You guys and your guns...

[Seth]

I think it is very sad that both mistermack and Seth go over the top with insulting and objectionable language.

Might have something to do with hoplophobes calling me a psychopath or something. I've told you before I'll give better than I get. Remain polite and I will too.

I am sure that both have valid points to make in the debate. However, most people, including myself, dismiss the arguments immediately, and there is a tendency to call them idiots (I am sure they are not) simply because it is hard to get past that awful language.

Now, especially for Seth. I am happy to address your arguments if you would care to rephrase them in a courteous form more suitable for debate. Otherwise, I will ignore them under the assumption they are worthless.

Pot, kettle, black. You haven't addressed a single argument yet, you've just repeated your propaganda.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Rephrased: "BG, I'm just a troll."

[Seth]

MM, you will never understand.

I understand what death means.

I doubt it.

It's just as devastating for foreign people, as it is for New Yorkers.

Then don't fly airplanes into New York buildings.

I find an amazing double standard in most people. 911 was a terrible tragedy.

It was a terrorist attack.

The invasion of Iraq was more like a ball game. Very little thought or concern given to the innocent people killed.

Actually, quite a lot of thought and effort was put into not killing innocent civilians. The precisely targeted initial cruise missile attack minimized to the greatest extent possible collateral damage, and the invasion (the first one) was one of the most successful and least bloody invasions in the history of warfare. But it was a war, and in war innocent people get killed. But the fact is that the vast majority of "innocent civilians" killed in Iraq, from the very first invasion till yesterday were killed by OTHER IRAQIS, not by US troops.

And nobody mentions all the people the vets have killed. Soldiers kill and get killed.
When they come home, people completely wipe the first bit from their minds, as if it just doesn't exist.

It's welcome home heroes, not welcome home killers.

That's because we sent the soldiers to do a dirty job, and they did it with honor, dignity and to the very best of their ability and therefore should be welcomed home as heroes. Shit happens in war, some very, very bad shit. But if you don't want bad shit to happen to your country, don't support global terrorism or lead the rest of the world to believe that you're developing WMD's, don't rape and murder hundreds of thousands of your own people, don't let your sons rape children and murder them on a daily basis, and don't defy UN sanctions 14 times in 12 years.

Act like a civilized human being, not a perverted, narcissistic animal and the US will have no reason or need to invade your country to liberate its people from tyranny and despotism.

Pretty simple, really.

[Seth]

The same was true in Oz, but I think it's not true (in both our countries) for more recent conflicts...

Iraq and Afghanistan veterans aren't welcomed home as murderers, but they aren't being welcomed as heroes either.

They are by me, whenever I encounter one.

[JimC]

Hey Jim, I want to apologise for my harsh response to you. I didn't even accurately read what you wrote at the time. My apologies.

No problemo!

(and it wasn't harsh, just a little muddled!)

[Jason]

(and it wasn't harsh, just a little muddled!)

More than a little. I really ought to install a breath tester on my computer.

No problemo!

[Wumbologist]

I was wondering when the patented CES tactic for derailing any criticism of the US would be deployed. Generally speaking, the people in this thread with the most blasé attitude to the death of foreign civilians are the Americans in the thread, so don't whine if you get a bit of flak for it. Here's an idea, if you don't want to get shot by a child in country X, don't invade country X. I doubt the blighter will turn up on your doorstep.

A Brit, scolding Americans for invading foreign countries. Now THAT is fucking rich.

[JimC]

The first intervention against Afghanistan was totally justified, IMO, and there is also an international group involved.

We are not going to agree on this one, Jim.

The wrong enemy was attacked. The Taliban are not a nice group for sure, but they were not really an enemy until the USA turned them into one. The enemy was Al Qaeda, and the military action in Afghanistan did not harm them. They just moved to safer places to operate from. The military action wiped out the Taliban government and killed a lot of innocent civilians, and barely touched the real enemy.

Of course, while all this was going on, the USA actually did the right thing, in setting up a truly effective action against Al Qaeda. That was the undercover operation. Putting agents into the field and into Al Qaeda itself. The information feed-back has permitted genuinely effective measures to be taken, such as the killing of bin laden. This operation is on-going and continues to be effective. How many measures have been taken on Al Qaeda plots before they happened, and stopping them? Quite a few, and there are probably some that we do not know about.

Not, the attack on Afghanistan should never have happened. The undercover operation was the way forward, and has proven effective. However, dirty politics got in the way. Bush had to be seen to be doing something, or the American people would not have re-elected him. So tens of thousands of people got to die to get him back into office.

I agree that intelligence activities etc. directed at Al Qaeda were and are vital. However, at the time, they were operating in Afghanistan with the full consent and support of the Taliban, which made the Taliban legitimate military targets, IMO...

[JimC]

I was wondering when the patented CES tactic for derailing any criticism of the US would be deployed. Generally speaking, the people in this thread with the most blasé attitude to the death of foreign civilians are the Americans in the thread, so don't whine if you get a bit of flak for it. Here's an idea, if you don't want to get shot by a child in country X, don't invade country X. I doubt the blighter will turn up on your doorstep.

A Brit, scolding Americans for invading foreign countries. Now THAT is fucking rich.

Well, it is a habit they've managed to give up in recent years (unless when they are tempted to join in by you lot...)

[Wumbologist]

I was wondering when the patented CES tactic for derailing any criticism of the US would be deployed. Generally speaking, the people in this thread with the most blasé attitude to the death of foreign civilians are the Americans in the thread, so don't whine if you get a bit of flak for it. Here's an idea, if you don't want to get shot by a child in country X, don't invade country X. I doubt the blighter will turn up on your doorstep.

A Brit, scolding Americans for invading foreign countries. Now THAT is fucking rich.

Well, it is a habit they've managed to give up in recent years (unless when they are tempted to join in by you lot...)

"Given up" my ass, British Imperialism didn't end one day because they up and decided it wasn't nice taking over all those places with funny talking people. If they could still play that game, they would.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I was wondering when the patented CES tactic for derailing any criticism of the US would be deployed. Generally speaking, the people in this thread with the most blasé attitude to the death of foreign civilians are the Americans in the thread, so don't whine if you get a bit of flak for it. Here's an idea, if you don't want to get shot by a child in country X, don't invade country X. I doubt the blighter will turn up on your doorstep.

A Brit, scolding Americans for invading foreign countries. Now THAT is fucking rich.

Well, it is a habit they've managed to give up in recent years (unless when they are tempted to join in by you lot...)

Malvinas.

[Blind groper]

A Brit, scolding Americans for invading foreign countries. Now THAT is fucking rich.

Am I permitted to scold the USA? After all, NZ never invaded anyone.

To Gawdzilla

I do not think the Falklands count. They were inhabited by British people, and the Argentine invasion was countered only by a defense of the Falklands themselves. Argentine claims on the "Malvinas" are decidely shaky when you look at the history.

[Blind groper]

However, at the time, they were operating in Afghanistan with the full consent and support of the Taliban, which made the Taliban legitimate military targets, IMO...

Not a good excuse, IMHO. The Taliban were providing a place for their fellow Muslims, but the Taliban were not themselves harming the USA. If some of your Italian immigrants in Australia exploded a bomb in Greece, for example, would that give Greece the right to invade Australia?

No, there was a better way to attack Al Qaeda, which was done. To attack Afghanistan as well was going too far, and had very, very bad consequences.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

To Gawdzilla

I do not think the Falklands count. They were inhabited by British people, and the Argentine invasion was countered only by a defense of the Falklands themselves. Argentine claims on the "Malvinas" are decidely shaky when you look at the history.

I was joking. The Argies claim is based on the fact that the Falklands are in the same hemisphere.

[JimC]

However, at the time, they were operating in Afghanistan with the full consent and support of the Taliban, which made the Taliban legitimate military targets, IMO...

Not a good excuse, IMHO. The Taliban were providing a place for their fellow Muslims, but the Taliban were not themselves harming the USA. If some of your Italian immigrants in Australia exploded a bomb in Greece, for example, would that give Greece the right to invade Australia?

No, there was a better way to attack Al Qaeda, which was done. To attack Afghanistan as well was going too far, and had very, very bad consequences.

If the Australian government was loudly proclaiming how wonderful the bombing was, and providing material support and training for future bombers, I'd say yes!