Noam Chomsky: Obama's drone campaign most extreme terrorism in recent history

[Deleted]

I can't really deny what you are saying here, no.

- - - Updated - - -



Though true, not sure how it detracts from the truth of what he is saying (In my opinion)

Noam Chomsky is a highly quoted and one of the foremost intellectuals in the entire world, he takes the fee because he is an experienced researcher and a respected scientist and because his time is valuable. Not because his opinion is for sale. I would also like to mention that his findings are taught in universities all over the globe.

The fact is that his time is valuable.

[Reg]

Drop 20 tons of pamphlets and candy, next day drop a bomb, wonder why they don't like you? :P

I wouldn't be surprised one bit if this hasn't already happened.

[Gumboy]

Noam Chomsky is a highly quoted and one of the foremost intellectuals in the entire world, he takes the fee because he is an experienced researcher and a respected scientist and because his time is valuable. Not because his opinion is for sale. I would also like to mention that his findings are taught in universities all over the globe.

The fact is that his time is valuable.

Yeah, I was making the point that his fee has nothing to do with what he is saying. I wasn't agreeing with his entire statement that he does it to get rich or anything ;P

[Deleted]

Yeah, I was making the point that his fee has nothing to do with what he is saying. I wasn't agreeing with his entire statement that he does it to get rich or anything ;P

I got the feeling you were unsure and honestly my point was directed at everyone posting here in general, not you. Mostly to the person you quoted, who seemed like the average redneck who sips beer on the couch and frowns on Chomsky as he saw him on the television spouting what he considers nonsense due to the fact that he doesn't comprehend it.

[Kathandira]

I wouldn't be surprised one bit if this hasn't already happened.

Isn't that how we went about bombing Japan? Didn't we send them letters saying their city was getting bombed and they have X amount of time to vacate or they will be incinerated?

[Wixwix]

Chomsky's right.

[Nadiru]

Drones, and by extension air power campaigns, are the most ineffective policies the US has in active use today. Haven't these assholes read Pape? Or the Strategic Bombing Survey? We have 50 years of the smartest strategists and policy analysts in the US saying "this is ineffective and counter-productive" but of course a politician wouldn't deign to read an expert. Let's ask the Air Force whether they think using planes to blow shit up is a good use of their time, they wouldn't be biased in any way, would they?

[Deleted]

Isn't that how we went about bombing Japan? Didn't we send them letters saying their city was getting bombed and they have X amount of time to vacate or they will be incinerated?

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistle...4_06-02_01.jpg

Chomsky's right.

The question is not if you want to drone strike but if you want to figth terrorists.

If you want to figth them drone strikes are deadly efficent.

[Reg]

Isn't that how we went about bombing Japan? Didn't we send them letters saying their city was getting bombed and they have X amount of time to vacate or they will be incinerated?

I know the government was warned to surrender of face ultimate destruction. I am not sure if we warned the civilian population.

EDIT: Apparently we did. Thanks for the link Dav.

[Daelak]

Drones, and by extension air power campaigns, are the most ineffective policies the US has in active use today. Haven't these assholes read Pape? Or the Strategic Bombing Survey? We have 50 years of the smartest strategists and policy analysts in the US saying "this is ineffective and counter-productive" but of course a politician wouldn't deign to read an expert. Let's ask the Air Force whether they think using planes to blow shit up is a good use of their time, they wouldn't be biased in any way, would they?

Yeah US military, why don't you just listen to the wisdom of Nadiru, a stalwart war veteran, with many battles won under his belt, liberal military pussies.

[Kathandira]

http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistle...4_06-02_01.jpg



The question is not if you want to drone strike but if you want to figth terrorists.

If you want to figth them drone strikes are deadly efficent.

At least we tried to warn them. Why haven't we done this in areas we are drone striking? Or have we and I am just unaware?

[Laerrus]

What Obama thinks that Conservative/Libertarian people want: More bombs and drones. Derp de derp.

What Conservative/Libertarian people really want: Bring the focus back to our own soil, less taxes, repair bridges/roads and further develop International trade relations.

Don't confuse us with those damn interventionist Neoconservatives.

[Daelak]

What Obama thinks that Conservative/Libertarian people want: More bombs and drones. Derp de derp.

What Conservative/Libertarian people really want: Bring the focus back to our own soil, less taxes, repair bridges/roads and further develop International trade relations.

Don't confuse us with those damn interventionist Neoconservatives.

I love this, less taxes, but more infrastructure investment. Doesn't make any sense.

[Reg]

What Obama thinks that Conservative/Libertarian people want: More bombs and drones. Derp de derp.

What Conservative/Libertarian people really want: Bring the focus back to our own soil, less taxes, repair bridges/roads and further develop International trade relations.

Don't confuse us with those damn interventionist Neoconservatives.

The second a single Conservative voices his opinion to decrease military spending and use that money to fix our crumbling infrastructure, I will slap one of their bumper stickers on my ass.

[Deleted]

As I stated. Anything that is scary is not terrorism. War is one of the biggest motivators in the world for political negotiation and things like the UN. That doesn't make every war terrorism.

Terrorism as an ideology is a specific type of assymetrical geurilla warfare used against a political state for the purpose of enacting a desired result. It isn't commiting violence against an organization with the intent to destroy and disrupt their ability to take action and also to dissuade other people to violence. All violence has an effect of dissuading action.

Terrorism is commonly defined as violent acts (or threat of violent acts) intended to create fear (terror), perpetrated for a religious, political, or ideological goal, and which deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (e.g., neutral military personnel or civilians).

Straight from wiki, so now let me ask you again, how drone strikes are not terror?? They are, the use violence to bring fear to terrorist to promoting American value's. You can not just give your own interpretation to something, words are things you know.

[Rukh]

like liberals, "conservative" is a very wide net. There's plenty of conservatives that would rather we turn anything islam in to a big sheet of glass.

[Wildtree]

The second a single Conservative voices his opinion to decrease military spending and use that money to fix our crumbling infrastructure, I will slap one of their bumper stickers on my ass.

Ron Paul/Rand Paul
go find a sticker

[Nadiru]

I love this, less taxes, but more infrastructure investment. Doesn't make any sense.

How much money do you think it takes to repave a road or repair a bridge? You could pay for all of the US' infrastructure in perpetuity by taking 1% from the three largest Federal budget items. If you took 2% from each of them you would fix the infrastructure deficit that we've built up in the US in a decade.

[Daelak]

How much money do you think it takes to repave a road or repair a bridge? You could pay for all of the US' infrastructure in perpetuity by taking 1% from the three largest Federal budget items. If you took 2% from each of them you would fix the infrastructure deficit that we've built up in the US in a decade.

http://www.infrastructurereportcard....rade-sheet/gpa


3.6 trillion by 2020.

[Wildtree]

How much money do you think it takes to repave a road or repair a bridge? You could pay for all of the US' infrastructure in perpetuity by taking 1% from the three largest Federal budget items. If you took 2% from each of them you would fix the infrastructure deficit that we've built up in the US in a decade.

To bring the entirety of the USA's infrastructure up to speed, and in line with today's standards in the rest of the leading modern nations, we're looking at ballpark number of right around 2 trillion dollars for a decent start.
And if you want to turn it into the opposite, pretty much like the President proposed, then you can double that figure easily.