Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

One in fifty killed by US killer drones in Pakistan is a known "terrorist".

124»

Comments

  • #152
    Piliger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,741 ✭✭✭Piliger


    Jelly 292 wrote: »
    I saw a stat once, to drunk to link

    explaining a lot .....
    , in WW1, 90% casualties were Military. in 2010 90% of casualties are civilian.
    Yeah.. The Muslim fanatics hadn't warmed up in WWI, they are responsible for 99% of them in 2010. A fantastic step forward for the accuracy of Western Military.


  • #153
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    long range shooter wrote: »
    Well nothing seems to satisfiy your knowledge,maybe you should start a new site;)thats better than wiki.:D
    Maybe you are wondering about the 1979 overthrow of Irans last Monarch and the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini instead??:D

    And what is that smiley bedecked little rant meant to mean?

    The fact remains you're entirely clueless on the subject, unable to present even your own case in a coherent manner, and - other than getting across your bigotry towards muslims - are largely incomprehensible.


  • #154
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    Nodin wrote: »
    And what is that smiley bedecked little rant meant to mean?

    The fact remains you're entirely clueless on the subject, unable to present even your own case in a coherent manner, and - other than getting across your bigotry towards muslims - are largely incomprehensible.

    And here we go again,lol:D
    This is gettin better and better each time,he he
    I guess not all can handle the truth


  • #155
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    long range shooter wrote: »
    And here we go again,lol:D
    This is gettin better and better each time,he he
    I guess not all can handle the truth


    What "truth" would that be?


  • #156
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Which ones are the terrorists now? Its a bit hard to tell really.


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Which ones are the terrorists now? Its a bit hard to tell really.

    ...the ones with the least money, generally speaking.


  • #158
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Which ones are the terrorists now? Its a bit hard to tell really.
    The Americans of course.

    Scroll down.


  • #159
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Nodin wrote: »
    ...the ones with the least money, generally speaking.

    Indeed. People will evolve when they realise army and terrorists are not all that different.


  • #160
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,201 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    Piliger wrote: »
    Exactly right. An unfortunate few innocent bystanders is worth the vast majority of accurate terrorists.
    that probably aren't terrorists at all.
    Piliger wrote: »
    This is a war.
    no it isn't, its america invading countries to protect its interests at all costs to everyone else and putting fear into its people to get away with it by using (terrorism) as the excuse.

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #161
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Terrorists does not equal bad by the way. The americans are called terrorists, the muslims were and nelson madela was. Its a phrase thrown at ones enemy and its long lost its meaning.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    Nodin wrote: »
    ...the ones with the least money, generally speaking.

    Well somehow i doubt they are paying taxes:rolleyes:


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_financing


  • #163
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    long range shooter wrote: »
    Well somehow i doubt they are paying taxes:rolleyes:


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_financing

    Sorry but lol! How could someone nelson mandelas anc pay taxes if they were fighting the existing regime? The fact that an armed force pays taxes only means that they are in power nothing more. Not good not bad not anything else. People on the other side cant pay tax to the government or thwy would be caught!!


  • #164
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Sorry but lol! How could someone nelson mandelas anc pay taxes if they were fighting the existing regime? The fact that an armed force pays taxes only means that they are in power nothing more. Not good not bad not anything else. People on the other side cant pay tax to the government or thwy would be caught!!

    Is Nelson Mandela a terrorist or did i miss something;)


  • #165
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    long range shooter wrote: »
    Is Nelson Mandela a terrorist or did i miss something;)

    He was labelled one by several governments at a time including thatcher. Which illustrates my point perfectly. Whats a terrorist if a name leveled at ones enemies. Nelson's ANC put bombs in trash cans where civilians where injured. He was called a terrorist during that time and when he was in power he wasnt a terrorist aparantly.

    As I said before in the words of a hero of mine, Tony benn "there is no difference between one using a bomb to kill and another using a stealth bomber, both are killing people to further your politics."


  • #166
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    He was labelled one by several governments at a time including thatcher. Which illustrates my point perfectly. Whats a terrorist if a name leveled at ones enemies. Nelson's ANC put bombs in trash cans where civilians where injured. He was called a terrorist during that time and when he was in power he wasnt a terrorist aparantly.

    As I said before in the words of a hero of mine, Tony benn "there is no difference between one using a bomb to kill and another using a stealth bomber, both are killing people to further your politics."

    Well i was thinking more international terrorism,not the fight against apartheid in South Africa.
    And if so where does IRA and Anders Behring Breivik come into it????
    And somehow there is a difference between pollitically motivated and religious motivated terrorism.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_terrorism


  • #167
    steddyeddy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,564 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    long range shooter wrote: »
    Well i was thinking more international terrorism,not the fight against apartheid in South Africa.
    And if so where does IRA and Anders Behring Breivik come into it????
    And somehow there is a difference between pollitically motivated and religious motivated terrorism.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_terrorism

    Its a matter of how much support they have. Being killed via stealth bomber or ira bomb is the same thing to the one who dies. Both groups are using killing murder whatever to further their political aim.


  • #168
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Its a matter of how much support they have. Being killed via stealth bomber or ira bomb is the same thing to the one who dies. Both groups are using killing murder whatever to further their political aim.

    Yes true,cause in a conventinal war or IRA its politically motivated,but those who decides to become a martyr because of religious believes, thats a different motiv alltogether.


  • #169
    end of the road
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,201 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    long range shooter wrote: »
    the fight against international terrorism
    very ironic, fighting against international terrorism, by being a terrorist
    long range shooter wrote: »
    still ongoing
    and failing

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • #170
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    Nodin wrote: »
    What "truth" would that be?

    The fight against international terrorism.:D


  • #171
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    long range shooter wrote: »
    The fight against international terrorism.:D

    So more disjointed blather then. Grand.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    end of the road wrote: »
    very ironic, fighting against international terrorism, by being a terrorist

    and failing

    Cant find them on the this list,when did they add the USA here??


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Sponsors_of_Terrorism

    And failing,well Rome wasnt built in a day;)


  • #173
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    Nodin wrote: »
    So more disjointed blather then. Grand.

    Well thats the good thing about the boards.ie,we all come from different countries and different walks of life,and we all have different opinions,isnt that great:D:D:D


  • #174
    Mr Cumulonimbus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,463 ✭✭✭Mr Cumulonimbus


    long range shooter wrote: »
    Cant find them on the this list,when did they add the USA here??


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Sponsors_of_Terrorism

    And failing,well Rome wasnt built in a day;)

    Erm, because its a list drawn from one put together by the U.S. Department of State? You do realise that the last couple of wiki articles you have linked to are indicated to have serious issues re quality, citation sources, bias etc.....


  • #175
    long range shooter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,493 ✭✭✭long range shooter


    Mr Cumulonimbus wrote: »
    Erm, because its a list drawn from one put together by the U.S. Department of State? You do realise that the last couple of wiki articles you have linked to are indicated to have serious issues re quality, citation sources, bias etc.....

    Well cant find them on EU,UN or NATOs list either:rolleyes:


  • #176
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    This comes as no surprise as the UK is in bed together with the US on this so called "war on terror'.

    Britain has spent over £2bn on buying and developing deadly military drones in the last five years and is said to be spending more, as the flying devices are known for killing civilians in current US-led invasions.

    http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/09/27/263799/billions-spent-on-uk-deadly-drones/


  • #177
    enfant terrible
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,592 ✭✭✭enfant terrible


    Zebra3 wrote: »
    So America supported Iraqi war crimes. At least we can agree on that. Yet they somehow think they have the right to police the world? :rolleyes:

    They don't think they have the right to police the world, they have the power to police the world and no amount of whinging is going to change that.


  • #178
    Zebra3
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,953 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    enfant terrible wrote: »
    They don't think they have the right to police the world, they have the power to police the world and no amount of whinging is going to change that.

    If you listen to way their leaders talk, they do think they have the right.

    All self-righteous crap about them being "good" fighting "evil".


  • #179
    pablomakaveli
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,752 ✭✭✭pablomakaveli


    enfant terrible wrote: »
    They don't think they have the right to police the world, they have the power to police the world and no amount of whinging is going to change that.

    To be fair there are a lot of countries that look to them to do it as well. Look at the drug gangs in Mexico, Somali pirates and the Yugoslavian invasion of Kosovo in the 90's as examples. And i know for a fact people would have complained had they stayed out of Libya and the rebels ended up being crushed by Gaddafi.


  • #180
    The_Kew_Tour
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,424 ✭✭✭✭The_Kew_Tour


    Slurryface wrote: »
    No more cowardly than flying planes into an office block, planting car bombs, blowing up trains and buses.
    What you also seem to miss is that these drones are no less effective than using convential fighter bombers.
    personally I have zero problem with them being used, you have to fight fire with fire!

    This most be one of the most retarded posts I have ever read on AH.


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    Jelly 292
    Closed Accounts Posts: 768 ✭✭✭Jelly 292


    Piliger wrote: »
    explaining a lot .....

    Yeah.. The Muslim fanatics hadn't warmed up in WWI, they are responsible for 99% of them in 2010. A fantastic step forward for the accuracy of Western Military.

    Who pissed on your face?


    I refer to fatalities in all conflicts through the 20th century. Its very obvious, but I think you lack perception somewhat.

    Quote:

    According to a 2001 study by the International Committee of the Red Cross, the civilian to soldier death ratio in wars fought since the mid-20th century has been 10:1, meaning ten civilian deaths for every soldier death.[8]

    End Quote.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties

    why dont you move to the states, join up and sort the rag heads out?

    Internet hardman.


  • #182
    Zebra3
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,953 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    pablomakaveli wrote: »
    To be fair there are a lot of countries that look to them to do it as well. Look at the drug gangs in Mexico, Somali pirates and the Yugoslavian invasion of Kosovo in the 90's as examples. And i know for a fact people would have complained had they stayed out of Libya and the rebels ended up being crushed by Gaddafi.

    Who is patrolling drug gangs in Mexico? :confused:

    Somali pirates have been operating in international waters.

    Yugoslavia didn't "invade" Kosovo. Kosovo was part of Yougoslavia. :confused:

    The US didn't intervene in Libya, it was the British and French that did on the back of a huge trade deal signed with the opposition to overturn the deal Gadaffi signed with Italy.


  • #183
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    Interesting reading,

    A moment's reflection is enough to understand why intellectually honest people should shun the loaded metaphor.

    he Obama Administration deliberately uses the word "surgical" to describe its drone strikes. Official White House spokesman Jay Carney marshaled the medical metaphor here, saying that "a hallmark of our counterterrorism efforts has been our ability to be exceptionally precise, exceptionally surgical and exceptionally targeted." White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan attributed "surgical precision" and "laser-like focus" to the drone program. He also spoke of "delivering targeted, surgical pressure to the groups that threaten us." And a "senior administration official" told The Washington Post that "there is still a very firm emphasis on being surgical and targeting only those who have a direct interest in attacking the United States."

    They've successfully transplanted the term into public discourse about drones.

    I've been told American drone strikes are "surgical" while attending Aspen Ideas Festival panels, interviewing delegates at the Democratic National Convention, and perusing reader emails after every time I write about the innocents killed and maimed in Pakistan, Yemen, and elsewhere.

    It is a triumph of propaganda.

    Further Reading.


Advertisement