I bet tony blair could have saved him, if he just made a call to G.Bush and told him to release the women prisoners so that the poor guy could have come back!....
Shame Shame Shame
Printable View
I bet tony blair could have saved him, if he just made a call to G.Bush and told him to release the women prisoners so that the poor guy could have come back!....
Shame Shame Shame
Ever heard the phrase "We don't bargain with terrorists?"
so what do you suggest?
if he had agreed with the kidnappers and freed the women prisoners there would have been no guarantee that he would have been released, also you would give them or others the green light to do it again.
its a double edged sword.
You can't deal with terrorists. The moment you start, you just fuel their greed and will cause a wave of kidnappings and hostage demands like we've never seen. The Romans knew it and had an effective way of dealing with it. Kill one Roman, they kill one hundred of yours. We've just gotten soft.
rubbish, no one could have done anything to save him that wouldn't have put many many other lives in jeopardy.Quote:
Originally posted by aka_tech
I bet tony blair could have saved him, if he just made a call to G.Bush and told him to release the women prisoners so that the poor guy could have come back!....
The only people responsible for this atrocity are the people that killed him.
I dislike blair and bush as much as the next guy but you can't blame either of them for this single act of terrorism.
Well, I don't think Blair or Bush are exactly blameless. This is some new kind of war they are playing at here, where they use civilians to wash army clothes and serve army chow, and a host of other things that the Army would have done in a previous war. Consequently, these civilians are not being protected the way an Army group would have been, and these guys are in a war zone that is still hot. A far cry from past wars, when civilians only went in after the place was pacified to rubble.
you gotta be pretty desperate or stupid to take a job over there right now. It's a known risk.
they're not blameless for creating the situation in which this happened, but they can't be blamed for this individual incident, once it had started there was nothing they could have done to prevent what happened.Quote:
Originally posted by iaskwhy
Well, I don't think Blair or Bush are exactly blameless.
same thing could be said for police officers and firefighters. I think some are motivated by helping the iraqi people, and of course some are motiveated by 6 figure incomes.Quote:
Originally posted by jAQUAN
you gotta be pretty desperate or stupid to take a job over there right now. It's a known risk.
Well, I have to disagree. After all, the buck stops on either desk. Individual beheadings carry the same blame as fighting an experimental war in the first place. It's not like Rumsfeld is sitting in the Oval Office, except when told to show up. Bush is just as much to blame for letting Rummy fight an unconventional war as he is for getting us into it in the first place. You can bet, if there was any praise being handed out, he'd get it, so he also gets the blame. It's his war.Quote:
Originally posted by aversion
they're not blameless for creating the situation in which this happened, but they can't be blamed for this individual incident, once it had started there was nothing they could have done to prevent what happened.
I agree completely, but as I said, the scope of my post about what happened after the men were kidnapped. There was nothing any leader could have done to prevent the killings at that point other than to capitulate to their demands, which, with terrorists, is always out of the question.Quote:
Originally posted by iaskwhy
Well, I have to disagree. After all, the buck stops on either desk. Individual beheadings carry the same blame as fighting an experimental war in the first place. It's not like Rumsfeld is sitting in the Oval Office, except when told to show up. Bush is just as much to blame for letting Rummy fight an unconventional war as he is for getting us into it in the first place. You can bet, if there was any praise being handed out, he'd get it, so he also gets the blame. It's his war.
Absolutly right. But have you noticed a change in the way war is fought in the last 3 or 4 decades? If an american had been kidnapped in Seoul 40 years ago, the second day, there would have been a draft callup in the US and by day 10, paratroopers would have been dropping all around the capital. The president then, like now had that authority, but unlike then, the people are no longer behind the president. There use to be patriotic pride in the fact that americans were safe anywhere. Now, it's ho hum, another one, huh?
I'm not defending either frame of mind, it's just the way it was. :)
It always hurts a little when a captive is killed. But it immediatly leads to me wondering if it was in vain or not. I end up less shocked that a barbaric people would do something like that and more shocked at our own arrogance thinking we could reason with them.
You could eliminate every evil person in Iraq tomarrow and the left-overs would still not be able to help themselves. They would still need professionals from other countries to run their water, power, government, etc.
If you ask me, it not that big of a loss to just start raising the worst cities to the ground.
Exactly!Quote:
Originally posted by aversion
rubbish, no one could have done anything to save him that wouldn't have put many many other lives in jeopardy.
The only people responsible for this atrocity are the people that killed him.
I dislike blair and bush as much as the next guy but you can't blame either of them for this single act of terrorism.
So whats the prediction for Iraqi situation now? We all know B&B (Bush & Blair) are there for only 1 reason i.e. OIL. And now since they cant pump out OIL without people being killed, what will be the solution? And i hear Kerry is planning to stay there 2 if he gets elected....
I am as against the farcical war as anyone, but I honestly don't think oil is the reason we're there. It is true that iraq is a valuable country because of its oil reserves but america won't steal its oil, even if they go back to post gulf war levels of production the revenue will barely cover the projected iraqi goverment budgets, never mind have any money left over to pay the americans.Quote:
Originally posted by aka_tech
So whats the prediction for Iraqi situation now? We all know B&B (Bush & Blair) are there for only 1 reason i.e. OIL. And now since they cant pump out OIL without people being killed, what will be the solution? And i hear Kerry is planning to stay there 2 if he gets elected....
The rising price of oil because of instability in the region might benefit big oil companies around the world, but the instability is bad for business and I don't think it's naive to say that most oil businesses would prefer a stable region to an unstable market.
I honestly think the whole 'they're there to steal oil' argument does nothing but retard and discredit opposition to the war.
Secondly, if Kerry, or anyone, is elected they can't just pull out the troops, now that the forces are there they must stay, or the country and perhaps the region will collapse. Kerry plans to open dialogue with other nations to replace american troops in the region, to bring more help to the coalition, initially from NATO countries. Thus he plans to lessen the american presence in the region over time, not just pull everyone out.
Bush.
I blame Billy Connolly ;)
Study a little Iraqi history. It was one of the most progressive in the Middle East not too long ago, without the need of other "professionals" to run their economy. The "evilness" isn't an epidemic, but a result of a certain environment that has been created over a great many years.Quote:
Originally posted by jAQUAN
It always hurts a little when a captive is killed. But it immediatly leads to me wondering if it was in vain or not. I end up less shocked that a barbaric people would do something like that and more shocked at our own arrogance thinking we could reason with them.
You could eliminate every evil person in Iraq tomarrow and the left-overs would still not be able to help themselves. They would still need professionals from other countries to run their water, power, government, etc.
If you ask me, it not that big of a loss to just start raising the worst cities to the ground.
You want to talk about arrogance? How about the arrogance of thinking that we (or any group of people) is superior to any other group of people?
The people involved in the killing deserve all the punishment that can be delivered to them. The majority of Iraqis do not.
Me too! Let's lynch the bugger!!Quote:
Originally posted by SpockBert
I blame Billy Connolly ;)
me too.Quote:
Originally posted by SpockBert
I blame Billy Connolly ;)
"Why don't they just get on with it?"
dp