Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Peeing on Afghans is A-OK by Perry.Follow

#77 Jan 24 2012 at 7:51 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,594 posts
Eske Esquire wrote:
I'll just check in on this thread in 36 pages, when y'all are arguing with Alma over whether or not it's *** to pee on a dead Afghan.

If you DADT it's all peachy.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#78 Jan 24 2012 at 9:14 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,366 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
You're being an idiot, Ugly.

If you can't beat them, join them.


Assholes.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#79 Jan 24 2012 at 9:38 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,268 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
You're being an idiot, Ugly.

If you can't beat them, join them.


Assholes.

Smiley: thumbsup
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#80 Jan 24 2012 at 1:51 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,646 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
You claimed that there's no "high road", so stop pretending that the U.S. should behave differently.
She's not rpetending that the US should take the high road. She's expecting it and demanding it because it has to take the high road.


Edited, Jan 24th 2012 8:52am by Uglysasquatch


It's pretty **** sad that a Cannuk understands this before a member of the military.
#81 Jan 24 2012 at 2:25 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,671 posts
It's all about getting the best the lowest bidder has to offer.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#82 Jan 24 2012 at 3:21 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,867 posts
Belkira wrote:
ETA: If this were an Afghan soldier peeing on a dead American soldier, these same morons who are saying that these "kids" should be left alone because they're in a "stressful situation" would be screaming for the Afghan soldier's head.


And the same Afghan folks screaming for the US soldiers heads would be saying that it was ok because the US soldiers deserved it. You had a point here?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#83 Jan 24 2012 at 3:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,646 posts
gbaji wrote:
Belkira wrote:
ETA: If this were an Afghan soldier peeing on a dead American soldier, these same morons who are saying that these "kids" should be left alone because they're in a "stressful situation" would be screaming for the Afghan soldier's head.


And the same Afghan folks screaming for the US soldiers heads would be saying that it was ok because the US soldiers deserved it. You had a point here?


Once again: Aren't we supposed to be "the good guy?" Aren't we supposed to be better than they are? Is your point "They do it, so it's ok if we do it to?" Are you in the second grade?
#84 Jan 24 2012 at 3:39 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Belkira wrote:
Is your point "They do it, so it's ok if we do it to?" Are you in the second grade?

You've never heard him argue politics, have you?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#85 Jan 24 2012 at 5:12 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,867 posts
Belkira wrote:
Once again: Aren't we supposed to be "the good guy?" Aren't we supposed to be better than they are?


Of course. However, that objective should be tempered with a realistic assessment of the relative import of ******* off (or on! hahah, I slay me!) people we're currently at war with. In a vacuum, sure. Our soldiers should not be behaving in that manner. But in the grand scheme of things I'm far more concerned about our government overspending on so-called "economic recovery", imposing draconian mandates on our own people in the pursuit of socialized medicine, ******** with the free market in an attempt to make us all go "green", and deliberately running an ATF gun selling operation apparently designed primarily to pad the stats on illegally sold guns in order to more easily impose stricter gun control laws. Forgive me if I save my outrage for things that really are more important than whether a group of soldiers in a war zone peed on some people they'd already killed.

Quote:
Is your point "They do it, so it's ok if we do it to?" Are you in the second grade?


No. My point is that it's helpful to put things in perspective rather than treat everything like an absolute case study in morality. For example (and this might just blow your mind), you do realize that those soldiers killed those Afghans first, right? While I get the whole "adding insult to injury" bit, do you really think the families of those killed would not be angry anyway?

Forgive me if I reserve my outrage for things that actually have a large delta of effect. The difference between "dead" and "dead and peed on" isn't really that huge if you step back and think about it objectively.

Edited, Jan 24th 2012 3:13pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#86 Jan 24 2012 at 5:15 PM Rating: Excellent
******
20,020 posts
You don't think desecrating the bodies makes a huge difference?
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#87 Jan 24 2012 at 5:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,646 posts
gbaji wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Once again: Aren't we supposed to be "the good guy?" Aren't we supposed to be better than they are?


Of course. However, that objective should be tempered with a realistic assessment of the relative import of ******* off (or on! hahah, I slay me!) people we're currently at war with. In a vacuum, sure. Our soldiers should not be behaving in that manner. But in the grand scheme of things I'm far more concerned about our government overspending on so-called "economic recovery", imposing draconian mandates on our own people in the pursuit of socialized medicine, ******** with the free market in an attempt to make us all go "green", and deliberately running an ATF gun selling operation apparently designed primarily to pad the stats on illegally sold guns in order to more easily impose stricter gun control laws. Forgive me if I save my outrage for things that really are more important than whether a group of soldiers in a war zone peed on some people they'd already killed.


You have your outrages, I have mine. What makes yours more important?

gbaji wrote:
Quote:
Is your point "They do it, so it's ok if we do it to?" Are you in the second grade?


No. My point is that it's helpful to put things in perspective rather than treat everything like an absolute case study in morality. For example (and this might just blow your mind), you do realize that those soldiers killed those Afghans first, right? While I get the whole "adding insult to injury" bit, do you really think the families of those killed would not be angry anyway?

Forgive me if I reserve my outrage for things that actually have a large delta of effect. The difference between "dead" and "dead and peed on" isn't really that huge if you step back and think about it objectively.


It's interesting that's how you look at it, and it surprises me not at all. I never took you for someone with any dignity, anyway.
#88 Jan 24 2012 at 5:20 PM Rating: Good
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,369 posts
To be fair if someone tried to kill me, and then I actually succeeded in killing them first, I'd probably be freaked out enough that I'd do a lot more than pee on them.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#89 Jan 24 2012 at 5:32 PM Rating: Excellent
******
20,020 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
To be fair if someone tried to kill me, and then I actually succeeded in killing them first, I'd probably be freaked out enough that I'd do a lot more than pee on them.


To be fair, you aren't a trained soldier representing the United States abroad. And this is no small issue.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#90 Jan 24 2012 at 5:39 PM Rating: Good
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,369 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
To be fair if someone tried to kill me, and then I actually succeeded in killing them first, I'd probably be freaked out enough that I'd do a lot more than pee on them.


To be fair, you aren't a trained soldier representing the United States abroad. And this is no small issue.


Oh I totally get that part. By my twisted logic though, if we were really able to fully train people for the situations they faced PTSD wouldn't be the problem it is. Punish them, okay sure, but I just read about the incident and think that they probably need counseling more than anything else.

Edited, Jan 24th 2012 3:39pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#91 Jan 24 2012 at 5:59 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,867 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
You don't think desecrating the bodies makes a huge difference?


If by desecrating, you mean chopping off body parts and otherwise mutilating them, taking keepsakes, etc, that's one thing. Peeing on them? No. I don't. You honestly think people are like "You killed my brother, but that's ok because at least you didn't pee on his body"? You do realize that bodies have to be cleaned prior to being prepared for viewing, funeral, burial, etc? Do you realize that it's common for excrement and urine to be released during or soon after death? And that's before we mention the blood and whatnot already present from having been killed in the first place.



I find it hard to imagine that anyone actually takes greater offense at a body having been peed on, than that the person was killed in the first place. You'd have to have some seriously screwed up priorities for that to be the case. Does peeing on a body make you a bit more upset? Sure. Is it even close to as upset you are that your loved one is dead? Not even close.

If you had a choice between your child being peed on or killed, which would you choose? Is one even remotely close to the other? So it's like adding .0001% more anger to those who already cared about the guy you just killed. It's honestly more about the appearance of professionalism of our own soldiers than it really is about how much this actually makes people more mad at us from killing those guys in the first place. And if you could step back from your own ridiculous over-reaction, you'd realize it.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#92 Jan 24 2012 at 6:04 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,671 posts
That .0001% is usually the difference between indifference of the soldiers and lobbing mortars into a base.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#93 Jan 24 2012 at 6:06 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,867 posts
Belkira wrote:
You have your outrages, I have mine. What makes yours more important?


Because those are things our current government is doing to its own citizens. When another nations government does something to your citizens, you expect your own government to step in and handle it. That's it's primary job and purpose, after all. So by all means, Afghanistan can complain and act and file complaints about this as it wishes.

When your own government is doing something wrong to you, no other government is likely to step up and do anything about it. Ergo, it's kinda more important to focus the most on preventing my government from doing things I feel are harmful to me and other citizens than to worry about what my government is doing to the citizens of another government.

Quote:
It's interesting that's how you look at it, and it surprises me not at all. I never took you for someone with any dignity, anyway.


I'm not sure what dignity has to do with it. I'm placing priorities here is all. I fully acknowledge that our soldiers should not be peeing on the bodies of anyone. ****. They shouldn't be peeing on live people either. But I'm not really going to lose any sleep over it, either. I just think that some people have become so accustomed to just following whatever outrage/reaction they see that they don't bother to step back and ask "is this really that important"?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#94 Jan 24 2012 at 6:11 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,867 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
That .0001% is usually the difference between indifference of the soldiers and lobbing mortars into a base.


Doubtful. Anyone angered enough by it to take violent action was almost certainly already on the "side" of the folks who got peed on and would have acted violently anyway. Everyone else is like "Yeah, that's not a very nice thing to do. Lets go get a beer".
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#95 Jan 24 2012 at 6:15 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
And here I thought the issue was less the immediate family of the dead but rather the image this portrays to the Afghani population at large.
Quote:
But I'm not really going to lose any sleep over it, either. I just think that some people have become so accustomed to just following whatever outrage/reaction they see that they don't bother to step back and ask "is this really that important"?

Others become so accustomed to things like this that they stop thinking it should be a big deal and only give lip service to it being "wrong" while actually being indifferent to the whole idea of our soldiers doing this sort of thing.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#96 Jan 24 2012 at 6:18 PM Rating: Excellent
******
49,671 posts
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
That .0001% is usually the difference between indifference of the soldiers and lobbing mortars into a base.
Doubtful.
Well, of course you're doubtful. A conservative told you to downplay the severity of what these marines did, by any means necessary. However, when "we shot at them because that one male soldier looked at that female" is reason enough to set people off over there, your "doubt" is really silly.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#97 Jan 24 2012 at 6:23 PM Rating: Good
***
1,000 posts
gbaji wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Once again: Aren't we supposed to be "the good guy?" Aren't we supposed to be better than they are?


Of course. However, that objective should be tempered with a realistic assessment of the relative import of ******* off (or on! hahah, I slay me!) people we're currently at war with. In a vacuum, sure. Our soldiers should not be behaving in that manner. But in the grand scheme of things I'm far more concerned about our government overspending on so-called "economic recovery", imposing draconian mandates on our own people in the pursuit of socialized medicine, ******** with the free market in an attempt to make us all go "green", and deliberately running an ATF gun selling operation apparently designed primarily to pad the stats on illegally sold guns in order to more easily impose stricter gun control laws. Forgive me if I save my outrage for things that really are more important than whether a group of soldiers in a war zone peed on some people they'd already killed.

Quote:
Is your point "They do it, so it's ok if we do it to?" Are you in the second grade?


No. My point is that it's helpful to put things in perspective rather than treat everything like an absolute case study in morality. For example (and this might just blow your mind), you do realize that those soldiers killed those Afghans first, right? While I get the whole "adding insult to injury" bit, do you really think the families of those killed would not be angry anyway?

Forgive me if I reserve my outrage for things that actually have a large delta of effect. The difference between "dead" and "dead and peed on" isn't really that huge if you step back and think about it objectively.

Edited, Jan 24th 2012 3:13pm by gbaji


When Gbaji starts raving like this, it's a sure sign he's off his meds again.
____________________________
Come on Bill, let's go home
[ffxisig]63311[/ffxisig]
#98 Jan 24 2012 at 6:44 PM Rating: Excellent
****
9,526 posts
gbaji wrote:
Everyone else is like "Yeah, that's not a very nice thing to do. Lets go get a beer".


All those Muslim beer drinkers in Afghanistan... laughing off the desecration of bodies. For sure.
____________________________
lolgaxe wrote:
When it comes to sitting around not doing anything for long periods of time, only being active for short windows, and marginal changes and sidegrades I'd say FFXI players were the perfect choice for politicians.


#99Almalieque, Posted: Jan 25 2012 at 12:46 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) This.. How is this so hard to comprehend.
#100 Jan 25 2012 at 3:20 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,546 posts


Olorinus wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Everyone else is like "Yeah, that's not a very nice thing to do. Lets go get a beer".


All those Muslim beer drinkers in Afghanistan... laughing off the desecration of bodies. For sure.


this


Edited, Jan 25th 2012 4:20am by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.

#101 Jan 25 2012 at 8:07 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,366 posts
gbaji wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
That .0001% is usually the difference between indifference of the soldiers and lobbing mortars into a base.


Doubtful. Anyone angered enough by it to take violent action was almost certainly already on the "side" of the folks who got peed on and would have acted violently anyway. Everyone else is like "Yeah, that's not a very nice thing to do. Lets go get a beer".
There's this thing called the middle ground. Those not involved in the fighting and never will be. The type of people who, if treated fairly, would help the US soldiers with information, albeit, maybe only small bits. Those people would look at this and think a good old GFY is in order. Those that think, "I don't like the Taliban, but I hate the US more."
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 79 All times are in CDT
lolgaxe, Anonymous Guests (78)