ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 7th November 2015, 07:12 PM   #121
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,540
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Were you replying to me?
You said this previously:

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I'm curious how you know it was a war crime?
I then asked you for examples of equivalent or worse war crimes.

None are forthcoming, and I fully understand why.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Intentionally targeting a hospital is not necessarily a war crime.
Ah, you're in upside-down land. Now I see the problem.

As we're never going to get past that statement, the discussion is a bit pointless from here on. By "hospital" I mean a functioning hospital not being run as a front - actual hospitals, like the Kunduz one.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Can we at least agree on whether or not it was a crime, ...
I have already. It was a war crime.

Geneva Convention IV

Article 16


Article 17


Article 18

Quote:
Civilian hospitals organized to give care to the wounded and sick, the infirm and maternity cases, may in no circumstances be the object of attack, but shall at all times be respected and protected by the Parties to the conflict.
Article 19

and Article 20 seem to cover the possibilities, because the attack broke all of those rules.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2015, 10:08 PM   #122
Toontown
Philosopher
 
Toontown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,452
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
The flippant & sarcastic responses to comments on one of - if not the worst - war crimes in history is so heartening to me you wouldn't credit it.
...

Not even in the top 100,000 war crimes, if it was a war crime. Your hyperbole deserves nothing more than flippant sarcasm.

Since you chose to milk the last drop of indoctrinational value out of the victims of My Lai, and dishonestly ranked the massacre ridiculously high on the war crimes list, I was moved to inform you that My Lai was but a drop in the bucket compared to the thousands of war crimes committed by the communists in Vietnam. Here is just one of many well known and documented examples:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_at_Hu%E1%BA%BF

Without the era of communist aggression which took an estimated 80 million lives and gave rise to the containment strategy of which the Vietnam intervention was a part, there would have been no Vietnam war, no My Lai massacre, no Hue massacre, and the list goes on and on.

And much the same can be accurately attributed to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

The real causes of these wars get a pass from you, though they are serial war criminals, having committed numerous war crimes as a matter of policy, with malice aforethought.
__________________
"I did not say that!" - Donald Trump

Last edited by Toontown; 7th November 2015 at 10:17 PM.
Toontown is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2015, 10:21 PM   #123
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,540
Originally Posted by Toontown View Post
Hardly worse than ISIS.

Nowhere near the same as targeting a hospital. No matter how misguided, even massacres like the one you link have a point. To terrorise the population.

Bombing hospitals and shooting doctors running for cover is a level beyond mere genocide.

Originally Posted by Toontown View Post
... and gave rise to the containment strategy of which the Vietnam intervention was a part,...


Tell me, how did that turn out?

Originally Posted by Toontown View Post
The real causes of these wars get a pass from you, though they are serial war criminals, having committed numerous war crimes as a matter of policy, with malice aforethought.
No, they don't get a pass at all.

I can understand those war crimes, however. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th November 2015, 10:42 PM   #124
Toontown
Philosopher
 
Toontown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,452
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Hardly worse than ISIS.

Nowhere near the same as targeting a hospital. No matter how misguided, even massacres like the one you link have a point. To terrorise the population.

Bombing hospitals and shooting doctors running for cover is a level beyond mere genocide.
Some of your statements are so meaningless that there is no meaningful response to them. One can only highlight them.


Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Tell me, how did that turn out?
It succeeded. Western Europe was saved. South Korea is now a thriving democracy. Communist designs on Iran and Iraq were thwarted. Soviet proteges in the ME were clobbered by Israel. Communist designs on South America were thwarted. Unable to seize more countries to loot, the chronically nonproductive Soviet Union collapsed and released Eastern Europe from bondage.

Vietnam was just one battle in the "twilight struggle". One that ended rather badly for the former and unlamented Soviet Union and Red China, one of which was told to stuff it, and the other repelled when it attempted an invasion of Vietnam after Vietnam clobbered it's genocidal Khmer Rouge protege.

Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
I can understand those war crimes, however. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
What freedom? The freedom of the Taliban to throw acid into the faces of schoolgirls, and shoot them in the head?

Well, if you can understand that, then perhaps there may be the slightest glimmer of possibility that you can understand this:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...an_rights.html

Quote:
The next stage—may it come soon—will be the realization that the Taliban does not "violate" human rights, but entirely lacks the concept of their existence.
__________________
"I did not say that!" - Donald Trump

Last edited by Toontown; 7th November 2015 at 11:07 PM.
Toontown is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 12:31 AM   #125
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,540
Originally Posted by Toontown View Post
Looks like they're trying hard to emulate the brave soldiers of the Coalition.

They have some way to go yet. Note they didn't attempt to murder the doctors at the MSF hospital.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 02:41 AM   #126
Roofgardener
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 387
I've not been following this story, but having read some of the links here, I am horrified.

The event was over a month ago; has there been any "official" US explanation of how the hospital came to be targetted like this ?

The concept of "accident" is strained, when you consider how specific the attack was. The Traume Centre was leveled, but adjacent buildings seem hardly damaged. The attack was remarkably specific, and very sustained.

The US military knew this was a long-established MSF facility, and one with an extensive track record of humanitarian work, and strict discipline. (no weapons allowed on site, with unarmed internal security ensuring that no group stationed troops or weapons in the compound). The idea that the large MSF staff where somehow supporting the Taliban is ridiculous.

Granted that the number of dead and wounded is small by the "standards" of massacres. But to target Medicine Sans Frontiers ?
It's almost as though the Americans wanted their military to be held in contempt throughout the civilized world. Whats next; bomb the vatican ?

I don't understand it.

Last edited by Roofgardener; 8th November 2015 at 02:44 AM.
Roofgardener is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 06:56 AM   #127
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
Classic agitator claptrap. The idea that anyone knowingly targeted Doctors Without Borders is ludicrous. It doesn't matter what the US investigations conclude, or when they do, many people will take their beliefs that it was intentional to their graves. A serious conversation can't be had with such people. Indeed, it's not their intention to have one. Moral shaming, posturing and agitation, that is the name of the game. There is not one conspiracist website on the internet that isn't pushing the theory it was intentional. All of them equally sure of themselves. It's shameful, but it's really your problem.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 07:13 AM   #128
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,702
I can envision a dozen scenarios on why/how this happened, but I would bet the farm that "the Chain-of-Command wanted MSF dead" is not among any of the plausible ones. But that doesn't mean there wasn't some culpable malfeasance somewhere in the chain. MSF is not the most popular group in the US military, and if there were cultural run-ins with this group before, it is conceivable that someone placed appropriately tilted the targeting assessment in the desired direction.

Frankly, that would almost be an easier issue to fix than a finding that the system of target nomination and validation is sloppy.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 07:14 AM   #129
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,702
And all of that said, I agree with all the others here that The Atheist's rants about this being among the worst war crimes are beyond ludicrous, and if he actually believes that then I find it impossible to take any of his posts seriously.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 07:26 AM   #130
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
The Atheist also thinks we should have given in to the Nazis to prevent human suffering.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 07:29 AM   #131
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,702
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
The Atheist also thinks we should have given in to the Nazis to prevent human suffering.
Yeah, I saw that. Have to wonder if he's not a Poe, but I don't read enough of him to judge.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 11:26 AM   #132
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,540
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
The idea that anyone knowingly targeted Doctors Without Borders is ludicrous.
This is why I love you - there is no doubt whatsoever that someone did exactly that.

Maybe as a result of a string of errors; maybe because there were two senior Taliban there; maybe because grunts are morons, but whatever the reason, the fact stands that the hospital was deliberately targeted. The exact co-ordinates of a known hospital were the attack point.

And as to the idea that only conspiracist sites are all over this, you're right!

Sydney Morning Herald

Guardian

And worst of all, the Commie pinkos at New Yorker.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 11:54 AM   #133
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
It says right in your link "It's unclear whether commanders who unleashed the AC-130 gunship on the hospital – killing at least 22 patients and hospital staff – were aware that the site was a hospital or knew about the allegations of possible enemy activity." Everyone but you realizes that the fact that they were given the coordinates doesn't mean that the party who decided on the attack knew what they were shooting at. So you saying that "there is no doubt" that it was knowingly targeted is complete nonsense. This is classic conspiracist stupidity. "Look! The mainstream news is admitting it!" complete comprehension fail.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 01:08 PM   #134
Roofgardener
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 387
Hmmm...

So what you are basicly suggesting, Joey McGee, is that the US Military command structure is dangerously incompetent, to the point of criminality ?

You're implying that the worlds largest, most expensive, and most technologically sophisticated Military organisation has a command-and-control system equivelent to a banana republic ?

A multi-trillion dollar organisation has "gaps" that result in "the party who decided on the attack (didn't) know who they where shooting at" ?

In that scenario, the "party" in question - and their commanding officers - should, under the USA Uniform Code of Military Justice - be SHOT ! (or at least, be subject to either the Electric Chair, or a Lethal Injection; I'm not sure how the military handle the death penalty these days).

Moreover, the Chief of the General Staff responsible for the branch in question should be cashiered, and the Commander in Chief required to attend Congress to answer questions relating to dereliction of duty, in that the armed forces under his pervue had been demonstrated to be unfit for purpose.

THAT is what should happen if "...the party who decided on the attack (didn't) know what they where shooting at".

Are you SURE you wan't to continue with that proposal ?
Roofgardener is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 01:53 PM   #135
Border Reiver
Philosopher
 
Border Reiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 6,567
You realize that it is a long way from "didn't cross reference the target co-ordinates with the co-ordinates of hospitals" to "neglect to the prejudice of good order and discipline"? And just a little further yet to summary field executions?
__________________
Questions, comments, queries, bitches, complaints, rude gestures and/or remarks?
Border Reiver is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 02:08 PM   #136
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,540
Originally Posted by Border Reiver View Post
You realize that it is a long way from "didn't cross reference the target co-ordinates with the co-ordinates of hospitals"...
Except that is clearly not the case, and admittedly so in the official US statement by General John Campbell, or did you miss the link in New Yorker.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 03:07 PM   #137
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
Originally Posted by Roofgardener View Post
Hmmm...

So what you are basicly suggesting, Joey McGee, is that the US Military command structure is dangerously incompetent, to the point of criminality ?
Every military in the world has it's own history of friendly fire and accidental targeting of noncombatants. This isn't the first time an AC-130 gunship has fired on the wrong target, soldiers have died. Every military is going to have incidents eventually. It's not acceptable, but neither is waging no war at all because of the risks.

Quote:
You're implying that the worlds largest, most expensive, and most technologically sophisticated Military organisation has a command-and-control system equivelent to a banana republic ?

A multi-trillion dollar organisation has "gaps" that result in "the party who decided on the attack (didn't) know who they where shooting at" ?
blah blah blah blah

Quote:
In that scenario, the "party" in question - and their commanding officers - should, under the USA Uniform Code of Military Justice - be SHOT ! (or at least, be subject to either the Electric Chair, or a Lethal Injection; I'm not sure how the military handle the death penalty these days).
People don't get shot for friendly fire and other accidents that get people killed. That's kind of sick and stupid.

Quote:
Moreover, the Chief of the General Staff responsible for the branch in question should be cashiered, and the Commander in Chief required to attend Congress to answer questions relating to dereliction of duty, in that the armed forces under his pervue had been demonstrated to be unfit for purpose.

THAT is what should happen if "...the party who decided on the attack (didn't) know what they where shooting at".

Are you SURE you wan't to continue with that proposal ?
I don't get it. Shouldn't you wait until you understand exactly what happened before you decide who should be punished for it and what should be done about it?

Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Except that is clearly not the case, and admittedly so in the official US statement by General John Campbell, or did you miss the link in New Yorker.
He doesn't say anything that supports your narrative whatsoever. I can tell that without looking at it. I did look at it, and of course, you can't read.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 03:10 PM   #138
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
The problem with trying to take tragedies and twist them to support your agenda is that everyone (except for you and the people who agree with you) sees right through your posturing and logical leaps.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 04:59 PM   #139
Toontown
Philosopher
 
Toontown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,452
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
I can understand those war crimes, however. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

Originally Posted by Toontown View Post
What freedom? The freedom of the Taliban to throw acid into the faces of schoolgirls, and shoot them in the head?

Well, if you can understand that, then perhaps there may be the slightest glimmer of possibility that you can understand this:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...an_rights.html


Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Looks like they're trying hard to emulate the brave soldiers of the Coalition.

They have some way to go yet. Note they didn't attempt to murder the doctors at the MSF hospital.


As expected, you did not understand any of that at all.

I wonder if you have the self awareness to understand how revealing it is that you excuse the war crimes you "understand". And the ones you understand are invariably the ones committed by enemies of the U.S.

I think the only way you could logically have that level of self awareness would be if you are in fact a Poe as Garrette suspects.

Are you a Poe, out to waste our time with silly little head games?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EItka8KXeq0
__________________
"I did not say that!" - Donald Trump

Last edited by Toontown; 8th November 2015 at 05:30 PM.
Toontown is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 05:50 PM   #140
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,923
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Hardly worse than ISIS.

Nowhere near the same as targeting a hospital. No matter how misguided, even massacres like the one you link have a point. To terrorise the population.
This is just bizarre. If I randomly slap some stranger while walking down the street, that may make no sense, while if I kill someone to steal their money, that has a purpose. But which is worse? Whether or not there's a "point" is hardly the important factor, is it? And terrorizing the population is itself a bad thing, so that doesn't mitigate the actions the VC and NVA.

Quote:
Bombing hospitals and shooting doctors running for cover is a level beyond mere genocide.
Yeah, no, it isn't. Not even close.

Plus, what's with the plural? This was one hospital, not multiple hospitals.

Quote:
No, they don't get a pass at all.

I can understand those war crimes, however. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
ISIS and the Taliban are explicitly not fighting for freedom. Neither were any of your commie friends. And yes, actually, you are giving them a pass with your cheap moral relativism.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 05:54 PM   #141
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,540
Originally Posted by Toontown View Post
I wonder if you have the self awareness to understand how revealing it is that you excuse the war crimes you "understand". And the ones you understand are invariably the ones committed by enemies of the U.S.
Utter bollocks again - I agreed that ISIS and Taliban are committing war crimes. ISIS are not freedom fighters in the way that Hamas could be seen to be.

I just happen to focus on the US ones because USA is the country that holds itself as above the law because they're the good guys. It is interesting that you see it that way, though. Not reading what I've actually typed is legion around here.

You already tried this fallacy and failed the first time. You're welcome to continue failing. I am not giving ISIS or Taliban a free pass, but so far, they haven't quite committed anything as atrocious as the Kunduz MSF attack.

Originally Posted by Toontown View Post
Are you a Poe, out to waste our time with silly little head games?
No, I'm making sure there is a balance between the apologists for atrocity and those who still have sufficient humanity left in the to be disgusted by the attack.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 06:16 PM   #142
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,252
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
Yeah, I saw that. Have to wonder if he's not a Poe, but I don't read enough of him to judge.
Once I would have said; gotta be a poe. But it's the Internet. .. lots of strangeness around.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 06:18 PM   #143
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
I am not giving ISIS or Taliban a free pass, but so far, they haven't quite committed anything as atrocious as the Kunduz MSF attack.
Savagely beating, raping and killing women, setting prisoners in cages on fire in cages, torturing children, none of this is worse than mistakenly bombing a hospital?

Quote:
No, I'm making sure there is a balance between the apologists for atrocity and those who still have sufficient humanity left in the to be disgusted by the attack.
An atrocity is "extremely wicked or cruel act" and the only evidence for such a thing here is in your head. Posturing as the one protecting humanity is a joke. You're the one who says we should just leave Afghanistan for the Taliban to take over as they will anyway, isn't that right?
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 07:49 PM   #144
Polaris
Penultimate Amazing
 
Polaris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,340
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Savagely beating, raping and killing women, setting prisoners in cages on fire in cages, torturing children, none of this is worse than mistakenly bombing a hospital?

An atrocity is "extremely wicked or cruel act" and the only evidence for such a thing here is in your head. Posturing as the one protecting humanity is a joke. You're the one who says we should just leave Afghanistan for the Taliban to take over as they will anyway, isn't that right?
Beheading children for not being Islamic enough. Credit where it's due!
__________________
"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

"Let your ears hear this beautiful song that's hiding underneath the sound," Ed Kowalczyk.
Polaris is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 08:04 PM   #145
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,540
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Savagely beating, raping and killing women, setting prisoners in cages on fire in cages, torturing children, none of this is worse than mistakenly bombing a hospital?
En masse, probably, but in single instances, I can't think of any at the level of a sustained attack and machine-gunning people running away from a burning hospital.

Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
An atrocity is "extremely wicked or cruel act"...
This is why I suspect you struggle with English, because that describes perfectly what happened at the MSF hospital.

Let me take it slowly for you.

The full description of atrocity - you only gave half of it - is:

An extremely wicked or cruel act, typically one involving physical violence or injury: war atrocities

No question it was cruel, no question it involved violence and injury.

You do know what "or" means don't you? Maybe you're struggling with "cruel". An ocean can be cruel - intent is not necessary, although the level of intent is presently unknown.

Here is one of the descriptions of cruel, from the same dictionary you used:

Causing pain or suffering.

Plain as it could be, The correct word has been used: atrocity.

Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
You're the one who says we should just leave Afghanistan for the Taliban to take over as they will anyway, isn't that right?
Yes it is, and it's notable that the Taliban didn't attack the hospital.

The US are the good guys, though.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 08:25 PM   #146
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
You don't just get to make up your own definitions for words as you go along trying to create emotional effect...

It's notable the Taliban didn't attack the hospital? Do you think the Taliban has never attacked a hospital before? Really?

There's no evidence that the people who pulled the trigger, let alone anyone in command, knew they were blowing up a Doctor's Without Borders hospital, you merely state you believe it, and then go on ranting about how evil it was, and how we're blind apologists... blah blah blah...

It's worse than My Lai, you haven't even proved it was done on purpose buddy, no one cares about your moral posturing. Or what you imagined happened and how horrible it seems to you.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 09:52 PM   #147
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,540
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
You don't just get to make up your own definitions for words as you go along trying to create emotional effect...
That's about as dishonest as it could be. I used the dictionary you took the meaning from to show you in extremely simple terms why your "reasoning" was incorrect.

You made an error, no point trying to get defensive about it.

Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
It's notable the Taliban didn't attack the hospital?
Correct!

They came and went away without seeing the need to fry the people in it.

USA: not so much.

Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
There's no evidence that the people who pulled the trigger, let alone anyone in command, knew they were blowing up a Doctor's Without Borders hospital,...
So, an official statement by a US Army General doesn't convince you.

Sounds good to me - I wouldn't trust them a millimetre.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 10:28 PM   #148
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,680
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post

The attack on the hospital is a war crime.



Nominate a better suggestion - I'm open to them.

All you need to come up with a single instance that matches the MSF hospital attack in immorality. The best I can come up with is My Lai, and I think this surpasses it, so over to you.
Albigensian Crusade
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th November 2015, 11:23 PM   #149
Joey McGee
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 10,307
You also invent interpretations from things a person didn't actually say, the Americans didn't admit to blowing it up on purpose, no one said that, you completely made that up, just like everything else.

You're actually saying the Taliban were more moral than the Americans for not blowing up the hospital, despite the fact that they have a history of attacking hospitals quite on purpose.
Joey McGee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2015, 12:40 AM   #150
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,540
Originally Posted by Noztradamus View Post
Albigensian Crusade
I presume you mean the massacre of the people of Beziers rather than the entire 20-year crusade.

A bagatelle compared to Kunduz - the papists gave the people a chance to surrender at Beziers! I don't see that option in the timeline of the MSF report.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2015, 01:50 AM   #151
Roofgardener
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 387
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
Every military in the world has it's own history of friendly fire and accidental targeting of noncombatants. This isn't the first time an AC-130 gunship has fired on the wrong target, soldiers have died. Every military is going to have incidents eventually. It's not acceptable, but neither is waging no war at all because of the risks.
I was reacting to your comment about "...Everyone but you realizes that the fact that they were given the coordinates doesn't mean that the party who decided on the attack knew what they were shooting at. ...", not making a generalised point, JM.

If a military organisation allows somebody to plan an attack when that person (or group) does not know what they are attacking, then that is gross dereliction of duty.

I would be intrigued to hear just WHAT the US Army thought it WAS attacking. After all, the attack was VERY precise.
Roofgardener is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2015, 03:23 AM   #152
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,702
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
I presume you mean the massacre of the people of Beziers rather than the entire 20-year crusade.

A bagatelle compared to Kunduz - the papists gave the people a chance to surrender at Beziers! I don't see that option in the timeline of the MSF report.
This No True Scotsman of massacres seals it. The Atheist is either a Poe, a gamer/troll, or a rabid ideologue without the slightest capacity for objectivity.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2015, 05:21 AM   #153
Toontown
Philosopher
 
Toontown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 6,452
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Utter bollocks again...
Yeah. Here it comes...

Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
I just happen to focus on the US ones because USA is the country that holds itself as above the law because they're the good guys...
Yeah. That's about as "utter bollocks" as you can get. But thanks for the warning anyway. Not that we needed it. Your pattern has been clear for some time now.

Right. I get it. As long as the Taliban, for example, does not hold itself up as the "good guys" while committing war crimes and crimes against humanity, you will continue to "focus" on the U.S., which, unlike your ilk, has spent blood and treasure trying to tamp down the Taliban.

Except the Taliban does hold itself up as the good guys. That's how they justify beheading children, for example.

You can't even come up with a feeble excuse for your bollocks that isn't bass ackwards. And to make your bollocks more completely odious, you hold yourself up as the righteous accuser and judge.
__________________
"I did not say that!" - Donald Trump
Toontown is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2015, 09:47 AM   #154
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Joey McGee View Post
The Atheist also thinks we should have given in to the Nazis to prevent human suffering.
And he thinks the Maori were happy to give New Zealand to the nice British men with guns because they thought they were so awesome, or enamored with the beauty and grace of Queen Victoria, or something.
__________________
Vive la liberté!

Last edited by WildCat; 9th November 2015 at 09:48 AM.
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2015, 09:55 AM   #155
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Garrette View Post
This No True Scotsman of massacres seals it. The Atheist is either a Poe, a gamer/troll, or a rabid ideologue without the slightest capacity for objectivity.
There's another possibility, but bringing it up is against forum rules.
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2015, 10:29 AM   #156
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 19,042
Don't forget the attack was not an isolated event.
There was a fierce battle going on for control of a town. Buildings snd streets change hands, there is no front line.
If you are tasked with close support then you shoot at the target that your FOO gives to you and you do it as quickly as you can. Fighting in built up areas is a difficult, dirty and confused business.

My uncle Harold was part of ajoint RN, RAF FOO in Normandy.
His unit was in armoured cars alongside the Infantry and tanks.
They got requests from the infantry and passed it to the Battleships (until they were 20 miles or so off the beaches) or the RAF Typhoons in the 'cab rank' It took about 5 minutes from a request to the fire coming in from the ships and as little as a minute for the Typhoons.
Sometimes things went wrong and the fire landed in tbe wrong place or a target was misidentified. It happens, it always will in a confusing, dynamic situation. It's sad when it does but it's war, it's nasty and tragic.

Last edited by Captain_Swoop; 9th November 2015 at 10:30 AM.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2015, 10:35 AM   #157
Jrrarglblarg
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 12,673
Originally Posted by Roofgardener View Post
Hmmm...

So what you are basicly suggesting, Joey McGee, is that the US Military command structure is dangerously incompetent, to the point of criminality ?

You're implying that the worlds largest, most expensive, and most technologically sophisticated Military organisation has a command-and-control system equivelent to a banana republic ?

A multi-trillion dollar organisation has "gaps" that result in "the party who decided on the attack (didn't) know who they where shooting at" ?

In that scenario, the "party" in question - and their commanding officers - should, under the USA Uniform Code of Military Justice - be SHOT ! (or at least, be subject to either the Electric Chair, or a Lethal Injection; I'm not sure how the military handle the death penalty these days).

Moreover, the Chief of the General Staff responsible for the branch in question should be cashiered, and the Commander in Chief required to attend Congress to answer questions relating to dereliction of duty, in that the armed forces under his pervue had been demonstrated to be unfit for purpose.

THAT is what should happen if "...the party who decided on the attack (didn't) know what they where shooting at".

Are you SURE you wan't to continue with that proposal ?
Totally rule of So.
Jrrarglblarg is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2015, 10:40 AM   #158
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 21,540
Originally Posted by WildCat View Post
And he thinks the Maori were happy to give New Zealand to the nice British men with guns because they thought they were so awesome, or enamored with the beauty and grace of Queen Victoria, or something.
Chalk up another thing you have absolutely no idea about - New Zealand history.

1 Maori didn't give land away.
2 They fought the British to a stalemate, so were in no danger of defeat.
3 They chose to enter into an agreement with the Crown that still applies today.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2015, 10:45 AM   #159
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 19,042
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Chalk up another thing you have absolutely no idea about - New Zealand history.

1 Maori didn't give land away.
2 They fought the British to a stalemate, so were in no danger of defeat.
3 They chose to enter into an agreement with the Crown that still applies today.
Shouldn't they have just surrendered according to your philosophy?

Last edited by Captain_Swoop; 9th November 2015 at 10:49 AM.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th November 2015, 10:54 AM   #160
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,923
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Shouldn't they have just surrendered according to your philosophy?
No, you've got it wrong. He's being perfectly consistent with his philosophy. If you're a westerner, you should never fight for your values because your values are evil. If you're not a westerner, it's OK to fight for your values.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:32 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.