Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Suave on August 05, 2005, 10:03:44 PM
-
They bring their children and carry signs that say "Thank God for IED's" to the funeral of an american soldier who was killed in Iraq.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/kmbc/20050805/lo_kmbc/2866367
Religion.. stupid is as stupid does.
-
How sad. :(
If people hate America so much then why don't they just leave?
-
depressing.
nuts, for sure.
sad to see these fell outta the religion tree.
-
Yep, these guys picket funerals of all gays that they can. Really class acts, but I notice a deafening silence from y'all when it's "just a gay citizen" and not a soldier.
-
nobodys brought it up before.. have they?
if they had and i saw it, the comment would be the same.
-
If by yall you mean the media. I can't post links to news stories that aren't.
-
Too bad they weren't the ones killed by the IED!:mad: The man dies protecting his family, friends, and country, and they have the testical fortitude to do such a thing. They arent americans, they are almost like who were are fighting in this war on terror!
GOD BLESS HIM!!
I just want to thank him for defending this country and i am sorry that those Mother trucker's did that at his funeral!:mad:
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Yep, these guys picket funerals of all gays that they can. Really class acts, but I notice a deafening silence from y'all when it's "just a gay citizen" and not a soldier.
Never heard of it. How's that for deafening silence?
-
Allow Honor Guard to use live ammo. Ready - AIM - FIRE...
-
Not even Jane Fonda did that :(
OTOH; sick as it is; at least I can respect a Christian saying "Don't kill!" more than I can one saying "Bless this cruise missle, Oh lord; and send it unto the unbelivers"....
There is, at least, a moral consistency in their stance.
-
their commies!
-
You don't ever criticize soldiers, (unless they committed crimes) you criticize the government and administration that causes the policies, never the troops.
Doing a job that most don't want and few can do. Give em hell boys!
-
"The first sin was being a part of this military. If this young man had a clue and any fear of God, he would have run, and not walked, from this military," said protester Shirley Phelps-Roper. "Who would serve a nation that is godless and has flipped off, defiantly defied, defiantly flipped off, the Lord their God?"
These morons need a dose of reality. Why don't we buy them all tickets (one way of course) to the "Holy Land" and let them protest there? Couldn't we consider them insurgents?
-
From the Article
"Do I like it? No, I don't. But what can you say, it's a free country," said veteran Dave Campbell.
I do not beleive the first amendment applies to these people at all. Not because of what they have to say but because of their approach and how they are saying it.
Ruining a person's funeral.....a time to honor a fallen soldier is not freedom of speech it's disorderly conduct and the police should arrest them. In fact I would agree with them being arrestd protesting any funeral. WHat nerve they have to protest a greiving family.
These people need psych evals and a really good look at WWJD.
-
One protester had an American flag tied to his belt that draped to the ground. He was holding a sign that read, "Thank God For IEDs," which are explosive devices used by insurgents to blow up military convoys.
1 these are not eurotards
2 they r christians who support moslims extremist.
Its a strange world out there.
I would say arrest for dishonouring a funeral.
Than blindfold em bring em to the middle of iraq with a sign on their back.
" we are western christians from the USA"
After that we might see some cool videos.
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Yep, these guys picket funerals of all gays that they can. Really class acts, but I notice a deafening silence from y'all when it's "just a gay citizen" and not a soldier.
Perhaps because the soldier died by giving his life in a foreign land while in the service of his country.
All I hear from the gays is whines about how terrible gays are treated.
Now if he were a soldier AND gay and died overseas then perhaps we would be just as outraged because he was doing something other then just being gay.
-
ok, i need to school a couple of you on your word and phrase usage.
1. they dont "hate america", they just hate the state it is in and want it to change. the ability to change is the main plus of democracies (or in this case a republic.)
2. sorry eagle, but the soldiers in question did not die in the "war on terror" they died on the war on TERRORISM. "war on terror" is a phrase cooked up by FUBAR 24 hour news channels.
3. the word "insurgent" refers to combatants from within a country. so calling the saudies or syrians attacking people in iraq "insurgents" is idiocy and shows a lack of understanding of the english language.
-
DREDIOCK, I was going to post something, but honestly words fail me.
-
3. the word "insurgent" refers to combatants from within a country. so calling the saudies or syrians attacking people in iraq "insurgents" is idiocy and shows a lack of understanding of the english language.
So the walk inbetween and work together with insurgents, what would u call em partizans??
-
i would call them "resistance fighters". i think you mean "partisan" not partizan. and yes, you could call them partisans.
"partisan n.
A member of an organized body of fighters who attack or harass an enemy, especially within occupied territory; a guerrilla."
-
they are non combatants they dont wear
uniforms.
U could call them war criminals.
Partisans weared uniforms. i think you mean "partisan" not partizan.
sorry for my half dutch translation im not perfect gramatically like u.
-
so u just asked that question to misslead me? you suggested that they could be called partisans, not me. i call them resistance fighters.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
DREDIOCK, I was going to post something, but honestly words fail me.
Perhaps I should clarify.
There is no justification for what they did. Yea its an outrage no matter whom they would have been protesting. Be it gays, straights,Jews,whites,blacks,hispanics, Christians, or purple people with green pony tails.
What makes it particularly outrageous is it wasnt just a member of one of the afore mentioned groups but he was a soldier who died for his country while serving his country.
He was someone who volunteered to put his life on the line for his country and ended up making the supreme sacrifice for his country.
He was a soldier and in my book that makes him special.
That to me makes it more offensive then if he were simply gay,or straight or,Jewish,white,black,hispanic, Christian, or a purple person with a green pony tail. Because he was a soldier and because he died the way he did. That makes his background irrelevant
Furthermore. I dont do pity parties for any of these groups. Just because they are a member of these groups
Many of them dont just want equal rights but special ones. or they want special treatment just because they are this or that.
Now before you think I dont know what its like to be discriminated against lemme paint you a little picture.
Im a mostly German and Irish guy who happens to have a Spanish last name. the last pure Spaniard in my family was my great grandfather. Hell I dont look Spanish nor do I speak a word of the language.
Now I happeend to go to school that was predominantly Black and Peurto Rican during the 70's and at the height of the racial tensions in my area. Race Riots were a weekly occurrence in my town.
I had the privilege of having to fight the blacks and Puerto Ricans for no other reason then because I was white and the whites for no other reason then because they thought I was Puerto Rican. In short I got it from all sides.
Growing up as a teenager I had girlfriends have to break up with me because either their parents or their brothers and I quote these words exactly "Didnt want their sister/daughter going out with a spic"
Later as a young adult I've had an instance where I applied for a job and have the interviewer tell me. "if it were up to me I'd love to hire you right now but I am going to be honest with you and tell you you wont get hired because the owner of the company doesnt like Puerto Ricans" I said. but Im not "Puerto Rican" He said "I understand but you have a spanish last name and thats all he needs to see"
And thats just a brief overview of what I've dealt with
So you see I very well know what its like to be discriminated and persecuted against. But not one time ever did I whine about it or look for a pity party, or anyone to be outraged or any kind of special treatment. I picked myself up by my bootstraps and just kept going.
and before you think I'm a homo phobe Im not. While straight myself I've had friends who were gay, Just as I have had friends who are Black,Jewish,Christain etc etc.
But just as I expected no special treatment or outrage over my treatment just because of who I was. Nor do I give the pity party because someone happens to be gay, or black or Spanish etc.
Now that being said. Is it wrong for them to protest someone's funeral because they were gay? Sure. But it would be equally as wrong had they done it to any other group. but no more or no less.
But it being done to a soldier IMO make it even worse
Soldiers are special. These other groups are not.
-
Originally posted by BUG_EAF322
1 these are not eurotards
2 they r christians who support moslims extremist.
Its a strange world out there.
I would say arrest for dishonouring a funeral.
Than blindfold em bring em to the middle of iraq with a sign on their back.
" we are western christians from the USA"
After that we might see some cool videos.
:cool:
-
there must be a human shield program with a few openings, somewhere..
-
they should use some strippers to counterprotest them. that would get them to move along.
:aok
-
Originally posted by BUG_EAF322
they are non combatants they dont wear
uniforms.
U could call them war criminals.
Partisans weared uniforms.
You just made similar decisions as nazies did with French resistance movement.
Would you like to change your opinion?
-
i consider them resistance fighters because they seem to limit their attacks to westerners and those who colaberate with the westerners. the french and many other resistance groups (including the dutch) did the same things. so are you calling the people who faught the nazis in order to liberate your country war criminals? you sicken me, sir.
-
Bug,
Non combatants are civilians, who stays outside of the combat.
Combatants are fighters of about any kind, because they.. well.. do combat. Clothes don't matter.
Partisans aren't required to wear uniform in order to be partisans, they can also wear civilian clothes (which they actually did all the time).
You cannot just one day be a partisan by wearing uniform and then be a civilian again - once you're a partisan and stay with your cause, you're a partisan.
Would be a short life if you would wear a "partisan uniform" all the time.
They do sometimes also wear uniforms in Iraq.
-
Is it illegal to set up IED's in front of these protestors?
-
There is no excuse for protesting at funerals, certainly not for people who dare to call themselves Christians. None whatsoever. It's bad enough to lose someone. But to find there are people outside the service who are glad your friend or relative is dead is sickening.
Their is no excuse, no cause justifies it, nor any so called moral stance, a funeral is the wrong moment entirely. It doesn't matter who or what the person is. There is no justification.
In many countries they would be beaten to death by a mob for their disrespect. Sometimes you can be too tolerant of people who abuse their 'freedom' to protest.
This is one such case.
-
They wouldn't ack dat way ifn they's been razed rat.
Mah mama woulda slappt the speeyet outta maw mouf ifn ahd evah sade somefin lak dat to any stranguh. An den win maw dadduh got home HOOOIIIEEEEE!!!! Ah tornader wif a belt!!!
Win he wuz dun, ah woodah had to set maw naked buhind own duh cold bafroom linoleum ta git any releaf.
In all seriousness, that is what would have happened to me. There seems to be a death of civility and a growth of arrogance in our society. How such chowder-heads expect our country to survive in this world without a military is beyond me. Their hatred for anything military and subsequent support for extremist groups that blow up groups of children getting hand-outs of candy is obscene.
-
1 Machetee, 15 minutes...protest over. Raging Bull...
That has to be the sorriest thing to do at a Funeral!
Is this Biyatch listed in the phone book? Would love to call her 24/7 and let her know I spent 20 years in the Military to give her the right to Freedom of Speech and now I'm just earning it back!!!!
Mac
-
As far as i know what i learned long time ago in the army.
That u have to show what u are.
U cannot walk around like a civilian and than suddenly attack.
Or wear a wrong uniform , those germans caught in US uniform in the ardennes where sentenced to death by fire squad.
There is prob a big grey area
-
I would "picket" them when they least expect it ....
did you see the home page of the "church"?
google: Westboro Baptist Church
cheekboness who need their collective arses kicked - hate mongers who need to be shown the door
-
Originally posted by BUG_EAF322
As far as i know what i learned long time ago in the army.
That u have to show what u are.
U cannot walk around like a civilian and than suddenly attack.
Or wear a wrong uniform , those germans caught in US uniform in the ardennes where sentenced to death by fire squad.
There is prob a big grey area
Those rules and the resistance fighters are two different things.
It's like a treaty between countries, but what government do the resistance fighters represent?
Besides that, if they would do it by all the regulations, they'd be squashed in no time by the occupation forces, or they would no longer be 'resistance fighters', but an army.
If your country is occupied and you really want to do something to it, you would do exactly the same as they do in Iraq.
Theres no other way to fight the occupiers, than hide in as a civilian.
If you want to assassinate someone important with a hit & run attack, you wouldn't get anywhere close the target in a uniform.
To be effective, it is desirable to be able to fade away after an attack, to be able to attack again.
Dressed in uniform in a heavily occupied territory would just make you hundred times more vulnerable.
At the countryside, or other lightly guarded territory, you could make strikes against targets in a uniform and get away.
For example germans didn't have so strong occupation all over France or lowlands, which is why partisans were also seen in uniform.
After the strike, they did return to their base or whatever and dress as civilian - thats against the convention rules as well.
However the actual army soldiers aren't expected to do that in a war.
Of course they can, but they'd be executed on the spot if caught alive. They wouldn't have any of the rights that POW's do.
This all makes a sort of "funny" controversy.
It was bad when germans executed resistance fighters, but it is good if they're executed in Iraq without rights.
Euro partisans were also seen as the good ones, but in Iraq they're the bad ones.
However they don't differ from each others much, what comes to the strikes against Iraqi officials and the occupiers.
Euros did target the native politicians and others cooperating with the occupiers, though not as radically as they in Iraq.
What is happening in Iraq, really isn't anything new.
Whats new, is the scale they're blowing up alot of their own as "traitors working for the occupiers", even if they're only builders on a site that is being built by foreigners.
Killing native politicians working in the occupiers government is very understandable - if you're such a radical person that you see them as occupiers, then the ones working as politicians for the "enemy" are among top of your enemies - traitors from within.
This isn't any pro-muslim resistance fighter speech.
You just can't dismiss the reasons and create controversies with your own history.
It is nothing new there are people whos pissed off at the occupiers and that they're going to act against much bigger foe like they do.
In the middle east the radicalness isn't anything new either.
Bush really should've studied the cultural and historical things somewhat better before launching his freedom anti-WMD al qaeda campaign in Iraq and planned accordingly.
Theres been no surprises that couldn't been thought of before the war.
-
Fishu in comparing "insurgant" activities in Iraq and resistance in france you are completly ignoring the religious aspects of it all. The majority of the attacks that are carried out are done by the sunnis and bathists....members of the old regiem. Those are just the IRAQIS that are carrying out attacks. Then theres the Iranians and syrians answering the call to jihad. wich IMHO is a completly different element in of itself. These are neither soldiers nore insurgents but terrorists.
It's not to say it didn't happen but I dont ever recall reading about french resistance fighters ever carrying out large scale attacks against civilian population. To compare them to iraqi insurgants is...GULP.....(note: this is hard to say).....an insult to the French
-
Gunslinger,
I did attempt to make a difference between the euro and iraq resistance fighters when it comes to mass killings of civilians.
However other aspects are pretty much the same.
Including killings of the people co-operating with the occupying forces.
However in Iraq virtually everyone is in danger to become killed for cooperating with the occupiers.
Besides it wasn't originally about blowing up people, but of the resistance fighters dressed as civilians.
Anyway, I'd like to first see some actual intelligence reports on where the different insurgents originates from and what they're mostly doing.
So far most of the 'intelligence' has been from the kinds of experts who fully agrees Osama is either dead or alive. :rolleyes:
And like you said, theres the cultural difference, which why the killers of civilians can be just as well native iraqis as foreign insurgents.
If they find it convincing enough that Islam calls the civilians as enemies, they're going to do it.
Then there are the other groups with their own criminal intents.
How do we for example know that a store owner simply didn't pay protection money to a criminal gang and they blew up the whole site?
We really don't know much of their intents and there are several different groups with different motives.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Gunslinger,
I did attempt to make a difference between the euro and iraq resistance fighters when it comes to mass killings of civilians.
However other aspects are pretty much the same.
Including killings of the people co-operating with the occupying forces.
However in Iraq virtually everyone is in danger to become killed for cooperating with the occupiers.
Besides it wasn't originally about blowing up people, but of the resistance fighters dressed as civilians.
Anyway, I'd like to first see some actual intelligence reports on where the different insurgents originates from and what they're mostly doing.
So far most of the 'intelligence' has been from the kinds of experts who fully agrees Osama is either dead or alive. :rolleyes:
And like you said, theres the cultural difference, which why the killers of civilians can be just as well native iraqis as foreign insurgents.
If they find it convincing enough that Islam calls the civilians as enemies, they're going to do it.
Then there are the other groups with their own criminal intents.
How do we for example know that a store owner simply didn't pay protection money to a criminal gang and they blew up the whole site?
We really don't know much of their intents and there are several different groups with different motives.
I saw on the news this morning a Brit Officer talking about a shipment of munitions (explosives) that was aledgedly intercepted from coming from Iran. The matter is under investigation though but I don't think it is a super secret matter that non-iraqis have joined the fight in big numbers.
The chance to fight US soldiers in Jihad is the chance of their liftime and are drawn to it like a bugs to a zapper.
But yes I would agree with you on your other points. How this all relates to idiot scum claiming to be christian protesting a time of honor is beyond me.
-
Hi Guys,
Fred Phelps, what can one say about Fred? Well, Fred seems to have forgotten the gospel of grace a long time ago and has switched over to a ministry consisting entirely of a grim preaching of the wrath of God towards sin, sans the equally important doctrine of the mercy of God extended to sinners. I can't help but imagine that Fred and the exceedingly sparse membership of his WBC church would benefit from a serious consideration of the phrase "There But For the Grace of God Go I" or that Christ Himself asked of the father "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do." regarding those who were crucifying him.
Personally, I am trying hard, very hard, to be filled with pity towards Fred and his flock instead of wrath. I have already lost Christian brothers to IEDs in the war on terror, including one, Captain Ernie Blanco, who himself was planning on marrying and going into the ministry when he left the military. To this day I cannot remember meeting a more godly, upstanding, and zealous proponent of the good news. His witness has been confirmed in the fact that all of the guys I have met who served in his unit, Christian and non-Christian were utterly devestated when he was killed, all of them had some memory of him that spoke of his kindness, selflessness, courage, and willingness to act as a servant leader. For Fred to conclude that men like Ernie are condemned to hell merely for their honorable service, indicates that they do not in fact understand salvation at all. I don't know what I would do if he ever showed up at a funeral I was conducting, but may God give me strength to pray and witness even to the hardened in heart in that moment, rather than repaying evil for evil with a swift kick in the rear.
All of this goes to show that ministers need an overseeing body, no good ever ultimately comes of absolute ministerial independency.
- SEAGOON
-
Amen Seagoon.
And Bug, whatever your ideas of what a "Partisan" or "Guerrilla" may be, they have their own ideas. Thats the thing about Guerrillas, their tactics change to suit the environment in which they are fighting. Its the very nature of Guerrilla tactics. In our own Civil War over 100 years ago, we had Partisans fighting on the fringes who wore civilian clothing to blend in, or even stole uniforms from the soldiers they killed. Many times they wore these uniforms in attacks on enemy forces, to create confusion. There is nothing new under the sun. Any way men can find to kill each other, we have tried before, somewhere, sometime. Its only the weapons that change.
-
Hello Suave,
While agreeing with you about the indecency of the group of religious protesters, your last comment paints with too broad a brush.
Religion.. stupid is as stupid does.
The fact is the young soldier's funeral was conducted at Grace Evangelical Church. I can only imagine that they honored him as is fitting.
All the best.
Cement.
-
Originally posted by Xargos
How sad. :(
If people hate America so much then why don't they just leave?
Typical conservative hyperbole.
-
fishu, "foriegn insurgent" is an oxymoron. an insurgent is someone who attacks from within the country being attacked. i already said most of what you said (albeit less elegently).
as for you gunslinger, you have lost your thinking privlages. you say the motives are different? well so is the situation. the reason that there weren't many foriegn resistance fighters in the french resistance was because they had their own countries to fight in: holland, belgium, czhechoslovakia, even poland.
-
Originally posted by SMIDSY
fishu, "foriegn insurgent" is an oxymoron. an insurgent is someone who attacks from within the country being attacked. i already said most of what you said (albeit less elegently).
as for you gunslinger, you have lost your thinking privlages. you say the motives are different? well so is the situation. the reason that there weren't many foriegn resistance fighters in the french resistance was because they had their own countries to fight in: holland, belgium, czhechoslovakia, even poland.
you've obviously have lost your READING privilages/ability. I was mearly responding to the comparison of French resistance to Iraqi insurgants. And yes there are SOME insurgants in Iraq (note: I feel we are fighting an insurgancy but it is not lead by native Iraqies but foreign jihadists and terrorists) THAT is among many reasons why I feel there cannot be a proper comparison between french resistance and iraqi fighters. Like I said it's an insult to the french resistance.
-
Originally posted by SMIDSY
so u just asked that question to misslead me? you suggested that they could be called partisans, not me. i call them resistance fighters.
So what you gonna call these heros when they carbomb a
friend or family member? Semantics suck.
-
gunslinger, just stop. they are resisting the american/brit/etc. occupation just like the french, dutch, belgian, etc. resistances resisted the german/italian occupations. their goals are the same: to expell the invading powers at any cost. it is not an insult, it is a comparison. just like comparing modern armored tactics to that used by the germans in WWII. my point is they are using similar strategies because they have worked in the past and they will work in the present. so if you call these resistance fighters "terrorists" it is YOU who is insulting the anti-nazi resistance fighters of WWII.
-
Originally posted by SMIDSY
gunslinger, just stop. they are resisting the american/brit/etc. occupation just like the french, dutch, belgian, etc. resistances resisted the german/italian occupations. their goals are the same: to expell the invading powers at any cost. it is not an insult, it is a comparison. just like comparing modern armored tactics to that used by the germans in WWII. my point is they are using similar strategies because they have worked in the past and they will work in the present. so if you call these resistance fighters "terrorists" it is YOU who is insulting the anti-nazi resistance fighters of WWII.
how many chruches did the french bomb because they were of a different "sect" so to speak. How many random civilians did the french kill? How many religious gatherings did the french set bombs off in?
Freedom fighters don't fight against freedom they fight for it.
-
Originally posted by SMIDSY
fishu, "foriegn insurgent" is an oxymoron. an insurgent is someone who attacks from within the country being attacked. i already said most of what you said (albeit less elegently).
Well, maybe it's just because english is a foreign language to me, but an english dictionary doesn't indicate it couldn't be a foreigner.
Gunslinger,
There isn't many (if at all) sources on how many civilians they killed, because most of the civilian deaths are credited to germans - which wasn't particularly hard to do.
It's the victors history and the least you want to do after a war, when celebrating the liberators and resistance fighters, is to find out how many "innocent" civilians were killed by the resistance fighters.
Some resistance groups actually often fought against each others interests, which happened quite frequently especially in Italy.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Well, maybe it's just because english is a foreign language to me, but an english dictionary doesn't indicate it couldn't be a foreigner.
Gunslinger,
There isn't many (if at all) sources on how many civilians they killed, because most of the civilian deaths are credited to germans - which wasn't particularly hard to do.
It's the victors history and the least you want to do after a war, when celebrating the liberators and resistance fighters, is to find out how many "innocent" civilians were killed by the resistance fighters.
Some resistance groups actually often fought against each others interests, which happened quite frequently especially in Italy.
I feel that the so called "insurgancy" in Iraq is more about Jihad than it is overcoming ocupation. By that I mean that there was a huge percentage of the population that did not like Sadam and would have loved to have seen him gone. Probably not at the expense of ocupation though.
That is yet another major difference in the comparison of the WWII resistance to the Iraqi "insurgancy". Maybe if it was a little well known or written about that france was on the verge of civil war while under German occupation I might be inclined to agree with the earlier comparison.
lastly I feel this deserves it's own thread. I think the original post about funeral protestors speaks for itself and is a different subject in it and of itself.
-
Originally posted by Russian
Allow Honor Guard to use live ammo. Ready - AIM - FIRE...
Smartest thing Ive read in this thread.:aok
-
Originally posted by SMIDSY
they are resisting the american/brit/etc. occupation just like the french, dutch, belgian, etc. resistances resisted the german/italian occupations. their goals are the same: to expell the invading powers at any cost. it is not an insult, it is a comparison. just like comparing modern armored tactics to that used by the germans in WWII. my point is they are using similar strategies because they have worked in the past and they will work in the present. so if you call these resistance fighters "terrorists" it is YOU who is insulting the anti-nazi resistance fighters of WWII.
These wackos in Iraq - whatever you want to call them are killing more of their own than American servicemen. They are for the most part murdering for the sake of murdering. Settling personal scores or religious ones. There is no "resistance". There is more opposition to the Iraqi government, a government elected by Iraqis btw, than there is opposition to the US military. This isn't about removing an occupying force, it's about establishing an islamofacist regime in Iraq.
Equating the wackos in Iraq with the resistance movements in WW2 Europe is an insult and a slap in the face to your own military and its members serving in Iraq. The flip side to that is that if the islamofacists = WW2 ETO resistance fighters, then the US military in Iraq = nazi occupation.
In contrast to nazi SOPs:
The US military doesn't use atrocity or torture as a matter of policy.
The US military doesn't take hostages to ensure good behaviour.
The US military doesn't massacre people because of their skin colour, religion or ethnic background.
The US military doesn't kidnap people and enslave them to work in US factories.
The US military does do its absolute best to reduce or eliminate civilian casualties.
Re the Iraqi government. The US did not install a puppet regime, no matter what the limp-wristed left say. The US said (and I'm reducing a whole whack of negotiation and policy to two simple sentences) "Iraq, though shalt have an election to form a government. Elect who ever the hell you want but elect someone who YOU want to be in charge here".
Smidsy, you might want to pull your head out from there, get some fresh air in your lungs and have a look around before you start concluding who is and who isn't the bad guy here.
asw
-
I got one for ya SMIDSY,
How many videos were made of french resistance chopping off the heads of reporters, clerics, woman, and basically innocent people to include diplomats for terror effect?
-
Freedom fighters don't fight against freedom they fight for it.
Exactly
Now if ur people are tortured and supressed against all human rights.
it would feel more legimit.
instead they terorize their qown people
they dont want human right
they dont want freedom of speak
they want to ruin their country
they dont deserve much rights
-
Originally posted by SMIDSY
gunslinger, just stop. they are resisting the american/brit/etc. occupation just like the french, dutch, belgian, etc. resistances resisted the german/italian occupations. their goals are the same: to expell the invading powers at any cost. it is not an insult, it is a comparison. just like comparing modern armored tactics to that used by the germans in WWII. my point is they are using similar strategies because they have worked in the past and they will work in the present. so if you call these resistance fighters "terrorists" it is YOU who is insulting the anti-nazi resistance fighters of WWII.
SMIDSY,
Take is easy young seaman, or yet to be seaman. First of all, don't try educating everybody on what's happening in Iraq if you've never been there. I have 3 tours there and I have a pretty good idea of what is happening there. You cannot just classify all of the enemy fighters in Iraq into one category. There are jihadists, foreign fighters, criminals and yes, there are insurgents and terrorists. I have some pretty graphic pictures of some terrorist acts on the local civilians - there was only one purpose for these acts and that was to terrorise the local populace. It's almost unbelievable what one human will do to another.
Another thing, don't correct people on their spelling when you need a spell checker yourself. Just lighten up bud.
Back to the original post, this stuff makes me sick. I would have gone to jail if I would have been there that day and it would have been worth it too - I can't believe somebody hasn't stomped the $**t out of these people yet.
My condolences go out to that Soldier's family.
-
Originally posted by WpnX
I have 3 tours there and I have a pretty good idea of what is happening there.
Jeeze - that's awesome, and .
It'd be great if you could give us the low down from your perspective - because we just don't hear it that much. Either here, or in a new thread if it's too off-topic for this one.
Really interested in your take on it.
-
thanks for the post WpnX :aok
I'm still wondering to myself if these guys would have a constitutional leg to stand on with free speech and all.
To me I would say no this is more like disorderly conduct than a protest but I guess there's a fine line. Or is there?
Common sense would say it is disrespectful and shouldnt be done, they can protest elsewhere and don't have to disrespect a greiving family.
-
Originally posted by detch01
The US military doesn't use atrocity or torture as a matter of policy.
They do do it too much at the moment and tries to say its not torturing or against the human rights or... whatever they use as an excuse to torture their prisoners that we've been hearing of and what we've heard of, hasn't been isolated just into one or two prisons.
-
Originally posted by Fishu
They do do it too much at the moment and tries to say its not torturing or against the human rights or... whatever they use as an excuse to torture their prisoners that we've been hearing of and what we've heard of, hasn't been isolated just into one or two prisons.
There's no denying that there have been far too many instances of mistreatment (one is too many and there have been several). The fact that there have been criminal prosecutions within the US military in regard to these incidences is pretty indicative of what will or won't be accepted by the American people as US policy.
asw
-
Originally posted by Fishu
They do do it too much at the moment and tries to say its not torturing or against the human rights or... whatever they use as an excuse to torture their prisoners that we've been hearing of and what we've heard of, hasn't been isolated just into one or two prisons.
Define 'torture'.
I find nekkid dogpiles, wearing a bra and halter and being made to bark like a dog just freakin hilarious.
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
Define 'torture'.
I find nekkid dogpiles, wearing a bra and halter and being made to bark like a dog just freakin hilarious.
Dude... what you do in your own home is your business... way WAY too much info. ;)
-
Originally posted by Fishu
They do do it too much at the moment and tries to say its not torturing or against the human rights or... whatever they use as an excuse to torture their prisoners that we've been hearing of and what we've heard of, hasn't been isolated just into one or two prisons.
off all the examples posted this is the one you choose to make a weak argument against? :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Slash27
Smartest thing Ive read in this thread.:aok
I'll second that.