Thread: Is the 'War on Terror' going too far?

Once there were allied operatives targeting an extremely dangerous enemy who was unaware of their presence. The enemy was in a house with his wife and kids. The operatives relaid the targets information back to their commander. The operatives then asked if they could destroy the target; the commander hesitated for a while before finally saying "abort". Later on down the road the enemy, who received mercy through his children, committed mass-murder.

Names, dates and places?

Originally Posted by kirin-rex

Regardless of who this guy is or what he did, I'm not 'okay' with killing women and children to get this guy. I'm also not okay with risking war with Pakistan to get this guy.

I thought we were supposed to be the good guys. I realize that in war, civilian casualties are unfortunately unavoidable, but we should be TRYING to avoid those casualties. Here, it sounds like a surgical missile strike against this guy's family.

Now, I KNOW they use women and kids as shields. I know it. I know how these people operate. I've read the stories of how soldiers in street-to-street fighting will send little kids out to pick up weapons in the street, counting on the Americans not to shoot little kids.

But I'm still not okay with this. I still think it's wrong.

While i am sorry for his wife and children Kirin but he would have known the risk to them was greatly increased when he became a member of Al-Queda it obviously did not deter him from the path of terrorism, and as such has paid the price and regretfully so has his familiy. As for Pakistan i believe the US are given permission to some extent to persue targets into Pakitani border region, but what Pakistan say to there own people may be different....

Ah, I wasn't aware that Pakistan said it was okay. The last I'd heard (years ago) Pakistan had told the US not to violate its borders.

As for this guy and his family. I'm not saying he didn't deserve it. I realize that it's the risk they take. I'm just not sure that it was right for us to say "Well, women and kids are gonna die ... but it's okay because we get HIM!"

I know we have to stop terrorism, but I'm an idealist, and I don't think the fact that THEY play dirty is necessarily a justification for US to play dirty. Somebody's gotta be the good guy.

Pakistan has interests in the Afghan resolution.

Pakistan is another country given free reign over the law. The selling of nuclear secrets to countless countries and groups, with government/intelligence agency involvement, being a case in point.

Pakistan allowing CIA to use airbase for drone strikes | The Australian

. Somebody's gotta be the good guy.

The tactics used to fight the war on terror have made sure that anybody trying to take a stand for the common good is vilified as the enemy.

The restriction of civil liberties in countries around the globe, the almost Orwellian global surveillance system, the disproportionate use of police powers and aggressive tactics at lawful, peaceful demonstrations, to the Israels recent actions, have all led to a situation where the humanitarians are the bad guys and the guys in black masks with guns are the good guys.

Originally Posted by comfortablynumb

........................The restriction of civil liberties in countries around the globe, the almost Orwellian global surveillance system, the disproportionate use of police powers and aggressive tactics at lawful, peaceful demonstrations, to the Israels recent actions, have all led to a situation where the humanitarians are the bad guys and the guys in black masks with guns are the good guys.

But if you are a non violent humanitarian, surely peacful protest would be the sensible course of action, instead of provocation. Even if it was wrong for israel to intercept that ship, they were asked to stop. Why would a peacful ship, with peacful people ignore a request like that to stop, knowing the consequences. If they were truly peacful, they would not have done what they did. When you look at Fenns clip, you can see that people on the ship are belting the crap out of the soldiers as they are coming down the ropes. It is very very clear that the people on the boat were hell bent on confrontation. This is not how a peaceful protest is conducted. You know that. Now we see the fools are sending yet another ship in defiance of the blockade. Why, what do they expect will happen. They just want yet another confrontation. If they were truly interested in getting humanitarian aid, they would not do it this way. At any demonstration you will always have a fringe element there for a fight. This will always hinder peacful protest. We see it in Australia even when we have the big international conferences here. Most protest peacefully but there is always a fringe element out for violence. the people in control of that ship should not have let those bent on trouble get on in the first place.

Originally Posted by kirin-rex

Ah, I wasn't aware that Pakistan said it was okay. The last I'd heard (years ago) Pakistan had told the US not to violate its borders.

As for this guy and his family. I'm not saying he didn't deserve it. I realize that it's the risk they take. I'm just not sure that it was right for us to say "Well, women and kids are gonna die ... but it's okay because we get HIM!"

I know we have to stop terrorism, but I'm an idealist, and I don't think the fact that THEY play dirty is necessarily a justification for US to play dirty. Somebody's gotta be the good guy.

I hate to say it Kirin but sometimes in a violent world there isn't room for a good guy, somebody allways has to get their hands dirty, when people play by a different set of rules you either have to play their way or lose, and when it comes to extremists we can't afford to lose...

kirin....if memory serves President Clinton passed on a chance to wax osama because of colateral damage in the late 1990s. While upsetting sometimes such things are required.

I know Vietnam Vets that had to kill women and children.....but what else would one do if a woman or child were pointing a rifle at you? I didn't hesitate when I had a choice.

It was the same in Northern Ireland back in the early days of the IRA. British soldiers where seen as the bad guys for shooting kids. What wasnt so publicly known was that the IRA was giving toy guns to kids to play with, then giving them real guns and telling them to 'go up to that soldier over there and pull the trigger and say bang your dead'.

Whilst this only happened a few times you can imagine the reaction of soldiers being confronted with a gun being pointed at them. If they wait to see if it is a prank they run the risk of being shot by an innocent child.