IDF-Apache firing missiles on 67yr old civilian in wheelchair- at Sabra mosque in Gaza...

"Oelewapper" wrote in message
...
Admittedly, I am not very familiar with this particular kind of issues in
military aviation, but how can it be "legal" for the Israëli occupation
force to send out US-made Apaches, to launch a couple of missiles on a 67
year old crippled, half-blind and unarmed man, leaving a mosque in a
wheelchair after having said his dawn prayers ?? What about the pilot's
responsibility ??

And what about the countries that are supplying and financing those
governments that are responsible for these "evil" state-sponsored - yet
IMHO
completely unlawful - brutalities ??

You do recall last year when US PGMs were used in repeated attempted
decapitation attacks on the Iraqi leadership? Your sympathy for terror
masterminds however feeble is touching. I would suggest that forming
organizations with the avowed purpose to destroy another state should be
expected to invite such attacks from said intended victims. He could of
course disavowed his creations murderous intent but he didn't. Ergo he got
what he deserved.

(I was going to add "may he rot in Hell", but then I remembered he lived in
Hamas created Hell-on-Earth already. Death was a release.)

Civilian? So was Chancellor Hitler, Chairman Mao, Secretary Stalin. Where do
you get the notion that only the pawns should be targets?


Oele.
In pace, Iustitia omnibus.

---
Juan Cole *Informed Comment*
http://www.juancole.com/

And what about the countries that are supplying and financing those
governments that are responsible for these "evil" state-sponsored - yet
IMHO
completely unlawful - brutalities ??

It was an execution of a fugitive criminal convicted to death for crimes
against the state, Jewish race, and humanity.

Oele.
In pace, Iustitia omnibus.

Your kind of "justice" would have Osama bin Laden as president and Kim Il
Sung as his chief of police...

"Jeroen Wenting" wrote :

Your kind of "justice" would have Osama bin Laden as president and Kim Il
Sung as his chief of police...

US has it's share in creating OBL and guys like him...

In article ,
"Nicky" wrote:

"Jeroen Wenting" wrote :

Your kind of "justice" would have Osama bin Laden as president and Kim Il
Sung as his chief of police...

US has it's share in creating OBL and guys like him...

Except that it didn't.

Osama bin Laden was "created" by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and
was trained and funded by Middle Eastern states. The US was backing a
*different* crowd of guerillas in Afghanistan. You know - the ones who
*aren't* running around blowing up innocents around the world.

It's funny how often people try to blame the bad guys on the US, when
most of them came directly from failed *Soviet* programs and support.

There's a reason the signature weapons of terrorists are the AK-47 and
the RPG.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Chad Irby" wrote :
Except that it didn't.

Oh, Yes they did. You can not neglect the history,

Osama bin Laden was "created" by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and
was trained and funded by Middle Eastern states. The US was backing a
*different* crowd of guerillas in Afghanistan. You know - the ones who
*aren't* running around blowing up innocents around the world.

US trained end equipted directly or indirectly the same people which were
later known as Talibans. During history US put to power (directly or
indirectly) lot of dictators, and trained lot of people who later bacem
terrorists.
That is the fat and ther is no argue about it.

It's funny how often people try to blame the bad guys on the US, when
most of them came directly from failed *Soviet* programs and support.

Soviets as also American and their cold war conflict producet lot od
dictators and terrorists.

There's a reason the signature weapons of terrorists are the AK-47 and
the RPG.

AK-47 is cheap, reliable and on the market for 50 years. It is also
produced in lot of countries so it is very easy to get.

"Nicky" wrote in message
...
"Chad Irby" wrote :
Except that it didn't.



US trained end equipted directly or indirectly the same people which were
later known as Talibans.

No they trained and equipped the group that later became
The Northern Alliance and who were opposing the Taliban

In particular they supported Ahmed Shah Masood aka The Lion
of Panjshir who was assassinated by Al Qaeda suicide bombers
2 days before the Sept 11 terrorist attacks.

He was killed because they knew the US would turn to him
to lead the Afghan forces in any attempt to overthrow
the Taliban regime.

The Taliban emerged from the Pakistani ISI operations
and didnt appear on the scene until well after the Soviets
had withdrawn and the US lost interest in that country. The
one thing that the US and the rest of theWest can be blamed
for is not recognising earlier the threat to us posed by
the Taliban and their allies in Al Qaeda.

Keith

In article ,
"Nicky" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote :
Except that it didn't.

Oh, Yes they did. You can not neglect the history,

Well, I can *read* it. *You* can neglect it.

Osama bin Laden was "created" by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and
was trained and funded by Middle Eastern states. The US was backing a
*different* crowd of guerillas in Afghanistan. You know - the ones who
*aren't* running around blowing up innocents around the world.

US trained end equipted directly or indirectly the same people which were
later known as Talibans.

Actually, the folks we backed were the guys the Taliban edged out to get
power after the USSR left. That's why the US didn't have any decent
connections in Afghanistan for 20 years.

During history US put to power (directly or indirectly) lot of
dictators, and trained lot of people who later bacem terrorists. That
is the fat and ther is no argue about it.

Funny how you can't seem to list "a lot" of them. We helped put some
dictators in, but I really can't think of any cases where we trained
folks who became world-class terrorists. The major players - PLO, Red
Brigades, et cetera - were all Soviet proteges.

Yeah, we backed some bad folks. But the thing to remember is that the
USSR was backing *worse* ones during the same time period. We also had
a tendency to train people how to fight wars, while the USSR defaulted
to training them how to commit acts of terror.

It's funny how often people try to blame the bad guys on the US, when
most of them came directly from failed *Soviet* programs and support.

Soviets as also American and their cold war conflict producet lot od
dictators and terrorists.

Look at the list, and get back to us. All of the worst folks around
right now are old Soviet clients.

There's a reason the signature weapons of terrorists are the AK-47 and
the RPG.

AK-47 is cheap, reliable and on the market for 50 years. It is also
produced in lot of countries so it is very easy to get.

Especially when the USSR gives them to you and shows you how to use them.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"Oelewapper" posted
in us.military.army on Mon,
22 Mar 2004 21:12:00 +0100:

Admittedly, I am not very familiar with this particular kind of issues in
military aviation, but how can it be "legal" for the Israëli occupation
force to send out US-made Apaches, to launch a couple of missiles on a 67
year old crippled, half-blind and unarmed man, leaving a mosque in a
wheelchair after having said his dawn prayers ?? What about the pilot's
responsibility ??

The crippled, half blind, unarmed old man leaving a Mosque is the
leader and chief ideologist of an organization that sends suicide
bombers into Israel to kill innocent civilians. He has organized and
lead an organization responsible for killing innocent men, women and
children. He's a Terrorist. He knew what he was doing.

You seem to have forgotten the other side of the coin.
It's Ok for Hammas to send suicide bombers to kill Israeli's.
It's not OK for Israel to target the people who are the leaders,
organizers and logisticians behind those suicide bombers?
Quid Pro Quo?

At the very least the Isreali's are being very specific in who they
are targeting. Not like Hammas. Hammas has been very indiscriminate in
who and what they target.

I guess if you organize and equip suicide bombers that kill innocent
civilians you shouldn't expect massive retaliation?

And what about the countries that are supplying and financing those
governments that are responsible for these "evil" state-sponsored - yet IMHO
completely unlawful - brutalities ??

Ummm....You completely ignore the fact that Hammas is killing innocent
civilians.

Evil state sponsored brutalities against evil organized terrorists is
OK in my book. You play the game you should understand the rules.
Quid Quo Pro.

Or do you condone terrorism and terrorists?

What ever happened to peaceful civil disobedience protests?
What the **** would Israel do if the Palestinians ever get a Martin
Luther King?





--
K. A. Cannon
kcannon at insurgent dot org
(change the orgy to org to reply)

mhm33x1

"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process
he does not become a monster. And when you look into the abyss,
the abyss also looks into you"
- Nietzsche, From Beyond Good and Evil, (1886)


"The person who stands up and says, 'This is stupid,' either is asked to
`behave' or, worse, is greeted with a cheerful 'Yes, we know! Isn't it
terrific!'" - Frank Zappa

Tom/Mark in alt.test sez:
"People like you are pure scum, K.A. Cannon."

In article ,
K. A. Cannon wrote:

What ever happened to peaceful civil disobedience protests?
What the **** would Israel do if the Palestinians ever get a Martin
Luther King?

They'd probably get to bury him after Hamas kills him.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 01:06:35 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
K. A. Cannon wrote:

What ever happened to peaceful civil disobedience protests?
What the **** would Israel do if the Palestinians ever get a Martin
Luther King?

They'd probably get to bury him after Hamas kills him.


Now yes-- but if one had appeared around hte first Intifada, and not
been killed by friend Arafat...well things would have been completely
different.
The isreali Palestinian conflict seems to have one main theme--
whenever one side is seriouly ready to make a deal, the other decides
it doesnt' want to. It's been more obvious on the Palestinian side,
but the Isreali's have also missed many chances to bolster the
moderates (back when such a thing existed).

I'm more interested in the big middle finger this seems to have sent
the US way-- Sharon really seems intent on proving that he is not
beholden in any way shape or form to U.S. preassure.