Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
Casualties of War
Talon Mistsong
Ranger
in Babylon 5
While everyone is discussing & plotting the strategy of this new war, I'd like to point out a basic fact of war that seems to have been forgotten.
Every war has its innocent victims. Forgotten ones. People who weren't chess pieces on anyone's strategic board, not affiliated with any side, really had nothing to do with any fighting, but managed to get caught in the middle.
There certainly seems to be no shortage of innocent bystanders in this new war. Starting with the people in the WTC towers - I'll bet most of them never even heard of Bin Laden (assuming he's responsible), they were just ordinary folks going about their business.
Now we have more innocent bystanders: people in Afghanistan anticipating a war and trying to get out of the country only to find the border closed. Men women and children with nowhere to go, probably only worried about surviving another 24 hours, and from what I've been hearing are on the brink of starvation. What about them?
I've no intention of assessing blame for that situation, I'm thinking why doesn't someone organize sending in humanitarian aid? Like maybe, the US and other nations who say they're committed to fighting terrorism? Instead of dropping bombs, get the military to be airlifting food & supplies to the refugees. I'm sure people in the area would say Americans are just trying to buy loyalty with food, but I could care less as long as some newborn baby doesn't starve to death.
I'm no stranger to strategy; besides being a compassionate thing to do, humanitarian aid would be a great way to cultivate sympathy for the American's cause in the Middle East, not to mention go a long way to proving that the West isn't against all Muslims. As for the enemy, what are they going to do, shoot down relief supply planes? Ohhh that would REALLY diminish the terrorists' in the eyes of the locals.
So as I see it, politically and strategicly humanitarian aid is very wise. Politics, strategy and morality on the same side? Now how often does that happen?? [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/biggrin.gif[/img]
------------------
There are 3 things in life I never forget: my friends, my enemies, and my access codes.
Never put gasoline in a fire extinguisher.
"No government, no dictator can hold an imprisioned population by force of arms forever. There is no power in the universe greater than the need for freedom. Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies [i]cannot stand[/i]." - G'Kar, [i]The Long Twighlight Struggle[/i]
[url="http://www.globalserve.net/~archons"]www.globalserve.net/~archons[/url]
Every war has its innocent victims. Forgotten ones. People who weren't chess pieces on anyone's strategic board, not affiliated with any side, really had nothing to do with any fighting, but managed to get caught in the middle.
There certainly seems to be no shortage of innocent bystanders in this new war. Starting with the people in the WTC towers - I'll bet most of them never even heard of Bin Laden (assuming he's responsible), they were just ordinary folks going about their business.
Now we have more innocent bystanders: people in Afghanistan anticipating a war and trying to get out of the country only to find the border closed. Men women and children with nowhere to go, probably only worried about surviving another 24 hours, and from what I've been hearing are on the brink of starvation. What about them?
I've no intention of assessing blame for that situation, I'm thinking why doesn't someone organize sending in humanitarian aid? Like maybe, the US and other nations who say they're committed to fighting terrorism? Instead of dropping bombs, get the military to be airlifting food & supplies to the refugees. I'm sure people in the area would say Americans are just trying to buy loyalty with food, but I could care less as long as some newborn baby doesn't starve to death.
I'm no stranger to strategy; besides being a compassionate thing to do, humanitarian aid would be a great way to cultivate sympathy for the American's cause in the Middle East, not to mention go a long way to proving that the West isn't against all Muslims. As for the enemy, what are they going to do, shoot down relief supply planes? Ohhh that would REALLY diminish the terrorists' in the eyes of the locals.
So as I see it, politically and strategicly humanitarian aid is very wise. Politics, strategy and morality on the same side? Now how often does that happen?? [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/biggrin.gif[/img]
------------------
There are 3 things in life I never forget: my friends, my enemies, and my access codes.
Never put gasoline in a fire extinguisher.
"No government, no dictator can hold an imprisioned population by force of arms forever. There is no power in the universe greater than the need for freedom. Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies [i]cannot stand[/i]." - G'Kar, [i]The Long Twighlight Struggle[/i]
[url="http://www.globalserve.net/~archons"]www.globalserve.net/~archons[/url]
Comments
------------------
[url="http://slade__tek.tripod.com/"]Alec McClymont, 3D Artist[/url]
3D Artist - GVFX
We live for the one. We die for the one.
Personally, I believe in a zero tolerance approach. When Mussad(sp?) catches up with one of the people they are after you don't hear them talking about it, you just find the body in a ditch. "No comment." It is one-on-one and a private matter between the terrorist and his or her maker.
Now the problem becomes one of "who makes the list" How do you keep it from being abused and having people added who's only crime is expressing contempt for the RIAA, disagreeing a politician's policies, or being told that their friend is having an affair with a president powerful person?
Who will watch the watchmen? [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/shyshad.gif[/img]
"It is a matter for the courts." Unfortunately, the courts don't seem to have the stomach to do what needs to be done. This isn't surprising; most civilized people cannot or will not see the world in the cold harsh light of truth that shines upon it. Only the most synical and practical of us are so blessed (or cursed, depending upon how you look at it).
Slade: I must respectfully disagree. Criminal punishment should not be treated as revenge or even 'judgement', but rather as a more practical and realistic action: preventing the same people from doing the same thing in the future.
Death is the only way to be absolutely certain that the terrorists will not contribute to any [b]more[/b] innocent deaths. The presumption that they "didn't mean to do it" or "won't do it again" is irrelevant and naive. They have already demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are capable of such acts and thus cannot be trusted to interact with others or exist among humanity without being tempted or coerced into causing harm again.
There is no vagueness of intent, guilt, unintentional side-effects, or collateral damage. Thousands had their lives stolen due to a deliberate act which had no other possible result. The question was not [i]if[/i] people would die, but rather [i]how many[/i].
No mercy for terrorists. None. It's not personal. It's just that we can not have a reasonably safe or functional civilization with these sorts of individuals being allowed to run around within it. Thanatos is the one true equalizer, he'll take care of the problem if we provide a little nudge to help things along.
be seeing you --
-- john [img]http://216.15.145.59/mainforums/shad.gif[/img]
[img]http://www.sigma957.yi.org/images/anti-terror_trans.gif[/img]
[This message has been edited by John Walker (edited 09-20-2001).]
I wasn't saying that they don't have a reason to kill Bin Laden, I just don't think it would be in everyone's best interests.
------------------
[url="http://slade__tek.tripod.com/"]Alec McClymont, 3D Artist[/url]
3D Artist - GVFX
We live for the one. We die for the one.
It has not been forgotten. But there's no need to talk about that all of the time.
Ten more recruits? It is a poor choice, but is theirs alone to make. In my experience, most people would rather not die for their country or cause if given the choice. Rhetoric is easy; looking down the wrong end of a barrel is not. The idea that "there is an endless supply of these fanatics" is a myth.
It must also be remembered that the organizations themselves are what must be smashed, not necessarily every individual in them. That does not mean that any individual in these groups is not a viable target, however.
Passivity in the face of those without respect for innocence or life (even their own) is what lead to the hijacking of multiple aircraft using case cutters and small knives.
While we agree upon the necessity to protect the innocent, I doubt that we will upon how best to deal with those responsible. So be it. Here is the joy of living in our society. We are allowed to debate, express, and disagree.
-- john
[img]http://www.sigma957.yi.org/images/anti-terror_trans.gif[/img]
[This message has been edited by John Walker (edited 09-20-2001).]
You were, of course, right John. No mercy.
------------------
[url="http://slade__tek.tripod.com/"]Alec McClymont, 3D Artist[/url]
3D Artist - GVFX
We live for the one. We die for the one.
Infact can you tell me who the biggest supplier of humanitarian aid to Afghanistan is?
It's not like we don't try. But they have a corrupt FOREIGN force holding their country hostage. (Most of the Taliban is Pakistani! by a large margin too)
Getting aid to people is hard if the people controlling the distribution networks is corrupted.
Soon enough the Taliban will be gone and those people will see relief flow without the corrupt military elite taking it.
I know, why don't you organize a sit-in and leaflet campaign. [i]That[/i] will stop the terrorists. (see, I can abandon rational debate and be sarchastic as well)
Actually, I wasn't being sarcastic.
------------------
[url="http://slade__tek.tripod.com/"]Alec McClymont, 3D Artist[/url]
3D Artist - GVFX
We live for the one. We die for the one.
-R.
------------------
[img]http://www.stomped.com/ribbon_small.gif[/img]
[i]"...Never start a fight, but [b]always[/b] finish it."[/i]
[This message has been edited by Rick (edited 09-21-2001).]
------------------
May the fleas of a thousand camels infest the groin and armpits of the idiot(s) who created the concept of "political correctness."
Just another stubborn Naval Reservist...
Local distribution networks are corrupted? Screw 'em then, I say airlift supplies directly to the camps. Since the Taliban regime spends most of its time executing women for not dressing like Vorlons, I doubt they care if the refugees live or die.
------------------
There are 3 things in life I never forget: my friends, my enemies, and my access codes.
Never put gasoline in a fire extinguisher.
"No government, no dictator can hold an imprisioned population by force of arms forever. There is no power in the universe greater than the need for freedom. Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies [i]cannot stand[/i]." - G'Kar, [i]The Long Twighlight Struggle[/i]
[url="http://www.globalserve.net/~archons"]www.globalserve.net/~archons[/url]
I wish the US would release their evidence, THEN proceed to eliminate Bin Laden. Somehow I don't think that's going to happen.
------------------
[url="http://slade__tek.tripod.com/"]Alec McClymont, 3D Artist[/url]
3D Artist - GVFX
We live for the one. We die for the one.
It's the same as the Iraqis or the Russians. Iraqis sell millions in oil and recieve millions in humanitarian aid, yet the populace still starves?
The military takes it and there isn't much we can do other than throw out such governments.
Russia gets Billions in aid, but the corrupt government imbezzles it. Alot gets stolen by the mafia there too. Again, not much we can do without forcing Russia to try and crackdown on that...but who in power isn't corrupted?
Really sucks, but the people who control the country control the relief. =[
The evidence there is already in a federal court.
That alone is enough to go after him.
--------
Besides, we can't show evidence to the general public because it could reveal sources.
We don't want him to know how the hell we are getting our info right now.
America cannot and should not abandon it's own moral and legal values during this. What better success could the terrorists hope for?
------------------
[url="http://slade__tek.tripod.com/"]Alec McClymont, 3D Artist[/url]
3D Artist - GVFX
We live for the one. We die for the one.
We aren't waiting ten years for them to get bored and finally turn him over.
The fact that he IS wanted and indicted by the courts already gives us all the legal justification we need to take him.
Al Capone went down on less. They may have wanted him on racketeering and murder, they got him on tax evasion.
Very legal and very American to go after someone with the lesser crime.
------------------
[url="http://slade__tek.tripod.com/"]Alec McClymont, 3D Artist[/url]
3D Artist - GVFX
We live for the one. We die for the one.
[This message has been edited by Santiago (edited 09-21-2001).]
Realistically though, the Taliban will never give him up, and he will never leave. I don't care if America doesn't prove to them that he did it, but I would like them to prove it to the rest of the planet.
------------------
[url="http://slade__tek.tripod.com/"]Alec McClymont, 3D Artist[/url]
3D Artist - GVFX
We live for the one. We die for the one.
I've shown you that we are not because of his underlying crimes that have a very large amount of evidence already on the record that make him vulnerable to our seizure so that he may stand trial for his crimes.
--
"The legal problem of getting Bin Laden is that it's never been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he did anything"
You are way ahead of yourself here. We can't put him on trial without a body to put on trial.
We aren't to that stage in our legal system yet.
What we do have is enough evidence for an idictment and his arrest. Which has already been done. He is a wanted man by the FBI for those crimes.
Proving his guilt comes AFTER we get him and put him on trial.
We can't try him without him being here and able to defend himself from the charges. You are not found guilty beyound a resonable doubt and THEN arrested in this country and under our legal system.
--
"America may act like the world police sometimes, but that doesn't mean they are."
He has opened up a can of worms himself with his attacks on the United States. Because of his attacks, under international law, we have the RIGHT to retaliate.
We are following our legal obligations to the tee on this one. We aren't going after innocent people, we are going after people who are indicted and who are more than open to our retaliation under international law.
We are abandoning none of our principles, not sacrificing any of our morals or legal values.
We are mearly exercising them.
(Entirely possible I misinterpreted the international legal law on this, but I don't think so.)
----
If you want to argue that we don't have a right to him because he wasn't in the United States when his actions were committed, that is fine. But I have never seen this as a defense by the Taliban or other Terrorists.
This must be due to the international law and extradition treaties that exist.
Commit a crime against a nation and it's people and stand trial in that country.
------
This is getting messy for our discussion for the simple reason we are not international lawyers.
But it does make good discussion nonetheless.
I think we have more than shown to the world that we aren't abandoning our principles or values. You aren't quite convinced yet.
And to really get you, I won't be here to respond this weekend, So I leave you hanging.
Hopefully I wrote enough with enough holes to keep you busy.
I have to travel to San Diego to see my Cousins before they ship out with the rest of the Marines. =)
Have a good weekend all.
I agree that the US has a right to Bin Laden, and I do think that he is to blame for the attacks. However the situation is not as "black and white" as everyone would like it to be. This isn't simply a matter of American or international law. Religion is involved, which makes it a whole other ball game. We're living in a "grey" world.
"He has opened up a can of worms himself with his attacks on the United States. Because of his attacks, under international law, we have the RIGHT to retaliate."
This comment assumes he is guilty. If America doesn't know for sure then how can they retaliate?
The reality of this situation is that there is NO solution to the problem. Terrorism will always exist, just as crime will always exist. However, the only course of action that maintains the balance is to strike back, and that's what's going to happen here.
------------------
[url="http://slade__tek.tripod.com/"]Alec McClymont, 3D Artist[/url]
3D Artist - GVFX
We live for the one. We die for the one.
I believe that the only way to really hurt thse terrorist organizations is by deploying soldiers on the ground and by doing so,running the risk of seeing at least some of them returning home in body bags,because make no mistake,some of these terrorists are extremely well trained...
In fact,some of them were actually trained and supplied equippement(some 5 bilion worth) by the US around the time afganistan was occupied by the former soviet union,and in ten years of occupation,the USSR coundn't beat them,mostly because those freedom fighters(as the US called them back then),were waging a guerrila warfare which is something that surgical or conventional air strikes won't solve.
Ultimately the US may win this,but both the soldiers fighting there and their families back home better be prepared to pay a heavy price for it,unfortunately.
Especially since some of these people have no problem in blowing themselves up and taking as many people with them as possible.
[This message has been edited by superfly (edited 09-21-2001).]