collateral damage - boston to afghanistan

24

Comments

  • IdrisIdris Posts: 2,317
    stickfig13 wrote:

    The United States of America CURRENTLY takes more precaution and risks more lives to ensure that collateral damage is minimized than any other nation in the history of the world. Prove me wrong

    Yet they still have killed more innocent people than any other nation in the history of the world, prove me wrong...
    -

    Really, 'One' innocent person being killed is too much.
  • stickfig13stickfig13 Posts: 1,532
    Idris wrote:
    stickfig13 wrote:

    The United States of America CURRENTLY takes more precaution and risks more lives to ensure that collateral damage is minimized than any other nation in the history of the world. Prove me wrong

    Yet they still have killed more innocent people than any other nation in the history of the world, prove me wrong...
    -

    Really, 'One' innocent person being killed is too much.


    Can't argue with that. My point was that the United States makes every effort to prevent collateral damage. More than any country has throughout the history of warfare. Does it still happen? You bet. It's a fact of war. Innocent people die.
    Sacramento 10-30-00, Bridge School 10-20 and 10-21-01, Bridge School 10-25 and 10-26-01, Irvine 06-02-03, Irvine 06-03-03, San Diego 06-05-03, San Diego 07-07-06, Los Angeles 07-09-06, Santa Barbara 07-13-06, London UK 06-18-07, San Diego 10-9-09, San Diego 2013, LA 1 2013
  • JC29856JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    someone else with half a brain sees the similarities too...

    http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/1682
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    JC29856 wrote:
    someone else with half a brain sees the similarities too...

    http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/1682

    exactly ...

    not to dismiss the tragedy that occurred the other day ... but perspective is almost always in order ... significantly more people died in iran on the same day due to an earthquake and the fear and horror that was felt the other day is felt daily by people living under american drones and air strikes ... think back to the sadness, the anger and the fury and wonder how people who live in afghanistan, pakistan and iraq feel every day ...

    saying americans take more care to save innocent lives in their wars is akin to saying rapists only enter through unlocked doors ...
  • stickfig13 wrote:
    Idris wrote:
    stickfig13 wrote:

    The United States of America CURRENTLY takes more precaution and risks more lives to ensure that collateral damage is minimized than any other nation in the history of the world. Prove me wrong

    Yet they still have killed more innocent people than any other nation in the history of the world, prove me wrong...
    -

    Really, 'One' innocent person being killed is too much.


    Can't argue with that. My point was that the United States makes every effort to prevent collateral damage. More than any country has throughout the history of warfare. Does it still happen? You bet. It's a fact of war. Innocent people die.


    When you drop as many bombs as the states. Wage as many wars as the states. Kill as many innocent people as the states. You have to look for a positive for all the killing you do all over the world. Let me guess that Israel is second in preventitive collateral damage? Just a wild guess!

    The poison from the poison stream caught up to you ELEVEN years ago and you floated out of here. Sept. 14, 08

  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    I guess you don't wanna bet on it.

    I'm no genius but it doesn't take a lot to think that 2 crude bombs in 2 different locations in a crowded place that go off at almost the same time are not meant for only 1 person.

    bet on it!? ... honestly - let's just say hypothetically it was a hit on a US target ... do you honestly think they would tell us? ...

    just like you honestly think they are gonna tell us who or why they are killing people overseas? ... all you hear is second in command or militant ... based on what? ... there is no proof ever ... for a country that supposedly believes in justice - it's sure afraid of giving anyone a fair trial ...

    but like i said - it's not that necessarily believe this is the case ... it's just that there has to be a motive and this is not "silly" as you believe ... it's definitely plausible ...
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    JimmyV wrote:
    I see one post that could possibly be interpreted that way. Not from anyone who has engaged you in a dialogue about it. You are projecting.

    dude ... if americans cared about collateral damage - would it not behoove the public to denounce the significant amount of casualties currently stockpiling? ... america went into 2 wars ... do you know how many innocent people died? ... based on lies? ... many of them children ... heck, forget about the war ... do you know how many children died due to the sanctions imposed by the US on iraq prior through lack of medicine? ... or those suffering from the affects of depleted uranium? ...
  • dimitrispearljamdimitrispearljam Posts: 139,721
    polaris_x wrote:
    JimmyV wrote:
    I see one post that could possibly be interpreted that way. Not from anyone who has engaged you in a dialogue about it. You are projecting.

    dude ... if americans cared about collateral damage - would it not behoove the public to denounce the significant amount of casualties currently stockpiling? ... america went into 2 wars ... do you know how many innocent people died? ... based on lies? ... many of them children ... heck, forget about the war ... do you know how many children died due to the sanctions imposed by the US on iraq prior through lack of medicine? ... or those suffering from the affects of depleted uranium? ...
    from the moment you drop a bomb,you going to war, "innocent people" will die

    even the ones wear a uniform and are in the army..

    so,if im at airforce at Canada and Germany start a war with Canada and drop a bomb and i got killed,im at "innocent people"too..just cos i serve myt country ,doesnt mean i deserve to die more or less than a guy has a grosery store in my country..

    the problem is why the war started..



    its a fuckin endless circle
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    from the moment you drop a bomb,you going to war, "innocent people" will die

    even the ones wear a uniform and are in the army..

    so,if im at airforce at Canada and Germany start a war with Canada and drop a bomb and i got killed,im at "innocent people"too..just cos i serve myt country ,doesnt mean i deserve to die more or less than a guy has a grosery store in my country..

    the problem is why the war started..



    its a fuckin endless circle

    well ... that's been debated before ... especially if one enlists in the army ... but i'm gonna pass on that one - i think i have probably irked enough with my other points ...
  • JimmyVJimmyV Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,305
    polaris_x wrote:
    JimmyV wrote:
    I see one post that could possibly be interpreted that way. Not from anyone who has engaged you in a dialogue about it. You are projecting.

    dude ... if americans cared about collateral damage - would it not behoove the public to denounce the significant amount of casualties currently stockpiling? ... america went into 2 wars ... do you know how many innocent people died? ... based on lies? ... many of them children ... heck, forget about the war ... do you know how many children died due to the sanctions imposed by the US on iraq prior through lack of medicine? ... or those suffering from the affects of depleted uranium? ...

    So is it about "Americans" or is it about people in this thread? Because you said there were posts here indicating that people do not care about collateral damage and that really is not the case.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,489
    polaris_x wrote:
    I guess you don't wanna bet on it.

    I'm no genius but it doesn't take a lot to think that 2 crude bombs in 2 different locations in a crowded place that go off at almost the same time are not meant for only 1 person.

    bet on it!? ... honestly - let's just say hypothetically it was a hit on a US target ... do you honestly think they would tell us? ...

    just like you honestly think they are gonna tell us who or why they are killing people overseas? ... all you hear is second in command or militant ... based on what? ... there is no proof ever ... for a country that supposedly believes in justice - it's sure afraid of giving anyone a fair trial ...

    but like i said - it's not that necessarily believe this is the case ... it's just that there has to be a motive and this is not "silly" as you believe ... it's definitely plausible ...

    Either you have gone off the deep end or you are just afraid to admit that it's a pretty silly suggestion even though you now know it.

    Again you are projecting other things on to me. And while both are awful, there is certainly a difference between collateral damage and specifically targeting civilians. And the reality is, as you say, we don't know for sure what is really being done during those missile strikes. But I am pretty confident that the Boston bombing was the latter. Don;t get me wrong, I'm waiting to see what they find. My mind isn't made up. But I'm not against eliminating a ridiculous argument that is made after a tragedy simply to try and make yoru own political statement.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • dimitrispearljamdimitrispearljam Posts: 139,721
    polaris_x wrote:
    from the moment you drop a bomb,you going to war, "innocent people" will die

    even the ones wear a uniform and are in the army..

    so,if im at airforce at Canada and Germany start a war with Canada and drop a bomb and i got killed,im at "innocent people"too..just cos i serve myt country ,doesnt mean i deserve to die more or less than a guy has a grosery store in my country..

    the problem is why the war started..



    its a fuckin endless circle

    well ... that's been debated before ... especially if one enlists in the army ... but i'm gonna pass on that one - i think i have probably irked enough with my other points ...
    i just want to make a point,about if any country go to a war doesnt mean some people deserve to die and are not innocent..
    the war and the reason started is the issue.


    so if usa want to bomb santam country with no reason,all die in iraq are innocent,not only the children.
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    Either you have gone off the deep end or you are just afraid to admit that it's a pretty silly suggestion even though you now know it.

    Again you are projecting other things on to me. And while both are awful, there is certainly a difference between collateral damage and specifically targeting civilians. And the reality is, as you say, we don't know for sure what is really being done during those missile strikes. But I am pretty confident that the Boston bombing was the latter. Don;t get me wrong, I'm waiting to see what they find. My mind isn't made up. But I'm not against eliminating a ridiculous argument that is made after a tragedy simply to try and make yoru own political statement.

    well ... based on this - i suppose there is no room for discussion ...
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    i just want to make a point,about if any country go to a war doesnt mean some people deserve to die and are not innocent..
    the war and the reason started is the issue.


    so if usa want to bomb santam country with no reason,all die in iraq are innocent,not only the children.

    i understand your point ... it's a valid one ... all i'm saying is some may not agree with you ... that's all ...
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,489
    polaris_x wrote:
    Either you have gone off the deep end or you are just afraid to admit that it's a pretty silly suggestion even though you now know it.

    Again you are projecting other things on to me. And while both are awful, there is certainly a difference between collateral damage and specifically targeting civilians. And the reality is, as you say, we don't know for sure what is really being done during those missile strikes. But I am pretty confident that the Boston bombing was the latter. Don;t get me wrong, I'm waiting to see what they find. My mind isn't made up. But I'm not against eliminating a ridiculous argument that is made after a tragedy simply to try and make yoru own political statement.

    well ... based on this - i suppose there is no room for discussion ...

    Like you were having a discussion anyhow.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • dimitrispearljamdimitrispearljam Posts: 139,721
    And while both are awful, there is certainly a difference between collateral damage and specifically targeting civilians..
    about that..how can anyone of us know the truth?
    i mean,a bomb go to pakistan,,and kill instead of 100 military ,killed 20 civilians..media at usa say,was wrong,the bomb was to hit military target..
    how we know if the target wasnt civilians in the first place??to make more noise,to make people of the country to turn against their own goverment?

    and as for the attack at usa..ofcourse they attack only to civilians..
    first of all,you cant get even close to military targets at the usa and second terrorist want you to hit your west way of life,to make you feel fear that you arent safe..+ cant control the media and public opinion when the tagret is people,than a military target..
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • cincybearcatcincybearcat Posts: 16,489
    And while both are awful, there is certainly a difference between collateral damage and specifically targeting civilians..
    about that..how can anyone of us know the truth?


    I get your point and agree. I believe I tried to say as much, that we don't really know in a lot of situations. Especially military strikes. We don't really know what precautions they take and whether or not they even care to try.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • dimitrispearljamdimitrispearljam Posts: 139,721
    And while both are awful, there is certainly a difference between collateral damage and specifically targeting civilians..
    about that..how can anyone of us know the truth?


    I get your point and agree. I believe I tried to say as much, that we don't really know in a lot of situations. Especially military strikes. We don't really know what precautions they take and whether or not they even care to try.
    exactly..at 1996 we had a crisis with Turkey,almost to be in a war..
    what was the orders and what we done in the airbase that week..was complitly different what was the official shit the goverment and politicians was saying at the media.
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    Like you were having a discussion anyhow.

    would you have preferred that i responded to your slags with: "either you are too stupid or simply too close minded to accept that if the US can bomb buildings to kill 1 person - why wouldn't others?"

    would that have been better?
  • IdrisIdris Posts: 2,317
    stickfig13 wrote:
    Idris wrote:
    stickfig13 wrote:

    The United States of America CURRENTLY takes more precaution and risks more lives to ensure that collateral damage is minimized than any other nation in the history of the world. Prove me wrong

    Yet they still have killed more innocent people than any other nation in the history of the world, prove me wrong...
    -

    Really, 'One' innocent person being killed is too much.


    Can't argue with that. My point was that the United States makes every effort to prevent collateral damage. More than any country has throughout the history of warfare. Does it still happen? You bet. It's a fact of war. Innocent people die.

    The US makes every effort to prevent innocent people from being killed.

    The Nukes they dropped over Japan only killed bad people, the cancers that have risen in Iraq have only hit the 'terrorists',

    American killing technology is so sophisticated that the depleted Uranium they have dropped on scores of people will only burn the skin off of the guilty, the birth defects from our chemical weapons, the lives of people yet to even be born are destroyed. But US tech knows that they will end up being bad so lets just destroy them before they are even born.

    The US cares very little about the lives of others, if they truly cared, they would not start/fight these unjust wars to begin with.
    -

    But look at us hypocrites and our very selective empathy, a few people sadly die in a bomb blast in Boston, and we all of a sudden care about life, last week a drone bomb ripped the legs off a few kids in Afghanistan, and it barley even makes the bottom scroll on CNN.
  • Last-12-ExitLast-12-Exit Charleston, SC Posts: 8,661
    Idris wrote:
    stickfig13 wrote:

    The United States of America CURRENTLY takes more precaution and risks more lives to ensure that collateral damage is minimized than any other nation in the history of the world. Prove me wrong

    Yet they still have killed more innocent people than any other nation in the history of the world, prove me wrong...
    -

    Really, 'One' innocent person being killed is too much.

    Do you have any numbers to back this up? Germany alone killed over 6.5 million innocent people in less than a 6 year period.
  • dignindignin Posts: 9,337
    The mainstream media had no problem showing the carnage after the bombings in Boston. How often do they show the carnage (on both sides) of the battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan?
  • dimitrispearljamdimitrispearljam Posts: 139,721
    dignin wrote:
    The mainstream media had no problem showing the carnage after the bombings in Boston. How often do they show the carnage (on both sides) of the battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan?
    this is true!!like how the media works with israel and palaistine,depence the country and the audience they have..
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • dimitrispearljamdimitrispearljam Posts: 139,721
    btw collateral damage...how and from where all of us take the information about how many "innocent people"killed at an attack??where ever this attack in the planet happened?
    from media, right??
    is anyone out there who is not believing that the countries or the people with money and power control what the media will say to public??seriously..
    "...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
    "..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
    “..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
  • peacefrompaulpeacefrompaul Posts: 25,293
    Pasha said the main Taliban suspect was in the house that was hit and was killed along with a woman and the children, ages 1 to 12, who were members of the suspect's family.

    No idea what this has to do with the Boston attacks but I wont shed a tear for the loss of a terrorist and his family.

    That's fucking sick and not in the good way
  • peacefrompaulpeacefrompaul Posts: 25,293
    stickfig13 wrote:

    The United States of America CURRENTLY takes more precaution and risks more lives to ensure that collateral damage is minimized than any other nation in the history of the world. Prove me wrong

    Well, my goodness! How nice of us to do that!
  • SmellymanSmellyman Asia Posts: 4,524
    stickfig13 wrote:

    The United States of America CURRENTLY takes more precaution and risks more lives to ensure that collateral damage is minimized than any other nation in the history of the world. Prove me wrong

    Well, my goodness! How nice of us to do that!

    a million killed in the middle east were 99.99% evil doers!
  • IdrisIdris Posts: 2,317
    Idris wrote:
    stickfig13 wrote:

    The United States of America CURRENTLY takes more precaution and risks more lives to ensure that collateral damage is minimized than any other nation in the history of the world. Prove me wrong

    Yet they still have killed more innocent people than any other nation in the history of the world, prove me wrong...
    -

    Really, 'One' innocent person being killed is too much.

    Do you have any numbers to back this up? Germany alone killed over 6.5 million innocent people in less than a 6 year period.

    Even given the time of a thousand years, that still would not be enough time to calculate the amount of innocent blood lost due to US actions, both direct and by it's numerous proxy wars.

    But you have to understand something, right at the end of my earlier post I said
    Really, 'One' innocent person being killed is too much

    So regardless of the US coming in second to the Nazis (what is that really some kind of achievement?) in killing innocent people is quite insignificant to me, cause (as I said earlier) 'One' innocent is already too much.

    But if it's numbers you want, (like this is some game) how many millions of Natives (the real Americans) has the US killed? Even conservative estimates are in the millions, going as high as 100 Million.

    But let me indulge you for a second. Let's not include the countless lives lost due to US actions, let's start fresh, clean slate. Starting right 'Now' this second.

    How many people are suffering due to US operations,actions right now? How many corrupt governments is the US supporting right now? (get the idea?)

    And this whole ridiculous concept that is rehashed over and over about how the US cares so much about innocent people and how much care they take in destroying these other nations, other people. How magnanimous of the US to care so much about these people.

    Wars the US should not even be fighting/starting, let alone talk about avoiding innocent deaths. We are in no position to be talking about "avoiding innocent deaths".
  • JC29856JC29856 Posts: 9,617
    collateral damage - boston to afghanistan
    1234by JC29856 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 6:14 am


    "Basically, the note says ... the bombings were retribution for the U.S. crimes against Muslims in places like Iraq and Afghanistan and that the victims of the Boston bombing were 'collateral damage,' the same way innocent victims have been collateral damage in U.S. wars around the world," said CBS News reporter John Miller, who is a former spokesman for the FBI.
  • JimmyVJimmyV Boston's MetroWest Posts: 19,305
    JC29856 wrote:
    collateral damage - boston to afghanistan
    1234by JC29856 » Tue Apr 16, 2013 6:14 am


    "Basically, the note says ... the bombings were retribution for the U.S. crimes against Muslims in places like Iraq and Afghanistan and that the victims of the Boston bombing were 'collateral damage,' the same way innocent victims have been collateral damage in U.S. wars around the world," said CBS News reporter John Miller, who is a former spokesman for the FBI.

    He is both a murderer and delusional. Also, he too does not know what collateral damage means.

    Part time jihadist, part time college student partying it up and doing drugs. I call bullshit on whatever justification these two fools convinced themselves of in their quest to commit mass murder.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
Sign In or Register to comment.