Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7226|Nårvei

usmarine wrote:

Vax wrote:

Not sure what the relevance to the topic is, but I suppose you are trying to say the Cole was small potatoes compared to  *what the usa did*

In that case I would point out that the Iran Air shootdown was a mistake, while the Cole was hit on purpose, by terrorists
I realize that some don't make any distinctions about intent, but to me it makes a difference.
it is what he and cam do...among others.  dont try and make sense though.  it does not work.
At least they explain it so it can make sense while others just rebut it without elaboration ... guess who is more trustworthy?

And Vax ... if an Iranian vessel shot down a US airliner by mistake ... how long would that vessel survive you think?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|7037|London, England

That guy wrote:

That move, Lippold said, would be "a tragic, politically based mistake. We are now politicizing the war on terrorism . . . an order of magnitude worse than anything we've done."
That's the only way it's going to be won, or at the very least, the solution will never be 100% military. People who think like that are delusional
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6706|Éire

Vax wrote:

Braddock wrote:

Commie Killer wrote:


Hard to tell if your being sarcastic....
I tell you what, read all of the source link I posted (particularly the part on independent sources) and then make up your mind.
I remember hearing about it.
 
Was a fuckup of monumental proportions.

Not sure what the relevance to the topic is, but I suppose you are trying to say the Cole was small potatoes compared to  *what the usa did*

In that case I would point out that the Iran Air shootdown was a mistake, while the Cole was hit on purpose, by terrorists
I realize that some don't make any distinctions about intent, but to me it makes a difference.

Do you .. believe the crew on the Vincennes thought they were shooting down an airliner, with kids on board ?
I would seriously doubt it but I'd imagine that's scant consolation to the relatives of the people who died. As Bertster pointed out, the same situation in reverse would have most of the Americans on here screaming for an invasion of Iran and yet no one seems to possess the empathy to understand Middle Eastern aggression towards the US when they continually meddle in that part of the world.
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7177

Varegg wrote:

usmarine wrote:

Vax wrote:

Not sure what the relevance to the topic is, but I suppose you are trying to say the Cole was small potatoes compared to  *what the usa did*

In that case I would point out that the Iran Air shootdown was a mistake, while the Cole was hit on purpose, by terrorists
I realize that some don't make any distinctions about intent, but to me it makes a difference.
it is what he and cam do...among others.  dont try and make sense though.  it does not work.
At least they explain it so it can make sense while others just rebut it without elaboration ... guess who is more trustworthy?

And Vax ... if an Iranian vessel shot down a US airliner by mistake ... how long would that vessel survive you think?
says you because you agree with them.  you and others cant seem to tell the difference.  you can type two paragraphs but if the message is always the same it does not matter.  nice try though.  but a lot of people dont buy into that shit you know.  just because you do doesnt make it the "proper" way.
cl4u53w1t2
Salon-Bolschewist
+269|6889|Kakanien
i've always admired colonel kurt(z)

wait...
mikkel
Member
+383|7017
''We shouldn't make policy decisions based on human rights and legal advocacy groups,'
And right there is where you should've stopped reading.
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6639|Escea

Braddock wrote:

Commie Killer wrote:

Braddock wrote:

So Kurt Lippold doesn't believe in judicial transparency, due process or human rights? Well, I guess ol' Kurt needs to shut the fuck up because the neo-cons are no more and Obama aint listening to their fascist, corner-cutting bullshit anymore.

His ship was hit off the coast of Yemen? Well that's a shame... was his ship the one that shot down that Iranian civilian flight or was that another American ship in a region where it didn't belong?
International waters?
If Iran shot down a US civilian flight and killed all 290 civilians on board from International waters off the coast of the USA the American Government and American people would have a fucking canary. Do you know where Mr. Lippold's ship would have been safe from fire? In a US harbour somewhere within the United States, that's where.

My advice to Kurt is dry your eyes and shut your mouth. Doe he think Obama is going to backtrack on his decision or something?
It would have been safe in a US harbour? Like the WTC was safe on US soil? It doesn't matter where it could have been, planting it in a harbour increases its safety but does not make it invulnerable to attack.

The airliner was believed to be an attacking F14 because there was one present at the same airport tha the flight took off from. Not too mention that the ship was attacked by Iranian gunboats prior. When the plane came on radar they tried to alert it on military and civilian frequencies, but never got a response. Tragic mistake, but they took correct action in shooting down an unidentified aircraft that could have been attacking the ship.
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7226|Nårvei

usmarine wrote:

Varegg wrote:

usmarine wrote:

it is what he and cam do...among others.  dont try and make sense though.  it does not work.
At least they explain it so it can make sense while others just rebut it without elaboration ... guess who is more trustworthy?

And Vax ... if an Iranian vessel shot down a US airliner by mistake ... how long would that vessel survive you think?
says you because you agree with them.  you and others cant seem to tell the difference.  you can type two paragraphs but if the message is always the same it does not matter.  nice try though.  but a lot of people dont buy into that shit you know.  just because you do doesnt make it the "proper" way.
That goes for more than Cam and Braddock but it was those two you mentioned, lowing is actually in the same elaborating category ... so is FEOS and several others, has nothing to do with who i agree with ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7177

Varegg wrote:

That goes for more than Cam and Braddock but it was those two you mentioned, lowing is actually in the same elaborating category ... so is FEOS and several others, has nothing to do with who i agree with ...
like i said.  they feel the need to write walls of text and argue the same thing over and over again.  some people understand that is a waste of time.  so, straight and to the point is much better imo.
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7226|Nårvei

usmarine wrote:

Varegg wrote:

That goes for more than Cam and Braddock but it was those two you mentioned, lowing is actually in the same elaborating category ... so is FEOS and several others, has nothing to do with who i agree with ...
like i said.  they feel the need to write walls of text and argue the same thing over and over again.  some people understand that is a waste of time.  so, straight and to the point is much better imo.
You can elaborate in a few lines also you know ... but when you get an answer that just says "no that is wrong" or similar that doesn't exactly discredit the previous or prove it wrong post does it ...

Sometimes it takes a long post or wall of text and sometimes a few lines are enough, depends if it is the OP that should contain lots of information or if it is a later part of an ongoing debate ... that also goes for both sides in the debate of course ...

Straight and to the point is a good example of how it should be done more often but sometimes you need more text to explain your view and the topic and what the topic is actually about ... way to often is the copy and paste method used imo ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7177

ok..........

i was not debating Vax.  you understand that yes?  maybe?

so, i was just speaking to him, not debating.  you understand maybe?

therefore, no mass amounts of info is need.  get it?
Vax
Member
+42|6267|Flyover country

Bertster7 wrote:

Vax wrote:

Was a fuckup of monumental proportions.

Not sure what the relevance to the topic is, but I suppose you are trying to say the Cole was small potatoes compared to  *what the usa did*

In that case I would point out that the Iran Air shootdown was a mistake, while the Cole was hit on purpose, by terrorists
I realize that some don't make any distinctions about intent, but to me it makes a difference.

Do you .. believe the crew on the Vincennes thought they were shooting down an airliner, with kids on board ?
Yes. A big fucking mistake. How the fuck he still has his job after a monumental fuckup like that is beyond me - let alone why anyone should be listening to someone who has proven themselves to be utterly incompetent.

It's interesting to see the double standards here. If Iran shot down an American passenger jet killing hundreds of Americans by mistake I'm sure there would be a lot of people on this forum baying for Iranian blood - not just a hundred odd million in compensation. I imagine the Iranians feel much the same. It's these sorts of fuckups that exacerbate the whole terrorism in the middle east issue. Much of the blame can be laid at the feet of morons like this guy.
Um he doesn't have a job anymore, and no one is "listening to him" -- this was 20 years ago.
The article posted by the OP has Nothing to do with the Iran Air mishap, the OP was an opinion from the Commanding officer of the USS Cole.
Vax
Member
+42|6267|Flyover country

Braddock wrote:

I would seriously doubt it but I'd imagine that's scant consolation to the relatives of the people who died. As Bertster pointed out, the same situation in reverse would have most of the Americans on here screaming for an invasion of Iran and yet no one seems to possess the empathy to understand Middle Eastern aggression towards the US when they continually meddle in that part of the world.
I don't know about that. Imagine if instead of 9/11, (4 airliners, etc, destroyed intentionally) we had one airliner shot down mistakenly...the response would be a bit different...I mean yes there would be some people irrationally wanting revenge, but if it's an accident...

Also there was a war on at the time, between Iran and Iraq, and it was threatening allies and oil shipping lanes, so yes we were "meddling"

Wiki wrote:

Starting in September 1980 the war between Iraq and Iran had begun to witness attacks against oil tankers and merchant shipping of neighboring countries. Iran struck a Kuwaiti tanker in Bahrain's territorial waters on the 13th and a Saudi tanker in its own territory on the 16th. For the next five years, attacks continued until Kuwait petitioned the US for help in 1986, and even then Iran attacked 29 ships between September 1986 and June 1987.[9] Besides the obvious damage to Kuwaiti and Saudi business interests, they also affected the flow of oil to America. In May 1987, USS Stark was struck by two missiles launched by an Iraqi Mirage F-1, killing 37. No weapons were fired in self-defense during the attack.[10]

In July 1987 eleven Kuwaiti-owned oil tankers were reflagged under the U.S. flag, and the Navy instituted Operation Earnest Will on the orders of President Reagan to protect these and other U.S. registered shipping.[11] They also undertook, again under Presidential directive, Operation Prime Chance. Following months of low intensity conflict, in April 1988 the frigate USS Samuel B. Roberts struck an Iranian mine, leading to a retaliation by the US called Operation Praying Mantis. The US Navy was operating under what Admiral Crowe called "the air of terrorism and peril that pervaded the Gulf at that time."[12]

On 29 April 1988 the U.S. expanded the scope of the U.S. Navy's protection to all friendly neutral shipping in the Persian Gulf outside of declared exclusion zones, which set the military scene of the shootdown incident.[11]
Helps to know the background IMO, we didn't just waltz in there and shoot an airliner out of the sky one day.
Worth noting that the Stark was attacked just a year previous, and hadn't even fired back. Maybe they were aware of that incident and didn't want a repeat - could have led to the crew on the Vincennes being too trigger happy.

Last edited by Vax (2009-01-31 10:57:23)

Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6861|The Land of Scott Walker

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

So since you can’t see the evidence there’s no due process and human rights?  We’ve released terrorists previously who have gone on to involve themselves in more terrorist acts.  Let the military do their job and try these guys.  That’s the due process you’re looking for.
And not even knowing the evidence against you so a defense can be supplied is due process?
You attended a trial noting evidence was not presented?  Post the transcript.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard