25 Children killed in Airstrikes

[Ripster42]

Nice clickbait title OP.

CNN is guardian/washingtonpost-tier cockameme.

Jihads use children as human bombs/shields. More@11

There are no mentions of the US having anything to do with that bombing in the article, only Zuul.

[Glorious Leader]

No. The "eye for an eye"-principle only applies to the individual that commits the act, in it's natural state. Ie, it doesn't mean that innocents on the other side should be sold into slavery. The principle was actually conceived to prevent blood feuds and excessive retributions, which basically means that it was enacted as a less-bloody alternative to earlier, more primitive forms of punishments - such as some of those ISIS uses. Barbaric or not (well...it obviously is), it isn't even in the same ballpark as ISIS.

Hardly. Isis doesn't view it that way and the context of the original quote is blood for blood on a organizational level. If ISIS sells a westerner into slavery we should feel well within our rights to sell the civilans living under ISIS into slavery as well. Or even members of ISIS for that matter. It is incredible barbaric and the fact that their are people in the west WHO WISH TO EMULATE THIS BEHAVIOR (and all the actions it can potentially entail) makes it just as bad. Go back and read the original quote of the gentleman I quoted. Hes not talking about individuals...

[Jester Joe]

I changed the OP around to have less accusations without evidence, please take a second look at it when you have the chance!

[Sama-81]

Hardly. Isis doesn't view it that way and the context of the original quote is blood for blood on a organizational level. If ISIS sells a westerner into slavery we should feel well within our rights to sell the civilans living under ISIS into slavery as well. Or even members of ISIS for that matter. It is incredible barbaric and the fact that their are people in the west WHO WISH TO EMULATE THIS BEHAVIOR (and all the actions it can potentially entail) makes it just as bad. Go back and read the original quote of the gentleman I quoted. Hes not talking about individuals...

I really don't think he actually meant that innocent children should be killed on purpose (or with utter disregard). I can see why one would interpret it that way, if one were so inclined, but it seems to me that it was more of way to declare that what happened was an accident (which it obviously was, if (highly unlikely) committed by the US), and should simply be immediately forgotten and justified on the basis of "american innocents also dying". Which is obviously not an acceptable stance either, but certainly less heinous than your interpretation, if true.

Either or, and be that as it may (I'm not really interested in defending said poster), ISIS actually commits atrocity upon atrocity, day by day, and chosing to favor innocents as targets. Here, people (usually angsty teenagers to boot, quite likely) simply make statements, often exaggerated, that they would not have the guts to stand behind in real life, and much less so in a situation where they actually had the power to turn their words into action. To use even the crazier posts around here, or historical events such as My Lai for that matter, as an argument as to why the US is as bad as ISIS, well, that is just...insane.

I do not mind backing you up in regards to bloodshed giving rise to bloodshed though, the core reasoning I certainly agree with. The US and other parties (the russians obviously doesn't give a flying fuck though), really needs to, rather desperately at this point, avoid the killing of innocents (somthing they historically haven't exactly excelled at, and well, drones...). While they at the same time have to remain in the conflict, as ISIS absolutely has to be forced back from the main cities, so that their robespierre-esque reign of terror won't affect nearly as many people as it currently does. Ah well, getting late (or rather, early). Time to call it a night.

[RickJamesLich]

The whole innocent people dying from these drone strikes thing IMO is just going to create more hatred towards the US. If you lose a family member to a drone strike, well if I did at least, I can't even imagine the rage and the desire for revenge i would want. I can't help but think these people feel the same way. War is a very evil thing and at the end of the day anything where we kill the enemy without dying is considered a "good thing" but I can't help but feel this stuff at the same time just creates another war down the road.

[stomination]

The whole innocent people dying from these drone strikes thing IMO is just going to create more hatred towards the US. If you lose a family member to a drone strike, well if I did at least, I can't even imagine the rage and the desire for revenge i would want. I can't help but think these people feel the same way. War is a very evil thing and at the end of the day anything where we kill the enemy without dying is considered a "good thing" but I can't help but feel this stuff at the same time just creates another war down the road.

Hatred comes from just having different views and cultures.

[Mormolyce]

If only there'd been good guys with guns there to protect them from the air strikes.

Oh wait, wrong hot button issue.

The commander in chief would have authorized the attack. Thanks Obama.

If only they'd voted Republican last election they wouldn't have to deal with a hawk in the White House.

Oh wait.

[PC2]

If only they'd voted Republican last election they wouldn't have to deal with a hawk in the White House.

Oh wait.

Jokes aside, this next election will also be between 2 hawks.

[Mormolyce]

Jokes aside, this next election will also be between 2 hawks.

You mean like all of them since 2001?

Well, at least 2001. Don't want to look weak on national security! War war war!

[Easo]

And thus the OP did not appear again.
P.S.
Thank you, mods, for changing the title to a normal one.

[AlphaOut]

This isn't much different than what ISIS or other terrorist organizations do and have been doing to local populace. While the US along with a number of other countries drop bombs and conduct airstrikes; a regular occurrence from terrorist organizations is to kidnap civilian children in order to coerce the head of the family to do whatever they ask. Whether its checking an IED, picking up HME and delivering it across checkpoints, or whatever other bidding they may have. Wives are raped and children killed / raped if a man refuses. Up until about 2011 it wasn't a major concern because groups like the Taliban would generally pay villagers in most areas, and threaten if they refused currency. Although it still did happen.

My point is, for all those that say, "Oh wow, 25 children that's terrible!" You know what? It is terrible, but there is a much larger picture and far worse things going on down range and on a far more regular occurrence. I hate to use the term collateral damage when referring to life, but it is what it is. Why do you think all the terrorist organizations the past 15 years seek refuge is civilian shelter? Because more often than not a civilian house is a far safer haven than setting up camp on the outskirts in some abandoned building. Unfortunately, every now and again a number of names that are on the BOLO list are spotted and action is taken and innocents are caught in the rain.

[Deleted]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/26/world/...cef/index.html

Mod note- As of this moment, there's absolutely nothing to suggest who committed this strike at all, but since there's still discussion that can be had, instead I'm snipping out the false accusations towards US and Russia. If any new info comes out, feel free to present it, but without any info right now, it's basically just bait blaming a country that has no evidence on them

It is one or the other and they are both just as guilty of terrorism.

- - - Updated - - -

This isn't much different than what ISIS or other terrorist organizations do and have been doing to local populace. While the US along with a number of other countries drop bombs and conduct airstrikes;

When you drop a bomb on a bunch of kids and their limbs are amputated you can rationalize all that away by calling it "collateral damage". I'm sure ISIS have some snivelling and vomit-inducing apologia for what they do.

[Cybran]

It was Russians. They don't care.

The airstrike happened on ISIS territory. I thought only USA bombs ISIS?

[Deleted]

It'd be interesting to see how everyone reacted if America just said fuck it and pulled out of every country. Let Isis be isis, close the boarders to refugees, let everyone kill everyone. Basically treat the rest of the world like North Korea and turn a blind eye. How long would it take for the anti war people to scream up and down that the USA has to help?

You seem to be under the illusion that any one wants the US to intervene anywhere. You are delusional. In poll after poll the US is continually credited with being the main threat to world peace.

Your media protects you from an accurate assessment of how your country is viewed. It is not admired, respected or trusted. No one would want it involved in their affairs.

[izayoi80]

You seem to be under the illusion that any one wants the US to intervene anywhere. You are delusional. In poll after poll the US is continually credited with being the main threat to world peace.

Your media protects you from an accurate assessment of how your country is viewed. It is not admired, respected or trusted. No one would want it involved in their affairs.

And this is what most Americans will never understand. That the United States aren't that far removed from the likes of China or Russia, or North Korea for that matter. The media reports what the government tells them to and the average American believes it.

[PickleballAce]

You seem to be under the illusion that any one wants the US to intervene anywhere. You are delusional. In poll after poll the US is continually credited with being the main threat to world peace.

Oh well. We'll get over it.

You guys should write a sternly-worded letter, or whatever limp-wristed threat that tickles your fancy. Maybe an online petition.

[Deleted]

Oh well. We'll get over it.

No one cares what you think. It is a statement of fact to illustrate the other's posters misconception that people see the us as some kind of white knight nation riding to the rescue.

[Mavett]

There are estimates of over 400,000 people dead since the fighting erupted, but lets slap "25 children killed in airstrikes" to appear like we care and shed some crocodile tears and blame X or Y for it.

[ParanoiD84]

Atleast we dont behead the children or force them into being sex slaves, suicide bombers and human shields. War is nasty but it's much beter then back in the days where civilians where not worth shit.

[tylenol]

You seem to be under the illusion that any one wants the US to intervene anywhere. You are delusional. In poll after poll the US is continually credited with being the main threat to world peace.

Your media protects you from an accurate assessment of how your country is viewed. It is not admired, respected or trusted. No one would want it involved in their affairs.

Main threat eh? I take it this was an RT poll because it has been pretty peaceful ever since a certain part of the world tried to take over said world quite a while ago

The US hasn't started 2 world wars in which nearly 100,000,000 people were killed, the US doesn't have any foreign military bases in it because it decided to fly off the rails a couple times and try to take over the world with military force, no leader of the US ever killed 20 some odd million of its own people, the US will always be involved in your countries affairs so...deal with it?

When the shit hits the fan, which countries phone rings and is always picked up?
Which country gets shit on constantly when they actually decide to stay out of something?

Without running to Google, which country or countries were responsible for Libya?