frededwards Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 some would also say 911 and 7/7 were inside jobs infact as it happens a Yorkshire based principal intellingence officer said just that... http://www.policespecials.com/forum/index.php?/topic/121061-tony-farrell-senior-police-intelligence-analyst-fired-from-syp/ Once we've decended to this, further discussion is superfluous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 I think the fact that he thinks for one moment that India would come to the defence of Pakistan says all we need to know regarding his understanding on politics in the sub-continent! Why would a nuclear strike on Pakistan be in the interest of India given the instability that would cause in the region? In any case your first post said any state shielding these people, not just Pakistan. That could include oil rich Middle Eastern states on which India and China rely. Do you think causing massive social and economic instability in Asia wouldn't elicit a response in kind? Sadly for you, Western leaders aren't the bloodthirsty genocidal maniacs you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waldo Posted May 14, 2013 Author Share Posted May 14, 2013 In any conflict collateral damage is inevitable. If, in the end, it leads to a safer world for innocent people in the civilised world, so be it. Why the euphemisms? Why not call it what it is? I don't think it will lead to a safer world. I don't think the ends justify the means. If the "innocent" people in Pakistan feel threatened, then they should insist that their government stop it's collusion in terrorism, then they no no longer have a reason to feel under threat Maybe the innocent people of pakistan will instead feel quite justified in siding with the 'terrorists' against those who are murdering their families with drone strikes. Then the US will wonder why the war on terror is never ending... (which, I suspect the US authorities, know good and well, it will never end; the notion that it will end, is just kidology to make war more palatable for the population). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xt500 Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 Once we've decended to this, further discussion is superfluous. if you say so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 Why the euphemisms? Why not call it what it is? I don't think it will lead to a safer world. I don't think the ends justify the means. Maybe the innocent people of pakistan will instead feel quite justified in siding with the 'terrorists' against those who are murdering their families with drone strikes. Then the US will wonder why the war on terror is never ending... So after 911, just turn the other cheek ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frededwards Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 Why the euphemisms? Why not call it what it is? I don't think it will lead to a safer world. I don't think the ends justify the means. So, do you also think that the brave crews of Bomber Command were, to use you terms, "terrorists" and "vermin" due to the civilians killed in the bombing of Dresden? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 The simplistic world view some have is a sad reflection of the stuff lacking between the flappy things attached to the side of their head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 The new Pakistan govt. are about to launch armed unmanned aircraft over the United States, to take out enemies of the Pakistan state. They're saying some innocent American lives will no doubt be lost; but that's acceptable to them. Okay, relax Americans!; I just made that up... However, it was true; would Americans be in any (moral) position to object; given they're doing the exact same thing to Pakistan? Or would objecting only make them hypocrites? If Pakistan had control over the areas the US is forced to attack. There wouldn't be any need for the USA to launch drones over their airspace. Pakistan's rhetoric is to divert attention away form its failings to secure the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mafya Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 So after 911, just turn the other cheek ? How many Pakistani terrorists carried out 9/11? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frededwards Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 The simplistic world view some have is a sad reflection of the stuff lacking between the flappy things attached to the side of their head. A typical liberal, holier than thou SF response. Lose the argument, then resort to insults. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.