Re: Springing Bin Laden's trap

Post #14,930 by addison 10/24/01 9:57:24 AM Reply	Re: Springing Bin Laden's trap Can't add anything useful to the earlier part of the reply. Couldn't make much sense of it. Then you really shouldn't be in this discussion. You keep implying that the collateral effects are and will be all Taliban's blame. That is one wierd bit of logic. I'd point out exactly how much sense that made, but you'd just ignore that, and keep going on and on. I've given you parallels you've not refuted, or have just said they're wrong. I really think you need to sit and think about the "nature of war". Because if you can't understand the part you said you didn't - you really need to. Addison
Post #14,939 by dmarker2 10/24/01 10:32:55 AM Reply	Re: Consider this ... Here we are unable to agree that we even understand what each other is saying. But this thread was always about bombing Afghans during Ramadan. I know that. So if we who are on the same side can't see eye-to-eye about the importance of some sensible handling of the Ramadan period, how the f*** do you imagine Muslims elsewhere can see any US justification for continuing bombing during Ramadan. Doesn't that worry you ? - Doesn't it smell like the OBL trap ?. Are you not concerned about how volotile Pakistan is ? Is killing Taliban troops so important to you that all caution gets cast aside ? Cheers Doug (PS I won't get personal if you don't - I can see the temptation for both of us is there but lets just keep this level)
Post #14,948 by addison 10/24/01 11:19:18 AM Reply	Re: Consider this ... But this thread was always about bombing Afghans during Ramadan. I know that. Its not always obvious. So if we who are on the same side can't see eye-to-eye about the importance of some sensible handling of the Ramadan period, how the f*** do you imagine Muslims elsewhere can see any US justification for continuing bombing during Ramadan. "Sensible handling"? That's what its about. There's no "sensible handling". The fact its Ramadan shouldn't affect our plans much. Slightly, yes. But not much. Muslims elsewhere can see any US justification for continuing bombing during Ramadan. The requirements for the US to stop the attacks have been quite clearly laid out. Doesn't that worry you ? - Nope. The issue is, as I keep telling you, irrelevent. There aren't any fence sitters who will be changed one way or the other. Doesn't it smell like the OBL trap ?. Nope. Are you not concerned about how volotile Pakistan is ? Not really. Is killing Taliban troops so important to you that all caution gets cast aside ? Continuing the US mission is important to me. I'm not casting caution aside, you're the one who will castrate the US mission. And why? So we bomb the MINUTE that Ramadan is over, and THOSE people being killed is "better"? I'm very against killing people in such situations. But "stopping" during Ramadan means more of their civilians will likely die later, as they have more time to shield behind them. Stopping means possibly more attacks on the US. Again, we didn't stop on Japanese holidays during WWII. The point of war is you don't get to choose the time and place, often. Furthermore, we're already hamstrung by our notions of "justice" and things like "fair treatment". You've yet to show any plausible reason that "stopping" during ramandan - until somebody kills hundreds more Americans (or anybody else) is logical at all. Because its not. So its a holiday. How does that change anything**? How is it better when we kill civilians during non-holidays? Addison
Post #15,033 by dmarker2 10/24/01 7:58:28 PM Reply	Re: stick to the facts " Is killing Taliban troops so important to you that all caution gets cast aside ? Continuing the US mission is important to me. I'm not casting caution aside, you're the one who will castrate the US mission. And why? So we bomb the MINUTE that Ramadan is over, and THOSE people being killed is "better"? I'm very against killing people in such situations. But "stopping" during Ramadan means more of their civilians will likely die later, as they have more time to shield behind them. Stopping means possibly more attacks on the US. 1) I have reminded you repeatedly (but you keep ignoring it) that I always argued to keep bombing hitting going after OBL & terrorists. Why do you bluntly keep writing that I want all bombing stopped - when it is clear I never once suggested it ?? 2) I said we should stop bombing near civillian areas during Ramadan & highlighted the massive disorder already underway with 100,000s of innocent civillians fleeing. You put up a pathetic case for 100 civillian casualties due to the precision bombing but never responded to the collateral issue of these people's plight during winter and the image seen by other countries if bombing was impacting civillians during Ramadan. 3) I highlighted the instability in nearby countries - you have told us what you think of that & I'm now not at all surprised. Cheers Doug "
Post #15,045 by addison 10/24/01 9:19:23 PM Reply	I'm not the one moving away from them 1) I have reminded you repeatedly (but you keep ignoring it) that I always argued to keep bombing hitting going after OBL & terrorists. Why do you bluntly keep writing that I want all bombing stopped - when it is clear I never once suggested it ?? 2) I said we should stop bombing near civillian areas during Ramadan & highlighted the massive disorder already underway with 100,000s of innocent civillians fleeing. Those two are exclusive. If the Taliban/terrorists aren't near civilian areas, then we wouldn't be bombing near there. We're not bombing civilians just to do it - you imply that we are. That's the facts. The airstrikes and commando raids are - for all evidence - avoiding civilian casualties. Therefore, there's no reason to change anything - and you are advocating that. 3) I highlighted the instability in nearby countries - you have told us what you think of that & I'm now not at all surprised. I'm not worried about it. More importantly, you did not explain how not bombing targets near civilian areas would decrease that instablity*. You're pulling isolated (and sometimes exclusive ideas) and attempting to make a stand with them. Addison
Post #15,084 by dmarker2 10/25/01 5:22:16 AM Reply	Re: wrapping up Just want to wrap this thread up from my end. It is obvious to me we have not enjoyed this interaction nor learned from each other. We don't even seem to have been able to agree to disagree. We haven't managed to reach an end where we can see each others point-of-view and respect it. That has been a dissapointment to me and I take it as my failure to adequately convey my views & to see yours clearly. I do consider discussing these issues to be very valuable and constantly rediscover the satisfaction when we here can put differing views and respect them as well as debate them. Occasionaly such discussions can seem to lead nowhere as it appears to me this line has. Irrespective of this outcome I trust we can debate other issues in the future and manage to earn each other's respect no matter if we disagree. Cheers Doug Good minds are extremely valuable to other good minds
Post #15,160 by addison 10/25/01 8:59:45 PM Reply	Re: wrapping up Just want to wrap this thread up from my end. It is obvious to me we have not enjoyed this interaction nor learned from each other. No, Doug, we've not. Mainly because you've started with something I consider to be somewhat illogical - and are expecting me to agree with you 1/2 way. Your insisting I'm a bloodthirsty killer didn't help, either. :) In short: We're not targeting civilians now. You've yet to explain how that should change during Ramadan. The people who are "on the fence" won't be influenced by Ramadan - and most people have already made up their mind. So insisting that it will make Pakistan fall is irrelevent.... And so no, there's no agreeing to disagree. Whether we bomb or not is utterly irrelevant, and there's no upside to not bombing. In order to agree to disagree, you'd have to show me where there is one. Though I appreciate your tone, I think its unnecessary, but thanks for the polite wrap up. Addison
Post #15,171 by dmarker2 10/25/01 10:20:55 PM Reply	Re: wrapping up - another try I was trying to reach out. My post didn't try to lay blame at either your or my feet other than my failure to make myself better understood - my fault!. I won't respond the the new points raised as they are not making the thread any clearer nor helping us understand each other better. Probably achieve the opposite. Let us both hope that we can do better on other topics. Let this one die a natural well earned death. Cheers Doug
Post #15,208 by wharris2 10/26/01 2:49:02 AM Reply	Retch out? If you start with illogical premises, you reaching out doesn't make me want to hold out my hand so you can pull me into your twisted pit of viprous snarled logic. 1+1 = 2. If you say differently, there's no amount of reaching out or meeting halfway. There are many things that are, indeed, black and white with no shades of grey in between. "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth
Post #15,217 by Ashton 10/26/01 3:11:02 AM Reply	Ah.. the 1+1 certain logic of the unwarranted kewl buttinski
Post #15,227 by dmarker2 10/26/01 6:36:21 AM Reply	Re: Retch out? Go screw yer boots (grin) Cheers Doug

Welcome to IWETHEY!