We are the most overtly militaristic and fascist nation in the world today and this fact influences every grain of our culture. The influence is even apparent in women’s clothing styles.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
We are the most overtly militaristic and fascist nation in the world today and this fact influences every grain of our culture. The influence is even apparent in women’s clothing styles.[/quote]
???
You mean slutty? To encourage procreation of the morally superior race?
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
We are the most overtly militaristic and fascist nation in the world today and this fact influences every grain of our culture. The influence is even apparent in women’s clothing styles.[/quote]
Gosh, I admire you.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
This basically amounts to circular reasoning due to the amount of unwarranted and hidden assumptions that must be made in order for it to have any validity. It will be my pleasure to point out some of them:
- The implicit assumption that you and every member of your forces qualifies as a “lawful combatant” and that any enemy you encounter qualifies as the opposite thereof.
This is a common propaganda technique used by the Nazi’s and many others. Basically, you assume that your enemy is subhuman from the start, and thereby the burden of moral justification is largely eliminated. You have, in effect, a priori justification for any action you choose to take. It’s powerful stuff when instilled in the minds of ignorant fascist youths (an accurate description of every organized fighting force).
- If the enemy has sworn to kill you, and you have done likewise, and they happen to succeed in their objective through, let’s say, a martyrdom operation, then this makes them…“idiots”? Sorry, does not compute. Where is the respect for the enemy, who is fighting an intruder in his native land? Oh, right, they get no respect because they’re subhuman waste.
The military. It ain’t exactly for thinking men, no sireee.
Git 'er on!
gunblast[/quote]
Nominal,
Don’t be stupid. There are actually laws of war that clearly identify what constitutes a lawful combatant. This isn’t some stuff military guys make up on their own. One of the rules is that if they don’t wear a uniform and are engaged in combat action, they are unlawful.
Iraqi Army was lawful. Guys who disguse themselves in women’s clothing and then shoot at us, “unlawful”. Sawing off the heads of prisoners falls into the “unlawful” category.
By the way, the insurgents are foreigners as well. We’re not fighting Iraqi citizens. These guys are from Syria, Jordan, Chechnya and a whole score of Muslim nations.
You need to back out of this discussion.
Who in their right mind wouldn’t make sure an enemy is down and out before moving on? Last thing I would want is some crazy bastard to get up and shoot me in the back, or worse run at my squadmates with a live grenade.
[quote]Ren wrote:
Who in their right mind wouldn’t make sure an enemy is down and out before moving on? Last thing I would want is some crazy bastard to get up and shoot me in the back, or worse run at my squadmates with a live grenade. [/quote]
That’s one of the laws of war. It is unlawful to feign death and then attack the enemy. You can hide from the enemy and attack him from the rear, but to lay down and pretend to be dead then jump up and attack is a unlawful.
Unfortunately, the “insurgents” obey no laws to include using women and children as human shields, pretending to surrender then blowing themselves up or firing on their captors, executing, torturing and mutilating hostages and so on.
I find the use of the phrase “unlawful combatants” hillarious–as if they care about some western convention. But yeah, this is a situation I would not want to be put in myself. I wonder if they consider US troops “unlawfully deployed”?
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
The military. It ain’t exactly for thinking men, no sireee.
Git 'er on!
gunblast
[/quote]
The military wouldn’t be able to function if it were. They need robots to carry out orders not an individual thinking person. Thats why marine corps boot camp takes 3 months to complete. There is usually 17 - 20 years of free thinking thay have to erase. This does not mean all of them are unintelligent.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
The military. It ain’t exactly for thinking men, no sireee.
Git 'er on!
gunblast\
The military wouldn’t be able to function if it were. They need robots to carry out orders not an individual thinking person. Thats why marine corps boot camp takes 3 months to complete. There is usually 17 - 20 years of free thinking thay have to erase. This does not mean all of them are unintelligent.[/quote]
Robots? Get the fuck off the internet you assholes. You both suck.
I could’ve come up with a more rational, intelligent retort but you are dumb fucks and do not deserve deep thought.
(That goes for both of you quoted above, you worthless pieces of garbage.)
[quote]derek wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
The military. It ain’t exactly for thinking men, no sireee.
Git 'er on!
gunblast\
The military wouldn’t be able to function if it were. They need robots to carry out orders not an individual thinking person. Thats why marine corps boot camp takes 3 months to complete. There is usually 17 - 20 years of free thinking thay have to erase. This does not mean all of them are unintelligent.
Robots? Get the fuck off the internet you assholes. You both suck.
I could’ve come up with a more rational, intelligent retort but you are dumb fucks and do not deserve deep thought.
(That goes for both of you quoted above, you worthless pieces of garbage.)
[/quote]
Dude dont even stress over their posts. Thats how they always are. But if they were sent over there you could garuntee they would have a different way of thinking or they wouldnt be coming home in one piece.
[quote]derek wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
The military. It ain’t exactly for thinking men, no sireee.
Git 'er on!
gunblast\
The military wouldn’t be able to function if it were. They need robots to carry out orders not an individual thinking person. Thats why marine corps boot camp takes 3 months to complete. There is usually 17 - 20 years of free thinking thay have to erase. This does not mean all of them are unintelligent.
Robots? Get the fuck off the internet you assholes. You both suck.
I could’ve come up with a more rational, intelligent retort but you are dumb fucks and do not deserve deep thought.
(That goes for both of you quoted above, you worthless pieces of garbage.)
[/quote]
It is the fine men and women of the military that keep the two ungrateful nimrods above safe enough to sit there and express their disdain for the very people who risk their lives for all of our protection.
It’s a WAR. The only rule that matters is winning the war. Americans are strong enough and to make sure our targets were hit and things that were not our targets not hits. Mistakes are made and that’s tragic, but at least we try to avoid unnecessary casualties. If we did not care about our fellow human being, nary a boot would have hit the ground. We can solve all of our problems from the air, but we don’t because we don’t want to kill everybody in and out of sight.
This, mind you is aside from the politics of this or any other war. I am talking about the people doing the fighting.
I have nothing but love and respect for our soldiers. Those of you who are not elitist assholes, thank a soldier everytime you see one. I try to.
[quote]etaco wrote:
You mean slutty? To encourage procreation of the morally superior race?[/quote]
Actually, I was thinking of the ever-increasing popularity of “athletic” (i.e. masculine) clothing lines for women and men, such as Under Armour. It’s a thorny issue; I can elaborate more if necessary.
[quote]PGJ wrote:
Nominal,
Don’t be stupid. There are actually laws of war that clearly identify what constitutes a lawful combatant. This isn’t some stuff military guys make up on their own. One of the rules is that if they don’t wear a uniform and are engaged in combat action, they are unlawful.
Iraqi Army was lawful. Guys who disguse themselves in women’s clothing and then shoot at us, “unlawful”. Sawing off the heads of prisoners falls into the “unlawful” category.
By the way, the insurgents are foreigners as well. We’re not fighting Iraqi citizens. These guys are from Syria, Jordan, Chechnya and a whole score of Muslim nations.
You need to back out of this discussion. [/quote]
No, I need to stay in until the “mission” is accomplished! Not every insurgent in Iraq fits your description of an unlawful combatant. And by the same token, not every American soldier adheres to the rules of warfare, despite the fact that he wears a uniform.
Of course there are laws of war, and the U.S. conveniently ignores whichever ones get in the way of it’s military ambitions. The U.S. military involvement with Serbia and Iraq was illegal according to international law – that didn’t stop us.
My sources have told me that your claim about “not fighting Iraqi citizens” is a neocon myth, created in order to bolster the “fighting over there so that we don’t have to fight here” mythology. There are foreign fighters in Iraqi, yes, but they don’t outnumber the native insurgents. So it’s been reported. Another example of neocon type A neurosis - I thought that America, as the greatest country on earth, shouldn’t have to abide by any international laws. So why use this “lawful vs. unlawful” combatant paradigm to justify your actions?
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
My sources have told me that your claim about “not fighting Iraqi citizens” is a neocon myth, created in order to bolster the “fighting over there so that we don’t have to fight here” mythology. There are foreign fighters in Iraqi, yes, but they don’t outnumber the native insurgents. So it’s been reported. Another example of neocon type A neurosis - I thought that America, as the greatest country on earth, shouldn’t have to abide by any international laws. So why use this “lawful vs. unlawful” combatant paradigm to justify your actions?[/quote]
Your sources?
[quote]pat36 wrote:
It is the fine men and women of the military that keep the two ungrateful nimrods above safe enough to sit there and express their disdain for the very people who risk their lives for all of our protection.
It’s a WAR. The only rule that matters is winning the war. Americans are strong enough and to make sure our targets were hit and things that were not our targets not hits. Mistakes are made and that’s tragic, but at least we try to avoid unnecessary casualties. If we did not care about our fellow human being, nary a boot would have hit the ground. We can solve all of our problems from the air, but we don’t because we don’t want to kill everybody in and out of sight.
This, mind you is aside from the politics of this or any other war. I am talking about the people doing the fighting.
I have nothing but love and respect for our soldiers. Those of you who are not elitist assholes, thank a soldier everytime you see one. I try to.[/quote]
I’ve already addressed this in the other thread. What am I supposed to be thanking them for? Let’s get real specific here, as “defending freedom” won’t cut it.
I want to know exactly who I’m being protected from by the U.S. military. Let’s look at some of it’s recent conquests:
Panama
Grenada
Serbia
Afghanistan
Somalia
Philippines
What kind of crack are you smoking if you genuinely believe that any of these nations posed even a remote threat to our own?
There have been hundreds of U.S. military conflicts since 1950 (to say nothing of those that came before).
How can you neocons possibly reconcile the fact that 99% of the countries we attack couldn’t touch us if they wanted to with your ever-popular “defending freedom” line?
Give me a real, tangible, non-bullshit pie-in-the-sky reason to thank the military and I’ll do it.
[quote]derek wrote:
Regarding the news blurb about the Marine who put two rounds (“doubletap”) in a wounded insurgent’s head in Fallujah, here’s a response from a Marine:
"It’s a safety issue, pure and simple. After assaulting through a target, we put a security round in everybody’s head. Sorry al-Reuters, there’s no paddy wagon rolling around Fallujah picking up “prisoners” and offering them a hot cup a joe, falafel, and a blanket. There’s no time to dick around on the target. You clear the space, dump the chumps, and move on.
Are Corpsmen expected to treat wounded terrorists? Negative. Hey Libs, worried about the defense budget? Well, it would be waste, fraud, and abuse for a Corpsman to expend one man-minute or a battle dressing on a terrorist. Its much cheaper to just spend the $.02 on a 5.56mm FMJ.
By the way, in our view, terrorists who chop off civilian’s heads are not prisoners, they are carcasses. Chopping off a civilian’s head is another reason why these idiots are known as “unlawful combatants.” It seems that most of the world’s journalists have forgotten that fact.
Let me be very clear about this issue. I have looked around the web, and many people get this concept, but there are some stragglers.
Here is your typical Marine sitrep (situation report): You just took fire from unlawful combatants (no uniform – breaking every Geneva Convention rule there is) shooting from a religious building, attempting to use the sanctuary status of their position as protection. But you’re in Fallujah now, and the Marine Corps has decided that they’re not playing that game this time. That was Najaf. So you set the mosque on fire and you hose down the terrorists with small arms, launch some AT-4s (Rockets), some 40MM grenades into the building and things quiet down. So you run over there, and find some tangos (bad guys) wounded and pretending to be dead. You are aware that suicide martyrdom is like really popular with these idiots, and they think taking some Marines with them would be really cool. So you can either risk your life and your fire team’s lives by having them cover you while you bend down and search a guy that you think is pretending to be dead for some reason. Most of the time these are the guys with the grenade or a vest made of explosives. Also, you don’t know who or what is in the next room. You’re already speaking English to the rest of your fire team or squad, which lets the terrorist know you are there and you are his enemy. You are speaking loud because your hearing is poor from shooting people for several days. So you know that there are many other rooms to enter, and that if anyone is still alive in those rooms, they know that Americans are in the mosque. Meanwhile (3 seconds later), you still have this terrorist (who was just shooting at you from a mosque) playing possum. What do you
do? You double tap his head, and you go to the next room, that’s what!
What about the Geneva Convention and all that Law of Land Warfare stuff? What about it? Without even addressing the issues at hand, your first thought should be, “I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.”
Bear in mind that this tactic of double tapping a fallen terrorist is a perpetual mindset that is reinforced by experience on a minute-by-minute basis. Secondly, you are fighting an unlawful combatant in a Sanctuary, which is a double No-No on his part. Third, tactically you are in no position to take “prisoners” because there are more rooms to search and clear, and the behavior of said terrorist indicates that he is up to no good. “No good” in Fallujah is a very large place, and the low end of no good and the high end of no good are fundamentally the same … Marines end up getting hurt or killed. So there is no compelling reason for you to do anything but double tap this idiot and get on with the mission.
If you are a veteran, then everything I have just written is self evident. If you are not a veteran, then at least try to put yourself in the situation. Remember, in Fallujah there is no yesterday, there is no tomorrow, there is only now. Right NOW. Have you ever lived in NOW for a week? It is really, really not easy. If you have never lived in NOW for longer than it takes to finish the big roller coaster at Six Flags, then shut your hole about putting Marines in jail for “War Crimes.”[/quote]
First, THANK YOU for defending me and my family. We WILL NOT forget you and all the wonderful guys there.
Secondly, you are an excellent writer; I could almost see it happening as I read. Wow!
Third, please put as many bullets as possible into each one of these sons-of-bitches.
God Bless You, and our country.
[quote]Grimnuruk wrote:
Your sources?
[/quote]
Allow me to direct you to Mr. Google for that one, sir.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=foreign+fighters+iraq+myth
There you are: http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0923/dailyUpdate.html
[quote]Christian Science Monitor:
Report by US think tank says only ‘4 to 10’ percent of insurgents are foreigners.
The US and Iraqi governments have vastly overstated the number of foreign fighters in Iraq, and most of them don’t come from Saudi Arabia, according to a new report from the Washington-based Center for Strategic International Studies (CSIS).
The CSIS report says: “The vast majority of Saudi militants who have entered Iraq were not terrorist sympathizers before the war; and were radicalized almost exclusively by the coalition invasion.”
The average age of the Saudis was 17-25 and they were generally middle-class with jobs, though they usually had connections with the most prominent conservative tribes. “Most of the Saudi militants were motivated by revulsion at the idea of an Arab land being occupied by a non-Arab country. These feelings are intensified by the images of the occupation they see on television and the Internet … the catalyst most often cited [in interrogations] is Abu Ghraib, though images from Guant�namo Bay also feed into the pathology.”
[/quote]
It’s far from the only news source that has reported similar findings.
Any libertarian or paleocon observer could have predicted this before the war, and many of us did. Pat Buchanon, Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, et al.
Round 1 is over and the results are in: the neocons were wrong and we were right. The “cakewalk” did not come to pass.
[pardon the multiple edits]
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
It’s powerful stuff when instilled in the minds of ignorant fascist youths (an accurate description of every organized fighting force).
[/quote]
I dare you to spout this crock of shit near anyone you just grossly insulted…
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I dare you to spout this crock of shit near anyone you just grossly insulted…[/quote]
Right, so that I can be viciously assaulted.
And this will surely refute my claim that the military is a bunch of fascist goons.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
It’s powerful stuff when instilled in the minds of ignorant fascist youths (an accurate description of every organized fighting force).
I dare you to spout this crock of shit near anyone you just grossly insulted…
[/quote]
The men and women going into the military are, by their very youth, ignorant. This is not meant in a disrespectful manner. This is the one thing my parents may have been correct about. The youth are the easiest to manipulate. They are also the strongest; the healthiest; the fittest; in other words, ready made soldiers. Why is it wrong to point this truth out? It’s not their fault politicians pull puppet strings in the name of “defense”.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Give me a real, tangible, non-bullshit pie-in-the-sky reason to thank the military and I’ll do it.[/quote]
You forgot to mention Vietnam and Korea, too.
Unfortunately, no one could give you what you asked for unless it were wrapped in sentimental rhetoric.