Drones being operated in UK attacking Afghanistan

[Hillpig]

Major General Butler died in 1940. He was the most highly decorated Marine ever. Two Medals of Honor & the Marine Corps Brevet Medal. I don't believe for one minute that he believed his oath of allegiance to his President or the Corps was no longer binding. Semper Fi means, as you undoubtedly know, ALWAYS faithful, a man like General Butler would not take such an oath lightly.

 

To possess physical courage is an admirable thing. To possess moral courage is, in some ways, even more admirable.

 

The General possessed both, & as such commands respect. He did not speak out in the manner he did for the fun of it or to gain fame, he already had that & it would have been so much easier to lay back & take the plaudits.

Speaking out cost him dearly but he was a man of principle & was not deterred. You may not agree with him Harleyman, but I'm afraid his experience, background, & knowledge of the upper reaches of power trump any opinions which you, or I, may hold.

 

As to killing your enemies using machines. Do you ever try & put yourself in the other mans position?

Just for a moment, think what your reaction would be to foreigners sending machines into your country, & killing your family & friends.

Would that be it for you Harleyman? Would you give in & live your life from then on as the foreigners dictated?

Or would you find a way, whatever it took, to seek out those responsible & exact the most bloody revenge possible upon them?

 

If you would take the second course of action, why do you imagine your enemies would not do likewise?

We can say what we like about our current enemy, but they do not lack for courage or fanaticism.

 

There is no doubt of the fanatiscism, I have reservations about the courage, my point is that these attributes of the enemy is irrelevant.

 

I believe that we must be more practical, these people seek to dominate the world and in effect subjugate the west. If we wish to preserve our way of life then we should be prepared to be as fanatic as they are and use the superior technologies in our possession including drones.

 

Remember, when the Turks conquered Constantinople they did it due to their superior cannon, in 1453, they had the technology and they used it, we must do the same, albeit many centuries later, the principle remains the same.

 

---------- Post added 01-05-2013 at 20:54 ----------

 

Regarding General Smedley Butler, undoubtedly a brave and rmarkable man. His warnings on the military/industrial complex were echoed by, of all people Eisenhower in one of his last speeches before leaving office as President.

 

I have no doubt he sincerely believed that foreign adventures by the US were a bad thing. I wonder what his attitude would have been had he lived beyond 1940 and witnessed Pearl Harbour?

[mjw47]

Hillpig. Had he been young enough he would have rejoined the Corps & fought the enemies of his country. The thing is the Germans, Japanese, Italians fought mainly conventional Wars as we understand them.

We are up against a whole new ball game now though. As I see it there is good news & bad news in the situation.

The good news is that no Islamic country is strong enough on it's own to pose a realistic threat to Europe or the US. Also, I cannot see a group of them combining in an Axis style alliance so as to provide a creditable force.

They are incredibly divided with differences of religion, Sunni, Shi'ite & various other offshoots of Islam all of whom appear to hate each others guts. Also their leaders all appear to suffer from enormous Egos (not unlike our lot) or religious fanaticism, or both.

They remind me of Europe in the Middle Ages & they are more likely to wage war amongst themselves than attack us.

 

The bad news however, is that the various terror groups which exist cannot be defeated in a conventional manner. Wipe out one lot & another takes it's place, negotiate an agreement with one group & it holds no sway with another.

The only thing I'm pretty sure of, is that if we continue to encroach into other peoples countries & kill innocents we will only increase the problem.

 

They cannot win, & we have to make clear the futility of their actions, but without adding to the hatred already engendered thus far.

And no, I have absolutely no idea how we do that, but as there are a lot of people out there smarter than me I'm sure someone will come up with a solution before it escalates to the point of no return.

[Hillpig]

Hillpig. Had he been young enough he would have rejoined the Corps & fought the enemies of his country. The thing is the Germans, Japanese, Italians fought mainly conventional Wars as we understand them.

We are up against a whole new ball game now though. As I see it there is good news & bad news in the situation.

The good news is that no Islamic country is strong enough on it's own to pose a realistic threat to Europe or the US. Also, I cannot see a group of them combining in an Axis style alliance so as to provide a creditable force.

They are incredibly divided with differences of religion, Sunni, Shi'ite & various other offshoots of Islam all of whom appear to hate each others guts. Also their leaders all appear to suffer from enormous Egos (not unlike our lot) or religious fanaticism, or both.

They remind me of Europe in the Middle Ages & they are more likely to wage war amongst themselves than attack us.

 

The bad news however, is that the various terror groups which exist cannot be defeated in a conventional manner. Wipe out one lot & another takes it's place, negotiate an agreement with one group & it holds no sway with another.

The only thing I'm pretty sure of, is that if we continue to encroach into other peoples countries & kill innocents we will only increase the problem.

 

They cannot win, & we have to make clear the futility of their actions, but without adding to the hatred already engendered thus far.

And no, I have absolutely no idea how we do that, but as there are a lot of people out there smarter than me I'm sure someone will come up with a solution before it escalates to the point of no return.

 

I agree with a great deal of what you say, the only thing I have trouble with is that if we sit back and do not continue to hit them they will grow and attack us more effectively. That said, its a horrible dilemma and I dread the news when innocents have been killed or injured.

 

---------- Post added 01-05-2013 at 23:51 ----------

 

Incidentally for Eisenhowers speech on the military/industrial complex see the opening of Oliver Stones JFK its right at the start.

[Harleyman]

Major General Butler died in 1940. He was the most highly decorated Marine ever. Two Medals of Honor & the Marine Corps Brevet Medal. I don't believe for one minute that he believed his oath of allegiance to his President or the Corps was no longer binding. Semper Fi means, as you undoubtedly know, ALWAYS faithful, a man like General Butler would not take such an oath lightly.

 

To possess physical courage is an admirable thing. To possess moral courage is, in some ways, even more admirable.

 

The General possessed both, & as such commands respect. He did not speak out in the manner he did for the fun of it or to gain fame, he already had that & it would have been so much easier to lay back & take the plaudits.

Speaking out cost him dearly but he was a man of principle & was not deterred. You may not agree with him Harleyman, but I'm afraid his experience, background, & knowledge of the upper reaches of power trump any opinions which you, or I, may hold.

 

As to killing your enemies using machines. Do you ever try & put yourself in the other mans position?

Just for a moment, think what your reaction would be to foreigners sending machines into your country, & killing your family & friends.

Would that be it for you Harleyman? Would you give in & live your life from then on as the foreigners dictated?

Or would you find a way, whatever it took, to seek out those responsible & exact the most bloody revenge possible upon them?

 

If you would take the second course of action, why do you imagine your enemies would not do likewise?

We can say what we like about our current enemy, but they do not lack for courage or fanaticism.

 

Too bad Smedley Butler died before Pearl Harbor isnt it? Wonder what his thoughts would have been then?

 

Prior to 1917 the policy of the American government was to avoid all foreign conflicts especially European ones. Here's the problem and the start of it all.

 

Squabbling Euro dynasties and military rivalries started WW One. Both sides by 1918 were in a state of complete and utter exhaustion. The arrival of several million US troops in 1917 was one of the reasons the Germans decided to throw in the towel.

 

The Americans say in 1918 "Right that's it. Glad to have helped you guys beat the Germans but now we're going home. So long and good luck"

 

Twenty years later Europe's in another mess with a timid British leader and a war mongering maniac running Germany.

 

Along comes Churchill "Hey Washingto we're in a world of trouble here"

 

1942 and America finds itslf not only fighting the Japs but sending a few more million troops to Europe again

 

The Americans say in 1945 "Right that's it. Hitler's gone. Glad to have helped you guys beat the Germans. Now we're going home. Here's a

few million bucks to help you all get back on your feet"

 

Churchill tells Truman "Hey you cant go home. We got another problem. The Soviet Union. We're broke. We dont have the money or the resources to fight Communist expansion. You'll have to stay and help us out"

 

Fast forward to 1989. The Americans nickle and dime the Rusians to death in the arms race and the Soviets throw in the towel then fall apart

 

Then along comes Bin Laden and the arrival of the sky pixie nutters who get a split second emotional orgasm blowing themselves up and taking as many unbelievers with them as possible.

 

Better yet they use something better than a drone, some big Boeing aircraft full of fuel and passengers and so it goes on

 

We ARE at war now and will be for the foreseeable future. Get used to it

[Mecky]

Attacks being targetted from UK airbases. Should this be done? What about protests? Are we for it or against it?

 

What's the difference between us bombing them with drones and them flying planes into tower blocks, bombing trains etc? How about islamic nutters attacking every country, even their own, in the world? Who started it first?

[scousemouse]

Well said Mecky!! The post I wrote in a similar way seems to have disappeared!

 

In my book they deserve all they get. War is war, and civilians get killed, rightly or wrongly.

[Halibut]

What's the difference between us bombing them with drones and them flying planes into tower blocks, bombing trains etc? How about islamic nutters attacking every country, even their own, in the world? Who started it first?

 

Wow, full-on playground level stuff, well done!

 

---------- Post added 02-05-2013 at 08:14 ----------

 

Well said Mecky!! The post I wrote in a similar way seems to have disappeared!

 

In my book they deserve all they get. War is war, and civilians get killed, rightly or wrongly.

 

Innocent women and kids. Yeah, they really deserve it don't they?

[Jason Bourne]

Who started it first?

 

Good question! Did the world as you know it begin on 11/09/01 or can we go back further?

[Hillpig]

Who started it? Very good question. It seems to me that it is part of a process that dates back to the foundation of the Muslim religion.

 

There are certain dates that are important, fall of Jerusalem to the Muslims from the Orthodox Byzantines in (about) 650. The Crusades, the fall of Constantinople to the Turks 1483. Many other episodes of conflict leading up to the current situation exemplified by the attacks on the twin towers 7/7 etc.

 

The difference, it seems to me, is fundamentalism. In the past the Muslims have been very tolerant of other religions particularly Judaism and Christianity. Certainly they were more tolerant than Christians.

 

This latest manifestation seems to be the result of Wahabeism (not sure of the spelling) a sect who have a very strict interpretation of the Koran and are very strong in Saudi Arabia, where they are able to utilize the vast wealth of that country to sponsor terrorism world wide. Bin Laden was a Wahabi and even by their standards was an extremist.

 

So, who started it, we did, mankind, our utter failure to tolerate the others opinion, beliefs and world view. We are no different to those who 1500 years ago slaughtered each other because we were "different" and whose road to god was not the same as ours.

[mjw47]

What's the difference between us bombing them with drones and them flying planes into tower blocks, bombing trains etc? How about islamic nutters attacking every country, even their own, in the world? Who started it first?

 

Err we did, read some history. Heard of the Crusades? They were fought on their territory. The closest the Muslims have come to our green & pleasant land is Spain, El Cid saw them off & the gates of Vienna & our Austrian friends saw them off.

Don't start adding up who's done the most harm to whom on this one Mecky it's not going to come out looking good for us!