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.

(Christian Science Monitor)   Good news, Boston. Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei has condemned the Boston Marathon attack and then took a jab at American policies because he was falling short on his yearly quota   (csmonitor.com) divider line 63
    More: Interesting, Khamenei, Iran, United States, proxy wars, candlelight vigil, WMDs  
•       •       •

3351 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Apr 2013 at 9:03 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-18 11:25:14 AM
So, basically this was a "We condemn the bombings done to the infidels in the nation of the Great Satan, for the innocent bloodthirsty Americans do not deserve such death, they instead must be stoned" type of apology.
 
2013-04-18 11:37:16 AM

NumberFiveIsAlive: The US military is just that.  Military.  Occupations have never been a solid part of military training.  Kill bad guys, break their shiat, bring in food and other stuff for the civies that suffered from the op.  You want a solid occupation?  Bring back law enforcement.  Let them do their jobs.  The problem is Iraqi cops were corrupt shiatheads that helped to terrorize the people.  Except Senior shiathead decided that means we should completely disband them and re-invent the wheel.

HOLY CRAP did anyone NOT see that decision ending badly?  Boots often facepalm or even facedesk over the decisions made by the brass and the suits.


Well I figured with all the trillions of dollars, they could have hired some civilian consultants on how not to fark up an occupation.  Like having someone to say, "Wait, you want to disband the entire Iraqi Army, and send them all home WITH THEIR GUNS?!  Seriously?!".

And you can hardly blame the Iraqi police for the shiatstorm that erupted.  They were far lower down on the totem pole than the Occupiers (US Army).

There's no way in hell that the USA said "Okay, let's keep regional policemen in every area, and just go about your business as before."  Because before they were operating under a dictatorship.  Cops under a dictatorship aren't there to "serve and protect" the people, they're there to clamp down on dissent and the law that they serve comes from the one guy at the top (Saddam).  The only justice they dispensed was jackbooted.
 
2013-04-18 11:38:36 AM

jakomo002: NumberFiveIsAlive: Shock and Awe was a stupid "Hey look at what we can do" public relations idiocy.  Though it wasn't to keep the civilians from fighting, it was to get the guys with guns to put them down.  This means the military.  Soldiers tend to surrender in droves when they hate being drafted to fight an army that clearly outclasses them 1000 to 1.  Also when they're hungry, and they know the "enemy" will feed them and eventually let them go home.

The only ones looking for those "pats on the back" for fixing what we broke were the suits up top and the contractors benefiting from it.  The boots hated that.  Blow up a road, and we have to fix it to use it later.  Blow up a power plant, we have to fix it to keep the civies from rioting.  Granted, we did it to keep the enemy from being able to communicate and fight back also, but we knew we would have to fix those, and we didn't expect to be thanked for it. Except by, you know, not planting bombs on us.

I agree with almost all of what you say.  The only thing I would point out is that "Shock and Awe" was probably perceived far differently by the people cowering in their bathtubs, holding their crying kids while bombs explode all over their neighbourhoods.

With Iraq, I find it hard to believe that the US military could go SO WRONG when it came to "winning hearts and minds".  Pretty much along every step of the way, they turned hearts and minds against them, radicalizing far more people than they "won over", because they were heavy-handed and looked at things from a military point of view.

They could have won over far more people with compassion and a modiucm of understanding than busting down doors in the night and whisking away "suspected militants" to be tortured in the very same prisons Saddam used.


Read the Sheriff of Ramadi, about the development of the tactics that agreed with what you just said, which our forces adopted finally, and which led to the "Anbar Awakening."  Much of it was recognizing basic human behavior in an unstable population and turning that to work in our favor, along with the brutality of the insurgents against the common Iraqis finally coming back on them.

That being said, when our extensive (eventually) biometrics systems (PDF) & spec ops intel networks reached a conclusion on a "real-bad-guy" target, I have very little problem with him being taken in or just taken out... many/most captures however were based on pretty hard evidence from about 2006 on (prior to that, yeah, everyone was just scrambling though).

/Sheriff of Ramadi is the 4th in a series of very up-close-&-accurate books on SEALs, written by a former SEAL and BUD/S Honor Man himself Dick Couch, so he had incredible access and literary permissions
 
2013-04-18 11:44:06 AM
Great, now even Khamenei sounds sane.
 
2013-04-18 11:47:11 AM
i'm pulling troops out of this debate
 
2013-04-18 11:49:29 AM

mat catastrophe: epyonyx: Anyone else think that the bombing was just a random nutjob? Wouldn't a terrorist group have claimed this by now?

Yes and yes.


This may be a non-AWing nutjob/s.If he/she/they are content with staying under the radar, this may lead to... interesting times.
 
2013-04-18 11:49:37 AM
THX 1138:

But I've been led to believe that the world is a binary place and everything he does or says is automatically wrong.  You mean it's more complex than that?

Huh, who took responsibility for "9/11"? Years later some agency eventually produced a clip  of Bin Laden purporting to gloat, but IIRC it was the Bush administration that said Al Qaeda did it.

I still suspect it was some shadowy something that would benefit from increased FUD.

In the old days we'd blame the CIA or some other part of of the "security" apparatus, or maybe some demented far-left group hoping to provoke a revolutionary situation by increasing repression (till it became obvious that that won't work because most Americans LIKE being repressed), or maybe a demented far-left group created or taken over by FBI agents or snitch-provocateurs (such as the SLA) to give hoi polloi an excuse to beg for more "protection." Then it became Lone (White Male) Nuts like Tin McVeigh (who didn't act alone) or the Unabomber (who does seem to fit the profile); then of course since the unfortinate events in Manhattan we've been conditioned to look for "Islamic extremists," usually but not always of foreign origin.

SO. Remember those "terrorist plots" the FBI "exposed" that turned out to be demented domestic Muslims the FBI heard about and then hooked up with agents who'd convince them to conspire to commit a terrorist act and even provide them with bombs (that would turn out to be duds) so the FBI could arrest them and brag about how well they "protected" us?

We'll probably never know if I'm correct, such things tend to be hushed up for decades, but my suspicion falls on an FBI-inspired fake bomb plot that somehow used real bombs, either by accident or design: maybe the bombers figured out how to dupe the FBI, or maybe the FBI was supposed to switch the bombs with duds at the last minute, or swoop down just before the real bombs were set to go off and save the day and missed a couple (perhaps because the bomber could get the bombs where they were supposed to go).

Or perhaps it could be an old-fashioned double or even triple agent situation. Maybe some right-wing extremists join the FBI to combat Muslim extremists and finagles a way to get involved in a switcheroo that doesn't work so the FBI will get hoodwinked into cracking down on Muslims and "saving America from sharia law." Or maybe some FBI task force or lone wolf deliberately set up a real bombing for a change. Real bombs do create panic better than fake ones.

Or maybe this was due to a rivalry inside the FBI or maybe between the FBI and Boston police: e.g., maybe some Boston cops cooked up this high-pressure plot to discredit or get rid of an FBI agent or two who got too close to exposing police corruption.

Or maybe it could be a real bomb plot masterminded by some Syrian goverment agency, meant to put the blame on an alleged Al Qaeda affiliate that has something to do a group involved in the uprising, like Al Nusra. Syria's goal would be change US policy by going "See? These are the people the US government supports against us!"

In any case, regardless of who the patsy will be, the Lone Nut theory seems a bit too far-fetched. How can the FBI protect us from those without putting implants in everybody?

OOPS.
 
2013-04-18 11:58:12 AM

Seraphym: Read the Sheriff of Ramadi, about the development of the tactics that agreed with what you just said, which our forces adopted finally, and which led to the "Anbar Awakening."  Much of it was recognizing basic human behavior in an unstable population and turning that to work in our favor, along with the brutality of the insurgents against the common Iraqis finally coming back on them.


I'll check it out.

My point is that they should have been on it right away, not after 2006.  You can't unkill people, and you can't win people's hearts and minds after, through incompetence, you've made them fear and distrust you.

No mulligans
 
2013-04-18 12:29:13 PM
NumberFiveIsAlive:

The US military is just that.  Military.  Occupations have never been a solid part of military training.

So unless the US is going to stop "liberating" foreign countries that'll have to change: maybe a vastly increased MP presence directed at the civilian population with its leadership augmented by FBI teams on special duty and backed by specially trained regular troops when necessary. And don't forget surveillance drones, wiretabs, local snitches, etc. etc.

It'll also help to have local puppet government agencies, political parties, educational organizations and social service agencies set up, as well as US Peace Corps or tame Red Cross. Use East Germany as a model. The idea would be that the USA is a good buddy come to protect the local population from extremists, dictators, drug cartels or whatever, and to help them learn to protect themselves (though of course we'll never abandon them). "Help the cause of Freedom and Democracy! Join the US-Syrian Friendship Society!"

But, as the Soviets did in East Germany, don't trust the local cops, troops or government with any real power until you bring in a generation that you yourself has trained and indoctrinated, and always make sure that every domestic anything has US "advisors" and "reinforcements" and uses US-made equipment.

The alternative is to let foreign countries run their own shows in their own ways, which of course simply can't be allowed.

A good thing will be that vastly increased and deepened "liberations" will help solve the US unemployment problem. Would you rather be homeless under a bridge or helping to kick the Syrians around? You'll get paid, room & board, medical care, special training, and even lots of gyms and plasma TVs.

The USSR provided us with a model that worked until years of CIA hassling eventually weakened it. And with the CIA on our side how can we ever lose?

It's time patriotic Americans did their duty to Humanity by helping the Forces of Freedom liberate every country we possibly can. Only if the USA rules the world can we keep everybody safe from oppression and exploitation. (Or will we let the UN do it? Hmmm?)
 
2013-04-18 12:43:26 PM
jakomo002:

There's no way in hell that the USA said "Okay, let's keep regional policemen in every area, and just go about your business as before."  Because before they were operating under a dictatorship.  Cops under a dictatorship aren't there to "serve and protect" the people, they're there to clamp down on dissent and the law that they serve comes from the one guy at the top (Saddam).  The only justice they dispensed was jackbooted.

History shows that jackbooted thugs usually enjoy being jackbooted thugs more than they care about any particular ideology, and they usually stay loyal to those who pay them well. And if the locals are used to that type of policing it'll be a while before they learn how "real" police in a "free" society like say Boston are supposed to act, so it'll be a while before they learn how to be "free" citizens instead of oppressed masses. In the meantime they'll hate the foreign devils.

So why bother replacing the local cops etc., at least for 15-20 years? Pay them better than they're used to, give them plasma screens, lots of porn, nifty gadgets of destruction and of course hookers & blow, and let 'em serve their new masters: US. At least till we've raised and trained a new generation that can keep their sheeple down in our enlightened & civilized manner.

It worked for the Soviets for decades. Learn from that example. Spread Freedom World-Wide!
 
2013-04-18 12:46:39 PM
"The Islamic Republic of Iran, which follows the logic Islam, is opposed to any bombings and killings of innocent people..."

I think this is something we can all get behind.
 
2013-04-18 02:49:19 PM
wise words from a wise man.
 
2013-04-18 08:34:00 PM

OtherLittleGuy: First the Pakistan Taliban and the Ayatollah. I love them coming out of the woodwork to say "It wasn't me! It wasn't me!"


And why are they doing this in that dreamworld of yours?
 
Displayed 13 of 63 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report