RE: US Airstrike in Somalia

RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events

Message

SovereignIsHe -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 12:34:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mcp As to who has given the military the "right" to act in such a way, the answer is our gov't, of course. What allows them to kill 12 people in order to get the bad guy? Why is it they are allowed to operate on a level unlike anyone else? The mere mention of war seems to toss the rule of law right out the window... quote: If we are attacked on our soil, what difference is that and Somalia asking us to help defend her soil? Even in defending our soil, many innocents could die. If the military killed 12 Americans to kill one bad guy there would be hell to pay... quote: But-- If by military rights, you are inferring to God's bestowed rights, well that is a matter for interpretation, isn't it? When you are taking life you better have your gear packed tight and your reasons why in very good order... quote: Leaders' jobs are to make hard catch22 decisions and usually the same people who deride the lack of high moral ground of America, criticize the gov't when it fails to protect and act on its foreknowledge after a bad event. Nope, not here.... quote: BTW, we don't know at this time whether the intellegence preceding this Somalian airstrike may have been faulty regarding innocents. Doesn't absolve anyone from the responsibilty of killing people that are not causing harm...

SovereignIsHe -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 12:39:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stamper_ben quote: Isn't the main issue we have with terrorists jsut that, killing innocent people? But who is their target? Innocent people are dead either way... I will agree that motive counts for something, and I don't believe we are making it a point to kill innocent people, yet the fact remains when push comes to shove we will and I don't see how one escapes the consequences for killing people without just cause. John

SovereignIsHe -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 12:46:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: I guess when the right color of people start being the collateral damage people will take notice.. Well, like I said, we saw 3000 of our own people die, not as collateral, but as the primary target, and still many would sit back and do nothing. I am fairly certain you could kill dozens of Americans without producing much of a reaction from the populace at large in terms of hunting down the perpetrators; 9/11 wasn't the first attack on Americans. You're kidding yourself... People break into homes and hurt themselves file law suits against the homeowner, and at times win… There would be a reaction... John

SovereignIsHe -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 12:52:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mcp quote: I guess when the right color of people start being the collateral damage people will take notice.. Those racist Americans[8\|]....I think our issue is more of the blindness of nationalism. If we lost Americans in collateral damage, the pain would be greater than collateral Somalis. Sort of like the arguments in this thread of losing family over just unknown people. But we do have some heart for Somalia in our Nation, but we are still gonna weigh our gov't actions against the greater national interests. We are rather selective when it comes to who is worthy of being help and who is ok to die in out pursuit of evil... Of course our own evil isn't an issue, we have a mission at hand... The means are justifiable because we say so… I keep waiting for Elwood to say “We’re on a mission from God…” Maybe someday another country will declare the US evil and deal with us... John John

mcp -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 12:54:34 PM)
quote: But no, instead we chasing smoke and killing innocents. We bombed Somialia already. Clinton did it in the '90's, trying to get Bin Laden. we did'nt care to help them for years, they have had no working gov't since, and when we come back, more bombs! no food, no nothing, bombs. Pro 24:22 For their calamity shall rise suddenly; and who knoweth the ruin of them both? We are doing all this killing of innocents , getting blood on our hands , for what? Is it a Holy War? It is interesting... we are called by the left to wait until we are attacked to justify retaliation; then when we wait till after the "smoke", we are just chasing smoke and not helping. We could put boots on the ground and then the left would charge us with being "illegally there" and "occupiers". Make up your mind. We use airstrikes because of the psychological implications weighed against our strategic effectiveness of pursuing other avenues in our national interests and in the interests of Sudan and Somalia. We have "fed" African countries for years only to have our products intercepted by the regimes' henchmen in place or unruly mobs. We could depose regimes to facilitate our feeding programs. It isn't that we always don't care as you infer, but that we don't always have the principles and strategies to make a positive difference easily (plus it is a lose-lose with some in our country). Just curious, why don't you complain to the UN about their apathy or ineffectiveness? Or do you? The bombs we use are sent to serve a specific purpose, sometimes at the behest of the powers in the country that are allied with our Western concept of freedom. And how pray does your verse from Proverbs prove to be in context with our actions in Africa? By no means am I saying we have the best of foreign policies (we rarely have); but part of that is due to the schizophrenia this country has historically had about how, when, and to what extent we would involve ourselves in world struggles. As to holy wars, world skirmishes can be more easily boiled down to human nature and the divergence of opinions and interests. That's why I dismiss the atheistic/secular view that removing religion relieves our tensions. It merely transfers to more ideological/materialistic struggles. I am hoping to see some of that nuance on the left of this argument[;)].

SovereignIsHe -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 12:54:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud As concerned as some seem over the people who died along with this terrorist, their seems to be little concern for the thousands who have died in Somalia because such people are in their country wreaking havoc. Eventually we’ll solve that problem by killing them ourselves... John

tracydolls -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 12:56:55 PM)
quote: We of course need to do two things there; eliminate Al Queda there, and do what we can to provide for a stable government and aid for those who are suffering. The first is unfortunately easier than the last. How is this easier, we have not stopped Al-Qida anywhere, we let them in Iraq. How will we know when the last of them is rooted out? How can we say we want to help when after 15? years we havent done anything! period. But now we want to make sure Al-Qida don't take over. ok.

SovereignIsHe -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 12:58:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jhud quote: How many more countires can we bomb looking for AL-Qida? Africa has 10 Northern Moslem Countries. We gonna bomb them all? We bombed what to get one man? Why did'nt we help the Sudanese Christians when the Moslems were taking them over? Darfar? that would be a noble cause!!! But no, instead we chasing smoke and killing innocents. We bombed Somialia already. Clinton did it in the '90's, trying to get Bin Laden. we did'nt care to help them for years, they have had no working gov't since, and when we come back, more bombs! no food, no nothing, bombs. Pro 24:22 For their calamity shall rise suddenly; and who knoweth the ruin of them both? We are doing all this killing of innocents , getting blood on our hands , for what? Is it a Holy War? Well it seems the modus operandi of Al Queda is to move into war torn country where various factions are vying for power, aid one faction (usually the most fanatical Sunni Muslims), ply them with money and weapons and train them for battle, and then once gaining power they impose the most stringent forms of Sharia law to quell resistance and begin importing fighters for training to send elsewhere. This isn’t going to happen throughout North Africa because not all countries there are like Somalia is in this respect. We of course need to do two things there; eliminate Al Queda there, and do what we can to provide for a stable government and aid for those who are suffering. The first is unfortunately easier than the last. Problem is by our actions we give legitimacy to the rhetoric they use on these people... We are only making our job more difficult by killing the local population. We simply become one of the choices in a game of pick the lesser evil... John

mcp -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 1:11:57 PM)
quote: We are rather selective when it comes to who is worthy of being help and who is ok to die in out pursuit of evil... Of course our own evil isn't an issue, we have a mission at hand... The means are justifiable because we say so… I keep waiting for Elwood to say “We’re on a mission from God…” Maybe someday another country will declare the US evil and deal with us... This point is exactly correct. We are selective because foreign policy weighs complex issues into the decisions. BTW, to simplify, all struggles are based on opposing opinions/interests; we already have countries that call us evil and are doing their dangdest to deal with us. But as for me, this, despite our faults, is still unacceptable. I have already expained this concept of our national decisions over and again in this thread. We weigh our move to action based on the expected results (ie, if killing 12 people is fully expected to save 200). We weigh the principles, strategies, and concern for national interests, and to some degree world interests which usually is closely linked (such as world economies). You keep mentioning one principle over and again (12 innocents may have died at the full knowing of our military leaders). You weigh nothing else into the matter; this is not very nuanced and not providing answers to other principles that may also apply. Take war for oil arguments. The detriment of ignoring a potential threat to the oil supply could be world catastrophic. It isn't so one-dimensional as Bush has Occidental stock (esoteric example intentional). If oil goes to the wrong groups, then may assume the whole world could suffer from numerous forms of chaos following a world economic downturn. Then whose fault would the results of such a situation rest. The cat is already out of the bag with regards to oil. BTW, every major war since the late 1800's had a huge oil component.

Jhud -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 1:12:03 PM)
I think what is really happening here in this discussion running into the limits of what earthly systems of justice can and can’t do. The first thing that must be realized is that all attempts by earthly authorities to impose laws, or order, or apprehend those who or doing evil, or simply provide security to our nation involves the risk that someone who is ‘innocent’ will get harmed or killed. Whenever a police officer chases someone who is fleeing or discharges his weapon, there is a risk someone can be harmed or killed. Whenever a bomb is dropped on a target or soldier engages in battle, there is significant risk someone ‘innocent’ will be harmed or killed. Even the imposing of sentences like jail time risk taking away years of the life of innocent people. So question then becomes, is it right or good for the government to act all in this capacity given that such risks exist? And Scripture seems fairly clear; despite such risks, God has ordained civil authorities to take such actions, despite the fact that human failings are a given. So the next question becomes weighing these risks against the possible harm to innocent lives. Obviously, on one end of the spectrum is the ‘nuke them to oblivion’ school of thought. We could all but eliminate Al Queda today by dropping nukes along the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan, ensuring that a zone where not a single terrorist escaped; and do similar things in other places they are known to concentrate. Obviously such an operation would entail the certain deaths of hundreds of thousands if not million of men women and children. The risk is too great. The other end of the spectrum of course would be to do nothing. That despite knowing where a terrorist or terrorists might be, if there is any risk of harming innocents we simply don’t act. This of course runs the risk of allowing such groups to metastasize, build up arms and organizations, wage numerous wars for power, and in the process kill thousands if not hundreds of thousands of innocents; much like we see in Darfur. Perhaps some see this as an acceptable option, I see it as neither acceptable nor moral. So I think the answer lies somewhere in between; and I think people of good conscience and Godly character will seek to minimize and understand risk, and attempt to deal with those who do evil; understanding that in the process, almost certainly innocents will be killed or harmed. That is simply the reality of living in a sinful world.

Jhud -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 1:13:04 PM)
quote: Problem is by our actions we give legitimacy to the rhetoric they use on these people... We are only making our job more difficult by killing the local population. We simply become one of the choices in a game of pick the lesser evil... Yes, that is a risk we take. But talking with Africans, they aren't particularly impressed when we do nothing either.

rcjames -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 1:13:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tracydolls How is this easier, we have not stopped Al-Qida anywhere, Well so far we have stopped them in the good ole USA, thanks to President Bush. Thanks RC

tracydolls -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 1:18:18 PM)
quote: Well so far we have stopped them in the good ole USA, thanks to President Bush today, what about tommorrow? I guarantee that they are on their networks planning another attack, what happens if one gets thru again?

tracydolls -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 1:22:01 PM)
quote: and attempt to deal with those who do evil; I'm sure some consider us evil also, who is right? Define evil. Because I say if all you bring is bombs to my country and no food, you are evil.

Jhud -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 1:27:05 PM)
quote: I'm sure some consider us evil also, who is right? Define evil. Because I say if all you bring is bombs to my country and no food, you are evil. In all due respect tracydolls, if you think the US has only brought bombs and no food to Somalia, you simply don't know what you are talking about.

rcjames -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 1:28:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tracydolls today, what about tommorrow? I guarantee that they are on their networks planning another attack, what happens if one gets thru again? Anything can happen and will happen if we get a demokrat for president. Bush, Cheney, and crew did a really brilliant thing with the iraq war; they knew we were going to have to fight the terrorist; so they chose Iraq as place for this to happen instead of downtown anywhere, USA. The terrorist are pouring into Iraq and being handled by trained troops. Praise God for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, and the rest for their forsight. When and if the demokrats pull out the troops from the present battleground against terrorism; then the terrorist will pour into our homeland. Thanks RC

mcp -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 1:39:14 PM)
quote: quote: ORIGINAL: mcp As to who has given the military the "right" to act in such a way, the answer is our gov't, of course. What allows them to kill 12 people in order to get the bad guy? Why is it they are allowed to operate on a level unlike anyone else? The mere mention of war seems to toss the rule of law right out the window... What laws do we owe allegiance to in this matter? All foreign actions taken by sovereign countries acknowledges this concept. We have gotten more sensitive to collateral damages for sure. We intentionally design weapons/tech to mitigate such undesirable results. quote: quote: quote: If we are attacked on our soil, what difference is that and Somalia asking us to help defend her soil? Even in defending our soil, many innocents could die. If the military killed 12 Americans to kill one bad guy there would be hell to pay... Do you realize that on many occasions the US has endangered US citizens to ward larger damage. On 9/11 the call was made to shoot any errant commercial aircraft. Luckily it was never necessary, but nobody knew that at the time. quote: quote: quote: But-- If by military rights, you are inferring to God's bestowed rights, well that is a matter for interpretation, isn't it? When you are taking life you better have your gear packed tight and your reasons why in very good order... You may be right; Christians and leaders alike have to make decisions in many areas of life that appear as a catch22 conundrum; we hate it of course. But as a hypothetical, what if some of us get to heaven and the Lord asks at the throne : "why did you sit back and allow this? I empowered you with the ability to make a decision on the matter, and you thought doing nothing would absolve you of any guilt. You claimed that at least your hands aren't blood-stained with innocent life. But I say to you, that many more died by your lack of resolve." I understand this is hypothetical and I don't claim to know His thoughts on many decisions of life, but I struggle as much or more with the moral imperative to do right for the greater good as much as keeping "my nose clean" in hard decisions. I will additionally admit, I don't think I could make airstrike decisions without dying from the stress of what is right in the matter. But I can definitely analyze the one dimensional arguments made here. quote: quote: quote: BTW, we don't know at this time whether the intellegence preceding this Somalian airstrike may have been faulty regarding innocents. Doesn't absolve anyone from the responsibilty of killing people that are not causing harm... Again, you have to answer for the validity of all wars if you are going to justify such a statement. I just got finished saying that leaders are forced to make hard decisions. Are you for charging all police that when drawn upon by a suspect being detained with an artificial .357, and the police shoots him in defense?

mapachito13 -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 2:14:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rcjames quote: ORIGINAL: tracydolls How is this easier, we have not stopped Al-Qida anywhere, Well so far we have stopped them in the good ole USA, thanks to President Bush. Thanks RC 1993 - First Attempt - WTC 2001 - Second Attempt succeeds 2008 - future - Next Attack? Don't let a lull in the violence in the US give you a false sense of security. Also, Pre- 9/11 almost no Al-Qaeda attacks Post 9/11 we hear about an Al Qaeda attack at least once a week

mapachito13 -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 2:18:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kernsfamily no..we are not "at war" with Somalia.... In a WAR, innocent people get killed....always....it's a sad fact....but, there's not a good alternative..... Well, I give up are we at war or not?

kernsfamily -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 2:45:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mapachito13 quote: ORIGINAL: rcjames quote: ORIGINAL: tracydolls How is this easier, we have not stopped Al-Qida anywhere, Well so far we have stopped them in the good ole USA, thanks to President Bush. Thanks RC 1993 - First Attempt - WTC 2001 - Second Attempt succeeds 2008 - future - Next Attack? Don't let a lull in the violence in the US give you a false sense of security. Also, Pre- 9/11 almost no Al-Qaeda attacks Post 9/11 we hear about an Al Qaeda attack at least once a week Al-Qaeda attacks began on December 29, 1992, when bombs at two hotels in Aden, Yemen kill two Austrian tourists. The blasts were targeting U.S. servicemen on their way to Somalia. The Riyadh compound bombings took place on May 12, 2003, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. These suicide attacks, attributed to al-Qaeda, were the first of several "spectacular attacks" carried out by that group in 2003, and the deadliest attack on Americans that year. The Khobar Towers bombing was a terrorist attack on part of a housing complex in the city of Khobar, Saudi Arabia, located near the national oil company (Saudi Aramco) headquarters of Dhahran. In 1996, it was being used to house foreign military personnel, including Americans. Al-Qaeda is believed to have conducted the bombings in August 1998 of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, killing more than 200 people and injuring more than 5,000 others. The USS Cole bombing was a suicide bombing attack against the U.S. Navy guided missile destroyer USS Cole (DDG 67) on October 12, 2000 while it was harbored in the Yemeni port of Aden. Seventeen sailors were killed. I could go on and on....but, those were the significant ones I could recall....MANY of them taking place after the first WTC bombing, and before....9/11. The Riyadh compound in '03 has been the worst yet since 9/11....again, on "U.S. interests", not necessarily "U.S. soil".... Of course, for most of those, U.S. interests, and people WERE attacked....killed....and, we didn't do much of anything about it....which, only emboldened Al Qaeda to do more and more (leading up to 9/11)....then, of course, as we all know....we started fighting back. quote: Well, I give up are we at war or not? It's apparent that Al Qaeda has been "at war" with the U.S. since 1992....but, didn't "engage'' the enemy until much, much later than that...

SovereignIsHe -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 3:30:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mcp This point is exactly correct. We are selective because foreign policy weighs complex issues into the decisions. BTW, to simplify, all struggles are based on opposing opinions/interests; we already have countries that call us evil and are doing their dangdest to deal with us. But as for me, this, despite our faults, is still unacceptable. Personally given what is allowed in the United State I don't see what moral high ground we can operate from. To say that our grand mission is so sacred that the death of people who we have no right to kill is acceptable doesn’t seem right. quote: I have already expained this concept of our national decisions over and again in this thread. We weigh our move to action based on the expected results (ie, if killing 12 people is fully expected to save 200). We weigh the principles, strategies, and concern for national interests, and to some degree world interests which usually is closely linked (such as world economies). You keep mentioning one principle over and again (12 innocents may have died at the full knowing of our military leaders). You weigh nothing else into the matter; this is not very nuanced and not providing answers to other principles that may also apply. I weigh the word of God into the matter... What grants the United States the right to kill innocent people? The bigger picture? We are better than those we kill... God is on our side. John

trainfan -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 3:39:19 PM)
quote: Of course, for most of those, U.S. interests, and people WERE attacked....killed....and, we didn't do much of anything about it....which, only emboldened Al Qaeda to do more and more (leading up to 9/11)....then, of course, as we all know....we started fighting back. You forgot about when Clinton tried to distract us from his adultery by shooting a few missles at empty tents. [8\|]

SovereignIsHe -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 3:41:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rcjames quote: ORIGINAL: tracydolls today, what about tommorrow? I guarantee that they are on their networks planning another attack, what happens if one gets thru again? Anything can happen and will happen if we get a demokrat for president. Bush, Cheney, and crew did a really brilliant thing with the iraq war; they knew we were going to have to fight the terrorist; so they chose Iraq as place for this to happen instead of downtown anywhere, USA. The terrorist are pouring into Iraq and being handled by trained troops. Praise God for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, and the rest for their forsight. When and if the demokrats pull out the troops from the present battleground against terrorism; then the terrorist will pour into our homeland. Thanks RC Yes, praise God they turned another sovereign nation into a battlefield. What a righteous act... And smart too, given the terrorist look just like the folks who live there, not to mention they tend to share the same religious belief... It's only too bad they didn’t pick Saudi Arabia to fight the great crusade… John

tracydolls -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 4:42:22 PM)
quote: quote: ORIGINAL: tracydolls today, what about tommorrow? I guarantee that they are on their networks planning another attack, what happens if one gets thru again? Anything can happen and will happen if we get a demokrat for president. Anything can happen and will happen if we get a Repub for President. One monkey don't stop no show! Now I finally get that saying. wow, my grandmother.... quote: Bush, Cheney, . I'm glad they are leaving. satan is preparing his army also. This is Biblical. no matter where you think we are in time, the Bible is unfolding before our very eyes. we are right where we are suppose to be, I agree, problem is. OIL Oba 1:6 How are the things of Esau searched out! how are his hidden things sought up! Oba 1:7 All the men of thy confederacy have brought thee even to the border: Search who is Esau, we know Esau had children 1Ch 1:35 The sons of Esau; Eliphaz, Reuel, and Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah. Mal 1:5 And your eyes shall see, and ye shall say, The LORD will be magnified from the border of Israel. WE America are in the wrong place, we got troops bogged down in Iraq, certainly not for Israel. For oil, for terrorists, Saddam, WMD's, but noone can lie and say Israel, Bush just went there for the first time in 8 years. Meanwhile we have been cutting funding to them over the years, brought democracy and got Hamas elected. 2 men that never served. As they leave , I pray they are ok. That they would come to the Fullness that is Christ. Op-war and rumors of war..........

mapachito13 -> RE: US Airstrike in Somalia (5/2/2008 6:29:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kernsfamily It's apparent that Al Qaeda has been "at war" with the U.S. since 1992....but, didn't "engage'' the enemy until much, much later than that... I don't remember the term Al Qaeda being used before 9-11. Now every bomb that goes off in the world is attributed to Al Qaeda. I guess it wasn't a good idea to let Bush Sr. (then head of the CIA) give all that training and weapons to the Mujaheedin and his then buddy Osama to use against the Russians in Afghanistan. Looks like we created another monster.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI