are only muslims terrorists?

Trippy discussions of moral issues, conspiracy theories, the paranormal and other otherworldly phenomenon.

Moderator: Dracofrost

Postby LarryTGC » Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:23 am

Yes, but is there any reason to believe human shields make up any significant amount of the casualities?


Well considering the T.E.I.I.G.S.F.T's immerse themselves into the civilian population and use the mosques, schools, and homes as their depots and staging grounds, most if not all the casulaties are human sheilds.

The mass of casulaties are at the hands of direct T.E.I.I.G.S.F.T's attacks.
They target the civilian population strategically.

The US military takes great strides to avoid civilian casulaties.
And the U.S. military doctors are constantly on hand to help any civilian injured.
Heck they even treat the T.E.I.I.G.S.F.T's.

The T.E.I.I.G.S.F.T's cut peoples heads off.
LarryTGC
Traveler
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 5:43 pm

Postby TerraFrost » Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:20 am

out of curriosity, is the death of a terrorist whose not a terrorist for the day a crime? i mean, the death of a us soldier on rec leave is undoubtedly, a crime. so what about terrorists?

likewise, soldiers can retire from the army and become civilians, again. how do terrorists retire? also, as the death of a retired soldier is a crime, is the death of a retired terrorist (however they retire) a crime?

i guess, ultimately, i'm currious to know if there are any circumstances in which terrorists, themselves, could be considered human shields.

if so, then i suppose one could argue that no one in iraq is innocent, but i, personally, think that'd be a fallacious argument - if no one in iraq was guilt-free when it comes to terrorist activities, then why would the US be concerned about them and their freedom? they wouldn't, if we're to take what the US says at face value. there'd be no need for elections, and perhapes not even a need for US troops. but they're there, none-the-less, so obviously there are some people in iraq who are innocent - some people who are at risk of dying at the hands of the US (and at the hands of the terrorists, for that matter, too).
Last edited by TerraFrost on Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby tsian » Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:26 am

The mass of casulaties are at the hands of direct T.E.I.I.G.S.F.T's attacks.
They target the civilian population strategically.


We are talking about Iraq... do you have any evidence about that?

The US military takes great strides to avoid civilian casulaties.


You already made that claim. I responded to it. You have yet to respond to my responce.

And the U.S. military doctors are constantly on hand to help any civilian injured.
Heck they even treat the T.E.I.I.G.S.F.T's.

The T.E.I.I.G.S.F.T's cut peoples heads off.


Yes. Good for the US army, as they should. Bad for the "TEIIGSFT"s. Horrible when they do such things.
Vive le titre de deux.
In an ironic twist, the only trait I find completely appaling is intolerance.
User avatar
tsian
Castle Guard
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:19 am
Location: BC, Canada

Postby Exalted Ugu » Sat Jan 29, 2005 4:36 am

Yes, arbitrary executions, or those resulting from 'secret trials' are abhorrent. Only terrorists would do such things.

I'm curious, larry, why do you insist on using language so impresicely? With your "T.E.I.I.G.S.F.T" amalgamation, you render your own arguements meaningless, as your refferent term is so broad as to encompass practically every special forces soldier, millitiaman or peasant fighter in the world, as well as those more generally referred to as 'terrorists'.

But i'm curious here, how do you believe that an Iraqi resistance force SHOULD fight against an occupation they consider unjust? Should they set up garment factories to create uniforms and line up in set-piece battlefield maneouvers? What would make millitary resistance to US aims NOT a terrorist act? In what circumstances can someone fight against the US without being in your eyes a terrorist?

-ugu

*laughs* wow, i just read the pentagon's press briefing on Saddam's use of 'human shields'... *laughs* Building millitary revetments at major road intersections near schools is not the same thing as using students as human shields. The only reason children would be in danger is that the US prefers to use imprecice high-altitude bombing rather than troops in it's millitary operations. The other examples of human shields consisted of trucks (claimed to be millitary) parked next to mosques. No indication of the strategic value of such trucks, nor the duration they were parked there. Is it so unlikely that the Iraqi army might not have perfectly above board reasons for visiting religious sites? Another example was a mosque situated in an ammunition depot, this struck me as emminently logical, the depot was an apparently huge millitary complex, one that would house many, many, soldiers. Does the US not provide religious facilities for it's soldiers? I doubt that there would be much sympathy for victims killed in a mosque in an ammunition depot in wartime. I doubt that anyone would even claim that a strike that damaged the mosque was unjust.

this was a joke. Show me soldiers standing guard in schools, or tanks based out of hospitals. Show me chemical weapons in a grain warehouse. Don't show me a fuzzy truck parked next to a mosque.

-ugu

Please refrain from double posting. Thank you.
Exalted Ugu
Townfolk
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 11:18 pm

Postby LarryTGC » Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:50 am

Larry:

The mass of casulaties are at the hands of direct T.E.I.I.G.S.F.T's attacks.
They target the civilian population strategically.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Tsian:

We are talking about Iraq... do you have any evidence about that?


The BBC has apologised for incorrectly broadcasting figures which suggested more Iraqi civilians had been killed by coalition and Iraqi forces than by insurgents.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/ ... 222353.stm
LarryTGC
Traveler
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 5:43 pm

Postby tsian » Tue Feb 01, 2005 5:40 am

Yes, what is your point?
Vive le titre de deux.
In an ironic twist, the only trait I find completely appaling is intolerance.
User avatar
tsian
Castle Guard
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2003 4:19 am
Location: BC, Canada

Previous

Return to Twilight Zone

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron