'US drone' hits Pakistan

[ChezGiven 0]

There's huge debate as to the rights and wrongs of government sponsored targeted assassinations.

 

I don't think hoying 49 civillians into the mix helps the argument for it.

 

How about if they'd just rounded them all up and imprisoned them all for a couple of years?

 

He'd have just forgiven them.

 

 

So what do you think should done then?

 

Who? When?

 

If they have firm intelligence of a Taliban commander's position, what should be done about it?

 

So this exact scenario? In Pakistan? In a civillian area?

 

I think it's pretty clear from my earlier posts that I'd prefer the approach espoused by General McChrystal.

How about you?

 

 

He seems to be mostly talking about air strikes in firefights, that's not the same thing as knowing exactly where a Taliban leader will be, and if it it were it's not said what would be done.

 

So like Fop said if they know exactly where a Taliban leader will be - what do you think they should do about it?

"Round them up in a field and bomb the bastards"

 

Prize to the poster who gets the reference.

[Happy Face 29]

There's huge debate as to the rights and wrongs of government sponsored targeted assassinations.

 

I don't think hoying 49 civillians into the mix helps the argument for it.

 

How about if they'd just rounded them all up and imprisoned them all for a couple of years?

 

He'd have just forgiven them.

 

 

So what do you think should done then?

 

Who? When?

 

If they have firm intelligence of a Taliban commander's position, what should be done about it?

 

So this exact scenario? In Pakistan? In a civillian area?

 

I think it's pretty clear from my earlier posts that I'd prefer the approach espoused by General McChrystal.

How about you?

 

 

He seems to be mostly talking about air strikes in firefights, that's not the same thing as knowing exactly where a Taliban leader will be, and if it it were it's not said what would be done.

 

So like Fop said if they know exactly where a Taliban leader will be - what do you think they should do about it?

 

“When we shoot into a compound, that should only be for the protection of our forces,” he said. “I want everyone to understand that.”

 

I can't see how you can be confused as to my opinion. I'm the one who started the thread to codemn a bombing that's killed a Taliban commander.

 

Your desparation to find an opposing view is palpable btw.

[Guest alex]

There's huge debate as to the rights and wrongs of government sponsored targeted assassinations.

 

I don't think hoying 49 civillians into the mix helps the argument for it.

 

How about if they'd just rounded them all up and imprisoned them all for a couple of years?

 

He'd have just forgiven them.

 

 

So what do you think should done then?

 

Who? When?

 

If they have firm intelligence of a Taliban commander's position, what should be done about it?

 

So this exact scenario? In Pakistan? In a civillian area?

 

I think it's pretty clear from my earlier posts that I'd prefer the approach espoused by General McChrystal.

How about you?

 

 

He seems to be mostly talking about air strikes in firefights, that's not the same thing as knowing exactly where a Taliban leader will be, and if it it were it's not said what would be done.

 

So like Fop said if they know exactly where a Taliban leader will be - what do you think they should do about it?

"Round them up in a field and bomb the bastards"

 

Prize to the poster who gets the reference.

Kenny Everett?

[ChezGiven 0]

There's huge debate as to the rights and wrongs of government sponsored targeted assassinations.

 

I don't think hoying 49 civillians into the mix helps the argument for it.

 

How about if they'd just rounded them all up and imprisoned them all for a couple of years?

 

He'd have just forgiven them.

 

 

So what do you think should done then?

 

Who? When?

 

If they have firm intelligence of a Taliban commander's position, what should be done about it?

 

So this exact scenario? In Pakistan? In a civillian area?

 

I think it's pretty clear from my earlier posts that I'd prefer the approach espoused by General McChrystal.

How about you?

 

 

He seems to be mostly talking about air strikes in firefights, that's not the same thing as knowing exactly where a Taliban leader will be, and if it it were it's not said what would be done.

 

So like Fop said if they know exactly where a Taliban leader will be - what do you think they should do about it?

"Round them up in a field and bomb the bastards"

 

Prize to the poster who gets the reference.

Kenny Everett?

Pair of fake boobs and giant pointy finger on its way in the post.

[Guest alex]

It was the American geezer in the tank, aye?

Used to love Kenny Everett back in the day.

[Fop 1]

There's huge debate as to the rights and wrongs of government sponsored targeted assassinations.

 

I don't think hoying 49 civillians into the mix helps the argument for it.

 

How about if they'd just rounded them all up and imprisoned them all for a couple of years?

 

He'd have just forgiven them.

 

 

So what do you think should done then?

 

Who? When?

 

If they have firm intelligence of a Taliban commander's position, what should be done about it?

 

So this exact scenario? In Pakistan? In a civillian area?

 

I think it's pretty clear from my earlier posts that I'd prefer the approach espoused by General McChrystal.

How about you?

 

 

He seems to be mostly talking about air strikes in firefights, that's not the same thing as knowing exactly where a Taliban leader will be, and if it it were it's not said what would be done.

 

So like Fop said if they know exactly where a Taliban leader will be - what do you think they should do about it?

 

“When we shoot into a compound, that should only be for the protection of our forces,” he said. “I want everyone to understand that.”

 

I can't see how you can be confused as to my opinion. I'm the one who started the thread to codemn a bombing that's killed a Taliban commander.

 

Your desparation to find an opposing view is palpable btw.

It wasn't in a compound though. Fop's not stated a view, just asked a question (which you won't answer).

 

And what about Pakistani air strikes and artillery strikes while we're at it? Yes? No? Maybe?

 

 

 

 

So again what is your opinion of what should be done when the have intelligence on a Taliban leaders position?

 

It's a very simple question that you refuse to answer.

Edited June 25, 2009 by Fop

[ChezGiven 0]

It was the American geezer in the tank, aye?

Used to love Kenny Everett back in the day.

It was all in the best possible taste.

 

The insane war-mongering US general in the tank slightly passed me by as a kid. Looking back you realise how political some of the characters were.

 

Obviously not the tranny chat-show host.

[Happy Face 29]

There's huge debate as to the rights and wrongs of government sponsored targeted assassinations.

 

I don't think hoying 49 civillians into the mix helps the argument for it.

 

How about if they'd just rounded them all up and imprisoned them all for a couple of years?

 

He'd have just forgiven them.

 

 

So what do you think should done then?

 

Who? When?

 

If they have firm intelligence of a Taliban commander's position, what should be done about it?

 

So this exact scenario? In Pakistan? In a civillian area?

 

I think it's pretty clear from my earlier posts that I'd prefer the approach espoused by General McChrystal.

How about you?

 

 

He seems to be mostly talking about air strikes in firefights, that's not the same thing as knowing exactly where a Taliban leader will be, and if it it were it's not said what would be done.

 

So like Fop said if they know exactly where a Taliban leader will be - what do you think they should do about it?

 

“When we shoot into a compound, that should only be for the protection of our forces,” he said. “I want everyone to understand that.”

 

I can't see how you can be confused as to my opinion. I'm the one who started the thread to codemn a bombing that's killed a Taliban commander.

 

Your desparation to find an opposing view is palpable btw.

It wasn't in a compound though. Fop's not stated a view, just asked a question (which you won't answer).

 

And what about Pakistani air strikes and artillery strikes while we're at it? Yes? No? Maybe?

 

 

 

 

So again what is your opinion of what should be done when the have intelligence on a Taliban leaders position?

 

It's a very simple question that you refuse to answer.

 

 

"You're not wrong, you're just an asshole"

[Fop 1]

There's huge debate as to the rights and wrongs of government sponsored targeted assassinations.

 

I don't think hoying 49 civillians into the mix helps the argument for it.

 

How about if they'd just rounded them all up and imprisoned them all for a couple of years?

 

He'd have just forgiven them.

 

 

So what do you think should done then?

 

Who? When?

 

If they have firm intelligence of a Taliban commander's position, what should be done about it?

 

So this exact scenario? In Pakistan? In a civillian area?

 

I think it's pretty clear from my earlier posts that I'd prefer the approach espoused by General McChrystal.

How about you?

 

 

He seems to be mostly talking about air strikes in firefights, that's not the same thing as knowing exactly where a Taliban leader will be, and if it it were it's not said what would be done.

 

So like Fop said if they know exactly where a Taliban leader will be - what do you think they should do about it?

 

“When we shoot into a compound, that should only be for the protection of our forces,” he said. “I want everyone to understand that.”

 

I can't see how you can be confused as to my opinion. I'm the one who started the thread to codemn a bombing that's killed a Taliban commander.

 

Your desparation to find an opposing view is palpable btw.

It wasn't in a compound though. Fop's not stated a view, just asked a question (which you won't answer).

 

And what about Pakistani air strikes and artillery strikes while we're at it? Yes? No? Maybe?

 

 

 

 

So again what is your opinion of what should be done when the have intelligence on a Taliban leaders position?

 

It's a very simple question that you refuse to answer.

 

 

"You're not wrong, you're just an asshole"

 

So you're refusing to answer the question then?

[Happy Face 29]

There's huge debate as to the rights and wrongs of government sponsored targeted assassinations.

 

I don't think hoying 49 civillians into the mix helps the argument for it.

 

How about if they'd just rounded them all up and imprisoned them all for a couple of years?

 

He'd have just forgiven them.

 

 

So what do you think should done then?

 

Who? When?

 

If they have firm intelligence of a Taliban commander's position, what should be done about it?

 

So this exact scenario? In Pakistan? In a civillian area?

 

I think it's pretty clear from my earlier posts that I'd prefer the approach espoused by General McChrystal.

How about you?

 

 

He seems to be mostly talking about air strikes in firefights, that's not the same thing as knowing exactly where a Taliban leader will be, and if it it were it's not said what would be done.

 

So like Fop said if they know exactly where a Taliban leader will be - what do you think they should do about it?

 

“When we shoot into a compound, that should only be for the protection of our forces,” he said. “I want everyone to understand that.”

 

I can't see how you can be confused as to my opinion. I'm the one who started the thread to codemn a bombing that's killed a Taliban commander.

 

Your desparation to find an opposing view is palpable btw.

It wasn't in a compound though. Fop's not stated a view, just asked a question (which you won't answer).

 

And what about Pakistani air strikes and artillery strikes while we're at it? Yes? No? Maybe?

 

 

 

 

So again what is your opinion of what should be done when the have intelligence on a Taliban leaders position?

 

It's a very simple question that you refuse to answer.

 

 

"You're not wrong, you're just an asshole"

 

So you're refusing to answer the question then?

 

 

"Life does not stop and start at your convenience, you miserable piece of shit."

[Fop 1]

There's huge debate as to the rights and wrongs of government sponsored targeted assassinations.

 

I don't think hoying 49 civillians into the mix helps the argument for it.

 

How about if they'd just rounded them all up and imprisoned them all for a couple of years?

 

He'd have just forgiven them.

 

 

So what do you think should done then?

 

Who? When?

 

If they have firm intelligence of a Taliban commander's position, what should be done about it?

 

So this exact scenario? In Pakistan? In a civillian area?

 

I think it's pretty clear from my earlier posts that I'd prefer the approach espoused by General McChrystal.

How about you?

 

 

He seems to be mostly talking about air strikes in firefights, that's not the same thing as knowing exactly where a Taliban leader will be, and if it it were it's not said what would be done.

 

So like Fop said if they know exactly where a Taliban leader will be - what do you think they should do about it?

 

“When we shoot into a compound, that should only be for the protection of our forces,” he said. “I want everyone to understand that.”

 

I can't see how you can be confused as to my opinion. I'm the one who started the thread to codemn a bombing that's killed a Taliban commander.

 

Your desparation to find an opposing view is palpable btw.

It wasn't in a compound though. Fop's not stated a view, just asked a question (which you won't answer).

 

And what about Pakistani air strikes and artillery strikes while we're at it? Yes? No? Maybe?

 

 

 

 

So again what is your opinion of what should be done when the have intelligence on a Taliban leaders position?

 

It's a very simple question that you refuse to answer.

 

 

"You're not wrong, you're just an asshole"

 

So you're refusing to answer the question then?

 

 

"Life does not stop and start at your convenience, you miserable piece of shit."

 

"Cowards can never be moral."

[The Fish 10972]

"I can't believe it's not butter"

[Guest alex]

"Never play cards with a man called Doc. Never eat at a place called Mom's. Never sleep with a woman whose troubles are worse than your own."

[Meenzer 15740]

"It's my time, it's my time, my moment, I'm not going to let go of iiiiiiit."

[The Fish 10972]

"This is my moment, this is my perfect moment, with you"

[Happy Face 29]

It wasn't in a compound though.

 

accounts described the target as a “Taliban training center”

 

So again what is your opinion of what should be done when the have intelligence on a Taliban leaders position?

 

It's a very simple question that you refuse to answer.

 

It's a very vague question, but I think I'd probably have him followed.

 

Howabout your good self?

[tooner 243]

There's huge debate as to the rights and wrongs of government sponsored targeted assassinations.

 

I don't think hoying 49 civillians into the mix helps the argument for it.

 

it's all about the semantics with gov't PR, but state sponsored terrorism is still terrorism, they just get to call it military operations

[Happy Face 29]

The US drone attack on the funeral procession exposes the hypocrisy of Obama’s professed outrage over the Iranian government’s repression of students and others protesting the June 12 elections. In just one day of drone attacks in neighboring Pakistan, the US killed more than twice as many civilians as have been reportedly killed in the course of the protests in Iran.

 

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jun2009/paki-j25.shtml

[Park Life 71]

The US drone attack on the funeral procession exposes the hypocrisy of Obama’s professed outrage over the Iranian government’s repression of students and others protesting the June 12 elections. In just one day of drone attacks in neighboring Pakistan, the US killed more than twice as many civilians as have been reportedly killed in the course of the protests in Iran.

 

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jun2009/paki-j25.shtml

 

Fuck me.

 

"Villagers were unable to provide help to those injured for hours, as US drones continued to hover overhead, according to Pakistani media. The US has carried out 43 drone attacks in Pakistan since January, 2008. About half of these have taken place under the Obama administration, leading to a death toll of well over 700."

[Fop 1]

It wasn't in a compound though.

 

accounts described the target as a “Taliban training center”

 

So again what is your opinion of what should be done when the have intelligence on a Taliban leaders position?

 

It's a very simple question that you refuse to answer.

 

It's a very vague question, but I think I'd probably have him followed.

 

Howabout your good self?

 

 

You'd have him "followed"?

 

 

Assuming that they didn't notice the bespectacled guy in the false beard as they trailed him through small villages where everyone knows everyone else and the middle of nowhere (where there is no one else)........... what would you do then?

 

Follow him a bit more?

 

 

 

 

It's not a vague question at all. It's a hard question, yes, but then it would be.

[Happy Face 29]

It wasn't in a compound though.

 

accounts described the target as a “Taliban training center”

 

So again what is your opinion of what should be done when the have intelligence on a Taliban leaders position?

 

It's a very simple question that you refuse to answer.

 

It's a very vague question, but I think I'd probably have him followed.

 

Howabout your good self?

 

 

You'd have him "followed"?

 

 

Assuming that they didn't notice the bespectacled guy in the false beard as they trailed him through small villages where everyone knows everyone else and the middle of nowhere (where there is no one else)........... what would you do then?

 

Follow him a bit more?

 

 

 

 

It's not a vague question at all. It's a hard question, yes, but then it would be.

 

 

Oh dear. You are simple.

 

The US "Black" budget is $50bn+ (equal to the UKs entire defence budget -which is the second biggest in the world).

 

That's on top of the standard $490bn US military budget.

 

They can stretch past a beard and glasses mate. The 3 rockets they ploughed into the funeral cost $3m.

 

Glad to see you advocate the bombing of 50-80 civilians to kill one man who hasn't had a trial. Kind of contradicts your doveish attitude elsewhere.

[Park Life 71]

Nicos is right on this one. They could not only follow him they could take a piss for him if needed.

Edited June 25, 2009 by Park Life

[Fop 1]

It wasn't in a compound though.

 

accounts described the target as a “Taliban training center”

 

So again what is your opinion of what should be done when the have intelligence on a Taliban leaders position?

 

It's a very simple question that you refuse to answer.

 

It's a very vague question, but I think I'd probably have him followed.

 

Howabout your good self?

 

 

You'd have him "followed"?

 

 

Assuming that they didn't notice the bespectacled guy in the false beard as they trailed him through small villages where everyone knows everyone else and the middle of nowhere (where there is no one else)........... what would you do then?

 

Follow him a bit more?

 

 

 

 

It's not a vague question at all. It's a hard question, yes, but then it would be.

 

 

Oh dear. You are simple.

 

The US "Black" budget is $50bn+ (equal to the UKs entire defence budget -which is the second biggest in the world).

 

That's on top of the standard $490bn US military budget.

 

They can stretch past a beard and glasses mate. The 3 rockets they ploughed into the funeral cost $3m.

 

Glad to see you advocate the bombing of 50-80 civilians to kill one man who hasn't had a trial. Kind of contradicts your doveish attitude elsewhere.

 

 

 

What does money have to do with it?

 

 

You can follow someone in a city, it's easy. But in villages and and mountainous countryside it's not the same thing, in villages and small towns strangers stick out like a sore thumb, in other areas the people you are following will know the area and how to spot/follow people in it much better than you?

 

So how do you think they will do it?

 

 

 

Long distance surveillance is good at watching AN area (for someone you have intelligence will appear), but following someone over a period of hours or days? No not really.

 

 

And you've still not answered the question: What do you do when you've followed him?

Edited June 26, 2009 by Fop

[Happy Face 29]

It wasn't in a compound though.

 

accounts described the target as a “Taliban training center”

 

So again what is your opinion of what should be done when the have intelligence on a Taliban leaders position?

 

It's a very simple question that you refuse to answer.

 

It's a very vague question, but I think I'd probably have him followed.

 

Howabout your good self?

 

 

You'd have him "followed"?

 

 

Assuming that they didn't notice the bespectacled guy in the false beard as they trailed him through small villages where everyone knows everyone else and the middle of nowhere (where there is no one else)........... what would you do then?

 

Follow him a bit more?

 

 

 

 

It's not a vague question at all. It's a hard question, yes, but then it would be.

 

 

Oh dear. You are simple.

 

The US "Black" budget is $50bn+ (equal to the UKs entire defence budget -which is the second biggest in the world).

 

That's on top of the standard $490bn US military budget.

 

They can stretch past a beard and glasses mate. The 3 rockets they ploughed into the funeral cost $3m.

 

Glad to see you advocate the bombing of 50-80 civilians to kill one man who hasn't had a trial. Kind of contradicts your doveish attitude elsewhere.

 

 

 

What does money have to do with it?

 

 

You can follow someone in a city, it's easy. But in villages and and mountainous countryside it's not the same thing, in villages and small towns strangers stick out like a sore thumb, in other areas the people you are following will know the area and how to spot/follow people in it much better than you?

 

So how do you think they will do it?

 

 

 

Long distance surveillance is good at watching AN area (for someone you have intelligence will appear), but following someone over a period of hours or days? No not really.

 

 

And you've still not answered the question: What do you do when you've followed him?

 

Aks yourself this Fop...how do they know unequivically that this bloke is there in the first place?

 

Keep banging the "bomb innocent civilians" drum though, it's brilliant you prefer killing people who've done nothing wrong to arresting them, giving them a beating and releasing them.

[Fop 1]

It wasn't in a compound though.

 

accounts described the target as a “Taliban training center”

 

So again what is your opinion of what should be done when the have intelligence on a Taliban leaders position?

 

It's a very simple question that you refuse to answer.

 

It's a very vague question, but I think I'd probably have him followed.

 

Howabout your good self?

 

 

You'd have him "followed"?

 

 

Assuming that they didn't notice the bespectacled guy in the false beard as they trailed him through small villages where everyone knows everyone else and the middle of nowhere (where there is no one else)........... what would you do then?

 

Follow him a bit more?

 

 

 

 

It's not a vague question at all. It's a hard question, yes, but then it would be.

 

 

Oh dear. You are simple.

 

The US "Black" budget is $50bn+ (equal to the UKs entire defence budget -which is the second biggest in the world).

 

That's on top of the standard $490bn US military budget.

 

They can stretch past a beard and glasses mate. The 3 rockets they ploughed into the funeral cost $3m.

 

Glad to see you advocate the bombing of 50-80 civilians to kill one man who hasn't had a trial. Kind of contradicts your doveish attitude elsewhere.

 

 

 

What does money have to do with it?

 

 

You can follow someone in a city, it's easy. But in villages and and mountainous countryside it's not the same thing, in villages and small towns strangers stick out like a sore thumb, in other areas the people you are following will know the area and how to spot/follow people in it much better than you?

 

So how do you think they will do it?

 

 

 

Long distance surveillance is good at watching AN area (for someone you have intelligence will appear), but following someone over a period of hours or days? No not really.

 

 

And you've still not answered the question: What do you do when you've followed him?

 

Aks yourself this Fop...how do they know unequivically that this bloke is there in the first place?

 

Tip off's usually (not someone trailing him or a spy drone being controled from Langley - sorry Parky but those fly ones can only operate in less than 1mph wind and only for a few mins at a time at the moment ), although it won't be 100% but then nothing is (look at JCM).

 

Keep banging the "bomb innocent civilians" drum though, it's brilliant you prefer killing people who've done nothing wrong to arresting them, giving them a beating and releasing them.

Fop never said anything of the sort, Fop's just asking you a question.

 

 

Which you've still NOT answered by the way:

 

What do you do when you've followed him?