[Corsair]

Compare these two stories. Seem similar to you?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/19/mideast/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/19/iraq.main/index.html

It's almost scary...

[Moonsword]

If you fire live rounds into the air in an area where there are unannounced attack helicopter patrols, you are going to get shot at, *particularly* in a war zone.

It's an accident, if they're telling the truth, and a preventable one.  It's common sense not fire a gun unless it is on a target you intend to kill.  Even then, you may want to think twice.  Otherwise, firing a weapon with a live round could cause all sorts of problems.

[Rictor]

yeah, about 20 bucks for one of those.

And this was just a screw up. More professional soldiers wouldn't have made that mistake, but thats what you get when you have trigger-happy 19 years old straight from Texas.

[Woolie Wool]

Originally posted by an0n
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3730423.stm

Accidents happen in every war. They happened in Vietnam, in Korea, in Gulf War I, in Kosovo, etc. Besides, My Lai makes anything that happened in Iraq look like an extremely minor error. THAT was a disgrace.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Corsair
Compare these two stories. Seem similar to you?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/19/mideast/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/19/iraq.main/index.html

It's almost scary...

thats cause you have guess who taking occupation tips from guess who, with guess who's expert "consultants" over in Iraq to train guess who's soldiers in how to deal with them towelheads.

[Flipside]

You know, it's amazing, sometimes I can go for weeks without taking my passport with me wherever I go. Is it for identification purposes in Iraq or something?

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Woolie Wool


Accidents happen in every war. They happened in Vietnam, in Korea, in Gulf War I, in Kosovo, etc. Besides, My Lai makes anything that happened in Iraq look like an extremely minor error. THAT was a disgrace.

Collateral damage, right? Sort of like Nick Berg and the people in the WTC towers? If you want to make an omlete, gotta break a few eggs. Or in this case, if you want to make war.....

[Moonsword]

That's a tad more callous than I think he meant it, Rictor.  I know I didn't.  But if people (military *and* civilian) would use a little common sense, some of these idiotic 'incidents' could be avoided.

[Woolie Wool]

Originally posted by Rictor


Collateral damage, right? Sort of like Nick Berg and the people in the WTC towers? If you want to make an omlete, gotta break a few eggs. Or in this case, if you want to make war.....

I want to choke you. THERE IS A ****ING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TAKING OUT A TARGET BELIEVED TO BE HOSTILE THAT TURNS OUT TO BE INNOCENT AND KNOWINGLY KILLING INNOCENTS TO INCITE FEAR AND TERROR! The deaths of Berg and the WTC victims were not collateral damage. To the terrorists, ANYONE who does not share their beliefs is fair game and must be converted or annihalated. The helicopter was firing in self-defense but simply made a tactical error in interpreting the celebratory gunfire as hostile gunfire.

[an0n]

The people in the WTC towers are only innocent by your definition.

They were military contractors, banks keeping 3rd world countries poor, international corporations raping piss-poor countries to increase their stock.....

[Flipside]

Well, most of them weren't really An0n, they were ordinary people doing what everybody does, which is 'what you are told if you want to keep your job'. They may be guilty by association, but then, we really don't want to start walking that road,

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Woolie Wool


I want to choke you. THERE IS A ****ING DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TAKING OUT A TARGET BELIEVED TO BE HOSTILE THAT TURNS OUT TO BE INNOCENT AND KNOWINGLY KILLING INNOCENTS TO INCITE FEAR AND TERROR! The deaths of Berg and the WTC victims were not collateral damage. To the terrorists, ANYONE who does not share their beliefs is fair game and must be converted or annihalated. The helicopter was firing in self-defense but simply made a tactical error in interpreting the celebratory gunfire as hostile gunfire.

I know it was an accident, I said as much. But I do not agree with your verdict regarding the insurgents that "ANYONE who does not share their beliefs is fair game and must be converted or annihalated." Thats propaganda. Wherever there is oppression, a group forms to counter it. al Queda formed in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The various Islamic militant groups in Palestine formed in response to the Israeli occupation. I'm not saying their aims are pure and good, but it is a bit more complicated than "they are evil!!!!!!!!!!".

And differences between an intended killing and an accidental killing are marginal. You can be forgiven if you run someone over with your car....once. But not if you do it 10,000 times. More people have died as a result of "accidents" and "collateral damage" in Iraq than have died as the result of the intentional plan to kill civilians at the WTC.

You think that you can just keep saying "sorry, our bad, it was an accident" and that makes everything all better?

[an0n]

True, Flipside, most of them were probably innocent, but they accepted what they were working towards without even questioning it. A man without integrity is no man at all, and certainly no loss to mankind.

And then there's the few who weren't so innocent......

Their deaths are worth the lives of the innocents by anyones standards.

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Rictor
"ANYONE who does not share their beliefs is fair game and must be converted or annihalated." Thats propaganda.

no that's part of the definition of a fundamentalist,

sorry better luck playing semantics next time

Wherever there is oppression, a group forms to counter it.

That doesn't justify terrorist actions

al Queda formed in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The various Islamic militant groups in Palestine formed in response to the Israeli occupation. I'm not saying their aims are pure and good, but it is a bit more complicated than "they are evil!!!!!!!!!!".

"they are evil" is a simplification of: "People who intentionally target civilians, knowing that they are civilians, is committing crimes against humanity"

Someone pointing a gun at you is not a civilian, someone firing a gun at you is not a civilian, someone rigging a bomb is not a civilian - those are combatants.  Remember not all combatants are professional soldiers.

And differences between an intended killing and an accidental killing are marginal. You can be forgiven if you run someone over with your car....once. But not if you do it 10,000 times.

false analogy - say you have 10,000 targets, and you get 20 enemy combatants and 1 civilian per target destroyed - that's a pretty damn good ratio.   Put things in perspective - know what they hell you're talking about.

Rictor you simply don't know anything about military tactics or doctrine.  You really are one of the people who are like "OMG! SOMEONE WAS KILLED! STOP THE PLANET!"

More people have died as a result of "accidents" and "collateral damage" in Iraq than have died as the result of the intentional plan to kill civilians at the WTC.

however ignoring your implications the WTC was an intentional targetting of civilians in a non-combat zone.  "Collateral damage" is civilians who get caught in the cross fire in a combat zone - it happens LIVE WITH IT, "Accidents" happen in a combat zone: intentions are misunderstood, etc the best way to minimize with is SHORTEN CONFLICT [short of avoiding war, but sometimes war is necessary].  

As for today's "incident" - they fired guns into the air in a combat zone with combat aircraft overhead - they brought that fire down on them - plain and simple.

You think that you can just keep saying "sorry, our bad, it was an accident" and that makes everything all better?

You act like acidents are never going to happen - it's a LARGE combat zone with no clearly defined frontlines, people having stupid traditions like shooting guns into the air at parties - and terroristic tactics raising tensions.

If you cannot see that ANY country occupying iraq under these conditions is going to have incidents like this then you're a fool.  IT HAPPENS, **** HAPPENS - you must live with it and move on.  Accidents happen, all you can do is express regret for them


PS: Under military doctrine, and probably in a War Crimes tribunal, the pilots who fired were in the right due to the people firing weapons.

[Col. Fishguts]

Originally posted by an0n
And I'll remind you that some Americans own more firepower than the Swiss army.

...how would you know ?
That's all T3h s3kr3t

[Corsair]

Originally posted by Rictor
thats cause you have guess who taking occupation tips from guess who, with guess who's expert "consultants" over in Iraq to train guess who's soldiers in how to deal with them towelheads.

Still, it just goes to show that the Iraq situation is becoming more and more like the Israel-Palestine conflict every day...

[ionia23]

Originally posted by Rictor Collateral damage, right? Sort of like Nick Berg and the people in the WTC towers? If you want to make an omlete, gotta break a few eggs. Or in this case, if you want to make war.....

stop.

[Rictor]

Kazan: knowing full well that a war in Iraq would cost so and so many civilian lives, thats no longer an accident. In order to count something as an accident, you need to be unaware of the corcumstance which would lead to such an accident. But you know what if you are going to bomb a country for X number of days, Y number of people will die. You know that if you impose sanctions for X number of years, Y number of people will die.

Saying "sorry, **** happens" everytime is not enough. You need to stop doing what you were doing which lead to such an accident.

No, I don't care what you intended. Its plain as day that invading Iraq would, bombing it and occupying it would get a substainial number of people killed. You could even go so far as to predict the exact number, if you were a military expert on such matters.

As for peope screaming "OMG!!! SOMEONE DIES< STOP THE WORLD!!!", that seems strangely familiar. A certain nation, who shall not be named here, thought that the deaths of 3000 of its people was a world-changing events, right up there with WW2 and the Great Flood. Hey, guess what. 3000 people died in North Korea about a month ago. Is this a world crisis? Has this event changed the world forever? Will history be forever altered to remember this, the greatest of all tragedies? Nah.

You are very quick to write off civilian deaths as "just part of life". Unless, of course, we are talking about Americans. Then, its a collosal, history-altering event. How would you react if tommorow, 10,000 Americans were killed by a foreign power, lets say by Iran. How would you feel?

I don't care how the military chooses to avoid casualties. They can wage war with horses and water pistols for all I care, strategy is their job, not mine. If they are unable to avoid a staggering amount of civilian casualties, they can either change their tactics or not wage war at all. Civilians are sacred, they must not be harmed.

[Flipside]

An0n, strangely enough, to a point, I agree, I couldn't sell guns to people, because if even one of those guns is used to kill someone, I would consider myself in part responsible. However, A large percentage of admin staff really don't get to hear about what the company is 'doing' they are too wrapped up in their own little world of 'The Office' to be concerned about bigger wheels. Once again, I can see how this could be interpreted as not-caring by those who are angry enough. However, they  were guilty only of the 'crime' of growing up in a 'What difference can I make on my own?' society.

In a way we still use Gothic thinking, cathedrals were built to remind worshippers that 'God is big and you are small'.  I see many of these skyscrapers in a similar light, 'The Company is big and you are small'. I suppose my problem is that you can kill the Director, you can kill the whole controlling board, but you just can't kill the corporation or it's ideals or motives, at least, not with bombs and guns. All you can kill with those are people

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Flipside
An0n, strangely enough, to a point, I agree, I couldn't sell guns to people, because if even one of those guns is used to kill someone, I would consider myself in part responsible. However, A large percentage of admin staff really don't get to hear about what the company is 'doing' they are too wrapped up in their own little world of 'The Office' to be concerned about bigger wheels. Once again, I can see how this could be interpreted as not-caring by those who are angry enough. However, they  were guilty only of the 'crime' of growing up in a 'What difference can I make on my own?' society.

Erm, you pay taxes correct?

Originally posted by Flipside

In a way we still use Gothic thinking, cathedrals were built to remind worshippers that 'God is big and you are small'.  I see many of these skyscrapers in a similar light, 'The Company is big and you are small'. I suppose my problem is that you can kill the Director, you can kill the whole controlling board, but you just can't kill the corporation or it's ideals or motives, at least, not with bombs and guns. All you can kill with those are people

True dat, I never really thought about it that way. But you're right, thats exactly the impression that skyscrapers give off, and the parralels between religon a few hundred years ago and the corporate culture today are...astoundng.

Some day, 250 years from now, a kid will be asking his teacher "were people back then really so obsessed with corporate identity, that they used it to fill the gaps in their culture and in their existence which were meant for more meaningful things? Wow, thats wierd."