Abuse is bad, but murder is worse

galfordo · May 28, 2004

Well, this in no way excuses what our soldiers did to Iraqi POW's, but it just goes to show that they could've done worse things, such as ....

Inquiry shows GI was executed by Iraqis

Not that non-oblivious people need further proof of the attrocities committed by Saddam's army - but just in case.

Atro · May 28, 2004

Lame way to show vengenace.

All said. :shame:

galfordo · May 28, 2004

Atrophyed said:
Lame way to show vengenace.

All said.

This was done long before the US prisoner abuse scandal, if that's what you're referring to - I think it was just a case of them being themselves.

Darklighterx · May 28, 2004

oh well...

bokmeow · May 28, 2004

My cawk > yuor Cawk.

Post Count +1

galfordo · May 28, 2004

galfordo cawk >>> spammer cawk :buttrock:

FeelGood · May 28, 2004

I agree.

humiliating hezbollai prisoners is never a bad thing.

we should round up all hezbollai and their families and gas them.

and for those of you that don't know what a hezbollai is, the hezbolla is that group of vigilante muslim extremists that you often call terrorists out thar in the west.

Moose · May 28, 2004

Daklighterx said:
oh well...

You sir, are an asshole.

But still, us Americans must mourn over the tragic abuse of the innocent POW's in Abu Gharib... :loco:

of course, I dont condone abuse on anyone, but damn, the U.S. Mediam plays it like WERE the terrorists, no?

evil wasabi · May 28, 2004

Those people aren't billing themselves as a moral compass.

bokmeow · May 28, 2004

lithy said:
Those people aren't billing themselves as a moral compass.

I thought that much was obvious to galfordo so I didn't feel it was worth mentioning, but kudos to lithy for pointing out the reason there was much outrage over the torture.

galfordo · May 28, 2004

lithy said:
Those people aren't billing themselves as a moral compass.

Morality is relative, like anything else, and relative to them - we're still light years ahead.

Jedite · May 28, 2004

In every war, the US was in, the US soldiers abused and executed people for no reason, so the US soldiers are no better than the terrorists. I just think that we're fighting for a lost cause, because there's a such a culture difference between US and Iraq, so, there's no way our type of gov't will work over in Iraq. The Iraqis are happy that Saddam's out, but, they want the US to get the fuck out as well.

Moose · May 28, 2004

Jedite said:
In every war, the US was in, the US soldiers abused and executed people for no reason, so the US soldiers are no better than the terrorists. I just think that we're fighting for a lost cause, because there's a such a culture difference between US and Iraq, so, there's no way our type of gov't will work over in Iraq. The Iraqis are happy that Saddam's out, but, they want the US to get the fuck out as well.

First off, I hope you mean ONLY some select U.S. Solidiers when you say that. Generalizing all U.S. Soldiers as equals of terrorists would be complete disrespect and utter stupidity. Secondly, yes, there are some Soldiers, even U.S ones who kill innocent people sometimes. But If we all talk about whats really on our minds, and what the liberals are really upset about, the prisoners of abu gharib. There not just prisoners, there terrorists, killers, and haters. I myself would not abuse, nor kill a confined terrorist, but I do understand a soldier, and how hard it might be sometimes to look a terrorist, a killer in the eye, and not feel an urge to humiliate them, just knowing that the judicial system we have today will pity the terrorists because of "horrible prison conditions" or whatnot. Note, I dont condone the activities, and yes I condemn them, but jeez, now AMERICA's the enemy, at least according to DAN RATHER AND CNN!!

jethrek · May 28, 2004

galfordo said:
Well, this in no way excuses what our soldiers did to Iraqi POW's, but it just goes to show that they could've done worse things, such as ....

Inquiry shows GI was executed by Iraqis

Not that non-oblivious people need further proof of the attrocities committed by Saddam's army - but just in case.

Yes, yes, and this somehow vindicates us of human rights violations...After all, as long as we're better than Saddam it's all ok!
:rolleyes:

Jedite · May 28, 2004

Moose said:
First off, I hope you mean ONLY some select U.S. Solidiers when you say that. Generalizing all U.S. Soldiers as equals of terrorists would be complete disrespect and utter stupidity. Secondly, yes, there are some Soldiers, even U.S ones who kill innocent people sometimes. But If we all talk about whats really on our minds, and what the liberals are really upset about, the prisoners of abu gharib. There not just prisoners, there terrorists, killers, and haters. I myself would not abuse, nor kill a confined terrorist, but I do understand a soldier, and how hard it might be sometimes to look a terrorist, a killer in the eye, and not feel an urge to humiliate them, just knowing that the judicial system we have today will pity the terrorists because of "horrible prison conditions" or whatnot. Note, I dont condone the activities, and yes I condemn them, but jeez, now AMERICA's the enemy, at least according to DAN RATHER AND CNN!!

But, I mean abuse to people in war has existed since the human race. I'm not saying all the US soldiers are abusers. But, they're soliders that just abuse innocent people in war for revenge or just for pleasure.

SSS · May 29, 2004

galfordo said:
Not that non-oblivious people need further proof of the attrocities committed by Saddam's army - but just in case.

We are an invading force, nitwit. We = ENEMY in Iraq. You don't think they would kill our men? It's war. I feel sorry for that man's family, their son should still be alive. Blame your favorite pres for that man's death, not Saddam.

galfordo · May 29, 2004

SamuraiShodownSensei said:
We are an invading force, nitwit. We = ENEMY in Iraq. You don't think they would kill our men? It's war. I feel sorry for that man's family, their son should still be alive. Blame your favorite pres for that man's death, not Saddam.

They didn't just kill him, they executed him after taking him prisoner, dipshit.

galfordo · May 29, 2004

jethrek said:
Yes, yes, and this somehow vindicates us of human rights violations...After all, as long as we're better than Saddam it's all ok!

Is it possible that you could even read the sentences that you quoted? If you had, you'd know that I said "Well, this in no way excuses what our soldiers did to Iraqi POW's". How much more clear can I make it?

SSS · May 29, 2004

galfordo said:
They didn't just kill him, they executed him after taking him prisoner, dipshit.

And since when did most countries observe the geneva convention. :rolleyes:

galfordo · May 29, 2004

SamuraiShodownSensei said:
And since when did most countries observe the geneva convention.

Since never, in an absolute sense. But some countries pay a lot more attention to it than others.

jethrek · May 29, 2004

galfordo said:
Is it possible that you could even read the sentences that you quoted? If you had, you'd know that I said "Well, this in no way excuses what our soldiers did to Iraqi POW's". How much more clear can I make it?

"Abuse is bad, but murder is worse"

You have clearly made a comparison between an action our troops have taken, and an action taken by the Iraqis, fucktard. You were crystal clear. Read what you type.

galfordo · May 30, 2004

jethrek said:
"Abuse is bad, but murder is worse"

You have clearly made a comparison between an action our troops have taken, and an action taken by the Iraqis, fucktard. You were crystal clear. Read what you type.

Yeah, I did make a comparison obviously, but that wasn't what this argument was predicated on. You said that I had excused the actions of our troops, when I had made no such comment. Try reading it one more time ....

bokmeow · May 30, 2004

galfordo said:
Yeah, I did make a comparison obviously, but that wasn't what this argument was predicated on. You said that I had excused the actions of our troops, when I had made no such comment. Try reading it one more time ....

galfordo, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but don't think it has escaped the attention of most members on this board that you started this thread as a distraction from the criticism that you perceive your good man Bush 43 is receiving. The abuse is abhorent for a few reasons.

First, the U.S. is there to bring a democracy but yet such morally repugnant torture was conducted. It is not even remotely excusable that this was the act of a few soldiers, because command has a responsibility to train competent, honorable, rule-abiding soldiers. They should satisfy the qualifications required for running a prison. And as pending investigation unfolds it's becoming increasingly suggestive of a systemic problem, even suggestive of command orders to 'set favorable interrogation conditions.'

Second, the US internment in Abu Ghraib has produced very little substantive intelligence of value according to reports. Now they are under pressure to release these imprisoned Iraqis because they have been held in the prison for an indefinite period merely for being Iraqi and being 'suspicious.' Do you think for a second that it would have been ok to hold someone in America for being 'suspicious' and being Muslim? Although there are also Iraqi Americans that are being imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay for those very reasons.

Third, these abuses have produced stress, unfavorable conditions that placed undue duress on the prisoners that have health conditions; some of these abuses did involve serious, hard physical punches, body slams. And more than a few have died under abuse, as I'm sure you have seen the photos of England, Graner grinning over the corpses packed in ice. That's murder matey.

Your only pathetic defense is hiding behind your disclaimer that 'this in no way excuses what our soldiers did to Iraqi POW's' for 'they could've done worse things.'

Can you find it morally defensible to defend a child pedophile's sexual molestation to say 'it could have been worse, he could have pulled a Jeffrey Dahmer?'

BeefJerky · May 30, 2004

Mmm, I love these insightful threads.

"Abuse bad, murder worse"

I shall ponder that throughout the day..

galfordo · May 30, 2004

bokmeow said:
galfordo, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt, but don't think it has escaped the attention of most members on this board that you started this thread as a distraction from the criticism that you perceive your good man Bush 43 is receiving. The abuse is abhorent for a few reasons.

First, the U.S. is there to bring a democracy but yet such morally repugnant torture was conducted. It is not even remotely excusable that this was the act of a few soldiers, because command has a responsibility to train competent, honorable, rule-abiding soldiers. They should satisfy the qualifications required for running a prison. And as pending investigation unfolds it's becoming increasingly suggestive of a systemic problem, even suggestive of command orders to 'set favorable interrogation conditions.'

Second, the US internment in Abu Ghraib has produced very little substantive intelligence of value according to reports. Now they are under pressure to release these imprisoned Iraqis because they have been held in the prison for an indefinite period merely for being Iraqi and being 'suspicious.' Do you think for a second that it would have been ok to hold someone in America for being 'suspicious' and being Muslim? Although there are also Iraqi Americans that are being imprisoned in Guantanamo Bay for those very reasons.

Third, these abuses have produced stress, unfavorable conditions that placed undue duress on the prisoners that have health conditions; some of these abuses did involve serious, hard physical punches, body slams. And more than a few have died under abuse, as I'm sure you have seen the photos of England, Graner grinning over the corpses packed in ice. That's murder matey.

Your only pathetic defense is hiding behind your disclaimer that 'this in no way excuses what our soldiers did to Iraqi POW's' for 'they could've done worse things.'

Can you find it morally defensible to defend a child pedophile's sexual molestation to say 'it could have been worse, he could have pulled a Jeffrey Dahmer?'

I started this thread to point out the hypocrisy of most of the left wing members here - not to praise Bush. It just strikes me as odd that people are humanitarians only when it illustrates some political point that they're trying to make. When someone gets murdered, they apparently couldn't care less because it doesn't allow them to saw "see, I told you so". I'm not defending what our soldiers did, as I've said probably ten times in this thread alone.

Just tell me this, why the selective humanitarianism?

Abuse is bad, but murder is worse

Analinguist of the Year

Who?,

Analinguist of the Year

J. Maximum Fan Club President

Ned's Ninja Academy Dropout

Analinguist of the Year

So Many PostsNo TimeFor Games.

Moose,

The Jongmaster

Ned's Ninja Academy Dropout

Analinguist of the Year

Bunker Buster

Moose,

,

Bunker Buster

neo retired

Analinguist of the Year

Analinguist of the Year

neo retired

Analinguist of the Year

,

Analinguist of the Year

Ned's Ninja Academy Dropout

Gnomesayin?

Analinguist of the Year

So Many Posts
No Time
For Games.