Sure, sure, but what did the Jews ever do to the Germans? Or Poland for that matter? France?
We have clear cause for fighting jihadists, and it's best done in their backyard, not ours. Unless, of course, you think they should be given free reign to murder people just going to work, or a bunch of israeli schoolchildren, or allowed to continue the hard-line islamic oppression of women (I thought folks like you were all for womens rights? What, don't have the werewithal to actually do something to improve women's rights, besides hold up a few signs outside a golf course?)
You're drawing parralels where they are quite strained, and I'm sure Hitler said things that are quite similar to what your heroes have said in times of war. Even a broken clock can be right twice a day.
The entire educational system, the theater, the cinema, literature, the Press, and the wireless - all these will be used as means to this end and valued accordingly.
Funny you bring that up, because most of those areas are run by the american left.
If George Bush, the neocons, myself, and everyone else where the nasty fascists you make us out to be, I would have already reported you for re-education camp, and maybe have gone to your house (tracked via IP addresses, warrantless siezures of ISP records, etc) and beat the shit out of you. But you're not worried about me knocking on your door, are you?
If our military was as cruel and brutal as you imagine, why do you think you'd hear anything about camp xray? Do you honestly think we'd let lawyers or puppet lawmakers visit? Do you think we'd ever let anyone out? No, we'd kill them, burn their bodies, and have the press sing praises about our decency, because if they didn't play ball, they'd dissapear too.
But none of these things are true. The fact that bedwetters of your ilk can whine and seeth and any slightest perceived ill show it's not as bad as you imagine.
Think about it, the American left has no way to force us neocons, or the military, or anyone to do anything. It's all us folks on the right who have all the guns anyway. Yet you continue on with your life, prattling on about stuff, making wild accusations, believing the worst anyone dares says about the US, and calling anyone with more backbone than you a fascist.
Here's what I'm saying: Anything we need to do to keep our cities and infrastructure from being attacked, lets do it.
If it means invading countries that harbor or supply bin laden and his ilk, then lets do it.
If it means trying to guide Iraq and Afgahnistan into forming liberal democracies, lets do it.
If it means turning two countries from the part of the world those assholes come from into flypaper, lets do it. (IE, Jihadists cannot suffer the insult of having a western-style democracy in the middle east, so they are forced to pour a great deal of their manpower and resources into fighting in their neighborhood, not ours)
If it means conducting covert ops into borderline unfriendly nations to capture and assasinate Bin laden or his buddies, lets do it.
If it means using psychological tactics and discomfort on detainees to gain information (and we have gotten plenty of info), lets do it. (Plain old bamboo shoots under the fingernail type of torture doesn't really work anyway)
If it means holding a tribunal and then executing foreign fighters bombing iraqi police stations, executing elected officials in broad daylight, and what have you, let's do that too.
If it means capturing a bunch of them, executing all of them save one, tossing the corpses in pit and defiling (according to islam) their bodies by covering them in pigs blood- hey, I'm fine with that too. (You let the one guy go to tell everyone else the price of attacking the US or the fledgling Iraqi government.) Since the jihadists are mostly killing iraqis now, they have no friends left.
You (presumably) and I can learn by logic and reason. Barbarians can only learn by neccesity.
Yeah, you just go ahead and keep showing how better than me you are! And save those self-rightoues eyes from any arguments that may be more articulate than mine, lest you have to think for five seconds.
As for the nazi comments, way to Godwinn the thread. My argument is that some people must be dealt with harshly because they have not be raised in a civilization that values what we do. It's not a matter of race, it's a matter of being born and raised in a civilization that respects decency.
We are not a master race, but we have a superior society, and the fact that it isn't blindingly obvious to you makes me think you've spent a few too many years being indoctrinated by multicultural evangalists.
And to those slashdot readers who somehow find themselves reading this: Civilization would fall if those charged with guarding it thought as this fellow. So much self-flaggelation over the rights of the enemy, so little concern about actually finishing the job so war's unpleasent aspects can be discontinued.
It's time we cleared the air about all this "code of conduct" and "rules of war" nonsense.
For many years back when I still lived there, the South African Army was engaged in counter-insurgency warfare (read: anti-terrorist activity) in both South Africa itself, and in Southwest Africa (now Namibia).
The people we were fighting were an amalgam of SWAPO (South West African People's Organization--the current neo-Marxist ruling junta) and the African National Congress (ANC--the sainted Nelson Mandela's likewise Marxist organization).
Their modus operandi was quite simple: infiltrate the country from over the border, then start a campaign of terror against the local population. This campaign of terror took several forms, but the main ones were: the planting of landmines in the roads (mostly dirt roads, so not difficult); planting of bombs in population centers (supermarkets, shopping malls etc, but NOT military installations); and terrorizing of the local population (killing individuals or random groups of suspected "sympathizers" in towns and villages).
As you can see from this, these "freedom fighters" operated under no rules of engagement--they fired RPG-7 rockets at hospitals, civilian airliners, and buses. They executed (okay, murdered) not only local leaders, but in many cases their entire families as well. They stayed well away from our Army installations, of course, because the Army could and did fight back.
The SA Army's modus operandi was simple: intercept and ambush these "flying columns". On a few occasions, some of our patrols were in turn ambushed. The SWAPO/ANC took prisoners, then tortured and killed them, in public, in a village that they needed to frighten into submission. One of our patrols once found the body of one of our kids, who had been tied to a tree and, after having had his fingers, toes and genitals cut off, burned alive. He was twenty years old, and left a wife and a newborn baby son at home.
After this, the units based in this sector took no prisoners either. They killed without mercy, took ears as souvenirs, tied terrorist corpses to the backs of trucks and dragged them through the bush till only a bloody piece of frayed rope was left, and the only reason any one of the bastards was spared was so that he could go back to his Commie buddies and warn them what would happen if they ventured across the river. In other words, the Army used counter-terror tactics against terrorists.
Did this cause an escalation of the conflict, and the "terms of engagement" to change? No. It caused the number of incursions to drop precipitously in that sector. But I don't want to talk about this any more, because it's old news, and last year's terrorists are now Nobel prize-winners.
Let's talk about the here and now, and what all this means to us.
As Americans, we are basically a decent, generous people. Unfortunately, there are times when we have to suspend our values, because our enemies will not only interpret this as a sign of weakness and pusillanimity, but will also turn those values against us. Terrorists spared in this conflict will inevitably be used as bargaining or blackmail chips, and when released will go back to waging war against us. The concept of personal honor, of "parole", is without meaning to them.
One of the problems we face with terrorists is that they will use any weapon against us, no matter how abhorrent it may appear to civilized people. Thus we see 8- and 10-year-old kids used as shields in anti-Israeli riots, behind which the terrorist marksmen calmly select their targets among Israeli soldiers. All people are enlisted to further their war aims--women will carry plastique hidden in their vaginas, teenagers are used as suicide bombers, families will hide firearms inside baby strollers, ambulances will be used to carry weapons. Nothing is sacred.
In the face of this unspeakable behavior, I find the oh-so civil
http://www.icao.int/icao/en/leb/Genev.htm Iraq signed, Afgahnistan didn't. Moreover, the jihadists from various contries pouring in to fight the 'infidels' sure as hell don't fight for any recognized army or country, and aren't covered by any treaty whatsoever. Such types comprise most of the people with extended involuntary stays in cuba. They're just there to kill people. However, please post the links you have of stories of Iraq Army soldiers being 'tortured'.
Then you should also note that it is merely a response to same.
So you admit then that an uncivilized response can be warranted to an uncivilized opponent. That's a start. Barbarians can only be taught by neccesity, not by reason, logic, or emotional apeal.
Your (continued) vitriolic response is consistent with that notion.
Also, the tales of 'torture' I hear out of Gitmo sound like the lamest torture ever invented. Made to sit uncomfortably. blindfolded and forced to listen to static. scared by dogs. moved between hot and cold rooms. Cry me a river, i've put myself through far worse than any of that intentionally.
What impact does that have on keeping people incommunicado in chains for years on no evidence I am not quite sure
If they are proper prisoners of war as you suggest, then they should be held until the end of hostilities. No trial, evidence, or communication needed. They're simply being kept off the battlefield.
As for the reuters journalist, there's been more than once when the press has been tipped off about an impeding terrorist photo-op and dutifully showed up to film people getting murdered, instead of warning anyone. Reuters folks have participated in such activities.
Reuters can whine and stamp all it wants about demanding release, but I'm more inclined to believe our military has a good reason to hold onto them, then terrorist-sympathizing Reuters claim that he's completely innocent. The press are not fully of mystical impartial beings who are always innocent. They're just as capable of being filled with assholes with agendas as any other organization.
So, we release people who are innocent. After having fed and housed them far better than they got in their own countries.
Yeah, not perfect, but not exactly showing us to be the pinacle of all evil, does it?
Do the people we release have the same number of limbs, digits, teeth, and scars they had before we got them? Do they weigh more? Yes? Then I'm not gonna cry myself to sleep over the fact that we may have picked up a few of the wrong people in a war zone.
Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War Adopted on 12 August 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Geneva from 21 April to 12 August, 1949
Article 2
In addition to the provisions which shall be implemented in peace time, the present Convention shall apply to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.
The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the said occupation meets with no armed resistance.
Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.
What were you saying?
Now, when you're done eating your humble pie over that, we can discuss how truly committed you are to being civilized if you rapidly degrade into middle-school name calling:
idiot, your peanut brain
imbecillic, vicious, murderous and bigoted
We can also discuss how human scum may or maynot be receptive to the kinder, gentler ways we prefer, and how we may have to adopt more brutal methods when dealing with these particular types if it is the only effective means of supressing and defeating such types.
Of course they are. Geneva conventions (plural) cover all classes of participants in warfare, one of them is "non-uniformed" combatants (GC3) or alternatively civilians (GC4). There is no possibility of anyone in a war not to be covered by one of the Conventions. The "unlawful combatant" bullshit is wholly invented by the Bush Administration.
Except the part about how the Geneva Convention is a reciprical agreement between signatory states and those who abide by it, neither of which can be said to apply to any of the pieces of shit at gitmo.
Folks like you piss and whine whenever US troops scare someone with a damn dog or make them sweat a little under the interrogation light, but you're awfully fucking quiet when the same type of folks we hold prisoner in gitmo blow up an iraqi police station, or kill a few newly elected iraqi officials in broad daylight.
Although the theaters themselves are a little old (decent picture, Dolby sound a generation or two old), the patrons in New Hampshire theaters are quite considerate. Occasionally some kids talk near me, but when i politely ask them to be quiet, they shut up.
I go to see my movies mostly in Newington, NH, (near the coast) and it's pretty good there. Occasionally someone talks a little in hushed tones, but overwhelming folks in this area are decent & considerate.
Same thing on the roads, actually. Sorry you live with a bunch of assholes, but thankfully there are pockets of humanity around.
On the flip side, the theaters are fairly low tech- no stadium seating, dolby sound a generation or two old, but still decent picture quality and good sound. If that's the tradeoff for civilized patrons, I'll take it. I go once a month or so.
I'd say that the initial storage limitation is one of the least fun parts of the beginning game in WoW
After you get your first 60, this isn't such a problem because you can always send gold and bags to your low level alts. But yeah, a pain at the start.
Other than that, I've actually noticed deflation on my server- arcane crystals and arcanite bars are down 9g or so from their peak, runecloth is down from 2g a stack, and some other crafting items have taken price hits as well. Gold sellers prices are also down a few bucks. I'm not entirely sure how that relates, if at all.
I think it has to do with the game/server reaching 'maturity'. Most of the first adopters who rushed to the scene have maxed out a character or two, and have them equipped with all the craftable items they're going to get. They also have an alt or so that can provide all of the players characters with whatever they need, so they don't visit the AH as much, driving up prices. So know you just have a trickle of characters passing through various levels and buying up some stuff, but at a slower rate than the original mass leveling that came with the server opening.
Anyway, I hope that all makes sense, cause i've been up far too late. And it's just my humble observations, I have no data to back any of it up.
I'm sorry, but what kind of 'expirement' was ever a failure? The point of one is to learn, and that happens regardless of wether or not you get the expected outcome.
I wish they could find a smarter way to fight the insanity of the american voter.
Have you ever considered the notion that the Democrats are insane (or wrong, ignorant of history, economics, etc)? Maybe your hubris is unwarranted- just something to consider.
I'm not interested in debating any specific topic with you- just asking you to engage in some introspection.
They're trying to woo moderates back into the fold(Hillary Clinton etc) by imposing conservative morality It's also a problem for democrats that they don't fool many people when they try to move to the center to woo your average 'insane american voter', and instead are offended by insincerity.
subject to Geneva Convention protections Wrong. The Geneva convention is a recipricol agreement by signatory nations. Al-Qaida didn't sign it, and they certainly don't abide by it- both conditions are neccessary for the convention to apply, though I'd imagine abiding by it would be enough.
(This analogy doesn't apply to a fight-to-the-death, but then, I don't see any credible threat to the security of the United States anywhere in the world.)
These people have murdered us, and want to murder us. The analogy doesn't apply by your own admission. We do not tolerate being purposeful killed by anyone, and we will not treat them with any less conviction simply because they have not killed a sizable part of our population yet.
You actually gain status by not sinking to his level. We do not need status. We need to get these people to stop waging war on us, and that may require sinking to their level in the theater. I don't see why you have any question as to the fact that we are better than them, unless you somehow think executing rape victims and similar barbarity occur in our society. They would and have used our restraint against us.
Basically, what I see is that the rule of law is inconvenient for the administration,
This is not a civil or criminal proceeding, so US courts have no jurisdiction- outside of that, international law is a farce obeyed only as far as it advances the interests of nations that sign it. International law is routinely flouted because there is no enforcement mechanism short of war or intolerable trade sanctions, which are seldom bothered with. Regardless, the captives at gitmo et al are not covered by any internation agreement we have signed to.
You seem to have no concept of 'enemy', and this is a luxury afforded to you by living deep within the confines of a safe, civilized society. Were you to allow yourself to imagine something beyond your relatively safe confines, you may bring yourself to a point where you realize that all the philosophical posturing in the world does you no good, should you and all you hold dear fall to barbarians.
I know we are better than them. It's pretty obvious if you do a qualitative or quantitative comparison of the society we've built, and the societies that breeds these murderers. Such people learn only by necessity. It's far past time to teach them.
War is not a criminal proceeding. Viewing it as such (aka, the limped dicked response to the first WTC boming and the attack on the Cole) was seen as weakness by al-qaeda, and emboldened them to do 9-11.
In War, the prisoners thereof are usually held until the end of hostilities, so some of those assholes might be in there for a long time- and that doesn't bother me at all.
And again, no conventions or treaties apply to them because they do not represent any sovereign nation, nor do they fight in a manner consistent with any convention or treaty.
Basically, they're our bitches. The fact that some captives are released with a pulse leaves me inclined to think we're doing the right thing overall down there.
Non-violence and passive resistence actually bring out the morality in those capable of it. They do nothing against sociopaths and psychopaths
Sociopaths and psychopaths are exactly the type of people who carry out these terrorist attacks. There maybe a few ideolouges at the top who are fairly smart and capable (but still sociopathic), but suicide bombers are generally culled from the dregs of society, and people who bomb subways are definately sociopaths.
I know we don't have the stomach for a scorched earth campaign, and I'm not advocating turning all of the middle east into glass. There are plenty of good people there, I don't dispute that.
The people who fight us, budding government in Iraq, bomb iraqi policemen, and bomb london subways- they deserve no mercy or quarter. We need to have the stomach for hunting them down tirelessly.
...Or so it seems to many of us who don't go around spouting nonsense...
I'm sorry, did you miss the parts in history class where more free, western type nations had the biggest, baddest militaries first?
Do I really have to argue with you about wether or not westerners can slaughter the entire continent of africa, the middle east, many asian countries, etc, if we so choose?
Do I really have to argue with you about how societies that value property rights and self-criticism (in business, government, academics, religion,personally) can amass the wealth needed to afford the weapons we have? How scientific research towards things that make bigger, better weapons goes along alot smoother in said societies? That is the foturnate artifact of nature, and it seems pretty obvious to me.
Here's the real world for ya: WE (western nations) POSSESS THE CAPABILITY TO KILL EVERYONE THAT STANDS IN OUR WAY, with both nuclear and conventional methods. That we haven't already speaks volumes about our restraint. We fight with one hand behind our back.
Totalitarian, oppressive societies can often some years later copy what we produced half a century ago,(North Korea, Iran, etc) and the soviets made a decent showing of trying to keep up with the US, but in the end they collapsed in the effort. They all pale in comparison to what we (westerners) are capable of.
If you had bothered to think about it for even a minute, you might have realized what I was saying. Fortunately for those who follow, I have now explained it.
The dead aren't particularly violent. So if you manage to kill a great deal of your enemies, you've made progress.
Naked force has solved more issues in the history of mankind than diplomacy ever will.
It is a fortunate artifact of nature that a more free a society is, the more capable of exerting violence it will be. (IE, the united states, european nations) It is simply the will to act that we lack at times.
Non-violence and passive resistince only work on a relatively moral enemy. Ghandis and Martin Luther Kings get killed in totalitarian societies before they even have the attention of two dozen people.
We are not fighting a moral enemy here. The only way to win is to kill their command structure and enough of their ranks so that they either cannot muster an attack, or they realize they are so far outclassed that any further action is pointless.
A terrorist does what he does not out of sheer spite but in order to achieve political and ideological goals.
Not always. It seems as though we're actually going up against death-worshippers in this case, who can only use thin theological reasons to justify their actions (though islam does lend itself to this sort of behaviour far more readily than judeo-christian types)
The terrorist attacks in Iraq over the past few months, with a few televised exceptions, have been mostly aimed at the Iraqi population. What kind of freedom fighter does that sort of thing?
The sort who just wants to kill people, and doesn't do it very well when they try against the US military.
Same thing in Israel and their problems with terrorists.
In both cases, they're death worshippers, who have a technique and a stated goal, but no plan on how exactly their technique (killing civilians while vulnerable with bombs) will lead to their stated goal.
No rationality. A thin veneer of politics. But ultimately, they're a bunch of crazy fuckers who like to kill 'infidels', and they need to be put down like the rabid dogs they are.
I don't feel sympathy for the bootleggers: I feel admiration for their hard work and gratitude for how they keep the authentic culture machine well-oiled.
So, fucking the original creators of the material out of their share is A-ok with you because it fits your multi-cultural fantasy fetish?
Please, beat off all you like the glory of the multi-colored tapestry of rich ethnic heritage or whatever trash you like, but bootleggers are simply being dishonest (and arguably thieves) no matter what their race, country of origin, accent, skin color, or the slant of their eyes.
You may not like the state of copyright laws in the US, and in many cases I'd likely agree with you. But the law is the the law, and it applies regardless of any 'diversity' you bring to the street vendors of new york city.
The folks selling apples a generation or four ago had the decency to pay for their wares honestly. Street bootleggers don't.
When the facts have been out in the open for three and a half years, you don't need a link.
So is this one of those instances where if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes true? Offer a link, or re-read my previous post until the notion sinks in.
Just one little link. If the facts have been 'out in the open' surely you can spend three seconds to find a link supporting yourself.
You're pretty good at calling someone a liar without a single link to back your view up.
Nothing would get posted on the internet if everyone had to cite something when making a statement, but if you're going to yell LIAR LIAR at someone, at least have the decency to post one link supporting your insulting allegation.
For some reason they won't let me access the site with internet explorer, and I'm at work, so it's not like I have control over it.
I have no idea why they would be so obnoxious as to simply prohibit a browser from accessing their site- I don't really care if it renders imperfectly as long as I can read it.
Really, what kind of idiot does that sort of thing? Some smug, bearded Unix administrator high on the righteousness of open source?
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, sure, but what did the Jews ever do to the Germans? Or Poland for that matter? France?
We have clear cause for fighting jihadists, and it's best done in their backyard, not ours. Unless, of course, you think they should be given free reign to murder people just going to work, or a bunch of israeli schoolchildren, or allowed to continue the hard-line islamic oppression of women (I thought folks like you were all for womens rights? What, don't have the werewithal to actually do something to improve women's rights, besides hold up a few signs outside a golf course?)
You're drawing parralels where they are quite strained, and I'm sure Hitler said things that are quite similar to what your heroes have said in times of war. Even a broken clock can be right twice a day.
The entire educational system, the
theater, the cinema, literature, the Press, and the wireless - all
these will be used as means to this end and valued accordingly.
Funny you bring that up, because most of those areas are run by the american left.
If George Bush, the neocons, myself, and everyone else where the nasty fascists you make us out to be, I would have already reported you for re-education camp, and maybe have gone to your house (tracked via IP addresses, warrantless siezures of ISP records, etc) and beat the shit out of you. But you're not worried about me knocking on your door, are you?
If our military was as cruel and brutal as you imagine, why do you think you'd hear anything about camp xray? Do you honestly think we'd let lawyers or puppet lawmakers visit? Do you think we'd ever let anyone out? No, we'd kill them, burn their bodies, and have the press sing praises about our decency, because if they didn't play ball, they'd dissapear too.
But none of these things are true. The fact that bedwetters of your ilk can whine and seeth and any slightest perceived ill show it's not as bad as you imagine.
Think about it, the American left has no way to force us neocons, or the military, or anyone to do anything. It's all us folks on the right who have all the guns anyway. Yet you continue on with your life, prattling on about stuff, making wild accusations, believing the worst anyone dares says about the US, and calling anyone with more backbone than you a fascist.
Here's what I'm saying: Anything we need to do to keep our cities and infrastructure from being attacked, lets do it.
If it means invading countries that harbor or supply bin laden and his ilk, then lets do it.
If it means trying to guide Iraq and Afgahnistan into forming liberal democracies, lets do it.
If it means turning two countries from the part of the world those assholes come from into flypaper, lets do it. (IE, Jihadists cannot suffer the insult of having a western-style democracy in the middle east, so they are forced to pour a great deal of their manpower and resources into fighting in their neighborhood, not ours)
If it means conducting covert ops into borderline unfriendly nations to capture and assasinate Bin laden or his buddies, lets do it.
If it means using psychological tactics and discomfort on detainees to gain information (and we have gotten plenty of info), lets do it. (Plain old bamboo shoots under the fingernail type of torture doesn't really work anyway)
If it means holding a tribunal and then executing foreign fighters bombing iraqi police stations, executing elected officials in broad daylight, and what have you, let's do that too.
If it means capturing a bunch of them, executing all of them save one, tossing the corpses in pit and defiling (according to islam) their bodies by covering them in pigs blood- hey, I'm fine with that too. (You let the one guy go to tell everyone else the price of attacking the US or the fledgling Iraqi government.) Since the jihadists are mostly killing iraqis now, they have no friends left.
You (presumably) and I can learn by logic and reason. Barbarians can only learn by neccesity.
So tell me, giv
[Neo Nazi manifesto skipped]
Yeah, you just go ahead and keep showing how better than me you are! And save those self-rightoues eyes from any arguments that may be more articulate than mine, lest you have to think for five seconds.
As for the nazi comments, way to Godwinn the thread. My argument is that some people must be dealt with harshly because they have not be raised in a civilization that values what we do. It's not a matter of race, it's a matter of being born and raised in a civilization that respects decency.
We are not a master race, but we have a superior society, and the fact that it isn't blindingly obvious to you makes me think you've spent a few too many years being indoctrinated by multicultural evangalists.
And to those slashdot readers who somehow find themselves reading this: Civilization would fall if those charged with guarding it thought as this fellow. So much self-flaggelation over the rights of the enemy, so little concern about actually finishing the job so war's unpleasent aspects can be discontinued.
Kim Du Toit:
Wednesday, April 10, 2002
03:34pm: Cry Havoc: Taking Off The Gloves
It's time we cleared the air about all this "code of conduct" and "rules of war" nonsense.
For many years back when I still lived there, the South African Army was engaged in counter-insurgency warfare (read: anti-terrorist activity) in both South Africa itself, and in Southwest Africa (now Namibia).
The people we were fighting were an amalgam of SWAPO (South West African People's Organization--the current neo-Marxist ruling junta) and the African National Congress (ANC--the sainted Nelson Mandela's likewise Marxist organization).
Their modus operandi was quite simple: infiltrate the country from over the border, then start a campaign of terror against the local population. This campaign of terror took several forms, but the main ones were: the planting of landmines in the roads (mostly dirt roads, so not difficult); planting of bombs in population centers (supermarkets, shopping malls etc, but NOT military installations); and terrorizing of the local population (killing individuals or random groups of suspected "sympathizers" in towns and villages).
As you can see from this, these "freedom fighters" operated under no rules of engagement--they fired RPG-7 rockets at hospitals, civilian airliners, and buses. They executed (okay, murdered) not only local leaders, but in many cases their entire families as well. They stayed well away from our Army installations, of course, because the Army could and did fight back.
The SA Army's modus operandi was simple: intercept and ambush these "flying columns". On a few occasions, some of our patrols were in turn ambushed. The SWAPO/ANC took prisoners, then tortured and killed them, in public, in a village that they needed to frighten into submission. One of our patrols once found the body of one of our kids, who had been tied to a tree and, after having had his fingers, toes and genitals cut off, burned alive. He was twenty years old, and left a wife and a newborn baby son at home.
After this, the units based in this sector took no prisoners either. They killed without mercy, took ears as souvenirs, tied terrorist corpses to the backs of trucks and dragged them through the bush till only a bloody piece of frayed rope was left, and the only reason any one of the bastards was spared was so that he could go back to his Commie buddies and warn them what would happen if they ventured across the river. In other words, the Army used counter-terror tactics against terrorists.
Did this cause an escalation of the conflict, and the "terms of engagement" to change? No. It caused the number of incursions to drop precipitously in that sector. But I don't want to talk about this any more, because it's old news, and last year's terrorists are now Nobel prize-winners.
Let's talk about the here and now, and what all this means to us.
As Americans, we are basically a decent, generous people. Unfortunately, there are times when we have to suspend our values, because our enemies will not only interpret this as a sign of weakness and pusillanimity, but will also turn those values against us. Terrorists spared in this conflict will inevitably be used as bargaining or blackmail chips, and when released will go back to waging war against us. The concept of personal honor, of "parole", is without meaning to them.
One of the problems we face with terrorists is that they will use any weapon against us, no matter how abhorrent it may appear to civilized people. Thus we see 8- and 10-year-old kids used as shields in anti-Israeli riots, behind which the terrorist marksmen calmly select their targets among Israeli soldiers. All people are enlisted to further their war aims--women will carry plastique hidden in their vaginas, teenagers are used as suicide bombers, families will hide firearms inside baby strollers, ambulances will be used to carry weapons. Nothing is sacred.
In the face of this unspeakable behavior, I find the oh-so civil
http://www.icao.int/icao/en/leb/Genev.htm
Iraq signed, Afgahnistan didn't. Moreover, the jihadists from various contries pouring in to fight the 'infidels' sure as hell don't fight for any recognized army or country, and aren't covered by any treaty whatsoever. Such types comprise most of the people with extended involuntary stays in cuba. They're just there to kill people. However, please post the links you have of stories of Iraq Army soldiers being 'tortured'.
Then you should also note that it is merely a response to same.
So you admit then that an uncivilized response can be warranted to an uncivilized opponent. That's a start. Barbarians can only be taught by neccesity, not by reason, logic, or emotional apeal.
Your (continued) vitriolic response is consistent with that notion.
Also, the tales of 'torture' I hear out of Gitmo sound like the lamest torture ever invented. Made to sit uncomfortably. blindfolded and forced to listen to static. scared by dogs. moved between hot and cold rooms. Cry me a river, i've put myself through far worse than any of that intentionally.
What impact does that have on keeping people incommunicado in chains for years on no evidence I am not quite sure
If they are proper prisoners of war as you suggest, then they should be held until the end of hostilities. No trial, evidence, or communication needed. They're simply being kept off the battlefield.
As for the reuters journalist, there's been more than once when the press has been tipped off about an impeding terrorist photo-op and dutifully showed up to film people getting murdered, instead of warning anyone. Reuters folks have participated in such activities.
Reuters can whine and stamp all it wants about demanding release, but I'm more inclined to believe our military has a good reason to hold onto them, then terrorist-sympathizing Reuters claim that he's completely innocent. The press are not fully of mystical impartial beings who are always innocent. They're just as capable of being filled with assholes with agendas as any other organization.
So, we release people who are innocent. After having fed and housed them far better than they got in their own countries.
Yeah, not perfect, but not exactly showing us to be the pinacle of all evil, does it?
Do the people we release have the same number of limbs, digits, teeth, and scars they had before we got them? Do they weigh more? Yes? Then I'm not gonna cry myself to sleep over the fact that we may have picked up a few of the wrong people in a war zone.
Adopted on 12 August 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of
International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Geneva
from 21 April to 12 August, 1949
What were you saying?
Now, when you're done eating your humble pie over that, we can discuss how truly committed you are to being civilized if you rapidly degrade into middle-school name calling:
We can also discuss how human scum may or maynot be receptive to the kinder, gentler ways we prefer, and how we may have to adopt more brutal methods when dealing with these particular types if it is the only effective means of supressing and defeating such types.
Of course they are. Geneva conventions (plural) cover all classes of participants in warfare, one of them is "non-uniformed" combatants (GC3) or alternatively civilians (GC4). There is no possibility of anyone in a war not to be covered by one of the Conventions. The "unlawful combatant" bullshit is wholly invented by the Bush Administration.
Except the part about how the Geneva Convention is a reciprical agreement between signatory states and those who abide by it, neither of which can be said to apply to any of the pieces of shit at gitmo.
Folks like you piss and whine whenever US troops scare someone with a damn dog or make them sweat a little under the interrogation light, but you're awfully fucking quiet when the same type of folks we hold prisoner in gitmo blow up an iraqi police station, or kill a few newly elected iraqi officials in broad daylight.
Although the theaters themselves are a little old (decent picture, Dolby sound a generation or two old), the patrons in New Hampshire theaters are quite considerate. Occasionally some kids talk near me, but when i politely ask them to be quiet, they shut up.
I go to see my movies mostly in Newington, NH, (near the coast) and it's pretty good there. Occasionally someone talks a little in hushed tones, but overwhelming folks in this area are decent & considerate.
Same thing on the roads, actually. Sorry you live with a bunch of assholes, but thankfully there are pockets of humanity around.
On the flip side, the theaters are fairly low tech- no stadium seating, dolby sound a generation or two old, but still decent picture quality and good sound. If that's the tradeoff for civilized patrons, I'll take it. I go once a month or so.
World of Warcraft end-game money sinks:
repair bills
air taxis
auction fees
Seems relatively stable to me, but it's the first mmo i've played.
I'd say that the initial storage limitation is one of the least fun parts of the beginning game in WoW
After you get your first 60, this isn't such a problem because you can always send gold and bags to your low level alts. But yeah, a pain at the start.
Other than that, I've actually noticed deflation on my server- arcane crystals and arcanite bars are down 9g or so from their peak, runecloth is down from 2g a stack, and some other crafting items have taken price hits as well. Gold sellers prices are also down a few bucks. I'm not entirely sure how that relates, if at all.
I think it has to do with the game/server reaching 'maturity'. Most of the first adopters who rushed to the scene have maxed out a character or two, and have them equipped with all the craftable items they're going to get. They also have an alt or so that can provide all of the players characters with whatever they need, so they don't visit the AH as much, driving up prices. So know you just have a trickle of characters passing through various levels and buying up some stuff, but at a slower rate than the original mass leveling that came with the server opening.
Anyway, I hope that all makes sense, cause i've been up far too late. And it's just my humble observations, I have no data to back any of it up.
I'm sorry, but what kind of 'expirement' was ever a failure? The point of one is to learn, and that happens regardless of wether or not you get the expected outcome.
I wish they could find a smarter way to fight the insanity of the american voter.
Have you ever considered the notion that the Democrats are insane (or wrong, ignorant of history, economics, etc)? Maybe your hubris is unwarranted- just something to consider.
I'm not interested in debating any specific topic with you- just asking you to engage in some introspection.
They're trying to woo moderates back into the fold(Hillary Clinton etc) by imposing conservative morality It's also a problem for democrats that they don't fool many people when they try to move to the center to woo your average 'insane american voter', and instead are offended by insincerity.
subject to Geneva Convention protections
Wrong. The Geneva convention is a recipricol agreement by signatory nations. Al-Qaida didn't sign it, and they certainly don't abide by it- both conditions are neccessary for the convention to apply, though I'd imagine abiding by it would be enough.
(This analogy doesn't apply to a fight-to-the-death, but then, I don't see any credible threat to the security of the United States anywhere in the world.)
These people have murdered us, and want to murder us. The analogy doesn't apply by your own admission. We do not tolerate being purposeful killed by anyone, and we will not treat them with any less conviction simply because they have not killed a sizable part of our population yet.
You actually gain status by not sinking to his level. We do not need status. We need to get these people to stop waging war on us, and that may require sinking to their level in the theater. I don't see why you have any question as to the fact that we are better than them, unless you somehow think executing rape victims and similar barbarity occur in our society. They would and have used our restraint against us.
Basically, what I see is that the rule of law is inconvenient for the administration,
This is not a civil or criminal proceeding, so US courts have no jurisdiction- outside of that, international law is a farce obeyed only as far as it advances the interests of nations that sign it. International law is routinely flouted because there is no enforcement mechanism short of war or intolerable trade sanctions, which are seldom bothered with. Regardless, the captives at gitmo et al are not covered by any internation agreement we have signed to.
You seem to have no concept of 'enemy', and this is a luxury afforded to you by living deep within the confines of a safe, civilized society. Were you to allow yourself to imagine something beyond your relatively safe confines, you may bring yourself to a point where you realize that all the philosophical posturing in the world does you no good, should you and all you hold dear fall to barbarians.
I know we are better than them. It's pretty obvious if you do a qualitative or quantitative comparison of the society we've built, and the societies that breeds these murderers. Such people learn only by necessity. It's far past time to teach them.
War is not a criminal proceeding. Viewing it as such (aka, the limped dicked response to the first WTC boming and the attack on the Cole) was seen as weakness by al-qaeda, and emboldened them to do 9-11.
In War, the prisoners thereof are usually held until the end of hostilities, so some of those assholes might be in there for a long time- and that doesn't bother me at all.
And again, no conventions or treaties apply to them because they do not represent any sovereign nation, nor do they fight in a manner consistent with any convention or treaty.
Basically, they're our bitches. The fact that some captives are released with a pulse leaves me inclined to think we're doing the right thing overall down there.
Non-violence and passive resistence actually bring out the morality in those capable of it. They do nothing against sociopaths and psychopaths
Sociopaths and psychopaths are exactly the type of people who carry out these terrorist attacks. There maybe a few ideolouges at the top who are fairly smart and capable (but still sociopathic), but suicide bombers are generally culled from the dregs of society, and people who bomb subways are definately sociopaths.
I know we don't have the stomach for a scorched earth campaign, and I'm not advocating turning all of the middle east into glass. There are plenty of good people there, I don't dispute that.
The people who fight us, budding government in Iraq, bomb iraqi policemen, and bomb london subways- they deserve no mercy or quarter. We need to have the stomach for hunting them down tirelessly.
...Or so it seems to many of us who don't go around spouting nonsense...
I'm sorry, did you miss the parts in history class where more free, western type nations had the biggest, baddest militaries first?
Do I really have to argue with you about wether or not westerners can slaughter the entire continent of africa, the middle east, many asian countries, etc, if we so choose?
Do I really have to argue with you about how societies that value property rights and self-criticism (in business, government, academics, religion,personally) can amass the wealth needed to afford the weapons we have? How scientific research towards things that make bigger, better weapons goes along alot smoother in said societies? That is the foturnate artifact of nature, and it seems pretty obvious to me.
Here's the real world for ya: WE (western nations) POSSESS THE CAPABILITY TO KILL EVERYONE THAT STANDS IN OUR WAY, with both nuclear and conventional methods. That we haven't already speaks volumes about our restraint. We fight with one hand behind our back.
Totalitarian, oppressive societies can often some years later copy what we produced half a century ago,(North Korea, Iran, etc) and the soviets made a decent showing of trying to keep up with the US, but in the end they collapsed in the effort. They all pale in comparison to what we (westerners) are capable of.
If you had bothered to think about it for even a minute, you might have realized what I was saying. Fortunately for those who follow, I have now explained it.
Violence begets violence
The dead aren't particularly violent. So if you manage to kill a great deal of your enemies, you've made progress.
Naked force has solved more issues in the history of mankind than diplomacy ever will.
It is a fortunate artifact of nature that a more free a society is, the more capable of exerting violence it will be. (IE, the united states, european nations) It is simply the will to act that we lack at times.
Non-violence and passive resistince only work on a relatively moral enemy. Ghandis and Martin Luther Kings get killed in totalitarian societies before they even have the attention of two dozen people.
We are not fighting a moral enemy here. The only way to win is to kill their command structure and enough of their ranks so that they either cannot muster an attack, or they realize they are so far outclassed that any further action is pointless.
A terrorist does what he does not out of sheer spite but in order to achieve political and ideological goals.
Not always. It seems as though we're actually going up against death-worshippers in this case, who can only use thin theological reasons to justify their actions (though islam does lend itself to this sort of behaviour far more readily than judeo-christian types)
The terrorist attacks in Iraq over the past few months, with a few televised exceptions, have been mostly aimed at the Iraqi population. What kind of freedom fighter does that sort of thing?
The sort who just wants to kill people, and doesn't do it very well when they try against the US military.
Same thing in Israel and their problems with terrorists.
In both cases, they're death worshippers, who have a technique and a stated goal, but no plan on how exactly their technique (killing civilians while vulnerable with bombs) will lead to their stated goal.
No rationality. A thin veneer of politics. But ultimately, they're a bunch of crazy fuckers who like to kill 'infidels', and they need to be put down like the rabid dogs they are.
I don't feel sympathy for the bootleggers: I feel admiration for their hard work and gratitude for how they keep the authentic culture machine well-oiled.
So, fucking the original creators of the material out of their share is A-ok with you because it fits your multi-cultural fantasy fetish?
Please, beat off all you like the glory of the multi-colored tapestry of rich ethnic heritage or whatever trash you like, but bootleggers are simply being dishonest (and arguably thieves) no matter what their race, country of origin, accent, skin color, or the slant of their eyes.
You may not like the state of copyright laws in the US, and in many cases I'd likely agree with you. But the law is the the law, and it applies regardless of any 'diversity' you bring to the street vendors of new york city.
The folks selling apples a generation or four ago had the decency to pay for their wares honestly. Street bootleggers don't.
When the facts have been out in the open for three and a half years, you don't need a link.
So is this one of those instances where if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes true? Offer a link, or re-read my previous post until the notion sinks in.
Just one little link. If the facts have been 'out in the open' surely you can spend three seconds to find a link supporting yourself.
You're pretty good at calling someone a liar without a single link to back your view up.
Nothing would get posted on the internet if everyone had to cite something when making a statement, but if you're going to yell LIAR LIAR at someone, at least have the decency to post one link supporting your insulting allegation.
Thank you for posting that.
Sadly, it was a complete waste of time to read. Something I should have expected.
For some reason they won't let me access the site with internet explorer, and I'm at work, so it's not like I have control over it.
I have no idea why they would be so obnoxious as to simply prohibit a browser from accessing their site- I don't really care if it renders imperfectly as long as I can read it.
Really, what kind of idiot does that sort of thing? Some smug, bearded Unix administrator high on the righteousness of open source?
Censorship is when the government bans publication under threat of arrest and imprisonment.
She was basically fired.
Get it straight.