+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 57
General Chat Thread, Guardian, Snowden etc in General; Originally Posted by pcstru I guess since there is naturally no evidence of this we will just have to take ...
  1. #31

    seawolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    969
    Thank Post
    12
    Thanked 285 Times in 217 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    175
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    I guess since there is naturally no evidence of this we will just have to take your word for it, you obvioulsy being in the know and all.
    Unless anyone else on this thread actually worked for the NSA for nearly a decade, then yes I suppose you will.

    Right. So some examples and evidence would help, but let me guess, you could tell me but then you would have to kill me.
    ...or option B, I honour my word.

    Funny how we (in the UK) managed to live with the IRA for so many years (funded by lovely Americans) and didn't have to resort to throwing the baby out with the bathwater. When I read your paragraph above it takes me straight into Orwell's 1984, the population fed fear of the Urasian menace to keep them compliant. We should instigate a two minute hate - everyone standing infront of their TV with pictures of OBL displayed for us to vent our hatred. Freedom, Justice, Privacy - if we throw those out we might as well let the terrorists win, although seeing as we are reigning death from the sky using unmanned drones in foreign countries we have not even declared war on, I'm not quite sure any more what makes them terrorists and us the good guys.
    The IRA killed around 1,800 people over a 30 year period with the majority of those being police or military personnel. Whereas 3,000 civilians died in a single morning due to terrorists flying airliners into buildings in 2001. If the IRA had ever resorted to such tactics the response would have been severe and aggressive I assure you. The conflict with the IRA was more the UK's civil war than a war on terror. It really is a pale comparison. I recommend visiting terrorist occupied areas of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, or Syria sometime if you're not quite sure what differentiates the US and UK from the terrorists. Might be an eye opener. I'm not saying that I agree with everything that has been done in the name of fighting terrorists, but you really don't understand their mindset and the things they have attempted to do in your country and many others, which have been stopped by good intel.

  2. #32

    seawolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    969
    Thank Post
    12
    Thanked 285 Times in 217 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    175
    Quote Originally Posted by Theblacksheep View Post
    Quietly protecting their interests, like the killing of journo's as Mannings video shows.

    Protecting peace and order, my arse, someone has been watching too much 24. It amazes me the amount of people that will believe and try to justify any propaganda their government tells them to.
    I didn't realise that was the NSA or GCHQ killing journalists in the videos...oh wait it wasn't. Never mind, bad example.

    No, I'm speaking as someone with first person knowledge and many years of it. I wouldn't expect you to understand or accept what really goes on because much of it was a shock to me as a young, naive new agent. Let's just say the scales fell off of the eyes rather quickly and that several "respected" world leaders are exceedingly narcissistic and bordering on insanity.

  3. #33


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,110
    Thank Post
    271
    Thanked 829 Times in 622 Posts
    Rep Power
    330
    @ SecretSquirrel - I operate "Nullus in verbia"; evidence trumps all.

    Not sure what you have in mind as to the "Terrorist" areas of Lybia, Iraq etc. The eye opener in Pakistan might be why the killing of innocent civilians (women and children) by unmanned drones operated by the USA, is not breeding more terrorists than it is. Iraq is a bit of a sore point in relation to "Terrorists" - there simply were none there until we invaded the country based on ... oh that's right, faulty intelligence, supplied by CGHQ and the NSA. Still, I suppose the subsequent deaths of a few hundred thousands Iraqi's as a result of that war is just so much collateral damage. Nothing to worry about and anyway, hell, we probably can't even hope to understand it anyway. Right?

  4. #34

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    578
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 89 Times in 50 Posts
    Rep Power
    30
    You could say the 'Iron Fist' of Dictators has been more successful at keeping certain countries in order than Western style governments have. As far as assisting them goes this is a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't. Sit by and let the bloodshed continue and you are failing to do your bit to save humanity. However, get involved, then you are a warmonger and the resultant effect, even when the military action is over, is usually ever more bloodshed than before as there is no one about to stop armed gangs forming in the struggle for power. Of course if you do hang about with a large force, then you are accused of trying to bring back colonialism!

    Either way, I'd much rather live in a Western Democracy, even if it does have its flaws.

  5. #35


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,110
    Thank Post
    271
    Thanked 829 Times in 622 Posts
    Rep Power
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by seawolf View Post
    The IRA killed around 1,800 people over a 30 year period with the majority of those being police or military personnel. Whereas 3,000 civilians died in a single morning due to terrorists flying airliners into buildings in 2001. If the IRA had ever resorted to such tactics the response would have been severe and aggressive I assure you.
    So you think if they had killed that number in that time, we would have had the right to fly bombing missions over Dublin, throwing LGB's into suspects cars? Perhaps we would have been justified in extending that to hunt down those who provided them havens and sponsored them with funds and weapons - we could have been targeting cruise missiles at little fund raising shindigs and if they hit, wiping out half of the New York Fire department! Oh the Irony.

    The conflict with the IRA was more the UK's civil war than a war on terror.
    Of course it was. How silly of me! They were rebels, freedom fighters, not Terrorists.

  6. #36


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,110
    Thank Post
    271
    Thanked 829 Times in 622 Posts
    Rep Power
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by superatticman View Post
    Either way, I'd much rather live in a Western Democracy, even if it does have its flaws.
    Personally so would I but the question might be why. The reasons generally involve words like freedom, justice, tolerance. When our states turn into bullies, when they torture and murder foreigners without legal oversight, when they imprison their own citizens and deny them access to legal process and representation; then I start to wonder.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    578
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 89 Times in 50 Posts
    Rep Power
    30
    I'd say the two major reasons why most of us are happy to live in the Western World are:

    Standard of living for the majority
    Quality of life for the majority

    I really don't think the ethics of Government are any real concern providing that the majority have a roof over their heads, access to healthcare, a chance to build a career etc. There will probably always be a small section of society that is marginalised. Sometimes this is courtesy of their own agenda, ie religious fanatics. Sometimes this is because of flaws in the 'system'. Either way most Western Countries provide a 'safety net' or an alternative path for those who are marginalised.

  8. #38

    seawolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    969
    Thank Post
    12
    Thanked 285 Times in 217 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    175
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    So you think if they had killed that number in that time, we would have had the right to fly bombing missions over Dublin, throwing LGB's into suspects cars? Perhaps we would have been justified in extending that to hunt down those who provided them havens and sponsored them with funds and weapons - we could have been targeting cruise missiles at little fund raising shindigs and if they hit, wiping out half of the New York Fire department! Oh the Irony.
    I never said it would give anyone the right, but an extreme response is most likely what would have occurred. You seem to have quite a hatred for any Americans who may have supported the IRA in deed or spirit. Much to my point about what would be going on in the world if the citizens of every nation really knew all that was going on between nations and the justice they would demand from their governments.

    Of course it was. How silly of me! They were rebels, freedom fighters, not Terrorists.
    civil war: [noun] a war between political factions or regions within the same country.

    So, yes, of course it was.
    Last edited by seawolf; 24th August 2013 at 01:09 PM.

  9. #39

    seawolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    969
    Thank Post
    12
    Thanked 285 Times in 217 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    175
    Not sure what you have in mind as to the "Terrorist" areas of Lybia, Iraq etc. The eye opener in Pakistan might be why the killing of innocent civilians (women and children) by unmanned drones operated by the USA, is not breeding more terrorists than it is. Iraq is a bit of a sore point in relation to "Terrorists" - there simply were none there until we invaded the country based on ... oh that's right, faulty intelligence, supplied by CGHQ and the NSA. Still, I suppose the subsequent deaths of a few hundred thousands Iraqi's as a result of that war is just so much collateral damage. Nothing to worry about and anyway, hell, we probably can't even hope to understand it anyway. Right?
    Now, I hate to burst your bubble, but that intel wasn't provided by the NSA. It was from the CIA. Always thought they were arrogant and sloppy myself. We did have verifiable (on ground) evidence of WDMs in Iraq up until late 1999, but since I left the agency in 2000 and the evidence presented was from 2003 I can't say. A lot can happen in three years time. I will say that Saddam went to great lengths to convince everyone that he had very dangerous capabilities, both to his enemies and his own people. Probably had something to do with ruling with an iron fist. If the fist has no iron, it can't rule very well, so I think Saddam probably did as good a job of framing himself on the WDMs as the CIA did.

    You seem to think that I agree with the actions taken during the Iraq war and other conflicts or find the death toll acceptable. How you got that from my comments in defending the primary purpose of the NSA and GCHQ and what they do behind the scenes to protect the citizens of their respective countries is a stretch.
    Last edited by seawolf; 24th August 2013 at 01:37 PM.

  10. #40


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,110
    Thank Post
    271
    Thanked 829 Times in 622 Posts
    Rep Power
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by seawolf View Post
    I never said it would give anyone the right, but an extreme response is most likely what would have occurred. You seem to have quite a hatred for any Americans who may have supported the IRA in deed or spirit.
    I'm simply pointing out the the hypocrisy but I am of an age where I may well have very good reason for despising cowards who planted bombs indiscriminately targeting civilians. We could mention other terrorists the USA has supported. I believe they were quite chummy with one Osama Bin Laden, at one time supplying copious quantities of arms and money. That ... err, seemed to work out well.
    civil war: [noun] a war between political factions or regions within the same country.

    So, yes, of course it was.
    Civil wars tend to involve rebel groups facing off against armies in pitched battles or skirmishes. Civilian casualties are an unfortunate by product of a civil war, civilians are not the actual target. The IRA targeted remembrance day gatherings with hidden bombs, the remote detonated devices besides marching bands and they secreted bombs in hotels targeting politicians. They set out to induce "Terror" in a population for political ends. If the word "Terrorist" does not apply to the IRA then it doesn't have much meaning.

    Oh and the …ire is not the same country. You might whisper that to the NSA next time you visit so they can update their records.

  11. #41

    seawolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    969
    Thank Post
    12
    Thanked 285 Times in 217 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    175
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    Civil wars tend to involve rebel groups facing off against armies in pitched battles or skirmishes. Civilian casualties are an unfortunate by product of a civil war, civilians are not the actual target. The IRA targeted remembrance day gatherings with hidden bombs, the remote detonated devices besides marching bands and they secreted bombs in hotels targeting politicians. They set out to induce "Terror" in a population for political ends. If the word "Terrorist" does not apply to the IRA then it doesn't have much meaning.
    Then you don't have an understanding of the way war really works. It's not all pretty and neat where civilian casualties are minimised. In WW2 civilian casualties were very high on both sides, Germany bombed British citizens daily and the allies firebombed Japan (creating more civilian casualties than even the A-bombs). So, is that terrorism or war?I really wish people really understood this rather than the fairy tale world where it's possible for wars to be prosecuted entirely with surgical strikes and near zero civilian casualties if only we wanted to. There would be far fewer wars if the truth were understood.

    Oh and the …ire is not the same country. You might whisper that to the NSA next time you visit so they can update their records.
    Great, I'll let them know that Northern Ireland is no longer part of the United Kingdom....

  12. #42

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    578
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 89 Times in 50 Posts
    Rep Power
    30
    Never mind what has been, I see Obama and Cameron are promising a "serious response" if Chemical weapons are proven to have been used in Syria. One would have to assume this will be some kind of military action. Not really appropriate for the UK considering we have cut back our armed forces further since our last little foray into Libya?

    We may well have the capability to take on the entire Syrian armed forces with what we have no matter how diminished we are. However that would more or less leave the UK defenceless given the slight chance that the conflict escalates into a full scale global conflict. Recent history suggests that these 'World Policing' scenarios do not escalate but you can never rule it out.

  13. #43


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,110
    Thank Post
    271
    Thanked 829 Times in 622 Posts
    Rep Power
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by seawolf View Post
    Then you don't have an understanding of the way war really works. It's not all pretty and neat where civilian casualties are minimised.
    You seem to have trouble understanding what is written. I didn't say "civilian casualties are minimised", I said they were a by product rather than the actual target. The IRA often deliberately, coldly, cynically targeted civilians. They were terrorist by their own admission, Seamus Twomey described their actions as "Terrorist Paramilitary". The goal was to force governance to become more and more severe - i.e to force the legitimate government have to resort to military rule, depriving ordinary citizens of their rights in order that they might be "safe". They deliberately targeted and killed civilians and as it happens, they were funded to a large part by USAians.

    The point of this is that regardless of scale, we did not resort to depriving ordinary people of their rights using blanket surveillance of the "if you have nothing to hide you have noting to fear" mentality. We did not throw away our privacy and our rights to justice. We did not fly IRA prisoners off to Egypt to have them tortured. We did not lock them up in Guantanomo Bay like institutions without access to justice. We didn't fly drones over Dublin or New York and commit murder as we seem to be doing in Pakistan (a supposedly friendly country), Yemmen and Afghanistan! We didn't throw out the baby with the bathwater as we seem intent on doing now.

  14. #44


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,110
    Thank Post
    271
    Thanked 829 Times in 622 Posts
    Rep Power
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by superatticman View Post
    Never mind what has been, I see Obama and Cameron are promising a "serious response" if Chemical weapons are proven to have been used in Syria. One would have to assume this will be some kind of military action. Not really appropriate for the UK considering we have cut back our armed forces further since our last little foray into Libya?
    I think UK involvement mostly involves standing by the USA and yapping like a good puppy dog.

  15. #45

    seawolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    969
    Thank Post
    12
    Thanked 285 Times in 217 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    175
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    You seem to have trouble understanding what is written. I didn't say "civilian casualties are minimised", I said they were a by product rather than the actual target.
    Civil war is by definition a "civilian" war and civilians are the target because everyone capable of using a weapon of any sort is a potential or actual combatant. Look at Vietnam, Uganda, and all of the other nations that have had civil wars that involved child soldiers. There are no "clean" wars and therefore war should always be a very last resort under ALL circumstances, which was the subject of my original post.

    Terrorism is an overused and ill-defined term because many tactics used during war are designed to produce maximum terror in the civilian population in hopes that it will break moral and cause the other side to give up (mass bombing of civilian and military targets in Germany one example). If the combatants are those of a nation state, it's deemed a "normal" war, but if they are stateless it's "terrorism". It's often just so much rhetoric.

    point of this is that regardless of scale, we did not resort to depriving ordinary people of their rights using blanket surveillance of the "if you have nothing to hide you have noting to fear" mentality. We did not throw away our privacy and our rights to justice. We did not fly IRA prisoners off to Egypt to have them tortured. We did not lock them up in Guantanomo Bay like institutions without access to justice. We didn't fly drones over Dublin or New York and commit murder as we seem to be doing in Pakistan (a supposedly friendly country), Yemmen and Afghanistan! We didn't throw out the baby with the bathwater as we seem intent on doing now.
    You don't know what your country was actually doing behind the scenes, but as long as you don't know it's ok though so that you can continue to maintain a superior mindset and look down upon the USA. I will leave you with your naive and incorrect view as I have better things to do than argue with you, especially as you didn't even seem to realise Northern Ireland was part of your nation, but tried to school me on my geography anyway.
    Last edited by seawolf; 25th August 2013 at 12:00 PM.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. which installation of gaim etc
    By mac_shinobi in forum Mac
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 5th February 2006, 09:47 PM
  2. Ranks and staff etc ?
    By mac_shinobi in forum How do you do....it?
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 19th January 2006, 08:33 AM
  3. peer guardian or protowall
    By russdev in forum Windows
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 20th November 2005, 12:28 AM
  4. VNC, Remote Desktop, etc thread
    By Inox in forum Windows
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 2nd August 2005, 09:53 PM
  5. Use of domain password (& staff AUP, etc.) ;)
    By mark in forum School ICT Policies
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 29th June 2005, 02:36 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •