EvilJester99 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Hey so what he killed the wounded guy. If it were the other way around do you think that Iraqi/terrorist soldier wouldn't have shot an American or any other soldier wounded or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 They are also trained to search the prisoner to make certain they are not armed, injured or not. Sounds like an urban legend to me. I doubt soldiers would have forgotten to check. I doubt that strongly. When I was over there there was a checkpoint incident where a car stopped and the driver frantically motioned to a soldier in the 3d ID ( the same division I served in ) that his supposedly pregnant wife was in need of help. When the soldier came over and looked in the car to see what was up the man shot the soldier in the face and killed him. Then there was the incident on the 1st day of the invasion where a group of "surrendering" Iraqi's bushwacked a platoon of Marines killing 6 of them. The Muslim extremist insurgents we're fighting in Iraq are savages. They employ Mosques as weapons dumps, they hide among civillians, they behead aid workers, hang people from bridges, they murder innocent Iraqis in the name of Islam, they explode car bombs in crowded market places.......the list goes on and on. I take no pity for this insurgent and put in the same position I probably would have plugged the guy myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Hey so what he killed the wounded guy. If it were the other way around do you think that Iraqi/terrorist soldier wouldn't have shot an American or any other soldier wounded or not? While I support the soldier and understand his actions, this (your quote, above)is no excuse for it. We're supposed to be different. We're supposed to be better. We're supposed to be a model for the world. That's why there will be and should be a full investigation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 I was on antiwar.com and found this: Poor Kevin Sites. All his war reporting in Kosovo and Afghanistan and Iraq, and the fact that he's embedded in the most dangerous place in Iraq isn't enough to save him from Neo-cons on Auto Smear. As with the Abu Ghraib torture photos, the problem for the pro-war With Us Or Against Us crowd isn't the act that horrifies the world, it's the fact that the pictures came out. On FreeRepublic.com, they had this to say about Mr. Sites *"Journalists" like this should be treated as ''enemy combatants." *No. They are traitors and should be hung. *OK, you're a Marine searching enemy bodies in a mosque. One of the bodies is starting to move and there is a reporter filming in the room. You only have two rounds left. Quick! What do you do! Shoot the reporter twice.... *It would be fitting to see him become the next "Salman Rushdie". *72 Virgins to you mother f***er! You media f***s who want to burn those Marines are not worth the sweat off my......just go f*** yourself! *Would it be a threat to suggest that mister sites be left in the next Mosque with a billet [sic] in his head? *[beneath a photo of Sites] Kevin Sites - - Next Friendly-Fire Victim Then these gems from Little Green Footballs *Journalists should wear bright orange clothes so the murdering terrorists can see who they don't need to shoot at but can if they want. *I just thought, there are very many Marines in California once Kevin Sites returns home. Just a thought. *The Marine in this situation deserves a Congressional Medal of Honor. *Note to Marines: save at least one round for embedded terrorist sympathizers. *"Oops, sorry, I was aiming at the rat behind your head and about to eat at your eyeballs. Damn, I wish I had trained harder during shooting practice. Third time this week I've missed a friggin' rat." *If I were in a Marine squad, the first thing I would do is make sure the embedded "reporter" and "cameraman" somehow got "lost". Failing that I'd make sure that the camera was damaged by "enemy" fire. *May be this smug elitist "blue stater", POS, will catch a live grenade....to save the life of a soldier, of course..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 While I support the soldier and understand his actions, this (your quote, above)is no excuse for it. We're supposed to be different. We're supposed to be better. We're supposed to be a model for the world. That's why there will be and should be a full investigation. That's what I meant earlier in the thread when I posted 2 wrongs don't make a right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soxman352000 Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 You're assuming that his guy was an enemy combatent, what if he wasn't. Well i guess we will never have the option of knowing that. He is sitting in a Mosque surrounded by Terrorist, you can't tell me that you actually can't believe he was an enemy combatant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hawaiisoxfn Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 Its really not fair to have a war fought on two different moral standards. One side is a group of soldiers who generally try to help the people they encounter, and they abide by strict rules of engagement that tell them not to shoot until shot at. Basically, give the other guy a chance to kill you first. And who is the other guy? He is an immoral third world pile of s***, whose idea of courage is to drive a truck full of C4 into a building of sleeping civilians. He thinks its ok to wave white flags and then open fire on your captors, to kidnap old women and cut their heads off, and to hide and fight from mosques, where a noble foe like us will not attack because its sacred to him! It doesnt mean jack s*** to us, but we wont annihilate it because its sacred to him and the rest of his worthless third world paupers. f*** his ideals. f*** the impoverished s***s who support him. f*** the rest of his dickless terrorist thugs who commit terrorism and murder at his side. And f*** him! He can take his 72 virgins and go to hell. :fyou :fyou Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 It's a little disgusting that this is even being debated. For the neocons, we have higher standards than the worst of the terrorists; that's what we're fighting for, right? Humanitarian behavior? You can't pop a defenseless, wounded fighter and then claim humanitarianism. This deserves a very thorough investigation, and full consequences. If you resort to this 'Well, they do worse...' reasoning, hell, what's the advantage of democratic rule if we automatically lower ourselves to the lowest common denominator? For liberals who take this to be any evidence on the war in general, get a clue. It only got attention b/c it was unusually disgusting. If it proves to be the worst, it's a war crime, not evidence one way or another on the war in Iraq. It should be a court martial if there is no dramatic change in the evidence, and then end of story. This says zero one way or the other about the war in Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hawaiisoxfn Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 Im not saying that we sink to their level. Im proud that I live in a country with such high moral standards. I just think the Iraqis should take their stupid country and ideals and go to hell. Thats all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelasDaddy0427 Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 I just don't get why we never learn this lesson. It shouldn't be our job to police the world. It didn't work in Korea and Vietnam and so far it's not looking good in Iraq. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pale Hose Jon Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 He is sitting in a Mosque surrounded by Terrorist, you can't tell me that you actually can't believe he was an enemy combatant i worded my statement incorrectly. I was meaning to say that he was still an combatent, perhaps he had given up fighting and hoped to hide until the americans left. All i am saying is that in this incident they should have taken steps before just deciding to shoot the guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pale Hose Jon Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 Im not saying that we sink to their level. Im proud that I live in a country with such high moral standards. I just think the Iraqis should take their stupid country and ideals and go to hell. Thats all. But wait, we're liberating them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 I think you have to take into consideration the type of stuff the terrorists have been doing when you judge the guy that pulled the trigger. I mean, someone "playing dead" suddenly moves, a hesitation on your part could prove to be fatal. This incident didn't "look" good and is being used by the enemy for political purposes, but when you think it might be your ass or his what choice do you have? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 It's a little disgusting that this is even being debated. For the neocons, we have higher standards than the worst of the terrorists; that's what we're fighting for, right? Humanitarian behavior? You can't pop a defenseless, wounded fighter and then claim humanitarianism. This deserves a very thorough investigation, and full consequences. If you resort to this 'Well, they do worse...' reasoning, hell, what's the advantage of democratic rule if we automatically lower ourselves to the lowest common denominator? For liberals who take this to be any evidence on the war in general, get a clue. It only got attention b/c it was unusually disgusting. If it proves to be the worst, it's a war crime, not evidence one way or another on the war in Iraq. It should be a court martial if there is no dramatic change in the evidence, and then end of story. This says zero one way or the other about the war in Iraq. Very nice post! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 I think you have to take into consideration the type of stuff the terrorists have been doing when you judge the guy that pulled the trigger. I mean, someone "playing dead" suddenly moves, a hesitation on your part could prove to be fatal. This incident didn't "look" good and is being used by the enemy for political purposes, but when you think it might be your ass or his what choice do you have? Beheading the guy to send a message would have been nice, or possible checking the wounded soldier for a weapon and treating his injuries like all civilized countries have agreed to do. We wouldn't be defending this if we were watching this on Arab TV and showing a wounded American soldier being shot, and I cannot see a way to defend this without being very hypocritical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 Beheading the guy to send a message would have been nice, or possible checking the wounded soldier for a weapon and treating his injuries like all civilized countries have agreed to do. We wouldn't be defending this if we were watching this on Arab TV and showing a wounded American soldier being shot, and I cannot see a way to defend this without being very hypocritical. Wounded Americans dont have a proven track record of booby trapping their dead or faking surrender to bushwack Iraqi's though. Bad comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YASNY Posted November 18, 2004 Share Posted November 18, 2004 Beheading the guy to send a message would have been nice, or possible checking the wounded soldier for a weapon and treating his injuries like all civilized countries have agreed to do. We wouldn't be defending this if we were watching this on Arab TV and showing a wounded American soldier being shot, and I cannot see a way to defend this without being very hypocritical. I'm not trying to defend it. I'm just saying we shouldn't be so quick to condemn when it could be a fatal decision to do what is correct in this instance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest hawaiisoxfn Posted November 19, 2004 Share Posted November 19, 2004 I think you have to take into consideration the type of stuff the terrorists have been doing when you judge the guy that pulled the trigger. I mean, someone "playing dead" suddenly moves, a hesitation on your part could prove to be fatal. This incident didn't "look" good and is being used by the enemy for political purposes, but when you think it might be your ass or his what choice do you have? Which is why I described in detail all the cowardly things terrorists have done over the years? Did I mention the Achille Lauro, where the ever courageous Abu Abbas shot a wheelchair bound American in the head and threw his body into the Mediterranean? To think that I have any regard for the safety or their lives would be naive. Its too bad that the AIDS epidemic raging through South Africa isnt raging through the Mid East. We could completely do without that region of the planet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted November 19, 2004 Share Posted November 19, 2004 Which is why I described in detail all the cowardly things terrorists have done over the years? Did I mention the Achille Lauro, where the ever courageous Abu Abbas shot a wheelchair bound American in the head and threw his body into the Mediterranean? To think that I have any regard for the safety or their lives would be naive. Its too bad that the AIDS epidemic raging through South Africa isnt raging through the Mid East. We could completely do without that region of the planet. Speaking for myself here, I don't want to see racist s*** like this anywhere on this board. If you can't play nice w/ the other children, SHUT THE f*** UP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted November 19, 2004 Share Posted November 19, 2004 That's as good a warning as I might have given, minus the profanity (maybe). Maybe I4E has moved to the Far West Coast? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighHeat45 Posted November 19, 2004 Share Posted November 19, 2004 Maybe I4E has moved to the Far West Coast? That would explain alot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pale Hose Jon Posted November 19, 2004 Share Posted November 19, 2004 Which is why I described in detail all the cowardly things terrorists have done over the years? Did I mention the Achille Lauro, where the ever courageous Abu Abbas shot a wheelchair bound American in the head and threw his body into the Mediterranean? To think that I have any regard for the safety or their lives would be naive. Its too bad that the AIDS epidemic raging through South Africa isnt raging through the Mid East. We could completely do without that region of the planet. i can't believe you just said that. :finger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted November 19, 2004 Share Posted November 19, 2004 www.antiwar.com/justin Yes, we are at war with radical Islam. However, that struggle does not require the democratic "transformation" of the Middle East, but rather a recognition of the reality that we are fighting an asymmetric war against a worldwide guerrilla insurgency, not a traditional-style battle to conquer and occupy nation-states – a battle that must be won politically, primarily, and conducted militarily only in a precise and strictly limited sense. Our strategy must be to isolate the Islamists, and that requires the renunciation, not the escalation, of the foreign policy that gave birth to the jihadists in the first place. --Justin Raimondo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted November 19, 2004 Share Posted November 19, 2004 Which is why I described in detail all the cowardly things terrorists have done over the years? Did I mention the Achille Lauro, where the ever courageous Abu Abbas shot a wheelchair bound American in the head and threw his body into the Mediterranean? To think that I have any regard for the safety or their lives would be naive. Its too bad that the AIDS epidemic raging through South Africa isnt raging through the Mid East. We could completely do without that region of the planet. :puke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted November 19, 2004 Share Posted November 19, 2004 Wounded Americans dont have a proven track record of booby trapping their dead or faking surrender to bushwack Iraqi's though. Bad comparison. How about fight to the death? Once they are wounded do they toss aside their weapons and just lie there waiting for the enemy? Are you stating that proper procedure is shooting wounded soldiers? What happens when the enemy believes they cannot surrender? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.