Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Reaction to the Nick Berg outrage
Topic Started: May 12 2004, 12:50 AM (1,726 Views)
Hoss
Member Avatar
Don't make me use my bare hands on you.
Is that why the Iraqi militants blew the hell out of the UN headquarters in Iraq a few months and murdered the top UN minister in Iraq?

The UN has been proven time and time again to be ineffective in the middle-east. One candidate realizes this (Bush) the other has his head up his butt (Kerry). :lol:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Swidden
Member Avatar
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
ImpulseEngine
May 13 2004, 07:22 AM
Swidden
May 13 2004, 01:45 AM
Frankly, I don't see this altering substantially our methods in fighting the war in Iraq. I can only hope that we will be able to finally track down this Zawaqiri (?sp.) bastard and help arrange his introduction to Allah with all due haste.

I'm not convinced that he was behind the beheading. (But he certainly needs to be caught and made to face the consequences anyway for obvious other reasons.) I was thinking, if they wanted the world to know he and al Qaeda were responsible, why hide behind masks? :shrug: This is especially true if he actually did the beheading. (I've heard 2 versions - one says he did it, another says he's behind it - i.e., just ordered it and might not have even been present.)

Some of TPTB are speculating that Zawaqiri's group was responsible for this atrocity (even to the point that Zawaqiri himself committed the actual act). I should have written my post with a qualifying "if". Regardless of whether or not the lead suspect was responsible, whoever did it deserves to meet a similar fate in my book. For me, this is saying a lot.

Really, these guys were looking for any kind of excuse to pull a stunt like this. I am not saying we gave them a good excuse, and it remains true that we have to deal with them strongly and decisively, but we have to do it in such a way that we do this by the book.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ANOVA
Vice Admiral
^^^

Maybe we should rewrite the book.

The Geneva Covention codified warfare between nations not between cultures or ideologies. Should a person who wears a mask and fades into the general population be afforded the same rights as a uniformed enemy combantant. I don't think so.

THose actually cuaght with a weapon and not waering a uniform shoul be afforded no due process. Those who are suspected of terrorism must be given enough legal protection to protect the innocent. Once found guilty, they should become non-persons.

ANOVA
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Minuet :
Quote:
 

Quote:
 
Minuet :
You've a short memory and no I can't be bothered seeking out a quote from you from another relatively recent thread - and even if I didn't have to sit an exam at 9am tomorrow - I wouldn't bother.

You are the one who is offended - you prove your allegation.

Talking about exams - I'd better get back to the lecture notes and text book - I've already wasted too much time here tonight - back to the grind-stone !


Ok, I will say it outright. You refuse to look not because you are lazy and not because you are busy. I submit it is because you are lying and know that the allegation does not exist. I have nothing to prove. Your lack evidence to back up YOUR allegations is all the proof I need.

Edit - How the hell does one go about proving one DID NOT say something anyways! I can't quote a non existing quote. You don't make any sense. The burden of proof is always on the person making the claim.


Bull dust !

You are the one who claims to be offended and hirt , so you prove you didn't (infer or advocate it).

I've better things to with my time .

Anova :
These people are either criminals (of the worst kind !) and should be treated as such (and dealt with once caught through the international or national (of where ever they were when the did the deed)) criminal system, or they should be treated like a soldier (and afforded military POW treatment - you can't have it both ways.
Taking matters outside criminal or military law is dangerous - you'd be the first to whinge if more of your citisens and nationals where captured / abducted and held in cognito (for years in pretty rigorous and nasty conditions) - just because some of your country's enemies choose to act in a shockingly barbaric and uncivilised manner, doesn't mean your military has a mandate to behave in a similar manner - to do so and decend to their level means that the enemy has already won .
Has it occurred to you that the murder of Mr.Berg was so brutal and gruesome exactly in order to evoke an over the top response from the USA or Israel or both in order to prove their point that this ongoing war in Iraq is actually part of some new Christian Crusade against Islam ? (After all this is part of their rhetoric and an over the top response (to what afterall is the death of only one man) on the part of the USA or Israel in particular would only ultimately serve their aims by encouraging more of the same and more people in the middle east come onto their side).
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
IE- During the American Revolution, the British called us animals for not forming up in nice lines so that they could shoot at us. When we actually took cover and started to take target at their officers, we may as well have been hiding behind children in their eye's. If we had not done so, we would not have won the war.

In this case, we have urban insurgents that have the general support of the Iraqi population. They can easily attack us and blend into the crowds (Adrian seems to agree with me on that). We are at a disadvantage in this case. We must shift the rules so that the war is in our favor. That means using our technological superiority to attack the Muslems. When there is an attack in a city, lob some high angle hell a kilometer away from the city. Inform the population that each time there is an attack in their city, those artillary rounds will get 100 meters closer. By the time the rounds are 300 meters away, the people will be scrambling to stop the attacks themselves.

The reason this will happen is that the Iraqis will have the INCENTIVE to stop the attacks. When the insurgents attack the Americans now, it just gives warm fuzzy feelings to the Muslems. But if they know that each attack will bring them one step closer to destruction, then not only will the civilians have an incentive to stop the attacks, but they will also not participate in them.

This is not barbaric. The French, ever the champions of human rights, did this to cities that were plagued with German guerillas and they didn't even give a kilometer head start to the inhabitants. They moved out, shelled the city, then moved back in. If anything, I am being more benevolent then the French were.

In any case, the Iraqis are never going to try to stop the violence as long as it doesn't affect them. When the terrorists attack them, they know that they can blame the US instead of themselves because they know we will never do anything against them. If we prove them wrong, then the security in Iraq will improve immensly.

Adrian- I don't suppose you knew that militarily Vietnam would have been a victory for the United States. Comparitive death tolls meant that the Viet Cong would have been forced out of the fight LONG before we were and the US never lost a battle with VC forces. The only reason we lost the Vietnam War was because support back home was lost due to anti-war propoganda. Because of that, thousands of Vietnamese were forced under a communist regieme.

Now which canidate backed that? Oh, yeah that Kerry guy!
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
somerled
May 14 2004, 01:18 AM
Minuet :
Quote:
 

Quote:
 
Minuet :
You've a short memory and no I can't be bothered seeking out a quote from you from another relatively recent thread - and even if I didn't have to sit an exam at 9am tomorrow - I wouldn't bother.

You are the one who is offended - you prove your allegation.

Talking about exams - I'd better get back to the lecture notes and text book - I've already wasted too much time here tonight - back to the grind-stone !


Ok, I will say it outright. You refuse to look not because you are lazy and not because you are busy. I submit it is because you are lying and know that the allegation does not exist. I have nothing to prove. Your lack evidence to back up YOUR allegations is all the proof I need.

Edit - How the hell does one go about proving one DID NOT say something anyways! I can't quote a non existing quote. You don't make any sense. The burden of proof is always on the person making the claim.


Bull dust !

You are the one who claims to be offended and hirt , so you prove you didn't (infer or advocate it).

I've better things to with my time .

Anova :
These people are either criminals (of the worst kind !) and should be treated as such (and dealt with once caught through the international or national (of where ever they were when the did the deed)) criminal system, or they should be treated like a soldier (and afforded military POW treatment - you can't have it both ways.
Taking matters outside criminal or military law is dangerous - you'd be the first to whinge if more of your citisens and nationals where captured / abducted and held in cognito (for years in pretty rigorous and nasty conditions) - just because some of your country's enemies choose to act in a shockingly barbaric and uncivilised manner, doesn't mean your military has a mandate to behave in a similar manner - to do so and decend to their level means that the enemy has already won .
Has it occurred to you that the murder of Mr.Berg was so brutal and gruesome exactly in order to evoke an over the top response from the USA or Israel or both in order to prove their point that this ongoing war in Iraq is actually part of some new Christian Crusade against Islam ? (After all this is part of their rhetoric and an over the top response (to what afterall is the death of only one man) on the part of the USA or Israel in particular would only ultimately serve their aims by encouraging more of the same and more people in the middle east come onto their side).

First, I stand by my comments. Your refusal to back up your lies just makes you look like a fool because everyone here knows the real reason you won't back them up - you can't.

Number 2 - I am going to use the anti-semitism label once again. What the f*** does Israel have to do with this incident and why have you brought them into this discussion? You have no idea what the reaction is there and are just trying to plant more lies here. It is not the habit of Israel to avenge those who are citizens of other countries for acts that happened outside it's own borders.I have only found a couple of places online that mention the man's religion and it certainly has not become a major issue. The murderers of this man may have been hoping it would, but they failed. The world sees this innocent victim for who he was, an American trying to help rebuild Iraq.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
Minuet :

A course in anger and stress management might be in order.

Do your own search - I'm not interested . :ZZZZZ:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
Doctortobe,
What if we had a terrorist cell spring up here in the U.S. where their members would do much the same thing - attack people and then blend into the crowds. Would you advocate the same solution?

I'll await your answer, but in the meantime my answer is a definite no. Why? Because it would potentially result in the death or serious harm to many innocent people. And there are other better ways of dealing with them. Our law enforcement, military, and intelligence could all be used to effectively deal with them and I believe that is exactly what would happen until they were caught.

So why don't we do the same over there? It's the track we are actually on in Iraq. What I suggested before is that we aim specifically at the leaders and organizers of these animals and have them replaced with better ones (that is, only the ones like Saddam who are in real government or influential positions that would need a replacement). I'm not saying it will be easy, but I do believe it's possible. With the new leaders in place, a new system can be set up where they will have their own law enforcement, military, and intelligence to deal with any remaining stubborn followers of terrorism themselves. Granted this will take time, but it's worth it IMO to prevent the slaughter of countless innocent people.

We also must work diplomatically with the leaders of Islam to get as many of them as possible to stand up and condemn this behavior. And I don't mean "We're sorry this happened because now, just when we had the Americans in a corner, these fools came along and ruined it" (because that's about all I've heard from them so far. :angry: ). I mean real condemnations. I think this would be easier once the leaders of the terrorism have been removed because then the leaders of Islam wouldn't have to fear for their lives as much for speaking out.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
somerled
May 14 2004, 09:39 AM
Minuet :

A course in anger and stress management might be in order.

Do your own search - I'm not interested . :ZZZZZ:

Not interested in defending yourself? Fine. We can all accept that you lied. I know that's how I see it. Minuet never said anything about nuking Palestinians and you've been unable to back up your accusation.

Case closed.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
No - just not interested in Minuet's overly emotional and vindictive BS.

Try looking that the thread about "extrajudicial killings" - It suspect it is there somewhere and think she lost the plot there and made a Freudian Slip about nuking them there.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
^^^
I've read everything I need to read.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
somerled
May 14 2004, 10:45 AM
No - just not interested in Minuet's overly emotional and vindictive BS.

Try looking that the thread about "extrajudicial killings" - It suspect it is there somewhere and think she lost the plot there and made a Freudian Slip about nuking them there.

Burden of proof falls on the accuser not the accused. If you cant prove she said that - it makes you a lyre. She does not have to prove you are not lying - that is just stupid.

But any how I did read through the post you said http://invisionfree.com/forums/SisterTrek/...pic=2234&st=135

and the only mention of nuclear was made by you (and a post Bill made that you offered as proof for something):

somerled
 
(ie the nucleararms race , where USA and old USSR remained armed because they don't trust each other).


Quote:
 
Bill 26-9-2003


Quote:
 
I think Mr. B posted earlier about "breaking eggs," right?

It wouldn't be too hard to enlist the assistance of both Russia and China... nations that also have "Islam problems."

What am I talking about? Tactical nuclear weapons. Both the US and Russia have neutron-type weapons as well, which minimize fallout. It would not be very bloody, at least from one side's standpoint.



Sorry somerled you are a lyre.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
24thcenstfan
Member Avatar
Something Wicked This Fae Comes
Somerled,

I just read through every single reply made by Minuet on that thread and not once did she advocate nuking the Palestinians. However, this is what she did say:

Quote:
 
Posted: Apr 19 2004, 03:09 AM
If these people would just change thier charter to include Israel's right to exist and then come and negotiate in good faith then the killing on both sides could stop. Israel does not want to kill Arabs. If that was what they wanted they could have nuked the Palestinians out of existence long ago. They only want to defend thier borders, and they have every right to do so.


Reiterating in so many words what she said above:

Quote:
 
Posted: Apr 19 2004, 01:42 PM
As I stated earlier - if the Israeli's wanted to murder Arabs they have the means. This is simply not what they want. All they want is secure borders and peace.


Somerled, get your facts straight before making such an allegation. I don't know about everyone else, but I am getting tired of hearing your excuses about not searching for links and quotes to back up what you say. We all do it, it doesn't take all that much time. Two or three of us here just went through and found all of the proper quotes in a matter of minutes on the thread that you referenced. Try doing it sometime.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
Then there is this comment from Minuet:

Quote:
 
Ever wonder why Israel hasn't nuked the Palestinians out of existence? Maybe because the Israeli people do have morals. The weapons are there for DEFENSIVE purposes. They don't have itchy fingers on the trigger, like you are implying.


... which says to me that she advocates the opposite of what you are saying she does.

The burden of proof IS on you, Somerled.

If you are going to make charges, look up the link that you think supports your allegations BEFORE you say it.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
8247
Member Avatar
Apparently we look like this now
I'm going :offtopic: here, but...

I saw on Fox News that when Nick Berg was picked up by Iraqi police, he had a copy of the Koran with him. Could Al Qaeda have decapitated a Muslim?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus