Meanwhile in London: Beheading in broad daylight

[BruceVC]

 

But here is the question, if the USA knows that there is Taliban leader in a village in western Pakistan that is directing attacks against coalition forces in Afghanistan how do you suggest he gets killed?

 

Send in a Navy SEAL team.

 

 

Yes that would be effective but the logistics would be very difficult to do every time there was a target. There have been over 60 drone Strikes alone since 2012, imagine trying to send in the SEALS every time that was necessary. The Pakistan government objected vociferously  when Bin Laden was killed, what would be there response if Special Forces were sent into there  territory just to kill a Taliban leader?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_attacks_in_Pakistan

[Hassat Hunter]

But thats what happens in a society where responsible citizen aren't allowed to carry weapons to defend themselves or others that are being attacked.

Yup, that worked out so well in Boston. Or that schoolshooting. Or the Batman shooting. Or the New York sniper. Or the multitude of family dramas. Or the schoolshootings. Etc. etc.

It only looks like it helps the perpetrators. Or is that what you want?

 

As horrible as this is, they had to resort to knives. Only one innocent life got lost. In gunhappy America the innocent deathtoll would probably be much higher as they would just empty their guns on everybody. Much easier killing.

 

*sigh*

Americans...

 

As for the other discussion; It doesn't matter when or how retraction will be. There will be civil war anyway. Both Iraq and Afghanistan have fundamentalist, hostile fractions of religions and beliefs in one country who hate each other. And now also ample terrorists who just like to add to the chaos of all. It doesn't matter if 'we' stay or leave, it'll be anarchy anyway. Even in non-occupied countries like Egypt once the dictator fell and all should be better things are worse than ever. And does not helping Syrie due to the black mark left on the west due to Iraq/Afghanistan help? No. But they just fear interfering due to getting more flak like that, and thousand of innocents die. It's a mess out there. And there isn't any way to fix it up... :/

[BruceVC]

 

But thats what happens in a society where responsible citizen aren't allowed to carry weapons to defend themselves or others that are being attacked.

As for the other discussion; It doesn't matter when or how retraction will be. There will be civil war anyway. Both Iraq and Afghanistan have fundamentalist, hostile fractions of religions and beliefs in one country who hate each other. And now also ample terrorists who just like to add to the chaos of all. It doesn't matter if 'we' stay or leave, it'll be anarchy anyway. Even in non-occupied countries like Egypt once the dictator fell and all should be better things are worse than ever. And does not helping Syrie due to the black mark left on the west due to Iraq/Afghanistan help? No. But they just fear interfering due to getting more flak like that, and thousand of innocents die. It's a mess out there. And there isn't any way to fix it up... :/

 

 

You do make some good points of problematic Middle East countries and the conflict that we now see after the Arab Spring but its not all doom and gloom.

 

There are several cases of successful transitions of  countries in the Middle East that have implemented there own versions of Democracy. Algeria, Morocco and Libya are just some examples. And as I tend to mention Libya is  how the West can intervene in regime change with a positive result, in other words the country isn't worse off after the Western intervention like we see in Iraq.

 

Its all about how you effect regime change

[Raithe]

And the eye witnesses were standing around watching a person getting cut to pieces right in front of them because they couldn't do anything. Awesome.

But thats what happens in a society where responsible citizen aren't allowed to carry weapons to defend themselves or others that are being attacked.

 

Although to be fair, a cub scout leader and mother of two actually did engage the attackers in conversation in an attempt to talk them down..

Technically she jumped in to check the pulse of the soldier, not realising the attackers were still there, then when she stood up found herself face to face and ended up confronting them in a nice verbal exchange...

 

And according to a fair few reports, other people actually stood in the way of the body to prevent the attackers from further slicing it up. Sure, they might not have jumped in to wrestle the guys with knives and a revolver.. But they still apparently did shield the body.

[Drowsy Emperor]

I don't think the US/NATO should have the right to intervene halfway across the world (that's what the UN was created for after all, and its the only collective entity that has legitimacy for those type of actions). That's what the post WWII world agreed, everything else is abuse.

 

However, I don't think leaving will change anything regarding terrorism. As a phenomenon it has grown into a sort of self justified crusade in the eyes of those who commit it - regardless of the actions of US/NATO forces, where they actually are and what they actually do. 

 

So, I don't think its going to magically stop even after Afghanistan is empty of foregin troops. Its bigger than Afghanistan - and certain other conflicts (the impending one with Iran, the "forever war" between Israel and Plaestine etc.) will keep the justifications for terrorism fresh for years to come.

[Malcador]

Okay I see what you are saying, to be honest I did think that drone strikes were able to reduce casualties by being more specific but I am not an expert. I do agree with your point that any innocent killed does fuel the "anti-Western" sentiment.

 

But here is the question, if the USA knows that there is Taliban leader in a village in western Pakistan that is directing attacks against coalition forces in Afghanistan how do you suggest he gets killed?

Have to use infantry for that. And if they did that, well, eh, have to worry about the villagers attacking them or just casualties in general. Not good PR for them to drag US bodies around the street chanting, etc., heh.

 

Drone strikes or air strikes are a lot more low risk, hard to make something like a guided grenade in terms of explosive power, therein lie the problem, as you vape everyone nearby with a Hellfire (overkill to use an ATGM for a man, really). But even doing that - sending troops in to kill the target- at this point is not going to deter the "it's a war on Islam" jihadists, so they'll keep plotting and keep doing stuff like this.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Malcador

[BruceVC]

I don't think the US/NATO should have the right to intervene halfway across the world (that's what the UN was created for after all, and its the only collective entity that has legitimacy for those type of actions). That's what the post WWII world agreed, everything else is abuse.

 

However, I don't think leaving will change anything regarding terrorism. As a phenomenon it has grown into a sort of self justified crusade in the eyes of those who commit it - regardless of the actions of US/NATO forces, where they actually are and what they actually do. 

 

So, I don't think its going to magically stop even after Afghanistan is empty of foregin troops. Its bigger than Afghanistan - and certain other conflicts (the impending one with Iran, the "forever war" between Israel and Plaestine etc.) will keep the justifications for terrorism fresh for years to come.

 

Good points but now Western countries only intervene militarily if the UN security council votes in favor and there are no veto's. So at least countries respect the UN now and its decisions. Of course the veto is also one of the failures on the UN IMO. Hence the mess in Syria

[Malcador]

The EDL must be mobilizing its forces over this, surely ?

[BruceVC]

 

Okay I see what you are saying, to be honest I did think that drone strikes were able to reduce casualties by being more specific but I am not an expert. I do agree with your point that any innocent killed does fuel the "anti-Western" sentiment.

 

But here is the question, if the USA knows that there is Taliban leader in a village in western Pakistan that is directing attacks against coalition forces in Afghanistan how do you suggest he gets killed?

Have to use infantry for that. And if they did that, well, eh, have to worry about the villagers attacking them or just casualties in general. Not good PR for them to drag US bodies around the street chanting, etc., heh.

 

Drone strikes or air strikes are a lot more low risk, hard to make something like a guided grenade in terms of explosive power, therein lie the problem, as you vape everyone nearby with a Hellfire (overkill to use an ATGM for a man, really). But even doing that - sending troops in to kill the target- at this point is not going to deter the "it's a war on Islam" jihadists, so they'll keep plotting and keep doing stuff like this.

 

 

You make some good points. Its strange because normally I find myself opposite your view in our political discussions

Edited May 23, 2013 by BruceVC

[Hurlshort]

 

But thats what happens in a society where responsible citizen aren't allowed to carry weapons to defend themselves or others that are being attacked.

Yup, that worked out so well in Boston. Or that schoolshooting. Or the Batman shooting. Or the New York sniper. Or the multitude of family dramas. Or the schoolshootings. Etc. etc.

It only looks like it helps the perpetrators. Or is that what you want?

 

As horrible as this is, they had to resort to knives. Only one innocent life got lost. In gunhappy America the innocent deathtoll would probably be much higher as they would just empty their guns on everybody. Much easier killing.

 

*sigh*

Americans...

 

 

Woldan is Austrian.

[Walsingham]

Anti-western terror doesn't give a flying **** what we do or don't do. Any alteration in foreign policy on a 'key' issue is met by a change in their propaganda. Israel, Chechnya, the Balkans, Afghanistan, Libya, London, Paris, Stockholm. I've been watching them work for at least 20 years. They take angry bloody cretins, indoctrinate them, give them some basic killing skills, and let them loose. They don't understand any of the so-called issues, and they don't want to.

 

At the same time, the terrorists are pushing and trying to provoke clashes between us and normal ordinary Muslims so that their sons and daughters feel personally threatened and the terrorists can hoover up more recruits. It's precisely what these stupid ****s were talking about while they waited for the police.

 

So every time someone calls all Muslims terrorists, and every time someone makes bull**** excuses about somehow it being our fault, they contribute a tiny bit to the process that makes these attacks happen. Directly. Personally.

 

Yes, I'm god damned angry. I've been taught to respect courage and sacrifice, to be grateful to those who make me safer. Like the fellah who died. By contrast what the internet calls trolls are cowards getting cheap thrills while making me less safe. It makes me want to puke.

 

You talk about wanting rid of all the Muslims? I want rid of all you ****s.

[Rostere]

The Talibans were not the enemies of the USA at all originally. In fact, the US was backing them when they fought for Afghanistan's independence. The Taliban have only held a grudge against the US since the American invasion. The US government was in negotiations for Osama bin Laden's extradition when the invasion started. Although I've no sympathy for the Taliban regime, the whole idea of invasion was utterly retarded according to me. But then, the Bush administration actually had war in the Middle East as their stated agenda even before they were elected: http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

 

So really, disengagement from this endless, pointless brawl destabilizing the Middle East would be really great. The extremists draw ALL OF THEIR SUPPORT from people who are angry with these wars. Who would care about belligerent extremists if those complaints didn't exist? Good times is always good for democratic leaders. When the bad times come, the belligerent, crazy leaders who put the blame on someone else get their support.

 

Now imagine instead a scenario where the US was instead a great investor and benefactor in the Middle East. Imagine if all of the money from the wars had gone instead to micro-loans to entrepreneurs, and to diplomatic efforts (and to strengthening the American economy at home!). I hope that Obama takes this approach to the new Libya. We need a Marshall program for the newborn and unstable democracies in that region, and especially the ones which are leaning toward modern liberal ideologies, like Libya. But of course I'm not proposing that the US should foot that bill alone. Indeed, a stable Libya is even more in the interest of the EU.

 

Meanwhile, my condoleances go out to the British army who are unfortunately caught in the middle of this.

 

 

The formation of the Finish SS division was a demand from Hitler, a result of a desperate peace deal because the Russians weren't going to back down from their territorial expansion. 

 

They are possibly the only SS division not linked to war crimes and by all accounts aquitted themselves well, so regular  people showing up to cheer on an SS flag. It's not quite as perverse as it appears at first glance. To their eyes these soldiers helped preserve Finland by being Hitler's mercenaries on the Eastern front.

 

That flag is not finnish SS division flag, but finnish air force flag that is older than natzi flag, party or ideology.

 

 

Was just going to post that myself...

[Meshugger]

So, it's a radicalized muslim again? I think the most discusting about this is how it was done: a beheading with a knife. Jesus....

[TrashMan]

What disgusts me is that people were just standing there and taking pictures.

[Nonek]

My thoughts are with the gentlemans family and friends, hopefully this brutal and cowardly murder will be punished with an adequate sentence, and its instigators (those who radicalised the murderers) captured for punishment as well.

[Raithe]

What disgusts me is that people were just standing there and taking pictures.

 

 

To jump back to what I said earlier:

 

 

And the eye witnesses were standing around watching a person getting cut to pieces right in front of them because they couldn't do anything. Awesome.

But thats what happens in a society where responsible citizen aren't allowed to carry weapons to defend themselves or others that are being attacked.

 

Although to be fair, a cub scout leader and mother of two actually did engage the attackers in conversation in an attempt to talk them down..

Technically she jumped in to check the pulse of the soldier, not realising the attackers were still there, then when she stood up found herself face to face and ended up confronting them in a nice verbal exchange...

 

And according to a fair few reports, other people actually stood in the way of the body to prevent the attackers from further slicing it up. Sure, they might not have jumped in to wrestle the guys with knives and a revolver.. But they still apparently did shield the body.

 

Edited May 23, 2013 by Raithe

[Malcador]

Now imagine instead a scenario where the US was instead a great investor and benefactor in the Middle East. Imagine if all of the money from the wars had gone instead to micro-loans to entrepreneurs, and to diplomatic efforts (and to strengthening the American economy at home!). I hope that Obama takes this approach to the new Libya. We need a Marshall program for the newborn and unstable democracies in that region, and especially the ones which are leaning toward modern liberal ideologies, like Libya. But of course I'm not proposing that the US should foot that bill alone. Indeed, a stable Libya is even more in the interest of the EU.

Interesting fantasy, not sure much would be different other than the US bleeding cash. They'd always be one wanting to bomb them due to Israel, being decadent, infidels, etc. But maybe less. Can't really see much of them starting to like the US.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Malcador

[Zoraptor]

It's not so much about them liking the US as having something better to do than sit around listening to firebrands tell them how everything wrong is the fault of The Great Satan. For example, a lot of the 'Taliban' in Afghanistan aren't even radicals, they're just being paid <5 USD a day to shoot their guns as that is the only way to get money in a country with something like 40% unemployment. Most islamic/ ME countries have very high unemployment especially amongst youth, even in rich places with lots of oil there often aren't enough jobs for everyone. That [economic development] won't effect home grown stuff directly, but the external is the trigger for a lot of the internal.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Zoraptor

[Malcador]

Fair enough. Might be a bit galling to have to pay to develop them so they don't want to kill you, but eh.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

Drone strikes are suppose to be specific  attacks against legitimate military targets in countries where you can't send ground troops in like Pakistan.

 

It's a lot more complicated than that. Drone strikes tend to have **** accuracy. So even if you're gonna manage to kill the target, so do hundreds of other people in it's vicinity. If you kill some taregt in Afghanistan where dozens of families get killed too, it tends to shatter entire communities that eventually will turn to radicalisation. This news of course is being spread around the entire Muslim community on the globe, and being perceived as an attack on Islam as a whole.

 

Of course it's easy to say "Well **** them, bomb them into pieces too", but a) not only is this kind of thinking just wrong, but b) also turns into a "national security problem" for the countries that do these attacks. So expect the rapidity of these revenge attacks soaring as cowardly drone strikes continue. At some point, we're gonna have a global Israel/Palestinian situation here. A perpetual war machine that will beget more revenge attacks which will beget even more drone strikes ad infinitum.

 

 

 

Okay I see what you are saying, to be honest I did think that drone strikes were able to reduce casualties by being more specific but I am not an expert. I do agree with your point that any innocent killed does fuel the "anti-Western" sentiment.

 

But here is the question, if the USA knows that there is Taliban leader in a village in western Pakistan that is directing attacks against coalition forces in Afghanistan how do you suggest he gets killed?

 

Actually the drone strikes are very precise and there's always an attempt to minimize civilian casualties.

 

Sending special forces into hostile territory against a heavily armed suicidal enemy is not practical. You might lose some or all of the force every time it's tried, it's a hugely complex and expensive operation, and if anything civilian casualties are likely to be much higher.

 

 

 

But thats what happens in a society where responsible citizen aren't allowed to carry weapons to defend themselves or others that are being attacked.

Yup, that worked out so well in Boston. Or that schoolshooting. Or the Batman shooting. Or the New York sniper. Or the multitude of family dramas. Or the schoolshootings. Etc. etc.

It only looks like it helps the perpetrators. Or is that what you want?

 

As horrible as this is, they had to resort to knives. Only one innocent life got lost. In gunhappy America the innocent deathtoll would probably be much higher as they would just empty their guns on everybody. Much easier killing.

 

Actually the terrorists had a gun, it's the civilians who were unarmed and helpless. Also Boston was a bombing, bombs are already illegal.

[Hurlshort]

Propaganda doesn't actually need any truth to work, it just needs a lack of education to prey on.  

[Zoraptor]

Fair enough. Might be a bit galling to have to pay to develop them so they don't want to kill you, but eh.

It's a difficult sell politically, especially if you have financial problems of your own. If done right though it would be temporary, you'd get some of the money back from them buying your products and even in absolute terms it would probably be cheaper than the costs involved in, say, occupying Afghanistan. A hellfire missile costs about 20k a pop (?), if you fired one less per day you could pay 4,000 people not to shoot at you (you'd want to dress it up in a different way though, of course) for that day.

[TrashMan]

*SNIP*

 

I am talking about those that did stand around and take pictures.

That kind of morbid behavior sickens me.

 

 

And the 2 guys had knives? Pikcup rocks, branches, trashcans.

Lets see their knife stop a flying trashcan or a rock to the face.

Mah...

 

[HoonDing]

Everyone's a hero behind a keyboard.

[TrashMan]

It's also easier to be a hero when there's 100 of you and 2 of them.

 

 

My beef is more with them taking pictures than anything.