PDA

View Full Version : If Someone's Shooting At Me, I WOULD!



Sid_Vicious
01-12-2012, 06:36 PM
This news about our marines pissing on dead Taliban...I call that a victory dance, and pee sure ain't gonna hurt those dead ENEMIES! Piss on'em. They are the enemy after all. sid

BTW, these enemies are terrorists, non committed to any actual country. They are worms!

eg8r
01-12-2012, 09:39 PM
Don't waterboard them but if you can actually kill them then you might as well piss on them. You are a nutcase.

eg8r

nAz
01-13-2012, 04:08 AM
Yeah i think they were trying to help them, I hear piss can clean the wounds? lol

I wish they didn't photograph it though, its gonna hurt the image of American soldier as a professional military... at least it wasn't a gay act.

LWW
01-13-2012, 05:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't waterboard them but if you can actually kill them then you might as well piss on them. You are a nutcase.

eg8r </div></div>

What you have to understand is that this happened on dear leader's watch ... hence, it will be deemed to be good by many on the far left.

OTOH, had this happened on <s>BEELZEBUB'S</s> <s>SATAN'S</s> <s>SPAWN OF HITLER'S</s> <s>EMMANUEL GOLDSTEIN'S</s> Bush's watch ... well the far left would be bleating in collective unison about this being the war crime of the new millennium.

eg8r
01-13-2012, 09:02 AM
They had a problem with stacking them up naked, but pissing on their dead bodies is perfectly fine. Hypocrites.

eg8r

eg8r
01-13-2012, 09:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wish they didn't photograph it though, its gonna hurt the image of American soldier as a professional military... at least it wasn't a gay act. </div></div>Picture or not, you don't think gay golden showers, on the bodies of dead enemies, hurt the image of American soldiers?

eg8r

LWW
01-13-2012, 09:05 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They had a problem with stacking them up naked, but pissing on their dead bodies is perfectly fine. Hypocrites.

eg8r </div></div>

At least they didn't make anyone wear women's panties on their head ... that's where civilized people draw the line.

LWW
01-13-2012, 09:11 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wish they didn't photograph it though, its gonna hurt the image of American soldier as a professional military... at least it wasn't a gay act. </div></div>Picture or not, you don't think gay golden showers, on the bodies of dead enemies, hurt the image of American soldiers?

eg8r </div></div>

Or picture this ... this incident is just another bit of evidence in the argument that, to the left, brown people are merely stage props to be brought out as "PROOF" of (INSTEAD NONSENSICAL LEFTIST POINT HERE) and then rolled off stage to be pizzed on when they would harm the agenda.

Sev
01-13-2012, 09:19 AM
They should been feeding the bodies to swine.

Seriously though. I dont condone what they did. Its not good form.
However if they are going to engage in mild acts of desecration such as this dont frigging video it for posterity sake!!

Soflasnapper
01-13-2012, 01:35 PM
There's a little problem with your position, called the UCMJ. These marines will be court martialled if they can be identified and are still under military control, and likely sentenced to jail sentences.

Soflasnapper
01-13-2012, 01:35 PM
What you have to understand is that this happened on dear leader's watch

I think you should understand that nobody knows when this happened. Isn't that more correct?

Soflasnapper
01-13-2012, 01:41 PM
They are the enemy after all. sid

BTW, these enemies are terrorists, non committed to any actual country. They are worms!

Marines are under orders not to do this to anyone, enemies or not. And if you think about it slightly, it's only enemies they need to be ordered not to do this on, as they would not do it to allies or innocent civilians (we would hope).

As for their being terrorists, evidently for defending their own country from an invading force allied with the Northern Alliance and the drug lords, running the opium crop at record levels after the Taliban had completely eradicated it JUST prior to our invasion (no relationship between those events, of course ;)), yeah, probably not so much.

Qtec
01-13-2012, 05:54 PM
I think everybody is missing the point here. This kind of behaviour puts the troops still out there at increased risk.

For the guys who think its no big deal, imagine the same video but its the Al Q fighters doing the pissing!
No big deal?

Q

Sid_Vicious
01-13-2012, 06:21 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They are the enemy after all. sid

BTW, these enemies are terrorists, non committed to any actual country. They are worms!

Marines are under orders not to do this to anyone, enemies or not. And if you think about it slightly, it's only enemies they need to be ordered not to do this on, as they would not do it to allies or innocent civilians (we would hope).

As for their being terrorists, evidently for defending their own country from an invading force allied with the Northern Alliance and the drug lords, running the opium crop at record levels after the Taliban had completely eradicated it JUST prior to our invasion (no relationship between those events, of course ;)), yeah, probably not so much. </div></div>

No I disagree. OBL attacked our country. OBL was protected by the Taliban. We went to get a criminal terriorist, OBL, and the Taliban shot at us. That makes the Taliban as bad as OBL. Whatever happens to dead terrorists is fine with me. P-On-Em. sid

LWW
01-14-2012, 06:20 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What you have to understand is that this happened on dear leader's watch

I think you should understand that nobody knows when this happened. Isn't that more correct? </div></div>

Yes, we do.

This was released within the last few days.

LWW
01-14-2012, 06:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Taliban had completely eradicated it JUST prior to our invasion (no relationship between those events, of course ;)), yeah, probably not so much. </div></div>

You never were one for reality.

Let's cast aside spoonfed leftist boiler plate talking points and review this topic through the prism of verifiable facts, shall we? You OK with that? Probably not ... but that's OK.

1 - The taliban financed their regime with taxes on opium/heroin with a 10% to 20% tax.

2 - The taliban financed their external actions, such as the Clinton supported KLA, with taxes on opium/heroin.

3 - The taliban operated a very predatory lending system with small uneducated farmers of opium/heroin.

4 - The taliban desperately wanted UN sanctions to be lifted.

5 - The taliban through the 1990's had pushed opium/heroin production to the point that prices were collapsing.

6 - The Afghan economy was being ground to even finer dust between the millstones of UN sanctions and collapsing opium/heroin prices.

7 - The talibam promised to "ERADICATE" opium/heroin.

8 - They did so, 90% anyway, which allowed them to claim to be good guys and hopefully get sanctions removed ... but it also increased prices by over tenfold.

9 - The result of that was opium/heroin selling for $50.00 a pound yielding $10.00 a pound in tax going to $500.00+ a pound and yielding $100.00 a pound in tax ... after the 90% cut back in production, leaving the taliban with the same net money.

10 - The small opium/heroin producers that were squeezed out of business could now no longer pay their loans to the taliban ... which allowed the taliban to seize the land.

11 - The taliban then no longer needed to tax the product as the now controlled production and distribution.

12 - The bleeding hearts on the left bought the taliban's spoon fed lies, as they always do.

13 - The myth is perpetuated to this very day.

14 - Repeating the myth doesn't make the myth true.

More leftist Bovine Scatology stomped beneath the heavy boot of reality. (http://www.usip.org/files/resources/taliban_opium_1.pdf)

Sid_Vicious
01-14-2012, 06:31 PM
I watched that video, uncensored, and it appeared that just one of the enemy was pissed upon, and apparently by more than just the one pissing on "it" at the time of the video. My guess is that maybe the one soaked with pee was a traitor within our own ranks. If you've ever intimately discussed things with many Viet Nam war vets, marines for sure, you will find that a simple golden shower is fine when given to some of the same people who sponsored cutting our soldier's, maybe THEIR buddy's, heads off on global television.

This is getting more over blown by the people here and in this country, who grab their mouths and jump back in horror. For the righties here though...when GWB waterboarded and defended waterboarding afterwards...NOW that was a sad expression of this country's leadership. Pissin'??? Gimme a break!

War is war. sid

LWW
01-15-2012, 02:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sid_Vicious</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I watched that video, uncensored, and it appeared that just one of the enemy was pissed upon, and apparently by more than just the one pissing on "it" at the time of the video. My guess is that maybe the one soaked with pee was a traitor within our own ranks. If you've ever intimately discussed things with many Viet Nam war vets, marines for sure, you will find that a simple golden shower is fine when given to some of the same people who sponsored cutting our soldier's, maybe THEIR buddy's, heads off on global television.

This is getting more over blown by the people here and in this country, who grab their mouths and jump back in horror. For the righties here though...when GWB waterboarded and defended waterboarding afterwards...NOW that was a sad expression of this country's leadership. Pissin'??? Gimme a break!

War is war. sid </div></div>

Who did we waterboard?

Honestly?

Do you actually believe this happened?

Do you even know what waterboarding actually is?

Obviously ... you do not.

Research the subject and get back to us.

Qtec
01-15-2012, 03:49 AM
Yes Dorothy, it never happened. It was all a dream.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Four memos from the Bush administration set out in chilling detail the kind of techniques used by the CIA against suspected al-Qaida operatives and others held after the 9/11 attacks:

The memos, from the justice department to the CIA in 2002 and 2005, list techniques that are permissible, from the most severe – waterboarding, to the almost laughable (though not for the detainee) – the use of insects in a confined space.

The lawyers insisted the techniques did not amount to torture. It would only be torture "if the medical and pyschological evaluations or ongoing monitoring suggest that the detainee is likely to suffer serious harm."

Waterboarding: Detainee placed on a board with his head lying downwards. The memos say: "A cloth is placed over his face on which cold water is then poured for periods of at most 40 seconds. This creates a barrier through which it is either difficult or impossible to breathe. The technique thereby induces a sensation of drowning." A doctor was to be on hand in case the detainee got into trouble. </div></div>

Q

Qtec
01-15-2012, 03:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Nightmares made law

Obama is right not to target CIA interrogators. The torture memos show where blame truly lies



The four secret US department of justice opinions released this week are jaw-dropping in their detail. They reveal how far the Bush administration was prepared to go in sanctioning interrogation techniques <u>that plainly amount to torture.</u>

The long-awaited publication of the August 2002 memo, signed by Jay Bybee but largely written by John Yoo,<u> authorises 10 previously unlawful interrogation techniques.</u> These include slapping, stress position and sleep deprivation, right up to waterboarding. It is doubtful a more shocking legal opinion has ever been written. It even purports to analyse if incarcerating a detainee in a small box with an insect for company would amount to mental torture (it depends what you tell him about its sting).

This is the stuff of dark nightmares, the rubber-stamping of policy rather than legal advice in the sense usually understood. It indicates how far the Bush administration fell, the kind of reasoning that infected a raft of policies and to which the British government often turned a blind eye. It has caused untold damage to US national security, and to its reputation.

When the memo was written, the administration had already fixed a policy of abuse, and the torture had<u> already started.</u><span style='font-size: 14pt'> Lawyers were needed to provide the "golden shield" against prosecution.</span> The memo did not benefit from the usual consultations; the many lawyers who would have objected were simply cut out of the process. A small group of lawyer-ideologues became participants in international crime, acts for which any state may, under the 1984 torture convention, exercise criminal jurisdiction. The evidence suggests complicity with the consequences that flowed from these flawed opinions - which went on to underpin CIA and military interrogations in Guantánamo, Iraq and beyond in the rendition programme. </div></div>

link (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/apr/18/memo-2002-torture-techniques-obama?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487)

Q

LWW
01-15-2012, 05:10 AM
What is "WATERBOARDING" ... and, yes, it is clear that you have no idea.

That's why a moonbat crazy leftist site can redefine what a word means ... then tell you that the new definition is equivalent to the old definition ... and leave you licking the spoon and begging to be fed more.

Please try again ... waterboarding has been defined as a war crime, what did waterboarding mean under that definition?

Qtec
01-15-2012, 05:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Chase J. Nielsen, one of the U.S. airmen who flew in the Doolittle raid following the attack on Pearl Harbor, was subjected to waterboarding by his Japanese captors.[117] At their trial for war crimes following the war, he testified "Well, I was put on my back on the floor with my arms and legs stretched out, one guard holding each limb. The towel was wrapped around my face and put across my face and water poured on. They poured water on this towel until I was almost unconscious from strangulation, then they would let up until I'd get my breath, then they'd start over again... I felt more or less like I was drowning, just gasping between life and death."[38] The United States hanged Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American prisoners of war </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Waterboarding is a form of torture in which water is poured over the face of an immobilized captive, thus causing the individual to experience the sensation of drowning. </div></div>

Its pretty clear.

Q

Qtec
01-15-2012, 05:47 AM
torture (http://www.salon.com/2010/03/09/waterboarding_for_dummies/)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Self-proclaimed waterboarding fan Dick Cheney called it a no-brainer in a 2006 radio interview: Terror suspects should get a “a dunk in the water.” But recently released internal documents reveal the controversial “enhanced interrogation” practice was far more brutal on detainees than Cheney’s description sounds, and was administered with meticulous cruelty.

Interrogators pumped detainees full of so much water that the CIA turned to a special saline solution to minimize the risk of death, the documents show. The agency used a gurney “specially designed” to tilt backwards at a perfect angle to maximize the water entering the prisoner’s nose and mouth, intensifying the sense of choking – and to be lifted upright quickly in the event that a prisoner stopped breathing.

The documents also lay out, in chilling detail, exactly what should occur in each two-hour waterboarding “session.” Interrogators were instructed to start pouring water right after a detainee exhaled, to ensure he inhaled water, not air, in his next breath. They could use their hands to “dam the runoff” and prevent water from spilling out of a detainee’s mouth. They were allowed six separate 40-second “applications” of liquid in each two-hour session – and could dump water over a detainee’s nose and mouth for a total of 12 minutes a day. Finally, to keep detainees alive even if they inhaled their own vomit during a session – a not-uncommon side effect of waterboarding – the prisoners were kept on a liquid diet. The agency recommended Ensure Plus. </div></div>

Q

LWW
01-15-2012, 06:15 AM
Since you deem that link credible, let's dig deeper:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The documents also lay out, in chilling detail, exactly what should occur in each two-hour waterboarding “session.” Interrogators were instructed to start pouring water right after a detainee exhaled, to ensure he inhaled water, not air, in his next breath. They could use their hands to “dam the runoff” and prevent water from spilling out of a detainee’s mouth. <span style='font-size: 11pt'>They were allowed six separate 40-second “applications” of liquid in each two-hour session – and could dump water over a detainee’s nose and mouth for a total of 12 minutes a day.</span></div></div>

The moonbat crazy left has redefined the words "TORTURE" and "WATERBOARD" to include this incredibly lame tactic ... ask NineBallPaul about how lame it is, and where my $20K is also ... and you never saw the switch.

Which leads us back to what the actal definition of "WATERBOARDING" ... meaning that which people were actually convicted of "TORTURE" for ... is?

Reciting the myth longer and longer that this meets the definition only proves you to be clinging to the lie like a drowning man clings to the thinnest of reeds.

You can figure this out ... if you want to.

I don't think you want to.

Qtec
01-15-2012, 06:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Which leads us back to what the actal definition of "WATERBOARDING" </div></div>

I have given you 3 links and they all say the same. OTOH, all you have provided is the same ol' condescending blah.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They were allowed six separate 40-second “applications” of liquid in each two-hour session – and could dump water over a detainee’s nose and mouth for a total of 12 minutes a day. </div></div>

Well, that doesn't sound too bad, right? I'm sure they made videos just to protect themselves from any accusations that they didn't stick to protocol....

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Torture victim's records lost at Guantánamo, admits camp general

· No evidence of al-Qaida suspect's interrogation
· CCTV automatically recorded over tapes

The former head of interrogations at Guantánamo Bay found that records of an al-Qaida suspect tortured at the prison camp were mysteriously lost by the US military, according to a new book by one of Britain's top human rights lawyers.

Retired general Michael Dunlavey, who supervised Guantánamo for eight months in 2002, tried to locate records on Mohammed al-Qahtani, accused by the US of plotting the 9/11 attacks, but found they had disappeared. </div></div> link (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/21/guantanamo.humanrights)

Q

LWW
01-15-2012, 07:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Which leads us back to what the actal definition of "WATERBOARDING" </div></div>

I have given you 3 links and they all say the same. OTOH, all you have provided is the same ol' condescending blah.</div></div>

Q [/quote]

Actually ... none of them do. and you obviously haven't the slightest curiosity to question what your handlers spoon feed you.

LWW
01-15-2012, 07:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They were allowed six separate 40-second “applications” of liquid in each two-hour session – and could dump water over a detainee’s nose and mouth for a total of 12 minutes a day. </div></div>

Q </div></div>

For amusement's sake, let's use the new moonbat crazy left redefinition that you so desperately cling to ... and let's compare what the word meant before the practitioners of "NEWSPEAK" got ahold of it.

I apologize in advance, because I am confident that this exercise in education will truly be torture to you.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">During World War II both Japanese troops, especially the Kempeitai, and the officers of the Gestapo,[112] the German secret police, used waterboarding as a method of torture.[113] During the Japanese occupation of Singapore the Double Tenth Incident occurred. <span style='font-size: 11pt'>This included waterboarding, by the method of binding or holding down the victim on his back, placing a cloth over his mouth and nose, and pouring water onto the cloth. In this version, interrogation continued during the torture, with the interrogators beating the victim if he did not reply and the victim swallowing water if he opened his mouth to answer or breathe. When the victim could ingest no more water, the interrogators would beat or jump on his distended stomach.</span></div></div>

The war crimes definition. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding)

LWW
01-15-2012, 07:42 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They were allowed six separate 40-second “applications” of liquid in each two-hour session – and could dump water over a detainee’s nose and mouth for a total of 12 minutes a day. </div></div>

Q </div></div>

For amusement's sake, let's use the new moonbat crazy left redefinition that you so desperately cling to ... and let's compare what the word meant before the practitioners of "NEWSPEAK" got ahold of it.

I apologize in advance, because I am confident that this exercise in education will truly be torture to you.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The technique was also used during the Algerian War (1954–1962). The French journalist Henri Alleg, who was subjected to waterboarding by French paratroopers in Algeria in 1957,[118] is one of only a few people to have described in writing the first-hand experience of being waterboarded. His book La Question, published in 1958 with a preface by Jean-Paul Sartre subsequently banned in France until the end of the Algerian War in 1962,[119] <span style='font-size: 11pt'>discusses the experience of being strapped to a plank, having his head wrapped in cloth and positioned beneath a running tap:

The rag was soaked rapidly. Water flowed everywhere: in my mouth, in my nose, all over my face. But for a while I could still breathe in some small gulps of air. I tried, by contracting my throat, to take in as little water as possible and to resist suffocation by keeping air in my lungs for as long as I could. But I couldn't hold on for more than a few moments. I had the impression of drowning, and a terrible agony, that of death itself, took possession of me. In spite of myself, all the muscles of my body struggled uselessly to save me from suffocation.</span> <span style='font-size: 14pt'>In spite of myself, the fingers of both my hands shook uncontrollably. "That's it! He's going to talk", said a voice. The water stopped running and they took away the rag. I was able to breathe. In the gloom, I saw the lieutenants and the captain, who, with a cigarette between his lips, was hitting my stomach with his fist to make me throw out the water I had swallowed.</span>[118][120] </div></div>

The modern French method. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding)

LWW
01-15-2012, 07:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They were allowed six separate 40-second “applications” of liquid in each two-hour session – and could dump water over a detainee’s nose and mouth for a total of 12 minutes a day. </div></div>

Q </div></div>

For amusement's sake, let's use the new moonbat crazy left redefinition that you so desperately cling to ... and let's compare what the word meant before the practitioners of "NEWSPEAK" got ahold of it.

I apologize in advance, because I am confident that this exercise in education will truly be torture to you.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Agents of the Dutch East India Company used a precursor to waterboarding during the Amboyna massacre, which took place on the island of Amboyna in the Molucca Islands in 1623. At that time, it consisted of wrapping cloth around the victim's head, after which the torturers "poured the water softly upon his head until the cloth was full, up to the mouth and nostrils, and somewhat higher, so that he could not draw breath but he must suck in all the water".[95][96][97][98] <span style='font-size: 14pt'>In one case, the torturer applied water three or four times successively until the victim's "body was swollen twice or thrice as big as before, his cheeks like great bladders, and his eyes staring and strutting out beyond his forehead"</span> </div></div>

It's the Euro way. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding)

LWW
01-15-2012, 07:49 AM
Now aren't you ashamed of yourself comparing the tactics used at GITMO with such barbaric depravity as that used by the Japanese and Euros?

LWW
01-15-2012, 07:53 AM
And how about your beloved and compassionate demokrooks?
They were down with it in private ... while committing sedition, if not trason, in public. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/5297269/Nancy-Pelosi-was-aware-harsh-interrogation-methods-had-been-used.html)

LWW
01-15-2012, 07:55 AM
This is where you insist that the topic is actually the Idaho potato crop.