Evil terrorists burn 13 year old child alive

Zebra3

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/10/u-s-media-13-year-old-yemeni-boy-killed-u-s-drone/

Looks like the media are totally ignoring the horrendous murder of this poor child.

His father and brother were murdered in the same way by the same evil bastards.

Gatling

Zebra3 wrote: »

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/10/u-s-media-13-year-old-yemeni-boy-killed-u-s-drone/

Looks like the media are totally ignoring
the horrendous murder of this poor child.

His father and brother were murdered in the same way by the same evil bastards.

Bad guys get nuked

In the words of Justin timberlake

"Cry me a river"

fedor.2.

Gatling wrote: »

Bad guys get nuked

In the words of Justin timberlake

"Cry me a river"

Harsh

jimboblep

Well that seems like a very balanced article from an unbiased source
just one point the hellfire missile is an explosive not an incendiary missile so saying he burned to death is factually wrong.
and if they got that wrong what else is wrong in the article

DeadHand

There is a critical difference between people being killed accidentally as collateral damage in a strike on combatants and people being deliberately tortured to death and their final moments broadcast around the world as propaganda.


While we're on the subject of the media ignoring certain issues, why is the organised, mass rape and torture of indigenous children by Muslim men in England being ignored by the mainstream media?

AlanS181824

That article is totally the opposite of being one sided.... Yeah no.

kneemos

Blown to bits,burned,crippled,what happens when bombs are dropped.
Hardly a revelation .

Tugboats

Zebra3 wrote: »

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/10/u-s-media-13-year-old-yemeni-boy-killed-u-s-drone/

Looks like the media are totally ignoring the horrendous murder of this poor child.

His father and brother were murdered in the same way by the same evil bastards.

Did you provide the wrong link I cant see the child burning alive?

Luke92

Going by some of his other posts it sounds like he wrote the article. Sure Isis are only being terrorists because of the Americans. Its all the Americans fault!

JC01

Zebra3 wrote: »

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/02/10/u-s-media-13-year-old-yemeni-boy-killed-u-s-drone/

Looks like the media are totally ignoring the horrendous murder of this poor child.

His father and brother were murdered in the same way by the same evil bastards.

You throw the term murder around an awful lot. I seriously struggle to beleive the U.S. randomly blows up "innocent farmers" for the crac. Twould be a very expensive pass time. War is a dirty violent nasty thing, be thankful some other country is waging it so you can sit at home in comfort and scream about how evil they are.

I'm far from a fan of Americas foreign policy but I hate this hipster anti-USA crap from people who are often incredibly ignorant of the facts of the situation.

Hermy

DeadHand wrote: »

There is a critical difference between people being killed accidentally as collateral damage in a strike on combatants and people being deliberately tortured to death and their final moments broadcast around the world as propaganda.

One difference is that some people are more tolerant of the term collateral damage than others. Perhaps if that collateral damage was broadcast around the world some people might think differently about it.

Manic Moran

Yemen is particularly well known for the use of child soldiers. Age may not be massively relevant, but even in the event that he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, the question then becomes 'why was the weapon fired in the first place?'

Hermy

Manic Moran wrote: »

...the question then becomes 'why was the weapon fired in the first place?'

An American solution to an American problem?

Zebra3

JC01 wrote: »

You throw the term murder around an awful lot. I seriously struggle to beleive the U.S. randomly blows up "innocent farmers" for the crac. Twould be a very expensive pass time. War is a dirty violent nasty thing, be thankful some other country is waging it so you can sit at home in comfort and scream about how evil they are.

I'm far from a fan of Americas foreign policy but I hate this hipster anti-USA crap from people who are often incredibly ignorant of the facts of the situation.

The U.S. attacks in Yemen are war crimes. If you're happy enough to turn a blind eye to things like that.....

Zebra3

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yemen is particularly well known for the use of child soldiers. Age may not be massively relevant, but even in the event that he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, the question then becomes 'why was the weapon fired in the first place?'

No, the question is why isn't the U.S. being investigated for violating international law.

Tugboats

Zebra3 wrote: »

The U.S. attacks in Yemen are war crimes. If you're happy enough to turn a blind eye to things like that.....

Zebra3 wrote: »

No, the question is why isn't the U.S. being investigated for violating international law.

Any chance of getting that link to the child being killed by evil terrorists?

Venus In Furs

Gatling wrote: »

Bad guys get nuked

In the words of Justin timberlake

"Cry me a river"

So bad-ass.

ireland.man

DeadHand wrote: »

There is a critical difference between people being killed accidentally as collateral damage in a strike on combatants and people being deliberately tortured to death and their final moments broadcast around the world as propaganda.


While we're on the subject of the media ignoring certain issues, why is the organised, mass rape and torture of indigenous children by Muslim men in England being ignored by the mainstream media?

Check up the use of intentional 'double tap' attacks by the US military against paramedics in Afghanistan and elsewhere.

Gummy Panda

I'd be more worried about these drones becoming self aware

goose2005

DeadHand wrote: »

There is a critical difference between people being killed accidentally as collateral damage in a strike on combatants and people being deliberately tortured to death and their final moments broadcast around the world as propaganda.

Is there such a difference for the victim? Moreover, by those standards all the 9-11 dead were just collateral damage.

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yemen is particularly well known for the use of child soldiers. Age may not be massively relevant, but even in the event that he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, the question then becomes 'why was the weapon fired in the first place?'

It's common whenever children or civilians are killed to claim that they were spies or secretly soldiers. No evidence. Why was the weapon fired? When all you have is a hammer...

goose2005

JC01 wrote: »

You throw the term murder around an awful lot. I seriously struggle to beleive the U.S. randomly blows up "innocent farmers" for the crac. Twould be a very expensive pass time. War is a dirty violent nasty thing, be thankful some other country is waging it so you can sit at home in comfort and scream about how evil they are.

I'm far from a fan of Americas foreign policy but I hate this hipster anti-USA crap from people who are often incredibly ignorant of the facts of the situation.

I hate this hipster pro-USA crap. How on earth does the endless US/UK wars make the world, or me, safer? When (not if) an Irish Muslim blows up a bus it will be because of these constant wars.

BlaasForRafa

When the western allies invaded france in 1944 the SS Hitler-Youth division occupied parts of the city of Caen. In the battle to drive them from the city 2000 french civilians were killed in allied air raids. Should the allies have abstained from attacking the Waffen SS with air power due to the risk to civilians?

JONJO THE MISER

These left wing idiots really annoy me, without America they could be living under the rule of some savages, we would see would they be getting there skinny lates then.
If anything the U.S are not carrying out enough drone attacks.

BlaasForRafa

goose2005 wrote: »

Is there such a difference for the victim? Moreover, by those standards all the 9-11 dead were just collateral damage.

You obviously don't understand what the term collateral damage means.

goose2005 wrote: »

It's common whenever children or civilians are killed to claim that they were spies or secretly soldiers. No evidence. Why was the weapon fired? When all you have is a hammer...

Whenever guerillas/terrorists are killed it's common for their relatives/neighbours/fellow-travellers to claim that they were civilians/just-mind-their-own-business.

goose2005 wrote: »

I hate this hipster pro-USA crap. How on earth does the endless US/UK wars make the world, or me, safer? When (not if) an Irish Muslim blows up a bus it will be because of these constant wars.

Lol, that's the first time I've ever heard the term hipster in this context. If anything the hipster stance would surely be the anti-american types that seem to frequent AH and put forth innumerable nonsensical rants.

Patser

Take a look at this OP

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-31425384

Just a general news piece about Obama saying ISIS will lose. But look at the picture of the ISIS APC near the top of the piece. It's an armoured vehicle, flying the ISIS flag with Armed men on board. It's a perfectly legitimate target for an air strike. Now zoom in on the person beside the man in the turret. It's a young child. Out for a spin, in a tank operated by a terrorist organusation in a war zone.

There's collateral damage. A drone or bomber only sees a tank with armed men.

Guy:Incognito

I never get the outrage about drones tbh. The way people go on about them like theyre the worst thing in the world. Its ok to kill someone with a bomb as long as the bomb was flown there in a plane with a pilot.


if you had a job that was dangerous and had the option of doing it by remote control I'd imagine quite a high percentage of people would be happy with that.

JC01

Zebra3 wrote: »

The U.S. attacks in Yemen are war crimes. If you're happy enough to turn a blind eye to things like that.....

What's the end of that sentance? I'm quite happy to see America blow extremists back to the Stone Age no matter what country they are hiding in. I'm just not naive enough to think this can be done without innocents dying in the process.

JC01

goose2005 wrote: »

I hate this hipster pro-USA crap. How on earth does the endless US/UK wars make the world, or me, safer? When (not if) an Irish Muslim blows up a bus it will be because of these constant wars.

Will it not be because an Irish Muslim has decided to blow up a bus?

And beleive me I'm far from pro-USA.

Venus In Furs

JONJO THE MISER wrote: »

These left wing idiots really annoy me, without America they could be living under the rule of some savages, we would see would they be getting there skinny lates then.
If anything the U.S are not carrying out enough drone attacks.

Which left wing idiots? Which savages? Why not enough drone attacks? The above post just seems pieced together with various meaningless soundbites.

Captain Chaos

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I never get the outrage about drones tbh. The way people go on about them like theyre the worst thing in the world. Its ok to kill someone with a bomb as long as the bomb was flown there in a plane with a pilot.


if you had a job that was dangerous and had the option of doing it by remote control I'd imagine quite a high percentage of people would be happy with that.

I don't get it either with drones. They are piloted my remote so what, there is still a man/woman in the loop for targeting and weapon release.

The US have been using TV guided smart bombs since the 60s where the guy in the back seat of the jet steers the bomb via remote as its falling with a datalink display of the bomb's point of view right until impact.

What about Tomahawk missiles, they fly 100s of miles pre programmed with a route to fly and where the target it's intended to hit roughly is and what it looks like. The missile's autopilot does the rest, that is smarter than any ucav drone.

goose2005

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

You obviously don't understand what the term collateral damage means.

Al-Qaeda targeted the economic, political and military headquarters of the US. A few thousand civilian deaths. Exactly what happened when Baghdad was attacked.

Whenever guerillas/terrorists are killed it's common for their relatives/neighbours/fellow-travellers to claim that they were civilians/just-mind-their-own-business.

Yep, but that's also what happens when innocent people are killed.

Karl Stein

JC01 wrote: »

be thankful some other country is waging it so you can sit at home in comfort and scream about how evil they are.

Be thankful for those that destabilise a region by invading countries based on lies, leaving power vacuums that are filled by murderous scum like ISIS and the Taliban, then they increase surveillance on all of us because terror terror terror?

Be thankful? They can fuck off.

Egginacup

jimboblep wrote: »

Well that seems like a very balanced article from an unbiased source
just one point the hellfire missile is an explosive not an incendiary missile so saying he burned to death is factually wrong.
and if they got that wrong what else is wrong in the article

Intriguing and yet pedantically correct.

I remember this kind of argument, or perhaps it was a heated debate with a clown in New York one time. He said through slugs of his cheap beer that the US never lost a war. I asked him if he ever heard of a tiny little conflict called Vietnam. His answer was that "That wasn't a war, it was a 'police action', and it was never declared, so there...we ain't never lost a war!"

I'm sure this winner is working on his Pulitzer winning opus as we speak. Either that or rotting in a pauper's grave somewhere in Pennsylvania.

Guy:Incognito

Egginacup wrote: »

Intriguing and yet pedantically correct.
.

Would you like to die burning in a fire or blown to pieces by a bomb? Might not feel too pedantic when your flesh is melting.

The thread title is clearly there to make people think of the Jordan pilot burning type rather than the instant blown up type of death and going for the emotional angle.

jimboblep

Egginacup wrote: »

Intriguing and yet pedantically correct.

I remember this kind of argument, or perhaps it was a heated debate with a clown in New York one time. He said through slugs of his cheap beer that the US never lost a war. I asked him if he ever heard of a tiny little conflict called Vietnam. His answer was that "That wasn't a war, it was a 'police action', and it was never declared, so there...we ain't never lost a war!"

I'm sure this winner is working on his Pulitzer winning opus as we speak. Either that or rotting in a pauper's grave somewhere in Pennsylvania.

Well when an article is willing to make up that much or is incapable of basic research you have to wonder what else they are willing to make up, its not like they have an agenda to follow now is it

osarusan

DeadHand wrote: »

There is a critical difference between people being killed accidentally as collateral damage in a strike on combatants and people being deliberately tortured to death and their final moments broadcast around the world as propaganda.

There is a big difference.

But it is also fair to ask just how careful the US military is to avoid accidentally killing civilians while targeting militants.

We don't know whether they make every effort to minimise civilian casualties, or whether they do not care in the slightest about civilian deaths as long as they are accompanied by militant deaths.

BlaasForRafa

goose2005 wrote: »

Al-Qaeda targeted the economic, political and military headquarters of the US. A few thousand civilian deaths. Exactly what happened when Baghdad was attacked.

I knew you didn't know what it meant but I figured I'd give you a chance anyway.

The USAF Intelligence Targeting Guide defines the term "[the] unintentional damage or incidental damage affecting facilities, equipment, or personnel, occurring as a result of military actions directed against targeted enemy forces or facilities. Such damage can occur to friendly, neutral, and even enemy forces".[1] Another United States Department of Defense document uses "nintentional or incidental injury or damage to persons or objects that would not be lawful military targets in the circumstances ruling at the time. Such damage is not unlawful so long as it is not excessive in light of the overall military advantage anticipated from the attack.

The twin towers were not a legitimate military target.

Also given the fact that no formal state of war can be declared by a terrorist group against a nation state then neither the pentagon, the airplanes themselves and their crew/passengers or any other person or property attacked was a legitimate target. Nothing that happened on 9/11 was collateral damage.

DarkyHughes

DeadHand wrote: »

There is a critical difference between people being killed accidentally as collateral damage in a strike on combatants and people being deliberately tortured to death and their final moments broadcast around the world as propaganda.


While we're on the subject of the media ignoring certain issues, why is the organised, mass rape and torture of indigenous children by Muslim men in England being ignored by the mainstream media?

That's true, the IRA didn't purposely kill innocent people. It was collateral damage. Very sad but mistakes.

anncoates

I think both deaths are to equally abhorred but it's sad that in the usual tit-for-tat rush to assign political significance to either, the importance of both is somehow lost.

It's sad that we've got to the point where our first reaction to a death is to immediately try and find another death with which to occupy a higher moral ground. Ironically, the kind of ideological desensitization that feeds discussion like this also in some way feeds terrorism as a modus operandi.

Kinda like ideological trump cards: I see your dead X and raise you a dead Y and on and on.

anncoates

DarkyHughes wrote: »

That's true, the IRA didn't purposely kill innocent people. It was collateral damage. Very sad but mistakes.

This is exactly the kind of arrant bollocks you'd expect from somebody called Darky Hughes.

The IRA regularly gave conflicting and sometimes plain late warnings about bombs.

Like US drones, they're not 'mistakes' as we understand them, rather percentages that are calculated as an inevitable consequence of killing the people you want to kill: helped by the fact that at the back of your mind, they're "only" Brit/ Iraqi/Insert value civilians at the end of the day.

ireland.man

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Would you like to die burning in a fire or blown to pieces by a bomb? Might not feel too pedantic when your flesh is melting.

The thread title is clearly there to make people think of the Jordan pilot burning type rather than the instant blown up type of death and going for the emotional angle.

Apparently the majority of victims of drone attacks and smart bombs are burnt, not killed from total body disruption. Play that fun game the medics play in Afghanistan, "Burnt animal or burnt person?" when they're collecting torsos after US attacks. Or check up double tap strikes where a second attack comes a little while after an initial strike in order to wipe out first responders.

And if you want an emotional angle, check out the Afghan children who were interviewed and said they were terrified of clear skies now.

SPM1959

DarkyHughes wrote: »

That's true, the IRA didn't purposely kill innocent people. It was collateral damage. Very sad but mistakes.

On occasion it did.

Kingsmill for example.

Gatling

ireland.man wrote: »

Apparently the majority of victims of drone attacks and smart bombs are burnt, not killed from total body disruption. Play that fun game the medics play in Afghanistan, "Burnt animal or burnt person?" when they're collecting torsos after US attacks. Or check up double tap strikes where a second attack comes a little while after an initial strike in order to wipe out first responders.

And if you want an emotional angle, check out the Afghan children who were interviewed and said they were terrified of clear skies now.

No depends really on what missile is used and type of warhead .
If there in a vehicle of course they will burn but in the open the initial explosion will kill and the fire is usually from the detonation of the warhead .
In Iraq Abu Musab al-Zarqawi then terrorist in chief famously survived 2 X 500lb bombs been dropped on his safe house .
He got pulled from the rubble and placed in an ambulance by the iraqi police .

Hellfire missles are high explosive anti tank rounds .
hellfire is actually an acronym rather than a description of its payload
.
Helicopter Launched, Fire and Forget Missile, 

Manic Moran

Something of a misnomer, considering that most Hellfires are semi-active and thus not, actually, fire and forget.

That said, there are a number of warhead options nowadays, to include HE and thermostatic. Neither relies on burning a target to death, of course.