The Battle Bar, Our Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy

Originally posted by truejedi
Your only example was the attack helicopter example. That one is pretty widely publicized. You underestimate sexy and myself if you think we don't already know abut that.

Your other accusations were pretty general though.

Have you CHECKED our rules of engagement recently? To call our troops irresponsible with THOSE rules of engagement is simply irresponsible in and of itself.

By bringing up the RoE's I can tell you are missing the point. Regardless of whatever our RoE are, it has never been okay for our troops to kill innocent civilians, but it happens anyway. Yes, most of the time it's accidental, but it still happens. A lot. Are any of you going to sit here and tell me that that statement is incorrect?

then i guess i fail to see your point blax. the taliban kill more civilians than we do, and on purpose. those numbers are public, and its true.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
You're missing the point if you're only going to focus on the example I listed. I shouldn't have to list twenty examples of civilians being killed in collateral damage for you to understand what I'm talking about.

http://www.afghanconflictmonitor.org/civilian.html

This. THe majority of civilian deaths are caused by insurgents. Not by our troops.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
I don't think you understand the difference between collateral damage and straight up murder, otherwise you wouldn't attempt making such a fallacious comparison.

I don't think you understand the difference between me not understanding the difference between collateral damage and straight up murder, and them not caring.

Originally posted by truejedi
http://www.afghanconflictmonitor.org/civilian.html

This. THe majority of civilian deaths are caused by insurgents. Not by our troops.

So out of curiosity, how many Afghans and Iraqis's do you think go onto the internet and google "Who kills more civilians, Americans or the Taliban"?

You guys are failing horribly to understand that you're trying to convince the wrong person. I'm an American. My life isn't threatened every day, I have free access to non-biased information.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
I wouldn't be able to fix it, not me or this country or any other country. If history has shown us anything it's that you can't just force a culture to abandon the traditions and beliefs that they've held for substantial amounts of time. They have to change themselves. Like someone was bringing up earlier, they need to have their own little "enlightenment", or "revolution". Blowing up their houses and pointing guns at them isn't going to make them feel that they should treat their women better.

Too many people are focused on... "fixing" the world. Tend to forget that it needs to fix itself.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
So out of curiosity, how many Afghans and Iraqis's do you think go onto the internet and google "Who kills more civilians, Americans or the Taliban"?

You guys are failing horribly to understand that you're trying to convince the wrong person. I'm an American. My life isn't threatened every day, I have free access to non-biased information.

I guess I don't understand what you are suggesting then. You just said yourself that or everything the taliban does, we do worse.

Sexy pointed out we don't kill children by beheading, I pointed out they kill more civilians than we do. These 2 things didn't matter to you, so WHAT did you mean by the statement that we do worse than the Taliban?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38812422/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
This.

Too many people are focused on... "fixing" the world. Tend to forget that it needs to fix itself.

These 2 things didn't matter to you

he said:
you're trying to convince the wrong person.

Iraqi citizens that are in danger every day (and who do not have the same access to information) can be swayed by Taliban propaganda, so long as the United States makes even the slightest mistake.

So once again, what is he suggesting? I mean:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38812422/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

we do nothing: and this happens over and over again. I'd rather a few people be confused than more people die than is necessary.

Originally posted by truejedi
I guess I don't understand what you are suggesting then. You just said yourself that or everything the taliban does, we do worse.

Sexy pointed out we don't kill children by beheading, I pointed out they kill more civilians than we do. These 2 things didn't matter to you, so WHAT did you mean by the statement that we do worse than the Taliban?

Picture yourself as a 14-year old child in Afghanistan. You have no internet, you have no TV. All you know is what you see and what you hear. What you see is a bunch of blue eyed blonde haired people with guns and tanks, rolling around your neighborhood. Some of them are nice, they give you candy or some other stuff, some of them get nervous if you get too close, or move suddenly, some of them yell at you or point their guns at you. You don't really understand why their there or what they're doing, it has something to do with the Taliban, but whatever. And then, one day, you find out that one of boys who lived across from you was killed. He was the same age as you and you used to see him all the time, but he was killed that morning by the white men while going to the shop. If you understood English, then maybe you could have known that he was killed because there was a heavy firefight two blocks away from where he was, and a US attack chopper mistook him as a fleeing target with an RPG in his hands, even though it was actually just a carpet, and they opened fire, and killed him. It was an accident, US soldiers don't murder innocent people. But you don't speak English, so you don't know that. All you know is that a friend of yours was killed by those people, and he'd never done anything wrong. A week later, the same thing happens, this time you know that both of the people who were killed were actual Taliban soldiers. You knew them both, though. They were a few years older than you, but they used to play soccer with you all the time. They were nice boys. But in any case, their both dead, killed by US forces. One day you're eating breakfast in your home, and suddenly the door to your house is kicked down, and next thing you know, there's a squad of white men with guns pointed at you, your mom, and your sister. They're yelling at you in a language you don't understand. Your father runs up the stairs, some of them go after him, you hear shouting, gun fire, and a few minutes later they're carrying your father's corpse down the stairs. You knew your father was a member of the Taliban, every night he told you about the atrocities that the US commits on people, every night he told you how much they hated you because you believed in Allah and you were brown and you spoke the language that you do, and your father loved you, and treated you like his son, which you were. He also built IED's upstairs and distributed them to Taliban soldiers. When you asked him about it he would explain to you that he built them to scare the white men away, and he told you that everything he did was to serve Allah and to protect you and your sister and your mother. Maybe if you had the internet, you could go on google and go to MSNBC.com and find out that the Taliban actually killed more innocent civilians than the US did. But you don't have the internet, and you don't speak English, so all you can go on is the word of your Father and all of the other people who speak your language and have been living around you for years. Your fathers dead now, though. So what will you do? Every day you see people who look like you, act like you, and talk like you, get killed by these people from another country, who don't even really like you. Which side are you going to believe? Which side are you going to see as "the monsters"?

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Picture yourself as a 14-year old child in Afghanistan. You have no internet, you have no TV. All you know is what you see and what you hear. What you see is a bunch of blue eyed blonde haired people with guns and tanks, rolling around your neighborhood. Some of them are nice, they give you candy or some other stuff, some of them get nervous if you get too close, or move suddenly, some of them yell at you or point their guns at you. You don't really understand why their there or what they're doing, it has something to do with the Taliban, but whatever. And then, one day, you find out that one of boys who lived across from you was killed. He was the same age as you and you used to see him all the time, but he was killed that morning by the white men while going to the shop. If you understood English, then maybe you could have known that he was killed because there was a heavy firefight two blocks away from where he was, and a US attack chopper mistook him as a fleeing target with an RPG in his hands, even though it was actually just a carpet, and they opened fire, and killed him. It was an accident, US soldiers don't murder innocent people. But you don't speak English, so you don't know that. All you know is that a friend of yours was killed by those people, and he'd never done anything wrong. A week later, the same thing happens, this time you know that both of the people who were killed were actual Taliban soldiers. You knew them both, though. They were a few years older than you, but they used to play soccer with you all the time. They were nice boys. But in any case, their both dead, killed by US forces. One day you're eating breakfast in your home, and suddenly the door to your house is kicked down, and next thing you know, there's a squad of white men with guns pointed at you, your mom, and your sister. They're yelling at you in a language you don't understand. Your father runs up the stairs, some of them go after him, you hear shouting, gun fire, and a few minutes later they're carrying your father's corpse down the stairs. You knew your father was a member of the Taliban, every night he told you about the atrocities that the US commits on people, every night he told you how much they hated you because you believed in Allah and you were brown and you spoke the language that you do, and your father loved you, and treated you like his son, which you were. He also built IED's upstairs and distributed them to Taliban soldiers. When you asked him about it he would explain to you that he built them to scare the white men away, and he told you that everything he did was to serve Allah and to protect you and your sister and your mother. Maybe if you had the internet, you could go on google and go to MSNBC.com and find out that the Taliban actually killed more innocent civilians than the US did. But you don't have the internet, and you don't speak English, so all you can go on is the word of your Father and all of the other people who speak your language and have been living around you for years. Your fathers dead now, though. So what will you do? Every day you see people who look like you, act like you, and talk like you, get killed by these people from another country, who don't even really like you. Which side are you going to believe? Which side are you going to see as "the monsters"?

Okay blax, i follow and get that. But in your scenario, that boy is screwed no matter what. I can't think of a single way to win over that boy's heart or mind. Do you have any suggestions? Us packing up and going home results in this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38812422/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

and women being raped and traded like animals...

so THAT'S not an option.

Anything else?

(don't get me wrong, I think, personally, we should have bombed the crap out of everyone we wanted to kill, and gotten out of Afghanistan immediately. Their civilians shouldn't have been OUR concern. We needed a hit and get out strategy, not an occupation.

However, NOW their civilians ARE our concern, because the ones that have started helping us, and trusted us when we said we would protect them are the ones being targeted by the Taliban.

Originally posted by truejedi
[B]Okay blax, i follow and get that. But in your scenario, that boy is screwed no matter what.

"That" scenario is the scenario for an overwhelmingly large amount of people who live out there. It's not something that I just made up on the fly to support my argument, it's the norm.

I can't think of a single way to win over that boy's heart or mind. Do you have any suggestions?

If history has shown us anything it's that you can't just force a culture to abandon the traditions and beliefs that they've held for substantial amounts of time. They have to change themselves. Like someone was bringing up earlier, they need to have their own little "enlightenment", or "revolution". Blowing up their houses and pointing guns at them isn't going to make them feel that they should treat their women better.

Us packing up and going home results in this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38812422/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

and women being raped and traded like animals...

so THAT'S not an option.

Anything else?

Why is that not an option? When Europeans were a bunch of ignorant ****s who thought it was wrong for women to divorce their husbands and that adulterers should be stoned and thieves should get their hands chopped off, no armies of Muslims invaded Europe and started slapping Christians around to get them to change their ways. Christianity went through it's stages and eventually changed itself for the better. It's incredibly arrogant of us to assume that not only can we meddle in the affairs of these countries and change them, but that it's our right to do so, our responsibility. And more importantly, it's counter productive, because it doesn't work. Just like Christians raped their women and treated them like animals, and nobody stopped them, and then eventually they changed, Islam needs to go through a similar metamorphosis. Unimpeded.

And how many will die and suffer while that happens? People we could have saved by helping them.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican

Why is that not an option? When Europeans were a bunch of ignorant ****s who thought it was wrong for women to divorce their husbands and that adulterers should be stoned and thieves should get their hands chopped off, no armies of Muslims invaded Europe and started slapping Christians around to get them to change their ways. Christianity went through it's stages and eventually changed itself for the better. It's incredibly arrogant of us to assume that not only can we meddle in the affairs of these countries and change them, but that it's our right to do so, our responsibility. And more importantly, it's counter productive, because it doesn't work. Just like Christians raped their women and treated them like animals, and nobody stopped them, and then eventually they changed, Islam needs to go through a similar metamorphosis. Unimpeded.

Maybe that is because it was 500 years ago? Most of the world has grown up, the Taliban has not matured. This country doesn't need a "metamorphosis." it had advanced just fine until the taliban came along, in just the last few decades and instilled sharia law.

We have overthrown an oppressor, not changed a culture. The people WANT the freedom (e.g. my other post, about the people that are trusting us to protect them.)

And you say muslims didn't invade europe, I can only say to that:
Islam conquered the Iberian peninsula, look it up.

ALL of that said, if it is within my power to stop someone from drowning and I refuse to do so, its the same as though I killed him. I would go to prison for it.

If it is within our power to stop women from being raped (and with our boots on the ground, its close) then we have to try.

to say, let them handle it themselves would be great if they were all criminals, but they aren't. Just the taliban. We take out the taliban, and who cares if the people hate us, they are using the very freedoms we give them to protest our presence. So lets revel in their freedom itself, and not in the use of it.

Simply put, with all the people who now depend on us, since they have thrown their lot in with us, we cannot leave them. We could have bombed and left without putting boots on the ground, but we can't just leave now, or everyone who has trusted us, or helped us, will die.

It would be the same as when we left Vietnam, and all of the vietnamese who had been helping us were massacred by the Viet Cong. Because we lied about protecting them. We cannot make that mistake again.

Originally posted by Nephthys
And how many will die and suffer while that happens? People we could have saved by helping them.

Originally posted by truejedi
[B]Maybe that is because it was 500 years ago? Most of the world has grown up, the Taliban has not matured. This country doesn't need a "metamorphosis." it had advanced just fine until the taliban came along, in just the last few decades and instilled sharia law.

We have overthrown an oppressor, not changed a culture. The people WANT the freedom (e.g. my other post, about the people that are trusting us to protect them.)

And you say muslims didn't invade europe, I can only say to that:
Islam conquered the Iberian peninsula, look it up.

Muslims did not invade Europe with the intent of "fixing" it's culture.

ALL of that said, if it is within my power to stop someone from drowning and I refuse to do so, its the same as though I killed him. I would go to prison for it.

No, you wouldn't. Legally you do not have to attempt to save someone who is in trouble if it involves putting yourself or others at risk. If someone is drowning and you jump into the water you are putting yourself at risk.

But regardless, that is an American law. An American law has nothing to do with other countries. It's a poor comparison. There is no law on earth or in heaven that states that we have a responsibility to jump in to other countries' affairs.

If it is within our power to stop women from being raped (and with our boots on the ground, its close) then we have to try.

According to what?

to say, let them handle it themselves would be great if they were all criminals, but they aren't. Just the taliban. We take out the taliban

and who cares if the people hate us,

Simply put, with all the people who now depend on us, since they have thrown their lot in with us, we cannot leave them. We could have bombed and left without putting boots on the ground, but we can't just leave now, or everyone who has trusted us, or helped us, will die.

Their dying while we're there, too. Many of them by our hands, directly or otherwise.

It would be the same as when we left Vietnam, and all of the vietnamese who had been helping us were massacred by the Viet Cong. Because we lied about protecting them. We cannot make that mistake again.

Why not? Their going to get massacred anyway, wither we leave or not. Perhaps next time though, we'll think twice about jumping into other countries' affairs. It's funny that you bring up Veitnam because it supports my point. This whole thing with Afghanistan is just a repeat of Vietnam, and Vietnam showed that you can't win a fight against the people. You can beat an army, but you can't beat the people, and the Taliban isn't an army.

Originally posted by Nephthys
And how many will die and suffer while that happens? People we could have saved by helping them.