Poll: sympathy for the devil

[2012 Wont Happen]

Mindless killing does not reap vengeance on a faceless murderer. Your quarrel lies with the pilot, NOT the nation. Too often are nation-states blamed for the heinous acts of some of their soldiers, who do not represent the majority of their army or their nation.

But, it is the other way around. The bombing raids surely do not display the desires of our soldiers. My brother is a United States Marine and I know he doesn't just morbidly want to kill. However, the government makes them do so.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

Mindless killing does not reap vengeance on a faceless murderer. Your quarrel lies with the pilot, NOT the nation. Too often are nation-states blamed for the heinous acts of some of their soldiers, who do not represent the majority of their army or their nation.

But, it is the other way around. The bombing raids surely do not display the desires of our soldiers. My brother is a United States Marine and I know he doesn't just morbidly want to kill. However, the government makes them do so.

But if he misses it is his fault, no the US's

The carpet bombing on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border are not misses or mistakes. Nor are the bombings of villages thought to contain "terrorists". They are the orders that are issued to the soldiers.

 

[Loop Stricken]

I chose the unjust option, but I'm on record as saying the only way I'd join any military was if I got to pilot a mecha.
And yes I realise if I were in a poor Afghan village I'd not know what one was - Point not my hypocrisy!

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

So, my question to the Escapist is this- if you were an Afghani citizen who's neighbors, friends and families had just been slaughtered by U.S. forces- can you honestly say that you wouldn't join the insurgency?

Almost certainly. Good intentions don't piece a life back together. Apologies don't rebuild homes. Accidents still leave scars.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

I have the paper here beside me and it says that 55 US soldiers died this month, and 22 of those were killed this past week.

I do not sympathise with the Taliban or any terrorist group that wishes harm upon america.

But if I was a normal citizen of Afghanistan and my family was blown to bit by a bomb that "missed" its target, or was aimed at our house because of faulty inteligence.

Yes, I would feel that it would be my duty to my people.

damn war...

The question was not one of sympathy for a cause.

Take tha taliban out of the question.

You live in an impoverised nation ruled by cruel totalitarian regime. A foreign power arrives and liberates your nation. In the process, your home is accidentally bombed and someone (or everyone) you hold dear has been killed.

The old regime might have been cruel but they didn't kill your family. The new guys might have been trying to help, but from a personal perspective I'd find it really hard to see the improvment.

At the end of the day I think most people come to a realization sooner or later. Everything is trivial compared to those you love. So, the question is what's left when you've lost everything BUT vengence?

Many people never find an alternative.

 

[Motti]

And that is why B-22s don't win this kind of war. It's about humanitarian efforts (providing supplies, education etc.) towards the afghan people and special forces training them for counter-insurgency that will defeat the taliban.
People don't like you if you blow them up, something both sides need to realise (just hope to god that NATO realises it first).

 

[Woodsey]

Do you not think that this is what happens on many sides of almost every war to have ever taken place?

The logic however, would seem a little off in your example. Yes you might want to fight back, but you're then proving their claims for invading.

You are not proving them right, you are resisting their already existing injustices.

War is an injustice. Its also necessary.

I'm not trying to prove it right, I'm trying to prove that its a side effect. Of course its going to happen, if someone wrongs you (and its likely in these cases you're not going to see the other side's argument) then you're going to want to get back at them.

Whether that's the wisest thing for you to do depends on the context.

 

[Socius]

THANK YOU! Finally someone being reasonable
the US have NO reason to continue this war!
Sure, some american people got killed 8 years ago
but over 1000 that number has been killed now!
and WHAT THE FUCK are we doing down there?
Norway got nothing to do with this war at all!
After the war starten (the US war mind you) Afghanistan
is now the second worst country in the world!
... somebody bomb Crawford and see how Bush like it.
(I know he ain't the president anymore, but hell I still hate him)

 

[nickfurze]

I'd probably fight.

But this thread has a problem in that we would be assuming that we would fundamentally be the same people when we talk about what we do, but we have no idea what it's like to live in these villages there's a fantastic quote by David Simon and Ed Burns in their non-fiction book the corner. which goes like this.

"If we were the damned of the American cities, we would not fail. We would rise above the corner. And when we tell ourselves such things, we unthinkingly assume that we would be consigned to places like Fayette Street fully equipped, with all the graces and disciplines, talents and training that we now possess ? Amid the stench of so much defeat and despair, we would kick fate in the teeth and claim our deserved victory. We would escape to live the life we were supposed to live, the life we are living now ? Why?"

At the end of the day we have no idea what it is like, because we are not the people in this situation.

 

[uncle-ellis]

I dunno dude I'm not so good at decideing what's right and what's wrong.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

Nope.

I wouldn't hate the Americans.
Wouldn't like them, but I wouldn't hate them.

I'd think they were a bunch of cunts who have no right to do what they did, but again: That's not hatred.

I'd just leave the country.

Then you're a coward. Someone just killed people you care about....and you do nothing. Sorry Max, but that's nothing but cowardice.



On a lighter note - so, there were survivors? How mishap. Clearly we weren't using the right kind of bomb. JENKINS! BREAK OUT THE FUEL-AIR DEVICES! RUPERT!! WARM UP THE B-52s!


It's a tragic accident. If we really wanted to kill civilians, we'd kill civilians. With fire.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Picture this:

You are a peaceful inhabitant of an Afghan village. You have never been any threat to anyone, particularly to the U.S., situated almost as far as physically possible from you, in your life. Now imagine that, as you are going about your perpetual struggle to survive, you hear the roar of a U.S. fighter jet flying over your village, and a bomb is dropped killing several other peaceful people that you knew and loved. The explanation- the United States of America, having no just right or reason for their continued occupation of your homeland, suspected that there may be terrorists living within your village.

Now picture this. Four days later, as the bodies still lay strewn across the streets as the people have yet to be able to properly bury their dead, a group of other Afghans come into the village with pamphlets. They claim to be fighting to drive the American murderers, who had so recently unjustly slain their families, from Afghanistan, and return Afghan tradition. These men are recruiters for the Taliban's forces. They offer you a fighting chance against the Americans- the alternative being but to wait to be the next killed by the bombs. They hate the Americans, as do you after your village's recent encounter with them. Would you not be tempted to join them?

Let me make this clear- I do NOT support the Taliban. Its ideology is that of authoritarian religious extremism, sexist oppression, and homophobia. However, to these people, so desperate to be rid of intruders in their country- I can feel no anger. If a nation had attacked my hometown, killing those I loved, I would be happy to join the first group that was organized against them- regardless of clashes of ideology. While I do not generally prescribe to the thought that the enemy of my enemy is to be my friend, in such a case of absolute desperation- I would put aside my usual aversion to the theory.

So, my question to the Escapist is this- if you were an Afghani citizen who's neighbors, friends and families had just been slaughtered by U.S. forces- can you honestly say that you wouldn't join the insurgency?

But that's retarded. The United States doesn't bomb villages, and they have to confirm targets at least ten times before firing. It's the Taliban who use the citizens as meat shields. The citizens know this.

Really? Because every time we DO bomb a village (which we do), that area becomes an absolute hotbed of Taliban recruitment. By killing the few "terrorists" who might be killed in the village- we create many more.

The man has a point. We shoudlnt be in afganistan. Heres why. NAME ONE! ONE! JUST ONE. Time that an armed country beat insurgents fighting on their own turf? "crickits"

Exactly. With insurgents you have 3 choices.

The first is leave if you leave usually they will relent (vietnam). The only way for both contries to come off without needless casualties.

The 2nd is find the right balence between brutaility and softness so as to not create new insurgents while still actively and effectively hunting down the old ones. This is HARD. People have different views in these countries as what consitutes as enough to fight the invaders. For some even us being there peacefully is too much. This plan requires the deaths of all these people but i think this is what we should aim for.

The third Utter brutality, glass the country, that WILL beat the insurgents but no one wants to commit genocide (me inculded this is hypothetical) and its pretty wastefull. And pure evil.

 

[Katherine Kerensky]

Under the circumsances mentioned in the OP, I would probably join them, out of a thirst for revenge.
but... It's all about the circumstances. for me to join, this shell's life would have to be cut away from the situation to make it possible.

 

[Amnestic]

But that's retarded. The United States doesn't bomb villages, and they have to confirm targets at least ten times before firing. It's the Taliban who use the citizens as meat shields. The citizens know this.

You know, I don't think that's quite the case. According to this, there's been quite a few 'mishaps' with Friendly fire incidents [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire#2003_invasion_of_Iraq], they clearly don't need to confirm the target that much or they wouldn't be bombing their own troops/friendly troops.

 

[LongAndShort]

You're painting the Taliban in a pretty positive light considering they're a bunch of murdering, drug-running, backwards arseholes, who have recruiting methods which include stealing children from their homes and conditioning them for warfare. Considering that the Taliban are just as bad if not worse, that they pick up most of their new recruits from northern Pakistan and a lot of Afghanis know it, no, I wouldn't join.

I met an Aussie soldier back from Afghanistan. He said that he'd happily go back because he wanted to protect a "wonderful, peaceful people" from "a pack of rat-bastards".

 

[Mr.Black]

But that's retarded. The United States doesn't bomb villages, and they have to confirm targets at least ten times before firing. It's the Taliban who use the citizens as meat shields. The citizens know this.

You know, I don't think that's quite the case. According to this, there's been quite a few 'mishaps' with Friendly fire incidents [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire#2003_invasion_of_Iraq], they clearly don't need to confirm the target that much or they wouldn't be bombing their own troops/friendly troops.

People make mistakes.

 

[clicketycrack]

What a preachy load of dog steamer.

 

[Amnestic]

But that's retarded. The United States doesn't bomb villages, and they have to confirm targets at least ten times before firing. It's the Taliban who use the citizens as meat shields. The citizens know this.

You know, I don't think that's quite the case. According to this, there's been quite a few 'mishaps' with Friendly fire incidents [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire#2003_invasion_of_Iraq], they clearly don't need to confirm the target that much or they wouldn't be bombing their own troops/friendly troops.

People make mistakes.

When you're supposedly checking a target at least 10 times, I don't think you make a mistake like bombing your allies.