|
Jeb! really is Gob Bluth isn't he?
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:43 |
|
|
DemeaninDemon posted:Jeb! really is Gob Bluth isn't he? Sheng-ji Yang posted:photographic confirmation
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:03
|
|
|
Ernie Muppari posted:what if a terrorist in the hospital had a nuke that would kill time square and you had to kill the maternity ward what then sharkie? I didn't know Sam Harris had an account here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:What likely happened was a horrible, unintended, tragedy. It should be investigated, it WILL be investigated, if they were acting wrongly they should be punished to the fullest extent of the law, but the way things are sounding it seems like they were being shot at, they shot back, and this hospital was in the crossfire. That's terrible, and tragic, but if that is the full story there isn't a ton of 'wrong' here to bend over backwards calling for blood over. Reread what you posted here. Look really hard at the words and what they mean, the scenarios they describe. US forces using weapons in a Not War in a foreign nation hit a hospital and killed noncombatant doctors and patients. It will be investigated. A scapegoat may get a slap on the wrist while everyone else gets a fierce browbeating. There will be no meaningful action otherwise. Meanwhile, a humanitarian group has left the country and we will not be sending in anyone to replace them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:09
|
|
|
A Terrible Person posted:Reread what you posted here. I think the dude calling people 'bullet sponges' who need to 'do their jobs and die' telling anyone to 'look at what the words mean' is pretty cute. So you've already settled that this is going to be a sham and a coverup, what do you want to happen?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
A Terrible Person posted:Meanwhile, a humanitarian group has left the country and we will not be sending in anyone to replace them. This would be horrible if it was, you know, actually true.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
A Terrible Person posted:Reread what you posted here. To be fair they were trying to kill notorious international terrorist Big Boss. It isn't their fault they got the wrong MSF.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:This would be horrible if it was, you know, actually true. What is the actual story? All I've heard is they're leaving the local area for, ya know, obvious reasons.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:What is the actual story? All I've heard is they're leaving the local area for, ya know, obvious reasons. That's what I've read as well. I'm just pointing out that evacuating the area is a tad different from leaving the entire country as A Terrible Person keeps claiming.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
Though from what I can tell leaving even just that area is a big deal, since according to an MSF press release it's "the only facility of its kind" in NW Afghanistan. Still a problem! But a tad different from "The entire country."
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
Our troops need more defenders in this discussion lest they call in a strike on another MSF hospital
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
joeburz posted:Our troops need more defenders in this discussion lest they call in a strike on another MSF hospital I don't think the soldiers were jerking off with their free hand as they ordered an attack on a hospital as babies and nurses begged for mercy = SUPPORT ARE TROOPS COMMIE I guess
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:24
|
|
|
When joeburz and A Terrible Person are inevitably promoted to Joint Chiefs of Staff, I'm going to have my terrorist group conquer swathes of large cities around the world by just taking over hospitals. Anyone in our sights who don't follow our laws gets whacked. Don't send food? Then the patients starve. And no shooting back. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:30
|
|
This poster loves police brutality, but only when its against minorities!
|
Hulk Krogan posted:http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/05/us/politics/a-struggling-jeb-bush-may-lean-on-george-w-in-south-carolina.html Pretty sure that when dubya is considered both the popular AND the smart one, he should probably just tell his family to gently caress off, and drop out. Mister Facetious fucked around with this message at 05:39 on Oct 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
why do we even have hospitals anyway?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
A Terrible Person posted:Reread what you posted here. It's a little terrifying, the first time you realize that people can cause absolutely horrific things without any person acting maliciously, or even negligently.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 06:04
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:It's a little terrifying, the first time you realize that people can cause absolutely horrific things without any person acting maliciously, or even negligently. im not sure it can be both of those things
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
So would all the people implicitly defending firing on a hospital say that stuff happens?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 06:28
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:So would all the people implicitly defending firing on a hospital say that stuff happens? Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy or that anyone who embarks on that strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events… incompetent or arrogant commanders, untrustworthy allies, hostile neutrals, malignant fortune, ugly surprise, awful miscalculations. tl,dr: War is mainly a catalogue of blunders.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 06:30
|
|
|
Quorum posted:We're still in the stage of things where a bunch of really furious and tense people are writing, reading, and digesting a series of vaguely panicked after action reports. Once that happens we will know more about where this falls on the spectrum from "tragic accident that should never have happened" to "flippant disregard for laws of war." Immediately jumping to "kill all the bloodthirsty baby eating soldiers" seems like gilding the lily a bit. Someone, likely multiple someones, hosed up. Hopefully we can figure out who and how and what degree of flippant disregard for civilian casualties there was. What's the lily here? Dead doctors?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 06:44
|
|
|
I think it's not very productive to keep speculating about whether or not this was militarily advisable under the circumstances, considering that the circumstances being a Special Forces operation, we will probably not learn any details on the US military side for a while; on the other hand, can we all at least agree that the outcome, the killing of innocent people and the driving out of a well-thought-of NGO from that region, is utterly terrible, and should push the US to rethink the strategy of performing any operations near such centers?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 06:44
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I think it's not very productive to keep speculating about whether or not this was militarily advisable under the circumstances, considering that the circumstances being a Special Forces operation, we will probably not learn any details on the US military side for a while; on the other hand, can we all at least agree that the outcome, the killing of innocent people and the driving out of a well-thought-of NGO from that region, is utterly terrible, and should push the US to rethink the strategy of performing any operations near such centers? This sounds good, and lets us define "near such centers" as narrowly or broadly as we each prefer to.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:This sounds good, and lets us define "near such centers" as narrowly or broadly as we each prefer to. IMO there should be a 15 day waiting period for such attacks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:02
|
|
|
The doctors themselves are trashing the US version of events. Apparently they heard no gunshots or signs of conflict before the first bomb. " Cornish also told CBC News that allegations of gunfire coming from inside the hospital are untrue. "The first bomb was actually the first signal that something was untowards," he said. "There were no strange noises or anything different in the compound so it's absolutely absurd to hear such false claims." " If history has taught us anything it's that you should never believe anything the US military says when a possible war crime's been committed. Zero sense of responsibility/shame from the soldiers or the institution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:17
|
|
|
I find "US bombed a hospital for the hell of it" way harder to believe personally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:27
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:I find "US bombed a hospital for the hell of it" way harder to believe personally. me too
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:28
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:I find "US bombed a hospital for the hell of it" way harder to believe personally. The US bombed a wedding for the hell of it. Why not a hospital? Could be terrorists inside. You don't know! There are a lot of Afghans going in and out of that hospital, after all... Better bomb it to be sure! EDIT: In short, the US will give some reason like the one they gave that doesn't really hold up to scrutiny. But hey, it's an explanation!
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:31
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:The US bombed a wedding for the hell of it. Why not a hospital? Could be terrorists inside. You don't know! There are a lot of Afghans going in and out of that hospital, after all... Better bomb it to be sure! "Suspect there are terrorists" isn't "for the hell of it," paper thin a justification it may be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:33
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:I find "US bombed a hospital for the hell of it" way harder to believe personally. I'm going to guess some high value insurgents were hanging around on the edge of the compound without the doctors knowing, knowing the Americans were in the region and thinking this provided them with a shield. The US then decided to bomb them, knowing the hospital was there, and when the hospital got hit they presented it as a self-defence thing because the optics are better. I'm certainly going to trust the word of the doctors who were bombed over that of the US military, historically one of the most cover-up happy organisations on the planet. lmaoboy1998 fucked around with this message at 07:50 on Oct 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:46
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:I find "US bombed a hospital for the hell of it" way harder to believe personally. It's not without precedent, didn't Clinton destroy a pharmaceutical factory in Sudan with a cruise missile in the 90s? I'm sure there are more historical examples but that incident sticks out to me as being similar...
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:46
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:I find "US bombed a hospital for the hell of it" way harder to believe personally. You might be surprised what you can rationalize when it's in the name of Fighting the War on Terror™. That being said, is there any reason to believe that the pilots even had the coordinates/were informed of there being a hospital set up there? Just because the higher ups had that info doesn't mean the killers dropping bombs like it's hot knew anything. Mister Facetious fucked around with this message at 07:49 on Oct 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:47
|
|
|
lmaoboy1998 posted:I'm going to guess some high value insurgents were hanging around on the edge of the compound without the doctors knowing, knowing the Americans were in the region and thinking this provided them with a shield. The US then decided to bomb them, knowing the hospital was there, and when the hospital got hit they presented it as a self-defence thing because the optics are better. This seems like the most probable explanation. Or, similarly, they just straight up had bad intel and saying "we bombed a hospital on a bad tip" also would not fly. Mister Macys posted:You might be surprised what you can rationalize when it's in the name of Fighting the War on Terror™. Which is why the higher ups should be the ones held accountable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:53
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:I find "US bombed a hospital for the hell of it" way harder to believe personally. I personally find it very easy to believe.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 07:54
|
|
|
I find it hard to believe that some terrorists would think that a hospital would provide them cover, like the US has ever had a problem with killing innocent people
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 08:03
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I think it's not very productive to keep speculating about whether or not this was militarily advisable under the circumstances, considering that the circumstances being a Special Forces operation, we will probably not learn any details on the US military side for a while; on the other hand, can we all at least agree that the outcome, the killing of innocent people and the driving out of a well-thought-of NGO from that region, is utterly terrible, and should push the US to rethink the strategy of performing any operations near such centers? My issue is that US forces know that unless they murder people in cold blood, desecrate the bodies, and release video evidence of it, there will be no repercussions. There's no downside to bombing a hospital if you suspect militants might be hiding in it, because you can be completely utterly certain that you'll be taken care of no matter what.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 08:23
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:This seems like the most probable explanation. Or, similarly, they just straight up had bad intel and saying "we bombed a hospital on a bad tip" also would not fly. Warcrimes. Heh, good one. (  )To this day, I still can't believe that the only American imprisoned for the CIA torture thing was the loving whistleblower. Oh hey, he's out of jail now. 
Mister Facetious fucked around with this message at 08:34 on Oct 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 08:29
|
|
|
moller posted:What's the lily here? Dead doctors?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 08:38
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Yea like, if we default with a capital D then it's kinda just game over for like, everyone. We're all hosed, not in the 'I lost my savings in the crash' way but the 'nothing any of us owns means anything gently caress' way. It will not happen. 1. A chance to be a cool religious cult like stories from the Bible. 2. An awesome world of ubiquitous gun violence that will be fun. 3. The death of the larger society they don't understand or believe in. 4. A time of exciting economic opportunities. These people want disaster and suffering.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 08:41
|
|
|
Sax Solo posted:Apocalyptic scenarios are attractive to the right wing because they are: Pity The Billionaire posted:They purred to hear about the campaign of "indoctrination" that the new president had planned for their innocent kids; their pulse quickened to think of the "chains" he was preparing for their mighty wrists; and they swelled with imagined bravery to picture how they would be targeted by "the coming insurrection." Their heroes, they quivered to learn, were victims of "persecution," their nation was under "systemic assault" by its own leaders, and they who had defeated Soviet communism; they who rejoiced to see their enemies writhe in the dungeons of Guantanamo- why, now they were "Gulag bound," as a popular website of the day moaned rapturously. This time it was apocalypse that moved the needle, that swayed the undecided, that made the sale.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 09:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 20:43 |
|
|
Ernie Muppari posted:im not sure it can be both of those things Wait, do you really believe that nothing bad has ever been caused by people acting in good faith with incomplete information?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2015 12:37
|
|