Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: AP IMPACT: study suggests drones kill far fewer civilians than many Pakistanis believe [View all]eridani
(51,907 posts)74. Our own 1% is the real threat to us, not religious whackjobs.
We are not trying to dominate Pakistan or Afghanistan. Actually I think we would love to leave.
Right. And I am Marie of Rumania. Name another country that has 800+ military bases around the world. Places like Bagram are not actually collections of Quonset huts, you know.
Extremist groups wil lose their audience for their nonsense if we butt out of people's lives. and 1950 sure was different--we had barely begun the project of world domination, and it could have been called off in favor of actual defense.
You and I are basically just among the more privileged of the class of disposable human garbage--that is to say the 99%. The US military empire is not for our benefit, and has little interest in actual defense of the US population--witness 9/11. Elements of the 1% wanted something to happen, so they ignored all warnings. They are far more dangerous to us than random religious whackjobs.
(Not advocating the "inside job" position here. Pearl Harbor was a similar event. No one had to know exactly what the specific Japanese response to the US and Britain cutting off their oil would be--they just knew it would be something, and they could declare war after whatever it was happened.)
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
75 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
AP IMPACT: study suggests drones kill far fewer civilians than many Pakistanis believe [View all]
limpyhobbler
Feb 2012
OP
In World War II the ratio was 1 civilian for every 2 dead soldiers for the Axis powers
Johnny Rico
Feb 2012
#12
the very serious problem wth your analogy is that most of the civilians that were
truedelphi
Feb 2012
#25
How does that affect kill ratios and whether they are bad or good? You dont really explain that. nt
stevenleser
Feb 2012
#53
You are asking how the people who lived there knew who was who?Because that is who provided the info
stevenleser
Feb 2012
#51
Not sure why people have a hard time believing there are some hardcore terrorist groups
limpyhobbler
Feb 2012
#6
We should defend our country from fascist terrorists who are plotting to kill us.
limpyhobbler
Feb 2012
#10
Targeted assassinations that allow for the murder of innocents IS TERRORISM!
Nostradammit
Feb 2012
#33
Well, if we are to stay true to the original intent of the people who started this country
Nostradammit
Feb 2012
#37
All due respect to you, there is no such thing as war without civilian deaths.
stevenleser
Feb 2012
#58
you're right. let's just continue to utilize the same costly and ineffective methods..
frylock
Feb 2012
#63
It's easy to understand if you think those terrorist groups pose a real threat.
limpyhobbler
Mar 2012
#71
Obama, Clinton, Panetta, and Petraeus? Aren't they the ones who escalated the war?
Tierra_y_Libertad
Feb 2012
#9
We were attacked by a multistate terror group on 9-11 why did you choose not to address that?
stevenleser
Feb 2012
#57
It poses an insignifican "threat" to America, except that it's bankrupting us.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Feb 2012
#32
So it sounds like we need to take steps to change both reality and perception n/t
DisgustipatedinCA
Feb 2012
#11
Yes, well said, and to extend your analogy, people here insist on superficial interpretations
stevenleser
Feb 2012
#55
These numbers are worse than what the Bureau of Investigative Journalism found.
joshcryer
Feb 2012
#30
It's interesting that some are reflexively attacking the article with no backup whatsoever
stevenleser
Feb 2012
#54