Latest - Western forces prepare for Military strikes in Syria, strike just hours away

esteve wrote: »

You are right, I made a mistake, I am sorry, I was getting my genocides supported by the US confused. In East Timor approx 200,000 were killed, more or less a quarter of their population. It is a shocking number, something that the small nation has never recovered from.

The figure of a million I refer to relates to a connected incident that precedes East Timor but led the way for it to happen, again involving Indonesia and Suharto, with the full backing and involvement of the US. It is the little known Indonesia killings of 1965-1966, also known as a purge, or could be called a genocide if you so please, ether way approx 1 million Indonesians were slaughtered due to their political beliefs. The US could not let these people ever be in power, so they helped annihilate them


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_killings_of_1965%E2%80%9366


There is this fascinating film where Generals who were involved in this massacre, reenact some of their mass killings.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2375605/?ref_=sr_1

Yes, but both of these incidents were in the distant past when the world was a different place.

Chechnya is not in the distant past.

Jonny7 wrote: »

Chances are if you join one of these Pashtun miltia's, you are going to find that the Pakistani army will be very quickly shooting at you - not asking for "proof". Of course if you become a commander, you might yourself targeted by US drones.

The average person in Waziristan is a lot more likely to be killed by these militia's or have a bomb strapped to them by the local Taliban - than ever killed by a drone. However that isn't much recourse for those that are.




I would say 0% of the thousands of Pakistanis they kill every year are guilty of anything but being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Sadly they haven't found a way of fighting these groups without, in the process, also killing other innocents. It's a kind of grim trade off, not one I particularly support at all.

They haven't constructed a working time machine either which can go back and reverse Cold War policies that helped **** up most of these countries in the first place.

An idealistic situation would of course be to capture and try each person in a court of law - but that doesn't work in the field.

So basically bomb them to oblivion and never mind the innocents. But if someone else does it the US gets on it's high horse and says you can't do that. Ok gotcha now

Jonny7 wrote: »

So basically miss the point and embellish what was said.. incorrectly. Gotcha

No because that's exactly what's happening!

bumper234 wrote: »

So basically bomb them to oblivion and never mind the innocents. But if someone else does it the US gets on it's high horse and says you can't do that. Ok gotcha now

You do realise that most of these targets use their own family members as human shields in the hope it prevents drone attacks?

You also realise that most of the targets are extremely nasty people who plan attacks against innocent civilians in the west? They are the type of AQ people who you say you abhor and yet when the West takes them out, you change tack again. You don't really feel sorry for the victims of drone attacks do you. You just use drone attacks as another stick to beat the west with, like all anti americans.

Clearly you think AQ should be allowed get on with their business of planning terrorists attacks?

You condemn alleged american support for AQ among the opposition in Syria, and yet you condemn when america attacks AQ as well. I suppose trying to get a logical consistant position is pointless from you or most anti americans. You just keep vacillating.

Like most anti Americans, you are completely and absolutely irrational....and you have an irrational and unlimited hatred of America and I suppose the west in general.

Which begs the ultimate question, if you hate the west, why do you still live here?

Admit it, America and the West is a lot better than many of the undemocratic sh*tholes around the world that people like you idolise.

AlekSmart wrote: »

Well.with regard to the Fighting on the ground,as they might say in the Courts of Justice..."We do have precedent...."

http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/books-arts/the-dubliner-who-fought-gadaffi-29559950.html

Today Libya,Tomorrow....??????

Tomorrow any mass mudering genocidal maniac who wants to kill hundreds of thousands of his people and displace at least 5 million. Seriously, you think people like that should be allowed do as they please?

International law has become an absolute joke. As it stands it is perfectly lawful for Assad to kill as many of his own people he wants using conventional means.

On the otherhand it is against international law for outside countries to intervene to prevent him doing that without UNSC support, which is not going to happen.

This is how perverse international law is and how it has been exploited by Assad to continue his massacring. The legal rights experts and anti-interventionists might sleep well at night just so long as international law isn't broken. It's not much help to the victims of Assad's atrocities.

realweirdo wrote: »

You do realise that most of these targets use their own family members as human shields in the hope it prevents drone attacks?

You also realise that most of the targets are extremely nasty people who plan attacks against innocent civilians in the west? They are the type of AQ people who you say you abhor and yet when the West takes them out, you change tack again. You don't really feel sorry for the victims of drone attacks do you. You just use drone attacks as another stick to beat the west with, like all anti americans.

Clearly you think AQ should be allowed get on with their business of planning terrorists attacks?

You condemn alleged american support for AQ among the opposition in Syria, and yet you condemn when america attacks AQ as well. I suppose trying to get a logical consistant position is pointless from you or most anti americans. You just keep vacillating.

Like most anti Americans, you are completely and absolutely irrational....and you have an irrational and unlimited hatred of America and I suppose the west in general.

Which begs the ultimate question, if you hate the west, why do you still live here?

Admit it, America and the West is a lot better than many of the undemocratic sh*tholes around the world that people like you idolise.

I don't hate America or the American people or the west in general and i have spent a.lot of time there on business. I do dislike America's foreign policies and i abhor the fact that they kill innocent people with impunity. If you want to bang your pro America pro war drum then beat away.

bumper234 wrote: »

I don't hate America or the American people or the west in general and i have spent a.lot of time there on business. I do dislike America's foreign policies and i abhor the fact that they kill innocent people with impunity. If you want to bang your pro America pro war drum then beat away.

That's fair enough. However, North Korea kill innocent people with impunity, as does China, Russia, and many other countries. They are just as bad as America in most cases. However, we rarely see around here post after post condemning the human rights abuses of these countries which are pretty bad. You'd honestly think America was the only country who kills innocent people. In any case, innocent people have always got killed during wars.

realweirdo wrote: »

That's fair enough. However, North Korea kill innocent people with impunity, as does China, Russia, and many other countries. They are just as bad as America in most cases. However, we rarely see around here post after post condemning the human rights abuses of these countries which are pretty bad. You'd honestly think America was the only country who kills innocent people. In any case, innocent people have always got killed during wars.

North Korea, Russia, China are 3 countries who don't preach to others about human rights abuses and then go out and deny others their human rights. None of those countries say lets bomb Syria, Iran North Korea because they have Nukes and chemical weapons but lets leave Israel alone even though they have CW and nukes.

realweirdo wrote: »

Do you not watch the news? You can watch RT for these ones.
For the last two and a half years, Putin has been preaching around the clock about how America cause trouble in the middle east, how their record is bad, human rights abuses blah blah blah. I'd imagine it's the same in China. Hugo Chavez had his own show denouncing all things American. Press TV condemns American human rights abuses around the clock. As does Cuba. As does North Korea.

So what you are saying is simply not true. Every one of these countries preaches about human rights abuses and yet are just as bad themselves.

Are you not the guy who said RT is not a credible news source? Now it is? As for Putin preaching about America's record in the middle east.....it's pretty much spot on. Years of war many thousands dead (most of them innocent civilians) all because America wants to control the oil fields and ensure the petrodollar stays strong.

bumper234 wrote: »

Are you not the guy who said RT is not a credible news source? Now it is? As for Putin preaching about America's record in the middle east.....it's pretty much spot on. Years of war many thousands dead (most of them innocent civilians) all because America wants to control the oil fields and ensure the petrodollar stays strong.

This is getting farcical, actually you are getting farcical. One minute you are saying Putin never preaches about human rights and now you are saying yes he does preach about human rights abuses. You're making it up as you go along and it's hard to take anything you say seriously. A tip, try to stay consistant, people will take you more seriously that way.

Eggy Baby! wrote: »

Wow...you are incredibly naive.

So De Valera signing Hitler's book of condolences is as bad as the sum total of American imperialism? Read up on the Phillippines, the Mexican-American wars, the Spanish American wars.

Convienently ignore the fact that America confronted and helped defeat three of the great evils of the 20th century Nazi Germany, Emperial Japan and the USSR. (Ireland stayed neutral). Ignore the fact that but for the US, South Korea would be a communist run sh*thole like North Korea. Ignore the fact that America is the biggest provider of humanitarian assistance in the world by far. Ignore the fact that America is about the only nation confronting Islamic terrorism, yes in a war where there is collatoral damage, but the alternative is to allow the spread of Islamofascism unchecked. It really is a case of either or in this situation. Ignore the fact that America sent the Taliban packing from large parts of Afghanistan.

And basically ignore every good deed America has ever done in its history.

You don't do balance do you?

realweirdo wrote: »

Convienently ignore the fact that America confronted and helped defeat three of the great evils of the 20th century Nazi Germany, Emperial Japan and the USSR. (Ireland stayed neutral). Ignore the fact that but for the US, South Korea would be a communist run sh*thole like North Korea. Ignore the fact that America is the biggest provider of humanitarian assistance in the world by far. Ignore the fact that America is about the only nation confronting Islamic terrorism, yes in a war where there is collatoral damage, but the alternative is to allow the spread of Islamofascism unchecked. It really is a case of either or in this situation. Ignore the fact that America sent the Taliban packing from large parts of Afghanistan.

And basically ignore every good deed America has ever done in its history.

You don't do balance do you?

America joined WW2 at the end they did not confront the Nazi's

Japan's bombing of pearl harbour was over oil (pretty much like Amerca's actions these days) and they paid for it by getting nuked twice (a more evil act in most peoples books).

America did not "confront" Russia it got into an arms war with it. It still fights wars with Russia by proxy (Syria these days)

Ireland stayed neutral as did Switzerland....so what?

America is confronting Islamic terrorism that America helped to create. America bankrolled the Taliban in Afghanistan and sent the CIA to train them. America used 9-11 as an excuse to invade Afghanistan and Iraq yet most of the 9-11 bombers were from Saudi Arabia (friends of the US)

America has not gotten rid of the Taliban and of anything by bombing innocent civilians it has ensured that the Taliban will have a ready supply of volunteers for many decades to come.

bumper234 wrote: »

America joined WW2 at the end they did not confront the Nazi's

Japan's bombing of pearl harbour was over oil (pretty much like Amerca's actions these days) and they paid for it by getting nuked twice (a more evil act in most peoples books).

America did not "confront" Russia it got into an arms war with it. It still fights wars with Russia by proxy (Syria these days)

Ireland stayed neutral as did Switzerland....so what?

America is confronting Islamic terrorism that America helped to create. America bankrolled the Taliban in Afghanistan and sent the CIA to train them. America used 9-11 as an excuse to invade Afghanistan and Iraq yet most of the 9-11 bombers were from Saudi Arabia (friends of the US)

America has not gotten rid of the Taliban and of anything by bombing innocent civilians it has ensured that the Taliban will have a ready supply of volunteers for many decades to come.

The war on terror is a a complex one which demands a complex debate...it can't be settled by the usual 'America bad, everyone else good' arguments that go on around here. If I thought anyone was interested in that complex debate I'd gladly take part. The main point of the debate is that the Taliban and AQ are against democracy and most forms of human rights for individuals. Yes there is collatoral damage confronting them, but allowing them spread their poisonous philosophy is just not an option. I think even you would agree with that.

America joined WW2 at the end of '41. Roosevelt was probably keen to join earlier but there was a very vocal anti-interventionist lobby in the states who prevented him acting. The vocal ant-interventionists have their descendents today who say things like "we shouldn't get involved, there's nothing in it for us, not our problem and so on."

America did confront Russia as much as possible. Cuban missible crisis an example, but yes much of it was proxy conflicts to try to prevent the spread of communism, something clearly you think would have been ok. You also think that Russia is a knight in shining armour in the world. I would love to see you condemnn Russia and before it the USSRs appalling human rights record...they ruled half of Europe with local dictators.

The Japanese Empire was a genocidal state, just ask the Chinese. No-one cares if they were about to run out of oil or not. The best thing that ever happened was that Empire was consigned to the dust bin of history.

This thread has got boring with the usual monotonous anti american foreign policy types on it. They never say anything new.