The "religion of peace" strikes again.

Muldur · 18th June 2012, 10:36 AM

Pakistani Taliban prohibit polio vaccinations for children in effort to force end to US/Allied Forces drone attacks.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...153252109.html

Islam...offending human civilization since 622AD...

The Dark Lord · 18th June 2012, 10:56 AM

This is abhorrent. But aren't you a fundie Christian? Shall we list all the evil things that people have done in the name of your retarded religion?

Foster Zygote · 18th June 2012, 11:01 AM

And the Taliban represent all Muslims since when?

Moss · 18th June 2012, 11:04 AM

I wonder if this has partially to do with the fake vaccination drive to find Osama. That might give some people paranoia.

EdG · 18th June 2012, 11:24 AM

And what would you do if your nation were invaded and occupied by a foreign power and your neighbors were being killed from the sky without benefit of trial? Cooperate fully with your new overlords and cheer them on as they bombed you?

geni · 18th June 2012, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by Moss

I wonder if this has partially to do with the fake vaccination drive to find Osama.

Assuming it isn't US properganda its entirely to do with that.

Quad4_72 · 18th June 2012, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by EdG

And what would you do if your nation were invaded and occupied by a foreign power and your neighbors were being killed from the sky without benefit of trial? Cooperate fully with your new overlords and cheer them on as they bombed you?

That's a hard one to answer. Personally, if I were them I would not have harbored terrorists who's plots have killed thousands of people around the world. It's pretty common knowledge that kind of behavior will get bombs dropped on your head.

baron · 18th June 2012, 01:49 PM

I'll watch this forum more carefully over the next few weeks because I really want to catch a thread critical of Christianity so I can swoop in there with the first reply of, "Yeah, that's bad but terrible things happen in Islam too, why aren't you talking about those?" There appears to be a veritable crowd of people doing it the other way around as evidenced by the fact it happens on almost every Islamic thread, so I figured it would only be fair to try and even out the playing field.

westprog · 18th June 2012, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

That's a hard one to answer. Personally, if I were them I would not have harbored terrorists who's plots have killed thousands of people around the world. It's pretty common knowledge that kind of behavior will get bombs dropped on your head.

That's a tempting answer, but when the IRA were freely collecting in bars in New York, the RAF wasn't launching air strikes to take them out. The real answer is that if you don't want to be bombed for harboring terrorists, then get a big air force.

kerikiwi · 18th June 2012, 01:59 PM

Originally Posted by Muldur

Pakistani Taliban prohibit polio vaccinations for children in effort to force end to US/Allied Forces drone attacks.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...153252109.html

Islam...offending human civilization since 622AD...

Rather like the catholic church in its banning of contraception is representative of all christians.
Christianity ... offending human civilization since AD dot.

Aepervius · 18th June 2012, 02:04 PM

Originally Posted by baron

I'll watch this forum more carefully over the next few weeks because I really want to catch a thread critical of Christianity so I can swoop in there with the first reply of, "Yeah, that's bad but terrible things happen in Islam too, why aren't you talking about those?" There appears to be a veritable crowd of people doing it the other way around as evidenced by the fact it happens on almost every Islamic thread, so I figured it would only be fair to try and even out the playing field.

Feel free to do it. Fundemmentalist of all ilk are all basket case and always try to top each otehr in the disgusting, malignant, and intolerant department. Be them christian or islamist or whatnot.

Foster Zygote · 18th June 2012, 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by baron

I'll watch this forum more carefully over the next few weeks because I really want to catch a thread critical of Christianity so I can swoop in there with the first reply of, "Yeah, that's bad but terrible things happen in Islam too, why aren't you talking about those?" There appears to be a veritable crowd of people doing it the other way around as evidenced by the fact it happens on almost every Islamic thread, so I figured it would only be fair to try and even out the playing field.

When a Muslim member posts something asserting that all Christians are evil because of the actions of some who identify as Christian, I'm sure you'll see such a response.

superfreddy · 18th June 2012, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by Muldur

Pakistani Taliban prohibit polio vaccinations for children in effort to force end to US/Allied Forces drone attacks.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...153252109.html

Islam...offending human civilization since 622AD...

Isn't this self-defeating? Polio stricken children don't make good future soldiers

baron · 18th June 2012, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by Aepervius

Feel free to do it. Fundemmentalist of all ilk are all basket case and always try to top each otehr in the disgusting, malignant, and intolerant department. Be them christian or islamist or whatnot.

I know, but that's not really my point. The diversionary tactics are always applied to Islamic topics, never any other religion, so much so that you can bet the second post in any Islamic thread will be attempting to drag the topic OT. I have a healthy dislike for all Abrahamic religions and many others too, but I that doesn't prevent me speaking out when people attempt this phony apologist nonsense at every turn.

MG1962 · 18th June 2012, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

That's a hard one to answer. Personally, if I were them I would not have harbored terrorists who's plots have killed thousands of people around the world. It's pretty common knowledge that kind of behavior will get bombs dropped on your head.

Oddly enough the only difference is in the two situations, the Taliban never had an airforce

Tricky · 18th June 2012, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by superfreddy

Isn't this self-defeating? Polio stricken children don't make good future soldiers

It does indicate how very desperate they are. If they're willing to commit atrocity against their own people to try to stop the attacks, they're going to have a hard time getting recruits.

Quad4_72 · 18th June 2012, 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by MG1962

Oddly enough the only difference is in the two situations, the Taliban never had an airforce

Are you suggesting the United States commits acts of terror around the world, specifically targeting civilians?

Moss · 18th June 2012, 02:33 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Are you suggesting the United States commits acts of terror around the world, specifically targeting civilians?

Depending on who you ask drone strikes might be seen as such.

tsig · 18th June 2012, 02:55 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Are you suggesting the United States commits acts of terror around the world, specifically targeting civilians?

As has been said, drone strikes certainly target civilians.

(bit OT though, might want a new thread)

Travis · 18th June 2012, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by Moss

Depending on who you ask drone strikes might be seen as such.

Well, yeah, if you only ask stupid people you will get stupid responses.

kerikiwi · 18th June 2012, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by baron

I know, but that's not really my point. The diversionary tactics are always applied to Islamic topics, never any other religion, so much so that you can bet the second post in any Islamic thread will be attempting to drag the topic OT

It is not dragging the topic OT to point out that the taliban are not representative of all Muslims.
What you call diversionary tactics are always applied to Islamic topics because we never see the actions of one group of christians being described as representative of all christians.

Piscivore · 18th June 2012, 03:22 PM

Originally Posted by Moss

Depending on who you ask drone strikes might be seen as such.

Beyond that, think about how absolutely impotent drones make today's insurgent/rebel/"freedom fighter". They can't ambush them, they can't set IEDs to kill them, they can't shout epithets and insults to harrass them into leaving them alone, can't send a sniper to shoot at the base (the drones might not even be based in the same country; it is not impossible for them to be based on an entirely different continent)- they can do nothing to demoralize this enemy. Compared to an infantryman patrolling an area or a Seal Team member, the pilot hasn't any more personal exposure than he does playing Xbox. If they do manage to "kill" a drone, the enemy just makes two more and the same pilot can fly them... but if one of them is killed, the rebel leaders need to recruit or raise a new insurgent, train him, and keep his morale up while his friends die around him.

Can you imagine how much different Vietnam would have turned out with this technology? Is it any wonder they have to resort to these tactics? They literally have no other way of fighting the drones.

MG1962 · 18th June 2012, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Are you suggesting the United States commits acts of terror around the world, specifically targeting civilians?

No that didn't come out right - I was referencing Edg's comments - That basically everything he is accusing the US of doing was exactly what the Taliban did first, except drop bombs, they just threw them cause the fuel card for the airforce was maxed out.

Marduk · 18th June 2012, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Are you suggesting the United States commits acts of terror around the world, specifically targeting civilians?

Wasn't Osama a civilian, didn't they raid his civilian house in a civilian area of Pakistan,
j/k

westprog · 18th June 2012, 03:48 PM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Beyond that, think about how absolutely impotent drones make today's insurgent/rebel/"freedom fighter". They can't ambush them, they can't set IEDs to kill them, they can't shout epithets and insults to harrass them into leaving them alone, can't send a sniper to shoot at the base (the drones might not even be based in the same country; it is not impossible for them to be based on an entirely different continent)- they can do nothing to demoralize this enemy. Compared to an infantryman patrolling an area or a Seal Team member, the pilot hasn't any more personal exposure than he does playing Xbox. If they do manage to "kill" a drone, the enemy just makes two more and the same pilot can fly them... but if one of them is killed, the rebel leaders need to recruit or raise a new insurgent, train him, and keep his morale up while his friends die around him.

Can you imagine how much different Vietnam would have turned out with this technology? Is it any wonder they have to resort to these tactics? They literally have no other way of fighting the drones.

Vietnam was pretty much similar technology. The US air losses were less than a tenth per sortie of WW2. They could bomb anywhere they wanted.

As to how they would respond to being attacked from the air, unable to fight back - I think we already know that one, don't we?

Tricky · 18th June 2012, 03:56 PM

Originally Posted by westprog

Vietnam was pretty much similar technology. The US air losses were less than a tenth per sortie of WW2. They could bomb anywhere they wanted.

As to how they would respond to being attacked from the air, unable to fight back - I think we already know that one, don't we?

It might have been more precise than WW2, but they were still dropping bombs from the sky. There is no way that can be as accurate as a drone attack. And they bombed whole villages. (We have some pretty good pictures of this.) Also, the satellite images and other intel that identify targets are products of a technology that is so sophisticated that it makes 1970's area recon look like cave drawings. I don't think you can even begin to compare the civilian losses from the bombing in VietNam and Cambodia to those due to drone attacks. My guess is that it is at least a couple orders of magnitude difference.

Also remember that Viet Nam never attacked us. The Taliban did, and has declared its intention to continue attacking us. This is not even apples and oranges. It is apples and warthogs.

I Ratant · 18th June 2012, 04:12 PM

Originally Posted by westprog

Vietnam was pretty much similar technology. The US air losses were less than a tenth per sortie of WW2. They could bomb anywhere they wanted.

As to how they would respond to being attacked from the air, unable to fight back - I think we already know that one, don't we?

.
The North was just about back at the Stone Age condition due to the bombing when some milksop liberal lackwits forced the "pause for peace", which allowed the North to re-group and re-arm.

westprog · 18th June 2012, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by Tricky

It might have been more precise than WW2, but they were still dropping bombs from the sky. There is no way that can be as accurate as a drone attack. And they bombed whole villages. (We have some pretty good pictures of this.) Also, the satellite images and other intel that identify targets are products of a technology that is so sophisticated that it makes 1970's area recon look like cave drawings. I don't think you can even begin to compare the civilian losses from the bombing in VietNam and Cambodia to those due to drone attacks. My guess is that it is at least a couple orders of magnitude difference.

Also remember that Viet Nam never attacked us. The Taliban did, and has declared its intention to continue attacking us. This is not even apples and oranges. It is apples and warthogs.

The main reason for the difference, while certainly the technology has developed hugely, is that there is intelligence gathering in Pakistan/Afghanistan, and specific targets. In Vietnam the targetting was necessarily broader.

tsig · 18th June 2012, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by I Ratant

.
The North was just about back at the Stone Age condition due to the bombing when some milksop liberal lackwits forced the "pause for peace", which allowed the North to re-group and re-arm.

The ole stab in the back?

angrysoba · 18th June 2012, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by Moss

I wonder if this has partially to do with the fake vaccination drive to find Osama. That might give some people paranoia.

The article does link it to that, yes.

angrysoba · 18th June 2012, 05:11 PM

Originally Posted by Travis

Well, yeah, if you only ask stupid people you will get stupid responses.

I think if you asked people on the ground about people who they know who are killed in drone strikes then there might be some interesting replies. If the people killed are Taliban militia then I am not that bothered, of course. But if they happen to be civilians then I think it is callous to dismiss their opinions as "stupid".

angrysoba · 18th June 2012, 05:31 PM

That said, this type of thing is utterly despicable. If the Taliban don't want to receive polio vaccines for their area from the US, then they should arrange things through the UN to make sure the US is not involved. By depriving the children supposedly in their charge of polio vaccinations they are doing the proverbial throwing acid in their faces to spite their, er...faces.

ETA: And while the article does mention the Osama bin Laden link there have been similar attempts by Islamists in places such as Nigeria and, I think, elsewhere to prevent polio vaccination campaigns. It could be that the Osama bin Laden thing is being used as an excuse.

I Ratant · 18th June 2012, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by tsig

The ole stab in the back?

.
Goodie Tw0-shoes with lots of wishful thinking.
"Going Downtown" by Broughton describes a court-martial of USAF personnel who'd fired on Soviet ships in Haiphong harbor who were firing at them!
And "Over The Beach" by Grant describes the Navy view of the situation.
.
Flying over Hanoi seeing SAMs on the their trailers in the streets, and NOT being able to destroy them!
Don't attack the MiG bases..
Attack only using this route.. So that's where the AAA was set up!

I Ratant · 18th June 2012, 06:14 PM

Anti-polio vaccination situations exist all through the 3rd world.
All of them instigated by clerics.
They're the sole reason polio hasn't gone the way smallpox has.

ANTPogo · 18th June 2012, 06:32 PM

Originally Posted by Muldur

Pakistani Taliban prohibit polio vaccinations for children in effort to force end to US/Allied Forces drone attacks.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...153252109.html

Islam...offending human civilization since 622AD...

What does the linked article have to do with Islam? It's quite clear that the Taliban is doing this (rather stupidly, but hey) as a response to Allied drone strikes, with not even a mention of religion being involved.

Or is this a case of anything that anyone claiming to be Muslim does is because they're Muslim?

[EDIT: And even other Muslims think the Taliban are supreme ********, not just us non-Muslims. See Charles Allen's God's Terrorists: The Wahhabi Cult and the Hidden Roots of Modern Jihad]

Originally Posted by baron

I know, but that's not really my point. The diversionary tactics are always applied to Islamic topics, never any other religion, so much so that you can bet the second post in any Islamic thread will be attempting to drag the topic OT.

Let me know when someone posts a thread about the murders and attempted murders of people claimed to be witches by Christians in Africa, with the title "The Religion of 'Turn the Other Cheek' Strikes Again", and I'll be right there saying the same things I am here. As I have, in fact, done in other threads before, where Christianity (and especially individual believing Christians) have been attacked.

And even that kind of thread would at least be far more justified in its blame of a religion than this trainwreck of nonsense.

Weirdly, all the atheists here with such a self-proclaimed disdain for "Abrahamic religions" who are so quick to label me an "Islam Apologist" have never called me a "Christian Apologist" for those posts. It's eerily like there's a double standard or something.

Toontown · 18th June 2012, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by baron

I'll watch this forum more carefully over the next few weeks because I really want to catch a thread critical of Christianity so I can swoop in there with the first reply of, "Yeah, that's bad but terrible things happen in Islam too, why aren't you talking about those?" There appears to be a veritable crowd of people doing it the other way around as evidenced by the fact it happens on almost every Islamic thread, so I figured it would only be fair to try and even out the playing field.

Bingo. You're on them. Maintain lock.

Craig4 · 18th June 2012, 06:52 PM

Originally Posted by MG1962

Oddly enough the only difference is in the two situations, the Taliban never had an airforce

No, the only difference is that when the US and allied forces kill innocents it's because we missed. I would submit that there is a wide difference between willful and unintended victims.

MG1962 · 18th June 2012, 07:10 PM

Originally Posted by Craig4

No, the only difference is that when the US and allied forces kill innocents it's because we missed. I would submit that there is a wide difference between willful and unintended victims.

As I mentioned in a subsequent post, that came out wrong - I was attempting to chide the poster before Quad who's list of sins laid at the feet of coalition forces was no different from what the Taliban did.

A report released a month ago indicated that the coalition has been responsible for 14% of civilian deaths during the war and the Taliban responsible for 77%

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1500368.html

It was never my intention to accuse coalition forces of any nation to be deliberately targeting civilians, as I said it just came out wrong

I Ratant · 18th June 2012, 07:15 PM

The Taliban are their religion.
And they are really really really nasty people!
Driven by their religion.
Which happens to be Islam, taken past common sense and decency.

ANTPogo · 18th June 2012, 07:19 PM

Originally Posted by Toontown

Bingo. You're on them. Maintain lock.

I am enjoying, perhaps a bit too much, the fact that you're saying this now to the very poster that just last month you called a "suck-up" to me back when you thought he had the temerity to agree with me about something Islam-related.

18th June 2012, 10:36 AM	#1
Muldur Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,952	The "religion of peace" strikes again. Pakistani Taliban prohibit polio vaccinations for children in effort to force end to US/Allied Forces drone attacks. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...153252109.html Islam...offending human civilization since 622AD...
Muldur Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 1,952

18th June 2012, 10:56 AM	#2
The Dark Lord Suspended Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 1,860	This is abhorrent. But aren't you a fundie Christian? Shall we list all the evil things that people have done in the name of your retarded religion?
The Dark Lord Suspended Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 1,860

18th June 2012, 11:01 AM	#3
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,382	And the Taliban represent all Muslims since when?
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it.

18th June 2012, 12:23 PM	#7
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Originally Posted by EdG And what would you do if your nation were invaded and occupied by a foreign power and your neighbors were being killed from the sky without benefit of trial? Cooperate fully with your new overlords and cheer them on as they bombed you? That's a hard one to answer. Personally, if I were them I would not have harbored terrorists who's plots have killed thousands of people around the world. It's pretty common knowledge that kind of behavior will get bombs dropped on your head.
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken Last edited by Quad4_72; 18th June 2012 at 12:24 PM.

18th June 2012, 01:49 PM	#8
baron Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Hill Posts: 1,910	I'll watch this forum more carefully over the next few weeks because I really want to catch a thread critical of Christianity so I can swoop in there with the first reply of, "Yeah, that's bad but terrible things happen in Islam too, why aren't you talking about those?" There appears to be a veritable crowd of people doing it the other way around as evidenced by the fact it happens on almost every Islamic thread, so I figured it would only be fair to try and even out the playing field.
	__________________

18th June 2012, 11:04 AM	#4
Moss Dramatocrat Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Heiligsblechle country Posts: 3,229	I wonder if this has partially to do with the fake vaccination drive to find Osama. That might give some people paranoia.

18th June 2012, 11:24 AM	#5
EdG Scholar Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Arizona, USA Posts: 108	And what would you do if your nation were invaded and occupied by a foreign power and your neighbors were being killed from the sky without benefit of trial? Cooperate fully with your new overlords and cheer them on as they bombed you?

18th June 2012, 11:36 AM	#6
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: UK Posts: 26,555	Originally Posted by Moss I wonder if this has partially to do with the fake vaccination drive to find Osama. Assuming it isn't US properganda its entirely to do with that.

18th June 2012, 01:56 PM	#9
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 That's a hard one to answer. Personally, if I were them I would not have harbored terrorists who's plots have killed thousands of people around the world. It's pretty common knowledge that kind of behavior will get bombs dropped on your head. That's a tempting answer, but when the IRA were freely collecting in bars in New York, the RAF wasn't launching air strikes to take them out. The real answer is that if you don't want to be bombed for harboring terrorists, then get a big air force.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

18th June 2012, 01:59 PM	#10
kerikiwi Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Bay of Islands NZ Posts: 5,843	Originally Posted by Muldur Pakistani Taliban prohibit polio vaccinations for children in effort to force end to US/Allied Forces drone attacks. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...153252109.html Islam...offending human civilization since 622AD... Rather like the catholic church in its banning of contraception is representative of all christians. Christianity ... offending human civilization since AD dot.

18th June 2012, 02:04 PM	#11
Aepervius Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Bierland. I mean , germany. Posts: 7,732	Originally Posted by baron I'll watch this forum more carefully over the next few weeks because I really want to catch a thread critical of Christianity so I can swoop in there with the first reply of, "Yeah, that's bad but terrible things happen in Islam too, why aren't you talking about those?" There appears to be a veritable crowd of people doing it the other way around as evidenced by the fact it happens on almost every Islamic thread, so I figured it would only be fair to try and even out the playing field. Feel free to do it. Fundemmentalist of all ilk are all basket case and always try to top each otehr in the disgusting, malignant, and intolerant department. Be them christian or islamist or whatnot.
	__________________ Omnes Blessant Ultima necat "I want, and this is my last and most dear wish, I want that the last of the king be strangled with the guts of the last priest" (Jean Meslier / 1664-1729 / Testament) A very early french atheist, a catholic priest in life.

18th June 2012, 02:08 PM	#12
Foster Zygote Dental Floss Tycoon Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge Posts: 14,382	Originally Posted by baron I'll watch this forum more carefully over the next few weeks because I really want to catch a thread critical of Christianity so I can swoop in there with the first reply of, "Yeah, that's bad but terrible things happen in Islam too, why aren't you talking about those?" There appears to be a veritable crowd of people doing it the other way around as evidenced by the fact it happens on almost every Islamic thread, so I figured it would only be fair to try and even out the playing field. When a Muslim member posts something asserting that all Christians are evil because of the actions of some who identify as Christian, I'm sure you'll see such a response.
	__________________ It looks just like a Telefunken U47... You'll love it. Last edited by Foster Zygote; 18th June 2012 at 03:34 PM.

18th June 2012, 02:10 PM	#13
superfreddy Thinker Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 232	Originally Posted by Muldur Pakistani Taliban prohibit polio vaccinations for children in effort to force end to US/Allied Forces drone attacks. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...153252109.html Islam...offending human civilization since 622AD... Isn't this self-defeating? Polio stricken children don't make good future soldiers
superfreddy Thinker Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 232

18th June 2012, 02:11 PM	#14
baron Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Hill Posts: 1,910	Originally Posted by Aepervius Feel free to do it. Fundemmentalist of all ilk are all basket case and always try to top each otehr in the disgusting, malignant, and intolerant department. Be them christian or islamist or whatnot. I know, but that's not really my point. The diversionary tactics are always applied to Islamic topics, never any other religion, so much so that you can bet the second post in any Islamic thread will be attempting to drag the topic OT. I have a healthy dislike for all Abrahamic religions and many others too, but I that doesn't prevent me speaking out when people attempt this phony apologist nonsense at every turn.
	__________________

18th June 2012, 02:15 PM	#15
MG1962 Guest Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kansas (Australia) Posts: 14,750	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 That's a hard one to answer. Personally, if I were them I would not have harbored terrorists who's plots have killed thousands of people around the world. It's pretty common knowledge that kind of behavior will get bombs dropped on your head. Oddly enough the only difference is in the two situations, the Taliban never had an airforce

18th June 2012, 02:27 PM	#16
Tricky Briefly immortal Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 42,345	Originally Posted by superfreddy Isn't this self-defeating? Polio stricken children don't make good future soldiers It does indicate how very desperate they are. If they're willing to commit atrocity against their own people to try to stop the attacks, they're going to have a hard time getting recruits.

18th June 2012, 02:28 PM	#17
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Originally Posted by MG1962 Oddly enough the only difference is in the two situations, the Taliban never had an airforce Are you suggesting the United States commits acts of terror around the world, specifically targeting civilians?
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

18th June 2012, 02:33 PM	#18
Moss Dramatocrat Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Heiligsblechle country Posts: 3,229	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Are you suggesting the United States commits acts of terror around the world, specifically targeting civilians? Depending on who you ask drone strikes might be seen as such.

18th June 2012, 02:55 PM	#19
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,645	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Are you suggesting the United States commits acts of terror around the world, specifically targeting civilians? As has been said, drone strikes certainly target civilians. (bit OT though, might want a new thread)

18th June 2012, 03:07 PM	#20
Travis Misanthrope of the Mountains Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Tuolumne City, CA Posts: 17,937	Originally Posted by Moss Depending on who you ask drone strikes might be seen as such. Well, yeah, if you only ask stupid people you will get stupid responses.
	__________________ "Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com Zingiber Officinale The Humor blog of some not crazy guy

18th June 2012, 03:18 PM	#21
kerikiwi Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Bay of Islands NZ Posts: 5,843	Originally Posted by baron I know, but that's not really my point. The diversionary tactics are always applied to Islamic topics, never any other religion, so much so that you can bet the second post in any Islamic thread will be attempting to drag the topic OT It is not dragging the topic OT to point out that the taliban are not representative of all Muslims. What you call diversionary tactics are always applied to Islamic topics because we never see the actions of one group of christians being described as representative of all christians.

18th June 2012, 03:22 PM	#22
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,454	Originally Posted by Moss Depending on who you ask drone strikes might be seen as such. Beyond that, think about how absolutely impotent drones make today's insurgent/rebel/"freedom fighter". They can't ambush them, they can't set IEDs to kill them, they can't shout epithets and insults to harrass them into leaving them alone, can't send a sniper to shoot at the base (the drones might not even be based in the same country; it is not impossible for them to be based on an entirely different continent)- they can do nothing to demoralize this enemy. Compared to an infantryman patrolling an area or a Seal Team member, the pilot hasn't any more personal exposure than he does playing Xbox. If they do manage to "kill" a drone, the enemy just makes two more and the same pilot can fly them... but if one of them is killed, the rebel leaders need to recruit or raise a new insurgent, train him, and keep his morale up while his friends die around him. Can you imagine how much different Vietnam would have turned out with this technology? Is it any wonder they have to resort to these tactics? They literally have no other way of fighting the drones.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen Last edited by Piscivore; 18th June 2012 at 03:23 PM.

18th June 2012, 03:30 PM	#23
MG1962 Guest Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kansas (Australia) Posts: 14,750	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Are you suggesting the United States commits acts of terror around the world, specifically targeting civilians? No that didn't come out right - I was referencing Edg's comments - That basically everything he is accusing the US of doing was exactly what the Taliban did first, except drop bombs, they just threw them cause the fuel card for the airforce was maxed out.

18th June 2012, 03:37 PM	#24
Marduk Banned Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Newbury, Berkshire Posts: 10,242	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Are you suggesting the United States commits acts of terror around the world, specifically targeting civilians? Wasn't Osama a civilian, didn't they raid his civilian house in a civilian area of Pakistan, j/k

18th June 2012, 03:48 PM	#25
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Piscivore Beyond that, think about how absolutely impotent drones make today's insurgent/rebel/"freedom fighter". They can't ambush them, they can't set IEDs to kill them, they can't shout epithets and insults to harrass them into leaving them alone, can't send a sniper to shoot at the base (the drones might not even be based in the same country; it is not impossible for them to be based on an entirely different continent)- they can do nothing to demoralize this enemy. Compared to an infantryman patrolling an area or a Seal Team member, the pilot hasn't any more personal exposure than he does playing Xbox. If they do manage to "kill" a drone, the enemy just makes two more and the same pilot can fly them... but if one of them is killed, the rebel leaders need to recruit or raise a new insurgent, train him, and keep his morale up while his friends die around him. Can you imagine how much different Vietnam would have turned out with this technology? Is it any wonder they have to resort to these tactics? They literally have no other way of fighting the drones. Vietnam was pretty much similar technology. The US air losses were less than a tenth per sortie of WW2. They could bomb anywhere they wanted. As to how they would respond to being attacked from the air, unable to fight back - I think we already know that one, don't we?
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

18th June 2012, 03:56 PM	#26
Tricky Briefly immortal Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 42,345	Originally Posted by westprog Vietnam was pretty much similar technology. The US air losses were less than a tenth per sortie of WW2. They could bomb anywhere they wanted. As to how they would respond to being attacked from the air, unable to fight back - I think we already know that one, don't we? It might have been more precise than WW2, but they were still dropping bombs from the sky. There is no way that can be as accurate as a drone attack. And they bombed whole villages. (We have some pretty good pictures of this.) Also, the satellite images and other intel that identify targets are products of a technology that is so sophisticated that it makes 1970's area recon look like cave drawings. I don't think you can even begin to compare the civilian losses from the bombing in VietNam and Cambodia to those due to drone attacks. My guess is that it is at least a couple orders of magnitude difference. Also remember that Viet Nam never attacked us. The Taliban did, and has declared its intention to continue attacking us. This is not even apples and oranges. It is apples and warthogs.
	Last edited by Tricky; 18th June 2012 at 04:00 PM.

18th June 2012, 04:12 PM	#27
I Ratant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 15,305	Originally Posted by westprog Vietnam was pretty much similar technology. The US air losses were less than a tenth per sortie of WW2. They could bomb anywhere they wanted. As to how they would respond to being attacked from the air, unable to fight back - I think we already know that one, don't we? . The North was just about back at the Stone Age condition due to the bombing when some milksop liberal lackwits forced the "pause for peace", which allowed the North to re-group and re-arm.

18th June 2012, 04:40 PM	#28
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	Originally Posted by Tricky It might have been more precise than WW2, but they were still dropping bombs from the sky. There is no way that can be as accurate as a drone attack. And they bombed whole villages. (We have some pretty good pictures of this.) Also, the satellite images and other intel that identify targets are products of a technology that is so sophisticated that it makes 1970's area recon look like cave drawings. I don't think you can even begin to compare the civilian losses from the bombing in VietNam and Cambodia to those due to drone attacks. My guess is that it is at least a couple orders of magnitude difference. Also remember that Viet Nam never attacked us. The Taliban did, and has declared its intention to continue attacking us. This is not even apples and oranges. It is apples and warthogs. The main reason for the difference, while certainly the technology has developed hugely, is that there is intelligence gathering in Pakistan/Afghanistan, and specific targets. In Vietnam the targetting was necessarily broader.
westprog Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 8,928	__________________ Dreary whiner, who gradually outwore his welcome, before blowing it entirely.

18th June 2012, 04:53 PM	#29
tsig a carbon based life-form Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 26,645	Originally Posted by I Ratant . The North was just about back at the Stone Age condition due to the bombing when some milksop liberal lackwits forced the "pause for peace", which allowed the North to re-group and re-arm. The ole stab in the back?

18th June 2012, 05:01 PM	#30
angrysoba Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 8,507	Originally Posted by Moss I wonder if this has partially to do with the fake vaccination drive to find Osama. That might give some people paranoia. The article does link it to that, yes.

18th June 2012, 05:11 PM	#31
angrysoba Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 8,507	Originally Posted by Travis Well, yeah, if you only ask stupid people you will get stupid responses. I think if you asked people on the ground about people who they know who are killed in drone strikes then there might be some interesting replies. If the people killed are Taliban militia then I am not that bothered, of course. But if they happen to be civilians then I think it is callous to dismiss their opinions as "stupid".

18th June 2012, 05:31 PM	#32
angrysoba Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 8,507	That said, this type of thing is utterly despicable. If the Taliban don't want to receive polio vaccines for their area from the US, then they should arrange things through the UN to make sure the US is not involved. By depriving the children supposedly in their charge of polio vaccinations they are doing the proverbial throwing acid in their faces to spite their, er...faces. ETA: And while the article does mention the Osama bin Laden link there have been similar attempts by Islamists in places such as Nigeria and, I think, elsewhere to prevent polio vaccination campaigns. It could be that the Osama bin Laden thing is being used as an excuse.
	Last edited by angrysoba; 18th June 2012 at 05:34 PM. Reason: Mention of other anti-vaxing amongst Islamists.

18th June 2012, 06:11 PM	#33
I Ratant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 15,305	Originally Posted by tsig The ole stab in the back? . Goodie Tw0-shoes with lots of wishful thinking. "Going Downtown" by Broughton describes a court-martial of USAF personnel who'd fired on Soviet ships in Haiphong harbor who were firing at them! And "Over The Beach" by Grant describes the Navy view of the situation. . Flying over Hanoi seeing SAMs on the their trailers in the streets, and NOT being able to destroy them! Don't attack the MiG bases.. Attack only using this route.. So that's where the AAA was set up!

18th June 2012, 06:14 PM	#34
I Ratant Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 15,305	Anti-polio vaccination situations exist all through the 3rd world. All of them instigated by clerics. They're the sole reason polio hasn't gone the way smallpox has.

18th June 2012, 06:32 PM	#35
ANTPogo Unique Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Birmingham, AL Posts: 9,295	Originally Posted by Muldur Pakistani Taliban prohibit polio vaccinations for children in effort to force end to US/Allied Forces drone attacks. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...153252109.html Islam...offending human civilization since 622AD... What does the linked article have to do with Islam? It's quite clear that the Taliban is doing this (rather stupidly, but hey) as a response to Allied drone strikes, with not even a mention of religion being involved. Or is this a case of anything that anyone claiming to be Muslim does is because they're Muslim? [EDIT: And even other Muslims think the Taliban are supreme ******, not just us non-Muslims. See Charles Allen's God's Terrorists: The Wahhabi Cult and the Hidden Roots of Modern Jihad] Originally Posted by baron** I know, but that's not really my point. The diversionary tactics are always applied to Islamic topics, never any other religion, so much so that you can bet the second post in any Islamic thread will be attempting to drag the topic OT. Let me know when someone posts a thread about the murders and attempted murders of people claimed to be witches by Christians in Africa, with the title "The Religion of 'Turn the Other Cheek' Strikes Again", and I'll be right there saying the same things I am here. As I have, in fact, done in other threads before, where Christianity (and especially individual believing Christians) have been attacked. And even that kind of thread would at least be far more justified in its blame of a religion than this trainwreck of nonsense. Weirdly, all the atheists here with such a self-proclaimed disdain for "Abrahamic religions" who are so quick to label me an "Islam Apologist" have never called me a "Christian Apologist" for those posts. It's eerily like there's a double standard or something.
	__________________ "A nation can survive with kufr, but not with zulm." - ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib "No more hurting people" - Martin William Richard Currently Reading: Righteous Victims, by Benny Morris Last edited by ANTPogo; 18th June 2012 at 06:42 PM.