Letters to the Editor
-
SHOOT DOWN OF IRANIAN AIRLINER RESULTED FROM COMMAND NEGLIGENCE
One of the comments in this story attempted to analagize the recent incident to the shooting down of an Iranian airliner. One of my classmates from the Naval Academy was on site monitoring the Vincennes during the contact and was part of the investigation team afterwards. His report was that the actions of the Captain of the Vincennes was not only overly aggressive but negligent. The picket destroyers radar and monitoring equipment identified the airplane as a civilian aircraft. There were allegations that the Captain was spoiling for a fight long before going on station in the gulf.
For the record the fire control systems are not under the guidance of a Midshipman (a rank which is limited to students in the US Navy) but the Combat Information Center (CIC) with experienced Officer, Chief Petty Officers, and highly technically trained enlisted.
I believe that the corrected Tonkin incident analysis was based on similar declassified evidence from CIC and Command Officers on the Destroyers involved. It now appears that the "attack" may well have been "sea return".
-
ProWar&Death Explains
ProWar&Death explains to Paul Dirks:
"I find it odd that you can't see that if you kill 400 people who were going to die at a death camp anyway and in doing so save 2 million then that is infact a net gain in life."
Don't you get it, Paul, you drooling berk?
The end justifies the means!
Collateral damage is always regrettable, but it's also always worth it, because some bad people are killed in the process, so they can't do their bad thing anymore, which is to kill more good people.
Now, it's true that you don't know in advance how many good people may be killed in the future by the bad people if you don't kill enough of those bad people, but why take the bloody chance that they will kill more good people than you will in the process of killing the bad people? That would just be sentimental and stupid!
"What," you may say? "How do you know for sure who are the good people and who are the bad people?" Well, you can't, of course, know for sure, especially in the case of insurgencies such as the one in Iraq, where the other day, for example, some 40,000 tons of high explosives were dropped on a "suspected" al-Qaida stronghold south of the city of Baghdad. But you can be damned sure that some of the people no doubt blown to pieces and into pink mist by the operation were bad people, i.e., people who wanted to kill other people who are probably good, i.e., people who at least probably don't hate our bloody guts.
Good God, man, it isn't easy to make these kinds of decisions regarding who deserves to die in order to keep other people from being killed by those people, good or bad, whom you've decided to kill, and this is why Our Leader, all praise to Him, says that he has cried many times at night when he couldn't deal with the emotional strain by joking in public about Iraq's WMD not being under his desk. Such a man of feeling and a card to boot is He!
No, my obtuse little toss-pot, there's no way to avoid these difficult choices regarding whom to kill and whom to spare a while.
It's pretty much a matter for a man of faith such as Our Leader, praised be his Being, to follow the dictum Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius. Or as He would no doubt eloquently put it, being a Man of the People, "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out, even if you have to go nucular on their asses!"
So do think about it, Paul, and make a serious effort to understand that mass homocide is quite often the only means we humans have for properly sorting things out.
So quit being such a bloody twit and leave off your womanish whining about civilian casualties. I would remind you that those "innocent victims" you bleeding-heart liberals so sentimentally exercise yourselves about know what kind of evil arse-wipes their leaders are, and if they don't have done with it and kill them, well then it'll just have to be up to us, then, won't it. So let's apportion responsibility appropriately here, shall we?
Chin up, then, old brick, and remember that in the service of the Empire, may God preserve It forever, yours is but to do and die,and never mind the reason why!
Carry on, then!
Leftenant Wankeroon
-
@Associative asshole
"I've come to the unavoidable conclusion that these psychologically and spiritually damaged human beings are in love with death and want to take with them on their Death Trip as many people as they can."
Another nail in the coffin of analysis. That exceeds even assumptions about my childhood when it comes to gross inaccuracy.
-
American War Ships in the Northwest Passage
The United States now regularly sends its ships through the Northwest Passage. Canada is not very happy about this, despite the fact that we have always given permission under pressure, in the past.
If Canada were to send a war ship or god forbid a motor boat out to see who's who and what's what in our back yard would that be a "provocation"?
When the Middle East is burning and the Strait of Hormuz blocked with sunken hulks where will America get its oil then? hmm...
"The US Minerals Management Service, which oversees drilling on the United States’ continental shelf, estimates that the Beaufort Sea could contain about 7 billion barrels of oil and 32 trillion cubic feet of natural gas."
… on Thursday as the Prime Minister-elect used his first post-election press conference to take direct aim at David Wilkins, the US ambassador to Canada, who last week described the North-west Passage as “neutral waters”.
Mr Harper was not asked by reporters about the ambassador’s comment, but he refused to let it pass unchallenged.
“The United States defends its sovereignty, the Canadian government will defend our sovereignty,” he said. “It is the Canadian government we get our mandate from, not the ambassador of the United States.”
http://www.martinstabe.com/blog/2006/01/29/canada-warns-the-us-and-europe-over-arctic/