Originally posted by Shakyamunison
shitshitshit
shitshitshit
shitshitshitThe most shit I have seen in a long time. Osama Ben Laden would love people to believe the quote above.
😆 . as i said. its a pity that you do not beleive me. in my humble oppinion, your views about your country are very wrong.
also, you may have undergone training, as did people who went to vietnam. it is only ON the battlefield that frustration etc are brought to a breaking point and the bad/selfish/high headed among the soldiers will do the kind of thing i mentioned. also, its only in battle that even GOOD soldiers will get bad orders from ruthless higher ups to do bad things that they might or might not be aware of.
also, i have no doubt that torture/killing civilians was not part of the training of soldiers who went on to torture and do morally wrong things to people in guantanamo bay{which they have admitted to and even admitted that they were under orders/directions from the higher ups to do so} either.
but really, it is your perpspective which cant be forced to change. no1 is defending osama here, he deserves to die with or without having bombed the twin towers. the sad thing is that that perspective can and does affect others in the world{even if the contribution individually might be minimum} , and the only reason the world will change is if people become aware of what is really happening.
Originally posted by anaconda
nah that can easily happen during non battle events as well
how? when not in battle you are in training. in training there are only your comrades about you. you cant start killing them. nor do you have orders to do morally grey things.
and btw, i dont cosider occupation n such peace.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
😆 . as i said. its a pity that you do not beleive me. in my humble oppinion, your views about your country are very wrong.also, you may have undergone training, as did people who went to vietnam. it is only ON the battlefield that frustration etc are brought to a breaking point and the bad/selfish/high headed among the soldiers will do the kind of thing i mentioned. also, its only in battle that even GOOD soldiers will get bad orders from ruthless higher ups to do bad things that they might or might not be aware of.
also, i have no doubt that torture/killing civilians was not part of the training of soldiers who went on to torture and do morally wrong things to people in guantanamo bay{which they have admitted to and even admitted that they were under orders/directions from the higher ups to do so} either.
but really, it is your perpspective which cant be forced to change. no1 is defending osama here, he deserves to die with or without having bombed the twin towers. the sad thing is that that perspective can and does affect others in the world{even if the contribution individually might be minimum} , and the only reason the world will change is if people become aware of what is really happening.
I don't think you and Shaky are arguing different points.
Everyone knows that war brings out the most savage parts of man, and there is no excuse for it. But like you allude to above, it is in the heat of the moment that this evil comes out, it is not some calculated plan to be evil.
I know you didn't mention it in this post, but I also agree with your stuff about Iraq. Most bombs aren't suicide bombers, or Al Qaeda. However, what do you think about groups that call themselves Al Qaeda in Iraq? Obviously not all violence in Iraq is Al Qaeda inspired, but surely you must agree that some is?
Originally posted by leonheartmm
😆 . as i said. its a pity that you do not beleive me. in my humble oppinion, your views about your country are very wrong...
I know for a fact, that the policy of the US Army is to minimize civilian casualties. The US military even goes as far as putting the soldier in danger rather then take the risk of civilian casualties. What you are saying does not agree with the facts.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I know for a fact, that the policy of the US Army is to minimize civilian casualties. The US military even goes as far as putting the soldier in danger rather then take the risk of civilian casualties. What you are saying does not agree with the facts.
Policy says a lot of things. In application, these things often do not boil over. Even with something like the Geneva Conventions, the U.S. says that any suspected terrorist is not subject to having those same rights JUST BECAUSE THEY CAN. The sole superpower has no one to check them so they do as they please.
Policy is there to be pretty and nothing else. I could name plenty of policies (U.S. history and elsewhere) where policy is not upheld.
What is important is if a nation actually respects it's own policies.
Originally posted by chithappens
Policy says a lot of things. In application, these things often do not boil over. Even with something like the Geneva Conventions, the U.S. says that any suspected terrorist is not subject to having those same rights JUST BECAUSE THEY CAN. The sole superpower has no one to check them so they do as they please.Policy is there to be pretty and nothing else. I could name plenty of policies (U.S. history and elsewhere) where policy is not upheld.
What is important is if a nation actually respects it's own policies.
That is not true. There is a court system in the US that has the right to over see the military. The system is slow, but it is still deciding that matter. My point is that US does not have a policy to target civilians. In war, shit happens, but to those people who say that the US targets civilians as a policy; you are wrong.
how? when not in battle you are in training. in training there are only your comrades about you. you cant start killing them. nor do you have orders to do morally grey things.even if you aint i battle you are on alert. Training ends after that you are placed around to diffrent location with different tasks, and officers can order soldiers to do shitty things in peace time
nor do you have orders to do morally grey things.oh yes, when in the military you are always told to bend the rules
^ im sorry, the term i shud have used was not NON PEACE, but whenever soldiers are DEPLOYED in places like prisons, or camps, or war or outposts or submarines or watever.
and yes, policy for the greater part is there to look pretty. and courts, LMAO, really, they can be moved very easily by political forces and juries. specially in such cases. or dont you think bush wud be guitly of tons of stuff including tapping phone lines etc, ofcourse, no1 has done anything about that. or the claim for the iraq war, weapons of mass destruction, it is manipulation on a countrywide/world wide scale. yet the courts, well, i suppose they take time...........
and i do agree ofcourse that SOME {very few percentage} of the bombings really are done by SPLINTER CELLS of alqaeda. but then again, you cant call them alqaeda cant you, just extremist terrorism. but seeing as america has lost in all things other than descending the area in chaos and stealing oil, they higher ups have to make it look like the reason for the instability is civil war and a country AT WAR WITH ITSELF, to shift the blame from america to the country itslef. that is why supposed "suicide bombings" are carried out covertly and any other incident is named SUICIDAL irrespective of cause.
it is just a little odd that a country with decades if not centuries of peaceful coexistance of shia and sunni people suddenly is up in arms and slaughtering each other and has nuthing better to do, seeing as any normal person wud be hateful of the AMERICAN occupation, as opposed to the minor differences found in between coexisting relegious sects.