Chinese student killed in bombings had followed her passion to Boston

[notsuperstitious]

Note to civilised people - every terrorism apologist plays with semantics and tries to rewrite meanings of words AS IF thats an argument. A civilian is not a combatant, a target is not collateral damage, a terrorist is not a peace activist and ends do not justify means.

 

[Redbull]

@Talon

Hi

Why do you think the Iraq/Afghan wars were wrong?

If it wasn't the American/European powers doing "collateral damage", the governments of those countries would be killing thier innocent civilians anyway; and that too for petty reasons : Both Taliban and Saddam were wiping out the minorities in their countries.

So where was the condemnation from the Muslim World there?

 

[INDIC]

wow.....and how many innocent iraqis are killed by your wmds in the name of Iraqi freedom???forget afghanistan...they are stone age terrorists...right??

More than American, sectarian violence in response to Shia dominated government is to blamed for the bloodshed in Iraq but you won't acknowledge this fact.

 

[Dubious]

'hai murz e zaeefi kee saza murg e mafajaat'.

@Sedqal bolh tk you ckp dlm bahasa lain?

So all of you guys are in fav of killing people and justifying it? Instead of condemning it NO MATTER WHO KILLS?

Because THAT is my REAL question....

 

[gambit]

@Talon

Hi

Why do you think the Iraq/Afghan wars were wrong?

If it wasn't the American/European powers doing "collateral damage", the governments of those countries would be killing thier innocent civilians anyway; and that too for petty reasons : Both Taliban and Saddam were wiping out the minorities in their countries.

So where was the condemnation from the Muslim World there?

Because those were not 'collateral damages'. Those minorities are targets based upon precise criteria and calculus by the attackers.

 

[Dubious]

@Talon

Hi

Why do you think the Iraq/Afghan wars were wrong?

If it wasn't the American/European powers doing "collateral damage", the governments of those countries would be killing thier innocent civilians anyway; and that too for petty reasons : Both Taliban and Saddam were wiping out the minorities in their countries.

So where was the condemnation from the Muslim World there?

@Redbull so you kill i kill is the same? The people deserve to die because we want war? They dont deserve to be acknowledge coz they were marked for death?

 

[INDIC]

@Gigawatt there is plenty of acknowledge for the other side...I also took part...but this side is not even looked at and NEEDS attention MORE than other side!

You mentioned Palestine but do you care of Israeli kids. Do you care about Darfur.

 

[Slav Defence]

I'll agree with your point on double standards when it comes to mourning the dead equally...in fact I had posted a rather long answer to why such a thing seems to persist in Hype's thread on the same regarding drones.

BUT- to conflate that with the idea- "But no one kills their own unless they are benefiting...there isnt much to benefit in Pakistan....so you add up the points......" is patently flawed. The menace that Pakistan faces is of its own making with liberal help and direction from the US. Mind you..Pakistan has in the past used these "non-state actors" to try and fulfill its own strategic objectives. This isn't poetic justice as much as it is common logic- armed groups have a nucleus of their own..as long as they are dependent upon a state agency to fund and train them they will remain subservient. As they become self-sustaining and reach critical mass they will then diverge from state policy and diktat. For Taliban today is a commercial vehicle as much as an armed extremist one..the environment of FATA has allowed them to create a black trade network worth millions..ideologically they consider themselves the better and more pious Muslims. They have their own center of gravity now and what Pakistan is now suffering from is a result of the autonomy they ceased for themselves during the WOT and due to the weak state institutions of Pakistan. One thing most of the most rabid posters have gotten right here is that it is indeed the Army that is the real linchpin that holds the state together albeit it is also the Pakistani party most responsible for having bred these groups. It is the one state institution that is ready to shed and spill blood, both, for the state.

But as long as you will segregate these groups along the lines of good and bad Taliban you will have problems....something Hype has been railing about since the first day I read his posts.

OK way too much OT..carry on.

so you mean to say we should kill every person who is labelled as taliban??i HAVE A BETTER IDEA....to leave USA alone with Afghan issue...seal our borders and deal with internal issues...where as USA can fight with afghan alone.she is backed up by NATO.remember when we can deal with tamils in sri lankan case successfully,then this ttp is nothing and only ttp is responsible for all this mess

 

[Sedqal]

@Sedqal bolh tk you ckp dlm bahasa lain?

So all of you guys are in fav of killing people and justifying it? Instead of condemning it NO MATTER WHO KILLS?

Because THAT is my REAL question....

- sorry didn't get you ?

- Iraqis were weak they became an easy target. NK and Iran have been a far greater nuisance but since they have enough power to strike back they are still safe. My sympathies are with Iraqis ofcourse.

 

[Dubious]

You mentioned Palestine but do you care of Israeli kids. Do you care about Darfur.

@Gigawatt In another thread I did mention African kids...No specific coz they are too many but at least I acknowledged!

About Israeli.....I said Gaza not 1 specific nation!

 

[Slav Defence]

Because those were not 'collateral damages'. Those minorities are targets based upon precise criteria and calculus by the attackers.

destroying iraq is not collateral damage...attacking japan is not collateral damage......bwahahahahaha....lol

 

[Dubious]

- sorry didn't get you ?

- Iraqis were weak they became an easy target. NK and Iran have been a far greater nuisance but since they have enough power to strike back they are still safe. My sympathies are with Iraqis ofcourse.

@Sedqal o it was Malay

 

[Redbull]

@Redbull so you kill i kill is the same? The people deserve to die because we want war? They dont deserve to be acknowledge coz they were marked for death?

But which would you rather have?

1. Innocents targetted by their own goverments.
2. Innocents killed by collateral damage when saving them from the tyrants that want to kill them?

And still no one condemns Muslim governments for killing thier own people. No protest or terrorism; there's complete silence on the Muslims Worlds part.

It's only when the foreigners do it it's a problem.

 

[Dillinger]

@gambit Perhaps the terms and red lines should be made clearer....do not let your sovereign territory be used by terrorists..hand them over and/or eradicate them and there will be no punitive strike..fail to do so and you've failed to comply with your duty as a sovereign state and thus can hardly argue when the intended targets of these terrorists strike at them within your lands in a preemptive manner.

I mean if tomorrow the Maoists in India start bombing foreign nations then we will have to step up our efforts to pacify them..or IF the KKK revitalizes and starts attacking foreign countries (I know that as not part of their MO but had a hard time finding a large scale armed extremist org of American origin) then the US cannot use the pretext that they are too dangerous or the US's economical situation too delicate for its state agencies to hunt the offenders down.

That having been said..damn man why Iraq? Should have left Uncle Saddam alone to die of old age..you guys ended up diverting precious resources and men from the Af- Pak theater.

 

[Sedqal]

Slav defense you really think you will appeal to some high moral principal and Gambit will 'see the light' .

@Sedqal o it was Malay

Ok sorry my stay in Malaysia has not been for long, still learning