Current Topics
Trump and Russia
by pondering_it_all
Today at 02:20 AM
Miscellaneous humor thread
by Golem
Yesterday at 08:35 PM
Worst Case Scenario
by pdx rick
Yesterday at 08:20 PM
Deceptive marketing, or frivolous lawsuit?
by pdx rick
Yesterday at 08:17 PM
Missouri SB 5 punishes women who use birth control
by pdx rick
Yesterday at 08:14 PM
Cartels? We don't need no steenking cartels
by pdx rick
Yesterday at 08:11 PM
RoundTable for June 2017
by NW Ponderer
Yesterday at 01:53 AM
Trump Forum
by pondering_it_all
06/24/17 04:57 AM
Star Trek: Discovery to ditch a long frustrating Trek rule
by Golem
06/23/17 06:45 PM
why democrats are losing
by pondering_it_all
06/23/17 04:56 AM
The truth - finally
by Jeffery J. Haas
06/23/17 12:53 AM
Want to do something about global warming?
by logtroll
06/22/17 12:29 PM
Should Star Trek Sequels Return to the Prime Timeline?
by Golem
06/22/17 01:46 AM
On Confirmation Bias (or why facts don't matter)
by jgw
06/21/17 09:53 PM
The Best of the Leon Russell Festivals (1972)
by Jeffery J. Haas
06/21/17 09:35 PM
Forum Stats
6234 Members
57 Forums
15948 Topics
275281 Posts

Max Online: 282 @ 05/29/08 05:08 AM
Google Adsense
Page 15 of 21 < 1 2 ... 13 14 15 16 17 ... 20 21 >
Topic Options
#300503 - 04/07/17 05:46 AM Re: Trump and Russia [Re: pdx rick]
pondering_it_all Offline
old hand

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6686
Loc: North San Diego County
It will be very interesting to see how Russia reacts. Assad is a Russian client and ally. I guess they tried to make sure there were no Russian planes where they sent those cruise missiles.

I think it would have been much more effective to just send one cruise missile to take out Assad.

1.5 million dollars * 59 cruise missiles = 88.5 million dollars

Is the plan to spend Russia into submission, ala Reagan?

Top
#300505 - 04/07/17 08:14 AM Re: Trump and Russia [Re: pdx rick]
pondering_it_all Offline
old hand

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6686
Loc: North San Diego County
Interesting:

In 2013 when a Sarin gas attack left over 1400 dead outside of Damascus, most Republicans did not approve of President Obama striking Syrian military forces, so he didn't.

In 2017 when a Sarin gas attack left at least 70 people dead, President Trump sends in 59 cruise missiles and Republicans say: "God Bless America."

If it was up to me, use of chemical weapons would get your head of state's location nuked immediately. If they missed, they would keep on doing that until he or she was dead. Use of banned weapons makes the entire regime war criminals subject to execution.

Top
#300506 - 04/07/17 09:36 AM Re: Trump and Russia [Re: pondering_it_all]
pdx rick Offline
Member
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/09/05
Posts: 40215
Loc: Puget Sound, WA
Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
Regarding Nunes: Sometimes your highest purpose in life is to serve as a bad example for others.

Yeah...no kidding! rolleyes , coffee
_________________________
Contrarian, extraordinaire



Top
#300507 - 04/07/17 09:37 AM Re: Trump and Russia [Re: rporter314]
pdx rick Offline
Member
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/09/05
Posts: 40215
Loc: Puget Sound, WA
Originally Posted By: rporter314
I thought this the other day .... could the ultimate distraction be Mr Trump going to war????


People are saying™ the very same thing. Hmm
_________________________
Contrarian, extraordinaire



Top
#300508 - 04/07/17 09:40 AM Re: Trump and Russia [Re: pondering_it_all]
pdx rick Offline
Member
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/09/05
Posts: 40215
Loc: Puget Sound, WA
Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
In 2013 when a Sarin gas attack left over 1400 dead outside of Damascus, most Republicans did not approve of President Obama striking Syrian military forces, so he didn't.

In 2017 when a Sarin gas attack left at least 70 people dead, President Trump sends in 59 cruise missiles and Republicans say: "God Bless America."


Bow
_________________________
Contrarian, extraordinaire



Top
#300510 - 04/07/17 12:52 PM Re: Trump and Russia [Re: pdx rick]
Schlack Offline
veteran

Registered: 07/22/04
Posts: 9715
Loc: Ireland
Can someone please explain the moral difference between killing with chemical weapons and "conventional weapons*"?


Not sure I really understand it. Are there nice ways of killing?

*including depleted uranium shells and white phosphorous.
_________________________
"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words."
(Philip K.Dick)


Top
#300512 - 04/07/17 01:58 PM Re: Trump and Russia [Re: Schlack]
NW Ponderer Offline
Moderator
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 15244
Originally Posted By: Schlack
Can someone please explain the moral difference between killing with chemical weapons and "conventional weapons*"?


Not sure I really understand it. Are there nice ways of killing?

*including depleted uranium shells and white phosphorous.
This would take a very long time thoroughly. The short answer is, yes there is a moral difference, the most significant being the sheer illegality of chemical weapons (which CAN include white phosphorus). And, yes, there are "nicer" ways of killing. We have a number of treaties that cover these issues, the lead one being the "Geneva Conventions".
_________________________
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.

Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich

Top
#300518 - 04/07/17 03:31 PM Re: Trump and Russia [Re: pdx rick]
Ujest Shurly Offline
stranger

Registered: 10/16/16
Posts: 177
Loc: Michigan, USA
Believe it or not conventional weapons are not considered indiscriminate while Nuclear, Chemical and Biological weapons by their very nature are indiscriminate. An indiscriminate weapon not only takes out the target(s) but also kills, wounds, maims the general population and the flora and fauna around the target(s).

Moral difference? I do not think there is one. But it is more a matter of degrees, or the lessor of the evils. It is the choice of the user on which weapon to use and that choice is what makes the act and the chooser evil.


edited: This is a response to Schlack, not pdx rick.


Edited by Ujest Shurly (04/07/17 09:43 PM)
_________________________
Vote 2018

Life is like a PB&J sandwich
The older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

Now, get off my grass!

Top
#300527 - 04/07/17 08:45 PM Re: Trump and Russia [Re: pdx rick]
pondering_it_all Offline
old hand

Registered: 02/27/06
Posts: 6686
Loc: North San Diego County
Shooting at an enemy soldier who is shooting at you, certainly has different moral dimensions than dropping sarin gas on a village full of civilians. Somebody ends up dead, but you have to consider what they were doing when you killed them.

We (collectively) define what is and is not a war crime, but poison gas is one of the oldest banned weapons. I hope we have progressed a little over the last 100 years.

BTW: I think Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes and terrorist acts in that they were attacks primarily on civilian populations in order to induce terror. Pearl Harbor, on the other hand was primarily an attack on military targets.

Top
#300528 - 04/07/17 09:23 PM Re: Trump and Russia [Re: pondering_it_all]
Ujest Shurly Offline
stranger

Registered: 10/16/16
Posts: 177
Loc: Michigan, USA
Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
BTW: I think Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes and terrorist acts in that they were attacks primarily on civilian populations in order to induce terror. Pearl Harbor, on the other hand was primarily an attack on military targets.


Beg to differ, both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were valid military targets. Now it is arguable that conventional bombing or fire bombing could have been used to the same effect over days as opposed to one bomb. Regardless, nukes are indiscriminate. If only we as a species could "forget" how they are made...

Hiroshima - "As a military target, Hiroshima was a major army base that housed the headquarters of the Japanese 5th Division and the 2nd Army Headquarters. It was also an important port in southern Japan and a communications center."

Nagasaki - "The city of Nagasaki was one of the most important sea ports in southern Japan. Although it was not among the list of potential targets selected by Oppenheimer's committee, it was added later due to its significance as a major war production center for warships, munitions, and other equipment."


Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki
_________________________
Vote 2018

Life is like a PB&J sandwich
The older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

Now, get off my grass!

Top
Page 15 of 21 < 1 2 ... 13 14 15 16 17 ... 20 21 >

Who's Online
0 registered (), 36 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Seadog, sapogvvsrost, papedPop, Dujmovochka123, zapedPop
6234 Registered Users
A2