Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Is Uncle Sam a terrorist?


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#16    Corp

Corp

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,945 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa

Posted 17 April 2013 - 05:16 PM

Does the US go out of their way to target civilians and only civilians? That's the difference between these two cases, though both are of course tragic.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse...A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

#17    Heaven Is A Halfpipe

Heaven Is A Halfpipe

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 914 posts
  • Joined:10 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

  • Hi. My name is Spike.

Posted 17 April 2013 - 05:23 PM

It's only a terrorist attack if it happens in America or the UK, obviously.

You can go the distance, you can run the mile and you can walk straight through HELL with a smile.

My UM Credentials: http://www.unexplain...5


#18    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 8,957 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 17 April 2013 - 05:28 PM

View PostKowalski, on 17 April 2013 - 04:53 PM, said:

No one's saying the government does this EVERYDAY but it DOES happen a lot
Then feel free to produce some actual examples of the US military using cluster bombs on civilian centers.

Please note that I'm not arguing that the US military causes civilian casualties. Just the mechanism in which they're caused - which is central to the article's comparison between the US military and the terrorist attack in Boston.


"What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?" - Tiggs vs PA - Did Jesus Really exist? - The Formal Debate:
HERE
Posted Image


#19    sk8tan71

sk8tan71

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 43 posts
  • Joined:21 Mar 2013

Posted 17 April 2013 - 05:40 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 17 April 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

http://tinyurl.com/cnn2c34


President Obama has described the Boston bombing as terrorism, which it is, and it appears the US has been the world's most methodical terrorist for many years running, including Clinton's tactics in Serbia.

Sad read.

It may be a sad read, but the author is an idiot.  No matter how you term it, war, terrorism, fighting is vicious, brutal, and capricious.  But what the author refuses to note is that once it is outside your country's borders, even if your country is involved in it, that war/terrorism/skirmish automatically becomes nebulous because there is no frame of reference for the people that are not from the other country in question.  People in Boston are a lot like people in San Francisco or Dallas or Anchorage we have that commonality of being American, just like someone in London, or Brighton, or Birmingham have the commonality of being English and you can extend this out to just about every country on the planet, which is why there is a natural herd instinct that kicks immediately after actions like what happened in Boston, or the 7/7/7 bombings, or the Madrid train bombings.

In the beginning the universe was created.  This made a lot of people angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move. - Douglas Adams

#20    Uncle Sam

Uncle Sam

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,250 posts
  • Joined:26 Jul 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

Posted 17 April 2013 - 06:49 PM

I ain't no terrorist! Lmao... but this is a tragedy! An extremely saddening event that happen to someone intolerance and hatred towards Americans. It wasn't aim at the government, it was aimed at the citizens.

A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. - Albert Einstein

#21    Yes_Man

Yes_Man

    hi

  • Member
  • 7,859 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portsmouth

Posted 17 April 2013 - 06:51 PM

View Postsk8tan71, on 17 April 2013 - 05:40 PM, said:

It may be a sad read, but the author is an idiot.  No matter how you term it, war, terrorism, fighting is vicious, brutal, and capricious.  But what the author refuses to note is that once it is outside your country's borders, even if your country is involved in it, that war/terrorism/skirmish automatically becomes nebulous because there is no frame of reference for the people that are not from the other country in question.  People in Boston are a lot like people in San Francisco or Dallas or Anchorage we have that commonality of being American, just like someone in London, or Brighton, or Birmingham have the commonality of being English and you can extend this out to just about every country on the planet, which is why there is a natural herd instinct that kicks immediately after actions like what happened in Boston, or the 7/7/7 bombings, or the Madrid train bombings.
He also got the wrong story and got mixed with another


#22    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,001 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 17 April 2013 - 06:54 PM

View PostCorp, on 17 April 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

Does the US go out of their way to target civilians and only civilians? That's the difference between these two cases, though both are of course tragic.

Going out of their way?

It seems to me that if we had a leader who was moral and honest, we would not be doing any of this.

To look at it perversely, here we have spent huge amounts of money and men waging this War On Terror, for years now, but STILL we have a bomb go off in Boston.  It seems that if the WOT were really working, we would have won by now and the world would be thanking us for having eliminated terror.  In reality, the reverse is the case.

The US drones kill more innocent people including children in one week than were killed at Newtown.  Can't you see that?


#23    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,001 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 17 April 2013 - 06:58 PM

View Postsk8tan71, on 17 April 2013 - 05:40 PM, said:

It may be a sad read, but the author is an idiot.  No matter how you term it, war, terrorism, fighting is vicious, brutal, and capricious.  But what the author refuses to note is that once it is outside your country's borders, even if your country is involved in it, that war/terrorism/skirmish automatically becomes nebulous because there is no frame of reference for the people that are not from the other country in question.  People in Boston are a lot like people in San Francisco or Dallas or Anchorage we have that commonality of being American, just like someone in London, or Brighton, or Birmingham have the commonality of being English and you can extend this out to just about every country on the planet, which is why there is a natural herd instinct that kicks immediately after actions like what happened in Boston, or the 7/7/7 bombings, or the Madrid train bombings.

How do you know the author is an idiot?

Are you concerned at all with his point?  Or do you even understand his point?  Have you ever had your best friend blown to smithereens as he slept in his bed?  What about friends celebrating a wedding, in which half of them are killed with no warning at all?

My bet is YOU have never seen a dismembered human body, never once.  Too busy skating, is my bet.


#24    Yamato

Yamato

    Omnipotent Entity

  • Member
  • 9,952 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 17 April 2013 - 07:05 PM

I think this bombing was clearly an act of terrorism whoever did it.   The nature of this investigation "there are no suspects so our options are wide open" is troubling.   It's plausible though unlikely a false flag attack could have been used to "get into all the records".  Though I am not a conspiracy theorist and reject nearly all conspiracy theories.   I find this possibility unlikely.

This could also be an act of domestic terrorism on tax day to make a political statement about taxes.   How high are state/local taxes in Massachusetts/Boston I wonder...

"To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity.   To impose on them a wretched life of hunger and deprivation is to dehumanize them." ~ Nelson Mandela

#25    Kowalski

Kowalski

    The Original Penguin Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • 4,102 posts
  • Joined:14 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:* Madgascar *

  • It's All Some Kind Of Wacked Out Conspiracy....

Posted 17 April 2013 - 07:05 PM

View PostTiggs, on 17 April 2013 - 05:28 PM, said:

Then feel free to produce some actual examples of the US military using cluster bombs on civilian centers.

Please note that I'm not arguing that the US military causes civilian casualties. Just the mechanism in which they're caused - which is central to the article's comparison between the US military and the terrorist attack in Boston.

I am NOT saying the US deliberately sends bombs or drones over civilian populations. But, the fact of the matter is, along with the terrorists that are killed, there are also women and children who are killed. But they are just deemed  "collateral damage". Did you see the links I provided? Both featured photos of people holding up pictures of some of the children killed by these drone strikes. But, they're just "collateral damage" right?
http://www.policymic...ds-of-civilians
http://rt.com/news/p...ims-drones-695/

This isn't right. Most of these people probably had no idea that an extremist group was even around them, I'm sure.
And everytime a drone strike kills innocent women and children along with the terrorists, it just makes MORE people angry and mad at the US. How would YOU feel if some of your family was killed by a drone strike all because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time? And people just say, "Well, that's war..." "Just collateral damage, at least we got the terrorists"
Would that not make you angry? Many in Pakistan probably just want all this to be over. I can't imagine the fear the probably have to live with. The US is CREATING more and more future terrorists by continuing these drone strikes. And then they will end up bombing a few of our people, and then we will go and bomb a few of theirs...A vicious violent cycle.




#26    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 8,957 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 17 April 2013 - 07:11 PM

View PostKowalski, on 17 April 2013 - 07:05 PM, said:

I am NOT saying the US deliberately sends bombs or drones over civilian populations.
Good, because I'm not disagreeing with anything else you've written.


"What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?" - Tiggs vs PA - Did Jesus Really exist? - The Formal Debate:
HERE
Posted Image


#27    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 17 April 2013 - 07:34 PM

View PostCorp, on 17 April 2013 - 05:16 PM, said:

Does the US go out of their way to target civilians and only civilians? That's the difference between these two cases, though both are of course tragic.

I am sure that is comfort for the many thousands of Pakistanis who are too afraid to go outside of their houses, despite not being involved in terrorist activities. I am sure the hundreds of children and women who died or are missing limbs are pleased to know they weren't deliberately targeted.

Either way, they are deserving of our love and sympathy just as much, if not more so than the Boston victims. I mean the Boston victims were hit by some loony, the Pakistanis were hit by the biggest military power in the world. Who should be held to higher account?


#28    DarkHunter

DarkHunter

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 197 posts
  • Joined:13 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 April 2013 - 07:39 PM

View PostKowalski, on 17 April 2013 - 07:05 PM, said:

I am NOT saying the US deliberately sends bombs or drones over civilian populations. But, the fact of the matter is, along with the terrorists that are killed, there are also women and children who are killed. But they are just deemed  "collateral damage". Did you see the links I provided? Both featured photos of people holding up pictures of some of the children killed by these drone strikes. But, they're just "collateral damage" right?
http://www.policymic...ds-of-civilians
http://rt.com/news/p...ims-drones-695/

This isn't right. Most of these people probably had no idea that an extremist group was even around them, I'm sure.
And everytime a drone strike kills innocent women and children along with the terrorists, it just makes MORE people angry and mad at the US. How would YOU feel if some of your family was killed by a drone strike all because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time? And people just say, "Well, that's war..." "Just collateral damage, at least we got the terrorists"
Would that not make you angry? Many in Pakistan probably just want all this to be over. I can't imagine the fear the probably have to live with. The US is CREATING more and more future terrorists by continuing these drone strikes. And then they will end up bombing a few of our people, and then we will go and bomb a few of theirs...A vicious violent cycle.



I question how innocent these so call innocent people are.  If they are housing, feeding, arming, and/or socializing with terrorist then it really makes it hard to call them innocent.  I will admit it is possible that they may not know the person they just rented a room out to or offered a meal to or something along those lines is a terrorist, but when you been housing high up members of Al Qaeda for weeks or months I have a hard time believing they are truly innocent, just because you ain't actively shooting at US soldiers or blowing up bombs doesn't mean you aren't a part of the enemy.  

Second we are fighting against an opponent we haven't fought against before.  Unlike past opponents who generally kept military units away from the civilian population, had militaries made up of almost exclusively adult males, and cared about the lives of their civilians, we are instead fighting an enemy that purposefully mixes its military units with the civilian population to use as cover, who also uses males, females, children, adults and the elderly to carry out their attacks, and who does not care about their own lives or the lives of their people but only about their ideology.  We can't fight this enemy like the enemies of the past .  

The only reason they use children, women, the elderly and mix in with the civilian population is that they know that we are reluctant to attack when we may harm innocent civilians and that if they can get enough pictures out of children, women and the elderly killed from US attacks that the US will eventually leave.  The biggest problem we have in this war on terror is that we refuse to identify the enemy correctly and refuse to take the steps necessary to win the war quickly.  The true enemy is not Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization but instead a radical form of Islam and the steps needed to defeat this ideology is brutal.  This ideology does not care about killing its members or innocents or anyone as long as it expands and controls, it will use any weakness from its opponents it can against them, and the only thing it seems to be capable of understanding is nothing but complete and utter power.


#29    Professor Buzzkill

Professor Buzzkill

    Integrity is all we have

  • Member
  • 2,583 posts
  • Joined:20 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:White Cloud

Posted 17 April 2013 - 07:43 PM

View PostDarkHunter, on 17 April 2013 - 07:39 PM, said:

I question how innocent these so call innocent people are.  If they are housing, feeding, arming, and/or socializing with terrorist then it really makes it hard to call them innocent.  I will admit it is possible that they may not know the person they just rented a room out to or offered a meal to or something along those lines is a terrorist, but when you been housing high up members of Al Qaeda for weeks or months I have a hard time believing they are truly innocent, just because you ain't actively shooting at US soldiers or blowing up bombs doesn't mean you aren't a part of the enemy.  

Second we are fighting against an opponent we haven't fought against before.  Unlike past opponents who generally kept military units away from the civilian population, had militaries made up of almost exclusively adult males, and cared about the lives of their civilians, we are instead fighting an enemy that purposefully mixes its military units with the civilian population to use as cover, who also uses males, females, children, adults and the elderly to carry out their attacks, and who does not care about their own lives or the lives of their people but only about their ideology.  We can't fight this enemy like the enemies of the past .  

The only reason they use children, women, the elderly and mix in with the civilian population is that they know that we are reluctant to attack when we may harm innocent civilians and that if they can get enough pictures out of children, women and the elderly killed from US attacks that the US will eventually leave.  The biggest problem we have in this war on terror is that we refuse to identify the enemy correctly and refuse to take the steps necessary to win the war quickly.  The true enemy is not Al Qaeda or any other terrorist organization but instead a radical form of Islam and the steps needed to defeat this ideology is brutal.  This ideology does not care about killing its members or innocents or anyone as long as it expands and controls, it will use any weakness from its opponents it can against them, and the only thing it seems to be capable of understanding is nothing but complete and utter power.

How are you so certain that these citizens are housing terrorists? How do you think terrorizing a countries youth will reduce the number of terrorists and 'win the war"?

Are you crazy? Has 9/11 changed you forever? Imagine having a 9/11 attack every day and you will know the mindset of a Pakistani citizen.


#30    Jackofalltrades

Jackofalltrades

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 747 posts
  • Joined:15 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today...
    As You don't know what tomorrow bring's.......

Posted 17 April 2013 - 09:04 PM

View PostDarkHunter, on 17 April 2013 - 07:39 PM, said:

I question how innocent these so call innocent people are.  If they are housing, feeding, arming, and/or socializing with terrorist then it really makes it hard to call them innocent.  I will admit it is possible that they may not know the person they just rented a room out to or offered a meal to or something along those lines is a terrorist, but when you been housing high up members of Al Qaeda for weeks or months I have a hard time believing they are truly innocent, just because you ain't actively shooting at US soldiers or blowing up bombs doesn't mean you aren't a part of the enemy.  


I always thought it was INNOCENT until proven guilty, and to find a person guilty, it takes evidence, where is Your evidence that PROVES the INNOCENT people, women and children killed was doing as You stated ?

Some of those people killed may be doing as You stated BUT I highly doubt all of them was, even if they was it still does not make it OK to kill and maim INNOCENT children

IF ANY other country was doing that then they would be tried for war crimes

Attached File  Afghan-civilians.jpg   24.62K   4 downloads

Quote

"In October (2012), the US launched an airstrike in Afghanistan that killed three children – ages 8, 10, and 12 -while they were gathering firewood (or by some accounts, dung to burn as fuel). NATO issued its usual dismissive statement, admitting it may have “accidentally killed three innocent Afghan civilians.”

Taken from this link
http://antiwar.com/b...n-is-fair-game/


Do You really think this type of thing is OK ?

Posted Image





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users