US drone kills 13 wedding guests in Yemen

[tonkatoy]

..laughable, and you don't believe the west is just as capable of a little spin and propaganda? Why are drones crashing on the Yemen in the first place?

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2013 at 13:54 ----------

 

 

Stunning...

 

I think you can take it that I haven't been taken in by the propaganda that you have trotted out on this forum day and night for several years.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2013 at 14:14 ----------

 

So what you are basically saying is that a soldier joins an army which receives it's orders from a Government?

That soldier then carries out those orders whatever the perceived rights or wrongs of the situation?

Should he be instructed to go to another mans land -to which he couldn't even point at on a map if requested to do so- & be prepared to kill if ordered to do so, he will?

For this he receives a wage, three square meals a day & a pension.

 

A terrorist on the other hand is a man or woman who sits down, thinks the situation through & decides that their particular cause is just. They then take up arms against well trained & armed troops who have the backing of a Government. No pension.

 

Now unless you believe that Governments & only Governments have the right to take lives, innocent or otherwise, it does appear that the terrorist at least has the moral upper hand, in having consulted their own conscience before taking up arms.

The soldier on the other hand is merely carrying out orders, & doesn't care about the rights & wrongs of the situation.

 

Obviously a lot depends on the cause being fought for. Is there genuine oppression & is the cause therefore a just one?

 

 

You sound like a Muslim who is trying to justify terrorism.

[boyfriday]

I think you can take it that I haven't been taken in by the propaganda that you have trotted out on this forum day and night for several years.

 

Not taken in by propaganda much...

 

The number of innocent people killed accidentally by drones is likely to be far lower than the number of innocent lives saved by those targeted by drones.

I would also be very careful about believing the tales of the innocents who have been killed by the drones. It suits the terrorists very well to pop a few wedding clothes around vehicles and claim they were civilians. I wouldn't rule out bodies of folk who were murdered by the terrorists being dumped at drone strikes to increase propaganda value.

One thing we do know is true the Islamists are murdering thousands in the villages and towns and dead bodies aren't exactly difficult to get hold of.

[WeX]

Did you speed watch the documentary Wex, it's over an hour long?

 

No, I haven't watched it yet, but the drone angle just made me think about the stats.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2013 at 14:43 ----------

 

The number of innocent people killed accidentally by drones is likely to be far lower than the number of innocent lives saved by those targeted by drones.

I would also be very careful about believing the tales of the innocents who have been killed by the drones. It suits the terrorists very well to pop a few wedding clothes around vehicles and claim they were civilians. I wouldn't rule out bodies of folk who were murdered by the terrorists being dumped at drone strikes to increase propaganda value.

One thing we do know is true the Islamists are murdering thousands in the villages and towns and dead bodies aren't exactly difficult to get hold of.

 

I fear this is true as three is no way to authenticate the claims. It is a tactic used in warfare to discredit your enemy and sway public opinion.

[tonkatoy]

 

I fear this is true as three is no way to authenticate the claims. It is a tactic used in warfare to discredit your enemy and sway public opinion.

 

Particularly those who need no swaying.

[mjw47]

I think you can take it that I haven't been taken in by the propaganda that you have trotted out on this forum day and night for several years.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2013 at 14:14 ----------

 

 

 

You sound like a Muslim who is trying to justify terrorism.

 

Do I? Well I'm not. In fact I'm not religious in any shape or form.

 

Whilst I do not agree with terrorism, I accept that on occasion it is justified.

 

Invariably on those occasions when it is justified it has come about because of the actions of a Government in oppressing, discriminating against, occupying or stealing the land and/or assets of civilians.

 

Governments are responsible for the deaths of more innocent people than any other organizations & shouldn't be supported blindly.

 

Just like terrorists sometimes Government killing can be justified, but should never be accepted simply on the basis that it is government backed & therefore cannot be questioned.

 

As to Muslim terrorism that is a difficult one. In the main it appears to be retaliatory in nature in response to genuine & perceived actions carried out by the Western Powers.

 

The eventual end game in any terrorist campaign - whatever governments say to the contrary - is to talk to them & establish what they want.

Having done that a compromise can usually be arrived at which both parties can live with.

 

However, if the Muslim terrorism is based purely on religion we have a serious problem. You cannot negotiate with religious fanatics.

[tzijlstra]

When we see Islamist terrorism apologists often say it's in response to the acts of the West.

 

I'd just like to make very clear that I am not an Islamist terrorism apologist.

 

All islamic terrorists deserve all the crap that comes their way, I am however not accepting the notion that innocent people are 'acceptable victims' in any way shape or form, be they muslim or not.

 

I am also not accepting the notion that the way that the US is trying to 'solve' the problem is either just or appropriate, in fact, I support the notion that what the US is doing is creating a larger problem than existed beforehand.

 

Some history:

 

There is a simple way to prove this: Before 9/11 the number of Islamic terrorist attacks on Western soil amounted to: 2.

 

A man threw hand grenades into a group of jewish children in Antwerp, Belgium in 1980, a clear link to Israel as the man was Syrian/Palestinian.

 

Then there was the bombing of the WTC in New York in 1993. The reason given for this bombing was that the US was supporting Israel and the bombers wanted them to stop.

 

Except for these two instances such attacks had been carried out in particular in Israel and Lebanon and was very rarely aimed at Jews outside of this part of the world.

 

There is no denying that these attacks occurred, and that those that carried out the attacks were nothing more than dogs.

 

Then 9/11 happened, the US and allies ramped up the 'anti-terrorist' rhetoric but took a wrong turn in promising the people of America to root out muslim terrorists all over the world. What did they do? They declared war on Afghanistan in 2001, presuming that this was where most Al-Qaeda were, followed in 2003 by a declaration of war on Iraq on the fumbled premise that Iraq might have weapons of mass destruction.

 

It is a simple fact of war that innocent people get hurt, by declaring war on Afghanistan and Iraq the US (because they lead all of this) declared war on innocent populations to target an estimated 20,000 to 30,000 farmers who were stupid enough to think they could get in their god's good book by fighting.

 

In Iraq, since the declaration of war, it is estimated over 110,000 civilians died, either as a direct consequence of acts of war (mass bombing etc.) or because the stability in the country has collapsed and new (NEW) terrorist movements have sprung up using terror as a means to gain power in a rudderless country. In Afghanistan the estimate is 19,000 civilians killed at the hands of foreign forces.

 

The short sightedness of these conflicts is that it creates a wave of repulsion and discomfort amongst muslims around the world, they feel they are being victimised because some of their own are complete wonkers that decided to commit acts of terrorism.

 

Unfortunately that also means that the idea that fighting for the terrorists is the only way to make these attacks stop, uneducated people are easily led by this sort of rhetoric, hence we now have increasingly large pockets of terrorist organisations, Al Shaabab in Somalia, the Northern Malinese in North Africa, the number of terrorists is growing because of this mindless eye-for-an-eye rhetoric that is propagated by our own governments.

 

I am not denying that the way islam works the community is more susceptible to falling for this rhetoric, in fact, I am saying that islamists around the world have a responsibility to try and resolve these issues within their own communities, but equally I am saying is that this will sure as hell not happen as long as we are exacerbating the problem by killing innocent people in mindless retaliation.

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2013 at 15:07 ----------

 

PS I am getting more than fed up with the idea that if I am against western intervention in other countries, I am pro-terrorism.

[boyfriday]

I fear this is true as three is no way to authenticate the claims. It is a tactic used in warfare to discredit your enemy and sway public opinion.

 

You don't think there's a possibility it's a tactic used by the military to discredit their enemy and justify drone attacks? After all 'there's no way to authenticate the claims'.

[WeX]

You don't think there's a possibility it's a tactic used by the military to discredit their enemy and justify drone attacks? After all 'there's no way to authenticate the claims'.

 

no, the other way round

[boyfriday]

no, the other way round

 

I know so

[WeX]

I'd just like to make very clear that I am not an Islamist terrorism apologist.

 

You certainly do not look like one although if that beard gets any longer, you could be mistaken for one

 

---------- Post added 13-12-2013 at 15:22 ----------

 

I know so

 

stop confusing me with your double speak