Qhimm.com Forums
Off-topic forums => Completely Unrelated => Topic started by: DLPB_ on 2011-05-04 02:16:03
-
Yeah I am GUTTED. APPALLED! Struck numb with anger and sadness (and not from a Tranq or a Hyper!)...
Osama was shot unarmed! This poor mass murdering scum was shot unarmed :( What are we coming to? Let's go on about it for the next 100 years and make sure that next time we bring a person like him alive! Yes, so they can act as a rallying cry to others in a silly court that is always gonna find em guilty (because they are), and then keep them on death row for years.
Yup it all makes sense. Give a dictator the ability to reach millions and make some lawyers and media happy... or blow the maggot away and avoid years of trouble and wasted money.
'Tis a tough choice. I don't think I will be able to sleep tonight, now that the great Satan (USA) has bumped off this remarkable man!
-
We killed more than a few unarmed civilians in my time. Who cares is there's 1 more to add to that list. We can't torture people anyways, so it's not like we could've gotten any info out of him.
-
So then you advocate the mass murderings of innocent people done under his orders? You aren't making your actual opinions on the matter distinct from your sarcasm. What part about him do you find "remarkable", exactly?
-
Oh come on :P you should know what I mean. Why are some people so poor at picking up that type of humour and sarcasm?
-
Oh come on :-P you should know what I mean. Why are some people so poor at picking up that type of humour and sarcasm?
Internets
-
The same of your TV channels that regularly mobs your president, has shown a S-deficite and reported several times "Obama death" A spokesperson of my goverment twittered from this and had to apologize.
This media will tell that Osama was armed and had a tank in his garden and that his cleaning woman had a AK47.
-
Oh come on :P you should know what I mean. Why are some people so poor at picking up that type of humour and sarcasm?
Because I haven't been selectively reading your posts enough to know your style of humor/sarcasm. I'm sure it would make sense if I had.
-
Osama was shot unarmed! This poor mass murdering scum was shot unarmed :(
He might not have had weapons, but he had a shield.
He was apparently fully willing to put his wife's body in front of his own in order to protect himself.
-
He might not have had weapons, but he had a shield.
He was apparently fully willing to put his wife's body in front of his own in order to protect himself.
I heard this morning that they are now saying that wasn't true.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/white-house-osama-used-his-wife-as-human-shield/
Only the people there can actually know what happened. I doubt we'll ever good details.
-
I wouldn't be even remotely surprised if it's not true. Sounds exactly like the kind of story someone would just perpetrate about him out of spite.
Or maybe it was a genuine misunderstanding. (Yeah right.)
-
who cares the warmunger is gone for good now and we can move on...im aussie but im still glad this murderer of thousands is dead. if it were me i would send a nuke and kill em all but i guess thats why it's not me hehe ;-)
-
I wouldn't be even remotely surprised if it's not true. Sounds exactly like the kind of story someone would just perpetrate about him out of spite.
It is something that people would like to believe about Bin Laden.
But it's also exactly the kind of thing Bin Laden would do. He sent young men off to die and stayed in his mansion. He conducted his wars through dirty tactics rather than straight fighting. It's entirely believable that he would use human shields to defend himself. It would be apt for someone who was so cowardly in life to be a coward in death too.
-
I wonder what someone would hope to accomplish using a human shield against a commando squad. If anything the woman takes a few hits, becomes dead weight, osama may take out 1 person if lucky. I guess people dont think clearly in those situations and their true nature shows.
-
Osama wasn't stupid. He knew that if he was taken alive it would be a real coup. He could have a farcical trial and spout his crap and get people onside. Not to mention his execution would be a rallying cry to militant Muslims.
The americans aren't stupid either, so they blew his brains out. :lol:
-
It is something that people would like to believe about Bin Laden.
But it's also exactly the kind of thing Bin Laden would do. He sent young men off to die and stayed in his mansion. He conducted his wars through dirty tactics rather than straight fighting. It's entirely believable that he would use human shields to defend himself. It would be apt for someone who was so cowardly in life to be a coward in death too.
I'd do the same.
Why go off to die yourself when you can have others do it for you ? I'd rather be a general than a foot soldier.
-
It would be apt for someone who was so cowardly in life to be a coward in death too.
I hope you're being sarcastic. The guy seriously had balls standing up against a superpower nation like the USA. He can not be called a coward (just because people hate him so much). To do the straight fighting would've been just plain stupid.
But it's also exactly the kind of thing Bin Laden would do.
Yeah, like you've met the guy. That's not a fact, that's an impression. To me, using a human meat-shield just seems so futile and desperate that I doubt it could've even occurred to him. But that's just my opinion as opposed to yours, I guess.
But it does sound exactly like a sick story made up to beat him down when he's already dead. Like the way the public spat over Mussolini's dead body in 1945.
-
He didn't stand up to anyone, seer. That's the point. He was a rich man living the high life sending others to die for him....
-
.
-
I wonder what someone would hope to accomplish using a human shield against a commando squad. If anything the woman takes a few hits, becomes dead weight, osama may take out 1 person if lucky. I guess people dont think clearly in those situations and their true nature shows.
The idea is that they won't shoot because they don't want an innocent to die.
I hope you're being sarcastic. The guy seriously had balls standing up against a superpower nation like the USA. He can not be called a coward (just because people hate him so much). To do the straight fighting would've been just plain stupid.
Yes he can. He apparently believed in 72 raisins for anyone who died a martyr. Why would he fear death if he was so sure that he would be rewarded for dying? Because he's a coward. Sorry, he was a coward ;D
He talked about God being on his side and invoked the idea of Islamic world domination, but his modus operandi was hiding, attacking civilians and using sneak attacks.
Yeah, like you've met the guy. That's not a fact, that's an impression. To me, using a human meat-shield just seems so futile and desperate that I doubt it could've even occurred to him.
Desperate times call for desperate measures.
But it does sound exactly like a sick story made up to beat him down when he's already dead. Like the way the public spat over Mussolini's dead body in 1945.
Mussolini deserved what he got, and so did Bin Laden. There's also a very practical reason to spread the story: if believed, it would lower Al-Qaeda's morale and would stop him from being regarded as a hero and an inspiration.
His dad was the Sultan's best friend, and Osama himself lived like a prince while he was in Saudi Arabia. Sending other people to their deaths is the Saudi way - Saudis are the financial backbone of Salafi terrorist groups, all around the world. They're willing to send the money, but ask them to risk their own lives for their country or their oil and they run crying to the USA.
Bandar bin Sultan actually bragged to a man who wrote his biography that he duped Saddam into believing the US didn't care if he invaded Kuwait. Sometimes I hope the Iranians nuke the Saudis, just because I hate how they push their oil on us like it's heroin, and how they have better access to our politicians than we do, though, to be fair, they wouldn't have the chance to push their drug if our gov't didn't let them. That is, if our gov't didn't force us into almost complete dependence on fossil fuels for transportation for the past seventy years.
Seconded.
An extra bonus of having the Iranians nuke Saudi Arabia would be to have a casus belli on Iran. Two birds with one stone.
If the Republicans were in power in the US, they'd probably steal your idea. 8)
-
On another note it seems Al-Queda has released a statement confirming Osama's death. So unless they are in on the big conspiracy he is most likely dead.
-
.
-
i don't believe in nuking anything because that would kill innocent civilians, but something has to be done about saudi, eventually we'll just have another person rise up and take bin ladens place.
and i agree with kudistos, Mussolini got what he deserved, he was a cruel genius and is partly responsible for the worst of world war 2.
-
i don't believe in nuking anything because that would kill innocent civilians,
There is an argument against that. Most voters applauded Hamas for example. The population is responsible for its leader.
-
There is an argument against that. Most voters applauded Hamas for example. The population is responsible for its leader.
many people are fools, but that doesn't mean we have the right to blow them to hell.
-
There is an argument against that. Most voters applauded Hamas for example. The population is responsible for its leader.
For Palestine, this is the case. And for this reason, I don't have much sympathy for them.
But the Saudi people have absolutely no choice in who leads their country. It's still an absolute monarchy over there. They don't even pretend to be a democracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia#Politics). Decisions are made by a royal family interpreting a very old book.
-
i don't believe in nuking anything because that would kill innocent civilians
I believe in nuking everything, everywhere, because that would kill all humans, which would actually be a pretty good move on our part.
-
I believe in nuking everything, everywhere, because that would kill all humans, which would actually be a pretty good move on our part.
thank god your not in control of any countries with nukes :P
-
I believe in nuking everything, everywhere, because that would kill all humans, which would actually be a pretty good move on our part.
You're trying too hard.
-
You don't need to kill all humans, we are going to die out one day anyway. No matter what we do., So really everything is rather pointless.
-
just... wow, everyones so "woe is us".
humanity has some bad sides sure, but we got a good side too.
-
You're trying too hard.
No, you can ask most of the IRC folk, I generally do legitimately express this opinion.
-
We can't torture people anyways
you might want to read the Patriot Act, it specifically states that anyone who is considered to be a "terrorist" against america is stripped of all constitutional rights including those that protect against the use of torture. Also you might want to take a look at what we did at guantanamo right after the patriot act was signed in.
-
yarlson. that torture happens in places where the law is limbo and it is not a harsh type of torture under the normal definition. It is hardly having your eyes poked out or toes cut off. Some would have you believe placing bacon in a Muslim cell is torture.
It comes down to hypothetics again... if someone knows where and when a deadly attack is going to take place that will kill thousands, do you torture him for the answer? Bluntly. yes you do if you have any sanity.
-
Except that
a) torture doesn't work, and even innocent people usually submit and,
b) terrorists don't leave key info with single individuals precisely because they can be coerced / bought off
-
Torture does work, or at least is has done. Not that I agree with the principle except in extreme circumstances.
-
i think it can work, but it can also get them to spew a bunch of lies and bs just to get you to stop
-
A discussion on torture...this could be really good, or could get really bad.
Anyone see the movie "Unthinkable"? I mean, torture certainly can work with many people. And it will almost certainly fail with other people. However, if you systematize the process, I'm certain that person-specific torture would work in most cases. Construct a psychological profile of the torturee, determine what they could or could not know and how valuable that information is, develop a specific procedure for that person, and don't kill them when it is over, keep them to torture in the future if the information isn't good.
NOT THAT I THINK TORTURE IS GOOD, but I do believe that in many situations the ends justifies the means. Though torture truely is a disgusting and cruel act.
-
Torture does work, or at least is has done.
No, it hasn't. Torture people and they will tell you exactly what you want to here. Not the truth.
This wastes time and makes the whole exercise pointless.
It also assumes that a competent terror cell would ever give an individual much key information. In practice, they would not, because an agent can be
a) tortured
b) bribed
c) a spy
d) accidentally killed
I don't know how al-Queda operate, but I imagine very few individuals could be captured who ever actually 'know' what is going on. An operative might know that something contains explosives, and a colleague might know that the something is going to place X, but no individual would know that an explosive is going to X except their handler.
-
So you are saying at no point through history has torture ever worked or saved lives? That simply isn't logical. It probably works in many cases and has saved lives. I don't know the figure of success and I suspect nor do you.
-
So you are saying at no point through history has torture ever worked or saved lives? That simply isn't logical. It probably works in many cases and has saved lives. I don't know the figure of success and I suspect nor do you.
Not in today's modern world. It may have worked back in olden times but not now :P DLBP you suffer from what I like to call "what once works always works" syndrome. Like your "gay" argument, it is very flawed. We live in the age of youtube and cheeseburgers. Bosola is correct torture does not work.
-
Torture people and they will tell you exactly what you want to here.
This shows us how much an English degree from Cambridge is worth.
-
Holy crow! Bosola has an English degree from Cambridge? @_@ That is astounding! Though that does not mean he is devoid of making mistakes :P
-
Holy crow! Bosola has an English degree from Cambridge? @_@ That is astounding! Though that does not mean he is devoid of making mistakes :P
He does. I have a Classics (http://www.classics.ox.ac.uk/) degree from Oxford, so there's a little bit of friendly (lolno) rivalry.
-
I am ashamed of my accomplishments now :P I have various medical degrees but nothing that exciting.
-
i'm failing in highschool -.-
-
I am ashamed of my accomplishments now :P I have various medical degrees but nothing that exciting.
At least you can comfort yourself with the fact that you're doing better than Jaitsu. ;D
i'm failing in highschool -.-
There, there. At least you can comfort yourself with the fact that you're doing better than Hermoor. ;D
BTW, is anyone else having trouble posting? I've noticed a weird problem with the page becoming unresponsive when I post. I can copy/paste what I've written and post using a different tab, but it's an inconvenience.
On the other hand, I'm using a bleeding edge version of Chromium, so my browser might be derping.
-
On the other hand, I'm using a bleeding edge version of Chromium, so my browser might be derping.
Same with fire fox 4! Dunno doesn't sound like a SMF problem.
-
At least you can comfort yourself with the fact that you're doing better than Jaitsu. ;D
There, there. At least you can comfort yourself with the fact that you're doing better than Hermoor. ;D
BTW, is anyone else having trouble posting? I've noticed a weird problem with the page becoming unresponsive when I post. I can copy/paste what I've written and post using a different tab, but it's an inconvenience.
On the other hand, I'm using a bleeding edge version of Chromium, so my browser might be derping.
aww, that gives me such a fuzzy feeling, being smarter then... well, whatever the hell he is.
and yeah, i am to, its as if the entire site just slowed down to a crawl
-
Not in today's modern world.
When the torture takes place does not alter anything. If I knew a terrorist had planted a bomb, I'd be quite happy to torture that man and I am willing to bet that many times you would get good information. It is hypothetical. I am not condoning torture, I am saying there is an argument for it especially in extreme circumstances.
Bosola's argument is torture never works, and I find that an amazing argument which has no proof at all. Logic would suggest that it would work, even if a minority of times. If I was tortured as to a crime I had done, I would spill the beans long before the torture. Just the threat of it would work.
So, I know myself how accurate torture would be with me. I would sing like Tweetie pie. But in any case, for 99.9% of cases, torture should never be an option. I am not saying it should.
Saying torture does not work, sounds nice, but there is not 1 shred of proof of that.
-
But in any case, for 99.9% of cases, torture should never be an option.
So (by your own logic) if torture for over 99% of the cases should not be used, then why debate the issue right? ^_^
Also the sheer amount of money, being sent on wild goose chases cause the terrorist gave bad info should make it worth it. :P
EDIT: I think your Logic O' Meter is busted :P
-
Apply it to those with information and those without information. The answer becomes: Who are you torturing and what do they know? I also think the threat of future torture or indirect methods of torture play a role.
-
The answer becomes: Who are you torturing and what do they know?
It really doesn't matter.
I also think the threat of future torture or indirect methods of torture play a role.
Even better! Now the terrorists can anticipate the torture methods and expect it, as well as plan for it. They can plan for an agent to be caught, and deliberately give him false info. To send us on a wild goose chase spending millions.
-
*refer to my first post regarding torture.
-
Even better! Now the terrorists can anticipate the tortur methods and expect it, as well as plan for it. Then can plan for an agent to be caught, and deliberately give him false info. To send us on a wild goose chase spending millions.
*cough* WMD's *cough*
-
lostwing, understand that scenario is very very rare (if possible), to know EVERYTHING there is to know about the person you are going to torture?! Before you torture them... See my last post is a more likely scenario, and even relates to your movie you mentioned.
-
I don't think torturing should be exercised at all. Isn't there some kind of mind-altering substance out there that could inhibit the person's... inhibitions and just make him answer every question without really thinking about it? Hell, you could probably do it with a generous dose of alcohol. I just don't see how torture can be effective especially when there's no guarantee that the person has the information you're looking for and that what he's telling you is definitely true (especially when what he thinks is true may not be the truth).
Although, that's just torturing for information. If your purposes are different - say if you just want to make POW No. 454 behave himself - then maybe it is effective, though I'm not saying it's therefore right.
-
This shows us how much an English degree from Cambridge is worth.
ah christ
Bosola's argument is torture never works, and I find that an amazing argument which has no proof at al
Sure. I said that under no circumstances has a true word ever, ever been said by a human being in any state that could be considered duress. That is exactly what I said. This is the only viable reading of my post and Seifer isn't being deliberately oblique in a bid to irritate everyone.
-
.