Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Peeing on Afghans is A-OK by Perry.Follow

#52 Jan 19 2012 at 4:40 PM Rating: Good
******
21,718 posts
Can't teach an old dog new tricks.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#53 Jan 19 2012 at 4:46 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
31,876 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
I'm just trying to encourage others to try new things.


I think you should try to encourage people to try new things.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#54 Jan 19 2012 at 4:54 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,744 posts
gbaji wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
I'm just trying to encourage others to try new things.


I think you should try to encourage people to try new things.

This.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

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

#55 Jan 19 2012 at 11:59 PM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,015 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
The French created parkour, which is the art of fighting by running away.

Smiley: lol
I always thought that was funny. Leave it to the French to make running away an art form.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#56 Jan 20 2012 at 10:08 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
****
9,047 posts
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
I don't condone that type of behavior, but at the same time, I don't have the same amount of feelings for a dead person with a dead person who attempted to kill me.


Yeah, peeing on zombies is ok. Peeing on other soldiers who you have shot isn't so much.


Are you implying that the Soldier was just minding his own business and the big bad American just came out from an ambush, shot and then ****** on the guy? I explicitly said that it depends on what that person did to you. Zombie or not, if you try to kill someone, especially me, I no longer have the same sentiments for you as another person.
____________________________
Demea wrote:
Almalieque wrote:

I'm biased against statistics
#57 Jan 20 2012 at 10:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
I don't condone that type of behavior, but at the same time, I don't have the same amount of feelings for a dead person with a dead person who attempted to kill me.


Yeah, peeing on zombies is ok. Peeing on other soldiers who you have shot isn't so much.


Are you implying that the Soldier was just minding his own business and the big bad American just came out from an ambush, shot and then ****** on the guy? I explicitly said that it depends on what that person did to you. Zombie or not, if you try to kill someone, especially me, I no longer have the same sentiments for you as another person.


I was implying that you said that a dead guy was trying to kill you. Which makes him a zombie.

And, are you implying that the American was just minding his own business when the Big Bad Afghan came along and shot at him? The two of you are doing the exact same thing. No one has the moral high ground here.

And there is something to be said for respecting another human being. More so to be said for showing enough self respect not to sink to the level of peeing on a dead body, no matter what the person did or did not do to you.

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.

Edited, Jan 20th 2012 10:15pm by Belkira
#58Almalieque, Posted: Jan 20 2012 at 10:46 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Didn't this thread already go over this? Besides, when these guys start playing by the rules of war, then they can have more sympathy. At least North Korea wears uniforms...That alone makes a huge difference!
#59 Jan 20 2012 at 11:07 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:

I was implying that you said that a dead guy was trying to kill you. Which makes him a zombie.


Why would you infer that as opposed to the guy being alive trying to kill me then dying?


It's called a joke. Maybe you should add that one to your vocab flash cards...?

Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:
And, are you implying that the American was just minding his own business when the Big Bad Afghan came along and shot at him?


No, I'm not. That's why I said it depends on what the person did.

Belkira wrote:
The two of you are doing the exact same thing. No one has the moral high ground here.


There is indeed a difference. If a US serviceman randomly attacks an innocent village and that serviceman is killed and violated, then I have no sympathy for him. If a terrorist who is involved with the planning of or execution of the deaths of innocent people gets killed and violated, then I don't have any sympathy for him. If any person is innocent of any such said crimes, they do not deserve it. There is a high ground. If you choose not to accept that fact, then that's on you.


When you try to use the words "moral" and "fact" together, your argument flies out the window.

Almalieque wrote:
Belkira wrote:
And there is something to be said for respecting another human being. More so to be said for showing enough self respect not to sink to the level of peeing on a dead body, no matter what the person did or did not do to you.


Yes, that sounds nice on paper, but not so much when someone rapes, assaults, steals, attempted to kill, etc. you, a friend or a family member. If you think that you (who is beyond emotional) are above the capability of feeling such anger and hatred after being placed in that situation, then you're sadly mistaken. Is it possible? Yes, but it isn't something that most people can do in a short time period.

As I said, I don't condone it, but at the same time, if a person is placed in that situation, then I can understand why it happened.


And was there a point in this discussion when I said I didn't understand the feelings that would lead to this idiotic act...?

Almalieque 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.


Didn't this thread already go over this? Besides, when these guys start playing by the rules of war, then they can have more sympathy. At least North Korea wears uniforms...That alone makes a huge difference!


Smiley: facepalm Once again, it's terrifying that you're in our armed services.

Edited, Jan 20th 2012 11:08pm by Belkira
#60 Jan 20 2012 at 11:12 PM Rating: Excellent
******
44,314 posts
Yeah, but consider it like this: He's in the service in the same sense that the guy in charge of the deep fryer at McDonalds is a chef.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#61 Jan 20 2012 at 11:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Yeah, but consider it like this: He's in the service in the same sense that the guy in charge of the deep fryer at McDonalds is a chef.


I do feel better when I imagine him as a fry cook at McDonald's...
#62 Jan 21 2012 at 12:36 AM Rating: Good
Prodigal Son
******
20,015 posts
Belkira wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Yeah, but consider it like this: He's in the service in the same sense that the guy in charge of the deep fryer at McDonalds is a chef.


I do feel better when I imagine him as a fry cook at McDonald's...

Did he take over Smash's job?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#63 Jan 21 2012 at 9:33 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,264 posts
******* on the dead is okay, so long as they're Muslims. Muslims don't count as human beings. Or, y'know, something.
____________________________
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
#64Almalieque, Posted: Jan 22 2012 at 12:44 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Based on the number one concept that was briefed during this war? You're really expressing your ignorance of the military. Don't try to put this on me, you will fail horribly.
#65Almalieque, Posted: Jan 22 2012 at 12:46 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) There's no one person in charge of a "deep fryer" at McDonalds.
#66 Jan 22 2012 at 1:34 AM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
Almalieque wrote:
My point is that while the act in itself might be disturbing, sympathy for the dead individual is situational. Since, you probably don't know the situation prior to the golden shower, you should reserve making such comments.


No one said anything about sympathy. I believe the phrase I have used is "respect for another human being." I have no doubt that the soldiers in question have zero sympathy for the guy who lost the shootout, nor would I expect them to.

I don't give a **** what the situation is. ******* on an enemy soldier is an immature response, and when it comes from a member of our armed forces, who are supposed to be trained to respond to stressful situations and who are our representatives in war torn countries, it is completely unacceptable.

#67Almalieque, Posted: Jan 22 2012 at 8:08 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) YOU are displaying sympathy for a person who could have been responsible for numerous deaths of innocent people. I don't condone the situation, but your reaction is just as immature. You said that you don't care about the situation, so this guy could have easily killed numerous of innocent people and you're more concerned about him getting a golden shower? Really? Smiley: rolleyes
#68 Jan 22 2012 at 8:29 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,744 posts
Or he could have bene someone forced into service with the Taliban. Who knows?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

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

#69 Jan 22 2012 at 11:37 AM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
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.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#70 Jan 22 2012 at 1:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
I don't care if a dead someone raped and tortured twenty innocent children before being killed. "We" are supposed to be better than "them". If you're feeling tormented and your torment has turned to hate, take it out on a cushion or a wall or the air or some other innocent inanimate thing or something.

I can understand desecrating a child torturer's corpse, or the corpses of the men who just killed my best buddy in the world, the guy who saved my life 10 times over. It's still not an excuse in my book.

Especially when you are representing your nation in a hideously complex and touchy location. Fuck, I know war twists, torments and brutalises anyone. We can't expect sane responses all the time from service personnel. But insane, or merely reprehensible behaviour from traumatised warriors has to be contained. It has to be punished and prevented as much as possible. Redirected and let out in as least harmful ways as possible.
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#71 Jan 22 2012 at 2:40 PM Rating: Excellent
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
Almalieque wrote:
YOU are displaying sympathy for a person who could have been responsible for numerous deaths of innocent people. I don't condone the situation, but your reaction is just as immature. You said that you don't care about the situation, so this guy could have easily killed numerous of innocent people and you're more concerned about him getting a golden shower? Really? Smiley: rolleyes


First: It's not sympathy. It's called "respect." More words for your vocabulary cards. And second, all of the people who are respectful towards American soldiers and want them to come home are displaying respect towards a person who could have been responsible for numerous deaths of innocent people. That's sort of the job of a soldier.
#72 Jan 22 2012 at 2:41 PM Rating: Good
Cervixhouse-Five
******
30,643 posts
Aripyanfar wrote:
I don't care if a dead someone raped and tortured twenty innocent children before being killed. "We" are supposed to be better than "them". If you're feeling tormented and your torment has turned to hate, take it out on a cushion or a wall or the air or some other innocent inanimate thing or something.

I can understand desecrating a child torturer's corpse, or the corpses of the men who just killed my best buddy in the world, the guy who saved my life 10 times over. It's still not an excuse in my book.

Especially when you are representing your nation in a hideously complex and touchy location. Fuck, I know war twists, torments and brutalises anyone. We can't expect sane responses all the time from service personnel. But insane, or merely reprehensible behaviour from traumatised warriors has to be contained. It has to be punished and prevented as much as possible. Redirected and let out in as least harmful ways as possible.


Also this.
#73 Jan 22 2012 at 3:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Everyone's Oiran
Avatar
*****
15,923 posts
I wouldn't even call it displaying respect for enemy and evil-people corpses. It's just displaying Not Disrespect.

War and Parenthood. The two most difficult and important jobs in the world to get right.

Edited, Jan 22nd 2012 4:39pm by Aripyanfar
____________________________
<3

http://www.reddit.com/r/Forum4/
#74Almalieque, Posted: Jan 24 2012 at 6:06 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Read above. You are focusing more on the fact that a dead guy got urinated on as opposed to the highly probable negative actions that guy has done. If you're a person of respect, then you would realize that it's likely that individual disregarded respect. You claimed that there's no "high road", so stop pretending that the U.S. should behave differently.
#75 Jan 24 2012 at 6:47 AM Rating: Excellent
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,744 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Exactly, you don't know.
So, when you don't know, the default is to treat them like sh*t? Another stellar example as to why no one likes you or dates you.

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
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

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

#76 Jan 24 2012 at 7:48 AM Rating: Good
******
44,314 posts
You're being an idiot, Ugly.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#77 Jan 24 2012 at 7:51 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,243 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:
Post and be happy!
#78 Jan 24 2012 at 9:14 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
34,744 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.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

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
*****
15,264 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
******
30,643 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
******
44,314 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
******
31,876 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
******
30,643 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
******
31,876 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
*****
19,954 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
******
30,643 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
*****
12,004 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
*****
19,954 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
*****
12,004 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
******
31,876 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
******
44,314 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
******
31,876 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
******
31,876 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
******
44,314 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
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
Avatar
****
9,356 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.

clicky
#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
****
7,476 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
******
34,744 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.
Need a hotel at a great rate? More hotels being added weekly.

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: 63 All times are in CST
Kavekkk, Samira, Shojindo, Anonymous Guests (60)