GreenvilleGrows
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 566
- Reaction score
- 221
- Location
- My version of reality
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
I'm confused... somehow urinating on a dead body is worse than killing a live one? Poor judgement? - yes. Deserving of punishment? - yes. But, how harsh should the punishment really be?
I've seen people piss on other people's cars. I've seen them piss on other people's furniture and in their houses (yes, drunk people). I've seen people piss on other people from on top of buildings. I've seen people piss on all sorts of things (non-sexual) in a desperate show of machismo. All are lewd. All should be punished in some way.
But, I think if someone was trying to kill me and got killed instead, I might be tempted to "piss on their grave", too. and, we train these boys to use their adrenaline and testosterone to the max. Using a young man's life for political grandstanding is bad. Our leaders should publicly apologize. And, the country should decry the misconduct. And, the boys should be "adequately" punished. But, their lives should not be permanently ruined over this.
Are people claiming the bolded part?
Yes, actually we all are.
Kill them? No problem.
Piss on 'em after? OMFG!!
Have to admit it makes me stop and think...
It seem any excuse is being sought for these scum. The "bad apples" lie will be next. It's the norm, these dullards were just too stupid or uncaring to consider the consequences of posting their triumphant victory on Youtube. Were the dead children really terrorists, or just fragged for fun like last years obscenity?
You are thinking of it in an emotional manner instead of logically. What they did wrong was act unprofessionally and created bad publicity. Both are very big nono's. Now, I am sure you can show me, since you claim people are amking that comparison, where exactly they are. Quoting should not be hard to do. Not that I would distrust your interpretation of what other people are saying or anything...
Oh, come on. The fact is no one on this post has complained about them killing them. No one's said, as you just did, "Very big no-no." No one has called killing them atrocious or deplorable or wrong or (pick-your-adjective). Greenville is correct. The only problem we seem to have is their actions afterwards. If that doesn't make one stop and think how we value lives in war, well...
You are thinking of it in an emotional manner instead of logically. What they did wrong was act unprofessionally and created bad publicity. Both are very big nono's. Now, I am sure you can show me, since you claim people are amking that comparison, where exactly they are. Quoting should not be hard to do. Not that I would distrust your interpretation of what other people are saying or anything...
I for one, am making the same comparison. I dont really care about the popularity campaign America is running, so if this did some damage to it, tough. There is a lot more going on in the world than PR. Blowing this thing so far out of proportion has done far more damage to the image of America than the initial act ever could.
Killing them was part of their job. Pissing on them was not. In fact, pissing on them was something that they are not supposed to do. Care to try again?
It's a stupid comparison. In fighting with those designated as enemy, our soldiers are doing their job. Pissing on the dead bodies, not so much. Expecting our soldiers to act professionally is not blowing things out of proportion. It is something we have expected for quite some time.
No, I don't care to try again. Greenville's observation will resonate with some and not others. Some will see the irony; others will not. I see the irony...others will, too.
So the next time you criticize congress or the president, we can ask you when you served in congress or the president? If you haven't, you can't judge? Yes, your argument is just that stupid.
I fail to see what your advocating then. We all agree that the soldiers should be punished. What are you saying that I am not getting? Are you saying they should be executed? Should terrorists be allowed to come pee on them in retaliation? What?
Apples and oranges. It's an afront to every person that has ever worn the uniform, to compare them to a 2 bit elected politician. You of all people should realize that, sister.
The irony is based on a flawed understanding of what people are talking about however. If you do not understand the situation, I can see how you can find things not actually there.
I did not compare them to elected officials. I pointed out the exact flaw in your reasoning. What you are doing is trying to dismiss the opinions of those who might disagree with you, instead of actually addressing their points. It's piss poor(get it?) debate.
What people are failing to see is that who the dead where, and what things the Taliban have done are entirely irrelevant. However, people pointing out that the act was inappropriate and bad is not blowing things out of proportion. It is things like the US reaction which we can point to as examples of why we are better than other countries.
First of all, it's not true that no one has had a problem with the killing. I remember a couple of posters saying that early on in thread - so that screws up about 3/4 of your post. Second, the criticism of the Marines in the video is based on disapproval of their gratuitous unprofessional actions. It is not based on general morality or a philosophy of humanity. Their job is to kill to protect themselves and their country - that's not unprofessional or gratuitous. So no, Greenville does not make a valid point.Oh, come on. The fact is no one on this post has complained about them killing them. No one's said, as you just did, "Very big no-no." No one has called killing them atrocious or deplorable or wrong or (pick-your-adjective). Greenville is correct. The only problem we seem to have is their actions afterwards. If that doesn't make one stop and think how we value lives in war, well...
Please explain how pointing out the actions of the Marines were inappropriate and bad is "advocating terrorists' rights" or "raising hell over a dead terrorist".So your grandstanding and advocating for terrorist rights? Who was it that made that post about the people that spit on the Marines when they were returning from Vietnam (my dad was one of those Marines by the way)? Cause that sounds a lot like what you are doing.
We see who the dead were. They were humans. Humans who held no value for human life. They didnt value OUR lives, their WIVES lives, they didnt even value THEIR own lives. Why should we in turn defend them and mourne what happened to them?
I think Mufasa said it best when he said yada yada yada, something about staying out of the shadowy place, oh ya "its the circle of life".
Liberals dont care about a human embryo but they raise hell over a dead terrorist.
Please explain how pointing out the actions of the Marines were inappropriate and bad is "advocating terrorists' rights" or "raising hell over a dead terrorist".
What people are failing to see is that who the dead where, and what things the Taliban have done are entirely irrelevant
First of all, it's not true that no one has had a problem with the killing. I remember a couple of posters saying that early on in thread - so that screws up about 3/4 of your post. Second, the criticism of the Marines in the video is based on disapproval of their gratuitous unprofessional actions. It is not based on general morality or a philosophy of humanity. Their job is to kill to protect themselves and their country - that's not unprofessional or gratuitous. So no, Greenville does not make a valid point.
Their job is to kill to protect themselves and their country - that's not unprofessional or gratuitous. So no, Greenville does not make a valid point.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?