tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post7724133614010763832..comments2023-11-05T04:43:31.501-05:00Comments on Kenneth Anderson's Law of War and Just War Theory Blog: Why targeted killing? And why is robotics so crucial an issue in targeted killing?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger64125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-25950399458160332512009-06-19T18:00:35.180-05:002009-06-19T18:00:35.180-05:00None of this discussion has any relevance to the a...None of this discussion has any relevance to the actual important question. Assuming for the sake of argument that it is legal and moral to kill a "known terrorist", the difficult and important question is how do you know you have such a person in your sights. I once was in a position to evaluate the cases against a number of persons detained by the U.S. military in Iraq. In many cases, probably over half, there was no "evidence" against them that would cause an American policeman or court to feel that they had sufficient suspicion or probable cause to even detain them, or search them, much less anonymously kill them. Too often they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, or had a nieghbor or other person willing to "inform" against them for some selfish reason. Perhaps the warlord in Afghanistan has cozied up to the local U.S. military, in order to get money, or perhaps just to know where they are operating so he can protect his opium traffic. And, to maintain their trust in him he has to inform them now and then of where some Taliban meeting is taking place. We in America have a misplaced faith in technology - we think some technician looking at a screen in Nevada can actually tell who is a terrorist and who is not. Everyone in those countries carries an AK-47 - surely we cannot wipe them out if we see that in their arms on the TV screen. Unless and until someone explains what the rules of engagement are, and what is the level of proof required, I'm not willing to accept this easy and safe way to wage war is something this country should be involved in. You don't have to take my word for this. I think everyone knows by now that we have people in Guantanamo who did nothing - who are there by some mistaken identity, or because they were sold to the US for a payment. It is bad enough to imprison such people for years based on that sort of flawed information - now we want to kill them anonymously. Too often what any lawyer or police officer would call "rumor" or "hearsay" or "bullshit" is labeled "intelligence" and classified. Well, unless and until our government is willing to explain to us what that consists of, then I'm not willing to give them the 007 "License to kill" in my name. An American citizen who has served in three wars.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-11388211263312932482009-04-15T08:35:00.000-05:002009-04-15T08:35:00.000-05:00A lie is deliberate statement which the speaker kn...A lie is deliberate statement which the speaker knows to be false, or with reasonable care, should have known was false. In this instance, the lies all consist of false statements concerning my view of the facts; in particular, jaundiced misrepresentations concerning my opinions regarding the facts and applicable laws. This a topic that you obviously don't know much about, because you're too busy spewing verbal diarrhea at me to care, and there's no reason for me to suppose that you're worth the effort of a detailed response be4casue anything I say will simply be twisted out of shape and used to fabricate more lies. <br /><br />I just do not fucking care what you think or say in the least: I don't like Nazis or liars, and you're both.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-90428949284488484022009-04-12T23:22:00.000-05:002009-04-12T23:22:00.000-05:00It looks like Chuckie has fled it permanent coward...It looks like Chuckie has fled it permanent cowardice. That means he knows his religion (leftism) is a bad one. <BR/><BR/>Let's list these items again, for Chuckie's benefit :<BR/><BR/>Violence committed by Democrats :<BR/><BR/>Democrats have :<BR/>*Dropped atomic weapons on Hiroshina and Nagasaki<BR/>*Fought in the Korean War<BR/>*Invaded Vietnam<BR/>*Invaded Bosnia and Kosovo<BR/>*Imposed Oil for Food sanctions on Iraq, killing 500,000 children<BR/>*Attacked Saddam for his WMD programs in 1998.<BR/><BR/>Racism committed by Democrats : <BR/><BR/>1) Slavery, which Abe Lincoln stopped<BR/>2) Internment of Japanese by FDR<BR/>3) Robert Byrd, a KKK kleagle, is a cherished bigot in the Democratic party to this day.<BR/>4) George Wallace running as a Democrat for President as recently as 1976.<BR/>5) Strom Thurmond was a Democrat at the time of supporting segregation. When he saw the error of his ways, he switched to the GOP.<BR/>6) Extreme Democrat racism against Bobby Jindal to this day.<BR/><BR/>By comparison, the worst that a Republican has ever done is utter a word like 'macaca', which is not even an insult OR an English word.<BR/><BR/>A mass-murdering racist like Chuckie Gittings cannot actually admit his actions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-86311662349410535232009-04-08T03:40:00.000-05:002009-04-08T03:40:00.000-05:00Note how Chuckie is clearly reading the historical...Note how Chuckie is clearly reading the historical wars and racism that Democrats have committed for a long time, yet cannot acknowledge these facts.<BR/><BR/>Chuckie squeals in protest, because he does not want to admit that racism and warmongering are predominantly Democrat traits. <BR/><BR/>Cornered Chuckie is getting bitchy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-79790432882370385682009-04-07T16:50:00.000-05:002009-04-07T16:50:00.000-05:00Notice how I don't give a shit what liars think or...Notice how I don't give a shit what liars think or say about much of anything, least of all me.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-13282988592278083602009-04-07T15:29:00.000-05:002009-04-07T15:29:00.000-05:00Notice how Chuckie fled in extreme cowardice once ...Notice how Chuckie fled in extreme cowardice once the facts were no longer easy to hide from.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-88373262255447438642009-04-07T00:23:00.000-05:002009-04-07T00:23:00.000-05:00RE: "I trust NPR more than the government right no...RE: "I trust NPR more than the government right now.."<BR/><BR/>National Proletariat Radio? <BR/><BR/>ROFLMAO!SMSgt Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08126690689798203866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-58104418163670800502009-04-06T22:49:00.000-05:002009-04-06T22:49:00.000-05:00Let's list these items again, for Chuckie's benefi...Let's list these items again, for Chuckie's benefit :<BR/><BR/>Violence committed by Democrats :<BR/><BR/>Democrats have :<BR/>*Dropped atomic weapons on Hiroshina and Nagasaki<BR/>*Fought in the Korean War<BR/>*Invaded Vietnam<BR/>*Invaded Bosnia and Kosovo<BR/>*Imposed Oil for Food sanctions on Iraq, killing 500,000 children<BR/>*Attacked Saddam for his WMD programs in 1998.<BR/><BR/>Racism committed by Democrats : <BR/><BR/>1) Slavery, which Abe Lincoln stopped<BR/>2) Internment of Japanese by FDR<BR/>3) Robert Byrd, a KKK kleagle, is a cherished bigot in the Democratic party to this day.<BR/>4) George Wallace running as a Democrat for President as recently as 1976.<BR/>5) Strom Thurmond was a Democrat at the time of supporting segregation. When he saw the error of his ways, he switched to the GOP.<BR/>6) Extreme Democrat racism against Bobby Jindal to this day.<BR/><BR/>By comparison, the worst that a Republican has ever done is utter a word like 'macaca', which is not even an insult OR an English word.<BR/><BR/>A mass-murdering racist like Chuckie Gittings cannot actually admit his actions.Leftists are Weirdnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-3906140349445408942009-04-06T22:47:00.000-05:002009-04-06T22:47:00.000-05:00"I'm not a ashamed of anything. You're a fucking f..."I'm not a ashamed of anything. You're a fucking fascist subversive who makes excuses for murder -- we have nothing to discuss."<BR/><BR/>Yawn.... you can't even admit that the Democrats have committed the aforementioned warfare and racism.<BR/><BR/>Extreme cowardice is the hallmark of a leftist like Chuckie Gittings.<BR/><BR/>Behold, everyone, how to totally corner and humiliate a lefty hypocrite.....<BR/><BR/>BTW, Chuckie, I am not white (upon knowing this, Chuckie's hatred for me has risen 10X).....Leftists are Weirdnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-38755299831695968422009-04-06T21:45:00.000-05:002009-04-06T21:45:00.000-05:00"An intense, six-month campaign of Predator strike..."An intense, six-month campaign of Predator strikes in Pakistan has taken such a toll on Al Qaeda that militants [sic] have begun turning violently on one another out of confusion and distrust, U.S. intelligence and counter-terrorism officials say."<BR/><BR/>We keep hearing this, and, we hear we need more troops in Afghanistan, because the situation is so bad. You can't have it both ways. I trust NPR more than the government right now, about what's going on over there.Xiaodinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00239287510764217450noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-9377968269429453672009-04-06T14:53:00.000-05:002009-04-06T14:53:00.000-05:00Note the crickets chirping within the ashamed sile...Note the crickets chirping within the ashamed silence of Charles Gittings...<BR/><BR/>That, children, is how to destroy a leftist in a debate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-8153637020559771512009-04-06T02:22:00.000-05:002009-04-06T02:22:00.000-05:00Let's make this more visible so Gittings finds it ...Let's make this more visible so Gittings finds it harder to hide :<BR/><BR/>Violence committed by Democrats :<BR/><BR/>Democrats have :<BR/>*Dropped atomic weapons on Hiroshina and Nagasaki<BR/>*Fought in the Korean War<BR/>*Invaded Vietnam<BR/>*Invaded Bosnia and Kosovo<BR/>*Imposed Oil for Food sanctions on Iraq, killing 500,000 children<BR/>*Attacked Saddam for his WMD programs in 1998.<BR/><BR/>Racism committed by Democrats : <BR/><BR/>1) Slavery, which Abe Lincoln stopped<BR/>2) Internment of Japanese by FDR<BR/>3) Robert Byrd, a KKK kleagle, is a cherished bigot in the Democratic party to this day.<BR/>4) George Wallace running as a Democrat for President as recently as 1976.<BR/>5) Strom Thurmond was a Democrat at the time of supporting segregation. When he saw the error of his ways, he switched to the GOP.<BR/>6) Extreme Democrat racism against Bobby Jindal to this day.<BR/><BR/>By comparison, the worst that a Republican has ever done is utter a word like 'macaca', which is not even an insult OR an English word.<BR/><BR/>As another commenter said, whatever planet Gittings comes from, it is certainly not Earth.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-90860717996167530782009-04-06T01:44:00.000-05:002009-04-06T01:44:00.000-05:00Oh, ya that all really bothers me. You are such pa...Oh, ya that all really bothers me. <BR/><BR/>You are such pathetic twits.<BR/><BR/>PS: It happens that I think Obama has a lot to learn i nsome areas, and that holding over Gates and Petraeus was a terrible mistake. It;s becomming quite obviosu that the CIA needs a good house cleaning too. <BR/><BR/>He'll learn, and as long as Gates and Petraeus are running the show, he'll learn the hard way.<BR/><BR/>You people just have no idea what I actually think about any of this stuff -- for the simple reason that you are literally so addled that you are incapable of understanding anything said to you.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-17253128147218693722009-04-06T00:35:00.000-05:002009-04-06T00:35:00.000-05:00I notice that Charles won't concede that Obama has...I notice that Charles won't concede that Obama has stepped up the strikes in Pakistan.<BR/><BR/>So it is not just a 'Bush/Cheney strategy.<BR/><BR/>Whatever planet Charles comes from, it is not Earth. The planet he comes from is called 'CastroFaggottia'.Democrats = Homocrats = Faggotsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-5280494118948124702009-04-06T00:32:00.000-05:002009-04-06T00:32:00.000-05:00Actually, the fact that a left-wing racist like Ch...Actually, the fact that a left-wing racist like Charles Gittings is so worried about targeted killing via drones PROVES that it is the right strategy for the free world to use.<BR/><BR/>Charles is bothered that his Al-Qaeda bretheren are vulnerable to this strategy. This proves that this is an effective counter-terror strategy. <BR/><BR/>Charles, now go admire the picture of GAYman al-Zawahiri that you have in your bedroom.Democrats = Homocrats = Faggotsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-43459033541966264182009-04-06T00:30:00.000-05:002009-04-06T00:30:00.000-05:00More projection from Charles 'girlie-man' Gitterin...More projection from Charles 'girlie-man' Gittering.<BR/><BR/>I posted a simple list of wars Democrats have started, and of racism by Democrats. <BR/><BR/>You simply cannot even acknowledge those historical facts - as they don't fit your narrative.<BR/><BR/>Acknowledge those historical facts, loser. <BR/><BR/>As much as you would like to say that Abe Lincoln was a Democrat and the Hiroshima/Nagasaki bombings were done by Republicans, the facts are the opposite.Leftists are Weirdnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-50995459625074602982009-04-05T23:14:00.000-05:002009-04-05T23:14:00.000-05:00HA. The only projecting going on here is YOURS.AS ...HA. The only projecting going on here is YOURS.<BR/><BR/>AS IF you can read my mind any better than you can read the minds of all these people you want to wage war on for thinking bad thoughts (according to you). <BR/><BR/>This not complicated: I don't care what you think, and I'm not going to waste my time arguing with someone as ignorant and irrational as you are. It's pointless.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-42106702798724917862009-04-05T22:31:00.000-05:002009-04-05T22:31:00.000-05:00"An intense, six-month campaign of Predator strike...<I>"An intense, six-month campaign of Predator strikes in Pakistan has taken such a toll on Al Qaeda that militants [sic] have begun turning violently on one another out of confusion and distrust, U.S. intelligence and counter-terrorism officials say."</I><BR/><BR/>2. Attack the alliances - Division<BR/><BR/>QEDAtomicSnarlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03599553102157476576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-73178747728850179112009-04-05T22:13:00.000-05:002009-04-05T22:13:00.000-05:00"An intense, six-month campaign of Predator strike...<I>"An intense, six-month campaign of Predator strikes in Pakistan has taken such a toll on Al Qaeda that militants [sic] have begun turning violently on one another out of confusion and distrust, U.S. intelligence and counter-terrorism officials say."</I><BR/><BR/>(From that evil bastion of Right-wing thought known as the <A HREF="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pakistan-predator22-2009mar22,0,1530442,full.story" REL="nofollow">LA Times</A>)<BR/><BR/>A rational person will be able to find the military utility in the above mentioned developments.<BR/><BR/>Ten...nine....eight...SMSgt Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08126690689798203866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-28500934159520121952009-04-05T22:12:00.000-05:002009-04-05T22:12:00.000-05:00Note how Charles Gittings hid in cowardice when pr...Note how Charles Gittings hid in cowardice when presented with a list of wars Democrats started, as well as examples of racism that Democrats have conducted.<BR/><BR/>A typical left-wing coward (but I repeat myself), who has no interest in inconvenient facts. <BR/><BR/>He would send Republicans to the gas chambers if he could get away with it. Everything he says here is merely projection (Psych 101).Leftists are Weirdnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-11623195728988062592009-04-05T16:11:00.000-05:002009-04-05T16:11:00.000-05:00"This is of great humanitarian benefit, as it is n...<I>"This is of great humanitarian benefit, as it is no longer necessary to take out an entire city in order to neutralize a single discrete objective."</I><BR/><BR/>What absolute bullshit.<BR/><BR/>I am unaware of a a single instance where it was "necessary" to any such thing in order to "take out a single discreet objective". I can't even imagine a case where anyone in their right mind would claim it was even a good idea.<BR/><BR/>In point of fact, the only reason anyone ever took out an entire city is becasue that was exactl what they wanted to do for the specific purpose of terrorizing the enemy population. Anyone who claims different is adamned liar or a damned fool. <BR/><BR/>Or in this case, a former JA who really ought to know better than to make such an outlandish claim. Lawyers have such bad habits when it comes to overstating arguments.<BR/><BR/><BR/>And what, pray tell, is the military objective of these predator strikes? <BR/><BR/>Enemy munitions factories? Ball bearing plans? Radar installations?<BR/><BR/>Oh no, just murdering civilians on the basis of unproved suspicions and accusations along with any innocent bystander who happens to get in the way. All this being in violation of both the laws of war and the laws of the United States, regardless of the dishonest excuses of all the apologists.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-39666660051742212182009-04-05T15:54:00.000-05:002009-04-05T15:54:00.000-05:00Tom,What can I tell you??That's nuts. This is just...Tom,<BR/><BR/>What can I tell you??<BR/><BR/>That's nuts. This is just one more pointless exercise in colonialism for the sake of political agendas that don't have much relation to reality. Your precious fantasies about what is or isn't going on inside the heads of other people have no relevance beyond the light they shed on your own feeble state of mind.<BR/><BR/>I told you <B>exactly</B> what I'm concerned with: enforcing the laws of the United States. That works for Osama Bin Ladin just as well as it does for Dick Cheney.<BR/><BR/>I don't have to make up anything, I don't have to read anyones mind, and I don't have to guess -- all I have to do is analyze the facts and the law.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-52881911305571421572009-04-05T06:23:00.000-05:002009-04-05T06:23:00.000-05:00Charles Gittings said...With extreme frustration.....<I>Charles Gittings said...</I><BR/>With extreme frustration...<BR/><BR/><I> Oh listen to you people.</I><BR/>Let's change the subject, because I don't have a response.<BR/><BR/><I> I got news for you: George Bush and Dick Cheney have murdered a lot more people than Al Qaeda has, </I><BR/>Using soldiers aiming at people who shot at them first, instead of merely putting bombs into marketplaces, schools, and weddings. <BR/><BR/>They also tried to put the government back into the hands of the people there instead of the factions trying to control them, those mean, meddlilng soldiers. Who do they think they are, trying to establish and encourage peaceful self-government by the locals? No wonder Al Qaeda was forced to slaughter so many people -- It's BusHitlerBurtonCheny's fault!<BR/><BR/><I> and both Al Qaeda and you Republicans are just criminals to me.</I><BR/>But not the Democrats who authorized the war. Nope -- not them. They don't count.<BR/><BR/><I> The only real difference is that you Republicans are a much worse threat to the safety of the United States.</I><BR/>As you can plainly see by the masses being shipped off to concentration camps, deportations, and dissappearances. Yes, beheadings, public executions, and kidnappings galore! Film at eleven.<BR/><BR/><I> The seventh century indeed. What's that supposed to mean?</I><BR/>Darn -- what was that Prophet thing all about again -- I missed that show on the History Channel, too. Maybe it was in the papers or something.<BR/><BR/><I> What it shows is something that was already obvious:</I><BR/>Here it comes...<BR/><BR/><I> you're religious and racial bigots...</I><BR/>Change the subject! Shoot the messenger! Pre-empt the opposition! Remove the middle!<BR/><BR/><I> who don't have a lick of sense or a shred of human decency...</I><BR/>To fawn obsequiously at my profound, awe inspiring insights without the slightest hint of contradiction or investigation.<BR/><BR/><I> You don't speak for America,</I><BR/>Heaven forbid that anyone would ever make that mistake.<BR/><BR/><I> you speak for your own lying, disloyal selves.</I><BR/>Which is to say, you disagree with me. Never mind why, it doesn't count. <BR/><BR/><I> Now why don't you all just crawl back under your rocks?.</I><BR/>Shut up. Shut UP! SHUT UP!! SHUT IT!!! NOW!!! <BR/>My mind's made up -- I don't want to learn anything today, least of all from any of you. So there. Nyah.<BR/><BR/><I> You worthless goons don't impress me in the least.</I><BR/>But you are fascinating enough to keep me coming back so I can yell at you. I'm making the world a better place this way, don't you know? It should be obvious. It is to me, and that's all that counts. So go away, or I shall taunt you again. I mean it. I really, really do.<BR/><BR/>===============================<BR/><BR/>It clear you have a brain, and I hope your spleen will let loose of it. You can be angry at, angry with, or angry because. I can be angry at my toaster because it burnt my toast. I can be angry with someone who slighted me. I can be angry because I was cheated.<BR/><BR/>So be angry all you want, but it's more useful when you can speak to the cause of your anger rather than lashing out. Stay on point and make your reasoning clearer so we can understand and we'll all come out ahead.AtomicSnarlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03599553102157476576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-41712169901947466512009-04-05T05:38:00.000-05:002009-04-05T05:38:00.000-05:00Mr. Gittings said:"Tom,Well that's about what I th...Mr. Gittings said:<BR/><BR/>"Tom,<BR/><BR/>Well that's about what I thought. Are you trying to tell me that you don't think they are criminals?"<BR/>===================================<BR/>I'm trying to tell you that in the prosecution of a world-wide war their obvious criminality adds less then 10 percent of incentive to the other reasons for fighting against them in World War 4. Their criminality exists, but is nearly irrelevant to whether or not we should be at war with them.<BR/>====================================<BR/>"I don't care if you think they are trying to destroy our society anymore than I care about them thinking that we are trying to destroy theirs. "<BR/>=====================================<BR/>Then do you care that *they* claim they *are* trying to destroy our society? Do you care that they have declared the existence and growth of representative government to be the greatest single threat to the society ruled by god (through his sheiks or mullahs, of course) that they wish to bring about as an alternative to today's majority of muslim states?<BR/>====================================<BR/>"The reality is that they don't have any real capacity to destroy our society beyond pushing the buttons of people like you and Dick Cheney."<BR/><BR/>Against an opponent that wants to win in 5 years, you would be correct. Against an opponent that always has admitted this will be a war of 50-100 years, you are projecting a fantasy in which they simply won't build the strength they need, to do what they say they will. Sort of like Brits in 1934 talking about the insane ravings of "that mustachioed madman" in Germany. As early as 1996, we could see websites (now vanished, without me taking screenshots:-/)detailing the 3 phase plan of their war, with the salafists and the khomeinists mirroring each other in their plans. Phase 1 was to be rallying the ummah of Islam to their banner in a conflict striking the industrial world from "the places in-between" where industrial society had no eyes to warn them, demonstrating the infidels would not harm the holy warriors. Once the ummah was united behind them, in a nuclear-protected Caliphate, then in Phase 2 gazavat raids based in their nuclear-protected Caliphate would harrass the decadent infidels to give up "the lost lands of Islam", from Lisbon to Manila. After those were recovered to the rule of the Caliphate, then in Phase 3 the world was to become dominated by the Caliphate so much that Sharia law was the norm in the world, including the dhimmi status of jews and christians, and the death of all polytheists. In 5 years, no. In 100 years, with little or no military resistance, all too possible!<BR/>====================================<BR/>"And I don't care about your version of Christian theology any more than I care about Osama Bin Ladin's version of Islamic theology either:" <BR/>====================================<BR/><BR/>OK. Since I have included nothing in this thread about my christian beliefs, it would be hard for you to know enough of them to care. I have no scriptural literalist beliefs in any religious texts.<BR/>=================================<BR/>god doesn't need a police force or an army, <BR/><BR/>Right!<BR/><BR/>But the United States does, if it is to defend our freedoms, and those of other participants in the world-wide networks of industrial society, from those who would destroy them, whether they are scriptural literalists here, or amidst the ummah of Islam.<BR/><BR/>"and if you think otherwise I'd have to question that you have any sincere belief in Christianity."<BR/>====================================<BR/>Well I'm glad we have cleared up your worries on that point!<BR/>====================================<BR/>"What I do care about is American officials committing dispicable war crimes that we once executed Nazis for committing in violation of our own laws,"<BR/>====================================<BR/>OK. I suppose you have your own lists of those? Why do you think I should believe your arguments more than the attorneys that were writing opinions for the last administration, or the current one, that has changed little of what you seem to most dislike?<BR/>====================================<BR/>"while simultaneously failing to do anything serious about bringing Osama Bin Ladin and his gang to justice"<BR/><BR/>Once again, criminal justice has little or nothing to do with the war we are in with the International Islamic Front, of which Al Quaeda is one major member. We could hang Bin ladin from the highest gallows in the world, and still lose World War 4 if we allow the Islamists to begin again at building their bandwagon, once again chanting, with the plausibility they enlarged from 1993 to 2001, that the infidels are too cowardly to strike back.<BR/>====================================<BR/>"because they are too busy raping Iraq and doing anything serious about the problem of Pakistan is too difficult and might upset some of their buddies."<BR/><BR/>Raping Iraq by buying them the time to build representative political institutions, while they give oil contracts to non-US companies? No Mr Gittings, if we wanted the oil we could have simply and silently made a deal with Saddam, as the French did, when Chirac sold their UN veto to Saddam for a $125 Billion dollar oil bribe. We could have got a better price, too!<BR/><BR/>As to Pakistan- operating in *any* country that already has nukes, even older, cruder Chinese designs from Ali Quadeer Khan, *is* far harder. This is especially so if/when we risk a split in the Pakistani Military, which could let ISI partisans of the salafists get control of those nukes. They would love nothing better than to encourage the martyrdom of Pakistan by striking at our Indian allies with nukes. Even if we could pre-empt, and destroy most of those nukes, at least 30 cities of a million people or more would still reside within range of the M-9 missiles the Pakistanis bought from China. If only 30 out of 200 nukes survive, their lives would be forfeit. *I* would be *very* cautious in any such situation.<BR/>====================================<BR/>"You're barking up the wrong tree: I saw 911 coming back in 1987, and I've been tracking the events since day to day for eight years now."<BR/>====================================<BR/><BR/>Yes, and as I did, others were warning people about the Muslim Brotherhood and their decedent organizations as early as 1965, and predicting we would be fighting them after "the socialist camp" folded. Many of us watch WW4 on a daily basis. Welcome to the club.<BR/><BR/>Regards,<BR/><BR/>Tom BillingsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7506249.post-54067915090251263872009-04-05T05:13:00.000-05:002009-04-05T05:13:00.000-05:00A most interesting and relevant topic, and a good ...A most interesting and relevant topic, and a good essay to start it off. Writing as a retired Marine Corps Judge Advocate, I naturally turn to the LOAC/LOW considerations inherent in UAV/PGM operations.<BR/><BR/>For one thing, as greater precision becomes available, the rules pertaining to the proportionality of collateral damage to military necessity require the use of the most discrinminate means.<BR/><BR/>This is of great humanitarian benefit, as it is no longer necessary to take out an entire city in order to neutralize a single discrete objective. For example, suppose we determine tha militarily relevant signals are emanating from a single building in downtown Belgrade. We no longer need to flatten half the city with B-24's, but can now targed a specific building, or even a specific room in a specific building. There still may be collateral damage--the Chinese embassy cleaning lady, that sort of thing, but much less than in the bad old days.<BR/><BR/>Two benefits accrue from this technological advance. First the obvious humanitariam benefit: less loss of innocent life. Second, and this bothers some of our commenters, it is now legally and politically feasible to use force in more situations.<BR/><BR/>The effect of this is to move the military threshhold, that level of civilizational competence an actor must attain to be just competitive. This leaves us with <I>Quod licet Jovi, non licet bovi.</I>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com