Afghanistan.

[Balta1701]

Meanwhile, I guess we're going to have to await an investigation on this. Because it really doesn't look that good.

[Milkman delivers]

I think that's hilarious.

[Balta1701]

I think that's hilarious.

I sure as Hell don't. If what the video appears to show is actually what happened, American soldiers will die because of this.

[Milkman delivers]

I sure as Hell don't. If what the video appears to show is actually what happened, American soldiers will die because of this.

 

Because they weren't before.

[Balta1701]

Because they weren't before.

More than a few people in Iraq admitted they were inflamed by the Abu Ghraib videos. This kind of stuff really, really matters, at the street level, in turning people who don't like us into people who are trying to kill us.

[StrangeSox]

More than a few people in Iraq admitted they were inflamed by the Abu Ghraib videos. This kind of stuff really, really matters, at the street level, in turning people who don't like us into people who are trying to kill us.

 

Americans would be justifiably outraged if videos of the reverse appeared.

[Cknolls]

Michael Hastings' new book, The Operators, jabs at what could be a vulnerable spot for the Obama Administration, the president's relationship with the troops.

The book describes a visit to Baghdad:

After the talk, out of earshot from the soldiers and diplomats, he starts to complain. He starts to act very un-Obamalike, according to a U.S. embassy official

who helped organize the trip in Baghdad.

He’s asked to go out to take a few more pictures with soldiers and embassy staffers. He’s asked to sign copies of his book. “He didn’t want to take pictures with any more soldiers; he was complaining about it,” a State Department official tells me. “Look, I was excited to meet him. I wanted to like him. Let’s just say the scales fell from my

eyes after I did. These are people over here who’ve been fighting the war, or working every day for the war effort, and he didn’t want to take f***ing pictures with them?"

 

[EvilMonkey]

More than a few people in Iraq admitted they were inflamed by the Abu Ghraib videos. This kind of stuff really, really matters, at the street level, in turning people who don't like us into people who are trying to kill us.

They get inflamed when they wake up. They get inflamed when KCF added bacon to their chicken bowl. They get enraged if a dog looks at them. Seriously, there isn't one person over there that wasn't a terrorist before that suddenly changed their minds after this and said "you know what, I feel like killing some Americans today, this was the final straw". And the day Karzi expresses such 'outrage' at terrorists killing the good guys over there is the day that I will listen to ANY of his complaints. He is slime trying to play both sides of the fence.

[Y2HH]

They get inflamed when they wake up. They get inflamed when KCF added bacon to their chicken bowl. They get enraged if a dog looks at them. Seriously, there isn't one person over there that wasn't a terrorist before that suddenly changed their minds after this and said "you know what, I feel like killing some Americans today, this was the final straw". And the day Karzi expresses such 'outrage' at terrorists killing the good guys over there is the day that I will listen to ANY of his complaints. He is slime trying to play both sides of the fence.

 

Pretty much, they get outraged at anything/everything, so of course they'd be outraged at this. But let's stop pretending they wouldn't have been outraged anyway, even if this never happened...and that's exactly what people are doing right now.

[Balta1701]

Pretty much, they get outraged at anything/everything, so of course they'd be outraged at this. But let's stop pretending they wouldn't have been outraged anyway, even if this never happened...and that's exactly what people are doing right now.

That doesn't mean we have to help! And that's not an excuse at all!

[Y2HH]

That doesn't mean we have to help! And that's not an excuse at all!

 

I never said I condone what was done, but we need not pretend it's why they're angry, either. Applying bit of logic to the situation is all that's necessary. The people that did this are idiots and I wasn't making an excuse for these idiots...but ironically, you ARE making an excuse for the terrorists by that same token.

 

Point is, they don't need an excuse to be angry, they already are, and have been for eons.

[Balta1701]

I never said I condone what was done, but we need not pretend it's why they're angry, either. Applying bit of logic to the situation is all that's necessary. The people that did this are idiots and I wasn't making an excuse for these idiots...but ironically, you ARE making an excuse for the terrorists by that same token.

 

Point is, they don't need an excuse to be angry, they already are, and have been for eons.

So they're always going to be angry and thus it doesn't matter if we do anything that pisses them off, but it's also worth having hundreds of our soldiers die to try to change the fact that they're always pissed off.

 

Seriously, if we want to pretend that desecrating the bodies of foreign fighters doesn't matter, then we should stop getting involved in wars where winning the "Hearts and minds" of the local population is so important.

[Jenksismyhero]

Americans would be justifiably outraged if videos of the reverse appeared.

 

And progressives would be telling us to ignore it as merely the "fringe" terrorists performing those types of acts, and that any hatred/animosity towards the citizens of X country generally would be wrong.

[Balta1701]

And progressives would be telling us to ignore it as merely the "fringe" terrorists performing those types of acts, and that any hatred/animosity towards the citizens of X country generally would be wrong.

So, the Afghan people are justified in conducting military acts against Americans in response?

[StrangeSox]

And progressives would be telling us to ignore it as merely the "fringe" terrorists performing those types of acts, and that any hatred/animosity towards the citizens of X country generally would be wrong.

 

They'd be correct in saying that. I said the outrage towards those acts would be justified, because they are deplorable.

[Y2HH]

So they're always going to be angry and thus it doesn't matter if we do anything that pisses them off, but it's also worth having hundreds of our soldiers die to try to change the fact that they're always pissed off.

 

Seriously, if we want to pretend that desecrating the bodies of foreign fighters doesn't matter, then we should stop getting involved in wars where winning the "Hearts and minds" of the local population is so important.

 

You should release your jump to conclusions mat...I bet it'd be a big seller!

 

What you did here was you moved the goal posts. So in response I'm throwing the little yellow flag.

 

If you want to say "seriously", let's actually be serious, then. Rather than changing the original point in which we all responded too, let's stick to the point we all responded too.

 

I outright said (once already) that I do not condone these actions. That's twice.

 

Now, to the point, desecrating the bodies of foreign fighters does NOT matter in relation to angering terrorists. This was the original point we responded too, and the ONLY point we responded too. We said nothing of the fact that it won't help win the "hearts and minds of the local population", because it wasn't what we were responding too in the first place.

 

So you moved the posts from angering/inciting terrorists to the local population. Changing the context in which our original statements were made was unfair.

Edited January 13, 2012 by Y2HH

[Balta1701]

Now, to the point, desecrating the bodies of foreign fighters does NOT matter in relation to angering terrorists. This was the original point we responded too, and the ONLY point we responded too. We said nothing of the fact that it won't help win the "hearts and minds of the local population", because it wasn't what we were responding too in the first place.

 

So you moved the posts from angering/inciting terrorists to the local population. Changing the context in which our original statements were made was unfair.

No, it's not unfair. Right here you've made the classic, obvious mistake of assuming that the total number of terrorists or people willing to kill Americans is a constant. It isn't.

 

My first statement was that American soldiers will die because of this. My second statement was that the Abu Ghraib videos were key parts of taking people who might not like us and otherwise convincing them to pick up weapons. The people who are already in Al Qaeda, yeah, they aren't going to change their feelings based on this. But the guy who is deciding whether to hide an Al Qaeda member in his home, or the 18 year old kid deciding whether to pick up the AK 47 and go after the Americans, those are the ones this matters for.

 

This isn't changing the context. That is the single biggest key to understanding how to "Win" these conflicts we've gotten ourselves into. When you inflame the local population, you hurt your chances of winning, you create enemies for yourself, and your soldiers die.

 

The other option would be to stop fighting these types of wars.

[EvilMonkey]

No, it's not unfair. Right here you've made the classic, obvious mistake of assuming that the total number of terrorists or people willing to kill Americans is a constant. It isn't.

And you seem to be assuming that everyone over there is a potential terrorist, just waiting for that one little slight to push them over the edge.

[Balta1701]

And you seem to be assuming that everyone over there is a potential terrorist, just waiting for that one little slight to push them over the edge.

It doesn't have to be everyone.

 

It just has to be 1.

[Y2HH]

No, it's not unfair. Right here you've made the classic, obvious mistake of assuming that the total number of terrorists or people willing to kill Americans is a constant. It isn't.

 

My first statement was that American soldiers will die because of this. My second statement was that the Abu Ghraib videos were key parts of taking people who might not like us and otherwise convincing them to pick up weapons. The people who are already in Al Qaeda, yeah, they aren't going to change their feelings based on this. But the guy who is deciding whether to hide an Al Qaeda member in his home, or the 18 year old kid deciding whether to pick up the AK 47 and go after the Americans, those are the ones this matters for.

 

This isn't changing the context. That is the single biggest key to understanding how to "Win" these conflicts we've gotten ourselves into. When you inflame the local population, you hurt your chances of winning, you create enemies for yourself, and your soldiers die.

 

The other option would be to stop fighting these types of wars.

 

Even if you don't "inflame the local population" there is no winning these conflicts. Nothing will change the mind of a terrorist, or the mind of a person that is prone to becoming a terrorist. If they don't become one today, they will tomorrow...something, anything, will turn them into what they want to become. If it's not this incident, it will be something else, be it something major (like this) or something minor...like perhaps McDonald's released an ad that made him/her/them "angreh".

 

I stand by my notion that this incident won't cost any more American lives than would have already been cost...for the reasons I've already stated multiple times. That 18 year old kid "deciding" whether to pick up that AK47 was going to do it anyway...you're just living in denial of that fact.

[Y2HH]

It doesn't have to be everyone.

 

It just has to be 1.

 

That 1 would have become that anyway, didn't need this as an excuse. That's what you seem to keep pretending, though.

[StrangeSox]

That 1 would have become that anyway, didn't need this as an excuse. That's what you seem to keep pretending, though.

 

So nothing the US ever does could possibly incite violent reaction? It's all deterministic? Whether we pass out food or piss on corpses, the responses will be the exact same?

[Y2HH]

So nothing the US ever does could possibly incite violent reaction? It's all deterministic? Whether we pass out food or piss on corpses, the responses will be the exact same?

 

If it wasn't the US giving them the excuse you're looking for, it would be someone else.

 

This is no different than me saying, because 1 black guy murdered someone, that it's ok if I blame all blacks for murder, because they're all the same!@#$!@ Because a few IDIOT soldiers did something stupid, that means these would be terrorists should blame the whole of the US, and other countries...and other soldiers for that matter?! How's it different? It's equally ignorant of them...

 

Hateful people don't NEED an excuse to hate. They're going to do it anyway. That's my point...and it's been my point from the start.

Edited January 13, 2012 by Y2HH

[EvilMonkey]

If it wasn't the US giving them the excuse you're looking for, it would be someone else.

 

This is no different than me saying, because 1 black guy murdered someone, that it's ok if I blame all blacks for murder, because they're all the same!@#$!@ Because a few IDIOT soldiers did something stupid, that means these would be terrorists should blame the whole of the US, and other countries...and other soldiers for that matter?! How's it different? It's equally ignorant of them...

 

Hateful people don't NEED an excuse to hate. They're going to do it anyway. That's my point...and it's been my point from the start.

So maybe we should hate all Muslims every time they cut off someone's head, or beat a woman, or marry a 12 year old. That seems to fit the logic.

[Y2HH]

So maybe we should hate all Muslims every time they cut off someone's head, or beat a woman, or marry a 12 year old. That seems to fit the logic.

 

It fits their logic 100%, actually.

 

But of course they'll deny it. Queue up goal post move in 3...2...1...

Edited January 13, 2012 by Y2HH