maybe we need to up the minimum age for service members to 21. if they ain't mature enough to drink, maybe they ain't mature enough to represent our country.

If the non military folks, behaved half as well as the majority of the military folks do, then there would be alot less violence in the world.

lol, no, they like their blanket parties. out of sigh, out of mind. they ain't much different from civilians.

This thread is full of ignorance.

what did you expect? meh, i should vacate this thread, it reminds me of too many things.

Couldn't agree more.

Seems we've revisited The Dark Ages, but with really impressive toys.

the point still stands. but to be more direct with his question, i think most people would probably be angry to see a marine getting pissed on by the taliban. im sure the taliban/afghan are angry about seeing a marine pissing on them, which is usually the idea when you degrade/desecrate someone/something then take a photo or video to show people what youve done.

its easy to sit here and say that you would never do such a thing, that you would never disrespect someone like that. youve also never been in the situation those people are in. youve never seen a friend killed right next to you, seen a friend blown up by an ied, seen what happens first hand the type of horrendous fluff those people do to their enemies. at some point they probably stop looking at them as an enemy and start looking at them as something that needs to be eliminated in the worst possible way.

was what they did in bad taste? sure. but the only real thing they did wrong was video tape it.

we'd actually expect it if we saw it coming from the Taliban. Our soldiers ain't suppossed to do that kind of stuff, they suppossed to be professional. hmm, maybe i've been reading too much of Tom Clancy's stuff. bullfluff.

theyre supposed to be professional but they are only human. emotions are a fluff.

doesn't matter, they'll receive some kind of punishment for doing it. they don't have a legitimate excuse for their behaviour. heard about a staff sergeant getting punished for jacking off in a stall because somebody peeked over the divider while he was doing it. not allowed to get caught jacking off in the military.

probably part of the dont ask dont tell policy, he was getting jacked off by a guy after all.

could be. maybe he was just out of uniform because the zipper was down.

Yea, maybe I would write what you said semantically different but we agree. I did not say that I would not do something similar in the situation those soldier were in but I suppose on some level when you say that it is wrong then your statement comes across like that. What I have said throughout this thread is that disrespecting individuals, enemies, or societies is negative. People should AIM to be respectful in their lives. Do I think that these soldiers should be jailed? No way. I do, however, think that they should be made to state that they regret their actions.

The reasons we are there? What are the reasons we are there? Do you know? Were you blessed with this knowledge while watching the news or surfing the internet?

And as for my reasons… when I join the military at 17 years old I might have had idealist reasons for doing so but now almost 14 years later the only reason I am still in is to support my family, being it’s the only thing I know and there is not a very lucrative market in the civilian sector for what I do. If you think anyone who has seen combat cares about some politicians reasons for invading a foreign country you are sadly very naïve.

I have had the unfortunate pleasure to have spent most of my adult life in the fluffholes you are so valiantly defending and let me tell you there are no innocents in war you learn that the 1st time you are shot at 10 year old child with an ak-47 or a mother with an infant in her arms begging for help and food from these "soldiers" blows herself and her baby up just to kill some of these “soldiers” that you have such distain for. The next time leave your family and loved ones and come with me to go defend your country for these "reasons" that you speak of and you see what its really like. Then you can judge me until then keep you righteous bullfluff to yourself because you have no idea what you would do.

One more thing

I already told you my reasons for being in so when someone tries to blow my head off and they fail that is pretty fluffing satisfying being it means I get to return to my family which happen to be the only reason I do what I do in the first place.




If you are referring to me see above.




That sentence basically sums up the opinions of most people who are "outraged" and "shocked" this type of behavior. All the people who preaching to respect all human life equally.... But behind all the self-righteousness deep down you consider them less human then us… modern day barbarian’s that should not be held to the same standards as our own because that kind of thing is "expected of them".

I personally have never pissed on an enemy’s corpse and do not condone doing it but if whatever they did in life was so monstrous that it warranted their body to be desecrated in death then I would not rule it out.

Let me pose this question to all of you. its abit off topic but it will serve for my point.

If someone raped and killed your wife and children, then tried to kill you but failed and instead you killed them. Would you want his body to be “respected” so that his friends that believed that he was right in what he did to your family can honor his memory?

Pain and MrCharcoal you views represent that of what any true American who has not been there themselves should be. You have the same views as my own but are less passionate about them which is understandable because you have no experiences of your own to compare them to.

But what do I know… I should be happy to leave my family and put my life in harm’s way and fight because some politician thinks it’s his responsibility to spread Democracy to a foreign nation that hates the ideals behind Democracy itself. If that’s not bad enough let me tie one hand behind my back with restrictive ROE that aims at minimizing “civilian casualties” so that the people who are burning the flag in protest of the war (that the “soldiers” themselves don’t support) don’t get upset and start to hate America more than they already do and elect someone who will actually get us the fluff out of the middle east and leave them to their own self destruction.

but the point would be that they didn't do that, they simply said we weren't allowed to go looking for Osama in their country. the church does kinda the same thing. going to kick down the door, kill a priest and piss on his body because somebody asked for sanctuary there? i'm limited in what i'm allowed to do to other people in response to what they do to me, soldiers are even more limited because their doing something other than just protecting themselves.

Losing your humanity, moralities, and ethics in the face of evil only means you let evil win.

Thread.

Jiman, that is pias crap. Sometimes emotion gets the best of everyone. It does not make you a bad person or evil. It makes you human. Judge them not until you have walked a mile in their shoes.

Again, I am referring to the people behind the computers, not the Marines themselves.

Thanks for clarification. Sorry for being snippy.

if my father or brother killed innocent civilians for the sake of terrorism, then they sure as hell deserve to be fed to dogs or some other animal. especially to the suicide bombers, if i can find some of their body parts id feed em to pigs. heck same thing applies to rapists and other criminals.

now were those talibans terrorists? i dunno.

i lost a grand uncle and a friend to bombings, i could care less what people do to the dead bodies of those who perpetrated it.

While I have absolutely zero sympathy for members of the Taliban or Al Qaeda, I can't believe anyone was so stupid as to film themselves pissing on the dead fighters. Didn't they see what happened after Abu Gharrab (no idea on spelling)?? Augh.

I get that said terrorists probably shot at them at the bare minimum and more than likely were involved in the killing of American soldiers. But turning them into mortars by helping to creata propaganda videos is ridiculously stupid and will likely lead to even better recruit for those pricks.

With all of that said, I wish our country's damn leadership would stop blabbering on about it. Beat the news cycle by issuing one sentence responses and then refusing to talk about it again: "It's wrong and those responsible will be held accountable." Then switch the damn subject. The more attention it gets the more the effect is magnified. This isn't rocket science.

Monex: I'm not going to quote everything you said to save space.

There are lots of soldiers I have respect for, typically those who are there for the right reasons. Those who are not, whether it be because the enjoy the thrill of killing people, they get off on the adrenaline of being shot at, are prejudice against some group they cannot wait to shoot at or are just career people so far in that they don't give a $%^#$ about the country or the outcomes of their actions -- those are the ones I don't like. And they should be removed from service.

We have a military to protect our country, not to stir up more hatred and more enemies. Anyone who cannot see the difference shouldn't be in a position to further endanger our country.

I chose not to pursue the military as a career because I believe the majority of what it is doing today is not in the best interest of our country and I prefer to work in a field that does contribute to our long term success. I'm not going to place blind faith in the politicians who architect wars for whatever fluffing reason.

On your postulated "example", its a straw man - not what we are discussing, first of all. But beyond that, what purpose does it serve? Do you really think that desecrating the corpses serves as some deterrent against future attacks? "Oh no, I'm not going to shoot at the Americans, they might not respect my body when I die". BS - its an emotional response in an arena where emotional responses get people killed and make more enemies.

Most of these Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11, why don't you retards stop bringing that up? Infact they probably don't know much about it. They were recruited to fight for Islam / defend Afghanistan from the US blahblah. They're not terrorists, they're enemy combatants.

By that argument, most of Al Qaeda had nothing to do with 9/11 either, but given your set of conditions, I would say the different between them is not motivation and is simply who recruited them first.

they kill people who dont have the same religous beliefs as them, they strap bombs to children and kill their own country men. thats a fluffing terrorist if i ever seen one. if you only consider them "combatants" youre naive.

You all need to read With the Old Breed by E.B. Sledge. Then you will have a clear understanding as to why these Marines did what they did. If you have not seen the horrors of war you should not judge the actions of those who have. Cut them some slack.

I hold nothing but shame in some of the peoples' mindsets and comments in this thread. Truly disturbing to say the least.

For those who wont read it consider this, the enemy captures your best friend, cuts off his hands, feet, head, and you find his junk stuffed in his mouth with his head laying on his body. Now, this same enemy tries his best to kill you, only you kill him first. Might you not feel so elated at killing him that you would piss on his corps? Nothing else matters but your alive and you got him and he didn't get you. Your still enraged and all you have left to do is piss on his dead corps.

Ya, give em a break.

The Taliban is the political force behind the last Afghani government. The Taliban is engaging in "peace talks" with the US/Afghani government. (whatever happened to not negotiating with terrorists?) I think that's enough to make them more than a terrorist group.

Now I will accept that the Taliban has a fair bit of "terrorism" in terms of the style of warfare. But it's not like they can do much else, and from what I've read (maybe it's just the news highlighting attacks against Americans vs. locals because the American public seem to think Americans are worth more) they've been pretty successful in strikes against American troops and the local government as opposed to indiscriminate hits against civilians. That and I don't think the media really reports on the "conventional" fighting going on, which is quite prevalent, and from my understanding the men these Peeheads killed were killed in a normal soldier to soldier gunfight.

I'm under the impression that the "terrorist" arm of Al Qaeda consisted of "educated" people from all around the world who could carry out attacks. Versus the people in Afghanistan who were sort of brainwashed to believe that the Americans would ruin the country and that they should fight the occupation... I guess they targeted civilians as well but I'll just say that none of the 9/11 bombers was an Afghani peasant. They were either experienced Jihadists who had traveled around the world and participated in conflicts or sort of middle class Muslims who got brainwashed.

Seems like everyone forgot that the terrorist organization that flew the planes is Al Qaeda, and the Taliban is pretty much a popular/religious organization of students that seek to return the control of their country to the people, by the use of violence (or at least that is what they where initially) and sadly at one point both organizations began to share members...

since when Taliban = Al Qaeda?

I think you people have mixed feelings on this, and wrong ones at that, the Taliban has done terrorist attacks, that is undeniable, but to blame them for 911 is kind of pushing it, is like finding out a squad of US army soldiers is raping civilian women and then saying the whole US military is doing it.

I bet your ass some Taliban cells have resorted to the use of booms in their desperation, but most of them would never resort to that because in the end the mission of their organization is to drive the outsiders of their land and return the power of the government to the people.

The impoverished people who died and were then urinated on were not terrorists. They were merely one of many factions of people living in now occupied Afghanistan. Your entire premise for comparison is false. Get with reality dude. Way to waste your breathe making an argument that even you realize is baseless.

Why do you dumbasses keep addressing people in Afghanistan as terrorists? There were only a handful of people involved in 9/11 and no more than a couple handfuls if you expand that to include other 'terrorist' events aimed towards americans (you can't expand it to all terrorists or you would have to include many americans). For the most part, all of you are making a HUGE error in the way you even discuss and address this. It is really ridiculous and demonstrates just how uninformed you are; lost in the sea of propaganda you are all but too willing to cheer slogans.

No. If that person captured my best friend and did all those things to him and I managed to kill him what I'd do is probably unload an entire magazine into his corpse while screaming in a fit of rage. Hell I'd probably reload and empty another one until there's more metal than flesh. I might even kick it a few times. What I wouldn't do is gather my 4 buddies, tell one of them to take out a camera, drop trou and start pissing. That isn't an emotional response. That isn't spur of the moment. That's a calculated and thought out series of events. That's not saying "fluff you you piece of fluff you killed my best friend!" That's saying "you Arab piece of fluff take this." There's a huge difference that you refuse to see.

It's easier to blame to someone else than to reflect on your own faults.

hawkeyee "That's saying "you Arab piece of fluff take this." There's a huge difference that you refuse to see."

Are you retarded? Why do you keep trying to make it about Arabs? Its not about that. And the way i see it is pissing on their corpses is no different or worse than "I'd do is probably unload an entire magazine into his corpse while screaming in a fit of rage. Hell I'd probably reload and empty another one until there's more metal than flesh. I might even kick it a few times." as you have said. No different. It is not about religion. Its i survived and you didn't and i still hate your guts, being here, everything so i'm pissing on you. frankly i don't see too much wrong with that (it is harmless if it releases their tension great) although i wouldn't do it and i think it was way stupid to video tape it.

So we can agree that they are a bunch of idiots that need a wake up call before they do a major fluff up? (oh wait too late).

meh arguing this is pointless, no one is going to change their point of view no matter how many pages we write or how many words we type, is pointless really.

why is it baseless? i said in the first post if they were terrorists then they deserved it, but i never said that the taliban were terrorists. i guess thats up to people like you to decide

ninong, the thing you have to remember is this: A state might not do or sponsor acts of terrorism. However, if they knowingly harbor groups who are is that not just as bad? It is like saying i did not rob the bank. I was just sitting in the car while the others robbed in and then i drove us all away. Am i not too guilty of the same crime?

I do believe Pakistan knew Bin Laden was there and did noting. I believe they helped protect and hide him. They are not our friends. The BIG difference between them and Afgan is that they have nukes. That changes the equation. Then you must decide how much trouble is worth the risk. We are walking that edge over there. But rest assured, if the Taliban is not a terrorist group, then they at least support those groups by hiding them and aiding them. Just as guilty in my book. Sorry no luv for Taliban.

You are referring to the dead people who were urinated as terrorists. If you want to argue it, you are at least insinuating that they are terrorists as that is the basis for your argument. Since they were not terrorists, and more correctly insurgents or civilians, your argument is baseless.

Deerhunter: I like what you are saying but lets make a more realistic example. You live in a city of 100,000 people and you and two friends rob a bank. In looking for you, I invade your city. People affiliated with me wrongly call all the people in your city bank robbers (ninong).

i'm not arguing with somebody who can't read

At least i can make change.

I can read ninong. The 'if' in front of what you wrote becomes increasingly less significant when you write five posts based on it. In a game of whisper down the lane, the person five people down would no longer hear the if, they would only hear that these people deserved to be pissed on or die a horrible death. The way you have constructed what you wrote has made it misleading. The people are not terrorists and that point has been illuminated. To continue talking about them as if they were is in the realm of magical and magical thinking about real issues is very dangerous.