Poll

Who is responsible?

Musharraf40%40% - 36
not Musharraf60%60% - 54
Total: 90
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6991

rdx-fx wrote:

Now think on that a minute.
Why does that tactic work, and who is using it?
It works only because the American-lead forces would rather risk their lives than accidentally shoot a civilian.
They use it because they really don't place the same value on human life that we do.

They could wear uniforms, and still use guerilla tactics.  Hit & run, fade into the woodwork.
No.. they'd rather hide behind the skirts of their women and children.
The few seconds of time that buys them is worth the risk to civilians?!  Not to my mind.
You seem to mistake me for someone who believes they value human life. I'm just informing you of the reality of who they are. Calling for 'uniforms' and a 'level playing field' is preposterous - because that's not the kind of people they are.

rdx-fx wrote:

Dehumanized them?  That's a mile off target.  They've dehumanized themselves, with the use of brainwashed kids as suicide bombers.

You really have put them up on a pedestal, and painted them as the heroic underdog fighting the evil imperialist Americans.  It's pointless talking to you

You're just wildly off base.  I guess you haven't ever heard my Sergeant's Speech on 'Remember, they're Human Too'.
I wouldn't expect you to understand it, so I'll just give you the really short version;
"If you have an enemy under your sights - remember that they're human before you pull the trigger.  It's the only way to avoid a head full of scramblefuck when you get home. Jose the Tequila worm is not your buddy - you don't want to spend your time at the bottom of a bottle with him."
We have our wires crossed. I was saying that I sense you have dehumanized MUSLIMS in general, not the perpetrators of suicide attacks who quite frankly dehumanize themselves as you state.

Hold on a fucking second here too - I'm not painting Al Qaeda as some kind of heroic organisation. Al Qaeda is the lowest of the lowest in my view - an organisation peddling death to civilians with a pretense of piety. They are the most cowardly of the most cowardly and have no motives worthy of respect whatsoever. Perhaps you need to reread my posts.

rdx-fx wrote:

Yeah, same tactic your beloved IRA used on the British.
How many innocent civilians died because of that tactic? hmm..?
There is nothing about the tactics of the latter day PIRA that I 'love', for your information. Military and economic targets only. They sullied the cause of a united Ireland with their dishonesty and rapine.

rdx-fx wrote:

You want to know how you defeat such a slimy enemy?
That is the Primary mission of the US Army Special Forces;
Show the civilians that we're there to help them build schools, help with medical issues, provide clean water.. and generally show that we're there to protect them - while the other guy is using them as human shields.
When the civilians get tired of being used as meat shields - they can come to their friendly neighborhood US Army SF with information, or for training to fight back against the cowards & thugs.

That is THE reason to be a soldier:  To put your own ass on the line, so the women, children, and civilians don't have to endure the bullshit & risks a soldier does.
Newsflash: People in other countries resent alien cultures coming in laying down the law and patronizing them with their 'benevolence'. That's an outdated view the British Empire realized was a pack of shit. Change must come from within not from without. Those who collaborate with the 'benevolent foreigners' will be the first with head on the chopping block when it's time for the 'benevolent foreigners' to leave.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6991

Dersmikner wrote:

I've got to admit that occasionally I think "well, I disagree with Cameron Poe but the guy is at least generally rational" and so I listen to what you have to say to at least get some understanding of the other side of an argument, and potentially to either challenge myself to change my way of thinking, or to reinforce my own beliefs, but when I hear you espouse the virtues of hiding amongst, and therefore endangering, innocent women and children, and hear you follow that up with decrying that someone else has "dehumanized" those who train children to commit suicide in the act of murder, I just lose all respect for anything you have to say.
Nobody else has to "dehumanize" anyone who straps explosives on to a 13 year old and sends him into a crowded market to kill/main/wound whoever might be around. They've done that themselves. They AREN'T human. They're biologically the same as the rest of us, but morally, intellectually, and spiritually they're pieces of shit. you are either trying to get a rise out of everyone, or you've completely lost touch with reality. Generally even though I disagree with you I just have the understanding that people on different sides of an issue can be honest, well-intentioned, decent people with different points of view, but if you think anybody is "dehumanizing" those fuckwads you're more than on the other side of the issue, you're on the other side of sanity.
Wakey, wakey Dersmikner - I implied that he dehumanized Muslims in general: NOT the barely human perpetrators of suicide attacks on civilians.
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6906
Anyone else with a penchant for conspiracy theories think it's a little OH SO CONVENIENT that apparently Al-Qaeda committed this attack? Talk about neatly tying in the agenda of the West with the problems of the East.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
SEREVENT
MASSIVE G STAR
+605|6542|Birmingham, UK
Personally, i don't think its either of those options, i think its a null vote, but that didn't stop me voting.
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6954|Πάϊ
Musharraf I guess...
ƒ³
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7036|132 and Bush

Bush has suggested an international police force should investigate, including our FBI. That is incredibly stupid. It will only implicate the United States as a co-conspirator.



https://i11.tinypic.com/6lxch8m.jpg
Xbone Stormsurgezz
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6991
Interesting twist. Looks like it was Musharraf after all. Al Qaeda never hesitate to claim responsibility for acts and this time they have denied it.

"The tribal leader from South Waziristan, who has close links to al-Qaeda, has denied the accusations through a spokesman."
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7017|SE London

CameronPoe wrote:

Interesting twist. Looks like it was Musharraf after all. Al Qaeda never hesitate to claim responsibility for acts and this time they have denied it.

"The tribal leader from South Waziristan, who has close links to al-Qaeda, has denied the accusations through a spokesman."
Why would they claim responsibility for this, when it is such a great opportunity to throw a spanner in the works?
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6991

Bertster7 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Interesting twist. Looks like it was Musharraf after all. Al Qaeda never hesitate to claim responsibility for acts and this time they have denied it.

"The tribal leader from South Waziristan, who has close links to al-Qaeda, has denied the accusations through a spokesman."
Why would they claim responsibility for this, when it is such a great opportunity to throw a spanner in the works?
Good point. But it works both ways. Musharraf could have blamed Al Qaeda for exactly the opposite reasons.
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7017|SE London

CameronPoe wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Interesting twist. Looks like it was Musharraf after all. Al Qaeda never hesitate to claim responsibility for acts and this time they have denied it.

"The tribal leader from South Waziristan, who has close links to al-Qaeda, has denied the accusations through a spokesman."
Why would they claim responsibility for this, when it is such a great opportunity to throw a spanner in the works?
Good point. But it works both ways. Musharraf could have blamed Al Qaeda for exactly the opposite reasons.
Also true.

I reckon Al Qaeda had the most to gain though.
theelviscerator
Member
+19|6724

basetballjones wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

If you're a gov official and you want someone wiped out without raising suspicion, what would you choose. A single 7.62 NATO bullet to the head from a sniper rifle 400m away or copy your enemy and make it look like they did it.
How would you convince someone to go on a suicide mission if you were a gov official? Just interested.
Radical Muslims do not need convincing to go on suicide missions- If it is for the "Glory of Allah" they will happily martyr themselves.


It could have been anyone.  You are talking about the assassination of a powerful woman, in a region where women are viewed by many as dirty, unintelligent, baby factories.
QFT

Teh libs here believe it was bushes fault though...hah..
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6991

theelviscerator wrote:

Teh libs here believe it was bushes fault though...hah..
Which 'libs' would these be now...?
PZmohax01
Banned
+13|6412|St.Petersburg, Russia

rdx-fx wrote:

but, somehow, they do it all with a nod to the niceties of civilized democracy.  (like the Russians, but with less vodka)
lol thanks now I am aware of my country)))))))))
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6846|'Murka

CameronPoe wrote:

Interesting twist. Looks like it was Musharraf after all. Al Qaeda never hesitate to claim responsibility for acts and this time they have denied it.

"The tribal leader from South Waziristan, who has close links to al-Qaeda, has denied the accusations through a spokesman."
No. It looks like the AQ douchebag is denying AQ had anything to do with it. That's a far cry from Musharaf being behind it.

With the response throughout Pakistan, AQ would be nuts not deny their complicity...it would galvanize the populace against them. Very different situation than they've enjoyed for the past decade or so. As you've said so many times before, Cam...these people are not stupid.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein

Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7036|132 and Bush

Chaos is the party of choice for AQ. How many attempts has Mushareff had on his life? .. okthxnowbye
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|7125|Tampa Bay Florida
My gut says it was Musharraf, but what do I know?
Little BaBy JESUS
m8
+394|6584|'straya
[sarcasm=massive] youve all got it wrong... one of Musharrah's security personal accidently shot her and accidently detonated an explosive that he likes to keep strapped to his chest..[/sarcasm]

anyways... i dont know who... theres so many possiblilities... all with something to gain from her death
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7193|Argentina
Mmmm, the elections were just delayed, I wonder who wanted this to happen.  *cough* Musharraf *cough*.
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6991


I now believe Musharraf's men at least colluded in the assassination. Why would the government be trying to cover the patently obvious method of death? This video is pretty damning. It looks to me that Musharraf tried to prevent the election through the 'state of emergency' and when that didn't work resorted to this. He's now talking about 'delaying the election'. Convenient.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-12-31 13:53:08)

Shaguart
Titties
+56|6804|Calgary, Canada

(T)eflon(S)hadow wrote:

Wait...











I'm the first one?









President Bush!
She was a democrat why would bush want to assasinate her if there going for the same goal

Last edited by Shaguart (2007-12-31 14:11:03)

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard