Should we be better than this

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

Maybe the enemy would consider what they do before doing it if they knew we would retaliate in the same manner, isn't that what the cold war was all about.

I have to say, I am almost dumbfounded with your comments in this thread, but it makes it very clear how I could be so far apart from you on most of the topics in this forum. Completely different world view and belief of right and wrong, let alone what it means to be an American. If you are under 21 or so, I can chalk it up to age, but otherwise...

[scottw]

Allen West summed it up nicely yesterday....

"The Marines were wrong. Give them a maximum punishment under field grade level Article 15 (non-judicial punishment), place a General Officer level letter of reprimand in their personnel file, and have them in full dress uniform stand before their Battalion, each personally apologize to God, Country, and Corps videotaped and conclude by singing the full US Marine Corps Hymn without a teleprompter."

As for everyone else, unless you have been shot at by the Taliban, shut your mouth, war is hell." Col. Allen West

...............................

sadly, isolated incidents like these are often used to denigrate the military and America and grandstand to score political points by those that I guess "fully understand right and wrong and really know what it means to be an American"?


"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings," #^&#^&#^&#^& Durbin said last week.


"On March 19, 2004, President Bush asked, 'Who would prefer that Saddam's torture chambers still be open?'" said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. "Shamefully, we now learn that Saddam's torture chambers reopened under new management: U.S. management."



Speaking with host Bob Schieffer about Iraq, Sen. John Kerry said, "There is no reason ... that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the ... of ... the historical customs, religious customs."


Murtha said on ABC's This Week program in May 2006 there was "no doubt" that the Marines were guilty, claiming a cover-up of their war crimes went "up the chain of command."

Among Murtha's unsubstantiated remarks to ABC: “One woman, as I understand it, in talking to officials in the Marine Corps, was kneeling over a child pleading for mercy and they shot her in cold blood. That’s the thing that’s so disturbing. ”


...........................................

it would be nice if we could maintain the perspective that our troops are trying to maintain peace and protect innocents over there every day while the "peed upon" types engage in efforts like this one below every day, I think it is silly to suggest that they will somehow be "more motivated" by an incident like the one in question

BBC News - Iraq suicide bomb kills 50 in Basra pilgrims attack



take the POLL http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...CctP_blog.html

[Joe]

In the wake of the incendiary bombing of Hamburg 40,000 people died in the napalm-fueled firestorm and another 37,000 were injured in one week. There would have been no insurgency had we bombed Iraq similarly.
From a military perspective, the insurgency was enabled by our generosity of restraint. In retrospect, we should have struck like Jehovah and left no doubt as to our supremacy.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Joe

There would have been no insurgency had we bombed Iraq similarly.

Correct, it would have not been an insurgency isolated to Iraq.

More likely it would have erupted into a broader war across the entire middle east.

-spence

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

I hope I haven't ruined your night, if you would like to elaborate perhaps we could find common ground.
Maybe this will help. I do feel it was stupid what they did but I really have no problem with their actions based upon the circumstances, it's war.

Add to that my belief that when a person dies they leave their body behind and the soul or spirit is free without the pains and limitations of the human body, it is just the vessel they spent their time here in, a carcass if you will. It may seem cold but it actually helps me deal with the passing of loved ones and pets. I'm Agnostic not an Atheist so that might also help explain my view of life here, it's temporary for everyone.

I'm an adult so attack me all you want, I can take it and I will try and continue the conversation without going to the level some others do, most likely because they find it easier to ridicule rather than openly discuss the issue.

I got where you are coming from. I also get that it was war. I don't get the idea that we should do what our enemies do. They do a lot of inhumane crap. I have always felt that we are better than that and should be. I am with McCain on this topic.

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I got where you are coming from. I also get that it was war. I don't get the idea that we should do what our enemies do. They do a lot of inhumane crap. I have always felt that we are better than that and should be. I am with McCain on this topic.

I suppose it's because I am feed up with treating them better than they treat us and it gets me angry seeing such a minor (in my eyes) offense causing so much BS both here and now with our enemies. They expect us to be held to a different standard and do what they do like it's just fine. I say give them a taste of their own medicine.

I wish I could be more eloquent but my education didn't go that well when it comes to the proper use of the english language.
That is also why, if you haven't noticed under my avatar it says "Limited intellect"

Our we on better terms now

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Joe

In retrospect, we should have struck like Jehovah and left no doubt as to our supremacy.

I think the connection between wwii and Iraq is a stretch. The German's were the aggressors with a clear plan for world domination. Such a campaign in Iraq would not have been supported by the American people or the global community because of the lack of clear reasons for the war and the false pretenses presented by the president and his cronies. Demonstrates why it to stupid to make up reasons to go to war.

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I think the connection between wwii and Iraq is a stretch. The German's were the aggressors with a clear plan for world domination. Such a campaign in Iraq would not have been supported by the American people or the global community because of the lack of clear reasons for the war and the false pretenses presented by the president and his cronies. Demonstrates why it to stupid to make up reasons to go to war.

False pretenses? I know WMD's has the left insinuated was the only reason we went in. It wasn't the only reason we went in, how many resolutions should we have let them violate before taking action, how many of our planes needed to be shot at before we responded?
And they had WMD's because we sold them to Iraq. where did they go? It's a giant litter box over there do you think they might have buried them? They had months to hide/dispose of them before we actually invaded, so they knew we were coming.
Also if you claim finding WMD's was the only reason technically we did:

Wikileaks documents show WMDs found in Iraq Hot Air

Saddam’s WMDhave been found

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15918

I don't see things through a political affiliation type filter, I don't like either party.

http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripert...me-change.html

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

I don't see things through a political affiliation type filter, I don't like either party.

http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripert...me-change.html

Really, yet you get your info from hotair.com? Ever hear of PNAC? The plan for invasion was laid out long before 9/11 and Bush used every excuse he could think of to moved forward with the "cavalry on the new American frontier." Even in the months prior to the war, when one reason didn't stand up, they found a new one.

[Joe]

They did have WMD, but they did not release evidence to the extent to which they had them. I know somebody who was involved personally.

[ecduzitgood]

It wouldn't have mattered what the reason was the left and the main stream media will never give the right any credit. They want to see the republicans gone, which I also would like by the way except I want them gone also.
Obama and the democrats had total control for 2 years and couldn't get squat accomplished because they had their eye's on the up coming elections and didn't want to take a chance of losing control.
This current president has spent more money than all previous presidents and yet he may get voted back in. What do you think is going to happen if he gets back in and the democrats regain total control?
Part of me would like to see this happen because I think it would in the end cause enormous damage to the democratic party for years to come, the other part of me fears what will happen to this country.
I want both parties gone and a complete over haul of the system starting with privatization of many public sector jobs.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Really, yet you get your info from hotair.com? Ever hear of PNAC? The plan for invasion was laid out long before 9/11 and Bush used every excuse he could think of to moved forward with the "cavalry on the new American frontier." Even in the months prior to the war, when one reason didn't stand up, they found a new one.

Actually that just came up in a fast search so I posted it along with other links pointing out the lame attempt to discredit the republicans. Repeating it over and over won't work when there are facts that totally discredit the no WMD's argument.
Nice attempt at deflecting though....bump

Which party perpetuated lies and still has followers believing them??????

[scottw]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

Which party perpetuated lies and still has followers believing them??????

"it all has to do with your state of mind and whether or not you had the requisite intent to come up with something that would be considered a lie"

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by scottw

"it all has to do with your state of mind and whether or not you had the requisite intent to come up with something that would be considered a lie"

Your right I suppose they were willing to grasp any straw to smear the other party, both parties should hang their heads in shame and get back to doing what's right for the country not just their party of affiliation. We are all in the same boat and it is going down
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Joe

They did have WMD, but they did not release evidence to the extent to which they had them. I know somebody who was involved personally.

Involved in the discovery of wmd's?

And EZ, if the weapons were there, it is a free press with plenty of conservative outlets and a (there was a) Republican controlled government. It would have been front page news on the wall street journal for weeks. A limited # of mustard gas casings from 1991 does not match what was presented to the American people or congress. The thing that is crazy about this is that even the most staunch supporters of the war that I know, including active military people, one of which who was an army colonel at the time, say we were completely wrong about the state of wmd's. I guess they just didn't report it on msnbc for them to hear about it.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Joe

They did have WMD, but they did not release evidence to the extent to which they had them. I know somebody who was involved personally.

By the way, that contradicts what George Tenent and David Kay testified to the senate arms committee.

[scottw]

as a public service and because we're routinely told "they're all the same" I've been scouring "the internets" thinking I'd find, in an election year featuring overflowing hatred toward the current administration, plenty of examples of elected republicans and conservative blowhards attacking the President, the troops and the mission as a result of this incident. Surely this would have been the case from the ususal suspects if 'Miss Me Yet?" were still the Commander-in-Chief ...right? we have ample evidence

surprisingly.....there is precious little...I did find the likes of William Kristol(Ever hear of PNAC?) complaining about the over the top phony reactions of many administration officials and a wonder at the lack of response from Republicans, in particular, the candidates....

hard to know anymore whether this should be described as a "tragedy" an "atrocity" or simply "workplace violence" with a little college humor added or maybe even a "war crime"

I think it goes like this...if they kill us...it's a tragedy and in some cases merely workplace violence depending on what the Justice Department and Pentagon decide regarding state of mind and requisite intent....

if we pee on them(after we kill them )...and a democrat is President .....it's an "atrocity" and probably a "war crime"...only the offending soldiers should be held accountable

if mistreat them in any way...and Bush is President.... the entire Administration and the entire military should be held accountable and compared to the most ruthless regimes in history

crazy stuff

[spence]

Originally Posted by zimmy

By the way, that contradicts what George Tenent and David Kay testified to the senate arms committee.

Well, it pretty much contradicts what anyone who's investigated the matter has reported...even Dulfer.

This issue has been beaten to death

-spence

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

as a public service and because we're routinely told "they're all the same" I've been scouring "the internets" thinking I'd find, in an election year featuring overflowing hatred toward the current administration, plenty of examples of elected republicans and conservative blowhards attacking the President, the troops and the mission as a result of this incident. Surely this would have been the case from the ususal suspects if 'Miss Me Yet?" were still the Commander-in-Chief ...right? we have ample evidence

surprisingly.....there is precious little...I did find the likes of William Kristol(Ever hear of PNAC?) complaining about the over the top phony reactions of many administration officials and a wonder at the lack of response from Republicans, in particular, the candidates....

hard to know anymore whether this should be described as a "tragedy" an "atrocity" or simply "workplace violence" with a little college humor added or maybe even a "war crime"

I think it goes like this...if they kill us...it's a tragedy and in some cases merely workplace violence depending on what the Justice Department and Pentagon decide regarding state of mind and requisite intent....

if we pee on them(after we kill them )...and a democrat is President .....it's an "atrocity" and probably a "war crime"...only the offending soldiers should be held accountable

if mistreat them in any way...and Bush is President.... the entire Administration and the entire military should be held accountable and compared to the most ruthless regimes in history

crazy stuff

The entire frame of reference is different.

-spence

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Involved in the discovery of wmd's?

And EZ, if the weapons were there, it is a free press with plenty of conservative outlets and a (there was a) Republican controlled government. It would have been front page news on the wall street journal for weeks. A limited # of mustard gas casings from 1991 does not match what was presented to the American people or congress. The thing that is crazy about this is that even the most staunch supporters of the war that I know, including active military people, one of which who was an army colonel at the time, say we were completely wrong about the state of wmd's. I guess they just didn't report it on msnbc for them to hear about it.

Who said what again? Is this a credible source or not? Ok so it's not the lack of WMD's, now it's the type and amount didn't match what we were told...They had 6 months to hide/dispose them before we invaded.
Defense.gov News Article: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

This issue has been beaten to death

-spence

I agree with Spence on this...please don't

[spence]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

Who said what again? Is this a credible source or not?
Defense.gov News Article: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says

Credibility of the source isn't an issue. But I'd ask if you even read it?

The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, Chu added.

If anything this should be classified as a Superfund site, not used as justification for a very long and costly war.

-spence

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by spence

Credibility of the source isn't an issue. But I'd ask if you even read it?



If anything this should be classified as a Superfund site, not used as justification for a very long and costly war.

-spence

Were there WMD or not? The left simply will not admit there were WMD's because they are to concerned with deflecting and changing the parameters of their previous accusations.

They had 6 months to hide/dispose of the majority of WMD's before we invaded, could it be possible they moved them and perhaps even altered the areas that the inspectors weren't allowed to search after they knew it was imminent that we would invade?

If your answer to either of these questions is not a yes or no I am done with this discussion, I am not going to read through a bunch of BS...as they say "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with BS" please dazzle me with a simple yes or no with a minimum amount of BS..

[spence]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

Were there WMD or not? The left simply will not admit there were WMD's because they are to concerned with deflecting and changing the parameters of their previous accusations.

They had 6 months to hide/dispose of the majority of WMD's before we invaded, could it be possible they moved them and perhaps even altered the areas that the inspectors weren't allowed to search after they knew it was imminent that we would invade?

If your answer to either of these questions is not a yes or no I am done with this discussion, I am not going to read through a bunch of BS...as they say "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with BS" please dazzle me with a simple yes or no with a minimum amount of BS..

To quote a defense official I remember reading about years ago...

"These were not the WMD we were looking for".

Use the search, there are dozens of posts on the subject.

-spene

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by spence

To quote a defense official I remember reading about years ago...

"These were not the WMD we were looking for".

Use the search, there are dozens of posts on the subject.

-spene

A perfect example of why I don't like the left, they can't speak straight foward using their own words without some type of emergency exit. A fine example of the lack of decision making that drives me nuts.
I knew I should have asked you to respond in just three words. One last time because after all I am of limited intellect.

Choose one:
There were WMD's
or
There weren't WMD's

[Raven]

i still think they got moved to Syria
never ever! should our boots hit the ground there
nothin but a shell game

[ecduzitgood]

That song from Jeopardy is playing in my head.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Use the search, my opinion on the issue is well documented
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[ecduzitgood]

Originally Posted by spence

Use the search, my opinion on the issue is well documented
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And now your lack of ability to make a decision is documented
I will now refer you to the last line below this post , thanks for playing.

[spence]

There is no inability to make a decision, in fact the question has already been answered.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device