Jakarta Attack

Postby 31acujoker » Fri Jan 15, 2016 3:51 pm

I just want to acknowledge that my thoughts and prayers are with the families of the two innocent people killed in the Terror attack that took place in Jakarta this week, we can't be hypocrites, getting all depressed, sad ad starting worldwide social media campaigns when the first world is attacked (Paris) and then brush it off when the second and third worlds suffer the same tragedy.

Many blessings to the brave men and women who were able to prevent the loss of more innocent lives, two may be a small number comparatively, but is no less tragic for those who loved the victims.
"A thing is not beautiful because it lasts"
- The Vision

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby Sniffmyfeet » Fri Jan 15, 2016 10:00 pm

Well said, acujoker. If people from all over the world mourn when innocent people are violently killed in France, then we should do exactly the same now, when innocent people are violently killed in Indonesia.

I'd like to offer my prayers and thoughts as well for all victims of IS's campaign of hate and violence.
bondage /'bɒndɪdʒ/ noun & verb. ME.
A The condition of being bound or tied; fig. subjection to authority, constraining force, or obligation. LME.
‣b
spec. Sadomasochism involving binding, handcuffing, etc. M20.

(SOED, 6th ed.)

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby viking » Sat Jan 16, 2016 1:58 am

really well spoken indeed.
Once a scout, always a perverted pyromaniac with a fetish for knives and duct tape

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby Jason Toddman » Sat Jan 16, 2016 6:45 am

It's a tragedy for us all when violence like this takes place no matter where in the world it is. People are people regardless of race, creed, color, or national origin. We Americans at least tend to lose sight of that sometimes with our own selfish preoccupations. Instead we feel put out when it snows and we have to shovel out the driveway again. Our sense of proportion is all messed up.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby drawscore » Sat Jan 16, 2016 7:15 am

Unfortunately, the only thing the jihadists will understand and respect, is violence greater than what they do to their victims.

There was a story that came out of the Philippines from around 115 years ago, after the Spanish-American War, when US Army general Arthur MacArthur (the father of Douglas MacArthur) was the governor, and was having a problem with Muslim radicals. His response, was to dig a trench eight feet deep, slaughter several pigs, and throw the carcases into the trench. He then told his troops to capture 50 militants, and bring them to the trench.

Once there, he lined them up, and had 49 of them shot, then dumped into the trench with the pig carcasses, and buried. The 50th radical was released, so he could go back and tell the other radicals what he had witnessed. After that incident, Arthur MacArthur did not have any further problems with Islamic radicals.

Now, do I condone this? No, but I do understand it. And the desired effect - no further problems with the radicals - was attained.

One other story that came out - this one more recent - came out of Pensacola, FL, where an Escambia County commission meeting had somehow gotten off track, and several audience members were arguing about "torture" of captured jihadists. One of the commissioners was reported to have stated "If hooking up the terminals of a car battery to the genitals of a known terrorist, saves even one American soldier's life, I have two things to say: Red is positive; black is negative."

Drawscore

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby misterg792000 » Sat Jan 16, 2016 7:18 am

drawscore wrote:Now, do I condone this? No, but I do understand it.


And yet you don't seem to understand that this favorite story of yours is completely imaginary, no matter how many times it's pointed out to you.

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby Jason Toddman » Sat Jan 16, 2016 8:09 am

drawscore wrote:Unfortunately, the only thing the jihadists will understand and respect, is violence greater than what they do to their victims.
Drawscore

If victory means sinking down to their level, then i'd just as soon die.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby wataru14 » Sat Jan 16, 2016 10:02 am

I would gladly stoop to anyone's level if it were effective. Unfortunately, doing that doesn't work.

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby Jason Toddman » Sat Jan 16, 2016 12:06 pm

wataru14 wrote:I would gladly stoop to anyone's level if it were effective. Unfortunately, doing that doesn't work.

Not me. The very idea of it makes me sick to my stomach. Oh, if I'm directly threaten I have no problems with self defense, but going proactive on people (that is, individuals selected at random) who never did anything to me would be too much against my nature and make me no better than a psychopath. I'd rather die and be done with it than to undergo such a radical change in my personality and lifestyle... especially at my age.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby drawscore » Sat Jan 16, 2016 2:01 pm

I think I would have qualms about coming down to that level. However, if I am in charge, I will tell my subordinate commanders to do whatever they think is necessary, to eliminate the threat, and that I would take the heat.

The fact remains, that the jihadists understand and respect force, and to stop them, you have to use more force on them, than they use on us. Sometimes considerably more force, and sometimes, in a way that offends the sensibilities of even conservatives.

Drawscore

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby Jason Toddman » Sat Jan 16, 2016 2:49 pm

drawscore wrote:I think I would have qualms about coming down to that level. However, if I am in charge, I will tell my subordinate commanders to do whatever they think is necessary, to eliminate the threat, and that I would take the heat.

The fact remains, that the jihadists understand and respect force, and to stop them, you have to use more force on them, than they use on us. Sometimes considerably more force, and sometimes, in a way that offends the sensibilities of even conservatives.

Drawscore


That's been common practice in the Middle East since centuries before Christ. Was common practice in Europe too once upon a time. It doesn't work.
Never has. Never will. Atrocities simply bring even more and even greater atrocities. A world run by such rules wouldn't be worth living in.
How the hell do you think terrorism got so out of control in the first place?
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby 31acujoker » Sat Jan 16, 2016 2:53 pm

Brutality breeds fear, in the short term.

In the long term it breeds resentment and eventually hatred, which is exactly why the world hates ISIS, and why ISIS hates the western world.
"A thing is not beautiful because it lasts"
- The Vision

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby misterg792000 » Sat Jan 16, 2016 7:39 pm

drawscore wrote:The fact remains, that the jihadists understand and respect force, and to stop them, you have to use more force on them, than they use on us.


LOL. Yeah, that'll work any day now, pay no attention to the events of the last 15+ years.

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby drawscore » Sun Jan 17, 2016 5:03 am

Jason Toddman wrote:That's been common practice in the Middle East since centuries before Christ. Was common practice in Europe too once upon a time. It doesn't work. Never has. Never will. Atrocities simply bring even more and even greater atrocities. A world run by such rules wouldn't be worth living in. How the hell do you think terrorism got so out of control in the first place?


Maybe, maybe not. But Air Force General Curtis LeMay did make a good point, when he said "If you kill enough of them, they'll quit fighting."

The bottom line, is that being nice to the jihadists is not going to work, either. And sanctions have not seemed to have an effect, either. How do you propose we stop the terrorists?

Drawscore

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby Jason Toddman » Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:19 am

drawscore wrote:Maybe, maybe not. But Air Force General Curtis LeMay did make a good point, when he said "If you kill enough of them, they'll quit fighting."

The bottom line, is that being nice to the jihadists is not going to work, either. And sanctions have not seemed to have an effect, either. How do you propose we stop the terrorists?

Drawscore

You are inordinately fond of quoting old warhawks, aren't you? I suppose you idolize those guys who said "Kill them all and let God sort them out" and "The only good Indian is a dead Indian" as well.
And it's been said to you before; no one says be nice to the Jihadists. Far from it. But what you are advocating - and what has been actually done all too often - is punish Muslims indiscriminately; assuming guilt in anyone Muslim rather than concentrating on wiping out the extremists that are the real enemy. Despite what people like Trump like to think, only a tiny minority of Muslims have been radicalized to the point where they are a danger to us. A much greater proportion may hate us over there, but considering our actions in the middle east and elsewhere (including supporting Israel's brutal repression on the Palestinians - a classic example of your way of thinking only making a bad situation worse right there), who the hell can blame them? Our own policies led directly to the extremism and hate we have to fight now. It's most likely thanks to Bush creating a power vacuum in Iraq for instance that ISIS was able to get started in the first place. Saddam was a thug it's true, but he liked terrorists no better than we do, as they would have been a threat to his own power. We're seeing the same thing in Syria now; naturally Assad is detestable, but look at the instability in the region now that his hold on the country is threatened. By interfering, we only made a bad situation much worse.
When we do find a legitimate target, we tend to bomb the area indiscriminately and ignore civilian casualties. That's winning us no friends either.
And people like trump worsen the situation even more with their hateful rhetoric. I bet he even supports the decision to hold all Japanese Americans in concentration camps for the duration of WW II; an utterly despicable and racist move especially considering that no one considered doing the same to German Americans. Assuming guilt just because of one's religion is as wrong as doing so based on race; also still a major problem today and related since most Muslims are (considered) non-white.
I've noticed for a long time that the extreme elements of the GOP has been on the slippery slope towards Nazism (Godwin's Law be damned; it assumes it cannot happen again but it most assuredly can and IS happening again; at least as much as 21st century society allows), and with Trump it's definitely slipping and sliding faster in that direction. As far as i'm concerned that's making us too much like the people we abhor, and it alarms me.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby drawscore » Sun Jan 17, 2016 6:43 am

All that, and you still did not answer the question. So, one more time: How do you propose to stop the jihadists?

Drawscore

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby misterg792000 » Sun Jan 17, 2016 8:12 am

drawscore wrote:Maybe, maybe not. But Air Force General Curtis LeMay did make a good point, when he said "If you kill enough of them, they'll quit fighting."


Ah yes, Curtis "the greatest failure in the history of the United States was not getting into a massive nuclear exchange in 1962" LeMay. Smart man.

Again, have you been taking a really long nap the last 15+ years, or do you just get some sort of weird macho sensation when you say such silly things?

drawscore wrote:The bottom line, is that being nice to the jihadists is not going to work, either.


The bottom line is, ludicrous false dichotomies are ludicrous.

drawscore wrote: And sanctions have not seemed to have an effect, either.


Perhaps you could be so kind as to explain how one goes about sanctioning a decentralized group with little or no state-like characteristics, much less when we've done such a thing.

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby viking » Sun Jan 17, 2016 2:48 pm

drawscore wrote:I think I would have qualms about coming down to that level. However, if I am in charge, I will tell my subordinate commanders to do whatever they think is necessary, to eliminate the threat, and that I would take the heat.

The fact remains, that the jihadists understand and respect force, and to stop them, you have to use more force on them, than they use on us. Sometimes considerably more force, and sometimes, in a way that offends the sensibilities of even conservatives.

Drawscore


dude, if any of this was true, then how come ISIS still haven't surrendered after Russia started bombing the hell out of them?
you can come up with as many arguments as you like, but the truth is that force as you call it (i personally would refer to it as brutal stupidity) is exactly what has been practiced to fight terrorism for decades already, and the result so far is more innocent lives being bombed in the ass than it has affected those people responsible for terrorism.

as if the people in the mid east didn't have enough to worry about already with some psychopath manipulating young rebels into doing their dirty work, they also have to worry about some asshole from the west sending even more bombs after them as well.

if i don't remember wrong, the US army bombed what they thought was the HQ for some terrorist members not too long ago, but it actually turned out to be a hospital, were their own allies from the red cross were helping out victims from terrorist attacks, and even when the US army learned the truth, it still took them another 15-20 minutes with bombs raining down at the hospital before the army pulled off the attack.
that's the result of using "force", innocent lives being brutally pulled away in a bloodbath, people who has to witness their own parents, brothers, sisters, and children, being literally blown up and having their intestines and limbs pulled apart from their body.

still, even though this has been the work of the army for so long, ISIS haven't stopped any of their bullshit yet.

you keep asking us for a better solution, well in that case, do you have any solution?
because i honestly don't consider the idea of using brutal force to fuck up everything even more than it already is for a solution at all.


Jason Toddman wrote:You are inordinately fond of quoting old warhawks, aren't you? I suppose you idolize those guys who said "Kill them all and let God sort them out" and "The only good Indian is a dead Indian" as well.
And it's been said to you before; no one says be nice to the Jihadists. Far from it. But what you are advocating - and what has been actually done all too often - is punish Muslims indiscriminately; assuming guilt in anyone Muslim rather than concentrating on wiping out the extremists that are the real enemy. Despite what people like Trump like to think, only a tiny minority of Muslims have been radicalized to the point where they are a danger to us. A much greater proportion may hate us over there, but considering our actions in the middle east and elsewhere (including supporting Israel's brutal repression on the Palestinians - a classic example of your way of thinking only making a bad situation worse right there), who the hell can blame them? Our own policies led directly to the extremism and hate we have to fight now. It's most likely thanks to Bush creating a power vacuum in Iraq for instance that ISIS was able to get started in the first place. Saddam was a thug it's true, but he liked terrorists no better than we do, as they would have been a threat to his own power. We're seeing the same thing in Syria now; naturally Assad is detestable, but look at the instability in the region now that his hold on the country is threatened. By interfering, we only made a bad situation much worse.
When we do find a legitimate target, we tend to bomb the area indiscriminately and ignore civilian casualties. That's winning us no friends either.
And people like trump worsen the situation even more with their hateful rhetoric. I bet he even supports the decision to hold all Japanese Americans in concentration camps for the duration of WW II; an utterly despicable and racist move especially considering that no one considered doing the same to German Americans. Assuming guilt just because of one's religion is as wrong as doing so based on race; also still a major problem today and related since most Muslims are (considered) non-white.
I've noticed for a long time that the extreme elements of the GOP has been on the slippery slope towards Nazism (Godwin's Law be damned; it assumes it cannot happen again but it most assuredly can and IS happening again; at least as much as 21st century society allows), and with Trump it's definitely slipping and sliding faster in that direction. As far as i'm concerned that's making us too much like the people we abhor, and it alarms me.


Jason Toddman, this might not mean much to you, but you just gained a lot of my respect because of this comment cheers
Once a scout, always a perverted pyromaniac with a fetish for knives and duct tape

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby Chris12 » Sun Jan 17, 2016 3:01 pm

drawscore wrote:All that, and you still did not answer the question. So, one more time: How do you propose to stop the jihadists?

Drawscore


Defeat them where possible and strengthen local governments to help with that. With enough defeats and setback a gang of psychopaths is sure to fall prey to infighting and decay.With how they treat their subjects its not unlikely they revolt when IS becomes weak enough. IS has no allies, has all the world powers against it and is staffed by lunatics. Eventually they will collapse. Its already starting. IS has been staging more terrorist attacks lately but that is in part to distract themselves and their enemies that it just isn't going well in their home theater.

Being ruthless can serve to scare an enemy but more often it just strengthens their resolve. Indiscriminate ruthlessness backfires because you make yourself more hated by more people and give your existing enemies all the more reason to fight you. Ruthlessness can work in certain doses but only in moderation. A policy of brutality leads to more resistance rather the less. History is filled with such example and the future shall be as well.

Besides this is not the age of ruthlessness any more. With Social media such things will be exposed instantly. This will lead to protest at home or even investigation for war crimes. That may be soft but its the world of today. Its not worth it to damage your enemy because it strengthens them and its not worth it for other positive results either because when found out its a danger to those who performed the act and those who commanded them, possibly even up to the very top. Its not worth it.

Those examples listen are almost all pre WWII examples right? You could do that in those days. Western nations paid less attention by morals and no one had the ability to immediately share the grisly scene with the world at large. Times have changed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

But the topic has been derailed long enough so I'l make a contribution that's on topic. Its still terrible but apparently the attack was performed REALLY clumsy. They attacked a movie theater when it was almost empty, they went to a starbux that wasn't very crowded either and then they attacked a police station and got shot. Those were some incompetent terrorists.

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby Jason Toddman » Sun Jan 17, 2016 4:15 pm

drawscore wrote:All that, and you still did not answer the question. So, one more time: How do you propose to stop the jihadists?

Drawscore

Someone asked you the same question and you have yet to answer. So why should I answer your obviously loaded question?
I never claimed to be an expert on dealing with terrorists. I just know that the way we've been going about it isn't the right way to go about it.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby ________Tornado_________ » Sun Jan 17, 2016 4:36 pm

Jason Toddman wrote:
drawscore wrote:All that, and you still did not answer the question. So, one more time: How do you propose to stop the jihadists?

Drawscore

Someone asked you the same question and you have yet to answer. So why should I answer your obviously loaded question?
I never claimed to be an expert on dealing with terrorists. I just know that the way we've been going about it isn't the right way to go about it.


I totally agree Jason. Bombing towns of innocent people just destroys their lives and kills their families. We make it so the citizens of Terrorism affected areas under bombing threat have nothing to lose, therefore creating more potential threats.
Never give up.

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby Jason Toddman » Sun Jan 17, 2016 9:09 pm

________Tornado_________ wrote: I totally agree Jason. Bombing towns of innocent people just destroys their lives and kills their families. We make it so the citizens of Terrorism affected areas under bombing threat have nothing to lose, therefore creating more potential threats.

Quite so. Our actions in Iraq have only made things worse for us there; not better. And that's one prime reason why. Yet the republican rabble-rousers do not seem to understand this at all; that it's their policies that are destroying us not those of the liberals.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby wataru14 » Sun Jan 17, 2016 10:11 pm

Interesting thing about people like Saddam and Assad and Gaddafi. When they are gone there is a power vacuum and stuff like ISIS pops up. But when they are in power, people die in scores as well. Saddam wasn't called the "Butcher of Baghdad" for nothing and don't forget that this whole Syrian mess started when Assad used chemical weapons on protesters in the wake of Arab Spring. Now, politicos are saying things like, "they were horrifying, but it's a horror we have to tolerate because it's the only thing keeping things like ISIS from happening everywhere." Do we really have to choose between a leader who indiscriminately murders his own people and an omnicidal religious cult? Is there really no other way?

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby drawscore » Mon Jan 18, 2016 6:49 am

Jason Toddman wrote:Someone asked you the same question and you have yet to answer. So why should I answer your obviously loaded question?
I never claimed to be an expert on dealing with terrorists. I just know that the way we've been going about it isn't the right way to go about it.


First, you don't justify "bad behavior" on your part, by pointing to "bad behavior" on my part. (and vice versa)

Second, I never claimed to want to kill civilians. If you would like to talk about the indiscriminate carpet bombing of civilians/non-combatants, talk about World War II. It was done by both the Allies, and the Axis.

Third, I did advocate bombing and killing terrorists. With drone, stealth, and smart bomb technology, pinpoint accuracy is quite possible, and has already been shown on cable news outlets, ranging from the ultra liberal MSNBC, to the untra conservative The Blaze." Will "collateral damage" occur? Probably, but with that technology, we're not bombing the shit out of London, as the Nazis did, or Dresden, as the Allies did. Still, collateral damage is something to be avoided, if at all possible. When it does occur, it is regrettable. It could also be more easily avoided, if the jihadists would not set up their field headquarters in or near hospitals and schools.

Drawscore

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby drawscore » Mon Jan 18, 2016 7:14 am

Chris12 wrote:
Defeat them where possible and strengthen local governments to help with that. With enough defeats and setback a gang of psychopaths is sure to fall prey to infighting and decay.With how they treat their subjects its not unlikely they revolt when IS becomes weak enough. IS has no allies, has all the world powers against it and is staffed by lunatics. Eventually they will collapse. Its already starting. IS has been staging more terrorist attacks lately but that is in part to distract themselves and their enemies that it just isn't going well in their home theater.

Being ruthless can serve to scare an enemy but more often it just strengthens their resolve. Indiscriminate ruthlessness backfires because you make yourself more hated by more people and give your existing enemies all the more reason to fight you. Ruthlessness can work in certain doses but only in moderation. A policy of brutality leads to more resistance rather the less. History is filled with such example and the future shall be as well.

Besides this is not the age of ruthlessness any more. With Social media such things will be exposed instantly. This will lead to protest at home or even investigation for war crimes. That may be soft but its the world of today. Its not worth it to damage your enemy because it strengthens them and its not worth it for other positive results either because when found out its a danger to those who performed the act and those who commanded them, possibly even up to the very top. Its not worth it.

Those examples listen are almost all pre WWII examples right? You could do that in those days. Western nations paid less attention by morals and no one had the ability to immediately share the grisly scene with the world at large. Times have changed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

But the topic has been derailed long enough so I'l make a contribution that's on topic. Its still terrible but apparently the attack was performed REALLY clumsy. They attacked a movie theater when it was almost empty, they went to a starbux that wasn't very crowded either and then they attacked a police station and got shot. Those were some incompetent terrorists.


Ahh, someone with a solution. That's all I really asked for. It didn't have to be one I'd totally agree with, just a solution or recommendation. Thank you.

I don't think we need to be heartless, ruthless bastards, but we do need to project an image of strength. Just be that heartless, ruthless bastard once, and usually, you won't have to do it again.

Drawscore

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby Jason Toddman » Mon Jan 18, 2016 7:38 am

drawscore wrote: First, you don't justify "bad behavior" on your part, by pointing to "bad behavior" on my part. (and vice versa)

Bad behavior on my part? For not answering a loaded question? Puh-leeze. I notice you still haven't come up with an answer, but yet you expect me to do so first. There's a word for that, and it's not nice. Are you really unable to grasp the point of what I said? Really? Why don't you come out and admit there are no easy answers and let it go at that? If we knew the answers and could convince are so-called leaders, we'd be famous. Instead, all the GOP can do is sabotage every effort Obama makes simply because he's Obama and they're a bunch of short-shorted assholes out only for themselves and a privileged few and playing political games for their own gain in an extremely volatile situation.
Not that Obama has all the answers either; didn't get me wrong about that. He's making mistakes too. But undercutting him at every turn with no good solutions of their own only makes the situation steadily worse. And don't forget it's the GOP that started this situation in the first place; leaving Obama to clean it up. Only he can't because the GOP has balked him at every turn. Unfortunately Obama lacks the political support (or the force of personality; unlike, say, Ronald Reagan) to get things done.
As i have always said, the GOP leads us in the wrong direction but the democrats only seem to lead us in circles. This is more true now than ever.

drawscore wrote:Second, I never claimed to want to kill civilians. If you would like to talk about the indiscriminate carpet bombing of civilians/non-combatants, talk about World War II. It was done by both the Allies, and the Axis. Drawscore

For someone who brings up WW II and previous war tactics a lot, that's kind of funny.
You don't want to hurt civilians, and yet what else are you advocating when you tell us 'But Air Force General Curtis LeMay did make a good point, when he said "If you kill enough of them, they'll quit fighting." ? This isn't a war, where we fight soldiers in uniform fighting for a government. This isn't even like the Viet Nam War (which we lost by the way), where we also fought an enemy we often could not see.

drawscore wrote:Third, I did advocate bombing and killing terrorists. With drone, stealth, and smart bomb technology, pinpoint accuracy is quite possible, and has already been shown on cable news outlets, ranging from the ultra liberal MSNBC, to the untra conservative The Blaze." Will "collateral damage" occur? Probably, but with that technology, we're not bombing the shit out of London, as the Nazis did, or Dresden, as the Allies did. Still, collateral damage is something to be avoided, if at all possible. When it does occur, it is regrettable. It could also be more easily avoided, if the jihadists would not set up their field headquarters in or near hospitals and schools. Drawscore

And if we hadn't continually meddled in Middle Eastern affairs since WWII (and Britain had not been doing so for over a century before that), we would have likely avoided this entire situation. Violence begets more violence. We've caused an entire population tom pull up stakes and move to safer locations, but ditch all responsibility for their plight and turn them away because they're Muslim.
Unfortunately, there is one thing I agree with you about; it's way too late for an exit strategy. It was too late 12-13 years ago when Bush created the seeds of this disaster in the first place. Even H G Wells back in the 1920s recognized that an active foreign policy always leads to disaster, and events ever since have consistently proven him right. Things are so far gone now I don't think there IS a decent solution to it anymore. Not until the rest of the world can get more organized about what to do about it, anyway.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby Jason Toddman » Mon Jan 18, 2016 8:08 am

In the words of Martin Luther King Jr., whose birthday we remember today: "To retaliate in kind would do nothing but intensify the existence of hate in the universe. Along the way of life, someone must have sense enough, and morality enough, to cut off the chain of hate."
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Jakarta Attack

Postby misterg792000 » Mon Jan 18, 2016 2:18 pm

drawscore wrote:Second, I never claimed to want to kill civilians. If you would like to talk about the indiscriminate carpet bombing of civilians/non-combatants


...then talk about Curtis LeMay. As President of his booster club here, you should be all about it.

drawscore wrote:Third, I did advocate bombing and killing terrorists. With drone, stealth, and smart bomb technology, pinpoint accuracy is quite possible


LOL. If you ask Lockheed, sure. Ask anyone who has lived anywhere near where these "pinpoint" munitions have been used and you'll get a very different story than what the MIC has drilled into your head. While you're at it, maybe you can explain to us what value "stealth technology" (which doesn't actually work as the usual layman thinks it does) holds when fighting an enemy without an air force or modern anti-air weapons anyway.