Human shields unhappy with target choices!

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2003-02-22 11:57pm

If I were a soldier attacking the base, I really wouldn't feel much remorse about having to take them out as well.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-02-23 12:28am

The Dark wrote:
AdmiralKanos wrote:
The Dark wrote:What're they going to do next, send Jane Fonda over to show how Saddam Hussein's really quite a nice guy when you get to know him, and the Kurds are better off under him than they would be on their own?
She's done that kind of thing before. Don't they still call her "Hanoi Jane" in some circles?
Exactly why I mentioned it . Let's just say she ain't real popular to a lot of military people I know. How she escaped treason charges I'll never know. She is as much a war criminal as Iva Ikuko Toguri ("Tokyo Rose"). The full story's at http://www.snopes.com/military/fonda.htm

No declaration of war.

Raxmei · Post by **Raxmei** » 2003-02-23 12:28am

Isn't this giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-02-23 12:29am

Raxmei wrote:Isn't this giving aid and comfort to the enemy?

Yes, for Americans, however most of them appear to be non-American.

Raxmei · Post by **Raxmei** » 2003-02-23 12:34am

Durran Korr wrote:
Yes, for Americans, however most of them appear to be non-American.

Oh yeah, there are other countries in the world besides America. How could I possibly forget.
Their homelands won't complain if they somehow die during this stunt, will they? That's about the only way I can think of them having any effect on a war.

Alex Moon · Post by **Alex Moon** » 2003-02-23 12:55am

Yesterday, the volunteers who will move into the plant - who include Algerians, South Africans, Finns, Turks and two Russians from Siberia - painted a large sign bearing the human shield emblem on its roof, to alert fighter pilots to their presence.

Enlightenment · Post by **Enlightenment** » 2003-02-23 01:15am

What I'd like to know is where these morons get the idea that it's unacceptable to attack military targets that happen to be surrounded by civilians.

Post by **AdmiralKanos** » 2003-02-23 01:18am

They seem to think that if the civilians are white people instead of Iraqis, the cruise missiles will veer off

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2003-02-23 01:18am

I think "collateral damage" is appropriate here.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-02-23 01:19am

Raxmei wrote:
Durran Korr wrote:
Yes, for Americans, however most of them appear to be non-American.
Oh yeah, there are other countries in the world besides America. How could I possibly forget.
Their homelands won't complain if they somehow die during this stunt, will they? That's about the only way I can think of them having any effect on a war.

They can't complain, really, the brainiacs we call human shields are doing what they're doing voluntarily. Their countries have no responsiblity for their welfare while they're on their mindless crusade.

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2003-02-23 01:25am

Enforcer Talen wrote:I think "collateral damage" is appropriate here.

That's probably part of the plan. When they're killed in the bombing runs, the survivors would call it a "war crime", despite bringing it on themselves.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-02-23 01:28am

Anti-war people are going to so get high on this.

David · Post by **David** » 2003-02-23 01:28am

The sheer stupidity of some people. What do you want to bet that if war breaks out and its obvious Saddam won't win that they'll take some of these volunteers to military bases?

Cal Wright · Post by **Cal Wright** » 2003-02-23 01:28am

Yeah, but if any of those walking, talking Darwin fucktard awards happen to suffer a 'casulty' due to American war efforts, then people will start whining. For that reason alone, it needs to be a face to face execution.

Utsanomiko · Post by **Utsanomiko** » 2003-02-23 01:40am

The only thing that would be dumber than these morons willing to die for something this pathetic and contrived, would be if Iraq actualloy started to rely on them to protect their more important stuff.

(Iraqi guard) "Yeas, you two women go stand by that building over there, and (points to tall guy with shades) the guy who insists he is not an undercover assassin can stand in front of Saddam."

(tall guy walks over to Saddam, pulls out a pistol and puts a .45 in Saddam's head)

(Iraqi guard) "Oh, the shit. We never saw that one coming."

KhyronTheBackstabber · Post by **KhyronTheBackstabber** » 2003-02-23 01:43am

[Future News] Our top story tonight. With the war on Iraq going bad for Saddam, the Iraqi leader has ordered the members of "human Shield" to be taken into custody, and are now considered hostages. The White House had this to say.

White House Spokesman: Eh...

[/future news]

Enlightenment · Post by **Enlightenment** » 2003-02-23 01:46am

Enforcer Talen wrote:I think "collateral damage" is appropriate here.

"Evolution in action" is more appropriate.

Typhonis 1 · Post by **Typhonis 1** » 2003-02-23 06:44pm

Well given the morons are doing this of there own free will.... Its there Ass no tribunl will hold soldiers responsible for killing them if they are "shielding" a militRY TARGET its about as bad as mounting AAA on Hospitals and schools the attacking power is free to shoot at the AAA reguardless of whre it is

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-02-23 06:53pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh ... world.html

Stupid shits are unhappy Iraq wasnt to use them to protect its army.

In the words of Forrest Gump, "Stupid is as stupid does."

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2003-02-23 06:58pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:
The Dark wrote:Exactly why I mentioned it . Let's just say she ain't real popular to a lot of military people I know. How she escaped treason charges I'll never know. She is as much a war criminal as Iva Ikuko Toguri ("Tokyo Rose"). The full story's at http://www.snopes.com/military/fonda.htm
No declaration of war.

You don't technically need a declaration of war. Levying war against the United States OR "adhering to their enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort" is treason. We may not have formally declared war, but under any definition the North Vietnamese were at the time our enemy. *Shrug* I suppose it's probably too late to do anything about it now anyway.

Post by **Beowulf** » 2003-02-23 08:08pm

The Dark wrote:
Sea Skimmer wrote:
The Dark wrote:Exactly why I mentioned it . Let's just say she ain't real popular to a lot of military people I know. How she escaped treason charges I'll never know. She is as much a war criminal as Iva Ikuko Toguri ("Tokyo Rose"). The full story's at http://www.snopes.com/military/fonda.htm
No declaration of war.
You don't technically need a declaration of war. Levying war against the United States OR "adhering to their enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort" is treason. We may not have formally declared war, but under any definition the North Vietnamese were at the time our enemy. *Shrug* I suppose it's probably too late to do anything about it now anyway.

No statue of limitations on treason.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-02-23 10:45pm

Beowulf wrote:No statue of limitations on treason.

But oh, how the longhairs would squeal...

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-02-23 10:46pm

RedImperator wrote:
Beowulf wrote:No statue of limitations on treason.
But oh, how the longhairs would squeal...

I think it would be hilarious to try her on charges of treason now. I would pay to see that.

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2003-02-23 10:57pm

why would the human sheilds complain? they volunteered to get shot at. they get shot.

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-02-23 11:18pm

Enforcer Talen wrote:why would the human sheilds complain? they volunteered to get shot at. they get shot.

They should be honored to serve as bullet sponges or missile magnets.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Human shields unhappy with target choices!

Re: Human shields unhappy with target choices!