Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
Looks like they found the bodies of our missing soldiers.
- Thread starter Phenom78
- Start date
H
heatherrae
Guest
I agree! All extremists should be shot!!!!!!!!!! ROFL.Phenom78 said:
H
heatherrae
Guest
Above was purposeful humor, in case anyone doesn't get the sarcasm. LOL.
H
heatherrae
Guest
You wouldn't shoot cuddly-wuddly widdle me. lol.
H
heatherrae
Guest
"attorneys" =-)
H
heatherrae
Guest
Oh boy, I guess I have to explain that joke to you too. I give up...lol.
I still love you, I guess.
I still love you, I guess.
JayC9
Well-known member
JayC9
Well-known member
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5039420.stm
This week and last week they've had US soldiers up for murdering civilians, not soldiers, innocent men women and Iraqi children that were slaughtered deliberately, stories about a 10 year old girl telling how they burst into her home and killed her whole family while she hid in the corner. Haven't seen any mention of that on the boards. Wonder how much the American press has been pushing those stories.
This week and last week they've had US soldiers up for murdering civilians, not soldiers, innocent men women and Iraqi children that were slaughtered deliberately, stories about a 10 year old girl telling how they burst into her home and killed her whole family while she hid in the corner. Haven't seen any mention of that on the boards. Wonder how much the American press has been pushing those stories.
Phenom78
New member
JayC9 said:
That has already been investigated and the soldiers cleared. It wasn't even them but a AC130 gunship that was called in after they came under fire from the building
Also left out of youre account was the fact that the person who made the charges was related to one of the main terrorist leaders in the country.
So much for BBC reporting.
And to answer your question it was all over American news.
Phenom78
New member
JayC9 said:
The obvious point you are missing is that it isn't our policy to torture, maim, or murder prisoners. The opposite is true. Which is why in those rare occurences when our side commits such acts the individuals involved are prosecuted.
In contrast our enemies explicitly seek to maim, torture and murder. They specifically target non combatants to achieve just that purpose.
But if you are right, and we should expect that in a war zone, then its time tochange our policy to reflect your reality. Lets begin pursuing those actions against our enemies with full vigor, since as you say they are a natural part of war. In fact since they target innocent women and children, lets do the same only with their families.
So not only will we kill the actual terrorists, we should also hunt down every single one of their family members for retribution as well. Let's see how anxious people are to sign up for jihad then.
hamstershaver
New member
thats not our "policy" but it sure doesnt mean we dont do it oftenPhenom78 said:
not that theres anything wrong with it
Phenom78
New member
hamstershaver said:
I dispute that we do it often. We do it rarely which is why even those who object to everything about our military are forced to repeat the same rare occurences even years later.
Or parrot endless unfounded allegations that are later proven false. Too bad they don't spend nearly so much effort voicing the corrections.
hamstershaver
New member
often may have been the wrong word to use, but rarely is also the wrong word, there is no doubt it is done a lot more often than the general public believesPhenom78 said:
Y_lifter
New member
I see the point and difference in this groups torture vs ours (US) is the fact
that they do it openly as a means to increase its impact.
Where we do it quietly, try and hide it and occasionally get caught.
Secondly,
I'd like to know Al Gore's thoughts on how this is impacting Global Warming.
that they do it openly as a means to increase its impact.
Where we do it quietly, try and hide it and occasionally get caught.
Secondly,
I'd like to know Al Gore's thoughts on how this is impacting Global Warming.
dullboy
New member
JayC9 said:
dullboy says that you seem to be reveling a little too much in the torture and death of a couple of american soldiers.
dullboy understands that you desire to teach ignorant americans a lesson.
dullboy just wonders where you get the idea that americans are any more ignorant than you.
H
heatherrae
Guest
Ever heard of the Geneva convention?JayC9 said:
H
heatherrae
Guest
Okay, I'll be good. 0;-)dullboy said:
JayC9 said:
Agree.
Instead of stooping to their level, we should be setting a higher example.
Besides, torture is proven to be ineffective for purposes of interrogation. Now, if you're just doing it to be vindictive or sadistic...
They do it to create fear. And by our reactions, apparently they've succeeded.
Phenom78
New member
Y_lifter said:
You lack imagination. The will may be strong, but the flesh is weak. No one can stand out against torture.
Im not claiming its acceptable. Just the empty headed nonsense of the statement that its ineffective bothers me. It is never enough with people any longer that something just is. If we disagree with someones policies he cant just be wrong, but rather has to be evil, ill intentioned, a traitor etc.
Same with this issue. They latched on to the idea of "well people can tell a lie while being tortured" so its unreliable. Ignoring that any interrogation involves the same dilemna. Thats why they use people trained at sifting through those issues.
lowpro
New member
JayC9 said:
Yes, we had prisoners pose naked and took pics of them - those abusers are now in prision.
No, we don't mutilate bodies, toture physically, behead, and so forth. Yes, American's have a few bad apples in the bunch. No, we don't compare to the war crimes committed by the enemy. You trying to place both actions on the same level seems absurd.
No, both sides aren't doing it and if you're not a soldier, how can you possibly know what a solider is to expect? Did you hear it second hand from Lestat?
Phenom78 said:
The bad guys need another History lesson of what happens to them when they mess with America and we need to fight this war to WIN like we did in WWII.
The checkpoint attacked Friday was in the Sunni Arab region known as the "Triangle of Death" because of frequent ambushes there of U.S. soldiers and Iraqi troops. It is filled with insurgents and terrorist.
What we need to do is go "old school" on their asses and bomb them with precision bombs for the next 30 days, 24/7, and use incendary type bombs and fire bomb the whole region non-stop until the people wave the white flag and surrender the murderers that they now harbor.
The problem is we have the anti-war left and the U.N. and inferior nations with a US complex bitching about our tactics. I say screw them all. We need to go medival on their asses and bomb them and bomb them and bomb them and then after that send in an armored division and about 25,000 ground troops and kill anyone left standing, except the women and children under 18!
For those of you who think that's too harsh you need to go back in time to 1940's. To win a war you must DESTROY the enemy and if he chooses to hide among women and children and among civilians then it's on their heads.
For instance in Tokyo we fire bombed them for 2 freaking days. After only the first 2 hours of bombardment the wooden city of Tokyo was engulfed in a firestorm. These fires were so hot they would literally ignite the clothing on individuals as they were fleeing.
The aftermath of the incendiary bombings lead to an estimated 100,000 Japanese dead. This may have been the most devasting single raid ever carried out by aircraft in any war including the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many liberals and activist felt these were war crimes, but Former Japanese prime minister Fumimaro Konoe's statement that,
"fundamentally, the thing that brought about the determination to make peace was the prolonged bombing by the B-29s, on Toyko ands other cities..." proves that it work and that this bombing campaign ended the war and saved both American and Japanese lives.
During WWII we bombed the city of Dresden. Out of 28,410 houses in the inner city of Dresden, 24,866 were destroyed. An area of 15 square kilometres was totally destroyed, among that: 14,000 homes, 72 schools, 22 hospitals, 18 churches, 5 theatres, 50 banks and insurance companies, 31 department stores, 31 large hotels, 62 administration buildings as well as factories such as the Ihagee camera works. In total there were 222,000 apartments in the city. 75,000 of them were totally destroyed, 11,000 severely damaged, 7,000 damaged, 81,000 slightly damaged. The city was around 300 square kilometres in area in those days. Although the main railway station was destroyed completely, the railway was working again within a few days.
If I was calling the shots. Operation Shock and Awe Part Two would commence today and end July 31st and I'd drop every bomb we had in our inventory until the area was one big hole and THEN these assholes would realize Americans mean business and they either come to the peace table or end up in pieces!!!
Last edited:
Mr. dB said:
All it's doing is pissing of who they should be most fearful of. They're too dillusional to realize they're only compounding the problems they want solved. Fighting terrorism is an endless battle unless we neutralize all perceived threats, which is next to impossible.
Btw torture is not use for the same purpose. US, Canada and other "civilized" countries will use it for interrogation purposes (being effective or not is another debate). They do it to create fear. Fear on the other hand is very effective against the weakest minds found among your ennemy's troops. Some of them may get scared, confused and/or not be the same anymore on duty. And you know why they keep doing it ? Because they know the ennemy are a bunch of humanistic pussies that care so much about human rights, collateral damages and other very politically correct BS.
lowpro
New member
manny78 said:
Have you ever truly read the Geneva Convention? It's not only for war. It's standards and codes of conduct during conflict, battles, and war.
Just because there was no decleration of "war" doesn't mean the Geneva Convention is not in affect. The truth is, the US upholds the Geneva Convention more so than any other conflicting state or country. We're not perfect (before the dumb bunnies jump in), but we hold our own responsible for when they fuck up.
I don't see trials for those insurgents and terrorist who behead civilians and soldiers.
What makes me sick is, when the US is in the news for improper codes of conduct, people are quick to say, "OMG, how dare they, this is a disgrace." Then, when the enemy performs even worse atrocities, the same people say, "..their soldiers, it's a part of war...they should expect it"
That's just sad.
lowpro said:
There's no conflict, battles or war. It's basically internal law enforcement. A domestic terrorist couldnt claim any rights under the Geneva convention. This Convention was signed back when wars and battles were between two or more organized armies. They never had any insurgents thing in mind. Same goes for The Haye Convention and this is why US Troops use hollowed bullets because it's domestic affairs not a war...
lowpro said:
Do a Google on it. They made extensive use of these in Fallujah. Also, I remember a US general saying on TV (right after Karzai was elected) that using tear gas against insurgents hidden in caves was an option because the international conventions were not active and he was right.
lowpro
New member
manny78 said:
CS gas is an allowable weapon, always has been.
People can try to side-step the fact that we are a nation at war, but, people are fooling themselves if they think otherwise. Try telling other men and women in uniform that they are not fighting a war nor conflict...You'll get the same responses, if not worse.
Phenom78
New member
biteme said:
I don't think they've released details other than to suggest it was particularly gruesome.
But no need for the terrorists to worry as I don't imagine that this will slow down in any way democractic efforts to extend American civil liberties to the killers, or subtract from their efforts to expand the Terrorist Bill of Rights.
lowpro said:CS gas is an allowable weapon, always has been.
People can try to side-step the fact that we are a nation at war, but, people are fooling themselves if they think otherwise. Try telling other men and women in uniform that they are not fighting a war nor conflict...You'll get the same responses, if not worse.
Not during a war. Technically banned (cant remember the treaty but right after WWI). Btw i dont care what the men and women in uniform think, yeah they could think the sky is pink and it wouldnt change my mind. What's happening in Iraq is definitely not a war. Same goes for Tchetchenia, Spain and the ETA, UK back when they had issues with the IRA in Northern Ireland. It was a war at the beginning but not anymore.
Prisoners of war according to the Geneva COnvention:
4.1.1 Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict and members of militias of such armed forces
4.1.2 Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, provided that they fulfill all of the following conditions:
- that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
- that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance (there are limited exceptions to this among countries who observe the 1977 Protocol I);
- that of carrying arms openly;
- that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
4.1.3 Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
4.1.4 Civilians who have non-combat support roles with the military and who carry a vaild identity card issued by the military they support.
4.1.5 Merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.
4.1.6 Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
4.3 makes explicit that Article 33 takes precedence for the treatment of medical personnel of the enemy and chaplains of the enemy.
Btw the Convention is clear: a non-signatory party is not bound BUT if it doesnt act according to the Convention, the other party will no longer have to follow the rules. So if the insurgents were indeed a recognized party, the US would be given the green light to do whatever they want, which they obviously dont.
lowpro
New member
manny78 said:
Who declared that we are no longer at war? Before the monkey's chime in, the declaration that Bush made was a mission accomplished, not the end of the war. So, who decided the war was over?
manny78 said:
I assumed this is a cut and paste and I wish I was as PC savy back when I had to memorize this as I am today. Although, I don't believe the excerpt helps your arguement.
manny78 said:
That's becasue the US has a seperate Code of Conduct (AR 350-30) regulation that is supported by the Manual for Court Marshals and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
We maybe allowed to respond in accordiance with the GC, but we've set higher standards within our own armed forces. We're not responding as such ( the US would be given the green light to do whatever they want) simply because we're NOT at war.
BigRupe said:
I agree totally. War is War. What about when the vikings would come and destroy villages, etc. WAR is OLDSCHOOL and should be treated that way. America is too fucking nice in war, its not a game out there, and if I WAS STANDING THERE WITH A M-16, AND A LITTLE KID WAS RUNNING AT ME WITH A MAN BEHIND HIM, THEY WILL BOTH GET LIT THE FUCK UP.
ALL you liberal pussies, never were in war, never knew anyone in war. Its thier lives or OURs. WTF. if you want to stick up for them, then GET THE FUCK out of our country and live there with them.
The point of war is CONQUER, not beat up and hope the other gives up.
Fuckin liberal pussies. Grow some balls. Faggots
lowpro
New member
manny78 said:
Pay attention.
You stated:
manny78 said:
I replied:
As such meaning - according to your last statement, if we were at war and the insurgents were recognized as a legitmate party, we could act in any manner we so desire based on the GC. (right? is that what you were getting at?) Then you stated, we are not acting like that (backing your story we are not at war)
I simply pointed out we are not acting like the insurgents because we have higher codes of conduct, not because it's "declared" (in some magic book)that this isn't a war.
Yes, we are at war.
Similar threads
