Napoleons war in Europe? "

 

I don't care who you are, if you try to say the events that took place on 9/11, or the bombings in Madrid and London were in any way justified, then you are in no way deserving of any shred of credibility.

 

Do I justify them? Nope. I just pick on the "Greater Evil" between the 2. Commiting acts of terror (Terrorists) is one thing, use these acts of them for personal gain (US) is a lot worse in my book...

 

For starters you can explain how you managed to memorize exact dialogue from a television report on Belgian TV from 3 years ago... a report, according to you, that was in Dutch. So either the American soldiers were speaking Dutch, or somebody was translating... and I'm sure the translations were absolutely accurate and the documentary was done without the slightest political slant. The truth is that those "quotes" were not accurate, they were paraphrased at best, fabricated at worst. If you are going to continually make accusations that color all American soldiers ... and all Americans for that matter... as bloodthirsty murderers, you'd freaking well better be prepared to back your statements up, and simply shrugging it off as something you saw on tv three years ago flat doesn't cut it.

 

The commentary was in Dutch, yes. The soldiers spoke American ofcourse, because they were, well, Americans...

And as said, I would love to back it up, just tell me how to get 3 year old material linked here...

 

BTW, your opinions ("Ofcourse without camera's there would have been torture involved, the US' little favorite activity...") are not facts, and shouldn't be tossed out as if they are.

 

That there is alot of torture going on on command of the US military or Inteligence services if a fact. Ever heard of Abu Ghraib, Guantanmalo, CIA camps... I am sure there was talk about them in this thread before

 

There's a big difference between discussing political issues and being rude, bigoted, and downright hateful. That is my point, sir.

 

Lol, I am rude and hatefull... lolz

 

We're not. That was sort of my point. If we bother expending the resources to go search/question somebody, we're doing it because we think they might know something. If we were to go house by house through every city in Iraq, nevermind the outlying villages, we wouldn't even be halfway through Baghdad alone right now. So try again.

 

Well, you probably didn't watched the whole movie, where was explained that it was "a frequent happening" and it lured the citizens into the Insurgents hands...

 

I imagine you're talking about Guantanamo. I'd love to see you provide some actual proof to back up all of these claims of yours. Last thing I remember hearing out of Gitmo was that we flushed a Koran down the toilet. American news magazine reported that, sparked a lot of worldwide condemnation. Turned out to be patently false.

 

Yeez... never saw these pics? Shaved men, all bound together in orange suit heavily watched by guards....

 

As far as the CIA camps go, no one's proven their existence, either. Do they exist? Probably. But you have no idea what they're for, because you haven't been to one, and neither has anybody else who's talking.

 

There can obviously be alot of talk about CIA camps who do not exist. Currently some European countries try to gather more info about the CIA camps, and there is already a movement to get Guatamala destroyed...

 

I don't support Bush, in the sense that I didn't vote for him and don't support many of his policies, but, you know, he's sort of my boss. Also, a loss for him sort of means a loss for the US, and I most definitely do support the US. You, on the other hand, have clearly stated your preference for an insurgent victory time and time again. No matter what the insurgency has managed to pull off, the vile, imperialistic Americans have always managed to do something worse. They sawed off a guy's head on camera? Well, golly gee, some of our half-wits took naked pictures of people! And got put in jail for it! That's much, much worse!

 

Hey. I never saw Insurgents bomb weddings, bomb marketplaces, drop additional bombs in a crowd that stared at the wreckage of one bomb, cut of water supplies and food supplies for the citizens etc.

 

Well, Iraq is entirely incapable of defending itself at the moment, so you're right, we're going to stick around for a while. Of course, being entirely unable to defend yourself isn't really all that uncommon in your neck of the woods, I'm aware, but it actually means something in the Middle East with a neighbor like Iran.

 

And they were before the Americans invaded. Odd, isn't it...

 

I don't know of any country in the world that allows non-citizens to determine who's put in charge of it. Do you?

 

There was certainly alot of fuzz internationally about the poisoning of the Georgian president, there were temporary governments in Iraq/Afghanistan not made by these people, the UN pushes on China etc.

 

Forget the quoting system

Edited January 16, 2006 by Battlewookiee

[Volourn]

"Kanada is close enough. I mean it is only a matter of time you are annexed to the US for your own protection. Someone needs to save you from the terrorists."

 

Good point. But, we need more proitection from our governemnt than terrorists at the momemnt. But,t hat's ok, as it looks like we're dumping them at the end of the month.

[Judge Hades]

I wish we were dumping ours. What the US eeds is a complete revamping of the political structure. Remove both the Republicans and democrats from office and bring in totally new and fresh people to the mix.

[Commissar]

Well, you probably didn't watched the whole movie, where was explained that it was "a frequent happening" and it lured the citizens into the Insurgents hands...

I watched the whole movie. I also have more experience with this sort of thing than you might choose to believe.

 

Yeez... never saw these pics? Shaved men, all bound together in orange suit heavily watched by guards....

You just described a prison. You're right, they don't get to wander freely all over Cuba and watch HBO in the afternoons.

 

There can obviously be alot of talk about CIA camps who do not exist. Currently some European countries try to gather more info about the CIA camps, and there is already a movement to get Guatamala destroyed...

A movement where? It's US property. People can bitch and moan about its existence all they want, doesn't much matter.

 

Hey. I never saw Insurgents bomb weddings, bomb marketplaces, drop additional bombs in a crowd that stared at the wreckage of one bomb, cut of water supplies and food supplies for the citizens etc.

You never saw that? Really? Must not be much of a TV person. I've seen plenty of clips of insurgents detonating a small IED, and then another as people gathered around. I also seem to remember a certain attack on a religious procession going over a crowded bridge.

 

But the point you're trying to make is that the US bombs weddings and marketplaces. I think what you're missing is that those aren't the targets. You won't find a strike board marked up for a hit on a wedding at any airbase or on board any carrier.

 

The insurgents, on the other hand? They most certainly do target civilians. They also target Iraqi politicians and policemen. But go on, keep trying to convince me that the insurgency plays by certain rules.

[Hildegard]

The insurgents, on the other hand?  They most certainly do target civilians.  They also target Iraqi politicians and policemen.  But go on, keep trying to convince me that the insurgency plays by certain rules.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

First of all the insurgency is not a homogeneous thing so one can adress it as a single entity, it's a much more complex issue - the main part of the insurgency make the radical Sunni groups followed by a number of foreign fighters including Al Qaida, some Shiite radical groups and leftovers of the Baath party - and these are not all.

Do many of the insurgent kill civilians? Yes. My view is they target civilians not because they don't have anything else to do, they do it for the sole purpose of stirring up violence and hostility amongst ethnical and religious groups in order to throw the entire country into a civil war in which they see their opportunity to overthrow the current Iraqi goverment they see as a US puppet and to ultimately create some sort of an Islamic state.

But also there are Iraqi insurgents that only engage US troops, not civilians, using guerilla warfare and I admire those ppl for having the guts to stand up against the strongest military in the world and I wish them all the best in their fight against an occupying force that has no justification for what they've done and what hardship they brought upon their country which made life in Iraq even worse then during Saddam era, but hey they have 'democracy' now ) so I guess in the eyes of the west it's 'OK'.

 

Another interesting thing - I guess insurgents finnaly aquired ground to air missiles

[BattleCookiee]

Wait...so now you're changing your statements? That al-Quaida only attacks U.S. for "major attacks"? The only "major" bombing listed there was 9/11, which actually destroyed far more than they intended. But in case you chose to ignore your own link, it also lists attacks that occurred against non-U.S. targets.

 

Nope. The only major attacks done BEFORE 9/11 were on the US. After that the US and the ones that helped them with Afghanistan/Iraq. Did you see Al-Quada blow up the Chinese? The Russian? The Swiss? The Scandanavians? All the other countries that don't support the US?

 

US soldiers never blow up "random targets". The targets are picked for legitimate reasons. Sometimes the intelligence is wrong, unfortunately. But that is war. Tragedies are unavoidable. It's happened throughout history. And there is a distinct difference between a "random house" and a house of a terrorist who uses it to while he plans strikes against US soldiers and Iraqi civilians.

 

Oh yeah, surely all the people's houses who they invaded were indeed of terrorists. Ofcourse using explosives to blow doors, flashbangs and gunfire is needed if you aren't even certain that there is a terrorist subject...

Such is war. Yup, but why is there a war in the first place. Hey, wasn't the war ended years ago according to your president? Peace time casualties = murder...

And there have been 30000 (1 dec 2005) civilians that died because the US is there (as seen on this map)

Nah, there is no difference between these 2 houses. Only a difference in the inhabitants. And you never know what kind of person lives inside untill you blow his front door in a zillion pieces no?

 

That sort of proves my point, you realize. How can there be a mistake made if it's entirely random? They had some particular target in mind, and got the wrong one. Your theory of random searches has been pushed right out the window by your very own evidence.

 

Eh, are you saying that if you randomly pick houses, you always get a house with a terrorist in it, or you always have the right house "according to yourself" but not to the international press...?

They got a target in mind, yup, and it was that journalist. So they actually got "the right target" except it wasn't a terrorist. Oops, here is some cash (yah, capitalism!), we don't care that your security has just been severly breached and you probably wind up dead next week or so...

 

 

There is nothing from that link that says Al Qaeda only attacks US targets, major attacks or otherwise. Please share what you are smoking.

 

I can't download video, but I can pretty much guarantee that US soldiers don't just wander into random houses to blow stuff up.

 

See "Before 9/11. Do you see a single non-US target? After the attack on Afghanistan they ofcourse assaulted the persons who attack them. Like the Americans respond (Attack us and we attack you) so do they respond...

 

And no, they do not wander into a random house to "blow stuff up". Roughing up the inhabitants is alot more fun no?

 

I wish we were dumping ours. What the US eeds is a complete revamping of the political structure. Remove both the Republicans and democrats from office and bring in totally new and fresh people to the mix.

 

Damn. I wish that could too

 

I watched the whole movie. I also have more experience with this sort of thing than you might choose to believe.

 

You are a soldier served in Iraq? If not, then how are you so certain I know more about it than you? Working for the Government of the US?

 

You just described a prison. You're right, they don't get to wander freely all over Cuba and watch HBO in the afternoons.

 

Not in my country, or any other European one. Also we do not torture our prisoners like has been done over there... even to innocents...

 

A movement where? It's US property. People can bitch and moan about its existence all they want, doesn't much matter.

 

The leaders of several European countries... Ofcourse, the US would probably not listen, like usual...

It is US property, eh? And that is why we may not bitch. Then why does the US bitch so many times about property (Nukes anyone) of other countries. And before you start: "A prison cannot be compared to a nuclear bomb!" Why not? It is all property. Hell, damn Americans, stay away from Iran's property!

 

You never saw that? Really? Must not be much of a TV person. I've seen plenty of clips of insurgents detonating a small IED, and then another as people gathered around. I also seem to remember a certain attack on a religious procession going over a crowded bridge.

 

Not really no. And note the world "small" you use yourself. While the Insurgents use small car bombs, the US drops 2000 lb bombs in the middle of blocks. Man, a terrorist standing in the middle of a block blowing his mine probably won't even kill a fly, while the US bomb kills dozens. Even so, why do you guys still drop bombs? Isn't the war over? And why bomb countries (ALLIED!!!) without their authority and authorisation? You think that really helps international agreements with the US if they even bomb allied countries with heavy bombs?

And about the bridge, if you talk about that incident I think you talk about, there was only chaos, not a real attack at all

 

But the point you're trying to make is that the US bombs weddings and marketplaces. I think what you're missing is that those aren't the targets. You won't find a strike board marked up for a hit on a wedding at any airbase or on board any carrier.

 

Wait... what happened with the "Impossibly accurate planebombs" from in the begin of the thread? The US brags about their precise bombings, but does it care if a bomb is precise if the target is already civilian? You can bomb things precise, but bombing the bad spot is still bombing the bad spot

 

The insurgents, on the other hand? They most certainly do target civilians. They also target Iraqi politicians and policemen. But go on, keep trying to convince me that the insurgency plays by certain rules.

 

No, they don't. Welcome to Guerilla War, favorite game in many many countries on the world. Just because a country doesn't has an organised armed army looses them their rights to defend themselves? Don't think so...

 

And about Iraqi policeman and politicans; think WW II. Resistance troops attacked the Nazi SS and the leaders... would you totally convict them now, because they attacked "the occupier"???

[Commissar]

You are a soldier served in Iraq? If not, then how are you so certain I know more about it than you? Working for the Government of the US?

I'm not a soldier.

 

Not in my country, or any other European one. Also we do not torture our prisoners like has been done over there... even to innocents...

Prove it.

 

The leaders of several European countries... Ofcourse, the US would probably not listen, like usual...

It is US property, eh? And that is why we may not bitch. Then why does the US bitch so many times about property (Nukes anyone) of other countries. And before you start: "A prison cannot be compared to a nuclear bomb!" Why not? It is all property. Hell, damn Americans, stay away from Iran's property!

I hate to break it to you, buddy, but we're not the only ones who don't want Iran or North Korea to have nuclear weapons. In fact, we're not even the ones doing the vast majority of the heavy lifting when it comes to trying to stop them at the moment.

 

Not really no. And note the world "small" you use yourself. While the Insurgents use small car bombs, the US drops 2000 lb bombs in the middle of blocks. Man, a terrorist standing in the middle of a block blowing his mine probably won't even kill a fly, while the US bomb kills dozens. Even so, why do you guys still drop bombs? Isn't the war over? And why bomb countries (ALLIED!!!) without their authority and authorisation? You think that really helps international agreements with the US if they even bomb allied countries with heavy bombs?

And about the bridge, if you talk about that incident I think you talk about, there was only chaos, not a real attack at all

Actually, no. We don't drop 2,000 pound bombs in the middle of city blocks. Only time we did that was Fallujah.

 

And what the hell are you talking about, bombing allied countries? Iraqi security forces request airstrikes from us all the time. We don't give them a direct link, of course, but where exactly do you think a lot of our information comes from?

 

Wait... what happened with the "Impossibly accurate planebombs" from in the begin of the thread? The US brags about their precise bombings, but does it care if a bomb is precise if the target is already civilian? You can bomb things precise, but bombing the bad spot is still bombing the bad spot

God, we're right back where we were a month ago. First of all, I never made any claims about the accuracy of our weapons. They are, indeed, very accurate for the most part, but targeting is only as good as the intelligence we get. It can be wrong, but most often it's not. For every failure you read about in the news, there's a hundred successes. You think we drop bombs, or, speaking more broadly, conduct combat operations of various sorts only once or twice a month? You never read about the successes because it's the usual stuff.

[BattleCookiee]

I'm not a soldier.

 

Then tell how you "know this much" about the use of war and the current wars (which aren't wars)

 

Prove it.

 

Would love to do so, but this is one of the subjects that can only be proved false, not true, even if it is true...

 

I hate to break it to you, buddy, but we're not the only ones who don't want Iran or North Korea to have nuclear weapons. In fact, we're not even the ones doing the vast majority of the heavy lifting when it comes to trying to stop them at the moment.

 

North-Korea is not really that big of an issue. Iran is also an issue for us in Europe indeed, but negotiations are running... no need to "play soldier".

 

Actually, no. We don't drop 2,000 pound bombs in the middle of city blocks. Only time we did that was Fallujah.

 

And what the hell are you talking about, bombing allied countries? Iraqi security forces request airstrikes from us all the time. We don't give them a direct link, of course, but where exactly do you think a lot of our information comes from?

 

Pakistan no longer an allied country now? Al-Zarqawi remember? Tried to kill him a few days ago on a place he wasn't with a heavy bomb without authorisation of the country you bombed...

 

God, we're right back where we were a month ago. First of all, I never made any claims about the accuracy of our weapons. They are, indeed, very accurate for the most part, but targeting is only as good as the intelligence we get. It can be wrong, but most often it's not. For every failure you read about in the news, there's a hundred successes. You think we drop bombs, or, speaking more broadly, conduct combat operations of various sorts only once or twice a month? You never read about the successes because it's the usual stuff.

 

Indeed, I replied to your quote, but the "accurate bomb" part was not of you... just read around page 5 again...

And I certainly do not hope there are 100 victories for every loss or the whole of Iraq should have been bombed around this time

 

EDIT: Also very curious you note "that not every "illegal succesfull US operation" (with many deads) gets reported by the press, but O_o, they do report EVERY "succesfull Insurgent operation". If that doesn't create a screwed up image... :ph34r:

Edited January 16, 2006 by Battlewookiee

[Commissar]

Then tell how you "know this much" about the use of war and the current wars (which aren't wars)

I said I'm not a soldier. Doesn't mean I've never been to the rodeo.

 

Pakistan no longer an allied country now? Al-Zarqawi remember? Tried to kill him a few days ago on a place he wasn't with a heavy bomb without authorisation of the country you bombed...

Yeah...and Pakistan was very much aware that we were doing it. They're an ally, after all.

Edited January 16, 2006 by Commissar

[BattleCookiee]

Nope. There is such a thing as "not informing". It happened before with a kidnap in Italy (see my thread "Illegal CIA hostage infuriates Italian Government" and also here with Pakistan...

[Hildegard]

Yeah...and Pakistan was very much aware that we were doing it.  They're an ally, after all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Bullsh*t they didn't know at all, but I guess the CIA has the 'right' to attack anyday anywhere she sees fit, talk about arrogance....