5 ms·

This is Edward Snowden's fault. Let's look at the facts: * Edward Snowden declared war against terrorists. * Edward Snowden started indescriminently bombing v

This is Edward Snowden's fault. Let's look at the facts: * Edward Snowden declared war against terrorists. * Edward Snowden started indescriminently bombing villages in the middle east. * Edward Snowden created massive ill will against America, then left a huge power vacuum in the region by pulling out after, dare I say it, conducting terrorism against the native inhabitants. So, Ed, wherever you are, this is your fault.

samstave 11y ago
Edward Snowden then had the audacity to leak our ways and means to the same terrorists and put the lives and safety of our men in the field at risk! Edward Snowden then had the balls to tell the American people that the NSA was sharing their nude selfies amongst NSA employees and put the lives and safety of our men in the field at risk!
stvswn 11y ago
"Indescriminately(sic) bombing?" "conducting terrorism?" I led a platoon in Iraq, and we did nothing of the sort. I'm fine with opposition to U.S. foreign policy; this is just lazy slander, and it shows a very shallow understanding of what actually happened.
- woodman 11y ago
  > I led a platoon in Iraq, and we did nothing of the sort. I fought in Fallujah; I would be very surprised to hear from the residents that they did not feel terrorized or modify their behavior in response to our activities. I have no doubt that you don't see yourself in that light, but your intents mean very little to those people. Putting too much weight on either perspective, the action's originator or recipient, leads to all sorts of silliness (the concept of hate crimes, donglegate, etc). Try to detach yourself and just consider the facts.
  - stvswn 11y ago
    You equate "they felt terrorized" with "terrorism." Terrorism is the deliberate targeting of civilians in order to cause fear for political ends. It's not "civilians being scared" and definitely not "civilians modified their behavior." I have no doubt civilians lived (and sometimes died) through horrible battles. In examining the ethics of violent conflict it absolutely does matter whether civilians were targeted or not. If you saw anyone deliberately harm civilians, or use disproportionate force against an enemy that resulted in needless civilian death, you should report it and hopefully that person goes to jail. I have no doubt some people did terrible things. That's a far, far distance from the general claim that the U.S. was "indiscriminate" or "conducted terrorism."
- vonklaus 11y ago
  Well, I can appreciate that you conducted yourself with honor. However, here is another data point, equally as anecdotal, showing another story (wikileaks apache video). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Hx-jA2m_hY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Hx-jA2m_hY
  - stvswn 11y ago
    It's not simply anecdotal about me and my conduct. It's a firm knowledge of the U.S. military's internal policies and controls. As for that video -- I wasn't sure it's one that I had seen, so I watched it again. I don't know what point you're trying to make -- those men were completely legitimate targets. I would have killed them myself. I'm sorry you had to confront what war's actually like, but killing is sort of the whole point.
- xenihn 11y ago
  it's really disappointing to me that you probably won't respond to woodman's post, and that you and countless others are incapable of taking even a moment to attempt overcoming your cognitive dissonance
  - stvswn 11y ago
    I did reply. And I have no cognitive dissonance, just moral clarity.
merpnderp 11y ago
Don't forget that in 2007 Edward Snowden started funding and training anti-government groups in Syria, then in 2009 when he won election, he upped his game and then in 2011 started arming them. Then in 2012 when Russia approached him with a deal to have Assad step aside and force the Syrian government to stop murdering its people, Snowden laughed and said Assad was on his way out anyways and he didn't need their deal. This is definitely all Snowden's fault.

samstave 11y ago

Edward Snowden then had the audacity to leak our ways and means to the same terrorists and put the lives and safety of our men in the field at risk! Edward Snowden then had the balls to tell the American people that the NSA was sharing their nude selfies amongst NSA employees and put the lives and safety of our men in the field at risk!

stvswn 11y ago

"Indescriminately(sic) bombing?" "conducting terrorism?" I led a platoon in Iraq, and we did nothing of the sort. I'm fine with opposition to U.S. foreign policy; this is just lazy slander, and it shows a very shallow understanding of what actually happened.

woodman 11y ago
> I led a platoon in Iraq, and we did nothing of the sort. I fought in Fallujah; I would be very surprised to hear from the residents that they did not feel terrorized or modify their behavior in response to our activities. I have no doubt that you don't see yourself in that light, but your intents mean very little to those people. Putting too much weight on either perspective, the action's originator or recipient, leads to all sorts of silliness (the concept of hate crimes, donglegate, etc). Try to detach yourself and just consider the facts.
- stvswn 11y ago
  You equate "they felt terrorized" with "terrorism." Terrorism is the deliberate targeting of civilians in order to cause fear for political ends. It's not "civilians being scared" and definitely not "civilians modified their behavior." I have no doubt civilians lived (and sometimes died) through horrible battles. In examining the ethics of violent conflict it absolutely does matter whether civilians were targeted or not. If you saw anyone deliberately harm civilians, or use disproportionate force against an enemy that resulted in needless civilian death, you should report it and hopefully that person goes to jail. I have no doubt some people did terrible things. That's a far, far distance from the general claim that the U.S. was "indiscriminate" or "conducted terrorism."
vonklaus 11y ago
Well, I can appreciate that you conducted yourself with honor. However, here is another data point, equally as anecdotal, showing another story (wikileaks apache video). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Hx-jA2m_hY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Hx-jA2m_hY
- stvswn 11y ago
  It's not simply anecdotal about me and my conduct. It's a firm knowledge of the U.S. military's internal policies and controls. As for that video -- I wasn't sure it's one that I had seen, so I watched it again. I don't know what point you're trying to make -- those men were completely legitimate targets. I would have killed them myself. I'm sorry you had to confront what war's actually like, but killing is sort of the whole point.
xenihn 11y ago
it's really disappointing to me that you probably won't respond to woodman's post, and that you and countless others are incapable of taking even a moment to attempt overcoming your cognitive dissonance
- stvswn 11y ago
  I did reply. And I have no cognitive dissonance, just moral clarity.

merpnderp 11y ago

Don't forget that in 2007 Edward Snowden started funding and training anti-government groups in Syria, then in 2009 when he won election, he upped his game and then in 2011 started arming them. Then in 2012 when Russia approached him with a deal to have Assad step aside and force the Syrian government to stop murdering its people, Snowden laughed and said Assad was on his way out anyways and he didn't need their deal. This is definitely all Snowden's fault.