abneo3sierra

I still remember reading "Weekly Readers" in primary school, where they told us that by the year 2010, we would be flying in our vehicles to jobs in the upper atmosphere,at fuel bases where large cruisers enroute to Mars, etc. docked for the tourists to shop. Maybe someday... In the meantime, the numbers on your chart actually are pretty sad JonS...hard to believe that when those people die, it will go back to 0.

Names are not issued at random, at least in all cases..I have been in some that were probably random, but also in some that, if random, were just AMAZINGLY well named. As for Quantrill, the manhunt for him was nowhere near that of the Apache leader,which had in effect the entire US Army in the southwest after him. As a note: I am actually on the side that sees Geronimo as probably a 'freedom fighter' although definitely not an innocent, as both sides of the American-Indian wars committed what anyone now would call war crimes.

Along the same line as what BD just said, but also this fact..Geronimo was the target of the first REAL manhunt the US Army conducted, thus its name here, involving probably the largest manhunt in the world's history, is not so out of place if you think about it.

Very good argument BigDuke(John Wayne??..cool name btw) A lot to think about there.

Aff and gunner beat me to it, yes, the Pakistanis were not informed, and were probably even quite misled.

Their stated(over,and over, and over again) reasons for killing us is because we are infidels..I do not plan on converting,sorry mate. They have written books on this subject over and over again. Their #2 reason, is refusal to admit that the state of Israel has a right to exist..Israel is the only democracy in the region that is truly free, I also would not be willing to turn them lose to conduct a second holocaust..in short, their strange beliefs give them all the reason they need to kill us, without us doing a damned thing. We have forces in the Middle East,since the 1990s..yes, they were sent (myself included) to defend an Islamic nation(Saudi Arabia) and free another(Kuwait)..use of THIS as a reason for their hatred, is only something they spew to the media who is usually willing to slurp it up. In short, their hatred(and not the hatred of Islam,but rather of those who would use it for their more sinister desires) should not stop us from doing anything. An awful lot of, for example, Afghans ,actually are glad we are there..this includes a lot of women who otherwise are in the same category as cattle.A lot of them will also be glad Osama is dead, yet the general view from the media will concentrate on those who are angry about it...those people, would be angry at us even if we were dropping steak dinners to them.

The difference(and it is a HUGE one) is that the Palestinians cheered the loss of 3000+ INNOCENT lives, while the Americans cheered the loss of the worst murderer in recent history. As to the piracy question..yes,large naval forces are deployed, but with the order not to shoot the pirates in most cases..which is a waste of naval resources. Your conclusion,though, I agree with....solving the problem requires more..but I do not believe it to be an "either/or" choice..I believe punishment of the bad is perfectly in agreement with the peaceful solving of the causes of the problem.

Erwin is correct I think also, have at least sometimes seen them appear confused if you move the vehicle. If planning to just embark them onto a sitting still vehicle, you just click the vehicle when the little upwards arrow shows green, and they load. If then you move the vehicle before they arrive,they will usually go to the original place,then look for it, so, if planning to move the vehicle, you can either move it first, or, sometimes I will, if the vehicle is far off, have them just go to a spot near where the vehicle will end up,and that way they already begin moving, then once the vehicle is there, can have them load onto it also.

Magpie..that may be on the surface correct...but in the end, the entire concept of law, in a "criminal law" type of setting at least, IS "petty revenge"..you send someone to prison for killing someone..doesn't bring back the victim..you send them to prison for stealing..90%+ of the time, the victim cannot recover what was stolen,etc..the entire idea is to give the victim revenge,despite that society wraps it as "taking the criminal off the street"etc..which, it also does.

I will actually agree with you on this one, I think it would have been better to bring him back to trial. A lot of questions still needed answers that now may never come. However, he was given the opportunity to surrender, and instead shoved his wife in front of him as a shield and opened fire, so, he did get what he had coming at that point I think.

No, we should hug them and tell them we love them..that may work afterall..

You do, as you said, have the ability to form an opinion..you do even have the ability to tell people who have other opinions,that they are making an ass of themselves. The accuracy of your opinion, is debatable, but you do have the right to it. And it is not the duty of the US as a country, to "convince"anyone of the rightness or wrongness of their actions...except, probably,the actual citizens of the US. Do I think they SHOULD do a better job "convincing" YES..most definitely..but in the end, we answer to ourselves. President Obama was a 100% "Anti-Gitmo"candidate, who swore he would shut it down once elected..once he WAS elected, however, he got to see the evidence,that convinced even him, that he was wrong..do I think they should show this evidence to everyone? YES.. I think some things are worth more, and gain more, than keeping secrets in every instance..but not my call.

The timing was even better than that Diesel....the TV show interrupted to bring us the President's speech, was "Celebrity Apprentice" (as in Donald Trump) :-P

These two bear special reply.. In our case, no matter how we treat the prisoners, we are killed if taken prisoner ourselves. Also, to your second point..I realize you are probably defending your (here to be un-named) countryman who haunts this board...but I have been to Guantanamo, where I would venture to guess most of the people posting in this column have not. I am not "speaking out of my ass" but I would say that anyone who lumps the entire thing into "bad"category,without ever having been there to see with their own eyes, is the one making an ass of themselves. I agree there are issues there..probably even some serious ones, but a verse in the Christian Bible seems to have the best part here.."Let he who is without sin cast the first stone"..mostly, I am tired as hell of people who themselves,and their countries, make far more mistakes, or, for the sake of argument, we will even say "make the same amount of mistakes" having the gall to accuse the US, at every step of the way. Perhaps if some of these countries defended themselves we could pull back to the US,and not have to be sent away every year to different godforsaken places. edit..your #5 above actually proves a point that there are 1-fighters,and 2--the non-fighters are even more dangerous..

SO..first, yes, it was a "nonsense"comparison,the point is that the other comparisons you are not seeming to get..and FYI..*most* of the detainees at Gitmo were battlefield prisoners, although, not all. And what I said in the end, was most soldiers have found it easier to shoot than take prisoners...that is not saying that most soldiers did take the easy way, but, it is saying,that those taken prisoner, are lucky,that their captors chose the harder way.

whatever.... The end justifying the means, is a debatable issue..not sure on which side of that I stand..for certain, to do wrong, in favor of a right end, I think is still wrong..my argument here, is that I do not think that it is wrong to punish the guilty. Perhaps in NZ, you allow murderers to run loose, rapists to prowl at night, pedophiles to "shop" in schools... And yes, these are just nonsense examples, I know you do not. In every war in history, prisoners were taken...they are, really, lucky they were not shot on the battlefields, as most soldiers in history, including from your country, have usually found that easier than dealing with prisoners..as even these same people do, when it is them taking us as prisoners...no mention of Geneva rules then, not one peep..and yes, we should live up to a higher standard..and the point is, WE DO..they are fed, given access to healthcare,libraries,lawyers for heaven sake,that they are not even really entitled to, except because some lawyer decided to give them the same rights as law abiding citizens of OUR country...rights they did not even have to begin with, in their own. These same lawyers, by the way, also have cleared any treatment the said prisoners received, as standing up to Geneva rules, our rules, etc. It is only uninformed people who generally are still against "Gitmo"..as an example, when President Obama was still Senator Obama, and was uninformed himself, he stated he would close it down..now that he is President Obama, and has actually been informed, he keeps it open.

Pretty sure that no one ever said that was the whole point of Gitmo..the primary point of Gitmo always was to have a more secure place to put people considered as threats, that was away from the US mainland. By the way, off the point you made, but it is worth saying here,that the intel derived which allowed the hit on bin Laden, was gained from prisoners at Gitmo, as well.

I love BFC...but would really hope they have not taken months to turn out a patch with just these items

That is a good one Elmar, I was just thinking the same thing about that.

Aff, I used them as an example of the worst case,holding 10 yrs after the war..in our case, the war is not even finished..I can add all of allied Europe(and Australia, as part of the Commonwealth)during WW2, for holding their prisoners at least until the war was over.

ding dong the witch is dead

SO... Prisoners of War have, throughtout recent history,dating back into WW2, been held until after the war, at minimum..relatives of mine, were held by the Soviets for 10 years after the war ended even,all without actually being "charged". Granted to your argument,and to BigDuke's, above, the line between "Prisoner of War" and "civilian detainee" is probably where the issue lies..but this is the reason, as seen by the US, at least..you cannot release "enemy" prisoners during a war,they will (as has already happened with many detainees released from Guantanamo) return to the fight against your forces. Those who claim these are not Prisoners of War, then, should stop demanding they be given Geneva rights reserved for POWs.

BigDuke, I can definitely see your point..not 100% sure I agree with it, but not 100% sure I do not, either..some things there I had not considered before,thanks.

It is a good story that even in war, people on both sides can sometimes come together for a good cause.

In my opinion, those who use Facebook, SHOULD already know this..they are getting a service that obviously they like,and want..it is free..the only way to keep it free, is for the expense associated with it, to be paid by SOMEONE. Still, it is good to remind people that everything they do, is actually being "watched" lol.