Joepistole said:
No one hear wants war...except Bush II and his ilk.
I would only point out that "his ilk" is a fairly large group.
(Also, while I wholly understand that typos happen, I wanted to note that it's 4,500 rounds per minute.)
Joepistole said:
No one hear wants war...except Bush II and his ilk.
As for the Iranian plane, you know as well as I that it was where it did not belong. It acted like an enemy warcraft and it was treated as such. It did not respond to international requests to identify itself. And the United States paid reparations to the Iranian people and apologized for the incident. If cowards would not use civilian airliners and hide behind burkaks and children to carrry out their bloody deeds, these things would not happen.
No one wanted war in 2001, either - until 9/11, and the propaganda machine got rolling. Most Americans can't find Iraq on an unmarked map, and more than half think Saddam was some kind of violent threat to the US in '03, to this day. They view the situation next to Iran - right on Iran's borders, where the US military has set up full scale carrier groups and built air bases - as one of discussions about how far Iran will go, how big a threat the belligerence and bluster of the Iranians really is. That media setup is not going anywhere.joe said:Nice verbiage Hype, but I think you went over the deep end. No one hear wants war...except Bush II and his ilk. And he is on his way out. The American people are tired of his lies and incompetence.
More than warned, one would say. Directly and repeatedly threatened. That's how we know they are the enemy.joe said:In this case the enemy has been warned on several occasions.
Is everyone who fights from their homes against an invading army, then, a coward ?joe said:We have here an enemy who hides behind children and burkaks to kill and murder not only Americans but children and women of their own people. I call them cowards, any one or group that uses innocents as a shield is indeed a coward.
No one wanted war in 2001, either - until 9/11, and the propaganda machine got rolling. Most Americans can't find Iraq on an unmarked map, and more than half think Saddam was some kind of violent threat to the US in '03, to this day. They view the situation next to Iran - right on Iran's borders, where the US military has set up full scale carrier groups and built air bases - as one of discussions about how far Iran will go, how big a threat the belligerence and bluster of the Iranians really is. That media setup is not going anywhere.
Most people were tired of the lies and incompetence in 2004. That didn't keep them from swallowing the Swiftboating, or getting all excited about how insane Iran's president was supposed to be. Now, as of Friday, half the work force at my local machine shop is arguing about whether Obama is a secret Muslim.
The power setup behind the media setup is not going anywhere.
To expect that the US will shed the fundamental problems that got us into Iraq by shedding W's coterie is blindness.
More than warned, one would say. Directly and repeatedly threatened. That's how we know they are the enemy.
Is everyone who fights from their homes against an invading army, then, a coward ?
Compared with, say, people who drop bombs on those homes from the safety of airplanes high above ?
And when did the cowardice of this or that people become a justification for invasion and war, for killing them and their families ?
So let me get this right. The US BATTLESHIPS can go through the Strait of Hormuz because they are international waters as defined by the US.
But an Iranian CIVILIAN aircraft cannot fly over them because they are not permitted to.
Is that right?
And btw, if you invade a foreign country, is it surprising that they are wearing their traditional clothes and if you bomb cities with high density populations how is that considered "hiding"? That is THEIR country, they can damn well live and dress as they like. Capische?
joepistole: "No one hear wants war...except Bush II and his ilk."
We have a prevalent attitude in the USA that consistently threatens war, by demanding exceptional hegemony over foreign lands and waters, in a manner that we would find entirely unacceptable in the USA, if the tables were turned. This hostile national stance is the most blatant invitation to provocation and war in the world today. Projecting deadly force beyond home defense is nothing less than an invitation to war, and a display of a tacit desire for war. It's the same if an individual walks into a normal gathering of people waving weapons in the faces of everyone encountered- it's just not reasonable to behave that way while insisting one isn't looking for a fight. Even considering a self-appointed role of World Policeman, we can all understand why policemen patrolling with weapons drawn and fingers on the trigger, warning of deadly force if approached, would be a counterproductive practise.
"When our troops are endangered, they need to respond with whatever force is necessary to save their lives."
Because a shootout with Iran would be deadly for US personnel throughout the region, it is not strategically prudent for the US Navy to escalate any isolated encounter in the Persian Gulf. Additionally, we remain equally subject as all nations do to the protocols of peacetime maritime and aviation law.
"In this case the enemy has been warned on several occasions. We have here an enemy who hides behind children and burkaks to kill and murder not only Americans but children and women of their own people. I call them cowards, any one or group that uses innocents as a shield is indeed a coward."
You are obviously conflating Iranian patrol vessels with unspecified terrorists, and that's a very dangerous and unreasonable assumption.
"They need to file and follow flight plans... you know as well as I that [IA 655] was where it did not belong."
You're repeating a long-exposed lie, and your readiness to do so is exemplary of belligerent US propaganda. Iran Air 655 followed her scheduled flight plan, and communicated with ATC on normal channels in plain English- right up until the moment they were blown out of the sky. That tragedy underlined in blood the imperative for naval vessels to comport themselves in accordance with international law in commercial lanes and under peacetime conditions- even as the standing-down of full defense may compromises a ship's security against real and present dangers.
In confined foreign waters, our formations are indeed more vulnerable to attack than they would be under hair-trigger wartime conditions. The law applies equally for any foreign vessels transiting American waters: Ready combat battle-group defenses are unacceptably hazardous to vessels sharing the sea and airspace, and it is improper to maintain a combat stance amidst normal commercial and patrol operations.
We have similarly compromised our own interests with inappropriate force-protection and Rules of Engagement in the streets of Iraq. The incongruity continues to result in unjustifiable casualties to Iraqi bystanders, and the accumulation of intense public antipathy to our military presence; false security. If US forces persist in endangering others by interjecting combat defenses amidst peacetime activities, we will continue to destroy the legitimacy of our unraveling mandate, and invite further resentment and retaliation. Similarly in the Strait of Hormuz, we're not in our own alleyway, and inappropriately hair-trigger defenses are false security.
In such delicate situations as this, potential adversaries must basically be allowed a greater opportunity to take the first shot than they would be in a war zone. The alternative to a restrained posture is a state of war with everyone encountered, which would directly result in multiplied danger to personnel in all our ships and garrisons. Hair-trigger defenses in this context multiply the likelihood of incidents getting out of control. The United States cannot long swagger around the planet in a deadly, unnapproachable posture before we forfeit our friends, our influence, and our security.
When logic is lost and arguements are emotional, there is no basis for further discusiion
SAM when I see you and Buffy go at it. It reminds me of an old quotation from the Jesus, "truth will make you free". The truth is somewhere between the two extremes. But I am starting to get the feeling that you just like to pull Buffy's strings.
I try to remain hopeful, but look what we're up against: The sore-loser meme that is gripping the USA kills reason, and blocks the perception that our society is degenerating, and it won't confront the reality that we're progressively corrupting every aspect that made us a great and innovative nation.
The quality of patriotism that founded the United States is now commonly rejected as subversion. The "We Can't Be Wrong" psychosis is enslaving us, compelling us to destroy- as if this is a game, and we've collectively become a petulant child in a tantrum who won't play by any rules, and can't stand losing. Send in the clowns.