If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Taliban "stop killing us, or we will do it for you". US "hmmm not seeing a downside here"   (cnn.com) divider line 115
    More: Dumbass, A Taliban, polio vaccine, United States, North Waziristan, Pakistan, Haqqanis, military officials, Haqqani network  
•       •       •

17142 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Jun 2012 at 9:55 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



115 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-06-18 09:23:01 AM  
"I don't think he's bluffing."

t2.gstatic.com
 
2012-06-18 09:28:33 AM  
Horror... Horror has a face... and you must make a friend of horror. Horror and moral terror are your friends. If they are not, then they are enemies to be feared. They are truly enemies! I remember when I was with Special Forces... seems a thousand centuries ago. We went into a camp to inoculate some children. We left the camp after we had inoculated the children for polio, and this old man came running after us and he was crying. He couldn't see. We went back there, and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. A pile of little arms. And I remember... I... I... I cried, I wept like some grandmother.
 
2012-06-18 09:58:00 AM  
wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net
 
2012-06-18 10:01:12 AM  
The Taliban could stop the drone attacks any time it wanted to...leave!
 
2012-06-18 10:03:37 AM  

Turbo Cojones: The Taliban could stop the drone attacks any time it wanted to...leavestop being farking terrorist assholes!


FTFY
 
2012-06-18 10:03:57 AM  

Turbo Cojones: The Taliban could stop the drone attacks any time it wanted to...leave!


and go where? pakistan?
 
2012-06-18 10:05:17 AM  
i.qkme.me

Seemed like the appropriate time for this picture.
 
2012-06-18 10:05:23 AM  
cunning plan
 
2012-06-18 10:08:02 AM  
I suppose they justify it by saying that the crippled and dead polio children are all martyrs for Allah?
 
2012-06-18 10:08:09 AM  
So these asshats threaten the free world with letting their own children die of polio or become cripples. Yeah, religious fanatics do get more evil than that, but not by much.
 
2012-06-18 10:08:51 AM  
That's a wonderfully nuanced take on, "Stop killing us or we will block vaccinations to children," there subby.
 
2012-06-18 10:09:05 AM  

EvilEgg: Horror... Horror has a face... and you must make a friend of horror. Horror and moral terror are your friends. If they are not, then they are enemies to be feared. They are truly enemies! I remember when I was with Special Forces... seems a thousand centuries ago. We went into a camp to inoculate some children. We left the camp after we had inoculated the children for polio, and this old man came running after us and he was crying. He couldn't see. We went back there, and they had come and hacked off every inoculated arm. There they were in a pile. A pile of little arms. And I remember... I... I... I cried, I wept like some grandmother.


Heh, first thing I thought of.
 
2012-06-18 10:09:33 AM  
Guess who just signed up for more drone strikes. If they want their children to die horrible, 100% preventable deaths; then let them. Maybe that will finally convince the people thaalthea taliban are not their friends.
 
2012-06-18 10:09:45 AM  

animesucks: Turbo Cojones: The Taliban could stop the drone attacks any time it wanted to...leave!

and go where? pakistan?


Know how I know you didn't RTFA?
 
2012-06-18 10:10:53 AM  
Sounds like a plan.
 
2012-06-18 10:11:21 AM  

iheartscotch: Guess who just signed up for more drone strikes. If they want their children to die horrible, 100% preventable deaths; then let them. Maybe that will finally convince the people thaalthea taliban are not their friends.


Well, crap; ment "the people that the Taliban"
 
2012-06-18 10:11:31 AM  
Dear Taliban,

fark you.
 
2012-06-18 10:12:41 AM  
Right....

So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?
upload.wikimedia.org

Or, We could send a single one of these and drop a single Laser guided bomb to destroy a target.
twistedsifter.sifter.netdna-cdn.com

Hell, We're so good at targeting LGB's and JDAM's these days, we sometimes just fill the bomb with cement and rely on kinetic impact alone to take out the target.

Now. I understand wanting an end to the killing. That's a completely legitimate request. Stop bombing us.

Asking us to stop using precision munitions is just requesting us to kill more people by not using guided weapons.

I'd like if we stopped bombing entirely, but since we cannot do that, we should probably keep using the drones.
 
2012-06-18 10:12:56 AM  

Mugato: "I don't think he's bluffing."

[t2.gstatic.com image 219x230]


Came here for this.

// Oh, lo'dy, lo'd, he's desp'it! Do what he sayyyy, do what he sayyyy!
 
2012-06-18 10:17:16 AM  

fluffy2097: Right....

So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]


Or B-2's...as the case may be.
 
2012-06-18 10:17:35 AM  

fluffy2097: So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?


I know it's irrelevant to your point, but that's a B-2, not a B-52.
 
2012-06-18 10:17:50 AM  

fluffy2097: Right....

So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]


That's a B-2.
 
2012-06-18 10:18:20 AM  
i'm thankful i wasn't born in one of the many third world shiatholes under attack by the usa.
 
2012-06-18 10:19:21 AM  

This About That: So these asshats threaten the free world with letting their own children die of polio or become cripples. Yeah, religious fanatics do get more evil than that, but not by much.


I quarantee their children already received the vaccine.
 
2012-06-18 10:19:31 AM  
i369.photobucket.com

We should drop more happy bombs on them.
 
2012-06-18 10:19:56 AM  
err..guarantee
 
2012-06-18 10:20:51 AM  
j.wigflip.com
 
2012-06-18 10:21:01 AM  

Rev. Skarekroe: fluffy2097: So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?

I know it's irrelevant to your point, but that's a B-2, not a B-52.


that's correct.

celebratearkansasmagazine.com
 
2012-06-18 10:21:51 AM  
Sorry. I found an image of actual B-52's. It's to early for me

i.imgur.com
 
2012-06-18 10:22:31 AM  

Andrew Wiggin: Rev. Skarekroe: fluffy2097: So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?

I know it's irrelevant to your point, but that's a B-2, not a B-52.

that's correct.

[celebratearkansasmagazine.com image 600x378]


beat me by 50 seconds...
 
2012-06-18 10:22:54 AM  
From a purely one-dimensional view, you'd be pretty pissed if unmanned aircraft constantly shook your homes with bomb drops or missile strikes. Couple that with being a Pakistani "leader", a resident in one of only 3 countries on the entire planet to not have eradicated polio, and...well, there's your result.
It'd just be cheaper to disguise a giant plane as a mosque, invite everyone, then fly it somewhere else. Make them France's problem or something. They have nothing else to do anyways.
 
2012-06-18 10:25:35 AM  

Rev. Skarekroe: fluffy2097: So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?

I know it's irrelevant to your point, but that's a B-2, not a B-52.


And those are mk-82 bombs, and 47 rather than a thousand.

/do not taunt happy mk-82 bomb
 
2012-06-18 10:25:52 AM  
The armchair generals are out way to early this morning.
 
2012-06-18 10:26:45 AM  
Taliban commander Hafiz Gul Bahadur's death by drone strike in 3... 2... 1...
 
2012-06-18 10:27:23 AM  
What is the point of this? Why would the military care if they stop vaccinating people?
This is some kind of bio warfare fail
 
2012-06-18 10:30:39 AM  

WelldeadLink: And those are mk-82 bombs, and 47 rather than a thousand.


Well yes, But the B-2 can carry the Mk-84, and we can drop thousands given enough B-2s and enough sorties. Saturation bombing takes more then one bombing raid and one bomber.

I figured if we were going to talk about total war, we should haul out the big bombs, not the wimpy MK-82's.

Once we're done with the B-2's, lets fly some C-130's over and drop MOABs. Those are unguided too. that makes them OK in the Talibans eyes yes?
 
2012-06-18 10:30:55 AM  
Way to work on your PR image, guys.....
 
2012-06-18 10:31:04 AM  

fluffy2097: Andrew Wiggin: Rev. Skarekroe: fluffy2097: So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?

I know it's irrelevant to your point, but that's a B-2, not a B-52.

that's correct.

[celebratearkansasmagazine.com image 600x378]

beat me by 50 seconds...


Who cares? You're both jerks.

:(
 
2012-06-18 10:31:15 AM  

WelldeadLink: And those are mk-82 bombs, and 47 rather than a thousand.


Well yes, But the B-2 can carry the Mk-84, and we can drop thousands given enough B-2s and enough sorties. Saturation bombing takes more then one bombing raid and one bomber.

I figured if we were going to talk about total war, we should haul out the big bombs, not the wimpy MK-82's.

Once we're done with the B-2's, lets fly some C-130's over and drop MOABs. Those are unguided too. that makes them OK in the Talibans eyes, yes?
 
2012-06-18 10:31:28 AM  

Nana's Vibrator: From a purely one-dimensional view, you'd be pretty pissed if unmanned aircraft constantly shook your homes with bomb drops or missile strikes.


And, assuming they won't stop until the "war" is over - wouldn't you rather they used targeted munitions than carpet-bombs? Or does the Taliban just want the US to fill their role of "The Great Satan" by indiscriminately killing everyone, not just indiscriminately killing everyone within ~9 meters of a suspected terrorist?

What's the Taliban really saying here? "Stop using methods of attacking us that keep your troops off the battlefield. It's not fair that you're shooting at/bombing our 'troops', but we only get to fire at your paper planes!"

Boo farkity hoo.

// the problem is when innocent people find themselves within ~9m of a suspected terrorist because it's market day and both terrorists and civilians shop at Jawad's Jam-boree on Tuesdays
// half-price peach jam on Tuesdays at Jawad's
 
2012-06-18 10:32:18 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: Who cares? You're both jerks.


I'm a jerk for pointing out the utter insanity of saying "stop drone strikes" rather then "stop bombing us?"
 
2012-06-18 10:34:21 AM  
I think the issue is that by not vaccinating against polio, they're essentially creating a stock of polio. Think of it like biological warfare, 13th century-style.
 
2012-06-18 10:35:34 AM  

fluffy2097: Satanic_Hamster: Who cares? You're both jerks.

I'm a jerk for pointing out the utter insanity of saying "stop drone strikes" rather then "stop bombing us?"


No, for getting in the B-2 correction just before me.

Jerk.
 
2012-06-18 10:40:55 AM  

Nurglitch: I think the issue is that by not vaccinating against polio, they're essentially creating a stock of polio. Think of it like biological warfare, 13th century-style.


That we can't get because we already vaccinated everyone here?

i'mokaywiththis.jpg
 
2012-06-18 10:41:22 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: fluffy2097: Satanic_Hamster: Who cares? You're both jerks.

I'm a jerk for pointing out the utter insanity of saying "stop drone strikes" rather then "stop bombing us?"

No, for getting in the B-2 correction just before me.

Jerk.


oh! Well, then I'm happy to be of service :D
 
2012-06-18 10:42:50 AM  

fluffy2097: Hell, We're so good at targeting LGB's and JDAM's these days, we sometimes just fill the bomb with cement and rely on kinetic impact alone to take out the target.


I like this idea. Drop cinder block on them. I imagine that would be a lot cheaper for the taxpayers.
 
2012-06-18 10:43:09 AM  
Ooh..the dreaded "Jenny McCarthy" approach to terrorism.
 
2012-06-18 10:43:13 AM  

Snowflake Tubbybottom: That we can't get because we already vaccinated everyone here?


It could breed a new strain we aren't resistant too. Also, herd immunity isn't perfect. If you have enough un-vaccinated people, it could still spread.

We will have to build a wall around them and not let anyone out till the screaming and gunfire stops.
 
2012-06-18 10:43:45 AM  

Snowflake Tubbybottom: Nurglitch: I think the issue is that by not vaccinating against polio, they're essentially creating a stock of polio. Think of it like biological warfare, 13th century-style.

That we can't get because we already vaccinated everyone here?

i'mokaywiththis.jpg


Not everyone. The anti-vaccers do not have it. Although again, that would be natural selection, which I am quite fine with.
 
2012-06-18 10:45:13 AM  
I'm sure FDR is rolling over in his grave about now.

(or at least being turned with a little assistance from one of his helpers).
 
2012-06-18 10:46:33 AM  
So why is it that Afghanistan is still living in the stone age? (Reads article) Oh, now I understand.
 
2012-06-18 10:47:03 AM  

austin_millbarge: I like this idea. Drop cinder block on them. I imagine that would be a lot cheaper for the taxpayers.


I imagine the JDAM kit is the expensive part of a guided bomb. We already have, probably millions of tons of unguided bombs we can put JDAM kits on. They've already been made and paid for (during Vietnam).

From what I've heard on documentaries, the cement bombs are used when they can't have the same sort of blast radius you get from a normal bomb. (EX: if you need to drop a bomb on a single apartment without destroying the apartments around it)
 
2012-06-18 10:52:37 AM  

fluffy2097: Right....

So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]

Or, We could send a single one of these and drop a single Laser guided bomb to destroy a target.
[twistedsifter.sifter.netdna-cdn.com image 640x480]

Hell, We're so good at targeting LGB's and JDAM's these days, we sometimes just fill the bomb with cement and rely on kinetic impact alone to take out the target.

Now. I understand wanting an end to the killing. That's a completely legitimate request. Stop bombing us.

Asking us to stop using precision munitions is just requesting us to kill more people by not using guided weapons.

I'd like if we stopped bombing entirely, but since we cannot do that, we should probably keep using the drones.


That's a B-2. Has anybody pointed that out, yet?
 
2012-06-18 10:55:26 AM  

ChipNASA: [j.wigflip.com image 376x662]


That is pretty good artwork.
 
2012-06-18 10:57:52 AM  

fluffy2097: So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?


Yes, but, "The whole shack shimmies! The whole shack shimmies when everybody's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target!" just doesn't scan as well.
 
2012-06-18 11:00:47 AM  

lobotomy survivor: ChipNASA: [j.wigflip.com image 376x662]

That is pretty good artwork.


Not mine...I just modify them.
 
2012-06-18 11:02:16 AM  

iheartscotch: Guess who just signed up for more drone strikes. If they want their children to die horrible, 100% preventable deaths; then let them. Maybe that will finally convince the people thaalthea taliban are not their friends.


Perhaps it's the optimist in me, but the the North Wazirstan area has been an armed camp since long before the Taliban showed up. In fact the Pakistani Army and civil authroties have been afraid to go there for years. Think the backwoods of Kentucky if all the residents had RPGs and ak-47s. Now If I were a Waziri father, and some dickhead told me that my kid was going to be at risk for a horrible fatal disease because he wanted a bargaining chip to use against his enemy, Well, let's just say I'd use to marksmanship skils I learned hunting for my supper to send Allah one more martyr
 
2012-06-18 11:05:42 AM  

fluffy2097: Right....

So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?


Has anyone told you that's a B-2?
 
2012-06-18 11:06:54 AM  
Am I supposed to cry?
 
2012-06-18 11:08:13 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: fluffy2097: Right....

So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]

That's a B-2.


Yeah and compared to the b-52 is an absolute lightweight: One B-52 and it ordanance load:
www.militaryfactory.com

Fortunately we don't fight wars on the old "flatten everything in a 10 mile radius " model anymore- In Afghanistan especially, such tactic would just make everyone MORE stubborn. The slected elimination of the enemy command structure is MUCH more effective, which is why this guy is complaining so bitterly about it
 
2012-06-18 11:09:39 AM  
Why does the US even bother? The "War on Terror" was lost a long time ago and you can't force civilization on people who absolutely don't want it (mainly because of jeebus / allah). I don't see how the US can "win" anything in this.

What is the US trying to achieve?

*puts on tinfoil hat*

Maybe the US just using this "war" in Afghanistan as an excuse to refine it's remote-assassination technology through live fire experiments.

*takes off tinf
 
2012-06-18 11:14:14 AM  
mtglair.de
 
2012-06-18 11:21:59 AM  
Pakistan remains one of only three countries that have yet to eradicate polio.

... yet they have nukes. Talk about priorities. It never cease to amaze me that the 'good' application of technologies are very narrow focus and will never be adopted corporately.
Based on human history and culture I can totally see some parts of the world still using bicycles, cars and suffering from famine, common illness and strive etc 500 yrs from now even when humans have moved to a Type 1 or 2 civilization or harness the energies of black holes etc and achieve close to lightspeed travels.
 
2012-06-18 11:25:47 AM  

Magorn: Fortunately we don't fight wars on the old "flatten everything in a 10 mile radius " model anymore- In Afghanistan especially, such tactic would just make everyone MORE stubborn. The slected elimination of the enemy command structure is MUCH more effective, which is why this guy is complaining so bitterly about it


There's always the intimidation factor. They say that during the 90's Gulf War, some Iraqi colonels and generals surrendering said that one of the main reasons they were having their units stand down was due to B-52 strikes. When asked how many times they were bombed by B-52's, they said zero, but they had heard about what happened to units that were.

During the recent Libya campaign, I was hoping they would do something like this:
Take our B-52's and B-1's and fly them in formation towards Tripoli. All of them, every damn one we have. Then call up the Libyans, tell them to check their radar and/or look up. "If Qaddafi doesn't resign from power in a hour these planes will start bombing your forces."
 
2012-06-18 11:27:19 AM  

Magorn: Fortunately we don't fight wars on the old "flatten everything in a 10 mile radius " model anymore- In Afghanistan especially, such tactic would just make everyone MORE stubborn. The slected elimination of the enemy command structure is MUCH more effective, which is why this guy is complaining so bitterly about it


Ahem. Make who more stubborn? Dead people aren't very stubborn.
 
2012-06-18 11:28:31 AM  

fluffy2097:
Hell, We're so good at targeting LGB's and JDAM's these days, we sometimes just fill the bomb with cement and rely on kinetic impact alone to take out the target.
.


Extremely effective vs tanks.
 
2012-06-18 11:28:40 AM  

Magorn: Satanic_Hamster: fluffy2097: Right....

So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]

That's a B-2.

Yeah and compared to the b-52 is an absolute lightweight: One B-52 and it ordanance load:
[www.militaryfactory.com image 640x461]

Fortunately we don't fight wars on the old "flatten everything in a 10 mile radius " model anymore- In Afghanistan especially, such tactic would just make everyone MORE stubborn. The slected elimination of the enemy command structure is MUCH more effective, which is why this guy is complaining so bitterly about it


Yes, actually we do. The B-52 has been used extensively in both Iraq and Iran. But we do attempt to used them only on military targets and in areas where civilian casualties will be limited.

We will never defeat the Taliban. They are the the guerrillas formerly known as the Mujahideen. The Soviet Union couldn't defeat them and we won't either.
 
2012-06-18 11:35:14 AM  

Dr Dreidel: What's the Taliban really saying here? "Stop using methods of attacking us that keep your troops off the battlefield. It's not fair that you're shooting at/bombing our 'troops', but we only get to fire at your paper planes!"


Pretty much. It's the same thing medieval knights said about crossbows, or the Turks said about the Mongols, or British troops about the American rebels. One side calls it "dishonorable," "unfair," or "cowardly," while the other side calls it "clever" or describes it as "superior tactics."

It does, however, cut both ways.
 
2012-06-18 11:36:54 AM  

JackieRabbit: Yes, actually we do. The B-52 has been used extensively in both Iraq and Iran. But we do attempt to used them only on military targets and in areas where civilian casualties will be limited.

We will never defeat the Taliban. They are the the guerrillas formerly known as the Mujahideen. The Soviet Union couldn't defeat them and we won't either.


We might not, but polio will.
 
2012-06-18 11:39:48 AM  
As long as no one confuses the drones with a B-2. That would be offensive.
 
2012-06-18 11:50:13 AM  

Uncle Tractor: Why does the US even bother? The "War on Terror" was lost a long time ago and you can't force civilization on people who absolutely don't want it (mainly because of jeebus / allah). I don't see how the US can "win" anything in this.

What is the US trying to achieve?


I feel the same way about the war on crime. We'll never stop criminals, there will always be criminals. We can never completely prevent murder and no matter how long we try, it will never be eradicated. So why do we even bother?

Perhaps the answer is amazingly obvious and simple to some but you and I are deep thinkers.
 
2012-06-18 11:53:32 AM  

Uncle Tractor: Why does the US even bother? The "War on Terror" was lost a long time ago and you can't force civilization on people who absolutely don't want it (mainly because of jeebus / allah). I don't see how the US can "win" anything in this.


Why did you say Allah doesn't want civilization? You're one of those conservative Islamophobes, aren't you?

/jeebus is the truly uncivilized one, spreading disgusting WASP culture through terrorist means like vaccinations and building overly tall skyscrapers
//I WANT TO BELIEVE JEEBUS, AND ONLY JEEBUS, IS WRONG
 
2012-06-18 11:56:18 AM  

fluffy2097: So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?


I don't know crap about planes, but I hear that's a B-2. Read it in a thread on Fark somewhere.
 
2012-06-18 11:57:06 AM  
Why does polio even still exist?
 
2012-06-18 12:02:38 PM  
I, for one, am thankful that the taliban is made up of so many morans.
 
2012-06-18 12:06:15 PM  

ABQGOD: Why does polio even still exist?


Because the environmentalists shiat a brick when we rendered smallpox extinct in the wild.

/took 50 years to reintroduce it from lab specimens
//even viruses have human rights
 
2012-06-18 12:07:15 PM  

Tatterdemalian: //even viruses have human rights


eeek. sounds like one of the ender's game sequels.
 
2012-06-18 12:12:13 PM  
B-2, or not B-2, that is the question.
 
2012-06-18 12:20:57 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: fluffy2097: Right....

So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]

That's a B-2.


You can tell because it's missing the 5.
 
2012-06-18 12:23:15 PM  

Magorn: Fortunately we don't fight wars on the old "flatten everything in a 10 mile radius " model anymore- In Afghanistan especially, such tactic would just make everyone MORE stubborn. The slected elimination of the enemy command structure is MUCH more effective, which is why this guy is complaining so bitterly about it


Well, we don't do it in Afghanistan largely because it's sparsely populated enough that it wouldn't be economical in the first place.

And yeah, targeted strikes are much more effective.
 
2012-06-18 12:28:05 PM  

iheartscotch: Guess who just signed up for more drone strikes. If they want their children to die horrible, 100% preventable deaths; then let them. Maybe that will finally convince the people thaalthea taliban are not their friends.


They figured that out some time ago. The best thing we could do now is give the population cell phones that can just dial the number of 1-800-KILLTALIBAN. When a group of those assholes show up and start shoving people around, the people can dime them out and get them a droning.
 
2012-06-18 12:29:35 PM  

fluffy2097: Right....

So this is the kind of war they want us to be waging? B-52's dropping 2000lb mk-84 unguided bombs by the thousand to destroy a single target?
[upload.wikimedia.org image 220x275]

Or, We could send a single one of these and drop a single Laser guided bomb to destroy a target.
[twistedsifter.sifter.netdna-cdn.com image 640x480]

Hell, We're so good at targeting LGB's and JDAM's these days, we sometimes just fill the bomb with cement and rely on kinetic impact alone to take out the target.

Now. I understand wanting an end to the killing. That's a completely legitimate request. Stop bombing us.

Asking us to stop using precision munitions is just requesting us to kill more people by not using guided weapons.

I'd like if we stopped bombing entirely, but since we cannot do that, we should probably keep using the drones.


That is not a b52 and those are not mk-84s

Those are not laser guided bombs.

I don't have a problem with them with holding treatment of their own people I also do not have a problem with dropping tons of unguided bombs on them. The problem with this limited strikes is that the message does not get through to the people, because the impact is not felt by the people who support these nut jobs. If we went in there and laid waste every time there was a terrorist attack I think the terrorist would find their support vanish.
 
2012-06-18 12:30:53 PM  

Skyred: What is the point of this? Why would the military care if they stop vaccinating people?


The polio vaccine also contains the communist zombie vaccine.
 
2012-06-18 12:32:57 PM  

ABQGOD: Why does polio even still exist?


I'll sum up for you: Pakistan is one of only 3 countries in the entire world to have not eradicated polio. That's a big takeaway here. This is a poorly organized, undereducated, and shellshocked population. Any attempts to reason with them is just as undereducated.
 
2012-06-18 12:36:37 PM  

fluffy2097: WelldeadLink: And those are mk-82 bombs, and 47 rather than a thousand.

Well yes, But the B-2 can carry the Mk-84, and we can drop thousands given enough B-2s and enough sorties. Saturation bombing takes more then one bombing raid and one bomber.

I figured if we were going to talk about total war, we should haul out the big bombs, not the wimpy MK-82's.

Once we're done with the B-2's, lets fly some C-130's over and drop MOABs. Those are unguided too. that makes them OK in the Talibans eyes, yes?


They modified the B-2 so it can carry MOABs now :D
 
2012-06-18 12:46:08 PM  

ABQGOD: Why does polio even still exist?


Because rich people still have horses to put in their swimming pools.
 
2012-06-18 12:49:28 PM  

This About That: So these asshats threaten the free world with letting their own children die of polio or become cripples. Yeah, religious fanatics do get more evil than that, but not by much.


I'm not sure who, or how. Burning people at the stake isn't as heinous as letting kids die out of spite.
 
2012-06-18 01:18:02 PM  

inelegy: [mtglair.de image 312x445]


That must be an old card. Under the new 2012 rules for MTG, that would only cost 1 red mana, would be a 5/5 instead of 2/2, also have trample, and destroys all permanents.

/Bitter at the new MTG sets
 
2012-06-18 01:34:43 PM  

Profedius: I don't have a problem with them with holding treatment of their own people I also do not have a problem with dropping tons of unguided bombs on them. The problem with this limited strikes is that the message does not get through to the people, because the impact is not felt by the people who support these nut jobs. If we went in there and laid waste every time there was a terrorist attack I think the terrorist would find their support vanish.


That theory has been put forth before innumerable times, from at least the time of the Roman Empire, and it's generally not worked. But if we just use *THAT* much more force this time, I'm *SURE* it will work. Guaranteed.
 
2012-06-18 01:47:22 PM  
Checks arcane sources..... Yep, that's evil.
 
2012-06-18 02:18:37 PM  
While I agree that this is a veiled threat, it's one not entirely disconnected from logic. The Taliban's concern is that door-to-door polio screening and shots are being used to identify targets. Considering that this is precisely the way that Bin Laden's whereabouts were ascertained, it seems like a not-illegitimate position to take.

However, from a Taliban hearts-and-minds perspective, it's a tactical mistake, so let them make it.
 
2012-06-18 02:20:04 PM  

chuggernaught: Checks arcane sources..... Yep, that's evil.

.........................................^ug
 
2012-06-18 02:30:28 PM  
So.... the drone strikes are working, I take it.

/this dude's afraid aware that soon he'll be riding a Hellfire into hellfire... fitting
 
2012-06-18 02:52:20 PM  

unyon: Considering that this is precisely the way that Bin Laden's whereabouts were ascertained, it seems like a not-illegitimate position to take.


Actually, that attempt failed. They located him by figuring out who is courier was and finding him.
 
2012-06-18 03:13:38 PM  

dittybopper: unyon: Considering that this is precisely the way that Bin Laden's whereabouts were ascertained, it seems like a not-illegitimate position to take.

Actually, that attempt failed. They located him by figuring out who is courier was and finding him.


Mea Culpa, thanks for the correction.

I should have said that this is precisely how they attempted to confirm his location. Successful or not, it's probably arguable that this tactic has been used, successfully, to identify other targets for future drone strikes. In any event, the Taliban are probably wise to be suspicious of anyone that goes door to door, from the Avon lady to the milkman.
 
2012-06-18 03:14:22 PM  

dittybopper: Profedius: I don't have a problem with them with holding treatment of their own people I also do not have a problem with dropping tons of unguided bombs on them. The problem with this limited strikes is that the message does not get through to the people, because the impact is not felt by the people who support these nut jobs. If we went in there and laid waste every time there was a terrorist attack I think the terrorist would find their support vanish.

That theory has been put forth before innumerable times, from at least the time of the Roman Empire, and it's generally not worked. But if we just use *THAT* much more force this time, I'm *SURE* it will work. Guaranteed.


Worked for Germany and Japan back in the 40s
 
2012-06-18 03:54:03 PM  

Profedius: dittybopper: Profedius: I don't have a problem with them with holding treatment of their own people I also do not have a problem with dropping tons of unguided bombs on them. The problem with this limited strikes is that the message does not get through to the people, because the impact is not felt by the people who support these nut jobs. If we went in there and laid waste every time there was a terrorist attack I think the terrorist would find their support vanish.

That theory has been put forth before innumerable times, from at least the time of the Roman Empire, and it's generally not worked. But if we just use *THAT* much more force this time, I'm *SURE* it will work. Guaranteed.

Worked for Germany and Japan back in the 40s


Sure, just ask Reinhard Heydrich.
 
2012-06-18 03:55:01 PM  

lennavan: I feel the same way about the war on crime. We'll never stop criminals, there will always be criminals. We can never completely prevent murder and no matter how long we try, it will never be eradicated. So why do we even bother?


The War on Terror is futile because terrorism is a method. Fighting a war on a method is just stupid. The notion of fighting a "war on crime" is equally stupid, because as you say, you can never completely remove it.

You fight crime first through prevention, mainly by educating the population and reducing / removing social ills, second by cleaning up the mess when crimes do happen (which includes rehabilitation). Terrorism is just another form of crime, and it should be dealt with as just another form of crime. Not by sending in a killer drone.

What the US is doing in Afghanistan / Pakistan has nothing to do with terrorism.
 
2012-06-18 03:58:12 PM  

URAPNIS: Magorn: Fortunately we don't fight wars on the old "flatten everything in a 10 mile radius " model anymore- In Afghanistan especially, such tactic would just make everyone MORE stubborn. The slected elimination of the enemy command structure is MUCH more effective, which is why this guy is complaining so bitterly about it

Ahem. Make who more stubborn? Dead people aren't very stubborn.


Yes, actually they are. Have you ever tried to get a dead person to do something? They just sit there and stare at you, like they didn't hear you. You tell them "Go wash up and clean up that mess you are getting all over the floor" and generally they get all contrarian and ooze some more body fluids.

And they don't get better with time. They'll stubbornly sit there for years. You go to move them a few years later and they get all passive-aggressive. Try to pick their desicated ass up and they'll detach their arm to make it harder for you. Huge cloud of dust - all disgusting too - that's old dead skin you breathe in. Makes you sneeze for what seems like hours.
 
2012-06-18 04:01:02 PM  

Uncle Tractor: The War on Terror is futile because terrorism is a method. Fighting a war on a method is just stupid. The notion of fighting a "war on crime" is equally stupid, because as you say, you can never completely remove it.


Agreed.

Uncle Tractor: You fight crime first through prevention, mainly by educating the population and reducing


Wait, you just said fighting crime is stupid. Did you change your mind? I imagine killing a terrorist is a decent way of preventing future terrorism. Is your beef with the method?

Uncle Tractor: Terrorism is just another form of crime, and it should be dealt with as just another form of crime. Not by sending in a killer drone.


Wait, again so your beef is not with attacking terrorists or the label, your beef is with the method itself? That's a completely different argument. Would you mind planting yourself for a minute, it's hard to have a discussion with all of this shifting around. If you're against teh drone strikes by all means. But to frame your "I hate drone strikes" argument as a "The War on Terror is stupid" is let's go with "silly."
 
2012-06-18 04:03:33 PM  

Profedius: dittybopper: Profedius: I don't have a problem with them with holding treatment of their own people I also do not have a problem with dropping tons of unguided bombs on them. The problem with this limited strikes is that the message does not get through to the people, because the impact is not felt by the people who support these nut jobs. If we went in there and laid waste every time there was a terrorist attack I think the terrorist would find their support vanish.

That theory has been put forth before innumerable times, from at least the time of the Roman Empire, and it's generally not worked. But if we just use *THAT* much more force this time, I'm *SURE* it will work. Guaranteed.

Worked for Germany and Japan back in the 40s


The problem being you have to hit the people who actually support terrorist, you need to destroy the factories that provide their war machine, and neither of those can be found inside Afghanistan.

/People going to be upset when you start bombing random nations.
/Alternative is to go all "British SAS" and start vanning perpetrators, drowning them in rivers.
/Neither will play good in the press.
 
2012-06-18 04:08:22 PM  

Profedius: That is not a b52 and those are not mk-84s

Those are not laser guided bombs.


I am happy to be wrong on everything I thought about those pictures.

It reaffirms to the government I only know about weapons through playing video games.
 
2012-06-18 04:36:40 PM  

way south: Profedius: dittybopper: Profedius: I don't have a problem with them with holding treatment of their own people I also do not have a problem with dropping tons of unguided bombs on them. The problem with this limited strikes is that the message does not get through to the people, because the impact is not felt by the people who support these nut jobs. If we went in there and laid waste every time there was a terrorist attack I think the terrorist would find their support vanish.

That theory has been put forth before innumerable times, from at least the time of the Roman Empire, and it's generally not worked. But if we just use *THAT* much more force this time, I'm *SURE* it will work. Guaranteed.

Worked for Germany and Japan back in the 40s

The problem being you have to hit the people who actually support terrorist, you need to destroy the factories that provide their war machine, and neither of those can be found inside Afghanistan.

/People going to be upset when you start bombing random nations.
/Alternative is to go all "British SAS" and start vanning perpetrators, drowning them in rivers.
/Neither will play good in the press.


Yes I agree the press would be an issue and the tactic is not favorable in the eyes of the world, but is the only way this problem is going to go away. The way we are going about it now it is just going to go on without end, because the members we kill just get replaced and countries harbor these groups. Sadly we can't just leave them alone, because they will attack us. We can't do what I am saying, but it would work as a means to end this problem, although it would create a whole new set of problems.

fluffy2097: Profedius: That is not a b52 and those are not mk-84s

Those are not laser guided bombs.

I am happy to be wrong on everything I thought about those pictures.

It reaffirms to the government I only know about weapons through playing video games.


I am not sure why I know all this stuff myself it really has nothing to do with my life, but I just know it anyway. It didn't even really matter when I was in the service, but I knew it then. Back in the 90s I could tell you the name and number of every weapon and vehicle in use by NATO or the Warsaw Pact (Soviet Union)
 
2012-06-18 04:36:57 PM  

lennavan: Uncle Tractor: The War on Terror is futile because terrorism is a method. Fighting a war on a method is just stupid. The notion of fighting a "war on crime" is equally stupid, because as you say, you can never completely remove it.

Agreed.

Uncle Tractor: You fight crime first through prevention, mainly by educating the population and reducing

Wait, you just said fighting crime is stupid. Did you change your mind? I imagine killing a terrorist is a decent way of preventing future terrorism. Is your beef with the method?

Uncle Tractor: Terrorism is just another form of crime, and it should be dealt with as just another form of crime. Not by sending in a killer drone.

Wait, again so your beef is not with attacking terrorists or the label, your beef is with the method itself? That's a completely different argument. Would you mind planting yourself for a minute, it's hard to have a discussion with all of this shifting around. If you're against teh drone strikes by all means. But to frame your "I hate drone strikes" argument as a "The War on Terror is stupid" is let's go with "silly."


Oh, piffle. Killing A terrorist is a decent way of preventing THAT TERRORIST from doing any future acts of terror. But it won't stop terrorism any more than executing one gangbanger will prevent any future killings by gangs.

As long as we treat terrorists like evil people who run around killing because they enjoy it, or else as some kind of super-villain out to destroy the world because they enjoy it, nothing will change. Terrorism is a legitimate tactic of insurgent warfare and always has been; but the terrorists themselves, and the organizations, can and should be treated as CRIMINALS, not as evil supervillains. Arrest them, charge them with the crime, and sentence accordingly.

Drone strikes, or extra-judicial assassination, merely enhances the terrorists' standing among their people, the ones they are trying to impress: See the righteousness of our cause! Even America is afraid of us! They can ride that all the way into a provisional government. But treating them like common criminals strips the mystique of Righteous Warrior from them and makes them look very bad to their people.

Everyone will support a freedom fighter; nobody supports a murderer. But when a Predator or a squad of SEALs comes in to take out a terrorist, they're not being treated like a murderer. Nobody sends a SEAL team to take out Joe Blow when he kills some guy in a bar fight.
 
2012-06-18 04:56:52 PM  

lennavan: Uncle Tractor: You fight crime first through prevention, mainly by educating the population and reducing

Wait, you just said fighting crime is stupid. Did you change your mind?


"Fighting crime" =/= "war on crime."

I imagine killing a terrorist is a decent way of preventing future terrorism. Is your beef with the method?

You could say that. I don't like the idea of killing people for crimes they might commit in the future. I also don't like killing suspects instead of arresting them and taking them to court.

Uncle Tractor: Terrorism is just another form of crime, and it should be dealt with as just another form of crime. Not by sending in a killer drone.

Wait, again so your beef is not with attacking terrorists or the label, your beef is with the method itself?


How would you feel about your house being damaged in a drone strike against a suspected criminal on the street? How would you like to be targeted by a drone because somebody thought you were somebody else?

Again: What exactly does the US hope to accomplish in Afghanistan? You've got OBL and most likely everybody else involved in 911 (and quite a few more). Why is the US still there?

That's a completely different argument. Would you mind planting yourself for a minute, it's hard to have a discussion with all of this shifting around. If you're against teh drone strikes by all means. But to frame your "I hate drone strikes" argument as a "The War on Terror is stupid" is let's go with "silly."

The only shifting here is taking place in your own head. Sorry if I don't fit in your pigeonholes.
 
2012-06-18 04:58:46 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Killing A terrorist is a decent way of preventing THAT TERRORIST from doing any future acts of terror.


Just to nitpick: Is he a terrorist if he hasn't committed any acts of terrorism?
 
2012-06-18 06:48:00 PM  
These people have truly never met an average American before.

This is how things roll here:

International Polio Organization: "Hello average American. Would you like to donate some money to help little Middle Eastern kids not get polio"

Average American: "What the hell is polio?"

International Polio Organization: "It's a virus that used to kill or severely injure hundreds of thousands of people. It attacks your nervous system; and even if treated properly, the people who had it will a handicapped life. The United States all but eliminated it several decades ago, but several poor countries need it to keep their children safe."

Average American: "I'll be honest with you, I kinda zoned-out while you were talking. But I heard you say something about helping sick kids, so here is some money."

International Polio Organization: "Thanks!"

*skip ahead*

International Polio Organization: "Hey! That money you gave me went towards the kids. But the terrorists you're fighting says the kids can't have them."

Average American: "Well we're throwing everything we have at them to get them to stop hurting others!"

International Polio Organization: "They said the'll let the kids have the vaccine if you stop using military drones."

Average American: " BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Ok. Yea. We'll get right on that!" *eye roll*
 
2012-06-18 07:11:12 PM  
Gee I wonder why?
 
2012-06-18 10:55:30 PM  

unyon: While I agree that this is a veiled threat, it's one not entirely disconnected from logic. The Taliban's concern is that door-to-door polio screening and shots are being used to identify targets. Considering that this is precisely the way that Bin Laden's whereabouts were ascertained, it seems like a not-illegitimate position to take.


Uh, that tactic didn't work.

/It was the courier.
//In the kitchen.
///With the bread knife.
 
2012-06-19 07:08:03 AM  
""On one hand, the U.S. spends millions of dollars to eliminate polio, while on the other hand it kills hundreds with the help of its slave, Pakistan.""

HA HA HA... you mean our "slave" that was harboring Osama bin Laden for all those years? Yeah, right. Got it backwards, there, buddy.
 
2012-06-19 09:45:52 AM  

Gumaraid: The armchair generals are out way to early this morning.


Well, they do more before 9am, than you do all day...
 
2012-06-19 11:12:31 AM  
In 1998, the World Health Organization was closing in on eradicating polio once and for all. They had one place left in the world, northern Nigeria.

Then some Islamist scumbag there decided that vaccines are a Jewish plot, and put a halt to vaccination.

So you still had polio in a Muslim part of Nigeria. What do Muslims do that's bad with infectious disease? Oh, right. It's called the Hajj.

An infected person made the pilgrimate to Mecca, and the next year there was polio in India, Pakistan, Indonesia too.

Now the WHO is closing in on the kill in northwest Pakistan. And once again an Islamist scumbag is stopping this.

The only good Islamist is a dead one.
 
2012-06-19 02:14:31 PM  
 
2012-06-19 02:26:50 PM  

HellRaisingHoosier: These people have truly never met an average American before.

This is how things roll here:

International Polio Organization: "Hello average American. Would you like to donate some money to help little Middle Eastern kids not get polio"

Average American: "What the hell is polio?"

International Polio Organization: "It's a virus that used to kill or severely injure hundreds of thousands of people. It attacks your nervous system; and even if treated properly, the people who had it will a handicapped life. The United States all but eliminated it several decades ago, but several poor countries need it to keep their children safe."

Average American: "I'll be honest with you, I kinda zoned-out while you were talking. But I heard you say something about helping sick kids, so here is some money."

International Polio Organization: "Thanks!"

*skip ahead*

International Polio Organization: "Hey! That money you gave me went towards the kids. But the terrorists you're fighting says the kids can't have them."

Average American: "Well we're throwing everything we have at them to get them to stop hurting others!"

International Polio Organization: "They said the'll let the kids have the vaccine if you stop using military drones."

Average American: " BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Ok. Yea. We'll get right on that!" *eye roll*


How does that stereotype square with this reality: Americans give more to charity, both per capita and as a percentage of GDP, than the citizens of other nations.
 
2012-06-19 08:19:57 PM  

dittybopper: HellRaisingHoosier: These people have truly never met an average American before.

This is how things roll here:

International Polio Organization: "Hello average American. Would you like to donate some money to help little Middle Eastern kids not get polio"

Average American: "What the hell is polio?"

International Polio Organization: "It's a virus that used to kill or severely injure hundreds of thousands of people. It attacks your nervous system; and even if treated properly, the people who had it will a handicapped life. The United States all but eliminated it several decades ago, but several poor countries need it to keep their children safe."

Average American: "I'll be honest with you, I kinda zoned-out while you were talking. But I heard you say something about helping sick kids, so here is some money."

International Polio Organization: "Thanks!"

*skip ahead*

International Polio Organization: "Hey! That money you gave me went towards the kids. But the terrorists you're fighting says the kids can't have them."

Average American: "Well we're throwing everything we have at them to get them to stop hurting others!"

International Polio Organization: "They said the'll let the kids have the vaccine if you stop using military drones."

Average American: " BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Ok. Yea. We'll get right on that!" *eye roll*

How does that stereotype square with this reality: Americans give more to charity, both per capita and as a percentage of GDP, than the citizens of other nations.



Did you review your own link?

Because the majority of those donations are to religious institutions. Religious institutions are very poor at getting money and items into the hands of those who need them.

Remember those assholes a few months back who took a ton of money and sent some poor people in Africa bibles. Now just imagine ... that ... was considered charity.
 
Displayed 115 of 115 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report