I feel so proud....

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-05-03 05:29pm

I'm so proud of the Thais

GENEVA – The United Nations' human rights chief demanded Friday that Thailand investigate clashes in the south of the country that killed at least 113 people. The investigation should be "swift and transparent," said Bertrand Ramcharan, the acting U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Security forces in southern Thailand killed 108 people, mostly young men wielding machetes, who attacked police and army posts on Wednesday. Three policemen and two soldiers were also killed in the bloodshed, the worst in years in Thailand.

Under U.N. treaties, security forces are "required to refrain from using force exceeding that strictly required by the exigencies of the situation," Ramcharan said. He said immediate action should be taken to ensure that everyone involved, including prisoners, are guaranteed their human rights.

Terrorists Again Exploit 'Mosque' as Fort

In one instance, Thai security forces opened fire with rocket-propelled grenades, automatic rifles and tear gas on militants holed up in a mosque, killing 32 people inside.

A Thai Foreign Ministry statement released Friday acknowledged that the death toll was "unfortunate," but defended the government's response.

"Given the scale and intensity and swiftness of the attacks ... strong and decisive action" was needed, it said.

Sharp-kun · Post by **Sharp-kun** » 2004-05-03 05:39pm

IS this the same UN that greatly watered down its crticisism of Sudan?

Guardsman Bass · Post by **Guardsman Bass** » 2004-05-03 05:39pm

I understand the idea of not bombarding a mosque ... but yay! It's about time that they realized that these guys realize that we realize blowing up mosques is bad PR.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-05-03 07:01pm

The double standard really is amazing. Blowing up Christian churches uninhabited by terrorists in Serbia is seen as basically OK, blowing up mosques that ARE inhabited by terrorists is waging war on Islam.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2004-05-03 09:37pm

Joe wrote:The double standard really is amazing. Blowing up Christian churches uninhabited by terrorists in Serbia is seen as basically OK, blowing up mosques that ARE inhabited by terrorists is waging war on Islam.

Hit the nail right on the head.

IMHO, whenever Terrori...er...enemy militants take over a building, it becomes a free target as long as the risk of non-combatant casualties is low enough. If they take over a mosque and start hiding behind the rest of the world's political correctness, then that mosque should become just another building infested with them.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-05-03 09:41pm

Yup, it's OK to blow up buildings where violent enemies have taken root ... unless they're Branch Davidians in Texas or white supremacists in Montana, in which case anything which results in any deaths is a FUCKING CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY!!!!!!!

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2004-05-03 09:50pm

Darth Wong wrote:Yup, it's OK to blow up buildings where violent enemies have taken root ... unless they're Branch Davidians in Texas or white supremacists in Montana, in which case anything which results in any deaths is a FUCKING CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY!!!!!!!

Who exactly are you arguing against?

I don't know enough about either situation (I assume you're talking about Ruby Ridge in Montana) to say either way.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-05-03 09:50pm

Darth Wong wrote:Yup, it's OK to blow up buildings where violent enemies have taken root ... unless they're Branch Davidians in Texas or white supremacists in Montana, in which case anything which results in any deaths is a FUCKING CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY!!!!!!!

What's your point?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-05-03 09:55pm

Joe wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:Yup, it's OK to blow up buildings where violent enemies have taken root ... unless they're Branch Davidians in Texas or white supremacists in Montana, in which case anything which results in any deaths is a FUCKING CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY!!!!!!!
What's your point?

My point is that unless you think they should have bombed the Branch Davidian compound, it would be logically inconsistent of you to approve the use of attacks which might cause "collateral damage" in other countries.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-05-03 09:57pm

Darth Wong wrote: My point is that unless you think they should have bombed the Branch Davidian compound, it would be logically inconsistent of you to approve the use of attacks which might cause "collateral damage" in other countries.

Except these were psychotics who were doped up on some primitive
form of cocaine, charging you with MACHETES screaming "Allau Ackbar".

Reports from the scene indicated that the only reliable manstopper on
these guys was the M2HB .50 cal HMG.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-05-03 09:59pm

My point is that unless you think they should have bombed the Branch Davidian compound, it would be logically inconsistent of you to approve the use of attacks which might cause "collateral damage" in other countries.

I thought the Branch Davidians set themselves on fire. I don't know a whole lot about the Waco incident.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-05-03 09:59pm

MKSheppard wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:My point is that unless you think they should have bombed the Branch Davidian compound, it would be logically inconsistent of you to approve the use of attacks which might cause "collateral damage" in other countries.
Except these were psychotics who were doped up on some primitive
form of cocaine, charging you with MACHETES screaming "Allau Ackbar".

How can one be holed up in a mosque while simultaneously outside charging at US Marines with a machete?

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-05-03 10:00pm

Darth Wong wrote:
MKSheppard wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:My point is that unless you think they should have bombed the Branch Davidian compound, it would be logically inconsistent of you to approve the use of attacks which might cause "collateral damage" in other countries.
Except these were psychotics who were doped up on some primitive
form of cocaine, charging you with MACHETES screaming "Allau Ackbar".
How can one be holed up in a mosque while simultaneously outside charging at US Marines with a machete?

Same way the Americans can be committing suicide at the Gates of Baghdad and not in Iraq.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2004-05-03 10:01pm

Darth Wong wrote:
MKSheppard wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:My point is that unless you think they should have bombed the Branch Davidian compound, it would be logically inconsistent of you to approve the use of attacks which might cause "collateral damage" in other countries.
Except these were psychotics who were doped up on some primitive
form of cocaine, charging you with MACHETES screaming "Allau Ackbar".
How can one be holed up in a mosque while simultaneously outside charging at US Marines with a machete?

The ones that had been doing that were in the mosque.

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-05-03 10:07pm

Darth Wong wrote: How can one be holed up in a mosque while simultaneously outside charging at US Marines with a machete?

Erm.........It's Thailand.....not Iraq.....

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2004-05-03 10:08pm

SirNitram wrote: Same way the Americans can be committing suicide at the Gates of Baghdad and not in Iraq.

If you'd read the articul, it goes:

GENEVA – The United Nations' human rights chief demanded Friday that Thailand investigate clashes in the south of the country that killed at least 113 people. The investigation should be "swift and transparent," said Bertrand Ramcharan, the acting U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Security forces in southern Thailand killed 108 people, mostly young men wielding machetes, who attacked police and army posts on Wednesday. Three policemen and two soldiers were also killed in the bloodshed, the worst in years in Thailand

.....

In one instance, Thai security forces opened fire with rocket-propelled grenades, automatic rifles and tear gas on militants holed up in a mosque, killing 32 people inside.

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-05-03 10:09pm

MKSheppard wrote:
SirNitram wrote: Same way the Americans can be committing suicide at the Gates of Baghdad and not in Iraq.
If you'd read the articul, it goes:

Yes, I know. I was answering the question, because otherwise things threaten to go very Zen.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2004-05-03 10:10pm

Oh, and just one other thing Mike, Shep and I both have been in contact with a Colonel in the Thai army who has been in this conflict, so we've been getting firsthand reports of the combat.

These people have been offering people on the streets dope and 72 virgins to go rush the evil non-muslims with macheties and whatnot, then hiding in their mosques. To not attack their place of hiding would be absolutely absurd.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-05-03 11:36pm

Nathan F wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:How can one be holed up in a mosque while simultaneously outside charging at US Marines with a machete?
The ones that had been doing that were in the mosque.

Then shoot them while they're stupidly charging at you with a weapon that has an effective range of three feet; why would it be necessary to bomb the mosque if they are, in fact, just a bunch of machete-wielding lunatics? And do you think they should have bombed the Branch Davidians, who were armed with much more than machetes and were easily as fanatical, considering the fact that they burned themselves to death rather than face capture?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-05-03 11:37pm

Nathan F wrote:Oh, and just one other thing Mike, Shep and I both have been in contact with a Colonel in the Thai army who has been in this conflict, so we've been getting firsthand reports of the combat.

These people have been offering people on the streets dope and 72 virgins to go rush the evil non-muslims with macheties and whatnot, then hiding in their mosques. To not attack their place of hiding would be absolutely absurd.

Fine, as long as you're consistent in your thinking and agree that they should have flattened the Branch Davidian compound in Texas with a MOAB.

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2004-05-03 11:42pm

I'm torn how I would have handled the Branch D compound.

Personally, I think the best way to deal with a group in a building that is not attacking others at the moment is to "board" them in for a few days.
(by board, I obvioulsy mean barricade and not let them out)

Once they run out of food and water, the situation solves itself.

In the case of a group known to have supplies, or that opens fire on law enforcement or military personel, probably tear gas.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2004-05-04 01:04am

Why do you keep bringing up the damn Branch Dividians, mike? Joe and I have already said that neither of us know enough about the situation to say one way or the other. Anyways, as Joe pointed out, they burned themselves down.

We're not talking about MOABing this place, either. They used 105mm recoilless rifles, RPGs, and grenades to take 'em out, not freaking carpet bombing from FL250. The people *behind* this were in the mosque, from what I took it anyways, not the cannon fodder they were throwing at the soldiers.

The Branch D thing is a whole other strawman. Why you keep bringing it up when we've said we don't know enough to say one way or the other is beyond me.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-05-04 01:08am

Nathan F wrote:Why do you keep bringing up the damn Branch Dividians, mike? Joe and I have already said that neither of us know enough about the situation to say one way or the other. Anyways, as Joe pointed out, they burned themselves down.

FOR THE UMPTEENTH FUCKING TIME, YOU'RE MISSING THE POINT, which is that a lot of people have a grotesque double-standard when it comes to hostiles holed up in a building where innocent lives may be impacted by military action. I keep bringing it up because a lot of people are reluctant to admit the existence of this double-standard.

We're not talking about MOABing this place, either. They used 105mm recoilless rifles, RPGs, and grenades to take 'em out, not freaking carpet bombing from FL250. The people *behind* this were in the mosque, from what I took it anyways, not the cannon fodder they were throwing at the soldiers.

Still missing the point, I see; the point is the level of caution exercised with respect to the possibility of casualties.

The Branch D thing is a whole other strawman. Why you keep bringing it up when we've said we don't know enough to say one way or the other is beyond me.

It's beyond you because you're apparently too goddamned stupid to get the point even when it's spelled out for you repeatedly.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2004-05-04 01:13am

Dammit, Mike, I'm not holding a double standard. First off, I'm not defending the BDs, in fact, the government was *probably* right in taking the place out. HOWEVER, I do NOT KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THE SITUATION.

Your point is completely moot, seeing as though I've yet to make a stance one way or the other on the issue you are harping on. Calm down man, don't bust a blood vessel, I'm not even disagreeing with you!

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2004-05-04 01:22am

I'm still struggling to determine what the Branch Dividian incident has to do with UN hipocracy. The hypocracy of wanting to blow up a mosque while condemning the Branch D incident is certainly interesting and worthy of discussion (not to say I see anyone here displaying such hipocracy right now), but it seems like something of a red herring with respect to the actions of the United Nations.