147 replies to this topic

[Peeves]

There is something drastically wrong with a 'cause' that justifies such martyrdom.
Yet, there are those that take exception when they are dealt with using a drone,....without a trial.

I suggest they be eliminated as we would plague carrying vermin. I further suggest giving such as these a trial is according them rights reserved for humans.


A suicide bomber blew himself up at a military parade rehearsal in Yemen's capital yesterday, killing more than 90 soldiers in one of the deadliest attacks in the city in years.

The bomber, dressed in military attire, made his way to the back of the military parade, near the presidential palace in Sana'a, before detonating explosives strapped to his chest. The explosion was small, but the suicide bomber's proximity to those around him meant it was devastating.

"Fifty men died right there on the spot," said Colonel Mohammed al-Kibsi, pointing to the blackened scar the bomb had left on the tarmac, his hands and uniform splattered in blood. "This was a massacre … The brave soldiers of our fatherland died this morning in cold blood."

By nightfall more than 90 men had died of their injuries.

The bombing, which wounded another 200, was the bloodiest incident in the city in years and dealt a serious blow to a political transition under way after a year of violent political upheaval that unseated Yemen's dictator, Ali Abdullah Saleh, after 33 years in office.




http://www.guardian....ide-bomb-attack

[Canuckistani]

To use a drone, you have to know who they are and where they are. To get a guy like this you'd basically have to carpet bomb the whole lot, and all the innocents along with them. Then you'd be just as evil as this guy and his ilk is.

[Peeves]

To use a drone, you have to know who they are and where they are. To get a guy like this you'd basically have to carpet bomb the whole lot, and all the innocents along with them. Then you'd be just as evil as this guy and his ilk is.

Intel points out the target, and drones are used pretty much surgically. Osama could have been 'droned', but more publicity the way it was done.* Election coming.





* I prefer the Seals since the body could be verified. Just making political hay..

[Canuckistani]

Exactly. Are you saying they had intel on this bomber and could have taken him out with a drone? That wa my point, for bombers like this drones are useless.

[Signals.Cpl]

Exactly. Are you saying they had intel on this bomber and could have taken him out with a drone? That wa my point, for bombers like this drones are useless.

Depends on when and where you get him. If you find that a bomber is going in to a school, send in tactical team if a suicide bomber is going to a school but is still some distance from his or her target then using a drone to kill the suicide bomber is better as long as you can ensure no civilian casualties.

[Canuckistani]

Depends on when and where you get him. If you find that a bomber is going in to a school, send in tactical team if a suicide bomber is going to a school but is still some distance from his or her target then using a drone to kill the suicide bomber is better as long as you can ensure no civilian casualties.

No doubt. If they knew the bomber referred to in the OP was going to suicide bomb, they would have taken steps to prevent it. My point has been that to say

There is something drastically wrong with a 'cause' that justifies such martyrdom.
Yet, there are those that take exception when they are dealt with using a drone,....without a trial.

I suggest they be eliminated as we would plague carrying vermin. I further suggest giving such as these a trial is according them rights reserved for humans.

misses the point - can't use drones or any other means to stop somebody you don't know what they plan to do. Who are we eliminating, and how? I thought we were doing our best to do just that in Astan, but it hasn't worked out all that well. And it won't unless we're willing to "destroy Afghanistan in order to save it." (What was that about Nam all over again?)

[Signals.Cpl]

No doubt. If they knew the bomber referred to in the OP was going to suicide bomb, they would have taken steps to prevent it. My point has been that to say misses the point - can't use drones or any other means to stop somebody you don't know what they plan to do. Who are we eliminating, and how? I thought we were doing our best to do just that in Astan, but it hasn't worked out all that well. And it won't unless we're willing to "destroy Afghanistan in order to save it." (What was that about Nam all over again?)

What was done in Afghanistan was and is a political failure. ISAF has been fighting for the last decade with their hands tied behind their backs, and as a result Afghanistan is the way it is. The political side never had a clear idea what they wanted to do and how they wanted to do it, if there was a strategy on what the political leadership wanted to do the military could do their job.


To stop people like that we need to invest more in intelligence and training the countries that are affected by terrorists.

[Canuckistani]

Sounds good. Except Astan is in no shape to defeat the terrorists, no matter how much we train them. The people's will isn't there, because the Taliban were preferable to the warlords, and there seems to be no other option at the moment for the country. And as long as Pstan remains a refuge for the Taliban, there isn't much we can do about it. We should have defeated Al Qaeda there, captured Bin Laden ourselves instead of contracting that job out, and gone home.

[GostHacked]

Depends on when and where you get him. If you find that a bomber is going in to a school, send in tactical team if a suicide bomber is going to a school but is still some distance from his or her target then using a drone to kill the suicide bomber is better as long as you can ensure no civilian casualties.

You will never be able to ensure anyone that there will not be civilian casualties. That's nicely termed 'collateral damage'.

We've seen how well that has worked out in Afghanistan. As well as Pakistan (24+ soldiers killed in drone strike) .....

[Signals.Cpl]

You will never be able to ensure anyone that there will not be civilian casualties. That's nicely termed 'collateral damage'.

We've seen how well that has worked out in Afghanistan. As well as Pakistan (24+ soldiers killed in drone strike) .....

Which incident are you referring to? Because if its the one where 24 Pakistani soldiers who died after opening fire on an Afghan Army Patrol all I have to ask is, what kind of genius fires on the soldiers and expects no return fire? If the Pakistani soldiers were sitting there just minding their own business its one thing, when they opened fire on an Nato-Afghan patrol I would expect the Afghans to return fire and the Americans to provide any and all assistance they could. If it was Canadian Soldiers under attack I would expect the same from them, protecting and assisting ANA forces.

[Signals.Cpl]

Sounds good. Except Astan is in no shape to defeat the terrorists, no matter how much we train them. The people's will isn't there, because the Taliban were preferable to the warlords, and there seems to be no other option at the moment for the country. And as long as Pstan remains a refuge for the Taliban, there isn't much we can do about it. We should have defeated Al Qaeda there, captured Bin Laden ourselves instead of contracting that job out, and gone home.

Sorry you have me confused, who did we contract the job to?

[jbg]

There is something drastically wrong with a 'cause' that justifies such martyrdom.
Yet, there are those that take exception when they are dealt with using a drone,....without a trial.*************
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/21/sanaa-suicide-bomb-attack

It may have been cruel, but it did a lot to help the Palestinians.

[Signals.Cpl]

It may have been cruel, but it did a lot to help the Palestinians.

Suicide bombers or drones? I don't think either of those helped one bit.

[dre]

What was done in Afghanistan was and is a political failure. ISAF has been fighting for the last decade with their hands tied behind their backs, and as a result Afghanistan is the way it is. The political side never had a clear idea what they wanted to do and how they wanted to do it, if there was a strategy on what the political leadership wanted to do the military could do their job.


To stop people like that we need to invest more in intelligence and training the countries that are affected by terrorists.

The real failure was ignoring what kind of country Afghanistan is. We went in there talking about "liberal democracies" and tried to set up a strong central government. But thats never how the place has worked. Even the Taliban only controlled a small portion of the country when they were in charge. Most the the real power rests with regional warlords.

There simply is no revenue stream there that can support a strong central government. We should have just supported the Northern alliance and all the other various regional powers that were ALREADY fighting the Taliban long before 911.

What in the ever loving fuck are Canadian soldiers even DOING in AssCrackistan? Good lord.

Edited by dre, 23 May 2012 - 09:20 PM.

[Canuckistani]

Sorry you have me confused, who did we contract the job to?

The US hired locals to go after Bin Laden. My guess is they took the money, got some more from BL to not find him.