Author Topic: Pre-emptive (Read 1762 times)

Arlo · « **Reply #45 on:** April 10, 2003, 09:44:32 PM »

Well, there ya go, then. I figure a good guage of where a protester is coming from can be arrived at in this way:

1: If they predominantly use "America" this and "America" that then they're really anti-America and not so much anti-war.

2: If they predominantly use "Bush" this and "The administration" that then they are anti-Republican/anti-administration and not really anti-war. Of course, this tends to be the back-step to the afore mentioned "anti-America" slogan user if the protester in not an American citizen yet comes to the realization that they have a rather strong reliance on the U.S. as well as regular dealings with Americans and need to modify their agenda. (ref: See: "Blitz")[/size]

3: If they use "Stop tyranny" or "Save the Iraqi people" then they are confused or just plain stupid.

It saves alot of wasted time and effort when looked at that way.

Martlet · « **Reply #46 on:** April 10, 2003, 10:11:21 PM »

I did notice he was carrying an M-16 A1.

Perhaps he's the guy that shot up Baroda's ambassador.

Thrawn · « **Reply #47 on:** April 11, 2003, 10:28:57 AM »

Wow, isn't Palistine the NRA promised land?

miko2d · « **Reply #48 on:** April 11, 2003, 11:50:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Arlo
Pakistani "anti-war" (anti-America) protesters. All we are saaaaaying .... is give peace a chaaaaaance.

We are not allowed to own this kind of weapons in New York.

Miko! only an 18 month old kid? What happened to the daughters...

What, is it uncommon for people to worry about their future children before actually having them? Real smart on your part.

Oh, and please post some more of that libertarian drivel.. I have sooooo much fun debunking it.

Why would I bother for people such as you who are full of prejudice and cannot hold a civil conversation even on abstract topics? I've posted information for people who may be unaware of it. I've got a few personal indications of interest. I referred those people to better sources - books, organisations, etc.

If you really care so much to argue libertarian worldview, you would not have any trouble picking up a book or an web site, reposting an excrept and arguing it all you want - without waiting for me. Or do you hope to change my views by just claiming that I do not believe myself in what I am saying?
But of course you are just a lazy windbag.

miko

lazs2 · « **Reply #49 on:** April 11, 2003, 12:05:15 PM »

miko... I consider myself to be pretty libertarian. I can't think of a better use for our military than what we did in iraq.. sure seems like a perfect job for em. Not only do I not want my government to screw with me.... I don't want outsiders to... otherwise.... why even have a military?

Iraq's saddam regime seemed like a perfect place to enforce the... "don't screw with us" policy... very libertarian in my opinion. especially if we help them install a democratic government that is friendly and prosperous.
lazs

lazs2 · « **Reply #50 on:** April 11, 2003, 12:24:18 PM »

I might also add, since this is ostensibly about "pre-emptive"....

Does anyone feel that the Israeli "pre-emptive" strike against the sadmans nuclear power plant (months before it could produce weapons grade material) was a bad thing?

miko... do you feel the stike in any way viollated libertarian principals?
lazs

miko2d · « **Reply #51 on:** April 11, 2003, 01:10:35 PM »

Lazs,

According to libertarian principles the main responcibility of the government is protecting the lives, property and rights of citizens.
Since the best defence is often a good offence, there is nothing in libertarian worldview - at least as far as I am concerned - that condemns any kind of military action in general.

When we discuss the particular cases, we may argue whether some action was justified and civilly disagree about it.

I believe that Israelis in 1981 had very good reasons to be gravely concerned about the iraqi nuclear weapons program and averting the perceived danger at the cost of a destroyed building and at most few lives lost was justified in my view.

I am not at all convinced that Iraq was a danger to US or to the democratic world. I believe that our security and long-term interests suffered rather than gained from that particular war.

In general, I would certainly expect our government to take all necessary measures - military and other kinds - to neutralise the danger it perceives whether I believe in it or not.

miko

Rasker · « **Reply #52 on:** April 11, 2003, 02:54:07 PM »

The problem with maintaining a fairly open society in the face of a terrorist threat, is that it requires us to take a proactive (or preemptive) stance in counteracting those prepared to strike at us.

These groups are not deterrable by threat of retaliation, since they will happily accept 100% losses in return for inflicting enormous damage on their target. And taking a proactive stance requires us to consider how broadly to define legitimate targets: those currently conspiring to hit America- sure; those who hate America and training for some assault but you can't prove who the target is - maybe?; those who 'merely' teach hatred for America, thus replenishing the pool of future 'martyrs' -??; those who merely disagree with one policy of America or another - surely not.

Reaching legitimate targets would also require the active and ongoing cooperation of the countries where the groups are organizing.

Krotki · « **Reply #53 on:** April 11, 2003, 03:13:10 PM »

Evidently, Blitz you don't have a concept ot what a premptive strike is, Furhter you must remember, US and coalition forces have been "locked on" in the no Fly zone signed in the cease fire agreement by Iraq an the coalition forces of that alliance in 1991. Iraq immediately began aprogram of utilizing there SAM's to lock on coalition aircraft. Those same aircraft were actually authorized to take out those sites further if you check some of your international lwa coalition forces were authorized via those actions to reinitiate further actions against Iraq at that time instead of waiting twelve years and 17 resoultions later. so therfore there was no premptive strike.

Further more it is a policy of American forces not to fire back unless fired upon. If I were in that situation I would fire back to defend myself and my soldiers and let what happens after that so be it. With the modern technology of todays weapon systems a "lock on" is as good as being shot at, because usually a "lock on" indicates weaponry to be fired. Just ask the two pilots of the SU's that fired on the two Tomcats over Libya what happens when they missed on said Tomcats.

AWMac · « **Reply #54 on:** April 11, 2003, 04:01:31 PM »

Quote

I consider myself to be pretty libertarian.

Oppps almost misread it...thought it was "Librarian"...never mind.

blitz · « **Reply #55 on:** April 11, 2003, 05:04:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Arlo
Pakistani "anti-war" (anti-America) protesters. All we are saaaaaying .... is give peace a chaaaaaance.

Arlo, are you a communist ?

Regards Blitz

This war is wrong, unjust, unnessasary and cost the lives of thousands of innocent people and wounded tenthousands innocents. The government of one country decided who's to live and who's to die for all the countries of this planet. Bush and the hawks in his government are dangerous for the civilised world. Keep an eye on them!

When germans were "liberating" Russia and Ukraine from bolshevik rule, they were also mostly greeted with hugs and kisses. Later when soviet troops were liberating same area, they were greeted with hugs and kisses.
So true .

Arlo · « **Reply #56 on:** April 11, 2003, 05:23:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by blitch the fantasy role-player lost in a world alien to him:
Arlo, are you a communist ?

You must have missed it. And it was in this very thread no less.

Quote

Arlo illuminated the world with the following revelation:

Oh nonono. That's ok. I was just curious. I'm happy to be an independent moderate without a party platform that includes stuff I don't agree with along with the stuff I do. Carry on.

~~Are you an idiot? (Rhetorical)~~

blitz · « **Reply #57 on:** April 11, 2003, 05:27:36 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Arlo
You must have missed it. And it was in this very thread no less.

Are you an idiot? (Rhetorical)

Take it, you are a hidden communist, then

Regards Blitz

Blitz

This war is wrong, unjust, unnessasary and cost the lives of thousands of innocent people and wounded tenthousands innocents. The government of one country decided who's to live and who's to die for all the countries of this planet. Bush and the hawks in his government are dangerous for the civilised world. Keep an eye on them!

When germans were "liberating" Russia and Ukraine from bolshevik rule, they were also mostly greeted with hugs and kisses. Later when soviet troops were liberating same area, they were greeted with hugs and kisses.
So true .

Hangtime · « **Reply #58 on:** April 11, 2003, 05:35:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by miko2d

What, is it uncommon for people to worry about their future children before actually having them? Real smart on your part.

Why would I bother for people such as you who are full of prejudice and cannot hold a civil conversation even on abstract topics? I've posted information for people who may be unaware of it. I've got a few personal indications of interest. I referred those people to better sources - books, organisations, etc.

If you really care so much to argue libertarian worldview, you would not have any trouble picking up a book or an web site, reposting an excrept and arguing it all you want - without waiting for me. Or do you hope to change my views by just claiming that I do not believe myself in what I am saying?

But of course you are just a lazy windbag.

miko

I'm worse than a lazy windabag miko.. I'm hunting your lies and decietful misrepresentation of facts to further your libertarian agenda. I can be an exceptionally energetic windbag when I see an enemy of my nation chipping away at it's institutions.

Quote

originally posted by miko, tread on rape in the air force
Nice 20/20 about our glorious airforce
We should re-broadcast it on Iraq. That will make irakis think twice before trying to resist...

P.S. What really surprised me was not that scores if not hundreds of women cadetes got raped over the years and everyone knew about that and did nothing, but how come nobody got killed?
We had quite a lot of abuse in the soviet army - nothing like rape, of course - and from time to time somebody would get his brains ventilated on a shooting range or a guard duty.
I am not even sure what kind of military I dislike more - the rapists and their friends who kept quiet or those who allowed themselves to be raped without consequences because of carreer considerations?

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

I am pissed off about it because right there my wife asked me: "Do you still want to send our daughters to serve in the army?" On which I replied "Well, we can raise them in a way that they cannot be taken advantage of no matter what is done to others..."

16.5 year jump on current events? My; arn't WE looking well into the future for our childrens education.. sure sounded to me like you had immediate concerns about your daughters welfare in the higher education programs being currently handled by the government.

Miko, you constantly post up any dirt you can on our government... anything to undermine it's credibility, anything to cast aspersions on it's aims.. One could easily come to the conclusion you just don't like the american government.

And, being an enemy of my government makes you my favorite pissing pole.

Try again.

in traffic.

Arlo · « **Reply #59 on:** April 11, 2003, 06:00:06 PM »

Quote

Blitch arrives at a conclusion:
Take it, you are a hidden communist, then