23 Americans wanted for kidnapping in Italy

wes

Piliger wrote: »

So the Muslim suicide murderers always kill the 'right' people ? duh I guess they do considering the 'right' people is ...... anyone.

So your defending random murder, by pointing out that the other guy is doing the same thing...... Great defense there :rolleyes:.

I know its impossible for some people to believe, that you can be against both sides, when they both kill innocent civilians. Being agains the US killing random people doesn't equal support for the other guy doing the same.

Piliger

cloptrop wrote: »

You however say oooh he didnt fill out the proper forms . Ooooh hes gonna come and kidnap me. Ooooh they are like Hitler.

Its hilarious when people accuse the country that fought Hitler of being Hitler!

A small element in society are deeply uneducated and not only don't really understand history, but have no rational ability to distinguish between hate filled mass murderers and those who are battling 24/7 to stop those murderers from bombing us indiscriminately in our streets, cafes, school and trains and busses.

American may be flawed but they are the ones holding the line against these slaughtering haters and I will throw my cap in with the US any day of the week.

They drop in and capture these killers in countries who haven't a clue how to deal with them - trying to treat them like every day burglars through the courts instead of as global organised terrorists.

The only way to deal with them is to kill them where they stand or capture them and take them somewhere safe where they can extract more information from them. These are not combatants and have no protection from the Geneva Convention. They are just filthy dirty mass murderers and pedlars of hate.

Pyr0

Lads, just ignore czx, he's clearly a troll.

Maybe he'd change his mind if his house was a suspected terrorist hideout based upon "best intelligence" and had his family blown to pieces. There'd be no problems of course, 'Merica is just ridding the world of suspected terrorists.

Piliger

wes wrote: »

So your defending random murder, by pointing out that the other guy is doing the same thing...... Great defense there :rolleyes:.

Except there is nothing random about the excellent extraction policy.

I know its impossible for some people to believe, that you can be against both sides, when they both kill innocent civilians. Being against the US killing random people doesn't equal support for the other guy doing the same.

Except the US is killing targeted terrorists, not 'random people'.

Equating what they do when small mistakes are made, which will always happen, is to fail utterly to grasp the meaning of context and proportionality. Either that or just intentionally ignore it.

Piliger

Pyr0 wrote: »

'Merica is just ridding the world of suspected terrorists.

Now you have it !

czx says it exactly right.

Pyr0

Piliger wrote: »

Now you have it !

czx says it exactly right.

I think your sarcasm detector is faulty.

czx

Pyr0 wrote: »

Lads, just ignore czx, he's clearly a troll.

Maybe he'd change his mind if his house was a suspected terrorist hideout based upon "best intelligence" and had his family blown to pieces. There'd be no problems of course, 'Merica is just ridding the world of suspected terrorists.

The London 7/7 bombings hit close enough for me, thanks. If only the CIA got those guys first.

Nice job ignoring me. It's America.

Nodin

czx wrote: »

The London 7/7 bombings hit close enough for me, thanks. If only the CIA got those guys first.

Nice job ignoring me. It's America.

Do please tell us how you know the quality of the intelligence the US uses....we're dying to know.

czx

Nodin wrote: »

Not really seeing how what you quoted relates to what you're saying. And that wouldn't be for the first time.

You're partial to a bit of IRA action, no?

Nodin

czx wrote: »

You're partial to a bit of IRA action, no?

Are you trying to say I like to have sex with provos there or.....?

czx

Nodin wrote: »

Do please tell us how you know the quality of the intelligence the US uses....we're dying to know.

I don't know. But I haven't seen any 9/11s recently.

czx

Nodin wrote: »

Are you trying to say I like to have sex with provos there or.....?

If it extends that far maybe. Whatever freedom fighters get you off.

wes

Piliger wrote: »

Except there is nothing random about the excellent extraction policy.

Except that there killing people whom they have no idea who they are.

So unless you can dispute the links I provided early, its safe to say your simply wrong.

Piliger wrote: »

Except the US is killing targeted terrorists, not 'random people'.

There not killing terrorists. They have admitted to killing people, who they had no idea who they were.

Secondly, they have attacked funerals and rescue workers, which you know if the other guy does it, is called terrorism.

Thirdly the US defines a "terrorist" killed in a drone attack, as any military age male:

US drone strikes target rescuers in Pakistan – and the west stays silent

and

Secret ‘Kill List’ Proves a Test of Obama’s Principles and Will

--SNIP--
It is also because Mr. Obama embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties that did little to box him in. It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants, according to several administration officials, unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.
--SNIP--

So they kill people and call them terrorists, until proven otherwise. To claim that the US doesn't kill civilians on purpose at this point is absurd. Redefining a combatant, so that it includes a lot of civilians, so as to claim that none were killed is pretty straight forward intent to try and hide the purposeful murder of civilians.

Piliger wrote: »

Equating what they do when small mistakes are made, which will always happen, is to fail utterly to grasp the meaning of context and proportionality. Either that or just intentionally ignore it.

There not small mistakes, but deliberate policy. To ignore the blatant attacks on civilians, including rescue workers and funerals, and call them small mistakes, is tantamount to support for those policies, and is the same sorry excuses for murder of civlians as long as its the US that does it.

Nodin

czx wrote: »

I don't know. But I haven't seen any 9/11s recently.

...which is a logical fallacy, as it makes a number of assumptions and presumptions.

If you haven't any notion as to the quality of US intelligence, how can you baldly state "no" when it was compared to the sort that was used to justify the invasion of Iraq?

wes

czx wrote: »

I don't know. But I haven't seen any 9/11s recently.

Reminds me of a Simpsons quote:

Homer: Well, there’s not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol is sure doing its job.
Lisa: That’s specious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: Thank you, sweetie.
Lisa: Dad, what if I were to tell you that this rock keeps away tigers.
Homer: Uh-huh, and how does it work?
Lisa: It doesn’t work. It’s just a stupid rock.
Homer: I see.
Lisa: But you don’t see any tigers around, do you?
Homer: Lisa, I’d like to buy your rock.

czx

wes wrote: »

Except that there killing people whom they have no idea who they are.

So unless you can dispute the links I provided early, its safe to say your simply wrong.



There not killing terrorists. They have admitted to killing people, who they had no idea who they were.

Secondly, they have attacked funerals and rescue workers, which you know if the other guy does it, is called terrorism.

Thirdly the US defines a "terrorist" killed in a drone attack, as any military age male:

US drone strikes target rescuers in Pakistan – and the west stays silent

and



So they kill people and call them terrorists, until proven otherwise. To claim that the US doesn't kill civilians on purpose at this point is absurd. Redefining a combatant, so that it includes a lot of civilians, so as to claim that none were killed is pretty straight forward intent to try and hide the purposeful murder of civilians.



There not small mistakes, but deliberate policy. To ignore the blatant attacks on civilians, including rescue workers and funerals, and call them small mistakes, is tantamount to support for those policies, and is the same sorry excuses for murder of civlians as long as its the US that does it.

What does the US have to gain from targeting civilians? Apart from sating their bloodlust...

czx

wes wrote: »

Reminds me of a Simpsons quote:

Nice. Except, unlike a rock, the CIA were pretty active in Milan by the looks of things

wes

czx wrote: »

What does the US have to gain from targeting civilians?

So that they can be seen to be doing something to protect there people. Its not to dissimilar to the security theatre we see nowadays. If a bunch of civilians are killed, they will just call them terrorists, and exonerate themselves of any wrong doing.

czx wrote: »

Apart from sating their bloodlust...

Yes, I have been calling the US blood thristy monsters... Oh wait, I haven't said that all, and this is just another silly strawman, from someone who simply isn't able to dispute the presented facts.

Nodin

czx wrote: »

Nice. Except, unlike a rock, the CIA were pretty active in Milan by the looks of things

I'm sure they're active in a number of places with regards to any number of issues. However, unless you can prove direct linkage, it doesn't make your statement any less fallacious.

If you haven't any notion as to the quality of US intelligence, how can you baldly state "no" when it was compared to the sort that was used to justify the invasion of Iraq?

ShaneScouse

czx wrote: »

Nice. Except, unlike a rock, the CIA were pretty active in Milan by the looks of things

Haha love that simpsons Quote. Also Id trust my life with a big mossy rock over the CIA anydays sir.

At least rocks aren't blowing up countless civilians inc. children in yemen with drone strikes as we speak

czx

ShaneScouse wrote: »

Haha love that simpsons Quote. Also Id trust my life with a big mossy rock over the CIA anydays sir.

At least rocks aren't blowing up countless civilians inc. children in yemen with drone strikes as we speak

Rocks have definitely killed more people than the CIA. They are often thrown at people as punishment in certain places.

wes

czx wrote: »

Nice. Except, unlike a rock, the CIA were pretty active in Milan by the looks of things

So the guy they grabbed was planning a 9/11 attack? Wow, you should show us this proof you have then.....

Nodin

czx wrote: »

Rocks have definitely killed more people than the CIA. They are often thrown at people as punishment in certain places.

Yeah, very funny. Any reason you can't answer the question I've linked below?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80881266&postcount=115

nacho libre

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/30/us-drone-haqqani-commander-pakistani?intcmp=239

just seen this guy was killed last month. this is big news, i'm sure most reading will agree with me on this. no doubt it will be the subject of conversation for many of you tonight:pac:

wes

nacho libre wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/aug/30/us-drone-haqqani-commander-pakistani?intcmp=239

just seen this guy was killed last month. this is big news, i'm sure most reading will agree with me on this. no doubt it will be the subject of conversation for many of you tonight:pac:

Yeah, and let ignore all the civilians they murder:

US drone attacks killing civilians constitute 'war crimes' says top UN official in Geneva

czx

Nodin wrote: »

...which is a logical fallacy, as it makes a number of assumptions and presumptions.

If you haven't any notion as to the quality of US intelligence, how can you baldly state "no" when it was compared to the sort that was used to justify the invasion of Iraq?

The size of the intelligence network, amount of people working on it, budget etc. The scrutiny their under too would play a part. They most definitely do not want another large scale terrorist attack.

The primary reason being that it doesn't make sense for the US to have a murder-civilians policy

czx

Nodin wrote: »

Yeah, very funny. Any reason you can't answer the question I've linked below?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80881266&postcount=115

Nothing funny about it. It does happen.

nacho libre

wes wrote: »

Yeah, and let ignore all the civilians they murder:

US drone attacks killing civilians constitute 'war crimes' says top UN official in Geneva

wes, you're under a misapprehension, i don't condone deliberately murdering civilians, depending on the actors involved. irrespective of the morality of it, it's likely counterproductive from a military point of view in the long run.

the harsh fact is most people in ireland don't give a damn that this is going on, as evidenced by the warm reception Obama has received here. he is seen as radically different to Bush in Ireland, yet he is continuing many of the same hawkish policy of bush, and in many cases expanding them- drone strikes, for example, have increased dramatically under his watch. whether you agree with the drone strikes or not, it is deeply hypocritical to give him a free pass on them as most of his celebrity supporters have done

having said that i'm not going to shed a tear upon reading about the killing of a guy who is responsible for dozens of suicide bombing, this as, you've mistakenly identified, does not equate to me endorsing the deliberate killing of civilians

wes

nacho libre wrote: »

having said that i'm not going to shed a tear upon reading about the killing of a guy who is responsible for dozens of suicide bombing, this as, you've mistakenly identified, does not equate to me endorsing the deliberate killing of civilians

Fair enough my bad then.

The Highwayman

czx wrote: »

What does the US have to gain from targeting civilians? Apart from sating their bloodlust...

You may direct that question to Julian Assange who will in all probability face the death penalty for telling the truth about america

Oregano_State

There are two issues going on here:

1. The capture (kidnapping) of suspected terrorists in European countries by the CIA, without trial or evidence, and their subsequent imprisonment.

2. The killing of civilians in the middle east/Pakistan by drone strikes.

1:
From a legal and moral perspective the practice is wrong. Im practise, putting international terrorists on trial is very tricky, and could take too long to stop a potential attack.

2:
czx seems very hung up over the allegation that the US has a policy of targeting civilians. This is not the issue at all.

I don't believe that the US deliberately targets civilians, more that it has deliberately relaxed both its definition of a terrorist/insurgent and its criteria for making sure a target is who they think it is before initiating a strike.

I don't like that they have done this, and I think it is horrifying that a country who claims to be protecting the western world is willing to sacrifice so many innocent people in order to get what they want done.

If they could increase their intelligence requirements before sending the drones in, this would improve matters.
The policy of targeting funeral goers is pretty disrespectful, and while they may see it as the only/best way to kill their top targets, it is morally wrong.

All in all, I'm very against America's operating tactics, but something has to be done.

Son Of A Vidic

czx wrote: »

it doesn't make sense for the US to have a murder-civilians policy

It's not so much that they have a policy, but more that they just don't give a shít. Ever figure out why the post 'liberation' honeymoon periods ended in Iraq or Afghanistan?

The US invented the expression 'Collateral Damage' few years ago. Quite a nice little invention it was too, because it makes the unnecessary death of innocent civilians almost consumer friendly and more palatable for the TV audience.

Think of it as a license to shoot, let's say there are three suspected bad guys in a house. So obliterate it and the five house around it. So what that twenty civilians died in their beds, they got the bad guys after all didn't they? The civilians were merely 'collateral damage'. So multiple this by a couple of hundred or even thousand times and you end up with a so called 'liberator' becoming the enemy.

Nodin

czx wrote: »

The size of the intelligence network, amount of people working on it, budget etc. The scrutiny their under too would play a part. They most definitely do not want another large scale terrorist attack.

.......

All of which was true pre-Iraq. Not a very convincing argument.

Piliger

wes wrote: »

There not small mistakes, but deliberate policy. To ignore the blatant attacks on civilians, including rescue workers and funerals, and call them small mistakes, is tantamount to support for those policies, and is the same sorry excuses for murder of civlians as long as its the US that does it.

Tiny mistakes that are not significant in the war on these murderers. I support the US policies. I support their lifting of these killers and transporting them to where they get more information extracted. I support it. We need more of it. Thank goodness for the US. We need to wipe these murderers off the planet, and if a few innocent people get in the way ... that's how it has to be.

czx

The Highwayman wrote: »

You may direct that question to Julian Assange who will in all probability face the death penalty for telling the truth about america

Don't worry about Julian, he'll be fine. Ecuador will suit him.

czx

Oregano_State wrote: »

All in all, I'm very against America's operating tactics, but something has to be done.

You seem like a reasonable guy, what do you think should be done?

czx

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Ever figure out why the post 'liberation' honeymoon periods ended in Iraq or Afghanistan?

Extreme sectarian violence?

wes

Piliger wrote: »

Tiny mistakes that are not significant in the war on these murderers.

Tiny mistake? So nice of you view the lives of the victims of the US, in such a fashion. It nice to know how worthless they are. BTW, the US are murder's, and there policy is one of deliberate murder. I have shown this several time already, via multiple examples, and your response, as has been the general response of those defending the US murderous actions, is that you are right on your say so alone.

Piliger wrote: »

I support the US policies.

You support murder and terror then.

Piliger wrote: »

I support their lifting of these killers and transporting them to where they get more information extracted. I support it. We need more of it. Thank goodness for the US. We need to wipe these murderers off the planet, and if a few innocent people get in the way ... that's how it has to be.

So nice of you to support the death of innocent people, and there deliberate murder. You really are no position to condemn anyone at this point, considering you support for murder and terror.

Zebra3

Piliger wrote: »

Tiny mistakes that are not significant in the war on these murderers. I support the US policies. I support their lifting of these killers and transporting them to where they get more information extracted. I support it. We need more of it. Thank goodness for the US. We need to wipe these murderers off the planet, and if a few innocent people get in the way ... that's how it has to be.

Do you also support the US when it overthrows democratic governments, when it facilitates dictators using chemical weapons on civilians and when it trains up "security services" of dictators to teach them how to torture pro-democracy supporters?

Piliger

wes wrote: »

T
So nice of you to support the death of innocent people, and there deliberate murder. You really are no position to condemn anyone at this point, considering you support for murder and terror.

Zebra3 wrote: »

Do you also support the US when it overthrows democratic governments, when it facilitates dictators using chemical weapons on civilians and when it trains up "security services" of dictators to teach them how to torture pro-democracy supporters?

A bunch of apologists for mass murderers. That's all you are. The US will take them out as and when needed. And the civilised people of Europe will support them.

Nodin

Piliger wrote: »

A bunch of apologists for mass murderers. That's all you are. The US will take them out as and when needed. And the civilised people of Europe will support them.

Who are the "civilised people" of Europe?

Zebra3

Nodin wrote: »

Who are the "civilised people" of Europe?

The people who support kidnapping, torture, and the bombing of faraway countries where the natives have a different skin colour.

Capt'n Midnight

How Americans have been killed by terrorists ?
Especially if you exclude acts of terror planned by members of families with close business ties to the US president.

How many civilians have died in the War on Terror ?
Iraq alone has one million excess deaths.

The reality is that worldwide governments kill a lot more people than terrorists.

If there is no accountability then there is no pressure on those people to behave.

For those who argue that the ends justify the means the counter argument is that the perps should stand up and be counted in a court of law afterwards. Until that happens it's just a licence to kill.

26,369 people were killed during Program Phoenix many tortured to death. One of the things that has changed is that nowadays they are better at keeping quiet about it.

Zebra3

More on America's War of Terror.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/outrage-at-cias-deadly-double-tap-drone-attacks-8168232.html

czx

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

How many civilians have died in the War on Terror ?
Iraq alone has one million excess deaths.

Sectarian violence being the majority, not US strikes.

Piliger

czx wrote: »

Sectarian violence being the majority, not US strikes.

The Majority ? No. Virtually 100%. The rest are terrorist combatants and Saddam's army.

Nodin

Piliger wrote: »

The Majority ? No. Virtually 100%. The rest are terrorist combatants and Saddam's army.

So the US killed no civillians? You've proof of this, I trust....

czx

Piliger wrote: »

The Majority ? No. Virtually 100%. The rest are terrorist combatants and Saddam's army.

Thanks for being more specific.

Oregano_State

czx wrote: »

Sectarian violence being the majority, not US strikes.

Sectarian violence?? There was little or none of that before the US came in and overthrew Saddam. Granted, he was no saint. But at least the country was relatively stable.

The actual STATE of that country now. Ridiculous.

nachocheese

Italy should send an elite military unit into the US to capture these guys as they claim to have with Osama.

Or better yet, just launch drone strikes on their suspected locations.

Sure the US would be grand with it, sure isn't it what they're doing in many parts of the world as we discuss this? They'd hardly be hypocrites, would they?