Over 50 killed in latest U.S. drone strikes in Pakistan

[Norcan]

Look up the definition of murder, it is not murder. And I don't have to watch the news, I'm there for some of it first hand, not sitting on my ass behind a computer monitor talking or running my fingers on a keyboard as it were, about stuff I know nothing about.

How did you manage to type that then?

Go get 'em Rambo!

Actually, I'm taking a break for while, but have been there and will try to go back after the first of the year. What about you?

I couldn't care less mate.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

Look up the definition of murder, it is not murder. And I don't have to watch the news, I'm there for some of it first hand, not sitting on my ass behind a computer monitor talking or running my fingers on a keyboard as it were, about stuff I know nothing about.

How did you manage to type that then?

Go get 'em Rambo!

Actually, I'm taking a break for while, but have been there and will try to go back after the first of the year. What about you, want to come use your computer in Iraq or Afghanistan?

I think you'll find that the good Private Manning saved us all the bother.

[koheesti]

Typical, the person who has the experience and first hand knowledge is ridiculed by the ignorant "masses".

Edited December 20, 2010 by koheesti

[Carib]

Typical, the person who has the experience and first hand knowledge is ridiculed by the ignorant "masses".

Now that really made me laugh out loud, what " firsthand" knowledge would that be?? Please enlighten the "ignorant masses".

[metisdead]

An off topic post and reply to it have been removed from view.

[Norcan]

An off topic post and reply to it have been removed from view.

You mean my post asking "what's this got to do with Thailand?"

This really is pathetic.

[metisdead]

An off topic post and reply to it have been removed from view.

You mean my post asking "what's this got to do with Thailand?"

This really is pathetic.

Because this is the World News forum.

[whybother]

An off topic post and reply to it have been removed from view.

You mean my post asking "what's this got to do with Thailand?"

This really is pathetic.

It's in WORLD NEWS.

Edited December 20, 2010 by whybother

[flying]

Not as first hand as I would have liked, actually my friends do the drones,

Wow expert via friendship ! Do they give a degree for that?...Puleeze

Along with the situational morals shown for what is murder & what isn't

all I can say is dead is dead.

While those that defend their homeland against invaders are killing & all the

deaths attributed to the invaders is some kind of righteous/justified act of what....rescue????

Hopefully none of your own family will be subject to such thinking & go there based on such lies.

It is funny how the invasion cheer leaders here can sit & cheer this... war... policing action... invasion

...based on the chasing of a ghost....yet

If China invaded the US in an undeclared war/attack on a individual... & said sorry but we need to be here because Osama Been Somebody... is hiding in your country

We will walk your streets kicking in doors & yes we are sorry but there will be some collateral damage along the way.....BUT you know WE HAVE TO DO THIS

because we are protecting the world ...ya know?

Well while the same cheer leaders here would I guess be ok with it.....

The rest of us would be killing these invaders every chance we had. I guess we would be terrorist according to the cheer leaders here.

But when we were done dispensing with these invaders we would do you cheer leaders for treason

Edited December 20, 2010 by flying

[koheesti]

Not as first hand as I would have liked, actually my friends do the drones,

Wow expert via friendship ! Do they give a degree for that?...Puleeze

Along with the situational morals shown for what is murder & what isn't

all I can say is dead is dead.

While those that defend their homeland against invaders are killing & all the

deaths attributed to the invaders is some kind of righteous/justified act of what....rescue????

Hopefully none of your own family will be subject to such thinking & go there based on such lies.

It is funny how the invasion cheer leaders here can sit & cheer this... war... policing action... invasion

...based on the chasing of a ghost....yet

If China invaded the US in an undeclared war/attack on a individual... & said sorry but we need to be here because Osama Been Somebody... is hiding in your country

We will walk your streets kicking in doors & yes we are sorry but there will be some collateral damage along the way.....BUT you know WE HAVE TO DO THIS

because we are protecting the world ...ya know?

Well while the same cheer leaders here would I guess be ok with it.....

The rest of us would be killing these invaders every chance we had. I guess we would be terrorist according to the cheer leaders here.

But when we were done dispensing with these invaders we would do you cheer leaders for treason

Welcome to the Real World! In the Real World, the strongest and most powerful can actually go around kicking in doors looking for someone who has pissed them off. That's the way it always has been and always will be. The Redcoats used to pull that door kicking-in on the Americans and now they do it for the Americans. I'm sure some time in the future, some country (or alien race like the Zobamians?) will come to America and kick in doors. What goes around, comes around.

That said, I agree with you that there is something wrong with killing "suspects", nevermind the innocent collateral deaths. I would HOPE, that by "suspect" they have more info along the lines of "the bank was robbed, there is a man leaving the bank wearing a mask, carrying a big bag of cash - he is the suspect, BANG!" and NOT "the bank was robbed, that man leaving the bank fits the description - he is a suspect, BANG!"

Edited December 21, 2010 by koheesti

[johna]

The Taliban have been making many people miserable for decades,

The taliban haven't been around for decades. But there predecessors have, though only thanks to the generosity of the Americans and the Saudis. There was, though, a government in Afghanistan which promoted women's rights. It was the communist government.

Accidental would keep it from being murder wouldn't it.

I'm no expert but I guess it would depend on the extent to which the person pulling the trigger could be expected to anticipate civilian deaths. As drones have killed thousands of Pakistanis and Afghans, I don't think there's much general excuse for ignorance but in any individual case it's hard to say. What it's not hard to say is that the Afghan war is murderous barbarism which is also utterly counter-productive.

Murder would be killing with malice or with malice aforethought, it is not their intention to kill or maim innocent civilians. Unfortunately mistakes and accidents happen, and if they can prove negligence, personnel can be prosecuted for that. I think that was the case in one of the wedding parties being attacked, they said the personnel didn't asses the intelligence properly before authorizing the attack, I don't recall what the punishment was.

So if I kill in cold blood with the defence "I was just following orders" it would not be murder.

I think the Nurenberg trials settled that point.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

Welcome to the Real World! In the Real World, the strongest and most powerful can actually go around kicking in doors looking for someone who has pissed them off. That's the way it always has been and always will be. The Redcoats used to pull that door kicking-in on the Americans and now they do it for the Americans. I'm sure some time in the future, some country (or alien race like the Zobamians?) will come to America and kick in doors. What goes around, comes around.

So there's no such thing as morality, only interests and the extent to which you can get away with pursuing them. In that case, I hope you never complain about people launching attacks on Americans - like, oh, I don't know, 9/11. After all, if you've pissed them off - and there's no point denying that - there's nothing wrong with their kicking in your door.

[Ulysses G.]

Not as first hand as I would have liked, actually my friends do the drones,

If China invaded the US in an undeclared war/attack on a individual... & said sorry but we need to be here because Osama Been Somebody... is hiding in your country

Welcome to the Real World!

If Osama Bin Ladin had launched a huge terrorist attack on China and gone to the US, he would not have been sheltered, he would have been handed over to them in a second. All Afghanistan had to do was turn over this mass murderer and they would not have been invaded.

All Saddam had to do is let the nuclear inspectors do their job and he would still be happily throwing his enemies off the roof and videotaping it for late night enjoyment.

They brought war on themselves. It is not like the US attacked these creeps without good reason.

Edited December 21, 2010 by Ulysses G.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

The Taliban offered to hand Bin Landen over to a neutral country if the americans gave them proof of Bin Laden's guilt and stopped bombing their country. However unpleasant the Taliban are/were, those are not unreasonable demands and I would certainly hope that Britain would ask for proof before handing over a suspect to the americans (although they probably wouldn't because British governments are astonishingly spineless when it comes to dealing with the americans).

[beechguy]

Not as first hand as I would have liked, actually my friends do the drones,

Wow expert via friendship ! Do they give a degree for that?...Puleeze

Along with the situational morals shown for what is murder & what isn't

all I can say is dead is dead.

While those that defend their homeland against invaders are killing & all the

deaths attributed to the invaders is some kind of righteous/justified act of what....rescue????

Hopefully none of your own family will be subject to such thinking & go there based on such lies.

It is funny how the invasion cheer leaders here can sit & cheer this... war... policing action... invasion

...based on the chasing of a ghost....yet

If China invaded the US in an undeclared war/attack on a individual... & said sorry but we need to be here because Osama Been Somebody... is hiding in your country

We will walk your streets kicking in doors & yes we are sorry but there will be some collateral damage along the way.....BUT you know WE HAVE TO DO THIS

because we are protecting the world ...ya know?

Well while the same cheer leaders here would I guess be ok with it.....

The rest of us would be killing these invaders every chance we had. I guess we would be terrorist according to the cheer leaders here.

But when we were done dispensing with these invaders we would do you cheer leaders for treason

Actually I don't think your post doesn't make a lot of sense, and that was the reason for some of my previous comments. You can write all of ths stuff you want and try to impress these other guys, but for many of us, it's clear to see the BS. If you got some of your knowledge from first hand experience instead of reading websites and newspapers you would probably think differently.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

If you got some of your knowledge from first hand experience instead of reading websites and newspapers you would probably think differently.

You mean, if someone were part of the american - or British or whoever - army and he or she were involved directly in the killing, they would think differently about tit. Yes, of course they would. They'd be in a worse position to reflect on the morality of their actions. That's one of the reasons why - in theory, at least - the army don't get to decide which countries to pick fights with.

[geriatrickid]

In reality it is an autonomous area where the Pakistani government is absent. Pakistan does not control the border region, the Taliban does

It's a tribal zone where the government does not have legal authority; it's not that the Pakistani army can't be bothered to go there - they can't. And heroin has been there for years. I went there in the early 90s, long before the Taliban appeared, and back then it was all guns and smack, though the Americans were not especially worried about it then.

Gee. You agreed with me and supported my complete statement, not just the little phrase you quoted, by going one step further, and claiming that Pakistan does not have legal authority. If Pakistan doesn't have the ability or the legal authority to stop the insurgents, and that's what they are, then it is up to Afghanistan and its allies to prevent these terrorists from infiltrating across the border and killing Afghanis. The fact of the matter is that Afghanistan has begged and pleaded with these Pashtun thugs to cease and desist, but the Afghani requests are ignored.

BTW, you are very wrong about the Pakistani army not being bothered to go there. They went in force in from 2004 to 2006 and consistently had their butts kicked by the Taliban. The Pakistani army basically surrendered control to the Taliban. As such, it falls upon outsiders to secure the border area. It's all quite simple. If the Taliban stick to the stone age glory that is the FATA and Pakistan and stays out of Afghanistan, there would be no need for tough self defense activity on the part of ISAF.

It's wonderful that you were in that region in the 90's. Were you there as a heroin or arms trafficer? I can't see you as an aid worker since it's been a no go zone for ages. Backpackers and tourists do not go there. So you must have an interesting story to tell. Lucky you were there before the Taliban took over. They don't like foreigners, no matter how sypathetic. They are after all Dhimmi. Some of us have had interaction with the Taliban, their apologists, their backers and their millions of victims.

Edited December 21, 2010 by geriatrickid

[koheesti]

Welcome to the Real World! In the Real World, the strongest and most powerful can actually go around kicking in doors looking for someone who has pissed them off. That's the way it always has been and always will be. The Redcoats used to pull that door kicking-in on the Americans and now they do it for the Americans. I'm sure some time in the future, some country (or alien race like the Zobamians?) will come to America and kick in doors. What goes around, comes around.

So there's no such thing as morality, only interests and the extent to which you can get away with pursuing them. In that case, I hope you never complain about people launching attacks on Americans - like, oh, I don't know, 9/11. After all, if you've pissed them off - and there's no point denying that - there's nothing wrong with their kicking in your door.

Americans don't have to complain. We can do something about it - and are.

Edited December 21, 2010 by koheesti

[beechguy]

If you got some of your knowledge from first hand experience instead of reading websites and newspapers you would probably think differently.

You mean, if someone were part of the american - or British or whoever - army and he or she were involved directly in the killing, they would think differently about tit. Yes, of course they would. They'd be in a worse position to reflect on the morality of their actions. That's one of the reasons why - in theory, at least - the army don't get to decide which countries to pick fights with.

No I mean, that if many of you saw things first hand, you would understand what is going on. and if you do have to read about it, choose the material more carefully. Some of you seem to be under the impression they are launching these drone attacks and shooting up the place at will, that's not the case.

Edited December 21, 2010 by beechguy

[koheesti]

The Taliban offered to hand Bin Landen over to a neutral country if the americans gave them proof of Bin Laden's guilt and stopped bombing their country. However unpleasant the Taliban are/were, those are not unreasonable demands and I would certainly hope that Britain would ask for proof before handing over a suspect to the americans (although they probably wouldn't because British governments are astonishingly spineless when it comes to dealing with the americans).

I remember the Taliban's offer.

Serious question - Which countries were neutral immediately after 9/11? Switzerland?

[Ulysses G.]

It looks like the Taliban should not have been so insistent about demands that they would never have honored.

[SweeneyAgonistes]

No I mean, that if many of you saw things first hand, you would understand what is going on. Some of you seem to be under the impression they are launching these drone attacks and shooting up the place at will, that's not the case.

No, I'd have a very partial view of what happened in a few instances but because I would be involved in it, I'd be in worse position to make a judgment, That's why, for example, the practice of embedding journalists is so terrible (and why governments are so keen on it). As for shooting up the place, thousands of innocents have been killed by drone attacks. That sounds like shooting up the place to me.

Serious question - Which countries were neutral immediately after 9/11? Switzerland?

I don't' know but the offer was instantly refused by Bush so the question never arose. The refusal was not based on a rejection of the neutrality of any particular country which had been proposed; it was based on america's 'right' to kick in any doors which it chose to kick in.

[beechguy]

No I mean, that if many of you saw things first hand, you would understand what is going on. Some of you seem to be under the impression they are launching these drone attacks and shooting up the place at will, that's not the case.

No, I'd have a very partial view of what happened in a few instances but because I would be involved in it, I'd be in worse position to make a judgment, That's why, for example, the practice of embedding journalists is so terrible (and why governments are so keen on it). As for shooting up the place, thousands of innocents have been killed by drone attacks. That sounds like shooting up the place to me.

Serious question - Which countries were neutral immediately after 9/11? Switzerland?

I don't' know but the offer was instantly refused by Bush so the question never arose. The refusal was not based on a rejection of the neutrality of any particular country which had been proposed; it was based on america's 'right' to kick in any doors which it chose to kick in.

You would have, is a view that there are a number of steps involved in conducting those operations, and preventing civilian casualties is considered in that process.

Anyway, if you were really concerned about civilian casualties you would be complaining about the Taliban and Al Qaeda intentional attacks, last report I saw attributed about 76% of the casualties to them. But I suppose it's kind of easy for some to ignore those facts.

Edited December 21, 2010 by beechguy

[beechguy]

It looks like the Taliban should not have been so insistent about demands that they would never have honored.

The Taliban wasn't even considered to be a legitimate government anyway were they? I think they were recognized by about 3 countries, N. Korea was probably one of them.

Did a quick look as I couldn't recall, according to Wikipedia they were diplomatically recognized by Saudi Arabia, U.A.E. and Pakistan. N.Korea didn't get their chance I suppose.

Edited December 21, 2010 by beechguy

[SweeneyAgonistes]

You would have, is a view that there are a number of steps involved in conducting those operations, and preventing civilian casualties is considered in that process.

And that's not reported? Don't be ridiculous. What do you think the army has a press office for? I don't need to join the army to get information on what the army claims it does to avoid civilian deaths.

you would be complaining about the Taliban and Al Qaeda attacks, last report I saw attributed about 76% to them.

Link? If there were members of the Taliban posting on Thaivisa I would argue with them too.

[beechguy]

You would have, is a view that there are a number of steps involved in conducting those operations, and preventing civilian casualties is considered in that process.

And that's not reported? Don't be ridiculous. What do you think the army has a press office for? I don't need to join the army to get information on what the army claims it does to avoid civilian deaths.

you would be complaining about the Taliban and Al Qaeda attacks, last report I saw attributed about 76% to them.

Link? If there were members of the Taliban posting on Thaivisa I would argue with them too.

I'm a little busy to find the quote I saw here on TV, but there were some U.N. reports placing a lot responsibility on them, I'll try to find some of those a little later.

Edit: Did a quick search and found this CNN Report if you want to beleive them, it gives the Taliban response to the report.

http://articles.cnn.com/2010-08-12/world/afghanistan.attacks.taliban_1_civilian-casualties-afghan-security-forces-taliban?_s=PM:WORLD

Edited December 21, 2010 by beechguy

[slapout]

Certain types only seem to feel "compassion" when someone is killed by American troops.

"Compassion" for what are referred to as civilian causalities, seems to be expressed as anti whomever. The US seems to be flavor of the year for many, while forgetting the other partners, including those citizens of the countries involved, who in some cases are pinpointing potential targets.

Civilian causalities in a free fire/war zone is not ever going to be totally eliminated. I would propose that most of those pointing fingers/blame have never served in a military unit, under hostile fire. A sad old fact is that you do not have the inclination nor the where with all, to determine, who is the friendly and who is trying to add another notch to their counting stick, when you are under fire/threat. The friendlies are in most cases recognized as those who are hunkered down with you within your control area. Humans seem to have a survival instinct, that when coupled with firepower is not real selective in perceived threatening situation.

[metisdead]

Inflammatory posts and replies have been removed from view.

[flying]

If you got some of your knowledge from first hand experience instead of reading websites and newspapers you would probably think differently.

And yet...Your the one doing quick internet searches?

Sure pal....There is a stool for you somewhere in Pataya .

I hear all the "In The Know" guys formerly of a 3 letter govt group sit & compare fictional glory days.

Get over yourself & realize your just another keyboard in cyberspace. Your glory days exist in your mind only & don't impress here.

Have something with actual content to add? Other than claims of superior knowledge?

Edited December 21, 2010 by flying

[ableguy]

Has there ever been a war anywhere with no civilian casualties? It is regrettable, but war is sometimes a necessary evil.

This is not an excuse. It is murder committed by USAmerican military.

Why is there a war anyway?

It's not murder, and I guess you don't watch the news much do you.

Which news ?

If it's not murder, suppose neither was the accidental drone attack on a wedding party..........

What do you call suicide bomb attacks that kill and maim, what do you call IED that kill and maim, what do you call ragheads who plan and carry out these attacks in the name of god ? freinds , innocent until proved guilty in a court of law? get real there is no law there, and if you do not understand this suggest you start following the news, please dont come back with Western law is manipulated and prove even more ignorance.