When there are NO physical military targets, which means no bombing of civilian targets for purely psychological purposes.
In this war expecially, when the Iraqi enemy hides in and among civilian areas, they bear the most responsibility when it comes to civilian non combatant deaths.
Although, I’m sure the Iraqi public sees this differently. They just want ALL the violence to end.
When there are NO physical military targets, which means no bombing of civilian targets for purely psychological purposes.
In this war expecially, when the Iraqi enemy hides in and among civilian areas, they bear the most responsibility when it comes to civilian non combatant deaths.
Although, I’m sure the Iraqi public sees this differently. They just want ALL the violence to end.[/quote]
According to that rubric for the difference between atrocity and collateral damage then setting off roadside bombs to kill U.S. soldiers (physical military targets) and taking out civilians (not for purely psychological purposes) in the process wouldn’t be terrorism, no?
When there are NO physical military targets, which means no bombing of civilian targets for purely psychological purposes.
In this war expecially, when the Iraqi enemy hides in and among civilian areas, they bear the most responsibility when it comes to civilian non combatant deaths.
Although, I’m sure the Iraqi public sees this differently. They just want ALL the violence to end.[/quote]
According to that rubric for the difference between atrocity and collateral damage then setting off roadside bombs to kill U.S. soldiers (physical military targets) and taking out civilians (not for purely psychological purposes) in the process wouldn’t be terrorism, no?[/quote]
No, but car bombing markets and mosques would be.
What is your point spook? They’re not really terrorists, just an army like the US army? Tell me that’s not your point.
When there are NO physical military targets, which means no bombing of civilian targets for purely psychological purposes.
In this war expecially, when the Iraqi enemy hides in and among civilian areas, they bear the most responsibility when it comes to civilian non combatant deaths.
Although, I’m sure the Iraqi public sees this differently. They just want ALL the violence to end.[/quote]
According to that rubric for the difference between atrocity and collateral damage then setting off roadside bombs to kill U.S. soldiers (physical military targets) and taking out civilians (not for purely psychological purposes) in the process wouldn’t be terrorism, no?[/quote]
No, but car bombing markets and mosques would be.
What is your point spook? They’re not really terrorists, just an army like the US army? Tell me that’s not your point.[/quote]
My point is that when you’ve lowered the standard for legitimate collateral damage to the point where it’s virtually indistinguishable from that used by Islamic terrorists then it’s time for some serious self-examination.
I haven’t seen the US attack purely civilian targets spook. I have seen Iraqi insurgents, or warlord-wannabees or whatever severe the heads of civilian contractors though, and bomb Iraqi policemen and children.
Face it, the Iraqis who are fighting don’t want peace. They want chaos. As long as there is chaos they can get whatever they want from the Iraqis they say they are fighting for.
If you want to idolize them and say they are one and the same as the US troops in manner and purpose, I’d have to say you’re full of it.
An American who was among four Christian activists kidnapped last year in Iraq has been killed, a State Department spokesman said Friday.
Edit: This just in
[quote]
The FBI verified that a body found in Iraq Friday morning was that of Tom Fox, 54, of Clear Brook, Va., spokesman Noel Clay said. He said he had no information on the other three hostages. [/quote]
breitbart.com/news/2006/03/10/D8G92PVO8.html
I can easily distinguish these.
I thought I was clear, but I guess not. I’ll repeat… Hiroshima, Nagasaki, MaiLai and many other SE Asian villages (many not even inside VietNam), Dresden, Basra & the highway of death (The US bombed the bejeezus out of retreating conscripts.), and most of Iraq has been contaminated with DU debris. Those are pretty specific complaints.
I said I think Americans are awfully quick to forgive themselves for their military atrocities, but very stubborn about accepting anything the enemy does. We can nuke cities and cover up the damage, but they’re scum for “breaking Geneva conventions” and hiding out in their own mosques. Since when do we get to tell them how they’re allowed to hide from our scary-as-shit military machine? BTW, the use of DU, MK-77 and White Phosphorus all violate the Geneva convention too, or at least some other UN conventions against sicko weapons of mass destruction. So does attacking Iraq based on invented evidence of some future threat potential.
The one point I will concede since my last post is that it is probably very true that most Iraqis are against the resistance and would like to get the nation-building underway. They did demonstrate this by getting out and voting. But that doesn’t mean the resistors have no foundation for their indignance at America. Some of them are likely indifferent and only seek to dominate Iraq for their own power, but there are many who are fighting because they feel America has shown a far lower moral standard than they can tolerate. You can’t just call that segment crazy. If we have our justification for attacking, then we must accept that they have their own justification for resisting.
Again, here is the kind of self-righteous assertion of ‘our’ justification that I think is very questionable and counter-productive. We pull the trigger, but it’s their own fault.
Exactly! They behead a Westerner on TV and it’s pure evil. We bomb six farmhouses when we think an Al Quaida leader may be inside one of them, and that’s a tough decision unfortunately necessary in a time of war. We pretty much know there will be innocent children inside any farmhouse over there. Where do we get off by simply saying that doesn’t matter? Easy. We are right; they are wrong; end of story.
[quote=“dearpeter”]
Basra & the highway of death (The US bombed the bejeezus out of retreating conscripts.)[/quote]
Uhhh…that’s what you are supposed to do when the enemy is retreating.
Your silliness about Dresden and the A-Bombings have been beaten to death here before.
Damn,
All the time and money spent developing precision bombs was all for naught. 
If you really want to talk about American military atrocities why look overseas? There is plenty right here at home.
Andersonville.
(And by your warped definition)
Burnsides frontal assault on Mayrne Heights during the Battle of Fredericksburg.
Lee’s roll of the dice on the third day of Gettysburg. (lots of conscripts in that one…you’ll like that one)
Mormons dressing up as Indians and slaughtering families.
Pre-Civil war Kansas.
I can easily distinguish these.[/quote]
If Saddam had sent Iraqi agents to the U.S. during the early stages of Operation Iraqi Freedom to try to kill President Bush by setting off high explosives in city streets as he passed by, thereby killing and injuring scores of innocent Americans, would you have considered these legitimate acts of war or terrorist atrocities?
I can easily distinguish these.[/quote]
If Saddam had sent Iraqi agents to the U.S. during the early stages of Operation Iraqi Freedom to try to kill President Bush by setting off high explosives in city streets as he passed by, thereby killing and injuring scores of innocent Americans, would you have considered these legitimate acts of war or terrorist atrocities?[/quote]
Act of war. Due to the fact that the C-in-C of the forces against you is a legitimate military target.
Back on topic, I took a quick look at the Wikipedia explanation of what constitutes Fascism, and the amalgamation of corporations and state seems to be pretty primary to meeting the definition.
Obviously, the US isn’t a pure fascist state, but is it going in that direction? I’d like to know if these companies like Halliburton and Carlyle are getting most of their revenue from government contracts. We all know a lot of these contracts are “no-bid” and overlap areas we used to consider government of military activities.
I have no idea where things stand, but hypothetically, if 5 of the top 10 corporations in America gained, say, 85% of their revenue from government service contracts (including weapons manufacturing), would that constitute fascism?
[quote=“dearpeter”]Back on topic, I took a quick look at the Wikipedia explanation of what constitutes Fascism, and the amalgamation of corporations and state seems to be pretty primary to meeting the definition.
Obviously, the US isn’t a pure fascist state, but is it going in that direction? I’d like to know if these companies like Halliburton and Carlyle are getting most of their revenue from government contracts. We all know a lot of these contracts are “no-bid” and overlap areas we used to consider government of military activities.
I have no idea where things stand, but hypothetically, if 5 of the top 10 corporations in America gained, say, 85% of their revenue from government service contracts (including weapons manufacturing), would that constitute fascism?[/quote]
Not even close.
Fascism utilizes a dictator to rule an extremely authoritarian state where the nation is primary over individuals.
It would seem then, that it would be harder to create fascism in America than just about any other country, given the various enshrined protections of individual liberty.
Okay, I agree that it doesn’t really hold water to call the US fascist. But I’d still call the corporate media fascist in the sense that individual journalists working within it can no longer question many of the actions of the state.
Exhibit A:
[quote] 
LINK
[size=75]
excerpts:
At that point, Dr. Robert M. Nelson, a 30-year Jet Propulsion Laboratory veteran who works on photo imaging for NASA
This thread prompted me to look into the American voting machines. I’d heard there were accusations of fraud, but never really worried about it. But it looks like things are pretty smelly, and dare I say, fascist.
Some of you proud Americans out there may not want to read this part.
From Wikipedia:
The American vote tally is stored in Microsoft Access. That’s insane! In my opinion these machines, if used at all, should be built by an independent government agency that is monitored by multiple independent NGOs. It’s the bloody vote, people!
This site, blackboxvoting.org/, has a lot of material on the problems and potential problems of the US system.
In recent news, one Florida official (who is elected) identified potential hacks to the system. He will be removed from office it looks like. But that wouldn’t be fascism, would it? Here is the link.
Of course it is obvious to see that this pattern of using private companies to make and program voting machines could easily be construed as partial confirmation of:
[ul]9. Corporate Power is Protected – The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.
and
13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption – Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions, and who use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability.[/ul]
But surely the people running Diebold are not in any way friendly or otherwise connected to the Neocon power holders in Washington and never will be. Right.
[quote]
In August 2003, Walden O’Dell, chief executive of Diebold, announced that he had been a top fund-raiser for President George W. Bush and had sent a get-out-the-funds letter to Ohio Republicans. In the letters he says he is “committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.” Critics of Diebold interpreted this as implying that he might rig the company’s electronic voting machines to give an unfair advantage to Bush. The letter also was seen as an indication of a perceived conflict of interest by critics. He has responded to the critics by pointing out that the company’s election machines division is run out of Texas by a registered Democrat. He also claims the statement about delivering Ohio’s electoral votes to Bush was simply a poor choice of words.
[/quote] From same Wikipedia article (and confirmed elsewhere)
Maybe some of the defenders of the great American way should get on over to Wikipedia and remove those vicious facts and distortions. 
Here are details of the hack experiment.
Well, since the thread’s still here…
bradblog.com/archives/00002615.htm
Republicans will even rig their own primaries it seems.