Quote :

"Irrelevant, the point is still that Israel should take the same measures any other civilized government would"

Irrelevant? The fact that people crowded around the militant's house as "shields" is the point of the discussion.
And how much more civilized can you get than warning your enemy before you bomb them?

11/21/2006 3:00:00 PM

Quote :

"No, I understand that, what I was saying was, instead of warning them so they flocked to his home, they could simply bomb his home. You can do that with RPGs and have a pretty small blast radius."

Why don't they just do what civilized countries do and arrest him and have a trial? Don't you see what is wrong with this?!

11/21/2006 4:38:10 PM

to arrest him would require going into the territory, where there would likely be a shoot out and result in more civilian deaths, give the people ( the idiot people to mobolize and still act like human shields), give time for the suspects to flee and disappear into the population. Granted the last reason is by far the weakest, cause your arguing that arresting someone is the right way to go about it.

11/21/2006 5:19:36 PM

It would probably result in more combatant deaths. We can debate about the civilians part (assuming you're counting civilians among the non-combatants, which I am).

If you're claiming that it's a hell of a lot easier to just bomb the hell out of shit, then congrats, you got it right.

11/21/2006 5:30:51 PM

Quote :

"wolfpack0122: And how much more civilized can you get than warning your enemy before you bomb them?"

Not bomb them?

On this particular topic, I think it's kick ass. It worked.

11/21/2006 5:53:05 PM

it won't work for long. the IDF isn't exactly known for their patience.

11/21/2006 6:08:21 PM

Quote :

"to arrest him would require going into the territory, where there would likely be a shoot out and result in more civilian deaths, give the people ( the idiot people to mobolize and still act like human shields), give time for the suspects to flee and disappear into the population."

I could understand that arresting someone and bringing them to court is much more trouble and more dangerous than just blowing up the city block he's on, but it doesn't matter how easy it is, it's still wrong.

Civilized countries arrest people and give them trials, Barbarian countries that we should not support, much less fund are the ones who hunt down suspected "terrorists" and bomb their homes.

[Edited on November 21, 2006 at 6:15 PM. Reason : ]

11/21/2006 6:14:55 PM

Quote :

"it won't work for long. the IDF isn't exactly known for their patience humanity."

11/22/2006 10:38:17 AM

Quote :

"Civilized countries arrest people and give them trials"

You know we kill terrorists when we find them right?
You know we killed Saddam's kids right?

Are we an uncivilized country or do you just ignore things that don't fit neatly into a box?

11/22/2006 10:41:26 AM

Quote :

"Why don't they just do what civilized countries do and arrest him and have a trial? Don't you see what is wrong with this?!"

what the fuck?

arresting enemy combatants is neither practical or how war is waged.

11/22/2006 11:25:03 AM

^^I'd say the US has its uncivilized moments.

11/22/2006 4:22:30 PM

Quote :

"You know we kill terrorists when we find them right?"

For real!? That would mean Guantanmo Bay is a holding place for zombies, I fucking knew it.

Quote :

"You know we killed Saddam's kids right?"

They were involved in a gunfight (Uday at least, he's the only one I really know about), they went in to apprehend him, and then he started shooting at him, in which case he was killed. We didn't just bomb his house.

Quote :

"arresting enemy combatants is neither practical or how war is waged"

Israel is at war? With what country?

11/22/2006 5:13:43 PM

Quote :

"For real!? That would mean Guantanmo Bay is a holding place for zombies, I fucking knew it. "

Did I put the word "all" in there or are you just playing the faulty-logic game again

Quote :

"As many as 200 American troops, later aided by Apache helicopters and an A-10 "Warthog" gunship, surrounded and fired on the house."

Yes, you're right the A-10 and the Apache's that blew the house to pieces and killed them didn't technically "just bomb the house"

11/22/2006 5:22:43 PM

Quote :

"Did I put the word "all" in there or are you just playing the faulty-logic game again"

You said we kill terrorists when we find them, that would imply that every terrorist we find will be killed. You made the mistake of not saying "some".

Quote :

"Yes, you're right the A-10 and the Apache's that blew the house to pieces and killed them didn't technically "just bomb the house""

The point is that he was killed because he was shooting at the guys who came to get him.

11/22/2006 5:25:45 PM

So, you think that in the case of the Israelis they should wait until the terrorist shoots at them, then its ok to drop the bomb?

I guess that could be arranged. A tad stupid, considering he isn't simply going to give up when they come for him.

11/22/2006 5:31:25 PM

Quote :

"I guess that could be arranged."

Sure it could, but it isn't.

Quote :

"A tad stupid, considering he isn't simply going to give up when they come for him."

It's not really stupid unless you think a government being able to bomb people's homes just because they're suspected of doing something is smart.

11/22/2006 6:10:29 PM

It makes me laugh that the best they could come up with to dissuade the bombing were a few people at the house. They couldn't shoot down the planes carrying the bombs...all they could do is round up a few volunteers to stand there...

11/23/2006 11:35:39 PM

haha those civil rights activists in the 50's were such pussies, all they could do is get sprayed down by firehoses, MLK was such a pussy

11/24/2006 12:13:24 AM

Should have just dropped the bomb anyway. They volunteered to go stand there, it's their own fault for being stupid.

11/24/2006 12:22:54 AM

That sounds like a reasonable reason for killing innocent people and killing a suspected criminal without giving him a trial.

11/24/2006 12:36:00 AM

Sounds good to me. Why do they have to give him a fair trial? This isn't the US, no one says that fair trials are required.

11/24/2006 11:52:20 AM

^^Kris, spare us the bullshit morality. They are at war. Bad shit happens. Enemy combatants don't get a trial. They get blown the fuck up.

11/24/2006 12:24:09 PM

Quote :

"This isn't the US, no one says that fair trials are required."

It's not just the US, any civilized government has fair trials, and israel isn't one of them.

Quote :

"Kris, spare us the bullshit morality. They are at war. Bad shit happens. Enemy combatants don't get a trial. They get blown the fuck up."

It's not bullshit morality to think that people deserve fair trials. Terrorists that attack us get fair trials, we don't just go to the house of a suspected terrorist and drop a bomb on it.

11/24/2006 1:01:28 PM

Quote :

"Kris, spare us the bullshit morality. They are at war."

Oh really? With what country?

Quote :

"They are at war. Bad shit happens."

This sounds like a great way to justify slaughtering innocents.

11/24/2006 1:09:59 PM

Quote :

"Oh really? With what country? "

McD, give that tired old argument a fucking rest:

http://webster.com/dictionary/war
WAR:

Quote :

"1 a (1) : a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations (2) : a period of such armed conflict (3) : STATE OF WAR b : the art or science of warfare c (1) obsolete : weapons and equipment for war (2) archaic : soldiers armed and equipped for war 2 a : a state of hostility, conflict, or antagonism b : a struggle or competition between opposing forces or for a particular end <a class war> <a war against disease> c : VARIANCE, ODDS 3 "

War doesn't have to be between two nations or states. You can be at war with a tribe. You can be at war with a neighborhood. You can be at war with a terrorist group.

Please shut the fuck up with that argument and move on to one that is less false.

11/24/2006 3:39:07 PM

Quote :

"open and declared armed hostile conflict"

The "war" on terror is niether open nor declared. You can declare yourself "at war with crime" that doesn't actually mean you're in a real war.

And regardless of whether it's an actual war or not, it's still not how things are supposed to be handled.

11/24/2006 4:12:09 PM

I have two thoughts on the best way to win a war:
The first involves not fighting it. Build up your weapons and armament and gear to such a point that the other side shits themselves and backs down. War is averted, no one gets killed.
If the war has already started--complete and total destruction. The worse and harsher it is the quicker it will be over.

11/24/2006 8:44:09 PM

Quote :

"It makes me laugh that the best they could come up with to dissuade the bombing were a few people at the house. They couldn't shoot down the planes carrying the bombs...all they could do is round up a few volunteers to stand there... "

Quote :

"If the war has already started--complete and total destruction. The worse and harsher it is the quicker it will be over. "

I don't know what you'll do in the future, but I'm pretty sure it won't be related to foreign policy.

Quote :

"And regardless of whether it's an actual war or not, it's still not how things are supposed to be handled. "

and how are things supposed to be handled? you go in and arrest everyone so you can bring them to trial? hell, why do we even have aircraft, missiles, ships, etc? All we need are 50 million MPs.

11/25/2006 11:21:51 AM

I think what he means is that Israel still conducts practices that wouldn't be okay in conventional warfare. (cluster bombs + residential areas, anybody?)

11/25/2006 11:24:43 AM