|
|
#121
11-04-2007, 03:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Blackwater in a time of peace
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, ok. Well, there you go. I've already made it clear that I will stop responding to people who are so poor in their debate skills that they cannot keep the conversation on Blackwater without allowing it to degenerate into a much simpler "I hate Bush/Pull out of Iraq" circle jerk. [/ QUOTE ] Why don't you use your awesome debate skills to show me where I said "I hate bush" or "pull out of Iraq"? And umm, yeah I wasn't responding to you anyways so I could care less whether you replied to that post or not. [ QUOTE ] Stick to Blackwater please. Thank you. [/ QUOTE ] Let me make it easier for you- [ QUOTE ] Well, I really can't disagree with you on that. I think what people should be mad at is a system that has lead to such a need for perpetual warfare, which BlackWater has contributed to. [/ QUOTE ] You're welcome. 
|
|
#122
11-04-2007, 03:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blackwater in a time of peace
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Oh, ok. Well, there you go. I've already made it clear that I will stop responding to people who are so poor in their debate skills that they cannot keep the conversation on Blackwater without allowing it to degenerate into a much simpler "I hate Bush/Pull out of Iraq" circle jerk. [/ QUOTE ] Why don't you use your awesome debate skills yo show me where I said "I hate bush" or "pull out of Iraq"? And umm, yeah I wasn't responding to you anyways so I could care less whether you replied to that post or not. [ QUOTE ] Stick to Blackwater please. Thank you. [/ QUOTE ] Let me make it easier for you- [ QUOTE ] Well, I really can't disagree with you on that. I think what people should be mad at is a system that has lead to such a need for perpetual warfare, which BlackWater has contributed to. [/ QUOTE ] You're welcome. [/ QUOTE ] OK, If Blackwater "contributes" what were you implying was the primary cause? You're welcome.
|
|
#123
11-04-2007, 03:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blackwater in a time of peace
[ QUOTE ]
OK, If Blackwater "contributes" what were you implying was the primary cause? [/ QUOTE ] Stick to blackwater please.
|
|
#124
11-04-2007, 03:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blackwater in a time of peace
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] OK, If Blackwater "contributes" what were you implying was the primary cause? [/ QUOTE ] Stick to blackwater please. [/ QUOTE ] OK, if Blackwater kills people for money, why on Earth can't I get them to kill people for money? Could it be because the statement is a gross, ridiculous oversimplification?
|
|
#125
11-04-2007, 03:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blackwater in a time of peace
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] and the argument you use is the same line the bush administration took when leading up to war in Iraq. The preemptive strike, it's a uniquely fascist technique, attacking them to ensure your own safety... [/ QUOTE ] No, the argument I use is that way too many people casually brush across the front page of a news paper every other morning and don't have a clue what the hell is actually going on over in Iraq and have these sick fantasies that security agents screened through Blackwater and about 12 other security companies are running through the streets fighting with the soldiers, yet somehow they're immune from the laws that govern the soldiers. The truth is, they only have incidental contact with the soldiers, they're not out there fighting side by side with them. Security agents have a job to do, soldiers have theirs, and they rarely cross paths. Everyone needs to actually learn what Blackwater does, what security agents do, what the soldiers do, then decide. I believe, as I've stated earlier in this thread, that alot of the hatred for Blackwater is actually hatred for the US Military, and often Blackwater gets blamed for things the US Military did. [/ QUOTE ] Everyone needs to actually learn what Blackwater does, what security agents do, what the soldiers do, then decide. I think the part that unnerves people is the potential there for a private military and or private military police service patrolling the world, unchecked by anyone. Maybe that's not what they are now, but i think i read somewhere in this thread about blackwater tanks and aircraft and such? If so, seems like there is a lot there to really be concerned about. see, to me, you're saying "i like the idea of a private super military, with soldiers who receive training second to none in the world, with a structure such that no one at the company can be held liable for worker malfeasance, with IMMUNITY granted by the US, running wild with billions of $$$$$ all around the world" maybe im hearing you wrong but... [/ QUOTE ] see, to me, you're saying "i like the idea of a private super military, with soldiers who receive training second to none in the world, with a structure such that no one at the company can be held liable for worker malfeasance, with IMMUNITY granted by the US, running wild with billions of $$$$$ all around the world" i am asking, do u think the above bolded statement is accurate?
|
|
#126
11-04-2007, 03:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blackwater in a time of peace
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] why do u feel that aljazeera is less reputable than western sources? Seems very ethnocentric. [/ QUOTE ] It is. Sue me. [/ QUOTE ] examples? or was your opinion formed for u? [/ QUOTE ] US Nukes Syria Thats a start. [/ QUOTE ] did u read this? all it says is "yes we bombed them, sorry turkey, we used ur air." totally invalid information [/ QUOTE ] If you say that article isn't filled with false information, I don't think "Tactical Nuclear Strike" means what you think it means. [/ QUOTE ] And about all this, you do see how/why the article you chose, and the way you misrepresented it is a perfect example of a red herring, right?
|
|
#127
11-04-2007, 03:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blackwater in a time of peace
They walk into marketplaces and light up the place for [censored] and giggles. The list of incidents involving Blackwater employees is a mile long.
The entire Iraq adventure is just about killing people for money. A whole war started to line the pockets of a few good ol boys. Our troops may not have a choice, but Blackwater does. They don't have to be in Iraq. However, they will gladly drive around Bagdahd shootin up some brown people if they get thier six figures.
|
|
#128
11-04-2007, 03:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blackwater in a time of peace
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] OK, If Blackwater "contributes" what were you implying was the primary cause? [/ QUOTE ] Stick to blackwater please. [/ QUOTE ] OK, if Blackwater kills people for money, why on Earth can't I get them to kill people for money? Could it be because the statement is a gross, ridiculous oversimplification? [/ QUOTE ] no, it's not, you just don't have enough money.
|
|
#130
11-04-2007, 03:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Blackwater in a time of peace
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] see, to me, you're saying "i like the idea of a private super military, with soldiers who receive training second to none in the world, with a structure such that no one at the company can be held liable for worker malfeasance, with IMMUNITY granted by the US, running wild with billions of $$$$$ all around the world" [/ QUOTE ] i am asking, do u think the above bolded statement is accurate? [/ QUOTE ] No, that's not what is going on at all. Sure that scares me, but it's not the point, because it's not happening here. Blackwater executives have stated they see no reason that security agents cannot be prosecuted under US law. Also, this "immunity" thing is really blown way out of proportion. The immunity you describe is nothing more than a statement saying the agents who were interviewed by the DOJ would not have their own statements used against them. Its essentially the same protection granted to civilian police officers who are involved in justifiable homicides here on US soil. Police are prosecuted all the time. It simply means they cannot be incriminated on the statement, and that evidence other than statements must be provided to prosecute.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
