Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Killing Civilians & Obselesence of War

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Killing Civilians & Obselesence of War

    I've read a lot of history. Targeting civilians was the norm until after WWII. Now we take it as a self evident truth that military operations should avoid targeting civilians - despite 9/11, despite regular events in Iraq and Israel even today. We have been convinced that is what civilized nations do and only 'barbarous' countries attack civilians. Our own history belies the propaganda. It dawned on me that war can be made obsolete by ONLY targeting civilians, specifically the leaders of belligerent nations.

    Instead of making "declarations of war" we ought to make declarations of intent to assassinate. Far cheaper. Far fewer deaths. It is clear why world leaders are opposed to assassination as a means to advance public policy. Other than Hussein, & Gaddafi' world leaders seldom bear the brunt of their warmongering. They want to keep it that way. This is why the UN documents oppose such action; they are written by world leaders.

    It's time to wake up! It's time to recognize war is the worst of big government programs. We, the little guys, pay for it, with our treasure and our lives. Thoughts?

  • #2
    Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

    Originally posted by JohnLocke View Post
    I've read a lot of history. Targeting civilians was the norm until after WWII. Now we take it as a self evident truth that military operations should avoid targeting civilians - despite 9/11, despite regular events in Iraq and Israel even today. We have been convinced that is what civilized nations do and only 'barbarous' countries attack civilians. Our own history belies the propaganda. It dawned on me that war can be made obsolete by ONLY targeting civilians, specifically the leaders of belligerent nations.

    Instead of making "declarations of war" we ought to make declarations of intent to assassinate. Far cheaper. Far fewer deaths. It is clear why world leaders are opposed to assassination as a means to advance public policy. Other than Hussein, & Gaddafi' world leaders seldom bear the brunt of their warmongering. They want to keep it that way. This is why the UN documents oppose such action; they are written by world leaders.

    It's time to wake up! It's time to recognize war is the worst of big government programs. We, the little guys, pay for it, with our treasure and our lives. Thoughts?
    Good luck with that...

    War remains 'politics by other means'

    War therefore is an act of violence to compel our opponent to fulfil our will.

    Violence arms itself with the inventions of Art and Science in order to contend against violence. Self-imposed restrictions, almost imperceptible and hardly worth mentioning, termed usages of International Law, accompany it without essentially impairing its power. Violence, that is to say physical force (for there is no moral force without the conception of states and law), is therefore the means; the compulsory submission of the enemy to our will is the ultimate object. In order to attain this object fully, the enemy must be disarmed; and this is, correctly speaking, the real aim of hostilities in theory. It takes the place of the final object, and puts it aside in a manner as something not properly belonging to war.
    Clausewitz, ON WAR

    On a slightly related note, we in the West are going to have to get re-acquainted with the violence and death of war and get very good at it if we wish to be around in 50 years or so.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

      I guess it is just better to ignore it all and then it will all go away and the world will be filled with rainbows and unicorns.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

        Originally posted by JohnLocke View Post
        I've read a lot of history. Targeting civilians was the norm until after WWII. Now we take it as a self evident truth that military operations should avoid targeting civilians - despite 9/11, despite regular events in Iraq and Israel even today. We have been convinced that is what civilized nations do and only 'barbarous' countries attack civilians. Our own history belies the propaganda. It dawned on me that war can be made obsolete by ONLY targeting civilians, specifically the leaders of belligerent nations.

        Instead of making "declarations of war" we ought to make declarations of intent to assassinate. Far cheaper. Far fewer deaths. It is clear why world leaders are opposed to assassination as a means to advance public policy. Other than Hussein, & Gaddafi' world leaders seldom bear the brunt of their warmongering. They want to keep it that way. This is why the UN documents oppose such action; they are written by world leaders.

        It's time to wake up! It's time to recognize war is the worst of big government programs. We, the little guys, pay for it, with our treasure and our lives. Thoughts?
        ehhh, the targeting of civilians wasn't the norm well before WW2. It was certainly more common, but wasn't the norm for a long time.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

          Originally posted by ThorHammer View Post
          ehhh, the targeting of civilians wasn't the norm well before WW2. It was certainly more common, but wasn't the norm for a long time.
          I think we can say that it was not the norm in the 19th century.

          I think we can say that it was the norm in the 11th century.

          But I'm a little hazy where in that 8 hundred years it switched.

          Also it should be noted that in this we are only talking about Western Europe and the US... everywhere else right up to and including now it is still he norm to target and kill civilians.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

            Listen, MHP, I am the first to agree with you that we need to change the way we wage war. But I think your vision goes too far.

            Originally posted by MeadHallPirate
            now that i've agreed with ye, imma say somethin' yer not goin' to like, but here it be; ye have the closest approximation 'o a ruthless and efficient assassin, as a political leader conductin' a belligerent "take-no-prisoners" foreign policy in our current POTUS, our skipper, President Obama.
            Except that isn't what he is doing.

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

              Originally posted by MeadHallPirate
              perhaps matey. i don't know...imma not a military person. i know that, in this country, if ye break the public's will to fight, ye end up makin' the idear 'o military might a non-factor.

              i also find the general way folks think 'o warfare hard fer meself to relate to. if i have some kinda ultimate and final disagreement with ye, Thorhammer, and ye challenged me a duel whar we take ten paces and open fire on one another, i'd turn around on me 2nd step and just shoot ye dead in the back. thats war, at least to me. 'tis the complete and utter breakdown in any kinda civil relations, whar both sides agree to revert back to the most barbaric and savage form 'o humankind that history hath produced...and the only point 'o startin' a war is to find a way to end it as soon as possible (with victory, 'o course).

              why have "rules"?

              are thar "rules" when a man rapes a woman? when ye have decided that, as part 'o the normal order 'o things, that its ok to kill yer adversary - why even bother with rules? the only things that "rules" accomplish is to make warfare more palatable, which seems utterly goofy to me.
              You'd wait till the second step?

              I'm all for giving my enemy no respite, MHP, and accept tactics and ways of waging war that would turn the stomachs of your average civilian. The difference between you and I, I guess, is that I don't view civilians as my enemy. In your duel scenario, you and I are combatants. As such we are fair game. I don't think civilians, when it comes to war, fit that scenario. Now will I shed a tear if civilians workers are killed in a strike on a factory? No way. But I can't accept going out of ones way to target civilians.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

                Originally posted by MeadHallPirate
                why have "rules"?
                - MeadHallPirate
                Why indeed...

                'What is best in life?

                To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.'


                As you can see from my quote in post #2 Von Clausewitz ask the very same question almost 200 years ago.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

                  Originally posted by tsquare View Post
                  Why indeed...

                  'What is best in life?

                  To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women.'
                  Ha, a great line.

                  Originally posted by tsquare View Post
                  As you can see from my quote in post #2 Von Clausewitz ask the very same question almost 200 years ago.
                  Just out of curiosity, have you read his entire work?

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

                    Originally posted by ThorHammer View Post
                    Just out of curiosity, have you read his entire work?
                    Years ago... and we, a group of friends, are going through it now. (Last summer this same group did The Art of War and The Prince)


                    I just finished Book 1 Von Clausewitz is not an easy read.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

                      Originally posted by JohnLocke View Post
                      I've read a lot of history. Targeting civilians was the norm until after WWII. Now we take it as a self evident truth that military operations should avoid targeting civilians - despite 9/11, despite regular events in Iraq and Israel even today. We have been convinced that is what civilized nations do and only 'barbarous' countries attack civilians. Our own history belies the propaganda. It dawned on me that war can be made obsolete by ONLY targeting civilians, specifically the leaders of belligerent nations.

                      Instead of making "declarations of war" we ought to make declarations of intent to assassinate. Far cheaper. Far fewer deaths. It is clear why world leaders are opposed to assassination as a means to advance public policy. Other than Hussein, & Gaddafi' world leaders seldom bear the brunt of their warmongering. They want to keep it that way. This is why the UN documents oppose such action; they are written by world leaders.

                      It's time to wake up! It's time to recognize war is the worst of big government programs. We, the little guys, pay for it, with our treasure and our lives. Thoughts?
                      I can certainly understand why you support the idea but it just doesn't work like that in the real world.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

                        Originally posted by Wagner View Post
                        I can certainly understand why you support the idea but it just doesn't work like that in the real world.
                        Actually it does. In fact The Obama is doing it now, and he's following the example given by Colin Powell when we first entered Iraq, 'find the head of the snake and kill it'.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: Killing Civilians &amp;amp; Obselesence of War

                          Originally posted by MeadHallPirate
                          ahoy Thorhammer,

                          we're close then, i think, but our ships still be separated by a bit 'o the blue sea.

                          i don't think i've ever mentioned this on USPO, but i saw the 9/11 attack as a legitimate military strike...i did not see the citizens in the towers as innocents (i know this sounds callous, lemme say that as former New Yorker who lived pretty close to the WTC, i was in shock as i watched the attacks). in our country, the civilians direct the actions 'o our military, the Pentagon be not some kinda internal monarchy that does as it pleases. our entire military apparatus be supported by a vast civilian infrastructure. the folks that serve in the military didn't come outta the womb in kevlar and hand grenades, they began as civilians, and it be from the civilian populus that future soldiers will be recruited.

                          all targets be fair game, and if thar be soft, squishy part 'o ye that will cause ye to yield if i poke it, then imma goin' to be pokin' away with me cutlass. what imma sayin', is if i were in a military conflict with the United States i'd find out whar the Joint Chiefs had thar children attend school, and then flatten them buildings if i thought it would horrify ye into seekin' a non-military solution to our current disagreement.

                          aye.

                          - MeadHallPirate
                          Well, I wouldn't call the strike on the WTC a legit military strike. Pentagon? Sure.

                          Those civilians (and we know its a very select few) that do direct military actions are part of the military chain of command and, as such, are legit targets in my book. Not all civilians are part of that chain and, likewise, aren't legit targets. Simply being a civilian of a nation doesn't make you a de-facto part of that nation's war effort.

                          Typically, actions like the ones you suggest serve to entrench our enemies more. Their will to resist, believe it or not, grows. The Germans, for example, didn't give up when their major cities were carpet bombed. They resisted until their nation was overrun.

                          - - - Updated - - -

                          Originally posted by Damn Yankee View Post
                          Actually it does. In fact The Obama is doing it now, and he's following the example given by Colin Powell when we first entered Iraq, 'find the head of the snake and kill it'.
                          Yeah, Obama is doing now is not what the OP or MHP are advocating.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

                            I have an outdated view of war, I think. I don't believe in war except in self defense, from an actual and real threat. And this defense may involve a good ally that is being attacked. So, I would only commit a nation to war if we or an ally was seriously attacked. And only engage if we had to save ourselves.

                            So, since this is the parameter for me going to war, any war I engaged in would be one of total destruction. To totally destroy the threat and any future threat. To try to forever to do away with the nation or the group that attacked me. Being such, we would not fight many wars.

                            If the nation had nukes that attacked us, both sides may decide not to use that weapon, as we did in ww2 with the poison gas. If one side wanted to win without destroying themselves in the process, nukes could not be used. And that is why I think the next world war, of a large scale will be devoid of nukes, unless one nation is ruled by a madman such as hitler and as he was about to be captured launched them because of the insanity. So any worries that we might have from a nation using nukes would be those nations that live by a religion and its myths. Those kinds are the most dangerous to ever trust with nukes. They are living for a myth after death, and can even blow themselves up as they kill their enemy. Thankfully most nations are not this crazy. And that is what our survival really depends upon, some sort of sanity, that so far we have been able to indulge in.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: Killing Civilians &amp; Obselesence of War

                              Originally posted by Damn Yankee View Post
                              Actually it does. In fact The Obama is doing it now, and he's following the example given by Colin Powell when we first entered Iraq, 'find the head of the snake and kill it'.
                              I would love to see an example of a country whose leader was assassinated by Pres. Obama.

                              There is honestly no point in it.

                              We're long past the point where one single guy can just suppress everyone else and that suppression disappears if that one guy died. Even the most illegitimate governments have general ideas on succession. There might be fighting between a despots family, etc. but that sort of stuff is temporary.

                              There is a reason we aim for complete regime change when we go to war.
                              Last edited by Wagner; 06-27-2012, 11:54 AM.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X