Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Funny how it requires a slight (but meaningless) concession by someone you agree with for you to change your mind even the smallest bit, while being shown wrong outright is something you can simply ignore.

Yea, but I don't post what my connclusions are if he's right...

Aren't you previously stated to want to just nuke them and leave? Not that thats an effective solution.

Even worse. Tke over their air waves and put this on 24/7. Oh the HUMANITY!

dogma wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:
Or just airports. They're pretty packed, and all those big lines are nice targets.

Yeah, honestly, I'm not sure why it hasn't happened yet. You can pack a lot of explosives into a rolling suitcase.

It's also a pretty strong economic attack considering the amount of business that requires air travel.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Funny how it requires a slight (but meaningless) concession by someone you agree with for you to change your mind even the smallest bit, while being shown wrong outright is something you can simply ignore.

Yea, but I don't post what my connclusions are if he's right...

Aren't you previously stated to want to just nuke them and leave? Not that thats an effective solution.

Even worse. Tke over their air waves and put this on 24/7. Oh the HUMANITY!

Didn't we do that to people in Guantanamo?

I wish.

Naw, detainees have it easier and nicer than in most other max. security prisons in the US.

Even if they didn't they are terrorists. They should get a darkened room, a pitcher of water and a bowl of dog or cat food once per day.

When you are in prison for committing acts of terrorism you have no rights as far as I'm concerned; Geneva Convention and leftists be damned.

Sorry Shuma, couldn't agree with you forever.

Fateweaver wrote:
Even if they didn't they are terrorists. They should get a darkened room, a pitcher of water and a bowl of dog or cat food once per day.

The point is that many people want that assumption of guilt to be proven publicly.

dogma wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:
Even if they didn't they are terrorists. They should get a darkened room, a pitcher of water and a bowl of dog or cat food once per day.

The point is that many people want that assumption of guilt to be proven publicly.

Again you're acting like this is a crime and not an act of war.

Frazzled wrote:
Again you're acting like this is a crime and not an act of war.

You want it to be an act of war? Fine. All terrorists are now non-uniformed combatants as laid out in the Geneva Conventions. Which stipulate that any unlawful combatant can expect to be treated humanely, prior to trial in a regularly constituted court.

You don't want this to be an act of war, or a crime. You either want it to be a third codified category that falls between and act of war and a crime, or you want it to be an imaginary category which is subject to the whims of whomever happens to be in power.

One of those options is a reasonable solution (codifying the treatment of unlawful combatants under US law), the other is nonsense that directly contravenes most of the positions you seem to hold with respect to the government.

Edit: for precision

Shuma, i know you just love to talk ridiculous gak in order to try and get a rise out of people, but how does one single guy (me) making a pro war statement mean that you are..

ShumaGorath wrote: Glad to see the moral high ground of the UK fail completely

I mean, i know you love to act the internet warrior all night, but seriously, you say things like that and you just strike people as being nothing more than a bored Troll. Nothing any individual says can possibly make the "moral high ground" of a COUNTRY fail. Its one of the most ridiculous things i have ever heard. Even if i said something like "I eat babies" it wouldnt mean... well.. you get the idea.

I know you like to just throw trash at a "country" in order to get some bile to rise in people, but think before you type eh?

A country is a collection of it's citizens. It can be judged on both a macro and micro level, however inaccurate that judgement may be.

I mean, i know you love to act the internet warrior all night, but seriously, you say things like that and you just strike people as being nothing more than a bored Troll. Nothing any individual says can possibly make the "moral high ground" of a COUNTRY fail. Its one of the most ridiculous things i have ever heard. Even if i said something like "I eat babies" it wouldnt mean... well.. you get the idea.

Certainly true. It was one of the more trollish things i've said today for certain. Alright. Your moral high ground fail.

Sorry.

Sorry.. takes a man to say that Shuma, good effort.

I dont think ive ever tried to claim a moral high ground though have i? I think i can see both sides of the argument, I mean, sure i can see why loads of Muslims would hate us enough to wage a war against us, but soldiers have to see things in black an white sometimes.

I dont think we are more or less moral than our enemies. I just want us to win. And im happy to bomb the gak out of people to do it!

dogma wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Again you're acting like this is a crime and not an act of war.

You want it to be an act of war? Fine. All terrorists are now non-uniformed combatants as laid out in the Geneva Conventions. Which stipulate that any unlawful combatant can expect to be treated humanely, prior to trial in a regularly constituted court.

You don't want this to be an act of war, or a crime. You either want it to be a third codified category that falls between and act of war and a crime, or you want it to be an imaginary category which is subject to the whims of whomever happens to be in power.

One of those options is a reasonable solution (codifying the treatment of unlawful combatants under US law), the other is nonsense that directly contravenes most of the positions you seem to hold with respect to the government.

Edit: for precision

Actually it stipulates they aren't classed as military so we can hang them as spies. I'm ok with that.

EDIT more personal stuff in posts above. I am closing this thread to avoid more suspensions. If anyone has an issue, please contact anyone but me.