Truths of war in our current day.

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    lain.the-wired.com Forum Index -> Politics and News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bulkoth
Whitest Forumer


Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 7689
Location: State College

PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 10:05 am    Post subject: Truths of war in our current day. Reply with quote

This article is getting a bit of press because people claim it advocates the wholesale slaughter of journalists and a complete surrender to right wing beliefs but I really found it hit the nail on the head with most of what was said.

A bit long but I thought it was a worthy read.

http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/05/right-wing-military-writer-we-may-have-to-kill-war-journalists/

_________________
Currently playing: Whatever we have players for
Reading: Nemesis, Paddle your own canoe
Obsessing over: Asheron's Call
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Marcus Brody
The Dog


Joined: 09 Jan 2004
Posts: 10599
Location: floating bumpercar

PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 11:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Seems like a total crackpot to me. You're not achieving much more than self-parody the second you say this:

Quote:
"Rejecting the god of their fathers, the neo-pagans who dominate the media serve as lackeys at the terrorists’ bloody altar,"



He's trying to compare the act of granting a bit of humanity to our enemies with literally killing our own troops. Two paragraphs into the column itself, he basically says we're inferior to terrorists because we use our superior technology to avoid unnecessary loss of life. That's where I decided the rest of the article wasn't worth my time, since the author is clearly some kind of retarded, belligerent caveman.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bulkoth
Whitest Forumer


Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 7689
Location: State College

PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 12:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You seem to be reading that statement very literally, it's meant more as a statement of how the journalists of today are more interested in portraying our enemies as worthy of sympathy and demonizing our military whose strength and devotion has granted them the write to freedom of speech in the first place. And by demonizing our troops they hurt funding and encourage our enemies which in turn causes a greater loss of life.

Back in WWII a ton of atrocities happen, but the point was we went in kicked ass and the world became a better place for it.

The media does not "grant a bit of humanity" to our enemies, they cry foul every time a single civilian in a warzone dies. Both Iraq and Afghanistan would have been quick and decisive and had lower total innocent deaths on both sides had the media not set an unrealistic expectation.

_________________
Currently playing: Whatever we have players for
Reading: Nemesis, Paddle your own canoe
Obsessing over: Asheron's Call
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Raptor
Sprints McGee


Joined: 04 Jan 2004
Posts: 5567
Location: The Wired

PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is a foul when we, or anyone else, kills non-combatants. We have the technology and the means to avoid most, if not all of those deaths. Were this a traditional war, given our current technology, it would be completely inexcusable. Given the current circumstances of guerrilla warfare, I do understand that it is sometimes unavoidable in order to achieve our goals and keep the promises we made.

That guy does seem like a bit of a nut, and the picture does not help at all.

_________________
The voices are back, excellent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Bulkoth
Whitest Forumer


Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 7689
Location: State College

PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Doh, sorry meant to post this link:

http://www.securityaffairs.org/issues/2009/16/peters.php

I got to it from that other link but digg is particularly bad at giving me an easy way to link to things not through them.

_________________
Currently playing: Whatever we have players for
Reading: Nemesis, Paddle your own canoe
Obsessing over: Asheron's Call
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Marcus Brody
The Dog


Joined: 09 Jan 2004
Posts: 10599
Location: floating bumpercar

PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The media makes a big point of it whenever civilians die. They also do the same thing when our own troops die. We have the technology to prevent both almost all of the time. Our enemies don't, and the media still condemns them. What's the problem?

If we fuck up our intel and accidentally throw a laser-guided bomb into a hospital, should we act like nothing wrong happened?


The WWII argument is inappropriate because military technology is miles above what it was then. With our current tech (especially relative to our enemies) we could have ended the war without ever bothering with nukes, for example.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bulkoth
Whitest Forumer


Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 7689
Location: State College

PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I believe we need to stop treating it like a "peace keeping" mission because what we should be over there doing is killing the people who are willing to kill others. I'm not suggesting we dismiss all fuck ups as part of war but we need to stop acting like the issue is always so clean cut, the entire place has major issues because of the collapse of the greater Muslim region.

The media acts like all terrorists are simply mislead, and that if we could explain to them what we're all about they'd stop trying to hurt us. The truth is that a great many of these people believe that we deserve to be killed. And the only way to cure that is to wipe them off the face of the earth and make every one else too afraid to think that.

People seem to think that just because our technology has advanced we can expect fewer casualties, but it's a lot easier now to make a mistake when you're looking only at intel and no one goes out to have a look around. For instance say a radio signal previously determined to be that of a terrorist is tracked to a building, and intel says there are 6 other radio signals in that area tonight that we haven't identified and several vehicles. Do you press the launch missile button? Even if a guy goes out and looks all he's going to see is some Arabs, likely with a weapon or two given the instability of the region.

The enemies may have lower tech but they still have lethal force and the will to use it, and the belief that their god want them to murder us. This isn't like a war for power and territory.

And atrocities of war happen because "war is hell" and it puts extreme strain on troops, technology has no effect on how a man treats someone he believes to be out to kill him, especially if he's seen fellow soldiers die to that same enemy.

Our enemies are willing to use what ever means they can find to kill us, and to expect our military to win against this and future foes we need to stop tightening the chains of what we find acceptable.

_________________
Currently playing: Whatever we have players for
Reading: Nemesis, Paddle your own canoe
Obsessing over: Asheron's Call
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
Raptor
Sprints McGee


Joined: 04 Jan 2004
Posts: 5567
Location: The Wired

PostPosted: Thu May 28, 2009 11:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I understand most of the point he makes, and even think quite a few are valid, but precision force trumps excessive force. Use technology to avoid collateral damage, don't use hellfire missiles to get one guy in a car driving down a crowded street; really don't use six of them.
_________________
The voices are back, excellent.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Marcus Brody
The Dog


Joined: 09 Jan 2004
Posts: 10599
Location: floating bumpercar

PostPosted: Fri May 29, 2009 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bulkoth wrote:
I believe we need to stop treating it like a "peace keeping" mission because what we should be over there doing is killing the people who are willing to kill others.


Which keeps the peace. "Peace-keeping mission" is a term that we use when we send troops into areas that are becoming unstable and require our intervention to maintain stability. We're literally there to keep/restore peace. The invasion of Iraq, for example, was not a peace-keeping mission, because we were there to fight the army of an already-relatively-stable nation.

Quote:
I'm not suggesting we dismiss all fuck ups as part of war but we need to stop acting like the issue is always so clean cut, the entire place has major issues because of the collapse of the greater Muslim region.

The ideal situation is that we can conduct a war without fuckups. When something happens that is explictly contrary to that ideal, it should be examined.

Quote:
The media acts like all terrorists are simply mislead, and that if we could explain to them what we're all about they'd stop trying to hurt us. The truth is that a great many of these people believe that we deserve to be killed.


They're not exactly born with American-hating DNA, are they? Most Muslim extremists are unstable, indoctrinated, or grossly uninformed about western society. That's just about the definition of mislead, though it is extreme in this situation.

Quote:
And the only way to cure that is to wipe them off the face of the earth and make every one else too afraid to think that.


Benevolent genocide. Great plan.

Quote:
People seem to think that just because our technology has advanced we can expect fewer casualties, but it's a lot easier now to make a mistake when you're looking only at intel and no one goes out to have a look around.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Rangers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_Recon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Forces_(United_States_Army)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA

Quote:
For instance say a radio signal previously determined to be that of a terrorist is tracked to a building, and intel says there are 6 other radio signals in that area tonight that we haven't identified and several vehicles. Do you press the launch missile button? Even if a guy goes out and looks all he's going to see is some Arabs, likely with a weapon or two given the instability of the region.


It's hard because they all look the same. Just like the blacks.

Quote:
The enemies may have lower tech but they still have lethal force and the will to use it, and the belief that their god want them to murder us. This isn't like a war for power and territory.


Iraq certainly was. Other than that, yeah, you're right.

Quote:
And atrocities of war happen because "war is hell" and it puts extreme strain on troops, technology has no effect on how a man treats someone he believes to be out to kill him, especially if he's seen fellow soldiers die to that same enemy.


Technology can provide comfort, even to front-line troops, that we couldn't dream of a few decades ago. This reduces stress, and allows the soldier to perform his or her mission with a clearer head. Technology also allows us to keep a lot of our soldiers out of harm's way entirely, which removes the consideration of "how a man treats someone he believes to be out to kill him."

Quote:
Our enemies are willing to use what ever means they can find to kill us, and to expect our military to win against this and future foes we need to stop tightening the chains of what we find acceptable.


Every time those chains tighten, we create more fanatics. Moral courage (since the author likes to talk about it) would dictate that we don't trade the lives of innocents for a bit more of our own safety.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jacob
HATES FIREWORKS


Joined: 11 Jan 2004
Posts: 3273

PostPosted: Fri May 29, 2009 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark you are my favorite dude of the day. As such I award you this:




For real. I totally agree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    lain.the-wired.com Forum Index -> Politics and News All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group // DustyGreen Theme 1.0.2 By Gil