General discussion

Locked

Yet more proof...

By Jaqui ·
that the usa needs to be taught how to think.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TRAVEL/08/15/no.fly.babies.ap/index.html

like a child of 2 and another of 11 months are going to be muslim terrorists.
only in the usa would you find this level of idiocy.
that baby cannot fly to her family's thanksgiving dinner, she is on the terrorist list, see there is her name.

whoever did it should get some ssense knocked into them.. pack pennies around a stick of dynamite, ram it down thier throat and light the fuse.


the real capper though, is that it's the american press advertising this stupidity.
how dumb can they be?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

64 total posts (Page 1 of 7)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Doing it by the book...

by neilb@uk In reply to Yet more proof...

One of my (fond) remeniscences of my last visit to Orlando airport was just after the "shoebomber" was caught trying to **** up an aircraft.

The "guard" asked my 80-year old mother to remove her shoes for examination for explosive devices. When I questioned this and why the guy next in the queue, who had size twelves that would have housed a thermonuclear device, wasn't asked, I realised that you are exactly right Jacqi.

Stupid people doing an important job badly.

The US will be Al Qaeda'd again because it's all just so easy.

Collapse -

At least..

by mhambrecht In reply to Doing it by the book...

we didn't chase down an innocent electrician and shoot him down in cold blood. Personally I think murdering innocent people is a much bigger crime. Oh yeah, I forgot that's been going on all along with the Irish problems so that should be pretty common place over there by now.

Collapse -

actually, the usa has been doing

by Jaqui In reply to At least..

exactly that since wwII.

in both europe and the pacific war.

dropping nukes on cities full of civilians, innocent women and children.

flattening an entire town because a german soldier shot an american soldier.

and this activity has been pandemic to military throughout history.

wartime is not an excuse.
crimes against humanity are crimes against humanity.
shall every country in the world that the us forces wronged file crimes against humanity charges against the usa?

you might find 5 countries that don't have a case to file.

Collapse -

Don't go down that road

by stress junkie In reply to actually, the usa has bee ...

You couldn't be more wrong talking about World War II. Some of your post is positively incoherent. You appear to be making two specific accusations of war crimes during WW II and you appear to imply that there were others. Of those the only thing that is understandable is the issue of dropping nuclear weapons on Japan. Let's look at that first.

That whole "dropping nukes" thing has been grossly misreported and misunderstood. The idea that the US has any guilt to bear over these actions is completely unfounded. There were several very important factors involved in dropping nuclear weapons on Japan. The decision to use these weapons was made at a time in the war when the next step to defeating the Japanese was going to be to invade the main island of Honshu. The relevant factors to using the nuclear weapons were these:

The Japanese were training their civilians to fight an invasion force.

An invasion of Japan would have killed a million American soldiers AND at least as many Japanese; both civilian and military.

The Soviets had just invaded Manchuria which was occupied by Japan at that time.

If the Soviets had participated in an invasion of Japan then it would have ended up like Germany, divided between Allied forces and Communist forces.

China would have been occupied by the Soviets after the war. The fact that Mao Tse Tung overthrew the Chinese emperor and installed a communist government doesn't mean that the Soviets may as well have kept China as a satellite as they did with Poland and other East European countries.

As far as guilt is concerned the Japanese, and the Germans for that matter, cry and whine about the devestation that was brought to them due to the war. They fail to take responsibility to this day for the fact that they started the war. They fail to take responsibility to this day that their own governments were engaged in inhuman treatment of civilians. The Nazis had the Jews, Slavs, Jehovah's Witnesses, mentally retarded, and other groups. The Japanese had the Chinese civilians, British military and American military prisoners of war, and British and American missionaries. A lot of Japanese and Germans would like us to believe that they were just peacefully minding their own business when the British and Americans brought this destruction and suffering to them without provocation. That's just crap.

The Americans had several reasons for using nuclear weapons in Japan. It saved the lives of at least a million American soldiers and another million Japanese military and civilians. It also showed the Soviets that we had working nuclear bombs, not just "lab" prototypes. This was intended to help us posture for the Soviet-American-British post war period when the Soviets wanted to rule Europe and Japan.

=====

Now for the incoherent part of your post.

"flattening an entire town because a german soldier shot an american soldier."

That doesn't make sense. The European theater in WW II involved leveling a lot of towns. So what?

As far as war crimes committed by the USA during WW II in the European theater I might remind you of the night time carpet bombing of Germany by the RAF. I personally don't condemn this practice but many people did at the time. Early in the war both the British and Americans tried to use precision day time bombing over Germany. This caused the bombers to be easy targets. Arthur Harris, Commander in Chief of British Bomber Command, switched the British bombers to using carpet bombing tactics at night. This helped to protect the British bombers. The American continued to use day time precision bombing and continued to suffer extraordinarily high casualty rates. Unfortunately after the war Arthur Harris was widely condemned in Britain for using carpet bombing. He was publicly disgraced and died with public opinion regarding him as a war criminal. I don't condemn Arthur Harris. I think he made the right decision to use carpet bombing at night. I'm just saying that public opinion after the war did condemn him.

I'll have to end here due to the fact that this post is getting too long. There is much more to say about why your entire post makes no sense at all. I have, at least, addressed two issues that people seem to like to bring up these days; nuclear bombs used on Japan, and carpet bombing Germany.

=========

Finally, I'll admit that the USA has done a lot of bad things since the end of World War II, but not DURING World War II.

Collapse -

okay 10 to 1 ratio?

by Jaqui In reply to Don't go down that road

that is a crime against humanity.

sorry, war is not an excuse for killing civilians.
purposely killing civilians is a crime against humanity.

use any excuse you want, it does not change the fact that nuking japan was a criminal act.

flattening dutch towns because german soldiers shot at americans, killing hundreds of civilians in the process, might not be a crime against humanity, but it is definately wrong.
and the us armed forces were the only ones in wwii that were flattening towns, every other military force went room by room to secure the towns.
it doesn't justify the germans own crimes.
it doesn't justify japans crimes. ( which they also never got tried for. )


by your reasoning, any terrorist that nukes any american city is justified.
after all thousands of innocent women and children have been killed by american troops in the war on terrorism.


like I said, the usa, by sticking it's nose into other countries has committed far more crimes under international laws than any other country.
you'll never find proof, unless you leave the usa and do the research in another country. the censorship in the us is almost as bad as in china.

Collapse -

Wait a second...what?

by jmgarvin In reply to okay 10 to 1 ratio?

"okay 10 to 1 ratio?"

A 10 to 1 ratio of what? Civilians to soldiers? I have to say this smacks of rhetoric. I have yet to see ANYTHING that says there was a 10:1....

"that is a crime against humanity."

Perhaps, but as the saying goes "war is ****." The long and the short of it is that people (soldiers and civilians) die in war. I personally believe war typically does nothing for your cause and will actually length political/idealogical conflict.

"sorry, war is not an excuse for killing civilians."

It happens. Civilians die in war. Always have, always will.

"purposely killing civilians is a crime against humanity."

I tend to think that many times civilians aren't the target. While there is such a thing a demoralizing bombing, civilians usually aren't specifically targeted. Especially by the US. While we do stupid things, one thing we don't do is target SPECIFICALLY target civilians.

"use any excuse you want, it does not change the fact that nuking japan was a criminal act."

I disagree. The firebombing of Tokyo was far more destructive than Fat Man or Little Boy. We also didn't fully realize the distructive power of a nuclear weapon.

Further, we either invaded Japan and lost millions of lives on both sides or we dropped two nuclear bombs and saved millions of lives on both sides.

You have to realize Japan was willing to fight a war of attrition. They would have fought to the last man, woman, or child. I don't think you know how bad taking some of the islands was. ****, there were Japanese soldiers holed up in caves LONG after the war ended (IIRC one was still living in the mid 70's and finally came out).

"flattening dutch towns because german soldiers shot at americans, killing hundreds of civilians in the process, might not be a crime against humanity, but it is definately wrong."

Huh?

"and the us armed forces were the only ones in wwii that were flattening towns, every other military force went room by room to secure the towns."

Huh? This is false. The reason American casuality rates were so high in various towns is because we went room to room rather than just driving tanks in.

"by your reasoning, any terrorist that nukes any american city is justified.
after all thousands of innocent women and children have been killed by american troops in the war on terrorism."

What? This is a total straw man. You are somehow equating terrorism to ground combat with clear combatants.

"like I said, the usa, by sticking it's nose into other countries has committed far more crimes under international laws than any other country."

*sigh* Ok, I'll bite...go ahead, let's hear what you have to say here.

"you'll never find proof, unless you leave the usa and do the research in another country. the censorship in the us is almost as bad as in china."

Oh please. It isn't like there is this thing called the internet. Or are you suggesting that we can't read or watch news other than what is in the US.

You really jumped off the deep end here Jaqui and you are usually pretty reasonable, what's the deal?

Collapse -

He broke a tooth

by stress junkie In reply to Wait a second...what?

A couple of posts down:

http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=8&threadID=179638&messageID=1831034

Broken tooth. I can sympathize with that. I've broken three teeth and now have three gold caps. It's a nuisance until the cap is put on. About two weeks.

Plus, he's Canadian. :-)

Collapse -

Oh, he's Canadian ;-)

by jmgarvin In reply to Wait a second...what?

Didn't we annex them ;-)

No a broken tooth will make you do crazy things...it HURTS. I chipped a tooth and the pain was bad, I can't imagine cracking the whole thing...OUCH!

Collapse -

Police were not at fault

by stress junkie In reply to At least..

If you're talking about the Brazilian guy I think that the London police did exactly the right thing. That Brazilian man ran from police and ran into a subway station. In other words he acted exactly like a terrorist would act. If he was a terrorist with a bomb he could have killed a lot of people. The fact that he ran from police gave the police probable cause to believe that the Brazilian was a threat to the people in the subway station. I applaud the actions of the London police in this case. We can never know why the Brazilian man ran from police. Too bad for him. The London police took the correct action.

Collapse -

So tell me, oh Smug One

by neilb@uk In reply to At least..

A character comes out of a building that has harboured known terrorists just weeks after four suicide explosions on your mass transit system kill over fifty people. He is wearing an overcoat and the temperature is eighty degrees. You tail him and, when you try to stop him, he leaps a barrier into that same mass transit system.

Describe, in words of how ever many syllables you wish, what the LAPD would have done.

And, yes, he did speak English. He was an illegal immigrant so I suppose his running could be explained but, hey, I'm still interested in what the NYPD or LAPD would have done.

Describe what you believe the Met Police should have done?

And where do the Irish come into this - at least in the last fifty years? Correct me if I'm wrong but I though that US funds paid for explosives set off by the IRA. We might have shot a couple at Gibraltar but - hey - they blew up enough people in return including the poor bugger (a muslim, by the way) who used to sell me my morning paper.

Back to Community Forum
64 total posts (Page 1 of 7)   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums